Checks & Balances

The system of checks and balances is an important part of the Constitution. With checks and balances, each of the three branches of government can limit the powers of the others. This way, no one branch becomes too powerful. Each branch “checks” the power of the other branches to make sure that the power is balanced between them. How does this system of checks and balances work?

The process of how laws are made (see the following page) is a good example of checks and balances in action. First, the legislative branch introduces and votes on a bill. The bill then goes to the executive branch, where the President decides whether he thinks the bill is good for the country. If so, he signs the bill, and it becomes a law.

If the President does not believe the bill is good for the country, he does not sign it. This is called a veto. But the legislative branch gets another chance. With enough votes, the legislative branch can override the executive branch's veto, and the bill becomes a law.

Once a law is in place, the people of the country can test it through the court system, which is under the control of the judicial branch. If someone believes a law is unfair, a lawsuit can be filed. Lawyers then make arguments for and against the case, and a judge decides which side has presented the most convincing arguments. The side that loses can choose to appeal to a higher court, and may eventually reach the highest court of all, the Supreme Court.

If the legislative branch does not agree with the way in which the judicial branch has interpreted the law, they can introduce a new piece of legislation, and the process starts all over again.

Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances

Crash Course Government and Politics #3

Play this short game online 

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has a special role to play in the United States system of government. The Constitution gives it the power to check, if necessary, the actions of the President and Congress.

It can tell a President that his actions are not allowed by the Constitution. It can tell Congress that a law it passed violated the U.S. Constitution and is, therefore, no longer a law. It can also tell the government of a state that one of its laws breaks a rule in the Constitution.

The Supreme Court is the final judge in all cases involving laws of Congress, and the highest law of all — the Constitution.
The Supreme Court, however, is far from all-powerful. Its power is limited by the other two branches of government. The President nominates justices to the court. The Senate must vote its approval of the nominations. The whole Congress also has great power over the lower courts in the federal system. District and appeals courts are created by acts of Congress. These courts may be abolished if Congress wishes it.

The Supreme Court is like a referee on a football field. The Congress, the President, the state police, and other government officials are the players. Some can pass laws, and others can enforce laws. But all exercise power within certain boundaries. These boundaries are set by the Constitution. As the "referee" in the U.S. system of government, it is the Supreme Court's job to say when government officials step out-of-bounds.

How the Justices Make Decisions

The decisions of the Supreme Court are made inside a white marble courthouse in Washington, D.C. Here the nine justices receive approximately 7,000 to 8,000 requests for hearings each year. Of these the Court will agree to hear fewer than 100. If the Court decides not to hear the case, the ruling of the lower court stands.

Those cases which they agree to hear are given a date for argument.

On the morning of that day, the lawyers and spectators enter a large courtroom. When an officer of the Court bangs his gavel, the people in the courtroom stand. The nine justices walk through a red curtain and stand beside nine tall, black-leather chairs. The Chief Justices takes the middle and tallest chair. "Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!" shouts the marshal of the Court. (It's an old Court expression meaning hear ye .) "God save the United States and this Honorable Court."

The justices take their seats. The lawyers step forward and explain their case. The justices listen from their high seats and often interrupt to ask the lawyers questions. Several cases may be argued in one day. Finally, in the late afternoon, the Chief Justice bangs his gavel, rises from his seat, and leads the other justices through the red curtain out of the courtroom.

The justices may take several days to study a case. Then they meet around a large table in a locked and guarded room. From their table, they may occasionally look up to see a painting on the wall.

It is a portrait of a man dressed in an old-fashioned, high-collared coat. This man is John Marshall, one of the greatest Chief Justices in American history. More than anyone else, he helped the Supreme Court develop its power and importance.
Before Marshall became Chief Justice, the Supreme Court had not yet challenged an act of Congress. The Constitution did not clearly give the Court power to judge laws passed by Congress. Therefore, the Court wasn't even sure it had this power.

But Marshall made a daring move. In a famous court case in 1803, Marbury v. Madison, he wrote the Court's opinion, which declared a law passed by Congress to be unconstitutional.
This decision gave the Supreme Court its power of judicial review. Ever since, the highest court has used the power to review the nation's laws and judge whether they were allowed under the Constitution. It has also reviewed the actions of the President.

