FChapter 1-Democracy

●​ A government is a central power of a region, in which a group of people is ruled or directed

○​ But why should these people follow the rules set by the government?
■​ Thomas Hobbs, in his book Leviathan, believed people were fundamentally bad
meaning a government is needed to create order and ensure that the rights of
everyone are respected at all times
■​ Jean-Jacques Rousseau expanded upon the ideals developed by Hobbs, he
developed the idea social contract, we give up the lesser rights so that our more
important rights are protected at all times
■​ John Locke would call these important rights, natural rights - life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness
○​ But what type of government should rule these people?
■​ There are three well-known types of government: monarchy, oligarchy, and
popular sovereignty
■​ Both monarchy and oligarchy are dependent on the mindset of either a single
person (monarchy) or a small group of people (oligarchy), meaning corruption
can easily occur
■​ Popular Sovereignty, on the other hand, is ruled by the people; this is the type of
government the US government would adopt
○​ But ruling by all of the people can be messy and time-consuming, so why not cut it
shorter?
■​ Republicanism, a notion that believes the government should be ruled by a select
few individuals, who are picked by the people, was developed by Montesquieu
■​ People do not lose their say in the government, rather their decisions are more
summarized and easier to vocalize - the indirect rule by the people
○​ To make sure a government does not overstep its authority the government is limited;
these limitations are called limiting government
○​ Natural rights, social contract, popular sovereignty, and limited government are the
foundations of the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution
●​ Democracy is a system of government in which the whole or a select few people rule
○​ Democracy has three versions…
■​ Pluralist Democracy, in which, the government is run by many different groups
with different ideas
■​ Elite Democracy, in which, the government is run by a select few who have
immense power or wealth
■​ Participatory Democracy, in which, the government is run directly by the people
○​ The US government is a democratic republic run by all three versions of democracy
Chapter 2-Articles of Confederation
●​ The Articles of Confederation (AoC), a document that served as the original constitution for the
US during and for some time after the Revolutionary War, was weak, to say the least
○​ The nation had only one branch - a unicameral legislative branch - no executive and
judicial branches, meaning no checks and balances
○​ The national government could not tax, meaning the nation lacked the ability to repay its
debts to foreign powers, thus, foreign powers lacked faith in the young nation - which led
the nation to rarely receive foreign support
○​ Additionally, the AoC made sure that the national government could not establish or
maintain any army of their own - a nation with no army?
○​ The national government relied on the states for joint defense and to provide money
●​ Shay’s Rebellion, a rebellion led by indebted veterans of the Revolutionary War, would finally
enlighten the nation that a new Constitution was required
●​
●​ Chapter 3-Ratification of the Constitution
●​ The Constitutional Convention, a meeting held so that the AoC can either be amended or
recreated, was a response to the Shays’ Rebellion
○​ The AoC was weak, the national government could not levy taxes, procure its own army
and navy, and the confederation of states led to the nation becoming a “league of
friendship” rather than a unified nation
○​ Each state, thus, sent delegates to discuss the amending of the Constitution, however,
some delegates traveled to the Convention seeking a recreation of the entire AoC
●​ Eventually, the delegates decided to throw out the AoC and start an entirely new Constitution
○​ The convention first debated how the legislative branch would function…
■​ The Virginia Plan favored a bicameral legislature where the population number
plays a defining role in determining the number of representatives in each state
●​ The Lower House was voted directly by the people and, in turn, these
representatives would vote the Upper House representatives into power
●​ However, the issue was, the states with a larger population would
overpower the states with a smaller population
■​ The New Jersey Plan, however, favored a unicameral legislature where every
state had one vote, thus allowing an equal voice for every state
●​ However, this meant the 700,000 people in Virginia had less power than
the 60,000 people in Delaware
●​ The smaller the population the more power the people in x state had
compared to the people from a larger populous state
■​ The Great Compromise combined the ideals of the New Jersey and Virginia
Plans and created a bicameral legislature
●​ The House of Representatives, or the lower house, would be voted in by
the people and the number of representatives was determined by the
population of each state
●​ The Senate, or the upper house, would be voted in by the representatives
of the House and every state had an equal voice (2 votes per state)
○​ The convention then tackled the issue of how the president would be voted into power
 ■​ The compromise created the Electoral College, the educated individuals who
vote the president into power
■​ The people of every state would vote for which president they favored, then a
body of electors would be chosen to vote the president into power
■​ The number of electors per state would be equal to the number of senators and
House of Representatives per state - in other words, the population would
determine the number of votes x state gets (all states got at least 2 votes)
○​ But if the number of representatives in the House was due to the population number, then
states with many slaves would have a larger say in governance
■​ Thus, the Three-Fifths Compromise stated that for every five slaves, only three
would be counted and added to the total population of a state
■​ Additionally, the convention led to the Gentlemen’s Agreement (1788), in which
the international importation of slaves would be ended in 1808
■​ The framers were embarrassed that the practice of slavery had not ended by now,
however, the framers knew that if the Constitution were to pass then slavery must
continue (the word slavery is never found in the Constitution)

Chapter 4-Federalists and Anti-Federalists

●​ Although the convention only lasted 116 days, the convention was far from simple
○​ Quickly two factions developed…
■​ Federalists - pro-Constitutionalists, who wanted to get rid of the AoC and make
a new Constitution - would write a series of essays known as the Federalist
Papers to bring the US population to back their ideals
■​ Anti-Federalists - anti-Constitutionalists, who wanted to only amend the AoC -
also wrote a series of essays known as the Anti-Federalist Papers, however, the
Anti-Federalists were less organized
○​ Brutus No. 1, a document drafted by an unknown anti-federalist, highlighted the beliefs
of the anti-federalists
■​ The author also wanted a smaller republic so that the chances of tyranny are
lowered and was not in favor of pluralist and elite democracy - instead they
favored participatory democracy
●​ The author believed pluralist democracy would lead the nation to be
indecisive due to the many factions that could develop
●​ Additionally, he saw elite democracy as giving certain citizens the ability
to become corrupt

○​ Federalist No. 10, on the other hand, was a document that highlighted the beliefs of
Madison - the author - and his fellow Federalists (remember “mischief of factions”)
 ■​ Madison favored elite democracy and a pluralist democracy - however, he
disliked the ideal of participatory democracy
●​ An elite democracy would allow the more educated to choose the
responses to every issue, leading to a better resolution
●​ A pluralistic democracy would allow the resolutions to be more astute
because for a resolution to be established the factions must first agree -
this inadvertently leads to all avenues of an issue to be explored
●​ A participatory democracy, in Madison’s mind, was both impractical and
straight-up a dumb idea, because the uneducated populous can not
distinguish between a good candidate and a bad candidate (“mobocracy”)
■​ Madison also favored a larger republic so that more people could be represented
●​ ex:/ the trans community is small - in a small republic there is a smaller
chance for a supporter to arise, however, in a larger republic there is a
larger chance of a supporter to arise

