Zachary Ennis TAH III Final Project Curriculum Unit The Living Constitution. Intro

Transcription

1 Zachary Ennis TAH III Final Project Curriculum Unit The Living Constitution Intro The Constitution is the founding document of the United States of America. It is considered the supreme law of the land and is the basis for all legal and governmental establishments in our country. The structure of our government also comes from this document and students must understand not only the importance of the document but the structure of it as well. To understand why a president makes the decisions he does, is to understand his powers and duties. To understand why Supreme Court justices are so influential is to understand why and how they are chosen and the cases they judge. To understand how a law gets passed is to understand the two houses and the process of bill to law. In this unit students will read, become familiar with and apply the specifics of the Constitution. When applying it, they will examine various presidents and some of the well known and lesser known actions including Truman s decision to drop the bomb, FDR and the new deal and Eisenhower and his role in one of the first US satellites. They will also examine all the Supreme Court Justices that were on the Brown v. Board of Education case including their backgrounds and basis on their decisions. These important people, events and decisions all had major impacts on the history of the United States and also give evidence to the fact that the Constitution is an awesome and powerful document that created, runs and protects our country. When students have completed the unit they will not only have a better understanding of the Constitution but be smarter, more informed citizens ready to actively participate in American Democracy. Background This unit uses specific examples from American History to allow students to examine and apply the powers, restrictions and specifications of the Constitution. It does this in two ways, one by examining the decision making of several presidents, Truman, Wilson, and Eisenhower and two by examining the backgrounds of the Supreme Court Justices on the Brown case as well as their basis for their ruling. While it is important for students to understand the powers and duties of the president, it makes a better connection when they can apply it to a real situation. Take Truman s decision to drop the Atomic Bomb. On the evening of July 16, 1945 Truman received a top-secret telegram from Washington. It slyly told him that hours earlier in the New Mexico desert scientists had successfully detonated the world s first nuclear explosion. Many in Washington discussed what the success of the Manhattan Project meant and most, if not all, seemed to seriously consider dropping as soon as possible. This varied greatly from what Roosevelt and Churchill had agreed upon in September of 1944, in which they said that after mature consideration it may be used against Japan (Kennedy, ). An Interim Committee was created and included a personal representative for the president, and looked for advice about postwar controls of nuclear weapons as well as how not if the bomb should be used against Japan (Kennedy, 838). In the end the committee said that the bomb should be used against Japan as soon as possible (Kennedy, 840). Truman wore later that

2 I regarded the bomb as a military weapon and never had any doubt that I should be used. Truman s advisers told him that Japan was susceptible to reason and that the shock of an atomic attack would allow them to see America s power and thus unconditionally surrender. This gave Truman a real alternative to an invasion of Japan which was sure to end in a large number of American deaths (Kennedy, 841). When Truman went to the Potsdam conference, he was unsure of how to use his knowledge of the new weapon. He then casually mentioned it to Stalin, who seemed unaffected by it. At the end of the conference the proclamation called for unconditional surrender of Japan forces or prompt and utter destruction (Kennedy, 845). It was not long after this that the atomic bomb was used not once but twice on the Japanese leading to their unconditional surrender. Many historians state that Truman s decision to drop the atomic bomb went hand in had with his well known motto The buck stops here meaning that the hard decisions were his and his alone (The Decision to Drop the Bomb, 314). So why did he do it? When he was first told of the atomic bomb he was told that it had the capacity to shorten the war. Thus, Truman could see the usefulness in dropping the atomic bomb and ending the war. At the same time on of Truman s aids, Byrnes explained that using the bomb would lessen the Russian demand for more political and territorial gains in Asia after the war. It seemed that with Japan s hopeless military situation ending the war would be preferable to encouraging the soviets ambitions (The decision to drop the bomb, 330). So it seems that Truman used the bomb to achieve two goals, one to end the war, and two to stop the Soviets from attempting to gain more power in Asia. His decision would have lasting effects in the Cold War era. Another president who used his power of office in support of America, but perhaps pushed too hard was President Woodrow Wilson. At the end of World War I he traveled to Europe in order to take part in the treaty process. Wilson went envisioning a peace without victory and a world in which commerce would be free from constraints and politics based on the principle of self-determination. He envisioned the League of Nations (Kennedy, 6) During the Paris Peace Conference he attempted to make the other countries adopt his famous 14 points but found he had no leverage. The Allies did not like it because it did not punish the Germans enough. Europe was angry and wanted to hold them accountable. In the end he compromised in order to combat the spread of Bolshevism and Communism, which were seen as the biggest enemies to the US, and especially Communist Russia. The down fall was that he did not include the US as part of the League of Nations, since they would not support his 14 points. When Congress saw the treaty there was significant opposition. Wilson explained that the League of Nations went too far. Even the when Congress attempted to make some amendments to the treaty he did not approve it. In an effort to gain support for the treaty he toured the country, but ended up having a stroke. The senate ended up refusing to ratify his treaty and the US become left out of the League of Nations, has not treaty with the foreign powers and Wilson s vision of a new world order was never brought to fruition (Schulman, Wilson, WWI and Versailles). Was Wilson s stubbornness and dedication to his own goals too much? Had he let go a few of his ideals in order to be a part of the treaty, would it have happened? As president did he use his power and influence too much, causing the embarrassing situation of the US not being in a international government body they helped create? These are the questions that can be asked of Wilson, and will be as students discuss the powers and duties of the president as understood by Americans and in the Constitution itself.

