The Right to Privacy

Announcements:

4/20-4/24 Weekly Planner

In addition to reading (and watching the screencast) today's post, please make sure you:

1. Read the Street Law Summary on Roe v. Wade
2. Fill in the information about this case on the Supreme Court case matrix (use the same copy you have been using)

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

Today's Question: How does the government effectively balance the right to privacy with the need to maintain order?

Learning Standards:

LOR-3.B.5: While a right to privacy is not explicitly named in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has interpreted the due process clause to protect the right of privacy from state infringement. This interpretation of the due process clause has been the subject of controversy, such as has resulted from:

• Roe v. Wade (1973), which extended the right of privacy to a woman’s decision to have an abortion while recognizing compelling state interests in potential life and maternal health

Right to Privacy

Does the right to privacy exist? What amendment guarantees your right to privacy?

There are several important cases related to the issue of privacy rights and individual liberties. One of the most important cases is Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). In this case, Estelle Griswold of Planned Parenthood was prosecuted for distributing birth control pills, prohibited by Connecticut law, even to married couples. Click on the above link to read about the case. What is meant by penumbra?

Griswold is considered a landmark decision by establishing a right to privacy. This serves as a springboard to other privacy cases, most notably the case Roe v. Wade (1973) and other court decisions involving abortion rights and attempts to limit and regulate abortions. Read this summary of Roe v. Wade. Why is Roe v. Wade so significant? What did it specifically do?

Roe v. Wade was just the beginning of legal challenges concerning abortion. Since 1973, states have repeatedly passed legislation to limit abortions. The Court has maintained the right to an abortion, but has gradually upheld state and federal restrictions during the last forty years. Some of the restrictions include:

• Ban on public employees/facilities used for abortions (Webster v. Reproductive Health Services)
• Parental notification, waiting period (Planned Parenthood v. Casey)
• Ban on partial-birth abortions (Gonzales v. Carhart)
• Required ultrasounds before abortion

Missouri has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, requiring a 72-hour waiting period.  Missouri has also increased its restrictive health regulations, threatening to shut down Missouri's only abortion provider (Planned Parenthood in St. Louis). Missouri would become the 1st state without any abortion access.

Can a state require abortion clinics to have surgical facilities and doctors with admitting privileges at local hospitals?

Other Privacy Issues

Forced sterilization: Buck v. Bell (1927) and Skinner v. Oklahoma

Right to Marry: Loving v. Virginia, 1967

Right to Die: Cruzan v. Missouri Dept. of Health, 1990

Sexual Behavior: Lawrence v. Texas, 2003

How do the Lawrence v. Texas and Loving v. Virginia cases affect the Supreme Court's decision regarding same-sex marriage?

Review Videos

The 8th Amendment

Announcements:
In addition to reading today's post, please make sure you:

1. Complete the assigned Khan Academy module on the 8th Amendment
2. Complete the assigned Khan Academy Civil Liberties Quiz #2. Keep attempting until you score at least 80%!
3. Study for Civil Liberties Amendments 2-8 Quiz on Friday
4. Play iCivics Do I Have a Right? to review

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

Today's Essential Question: Does the death penalty violate the 8th Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment?

Learning Standards:

LOR-2.D: Explain how the Supreme Court has attempted to balance claims of individual freedom with laws and enforcement procedures that promote public order and safety.

LOR-2.D.1: Court decisions defining cruel and unusual punishment involve interpretation of the Eighth Amendment and its application to state death penalty statutes over time. 

Eighth Amendment 

Two main provisions:

• No cruel & unusual punishment
• No excessive fines or bail

Most relevant issues involve use of the death penalty.

Furman v. Georgia, 1972: Death penalty was being unfairly applied (too random/arbitrary); puts a temporary moratorium on it

Gregg v. Georgia, 1976: reinstates the death penalty; provides more guidance to jurors

Other issues:

Death penalty for mentally challenged? Minors?





Review your civil liberties: Play the game Do I Have a Right  by iCivics. Pretend to be a lawyer and build up your law firm helping people with their complaints.

