Wayne RESA
RESA, MAISA MC3 Units
Unit Abstract

This unit explores the judicial branch of government, the power of judicial review, and how the courts maintain the Constitution as the highest law of the land. Students begin by revisiting the seminal decision of Marbury v. Madison to explore how the courts, as interpreter of the law, retains a separate and distinct power, yet employs the power of judicial review as a check on the power of the other branches. They explore the organization and processes of the judicial branch and how these reflect the constitutional principles of separation of powers and federalism. As students learn about the federal court system, they distinguish between appellate and original jurisdiction. Students analyze the role of federalism and explore the concept of dual sovereignty in our constitutional system through a case study. They learn that where any case involves the U.S. Constitution, both state and federal court systems end with the U.S. Supreme Court. They then turn their attention to the Bill of Rights and its explicit protections against governmental action. After reviewing why the Bill of Rights was added, they consider how each of the rights serves to limit the power of government and promote democracy. Since the First Amendment contains five fundamental rights essential to our constitutional democracy (freedom of the press, speech, religion, association, and petition), students take a close and critical look at the specific text of the amendment, and consider the types of protections included within its purview. After exploring several free speech and expression cases, students work in groups to create an original free speech narrative that falls within the current gray area of First Amendment jurisprudence. Working in triads, students use existing case law to role play the arguments of both plaintiff and the government, while the third student acts as a judge rendering a decision based on precedent. Next, students examine the group of amendments that work within the criminal justice system to protect the rights of the accused found in the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments. Students engage in a simulation, close and critical readings, and a case study to deepen their understanding of the Fourth Amendment. Using a multi-modal approach, students then explore the rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments and the criteria used by the Supreme Court to consider their nature and scope. They reflect upon a number of scenarios to help them distinguish between the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination and the Sixth Amendment right to an attorney. Students also explore the remedy fashioned by the courts to protect violations – the exclusionary rule and its limits. In considering the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment in the Eighth Amendment, students explore statistics on the death penalty and then consider some difficult cases, identifying the pros/cons on society in an effort to identify their own opinion on the issues presented. After engaging in a class discussion, they consider what factors make it difficult to decide whether a punishment is “cruel and unusual.” The unit concludes with an exploration of the Fourteenth Amendment and a review of the Incorporation Doctrine from Unit 2. Added to the Constitution as part of the Reconstruction Amendments at the end of the Civil War, the Fourteenth Amendment granted former slaves the rights of citizenship. Students explore how the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clauses in section 1 have significantly affected ideas of freedom and equality in the United States since its ratification. Students then consider affirmative action in college admissions through case studies and a debate. They then view a discussion on affirmative action from a Harvard University classroom. They conclude the unit by assessing how other groups have benefitted from the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and consider the current status of equal protection in the United States.

...

Stage One - Desired Results

...
Standards
 
...
Compelling Question

How are both knowledge about American constitutional government and actions by citizens essential components of effective government?

Supporting Questions
  1. How do the structures, functions, and relationships between the state and federal court systems resolve conflicts?
  2. How have the courts interpreted and applied the Bill of Rights to define the scope and limits of individual rights?
  3. How have the courts interpreted the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to both extend rights and limit power?
...
Content (Key Concepts)

adversary system

constitutional supremacy

dual sovereignty

due process

equal protection

government (state) action

independent judiciary

individual rights

judicial review

jurisdiction

precedent

rule of law

trial/appellate/supreme courts

Skills (Intellectual Processes)

Classifying/Grouping

Compare and Contrast

Description

Evidentiary Argument

Identifying Perspectives

Issue Analysis

Predicting

Problem Solving

...

Stage Two - Assessment Evidence

...
Unit Assessment Tasks
 
...

Stage Three - Learning Plan

...
Lesson Plan Sequence
...
Resources

Equipment/Manipulative

Computer with Internet Access and Projector

 

Student Resource

“Bill of Rights.” Charters of Freedom. National Archives and Records Administration. 6 October 2015

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

 

Chase, Alycia and Jennifer Simone. PowerPoint Lesson 5 (Unit 5, Lesson 6). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools. 2012.

 

- - -. Supplemental Materials (Unit 5, Lesson 5). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools. 2012.