3 A third instance of impressive presidential power falls to Dwight D. Eisenhower and his involvement in Project SCORE. After the launch of Sputnik, the United States military, government and population were in a frenzy to match and beat the Russians in the space race. While early attempts failed, a closely guarded secret known only to eighty-eight individuals and the president of the United States was put in place to finally have success in space. Project Signal Communications by Orbiting Relay Equipment (SCORE) began in July of It was decided that an Atlas rocked would be used to launch a 150 pound satellite into orbit (Dickson, 195). SCORE turned out to be one of the best kept secrets of the beginning of the space race, with all of the eighty eight Army Signal Corps members aware they would be court-martialed if they leaked information. It was not only the eighty eight, there was one more that had to keep this a secret too, even from his closest advisers, President Eisenhower. Here is what makes this story so great. While Eisenhower may not be the most memorable presidents he was able to play a significant role in the space race in two ways. The first was helping to initiate this project, ultimately helping to lead it to success. The second way has to do with the workings of the project itself. In the 150 satellite was a to be a prerecorded message prepared by a member of SCORE on a tape. At the last minute President Eisenhower recorded a Christmas message to the world. After the launch the satellite began to transmit and for the next thirteen days his message was hear intermittently throughout the world. This personal message of peace garnered very positive international press, with reports that even average Russians were offering congratulations (Dickson, ). Students will often say that a president must do what is in the best interest of the country, and while this is true, the nature of that statement changes every new term with every new president. This is proven with just these three examples. It is my hope that students will examine these and apply both the Constitutional provisions of the president to them, as well as the expectations of the average American citizen to decide if the president did his duty in these situations. When discussing the Judicial Branch with my students, it s important to know the role of the Supreme Court Justices. This includes how they are chosen, how long the serve and how they rule cases. Often the concept of 9 or 13 justices making major decisions that effect a whole nation, is difficult to understand or comprehend. Giving a case study may help. Using Brown V Board of Education is a good fit for this. The Court case reversed the earlier decision of Plessy v. Ferguson and stated that separate but equal is not constitutional and caused the desegregation of schools. While most students know this they may not be aware that who the judges were and how they came to a unanimous decision from a losing decision, tells a lot about how the judicial branch works, while also bringing up questions. There were nine supreme court justices at the time of Brown and each had their own background and opinions. The Chief Justice at the time was Fred M. Vinson who was from the border state of Kentucky where segregated education was the norm. He stated that a long line of judicial precedents had upheld segregation as constitutional and that while it had passed the fourteenth amendment it had also enforced the segregation of schools in Washington DC for eighty plus years, implying that segregation was constitutional. Additionally he worried that there may be complete abolition of public schools in some areas if desegregation was passed (Klarman 58, 59). The senior associate justice was Hugo Black, from Alabama who also worried of violence and abolition of public schools if desegregation was allowed. At the same time he was sure that the intention of segregation laws was based on discrimination of color and saw the