The Constitution does not allow Congress or state legislatures to pass laws that "abridge the freedom of speech." Freedom of speech is protected in the United States, and no lawmaking body may interfere with that freedom. Right? Usually. But there may be limits, even to free speech.

No freedom, even one specifically mentioned in the Constitution, is absolute. People convicted of serious crimes lose their right to vote. Some religions encourage a man to have several wives. But that practice is forbidden in the United States, even though the Constitution says that there shall be no laws that prohibit the "free exercise" of religion. Even words themselves may pose a "clear and present danger" to the well-being of the country.

When are mere words so dangerous that Congress (or a state legislature) may limit the freedom of speech?

That is the sort of difficult question that the Supreme Court justices must often answer.

Here's an example. The justices sat around the conference table in their locked room, trying to decide what to do about a man from Chicago named Terminiello. The year was 1949.
It seems that Mr. Terminiello had given a speech to an audience in a hall in Chicago, attacking all sorts of people. A crowd had collected outside the hall to protest. Terminiello had called the crowd "a surging, howling mob." At other points in his speech, he called those who disagreed with him "slimy scum," "snakes," "bedbugs," and the like. The crowd outside screamed back: "Fascists! Hitlers!" Windows were broken, a few people were injured, and Terminiello was arrested. For what? All he did was talk. But by talking, he broke the law.
This Chicago law outlawed speech that "stirs the public to anger, invites dispute, (or) brings about a condition of unrest." But maybe this law was unconstitutional.

Justice William Douglas said that the Chicago law went against the First Amendment. He said that freedom of speech is important because it invites dispute. It allows people to raise tough questions, questions which should be answered in a democracy. Just because people get angry or annoyed at something that is said, Justice Douglas went on, does not mean that it should not be said.

Justice Robert Jackson felt differently. Yes, he agreed, Terminiello had not said anything illegal. But because of the crowd and the anger around him, his speech was dangerous to the peace and order of the community. Therefore it was not protected by the First Amendment. There is a point, said Justice Jackson, beyond which a person may not provoke a crowd.

Finally the Court voted. Each justice, including the Chief Justice, had one vote. Five agreed with one opinion, four with the other. One of the justices in the majority was then asked to write a long essay explaining the legal reasons for the majority's decision. Another justice announced that he would write a dissenting opinion. This was an essay telling why he disagreed with the Court's decision.

How do you think the Court ruled in Terminiello v. Chicago?
What if Terminiello had been a Republican campaigning for office among bad-tempered Democrats? What if he had been a Communist? Consider these and other important questions that might occur to you. Which is more important: protecting free speech, or the peace and order of the community? Where do you draw the line?


If you had been on the Court in 1949, would you have voted to allow the Chicago law to stand, or would you have voted to rule it unconstitutional?

Watch: How is a Supreme Court Justice chosen? (3.44)

Watch: Inside the Supreme Court. (4 minutes) 

credit:  http://www.socialstudiesforkids.com/articles/ushistory/brownvboard.htm#sthash.0APx7AJB.dpuf

Famous cases

Brown v. Board of Education

In Topeka, Kansas in the 1950's, schools were segregated by race. Each day, Linda Brown and her sister had to walk through a dangerous railroad switch yard to get to the bus stop for the ride to their all-black elementary school. There was a school closer to the Brown's house, but it was only for white students. Linda Brown and her family believed that the segregated school system violated the Fourteenth Amendment and took their case to court. 

Federal district court decided that segregation in public education was harmful to black children, but because all-black schools and all-white schools had similar buildings, transportation, curricula, and teachers, the segregation was legal. 

The Browns appealed their case to Supreme Court stating that even if the facilities were similar, segregated schools could never be equal to one another. The Court decided that state laws requiring separate but equal schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Watch this 2 minute video and tell us what you learned.

Miranda vs State of Arizona

Ernesto Miranda was arrested after a crime victim identified him, but police officers questioning him did not inform him of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, or of his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of an attorney. While he confessed to the crime, his attorney later argued that his confession should have been excluded from trial. The Supreme Court agreed, deciding that the police had not taken proper steps to inform Miranda of his rights.

First watch this one minute video then 

 this 2 minute video and comment one thing that you learned.

The 2016 Election is OVER!!

