12th grade Find the Constitution's principles in its actual text worksheet

Find the Constitution's principles in its actual text

Grade 12 Social Studies Worksheet - Challenge Me

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Cards A to C on presidential power (the excerpts are exact; card B is a summary in our words; card C is made up). Card A, "Justice Jackson's three situations". Who made it: Justice Robert Jackson, writing a concurring opinion. When: June 2, 1952. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to explain how to judge a claim of presidential power. Excerpt 1: "When the President acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress, his authority is at its maximum, for it includes all that he possesses in his own right plus all that Congress can delegate." Excerpt 2: "When the President acts in absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority, he can only rely upon his own independent powers, but there is a zone of twilight in which he and Congress may have concurrent authority, or in which its distribution is uncertain." Excerpt 3: "When the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb, for then he can rely only upon his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers of Congress over the matter." Card B, "The steel seizure of 1952". Who made it: written for this sheet from the opinions. Summary in our words, not a quotation: During the Korean War a strike was threatened at the steel mills. On April 8, 1952, President Truman ordered the Secretary of Commerce to seize the mills. No law of Congress had authorized the seizure, and Congress had passed other laws on strikes without giving the President that power. On June 2, 1952, the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 that the seizure was unconstitutional. Card C, "Three made-up cases". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Case 1: A law passed by Congress lets the President ration fuel in a declared emergency, and the President does so. Case 2: Congress has passed no law on the subject, and the President closes federal offices in a snowstorm. Case 3: A law passed by Congress forbids the sale of certain machines to the country of Lorien, and the President orders a sale to Lorien anyway.

2. 1.

   The President rations fuel under a law of Congress (Case 1). Kira applies card A. Which situation is it, and how strong is the claim?

   • The third situation: the President acts under a law, so the power is at its lowest ebb and needs a court
   • The second situation: Congress has been silent, so the President must rely on independent powers
   • No one of the three situations, because rationing fuel is a power of Congress and not of the President
   • The first situation: the President acts with Congress's authorization, so the authority is at its maximum
3. 2.

   A law forbids selling certain machines to Lorien, and the President orders a sale anyway (Case 3). Ren applies card A. What follows?

   • The order is void at once, because card A says the President's power is gone when Congress disagrees
   • The first situation, because the President holds the executive power and so acts with maximum authority
   • The second situation, because foreign affairs are a zone of twilight in which Congress may not legislate
   • Third situation: the order is incompatible with the will of Congress, so the power is at its lowest ebb
4. 3.

   Esme applies card A to the steel seizure in card B. Which situation was it, and what does the 6 to 3 ruling show?

   • The first situation: the Korean War emergency implied Congress's authorization, which the Court then set aside
   • The third situation: Congress gave other tools and withheld seizure, so the claim was at its lowest ebb
   • Outside the three situations, because a seizure of private property is a power of the courts and not the President
   • The second situation: Congress was silent about steel, so the claim rested on the zone of twilight
5. 4.

   Claim: "When Congress has not authorized an action, the President has no power to take it" (as in Case 2, closing federal offices in a snowstorm). Noah tests it.

   • Excerpt 2: with no grant or denial the President may rely on independent powers, so the claim is too strong
   • The claim holds, because excerpt 3 says the President's power is gone when Congress has not spoken
   • The claim is false, because excerpt 2 says the President and Congress share power equally in matters where Congress is silent
   • The claim holds, because excerpt 1 says presidential authority exists when Congress authorizes it and not otherwise

6. Use this

   Cards A to D on who decides what the Constitution means (the excerpts are exact; cards C and D are made up or in our words). Card A, "Marbury v. Madison (1803)". Who made it: Chief Justice John Marshall, writing the opinion of the Supreme Court. When: 1803. For whom: the parties, other courts and the public. Why: to explain the Court's decision. Excerpt: "Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void." Card B, "Article VI, third paragraph (1787)". Who made it: the Constitutional Convention. When: September 17, 1787. For whom: the states and the people. Why: to say who must support the Constitution. Excerpt (in part): "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;" Card C, "Two readings by scholars". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Reading 1: Because the courts must decide cases under the Constitution, they must decide when a law conflicts with it, so judicial review follows from the text. Reading 2: Because Article VI binds every officer, including the President and members of Congress, to support the Constitution, each branch must judge for itself what the Constitution allows. Card D, "Lorien, a made-up republic". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Lorien's constitution names three branches and says nothing about courts voiding laws. A Lorien court decides that a law of its legislature conflicts with the constitution and refuses to apply it.

