mag05 na te ch20 co 1/6/06 1:08 pm page 562 chapter 20

Civil Liberties:ProtectingIndividual RightsIntroducing the ChapterIn this chapter, students will learnabout the many individual rightsguaranteed by the Bill of Rights, aswell as the constitutional guidelinesfor trying and punishing Americansaccused of committing crimes.

Chapter 20

The following resources are available only fromthe Close Up Foundation to support the conceptsdiscussed in Chapter 20 “Civil Liberties: ProtectingIndividual Rights”:! The Bill of Rights: A User’s Guide! The Bill of Rights Video Series! Profiles of Freedom: A Living Bill of Rights! Democracy and Rights: One Citizen’s Challenge

Close Up Foundation44 Canal Center Plaza

Alexandria, VA 22314-1592800-765-3131

Corner

To keep up-to-date on Close Up news and activities, visit Close Up Online at

www.closeup.org

ConstitutionalPrinciples

Emphasize the following basic prin-ciples as students read Chapter 20.Have the class respond to the ques-tions, and then ask volunteers todiscuss whether individual rightswould be endangered without anyone of these principles.

Limited Government In what wayscan the Due Process Clause bedescribed as the ultimate state-ment of limited government?

Checks and Balances How doesthe judicial branch use the con-cept of due process to check theexecutive branch?

Judicial Review What impact haveSupreme Court decisions made onthe expansion or restriction ofindividual rights?

562

Make It RelevantYou Can Make a Difference

Organize a group of studentsto plan, create, and operate acenter in your school to resolvedisputes between students.Those students who operate thedispute resolution center shoulddevelop plans and proceduresfor hearing cases, consideringthem with faculty advisors, andsuggesting solutions. Considerhaving students invite a profes-sional mediator to help themprepare and operate the center.

Service Learning

Civil Liberties:Protecting Individual Rights

CHAPTER 20

“Most of all, we have got to rememberthat the law is people. . . . What we aretrying to do is solve people’s problemsand protect their freedoms and protecttheir interests.” —Janet Reno (1995)

As Attorney General Reno pointed out, the goalof the law is to serve people, to protect both therights of individuals and the rights of thoseaccused of crimes. Judges and lawmakers thusconstantly debate the spirit of the law and howit applies in real life.

!! 562

" Courtroom with a trial in session

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_CO 1/6/06 1:08 PM Page 562

To Omit the ChapterIf you wish to skip Chapter 20, askstudents to read the Chapter in Briefand assign the Guide to the Essentialsbefore continuing to another chapter.You may also want to assign theChapter 20 Test in the Chapter Testbooklet. Then specific portions ofChapter 20 may be assigned to stu-dents needing reinforcement of keyterms and concepts.

To Preview the ChapterTo introduce students to key termsand concepts in each section, havethem read the Chapter in Brief. Youmay also assign the Reading Strategyactivities on pp. 565, 570, 577, and586 of this book.

To Review the ChapterWhen students have completedChapter 20, you might want to assignthe Guide to the Essentials or theGuided Reading and Review work-sheets on pp. 18, 20, 22, and 24 ofthe Unit 5 booklet.

To Cover the Chapter QuicklyTo cover the material in Chapter 20quickly, use the following activity.Focus Ask students what they knowabout the protection of civil liberties inthe United States. Encourage them toname amendments that relate to theseprotections, and summarize them ifthey can. Refer them to the text of theamendments in the back of the book.Instruct Write Due Process on theboard; below it, write 5th Amendmentand 14th Amendment. Explain howdue process is covered in each of theseamendments. Then ask students tocreate a table, using the head struc-ture on the board, in their notebooks.Students should record informationabout these two amendments as theywork through the chapters.Close/Reteach Ask students to explainall they know about what happenswhen a person is accused of a crime.What are the person’s rights and howis the person made aware of thoserights? What guidelines apply to thesentencing of a person convicted ofa crime? Have students write shortparagraphs describing this process.

Pressed for Time?

563

Keep It CurrentKeep It CurrentKeep It Current

Keep It Current CD-ROM includes government-related projects by unit. Students complete

each project using current information that theyobtain by linking to the Prentice Hall SchoolWeb site from the CD-ROM.

Internet UpdateUse the Prentice Hall School Web siteand the Keep It Current CD-ROM tofind quick data updates.

Have students access WebCode mqg-5206 to access

this chapter’s updated data.PHSchool.com

You Can Make a DifferenceFOR CORY KADAMANI, “real life” once meant drugs, dropping

out, and run-ins with the New York City police. Then he turned his

life around, earning a high school equivalency diploma and joining

Youth Force, a community group. At age 17, Cory helped create the

group’s South Bronx Community Justice Center to resolve

neighborhood issues before they led to crimes. Young people—

including former gang members—worked with lawyers, community

leaders, and probation officers. Cory also advised younger kids

awaiting trial at a South Bronx detention facility. He hoped his story

would keep them from making the same mistakes he had made.

Due Process of Law (pp. 564–568)

!The 5th and 14th amendments guarantee that the governmentcannot deprive a person of “life, liberty, or property, without dueprocess of law.”

!The States’ reserved powers include the police power—thepower to protect and promote public health, public safety, publicmorals, and the general welfare.

!The exercise of the police power can produce conflicts withindividual rights.

!The constitutional guarantees of due process create a right of privacy.

!The most controversial applications of the right of privacyinvolve abortion.

Freedom and Security of the Person (pp. 569–574)

!The 13th Amendment was added to the Constitution in 1865 toend slavery and involuntary servitude.

!The 2nd Amendment was added to the Constitution to preservethe right of States to keep a militia.

!The 4th Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches andseizures, not those which are reasonable. The amendment hasgiven rise to the controversial Exclusionary Rule.

Rights of the Accused (pp. 576–583)

!Rights of the accused include the writ of habeas corpus and aconstitutional ban on bills of attainder and ex post facto laws.

!The 5th Amendment says that one may be accused of a seriousfederal crime only by grand jury indictment.

!Accused persons are guaranteed a speedy and public trial. Theycannot, however, be tried twice for the same crime.

!The accused also have the right to a trial by jury.!The right to an adequate defense and the guarantee against

self-incrimination help safeguard the rights of the accused.

Punishment (pp. 585–588)

!A person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

!The accused must not face excessive bail or fines.!The Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.!The Supreme Court has consistently held that the death penalty

is constitutional if it is applied fairly.!The crime of treason is specifically defined in the Constitution to

prevent its use for political purposes.

SECTION 4

SECTION 3

SECTION 2

SECTION 1

!!!

Chapter 20 in Brief

563

PHSchool.com

For: Current DataWeb Code: mqg-5208

For: Close Up Foundation debatesWeb Code: mqh-5209

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_CO 1/6/06 1:08 PM Page 563

Objectives You may wish to callstudents’ attention to the objectivesin the Section Preview. The objectivesare reflected in the main headings ofthe section.Bellringer Ask students to describethe process of getting a driver’slicense (for example: application,vision test, written test, driving test).Ask whether it would be fair toallow certain people to skip one ormore parts of this process. Explainthat, in this section, they will learnabout due process of law—whichbasically means that the governmentmust follow the rules and act fairly.Vocabulary Builder Point out the twotypes of due process in the PoliticalDictionary. Briefly discuss the basewords in substantive (substance)and in procedural (procedure). Askstudents which term has to do withthe “how” of due process and whichhas to do with the “what.”

Point-of-Use Resources

Block Scheduling with LessonStrategies Activities for Chapter 20 arepresented on p. 29.

Due Process of Law 1

564

Customize forMore Advanced StudentsHave students conduct research to investigate thechanging role of the Speaker of the House. (Youmay wish to assign each student a specific speaker.)Ask students to summarize their research in briefreports and then lead a discussion on the changingrole.

Consider these suggestions to manage extendedclass time:! Tell students that they must explain the conceptof due process to a person from another countrywhose government does not use it. Have smallgroups of students prepare a visual presentationexplaining due process. Presentations shouldinclude pictures of some aspect of due process,and should also include highlighted sentencesfrom the 5th and 14th amendments as well asquotes from relevant Supreme Court decisions.

Finally, groups should write a one-to-two sentencesummary of what the due process clauses mean.! Have students brainstorm a list of scenariosin which their individual rights might be chal-lenged—for example, being pulled over forspeeding in a car, being submitted to a randomdrug test, etc. Then have the class discuss eachscenario, providing relevant constitutional prin-ciples and Supreme Court precedents for each.Have students vote on what the outcome ofeach scenario should be.

Block Scheduling Strategies

Due Process of Law

Objectives

1. Explain the meaning of due processof law as set out in the 5th and 14thamendments.

2. Define police power and understandits relationship to civil rights.

3. Describe the right of privacy and itsorigins in constitutional law.

Why It Matters

The guarantees of due process mean thatgovernment must act fairly and in accor-dance with established rules. The Statespossess the power to safeguard the well-being of their people through the policepower. But in doing so, they must observedue process rights, including the right ofprivacy.

PoliticalDictionary" due process" substantive due process" procedural due process" police power" search warrant

The Meaning of Due ProcessThe Constitution contains two due processclauses. The 5th Amendment declares that theFederal Government cannot deprive any personof “life, liberty, or property, without due processof law.” The 14th Amendment places that samerestriction on the States, and, very importantly,on their local governments, as well. A thoroughgrasp of the meaning of these provisions isabsolutely essential to an understanding of theAmerican concept of civil rights.

It is impossible to define the two due processguarantees in exact and complete terms. TheSupreme Court has consistently and purposelyrefused to give them an exact definition. Instead,it has relied on finding the meaning of dueprocess on a case-by-case basis. The Courtfirst described that approach in Davidson v.New Orleans, 1878, as the “gradual processof inclusion and exclusion, as the cases pre-sented for decision require.”

Fundamentally, however, the Constitution’sguarantee of due process means this: In what-ever it does, government must act fairly and inaccord with established rules. It may not act un-fairly, arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably.

The concept of due process began and devel-oped in English and then in American law as aprocedural concept. That is, it first developed as arequirement that government act fairly, use fairprocedures.

AA re you familiar with the riots that tookplace in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on May 31–

June 1, 1921? Are you aware of the conduct ofsome officers in the Ramparts Division of theLos Angeles police department much morerecently? Both of these matters have been thesubject of extensive and ongoing news cover-age. Learn what happened in Tulsa in 1921 andwhat some LAPD officers did much morerecently, and you will understand why the con-cept of due process of law is so very importantto you and to everyone in this country.

! A Failure of Due Process Injured and wounded prisoners are taken tothe hospital by the National Guard in the aftermath of the 1921 Tulsa riots.

Lesson PlanTeaching the Main Ideas1. Focus Tell students that the gov-ernment, in whatever action it takes,must observe due process of law.Ask students to discuss what theyknow about due process as it appliesto the police.2. Instruct Ask students for theSupreme Court’s exact definition ofdue process. (There is none; the Courtfinds its meaning on a case-by-casebasis.) Review the constitutionalsources of due process. Discuss howdue process affects police power andhow it creates privacy rights.3. Close/Reteach Remind studentsthat the right to privacy is not spelledout in the Constitution. Ask studentsto draw a diagram showing whereprivacy rights come from and howthe Court has interpreted those rightsin the controversy over abortion.

L3

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_01 1/6/06 11:47 AM Page 564

Reading StrategySelf-QuestioningTell students that in this section theywill read about a number of SupremeCourt cases relating to due processof law. Suggest that students, as theyread about each new case, ask them-selves how it relates to the conceptof due process.


Guided Reading and Review Unit 5booklet, p. 18 provides students withpractice identifying the main ideas andkey terms of this section.

Lesson Planner For completelesson planning suggestions, see theLesson Planner booklet, section 1.

the Political Cartoons booklet for acartoon relevant to this section.

Section Support TransparenciesTransparency 81, Visual Learning;Transparency 180, Political Cartoon

To introduce the chapter, write thefollowing statement on the board:“Laws serve the people.” Give eachstudent half a sheet of paper andask them to respond either in sup-port of or against the statement.Then lead a discussion on students’responses.LPR

565

Chapter 20 • Section 1

To make sure students understand the mainpoints of this section, you may wish to use theweb graphic organizer to the right.

Tell students that a web can be used to recordinformation about a topic. Have students use aweb to record details about the right to privacy.Right to Privacy should appear in the inner circle;outer circles may be used to record summariesof relevant Supreme Court cases.

Teaching Tip A template for this graphic organizercan be found in the Section SupportTransparencies, Transparency 1.

Organizing Information

Answer to . . .Interpreting Diagrams To ensure notonly that procedures are fair, butalso that the laws they administerare fair.

Fair procedures are of little value, however,if they are used to administer unfair laws. TheSupreme Court recognized this fact toward theend of the nineteenth century. It began to holdthat due process requires that both the ways inwhich government acts and the laws underwhich it acts must be fair. Thus, the Courtadded the idea of substantive due process to theoriginal notion of procedural due process.

In short, procedural due process has to dowith the how (the procedures, the methods) ofgovernmental action. Substantive due processinvolves the what (the substance, the policies) ofgovernmental action.

Examples of Due ProcessAny number of cases may be used to illustratethese two elements of due process. Take a clas-sic case, Rochin v. California, 1952, to exempli-fy procedural due process.

Rochin was a suspected narcotics dealer.Acting on a tip, three Los Angeles Countydeputy sheriffs went to his rooming house.They forced their way into Rochin’s room.There the deputies found him sitting on a bed,and spotted two capsules on a nightstand.When one of the deputies asked, “Whose stuffis this?” Rochin popped the capsules into hismouth. Although all three officers jumped him,Rochin managed to swallow them.

The deputies took Rochin to a hospital,where his stomach was pumped. The capsuleswere recovered and found to contain mor-phine. The State then prosecuted and convictedRochin for violating the State’s narcotics laws.

The Supreme Court held that the deputies hadviolated the 14th Amendment’s guarantee ofprocedural due process. Said the Court:

“ This is conduct that shocksthe conscience. Illegally

breaking into the privacy of the petitioner,the struggle to open his mouth and removewhat was there, the forcible extraction of hisstomach’s contents—this course ofproceeding by agents of government toobtain evidence is bound to offend evenhardened sensibilities. They are methods tooclose to the rack and the screw. . . . ”

—Justice Felix Frankfurter,Opinion of the Court

Take Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 1925, to illus-trate substantive due process. In 1922, Oregon’svoters had adopted a new compulsory school-attendance law that required all persons betweenthe ages of 8 and 16 to attend public schools. Thelaw was purposely drawn to destroy private, espe-cially parochial, schools in the State.

A Roman Catholic order challenged the law’sconstitutionality, and the Supreme Court heldthat the law violated the 14th Amendment’s DueProcess Clause. The Court did not find that theState had enforced the law unfairly. In fact, theState’s courts had found the law unconstitutional,and it had never been put into effect. Rather, theCourt held that the law itself, in its contents,“unreasonably interferes with the liberty of par-ents to direct the upbringing and education ofchildren under their control.”

The 14th Amendment and the Bill of RightsRecall these crucial points from Chapter 19:

1. The provisions of the Bill of Rights applyagainst the National Government only.

The 5th Amendmentprovides that the Federal Government cannot deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process

The 14th Amendmentprovides that State (and local) governments cannot deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process

Procedural, the how, ormethods of government action

Example: Rochin v. California, 1952

Substantive, the what, or policies of government action

Example: Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 1925

Due Process

Guarantee

is of two types

Due Process

Interpreting Diagrams The 5th and 14th amendments ensure thatneither the Federal nor State and local governments can deprive anyperson of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”Why are procedural and substantive due process both necessary?

L2


Enrichment Separate the class intosmall groups. Assign one of the fol-lowing cases described in Chapter 20to each group: (1) Rochin v. California,1952; (2) Pierce v. Society of Sisters,1925; (3) Schmerber v. California,1966; (4) Stanley v. Georgia, 1969;(5) Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965;(6) Roe v. Wade, 1973; (7) PlannedParenthood of SoutheasternPennsylvania v. Casey, 1992; (8)Stenberg v. Carhart, 2000. Ask students to prepare four to fiveinterview questions for SupremeCourt justices about their case.Then have each group elect aspokesperson who will identify thegroup’s case and its subject matter,and read the interview questions tothe class.

