AP Government Unit 1 Schedule
Unit 1: Chapter 2,4,5 (Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties)
**You will be responsible for integrating the specified reading of the chapters while also completing the assignments
below** Periodic reading quizzes will be given (note quizzes)
**BLOGGING IS THE ONE WAY TO IMPROVE YOUR GRADE-- THE BLOG IS YOUR FRIEND**
BLOGGER OF THE WEEK-gets a homework pass! Blog site is: http://mrbrookshistory.proboards.com
Overriding Questions for Unit
1. How are the Courts responsible for social change/ civil rights?
2. How are the Courts responsible for changing federalism?
3. How are the Courts responsible for the expansion of civil liberties?
4. How has the role of the Court changed since the Founding?
Name: ___________________ Hour: ___ AP European History – Mr. W.B. Brooks
#
Assignment Title
U1HW1
U1HW2
U1HW3
U1HW4
U1HW5
U1HW6
U1HW7
U1HW8
Read Chapter 2 and take notes (complete by end of 1st week)
Read Chapters 4, 5 and take notes (complete by end of 2nd week)
Post “Your Bio” on the Blog Site by the end of 2nd week.
Issue Outline (75 Points)
Supreme Court Case (100 Points)
Hear Ye, Hear Ye Listen to audio version of Supreme Court ruling
Supreme Court Justice Kagan (50 Points)
Test Corrections (Only required for those that scored BELOW 80%
on Unit Summative)
Reading Quiz (Only Over Textbook Chapters)
Pickney Article – “Invisible Black America”
Unit Summative / Exam (MC, FRQ, DBQ – Possible Formats)
Unit Reading Journal (Completed By 3rd Day of Unit)
Reading Groups (Done In Class On Day Before Unit Exam)
U1CL1
U1CL2
U1CL3
RJ
RG
Due
Date
Unit 1 - Constitution, Civil Rights &
Liberties
(Note: HW means “Homework” and CL means “Classwork.”)
Readings: Edwards, George C.,et all. Government in America: Chapter 2, 4 and 5
Federalist papers #10, #51
U.S. Constitution
Areas of Study:
 Articles of Confederation & The Constitutional Convention
 Shay’s Rebellion
 Judicial Review
 Amending the Constitution & The Bill of Rights
Readings: Edwards, et. al., Chapters 2, 4 and 5
Relevant Washington Post, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Time and wire service articles
Areas of Study:
 Scope of Judicial Power & The Federal Judicial System
 The Politics of Appointing Judges
 Supreme Court and its Operation
 Role of the Courts in Policy Process
 First Amendment and its clauses
 Property Rights and Privacy Rights
 Criminal and Due Process Rights
 Selective Incorporation
 Voting and Civil Rights & The Equal Protection Clause
 Affirmative Action
Assignments:
 See Assignments Above
Points
Possible
25
75
100
25
50
50
After studying this Unit, students should be able to:
• Summarize the parallels between Locke’s writings and Jefferson’s language in the Declaration
of Independence.
• Describe what Madison meant by “factions” and how he proposed to solve the problems
presented by factions.
• Demonstrate what we mean by the “Madisonian model” and how it is incorporated within the
Constitution.
• Describe the major issues between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists in the debates over
ratification of the Constitution.
• Ascertain how constitutional changes—both formal and informal—continue to shape and alter
the Madisonian system.
• Understand how the Constitution affects the scope of government in America.
• Examine how decisions of the Supreme Court have extended specific provisions of the Bill of
Rights to the states as part of the incorporation doctrine.
• Describe how the two constitutional statements about religion and government—the
establishment clause and the free exercise clause—may sometimes conflict.
• Establish why the Supreme Court will usually not permit prior restraint on speech and press.
• Explain why it has been so difficult for the courts to clearly define which types of materials are
considered to be obscene.
• Differentiate between freedom of speech and related concepts such as symbolic speech and
freedom of expression.
• Explain how specific provisions of the Bill of Rights have been used to extend basic rights to
defendants in criminal trials.