 

- - -. Supplemental Materials (Unit 5, Lesson 6). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools. 2012.

 

“The Court’s Blow to Democracy.” New York Times Editorial. New York Times. 22 Jan. 2010. 6 October 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/opinion/22fri1.html

 

Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/eighth_amendment

 

Evans, Tammy and Angela LoPiccolo. Supplemental Materials (Unit 5, Lesson 3). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools, 2012.

 

Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment

 

First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment

 

Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Primary Documents in American History. 6 October 2015 http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/14thamendment.html

 

Fourteenth Amendment. U.S. Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

 

Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

 

Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicag-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2002/2002_02_516

 

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicag-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2002/2002_02_241

 

Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967). The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent Collage of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_35

 

Lee P. Arbetman and Edward L. O’Brien, Street Law: A Course in Practical Law, 6th ed. (Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co., 1999), Figure 5.2, p. 53, citing “Administrative Office of The United States Courts, January, 1993.”

 

LoPiccolo, Angela and Tammy Evans. Supplemental Materials (Unit 5, Lesson 4). Teacher made materials. Oakland Schools, 2012.

 

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent Collage of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1965/1965_759

 

New Jersey v. T.L.O, 469 U.S. 325 (1985). The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent Collage of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_83_712

 

Opinion of Justice Souter in McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (2005). US Supreme Court Center. Justia.com http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/545/03-1693/opinion.html

6 October 2015 http://www.justiceharvard.org/

 

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1977/1977_76_811

 

Remarks of Thurgood Marshall at the Annual Seminar of the San Francisco Patent and Trademark Law Association. Maui, Hawaii May 6, 1987. 6 October 2015 http://www.thurgoodmarshall.com/speeches/constitutional_speech.htm

 

Sherman, Paul. “Citizens United Decision Means More Free Speech.” Bench Memos. National Review Online. 22 January 2010. 6 October 2015 http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/49332/citizens-united-decision-means-more-free-speech/paul-sherman

 

Simone, Jennifer and Alycia Chase. Supplemental Materials (Unit 5, Lesson 5). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools. 2012.

 

Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/sixth_amendment

 

The Story of the Bill of Rights. Annenberg Classroom. The Leonore Annenberg Institute for Civics. 6 October 2015 http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/the-story-of-the-bill-of-rights

 

“Understanding the Federal Courts.” Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Leonidas Ralph Mecham, Director, 2003), pp. 9-10. 6 October 2015 http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/FederalCourtsStructure.aspx

 

U.S. Constitution, Article III. Findlaw. 2012. 6 October 2015 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article03/

 

Zuschlag, Dirk. PowerPoint Lesson 1 (Unit 5, Lesson 1). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools. 2012.

 

- - -. Supplemental Materials (Unit 5, Lesson 1). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools. 2012.

 

- - - . Supplemental Materials (Unit 5, Lesson 2). Teacher-made Materials. Oakland Schools. 2012.

 

Teacher Resource

1st Amendment for All: Lesson Plans for the 1st Amendment. 6 October 2015 http://1forall.us/teach-the-first-amendment/

 

Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/378/108/case.html

 

Baker v. Carr – Case Brief Summary. Lawnix. 6 October 2015 http://www.lawnix.com/cases/baker-carr.html

 

Baker v. Carr – Significance. Law Library. American Law and Legal Information. 6 October 2015 http://law.jrank.org/pages/24894/Baker-v-Carr-Significance.html


Barbeau, Rich. “Case Studies on the Sixth Amendment: The Right to Counsel.” Civilly Speaking.org 6 October 2015 http://www.civicallyspeaking.org/case_studies_sixth.pdf

 

Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 (1969). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/784/

 

Bill of Rights. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights

 

Bond v. Floyd. Milestone Documents. Schlager Group. 2012. 6 October 2015 http://www.milestonedocuments.com/documents/view/bond-v-floyd/

 

Brandenburg v. Ohio. Casebriefs. 6 October 2015 http://www.ecasebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-stone/freedom-of-expression/brandenburg-v-ohio-2

 

Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law, Inc., and The Supreme Court Historical Society.6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org/en/landmark/cases/brown_v_board_of_education

Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Summary of the Decision. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law, Inc., and The Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org/en/Page/522/Summary_of_the_Decision

