Ch. 13 Quiz on FRIDAY!
Please open the link to the Google Form in your school email and answer the Daily 3.
Please open Canvas and complete BRD 13.
Friday gameplan
I. 20. Among the executive branch’s checks on the legislative branch is the president’s power to
I. 21. The amount of access cabinet secretaries have to the president is most likely to be controlled by the
I. 22. Unlike a treaty, an executive agreement
Writing a Supreme Court Opinion
Writing a Supreme Court Opinion
AP Government
Read the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
What do they have in common?
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment XIV—Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Writing a Supreme Court Opinion
AP Government
Read the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
What do they have in common?
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment XIV—Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Benjamin Gitlow
<<< Justice Stephen Breyer
Advocate of the Living Constitution
Justice Antonin Scalia >>>
Advocate of Originalism
Writing a Supreme Court Opinion
AP Government
Margie Boulé, “The Stalker and the Grade School Girl” - [Content Warning: Stalking]
The Mannix bill—House Bill 2412
PSJ #5 - Writing a Supreme Court Opinion
150 words
In response to the situation described in Margie Boulé’s column and many other situations like it, House Bill 2412 was introduced in the 1992 Oregon legislature to prohibit stalking.
For this assignment, you are not being asked to justify stalking or minimize harm. You are acting as a judge reviewing whether the wording of the law follows constitutional rules that apply to all criminal laws, including laws aimed at protecting victims.
Assume you are a Supreme Court of the United States justice. You have heard arguments in a case challenging Oregon’s stalking law. The defendant argues that the law is unconstitutional. After conference, you are assigned to write the Court’s opinion.
Your task is to write an opinion in this case in which you explain whether the law is or is not constitutional. You will want to do the following:
In writing your decision, you may wish to consider the following points:
DO NOT LOOK AT THE FOLLOWING SLIDES UNTIL YOU HAVE FINISHED WRITING YOUR COURT OPINION.
Writing a Supreme Court Opinion
AP Government
In 1992, Oregon adopted a tough stalking law meant to protect victims from frightening and persistent behavior. But when the law reached the courts, judges found a major constitutional problem. The statute depended on the phrase “without legitimate purpose,” which the Oregon Court of Appeals treated as too vague to give clear notice of what conduct was illegal. In State v. Norris-Romine/Finley, Starr v. Eccles, and State v. Orton, courts overturned stalking protective orders and reversed convictions that relied on that vague standard.
In 1995, the Legislature rewrote the law by removing “legitimate purpose,” limiting police authority, and grounding the statute in more objective standards tied to safety and defined “contact.” This amended law was stronger and survived challenges in court (Article from 1995).
Nearly thirty years later, Oregon updated the statute again through HB 4156 (2024) to address cyberstalking, expanding “contact” to cover behaviors like electronic monitoring, nonconsensual intimate image disclosure, identity-related misuse, and online harassment through third parties.
NOTE: I modified the 1992 bill language significantly for the purpose of this assignment. “Without legitimate purpose” was not in the bill you read.
Writing a Supreme Court Opinion
AP Government
However,…
In Counterman v. Colorado, the Court considered whether repeated, disturbing social media messages could be punished as threats based only on how the recipient felt.
A Colorado musician received hundreds of unsettling messages and felt unsafe. The sender was convicted. The Supreme Court reversed that conviction in a 7–2 decision, sending it back to the Colorado Court of Appeals to reconsider the case with the new standard set by the court.
Writing for the majority, Justice Kagan explained that the First Amendment requires more than proof that the listener felt fear. The government must show the speaker knew their words could be taken as threatening or recklessly disregarded that risk.
Justices across ideological lines joined the majority. Justices Alito and Thomas dissented, arguing the Court made it harder to prosecute threatening behavior.
The takeaway echoed Oregon’s lesson from the 1990s: You cannot criminalize speech or contact based only on how it is received. The law must consider intent and be written with precision.
Should Supreme Court Justices Serve One Eighteen-Year Term?
William O. Douglas served 36 years; he was the longest-serving justice in Supreme Court history.
When Justice Scalia died in February 2016, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland for that seat. Senate Republicans refused to even give Garland a hearing, saying the vacancy occurred too close to the presidential election and that the next president should choose the new justice. After the election, President Trump nominated Neal Gorsuch, who was quickly confirmed.
When Justice Scalia died in February 2016, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland for that seat. Senate Republicans refused to even give Garland a hearing, saying the vacancy occurred too close to the presidential election and that the next president should choose the new justice. After the election, President Trump nominated Neal Gorsuch, who was quickly confirmed.
When Justice Scalia died in February 2016, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland for that seat. Senate Republicans refused to even give Garland a hearing, saying the vacancy occurred too close to the presidential election and that the next president should choose the new justice. After the election, President Trump nominated Neal Gorsuch, who was quickly confirmed.
When Justice Ginsburg died in mid-September 2020 with the election less than two months away, President Trump nominated and Senate Republicans rapidly confirmed Amy Coney Barrett.
When Joe Biden became president in 2020 with Democratic majorities in the House and the Senate, there was serious talk of the Democrats adding new seats to the Supreme Court to which Biden could then appoint liberal justices. In other words—packing the Court.
Current System
Alternate System
Current System
Alternate System
Should Supreme Court justices serve for life or should they have term limits (e.g., 18 year terms)?
Discuss this with your partner.
Then write a Yes, But thesis statement answering the question.
teachers