Chapter 6-Checks on the Government

●​ Separation of Powers is a notion that separates the government into three branches so that the
powers of one branch do not come into conflict with the powers of another
○​ Federalist No. 51, a document written by Madison, details the reason for the separation
of powers and the checks and balances of each branch
○​ The checks and balances is a notion where each branch puts “checks” on the other two
branches so that there is always a “balance”
●​ One such check and balance is the power of the legislative branch to impeach the presiwdent…
○​ Impeachment is a series of steps…
1.​ First, a president is accused of performing an illegal action
2.​ This accusation is then brought before the House for them to either indict (a more
formal accusation) or declare the original accusation false - needs a majority vote
3.​ If indicted, the president is sent before the senate for them to either convict or
acquit the president - needs a 2/3rds vote (for conviction)
4.​ If convicted, the president will be removed from office and never allowed to hold
any position of power in the United States ever again
5.​ The conviction does not arrest the president!!!!
○​ Three presidents have been indicted by the House, but all three were acquitted by the
Senate
■​ Johnson was accused and then indicted for violating the Tenure of Office Act, in
which Johnson fired his secretary of war, Johnson was acquitted by only one vote
■​ Clinton was accused and then indicted for obstructing justice and perjury (he lied
about having sex), both of these charges were acquitted by the senate
■​ Trump, the only president to be impeached twice, was accused and then indicted
for tampering with the elections of 2016 & 2020, both of which he was acquitted
Chapter 7-Federalism
●​ Federalism - literally meaning “treaty” - is a system of governing in which power is shared
between the national government and its many subdivisions
○​ Due to federalism, three types of powers developed: enumerated (power of the national),
reserved (power of the states), and concurrent (power of both the states and national)
●​ Due to grants, a sum of money given to the states by the national government, the national
government has slowly been gaining more power…
○​ Categorical Grants are money given to states for specific purposes - for example, giving
money to a state to add more stop signs or traffic lights
○​ Block Grants are money given to states for a more broad purpose - for example, giving
money to a state to improve the electrical system, the state government can use the
money for anything related to improving the electrical system
○​ Mandates, a required quota for every state to reach for them to receive federal aid - for
example, the government can pass a law requiring all states to have a certain age
requirement for drinking and driving…if a state refuses to comply then the state will have
no federal aid to keep their roads up to date (they are sort of forced)
●​ The Necessary and Proper Clause, which is also called the elastic clause, establishes the implied
powers… which allows the national government to establish laws that are necessary and proper
for carrying out the constitutionally protected functions of the national government
○​ Due to this clause, the national government has been able to gain more and more power
over the states
○​ For example, the national government has the power to run the postal service, but for this
to occur the federal government needs mailmen…so the national government is granted
the power to hire mailmen meaning the power to hire mailmen is only a national power
(this power is not directly listed in the Constitution, rather it is implied)
●​ The Commerce Clause allows the national government to oversee interstate and foreign trade and
commerce
○​ Due to this clause, the national government has been able to gain more power, using the
elastic clause…because the national government can logically say anything can disrupt
interstate or foreign commerce
○​ ex:/ speeding can lead to crashes which can slow commerce between states… so the
national government has the right to police state roads
●​ Reserved powers were defined through the amendments…
○​ It was first mentioned in the 9th Amendment - establishing a notion that any right the
national government is not specifically granted through the constitution will be given to
the people
○​ The 10th amendment directly defines and establishes the reserved powers - establishing a
notion that any power the national government is not specifically granted through the
constitution will be given to the state governments (or rather “reserved” to the states)
○​ The Fourteenth Amendment, however, weakened the reserved powers and required each
state to put the rights of the people before the powers of the states (people rights > state
power)
●​ McCulloch v Maryland (1819), established that Congress had the power to create a national bank
because they have the power to levy taxes and regulate commerce, and to do these acts they need
a bank and so the necessary and proper clause - additionally, federal law outweighs state law
because supremacy clause
○​ Maryland taxed the Second Bank of the United States which is unconstitutional because
the state does not have the right to tax the national government because supremacy
clause: federal laws outweigh state laws
○​ Maryland said the national government could not establish a bank, because it’s not
specifically mentioned in the Constitution
○​ This is wrong because the commerce clause is harmed if there is no bank so the necessary
and proper clause comes into effect (a bank is implied, no bank means no commerce)
○​ Meaning it increased the power of the national government (anti-decentralization)
●​ United States v Lopez (1995), established that Congress cannot overstep its bounds of power
using the commerce clause
○​ Lopez brought a gun into a school zone - which breaks state AND federal laws -
supremacy clause means Lopez broke ONLY a federal law so he was brought before
federal courts instead of state courts
○​ SCOTUS found Lopez innocent because this was a criminal offense, not federal - in other
words, he was innocent because guns in schools are illegal, but it's not a federal offense!!!
○​ Meaning it decreased the power of national government (pro-decentralization)
●​ Public Policy is a process in which a day-to-day problem is combatted
○​ Agenda setting (issue) →policy formulation (solution) →policy legitimization (making
sure people support your solution) →policy implementation (performing solution) →
policy evaluation (making sure the solution worked and does not cause new problems)
○​ ex:/ an autistic child lives in a house in some town and he is known for running on the
street (agenda setting) →add a sign warning drivers (policy formulation) →hold a town
meeting to present the solution (policy legitimization) →add sign (policy
implementation) → make sure sign is noticed by drivers (policy evaluation)
Chapter 8-Legislative Branch
●​ Congress, Latin for “to come together,” is a bicameral legislature composed of a lower house
(House of Reps) with 435 members and the upper house (Senate) with 100 members
○​ The Senate is designed to represent the states equally, while the House is designed to
represent the people equally
■​ The House has a two-year term, while the Senate has a six-year term - meaning
the members from the House have to appeal more to their constituents
■​ However, the people care more about who their senator is than who their
representative is, and so, House positions can be relatively “safe”
