Supreme+Court

=WEEK TWO: THE SUPREME COURT =

[|Ms. Pember's Wiki]

=Day One- Questions about the Supreme Court =

=
//Objective: To find out what we know about the Supreme Court and determine what else we would like to know about the Supreme Court. **Students will be able to:** -Connect last week's unit on immigration to this week's unit on the Supreme Court, Identify prior knowledge about the Supreme Court, & Create a list of questions students still have about the Supreme Court// =====

My research question for the Supreme Court:
What is the history of our current Chief Justice? What are some of his famous past cases in this position of power?

=Day Two- Research =

July 13th, 2010
//Objective: To answer my research question that I decided upon yesterday and find out as much as I can about Chief Justice John G. Roberts from reliable websites.// //Students will be able to - research a topic of personal interest on the Supreme Court - evaluate a variety of internet resources for research - organize research findings on to a Mind Map using the program Inspiration - present research findings within the classroom and virtually using video chat

My Delicious Page


 * Mind Map on John G. Roberts:**//



I learned about the people working in the Supreme Court, especially our current chief justice. He can remain Chief Justice until he decides to step down and retire, or until he dies. He's basically in there for life. I learned about the steps he took in life to get to the top, such as attend Harvard Law School and work as an assistant to Ronald Reagan. Video chatting is fun, but TokBox is a bad website to use. It's really laggy. The movements and sounds come very late, so it makes it hard to communicate with the other person. I couldn't find out any information from my partner because the website was being so laggy. But its fun to goof around with the afro's and mustaches you can put on yourself. :)
 * //__REFLECTION:__//**

=Day Three- Famous Court Case =

July 14th, 2010

 * __ Marbury v. Madison __**-- Ms. Pember
 * the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting the Constitution;
 * the significance of Marbury v. Madison;
 * the concept of judicial review and how //Marbury v. Madison// solidified it;


 * <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">Students will be able to: **
 * <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">- summarize researched and shared information on the Supreme Court by creating a Glog
 * <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">- research current trends/decisions of the US Supreme Court
 * <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">- analyze and annotate court documents (majority/minority opinions) and expert analysis reports

<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">** DO NOW: **
“You have been elected the new Mayor of Malden. Before leaving office, the old mayor gave jobs to several of his political friends but the paperwork hasn’t made it to the personnel office yet.

// I would honor it on a case to case basis. Since I am the new mayor, I have the last word in matters such as these. If the person seems shady or wouldn't be a help to me in office, I would deny them the job. But if they seem agreeable enough (and not just align with my own political views), I will honor the promise. // // Negatives: they could work against me during reelections or even just during my time in office. They could be angry and make up rumors or try to sabotage my reputation as mayor. A positive is that they would be on my good side and could help me out with being a new mayor, since they seemed to be close with the old mayor. They wouldn't feel the need to publically attack me. // // Yes, it would make a difference to me. If they worked against me back then, why should I trust them now? It might be because they don't agree with my views, but it could also be something deeper than that. They could be looking to cause me trouble in office. //
 * A.** Should you 1) honor the jobs promised by the old mayor, or 2) cancel the jobs since they aren’t “officially” in the system yet?
 * B.** What are the possible negatives to denying these people their jobs? What are the possible positives to allowing them to take these jobs?
 * C.** Would it make a difference if the perspective employees had worked against you in the mayoral elections?

<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">**Marbury v. Madison Summary Markup:** [|Marbury v Madison Mark Up.docx]

My Glog on the Supreme Court: [|Glog]

My glog is pretty straight forward. The pictures have captions or are self explanatory (like the seal of the US Judicial Branch or the balance representing "checks and balances"). The color scheme is red, white, and blue to represent the patriotic colors of the United States. The stars represent the stars on our flag and there is lots of information about famous court cases that I have learned about and also some of the information found in my research on Chief Justice John G. Roberts.

=<span style="color: #800080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">Day Four- Supreme Court Project =

====<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">Christian Legal Soc. Chapter of Univ. of Cal., Hastings College of Law v. Martinez: ==== <span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">The Supreme Court held that state schools (universities) can deny recognition to religious student organizations if the group requires its members to agree with its core religious beliefs, thereby excluding gay and lesbian students.

<span style="color: #800080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">Activity Two
===<span style="color: #800080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">My article was from the New York Times and was both a summary of the case and an explanation of the majority, or in this case Liberal, opinions. It talked about how the Christian Legal Society could not use the First Amendment against Martinez because it doesn't matter because the public institution they want to start the club under the name of doesn't allow discrimination. If the CLS was to be officially recognized by the school, then they would be violating the rights of the gay people they exclude from their club because of their religious beliefs. I believe the court was correct in ruling against the CLS, especially since it goes against the public school and is discriminatory towards people who aren't Orthodox Christians. ===

<span style="color: #800080; font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">My Mark-up on the Liberal POV:
<span style="font-family: Tahoma,Geneva,sans-serif;">[|liberal view on cls v martinez.docx]

What I'm saying as Sonia Sotomayer in the Video Project: [|sonia sotomayer.docx]

I learned a lot about this case today. I learned all about the CLS about v MARTINEZ case. I read about the different sides--the conservative side that believes they should be allowed to open this club and be funded and the liberal side that thinks this club is discriminatory and goes against the the rules of U of CA, the public institution they are trying to open it under. I agree with the Supreme Court's decision. If University of CA doesn't allow discriminatory or clubs that exclude, then the CLS is not above this rule. They have to follow it and either allow gays into their club or open the club without affiliation to U of CA. It shows how in Malden, we encourage diversity and we allow any students to join any clubs. It keeps our community united. I liked the project. It was pretty easy even though we had such a large group (something I'm usually very aprehensive about). Everyone did their part, making the project quick and stressless.