Do you use document-based questions in your classroom?

This fall the Bill of Rights Institute is blogging a document-based question on the Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Each weekly post will feature an excerpted document related to the case, along with some questions to guide your thinking on it. Each document should be used to address the question: “Assess the role played by the Court as the protector of individual rights against the tyranny of the majority in Brown v. Board of Education.”

Virginia Criminal Code (1847)

Any white person who shall assemble with slaves, [or] free Negros … for the purpose of instructing them to read or write … shall be punished by confinement in the jail … and by fine.…

>What does this law reveal about African Americans’ access to education in mid-nineteenth century Virginia?

_________________________________________________________

Check back each week to see the next document and how it might change your thinking on this important question that affects all public school teachers and students in the U.S.! If you are enjoying this DBQ – be sure to check out our curriculum Supreme Court DBQs: Exploring the Cases the Changed History.

The University of Missouri-Kansas City Law School and Law Review will hold a symposium titled “40 Years of Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Through the Eyes of Those Who Were There.”  The program will be held September 20-21, 2012 and will feature cases like Tinker v. Des Moines and Hazelwood v. Kurlmeier.  Join UMKC for presentations and expert panel discussions on this fascinating topic.  To register for this event, go to: law.umkc.edu/schools.

For lesson ideas on Landmark Supreme Court cases to using your classroom, see the Bill of Rights Institute’s book Supreme Court DBQs.

Martin Luther King, Jr. persevered for civil rights throughout his life.  King was born in Georgia in 1929.  He found for desegregation and equal rights for African Americans by speaking out and leading marches.  He always preached non-violence as a means for change.

The most important march of King’s career was the March on Washington in 1963.  A quarter of a million people packed the National Mall.  King stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.  In his speech, King referred to the “architects of our republic” and their commitment to freedom.  He electrified the crowd with his speech, saying, “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

In the years that followed, King led civil rights marches in Selma, Alabama.  He always urged moderation in non-violent protest. King was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964.  King was assassinated in 1968.  Martin Luther King, Jr.’s funeral was attended by 300,000 people, and his courageous life continues to inspire people today.

For Black History Month, A More Perfect Blog will feature profiles of influential and heroic African-American leaders from our curriculum,

Martin Luther King, Jr. persevered for civil rights throughout his life.  King was born in Georgia in 1929.  He found for desegregation and equal rights for African Americans by speaking out and leading marches.  He always preached non-violence as a means for change.

The most important march of King’s career was the March on Washington in 1963.  A quarter of a million people packed the National Mall.  King stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.  In his speech, King referred to the “architects of our republic” and their commitment to freedom.  He electrified the crowd with his speech, saying, “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

In the years that followed, King led civil rights marches in Selma, Alabama.  He always urged moderation in non-violent protest. King was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964.  King was assassinated in 1968.  Martin Luther King, Jr.’s funeral was attended by 300,000 people, and his courageous life continues to inspire people today.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was one of the most significant and compelling civil rights activists in history. He is often recalled as a model of peaceful resistance and a hero of the civil rights movement. He was born in Georgia and became a minister in 1947, and a pastor of an Alabama Baptist church in 1954. He strongly believed that segregation was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and led a boycott of segregated bus lines in Montgomery, Alabama in 1955, which led to their integration the next year. Calling for non-violent resistance, he organized the Southern Christian Leadership Conference to fight for civil rights.

In 1963 King spoke at the March on Washington. Standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, King electrified the crowd of 250,000 with his “I Have a Dream” speech. He invoked the Declaration of Independence and its promise of equality. This speech would become one of the most well-known speeches of the 20th century.

In the years that followed, King led civil rights marches in Selma, Alabama. Television cameras captured police brutality on peaceful marchers exercising their right to assembly. While imprisoned for marching in April 1963, King wrote “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, which is regarded as a manifesto of the civil rights movement. King was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. Throughout his life King spoke often, before many crowds, in an effort to promote and expand liberty and equality for Americans with his right to freedom of speech.

