The Current Court

What Students Should Know About Our Court

When I meet with other AP Government teachers and we discuss the Judiciary and the Court, the topic always seems to come up of how much of the current Court we should expect the students to know. To the best of my knowledge, the multiple choice portion of the Exam has never had a question about current Court members, their ideology, their stance on judicial activism versus judicial restraint, or their views on strict versus loose construction. These topics may trickle into the Free Response questions, but in the past students could get by without specific knowledge of the current Court.

Still, I am an ardent believer that we must teach this information and incorporate it into our classes. While I have been accused of "teaching to the Exam" (guilty...isn't that our job after all?), a great deal of what I cover in my curriculum is information that every intelligent participant in our government should have in their repertoire. Having a cursory understanding of the Justices who make critical public policy is vital to understanding the policy they make. So, I spend a bit of time looking at the life, career, and beliefs of these men and women.

I will have each of my students research one of the nine current Justices and report out to the class on what they find. I give them some places to start, however information is not hard to come by on the internet. For pure biographical information, I like the Oyez site. The information is dependable and straight forward. For case information, the Cornell site is a quick and reliable reference. And of course, there is Wikipedia. We all have our opinions on Wikipedia, I have shared mine in the past. As far as the Court goes, I have found no serious errors, a plethora of quick references, and so-so discussions on Court topics. Trust Wikipedia? No, but it has it's uses for high school students. Caveat emptor...to say the least. Finally, and probably most importantly, the Supreme Court's own site is the first place to send the inquiring students.

As far as books go, last week I mentioned "The Nine" by Toobin. Clarence Thomas' autobiography "My Grandfather's Son" was interesting and insightful, "Scalia Descents" was an eye opening look into the judicial understandings of Justice Scalia, and Jan Crawford Greenburg had some interesting chapters in "Supreme Conflict". For a quick project, these are probably a bit much for the kids to digest. For teachers, they are great summer reads. I also found an interesting interview transcript with John Paul Stevens, the 60 Minutes interview with Justice Scalia was very interesting, as was an NPR story on Justice Breyer. The PBS Supreme Court series does not cover the current court, but it does look at the Rehnquist Court, which gives us a great deal of insight on the Roberts Court. If you have time, it is worth viewing or having the students stream at home.

The problem is not a lack of information on the Court, there is almost too much stuff out there for the students to digest. I am sure they will find many more useful sites that you can add to a list for future use.

Here is the thing about doing a unit on the current Court. If you are lacking on time in your course, this could be an area to cut. A brief mention and the information picked up in the textbook will probably suffice test-wise. If you have the opportunity, however, I would take a few days, get into the Court personalities, and bring the modern Court alive for your students. It is a side trip well worth the effort. Next week I want to focus on a few of the important cases that are a must know for the AP students. Until then...

More on the Judiciary

Restraint and Constructionism

Most of us agree that President Obama will be faced with two crucial decisions in his administration...the selection of two seats for the Supreme Court. I was just a lad when Justice John Paul Stevens was tapped for the Court. If you have forgotten, Stevens was President Gerald Ford's appointment. At 89, Justice Stevens will most likely leave the Court during the Democratic administration giving President Obama his first opportunity to appoint a Court seat.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg could possibly also decide to leave the Court during the reign of Mr. Obama. While a youngster in Court years, her health combined with age (76) could result in an early retirement. Ginsburg also misses her friend and female colleague on the Court Sandra Day O'Connor and stands alone on many women's issues. Justice Ginsburg most probably would desire to see her replacement be a female and would most likely find Mr. Obama's choices more in line with her own ideologies and views of the Court. Neither Stevens or Ginsburg would want to risk their replacements in the hands of a future conservative GOP administration. I'm betting on their retirements in the next couple of Court terms.

So what are we teaching the students about the selection process that President Obama will utilize to narrow his candidates and make these critical appointments? One of the places to help us and the students gain insight into this process are the confirmation hearings of Justice Samuel Alito. The Alito confirmation was a textbook for the process! The discussions on the topic of judicial activism versus judical restaint were deep and insightful. Justice Alito, of course, professed a disdain for activism, rejecting the concept of the Court as a social engineer. His comments demonstrated the GOP attitude for restraint and conservative case determination.

The topic of constructionism is also found in these hearings. Just how should the Constitution be viewed? Is it a dynamic document bendable with the winds of social, political, and economic change? Or is the Constitution Hammarabi's Law; carved in stone, unchangeable and unflappable, setting principles that endure unchanged with time's ravages?

The Senate's grilling of Justice Alito, and Chief Justice Roberts before him, should give President Obama a clear picture of what to expect when his conformation battles begin. He will need to vet his selections carefully and while many of us foresee Obama candidates as activists and loose constructionist, those characteristics will need to be tempered to pass GOP Senate scrutiny. Without a filibuster blocking 60 votes, the process will be anything but automatic for Mr. Obama and his candidates.

Advanced Placement Exams have been interested in this process in the past years (for example, 2000 Free Response Question Number Two). Since College Board has a tendency to ask questions a year or two following the front page stories, and since we haven't seen a selection process question in almost a decade, it is a good bet one is coming sometime in the near future. I'm not in the crystal ball business, but I think you have to agree we don't want to ignore this topic with the students this year. One very good source for discussions on Court issues is Peter Woll's Reader. I will have my students read several of the articles for class discussion. We will also view the video "Gideon's Trumpet" intentionally watching for Court ideology.

Last week I indicated that this week would be all about the current Court and its personalities, but in my reading and research I got off track and on this subject of judicial ideology. I had intended on covering this anyway so I moved the discussion forward while it was fresh on my mind. I promise next week to discuss the current Court and look briefly at the historic Courts and Justices we should not ignore. Until then...