For career-related links and activities, visitthe Magruder’s American Governmentcompanion Web site in the Social Studiesarea at the Prentice Hall School Web site.

566


Answer to . . .Interpreting Political CartoonsPossible answer: No; the prisoner’sobjection that due process didn’tprotect him is most likely biased.

it does, courts must strike a balance betweenthe needs of society, on the one hand, and ofindividual freedoms on the other. Any numberof cases can be used to illustrate the conflictbetween police power and individual rights. Takeas an example a matter often involved in drunk-driving cases.

Every State’s laws allow the use of one ormore tests to determine whether a personarrested and charged with drunk driving was infact drunk at the time of the incident. Some ofthose tests are simple: walking a straight line ortouching the tip of one’s nose, for example.Some are more sophisticated, however, notablythe breathalyzer test and the drawing of ablood sample.

Does the requirement that a person submitto such a test violate his or her rights under the14th Amendment? Does the test involve anunconstitutional search for and seizure of evi-dence? Does it amount to forcing a person totestify against himself or herself (unconstitu-tional compulsory self-incrimination)? Or is therequirement a proper use of the police power?

Time after time, State and federal courtshave come down on the side of the policepower. They have upheld the right of society toprotect itself against drunk drivers and rejectedthe individual rights argument.

The leading case is Schmerber v. California,1966. The Court found no objection to a situa-tion in which a police officer had directed a doc-tor to draw blood from a drunk-driving suspect.The Court emphasized these points: The bloodsample was drawn in accord with accepted med-ical practice. The officer had reasonable groundsto believe that the suspect was drunk. Further,had the officer taken time to secure a searchwarrant—a court order authorizing a search—the evidence could have disappeared from thesuspect’s system.

Legislators and judges have often found thepublic’s health, safety, morals, and/or welfare tobe of overriding importance. For example:

1. To promote health, States can limit the saleof alcoholic beverages and tobacco, make lawsto combat pollution, and require the vaccinationof school children.

2. To promote safety, States can regulate thecarrying of concealed weapons, require the useof seat belts, and punish drunk drivers.

2. However, the Supreme Court has held thatthe 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clauseincludes within its meaning most of the protec-tions set out in the Bill of Rights.

In a long series of decisions dating from1925, the Court extended the protections of theBill of Rights against the States through the 14thAmendment’s Due Process Clause. The land-mark cases in which this occurred are set out inthe table on page 536—and with them the few(four) provisions in the Bill of Rights that havenot been incorporated.

The key 1st Amendment cases were dis-cussed in Chapter 19. Those involving the 4ththrough the 8th amendments are treated inSections 2–4 of this chapter.

The Police PowerIn the federal system, the reserved powers of theStates include the broad and important policepower. The police power is the authority of eachState to act to protect and promote the publichealth, safety, morals, and general welfare. Inother words, it is the power of each State tosafeguard the well-being of its people.

The use of the police power often producesconflicts with civil rights protections. When

Interpreting Political Cartoons Can you assume that theprisoner’s complaint is justified? Explain your answer.

L3

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_01 1/6/06 11:50 AM 66

Ask students to write a letter to theirCongressperson expressing theiropinion on abortion and the right toprivacy. Encourage students to dis-cuss whether or not these issues areprotected by the Constitution.Students may choose to focus onspecific court cases, such as Roe v.Wade or Planned Parenthood ofSoutheastern Pennsylvania v. Casey,and the impact these court decisionshave had on this topic. GT


Close Up on the Supreme CourtRoe v. Wade (1973), pp. 52–53

567


Background NoteConstitutional IssuesOn the Griswold decision and the privacydue to married couples, Justice WilliamO. Douglas wrote the following: “Wedeal with a right of privacy older than theBill of Rights—older than our politicalparties, older than our school system.Marriage is a coming together for betteror for worse, hopefully enduring, andintimate to the degree of being sacred.It is an association that promotes a wayof life, not causes; a harmony in living,not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty,not commercial or social projects. Yet itis an association for as noble a purposeas any involved in our prior decisions.”Griswold later served as a precedentfor the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision permitting abortion.

Make It Relevant

“Social worker” is a broad term that refers totrained individuals who provide services such ascounseling, guidance, and support to people whoneed them. Social workers are employed at alllevels of government. One thing that all socialworkers have in common is a deep desire to helpother people. Another is that they make a huge dif-ference in millions of Americans’ lives. Social work

is among the most rewarding of all professions. Skills Activity Have a small group of students inter-view a community social worker while accompa-nying him or her at work. Have students report ontheir experiences to the class, and answer questions.Then have individual students write paragraphsexplaining why they would or would not beinterested in this career.

Careers in Government—Social Worker

Government Online Answers shouldreflect how protecting individualrights helps ensure that minoritieshave a voice in government.

3. To promote morals, States can regulategambling and outlaw the sale of obscene mate-rials and the practice of prostitution.

4. To promote the general welfare, Statescan enact compulsory education laws, providehelp to the medically needy, and limit the prof-its of public utilities.

Clearly, governments cannot use the policepower in an unreasonable or unfair way, how-ever. In short, they cannot violate the 14thAmendment’s Due Process Clause.

The Right of PrivacyThe constitutional guarantees of due processcreate a right of privacy—“the right to be free,except in very limited circumstances, fromunwanted governmental intrusions into one’sprivacy,” Stanley v. Georgia, 1969.1 It is, inshort, “the right to be let alone.”2

The Constitution makes no specific mentionof the right of privacy, but the Supreme Courtdeclared its existence in Griswold v. Connecticut,1965. That case centered on a State law that out-lawed birth-control counseling and prohibited alluse of birth-control devices. The Court held thelaw to be a violation of the 14th Amendment’sDue Process Clause—and noted that the Statehad no business policing the marital bedroom.

Roe v. WadeThe most controversial applications of the right ofprivacy have come in cases that raise this question:To what extent can a State limit a woman’s rightto an abortion? The leading case is Roe v. Wade,1973. There, the Supreme Court struck down aTexas law that made abortion a crime exceptwhen necessary to save the life of the mother.

In Roe, the Court held that the 14th Amend-ment’s right of privacy “encompass[es] a woman’sdecision whether or not to terminate her preg-nancy.” More specifically, the Court ruled that:

1. In the first trimester of pregnancy (aboutthree months), a State must recognize a

woman’s right to an abortion—and cannotinterfere with medical judgments in that matter.

2. In the second trimester a State, acting in theinterest of women who undergo abortions, canmake reasonable regulations about how, when,and where abortions can be performed, but can-not prohibit the procedure.

3. In the final trimester a State, acting to pro-tect the unborn child, can choose to prohibit allabortions except those necessary to preserve thelife or health of the mother.

Later Reproductive Rights CasesIn several later cases, the Court rejected a num-ber of challenges to its basic holding in Roe. Asthe composition of the Court has changed, how-ever, so has the Court’s position on abortion.That shift can be seen in the Court’s decisions inrecent cases on the matter.

In Webster v. Reproductive Health Services,1989, the Court upheld two key parts of aMissouri law. Those provisions prohibit abortions,except those to preserve the mother’s life orhealth, (1) in any public hospital or clinic in

1Stanley involved the possession of obscene materials in one’sown home. In the most recent right to privacy case, the Court struckdown a Texas law that made sexual relations between consentinggay adults a crime, Lawrence v. Texas, 2003.

2Justice Louis D. Brandeis, dissenting in Olmstead v. UnitedStates, 1928.

Fighting Prejudice You don’t have to be an expert in constitu-tional law to look out for the rights of others. Take the case of TristanCoffin.

The soccer teams of Franklin and Dudley, two towns south ofBoston, Massachusetts, were preparing to play for their league champi-onship one summer Sunday. As Franklin took the field, however, Coffin,12, was pulled aside by a referee and told to remove a bandanna cov-ering his head. Coffin respectfully declined, explaining that he was adevout Sikh, a member of an Indian religion that requires followers tocover their heads in public. The referee, citing tournament rules, againordered Coffin to remove the bandanna or leave the field.

When Coffin’s teammates learned that he wouldn’t be allowed toplay, they walked off the field. Franklin’s coaches pleaded with thereferee and tournament officials, as did Dudley’s coach. When the refdidn’t budge, the Franklin coaches refused to send their team back onthe field, thereby forfeiting the game. Afterwards, Dudley’s coachesand players had misgivings about accepting their first-place trophies.So they presented one to Coffin.

Government OnlineGovernment Online

Use Web Code mqd-5207 to find outmore about protecting individual rightsand for help in answering the following

question: How does standing up for the rights of others enhancedemocracy?

PHSchool.com

L4



Guide to the Essentials Chapter20, Section 1, p. 107 provides

support for students who need addi-tional review of section content.Spanish support is available in theSpanish edition of the Guide on p. 100.

Quiz Unit 5 booklet, p.19includes matching and multiple-choice questions to check students’understanding of Section 1 content.

Presentation Pro CD-ROM Quizzesand multiple-choice questions

check students’ understanding ofSection 1 content.

Answers to . . .

Section 1 Assessment1. Due process means that govern-ment must act fairly and in accordwith established rules and laws.2. Procedural due process refers tothe how of government actions—procedures and methods; substan-tive due process refers to the whatof government actions—substanceand policies.3. (a) Police power is the authorityof each State to protect and pro-mote the public health, safety,morals, and general welfare. (b) Courts have usually upheld theuse of police power.4. (a) The right to privacy is the gen-eral right to be free from unwantedgovernmental intrusions into one’sprivacy. (b) It is most often an issuewith respect to abortion and repro-ductive rights.5. Possible answers: Yes, protectionof morals falls within the State’spolice powers. No, right of privacylimits the right of government todeem actions immoral.6. Possible answer: Because justicesdo not see due process as absoluteand unyielding; rather, they feel thatit is relative and should be decidedon a case-by-case basis.7. Possible answer: That the impor-tance of ensuring the public’s welfareoverrides the individual’s right tochoose in this situation.


568

that State, and (2) when the mother is 20 ormore weeks pregnant and tests show that thefetus is viable (capable of sustaining life out-side the mother’s body).

Two cases in 1990 addressed the issue ofminors and abortion. In those cases, the Courtsaid that a State may require a minor (1) toinform at least one parent before she can obtainan abortion, Ohio v. Akron Center for Repro-ductive Health, 1990, and (2) to tell both parentsof her plans, except in cases where a judge givespermission for an abortion without parentalknowledge, Hodgson v. Minnesota, 1990.

The Court’s most important decision onthe issue since Roe v. Wade came in PlannedParenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v.Casey in 1992. There the Court announcedthis rule: A State may place reasonable limitson a woman’s right to have an abortion, butthese restrictions cannot impose an “undueburden” on her choice of that procedure.

In Casey, the Court applied that new stan-dard to Pennsylvania’s Abortion Control Act.It upheld sections of that law that say:

• A woman who seeks an abortion must begiven professional counseling intended to per-suade her to change her mind.

• A woman must delay an abortion for atleast 24 hours after that counseling.

• An unmarried female under 18 must havethe consent of a parent, or the permission of ajudge, before an abortion.

• Doctors and clinics must keep detailedrecords of all abortions they perform.

Those four requirements do not, said theCourt, place “a substantial obstacle in thepath of a woman seeking an abortion of anonviable fetus.” That is, they do not imposean “undue burden” on a woman.

The Court did strike down another keypart of the Pennsylvania law, however. Thatprovision required that a married woman tellher husband of her plan to have an abortion.

To this point, the Court has decided onlyone abortion law case since 1992. In Stenbergv. Carhart, 2000, it applied Casey’s “undueburden” rule to a Nebraska law and foundthat statute unconstitutional. The Nebraskalaw prohibited an operation that the oppo-nents of abortion call “partial birth abortion.”That procedure is one that doctors use onlyinfrequently to terminate pregnancies afterabout 16 weeks.

The Court’s 5–4 majority found theNebraska law to be flawed because it (1) wastoo loosely drawn, (2) banned a procedurethat may in fact be the most medically appro-priate way to end some pregnancies, and (3)allowed an exception to protect the life, butnot the health, of a pregnant woman. Thirtyother States have passed similar laws inrecent years, and the Court’s decision inStenberg apparently destroyed those statutes,as well.

Key Terms and Main Ideas1. Explain what is meant by due process.2. How do procedural due process and substantive due

process differ?3. (a) Define police power. (b) How have State and federal

courts usually ruled on cases involving the police powerand drunk driving suspects?

4. (a) What is the right of privacy? (b) The most controversialapplication of the right occurs in cases involving what?

Critical Thinking5. Checking Consistency Considering the constitutional right

of privacy, do you think it is proper for a State to use itspolice power to protect and promote morals among its citizens? Explain your answer.

6. Identifying Central Issues Why do you think the SupremeCourt has refused to offer an exact definition of due process?

7. Drawing Conclusions What would you reply to someone whoargues that the use of seat belts is a matter of individual choice?

PHSchool.com

For: An activity on the right toprivacy

Web Code: mqd-5201

Progress Monitoring OnlineFor: Self-quiz with vocabulary practiceWeb Code: mqa-5201

PHSchool.com


Typing in the Web Code whenprompted will bring students directly to detailedinstructions for this activity.

PHSchool.com



Consider these suggestions to manage extendedclass time:! Elicit from students definitions of the termracial discrimination. Then ask students whetherany definition of the term can be absolute, or ifthere are situations in which it can be vieweddifferently. Have small groups of students presentdiscrimination cases in restaurants and transporta-tion, perceived discrimination in school admissionsor hiring practices, and discrimination in privateclubs or residences. Then have other groups decide

whether the discrimination in each case wasunconstitutional, and explain why.! Have groups of students consider the twocases from the section concerning wiretapping inwhich the Supreme Court overturned a previousdecision (Olmstead and Katz). Have them writeshort editorials on the cases, in which theydescribe the circumstances of each case, summa-rize the decision, and then express a viewpointconcerning which case’s Supreme Court decisionthey most agree with, and why.


Objectives You may wish to callstudents’ attention to the objectivesin the Section Preview. The objectivesare reflected in the main headings ofthe section.Bellringer Ask students whether theythink the government should have theright to keep them, or anyone else,from buying a hunting rifle. Explainthat, in this section, they will learnabout how the Supreme Court hasinterpreted the right of Americans toown guns.Vocabulary Builder Point out theterms in the Political Dictionary.Have students give the meaning ofany term they recognize. Ask themto brainstorm the meanings of theother terms.

569

Freedom and Security of thePerson

2

SS everal of the Constitution’s guarantees areintended to protect the right of every

American to live in freedom. This means that theConstitution protects your right to be free fromphysical restraints, to be secure in your person,and to be secure in your home.

Slavery and Involuntary ServitudeThe 13th Amendment was added to theConstitution in 1865, ending over 200 years ofslavery in this country. Section 1 of the amend-ment declares, “Neither slavery nor involuntaryservitude, . . . shall exist within the UnitedStates, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”Importantly, Section 2 of this amendment givesCongress the expressed power “to enforce thisarticle by appropriate legislation.”

Until 1865, each State could decide for itselfwhether to allow slavery. With the 13thAmendment, that power was denied to them,and to the National Government, as well.

The 13th Amendment: Section 1As a widespread practice, slavery disappearedin this country more than 140 years ago. Thereare still occasional cases of it, however. Mostoften, those cases have involved involuntaryservitude—that is, forced labor.

The 13th Amendment does not forbid allforms of involuntary servitude, however. Thus, in 1918, the Court drew a distinction between“involuntary servitude” and “duty” in uphold-ing the constitutionality of the selective servicesystem (the draft).3 Nor does imprisonment forcrime violate the amendment. Finally, note thisimportant point: Unlike any other provision inthe Constitution, the 13th Amendment coversthe conduct of private individuals as well as thebehavior of government.