King was assassinated in 1968. His funeral was attended by 300,000 people.  In 2011, the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial was dedicated on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

The work of King and other civil rights activists illustrates perseverance, courage, initiative, and industry.

To learn more about Martin Luther King, Jr. and other American heroes, see our curriculum Being an American: Exploring the Ideals That Unite Us.

Explore the impact of the First Amendment in this eLesson!

Did you use this eLesson in your classroom to discuss First Amendment rights?  How did your students react to the story?

What could be more frightening than violations of our constitutional rights? But is everything that appears to be a violation actually one? Join us as we explore some current constitutional issues. We hope you enjoy our Bill of Frights!

Of all the amendments to the Constitution, the First is, in many respects, the one whose meaning seems most plain. Its protection of speech appears unequivocal: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” But some people wonder and worry if this prohibition against speech regulation has been observed by Congress and other government officials.

Free speech cases have a long history of litigation and Supreme Court precedent. And while the current trend in Supreme Court decisions supports a robust view of speech rights, regulations of speech continue. Earlier this year, the city council of a small town in Arkansas attempted to ban citizens from forming organizations without city approval. The ban would have even made it illegal to have four people meet in a residence to discuss issues the council was considering. The implications for freedom of assembly as well as speech concerned many, and the ordinance was later repealed.

Another interesting case of speech regulation comes in the Stolen Valor Act. The Act gives government a role in regulating speech based on the truth-value of the statement. In 2006, Congress overwhelmingly passed the Stolen Valor Act—legislation making it illegal for an individual to lie about receiving military medals of distinction from the government. The act states: “Whoever falsely represents himself or herself, verbally or in writing, to have been awarded any decoration or medal authorized by Congress for the Armed Forces of the United States, any of the service medals or badges awarded to the members of such forces … shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than six months, or both.”

In July, 2008 Xavier Alvarez was fined $5,000 and sentenced to three years of probation for uttering these words at a public meeting in 2007: “I’m a retired Marine of 25 years. I retired in the year 2001. Back in 1987, I was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. I got wounded many times by the same guy. I’m still around.” Alvarez had actually never received the congressional medal.

Alvarez’s case found its way to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010. The court overturned Alvarez’s sentence. In his concurring opinion, Chief Justice Kozinski stated that: “If false factual statements are unprotected, then the government can prosecute not only the man who tells tall tales of winning the Congressional Medal of Honor, but also the JDater who falsely claims he’s Jewish or the dentist who assures you it won’t hurt a bit.”

In October of this year, the Supreme Court announced that it will be reviewing Alvarez’s case.

So what do you think? Will federal, state, and local governments continue to attempt to regulate speech? Should the government have a role in punishing fallacious statements?

This summer the Bill of Rights Institute is blogging a document-based question on the Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). Each weekly post will feature an excerpted document related to the case, along with some questions to guide your thinking on it. Each document should be used to address the question: “Evaluate the extent to which the First Amendment should protect symbolic speech, and the degree to which that protection should be guaranteed to students in public school.”

Check out our previous posts for a case background and document #1, document #2, West Virginia v. Barnette, document #3, a picture of Vietnam War protestors outside the White House, document #4, a collection of “Hate Mail” received by the Tinker Family, document #5 and document #6, parts of the Oral Arguments for the case, document #7, the Majority Opinion, document #8, the Concurring Opinion, and document #9, the Dissenting Opinion (Hugo Black), document #10, the Dissenting Opinion (John Marshall Harlan), document #11, a picture of Lorena, Paul, and Mary Beth Tinker, and document #12, a Dissenting Opinion, Street v. New York.

Today’s document is a picture: “A Symbolic Protest Mounted by Vietnam Veterans Against the War,” 1976

Think about it:

Compare this example of a symbolic protest of the Vietnam War with the Tinkers’ actions.