○​ The Senate was mainly built to put a “check” on the larger House where the framers
believed most of the legislation would occur
■​ House members are required to be at least 25 years of age, live within the district
they wish to represent for at least 7 years, and be a native of the US
■​ The Senators are required to be at least 30 years of age, live within the state they
wish to represent for at least 9 years, and be a native of the US
●​ A bill, a draft of a law that is presented before Congress for discussion, can be drafted by anyone
but introduced ONLY by congress members (this rule is the same for presidents as well)
1.​ A bill is drafted by ANY person and then introduced, ONLY, by a member of Congress
2.​ The bill is then sent to a committee relating to the bill - which then sends it to a
subcommittee of their committee
3.​ The bill is voted in the subcommittee…if passed, it moves up to the committee, if passed
again, it's sent up toward the chamber where the bill was first introduced
4.​ If the first chamber passes the bill, the next chamber then votes on the bill, and if both
chambers pass the bill, the bill is sent to the president
5.​ If the president chooses to veto the bill, the bill is sent back to the original chamber for a
2/3rds vote to be passed…if passed with 2/3rd vote, the same occurs in the next chamber
6.​ If both chambers reach a 2/3rds vote, the veto is overridden and the bill becomes a law
●​ A committee is a group of people within a legislative body to represent a particular issue and
make the process for the more important issues easier and quicker, while a caucus, is an
ideological group that voices their opinions but never impacts legislation
○​ A standing committee, a permanent committee that represents crucial issues, is the most
important type of committee, which is then divided into subcommittees
○​ The Ways and Means Committee, a committee that oversees bills based upon taxation, is
ONLY found in the House
○​ The Foreign Relations Committee and Armed Services Committee are ONLY found in
the Senate
●​ Due to its larger size, floor action in the House is more formalized than in the Senate - each
House member is allotted a certain amount of time, and both the pros and against of a bill are
given the same amount of time (if you ever did MUN, then you know what I mean)
○​ Rules Committee is the most powerful committee in the House and has the ability to kill
or quicken the process for a bill to be passed
○​ Establishing which bills have an open rule (amendments can be added) or a closed rule
(amendments cannot be added) - additionally, they can delay a vote or add a “poison-pill
amendment” to kill a bill
●​ Although more laid back, bills are harder to pass in the Senate and the process is a lot slower
○​ Each senator is allowed to speak for however long they wish and this has led to the
filibuster, a tactic in which senators say a speech for hours READ
○​ Although not popular prior to the Civil War, in recent times the filibuster has been used to
delay a vote on a bill, which is the main weapon of a minority party
○​ A cloture motion, a motion to end a filibuster, is the only way to end a filibuster - it
requires the support from 16 senators to bring it to the floor, and then a 2/3rds vote to
“accept” the motion and end the filibuster
●​ Budgeting of the executive branch, one of the powers of the legislative branch, is run by the
Appropriations Committee which is found in both chambers
○​ An earmark, the setting aside of parts of a budget for specific projects, can be used for
political gain, and when it is a political gain its called pork barreling
○​ Pork barreling can be the product of logrolling when two legislators agree to trade
votews for each other’s benefit
○​ An example of an earmark is setting aside parts of a military budget to buy a fighter jet
●​ The main goal of the House is to represent their constituent's needs and wants, however,
sometimes the wants are not equal to the needs leading to 3 different types of representation…
○​ A delegate model, when a representative acts on the “wants” of their constituents
○​ A trustee model, when a representative vote based on their constituent's needs not wants,
is the type of representation Madison was hoping for - common people are dumb
regarding legislation, but representatives were educated in it
○​ A politico model, a combination of delegate and trustee models, is the political side of
representation - for example, if the constituents began to protest the representatives vote,
the representative will change his response to better represent their constituents
●​ A divided government, when one faction controls the legislative and the other faction controls the
executive, is the best form of government
○​ Similar to what Madison said in Federalists No. 10, more factions in power means more
compromise which indirectly means all avenues of a particular issue will be explored and
so the response to an issue will be more “well-thought-out”
○​ However, partisanship, the act of voting based solely on one’s party, can lead to gridlock,
when the government cannot reach compromises or make policy decisions
●​ Gerrymandering, the act of reshaping districts to benefit x political party, occurs every 10 years
due to the census - was challenged in two landmark court cases
○​ Baker v Carr (1962), a landmark court case that questioned whether one person’s vote is
equal to another person’s vote and if the federal government can oversee redistricting in
states (a fight over Federalism)
■​ Tennessee did not redistrict since 1901, even though people have relocated -
meaning some districts had larger populations than other districts
■​ Charles Baker argued that since his district had more people than the rural areas
surrounding it, his vote was worth less than the vote of the people from these
rural districts - a breach of the 14th Amendment
■​ In a 6-2 opinion, SCOTUS argued that this was indeed a violation of Baker’s
14th amendment rights and the federal government did have the power to oversee
the redistricting of a state as it was a violation of a person’s rights
 ○​ Shaw v Reno (1993), a landmark court case that questioned whether redistricting can be
based upon race and if it is a breach of the 14th amendment
■​ After the census of 1990, North Carolina redistricted to account for changes in
population - however, one of these districts was a majority-minority district: a
district with more minority voters than white voters, in this case, it was black
voters - in other words, it's used to put all the minority voters into one district
■​ Janet Reno, Attorney General at the time, ordered North Carolina to redistrict
and add another majority-minority district to comply with the recent amendments
to the Voting Rights Act - the proposed second district was oddly-shaped and was
obviously based upon race alone
■​ As this was clearly the product of empowering the black votes, a group of white
citizens, led by Ruth O. Shaw, sued Reno
●​ Shaw believed this was a violation of the equal protection clause of the
14th Amendment
●​ Reno said the majority-minority district was established to give black
voices more say
■​ SCOTUS ruled in a 5-4 decision in favor of Shaw, as the shape was so odd that it
was most clearly racially motivated
●​ SCOTUS said that districts may be built with racial considerations, but it
can NEVER be the SOLE reason
●​ The 4 dissenters said that the redistricting was to empower the weaker
voices, and so this was lawful - but the basis of this opinion is race,
making it illogical

