ANSWER KEY EXPLORING CIVIL AND ECONOMIC FREEDOM Critical Thinking Questions 1. The Founders understood that property is the natural right of all individuals to create, obtain, and control their possessions, beliefs, faculties, and opinions as well as the fruits of their own labor. 2. The Federalists feared that listing certain rights would lead people to less important. 3. Accept reasoned responses. 4. Accept reasoned responses. 5. Accept reasoned responses. DBQ: LIBERTY AND THE Document A: John Locke, Second Treatise of Civil Government, 1690 1. lives, liberties and estates; his own his hands 2. for the preservation of their property 3. When we remove something from the state of nature and mix it with it our own 2. Jefferson wrote that government s purpose is to secure rights because rights were pre-existing in individuals. They were not given by government. This means that government s role is to protect peoples rights that belong to them by nature. 3. Today: synonyms include pleasure, joy, exhilaration, contentment, good fortune. one s family, to build wealth and enjoy the fruits of one s labor. Happiness was attained by living in liberty and by practicing virtue. Document C: The United States Constitution and Amendments 1789-1791 1. The First Amendment protects property including beliefs, opinions, and the free expression of them. The Fifth Amendment protects property by requiring due process and just compensation. The Ninth Amendment protects property by stating that individuals have unlisted rights. The Tenth Amendment protects property by reserving to the states and the people any powers not granted by the Constitution to the national government. 2. Government s power is limited, and it is the role of government to protect the rights of citizens. Document B: Declaration of Independence, 1776 1. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 41
Document D: James Madison, On Property, 1792 1. everything to which a man may attach a value and have a right: land, merchandise, or money, as well as opinions and the free communication of them, religious opinions, safety and liberty, free use of his faculties. According to Madison, property is an inalienable right: (A)s a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. 2. would call the state of nature. government exists only because man creates it for his own ends, and that no one but the individual has a hands, the free use of his faculties, or the expression of his beliefs corresponds to what Madison called an excess of power. 3. conscience 4. According to Madison, a just government will equally respect the rights of property, and property in rights. Document E: Amendment XIV, 1868 1. This amendment protects the following from abridgment by states: a. privileges and immunities of citizens, b. guarantee of due process person s life, liberty, and property, and c. equal protection of the laws for all persons in a state s jurisdiction. 2. Yes. This amendment changed the relationship between the national government and individuals by protector of people s rights against the action of the states. The federal government gained power while the states lost it. Document F: Slaughterhouse Cases, 1873 1. immunities narrowly, as rights which owe their existence to the national government, as opposed to the state governments. Examples are: The right to come to the seat of government to assert a claim upon it, or to transact business functions; Free access to seaports, states; The right to demand the federal government s protection of life, liberty, and property when on the high seas or in the jurisdiction of a foreign government; The rights to peaceable assembly, petition, privilege of habeas corpus; The right to use navigable waters; Any rights with foreign governments Document G: Meyer v. State of Nebraska, 1922 1. Broadly, as encompassing a wide range of activities: Freedom from bodily restraint, individual right to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of conscience, to enjoy common law privileges essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by teacher s right to teach, the parents right to hire him to do so, and the authority of parents to direct the education of their children. 42
2. The government could not abridge the rights of individuals; the ends did not justify the means. Certain fundamental rights must be respected a desirable end cannot be promoted by prohibited means. Document H: Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 1924 1. Broadly, as encompassing a wide range of activities. Parents and guardians, as a part of their liberty, might direct the education of children by selecting reputable teachers and and property for which they claim protection. (R)ights guaranteed by the Constitution may not be abridged by legislation which has no reasonable relation to some purpose Document I: Schechter v. U.S., 1935 1. The power of the national government is not made greater by crisis powers of the national government are limited by the constitutional grants. Extraordinary conditions do not create or enlarge constitutional power. 