• Ascertain how concepts such as a right to privacy can be inferred or implied from the Bill of
Rights.
• Explain why civil liberties are seen as an individual’s protection against the government.
• Understand how civil rights have been used to extend more equality to groups that historically
have been subject to discrimination.
• Analyze different interpretations of equality, such as equality of opportunity contrasted with
equality of results.
• Explain how the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of “equal protection of the laws” has been
applied to the idea of equality.
• Show the significance of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and explain why efforts for civil rights
legislation were finally successful in the mid-1960s.
• Explain why gay and lesbian activists may face the toughest battle for equality of any of
America’s minority groups.
• Describe the opposing positions of those who favor affirmative action and those who claim
that these policies simply create reverse discrimination.
• Determine how civil rights laws increase the scope and power of government.
From Unit I – Constitution, Civil Rights and
Liberties (Chapters 2, 4, 5)
Name: _________________________ Hour: ___ AP Gov’t & Politics – W.B. Brooks
U1HW # 4: ---ISSUE OUTLINE--- (75 Points)
“TO SUPPORT OR NOT TO SUPPORT, THAT IS THE ULTIMATE QUESTION.”
In our democracy today, there are a plethora of issues being discussed and debated. Seven of the
most hotly contested issues are:
Affirmative Action, National Missile Defense System, Stem Cell Research, Nationalized
healthcare, Preemptive Strike in Iran, Gays in the military and Same Sex Marriage.
In order to become an astute citizen it is important to keep abreast of the HOTTEST topics of the
day. Therefore, you will complete this assignment and be on your way to becoming a political
animal that is governmentally savvy.
Directions: Each person will choose one of the seven above topics to research. Then follow each step
delineated in order to receive full credit for this assignment. Read all questions carefully and complete in
an outline format.
(25 points in the homework category)
1. STEP ONE
Provide a paragraph definition (make sure this is in your own words and not plagiarized from someone
else) or description of the critical issue at hand. Be sure that you make it clear that you fully understand
the issue and its complexities.
2. STEP TWO
List at least two specific examples of your issue (i.e. how is it used, how will it be implemented)
3. STEP THREE
List at least three statements of agreement with your issue.
4. STEP FOUR
List at least three statements of disagreement with your issue.
5. STEP FIVE
State your position in an articulate and concise paragraph. One sentence must include a quote from a
notable personality.
6. STEP SIX
Bibliography of at least three sources
Good luck and be sure that you fully understand your issue. You may be expected to go in front of the
class and debate the issue with a peer. Or we may receive a special visit from Senator Brooks and then
you would have to convince her to vote your way. In either case, just be able to articulate, debate and
illustrate your argument.
U1HW# 5: Supreme Court Case (100 Points)
“Cause Judge Judy Says So” or “Singing’ with the Supremes”
An Advanced Placement Look at Recent Supreme Court Precedents
“We have vested in the Court broad authority to interpret the Constitution in the belief that unelected and therefore
independent judges can wield powers of reasoning, imagination, and wisdom that will raise their decisions above the tradeoffs of everyday politics and the naked act of voting. The method of their decision making is the irreplaceable source of the
Justice’s legitimacy. Thus, when they disregard the traditions of law, invoke intellectually dishonest arguments, engage in
glaring inconsistencies, and reduce their deliberations to the shallow calculus of five votes beats four, they call their own
reason for being into question.
The enterprise of the Court, the process of constitutionalism, depends of the Justice’s ability to persuade us (and one another)
that their choices among competing arguments, however imperfect, represent reasoned, dispassionate, honest attempts to
decide cases in a principled way. We accept the imperfection- the certainty that judges will sometimes err or overstep their
bounds- because we maintain faith that, in the run of things, better arguments will triumph over lesser one. And we depend
on the judges themselves to undertake the process with a sense of self-doubt and humility that leaves open the constant
possibility of reassessment and change.”
Edward Lazarus, Closed Chambers, 1998
“We are a nation of laws not of men” President Ford, 8/9/74
Directions: Select a Supreme Court decision from the next page and complete the following tasks to receive full
credit for this assignment:
(50 points in the homework category)
1. Provide a brief summary of the case. This should include a specific reference to a particular liberty guaranteed
in the Bill of Rights at issue in the case.
