Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Warm Up: Which Court?


Directions: Read the following situations and determine whether the case would be heard in State court or Federal court.  In a sentence or two, explain your reasoning.


Case #1: Jan just lost her job. One day, while she is out looking for work, she takes a blouse and skirt from a store so that she will have something to wear to job interviews. Jan gets caught, is arrested and charged with shoplifting.  Jan would be tried in the:



Case #2: Jim and his friends decide that they need money. They rob a bank in the town that neighbors theirs.  Jim’s friend Bob drives the getaway car, while Jim, Ted, and Frank rob the bank.  Jim and his friends get caught.  They will be tried in the:



Case #3:  Sarah buys a new bicycle over the internet.  One week after receiving her bike, she is riding it, and the front wheel comes off, causing her to have an accident in which she is severely injured.  Sarah lives in Indiana, but the company she bought the bike from is in Texas.  Sarah wants to sue them, to recover the cost of the bike ($500.00), and to have them pay for her hospital bills ($2,000.00).

Monday, December 14, 2015

Judicial Branch WebQuest

Read each section below.  Visit the link provided to you for that section and use the information you find to answer the questions that follow. Copy the questions and your answers to your own sheet of paper and title it "Introduction to the Judicial Branch: WebQuest."

A Court is Born!

What if there were only one court in the entire United States? Would that be enough? The Constitution of the United States created just one court: the Supreme Court. But you probably already know that today there are LOTS of courts. What happened?

Well, for one thing, each state has its own state court system. But somehow, a whole network of federal courts also came into existence...

Follow the link to see a transcript of the Constitution. Scroll down until you find Article III. Read the beginning of Section 1.

Link: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

Question:
  • According to the Constitution, who has the power to create federal courts that are below the Supreme Court?
  • In the quote "The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office" what do you think the italicized phrase means?
  • How does Article III compare to Articles I and II in terms of length?  What do you think that means?



Authority of the Courts

If someone stole your smartphone, would you ask the United States Supreme Court for help? Probably not, because you probably already know the Supreme Court doesn't deal with small stuff like that. Different courts have authority to hear different kinds of cases. This authority is called the court's jurisdiction.

In America, we have a system of federal courts and many systems of state courts. Not only that, there are several levels of courts inside each system! Each system -- federal and state -- has its own jurisdiction. But who has authority over what?

Follow the link to see which types of cases each system has the authority to hear.

Link: http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure/comparing-federal-state-courts

Question:
  • According to the notes on the Federal Court System, Congress has established how many U.S. Courts of Appeals?  How many U.S. District Courts?
  • What is the difference between the way Federal and State judges are selected?
  • List one type of case that federal courts have jurisdiction over, one type that state courts have jurisdiction over, and one type that BOTH court systems can hear.



State Court Systems

State court systems aren't too complicated. Each state has its own court system that is only to resolve problems in that state. Inside each state system, there are different levels of courts. Most cases start in a trial court. In many states, this is called a superior court. These courts deal with serious crimes and disputes over larger amounts of money or property.

It doesn't end there. A trial court's decision can be challenged in an appeals court. If the people involved still think a mistake was made, each state has a high court that can review decisions from an appeals court. The highest court in most states is called its Supreme Court.

But wait -- there's more! States often have a variety of lower courts that deal with small issues like traffic violations or disputes over small amounts of money. They can also have special courts that only deal with certain types of cases, such as juvenile courts, divorce courts, or "probate" courts that help distribute a person's stuff after they've died.

Follow the link and click on California on the map to see what it calls its courts!

Link: http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/statecourtmap.html

Question:
  • List the different tiers of courts in California.
  • According to the map below, what Appellate Court district does San Diego fall into?




Federal District Courts

The federal court system is one, big court system for the entire United States. Only certain types of cases can be heard in federal court. Just like in state court systems, most federal cases start in a trial court.

Federal trial courts are called district courts. Why? Because the federal court system is divided into districts! Dividing it up keeps things organized by letting people know which district court they need to go to. (Usually, you go to the court in the district where your problem happened.)

There are 94 districts. That means 94 district courts! A district is either an entire state (the District of Wyoming) or part of a state (the Northern District of Georgia).

Follow the link to see a map of the United States federal court system. See how some states are divided by gray dashed lines? These lines show district boundaries. Some states are divided into regional districts and some are not.

Link: http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/federal-courts-public/court-website-links

Questions:
  • Scroll down on the page and find the table that shows U.S. District Courts. How are the districts inside a state named?
  • Is California divided into districts, or is it one big district?
  • Use the map and other information on this page to help you complete this sentence: I live in the _____ District of _[your state]_. (If your state isn't divided into regions, you won't put anything in the first blank.)