Should the First Amendment protect this kind of symbolic speech?

How does this impact your answer to the DBQ question: “Evaluate the extent to which the First Amendment should protect symbolic speech, and the degree to which that protection should be guaranteed to students in public school”?

_____________________________________________________________________

Check back each week to see the next document and how it might change your thinking on this important question that affects all public school teachers and students in the U.S.!

If you are enjoying this DBQ – be sure to check out our curriculum Supreme Court DBQs: Exploring the Cases the Changed History.

]]> http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/08/25/tinkervdesmoinesdbqdocument13/feed/ 0 http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/08/19/tinker-v-des-moines-document-12/ http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2011/08/19/tinker-v-des-moines-document-12/#comments Fri, 19 Aug 2011 23:30:32 +0000 maria santos http://blog.billofrightsinstitute.org/?p=1512 Read more...]]> Do you use document-based questions in your classroom?

This summer the Bill of Rights Institute is blogging a document-based question on the Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). Each weekly post will feature an excerpted document related to the case, along with some questions to guide your thinking on it. Each document should be used to address the question: “Evaluate the extent to which the First Amendment should protect symbolic speech, and the degree to which that protection should be guaranteed to students in public school.”

Check out our previous posts for a case background and document #1, document #2, West Virginia v. Barnette, document #3, a picture of Vietnam War protestors outside the White House, document #4, a collection of “Hate Mail” received by the Tinker Family, document #5 and document #6, parts of the Oral Arguments for the case, document #7, the Majority Opinion, document #8, the Concurring Opinion, and document #9, the Dissenting Opinion (Hugo Black), document #10, the Dissenting Opinion (John Marshall Harlan), and document #11, a picture of Lorena, Paul, and Mary Beth Tinker.

Today’s document is a Dissenting Opinion, Street v. New York, 1969

…Action, even if clearly for serious protest purposes, is not entitled to the pervasive protection that is given to speech alone. …It may be subjected to reasonable regulation that appropriately takes into account the competing
interests involved.

Think about it:

Restate this document in your own words.

How does this impact your answer to the DBQ question: “Evaluate the extent to which the First Amendment should protect symbolic speech, and the degree to which that protection should be guaranteed to students in public school”?

_____________________________________________________________________

Check back each week to see the next document and how it might change your thinking on this important question that affects all public school teachers and students in the U.S.!

If you are enjoying this DBQ – be sure to check out our curriculum Supreme Court DBQs: Exploring the Cases the Changed History.

This summer the Bill of Rights Institute is blogging a document-based question on the Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). Each weekly post will feature an excerpted document related to the case, along with some questions to guide your thinking on it. Each document should be used to address the question: “Evaluate the extent to which the First Amendment should protect symbolic speech, and the degree to which that protection should be guaranteed to students in public school.”

Check out our previous posts for a case background and document #1, document #2, West Virginia v. Barnette, document #3, a picture of Vietnam War protestors outside the White House, document #4, a collection of “Hate Mail” received by the Tinker Family, document #5 and document #6, parts of the Oral Arguments for the case, document #7, the Majority Opinion, document #8, the Concurring Opinion, and document #9, the Dissenting Opinion (Hugo Black), and document #10.

Today’s document is a picture: “Lorena, Paul, and Mary Beth Tinker,” 1969

Think about it:

Do the armbands look the way you expected them to?

Do you agree with the majority of Justices that these armbands would
not cause disruption?

How does this impact your answer to the DBQ question: “Evaluate the extent to which the First Amendment should protect symbolic speech, and the degree to which that protection should be guaranteed to students in public school”?

_____________________________________________________________________

Check back each week to see the next document and how it might change your thinking on this important question that affects all public school teachers and students in the U.S.!

If you are enjoying this DBQ – be sure to check out our curriculum Supreme Court DBQs: Exploring the Cases the Changed History.