Freedom and Security of the Person

Objectives

1. Outline Supreme Court decisions regard-ing slavery and involuntary servitude.

2. Explain the intent and application of the2nd Amendment’s protection of the rightto keep and bear arms.

3. Summarize the constitutional provisionsdesigned to guarantee security of homeand person.

Why It Matters

Various constitutional provisions protectAmericans’ right to live in freedom. The13th Amendment and subsequent civilrights laws prohibit slavery and involun-tary servitude. The 2nd Amendment aimsto preserve the concept of the citizen-soldier, while the 3rd and 4th amendmentsprotect the security of home and person.

PoliticalDictionary" involuntary servitude" discrimination" writs of assistance" probable cause" exclusionary rule

3Selective Draft Law Cases (Arver v. United States), 1918.

! Slave tags serve as a reminder of a time before the passage of the 13th Amendment.

Lesson PlanTeaching the Main Ideas1. Focus Tell students that severalamendments protect the freedom andsecurity of Americans. Ask students todiscuss what they know about whenpolice must obtain a proper warrant.2. Instruct Ask students what the13th Amendment outlawed. Discussthe Court cases resulting from thisamendment. Then discuss the Court’sinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment.Finally, conclude the earlier discussionof warrants, noting when they are andare not needed and why.3. Close/Reteach Remind studentsthat the 3rd Amendment has had littleimpact since it was adopted. Ask stu-dents to write a letter to the editorsuggesting that the 3rd Amendmentbe repealed. Their letters should pointout how much more important the2nd, 4th, and 13th amendments areto Americans’ freedom.

L3


Reading StrategyPredictingTell students that they will be readingabout several Court cases involvingpolice encounters with individualssuspected of crimes. Have studentspredict what might be the subsequentCourt decision, using their ownknowledge of current events and theirunderstanding of 4th Amendmentrights.


Guided Reading and Review Unit 5booklet, p. 20 provides students withpractice identifying the main ideasand key terms of this section.


Political Cartoons See p. 79 ofthe Political Cartoons booklet for acartoon relevant to this section.



570

The Court affirmed that decision in severallater cases. Thus, in Runyon v. McCrary, 1976,two private schools had refused to admit twoAfrican American students. By doing so, theschools had refused to enter into a contract ofadmission—a contract they had advertised to thegeneral public. The Court found that the schoolshad violated another provision of the 1866 law:

“ [All] citizens of the UnitedStates, . . . of every race and

color, . . . shall have the same right, . . . tomake and enforce contracts . . . as is enjoyedby white citizens. . . .”

—Civil Rights Act of 1866

The Court has also ruled that the Civil RightsAct of 1866 protects all “identifiable groupswho are subject to intentional discriminationsolely because of their ancestry or ethnic charac-teristics”—for example Jews (Shaare TefilaCongregation v. Cobb, 1987) and Arabs(St. Francis College v. Al-Khazraji, 1987).

More recently the Court has backed off abit. In Patterson v. McLean Credit Union,1989, it declared that while the 1866 law doesprohibit racial discrimination in a contract ofemployment, any on-the-job discriminationshould be handled in accord with the CivilRights Act of 1964 (see Chapter 21). Never-theless, the Court has several times held thatthe 13th Amendment gives Congress signifi-cant power to attack “the badges and inci-dents of slavery,” from whatever source theymay come.

The Right to Keep and Bear ArmsThe 2nd Amendment reads this way:

“ A well regulated Militia,being necessary to the security

of a free State, the right of the people to keepand bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

—United States Constitution

These words excite as much controversy asany words in all of the Constitution. The 2ndAmendment was added to the Constitution toprotect the right of each State to keep a militia.The Amendment’s aim was to preserve the con-cept of the citizen-soldier.

The 13th Amendment: Section 2Shortly after the Civil War, Congress passedseveral civil rights laws based on the 13thAmendment. The Supreme Court, however,sharply narrowed the scope of federal authorityin several cases, especially the Civil RightsCases, 1883. In effect, the Court held thatracial discrimination (bias, unfairness) againstAfrican Americans by private individuals didnot place the “badge of slavery” on them norkeep them in servitude.

Congress soon repealed most of the lawsbased on the 13th Amendment. The enforce-ment of the few that remained was, at best,unimpressive. For years it was generallythought that Congress did not have the power,under either the 13th or 14th Amendment, toact against private parties who practice race-based discrimination.

In Jones v. Mayer, 1968, however, theSupreme Court breathed new life into the 13thAmendment. The case centered on one of thepost-Civil War acts Congress had notrepealed. Passed in 1866, that almost-forgottenlaw provided in part that

“ [All] citizens of the UnitedStates, . . . of every race and

color, . . . shall have the same right, in everyState and Territory of the United States, . . .to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, andconvey real and personal property . . . as isenjoyed by white citizens. . . .”

—Civil Rights Act of 1866

Jones, an African American, had suedbecause Mayer had refused to sell him a home,solely because of his race. Mayer contended thatthe 1866 law was unconstitutional, since itsought to prohibit private racial discrimination.

The Court upheld the law, declaring that the13th Amendment abolished slavery and gaveCongress the power to abolish “the badges andincidents of slavery.” Said the Court:

“ At the very least, the freedomthat Congress is empowered to

secure under the 13th Amendment includesthe freedom to buy whatever a white mancan buy, the right to live wherever a whiteman can live.”

— Justice Potter Stewart, Opinion of the Court

Background NoteConstitutional IssuesIn November 2001, Attorney GeneralJohn Ashcroft informed attorneysworking for the National Government ofa shift in policy regarding the 2ndAmendment. In the past, U.S. attorneyshad argued that the 2nd Amendmentreferred primarily to a collective rightbased on State militias. Ashcroft wrotethat U.S. attorneys were to argue inweapons-related court cases that the2nd Amendment was intended to pro-tect an individual’s right to keep andbear arms. The new policy was appar-ent in a letter that Solicitor GeneralTheodore Olson wrote to the SupremeCourt in May 2002 regarding a chal-lenge to a District of Columbia law.Olson wrote, “The current position ofthe United States is that the 2ndAmendment more broadly protects therights of individuals . . . to possess andbear their own firearms, subject to rea-sonable restrictions.”


Tell students to suppose they areSupreme Court justices hearing acase involving an individual’s consti-tutional guarantee of security ofhome and person. Have them writean opinion outlining the point atwhich governmental authorities canand cannot restrict a person’s rightto security of home and person.Encourage students to include prop-erty and automobiles in their written statements. Studentsshould base their reasoning on whatthey have learned about the Bill ofRights in this chapter. GT


Simulations and Debates GunControl, pp. 68–70 provides studentswith a debate about this controversialtopic.

Close Up on the Supreme CourtThe Civil Rights Cases (1883), pp. 34–35

The Enduring ConstitutionFederalism, p. 8

Basic Principles of the ConstitutionTransparencies Transparencies 44-50,Federalism

ABC News Civics andGovernment Videotape Library

Coming to America, Part 1 (time:three minutes, 17 seconds)

571


FederalismThe principle set out in the 2nd Amendment—theright to “keep and bear Arms”—is one of the mostcontroversial subjects of debate today. Gun-controladvocates cite the first phrase of the amendment toargue that it was meant to provide protection to theentire community, a task now taken up by the gov-ernment, not individuals. Gun-control opponentscite the second phrase to argue that gun ownershipis a protected right. When Madison penned the2nd Amendment, the debate was moot; having just

fought the Revolution, Americans simply wantedthe ability for States to protect themselves againsta tyrannical government.ActivityOrganize a debate in which half the class supportsgun control and the other opposes it. Encouragestudents to research the positions of gun-controlgroups (such as the Fraternal Order of Police) andof gun-control opposition groups (such as theNational Rifle Association). Arguments shouldcite historical precedents and current events.

Constitutional Principles

Many—including the Bush administrationtoday—insist that the 2nd Amendment alsosets out an individual right. They say that itguarantees a right to keep and bear arms justas, for example, the 1st Amendment guaranteesfreedom of speech.

The Supreme Court has never acceptedthat interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.The only important 2nd Amendment case isUnited States v. Miller, 1939. There, the Courtupheld a section of the National Firearms Actof 1934. That section made it a crime to shipsawed-off shotguns, machine guns, or silencersacross State lines, unless the shipper had regis-tered the weapons with the Treasury Depart-ment and paid a $200 license tax. The Courtcould find no valid link between the sawed-offshotgun involved in the case and “the preser-vation . . . of a well-regulated militia.”

The 2nd Amendment is not covered by the14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Thus,each State can limit the right to keep and beararms—and all of the States do so, in various ways.

Security of Home and PersonThe 3rd and 4th amendments say that govern-ment cannot violate the home or person of any-one in this country without just cause.

The 3rd AmendmentThis amendment forbids the quartering (housing)of soldiers in private homes in peacetime withoutthe owner’s consent and not in wartime but “in amanner to be prescribed by law.” The guaranteewas added to prevent what had been British prac-tice in colonial days. The 3rd Amendment hashad little importance since 1791 and has neverbeen the subject of a Supreme Court case.

The 4th AmendmentThe 4th Amendment also grew out of colonialpractice. It was designed to prevent the use ofwrits of assistance—blanket search warrantswith which British customs officials had invadedprivate homes to search for smuggled goods.

Each State constitution contains a similarprovision. The guarantee also applies to theStates through the 14th Amendment’s DueProcess Clause. Unlike the 3rd Amendment, the4th Amendment has proved a highly important

guarantee. The text of the 4th Amendmentreads:

“The right of the people to besecure in their persons, houses,

papers, and effects, against unreasonablesearches and seizures, shall not be violated,and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probablecause, supported by Oath or affirmation, andparticularly describing the place to be searched,and the persons or things to be seized.”


Probable CauseThe basic rule laid down by the 4thAmendment is this: Police officers have no gen-eral right to search for evidence or to seizeeither evidence or persons. Except in specialcircumstances, they must have a proper war-rant (a court order). Also, the warrant must beobtained with probable cause—that is, a rea-sonable suspicion of crime.

Florida v. J. L., 2000, illustrates the rule.There, Miami police had received a tip that ateenager was carrying a concealed weapon.Immediately, two officers went to the bus stopwhere the tipster said the young man could befound. The police located him, searched him,pulled a gun from his pocket, and arrested him.

The Supreme Court held that the policeacted illegally because they did not have a pro-per warrant. All they had was an anonymoustip, unsupported by any other evidence. Theirconduct amounted to just the sort of thing the4th Amendment was intended to prevent.

Police do not always need a warrant, how-ever—for example, when evidence is “in plainview.” Thus, the Court recently upheld asearch and seizure involving two men whowere in a friend’s apartment bagging cocaine. Apoliceman spotted them through an open win-dow, entered the apartment, seized the cocaine,and arrested them. The Court rejected theirclaim to 4th Amendment protection,Minnesota v. Carter, 1999.

Many 4th amendment cases are complicated.In Lidster v. Illinois, 2004, for example, the Courtupheld the use of so-called “informational road-blocks.” In 1997, police had set up one of thosebarriers on a busy highway near Chicago, hopingto find witnesses to a recent hit-and-run accident.

L4


572


Background NoteSearch WarrantsThe search warrant has a long history,dating back to Elizabethan England.In 1604, the English case Semayne v.Gresham stated that “every man’s houseis looked upon by the law to be hiscastle.” Consequently, a bailiff was notallowed to break into a person’s housein order to arrest its owner. The 4thAmendment, which was written partlyin response to the “writs of assistance”used by the British against theAmerican colonists in the eighteenthcentury to search for smuggled goods,only offers restricted protection fromsearch and seizure. As upheld inMinnesota v. Carter, a person has limited4th Amendment rights while withinanother person’s home. As a result, he orshe may be arrested without a warrantin another person’s place of residence.

Magruder’s American Government Video Collection

The Magruder’s Video Collection explores keyissues and debates in American government. Eachsegment examines an issue central to chaptercontent through use of historical and contempo-rary footage. Commentary from civic leaders inacademics, government, and the media followeach segment. Critical-thinking questions focusstudents’ attention on key issues, and may beused to stimulate discussion.

Use the Chapter 20 video segment to examine4th Amendment issues. (time: about 5 minutes)This segment uses current footage to highlightstudents’ rights in public schools, focusing ondrug-testing policies in Lockney, Texas, where a 12-year old student and his parents broughtsuit, claiming that mandatory drug testing violated the student’s constitutional rights.

Box HeadSpotlight on TechnologySpotlight on Technology

Answer to . . .Evaluating the Quotation Possibleanswer: Those feelings might guideher to decide cases in favor of pro-tecting individual rights and civilliberties.

When Robert Lidster was stopped, an officersmelled alcohol on him. Lidster failed severalsobriety tests and was arrested on a drunk-drivingcharge. Lidster’s attorney filed a motion to quash(set aside) that arrest. The lawyer argued thatLidster was forced to stop by officers who, beforethey stopped him, had no reason (probable cause)to believe that he had committed any crime.

Lidster lost that argument. The Courtupheld both his conviction and the use of infor-mational roadblocks. In short, Lidster had sim-ply run afoul of the long arm of coincidence.

ArrestsAn arrest is the seizure of a person. When officersmake a lawful arrest, they do not need a warrantto search “the area within which [the suspect]might gain possession of a weapon or destruc-tible evidence.”4 In fact, most arrests take placewithout a warrant. Police can arrest a person ina public place without one, provided they have

Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined the Supreme Court in 1993.Earlier in her career, she had appeared before the

Court several times in cases involving women’srights. She was also a law professor and then

a federal judge. When asked about America’sgreatest challenge, Justice Ginsburg hadthis answer:

“ I thought of Justice ThurgoodMarshall’s praise of the evolution

of the concept ‘We the People’ toinclude once excluded, ignored, or

undervalued people, then of ournation’s motto: E Pluribus Unum (“of

many, one”). The challenge, I responded, is tomake and keep our communities places wherewe can tolerate, even celebrate, our differences,while pulling together for the common good.‘Of many, one’ is the main challenge, I believe;it is my hope for our country and world.”

Evaluating the QuotationHow might Justice Ginsburg’s feelings about inclusion and toler-ance affect her decisions on cases involving individual rights and civil liberties?

Voices on GovernmentVoices on Government

4This rule was first laid down in Chimel v. California, 1969.5A person arrested without a warrant must be brought promptly

before a judge for a probable cause hearing. In County of Riverside v.McLaughin, 1991, the Court held that “promptly” means within 48 hours.

probable cause to believe that person has com-mitted or is about to commit a crime.5

Illinois v. Wardlow, 2000, illustrates this point.There, four police cars were patrolling a high-crime area in Chicago. When Wardlow spottedthem, he ran. An officer chased him down analley, caught him, and found that Wardlow wascarrying a loaded pistol. The Court held, 5–4,that Wardlow’s behavior—his flight—gave thepolice “common sense” grounds on which tobelieve that he was involved in some criminalactivity. (Note, however, that the Court did nothold that police have a blanket power to stopanyone who flees at the sight of a police officer.)

When, exactly, does the 4th Amendment protection come into play? The Court has sev-eral times held that this point is reached “onlywhen the officer, by means of physical force orshow of authority, has in some way restrainedthe liberty of a citizen,” Terry v. Ohio, 1968.

AutomobilesThe Court has long had difficulty applying the4th Amendment to automobiles. It has severaltimes held that an officer needs no warrant tosearch an automobile, a boat, an airplane, or someother vehicle, when there is probable cause tobelieve that it is involved in illegal activities. Thisis because such a “movable scene of crime” coulddisappear while a warrant was being sought.

Carroll v. United States, 1925, is an earlyleading case on the point. There, the Courtemphasized that “where the securing of a war-rant is reasonably practicable it must be used. . . .In cases where seizure is impossible except with-out a warrant, the seizing officer acts unlawfullyand at his peril unless he can show the courtprobable cause.”

The Court overturned a long string of auto-mobile search cases in 1991. Before then, it hadseveral times held that a warrant was usuallyneeded to search a glove compartment, a paperbag, luggage, or other “closed containers” in anautomobile. But, in California v. Acevedo, 1991,the Court set out what it called “one clear-cutrule to govern automobile searches.” Whenever


Have students write a letter to afriend outside this country in whichthey explain how the Constitutionhas historically sought to protect thesecurity of the person. The lettersshould be written in the students’native language(s), and then trans-lated into English. Letters shouldcontain references to the prohibitionof slavery, the right to keep andbear arms, and the guaranteesagainst unreasonable searches andseizures. ELL


Simulations and Debates DrugTesting, pp. 65–67 provides studentswith a debate about this controversialtopic.