2. The ruling asserts that the Founders anticipated and precluded the argument that times of crisis would justify enlarging the power of the federal government, and acted adding the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. Document J: Palko v. Connecticut, 1937 1. including rights to speech, press, religion, peaceable assembly, crime, or those rights implicit in the fundamental. 2. Two rights not included in the concept of ordered liberty include the right to trial by jury and immunity from prosecution except as the result of an indictment. 3. Accept reasoned responses. Document K: West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 1937 1. Regulation of liberty of contract is constitutional as long as the restraint is reasonable for its goal, and is done with the intent of protecting people. 2. Reasonable in relation to a regulation s subject, and adopted for the protection of the community s health, safety, morals, and welfare. 3. Accept reasoned answers. Document L: U.S. v. Carolene Products, 1938 1. The Court will presume that laws are constitutional. The Court should trust the legislators in laws that regulate only whether the law is rationally related to a legitimate state interest. The rational basis test is a very low standard and results in most laws that are subjected to it being interpreted as constitutional. 2. Footnote 4 lists circumstances in which the Court might NOT assume the constitutionality of a law: when legislation appears on its face to be a violation of a protection listed in the Bill of Rights, or is directed against particular religious, or national, or racial minorities, or against discrete normal protections of the political process. In these instances, the Court should apply a stricter standard ( strict scrutiny ) in determining constitutionality, and will be less 43
(Fewer laws survive strict scrutiny 3. Accept reasoned responses. Document M: Griswold v. Connecticut, 1964 1. As encompassing intimate relations, which are protected by virtue of emanations and penumbras of other constitutional protections. 2. the pattern set by Footnote 4 in the Carolene Products decision, applying only the rational basis test to laws touching on these areas. 3. Related, implied rights help support stated rights. 4. Accept reasoned responses. Document N: Lawrence v. Texas, 2002 1. from unwarranted government intrusions into a dwelling or other private places. Even outside the home, we should have an expectation of an autonomy of self that includes freedom of thought, belief, expression, and certain intimate conduct. 2. economic rights. 2. of the Kingdom magazine editors, 1914 3. Notes on the State of Virginia, 1785 4. Convention, 1936 5. 6. The Farmer Refuted, 1775 7. Progressive - Williams Jennings Democratic National Convention, 1896 8. Founder - Thomas Jefferson, Resolutions Relative to the Alien and 9. The National Gazette, 1792 10. Progressive - Woodrow Wilson, Socialism and Democracy, 1887 11. Letter on the Passage of the 18th 1928 12. Why Prohibition!, 1918 QUOTE MATCH: Handout A: Too Much, Too Little, or Just Right? 1-6: Accept reasoned responses. Handout B: Who Said it? Quote Sorting 1. Independence, 1776 Handout B: Citizens United v. F.E.C., 2010 Background Essay 1. The banning of direct campaign contributions by corporations (Tillman Act, 1907), limitations on activities of federal employees (Hatch Act, 1939), banning direct campaign contributions by labor unions (Taft-Hartley, 1947), 44
public reporting requirements and dollar-amount limitations on contributions (FECA, 1971 & 1974), and a ban on electioneering communications within a set time period prior to elections (BCRA, 2002). 2. The Court deemed that restricting independent spending by individuals and groups to support or defeat a candidate interfered with speech protected by the First Amendment, so long as those funds were independent of a candidate or his/her campaign. unconstitutionally interfered with message to as many people as possible. 3. funded by donations, produced a feature-length movie critical of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The movie was to be shown nationwide in select theaters and through a major cable company s On-Demand service. It potentially ran afoul of the BCRA s limitation on electioneering communications within 30-days of a primary election or 60-days of a general election, paid for by a corporation s general fund. 4. Citizens United v. F.E.C. extended the principle, set 34 years earlier in Buckley, that restrictions on spending money for the purpose of engaging in political speech unconstitutionally burdened the right to free speech protected by the First Amendment. 5. Accept reasoned answers. 