Becoming a citizen, duties and responsibilities, and ways to take part

Grade 12 Social Studies Worksheet

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Cards A to D on jury service (the excerpts are exact; card D is made up). Card A, "The jury clauses". Who made it: the Constitutional Convention and the First Congress. When: 1787 and 1791. For whom: the states and the people. Why: to set up trial by jury. Excerpt 1 (Article III, Section 2): "The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed;" Excerpt 2 (Amendment VI, in part): "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed…" Card B, "Taylor v. Louisiana (1975)". Who made it: Justice Byron White, for the Supreme Court. When: January 21, 1975. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to decide whether Louisiana could excuse women from jury service unless they volunteered. Excerpt 1: "the selection of a petit jury from a representative cross section of the community is an essential component of the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial." Excerpt 2: "we impose no requirement that petit juries actually chosen must mirror the community and reflect the various distinctive groups in the population. Defendants are not entitled to a jury of any particular composition, … but the jury wheels, pools of names, panels, or venires from which juries are drawn must not systematically exclude distinctive groups in the community and thereby fail to be reasonably representative thereof." Excerpt 3: "It is true that Hoyt v. Florida … held that such a system did not deny due process of law or equal protection of the laws because there was a sufficiently rational basis for such an exemption. But Hoyt did not involve a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury drawn from a fair cross section of the community." Card C, "Powers v. Ohio (1991)". Who made it: Justice Anthony Kennedy, for the Supreme Court. When: April 1, 1991. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to decide whether a prosecutor may strike jurors because of their race. Excerpt: "Indeed, with the exception of voting, for most citizens the honor and privilege of jury duty is their most significant opportunity to participate in the democratic process." Card D, "Three counties (made up)". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Case 1: Calder County lists a resident for jury duty only if the resident volunteers, a rule it applies to its three rural townships because the courthouse is far away. The townships hold 30 percent of Calder's adults and supplied 2 percent of last year's jury pool. Case 2: Orrin County draws its jury pool at random from all adults. At one trial the twelve seated jurors were all under 40, though adults under 40 are 45 percent of Orrin's adults. Case 3: Brant County draws its pool from its voter list alone. Brant has 40,000 adults and 24,800 are registered. Of its 14,000 adults under 35, 3,500 are registered.

2. 1.

   Case 1 on card D lists rural residents for jury duty only if they volunteer. Ren must decide which authority governs. Which reasoning is strongest?

   • Taylor governs: Hoyt decided equal protection, and townships with 30 percent of adults gave 2 percent of the pool
   • Taylor governs, and Calder's rule fails because the juries it seats do not mirror the townships' share of adults
   • Neither governs: Article III and the Sixth Amendment fix where a trial is held, not who is on the jury list
   • Hoyt governs: it upheld a volunteer system for jury service, so Calder's rule does not violate the Constitution
3. 2.

   Case 2 on card D seats twelve jurors who are all under 40. Jun reads card B. Which statement is best supported?

   • No flaw, since Article III leaves the makeup of a jury to the county where the crime was committed
   • A flaw: excerpt 1 requires each jury to be a representative cross section, and twelve people under 40 are not one
   • No flaw shows from the twelve: excerpt 2 tests how the pool was drawn, and Orrin draws it at random
   • No flaw, since Taylor concerned women's jury service and does not reach differences in age between jurors
4. 3.

   Claim: "Most citizens take part in democracy through jury duty." Pia tests it against card C. What is the best verdict?

   • Untestable: a court's opinion states values and holds no evidence about what citizens actually do in practice
   • Weakly supported: card C ranks jury duty first after voting but gives no count of who serves
   • Refuted: card C sets voting apart as the main way, so jury duty cannot be how most citizens take part
   • Supported: card C says that for most citizens jury duty is their most significant opportunity to participate
5. 4.

   Brant draws its jury pool from the voter list (Case 3, card D). Bo compares young adults with all adults. Which claim do the numbers support?

   • The list is fair, since 24,800 registered adults are a majority of Brant's 40,000 adults
   • The list misses 38 percent of adults, which shows by itself that Brant's pool breaks the Taylor rule for a group
   • Adults under 35 are 35 percent of Brant's adults but about 14 percent of its list, so it misses them more
   • Adults under 35 make up 25 percent of the list, since 3,500 of 14,000 young adults are registered