Federal Courts of Appeals

Just like in state courts, there’s action you can take if you think the federal district court made the wrong decision in your case. So what do you do? Appeal! That means asking a higher court to review and change the decision.

To appeal a decision from a federal district court, you go to a federal Court of Appeals. Remember how the country is divided into districts for trial courts? Well, the country is divided into circuits for appellate courts. To appeal your case, you go to the Court of Appeals in the circuit where your district is located.

There are 13 circuits all together — 11 numbered circuits, plus the District of Columbia (D.C.) Circuit and a circuit called the Federal Circuit, which hears certain kinds of appeals from all over the country.

Follow the link to the same map you just looked at. This time, focus on the big numbers. See how different areas of the country are shaded different colors? Those are the circuits!

Link: http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/federal-courts-public/court-website-links

Question:
  • Which circuit do you live in? (Hint: nobody lives in the Federal Circuit.)



The Highest Court in the Land

And you probably already know which one it is: The United States Supreme Court! This is where you go if you think the Court of Appeals made the wrong decision in your case. Or at least, you can TRY to take your case to the Supreme Court… The Supremes don’t have to take just any case. They get to pick and choose!

You can also appeal to the Supreme Court if you took your state case all the way to your state’s Supreme Court, and you think the wrong decision was made.

The Supreme Court was created by the U.S. Constitution. It is the head of our entire judicial branch of government — both the state and federal systems! The nine justices on the Court each had to be nominated by a president (whoever was president at the time) and approved by the Senate. Then they get to stay on the Court for life! Most Supreme Court Justices served on the federal Court of Appeals before being appointed to the Supreme Court.

Follow the link to see all the current justices. (At the bottom, you'll see justices who are retired but still living.)

Link: http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Questions:
  • Who is the current Chief Justice? When did the Chief Justice join the court?
  • Who has been on the court the longest? What year did that justice take his/her seat?  For this, IGNORE any justices that have (Retired) by their names.
  • Who is the newest justice? What year did he/she join the court? 
  • Based on the year each justice joined the court, determine which president nominated him/her.
  • Which president nominated the longest serving member?  Why might that be significant?

WebQuest adapted from iCivics (https://www.icivics.org/web-quests/courts-nutshell)

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

Electoral College Maps

Use the accompanying Electoral College maps (illustrating election results from 1928 to present) and answer the following questions. CLICK ON THE MAP TO VIEW FULL SIZE.

1. What year was the biggest Electoral College win for the Democrats? For the Republicans?
2. What two consecutive elections show the biggest swing from the Republicans to the Democrats?
3. What year showed the greatest Electoral College success for a third party?
4. Which year had the closest Electoral College vote?
5. Which year had the closest popular vote?
6. Choose two states that have been the most consistently Republican since 1964 (there are several choices).
7. Choose two states that have been the most consistently Democratic since 1964 (there are fewer choices).
8. What two states voted Democratic in 2008 that hadn’t done so since 1964.
9. Find one state that used to be consistently Democratic, but is now consistently Republican.
10. Find one state that used to be consistently Republican, but is now consistently Democratic.



Tuesday, December 8, 2015

Presidential Powers

Homework:  Read the following paragraphs about presidents using executive power and answer the three questions below for each example. Be concise.


EXPANDING PRESIDENTIAL POWER

For each president (Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Truman, Bush)  answer the following questions:
  1. What did the president do?
  2. How was this different than what the president had done before?
  3. Why was this controversial?

Thomas Jefferson

In 1803, President Thomas Jefferson authorized the purchase of the Louisiana
Territory from France for $15 million (the equivalent of $219 million today). The purchase more than doubled the size of the United States, and the land acquired comprises 1⁄4 of current American territory. While a significant event in Jefferson’s presidency, the purchase was highly controversial because the U.S. Constitution does not include any provisions for acquiring territory. Though himself a champion of small government, Jefferson decided to purchase Louisiana because of his concerns over French and Spanish power to block America’s trade through the port of New Orleans.

Andrew Jackson

Whereas members of Congress only represent their specific constituencies,
President Andrew Jackson emphasized the presidency as the only office that truly represents all people. Thus when elected, Jackson’s perceived mandate led him to act on the public’s behalf, making decisions as he saw fit. Jackson especially exercised this power through the use of veto; he vetoed more bills in his term in office than all previous presidents put together, and was the first president to use the pocket veto. Jackson particularly used the veto to counter the national bank. Though Congress and the Supreme Court had found the bank to be constitutional, Jackson thought it to be unconstitutional and used the power of the veto to shut it down.

Abraham Lincoln

When the Confederates attacked Fort Sumter, S.C. in 1861, President Lincoln did
not wait for Congress to reconvene before taking action. Without Congressional approval, Lincoln increased the size of the army and navy, blockaded Southern ports, spent money that had not been appropriated by Congress, arrested Northern citizens that were suspected to sympathize with the Confederacy, and suspended habeas corpus (which prevents people from being unlawfully detained), thereby taking away civil liberties. Lincoln later addressed Congress and admitted that he had exceeded his authority under the Constitution, but claimed he felt the need to act instantly in response to the crisis. Lincoln asked Congress to retroactively authorize his actions, which it did.

Harry Truman

Up until 1950, it was generally thought that the constitutional power to wage war
rested with Congress alone. However, in June of that year President Truman asserted the war-making power in the executive branch by sending troops to South Korea without congressional authorization or a declaration of war. In 1950, North Korean troops invaded the Republic of Korea. President Harry Truman deployed troops to South Korea without a formal declaration of war by Congress. Senators protested this action, saying the president had “usurped power and violated the Constitution” with this action, through they agreed to provide funds to support the war. Truman’s actions set a precedent for presidential “warmaking” without congressional approval, from LBJ and Nixon in Vietnam to Bush in the Middle East.

George W. Bush

As part of his War on Terror (after the attacks of 9/11), President Bush exercised
broad powers in the name of national security. The Patriot Act, approved by Congress, enabled surveillance powers such as the ability to monitor emails, phone calls, internet activity, texts, etc. without a search warrant. President Bush’s administration also exercised the rights to detain citizens indefinitely as enemy combatants without a warrant, trial by jury, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Additionally, the administration has asserted power to ignore treaties that prohibit torture, and detain foreign citizens indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay.



Monday, November 16, 2015

Test Review for Unit 2: Congress

Below are all of the resources you will need to complete the test review activities for the Unit 2 Exam on Congress.

Study Guide: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9UCSbmq42fUM2VCMlltZnFlU00
(Download and print this first.)

Visit each station and answer the questions for that station on the Study Guide.

Station 1: Leadership/Organization of Congress Prezi
http://prezi.com/pz0khhiuy5ta/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy&rc=ex0share

Station 2: Congressional Powers Google Slides
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1FRA4fA9_zEZWPjMZcvSvb0GiHz4OR_HkRLFgGpIkhjs/edit?usp=sharing

Station 3: Vocabulary Quizlet
https://quizlet.com/join/8DTp54G2Z (must have a free Quizlet account)
https://quizlet.com/105450049/flashcards (link if you don't want an account)

Station 4: The Constitution Article 1 (click link and scroll to page 3)
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6BLDSTKJo6Pdjl5eUhaZzlaOGc

Station 5: Test Review Kahoot
* From a computer visit: https://play.kahoot.it/#/k/2ee3eb99-319f-4a0c-9906-d4e64ba863cb
* On your cell phone, navigate to www.kahoot.it and enter the Game PIN


Bernie Sanders Response to ISIS attacks

Below is an excerpt from Senator Bernie Sanders's response to the ISIS attacks in Paris as given during the Democratic debate on Saturday, 11/14 (the day after the attacks) at Drake University in Iowa.  Read the following quote and answer the questions below.

"International terrorism is a major issue that we've got to address today. And I agree with much of what -- the secretary (Hillary Clinton) and -- and the governor (Michael O'Malley) have said. Only have one area of -- of disagreement with the secretary. I think she said something like, "The bulk of the responsibility is not ours." Well, in fact, I would argue that the disastrous invasion of Iraq, something that I strongly opposed, has unraveled the region completely. And led to the rise of Al Qaeda -- and to -- ISIS. 
Now, in fact, what we have got to do -- and I think there is widespread agreement here - 'cause the United States cannot do it alone. What we need to do is lead an international coalition which includes -- very significantly - Muslim nations in that region are going have to fight and defend their way of life. 
I don't think any sensible person would disagree that the invasion of Iraq led to the massive level of instability we are seeing right now. I think that was one of the worst foreign policy plunders in the modern history of United States. Not only did I vote against the war in Iraq, if you look at history, you will find that regime change -- whether it was in the early '50s in Iran, whether it was toppling Salvador Allende in Chile or whether it was overthrowing the government Guatemala way back when -- these invasions, these -- these toppling of governments, regime changes have unintended consequences. I would say that on this issue I'm a little bit more conservative than the secretary. 
It is enormously complicated. But here's something that I believe we have to do is we put together an international coalition. And that is we have to understand that the Muslim nation in the region, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, Jordan, all of these nations, they're going just have to get their hands dirty, their boots on the ground. They are going have to take on ISIS. This is a war for the soul of Islam. And those countries who are opposed to Islam [I think he meant radical Islamic fundamentalism], they are going have to get deeply involved in a way that is not the case today. We should be supportive of that effort. So should the UK, so should France. But those Muslim countries are going have to lead the efforts. They are not doing it now."
Questions
1. Why does Senator Sanders believe the United States has major responsibility for conditions in the Middle East today?
2. What is the Senator's attitude toward regime change?
3. What does Senator Sanders propose as a way to combat ISIS?
4. In your opinion, what should be done to prevent future attacks like the one in Paris this weekend?