Chapter 9-Executive Branch

●​ The role of the president has changed throughout history, with the president slowly gaining power
and prominence in the nation
○​ George Washington, knowing the people were scared of having another king, made sure
to not overstep his realm of power and made sure to limit his veto powers
○​ Andrew Jackson would be the first president to actually expand the power of the
president by firing and hiring individuals as he pleased
○​ During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, a fundamental right
in the Constitution that protects against unlawful and indefinite imprisonment, showing
that the president can directly influence the laws of the land
○​ Teddy Roosevelt, in his autobiography, argued that the president must be a leader of his
nation and be prepared to take bold action to protect his people and their rights
○​ Howard Taft, in his book, argued that the presidential powers are limited to the
Constitution, making the role of president more of a ceremonial position
○​ During the Great Depression and lead up to WW2, FDR redefined the American
economy and in his State of the Union Address, FDR said the job of a president was to
lead the nation toward the Four Freedoms (speech, religion, want, and fear)
●​ The president has many powers, these powers are separated into two categories… formal powers,
the powers of the president detailed in Article II of the Constitution, and informal powers,
powers not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but are “implied”
○​ The president has the formal power to veto a bill
■​ The president has 10 days to choose to either veto or pass a bill, if he does not
sign the bill in 10 days then either the bill becomes law (if Congress was in
session within those 10 days) or a pocket veto is enacted (Congress adjourned at
some point within those 10 days) - it’s weird, I know
○​ The president also has many formal powers that fall under the realm of foreign policy
■​ The president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, however, the
power to declare war is granted to Congress - however, both the Vietnam and
Korean Wars were engaged without a specific declaration of war
■​ The War Powers Act, an act that required the president to notify Congress within
48 hours of deploying any troops and deployment, which can be for up to 60 days
without a formal Congressional declaration, gave more power to the Legislative,
additionally, money for war still comes from Congress
■​ The president is also the chief diplomat, meaning he can appoint ambassadors
(with the approval from the Senate), receive ambassadors, and recognize nations
- to improve foreign relations, the president can also visit other nations
■​ Lastly, the president is allowed to negotiate treaties, however, the treaty is only
passed in the US if Congress agrees to it - ex:/ Treaty of Versailles
○​ The president has the following informal powers…
■​ POTUS can bargain with the legislative branch to do xyz - no president can run a
nation without the use of bargaining
■​ Executive Orders, a declaration by the president that directs the federal
government to do xyz, do not have to be approved by Congress and so they are a
mechanism to empower the president - leading to conflict between both branches
■​ A president can persuade Congress to modify a bill by threatening to veto it,
additionally, the president can give his opinion of a law
■​ Executive Agreement, agreements with foreign governments, do not have to be
approved by Congress and so they are a mechanism to empower the president
●​ The president is the most powerful person in America, however, Americans do not like a king and
so there must be “checks” on the president to make sure there is a “balance” of power
○​ The president has the power to appoint people to various positions, however, the Senate
has the power to approve these appointments
■​ Cabinet, the president’s top advisors who are responsible for managing the many
departments and agencies of the executive branch, are appointed by the president,
but affirmed by Congress (high position, so more contentious)
■​ Ambassadors, responsible for representing the US in foreign countries and
managing diplomatic relations, are appointed by POTUS and checked by the
Senate (midtier position, so midtier contentious)
■​ White House Staff, members of the executive responsible for providing
assistance to the president, are less contentious than an ambassador or cabinet
position but are still confirmed by the Senate (lowest contention)
 ●​ The most important check on the president’s power is the Senate’s power to confirm
appointments made by the president to add new judges to the judiciary
○​ Adding members to the judiciary can be the longest-lasting influence of a president, and
so this is an extremely contentious point between the two branches
○​ ex:/ LBJ nominated Sandra Day O’Connor (first female justice) and Thurgood Marshall
(first African American justice) to SCOTUS which allowed LBJ to go down in history as
the first to appoint these minorities to SCOTUS
●​ The president can use his prestigious position to influence the national agenda, this is called bully
pulpit, a term coined by Teddy Roosevelt
○​ The president can use social media, public appearances, television broadcasts, and so
much more to offer their opinion on a specific topic - people will side with their leader
○​ State of the Union Address: an annual address given by the president to Congress and the
nation, in which he outlines his vision for the future of the country (very important)
○​ Due to advancements in technology, the president has been able to talk to the population
at large, not through written speeches but in questionnaires that are broadcasted to the
entire nation - the most famous example of this was Reagan’s Address to the Nation on
Federal Tax Reduction, a video of Reagan explaining Reaganomics
●​ Federalists No. 70, authored by Alexander Hamilton, outlined the need for the executive branch
to be a one-man show
○​ While the legislative branch was created to be slow, the executive branch is designed to
be quick and decisive - and so if there were more executives in power then the
“energized” president would not be so “energized” (remember the word ENERGIZED)
○​ Additionally, if there is only one president then, if there is a catastrophe, we know who to
blame and who to avoid in the next election, but if there were more than one, then placing
the blame would be difficult (ex:/ James Buchanan is blamed for the Civil War)
●​ The interpretation of the power of the executive has been the source of ongoing debate, should we
give more power to the executive or less - or is it good the way it is right now?
○​ Some believe that the president needs to be limited in their power, while others think he
needs more power; would giving more power make the US more fluid in policy making?
○​ For example, the 22nd Amendment, which limited the president to only two terms, was
established just after FDR was given more power (only president to serve four terms)