2. In a simple sentence clearly state the precedent established in your case.
3.List the important Court data from your case. This should include the vote totals and the names of the Justices in
the majority and minority.
4. Provide a critical passage from the majority opinion which clearly exemplifies the legal principle behind the
decision of the case.
5. Provide a critical passage from the minority opinion which clearly exemplifies the opposing legal principle.
6. In a brief essay, no longer than a page, evaluate the Court’s precedent established in this case. Your essay
should also evaluate the decision making process of the Supreme Court. Is it deliberative not afflicted by political
predilections? Also address the following question, “are we a nation of laws” or “of men and women, 9 to be
exact”?
7. Be prepared to present your findings to the class and record the findings of your classmates (This assignment
will be a valuable resource later in the semester).
This should be a 3-4 sentence summary of the case, verdict and precedent established. This should NOT be
a very lengthy paper.
Hints: The internet has become an incredible source for students of the Supreme Court. There are numerous sites
which provide full text of major Supreme Court decisions. Five of the best are
http://www.law.cornell.edu http://www.findlaw.org www.fac.org www.landmarkcases.org
www.oyez.com
However, various newspapers (www.washingtonpost.com, www.usatoday.com and www.nytimes.com) also
provide valuable information regarding recent Supreme Court decisions.
Furthermore, the traditional library continues to serve as it has for 5,000 years. One excellent single-volume
source is The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court. You can also use Proquest in the library to search for
pertinent articles.
“Judicial Supremacy?”
Highlights from the 2001-2007 Docket
1. Lawrence vs. Texas- Sodomy and 10th amendment
2. Roper v. Simmons- Outlawed the death penalty
3.Gonzales v. Raich- Medical Marijuana
4. Lockyer vs. Andrade/Ewing vs. California- 8th amendment and 3 strikes law
5. Atwater v. Lago Vista (2001)- 4th amendment (Search and Seizure)
6. Smith vs. Doe- Privacy and sexual offenders
7. Van Orden v. Perry- 10 Commandments
8. McCreary Country v. ACLU- 10 Commandments
9. Kelo v. City of New London- Eminent Domain and seizing private property
10. MGM Studios v. Grokster- File sharing
11. Sell vs. US- Mentally ill patients and force of psychosis medicine
12. Granholm v. Heald- Wine Shipments
13. Smith v. City of Jackson- Age Discrimination
14. Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education- Sex Discrimination
15. Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd. - Disabilities and Cruise Liners
16. Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association- “Beef, its what for Dinner”
17. Cutter v. Wilkinson- Religion and Prison
18. Bartnicki v. Vopper (2001)- Free Speech and press
19. Parents v. Seattle – Affirmative Action
20.Tenet v. Doe- Espionage and Suing the American government
21. City of Sherrill v. The Oneida Indian Nation - Indian Rights and Federal Treaties
22. Devenpeck v. Alford- 4th Amendment
23. Illinois v. Caballes - 4th Amendment
24. Johnson v. California- Prisons and Race
25. Madigan vs. Telemarketing Associates- Charity and misleading telemarketers
26. Good News Club vs. Milford Central School (2001)- Free Speech
27. Penry vs. Johnson (2001)- 8th Amendment-Prison and Cruel and Unusual Punishment
28. Garcetti v. Ceballos (May 30, 2006)- Gov’t Employees and Free Speech
29. Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (March 6, 2006)- Equal Access and
Free Speech
30. Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Unias Do Vegetal- Religious Freedom and hoasca
tea
31. Bringham City, Utah v. Stuart (May 22, 2006)- Warrantless searches
32. Georgia v. Randolph (March 22, 2006)- Warrantless searches
33. Clark v. Arizona (June 29, 2006)- Due Process and insanity test
34. Hudson v. Michigan (June 15, 2006)- Knock and Announce Search Warrants
35. Beard v. Banks (June 28, 2006)- Prison inmates and Denial of access to certain media
36. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (June 29, 2006)- Separation of powers
37. Gonzales v. Oregon (January 17, 2006)- Federalism and Doctor Assisted suicide
38. Gonzales v. Carthart –Abortion Rights
39. Scott v. Victor (2007) High Speed Chases and 4th Amendment
U1HW# 6 (25 Points)
Hear Ye, Hear Ye
Here’s the deal: In order to understand how the highest Court in the land makes its decisions you
will listen to an oral argument. Go to www.oyez.com and click on audio and choose one case to
listen to its audio arguments or link directly via http://www.oyez.org/oyez/portlet/popularAudio/.