Sources:
  • http://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-debate-transcript-clinton-sanders-omalley-in-iowa/
  • http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/teaching-about-paris-and_b_8568550.html

Isis Attacks in Paris

Media Coverage of the Isis Attacks in Paris and Related Issues

60 Minutes (video): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-the-paris-attacks/

President Hollande: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/11/13/it-is-horror-french-president-hollandes-remarks-after-paris-attacks/

President Obama: https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/13/watch-president-obamas-statement-attacks-paris

Supporting France, Obama Loath to Add Troops to ISIS Fight: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/16/world/europe/obama-g20-turkey.html

Charlie Hebdo: https://youtu.be/O2P7cUYFwoc

The Paris Attacks: What we Knowhttp://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/11/paris-attacks/415953/

Hollande Class Paris Attacks an "Act of War"http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/11/hollande-paris-france-attacks-concern-stadium-isil-151114103631610.html

How Paris Stood with the U.S. after 9/11http://time.com/4112746/paris-attacks-us-september-911-terrorism/

The Confused Person's Guide to the Syria Civil Warhttp://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/syrian-civil-war-guide-isis/410746/

France launches fierce assault on ISIS targets in Syria: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-vows-to-help-france-hunt-down-perpetrators-of-paris-terror-attacks/2015/11/15/a4628faa-8b74-11e5-9a07-453018f9a0ec_story.html?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_politics

How the 2016 Candidates Responded to the Paris Attacks: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/paris-2016-candidates-response/416046/

Republican Responses

As new speaker, Ryan will be quickly tested on foreign policy: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/11/16/as-new-speaker-ryan-will-be-quickly-tested-on-foreign-policy/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_politics

Cruz: ‘No meaningful risk’ of Christians committing terrorism: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/15/cruz-no-meaningful-risk-of-christians-committing-terrorism/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_politics

Rubio calls for invoking NATO’s collective-defense clause after Paris attacks: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/15/rubio-calls-for-invoking-natos-collective-defense-clause-after-paris-attacks/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_politics

Mitt Romney's Responsehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-must-wage-war-on-the-islamic-state-not-merely-harass-it/2015/11/15/00a8884c-8bba-11e5-ae1f-af46b7df8483_story.html?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_headlines

Sen. Graham calls on president, Congress to act after Paris attacks: http://www.wyff4.com/news/sen-graham-calls-on-president-congress-to-take-action-after-paris-attacks/36451796

Democratic Responses

Clinton, Sanders, O'Malley: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/at-debate-democratic-candidates-respond-to-paris-attacks-20151114

More Articles

White House, Congress clash over Syrian refugees in wake of Paris attacks: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/15/white-house-congress-clash-over-syrian-refugees-wake-paris-attacks/75824438/

'Act of War': Will Congress finally vote to declare war on ISIS, after Paris attacks?: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11/14/act-war-will-congress-finally-vote-to-declare-war-on-isis-after-paris-attacks/

Paris Attacks Could Bolster Congressional Efforts to Block U.S. Refugee Plan: http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/16/paris-attacks-could-bolster-congressional-efforts-to-block-u-s-refugee-plan/

Republican Candidates Urge Aggressive Response: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/us/politics/republican-candidates-urge-aggressive-response-after-paris-attacks.html


Friday, October 30, 2015

Republican Debate in Boulder, Colorado

Today we watched about 45 minutes of the Republican debate from Boulder, Colorado.

Link to debatehttp://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000439339

Link to Candidate Score Cardhttps://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9UCSbmq42fUQ18wdjdDNTN6MGM

HOMEWORK: Answer the following questions and turn in along with your Candidate Score Card

  1. Which candidate do you think was most effective and why? (Who “won”)
  2. Which candidate do you think was least effective and why? (Who “lost”)
  3. Did you learn anything new from any of the candidates?  Did anyone challenge or change your viewpoints on an issue or his/her candidacy?
  4. Was the event you viewed an effective way to obtain information about the candidates' positions on issues?