Review Videos:

3.8 Amendments: Due Process and the Rights of the Accused

Announcements:

Welcome to another week of online learning! It looks like the Missouri Constitution test was a success and you have cleared that hurdle towards graduation. This week, we will continue our examination of civil liberties, specifically looking at Amendments 2-8. Like past weeks, this will consist of daily posts, Khan Academy modules, videos, and multiple Supreme Court cases. You can find our weekly planner here. Remember that posts are in reverse order.

Please continue to stay on top of the content as all of this material is part of Unit 3 which will be tested on the AP exam on May 11th.

In addition to reading today's post, please make sure you:

1. Read the Street Law summary on Gideon v. Wainwright (required case).
2. Fill in the information about this case on the Supreme Court case matrix (use the same copy you have been using)
3. Watch the Khan Academy videos on the 5th & 6th Amendments
4. Complete the self-assessment on Rights of the Accused
5. Google Meet Optional check-in to ask questions and clarify any concepts. Join either one of our meeting times at 10:30am or 1:00pm (see weekly planner for links)

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

Today's Essential Question: How does the government effectively balance the 5th and 6th Amendments’ rights of the accused with the need to maintain social order?

Learning Standards:

LOR-2.D: Explain how the Supreme Court has attempted to balance claims of individual freedom with laws and enforcement procedures that promote public order and safety.

LOR-3.B.2: The Miranda rule involves the interpretation and application of accused persons’ due process rights as protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, yet the Supreme Court has sanctioned a public safety exception that allows unwarned interrogation to stand as direct evidence in court. 

LOR-3.B.3: Pretrial rights of the accused and the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures are intended to ensure that citizen liberties are not eclipsed by the need for social order and security, including: 

1. The right to legal counsel, a speedy and public trial, and an impartial jury 
2. Protection against warrantless searches of cell phone data under the Fourth Amendment 
3. Limitations placed on bulk collection of telecommunication metadata (Patriot and USA Freedom Acts)

LOR-3.B.4: The due process clause has been applied to guarantee the right to an attorney and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, as represented by: 

1. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent 
2. The exclusionary rule, which stipulates that evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of the suspect’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against that suspect in criminal prosecution

Rights of the Accused

Similar to the 4th Amendment and the protection of unwarranted searches, the government must balance the rights of the individuals and those accused of a crime with the need to maintain order and promote public safety. The various rights expressed in both the 5th and 6th Amendments were seen as essential in the early days of the republic and were rooted in grievances against prior English practices. In the 20th century, many of these rights were incorporated at the state level through a series of court decisions, most notably Gideon v. Wainwright and Miranda v. Arizona.

Review Videos:

3.6 Amendments: Balancing Individual Freedom with Public Order and Safety

Announcements:

Welcome to another week of online learning! It looks like the Missouri Constitution test was a success and you have cleared that hurdle towards graduation. This week, we will continue our examination of civil liberties, specifically looking at Amendments 2-8. Like past weeks, this will consist of daily posts, Khan Academy modules, videos, and multiple Supreme Court cases. You can find our weekly planner here. Remember, posts are reverse ordered, so you may have to scroll to find Monday's, Tuesday's, etc.


Please continue to stay on top of the content as all of this material is part of Unit 3 which will be tested on the AP exam on May 11th.

In addition to watching the screencast and/or reading today's post, please make sure you:

1. Read the Oyez summary of Mapp v. Ohio
2. Fill in the information about this case on the Supreme Court case matrix (use the same copy you have been using)
3. Watch the Khan Academy video on the 4th Amendment

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

Today's Essential Question: How does the government effectively balance protection of private property and privacy with the need to maintain order?

Learning Standards:

LOR-2.D: Explain how the Supreme Court has attempted to balance claims of individual freedom with laws and enforcement procedures that promote public order and safety.

LOR-2.D.2 The debate about the Second and Fourth Amendments involves concerns about public safety and whether or not the government regulation of firearms or collection of digital metadata promotes or interferes with public safety and individual rights.