Chapter 10-Judicial Branch

●​ The Judicial Branch, which was established in Article III of the Constitution, is composed of the
Supreme Court and its many lesser courts
○​ Hamilton famously said the judicial was the “least dangerous” branch because it had no
“Purse nor Sword” - however, today a SCOTUS decision can change the entire nation
○​ The jurisdiction, the official power to make legal decisions and judgments, of the judicial
branch is split into original jurisdiction, a court can hear a case for the first time, and
appellate jurisdiction, a court can ONLY hear cases from lower courts
○​ Judicial Review, the power of the judicial to rule on the Constitutionality of law, is the
judicial branch's “check” on the legislative - was not established in the Constitution,
rather it came about due to Federalist No. 78 and Marbury v Madison
●​ There is a three-tier federal court system… SCOTUS → Courts of Appeals → District Courts
1.​ Supreme Court, the “supreme law of the land,” is composed of NINE JUDGES and NO
JURY
a.​ SCOTUS has original and appellate jurisdiction, however, the original
jurisdiction is extremely narrow - most cases in SCOTUS are appeals
b.​ Original jurisdiction ONLY sets in for SCOTUS when a case involves two states
or an ambassador or other public officials (interstate or foreign issues)
2.​ Courts of Appeals is a group of TWELVE federal courts that hear appeals from lower
courts to make sure the law was handled correctly
a.​ Composed of THREE JUDGES and NO JURY
b.​ ONLY have appellate jurisdiction!!!
3.​ District Courts is a group of 94 federal courts that hear original cases
a.​ Found in every state and are composed of ONE JUDGE and a JURY
b.​ Their job is to hear all federal crimes and make a decision - “the first line of
defense”
c.​ ONLY has original jurisdiction!!
●​ Federalist No. 78, a document written by Alexander Hamilton, discussed how and how long a
justice will be appointed and what kind of powers the judicial branch should have
○​ Hamilton said all judges, who are to be appointed by the president and confirmed by
Congress, “are to hold their offices during good behavior” (meaning judge for life)
○​ Hamilton reasoned a judge should rule for life so that the judicial branch can rule
independently of the other branches (if a judge is constantly appointed and confirmed by
the other branches, then does that not make the other branches more powerful?)
○​ The power of the judicial branch was to check laws created by the legislative and
enforced by the president and make those laws “contrary to the manifest tenor of the
Constitution void” (or bad laws gotta go - or in other words judicial review)
○​ Hamilton also reasons that the judicial branch is used to make sure the legislative always
has their people at heart - a second line of defense to protect the rights of citizens
●​ Marbury v Madison, a court case that cemented judicial review as a legitimate power of the
judiciary, was a landmark court case that took the word politics out of the judicial branch
○​ Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams in the election of 1800, however, right before
Adams was removed from office, he passed the Judiciary Act: created new courts, added
judges, and gave the president more control over the appointments of judges
○​ One of these judges added was William Marbury, and Madison, the new secretary of
state, refused to give Marbury his commission documents - Marbury sued and the case
made its way into the Supreme Court
○​ SCOTUS ruled that Madison’s refusal to deliver the commission was illegal, however,
SCOTUS ruled in favor of Madison because the Judiciary Act that gave Marbury his seat
in the judiciary was itself unconstitutional (in other words, the judicial branch “checked”
the legislative branch using judicial review…this is the first time that ever happened)
●​ Stare Decisis, Latin for “to stand by decided matters,” is the principle that courts should generally
follow the decisions made in earlier, similar cases
○​ In other words, following a precedent will allow a law to be applied consistently and
predictably which helps promote stability and fairness in the court of law
○​ However, courts have the power to overrule previous decisions and establish new
precedents when a previous decision is unjust or outdated
○​ Society is constantly evolving, the judicial system should evolve alongside the rest of the
nation (ex:/ what if we abided by the Dred Scott decision?) - evolution is required
●​ SCOTUS establishes Stare Decisis and can affect the precedent within the nation, so the ideology
of each justice is important to evaluate
○​ A judge can either be conservative, more likely to follow the precedent and uphold
existing precedents, or liberal, open to change in the precedent
○​ Justices may also be influenced by specific facts in a case, their understanding of the role
of SCOTUS, and the dynamics of the Court as an institution
●​ Additionally, since a president appoints justices, a president can directly affect how a supreme
court functions, for example, if a single president nominates four justices, then most likely the
president may add four justices with the same ideology (people tend to nominate people they like)
○​ ex:/ when LBJ nominated Thurgood Marshall and Sandra Day O’Connor SCOTUS
shifted a bit more to the liberal side and, shortly after their appointments, the Brown v
Board decision was created (the definition of a liberal approach)
●​ Since judges rule for life, judges are able to make decisions without worrying about the public’s
opinion or losing their position of power
○​ This was intentionally designed by the framers to remove the word political from the
judicial, however, there have been times when politics were added to the branch
○​ ex:/ The appointment of Brett Kavanaugh was characterized by Reps fighting for a
candidate with a rocky past and Dems stopping at nothing to remove him from office
despite Kavanaugh seemingly acting like a changed person (politics in nature)
●​ Sometimes the decisions made by SCOTUS are controversial or unpopular, when this is the case,
branches, and the general public may take steps to challenge the decision, however, it’s important
to note that SCOTUS makes decisions based on the Constitution not the mindset of the people!!
○​ Court-Curbing, measures to limit the power of SCOTUS, can be used to influence the
decisions of SCOTUS or threaten them into submission - however, these measures are
rare and can be controversial
■​ Presidential appointments, where the President can appoint new justices who
share their interpretation of the Constitution, potentially changing the ideological
composition of the Court…meaning more liberal or more conservative
■​ Legislative action, where Congress has the power to determine the Supreme
Court's appellate jurisdiction and pass acts that prevent the Supreme Court from
hearing appeals in certain types of cases
■​ Refusal to implement decisions, where the other branches of government may
refuse to follow or enforce the Supreme Court's decisions
■​ Court-Packing, a proposal to add more justices to SCOTUS to change its
ideology, was implemented by FDR and is the only reason why FDR is not the
most beloved president (court-curbing can ruin the reputation of a president)
 ●​ There are many checks on the judicial branch…
○​ Public opinion can put a check on the power of SCOTUS - when the Court makes
decisions that is controversial, it can lead to public criticism and pressure to reconsider
○​ The legislative has the power to impeach and remove federal judges for "high crimes and
misdemeanors," this holds Justices accountable for unethical/illegal behavior
○​ The legislative can also pass laws that overrule SCOTUS decisions or limit judicial
review
○​ The legislative branch also has the power of the purse, which it can use to limit the
resources available to SCOTUS (ex:/ limit funding for needed staff members)
○​ The president has the power to nominate SCOTUS Justices, and the Senate must approve
these nominations which can shape SCOTUS’ ideology
○​ The president is responsible for enforcing SCOTUS decisions, and has discretion over the
extent to which he enforces the decisions - if the president chooses not to enforce a
SCOTUS ruling, it can limit the impact and authority of the Court
○​ The President has the power to issue executive orders, which can impact the authority of
SCOTUS
○​ The President has the power to pardon, including individuals convicted by SCOTUS