573


Have students read the passages under The Exclusionary Rule on p. 573 andthen complete the sentence below.The main point of the exclusionary rule is toA protect people’s private possessions.B prevent police misconduct.C lessen States’ caseloads by limiting the use of evidence.D keep police from searching homes for evidence.

Preparing for Standardized Tests

Background NoteCommon MisconceptionsOne of the defining characteristics of theUnited States is its protection of indi-vidual rights. In fact, Americans prob-ably know more about their rights thanthey do about the very name of theirown country, for, contrary to popularbelief, “The United States of America”has not always been so-called. Untilthe Articles of Confederation were ratified in 1781, our country was called“The Congress.” Under the Articles ofConfederation, it was “The UnitedStates in Congress Assembled.” Weweren’t “The United States of America”until the Constitution was ratified, in1789. (The name was coined by ThomasPaine.) Interestingly, Alexander Hamiltonwanted to do away with individualStates, and name our country “TheUnited State of America.”

police lawfully stop a car, they do not need awarrant to search anything in that vehicle thatthey have reason to believe holds evidence of acrime. “Anything” includes a passenger’sbelongings, Wyoming v. Houghton, 1999.

Most recently, the Court has held that afterpolice make a routine traffic stop, they do notneed a warrant when they use a trained dog tosniff around (search) the outside of a car for nar-cotics. Police may proceed without a warranteven if, before they made the stop, they had noreason to believe that there was anything illegalin the vehicle, Illinois v. Caballes, 2005.

The Exclusionary RuleThe heart of the guarantee against unreasonablesearches and seizures lies in this question: If anunlawful search or seizure does occur, can that“tainted evidence” be used in court? If so, the4th Amendment offers no real protection to aperson accused of crime.

To meet that problem, the Court adopted, andis still refining, the exclusionary rule. Essentially,the rule is this: Evidence gained as the result of anillegal act by police cannot be used at the trial ofthe person from whom it was seized.

The rule was first laid down in Weeks v.United States, 1914. In that narcotics case, theCourt held that evidence obtained illegally byfederal officers could not be used in the federalcourts. For decades, however, the Court leftquestions of the use of such evidence in Statecourts for each State to decide for itself.

Mapp v. OhioThe exclusionary rule was finally extended tothe States in Mapp v. Ohio, 1961. There, theCourt held that the 14th Amendment forbidsunreasonable searches and seizures by Stateand local officers just as the 4th Amendmentbars such actions by federal officers. It alsoheld that the fruits of an unlawful search orseizure cannot be used in the State courts, justas they cannot be used in the federal courts.

In Mapp, Cleveland police had gone toDollree Mapp’s home to search for gamblingevidence. They entered her home forcibly, andwithout a warrant. Their very extensive searchfailed to turn up any gambling evidence, butthey did find some obscene books. Mapp wasconvicted of possession of obscene materials and

sentenced to jail. The Court overturned her con-viction, holding that the evidence against her hadbeen found and seized without a warrant.

Cases Narrowing the RuleThe exclusionary rule has always been contro-versial. It was intended to put teeth into the 4thAmendment, and it has. It says to police: As youenforce the law, obey the law. The rule seeks toprevent, or at least deter, police misconduct.

Critics of the rule say that it means that somepersons who are clearly guilty nonetheless gofree. Why, they ask, should criminals be able to“beat the rap” on “a technicality”?

The High Court has narrowed the scope ofthe rule somewhat over the years—most notablyin four cases.

• In Nix v. Williams, 1984, it found an“inevitable discovery” exception to the rule. TheCourt ruled that tainted evidence can be used incourt if that evidence would have turned up nomatter what—“ultimately or inevitably wouldhave been discovered by lawful means.”

• In United States v. Leon, 1984, the Courtfound a “good faith” exception to the rule.There, federal agents in Los Angeles had usedwhat they thought was a proper warrant to seizeillicit drugs. Their warrant was later shown to befaulty, however. The Court upheld their actionsnonetheless. It said: “When an officer acting withobjective good faith has obtained a search war-rant . . . and acted within its scope . . . there isnothing to deter.”

• In Arizona v. Evans, 1995, the Court heldthat the good faith exception applied in a casewhere evidence of a crime was seized by policewho acted on the basis of a computer printoutthat later proved to be erroneous. The printoutindicated an outstanding arrest warrant againstthe defendant in the case. In fact, there was nowarrant. The computer error was made by courtclerks, not the police—who, the Court said,acted in good faith.

• In Maryland v. Garrison, 1987, the Courtgave police room for “honest mistakes.” There,it allowed the use of evidence seized in the mis-taken search of an apartment in Baltimore.Officers had a warrant to search for drugs in anapartment on the third floor of a building. Notrealizing that there were two apartments there,they entered and found drugs in the wrong

L2





Quiz Unit 5 booklet, p. 21includes matching and multiple-choice questions to check students’understanding of Section 2 content.



Answers to . . .

Section 2 Assessment1. Recent Supreme Court decisionshave acted against private parties whopracticed race-based discrimination.2. The 2nd Amendment was addedto protect the right of each State tokeep a militia.3. Probable cause is reasonable sus-picion of a crime, which justifies theissuance of a warrant.4. (a) The exclusionary rule says thatevidence gained by an illegal policeact cannot be used against the per-son from whom it was seized. (b) Toprotect persons accused of crimes.5. Possible answers: (a) Yes; the ruleprotects the accused and disallowspolice misconduct; (b) No; the ruleunreasonably restricts the ability ofpolice officers to gather evidence toconvict a guilty person.6. Possible assumptions: Government’sability to provide for its nationaldefense takes precedence over indi-vidual rights; civic duty is moreimportant than individual rights.

574


Key Terms and Main Ideas1. In what sense has the Supreme Court “breathed new life”

into the 13th Amendment?2. Why was the 2nd Amendment added to the Constitution? 3. Define probable cause.4. (a) What is the exclusionary rule? (b) What is its basic

purpose?

Critical Thinking5. Expressing Problems Clearly Consider this question: Does

the exclusionary rule serve the interests of justice? Explainhow you might answer this question if you were (a) thedefendant in a criminal trial; (b) a police officer.

6. Identifying Assumptions In 1918, the Court ruled that the13th Amendment’s prohibition of involuntary servitude doesnot prevent Congress from launching a military draft. Whatassumptions about the importance of individual rights andcivic duty lie behind that decision?

seizure questions that the authors of the 4thAmendment could not have begun to foresee.

The Supreme Court decided its first wire-tap case in 1928. In Olmstead v. UnitedStates, federal agents had tapped a Seattlebootlegger’s telephone calls. Their bugs pro-duced evidence that led to Olmstead’s convic-tion. The High Court upheld that conviction.It found that although the agents had not hada warrant, there had been no “actual physicalinvasion” of Olmstead’s home or office—because the phone lines had been tapped out-side those places.

The leading case today is Katz v. UnitedStates, 1967. There, the Court expressly over-ruled Olmstead. Katz had been convicted oftransmitting gambling information acrossState lines. He had used a public phone boothin Los Angeles to call his contacts in Bostonand Miami. Much of the evidence against himhad come from an electronic tap planted onthe roof—outside—the phone booth.

The Court held that the bugging evidencecould not be used against Katz. Despite thefact that Katz was in a public, glass-enclosedphone booth, he was entitled to make a pri-vate call. Said the Court: the 4th Amendmentprotects “persons, not just places.” It did goon to say, however, that the 4th Amendmentcan be satisfied in such situations if policeobtain a proper warrant before they install alistening device.

apartment—the one for which they did not havea warrant.

Drug Testing Federal drug-testing programs involve search-es of persons and so are covered by the 4thAmendment. To date, the Court has held thatthey can be conducted without either warrantsor even any indication of drug use by thosewho must take them. It did so in two 1989cases. They involved mandatory drug testingfor (1) drug enforcement officers of the UnitedStates Customs Service who carry firearms,National Treasury Employees Union v. VonRaab, and (2) railroad workers following atrain accident, Skinner v. Federal RailwayLabor Executives Association.

The Court has also upheld an Oregon schooldistrict’s drug-testing program, Vernonia SchoolDistrict v. Acton, 1995. The program required allstudents who take part in school sports to agreeto be tested for drugs. That ruling was extendedin Board of Education of Pottowatomie Countyv. Earls in 2002. There, the court upheld the ran-dom testing of students who want to participatein any competitive extracurricular activity.

WiretappingWiretapping, electronic eavesdropping, video-taping, and other more sophisticated means of“bugging” are now quite widely used in theUnited States. They present difficult search and

PHSchool.com

For: An activity on the securityof home and person

Web Code: mqd-5202


PHSchool.com



PHSchool.com


Test for SuccessStudents should refer to Steps 1, 4,and 5 in their explanations.


Skills for Life Activity Unit 5 booklet,p. 28 provides an additional skill activityfor this chapter.

Social Studies Skills Tutor CD-ROMProvides interactive practice in geo-

graphic literacy, critical thinking and read-ing, visual analysis, and communications.

Someday you may receive anotice ordering you to appearfor jury duty. This is a rare

opportunity to observe the United Statesjustice system at work. That systemrelies on the participation of ordinarycitizens in the judicial process.

Potential jurors are most often select-ed from voting lists and summoned toappear at court. How long they mustserve varies from place to place. People with certain hardships, such as health,language, or job problems, may beexcused from jury duty.

When you arrive at the courthouse, you might bedismissed without having served at all. Or you mightbe chosen to appear for jury selection. In this phase,lawyers for both sides question potential jurors andselect those they think will be favorable to their side.Many people are rejected at this stage.

If you are chosen for a jury, you and the otherjurors will receive instructions prior to the start oftrial. The following steps are adapted from thoseinstructions:1. Do not be influenced by bias. Your decisionshould not be affected by any sympathies ordislikes you might have for either side in thecase. How might you avoid biased thinking?2. Follow the law as it is explained to you.Your job is to determine whether or notsomeone broke the law, regardless of whetheryou approve of the law. Would you find thisrequirement difficult? Explain.3. Remember that the defendant is presumedinnocent. The government has the burden ofproving a defendant guilty beyond a “reason-able doubt.” If it fails to do so, the jury verdictmust be “not guilty.” What does “reasonabledoubt” mean to you?4. Keep an open mind. Do not form or stateany opinion about the case until you haveheard all the evidence, the closing arguments

of the lawyers, and the judge’s instructionson the applicable law. Why is it importantfor jurors to base their opinions on evidenceand testimony alone?5. During the trial, do not discuss the case.Do not permit anyone to talk about thecase with you or in your presence, exceptyour fellow jurors in the secrecy of thejury room. Avoid media coverage of thecase once the trial has begun. What is thereason for this rule?

Under “three strikes” laws in several States, a person who com-mits a third felony can be jailed for 25 years to life. Such laws areaimed to keep violent, habitual criminals behind bars. But thelaws are also being applied to nonviolent crimes, such as stealinga bicycle. Some juries have resisted convicting people they knoware guilty because the possible penalties are so harsh. If you werea juror on such a case, would you vote to convict? Consider theinstructions to jurors given on this page.

Test for Success

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Skills for LifeSkills for LifeServing on a Jury

Serving on a JuryFocus To explore the responsibilitiesof serving on a jury, hold a mocktrial on a topic of students’ choosing.Instruct Have a group of student“prosecutors” scan the media foraccounts of interesting trials in thenews. Find a trial for which detailsare available, and conduct a trial onthat case. Choose a judge, a defen-dant, a defense team, and a jury.Have both sides explain what typeof juror would be most advanta-geous to their side. During the trial,the judge should caution jurors tofollow Steps 1–5 on this page.Close/Reteach After the verdict isread, jurors should respond to ques-tions from the class about how thedeliberations were conducted andwhat challenges arose during thediscussions.

SKILLS FOR LIFESKILLS FOR LIFE! ! ! ! ! ! !

575

Answers . . .1. Possible answer: By analyzingyour views to see what assump-tions they are based on.2. Students might consider specificsituations. For example: Wouldthey vote to convict a lawbreakerwho was nonviolently protesting ifthey believed in the lawbreaker’scause?3. Answers should suggest thatabsolute certainty is rarely possi-ble, but that little doubt shouldremain.4. Evidence and testimony thatare presented in court aredeemed acceptable by the court.If jurors are influenced by otherideas, their opinions might bebiased.5. Media coverage or the opin-ions of fellow jurors might bebiased; they could sway a juroraway from his or her true opinions.

MAG05_NA_TE_SK_p575 1/6/06 11:43 AM Page 575

Objectives You may wish to callstudents’ attention to the objectivesin the Section Preview. The objectivesare reflected in the main headings ofthe section.Bellringer Have students supposethat they suspect their cousin ofstealing their watch. Ask studentswho would be the first person theywould want to question about thiscrime. (expected answer: the cousin)Explain that, in this section, they willlearn that in a court of law the cousinwould not have to testify at all.Vocabulary Builder Have studentsuse root words to “translate” thefirst and third terms in the PoliticalDictionary. Then ask students toguess which of the other terms namesa secret process for accusing a personof a serious crime. (grand jury)

Rights of the Accused3

576


Consider these suggestions to manage extendedclass time:! Write the first sentence of the section on theboard. Then ask students to write newspaperarticles in which they describe how this ideaworks in American society. Articles should referto laws and constitutional principles that supportthis sentence, and should be written as if for anon-American audience. If students do not feel

that this idea actually works in the Americansystem of justice, they may write their articlesfrom that point of view.! Have students debate the topic of televisedtrials. Have them respond to these questions:Does the televising of a trial harm the defen-dant? Does it in any way help the public?What effects can televising a trial have on the outcome?


Answer to . . .Interpreting Political Cartoons Toimply that Lincoln has “mur-dered” the Constitution by with-drawing one of the basic rights itestablishes.

Rights of the Accused

TT hink about this statement for a moment: “Itis better that ten guilty persons go free than

that one innocent person be punished.” Thatmaxim expresses one of the bedrock principlesof the American legal system.

Of course, society must punish criminals inorder to preserve itself. However, the law intends

Objectives

1. Define the writ of habeas corpus, bills ofattainder, and ex post facto laws.

2. Outline how the right to a grand jury and the guarantee against double jeopardy helpensure the rights of the accused.

3. Describe issues that arise from the guaranteeof a speedy and public trial.

4. Determine what constitutes a fair trial by jury.5. Examine the right to an adequate defense

and the guarantee against self-incrimination.

Why It Matters

In the American judicial system,any person who is accused of acrime must be presumed to beinnocent until proven guilty. TheConstitution, especially in the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments,contains a number of provisionsguaranteeing rights to peopleaccused of a crime.

PoliticalDictionary" writ of habeas corpus" bill of attainder" ex post facto law" grand jury" indictment" double jeopardy" bench trial" Miranda Rule

6The phrase habeas corpus comes from the Latin, meaning “youshould have the body,” and those are the opening words of the writ.

that any person who is suspected or accused ofa crime must be presumed innocent until provenguilty by fair and lawful means.

Habeas CorpusThe writ of habeas corpus, sometimes called thewrit of liberty, is intended to prevent unjustarrests and imprisonments.6 It is a court orderdirected to an officer holding a prisoner. Itcommands that the prisoner be brought beforethe court and that the officer show cause—explain, with good reason—why the prisonershould not be released.

The right to seek a writ of habeas corpus isprotected against the National Government inArticle I, Section 9 of the Constitution. Thatright is guaranteed against the States in each oftheir own constitutions.

The Constitution says that the right to thewrit cannot be suspended, “unless when inCases of Rebellion or Invasion the publicSafety may require it.” President AbrahamLincoln suspended the writ in 1861. His ordercovered various parts of the country, includ-ing several areas in which war was not thenbeing waged. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney,

Interpreting Political Cartoons This detail from an 1860s car-toon is critical of President Lincoln’s 1861 suspension of the writof habeas corpus. Why is a coffin labeled “Constitution”being lowered into the ground?

