Tag: Supreme Court

Interactions Among Branches of Government, Required Documents, Teaching Tips, Writing for AP Gov

Congress and the President

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

After giving notes on the presidency, I wanted to really show students how it works in action today and historically. Here are a few ways I did so. I also discuss the American Presidency in another post. I used a block day and a day for these in total. If you are curious about my schedule, check this out.

Checks on the Presidency:

When looking at my binder and topic 2.5 I wanted to make sure I showed Supreme Revenge because it talks about the failed appointment of Robert Bork and how it changed the nomination process.

Supreme Revenge: this is an excellent look at the Senate’s role in confirmation hearings and how it’s changed since Robert Bork. *Warning- this does look at Anita Hill’s testimony as well as Dr. Blasey-Ford. It is graphic. Please watch this before you decide to show it in class. (CON-4.B.2)

This led to a great conversation about the role of factions in government, how much power the Senate can have, and the best question, ¨Can they do that?¨ It also introduces students to interest groups (Federalist Society), talks about Congressional leadership, committee work, and how a divided government causes gridlock. I often stopped the documentary to show key players throughout the discussed period (Bork´s nomination to Kavanaugh) that include current presidential nominees.

Expansion of Presidential Power:

After reading Federalist 70, we also dig into the War Powers Act and Nixon’s Veto. In order to prepare for a Socratic discussion (or a make-up argumentative essay) I asked students to find another time in history that a president interpreted or justified their formal or informal powers. Because of how we studied, my essay prompt deviates from the traditional structure because I require them to use 4 pieces of evidence in discussing the presidency, including how the Framers saw the president´s role, what the Constitution says, how the War Powers Act (and Nixon´s veto) looks at that role in war time, and contextualizing interpretation or justification of powers to another time in history.

Below is the prompt:

Using your documents, write an argumentative essay on the following prompt:

Develop an argument that analyzes the constitutionality of the War Powers Act.

Use at least one piece of evidence from each of the following documents:
● Federalist 70
● Constitution
● War Powers Act
● An additional piece of evidence from a document you researched from another
time in history that a president

  1. Respond to the prompt with defensible claim or thesis that establishes a line of
    reasoning.
  2. Support your claim with evidence and reasoning to explain why the evidence supports your claim or thesis.
  3. Respond to an opposing or alternate perspective using refutation, concession or
    rebuttal.
    *You will be graded using the AP Argumentative Essay Rubric

There are so many ways to teach the presidency with the new curriculum! What are your favorite resources?

Assessment, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Political Participation, Professional Development, Projects, Required Documents, Teachable Moments, Teaching Tips

Teaching Controversial Topics… like abortion laws

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

 

Love is a much needed emotion in today’s world and it is always welcomed. It is a great way of cashing in on your own moral savings. Many people donate to charities that they are passionate about, they also donate to

 

As I scroll through social media, it’s hard to miss that Georgia and Alabama have recently passed the nation’s strictest abortion laws. So, naturally, when students walk in they want to know what I think.

I think that certain factions are trying to overturn Roe v. Wade (my standard response, which my students understand.

I’m not about to discuss my views because in my classroom, it’s not relevant.) I will not discuss this right at the beginning of my class because I need time to get to know my students. This is why I do my Civil Liberties and Civil Rights unit at the end of my class. When discussing the 2nd amendment or abortion case law as civil liberties, I need my students to know the procedures and be comfortable in the classroom. In my classroom, opinion is not relevant. You can have your opinion, but we aren’t about to debate gun rights or abortion. My job is to give you information about the Constitution, how to find relevant and trustworthy sources, and teach you how to develop an educated argument.

I’m going to assume that this issue will continue and have already started to consider how I will address it with my students next year. Here are some I have collected to help with #1 and #2 on the 5 ways to improve your practice. If you are curious about #4, I discuss it in The New York Times Op-Ed in AP Government.