 

Bush v. Gore. Oyez. U.S. Supreme Court Media. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_00_949/

 

Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board. Oyez. U.S. Supreme Court Media. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_00_836

 

California v. Greenwood. Findlaw. 6 October 2015 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=486&invol=35

 

California v. Greenwood. Oyez. U.S. Supreme Court Media. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1987/1987_86_684

 

Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 7 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1939/1939_632

 

Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc. Oyez. U.S. Supreme Court Media. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2008/2008_08_22

 

Caperton v. Massey. Brennan Center for Justice. New York University School of Law. 8 June 2009. 6 October 2015 http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/caperton_v_massey/

 

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 (1897). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1851-1900/1896/1896_129

 

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Syllabus. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZS.html

 

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Oyez. U.S. Supreme Court Media. 6 October 2015

http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2008/2008_08_205

 

"Civil Rights and Equal Protection." Supreme Court Drama. Ed. Elizabeth M. Shaw. UXL-Thomson Gale, 2001. eNotes.com. 2006. 6 October 2015 http://www.enotes.com/supreme-court-drama/civil-rights-and-equal-protection

 

Cohen v. California. Case Briefs. 6 October 2015 http://www.ecasebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-sullivan/freedom-of-speech-why-government-restricts-speech-unprotected-and-less-protected-expression/cohen-v-california-4/

Death Penalty Information Center. 6 October 2015 http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/methods-execution

 

DeJonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 (1937). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1936/1936_123

 

“Does the US need affirmative action?” ProCon. ACLU. 6 October 2015 http://aclu.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000697

 

Due Process. Merrian-Webster Online. 6 October 2015 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/due%20process

 

Due Process. Wikipedia. 6 October 2015 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process

 

Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_410

 

Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963) The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_86

 

Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 6 October 2015 http://law.jrank.org/pages/6368/Eighth-Amendment.html#ixzz1G9pwHwgl

 

Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1946/1946_52

 

Fourteenth Amendment. Annotated Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt14a_user.html#amdt14a_hd1

 

Fourth Amendment. Annotated Constitution. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt4toc_user.html

 

Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_155

 

Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1922/1922_19/

 

Grutter v. Bollinger. Duke Law School. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.duke.edu/publiclaw/supremecourtonline/certgrants/2002/gruvbol.html

 

Hamilton, Alexander. The Federalist No. 78 (1788). 6 October 2015 http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa78.htm

 

Help Tomorrow’s Citizens Find Their Voice. Teach the First Amendment. Knight Foundation. 6 October 2015 http://www.splc.org/teach/

 

Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1851-1900/1883/1883_0

 

In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257 (1948). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/333/257/case.html

 

Incorporation Doctrine. The Free Dictionary. Farlex. 6 October 2015 http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Incorporation+Doctrine

 

Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey M. Berry, and Jerry Goldman, The Challenge of Democracy, 9th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2008, p. 429).

 

Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23 (1963). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/374/23/case.html

 

Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213 (1967). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/386/213/

 

Landmark Supreme Court Cases about Students. United States Courts. Educational Resources. 6 October 2015 http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/ConstitutionResources/LegalLandmarks/LandmarkSupremeCourtCasesAboutStudents.aspx

 

Linder, Doug. Exploring Constitutional Law. University of Missouri-Kansas city Law School. 2001-2011. 6 October 2015 http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/home.html

 

Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 (1964). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_110

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 64 (1961). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1960/1960_236

 

Mapp v. Ohio: Background Summary and Questions. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Mapp.background.two.aspx

 

Mapp v. Ohio: Summary of the Decision. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Mapp.decision.summary.aspx

 

Marbury v. Madison: Background Summary and Questions. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Marbury.background.two.aspx

 

Marbury v. Madison: Summary of the Decision. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.aspx?p=Landmark.Marbury.decision.summary

 

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2009/2009_08_1521

 

McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (1971). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403/528/case.html

 

Messerli, Joe. “Should affirmative action policies, which give preferential treatment based on minority status, eb eliminated?” Balanced Politics.org. 7 January 2012.6 October 2015 http://www.balancedpolitics.org/affirmative_action.htm

Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis, 241 U.S. 211(1916). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/241/211/case.html