Donald Trump delivers victory speech 

after winning US election

Hillary Clinton's Full Concession Speech

President Obama Reacts 

To Donald Trump's Election Win  11/9/16

Election 2016 by the numbers

Voting in the United States

To vote in the United States, one must be a U.S. citizen and at least 18 years old on election day. States also require various periods of residency before voting is permitted. Most states have two other rules as well: A voter cannot be a felon (someone who has committed a serious crime) or mentally incompetent.

In all states, voting is free. It is also voluntary; no one can be forced to vote. It is also a crime to try to stop another person from voting. Voting is private — no one can see how another person votes. And a person may vote only once in any election.

Each state, county, city, or ward (division of a city) is divided into voting districts called precincts. Before voting, people must register to vote in the precinct where they live. This consists of filling out a form with one's name, address, and other information. Registration ensures that people vote in the right place. People can usually register by mail.
Registration laws vary from state to state. In some states, citizens can register on election day. Typically, however, the registration deadline is several weeks before this. If a person fails to register in time, he or she will not be allowed to vote. 


Elections may take place at many different times. In the United States, general elections (for federal officials) are held every two years in even-numbered years. They are held on the Tuesday that falls between November 2 and 8.
In most cases, people vote by machine in private voting booths. Because elections in the United States are generally run by state and local governments, many kinds of voting machines and devices are in use. Today these have become increasingly computerized. A voter may touch a computer screen to cast a ballot or may fill out a computer-readable paper form.

People can also vote by mail; they submit what is known as an absentee ballot. Absentee ballots are especially useful for those who have difficulty getting to the polling place or who are away from their hometowns on election day.
After all the votes have been cast, poll workers and election officials count them (usually with help from computers) and declare which candidates and ballot measures (votes on public issues) have won. 

Winning the Right to Vote

In the early days of the United States, only about 120,000 people in a total population of more than 4 million could vote. Voting was usually limited to free white men who owned property and met certain religious qualifications. Eventually the right to vote became more widespread. By 1860 almost every state allowed all white men over 21 to vote.

After the Civil War (1861–65) the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gave the vote to men of all races. In practice, however, most black people in the South did not gain the right to vote until the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Women, after a long political struggle, won the right to vote in 1920 with the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.

The right to vote has been further extended in recent decades. In 1971 the 26th Amendment to the Constitution gave 18-year-olds the right to vote. More recently, federal law has guaranteed the vote to people with disabilities and to those whose first language is not English.

Another important advance in the voting process has been the secret ballot. This allows people to vote without worrying about retaliation from others, including those in power. At one time, voting was not private. Before the Civil War, U.S. citizens often said their votes out loud or voted by raising their hands. After the Civil War, printed ballots became common. However, since these were distributed by individual candidates or parties and were often different colors or shapes, it was usually possible to tell whom someone was voting for.

It was not until the 1890s, when the Australian ballot came into use, that voting became truly secret. Under this system (so named for its earlier use in Australia), the names of all qualifying candidates were printed on a single ballot by the government. These could only be distributed at polling places, where voting was done in private booths. The use of voting machines has further ensured the secrecy of the vote.

Voting Today

In the United States, voter turnout — the percentage of qualified voters who vote — often depends on the type of election being held. More people tend to vote in presidential elections than in other kinds. Even in this case, though, many people who are qualified to vote do not. In the 2000 presidential election, for example, only 51 percent of the electorate (all qualified voters) turned out.

This was not considered unusual. But other voting issues during the 2000 election drew considerable public attention. Significant flaws in the voting process were revealed when the vote in Florida required a recount that lasted for 36 days. A close examination of the results showed that thousands of people had voted incorrectly. Thousands of other votes were unclear.

In fact, experts believe that between 1 and 4 percent of all votes are not counted as the voter intended. In 2002, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act to help eliminate voting errors and to give states money to improve their voting systems. However, some computer experts and citizens' groups continue to question the accuracy of computerized voting machines.

In 2004, a proposal to allow military personnel and other U.S. citizens living abroad to vote via the Internet was canceled after computer experts tested the process and found that it would be impossible to prevent hackers from tampering with election results.

Watch this 3 minute video on the History of Voting. 

View this 3 minute video as well. 

This is the link for Monday's homework. 

Check out the Election Map tomorrow as the voting results trickle in across the country! 

Comment: Tell us two things you learned from the reading above and one thing from a video.