6. Use this

   Cards A to D on the vote and the fee (the excerpts are exact; card D is made up). Card A, "The Twenty-fourth Amendment (1964)". Who made it: Congress proposed it and the states ratified it. When: ratified January 23, 1964. For whom: the people of the United States. Why: to end poll taxes in federal elections. Excerpt (Amendment XXIV, Section 1): "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax." Card B, "Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966), the opinion of the Court". Who made it: Justice William O. Douglas, for the Supreme Court. When: March 24, 1966. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to decide whether Virginia could make voters in state elections pay a poll tax. Excerpt 1: "We conclude that a State violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard." Excerpt 2: "Notions of what constitutes equal treatment for purposes of the Equal Protection Clause do change." Excerpt 3: "Levy 'by the poll,' … is an old familiar form of taxation; and we say nothing to impair its validity so long as it is not made a condition to the exercise of the franchise." Card C, "The dissents in Harper". Who made it: Justice Hugo Black, and Justice John Marshall Harlan with Justice Potter Stewart, disagreeing with the Court. When: March 24, 1966. For whom: the public, the bar and later courts. Why: to explain why they would have decided the other way. Excerpt 1 (Black): "The Court, however, overrules Breedlove in part, but its opinion reveals that it does so not by using its limited power to interpret the original meaning of the Equal Protection Clause, but by giving that clause a new meaning which it believes represents a better governmental policy." Excerpt 2 (Harlan): "The final demise of state poll taxes, already totally proscribed by the Twenty-Fourth Amendment with respect to federal elections and abolished by the States themselves in all but four States with respect to state elections, … is perhaps in itself not of great moment." Card D, "Marlow (made up)". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Case 1: The made-up state of Marlow charges every voter $5 to receive a ballot in its election for governor. A voter who does not pay is given no ballot. Case 2: Marlow also collects a $5 yearly tax from every adult, with its other county taxes, to pay for schools. No one is refused a ballot for not paying it, in any election.

7. 5.

   Case 1 on card D charges $5 for a ballot in the governor's election. Zee compares cards A and B. Which reasoning is strongest?

   • Card A reaches it: its ban on a poll tax or other tax covers a $5 charge in any election held in the state of Marlow
   • Card B reaches it: a state may not make payment of any fee a standard for voting, though card A omits governor
   • Card A governs and the fee stands, since governor is not an office on its list and card B adds nothing to that
   • Neither card reaches it, since card B concerned a Virginia poll tax and not a $5 charge for a ballot
8. 6.

   Milo sets excerpt 2 on card B beside Black's excerpt on card C. What do the two disagree about?

   • How to read the Equal Protection Clause: by present notions of equal treatment, or by its original meaning
   • Whether the Twenty-fourth Amendment reaches Virginia, which Black affirms and the Court denies
   • Whether Breedlove should be overruled in full, which Black favors and the Court's opinion rejects
   • Whether Virginia's poll tax was fair, which Black defends and the Court's opinion condemns
9. 7.

   Case 2 on card D is a $5 yearly school tax that never costs anyone a ballot. Esme applies cards A and B. What follows?

   • Both cards leave it alone: they bar denying the vote over nonpayment, and no one is denied a ballot here
   • Card A bars it in federal elections and card B in state elections, since the two cards cover different elections
   • Card A bars it, since the amendment bans a poll tax or other tax in any election for President or Congress
   • Card B bars it, since excerpt 1 reaches payment of any fee, whether or not a ballot depends on it

10. Use this

    Cards A to C on compulsory voting in Australia (card A is real data; card B and card C are summaries in our words). Card A, "Turnout at House of Representatives elections". Who made it: the Australian Electoral Commission. When: table updated November 7, 2023. For whom: the public. Why: to record turnout at federal elections. Table, columns Year | Turnout (percent): 1917 | 78.30; 1919 | 71.59; 1922 | 59.38; 1925 | 91.38; 1928 | 93.62; 1931 | 95.02. The Commission's note: turnout is the sum of formal and informal votes divided by the final enrolment, the number of people entitled to vote. Informal votes are ballots that are blank or not marked correctly. Card B, "The Commonwealth Electoral Act 1924". Who made it: written for this sheet from the Commission and standard histories. Summary in our words, not a quotation: A senator introduced a private member's bill for compulsory voting on July 16, 1924. Parliament passed it with little debate, and no vote against it was recorded. It became law on July 31, 1924. The 1925 election was the first held under it. Card C, "Two arguments about compulsory voting". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Argument 1: when nearly every enrolled voter must turn up, the winner answers to nearly everyone, not just the keenest voters. Argument 2: a duty to turn up does not make a voter informed or interested, so high turnout can hide how many gave the choice little thought.

11. 8.

    Claim: "Compulsory voting raised House turnout by 32 points." Tala checks cards A and B. What is the best verdict?

    • Overstated: the table starts at 78.30 in 1917, so the real rise from the earlier level is a modest 13 points
    • Unsupported: a table of turnout figures cannot say anything about the effect of a law
    • Shown: turnout stayed above 90 percent at each later election on card A, so no other cause is possible
    • Fits the numbers, 59.38 to 91.38 at the first election under the Act, though one jump leaves other causes open
12. 9.

    Argument 2 on card C says high turnout can hide thin interest. Luz looks for the evidence that would test it. Which is it?

    • How turnout in Australia in 1925 compared with turnout in other countries that year, on the same measure
    • How many voters were fined for not turning up at the 1925 election, the first held under the Act
    • How the share of informal ballots, blank or marked wrongly, changed after 1925 compared with before
    • Turnout at the elections of 1934 and 1937, to see whether it stayed above 90 percent
13. 10.

    Claim: "Parliament passed the 1924 bill because voters demanded compulsory voting." Ari tests it against card B. What is the best verdict?

    • Refuted: card A shows turnout was 71.59 percent in 1919, so voters needed no law to attend
    • Weakly supported: card B shows a private bill passed with little debate, not what voters wanted
    • Refuted: a private member's bill cannot reflect what voters wanted, since governments, not senators, write laws
    • Supported: no vote against the bill was recorded, so voters must have wanted it