Chapter 11-The Bureaucracy

●​ The bureaucracy, the millions of people who are employed to carry out the responsibilities of the
federal government, falls under the authority of the executive branch
○​ The bureaucracy is divided into 15 departments, which are led by one of the president’s
24 cabinet members and are in charge of undertaking federal responsibilities
○​ However, some of these responsibilities are complex and so a department is broken down
into bureaus, which are sometimes called an agency, to split the work and make the
process more efficient (ex:/ the CIA and the FBI fall under the Department of Justice)
○​ A government corporation, a private business that is run by the government, is created
when there are services the government wants to divvy out to their people, but the free
market is the best way to do it (ex:/ United States Postal Service)
●​ Sometimes the bureaucracy leaves the realm of the executive branch and is independent of the
branches - hence its called an independent regulatory commission
○​ These agencies are established to regulate a specific economic activity or interest (ex:/
Federal Reserve and NASA)
○​ They are independent because the president can only appoint the head of the agency, after
that, the president cannot touch the head (agencies that are free of executive control)
●​ The main function of the bureaucracy is to enforce the laws created by the legislative branch
○​ The executive branch is responsible for enforcing the laws created by the legislative
branch - the bureaucracy is the body of people who do the enforcing
○​ ex:/ a law came out requiring television shows to add captions so that people with
disabilities may enjoy the services, the FCC is the body that enforces this law
●​ There are many different types of bureaucratic departments…
○​ Department of State: responsible for US foreign policy and diplomacy
○​ Department of the Treasury: responsible for managing the country's financial resources, including revenue
collection and economic policy formulation
○​ Department of Defense: responsible for national security and the management of military forces
○​ Department of Justice: responsible for enforcing federal laws and representing the US in legal matters
○​ Department of Homeland Security: responsible for ensuring the security of the US through counter-terrorism
measures, disaster response, and border security
○​ Department of Health and Human Services: responsible for protecting the health of all Americans and
providing essential human services
○​ Department of Education: responsible for setting education policy and overseeing federal education
programs
○​ Environmental Protection Agency: responsible for protecting the environment and human health by
enforcing federal environmental laws and regulations
○​ Department of Agriculture: responsible for developing and executing federal policies related to agriculture,
forestry, and food
○​ Department of Commerce: responsible for promoting economic growth and job creation through the support
of businesses and international trade
○​ Department of Transportation: manages all kinds of transportation like highways and airways
○​ Department of Veteran Affairs: manages the general welfare of the nation’s veterans
○​ Federal Elections Commission: administers and enforces campaign finance laws
○​ Securities and Exchange Commission: regulates the stock market and prevents funding
●​ The bureaucracy can fine an individual for not complying with the law
○​ For example, compliance monitoring, to make sure a company is abiding by the law,
often results in a fine on the company
○​ ex:/ companies can be fined for not complying with the provisions of the Clean Air Act,
an act that made it illegal to pollute the air
●​ Additionally, the bureaucracy works closely with Congress to make sure topics are better
understood prior to laws being created
○​ Department heads are often times experts in their fields, but Congressmen are not, so
department heads will usually be called by Congress to testify before them to help them
better understand the topic in question
○​ ex:/ if Congress is passing a new law on nuclear energy, they will ask the head of the
Office of Nuclear Energy to testify before them to help them better understand how
nuclear energy works…it usually is only the head that does testifies
●​ Bureaucracy works closely with Congress and interest groups, thus a strong relationship is built,
this relationship is called the iron triangle: these three entities rely on each other to make policy
○​ Beurocrats offer professional expertise to committees in Congress, while Congress
approves funding for each bureau of bureaucracy
○​ Interest groups contain professional expertise and can provide funding for congressional
races, while Congress can carry out the beliefs of each interest group
○​ Since an interest group can provide funding for congressional races, they can influence
the bureaucracy, and the bureaucracy can address the interests of an interest group
○​ These days iron triangles are not as prevalent as the number of competing interest groups
has increased dramatically
○​ Additionally, an issue network, a group of people in DC who are a part of the
congressional staff and are the think tanks of legislation, can direct legislation that will
limit the power of an iron triangle (ex:/ legislation that fights tobacco iron triangles)
●​ Andrew Jackson famously utilized the spoils system, a system of public employment based on
rewarding loyalists and friends, which gave offices to people loyal to him (also called patronage)
○​ The qualifications of a candidate were never viewed, the only thing that mattered was are
you loyal to the president who just won the election (“to the winner goes the spoils”)
○​ The spoils system was utilized up until the presidency of James Garfield, who was
assassinated for not giving one of his loyalists a position in the federal government
○​ The assassination of Garfield led to the Civil Service Reform, which led to the Pendleton
Civil Service Act which filled federal jobs on the basis of merit rather than patronage
which increased the efficiency of the bureaucracy
○​ During the presidency of Jimmy Carter, the Civil Service Reform Act, a law that added
women to the mix, was passed which again increased the efficiency of the bureaucracy
●​ Delegated Discretionary Authority, the authority given to the bureaucracy, is not specifically
mentioned in the Constitution and so their power is delegated to them to enforce the law
○​ These members of the federal government are educated in their fields, so they have the
discretion to decide how and when a law is implemented
○​ Additionally, they have rule-making authority, they make the specific rules on how a law
will be carried out
○​ ex:/ the 16th Amendment establishes the income tax - the IRS builds the specific rules for
how a person will pay taxes (taxes due by x and are to be paid by doing y)
●​ Congress is concerned that the bureaucratic agencies actually implement the laws as Congress
intends - there are two mechanisms used by Congress to see if the bureaucracy is on “track”
○​ Committee Hearings, a committee that relates to a bureaucratic agency calls the head of
the agency in to give reports on their progress
■​ Can be friendly but also not so friendly, depending on the circumstances
■​ ex:/ Army-McCarthy, a committee hearing where Joe McCarthy “investigated”
whether or not Communism was spread throughout the departments of the army
○​ Since Congress has the power of budgeting the executive branch, it can use its “power of
the purse” to persuade and threaten bureaucrats into submission
●​ The president is worried about whether or not a department is working concurrently with his
agenda
○​ Since the president owns most of the departments, he can simply fire the head and
appoint a new head - ex:/ Trump fired James Comey, director of the FBI, for his handling
of the Hillary Clinton email controversy and the Russian interference with the 2016
election - this all occurred because Comey did not align with Trump’s agenda
○​ The president can also make new departments if new issues arise… ex:/ the creation of
the Department of Homeland Security after 9/11 brought together multiple government
agencies under a single department with a unified mission to protect the country from
terrorism
●​ Judicial rulings can change the precedent in a nation, and so it can also lead to the creation of new
agencies in the bureaucracy (ex:/ in response to the Roe v Wade decision, many abortion-related
agencies were created)
Chapter 11-Amendment Process
●​ The amendment process, which was layed out in Article 5 of the Constitution, is a long and very
difficult process - its not easy to bring about change within the US
1.​ The proposal phase can go through either of the two following methods
a.​ When Congress introduces an amendment, it is drafted (by anyone) and then
introduced ONLY by a member of Congress — it is then voted on and requires a
2/3rds vote from both chambers (it starts in the chamber where it was introduced)
b.​ When a state legislature introduces an amendment, they recommend having a
Constitutional Convention to debate over adding an amendment to the
Constitution (requires the support from 2/3rds of the states)
2.​ The ratification phase is always the same - the amendment is voted on by all of the
current states within the union and requires support from 3/4ths of all the states for it to
become official
●​ It's important to note that some eras in US history are filled with many amendments being added,
while others have only one or two amendments added
○​ The amendments are only used to bring about social and political change - and even this
is very rare
○​ According to Madison, the amendment process must be difficult so that stability can be
brought to the US

Chapter 12-The Bill of Rights

●​ The Bill of Rights (BoR), the first ten amendments of the Constitution, was a list of expectations
the citizens should have so that they know what the government can and cannot do to them
○​ BoR was one of the products of the long debate between the Federalists and the
Anti-Federalists; the two sides disagreed about how individual liberties and rights should
be protected in the Constitution - the two groups eventually agreed to pass BoR
○​ Civil Liberties are the rights of citizens to be free from undue government interference in
their lives, while the civil rights are the rights of citizens to be free of unequal or
discriminatory treatment on the basis of race, gender…

