Monday, February 27, 2012

Civil Liberties



The Bill of Rights


Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.






Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.



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, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.



Writing Comments



CMC's Admission Policies and the Supreme Court

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/us/justices-to-hear-case-on-affirmative-action-in-higher-education.html?scp=1&sq=supreme%20court%20race%20admissions&st=cse


In 2003 the Supreme Court ruled that it was okay for public universities to have race-conscious admission policies. They have just decided to hear another case in which a white student is suing the University of Texas to end this practice. This article explains that by merely agreeing to hear the case, the court signaled that it may be seeking to reverse the decision it made in 2003.

When the SAT scandal occurred there was a lot of discussion about CMC's admission policies. CMC has no explicitly stated goals for the racial demographics of an admitted class, however the admissions office has been trying to increase the population of international students in recent years. I'm not sure this ruling would have any effect on private colleges, but if it did, would it have an impact on CMC's admissions policy? I'm curious whether a policy to promote international diversity could be affected by an affirmative action case like this.

Liberties and Rights


As Chinese Vice President Xi concluded his visit to the U.S., the takeaways of the trip are still being debated. However, on Feb 20th, the day of his return to China, the Chinese social network underwent shock as some Chinese ‘netizens’ gained access to Google+. Surprisingly, the first thing on their list was to “occupy” U.S. President Barack Obama’s Google+ page. ‘Netizens’ flocked to Obama’s page, posting hundreds of comments underneath each of his campaign updates. Due to the restriction on the number of comments, ‘netizens' even discussed the possibility of occupying Mitt Romney’s page. Although, a few ‘netizens’ have stressed on U.S. intervention of releasing Chinese civil rights activists under house arrest, most left trivial posts as evidence of their new gained privilege. For them, the significance of posting comments surpasses the context of these comments.

Freedom of speech in China is sometimes more of a privilege than a right, or a civil liberty as viewed in the United States. Some people forget they are entitled to speak freely, more importantly, their responsibility in speaking up against the wrongdoings of authorities and corporations. However, the entire population of the United States was not given the same civil liberties and rights since the founding of the country, as demonstrated through the inequalities of African-Americans, women and minorities in chapter seven. For African-Americans, why did Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. trigger civil rights movements a century after the Emancipation Proclamation? If decades of inequality and segregation lay the foundation for these movements, why was the outburst in the 1950s to 1960s? For a society without segregation or obvious inequality, what fosters the sense of civil liberties and rights leading to movements and possibly political change? 

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Second Assignment

Below is your second assignment.   Each of you has a different Supreme Court case dealing with citizenship, civil liberties, civil rights, or voting rights.  In your essay, tell why the case was significant.  Specifically, answer these questions:

  • What was the issue?
  • What was the historical and legal context?
  • What was the long-term legal and political impact of the case?

Before writing it, re-read Strunk and White. Also see my writing advice, which in turn contains links to model papers. 

  1. Chris Albanese, North Haven Board of Education v. Bell
  2. Ratik Asokan, Plyler v. Doe
  3. Christian Ayala, Shaw v. Reno
  4. Aja Brofferio, O'Connor v. Board of Education
  5. Dan Campbell,  Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music
  6. Danial Ceasar, Everson v. Board of Education
  7. Karen Chen, Ex parte Milligan
  8. Elizabeth Eggert, Victor v. Nebraska
  9. Jack Flannery, Escobedo v. Illinois
  10. Vikrant Jain, US v. Bhagat Singh Thind
  11. Julia Keinan, Hirabayashi v. US
  12. Jessica Laird, Gratz v. Bollinger
  13. Willy Leach, Pierce v. Society of Sisters
  14. Blake Li, Graham v. Richardson
  15. Linda Lin, US v. Wong Kim Ark
  16. Yi Luo, Hendrick Hudson District Board of Education v. Rowley
  17. Margot Penn, NCAA v. Smith
  18. Felipe Peterson,  Ozawa v. United States
  19. Samuel Pitcavage, San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez
  20. Sridhar Poddar, Afroyim v. Rusk
  21. Elena Segarra, Ex parte Merryman
  22. Ben Tillotson, Jacobson v. Massachusetts
  23. Kyle Weiss, FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life
  24. Danmai Xiang, Chae Chan Ping v. US
  25. Nikki Yea, Texas v. Johnson
Do research to document your claims. Do not write from the top of your head. Your paper must cite at least three hardcopy or microform books or government publications. In other words, you must go to the library.

Your sources may include specialized references such as The Almanac of American Politics, but do not cite general-purpose encyclopedias such as Encyclopaedia Britannica and Encyclopedia Americana. And especially do not count on Wikipedia, which is sometimes unreliable. (You might be able to get leads from Wikipedia, but then go elsewhere for verification and citable sources.) In your answer, you should not merely identify persons or concepts. You should also explain the subject matter’s political significance.


You may find relevant links here.
  • Essays should be typed (12-point), stapled, double-spaced, and no more than four pages long. I will not read past the fourth page.
  • Put your name on a cover sheet that is blank on the reverse side. Do not identify yourself on the text pages.
  • Cite your sources with endnotes, which should be in a standard style (e.g., Turabian or Chicago Manual of Style). Endnote pages do not count against the page limit.
  • Watch your spelling, grammar, diction, and punctuation. Errors will count against you.
  • Return essays by the start of class, Wednesday, March 7. Late essays will drop a gradepoint for one day's lateness, a letter grade after that.  I will grant no extensions except for illness or emergency.

Monday, February 20, 2012

What role do you think secularism can have in American politics?

After reading about the role of religion in American rhetoric and politics, and hearing that there is only one openly atheist member of congress at the moment, it got me thinking about the role of secular beliefs in American politics.

I did some research and found some statistics. Overall, about 16% of Americans say they are not affiliated with any religion. However, this non-religious minority can hardly be called politically relevant considering their representation in government. Mormons, who make up a mere 1.7% of the country, hold much more sway in congress with 11 representatives and 4 senators (did you know Harry Reid is Mormon?).

I guess it doesn’t really surprise me that many voters would not vote for an outspoken atheist, but what I do wonder is this: what is the future of the secular minority in American politics?

Although comprising only 16% of all voters, 25% of voters under the age of 29 identify as having no religion, showing that the demographic is changing. In fact, the non-religious population is the fastest growing among all beliefs. American voters seem to be in the habit of requiring their elected officials to have some kind of religion, but will that tradition remain forever if the demography keeps changing? I’d love to know the thoughts of the class.

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Civic Culture in the United States

Tocqueville  wrote: "The religious atmosphere of the country was the first thing that struck me on arrival in the United States." (p. 295 of Lawrence-Mayer ed.) See here for relevant data.


In June 2006, Barack Obama gave an important speech on religion in politics, which the textbook quotes on page 140. See prepared text here.


The president's remarks at 2012  National Prayer Breakfast:






Individualism and Religion
Evolution
Patriotism
Charity and Service
Pie chart of 2010 contributions by charitable cause