Each person will choose one oral argument of the Supreme Court. Then follow each step delineated in
order to receive full credit for this assignment. Read all questions carefully and complete in an outline
format. (The case you choose cannot be the same one for U1HW#5)
Step One:
Choose a Supreme Court case, read it brief synopsis and then listen to at LEAST 10 minutes of its audio
portion. Chose a case you find interesting not the first one you encounter. There are a plethora of topics
so one should spark your interest. You will need to take notes in order to complete step two. Diligent
notes will be required. *Note you will need real player to listen to the audio portion. You can download
it for free or the school technology will allow you to listen to it. The audio files will not work with quick
time*
Step Two: Give a brief synopsis of what you heard. What does the baliff say that could be construed as
controversial? How do the lawyers begin their arguments? Which justice was most vocal? Which justice
was most subdued? Did you notice any patterns? What topic or critical point did the questioning center
on? Interesting points made? Interesting questions?
Step Three: Do you believe it is justice’s job to be active during oral arguments? Why or why not. Does
a justice’s behavior during oral arguments affect the preservation of justice? Why or why not.
Step Four: If you were a justice, how would you view your job in deciding cases? Is it a justice’s job to
merely interpret the law? Or should it be a platform for legislating social reforms? Would you be an
activist judge or do you believe the role of the courts is more limited such as Madison in Federalist #78.
Why?
Step Five: Why would the Supreme Court provide audio versions of its decisions? How is it beneficial
to democracy? How does it serve as an informal check on the Supreme Court?
Congrats:) You are now a Supreme Court afficianado! Keep listening to oral arguments to maintain your
Supreme Court edge and stay in the Beltway loop...
U1HW#7: Supreme Court Kagan
Some Things You Need to Know About Her
In the weeks since Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, hundreds of thousands of
documents have been released, providing a more robust picture of the would-be justice as an academic, a
lawyer and the first female solicitor general of the United States.
The memos reflect her ambition to dig into some of the country's most divisive social issues and
offer analysis or policy recommendations depending upon her job at the time. They also give a glimpse
of her personality as she corresponds with colleagues, sometimes with salty language, taking command
of the issues, rarely suffering fools gladly.
As her confirmation hearing unfolds over the next few weeks, senators will want to know whether the
memos reveal her personal beliefs.
"I do not want to say that there was nothing of me in these memos," she said during her 2009
confirmation hearing for solicitor general, referring to her writings as a clerk for Justice Thurgood
Marshall in 1984.
But, she said, "I was a 27-year-old pipsqueak, and I was working for an 80-year-old giant in the
law and a person who, let us be frank, had very strong jurisprudential and legal views."
Kagan assured senators in 2009 that she would make decisions as solicitor general based only on the
law. Still, Kagan's critics believe she would have a difficult time putting aside her personal beliefs if she
assumes a seat on the Supreme Court.
"In her memos to Justice Marshall as well as her work for Clinton, Kagan consistently wrote
from her own perspective, prefacing her advice with 'I think' and 'I believe' and distinguishing her
opinions from other members of Clinton's White House team or from the president's own opinions," said
Carrie Severino of the Conservative Judicial Crisis Network.
"A troubling pattern has already emerged in Ms. Kagan's record," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
"Throughout her career, she has demonstrated a willingness to make legal decisions based not on the law
but instead on her very liberal politics."