7. 5.

   Ari compares card A with card B. What does card A argue that card B, by itself, does not?

   • Card A cites the text of Article III, while card B reasons from the idea of a written constitution
   • Card A argues that a law opposed to a written constitution is void; card B only binds officers to support it
   • Card B argues that courts alone may void a law, while card A says each officer must support the Constitution
   • Both cards say in so many words that courts may void a law, and card A adds the reason for it
8. 6.

   A critic says judicial review is not in the text. Luz looks for the best reply from the cards.

   • Reading 2 of card C answers the critic, because it says courts must decide each question of constitutional law
   • Card A's reasoning treats voidness as part of having a written constitution, so the text need not repeat it
   • Card D shows a court voiding a law in Lorien, so the practice shows that the text allows it
   • Card B says officers are bound to support the Constitution, so judges alone may void a law that conflicts with it
9. 7.

   Jun applies card A to Lorien in card D. Does Lorien's court reason the way Marshall does?

   • No, because Marshall relied on a clause that names courts, and Lorien's constitution has no such clause
   • No, because Marshall wrote about the legislature of one country, and card A cannot reach another country's court
   • Yes, because card A says courts alone decide what the constitution means in any country
   • Yes: a written constitution is fundamental law, so an act opposed to it is void even if no clause says so

10. Use this

    Cards A to C on listing rights (the excerpts are exact; card C is made up). Card A, "Hamilton on a bill of rights (1788)". Who made it: Alexander Hamilton, writing as Publius. When: May 1788. For whom: the people of New York. Why: to argue that the Constitution needed no bill of rights. Excerpt (The Federalist No. 84): "I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?" Card B, "The Ninth Amendment (1791)". Who made it: Congress proposed it and the states ratified it. When: 1791. For whom: the people of the United States. Why: to answer the worry that listing rights would deny others. Excerpt: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Card C, "A made-up constitution". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: The made-up republic of Valmere has a constitution that lists five rights. A citizen of Valmere says the government may not read her private letters, a right the list does not name. The government answers that only the five listed rights exist.

11. 8.

    Hamilton says a bill of rights would be dangerous. Bo asks which assumption the argument needs.

    • That the people of New York would ratify if a bill of rights were added to the proposed Constitution first
    • That a list of rights will be read as the full set of rights, as Valmere's government reads its list
    • That the national government can use just the powers it is granted, so a list of exceptions adds nothing
    • That the States already protect the rights a list would name, so a national list repeats them
12. 9.

    Claim: "The Ninth Amendment shows that Hamilton's argument was wrong." Milo tests it. What do cards A and B show?

    • The claim holds, because card B protects rights that card A says no power could reach, so Hamilton lost the point
    • The claim fails, because Hamilton wrote that a list was needed and card B rejects the view that he held
    • Card B answers a different worry, that a list denies other rights, and leaves his point about powers untouched
    • The claim holds, because the Ninth Amendment came after Hamilton wrote, and later law corrects earlier law
13. 10.

    Claim: "Hamilton and the Ninth Amendment both assume that rights exist apart from any list." Zee looks for the best evidence in cards A and B.

    • Card B says rights are enumerated, which shows the Amendment makes rights depend on being on a list
    • Card B speaks of rights "retained by the people," and card A treats a list as needless where no power is granted
    • Card A says a list would be dangerous, which shows Hamilton thought rights do not exist apart from a list
    • Card C shows Valmere's citizen claiming a right off the list, which shows both texts agree on each right