1. Why was the bill of rights added to the constitution?
a. The framers thought a bill of rights was not necessary because the constitution spelled out the extent of the feds power. Blah blah blah (now at the top of page 487) In 1791 the states ratified 10 amendments and the nation had a bill of rights. The BOR imposed limits on the national gov but not on state gov. b. So… all in all I’m really not sure what the exact answer is. Sorry bro
2. Difference between civil liberties and civil rights
c. Civil liberties (sometimes referred to as “negative rights”) are freedoms that are guaranteed to an individual. These are restraints on the gov. Civil liberties declare what the government cannot do. d. Civil rights (“positive rights”) are powers and privileges that are guaranteed to the individual and protected against arbitrary removal at the hands of the gov or individuals. Like the right to vote or free expression and stuff.
3. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion in two clauses: e. The establishment clause- this prohibits laws establishing religion. f. Free exercise clause- which prevents the government from interfering with the exercise of religion. g. Together, these ensure that the government can neither promote nor inhibit religious beliefs or practices.
4. Know where phrase “Wall of separation between church and state” appears and comes from h. In 1879, the Supreme Court contended, quoting Thomas Jefferson, that the establishment clause erected “a wall of separation between church and State.”
5. Lemon v. Kurtzman bottom of 490-491: in 1971, the court struck down a state program that would have helped pay the salaries of teachers hired by parochial (parochial means of or relating to a church or parish) schools to give instruction in secular subjects. i. The justices proposed a 3 prong test for determining the constitutionality of gov. programs and laws under the establishment clause: i. The must have a secular purpose
ii. Their primary effect must not be to advance or inhibit religion iii. They must not entangle the government excessively with religion. j. The program in Lemon v Kurtzman did not satisfy the last prong of the test. The government would have had to constantly monitory the program which would have cause and excessive entanglement with religion.
6. Engel v Vitale (bottom on 493) in 1962 the court struck down the daily reading of a 22 word nondenominational prayer in New York’s public schools. Justices stated that official state approval of prayer was an unconstitutional attempt on the part of the state to establish a religion. This decision drew a storm of protest that has yet to subside. k. In class I wrote down that he told us we needed to know the difference between freedom of beliefs and freedom of practice but I really don’t see how that has anything to do with this court case.. like whateverrrr coach sybert. l. He also said to note the “Certain things you can’t do and hide behind religion. The one we talked about in class was the guy with the snakes” So I’m clueless yet again.
7. Strict scrutiny- A neutral law that burdens the free exercise of religion is subject to strict scrutiny. This means that the law may be upheld only if the government can demonstrate that: m. The law is justified by a “compelling governmental interest” n. The law is narrowly tailored to achieve a legitimate goal o. The law in question is the least restrictive means for achieving that interest p. That was on page 496 and you may need to read the paragraph to understand the definition in context
8. Scheneck v U.S. (pg 498)- Charles Scheneck and his fellow defendents were convicted for attempting to disrupt WWI military recruitment by distributing leaflets claiming that conscription (conscription is enlistment for state service, typically the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document