But Paul Clement, who served as solicitor general during the Bush administration and supports
Kagan's nomination, disagrees. He says the documents serve a limited role. They do not necessarily
reflect her personal beliefs but the job she was tasked with doing when she wrote the memos.
"The key to me in the documents is trying to discern whether Kagan understood her role and did
it well," said Clement.
"What you can see though, is that in a variety of different roles, I think Elena understood the role
that she was discharging and I think she, you know, acquitted herself very well in those different roles&
She understands the role that she's been assigned, which I think speaks very well for her," he said.
Directions: Research the newest Supreme Court Justice (Kagan) and pick 5 of the following 8 topics
and write about her views (opinion). The topics are as follows:
Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Abortion, Executive Power and War on Terror, Free Speech and Campaign
Finance, Gay Marriage, Gun Control, Death Penalty, and/or Race and Affirmative Action
Be sure to cite your source on where Justice Kagan stands on any of these issues.
Unit One Review Guide
Please read the chapters and use the following review guide to help you study for the unit test.
1. What was the principal goal of the American Revolution? What was the principal goal of the French Revolution?
2. Define natural rights. Why did the colonists believe they had a right to natural rights? How did they defend these natural rights?
3. Under the Articles of Confederation, issues such as the environment would be handled by?
4. What was the PRIMARY purpose of the Constitutional Convention of 1787?
5. Describe what Madison means when he states, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” What is he saying about the
nature of man? How does that nature affect government?
6. What was the central issue in the framing of the US Constitution? (Hint* It was the major problem with the Articles of Confederation)
7. What was the Great Compromise? Why was it so great?
8. What was the goal of the framers of the Constitution?
9. What is the most common method to amending the Constitution? How does it reflect federalism? What is the effect of such an arduous
process?
10. Define separation of powers. From whom did the colonists take this idea from?
11. Define federalism.
12. What are the reserved powers? In which amendment does it state the reserved powers?
13. What are the enumerated powers? In which Article are these powers listed?
14. Why did the anti-federalists disagree with the US Constitution?
15. Why did the framers at first not put a Bill of Rights into the US Constitution?
16. Define the line-item veto? Why was it created in 1994? Why was it declared unconstitutional? Who has the right and power to use the
line-item veto?
17. What is a plea bargain? Why is used so frequently in our judicial process?
18. Is it legal to burn the flag?
19. Why do conflicts in our civil liberties occur?
20. Define selective incorporation. How was selective incorporation affected the states?
21. Were the US Nazis allowed to march in Skokie? Why? How does this example relate to Madison’s Federalist #10?
22. Define the doctrine of preferred position. How does the right of free expression demonstrate this doctrine?
23. Define libel. Define slander. How are those two terms different?
24. What is symbolic speech? Is it protected under the First Amendment? What would be an example of symbolic speech?
25. Define Free Exercise and No Establishment. What amendment are those two clauses found? What do they deal with specifically?
26. Define the exclusionary rule. What is the purpose of it? How does it contain the executive branch?
27. Does the Supreme Court hear cases of non-Americans suing the government? How does the detainee situation in Cuba illustrate this?
28. What are civil rights? Can laws make distinctions between people? Are all distinctions acceptable?
29. Define strict scrutiny. What does the Supreme Court mean if they are going to apply strict scrutiny? To what issue do the court’s apply
strict scrutiny?
30. Which amendment gave equal political rights to blacks?
31. Why did the NAACP strategy of using the courts and litigation further to further civil rights work so effectively.
32. What is the difference between de jure and de facto segregation?
33. What is the right to privacy? What amendment do they interpret the right to privacy? Why is this right so controversial?
34. Define affirmative action. Why does it exist? Why is it so controversial?
35.What was the Bakke case? Why did the supreme court rule that quotas were illegal? What are quotas?
36. Why do Americans polled typically oppose preferential treatment in hiring and admission processes?
Know the Bill of Rights.
Know the following court cases and precedents.
Roe v. Wade, Griswold v. Connecticut, Brown v. Board, Mapp v. Ohio, Miranda v. Arizona, Baker v. Carr, Gitlow v. New York