GOV 111 Summer 2020
Class Assignment #1
Worth up to 80 points
Due by 11:59p.m. on 06-28-20
NAME: Emma Smith
DIRECTIONS: First, each GOV 111 student will be expected to watch a SCOTUS brief video
segment, “Gamble v. United States.” This SCOTUS brief video segment, along with closed
captioning, can be accessed on the following link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r31BDD5KQwI. Second, each GOV 111 student, as he/she
watches this video segment, is expected to respond to both of the video prompts that are listed in
the “Video Prompts” section on the first GOV 111 class assignment handout. A GOV 111
student may also wish to access a handout that is referenced in the “Video Prompts” section on
the first GOV 111 discussion board assignment. An electronic copy of this handout can be
accessed in the "Class Assignment #1" folder in the “Class Assignments” tab on the GOV 111
Blackboard platform. He/she may type his/her response to the two video prompts directly onto
the space on the first GOV 111 class assignment handout that is devoted for that purpose.
Third, each GOV 111 student will need to access the handout that is referenced in the
“Application Prompts” section on the first GOV 111 class assignment handout, of which an
electronic copy can be accessed in the “Class Assignment #1" folder in the “Class Assignments”
tab on the GOV 111 Blackboard platform. Fourth, each GOV 111 student is expected to respond
all three of the application prompts that are listed on the first GOV 111 class assignment
handout. He/she may type his/her responses to each of these application prompts directly onto
the space on this handout that is devoted for that purpose. Lastly, each GOV 111 student must
use COMPLETE sentences as he/she composes his/her responses to both of the video prompts
and all three of the application prompts that are listed on the first GOV 111 class assignment
handout.
The total number of points that are assigned for completing the first GOV 111 class
assignment is 80 points. All GOV 111 students must first upload a file that is created by a wordprocessing software program, such as Microsoft Word, which contains their responses to all of
the video prompts and the application prompts that are listed on the first GOV 111 class
assignment handout onto the “Class Assignment #1” folder in the “Class Assignments” tab on
the GOV 111 Blackboard platform by 11:59p.m. on Sunday, January 28, 2020, in order to be
eligible to receive all of the 80 points that are assigned for completing the first GOV 111 class
assignment. A GOV 111 student should NOT USE the Google Docs format, as it is NOT
compatible with the OCC Blackboard platform.
The professor WILL NOT grade a GOV 111 student’s first GOV 111 class assignment
that is submitted to her via e-mail. A GOV 111 student may submit the first GOV 111 class
assignment past its due date, but a late penalty will be applied toward the first GOV 111 class
assignment. Please review the “late penalty” policy that is outlined in the GOV 111 course
syllabus for more information on this policy. He/she will be required to submit a late GOV 111
class assignment onto the GOV 111 Blackboard platform by uploading a file that contains his/her
responses to all of the video prompts and the application prompts that can be found on the first
GOV 111 class assignment handout. The professor posted an announcement on the GOV 111
1
Blackboard platform (in the “Announcements” tab) that contains more detailed instructions on
how to submit a GOV 111 class assignment onto the GOV 111 Blackboard platform.
“Video Prompts” Section (Worth up to 26 points; each prompt is worth the number of
points that are assigned to it.)
1. Each GOV 111 student must summarize only ONE legal argument that could be offered in
favor of Mr. Gamble. (Worth up to 13 points)
a.) He/she may also review pp.2-3 of Garrett Epps’ The Atlantic magazine article, “There’s an
Exception to the Double-Jeopardy Rule,” as he/she responds to this video prompt.
b.) The professor uploaded an electronic copy of this handout into the “Class Assignment #1”
folder in the “DB Posts” tab on the GOV 111 Blackboard platform.
A legal argument in favor of Mr. Gamble is that although he broke two sovereign’s laws, by
them both prosecuting him, he is being prosecuted twice for the same exact crime, being in
possession of a firearm while being a felon. This directly goes against the double-jeopardy rule
that can be found in the 5th Amendment.
