Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
Lesson 4
Title: Power of the Court
Grade Level: 8
Unit of Study: Expansion and Reform
GLCE:
U4.1.4 Establishing a National Judiciary and Its Power – Explain the development of the power
of the Supreme Court through the doctrine of judicial review as manifested in Marbury v.
Madison (1803) and the role of Chief Justice John Marshall and the Supreme Court in
interpreting the power of the national government (e.g., McCullouch v. Maryland, Dartmouth
College v. Woodward, Gibbons v. Ogden).
Abstract: Civic participation is essential for effective government.
Key Concepts: How do court rulings establish precedent and define the judiciary branch?
Sequence of Activities:
1. Introduce vocabulary used in this lesson. Students can make flash cards or create a
jeopardy type game to use the words.
2. Watch the film titled “Gambling and Judicial Review” on the Discovery Education
Website. This is a two part video. Watch only part one.
3. Discus the concept of Marbury V. Madison. As a class create a T chart of the Defense
and the Prosecution sides of the argument. Then have the students write an opinion on
the gambling case and relate it to the idea of Judicial Review.
4. As a class take a vote on whether the law is “constitutional” or “unconstitutional.”
Discuss the evidence that supports this argument. Finish watching “Gambling and
Judicial Review.”
5. Discuss why the courts chose the decision that they made. Analyze 1-2 court cases:
(what was the decision, why it is precedent, is it still applicable?) One recent example
would be Snyder v. Phelps which upheld the first Amendment of free speech. Or
another is the1954 case of Brown v. Board of Education. (In that case, the Supreme
Court found that it was an equal protection violation to separate students in public
schools by color).
6. Connect court decisions/precedent to student centered issues (student handbook/rules,
1st amendment rights, dress codes, and computer rights).
Extension:
Students can write an opinion on the additional court cases which the class has examined.
Connections:
English Language Arts
Students debate court decisions and write an opinion piece of writing. Students analyze various
court decisions using primary and secondary sources.
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project
Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
Mathematics
Instructional Resources:
Equipment/Manipulative
Projector
Computer with access to internet
Account with Discovery Education
Student Resources
Copies of court case summaries
T chart on Prosecution and Defense
Teacher Resources
Supreme Court Cases
Judicial Review Teacher’s Guide
Background information on Marbury V. Madison and how it established Judicial Review
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project
Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
Vocabulary:
Appellate Court – A court above a trial court that decides whether there were any
errors made by the trial court judge or during the trial.
Appellant – The party which brings the appeal.
Appellee – The party which the appeal is brought against.
Bill of Rights – The first ten amendments to the United States Constitution which
set out the rights of the people.
Judicial Review – The power of a court to invalidate legislative and executive
action as being unconstitutional.
Oral Argument – The oral presentation by the lawyers of a case before an
appellate court and where judges have the opportunity to ask questions of the
lawyers regarding issues in the case.
The Three Branches of the Government:
• Legislative Branch – The branch of the government which makes the laws
(e.g., the Congress).
• Executive Branch – The branch of the government which enforces the
laws (e.g., the President) .
• Judicial Branch – The branch of the government which interprets the laws
(e.g., the U.S. Supreme Court). United States Supreme Court – The highest
court in the
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project
Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
Appellate – Prosecutor
Appeal - Defense
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project
Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
Marbury v. Madison summary:
Here is a summary:

At the very end of his term, President John Adams had made many federal
appointments, including William Marbury as justice of the peace in the District of
Columbia.

Thomas Jefferson, the new president, refused to recognize the appointment of
Marbury.

The normal practice of making such appointments was to deliver a "commission," or
notice, of appointment. This was normally done by the Secretary of State. Jefferson's
Secretary of State at the time was James Madison.

At the direction of Jefferson, Madison refused to deliver Marbury's commission.
Marbury sued Madison, and the Supreme Court took the case.

Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that the Judiciary Act of 1789, which spelled out
the practice of delivering such commissions for judges and justices of the peace, was
unconstitutional because it the gave the Supreme Court authority that was denied it
by Article III of the Constitution. Thus, the Supreme Court said, the Judiciary Act of
1789 was illegal and not to be followed.
This was the first time the Supreme Court struck down a law because it was
unconstitutional. It was the beginning of the practice of "judicial review."
Source: http://www.socialstudiesforkids.com/wwww/us/marburydef.htm
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project
Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
1st Amendment protects military funeral protesters
WASHINGTON (AP) -The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the First Amendment protects fundamentalist church
members who mount anti-gay protests outside military funerals; despite the pain they cause
grieving families.
The court voted 8-1 in favor of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan. The decision
upheld an appeals court ruling that threw out a $5 million judgment to the father of a dead
Marine who sued church members after they picketed his son's funeral.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the court. Justice Samuel Alito dissented.
Roberts said free speech rights in the First Amendment shield the funeral protesters, noting that
they obeyed police directions and were 1,000 feet from the church.
"Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and
— as it did here — inflict great pain. On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by
punishing the speaker," Roberts said. "As a nation we have chosen a different course — to
protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate."
Alito strongly disagreed. "Our profound national commitment to free and open debate is not a
license for the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case," he said.
Matthew Snyder died in Iraq in 2006 and his body was returned to the United States for burial.
Members of the Westboro Baptist Church, who have picketed military funerals for several years,
decided to protest outside the Westminster, Md., church where his funeral was to be held.
The Rev. Fred Phelps and his family members who make up most of the Westboro Baptist
Church have picketed many military funerals in their quest to draw attention to their incendiary
view that U.S. deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq are God's punishment for the nation's tolerance of
homosexuality.
They showed up with their usual signs, including "Thank God for dead soldiers," ''You're Going
to Hell," ''God Hates the USA/Thank God for 9/11," and one that combined the U.S. Marine
Corps motto, Semper Fi, with a slur against gay men.
The church members drew counter-demonstrators, as well as media coverage and a heavy police
presence to maintain order. The result was a spectacle that led to altering the route of the funeral
procession.
Several weeks later, Albert Snyder was surfing the Internet for tributes to his son from other
soldiers and strangers when he came upon a poem on the church's website that attacked
Matthew's parents for the way they brought up their son.
Soon after, Snyder filed a lawsuit accusing the Phelpses of intentionally inflicting emotional
distress. He won $11 million at trial, later reduced by a judge to $5 million.
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project
Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
The federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., threw out the verdict and said the Constitution
shielded the church members from liability.
Forty-eight states, 42 U.S. senators and veterans groups sided with Snyder, asking the court to
shield funerals from the Phelps family's "psychological terrorism."
While distancing themselves from the church's message, media organizations, including The
Associated Press, urged the court to side with the Phelps family because of concerns that a
victory for Snyder could erode speech rights.
Roberts described the court's holding as narrow, and in a separate opinion, Justice Stephen
Breyer suggested in other circumstances, governments would not be "powerless to provide
private individuals with necessary protection."
But in this case, Breyer said, it would be wrong to "punish Westboro for seeking to communicate
its views on matters of public concern."
Margie Phelps, a daughter of the minister and a lawyer argued the case at the Supreme Court,
said she expected the outcome. "The only surprise is that Justice Alito did not feel compelled to
follow his oath," Phelps said. "We read the law. We follow the law. The only way for a different
ruling is to shred the First Amendment."
She also offered her church's view of the decision. "I think it's pretty self-explanatory, but here's
the core point: The wrath of God is pouring onto this land. Rather than trying to shut us up, use
your platforms to tell this nation to mourn for your sins."
Source: http://www2.dothaneagle.com/news/2011/mar/02/1st-amendment-protects-militaryfuneral-protesters-ar-1527685/
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project
Eighth Grade Expansion and Reform Unit
Summary of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347
U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873 (1954).
Facts
This case is a consolidation of several different cases from Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and
Delaware. Several black children (through their legal representatives, Ps) sought admission to
public schools that required or permitted segregation based on race. The plaintiffs alleged that
segregation was unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment.
In all but one case, a three judge federal district court cited Plessy v. Ferguson in denying relief
under the “separate but equal” doctrine. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the plaintiffs contended
that segregated schools were not and could not be made equal and that they were therefore
deprived of equal protection of the laws.
Issue

Is the race-based segregation of children into “separate but equal” public schools
constitutional?
Holding and Rule (Warren)

No. The race-based segregation of children into “separate but equal” public schools
violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and is
unconstitutional.
Segregation of children in the public schools solely on the basis of race denies to black children
the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment, even though the
physical facilities and other may be equal. Education in public schools is a right which must be
made available to all on equal terms.
The question presented in these cases must be determined not on the basis of conditions existing
when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, but in the light of the role of public education in
American life today. The separate but equal doctrine adopted in Plessy v. Ferguson, which
applied to transportation, has no place in the field of public education.
Separating black children from others solely because of their race generates a feeling of
inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way
unlikely ever to be undone. The impact of segregation is greater when it has the sanction of law.
A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of
law tends to impede the educational and mental development of black children and deprives
them of some of the benefits they would receive in an integrated school system. Whatever may
have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson, this finding
is amply supported by modern authority and any language to the contrary in Plessy v. Ferguson
is rejected.
Source: http://www.lawnix.com/cases/brown-board-education.html
Calhoun ISD Social Studies Curriculum Design Project