  • This USA Today article gives information on the states’ abortion laws. The quantitative analysis could be a great warm up to discuss federalism (Unit 1)
    • How do states have the ability to pass laws that differ from others based on Supreme Court cases?
  • Discussing the sides of abortion in relation to factions and Federalist 10. Abortion will likely be a constant source of division because there are so many factions within the argument.
  • A great source for teachers to learn is Body Politic from Oyez. It features Roe v. Wade, Casey v. Planned Parenthood (and Justice O’Connor’s famous undue burden standard), Gonzales v. Carhart, and Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt.
    • In my classroom, I skip over Gonzales because of the content. Roe v Wade is a required case, Casey sets a different standard, and Whole Women’s Health is the case I was at the Supreme Court for so I know a lot about it. 
  • The Future of Abortion Laws: “Two leading voices from organizations on different sides of today’s biggest debates over reproductive rights and abortion laws—Catherine Glenn Foster of Americans United for Life and Dr. Kelli Garcia of National Women’s Law Center—join host Jeffrey Rosen to explore the key cases making their way up to the Supreme Court. Garcia and Foster also share their views on landmark abortion precedent like Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and the more recent case Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, and predict how precedent might affect the outcomes of challenges to pending abortion laws at the federal level and in states like Louisiana, Tennessee, and Mississippi.” The Constitution Center.
    • I love the Constitution Center so much. The podcasts show both sides and have a very educated discussion based on law.
  • FiveThirtyEight Politics
    • This podcast goes through political ideology, polling, how cases go through the Court system, and the 2020 election. I would assign this to listen to at home or listen to it in class so that I am available to answer questions since I am the content expert.
  • The Words We Live By by Linda Monk
    • First of all, I love this book. Secondly, pages 222-224 has a great explanation of abortion under the 14th amendment.

 

With all controversial topic, knowing your kids and having your kids know procedures in your class is super important.

I plan for the comments that get us off track or may be inflammatory. My standard response is, “I appreciate your opinion, but we need to stick to the facts and get back on track.” I may not appreciate their opinion, but I want to keep my classroom a place where students can make mistakes and learn.

How do you navigate controversial topics in your AP Government class?

 

Assessment, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Projects, Required Documents

Tyson Timbs and a 2012 Land Rover LR2 v. State of Indiana… A Moot Court

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

It has begun. We’ve started our week of deep diving into Street Law’s Winter SCOTUS in the classroom case, Tyson Timbs and a 2012 Land Rover LR2 v. State of Indiana. This is the final exam for my AP Government class as well as my accelerated 8th graders. I have discussed how I do this in a previous post. This is how I’m doing it for this year!

We end our semester in AP Government with Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. Since this case was argued November 28, the media is fresh and there is a lot of information out there. It’s in the news, it’s on podcasts, it’s part of our everyday lives.

This is how the last week and a half goes:

Preface: I’ve given them case and assignment before to allow them to look it over and decide what they will want to do or what they will be successful at. I’ve developed these roles because I know students show their knowledge in different ways. It’s an ever developing project as I get feedback from my students.

Day 1/2: Listening to oral arguments and discussing what we hear.  I started to write down the cases as they were mentioned, do a bit of research to see if they were worth a look by the students, and list them on the board. (I also get for graduation robes so the students can have robes and be a bit more official)

img_0747

Related cases:

  • McDonald v. Chicago (HELLO required Supreme Court case)
  • Bennis v. Michigan
  • von Hofe v. United States
  • US v. Bajakajian
  • Austin v. US
  • Kokesh v. SEC
  • US v. Halper
  • Van Oster v. Kansas

Vocabulary to Know:

  • in rem
  • in personam
  • civil forfeiture
  • stare decisis

 

img_0746

Day 3 (Block Day) Full practice exam– not related, but I want one last exam before they leave so I can see where they are at and personalize review assignments for the spring AP test.

Day 4,5: Research case, amicus briefs (example from SCOTUSblog), related cases, etc. I like to do a few days in class so they have each other and me, the content “expert”. There is also a podcast from First Mondays called “8,000 pounds of shark fins”. (Even though the actual case is called United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins. Yes, that is real. There is also a John Oliver clip, however I don’t show it in class because… well, we all know John Oliver…

Day 6: Finalize papers and turn in. Run through what to expect with Moot Court. I look through all papers that night to ensure quality before the moot court date.