Chapter 13-The First Amendment

●​ The First Amendment is widely believed to be the most important amendment within the entire
Constitution
○​ The amendment gives us the freedoms of religion, speech, press, peacefully assemble,
and to petition the government
○​ Many landmark SCOTUS cases debated on the legality of the First Amendment and what
it actually gives the citizens the liberties to
●​ Freedom of Religon, or the freedom to practice any religion or no religion at all, was famously
debated in two landmark court cases
○​ Establishment Clause, the first clause of the first amendment, which states that
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” - in other words,
this prevents the federal government from supporting an official religion
○​ Free Exercise Clause, the second clause of the first amendment, which prevents the
federal government from interfering with its citizens’ religious beliefs and practices,
however, SCOTUS has placed some limits on religious practices (ex:/religious drug use)
○​ Lemon Test, a test to determine whether a law violates the establishment clause, was
created in the Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), which found that laws are constitutional only
if they have a legitimate secular purpose, neither advance nor inhibit religion, and do not
result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion
○​ “Wall of Separation,” a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson, which described his view
that there should be complete separation between the government and religion
●​ Engel v Vitale (1962) was a landmark courtcase that held that a state cannot hold prayers in
public schools, even if participation is not required or if the prayer is not tied to a religion
○​ A group of Jewish families sued their children’s school district for having prayer in the
classroom, although illegal, the Appeals level upheld the decision to allow school prayer
○​ The enraged families took the case to SCOTUS and argued that it violated the
establishment clause
○​ in a 6-l decision, SCOTUS ruled that the school prayer did violate the establishment
clause and affirmed that the government must remain neutral in religious matters
●​ Wisconsin v Yoder (1972) was a landmark court case that upheld the free exercise clause, stating
that a person may be taken out of public school to engage in religious activity
○​ Wisconsin fined three Amish families for refusing to send their children to school past the
eighth grade since state law mandated that all students attend school until age 16
○​ However, the Yoder family believed that further education for their children would
damage their religious beliefs - the Amish believe in simplicity, and the families
considered worldly education harmful to maintaining their way of life
○​ The Yoder family sued the Wisconsin state government for creating a law that violated
the free exercise clause - the case made its way to SCOTUS
○​ SCOTUS ruled in favor of the families which led to the state of Wisconsin taking the case
back to SCOTUS, which SCOTUS ruled in favor of the families again stating that taking
their children out after the 8th grade was protected by the free exercise clause
●​ Freedom of Expression, or the freedom to express opinions, is a fundamental liberty granted in
the First Amendment as democracy depends on the free exchange of ideas
○​ It allows a person to express themselves freely, without the fear of government
censorship and involves many forms of expression: written, spoken, artistic, and symbolic
expression (to express oneself through symbols and gestures)
○​ This right is considered to be essential for the functioning of a democratic society, as it
allows individuals to express their opinions, ideas, and beliefs freely and openly,
however, it is not absolute and has certain limits and exceptions
●​ Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) was a landmark courtcase
that affirmed that symbolic speech is protected under the First Amendment
○​ A group of students led by John Tinker were suspended for wearing black armbands in
school to protest the Vietnam War
○​ The students sued claiming that their First Amendment rights were being violated and
SCOTUS agreed and held that the students had the right to express their views through
symbolic speech, even if it was disruptive or unpopular
○​ The decision was significant because it established that symbolic speech is protected by
the First Amendment and that the government cannot censor or restrict such speech
simply because it is controversial or unpopular
●​ Schenck v. United States (1919) was a landmark courtcase that dealt with the issue of freedom of
speech and its limits in the context of wartime
○​ Charles Schenck, a known Socialist, was arrested for handing out pamphlets urging men
to refuse the WW1 draft - he was convicted under the Espionage Act of 1917, which
made opposition to the US entering the war a treasonable offense
○​ Schenck's attorney argued that the Espionage Act violated the freedom of speech,
however, SCOTUS ruled that Schenck's actions were not protected by the First
Amendment asit was a clear and present danger to the nation during a time of war
○​ This case established the "clear and present danger" test, which is used to limit First
Amendment rights when they pose a significant threat to the safety or well-being of
American citizens - to offer an example, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes would famously
added that to falsely shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater was not protected speech
because it would cause panic and endanger lives
●​ Freedom of Press, the freedom to exchange ideas with others, allows for the dissemination of
information and ideas and serves as a check against government power and abuse
○​ The framers of the Constitution recognized it importance and included it in the First
Amendment to ensure that the government does not suppress the flow of information
○​ It protects both the right to print and distribute news and opinions, as well as the right of
journalists to gather and report information without interference from the government
●​ New York Times Co. v United States (1971) was a landmark courtcase that reinforced the
principle that freedom of the press is a cornerstone of a democratic society and must be protected,
even in cases involving national security
○​ The American public had become increasingly hostile to the ongoing US military
intervention in Vietnam and analyst Daniel Ellsberg leaked a top-secret document known
as the Pentagon Papers to New York Times
○​ The document showed that LBJ had lied to Congress and the American people about the
extent of US involvment in Vietnam and Richard Nixon would subsequently attempt to
suppress the publication of them claiming that they endangered national security
○​ New York Times would still publish the first chapter of the papers and Nixon would
subsequently issue federal injunctions against publishing
○​ The case eventually reached SCOTUS and SCOTUS ruled that the newspaper could
publish the papers without prior restraint because their publishing did not lead to the
“inevitable, direct, and immediate event imperiling the safety of American forces”
Chapter 14-Balancing Individual Freedom with Public Safety
●​ A large question these days is whether an individual’s right is more important than the safety of
the individuals that can be harmed if the right is respected - over time, SCOTUS has attempted to
balance these rights with laws that promote public safety through the use of various legal tests
○​ Strict Scrutiny is used to evaluate laws that restrict fundamental constitutional rights such
as freedom of speech and religion - under this standard, the government must show that
the law is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest
○​ Intermediate Scrutiny is applied to laws that regulate conduct that is of lesser importance
than fundamental rights. The government must show that the law serves an important
government interest and is substantially related to that interest.
○​ Balancing Test, which weighs the individual's rights against the government's interest in
regulation, has been used by courts to strike down laws that substantially burden
individual rights, while in other cases it has upheld laws that impose a lesser burden
●​ The 2nd Amendment, which protects an individual’s right to bear arms, was originally created to
ensure that states had the ability to maintain a militia that was independent of the federal
government's control - it was viewed as a necessary safeguard against potential tyranny
○​ This amendment has sparked a canister of controversy and is one of the most heavily
debated amendments, especially after the increase in mass shootings in the US
■​ Today we do not have a militia anymore, so do we need the 2nd amendment?
■​ But which is more important individual rights or the lives it can harm?
○​ The current interpretation of the amendment is that it protects an individual's right to
self-defense
■​ This interpretation is often used to support the argument for expanded access to
firearms
■​ Proponents of this interpretation point to the use of the words "the right of the
people" in the amendment as evidence of its protection of individual rights
○​ On the other hand, others interpret the Second Amendment as only being guaranteed for a
well-regulated militia and not for self-defense
■​ This interpretation is often used to support the argument for stricter gun control
measures, such as background checks and restrictions on certain types of firearms
●​ McDonald v Chicago (2010) was a landmark courtcase that that addressed the issue of whether or
not the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms from being infringed upon
by state and local governments
○​ The plaintiff, Otis McDonald, was a resident of Chicago who sought to purchase a
handgun but was restricted by the city's new regulations on handgun ownership
McDonald filed a lawsuit and the case eventually made its way to SCOTUS
○​ He argued that the regulations violated his rights under the Fourteenth, which ensures that
no state can make laws that infringe upon the rights and privileges of its citizens
○​ In a 5-4 decision, SCOTUS agreed with McDonald arguing that the Second Amendment
protects an individual's right to possess firearms, regardless of their intended use, and that
this right applies equally to state and local governments as it does to the federal
○​ The decision determined in this case was furthered by the D.C. v Heller (2008) which
ruled that an individual has the right to possess a loaded firearm in their homes despite
the intended use
 ●​ The Eighth Amendment, which made it unconstitutional to give “cruel and unusual”
punishments, includes the use of the death penalty
○​ Should someone be killed if they are a risk to society, or is it not an infringement on their
individual freedom? (is it not against their rights…but is not for the good of society?)
○​ The courts have been tasked with examining the constitutionality of state death penalty,
but instead of making the death penalty process harder, they made the process easier
○​ However, they did place certain limits on who deserves the death penalty - for example,
recent cases have found it illegal to give minors and the mentally ill the death penalty
●​ The Fourth Amendment, protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, places limits
on the government in regards to searching for criminal activity
○​ Should the individual freedom of an individual be intruded upon if they harm public
safety or should they be allowed to continue their dangerous activities?
○​ Its a fundamental right to have one’s home, person, and belongings be protected from
unreasonable search and seizures from the government
○​ There must be probable cause before the judge can issue a search warrant, which limits
when the police can search and take evidence
○​ An when these rules are not followed, the evidence that is found may not be allowed in
the trial because of the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the use of illegally obtained
evidence in a trial