Lesson PlanTeaching the Main Ideas1. Focus Tell students that theConstitution strongly supports therights of people accused of crimes.Ask them to discuss what they knowabout the pretrial rights of the accused.2. Instruct Ask students to explainthe Miranda Rule. Have them discussthe other constitutional rights of theaccused, noting for each the basisin the Constitution and in case law.Conclude by asking students whetherthey think the law gives the accusedtoo many rights.3. Close/Reteach Remind studentsthat the rights of the accused stemfrom the idea that the accused areinnocent until proven guilty. Ask stu-dents to suppose that one of theserights did not exist. Have them writea story about what will happen to aperson arrested for a crime who doesnot have the benefit of that right.

L3


Reading StrategyGetting the Main IdeaTell students that they will be readingabout the rights of the accused. Havethem write all the headings from thesection on a sheet of paper, leavingroom under each for notes. Tell themthat the text under each headingexplains a right. Suggest that studentsnote, as they read, why that right isvital to people accused of a crime.

To dramatize the point that “It isbetter that ten guilty persons go freethan that one innocent person bepunished,” you might want to showstudents all or part of the 1983 filmThe Star Chamber. After the view-ing, have students discuss the ramifi-cations of the maxim.




Political Cartoons See p. 80 of the Political Cartoons booklet for acartoon relevant to this section.

Close Up on Primary SourcesThurgood Marshall, The Sword and the Robe (1981), p. 60


577


To make sure students understand the mainpoints of this section, you may wish to use theVenn diagram to the right.

Tell students that a Venn diagram can be used tocompare two things by showing attributes theyhave alone and those they share. Have studentsuse a Venn diagram to compare public trials withgrand juries. Characteristics that both have shouldappear in the space where the circles overlap.

Teaching Tip A template for this graphic organizercan be found in the Section SupportTransparencies, Transparency 6.

Organizing Information

sitting as a circuit judge, held Lincoln’s actionunconstitutional.

Taney ruled that the Constitution gives thepower to suspend the writ to Congress alone.Congress then passed the Habeas Corpus Act of1863. It gave the President the power to suspendthe writ when and where, in his judgment, thataction was necessary. In Ex parte Milligan,1866, the Supreme Court ruled that neitherCongress nor the President can legally suspendthe writ where there is no actual fighting nor thelikelihood of any.

The right to the writ has been suspended onlyonce since the Civil War and the ReconstructionPeriod that followed it. The territorial governorof Hawaii suspended the writ following theJapanese attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7,1941. The Supreme Court later ruled that thegovernor did not have the power to take thataction, Duncan v. Kahanamoku, 1946.

Bills of AttainderA bill of attainder is a legislative act that inflictspunishment without a court trial. NeitherCongress nor the States can pass such a measure(Article I, Sections 9 and 10).

The ban on bills of attainder is both a pro-tection of individual freedom and part of thesystem of separation of powers. A legislativebody can pass laws that define crime and setthe penalties for violation of those laws. Itcannot, however, pass a law that declares aperson guilty of a crime and provides for thepunishment of that person.

The Supreme Court has held that this prohi-bition is aimed at all legislative acts that apply“to named individuals or to easily ascertainablemembers of a group in such a way as to inflictpunishment on them without a judicial trial,”United States v. Lovett, 1946.

The Framers wrote the ban on bills ofattainder into the Constitution because bothParliament and the colonial legislatures hadpassed many such bills. Bills of attainder havebeen rare in our national history, however.

United States v. Brown, 1965, is one of thefew cases in which the Court has struck downa law as a bill of attainder. There it overturneda provision of the Landrum-Griffin Act of1959. That provision made it a federal crime

for a member of the Communist Party to serveas an officer of a labor union.

Ex Post Facto LawsAn ex post facto law (a law passed after the fact)has three features. It (1) is a criminal law, onedefining a crime or providing for its punishment;(2) applies to an act committed before its pas-sage; and (3) works to the disadvantage of theaccused. Neither Congress nor the State legisla-tures may pass such laws.7

For example, a law making it a crime to sellmarijuana cannot be applied to someone whosold it before that law was passed. Or, a law thatchanged the penalty for murder from life inprison to death could not be applied to a personwho committed a murder before the punishmentwas changed.

Ex post facto cases do not come along veryoften. The Court decided its most recent one,Carmell v. Texas, in 2000. There, the Court over-turned a man’s sexual abuse conviction because ofa change in State law. That change had made it easier for the prosecution to prove its charge thanwas the case when the abuse was committed.

Retroactive civil laws are not forbidden. Thus,a law raising income tax rates could be passed inNovember and applied to income earned throughthe whole year.

Grand JuryThe Constitution provides that:

“ No person shall be held toanswer for a capital, or

otherwise infamous crime, unless on a present-ment or indictment of a Grand Jury. . . . ”

—5th Amendment

The grand jury is the formal device by whicha person can be accused of a serious crime.8 Infederal cases, it is a body of from 16 to 23 personsdrawn from the area of the federal district courtthat it serves. The votes of at least 12 of the

7Article I, Sections 9 and 10. The phrase ex post facto is from theLatin, meaning “after the fact.”

8The 5th Amendment provides that the guarantee of grand jurydoes not extend to “cases arising in the land or naval forces.” Theconduct of members of the armed forces is regulated under a codeof military law enacted by Congress.

L3


Have students create a time line thatcharts the development of the rights ofthe accused. Time lines should beginat the time of the Constitution andcontinue to the present. Encouragestudents to include key dates,including any Supreme Court casesdiscussed in the section, along withexplanations of their significance.Find space in the classroom to dis-play students’ charts. LPR


Answer to . . .Interpreting Charts No excessive fine,no cruel and unusual punishment,and the right to appeal.

Make It Relevant

Stephanie Lam is known insome circles as presiding judge,defense attorney, and prosecutingattorney. Why? Stephanie beganvolunteering in high school as amember of the Tulsa, OklahomaYouth Court, a volunteer all-teen court that gives first-time,misdemeanor juvenile offendersa trial by their peers. After takinga training course, teens rotatethe roles of prosecuting anddefense attorneys, bailiff, courtclerk, and judge. Teens learnabout the legal system andcontribute to their communityat the same time. Stephaniedescribes the value of the pro-gram in this way: “[N]othing ismore effective than positivepeer pressure and TYC pro-motes peer pressure to do theright thing.” She says thelessons she has learned whileserving on the court have beenfar-reaching: “I have learnedthings are not always black orwhite, but often gray. This hasenabled me to change my ownlife perspective to better my lifeas well as the defendants’.”

Students Make a Difference

for a trial, it returns a “true bill of indictment.”The accused is then held for prosecution. If thegrand jury does not make such a finding, thecharge is dropped.

A presentment is a formal accusation broughtby the grand jury on its own motion, rather thanthat of the prosecutor. It is little used in federalcourts.

A grand jury’s proceedings are not a trial.Since unfair harm could come if they were pub-lic, its sessions are secret. They are also one-sided—in the law, ex parte. That is, only theprosecution, not the defense, is present.

The right to grand jury is intended as a protec-tion against overzealous prosecutors. Critics saythat it is too time-consuming, too expensive, andtoo likely to follow the dictates of the prosecutor.

The 5th Amendment’s grand jury provision isthe only part of the Bill of Rights relating to crim-inal prosecution that the Supreme Court has notbrought within the coverage of the 14thAmendment’s Due Process Clause. In most Statestoday, most criminal charges are not brought bygrand jury indictment. They are brought,instead, by an information, an affidavit in whichthe prosecutor swears that there is enough evi-dence to justify a trial (see Chapter 24).

Double JeopardyThe 5th Amendment’s guarantee against dou-ble jeopardy is the first of several protectionsin the Bill of Rights especially intended toensure fair trial in the federal courts.9 Fair tri-als are guaranteed in State courts by eachState’s own constitution and by the 14thAmendment’s Due Process Clause.

The 5th Amendment says in part that no per-son can be “twice put in jeopardy of life orlimb.” Today, this prohibition against doublejeopardy means that once a person has been triedfor a crime, he or she cannot be tried again forthat same crime.

A person can violate both a federal and aState law in a single act, however—for example,by selling narcotics. That person can then be

9See the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th amendments and Article III,Section 2, Clause 3. The practice of excluding evidence obtainedin violation of the 4th Amendment is also intended to guarantee afair trial.

No third degree or coerced confession

Grand jury or prosecutor weighs

evidence

Informed of charge by indictment or

information

Speedy and public trial byimpartial jury

Verdict of jury

No excessive fine or cruel and unusual

punishment

Right to appeal

Informed of right to counsel and to

remain silent

Arrest on warrant or probable cause

Writ of habeascorpus if

illegally detained

No unreasonablesearch or seizure

Nodouble

jeopardy

Confront witnesses

Noexcessive

bail

Noself-incrimination

Assistanceof counsel

Constitutional Protections for Persons Accused of Crime

Interpreting Charts Any person accused of a crime is pre-sumed innocent until proven guilty. What protections doesthe Constitution extend to those convicted of crime?

grand jurors are needed to return an indictmentor to make a presentment.

An indictment is a formal complaint that theprosecutor lays before a grand jury. It chargesthe accused with one or more crimes. If thegrand jury finds that there is enough evidence

578

L2


579


Ask students to create a graphicorganizer that outlines how the legalsystem works in a criminal case,and the protections an individual is granted if accused of a crime.Encourage students to provide astep-by-step analysis of legal pro-ceedings and the accused person’srights that are associated with eachstep. Have students share their dia-grams with the class. ELL


The Enduring ConstitutionLimited Government, p. 4

Basic Principles of the ConstitutionTransparencies Transparency 16-22,Limited Government

Background NoteRecent ScholarshipThose interested in seeing howAmerican legal thought has evolvedover time might explore AlanDershowitz’s America On Trial: Insidethe Legal Battles That Transformed OurNation—From the Salem Witch Trials tothe Guantanamo Detainees. This sur-vey of notable trials from colonial daysto the present distills a huge volume ofinformation into a manageableoverview. An introductory chapterplaces the American legal system inhistorical context by looking at thetrials of Socrates, Jesus, Galileo,Thomas More, Mary Queen of Scots,and Louis XVI. Subsequent chapterseach deal with a particular importantAmerican trial—over 60 cases are cov-ered—and offer basic backgroundinformation on each as well as theauthor’s commentary on the impact ofthe trial.

Answer to . . .Interpreting Political Cartoons It candisrupt courtroom proceedings,compromise security, and result inbias against the accused.

Limited GovernmentA key component of limited government is theprotection of individual rights. That assurance isparticularly important in the holding of publictrials, and explains why the televising of trials hasbecome a topic of hot debate. An interesting partof the debate concerns whether media coverageskews the perception of certain cases. The 1995California v. Simpson trial, in which O.J. Simpsonwas acquitted of murdering his ex-wife, has beencalled the “Trial of the Century” by some. Critics,

however, say the only big thing about the trial wasthe amount of TV coverage it received; it was atypical domestic murder case and did not delveinto any of the issues of other 20th-century casessuch as the Scopes “Monkey Trial” of 1925.ActivityHave students research several 20th-century cases,including the Scopes trial, the Lindbergh kidnap-ping trial, the Scottsboro trials, and the Sacco andVanzetti trial. Have them explain which trial shouldbe labeled the “Trial of the Century,” and why.

Constitutional Principles

The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 says that the timebetween a person’s arrest and the beginning of hisor her federal criminal trial cannot be more than100 days. The law does allow for some excep-tions, however—for example, when the defendantmust undergo extensive mental tests, or when thedefendant or a key witness is ill.

The 6th Amendment guarantees a prompttrial in federal cases. The Supreme Court firstdeclared that this right applies against the Statesas part of the 14th Amendment’s Due ProcessClause in Klopfer v. North Carolina, 1967.

Public TrialThe 6th Amendment says that a trial must alsobe public. The right to be tried in public is alsopart of the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of pro-cedural due process.

A trial must not be too speedy or too public,however. The Supreme Court threw out anArkansas murder conviction in 1923 on justthose grounds. The trial had taken only 45 min-utes, and it had been held in a courtroompacked by a threatening mob.

Within reason, a judge can limit both thenumber and the kinds of spectators who may bepresent at a trial. Those who seek to disrupt acourtroom can be barred from it. A judge canorder a courtroom cleared when the expected

10The Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 allows federal prose-cutors to appeal sentences they believe to be too lenient. TheSupreme Court has held that such appeals do not violate the doublejeopardy guarantee, United States v. Di Francesco, 1980.

tried for the federal crime in a federal court andfor the State crime in a State court. A single act canalso result in the commission of several crimes. A person who breaks into a store, steals liquor,and sells it can be tried for illegal entry, theft, andselling liquor without a license.

In a trial in which a jury cannot agree on averdict, there is no jeopardy. It is as though notrial had been held. Nor is double jeopardyinvolved when a case is appealed to a highercourt.10 Recall that the Supreme Court has heldthat the 5th Amendment’s ban on double jeop-ardy applies against the States through the 14thAmendment, Benton v. Maryland, 1969.

Several States allow the continued confine-ment of violent sex predators after they havecompleted a prison term. The Court has twiceheld that that confinement is not punishment—and so does not involve double jeopardy. Rather,the practice is intended to protect the publicfrom harm, Kansas v. Hendrick, 1987, andSeling v. Young, 2001.

Speedy and Public TrialThe Constitution commands

“ In all criminalprosecutions, the accused

shall enjoy the right to a speedy and publictrial. . . .”

—6th Amendment

Speedy TrialThe guarantee of a speedy trial is meant toensure that the government will try a personaccused of crime within a reasonable time andwithout undue delay. But how long a delay istoo long? The Supreme Court has long recog-nized that each case must be judged on its ownmerits.

In a leading case, Barker v. Wingo, 1972, theCourt listed four criteria for determining if adelay has violated the constitutional protection.They are (1) the length of the delay, (2) the reasons for it, (3) whether the delay has in factharmed the defendant, and (4) whether thedefendant asked for a prompt trial.

Interpreting Political Cartoons The term “media circus”applies to trials that generate a great deal of publicity. Whatare the dangers of a trial becoming too public?

L2


Share the following quotation withstudents:

“A man who has never gone toschool may steal from a freightcar, but if he has a universityeducation he may steal thewhole railroad.”

—Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Discussion Ask students whatRoosevelt meant by his remark.Ask: How does Roosevelt’s commentrelate to the day-to-day rights ofaccused persons in the United States?GT


580

Background NoteConstitutional IssuesAs another way to insure the justice of alaw before a person could be punishedfor violating it, the Framers allowed for“jury nullification.” This was an ideastemming back to the Magna Carta of1215, when English citizens complainedabout the excessive power of King John.In jury nullification, a jury has the rightto return a “not guilty” verdict for a pris-oner, who is actually guilty of breakinga certain law, if they feel that the law isunjust or oppressive. In this way, no juryis forced to decide against a person forbreaking a law with which they do notagree.

testimony can embarrass a witness or someonenot a party to the case.

Many of the questions about how public atrial should be involve the media—especiallynewspapers and television. The guarantees offair trial and free press, however, often collidein the courts. On the one hand, a courtroom isa public place where the media have a right tobe present. On the other hand, media coveragecan jeopardize the right to a fair trial.

Champions of the public’s right to knowhold that the courts must allow the broadestpossible press coverage of a trial. The SupremeCourt has often held, however, that the mediahave only the same right as the general public to be present in a courtroom. The rightto a public trial belongs to the defendant, notto the media.

What of televised trials? Television cam-eras are barred from all federal courtrooms.Most States do allow some form of in-courttelevision reporting, however. Does televisinga criminal trial violate a defendant’s rights?

In an early major case, Estes v. Texas,1965, the Supreme Court reversed the convic-tion of an oil man charged with swindling bil-lions of dollars. Radio and television coverageof his trial had been allowed from within thecourtroom, over his objection. The Courtfound that the media coverage had been so

“circus-like” and so disruptive that Estes hadbeen denied his right to a fair trial.

Sixteen years later, the Court held in Chandlerv. Florida, 1981, that nothing in the Constitutionprevents a State from allowing the televising of acriminal trial. At least, televising is not prohibited

as long as steps are taken toavoid too much publicity andto protect the defendant’srights.