Day 7: Moot Court (It’s our final exam day and we have 90 minutes)

I will update as we move forward, but wanted to give an overview of what I’ll be doing the next few weeks!

 

Update:

Man, this was fun! I even had a student come up with their own media company to live tweet the case.

 

Things I will change for next semester:

  1. As much as I trust my students, there was an issue of misuse of technology and a student tweeting something with inappropriate language tied to our class hashtag. I had it immediately removed, but it taught me a valuable lesson.  Next time, I will review appropriate use of technology as it relates to using class hashtags and have a set punishment for. It is the unfortunate byproduct of using social media in a classroom. Lesson learned.
  2. Because I had my 8th graders do this as well, they came up with the idea to write a newspaper as they watched! {Twitter wasn’t an option}5th hour
  3. One class got off topic and the Justices were asking irrelevant questions. I need to be better at preparing them as to what to ask.
  4. The Justices in a few classes were on a mission to be tough. Next semester, I will be more specific with what they need to do. I caught one class and reminded the Justices that they are to let the lawyers answer their questions and to not try to trick them.

 

All classes were unanimous in their decisions and had so much fun!

img_0890

img_0839
We had to pack a Court because of class size. 
Assessment, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Interactions Among Branches of Government, Projects

Supreme Court Hand Turkeys

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

It’s the day before Thanksgiving and our school is hosting a blood drive. This means sparse classes and excited students. Yesterday, I assigned them a Supreme Court case from the list I made so they could prepare for Supreme Court Dating next week. {My students loved the Bureaucratic Speed Dating we did and last year appreciated the Supreme Court speed dating because they were able to get a lot of info from it!} With the new cases, I want them to have a firm understanding of the case. It’s an easy assignment, it’s fun, and it’s awesome to see what they create! Hand Turkeys assignment.

To really get the cases, we will draw them, talk about them (Supreme Court speed dating), and write about them. I loved the way these turned out! 

  • US v. Nixon
  • Tinker v. Des Moines
  • Mapp v. Ohio
  •  
  • Shaw v. Reno


    Have a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday! 
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Foundations of American Democracy, Interactions Among Branches of Government, Political Participation, Professional Development

My favorite podcasts for AP Government

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

I absolutely love podcasts! I can listen while I’m driving or out for a walk. I love having my students listen to them as well. I often assign them outside of class, but sometimes we will listen to them if they are short and meaningful. It’s also helpful for my auditory learners or for students that just need a bit of extra information to really “get it”. The green are ones I listen to in class or assign for extra knowledge on a subject! The red are for my own personal knowledge and growth. 

Here are my favorite podcasts for AP Government!

  • Constitutional– I use this one in class and for my personal knowledge.
  • We the People– I have to admit, I love Jeffrey Rosen. And when he followed me on Twitter one day, I about died. THIS is a podcast I have my students listen to because it presents both sides from a scholarly view point. It has been especially amazing for the redesign. I highly recommend this! 
  • The Daily– I listen to this daily. Each day on my way to work. Like clockwork. 
  • Teaching American History– with titles such as “How to Read Federalist #10” , many AP teachers jump for joy. Let’s be honest, we all need to brush up on some of our document knowledge. This is a great resource for teachers who don’t want to be caught unaware! 
  • More Perfect I love using this in class. More specifically, they have a great one on Citizen’s United which can be used with my lesson on the required case. There are 3 seasons and I’ve found they are easy listening. 
  • PBS News Hour- quick, easy, informative, and part of my Alexa morning routine. 
  • Ain’t No Free Lunch– I met Danielle at my Street Law summer and really loved listening to her talk. Her and her friend, Taikein look at current/past issues. I appreciate hearing different points of view because it makes me a better teacher and better citizen. Plus, I am working on expanding my resources so that all students feel represented. And my students love the back and forth. 
  • Slow Burn– Nixon’s Watergate. Clinton’s impeachment. So enthralling and something I listen to so I can strengthen my history knowledge. 
  • Up First– The news from NPR in 10 minutes. I recommend to students who want to listen to the news and keep up. They can listen to it on the way to school or work. 
  • The Wilderness– I started to listen to Pod Save America awhile ago on the recommendation of a friend, but soon found it to be not up my alley. I decided to give this a try because of it’s look at what happened to the Democratic Party in the 2016 and what they need to change. It’s like an autopsy and it’s refreshingly honest. This is a podcast I listen to for my own personal knowledge.  From the website: “The Wilderness is a documentary from Crooked Media and Two-Up about the history and future of the Democratic Party. Pod Save America’s Jon Favreau tells the story of a party finding its way out of the political wilderness through conversations with strategists, historians, policy experts, organizers, and voters. In fifteen chapters, the series explores issues like inequality, race, immigration, sexism, foreign policy, media strategy, and how Democrats can build a winning majority that lasts.”