 

Miranda v. Arizona: Background Summary and Questions. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Miranda.background.three.aspx

 

Miranda v. Arizona: Summary of the Decision. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Miranda.decision.summary.aspx

 

Murphy v. Hunt, 455 U.S. 478 (1982), Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/455/478/

 

NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_91/

 

Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1929/1929_91/

 

Notable First Amendment Court Cases. American Library Association. 1997-2012. 6 October 2015 http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/firstamendment/courtcases/courtcases.cfm#rr

 

Oakland Schools Teaching Research Writing Website: Skills Progression & Lessons http://www.osteachingresearchwriting.org/

 

Padfield, Stefan. “Citizens United And the Nexus-Of-Contracts Presumption.” Harvard Business Law Review. 18 Jan. 2011. 6 October 2015 http://www.hblr.org/2011/01/citizens-united-and-the-nexus-of-contracts-presumption/

 

Pillars of the First Amendment. United States Courts. Educational Resources. 6 October 2015

http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/ClassroomActivities/FirstAmendment/PillarsOfTheFirstAmendment.aspx

 

Plessy v. Ferguson, (1896). Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law, Inc., and The Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org/en/landmark/cases/plessy_v_ferguson#Tab=Overview

 

Plessy v. Ferguson, (1896). Summary of the Decision . Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law, Inc., and The Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org/en/Page/436/Summary_of_the_Decision

 

Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400 (1965). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/380/400/case.html

 

Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/370/660/case.html

 

Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996). The Oyez Project. U.S. Supreme Court Media and ITT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1039

 

Scored Discussion. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law, Inc., and The Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org/en/Page.Landmark.strategies.discussion.aspx

 

Split Ruling on Affirmative Action. NPR. 23 June 2003. 6 October 2015 http://www.npr.org/news/specials/michigan/index.html

Teaching Module: Fourth Amendment Lesson Plan. Band of Rights. 6 October 2015 http://www.band-of-rights.org/fourth_amendment_lesson_plan.pdf

 

Texas v. Johnson. Oyez. U.S. Supreme Court Media. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_88_155

Texas v. Johnson: Background Summary and Questions. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org/en/Page.Landmark.Johnson.background.three.aspx

 

Texas v. Johnson: Summary of the Decision. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Johnson.decision.summary.aspx

 

The Fifth Amendment. Revolutionary War and Beyond. 2008-2012. 6 October 2015 http://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/5th-amendment.html#ixzz1xhl04Gi9

 

The First Amendment. Revolutionary War and Beyond. 2008-2012. 6 October 2015 http://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/1st-amendment.html

 

The Fourth Amendment. Revolutionary War and Beyond. 2008-2012. 6 October 2015 http://www.revolutionary-war-and-beyond.com/4th-amendment.html

 

The Incorporation Debate. Exploring Constitutional Conflicts. University of Missouri-Kansas City Law School. 6 October 2015 http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/incorp.htm

 

The Justices v. Murray, 76 U.S. 274 (1869). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/76/274/

 

Understanding the Federal Courts. United States Courts. 6 October 2015 http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/FederalCourtBasics/UnderstandingTheFederalCourts.aspx

 

“Understanding Federal and State Courts Case Study.” United States Courts. 6 October 2015 http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/FederalCourtBasics/CourtStructure/UnderstandingFederalAndStateCourtsCaseStudy.aspx

 

United States v. Lopez. Bill of Rights Institute. 6 October 2015 http://billofrightsinstitute.org/resources/educator-resources/lessons-plans/landmark-cases-and-the-constitution/us-v-lopez-1995/12

 

United States v. Nixon: Background Summary and Questions. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015 http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Nixon.background.one.aspx

 

United States v. Nixon: Summary of the Decision. Landmark Cases of the Supreme Court. Street Law and the Supreme Court Historical Society. 6 October 2015

http://www.streetlaw.org//en/Page.Landmark.Nixon.decision.summary.aspx

 

Vernonia School District v. Acton. FindLaw. 6 October 2015

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=U10263

 

Vernonia School District v. Acton. Oyez. U.S. Supreme Court Media. 6 October 2015 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1994/1994_94_590

 

Vernonia School District v. Acton. University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law. 6 October 2015 http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/veronia.html

 

Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (1967). Justia.com. US Supreme Court Center. 6 October 2015 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/388/14/case.html

 

What Does Free Speech Mean? United States Courts. Educational Resources. 6 October 2015 http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/ClassroomActivities/FirstAmendment/WhatDoesFreeSpeechMean.aspx

 

“What Does That Mean?” Our Courts. I-Civics. 21st Century Civics. 6 October 2015 http://static.icivics.org/sites/default/files/uploads/Interpreting-The-Constitution-Handouts.pdf

 

Youngston Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer. The Free Dictionary. Farlex. 6 October 2015 http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Steel+Seizure+Case

 

For Further Professional Knowledge

Baum, Lawrence. The American Courts: Process and Policy. Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2013

 

- - -. The Supreme Court. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2007.

 

Carp, Robert A. and Ronald Stidham. Judicial Process in American. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2011.

Chemerinsky, Erwin. Constitutional Law: Principles And Policies (Introduction to Law Series). NY: Aspen Publishers, 2006. (textbook)

 

Epstein, Lee. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Institutional Powers and Constraints. Washington, DC: CQ Press, Inc. 2007.

 

Hall, Kermit L. and Kevin T. McGuire. Institutions of American Democracy: The Judicial Branch. Oxford University Press. NY, 2005. (textbook)

 

O'Brien, David M. Storm Center: The Supreme Court in American Politics. 9th ed. NY: W.W. Norton & Co., 2011.

 

Toobin, Jeffrey. The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court. Anchor Books, NY, 2008.

 

Tribe, Laurence H. Tribe's American Constitutional Law. 3d ed. Foundation Press, Inc. (University Textbook Series) 2000.

