John Adams on the Alien & Sedition Acts of 1798

Under the threat of war with France, Congress in 1798 passed four laws in an effort to strengthen the Federal government. Known collectively as the Alien and Sedition Acts, the legislation sponsored by the Federalists was also intended to quell any political opposition from the Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson.


The first of the laws was the Naturalization Act, passed by Congress on June 18. This act required that aliens be residents for 14 years instead of 5 years before they became eligible for U.S. citizenship.

Congress then passed the Alien Act on June 25, authorizing the President to deport aliens "dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States" during peacetime.

The third law, the Alien Enemies Act, was enacted by Congress on July 6. This act allowed the wartime arrest, imprisonment and deportation of any alien subject to an enemy power

The last of the laws, the Sedition Act, passed on July 14 declared that any treasonable activity, including the publication of "any false, scandalous and malicious writing," was a high misdemeanor, punishable by fine and imprisonment. By virtue of this legislation twenty-five men, most of them editors of Republican newspapers, were arrested and their newspapers forced to shut down.

One of the men arrested was Benjamin Franklin's grandson, Benjamin Franklin Bache, editor of the Philadelphia Democrat-Republican Aurora. Charged with libeling President Adams, Bache's arrest erupted in a public outcry against all of the Alien and Sedition Acts.

One of the men arrested was Benjamin Franklin's grandson, Benjamin Franklin Bache, editor of the Philadelphia Democrat-Republican Aurora. Charged with libeling President Adams, Bache's arrest erupted in a public outcry against all of the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton Arguing Over Dinner

Thomas Jefferson's Moments From HBO's Mini Series John Adams

Alexander Hamilton

Washington and Edmond Genet on the French Revolution

The Whiskey Rebellion

Nearly twenty years after the revolutionary War began, the United States government faced a small-scale revolution by some of its own citizens. As in the previous war, taxes were a central issue. And Alexander Hamilton understood that putting down this rebellion was critical to the life of the nation.

In order to create a self-supporting and effective government, Treasury Secretary Hamilton knew he needed to find a steady source of revenue. He proposed an excise tax on whiskey produced in the United States, and Congress instituted the levy in 1791. In general, the citizens of that time felt negatively toward the idea of taxation. The farmers of western Pennsylvania, many of whom distilled whiskey and profited from its sale, proved outright hostile to the idea.

In July of 1794, a force of disaffected whiskey rebels attacked and destroyed the home of a tax inspector. The rebellion grew in numbers, if not in actions, and threatened to spread to other states. Hamilton knew that the presence of a large and potentially hostile force in Pennsylvania could not be tolerated. If the government were to survive, it would have to show itself capable of keeping control. 

Hamilton advocated the use of military force; President George Washington instead put state militias on the ready and sent in negotiators. When talks proved fruitless, Washington acquiesced to Hamilton's view. A force of 13,000 militia troops, led by Hamilton and Virginia governor Henry Lee, marched into western Pennsylvania. 

By the time the federal force arrived, the rebellion had collapsed and most of the rebels had fled. Two men were convicted of treason and later pardoned by Washington. Alexander Hamilton was elated. The fledgling federal government had proven it could keep order -- a necessity if the U.S. was to avoid instability. But many, in particular Thomas Jefferson, thought that this resort to military force was a dangerous mistake. It convinced them that Hamilton was a dangerous man. 

George Washington's Oath of Office

Federalists vs. Republicans on the Issue of Freedom vs. Big Government

Thomas Jefferson

The Democratic-Republican Party...

• believed in small, local government.
• favored a narrow view on the meaning of the words in the Constitution (no wiggle room).
• held that the federal government should not be able to do whatever it wanted nor should it be able to do things just because of convenience.
• strongly felt that the federal government's powers should be limited to strictly what is laid out in the Constitution.
• Jefferson, who led the party, worried that if the government could define it's own powers it would threaten the liberty of the people.

Alexander Hamilton

The Federalist Party...

• believed in a strong federal government.
• favored a broad view of the Constitution (lots of wiggle room).
• held that the government should be able to do whatever is "necessary" to solve a problem.
• Hamilton, the leader of the party, felt that all national problems should be handled by the federal government.

New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)

 1. Does the Fourth Amendment protect students from searches by school officials?

 2. Under what circumstances, if any, can school officials search students or their belongings?

Facts of the Case: 

T.L.O. was a fourteen-year-old; she was accused of smoking in the girls' bathroom of her high school. A principal at the school questioned her and searched her purse, yielding a bag of marijuana and other drug paraphernalia.

Question: 

Did the search violate the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments?

Conclusion: 

No. Citing the peculiarities associated with searches on school grounds, the Court abandoned its requirement that searches be conducted only when a "probable cause" exists that an individual has violated the law. The Court used a less strict standard of "reasonableness" to conclude that the search did not violate the Constitution. The presence of rolling papers in the purse gave rise to a reasonable suspicion in the principal's mind that T.L.O. may have been carrying drugs, thus, justifying a more thorough search of the purse.

Wallace v. Jarffee (1985)

1. Was the law authorizing a moment of silence for meditation or voluntary prayer an attempt to establish a religion?
2. Is a child’s First Amendment right to freedom of religion violated if voluntary prayer is allowed in the school?

Facts of the Case:
An Alabama law authorized teachers to conduct regular religious prayer services and activities in school classrooms during the school day. Three of Jaffree's children attended public schools in Mobile.
Question:
Did Alabama law violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause?
Conclusion:
Yes. The Court determined the constitutionality of Alabama's prayer and meditation statute by applying the secular purpose test, which asked if the state's actual purpose was to endorse or disapprove of religion. The Court held that Alabama's passage of the prayer and meditation statute was not only a deviation from the state's duty to maintain absolute neutrality toward religion, but was an affirmative endorsement of religion. As such, the statute clearly lacked any secular purpose as it sought to establish religion in public schools, thereby violating the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.

Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988)

1. Who is considered the publisher of a school newspaper, with the right to determine the content of the paper?
2. Under what circumstances, if any, does the First Amendment allow school officials the right to censor school newspapers?

Facts of the Case:
The Spectrum, the school-sponsored newspaper of Hazelwood East High School, was written and edited by students. In May 1983, Robert E. Reynolds, the school principal, received the pages proofs for the May 13 issue. Reynolds found two of the articles in the issue to be inappropriate, and ordered that the pages on which the articles appeared be withheld from publication. Cathy Kuhlmeier and two other former Hazelwood East students brought the case to court.
Question:
Did the principal's deletion of the articles violate the students' rights under the First Amendment?
Conclusion:
No. In a 5-to-3 decision, the Court held that the First Amendment did not require schools to affirmatively promote particular types of student speech. The Court held that schools must be able to set high standards for student speech disseminated under their auspices, and that schools retained the right to refuse to sponsor speech that was "inconsistent with 'the shared values of a civilized social order.'" Educators did not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the content of student speech so long as their actions were "reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns." The actions of principal Reynolds, the Court held, met this test.

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)

Mary Beth and John Tinker

1. Do students have a right to freedom of expression in school?
2. Do school officials have the right to limit freedom of expression?

Facts of the Case: 

John Tinker, 15 years old, his sister Mary Beth Tinker, 13 years old, and Christopher Echardt, 16 years old, decided along with their parents to protest the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands to their Des Moines schools during the Christmas holiday season. Upon learning of their intentions, and fearing that the armbands would provoke disturbances, the principals of the Des Moines school district resolved that all students wearing armbands be asked to remove them or face suspension. When the Tinker siblings and Christopher wore their armbands to school, they were asked to remove them. When they refused, they were suspended until after New Year's Day.

Question: 

Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the First Amendment's freedom of speech protections?

Conclusion: 

The wearing of armbands was "closely akin to 'pure speech'" and protected by the First Amendment. School environments imply limitations on free expression, but here the principals lacked justification for imposing any such limits.The principals had failed to show that the forbidden conduct would substantially interfere with appropriate school discipline.

The Bill of Rights

 

The first Ten Amendments of the Constitution are known as The Bill of Rights.  Click here to learn more.

Prevent Tyranny with a System of Checks & Balances!!!

System of Checks & Balances

The national government is divided up into three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. These three branches are not independent of one another because the Constitution set up a system of checks and balances to help ensure that no one branch became too powerful. Each branch has powers that it can use to check and balance the operations and power of the other two branches.

" A Living Document"

How could a 208 year-old document, written for a small agricultural nation of thirteen states endure through the tests of time to apply to today's immense, modern highly industrialized society? This is because of the flexibility with which the Constitution was imbued. The framers knew that they could not possibly plan for every circumstance or situation. As such, they provided various methods by which the Constitution and its laws could be modified as society grew and changed. That is why the United States Constitution is known as a "living constitution," one which can adapt and be flexible as necessary. There are three ways in which the Constitution is a "living" document: the formal amendment process; the informal amendment process; and custom, usage, and tradition. The formal amendment process is how amendments are added to the Constitution. Article V details the two methods to propose an amendment and the two methods to ratify an amendment. This part of the living constitution has been a useful tool by which Congress may enact an amendment. It keeps them honest in that the states must approve of any amendments by a three-fourths vote.

Federalism: National vs. State Government

The U.S. Constitution establishes a government based on "federalism," or the sharing of power between the national, and state (and local) governments. Our power-sharing form of government is the opposite of "centralized" governments, such as those in England and France, under which national government maintains total power.

While each of the 50 states has its own constitution, all provisions of state constitutions must comply with the U.S. Constitution. For example, a state constitution cannot deny accused criminals the right to a trial by jury, as assured by the U.S. Constitution's 6th Amendment.

Under the U.S. Constitution, both the national and state governments are granted certain exclusive powers and share other powers.

Martin Luther King Jr.

1963 Newsreel Covering 'The March On Washington'

The Judicial Branch

The Supreme Court

The Roberts Court, 2010
Back row (left to right): Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen G. Breyer, Samuel A. Alito, and Elena Kagan. Front row (left to right): Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Federal Court Structure

Federal Court System Diagram

The Legislative Branch

The Capitol Building

Who Advises the President?

President Obama's Cabinet

The tradition of the Cabinet dates back to the beginnings of the Presidency itself. Established in Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, the Cabinet's role is to advise the President on any subject he may require relating to the duties of each member's respective office.

The Cabinet includes the Vice President and the heads of 15 executive departments — the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, as well as the Attorney General.

For more information click here

The Executive Branch

The White House

President Barack Obama & Vice President Joe Bidden

The President's Cabinet

Inspiration

Heads Up...

The semester ends on January 27!!!

• We will have our 2nd workbook check on Monday, January 16th.  You will be responsible for all the work book pages we have completed since the first workbook check.  Those pages are clearly listed here on the blog.
• We will have one more benchmark sometime around Monday, January 23rd.
• Finally, any and all late or missing assignments must be turned in NO LATER THAN WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 25th!!!
• If your are curious about your current grade please see me before school, at nutrition, at lunch, or after school.  DO NOT ASK ME DURING CLASS TIME!!!