 

Tell me, what are your favorite podcasts and how do you use them?

American Political Ideologies and Beliefs, Political Participation, Writing for AP Gov

Discussing Citizens United

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

Oh campaign finance.

The wonderful world.

{take a deep breath and continues to pretend it’s super fun!}

money

*I take 2 regular and 1 block day for this.

On Friday, I assigned Citizens United v. FEC. They are not writing the DBQ, but using the documents (including Federalist 10) to prepare for a Socratic discussion on their block day (Wednesday/Thursday).  This is out of classwork and I like giving them a weekend to look over it and ask questions if needed on Monday during the lecture.

On Monday, I give notes on Elections and Campaign Finance. I use Edward’s 2016 Presidential Election Edition for notes, or find some via a group, friend, or other teacher. Because the notes I use are from a group, I don’t share them here since they are not mine to share.

On Tuesday, we use Bill of Rights Institute Homework Help video as well as Money Unlimited from a 2012 issue of the New Yorker and a campaign finance cheat sheet. Students are instructed to ‘draw’ campaign finance reform as a map and prepare for their Socratic discussion. I generally walk around during this time to ensure everyone “has it”.

The day of their Socratic discussion I write the question up on the board so students have a focus: Assess whether the Supreme Court ruled correctly in Citizens United v. FEC in light of constitutional principles including republican government and freedom of speech. 

How I run Socratic:

  1. Students are familiar with how Socratic Seminar- How am I graded_. Often times students get stuck with how many times they need to talk. I care about what they say, not how many times they talk. Noting that, taking up too much of the discussion gets you points taken away. For some classes, I give them 3 sticky notes. Once those are gone, they are gone. It also helps them to regulate who hasn’t been able to speak yet with a visual that doesn’t disturb the discussion.
  2. Because I have larger classes, I do the inside-outside circle. Each group gets 2 sets of 15 minutes. Students in the outside circle are listening and filling out Socratic Seminar Observations They can use them when they are in the inside circle. Below are examples from my 8th grade class.

Group A goes first on the inside for 15 minutes while Group B writes. Then they switch, but this time Group B goes for 30 minutes while Group A writes. The final switch happens and Group A is given their remaining 15 minutes. These times can be readjusted to fit your class period. This works well for two topic Socratics (Federalist/AntiFederalist). I change it up depending on the class.

You can also use an argumentative writing rubric and give points based on that. I record my observations using Socratic Seminar Observations. I can change up what I’m grading them on easily. This is the one I use most often.

At this point, after the discussion, you can have them do a piece of writing using the focus question. I love writing after a Lecture-Reading-Discussion train because they really have the ability to look at it from all angle and engage with the material.

