Blog #5

Blog 5 (test prep)

Copy each question into a blog post (ctr+c; ctr+p) then explain why you answered each accordingly. You may help each other through these questions, and use the internet or book resources.

1. A Supreme Court that demonstrates a willingness to change public policy and alter judicial precedent is said to be engaging in

a) judicial activism
b) due process
c) judicial restraint
d) ex post facto lawmaking
e) judicial review

The answer is (a) because judicial activism is to change a policy or law that is seen as unconstitutional or wrong and to improve it. 

2. A writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court indicates that the Court

a) Will review a lower decision

b) Has rendered a decision on a case

c) Has decided not to hear an appeal

d) Will recess until the end of the calendar year

e) Plans to overturn one of its previous rulings

The answer is (a) because writ of certiorari means to send an order to lower court to send the record to higher court.

3. The Supreme Court holds original jurisdiction in all of the following types of cases EXCEPT

a) If the United States is a party in the case

b) In controversies in criminal law between a citizen and a state

c) In controversies under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties

d) if a case is between citizens of different states

e) If cases arise under admirality and maritime laws

The answer is (b) because the Supreme Court states that it holds jurisdictions between 2 or more states, a state and citizens of a different state, but nothing involving criminal law, since that is up to each state and its own laws. 

4. All of the following are specifically mentioned in the Constitution EXCEPT

a) judicial review

b) the national census

c) rules of impeachment

d) the State of the Union address

e) length of term if federal judgeships

The answer is (a) because judicial review is more of a concept that the Supreme Court stated after a case. 

5. Which of the following correctly states the relationship between the federal and state judiciaries?

a) Federal courts are higher courts than state courts and may overturn state decisions on any grounds.

b)The two are entirely autonomous, and neither ever hears cases that originate in the other.

c) The two are generally autonomous, although federal courts may rule on the constitutionality of state court decisions.

d) State courts are trial courts; federal courts are appeals courts.

e) State courts try all cases except those that involve conflicts between two states, which are tried in federal courts.

The answer is (

6. The Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona was based mainly on the

a) Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws

b) Incorporation of the Fifth Amendment through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

c) Eighth Amendment restriction against cruel and unusual punishment

d) Abolition of slavery by the Fourteenth Amendment

e) full faith and credit clause of the Constitution

The answer is (b) because 

7. The Supreme Court has used the practice of selective incorporation to

a) Limit the number of appeals filed by defendants in state courts

b) Extend voting rights to racial minorities and women
c) apply most Bill of Rights protections to state law

d) Hasten the integration of public schools

e) Prevent the states from calling a constitutional convention

The answer is (

8. Which of the following cases extended the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures to the states?

a) Gideon v. Wainwright

b) Schneck v. United States
c) Miranda v. Arizona

d) Mapp v. Ohio

e) Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States

The answer is (d) because the case involved a lack of evidence when Mapp was tried and found guilty for materials found by officers who barged in her home, that presented a "search warrant". But it is not sure if it was an actual search warrant. 

9. Which of the following is true of court cases in which one private party is suing another?

A) They are tried in civil court

B) The federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them

C) They are tried in criminal court

D) The state court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them.

E) They are tried before a grand jury.

The answer is (a) because civil courts deal with more than one party.

10. Which of the following is an accurate statement about the federal court system?

a) The creation of new federal courts requires a constitutional amendment

b) The creation of new federal courts requires the unanimous consent of all 50 states

c) The Supreme Court has the sole power to create new federal courts.

d) Congress had the power to create new federal courts

e) The number of federal courts if fixed by the Constitution and cannot be changed.

The answer is (d) because Article III, section one states that Congress has the power to create new federal courts. 

Blog #4

Pick 3 cases from the previous list. For each case:

- Explain the holding (decision) and majority opinion (puclic opinion) (and notable dissent (disagreement))

- Explain what judicial philosophy is reflected

- Evaluate the context of the decision with the framework of your own beliefs (e.g. if you select Roe v. Wade, explain your position on abortion.)