...
Expectations/Standards
MI: Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, & Technical Subjects 6-12
MI: Grades 9-10
Reading: History/Social Studies
Key Ideas and Details
1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.
RH.9-10.1. Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, attending to such features as the date and origin of the information.
2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.
RH.9-10.2. Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary of how key events or ideas develop over the course of the text.
Craft and Structure
4. Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.
RH.9-10.4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including vocabulary describing political, social, or economic aspects of history/social science.
5. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole.
RH.9-10.5. Analyze how a text uses structure to emphasize key points or advance an explanation or analysis.
6. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.
RH.9-10.6. Compare the point of view of two or more authors for how they treat the same or similar topics, including which details they include and emphasize in their respective accounts.
8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.
RH.9-10.8. Assess the extent to which the reasoning and evidence in a text support the author’s claims.
9. Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to compare the approaches the authors take.
RH.9-10.9. Compare and contrast treatments of the same topic in several primary and secondary sources.
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
10. Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.
RH.9-10.10. By the end of grade 10, read and comprehend history/social studies texts in the grades 9–10 text complexity band independently and proficiently.
Writing
Production and Distribution of Writing
4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
WHST.9-10.4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
5. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach.
WHST.9-10.5. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on addressing what is most significant for a specific purpose and audience.
9. Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.
WHST.9-10.9. Draw evidence from informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.
Range of Writing
10. Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences.
WHST.9-10.10. Write routinely over extended time frames (time for reflection and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of discipline-specific tasks, purposes, and audiences.
MI: Social Studies (2007)
High School
Civics & Government
C2 Origins and Foundations of Government of the United States of America
2.1 Origins of American Constitutional Government (Note: Much of this content should have been an essential feature of students’ 5th and 8th grade coursework. High School U.S. History and Geography teachers, however, revisit this in USHG Foundational Expectations 1.1, 1.2, and 2.1.) Explain the fundamental ideas and principles of American constitutional government and their philosophical and historical origins through investigation of such questions as: What are the philosophical and historical roots of the foundational values of American constitutional government? What are the fundamental principles of American constitutional government?
2.1.4 Explain challenges and modifications to American constitutional government as a result of significant historical events such as the American Revolution, the Civil War, expansion of suffrage, the Great Depression, and the civil rights movement.
2.2 Foundational Values and Constitutional Principles of American Government
Explain how the American idea of constitutional government has shaped a distinctive American society through the investigation of such questions as: How have the fundamental values and principles of American constitutional government shaped American society?
2.2.2 Explain and evaluate how Americans, either through individual or collective actions, use constitutional principles and fundamental values to narrow gaps between American ideals and reality with respect to minorities, women, and the disadvantaged.
2.2.5 Use examples to investigate why people may agree on constitutional principles and fundamental values in the abstract, yet disagree over their meaning when they are applied to specific situations.
C3 STRUCTURE AND Functions of Government in THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
3.1 Structure, Functions, and Enumerated Powers of National Government Describe how the national government is organized and what it does through the investigation of such questions as: What is the structure of the national government? What are the functions of the national government? What are its enumerated powers?
3.1.3 Analyze the purposes, organization, functions, and processes of the judicial branch as enumerated in Article III of the Constitution.
3.1.5 Use case studies or examples to examine tensions between the three branches of government (e.g., powers of the purse and impeachment, advise and consent, veto power, and judicial review).
3.2 Powers and Limits on Powers
Identify how power and responsibility are distributed, shared, and limited in American constitutional government through the investigation of such questions as: How are power and responsibility distributed, shared, and limited in the government established by the United States Constitution?
3.2.1 Explain how the principles of enumerated powers, federalism, separation of powers, bicameralism, checks and balances, republicanism, rule of law, individual rights, inalienable rights, separation of church and state, and popular sovereignty serve to limit the power of government.
3.2.2 Use court cases to explain how the Constitution is maintained as the supreme law of the land
3.2.3 Identify specific provisions in the Constitution that limit the power of the federal government.
3.2.4 Explain the role of the Bill of Rights and each of its amendments in restraining the power of government over individuals.
4 System of Law and Laws
Explain why the rule of law has a central place in American society through the investigation of such questions as: What is the role of law in the American political system? What is the importance of law in the American political system?
3.4.1 Explain why the rule of law has a central place in American society (e.g., Supreme Court cases like Marbury v. Madison and U.S. v. Nixon; practices such as submitting bills to legal counsel to ensure congressional compliance with the law).
3.4.3 Explain the meaning and importance of equal protection of the law (e.g., the 14th Amendment, Americans with Disabilities Act, equal opportunity legislation).
3.4.4 Describe considerations and criteria that have been used to deny, limit, or extend protection of individual rights (e.g., clear and present danger, time, place and manner restrictions on speech, compelling government interest, security, libel or slander, public safety, and equal opportunity).
3.4.5 Analyze the various levels and responsibilities of courts in the federal and state judicial system and explain the relationships among them.
5.3 Rights of Citizenship Identify the rights of citizenship by investigating the question: What are the personal, political, and economic rights of citizens in the United States?
5.3.1 Identify and explain personal rights (e.g., freedom of thought, conscience, expression, association, movement and residence, the right to privacy, personal autonomy, due process of law, free exercise of religion, and equal protection of the law).
5.3.2 Identify and explain political rights (e.g., freedom of speech, press, assembly, and petition; and the right to vote and run for public office).
5.3.3 Identify and explain economic rights (e.g., the right to acquire, use, transfer, and dispose of property, choose one’s work and change employment, join labor unions and professional associations, establish and operate a business, copyright protection, enter into lawful contracts, and just compensation for the taking of private property for public use).
5.3.4 Describe the relationship between personal, political, and economic rights and how they can sometimes conflict.
5.3.5 Explain considerations and criteria commonly used in determining what limits should be placed on specific rights.
5.3.6 Describe the rights protected by the First Amendment, and using case studies and examples, explore the limit and scope of First Amendment rights.
5.3.7 Using the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Amendments, describe the rights of the accused; and using case studies and examples, explore the limit and scope of these rights.
5.3.8 Explain and give examples of the role of the Fourteenth Amendment in extending the protection of individual rights against state action.
5.3.9 Use examples to explain why rights are not unlimited and absolute.
C6 Citizenship in Action
6.1 Civic Inquiry and Public Discourse Use forms of inquiry and construct reasoned arguments to engage in public discourse around policy and public issues by investigating the question: How can citizens acquire information, solve problems, make decisions, and defend positions about public policy issues?
6.1.5 Make a persuasive, reasoned argument on a public issue and support using evidence (e.g., historical and contemporary examples), constitutional principles, and fundamental values of American constitutional democracy; explain the stance or position.
© Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.
...
Wayne RESA