If you have time and a class that this would work for, watch “The Kid is All Right“. This Simpson’s episode. It’s a quick 20 minutes and the kids always get a kick out of it because they actually get it after learning about political parties, interest groups, campaigns, and campaign finance. I bought the copy on YouTube for $2 and have shown it each semester.

simpsons.jpg

Interactions Among Branches of Government, Writing for AP Gov

Wrapping Up with Lessons in the Judiciary

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

It’s been 9 weeks since we started school and I am half way through the semester and the redesign. I’m tired and unsure, but after giving the FRQ and the unit test, I’m feeling a bit better about how I’ve taught this quarter. If you are struggling or doubting yourself, chances are you are doing an amazing job and putting way too much stress on yourself. We all do it. We are teachers and want to do what is best for our students.

This past few weeks, the Judiciary Committee has given us plenty to discuss in the way of their power of “advice and consent” One of the reasons I love/despise teaching AP Government is because each day is something new. We watched the hearing a bit to see the interaction of Congressional committees the executive pick for the judiciary and discussed how politics plays into the questions the Senators act, or who we think will run for President in 2020 based on their mini speeches they give before they ask the questions for the nominee.

harris
Photo: J. Scott Applewhite, AP

Within my week of the judiciary, we also had our Congressman come and talk to the students, leaving me with 4 days to teach my favorite branch of government. I gave the usual notes and carried on because after my time at Street Law’s Summer Institute I feel like I could go on forever, but I wanted to focus on the interactions of the branches, so I turned to FDR for help.

Federalist 78 is one of our required documents. I didn’t have students read this one because they are burnt out on documents. We did a quick video before moving on to FDR’s Fireside Chat on the Plan for Reorganization of the Judiciary

Because we were short on time, I let the students know that they needed to read this on their own as it would be a part of their FRQ. Next semester, I plan to make this a Socratic discussion because it ties the two branches in very nicely.

Concept Analysis FRQ:

“What is my proposal? It is simply this: whenever a Judge or Justice of any Federal Court has reached the age of seventy and does not avail himself of the opportunity to retire on a pension, a new member shall be appointed by the President then in office, with the approval, as required by the Constitution, of the Senate of the United States.
That plan has two chief purposes. By bringing into the judicial system a steady and continuing stream of new and younger blood, I hope, first, to make the administration of all Federal justice speedier and, therefore, less costly; secondly, to bring to the decision of social and economic problems younger men who have had personal experience and contact with modern facts and circumstances under which average men have to live and work. This plan will save our national Constitution from hardening of the judicial arteries.
The number of Judges to be appointed would depend wholly on the decision of present Judges now over seventy, or those who would subsequently reach the age of seventy.”
Fireside Chat Discussing the Plan for Reorganization of the Judiciary, President Franklin D. Roosevelt; March 9, 1937
 After reading the above, respond to the questions below.
  1. Explain Hamilton’s view of the judiciary in Federalist 78. (1 points)
  2. Compare your answers in Part A with FDR’s view of the judiciary from the above reading. (2 points)
  3. Using your knowledge of the Constitution, evaluate the constitutionality of FDR’s plan. (2 points)

Students had a harder time on the second FRQ, so on Monday {we are testing this week} we are going to go over it again, just in a different way, together. We are going to talk about this as a class so they understand what was expected of them on the original. I did give three different questions, as I have three different classes.

05dc-kavanaughbriefing-superJumbo-v3.jpg
Doug Mills/The New York Times

I am looking forward to doing this again next semester, but changing it up a bit to better use my time!

What is your favorite lesson on the judiciary?

Assessment, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Interactions Among Branches of Government, Professional Development

Moot Court Assessments…Beyond Multiple Choice

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

After I attended the Street Law Institute in 2016, I started to really look at how I assessed my AP Gov kids. Sure, multiple choice is important, as is learning to write FRQ’s but I wanted to really assess what they learned in my class.

Enter Moot Court and changing the way I look at AP.

Now don’t get me wrong, I absolutely use multiple choice and writing for assessing. However, I struggled with giving a final exam that didn’t really match what I wanted to see. I wanted to see the application of the knowledge.

This will be my 3rd year doing it, and I’m already excited for it!