6. Using the same reasoning as the Court did in Buckley and Citizens United, these laws would be unconstitutional. They would be unconstitutional not because spending [on a lawyer] amounted to [assistance of counsel] protected by the [on a private education] amounted to [private education] protected by the [Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment], or that spending [on an abortion] amounted to [an abortion] protected by the [Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment]. Rather, the reasoning would be that banning such spending unconstitutionally interfered with the rights to assistance of counsel, private education, or an on candidates from traveling in order be unconstitutional because the ban on travel unconstitutionally burdened CITIZENS UNITED V. F.E.C. DBQ Document A: Federalist 10, James Madison, 1787 1. According to Madison, a faction is a number of citizens who are 1) united by a common interest and 2) opposed to the rights of others and/ or the permanent interest of the community. 2. elections. 3. Accept reasoned answers. Document B: Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787 1. The opinion of the people 2. The only safeguard of the public liberty is, for Jefferson, the ability of opinions on governmental matters freely. Too much information is preferable to too little. 3. A disadvantage to press freedom is that the people may be led astray at times. This possibility is acceptable to Jefferson because he believes their good sense will win out, and they will correct themselves. Also, for all the faults that people are prey to, government censorship would be more dangerous than public error. 45
4. Those with power will become wolves, which is to say they will oppress those without power. Document C: The First Amendment, 1791 1. Accept reasoned answers. 2. persuasively to friends or larger writing for a newspaper or other media, writing letters to the editor, attending political rallies, meeting in clubs or other groups. Document D: The Bosses of the Senate, Joseph Keppler, 1889 1. Quid pro quo refers to a more or less equal exchange. In the context of political discourse, the term often suggests bribery. Quid pro quo refers to an expectation that, if wealthy contributors donate large sums of money to a political campaign, the person receiving this 2. The cartoonist believes that, through the business interests of the industrial age have seized control of pro quo corruption is indicated by the position and size, relative to the business interests. 3. The closed door leading to the public the author s message that the government is no longer open to the people. 4. may note that in the cartoon s time state legislatures. Document E: New Nationalism Speech, Theodore Roosevelt, 1910 1. control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own 2. Roosevelt s description of special interests seems very similar to Madison s concept of faction. Document F: Buckley v. Valeo, 1976 1. the same First Amendment speech. Civil discourse on politics is essential for self government. Engaging in speech requires spending money. Therefore, limits on spending by individuals and groups unconstitutionally burden their ability against a candidate, and was meant to ensure such speech could occur in a variety of ways. Document G: Citizens United Mission Statement, 1988 1. Probably not. While Citizens United is a number of citizens united and actuated by some common interest, its expressive activities do not satisfy faction: adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community. 46
Document H: McConnell v. F.E.C., 2003 1. to engage in political speech, corporations and unions are not merely must do so through their PACs. Document I: Citizens United v. F.E.C., 2010 1. The First Amendment protects citizens, or associations of citizens, from being punished for engaging in political speech. 3. Accept reasoned answers. Document J: Dissenting Opinion, Citizens United v. F.E.C., 2010 1. The dissent argues that the right to free speech was designed to protect was never understood to apply to corporations, which are business associations, not political ones. The notion of corporate speech was foreign to the Founders, and the First Amendment doesn t protect it at the same level. Congress has a legitimate interest in protecting against undue vast resources of corporations in The BCRA s ban may regulate how but it does not prevent anyone from Document K: Concurring Opinion, Citizens United v. F.E.C., 2010 1. This concurring justice argues that corporations existed at the time of the Founding. They not only engaged in speech and petitioned the government, but were understood by the authors of the First Amendment to have speech rights equivalent to individual Americans. Further, the First Amendment does not allow restrictions to be made on the basis Document L: Another Dam Breaks, Matt Wuerker, 2010 1. Court s ruling in Citizens United union and corporate money from overwhelming American voters with political speech. The resulting wave of special interest money threatens individual voting Americans. 47