Trial by JuryThe 6th Amendment also saysthat a person accused of a fed-eral crime must be tried “by animpartial jury.” This guaranteereinforces an earlier one set outin Article III, Section 2. Theright to trial by jury is alsobinding on the States throughthe 14th Amendment’s Due

Process Clause, but only in cases involving “seri-ous” crimes, Duncan v. Louisiana, 1968.11 Thetrial jury is often called the petit jury. Petit is theFrench word for “small.”

The 6th Amendment adds that the membersof the federal court jury must be drawn from“the State and district wherein the crime shallhave been committed, which district shall havebeen previously ascertained by law.” This clausegives the defendant any benefit there might be inhaving a court and jury familiar with the peopleand problems of the area.

A defendant may ask to be tried in anotherplace—seek a “change of venue”—on groundsthat the people of the locality are so prejudicedin the case that an impartial jury cannot bedrawn. The judge must decide whether a changeof venue is justified.

A defendant may also waive (put aside or relin-quish) the right to a jury trial. However, he or shecan do so only if the judge is satisfied that the defen-dant is fully aware of his or her rights and under-stands what that action means. In fact, a judge canorder a jury trial even when a defendant does notwant one, One Lot Emerald Cut Stones and OneRing v. United States, 1972. If a defendant waives

11In Baldwin v. New York, 1970, the Court defined serious crimesas those for which imprisonment for more than six months is possible.

! Cameras in the Courtroom? Friends and family watchthe televised trial (above) of nanny Louise Woodward for themurder of a child in her care. In trials in which cameras arenot allowed in the courtroom, lawyers and the public may“view” the trial through courtroom sketches (right).

L4



Time 90 minutes.Purpose Perform skits on the rightsof the accused. Grouping Groups of 3–4 students. Activity Remind students of thequote, “It is better that ten guiltypersons go free than that one inno-cent person be punished.” Have stu-dents write a script for a skit basedon the plight of an individual who iswrongly convicted of a crime. Or,students can create their skit aboutthe consequences of guilty personsgoing free as a result of constitu-tional protections of the rights of the accused. Encourage students toexamine the cost and/or benefit tosociety in pursuing the principleexpressed by the quote. Roles Discussion leader, scriptwriter,performers.Close Groups will perform their skitsfor the class, and the class willrespond to them.


Government Assessment RubricsOral Presentation, p. 24

Block Scheduling with LessonStrategies Additional activities forChapter 20 appear on p. 29.

581

Answer to . . .Interpreting Political Cartoons Possibleanswer: No, because friends wouldbe biased in favor of the accused,and neighbors might be biased foror against.

that the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clausehas been violated. Recall from Chapter 19 thatthe Supreme Court protected the right to counselin Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963; the right of con-frontation in Pointer v. Texas, 1965; and the rightto call witnesses in Washington v. Texas, 1967.

These guarantees are intended to prevent thecards from being stacked in favor of the prosecu-tion. One of the leading right-to-counsel cases,Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964, illustrates this point.

Chicago police picked up Danny Escobedofor questioning in the death of his brother-in-law. On the way to the police station, and thenwhile he was being questioned there, he askedseveral times to see his lawyer. The policedenied these requests. They did so even thoughhis lawyer was in the police station and wastrying to see him, and the police knew thelawyer was there. Through a long night ofquestioning, Escobedo made several damagingstatements. Prosecutors later used those state-ments in court as a major part of the evidencethat led to his murder conviction.

The Supreme Court ordered Escobedo freedfrom prison four years later. It held that he hadbeen improperly denied his right to counsel.

In Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963, the Courtheld that an attorney must be furnished to adefendant who cannot afford one. In manyplaces, a judge still assigns a lawyer from thelocal community, or a private legal aid associa-tion provides counsel.

12The 14th Amendment does not say that there cannot be juriesof fewer than 12 persons, Williams v. Florida, 1970, but it does notallow juries of fewer than six members, Ballew v. Georgia, 1978. Nordoes it prevent a State from providing for a conviction on a less thanunanimous jury vote, Apodaca v. Oregon, 1972. But if a jury has onlysix members, it may convict only by a unanimous vote, Burch v.Louisiana, 1979.

the right, a bench trial is held. That is, a judgealone hears the case. (Of course, a defendant canplead guilty and so avoid a trial of any kind.)

In federal practice, the jury that hears a crimi-nal case must have 12 members. Some federalcivil cases are tried before juries of as few as sixmembers, however. Several States now providefor smaller juries, often of six members, in bothcriminal and civil cases.

In the federal courts, the jury that hears a crim-inal case can convict the accused only by a unan-imous vote. Most States follow the same rule.12

In a long series of cases, dating from Strauderv. West Virginia, 1880, the Supreme Court hasheld that a jury must be “drawn from a faircross section of the community.” A person isdenied the right to an impartial jury if he or sheis tried by a jury from which members of anygroups “playing major roles in the community”have been excluded, Taylor v. Louisiana, 1975.

In short, no person can be kept off a jury onsuch grounds as race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. As the Court has put it in severalrecent decisions on the point: Both the 5th andthe 14th amendments mean that jury servicecannot be determined by “the pigmentation of skin, the accident of birth, or the choice ofreligion,” Miller-El v. Dretke, 2005.

Right to an Adequate DefenseEvery person accused of a crime has the right tothe best possible defense that circumstances willallow. The 6th Amendment says that a defen-dant has the right (1) “to be informed of thenature and cause of the accusation,” (2) “to beconfronted with the witnesses against him” andquestion them in open court, (3) “to have com-pulsory process for obtaining witnesses in hisfavor” (that is, favorable witnesses can be sub-poenaed, or forced to attend), and (4) “to havethe Assistance of Counsel for his defense.”

These key safeguards apply in the federalcourts. Still, if a State fails to honor any of them,the accused can appeal a conviction on grounds

Interpreting Political Cartoons Would a poll of friends andneighbors produce a fair verdict? Explain your answer.

Use this complete suite of powerfulteaching tools to make planninglessons and administering testsquicker and easier.

L3


Divide the class into pairs of stu-dents. Begin this activity by present-ing samples of newspaper editorialsand discussing the nature of thewriting in each. Then assign one ofthe following issues to each pair ofstudents, asking partners to writeopposing viewpoint editorials aboutthe topic: (1) Federal Governmentdrug testing programs; (2) the exclu-sionary rule; (3) limits on the rightto bear arms; (4) the televising ofcriminal trials; (5) the MirandaRule. Ask for pairs to volunteer toread their opposing viewpoint edi-torials to the class.


Close Up on the Supreme CourtMiranda v. Arizona (1966), pp. 48–49

Simulations and Debates MockTrial, pp. 18–23 and Mock JuryDeliberation, pp. 2–17 provide stu-dents with simulations of a criminaltrial and jury deliberation.

Draw a web graphic organizer onthe board that includes one centercircle and five circles surrounding it.In the center circle, write “MirandaRule.” Have students fill in theother circles with the five provisionsof the Miranda Rule. If students arevisually inclined, they may wish toattach a simple drawing to each pro-vision. For “right to remain silent,”for example, students might draw apicture of a person talking, then puta circle around it and a line throughthe picture. SN


582

a person does not have to submit to a bloodtest in a drunk driving situation, Schmerber v.California, 1966.

A person cannot, however, be forced to con-fess to a crime under duress, that is, as a resultof torture or other physical or psychologicalpressure. In Ashcraft v. Tennessee, 1944, forexample, the Supreme Court threw out the con-viction of a man accused of hiring another per-son to murder his wife. The confession on whichhis conviction rested had been secured only aftersome 36 hours of continuous, threatening inter-rogation. The questioning was conducted byofficers who worked in shifts because, they said,they became so tired that they had to rest.

The gulf between what the Constitutionsays and what goes on in some police stationscan be wide indeed. For that reason, theSupreme Court has come down hard in favorof the defendant in many cases involving theprotection against self-incrimination and theclosely related right to counsel.

Recall, for example, the Court’s decision inEscobedo v. Illinois, 1964. There it held that aconfession cannot be used against a defendantif it was obtained by police who refused toallow the defendant to see his attorney and didnot tell him that he had a right to refuse toanswer their questions.

Miranda v. ArizonaIn a truly historic decision, the Court refined theEscobedo holding in Miranda v. Arizona, 1966.A mentally retarded man, Ernesto Miranda,had been convicted of kidnapping and rape.Ten days after the crime, the victim pickedMiranda out of a police lineup. After two hoursof questioning, during which the police didnot tell him of his rights, Miranda confessed.

The Supreme Court struck down Miranda’sconviction. More importantly, the Court saidthat it would no longer uphold convictions inany cases in which suspects had not been toldof their constitutional rights before policequestioning. It thus laid down the MirandaRule. Under the rule, before police may ques-tion a suspect, that person must be

Since Gideon, however, a growing numberof States, and many local governments, haveestablished tax-supported public defenderoffices. In 1970, Congress authorized theappointment of federal public defenders or, asan alternative, the creation of community legalservice organizations financed by federal grants.

Self-IncriminationThe guarantee against self-incrimination isamong the protections set out in the FifthAmendment. That provision declares that noperson can be “compelled in any criminal caseto be a witness against himself.” This protectionmust be honored in both the federal and Statecourts, Malloy v. Hogan, 1964.

In a criminal case, the burden of proof isalways on the prosecution. The defendant doesnot have to prove his or her innocence. Theban on self-incrimination prevents the prosecu-tion from shifting the burden of proof to thedefendant. As the Court put it in Malloy v.Hogan, the prosecution cannot force theaccused to “prove the charge against” him“out of his own mouth.”

Applying the GuaranteeThe language of the 5th Amendment suggeststhat the guarantee against self-incriminationapplies only to criminal cases. In fact, the guar-antee covers any governmental proceeding inwhich a person is legally compelled to answerany question that could lead to a criminalcharge. Thus, a person may claim the right(“take the Fifth”) in a variety of situations: in adivorce proceeding (which is a civil matter),before a legislative committee, at a schoolboard’s disciplinary hearing, and so on.

The courts, not the individuals who claim it,decide when the right can be properly invoked.If the plea of self-incrimination is pushed toofar, a person can be held in contempt of court.

The guarantee against self-incrimination is apersonal right. One can claim it only for oneself.13

It cannot be invoked in someone else’s behalf; aperson can be forced to “rat” on another.

The privilege does not protect a person frombeing fingerprinted or photographed, submit-ting a handwriting sample, or appearing in apolice lineup. And, recall, it does not mean that

13With this major exception: A husband cannot be forced to testi-fy against his wife, or a wife against her husband, Trammel v. UnitedStates, 1980. One can testify against the other voluntarily, however.

L3

L1

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_03 1/6/06 3:19 PM Page 582








Answers to . . .

Section 3 Assessment1. The writ of habeas corpus seeks toprevent unjust arrests and imprison-ments.2. These laws are forbidden becausethey threaten individual freedom andthe principle of separation of powers.3. The 5th Amendment provides forgrand juries and prohibits doublejeopardy.4. The 6th Amendment guarantees aprompt trial in federal cases, calls forpublic trials and trial by an impartialjury, and gives defendants the rightto know the charges against themand to have legal counsel.5. By preventing the legislature fromtaking over functions normally per-formed by the judicial branch of gov-ernment (the finding of guilt and thepunishment for a crime).6. Yes; They allow broad coverageof the trial and inform the public.No; They disrupt trials and mayintroduce bias.7. Possible answer: More peoplemight be found guilty, because theycould be tried more than once forthe same crime.

583

Answer to . . .Critical Thinking The Miranda Rulehas become a routine part ofpolice practice and is well-knownto all citizens.

Key Terms and Main Ideas1. What does the writ of habeas corpus seek to prevent?2. Why are bills of attainder and ex post facto laws

forbidden?3. What guarantees does the 5th Amendment offer to the

accused?4. List the provisions of the 6th Amendment concerning the

rights of the accused.

Critical Thinking5. Drawing Inferences The Constitution denies to both

Congress and the State legislatures the power to enact billsof attainder. How does this fact illustrate the principle ofseparation of powers?

6. Expressing Problems Clearly Should television camerasbe allowed in the courtroom? Why or why not?

7. Predicting Consequences If the ban on double jeopardywere removed from the Constitution, what might be theeffect on the criminal justice system?

(1) told of his or her right to remain silent;(2) warned that anything he or she says can

be used in court;(3) informed of the right to have an attorney

present during questioning;(4) told that if he or she is unable to hire an

attorney, one will be provided at public expense;(5) told that he or she may bring police ques-

tioning to an end at any time.The Miranda Rule has been in force for 40

years now (and made famous by countless televi-sion dramas over that period). As the Court putit in Dickerson v. United States, 2000, the rule“has become embedded in routine police practiceto the point where the warnings have becomepart of our national culture.”

The Supreme Court is still refining the rule on a case-by-case basis. Most often the rule is closely followed. But there are exceptions. Thus,the Court has held that an undercover police offi-cer posing as a prisoner does not have to tell a cellmate of his Miranda rights before prompting himto talk about a murder, Illinois v. Perkins, 1990.

Missouri v. Seibert, 2004, centered on whatlately had become fairly common police prac-tice: two-step interrogations, also known as“rehearsed confessions.” Here, police officershad questioned Patrice Seibert, drawing outdetails of the fire she had set to cover up themurder of her son. Then, she was told of herMiranda rights—and questioned again. Thatsecond round was taped, and she was askedquestions based on the incriminating statements

she had made in the first—untaped, unwarned—round. She confessed again.

The Supreme Court found that her confes-sion had been coerced and so was invalid. Itstruck down the two-step practice, saying that itthreatened the very purpose of Miranda.

The Miranda rule has always been contro-versial. Critics say that it “puts criminals backon the streets.” Others applaud the rule, how-ever. They hold that criminal law enforcementis most effective when it relies on independent-ly secured evidence, rather than on confessionsgained by questionable tactics from defendantswho do not have the help of a lawyer.

! In 1966, the Court struck down the conviction of ErnestoMiranda (right), who had confessed to a crime without beingtold of his rights. Critical Thinking What were the long-termeffects of the Miranda decision on police procedures?

PHSchool.com

For: An activity on the rightsof the accused

Web Code: mqd-5203


PHSchool.com



PHSchool.com


The Right to an Attorney

on Primary Sources

Clarence Gideon was an uneducated man who had to defend himself in a Floridacourt because he could not afford an attorney and the trial judge refused to provideone at public expense. Here, Gideon writes from prison to the attorney assigned to han-dle his Supreme Court appeal. Fourteen months after this letter, the Court ruled inGideon v. Wainwright that every defendant has a right to an attorney.

attorney[,] he could brought outall these things in my trial.

When I was arrested I was put insolitary confinement and I was notallowed the papers not to use thetelephone or write to everyone Ishould. I did get a speedy arraign-ment and . . . was allow more timeto try and obtain a attorney[,]which I could not do. You knowabout the rest of my trial. . . .

I hope that [this letter] may helpyou in preparing this case. I am sorry

I could not write better[.] I have done the best I could.I have no illusions about the law and courts or

the people who are involved in them. I have readthe complete history of law ever since the Romansfirst started writing them down and[,] before[,] ofthe laws of religions. I believe that each era finds aimprovement in the law[.] Each year brings some-thing new for the benefit of mankind. Maybe thiswill be one of those small steps forward. . . .

On June 3rd 1961 I was arrest-ed for the crime I am nowdoing time on. I was charged

with Breaking & Entering tocomitt a misdemeanor and wasconvicted in a trial August 4th1961 [and] sentenced to StatePrison August 27th 1961.

This charge growed out ofgambling. . . . I worked in thisplace and did run a Poker gamethere. . . . I did not break into thisbuilding nor did I have to [because]I had the keys to the building. . . . The Statewitness Cook who was supposed to identify me.Had a bad police record and the Court would notlet me bring that out. Nor that one time I had atthe point of a pistal made him stop beating a girl[.]