First, I pass out the Supreme Court Mock Trials instructions. I use current cases that I get from Street Law. Last year, we used Carpenter v. US, NIFLA v. Becerra, and Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. I liked being able to use them in conjunction with the oral arguments because of the news stories in current times. It got the students more involved! Even though the sheet requires the lawyers to write a paper, I let them know it’s more of notes for their oral essay in front of the Court. They don’t actually turn anything in.

I give students a choice as to their role. It has worked out in the past because you have students who do not want to speak, but like the social media aspect. You have students that try new things. {I used this letter for my re-certification for National Boards and it still get me every time. As teachers, we wield a power greater than anything, the power to get kids to believe in themselves}

Throughout the course of the time I allot for this project, we listen to oral arguments {yes, we listen to the full oral argument}. I use oyez.org because as we listen, student can read the transcript and see who is talking. We watch news clips that students find. We immerse ourselves in that world and it covers everything we learned. We look at the Constitution, at the amicus briefs submitted by interest groups, and precedent cases. Each year is a bit different as each class is a bit different.

The day of is always the best. I require students to dress up for Court. I take this very seriously. We do it on a block day to allow for full time. Here is the breakdown of the roles:

Chief Justice: This person runs the show. Just like Chief Justice John Roberts, they are in charge of the introduction, the timing, and reigning in any issues. They also get to use the gavel that I got from the Supreme Court.

Justices: Are responsible for asking questions, knowing their stuff, and making sure the lawyers do too.

img_8356

The lawyer present their case in front of the Court. They have to be ready for anything, and after listening to the actual oral arguments, they are. This is the only role that does not require a written paper to be turned in because they are essentially giving an oral essay foe 20-30 minutes. Here is an example of what a lawyer wrote up to start off their case.

Lastly, we have the clerks. There are students who don’t want to speak but still want to be involved. The clerks write a paper, but they also live Tweet during the case. We use our class hashtag as well as #scotusintheclassroom to it’s easy for me to find the information. If you don’t use Twitter, it’s easy to adapt this to writing articles for newspapers. One year, I had a conservative media and liberal media. We had discussed the biases each media had on the particular case and it was their chance to apply it.

Screen Shot 2018-08-26 at 9.41.19 AM
This is my TweetDeck that I keep open during oral arguments for easy grading

img_8346-1
We invited our Accelerated Middle School to witness Carpenter v. US

First semester, we have the luxury of doing two because we have more time. Second semester, with the AP test, means we can only fit in one. This is the primary reason I do Civil Liberties and Civil Rights last in my units.

I have also done this with my on-level classes and my accelerated 8th grade class!

img_8347
This year NIFLA v. Becerra, lawyers presenting their case.

American Political Ideologies and Beliefs, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Separation of Church and State

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

I just returned from my APSI in San Diego and got a lot of great ideas, as well as planned 2.5 units out. I teach a semester class, so using my time wisely is key. My lessons are viewable to the general public, so if you are a newbie who isn’t sure how to break it apart, you are more than welcome to see what I do. It changes, but it’s a rough sketch.

PS San Diego is not the worst place in the world to go to an APSI.

Lord, help me on this one.

The separation of church and state is not explicitly written in the Constitution. It’s one of the things that drives me insane when I see  or hear this as an argument. And inevitably, it comes up in class.

My favorite response? “Please back that claim using the Constitution as your source.” I say it as plainly as possible, because this is a teachable moment.

Crickets.

*Looks at fingernails, waiting for something that will never come. Because you need more than the First Amendment for this argument. 

That day (if I’m on my game) or the next, I hand the students this. It’s a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802. It easy to read, accessible for most students, and contains “thus building a wall of separation between Church & State” in reference to the First Amendment.

For reference, the First Amendment (a popular argument) was ratified in 1791. I love this argument because the Free Exercise clause contradicts the Establishment clause. Well played, James, well played. I LOVE Constitutional arguments. I love them because I ALWAYS learn something from my students and the Constitution is up for interpretation!

Then come the inevitable questions.