Case #1: Mapp vs. Ohio
Police officers of the state Ohio were given information that a suspected bomber and evidence of bombing was located in Dollree Mapp's home. They arrived at Mapp's home but were not granted permission to enter unless they had a search warrant. The officers left and came back a few hours later with a piece of paper they claimed to be the "search warrant". Mapp took the paper and put it in her dress, she was handcuffed for being "belligerent". The officers did not find any trace of a bombing set up, but they found pornographic material which Mapp was arrested for and found guilty. But no search warrant was brought up as evidence during her trial. The state of Ohio did not argue against the lack of evidence. They actually argued that the 14th Amendment does not guarantee 4th Amendment protections in state courts. Meaning that although there was no evidence used for the trial, there was no need to because it was a reasonable search and intent. I agree and disagree with the holding of this case. I agree because I feel that if the statements were in fact true, that there was a suspect bomber and evidence of bombing in the home, they should have been granted access inside with or without a warrant to protect citizens safety. But I also disagree because this goes against what the 2nd Amendment which states privacy in one's home.

Case #2: Brown vs. Board of Education
The Brown vs. Board of Education case overturned the Plessy vs. Ferguson case which was declared unconstitutional. All judges voted that schools in the U.S. should be desegregated and paved the way to integration fro the U.S. The major opinion on the holding for the Brown vs. Board of Education was not unexpected. Many were surprised about the result, and were not pleased with it. This case was opened because the nation had come to a realization that the holding of the Plessy vs. Ferguson case was unconstitutional, and went against the 14th Amendment which granted equals rights to all citizens. I agree with the decision of the case because Americans deserve to have equal rights, which include be able to go to school and the right to receive an education.


Case #3: Roe vs. Wade
The Roe vs. Wade case was brought up from a Texas law that prohibited abortion, except to save a woman's life. The holding stated that a woman was allowed to terminate her pregnancy at any time, with exception to individual state laws, and if the pregnancy was harmful to her. This case deals with one of the largest issues in America, abortion. Many argue that abortion should be legal because it is a individuals choice and body. Others argue that abortion should be illegal and prohibited because it is equal to killing a person, and it is not justice. There are also many religious beliefs that play into opinions. In my opinion, I believe that a woman should have the right to get an abortion if she feels as though she needs to or wants to. Whatever the choice is, it is their choice because everyone has equal rights and should be allowed to express that.

Blog #3

Refer to the cartoon posted here. Identify the point of view of the cartoonist. Do you agree or disagree with it? Explain your position, using Supreme Court cases to illustrate your argument.

"Do you ever have one of those days when everything seems unconstitutional?"

This cartoon shows three of the nine justices on the US Supreme Court sitting and talking amongst themselves. The cartoonist believes that the US Supreme Court does not do much and that the name, "US Supreme Court" is used as a title for a group that does nothing. The cartoonist is portraying the court in a negative way because he feels as though they don't do much for the country since they have such limited judicial power. He uses the quote for this specific cartoon to portray the mistakes or bad decisions made by the Supreme Court, hence the "one of those days when everything seems unconstitutional."

Blog #2

What are the judicial powers of the US Supreme Court and where does this power come from (specific documents)?

Most of the judicial powers the US Supreme Court receives comes from Article III section 2 of the Constitution. Some powers given to the Supreme Court is the ability to hear certain special cases as stated in Article III section 2. They are given limited judicial powers as presented in the Three Tier System. The Three Tier structure of the federal court goes as follows: 1. Trial Tier, 2. Appellate Tier and 3. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, as seen by many as the highest court system in America, is actually the lowest based on the Three Tier System of the federal court. It is a step above federal supreme courts and they are given the right to primarily hear cases directly from US district courts. It also limits the number to only nine justices on Supreme Court.

First Blog Post :D

Hey! My name's Jackie and I'm in Robledo's AP Gov class. I love to blog, since I have a tumblr too. I blog pictures, funny/scary stories and rants. I like blogs because I feel that they allow you to be creative, it's like an online journal, but you can do whatever you want. You can blog videos, pictures that you like, rant about things and voice your opinion in a different way.