Follow a court's reasoning and where the dissent parts ways

Grade 11 Reading Worksheet - Building Confidence

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Can Congress Hold a New State to Its Terms? (court opinion)

   Background: [1] Oklahoma joined the Union in 1907 under an enabling act of Congress, which said that the state capital must stay at Guthrie until 1913. [2] In 1910 the state's lawmakers voted to move the capital to Oklahoma City at once, and taxpayers who owned property in Guthrie went to court to stop the move. [3] In Coyle v. Smith (1911), the Supreme Court let the move stand, and Justice Horace Lurton wrote the Court's opinion. [4] Every quotation is exact, and cuts are marked.

   The Court's opinion (majority): [5] The power to locate its own seat of government and to determine when and how it shall be changed from one place to another, and to appropriate its own public funds for that purpose, are essentially and peculiarly state powers. [6] That one of the original thirteen States could now be shorn of such powers by an act of Congress would not be for a moment entertained. [7] The question then comes to this: Can a State be placed upon a plane of inequality with its sister States in the Union if the Congress chooses to impose conditions which so operate, at the time of its admission? [8] The argument is, that while Congress may not deprive a State of any power which it possesses, it may, as a condition to the admission of a new State, constitutionally restrict its authority, to the extent at least, of suspending its powers for a definite time in respect to the location of its seat of government. [9] …"This Union" was and is a union of States, equal in power, dignity and authority, each competent to exert that residuum of sovereignty not delegated to the United States by the Constitution itself.

   Word notes: [10] A seat of government is a state's capital city. [11] To appropriate funds is to set money aside for a use. [12] Shorn of means stripped of, and entertained here means seriously considered. [13] A plane of inequality is a lower level than the other states, and admission is the act of joining the Union. [14] A residuum of sovereignty is the power to govern that a state keeps for itself, not delegated, or handed over, to the nation.

2. 1.

   Ari fills the question row of the matrix for Coyle v. Smith. Which question does the Court say it must answer?

   • Can Congress take away a power that one of the original thirteen states already holds today?
   • Oklahoma may move its capital from Guthrie to Oklahoma City before 1913.
   • Can Congress admit a state on terms that leave it less power than the others?
   • What powers does Congress have over the states of the Union?
3. 2.

   Luz rewrites the question in sentence 7 in plain words. What does “a plane of inequality with its sister States” mean there?

   • A lower standing than the other states, with less power than they have
   • Any difference between two states, such as their size, shape or climate
   • A flat stretch of land that a state shares with its neighbors
   • A state that has been pushed out of the Union to stand alone
4. 3.

   Jun fills a second principle row, from sentence 5. Which principle does sentence 5 state?

   • States have many powers that Congress does not share with them.
   • Oklahoma's capital should sit in Oklahoma City rather than in the city of Guthrie.
   • Choosing and paying for its own capital is a power that belongs to the state.
   • A seat of government is the same thing as a state's capital city.
5. 4.

   Bo draws an arrow from sentence 6 toward the Court's conclusion. How does sentence 6 help the Court decide the case?

   • It shows that the original thirteen states wrote the Constitution.
   • If an original state cannot lose this power, an equal new state cannot lose it either.
   • It shows that Congress has no say over any state's affairs.
   • It shows that the original states could be stripped of such powers by an act of Congress.

6. Birds That Cross a Border (court opinion)

   Background: [1] In 1916 the United States signed a treaty with Great Britain, which then handled Canada's foreign affairs, to protect birds that migrate between the United States and Canada. [2] In 1918 Congress passed a law to carry out the treaty, and the State of Missouri went to court to stop a federal officer, Ray Holland, from enforcing it. [3] Missouri said the law broke the Tenth Amendment, which keeps for the states the powers not given to the nation. [4] In Missouri v. Holland (1920), the Court upheld the treaty and the law, and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote its opinion. [5] Every quotation is exact, and cuts are marked.

   The Court's opinion (majority): [6] To answer this question it is not enough to refer to the Tenth Amendment, … because by Article II, § 2, the power to make treaties is delegated expressly, and by Article VI treaties made under the authority of the United States, … are declared the supreme law of the land. [7] …It is said that a treaty cannot be valid if it infringes the Constitution, that there are limits, therefore, to the treaty-making power, and that one such limit is that what an act of Congress could not do unaided, in derogation of the powers reserved to the States, a treaty cannot do. [8] …Wild birds are not in the possession of anyone; and possession is the beginning of ownership. [9] …Here a national interest of very nearly the first magnitude is involved. [10] It can be protected only by national action in concert with that of another power. [11] The subject-matter is only transitorily within the State and has no permanent habitat therein. [12] But for the treaty and the statute there soon might be no birds for any powers to deal with.

   Word notes: [13] Delegated expressly means handed over in plain words, and the supreme law of the land binds every state. [14] To infringe is to go against, and in derogation of means taking away from. [15] Of the first magnitude means of the greatest importance, and another power here means another nation. [16] Transitorily means for a short time only, a habitat is the place where an animal lives, and but for means without.

7. 5.

   Milo fills the question row for Missouri v. Holland. Which question does the Court have to answer?

   • Do the treaty and the law that carries it out take powers the Tenth Amendment keeps for the states?
   • Who owns the wild birds while they are inside Missouri?
   • How should the United States protect its wild birds?
   • The treaty and the law that protect migrating birds are both valid.
8. 6.

   Zee sees the question narrow in sentence 7. After sentence 7, what is left for the Court to decide?

   • Whether a treaty may do what Congress alone could not do against the states
   • Whether the Constitution places limits on the government
   • Whether the migrating birds will now be safe in each state
   • Whether Congress may do on its own what a treaty could not do
9. 7.

   Kira fills the principle row from sentence 6. Why does the Court say the Tenth Amendment is not enough to settle the case?

   • Wild birds are not in anyone's possession, so no state owns them.
   • No limit of any kind can apply to a treaty that the nation makes.
   • The Tenth Amendment hands the power to make treaties to the states.
   • The Constitution gives the treaty power to the nation and makes treaties supreme law.
10. 8.

    Ren fills the row for the Court's main reason, in sentences 9 and 10. Which principle do they state?

    • Another power here means another nation, such as a treaty partner.
    • The national government may act on whatever matter it thinks is important to the whole country.
    • Each state may join with another nation to protect the birds inside it.
    • When a great national interest needs joint action with another nation, the nation may act.
11. 9.

    Esme labels each step in the matrix. What job does sentence 7 do in the Court's reasoning?

    • It gives the Court's own ruling that a treaty cannot override the powers kept by a state.
    • It explains why the birds need protection across a border.
    • It reports the other side's limit on treaties, which the Court goes on to test.
    • It announces that the treaty and the law are upheld.
12. 10.

    Noah draws arrows from sentences 8 and 11 toward the conclusion. How do these two steps weaken Missouri's claim?

    • A habitat is the place where an animal makes its home.
    • The birds belong to Missouri for as long as they stay inside it.
    • The birds are owned by no one and stay in Missouri for only a short time.
    • No state may ever pass a law of its own about wild birds.