“Our country was built on Christianity.” What? No. Oy.  I have yet to find a clear answer on this, but I like this essay. It’s a hard answer. AND THAT’S OK. History often doesn’t have definitive answers. That’s why it’s fun to study! When they say this, I ask them to find me proof. Or find me a source that refutes it. And then WE TALK ABOUT IT. I don’t know everything and I never pretend I do. Teach ME, students. (You’d be surprised)

Side note: Jefferson was never really outward about his religious beliefs, and Washington often referred to the Providence as opposed to an outright God.

“Why do we have to say Under God in the pledge?”  (You don’t actually have to. I cite West Virginia vs. Barnette– see you should know your rights!)

And a plethora of other questions. I like to challenge the students to find answers to their own questions. (Legit, y’all are on your phones all the time anyway. Why don’t you use it for something useful instead of watching your best friends’ SnapChat story about a class she should be paying attention in) This leads them to look at sources, find out new tidbits, and use their prior knowledge. In helping students to answer their own questions or find sources to further their curiosity, you capture a way to teach history that stays with students beyond your classroom. This is hard because students just want an answer.

You know what they want more? To best their teacher. Or to show their teacher that they have the answer that the teacher doesn’t (I love that one). Nothing makes me happier that being bested by a student. I leave my ego at the door because at the end of the day, I am not the all-knowing. Some days, I can’t remember if I drank all of my coffee or if it’s still sitting on my kitchen counter. I’m a human.

You may have students who hold deep religious beliefs. Good for them, it’s part of their political socialization! You may have atheists. Awesome! This is a hard topic because it can be polarizing and that is the last thing we want in our classrooms. We can facilitate conversations, model behaviors that are appropriate, and make sure the learning environment is safe for all. So, here are some resources:

Constitution Center Essays (don’t act surprised)

Podcast on the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their fight in the Supreme Court (I LOVE THIS PODCAST)

Interactions Among Branches of Government

What Happens When A Justice Retires?

Elizabeth Schley, NBCT

“No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice and family,” -Justice Anthony Kennedy, majority opinion Obergefell v. Hodges.

 

Justice Anthony Kennedy has announced his retirement as of July 31. At 81, he has made the decision to step down at the end of July. Kennedy has been a crucial swing vote on cases such as Obergefell v Hodges {14th amendment case requiring the recognition of gay marriage in all states}. He has upheld Roe v. Wade (1992). At times, he has sided with conservatives as in the recent travel ban case. Justice Kennedy was a man of his own principles, leaning both ways.

So now what?

When a seat is open, it’s not as if it hasn’t been thought of prior to. After Justice Antonin Scalia’s sudden passing, the seat was open for awhile. It was a Presidential election year, and Republicans did not have a hearing for Merrick Garland (a potential nominee for this seat). Because the Republicans have control of the two main operatives in this, we likely will not see a delay. *I could be wrong*

The President has a short list of vetted nominees that the Department of Justice has looked at. This list always exists so that the President is ready to go with a valid nominee. Politico has it’s thoughts, as do most media venues. Only time will tell.

The President will announce a potential nominee to the Court possibly this summer. At this point, the Senate is responsible for hearings and confirmation. Article 2, Section 2 reads that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court.” The Senate Judiciary Committee (a standing committee chaired by Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, R)investigates and holds a hearing. This is the stuff you see on C-Span or your nightly news. After this, the committee can report favorably or unfavorably to the Senate and a simple majority is needed. At this time, there are 51 Republican Senators (same party as the President). Because there is an election forthcoming, there may be a rush to confirm the new justice.

Justice Kennedy will join {my personal hero} Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Justice Souter, and Justice John Paul Stevens (and his adorable bow ties which he wore when I saw him in Court) in retirement.

Article III of the Constitution allows for judges on the Federal Courts to serve on good behavior. This is viewed as a lifetime appointment, which makes the next nominee very important in Constitutional history.

Resources:

American Bar Association

Federalist 78

Senate List of Nominees throughout the years

Donald Trump and the federal judiciary (Podcast)

** This session was a surprise for me. I always thought the last Monday in June was it. But this term showed me “but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” Benjamin Franklin