2. Each GOV 111 student must summarize only ONE legal argument that could be offered in
favor of the U.S. (Worth up to 13 points)
a.) He/she may also review pp.3-4 of Garrett Epps’ The Atlantic article, “There’s an
Exception to the Double-Jeopardy Rule,” as he/she responds to this video prompt.
Although many can argue that this rule is outdated and wrong, the separate sovereign’s rule does
protect the United States if they also choose to prosecute the defendant on the same crime, they
were tried for in the state that the crime occurred. Regardless of our feelings of the rule, they are
currently allowed to exercise that right and most likely will continue to instead of changing an
outdated law because there are times when it is very handy, such as in the Rodney King trial
where the officers would not of been charged if the United States had not also tried them.
“Application Prompts” Section (Worth up to 54 points; each prompt is worth the number
of points that are assigned to it.)
1. Each GOV 111 student must state how a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court’s justices
resolved its Gamble v. United States case (p.1). (Worth up to 14 points)
a.) In other words, what ruling did a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court justices “hold” for its
Gamble v. United States case?
b.) The professor uploaded an electronic copy of this handout into the “Class Assignment #1”
folder in the “DB Posts” tab on the GOV 111 Blackboard platform.
2
The court’s decision not to overturn the dual sovereignty doctrine. This was a 7-2 opinion by the
court where Justice Samuel Alito Jr wrote the majority opinion. They mentioned in their
argument that since the majority of the laws are set by a sovereign then the laws of two
sovereigns create two offences, thus making being tried by each sovereign okay. Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion where she argued that the double jeopardy clause
should bar successive prosecutions for the same offense by parts of the whole United States.
Justice Neil Gorsuch filed a separate dissenting opinion where he argued that a free society is not
one is which its government can try the same individual for the same crime until its happy with
the end result.
2. A GOV 111 student is expected to summarize only TWO of the legal arguments that is
contained in the U.S. Supreme Court’s “Opinion of the Court” for its Gamble v. United States
case concerning its ruling for this case. (Worth up to 20 points; sufficiently summarizing
one legal argument is worth up to 10 points and sufficiently summarizing two legal
arguments are worth up to 20 points.)
a.) He/she should refer to the (a.) -(d.) sections that can be found on pp.1-3 of this handout as
he/she responds to this application prompt.
The dual-sovereignty doctrine is not an exception to the double jeopardy right found in the 5th
Amendment. Each offence is defined by a law and each law is defined by a sovereign thus
allowing two different sovereigns where there are two law and then two offenses to charge the
same person for breaking both sovereigns’ laws. Another legal argument that was made in this
case was that this doctrine contradicts the rights laid out in the double jeopardy clause that was in
the Constitution due to the issues that the founding fathers saw occurring in England. In England
the crown was prosecuting people multiple times because they were unhappy with the results
they received.
3. Each GOV 111 student is expected to compose only ONE argument on whether the U.S.
Supreme Court’s legal ruling for its Gamble v. United States case is consistent with the U.S.
system of federalism. His/her response to the third application prompt must consist of a
MINIMUM of FOUR complete sentences. (Worth up to 20 points)
a.) He/she may wish to review the SCOTUS brief video segment, “Gamble v. United States,”
and/or Garrett Epp’s The Atlantic magazine article, “There’s an Exception to the DoubleJeopardy Rule,” as he/she responds to the third application prompt.
I personally do not think that the United States legal ruling on the Gamble v United States case is
consistent with the United States system of federalism because of the way the founding fathers
put together the Constitution. The founding fathers designed the Constitution in such a way that
the United States would not make the same mistakes that England was making at that point in
time. I believe that upholding this ruling made the United States policies align with the crowns
policies of trying people multiple times simply because they were unhappy with the results of the
first court. I believe that the United States is a sovereignty that is set up to work for and protect
its citizens and this ruling does not do that, instead it belittles the citizens of the United States by
inserting the federal laws power over such.
3