LOR-3.B.3: Pretrial rights of the accused and the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures are intended to ensure that citizen liberties are not eclipsed by the need for social order and security, including: 

1. The right to legal counsel, a speedy and public trial, and an impartial jury 
2. Protection against warrantless searches of cell phone data under the Fourth Amendment 
3. Limitations placed on bulk collection of telecommunication metadata (Patriot and USA Freedom Acts)

LOR-3.B.4: The due process clause has been applied to guarantee the right to an attorney and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, as represented by: 

1. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent 
2. The exclusionary rule, which stipulates that evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of the suspect’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against that suspect in criminal prosecution

The 4th Amendment

One of the most difficult challenges for government is finding the balance between individual freedom and maintaining order. The rights outlined in the first ten amendments are designed to protect individual freedoms, but government must also protect public safety. One area that is frequently at issue is the protection from unreasonable search and seizure guaranteed by the 4th Amendment.

Review Videos:

3.2 The First Amendment: The Establishment Clause

Listen to the screencast of today's post.

Announcements:
In addition to reading today's post, please make sure you:

1. Read the Street Law summary of Engel v. Vitale, one of the required SCOTUS cases
2. Fill out the SCOTUS Required Cases Matrix for Engel v. Vitale
3. Complete the Flipgrid (check your email for instructions and link) on the Establishment Clause.

As you look at today's post, you will see there are quite a few court cases. Like an excessive amount. The only case that is required by the College Board is Engel v. Vitale, but I have included the others to show you how often the Establishment Clause comes up in a variety of situations, most commonly involving public schools and religion. The most important thing is that you understand what the Establishment Clause means (based on the Court's interpretation over the last 50+years) and how it continues to be litigated and debated today.

As always, email me if you have any questions or need help!

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 

READING: 85-126 in Edwards

UNIT THREE Identification Terms 
________________________________________________

Today's Essential Question: How does the government effectively interpret and balance religious freedom and practice with respect to the First Amendment?

Learning Standards:

LOR-2.C: Explain the extent to which the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First and Second Amendments reflects a commitment to individual liberty.

LOR-2.C.1: The interpretation and application of the First Amendment’s establishment and free exercise clauses reflect an ongoing debate over balancing majoritarian religions practice and free exercise, as represented by such cases as:

• Engel v. Vitale (1962), which declared school sponsorship of religious activities violates the establishment clause 
• Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), which held that compelling Amish students to attend school past the eighth grade violates the free exercise clause 

________________________________________________

The Establishment Clause

The 1st Amendment protects five basic freedoms: speech, religion, press, right to petition, and the right to assemble. However, freedom of religion is a little more nuanced and actually contains two clauses related to religion.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof..."

The clause in red is referred to as the Establishment Clause and the one in blue is called the Free Exercise Clause. Today's focus is on the difference between these two clauses dealing with freedom of religion.

Discuss with your group what you think the Establishment Clause means. Does it prohibit strictly a national religion or does it mean there should be no endorsement or favoritism towards a specific religion or religion in general? How is religion part of American life and government? What is meant by the separation between church and state?

Many of the Court's decisions about the Establishment Clause involve religion in schools. Here are some of the important cases. Must-know cases are in larger font.

Religion and the Establishment Clause in School

Everson v. Board of Education, 1947: Can parents of students attending a private school (i.e. St. James or Pius) be reimbursed for transportation (busing) costs for students?

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971: What can private/religious schools be reimbursed for? 

The Lemon Test: 

1. Does it serve a religious purpose?

2. Does it create excessive entanglement?

3. Does it have a primary purpose of advancing or inhibiting religion?

Which of the following passes the Lemon Test?

• math textbooks
• state mandated tests
• field trips
• teacher salary
• interpreter for a deaf student
• free/reduced lunch program

Engel v. Vitale, 1962: Can school officials (teachers, principals, etc) lead students in non-denominational prayer?
SCOTUS TEMPLATE

The prayer recited in New York that led to Engel v. Vitale:
Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen


Discuss the following example with your group:

Is it a prayer? (source: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/estabinto.htm) The following verse was read each day to a Florida kindergarten class.  The school board said the purpose of the verse was to calm kids down and create a sense of appreciation for the world.  Is the verse a prayer?  How are students likely to interpret "you"? Could "you" be Mother Nature or a Giant Slug?

We thank you for the flowers so sweet;
We thank you for the food we eat;
We thank you for the birds that sing;
We thank you for everything.

Wallace v. Jaffree, 1985: Can schools have a moment of silence for meditation/prayer?

Lee v. Weisman, 1992: Can schools have sponsored prayer (by a school official or religious figure) at graduation ceremonies?