4 Fourteenth amendment as the protection of blacks against it. After Black, Stanley R. Reed, a Kentuckian, was the most supportive of segregation. He claimed that Negroes have not thoroughly assimilated and that it was up to the states to decide what to do (Klarman, 59). His belief was that the people will make the change when they believe it is unconstitutional. Felix Frankfurter was an immigrated Austrian Jew who had taught law at Harvard for 25 years. In the case of segregation being constitutional he had not made up is mind and favored putting all the cases down for reargument, thus leaving it to the precedent o fulfill his promise to end racial segregation in areas under federal control through administrative action (Klarman, 60,61). William O. Douglas a law professor and later appointed by Roosevelt and saw Segregation easily as unconstitutional stating that the 14th amendment prohibits racial classifications as does the fifth amendment thus segregation is unconstitutional. Robert H. Jackson, raised in upstate New York saw it the matter easily the other way. He argued that no where in the int he constitution says its illegal, and no where in the court opinions says its illegal. So he found it to be constitutional. Likewise he believed it would be bad for the Negroes to be put into shite schools and predicted that segregation is nearing an end and felt that giving it time to pass on its own was the answer (Klarman, 61-62). Harold H. Burton a republican (and the only one) saw that segregation violated equal protection and that separate education is not sufficient for today s problems (Klarman, 62). Tom Clark another Texan made a rather ambiguous statement and showed a willingness to go along with lower courts discretion to withhold relief and suggested a vote against segregation. Sherman Minton from Indiana, saw that Classification on the basis of race does not add up...segregation is per se illegal (Klarman, 63). Those doing their math would see that four (Black, Douglas, Burton and Minton) would have voted against segregation, two would have voted for it and three would have remained ambivalent. So how did they come to a unanimous decision? Black was a textual literalist and would not have found support in the fourteenth amendment nor his usual legal sources and must have voted due to his personal views, not to mention his possible need to continue to fight the 1937 public criticism of his former Klan membership (Klarman, 64). Douglas vote can be explained in his lack of commitment in the distinction between the law and his own values. For Douglas segregation's immorality was the answer to his legal inquiry. Burton and Minton s antisegregation votes may be a bit harder to explain. Most likely, and based on the briefs, oral arguments and newspaper reactions, the Cold War imperative for racial change. The idea that if the US wanted to look better than most communist countries, racism in any form had to go. Both Burton and Minton were fierce judicial Cold Warriors (Klarman, 65). Frankfurter and Jackson both hated segregation but were committed (unlike Douglas) to the distinction between the law and personal values. Any sources they would have turned to would have pointed them to reaffirm Plessy. They voted (along with Black Burton and Minton) for reargument and got the cases rescheduled. in the end it was time that changed their minds. Both Frankfurter and Jackson who were more ambivalent, saw that when it was obvious that the majority were committed to ending segregation, the second time around, they side with them and suppressed any legal doubts (Klarman, 68-69). This leaves Vinson and Reed, leaning toward reaffirming Plessy. Half of this problem was solved when Vinson died suddenly and was replaced with Earl Warren who could not see how segregation can be justified in this day and age (Klarman, 68). In the end Reed turned out to be what Frankfurter had observed was a soldier and glad to d anything in the interest of the Court might require. In this case it was a unanimous decision - exactly what he gave them (Klarman, 68).

5 What is extremely interesting, and what students should note when examining the information on the judges, is that not only their views of the legality of the case came into play but also their personal views and there interest in doing what was best for the court. Asking students to discuss how these play a role in Supreme Court decisions should invoke lively discussion as most will probably have thought that judges think in terms of legal vs illegal and that is all. They may still argue that this is the only way they should think and that other influences should stay away from the court. In both instances, examining the influence and use of influence in the Executive and Judicial branches will allow students to see how real life examples bring the constitution to life. It will also force them to apply what they have learned while also using reasoning and finding their own opinions and backing them up. These topics will bring the Constitution alive and have students voicing their opinions as knowledgeable and free thinking citizens, in the way the founding fathers would have wished.

6 Bibliography 1. Dickson, Paul. Sputnik: The Shock of the Century. New York: Walker and Co., Kennedy, David M. Freedom From Fear: the American People in Depression and War, New York: Oxford University Press, Klarman, Michael J.Brown V. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement. New York: Oxford University Press, Schulman, Bruce. Wilson, WWI and Versailles (Lecture given at TAH Program, Whtiman, MA July 25, 2012)