I always believed that the primarily reason of atrial in a court of law was to reach the truth. My trialwas far from the truth. One day when I was beingarraigned [brought to court to be formally charged]I seen two trials of two different men tried withoutattorneys. One hour from the time they started theyhad two juries out and fifteen minutes later theywere found guilty and sentenced. Is this a fair trial?This is common practiced through most of thisstate. . . . I am an electrician here [in prison] and oneof my fellow workers has two years for drunk andresisting arrest. Most city Police courts would give acitizen a twenty-five dollar fine for the same chargehe was tried without an attorney and convicted. . . .

There was not a crime committed in my caseand I don’t feel like I had a fair trial. If I had a

Clarence Gideon1910–1972

on Primary Sources

Analyzing Primary Sources1. What “proof” does Gideon offer to support his

innocence?2. In what three ways, according to Gideon, are

defendants harmed by not having an attorney?3. What attitude does Gideon show toward the law

and the legal system?4. What point is Gideon trying to make in the last

paragraph of his letter?

The Right to an AttorneyFocus Ask students to describe the jobof an attorney. Then have studentsidentify reasons why people wouldwant to have an attorney acting ontheir behalf when facing charges. Besure that students realize that attor-neys can often clear a defendant ofcharges or get the charges reduced.Instruct Organize the class into sev-eral small groups. Ask each group to create a mock public-serviceannouncement informing U.S. citizensof the rights of the accused. Be surethat students include the right to anattorney in their presentations. Haveeach group present its announcementto the class. Be sure to allow timefor correction of ideas presented andgeneral discussion.Close/Reteach Ask students to rereadthe selection. Based on ClarenceGideon’s letter, would they havevoted to support his appeal? Havestudents discuss how the judicialprocess might be different today ifaccused people did not have theright to attorneys.

Keep It Current CD-ROM includesgovernment-related projects

by unit. The CD-ROM links to thePrentice Hall School Web site andmay be used for daily updates.

584

Answers to . . .Analyzing Primary Sources1. Gideon points out that he hadkeys to the building so he didn’tneed to break in, and he raisesquestions about the reliability oftestimony of a witness against him. 2. They are less able to defendthemselves, are more quickly con-victed, and are more likely toreceive harsh sentences. 3. Answers will vary, but studentsshould recognize that he criticizesthe legal system as flawed andunfair but also believes that it hasimproved over time.4. Answers will vary, but studentsshould recognize that he hopes thathis appeal will improve the law.

Close Up on Primary Sources The Right toDue Process, p. 22, extends this feature with aprimary source activity.

Corner


www.closeup.org

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_PS 1/6/06 11:45 AM Page 584

Objectives You may wish to callstudents’ attention to the objectivesin the Section Preview. The objectivesare reflected in the main headings ofthe section.Bellringer Have students supposethat one night they arrived home 20 minutes after their curfew. As aresult, for two months they weregrounded, could watch no TV, andcould not use the phone. How wouldthey describe that punishment? Inthis section, they will learn about theconstitutional prohibition against“cruel and unusual punishment.”Vocabulary Builder Point out theterms in the Political Dictionary. Askstudents what they think preventivedetention prevents. (additionalcrimes) Then have them define capitalpunishment, and ask what capitalmeans. (head, as in beheading)

Punishment4

585


Consider these suggestions to manage extendedclass time:! Have students as a class work together toframe a definition of “cruel and unusual punish-ment.” Then have them read through the sectionand take notes about how the 8th Amendmentdefines the phrase, and how Supreme Courtdecisions have redefined it. After students havefinished, have them revise their initial definition.

! Remind students that capital punishment is oneof the most controversial topics in politics. Holda class debate by forming small teams of debaters.Ask students to take the viewpoint opposite totheir own. Encourage students to refer to SupremeCourt decisions in their arguments, whether toagree or refute.


Answer to . . .Interpreting Political Cartoons In thepreventive detention of accusedfelons.

OOnce again, think about this statement: “It isbetter that ten guilty persons go free than

that one innocent person be punished.” What doyou think of that notion after reading the pre-vious section? Turn now to those guilty personswho do not go free but are instead punished.How should they be treated? The Constitutiongives its most specific answers to that questionin the 8th Amendment.

Bail and Preventative DetentionThe 8th Amendment says, in part:

“ Excessive bail shall not berequired, nor excessive finesimposed. . . .”


Each State constitution sets out similarrestrictions. The general rule is that the bail orfine in a case must bear a reasonable relation-ship to the seriousness of the crime involved.

BailBail is a sum of money that the accused maybe required to post (deposit with the court) asa guarantee that he or she will appear in courtat the proper time. The use of bail is justifiedon two grounds: (1) A person should not bejailed until his or her guilt is established. (2) Adefendant is better able to prepare for trialoutside of a jail.

Note that the Constitution does not say thatall persons accused of a crime are automaticallyentitled to bail. Rather, it guarantees that, wherebail is set, the amount will not be excessive.

The leading case on bail in the federal courtsis Stack v. Boyle, 1951. There the Court ruledthat “bail set at a figure higher than the amountreasonably calculated” to assure a defendant’sappearance at a trial “is ‘excessive’ under the8th Amendment.”

A defendant can appeal the denial of releaseon bail or the amount of bail. Bail is usually setin accordance with the severity of the crime

Punishment

Objectives

1. Explain the purpose of bail and preventivedetention.

2. Describe the Court’s interpretation of crueland unusual punishment.

3. Outline the history of the Court’s decisionson capital punishment.

4. Define the crime of treason.

Why It Matters

The 8th Amendment addresses theissue of punishment for crime. It bansexcessive bail and cruel and unusualpunishment. The Court has ruled thatthe death penalty does not constitutecruel and unusual punishment, althoughthe question of capital punishment continues to be hotly debated.

PoliticalDictionary! bail! preventive detention! capital punishment! treason

Interpreting Political Cartoons Under what circumstancesmay bail actually be denied?

Lesson PlanTeaching the Main Ideas1. Focus Tell students that the 8thAmendment has generated severalissues related to punishment. Askstudents to discuss what they knowabout capital punishment and why itis controversial.2. Instruct Ask students to explainwhy bail is justified. Write the tworeasons on the board. In light of thoseanswers, discuss why the Court hasalso sanctioned preventive detention.Conclude with a discussion of crueland unusual punishment, focusing onthe death penalty.3. Close/Reteach Remind studentsthat treason—the only crime definedin the Constitution—can be punishedby death. Ask students to develop aset of debating points, includingCourt cases, on both sides of thedeath-penalty issue.

L3


Reading StrategyOrganizing Information/Graphic OrganizerTell students that they will be readingabout various punishments for crimes;they may think some laws are toosoft on criminals and others too hard.Have students draw a “crime line”—a line with the label “Soft” at one endand “Hard” at the other. Tell studentsto position each heading or subhead-ing on this line to show how theyfeel about the law. With the heading,they should include a summary ofthe law and their position on it.




Political Cartoons See p. 81 ofthe Political Cartoons booklet for acartoon relevant to this section.

Simulations and Debates DeathPenalty, pp. 50–52 provides studentswith a debate about this controversialtopic.



586

Answer to . . .Critical Thinking For: It is appropri-ate punishment and a gooddeterrent. Against: It is cruel andunusual punishment; the processof assigning it can be unfair andarbitrary.

The Supreme Court decided its first cruel andunusual case in Wilkerson v. Utah, 1879. Therea territorial court had sentenced a convictedmurderer to death by a firing squad. The Courtheld that this punishment was not forbidden bythe Constitution. The kinds of penalties theConstitution intended to prevent, said the Court,were such barbaric tortures as burning at thestake, crucifixion, drawing and quartering, “andall others in the same line of unnecessary cru-elty.” The Court took the same position a few years later when, for the first time, it upheldthe electrocution of a convicted murderer, In reKemmler, 1890.

Since then, the Court has heard only a hand-ful of cruel and unusual cases, except for thoserelating to capital punishment. More often thannot, the Court has rejected the cruel and unusualpunishment argument.14 Louisiana v. Resweber,1947, is fairly typical. There the Court foundthat it was not unconstitutional to subject a con-victed murderer to a second electrocution afterthe chair had failed to work properly on the firstoccasion.

The Court also denied the cruel and unusualclaim in a recent case involving California’s“three strikes” law, Lockyer v. Andrade, 2003.That law provides that any person convicted of acrime for a third time must be sent to prison forat least 25 years. Leonard Andrade had received50 years for stealing $153.54 worth of children’s

charged and with the reputation and financialresources of the accused. People with little or noincome often have trouble raising bail. The fed-eral and most State courts thus release manydefendants “on their own recognizance,” that is,on their honor. Failure to appear for trial—“jumping bail”—is itself a punishable crime.

Preventive DetentionIn 1984, Congress provided for the preventivedetention of some people accused of federalcrimes. A federal judge can order that theaccused be held, without bail, when there isgood reason to believe that he or she will com-mit another serious crime before trial.

Critics of the law claim that preventive deten-tion amounts to punishment before trial. Theysay it undercuts the presumption of innocence towhich defendants are entitled.

The Supreme Court upheld the 1984 law, 6–3,in United States v. Salerno, 1987. The majorityrejected the argument that preventive detention ispunishment. Rather, it found the practice a legiti-mate response to a “pressing societal problem.”The Court held that, “There is no doubt that pre-venting danger to the community is a legitimateregulatory goal.” More than half the States haverecently adopted preventive detention laws.

Cruel and Unusual PunishmentThe 8th Amendment also forbids “cruel andunusual punishment.” The 14th Amendmentextends that prohibition against the States,Robinson v. California, 1962.

14The prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment is limited tocriminal matters. It does not forbid paddling or similar punishmentsin the public schools, Ingraham v. Wright, 1977.

! Supporters for (right)and against (left) capitalpunishment make theirviews known. CriticalThinking Briefly sum-marize arguments for and against thedeath penalty.


Have students research and reporton the history of the death penaltyin the United States, tracing thedevelopment of capital punishmentfrom colonial times to the presentday. Encourage them to evaluatepast practices in light of currentstandards of justice and fairness asexpressed in various Supreme Courtopinions. In addition, ask studentsto create and conduct a survey inwhich they ask other students intheir school about their feelings onthis issue. Compare these responseswith poll statistics given in the text.In a final report, have students pre-sent their research findings and theirsurvey results. GT

587


Have students read the passages under Capital Punishment and Treason onpp. 587–588 and then answer the question below.What is the only crime explicitly defined in the Constitution?A treasonB murderC killing a police officerD committing rape

Preparing for Standardized Tests

Background NoteBehind the Scenes Before 1888, hanging was the mostcommon way in which those on deathrow were executed. Some consideredit a form of “cruel and unusual punish-ment.” The electric chair was developedin 1887 as a result of a rivalry betweenThomas Edison and Westinghouse. Intrying to promote his DC electricity,Edison proved that AC electricity, usedby Westinghouse, could easily kill peo-ple and animals exposed to it. Whiledoing this, he proposed the idea for an“electric chair” for capital punishmentusing AC, thinking that people wouldnot want the same type of electricity in their houses. Contrary to his plans,electrocution was adopted by manyStates, yet AC still became the maintype of current used across the country.

videos from two K-Mart stores. The K-Martthefts were treated as separate offenses and hehad an earlier burglary conviction on his record.

However, the Court has held some punish-ments to be cruel and unusual, although only afew. It did so for the first time in Weems v.United States, 1910. There, the Court over-turned the conviction of a Coast Guard officialconvicted of falsifying government pay records.He had been sentenced to 15 years at hard labor,constantly chained at ankle and wrist. InRobinson v. California, 1962, the Court heldthat a State law defining narcotics addiction asa crime to be punished, rather than an illness tobe treated, violated the 8th and 14th amend-ments.15 In Estelle v. Gamble, 1976, it ruled thata Texas prison inmate could not properly bedenied needed medical care.

Capital PunishmentIs capital punishment—punishment by death—cruel and unusual and therefore unconstitutional?16

For years, the Supreme Court was reluctant toface that highly charged issue.17

The Court met the issue more or less direct-ly in Furman v. Georgia, 1972. There it struckdown all of the then existing State laws allow-ing the death penalty, but not because thatpenalty as such was cruel and unusual. Rather,the Court voided those laws because they gavetoo much discretion to judges or juries in decid-ing whether to impose the death penalty. TheCourt noted that out of all the people convictedof capital crimes, only “a random few,” most ofthem African American or poor or both, were“capriciously selected” for execution.

Since that decision, Congress and 38 Stateshave passed new capital punishment laws. Atfirst, those laws took one of two forms. SeveralStates made the death penalty mandatory forcertain crimes, such as killing a police officer or

murder committed during a rape, kidnapping,or arson. Other States provided for a two-stageprocess in capital cases: first, a trial to settle theissue of guilt or innocence; then, for those con-victed, a second hearing to decide whether thecircumstances justify a sentence of death.

In considering the scores of challenges tothose State laws, the Supreme Court found themandatory death penalty laws unconstitutional.In Woodson v. North Carolina, 1976, it ruledthat such laws were “unduly harsh and rigidlyunworkable.” It saw the laws as attempts simplyto “paper over” the decision in Furman.

The two-stage approach to capital punish-ment is constitutional, however. In Gregg v.Georgia, 1976, the Court held, for the first time,that the “punishment of death does not invari-ably violate the Constitution.” It ruled that well-drawn two-stage laws can practically eliminate“the risk that [the death penalty] will be inflictedin an arbitrary or capricious manner.”

The death penalty can be imposed only for“crimes resulting in the death of the victim,”Coker v. Georgia, 1977. That penalty cannot beimposed on those who are mentally challenged,Atkins v. Virginia, 2002, or on those who wereunder the age of 18 when their crimes werecommitted, Roper v. Simmons, 2005.

The question of whether the death penalty isto be imposed in a case must be decided by the

15But, notice, that does not mean that buying, selling, or possess-ing narcotics cannot be made a crime. Such criminal laws aredesigned to punish persons for their behavior, not for being ill.

16The phrase “capital punishment” comes from the Latin caput,meaning “head”; in many cultures, the historically preferred methodfor executing criminals was beheading (decapitation).

17The Court did hold that neither death by firing squad (Wilkersonv. Utah, 1878) nor by a second electrocution (Louisiana v. Resweber,1947) is unconstitutional. But in neither of those cases, nor in others,did it deal with the question of the death penalty as such.

Executions in the United States, 1976–2004

SOURCES: Death Penalty Information Center; New York Times Almanac

1976 1980 1984 1988Year

1992 1996 2000

Num

ber o

f exe

cutio

ns

98

84

70

56

42

28

14

0

2004

Interpreting Graphs In 1976, the Supreme Court upheld theconstitutionality of the death penalty. Summarize the datashown on the graph.

L4

Answer to . . .Interpreting Graphs The number ofexecutions rose dramatically, from0 in 1976 to 98 in 1999. Theyears 2000–2003 saw a decline,which may or may not signal thebeginning of an extended down-ward trend.








Answers to . . .

Section 4 Assessment1. Excessive bail is an amount higherthan that necessary to assure adefendant’s appearance at a trial.2. The Court has usually ruled thatthe punishment in question was notcruel and unusual.3. The Court’s view of capital punish-ment has been that as long as it isfairly applied, it is constitutional.4. To prevent political leaders fromusing the charge of treason againsttheir opponents.5. (a) Mandatory death penalty sen-tences for certain crimes; a two-stageprocess with a trial and then a sepa-rate hearing for sentencing. (b) TheCourt has found mandatory sentenc-ing unconstitutional because it is toorigid.6. Possible answer: The Court assumesthat protection of the community takesprecedence over personal liberties insuch cases.

Chapter 20 • Section 4The death penalty statutes in New York and

Kansas were held unconstitutional by thoseStates' highest courts in 2004. Efforts to revivethose laws continue.

TreasonTreason against the United States is the onlycrime that is defined in the Constitution. TheFramers provided a specific definition of thecrime because they knew that the charge of trea-son is a favorite weapon in the hands of tyrants.

Treason, says Article III, Section 3, can consistof only two things: either (1) levying war againstthe United States or (2) “adhering to theirEnemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” Noperson can be convicted of the crime “unless onthe Testimony of two Witnesses to the sameovert Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

Congress has set death as the maximumpenalty for treason against the United States, butno one has ever been executed for the crime.Note that a person can commit treason only inwartime. However, Congress has made it acrime, during times of either peace or war, tocommit espionage or sabotage, to attempt tooverthrow the government by force, or to con-spire to do any of these things.