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 2000: Can a popularly elected student representative lead students in prayer over the loudspeaker at a sporting event?


Could a student valedictorian lead her classmates in prayer at graduation? Discuss with your group if you think this violates the Establishment Clause. Are the free exercise of religion and freedom of speech rights in conflict with the Establishment Clause?

Epperson v. Arkansas, 1968 : Can a school ban the teaching of evolution?

Edwards v. Aguilard, 1987: Can a school require the teaching of creationism?

Westside v. Mergens, 1990: Can student religious groups meet on school grounds?

Is the Establishment Clause violated by allowing an optional Bible study class once a week for elementary and middle school students during school hours?

Is the Establishment Clause violated by allowing high school cheerleaders to put Bible verses on their banners at football games?

Religion and the Establishment Clause in Public Places

Lynch v. Donnelly, 1984: Can religious figures (i.e. Nativity scene) be part of a Christmas display on city property?

Stone v. Graham, 1980 & Van Orden v. Perry, 2004: Can the Ten Commandments be posted on government property?

Marsh v. Chambers, 1983 & Town of Greece, NY v. Galloway, 2014: Can legislative or town hall meetings begin with a prayer?

Do you think the city of Republic's city logo violates the Establishment Clause? Why or why not?

The court's ruling.

Other Establishment Clause Resources

First Amendment Center: Establishment Clause

Exploring Constitutional Conflicts: The Establishment Clause

The Supreme Court & Federalism

ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Read: 68-78 in Edwards
Unit 1 Identification Terms
Unit 1 Exam: Monday, October 21
Study the Unit 1 Standards
Unit 1 Standards-Student Questions Review
5th Hour Survey: Complete this survey to be eligible to win a class pizza party! Seniors--use this link instead.

_________________________________________________________________
Learning Objectives:

CON-2.B: Explain how the appropriate balance of power between national and state governments has been interpreted differently over time.

CON-2.B.2: The balance of power between the national and state governments has changed over time based on U.S. Supreme Court interpretation of such cases as:

• McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), which declared that Congress has implied powers necessary to implement its enumerated powers and established supremacy of the U.S. Constitution and federal laws over state laws
• United States v. Lopez (1995), which ruled that Congress may not use the commerce clause to make possession of a gun in a school zone a federal crime, introducing a new phase of federalism that recognized the importance of state sovereignty and local control

The Supreme Court and Federalism
The Supreme Court has decided many cases dealing with issues of federalism. Two of the most important cases are McCulloch v. Maryland and US v. Lopez. Today, we will look at these two cases and several others to see how the Court's rulings have impacted state-national relations.

***SCOTUS CASE TEMPLATE***
The College Board has identified 15 Supreme Court cases that are MUST-KNOWS. For each of these cases, you will make a copy of the SCOTUS Case Template and fill in the necessary information. Create a folder in your Google Drive:APGOV:SCOTUS Cases. Save a copy of the template and all 15 cases that we cover throughout the year here.

For each case, I have created a list of resources, both print and video for you to review and utilize to fill out the template. The Street Law and Oyez resources will be your best bets. Please make two copies of the template, one for McCulloch v. Maryland and one for US v. Lopez, use the resources provided and fill out each form.

McCulloch v. Maryland

MCCULLOCH V. MARYLAND DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. What are the two central questions raised by this case?

2. How does the Court answer these two questions?  What rationale (constitutional clauses) does the Court use to explain its decision?

3. Compare the Court’s reasoning with the concerns raised by Brutus regarding the power of the government.

4. How would our nation be different today if the Court had decided differently?

US v. Lopez (PBS Landmark Cases)

US v. Lopez (Bill of Rights Institute)

DAY TWO (Wednesday, Oct. 16)
Yesterday, we looked at two important cases involving federalism. It is imperative that you understand the importance of both McCulloch v. Maryland and US v. Lopez. However, it is also vital that you understand the role of federalism and the constitutional issues involved in a variety of questions and court cases.

Today, you will look at other Supreme Court cases that are questions of federalism and the role of the national government vs. the power of the states. Make a copy of this chart and fill out the information based on the above case summaries. Have this completed and ready to discuss for tomorrow. Use your class time wisely! Finish early? Study for your Unit 1 exam.



Videos for Review: