Flip Classroom # 2
I plan to walk you through the history of the Supreme Court in an effort to help you understand the best way to study the case law section of the AP exam.
Does the Supreme Court have moodswings?
Click on the link and please watch the video lectures, take notes and leave me a question on the blog. Use The handouts in your packet to help.
Furman v. Georgia struck down the death penalty temporarily. When/how was it reinstated?
ReplyDeleteI know it was covered, but I'm still confused about definition of Judicial Activism/Restraint.
ReplyDeleteIf the perceived problem of a political court has been discussed for many years, what has been done to try and correct this and, if nothing has, how could it be fixed?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Natalie. Also I am confused about Parte Milligan and Parte Merryman.
ReplyDeleteMegan Musachio
If the marshal court was federal over states and the taney was states over federal, than isn't that a prime example of judicial advisory because their using their opinions through the Constitution?
ReplyDeleteHow is the Bridge Case not a way of interstate commerce? Wouldn't it be just like Gibbons v Ogden? They should have both had the same decision.
ReplyDeleteWhat type of event would spark a landscape change or a mood swing in the Supreme Court?
ReplyDeleteKatie Cresser
What was the political make-up of the courts prior to the frequent 5-4 decisions, and were any decisions based on politics prior to the most recent court? Or was the influence of politics on judges a more recent phenomenon?
ReplyDeleteSo does Martin v Hunter's Lesse mean that a state court decision can be appealed to the federal courts?
ReplyDeleteAlso, how do you tell the difference between a "mood swing" in the court and just a change of justices?
If federal law is supreme to state law due to the supremacy clause than how are justices such as Taney able to get away with favoring state rights at the expense of the government?
ReplyDeleteIf the Supreme Court has mood swings, is that an example of judicial advisory? With that thought, why is it just now that people are making comments that justices are legislating from the bench?
ReplyDeleteIf Furman Vs. Georgia struck down the death penalty temporarily, when and how do the Justices decide that it can be a debated issue again?
ReplyDeleteCasey Signorelli
If an issue is struck down once and then passed many years later in a different court, how do they find it the issue to be constitutional if it was previously denied? I don't see how it would happen unless political agenda is involved.
ReplyDeleteWhat made Brown vs. The Board of Education come back a year later for round 2 and not just die out?
ReplyDeleteGreat questions, who's doing their Homework after 11:30 PM? Good Luck guys. Get some sleep.
ReplyDeleteHow did the federal government strike back after Dred Scott?
ReplyDeleteI know the Dred Scott case was the result of the Civil War, but during the Post War, were they still saying it was because of the Dred Scott Decision and not other reasons?
ReplyDeleteHow are judges able to effectively convince others of their opinion when they are one of the few people to have it in a particular instance? (Holmes and Brandeis during the pro-business era)
ReplyDeleteDid Justice Earl Warren drastically change his views and become pro civil liberties immediately after he was appointed to the Supreme Court? Or did his views shift after a few years of being a judge?
ReplyDeleteI still don't understand why Jackson didn't have to enforce the law and how Marshall "gave him an out". Can you clarify this?
ReplyDeleteHow did the 13th and 15th amendments override the Dred Scott decision?
ReplyDeleteI am looking at the sheet you told us to follow along with, I don't see cases where a "Right to Life" lobby group or Pro-Choice lobby group might file an amicus curiae brief...can go over specific cases in class?
ReplyDeleteHow did the Charles River Bridge Case give more power to the states during the Taney Court?
ReplyDeleteIf the Supreme Court bases it's decisions on legal precedents, why does it often seem to go against past decisions?
ReplyDeleteHow can an issue that was first denied be brought back to the courts and then be stated to be constitutional? Is it because of the way one judge may interpret the constitution differently from another?
ReplyDeleteI'm aware it was previously stated but how can an issue be declared unconstitutional and then later declared constitutional if the court had already reached a verdict? (possibly different interpretations I suppose but...)
ReplyDeleteHas a supreme Court ever tried to be aggressive and push a case into their court so they could reach a verdict on it? If so, what were the consequences?
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the way that a president won't veto a bill that he knows will be overturned, have there been instances where justices do not voice their true opinion because they fear loosing power?
ReplyDeleteIs Brown v. Board of Education the only case which has a direct companion case (Brown II)?
ReplyDeleteI have the same question as Joe F, if the decisions of similar cases differ in the Supreme Court, couldn't that be seen as legislating from the bench and not interpreting the Consititution?
ReplyDeleteHas there ever been an instance where a case has been overturned in a short amount of time, where it has been the same judges that called it overturned it?
ReplyDeleteHas there been any other time in history where a president has just kind of ignored a supreme court decision? (or is Jackson just "that guy")
ReplyDelete