Most of the State constitutions also providefor treason. John Brown was hanged as a traitorto Virginia after his raid on Harpers Ferry in1859. He is believed to be the only person everto be executed for treason against a State.

jury that convicted the defendant, not the judgewho presided at the trial, Ring v. Arizona,2002. A convicted defendant cannot be forcedto appear in court in shackles and chains whenthe jury is deciding whether he or she should besentenced to die or, instead, to life in prison,Deck v. Missouri, 2005.

Opponents of capital punishment continue toappeal cases to the Court, but to no real avail.The sum of the Court’s many decisions over thepast 30 years is this: The death penalty, fairlyapplied, is constitutional.

A sizable majority of the American peoplesupport capital punishment. Still, many whofavor it have misgivings about the fairness withwhich death sentences are applied.

Governor George Ryan of Illinois ignitedcontroversy when he ordered a suspension ofexecutions in his State in 2000. He did so, hesaid, because the death penalty process is"fraught with error." From 1977 to 2000, 285people were sentenced to die in Illinois. By2000, 12 of them had been executed, but 13others had been released from prison becausethey had been wrongly convicted.

In 2003, Governor Ryan commuted the sen-tences of all the inmates then on death row inIllinois. He justified that extraordinary actionby citing a State investigation that uncoveredcorruption and racial bias in the State's deathpenalty process. The legislature has since passedseveral reform measures, but current governorRod Blagojevich has refused to lift the suspen-sion. He says the State's problems continue.

Key Terms and Main Ideas1. What constitutes excessive bail?2. In cases involving cruel and unusual punishment, how has

the Court generally ruled?3. What is the Supreme Court’s view of capital punishment?4. Why does the Constitution specifically define treason?

Critical Thinking5. Demonstrating Reasoned Judgment (a) What two forms did

State laws allowing capital punishment take after the Court’sdecision in Furman v. Georgia? (b) Why did the Court find oneof those forms “unduly harsh and rigidly unworkable”?

6. Identifying Assumptions What assumptions underlie theCourt’s decision that preventive detention is constitutional?

PHSchool.com

For: An activity on the deathpenalty

Web Code: mqd-5204


PHSchool.com

588



PHSchool.com


on the Supreme Court

The 4th Amendment prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures,” but it does notdefine the term “unreasonable.” In a leading case, Terry v. Ohio, 1968, the SupremeCourt held that police officers may stop and frisk a person when they have good rea-son to believe that that person is armed and dangerous. May police stop and searcha person simply because that person flees when the police approach?

Does a Suspect’s Flight From PoliceJustify a Stop and Search?

the arrival of the police, provide reasonablegrounds for stopping the suspect.

3. The standard that must be met to justify stoppinga suspect, “reasonable suspicion,” is less demand-ing than the standard of “probable cause” thatmust be met to justify arresting a suspect.

Arguments for Wardlow1. There can be many reasons for fleeing from

police; the fact that a person fled does not byitself mean that he is guilty of a crime.

2. Even the combined circumstances of being in ahigh-crime area, carrying a white bag, and run-ning from the police do not create reasonable sus-picion to justify a search.

3. An individual has the right to ignore the policeunless and until the police have sufficient groundsunder the Constitution to detain or arrest him.No one is required to cooperate with the police.

Illinois v. Wardlow (2000)William Wardlow was holding a white bag while inan area of Chicago known for heavy drug traffick-ing when he saw a caravan of police cars approach-ing. He fled, and the police pursued. When theycaught up with him, one of the officers conducted a“pat-down” search for weapons. (In the police offi-cer’s experience, weapons were usually found in thevicinity of narcotics transactions.) The officersqueezed the bag Wardlow was carrying and felt aheavy, hard object shaped like a gun. He opened thebag and discovered a .38-caliber handgun with fivelive rounds of ammunition.

At his trial, Wardlow argued that he should notbe prosecuted for possession of the gun because theofficer did not have reasonable suspicion to stopand search him. The Illinois trial court ruled againsthim, and he was convicted of unlawful use of aweapon by a felon. The Illinois Appellate Courtthen reversed his conviction. The Illinois SupremeCourt affirmed that ruling, holding that both thestop and the arrest violated the 4th Amendment.The case then went to the Supreme Court.

Arguments for Illinois1. The fact that a person fled from a police officer

strongly indicates criminal behavior and pro-vides reasonable grounds for stopping the sus-pect in order to conduct a brief investigation.

2. Even if flight alone is not sufficient to justifystopping and searching a suspect, the fact thatthe suspect was in a high-crime area, com-bined with the fact that the suspect fled upon

on the Supreme Court

Decide for Yourself1. Review the constitutional grounds on which

each side based its arguments and the specificarguments each side presented.

2. Debate the opposing viewpoints presented in this case. Which viewpoint do you favor?

3. Predict the impact of the Court’s decision on theconduct of police investigations and on relationsbetween minority groups and the police. (To reada summary of the Court’s decision, turn to pages799–806.)

PHSchool.com

Use Web Code mqp-5208 to reg-ister your vote on this issue andto see how other students voted.

Does a Subject’s Flight fromPolice Justify a Stop andSearch? Focus Have the class skim the chapter’s section on the 4thAmendment. Then call on volunteersto explain the amendment’s purpose(to prevent unreasonable searchesby the government) and the mainrequirement for obtaining a searchwarrant. (probable cause) Instruct Call on volunteers to explainthe plain view, emergency, arrest, andautomobile exceptions to the searchwarrant rule. Then explain that thiscase considers another exception tothe search warrant requirement. Afterreading the feature, have the classidentify the argument in the featurethat they find most convincing andexplain why. Close/Reteach In President John Adamswords, “the child Independence wasborn” in the colonists’ opposition towrits of assistance issued to Britishcustoms officials. Have students suppose that they are colonists whoopposed British threats to liberty.Have them write a petition to theking that explains why blanketsearch warrants pose a threat to the security of home and person.

Have students access Web Codemqp-5208 to participate in an onlinestudent poll on the topic of thisdebate.

PHSchool.com

589

Answers to . . .Decide for Yourself1. Illinois argued that police officersmay stop a suspect providing thatthey have “reasonable suspicion.”Wardlow argued that his 4thAmendment rights were violated,and that the Constitution doesnot specify grounds under whicha suspect may be detained.2. Answers will vary, but shouldbe supported with valid reasoning.3. The Court ruled in favor ofIllinois, holding that police didhave reasonable suspicion and thatwas enough to justify a stop.

Close Up on the Supreme Court Illinois v.Wardlow, p. 21 provides an activity to extendcoverage of this case.

Corner


www.closeup.org

MAG05_NA_TE_20_SC 1/6/06 3:21 PM Page 589

AssessmentPracticing the Vocabulary1. grand jury2. due process3. police power4. bail5. bill of attainder6. writs of assistance7. Miranda Rule8. double jeopardy9. search warrant10. ex post facto law

Reviewing Main IdeasSection 111. Rochin—in which sheriffs brokeinto a suspect’s home, pried open hismouth, and pumped his stomach—pointed to the need for procedural dueprocess. Pierce—in which a law waspassed with the purpose of destroyingparochial schools—pointed to theneed for substantive due process.12. Procedural due process refers tothe fact that government must con-duct itself fairly; substantive dueprocess says that the laws and poli-cies under which the governmentacts must be fair.13. To protect and promote health,safety, morals, and general welfare.14. The right of privacy.

Section 215. With the Civil Rights Cases, the Court weakened the 13thAmendment by holding that racialdiscrimination was different fromslavery; with Jones, the Courtstrengthened the amendment byholding that it had the power toabolish “the badges and incidentsof slavery.”16. The 3rd Amendment was madein response to the British practice ofquartering soldiers in private homes;it is no longer significant, as the his-torical context from which it grewno longer exists. 17. To provide for the security ofpeople in their homes and on theirpersons.18. Evidence obtained illegally.

Section 319. One of the principles of theAmerican legal system is that theprotection of innocent people outweighs the prosecution of theguilty.20. By mandating writs of habeas

590

Chapter 20

corpus, grand juries, and publictrials by jury, and by outlawingbills of attainder and ex postfacto laws.21. Trials must be speedy andpublic, and they must involve ajury—unless this right is waivedby the defendant. Also, theaccused cannot be exposed todouble jeopardy.22. The Miranda Rule ensuresthat the accused are aware oftheir rights.

Section 423. No excessive bail or finesare allowed, and punishmentcannot be cruel or unusual.24. Mandatory death sentenceshave been found unconstitutional.25. Furman struck down allState laws that allowed thedeath penalty, on the groundsthat executions were random.This led to the passage of newState laws.

26. (a) Treason. (b) A court musthave the testimony of two wit-nesses or an open confession bythe accused in order to convict.

Section 111. What is the difference between procedural and substantive due

process?12. Describe the relationship between the States’ police power and

due process of law.13. The States may exercise the police power to protect and pro-

mote what?14. What right did the Court first articulate in Griswold v.

Connecticut, 1965?

Section 215. Use the examples of the Civil Rights Cases, 1883, and Jones

v. Mayer, 1968, to illustrate how the Court’s interpretation ofthe 13th Amendment changed over the years.

16. What is the aim of the 4th Amendment?17. What are the roots of the 3rd Amendment, and why is it not

significant today?18. What does the exclusionary rule exclude?

Section 319. For what reason does the Constitution protect the rights of

those accused of a crime?20. In what ways does the Constitution protect the rights of the

accused?21. What are the key constitutional guarantees of a fair trial?22. What is the Miranda Rule?

Section 423. What are the key constitutional guarantees regarding punish-

ment of the guilty?24. Under what circumstances has the Supreme Court found

death penalty laws to be unconstitutional?25. What was the significance of Furman v. Georgia, 1972, in the

history of the Supreme Court’s rulings regarding capital pun-ishment?

26. (a) What is the only crime defined in the Constitution? (b) What requirements must be met in order for a person tobe convicted of this crime?

due process (p. 564)substantive due process (p. 565)procedural due process (p. 565)police power (p. 566)search warrant (p. 566)involuntary servitude (p. 569)discrimination (p. 570)writs of assistance (p. 571)

probable cause (p. 571)exclusionary rule (p. 573)writ of habeas corpus (p. 576)bill of attainder (p. 577)ex post facto law (p. 577)grand jury (p. 577)indictment (p. 578)double jeopardy (p. 578)

bench trial (p. 580)Miranda Rule (p. 582)bail (p. 585)preventive detention (p. 586)capital punishment (p. 587)treason (p. 588)

Political Dictionary

Practicing the Vocabulary

Reviewing Main Ideas

Matching Choose a term from the list above that best matcheseach description.

1. A group convened by a court to determine whether or notthere is enough evidence against a person to justify a trial

2. A constitutional guarantee that a government will not depriveany person of life, liberty, or property by any unfair, arbitrary,or unreasonable action

3. The power of each State to act to protect and promote thepublic health, safety, morals, and general welfare

4. A sum of money that an accused person may be required topost as a guarantee that he or she will appear in court at theproper time

5. A legislative act that inflicts punishment without court trial

Fill in the Blank Choose a term from the list above that bestcompletes the sentence.

6. During colonial times, British officials used _________ inorder to search private homes for smuggled goods.

7. According to the _________, suspects must be advised oftheir rights before police questioning.

8. If a person is tried twice for the same crime, he or she mayhave been subjected to _________.

9. Police generally need a _________ in order search some-one’s house.

10. An _________ is a law applied to acts performed before thelaw was passed.

AssessmentAssessment

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_CA 1/6/06 11:44 AM Page 590

Critical Thinking Skills27. Answers should show an under-standing of the differences betweengrand and trial juries and civil andcriminal cases.28. Answers will vary; studentsshould question on what basis a per-son who is technically innocent canbe considered a danger with thepotential to commit a crime.29. The Rule assumes that manypeople are unaware of the rights ofthe accused.30. Anger about British colonialpractices that infringed on colonists’rights brought about each of theseamendments.31. To uphold the 4th Amendment’sprotections of persons accused ofcrimes. Answers will vary, butshould reveal an understanding ofthe motivation behind the adoptionof the rule as well as of the difficul-ties it poses for law enforcementofficers in the pursuit of justice.

Analyzing Political Cartoons32. (a) Ordinary Americans. (b) A well-publicized trial.33. That they trivialize importanttrials.

You Can Make a DifferenceStudents should be given credit forsuccessfully identifying and contact-ing an appropriate organization.Interview questions should berespectful and it should be clear thatstudents prepared them in advanceof the interview.

Participation Activities34. Summaries should be accurate andinclude all relevant points; opinionsshould be backed with precedents.35. Time lines should be clearlyconstructed and show an obviousdevelopment of political thought.36. Surveys should ask non-biased,non-leading questions.

591


Guide to the Essentials ofAmerican Government Chapter 20

Test, page 111 provides multiple-choice questions to test students’knowledge of the chapter.

ExamView ®Test Bank CD-ROMChapter 20 Test

Chapter Tests Chapter Testsbooklet

Additional support materials and activities for Chapter 20of Magruder’s American Government can be found in theSocial Studies area at the Prentice Hall School Web site.PHSchool.com

Participation Activities34. Current Events Watch Scan the newspaper for stories

concerning any guarantees of the rights of the accusedshown on the chart on page 578. Be prepared to give an oralreport of your findings.

35. Time Line Activity Choose an issue discussed in thischapter (for example, the constitutionality of the death penaltyor abortion). Based on both the information in this chapterand your own research, make a list of the key Supreme Courtdecisions regarding the issue. Present these decisions in atime line that demonstrates the development of the Court’sposition on this issue.

36. It’s Your Turn Create a survey to gauge opinions on theConstitution’s protections of individual rights. First, list theseveral rights discussed in this chapter. Then note some ofthe controversies associated with some of those rights.Construct a list of questions designed to prompt the expres-sion of opinions on those matters. Ask a number of people to respond to your survey and compile the results.(Conducting a Survey)

Analyzing Political CartoonsUse your knowledge of American history and government and thiscartoon to answer the questions below.

32. (a) Who are the people in the cartoon? (b) What are theywatching on television?

33. What does the cartoon suggest about television cameras inthe courtroom?

You can make a difference. You can make a differ-ence. You can make a difference. You can make a dif-ference. You can make a difference. You can make adifference. You can make a difference. You can makea difference. You can make a difference. You canmake a difference. You can make a difference. Youcan make a difference. You can make a difference.You can make a difference. You can make a differ-ence.

What agencies in your community confront crime?Some might target alcohol or other substance abuse,or provide counseling or legal assistance; othersemphasize crisis intervention or youth services or giveaid to those in need. Set up an interview with a repre-sentative from one of these groups and get his or heropinion about what students can do within the schoolsetting to help combat crime. If possible, make a taperecording of your interview to play for the class.

You Can Make a DifferenceCritical Thinking Skills27. Applying the Chapter Skill If you are summoned for

jury duty, would you rather serve on a grand jury or a trial jury?Why? On a jury that hears a civil or a criminal case? Why?

28. Checking Consistency Recall that an accused personcan be held without bail when there is good reason to believethat he or she will commit another crime. In your opinion,does this rule violate the principle of presumed innocenceuntil proven guilty? Does it violate the guarantee of dueprocess?

29. Identifying Assumptions What assumptions underliethe Miranda Rule and its warnings?

30. Determining Relevance Why may it be said that the2nd, 3rd, and 4th amendments are a reflection of colonialexperience?

31. Identifying Central Issues (a) Why did the SupremeCourt adopt the exclusionary rule? (b) Do you think the ruleshould be retained or abandoned?

PHSchool.com

For: Chapter 20 Self-TestVisit: PHSchool.comWeb Code: mqa-5205

As a final review, take the Magruder’s Chapter 20 Self-Testand receive immediate feedback on your answers. Thetest consists of 20 multiple-choice questions designed totest your understanding of the chapter content.

PHSchool.com

MAG05_NA_TE_CH20_CA 1/6/06 11:44 AM Page 591

mag05 na te ch20 co 1/6/06 1:08 pm page 562 chapter 20

Documents