Chapter 15-Selective Incorporation

●​ Selective Incorporation is a process by which SCOTUS incorporates provisions of the Bill of
Rights into the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause, making them applicable to the states
○​ The reason for this is that the framers only specified that the federal government must
respect BoR, they never said anything about the state and local governments
○​ The main way SCOTUS undergoes this process is through judicial review, they look at
laws made by state/local governments and see if they respect the citizen’s rights
○​ If a citizen sues a state law for going against a right that is defined in BoR, then SCOTUS
will relate the law to the Due Process Law of the 14th and if it goes against it then
SCOTUS will declare the law unconstitutional
○​ The McDonald v Chicago (2010) courtcase is the best example of selective incorporation
- SCOTUS declared a Chicago-law unconstitutional and declared that all state/local
governments must respect their citizen’s second amendment rights

Chapter 16-Due Process

●​ The Fifth Amendment - which provides various protections to criminal defendants, including the
right against self-incrimination, the right to due process of law, and the right to a fair and
impartial trial - protects four different things
○​ You cannot be indicted of a serious crime without a grand jury
○​ You cannot be compelled to be a witness against yourself
○​ You cannot be subjected to double jeopardy
○​ You have the right to Due Process of Law
●​ The Grand Jury, a body of people chosen to rule on whether or not there is probable cause if an
individual committed a crime, is a check on the legal system
○​ Back then there were no modern police forces and so law enforcement was usually
“self-help” - but if convicted of a crime then a body is needed to protect someone from
“malicious activity” in the court system (hence, the addition of the grand jury)
○​ The framers were likely influenced by the case of the Earl of Shaftesbury, who was
suspected of misdeeds but a grand jury refused to indict him
●​ Double Jeopardy, the protection against being tried or punished twice for the same crime, has
some exceptions
○​ If you are found innocent of possible cause at the federal level, the state level can then
have a try at convicting you…also if one state fails to convict you then another state can
give it a try (by the time you prove your innocence, you will be broke…rework needed?)
○​ If you are acquitted for one crime, that does not make you innocent for your other crimes
(ex:/ if you are foud innocent for a murder charge, you can still be convicted for
kidnapping charges)
●​ Due Process Clause: a clause found in the fifth and fourteenth amendments that prohibits the
government from depriving a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law
○​ Due Process was first developed in the Magna Carta, a document that, among other
things, prevented the English government from jailing a citizen “except by the lawful
judgment of his peers and by the law of the land”
○​ The Magna Carta was a product of misrule by King John of England who often times
disrespected his citizens and thought of himself as a god - this document made King John
more equal to his constituents, he is their leader not their god - this belief is portrayed
through the Due Process Clause, the government is no god they are only our leaders
○​ In other words, it gives the government a set of rules/procedures that they MUST abide to
in order for their citizen’s rights to be respected - this is so that the government does not
act arbitrarily or unjustly and that individuals are free from government infringement
●​ Taking the Fifth, or refusing to be a witness of your own crime, can be asserted by anyone as the
framers realized that human memory can be faulty
○​ This was likely influenced by the fact that European judicial systems usually used torture
as a mechanism to force the suspected into confessing
○​ The framers did not want the horrors occurring in other countries to occur within the
newly formed US (we want to look good for the immigrants)
●​ Miranda v Arizona (1966) was a landmark courtcase that established the Miranda Rights: the
rights (as the right to remain silent, to have an attorney present, and to have an attorney appointed
if indigent) of which an arresting officer must advise the person being arrested
○​ Ernesto Miranda, a mentally ill individual, was arrested and would confess to his crimes,
however, his attorney appealed on the grounds of self-incrimination
○​ Using the 14th amendment as justification, SCOTUS ruled that the police had deprived
Miranda of his right to due process by not informing him of his right to remain silent
 ●​ The Sixth Amendment, which guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney and the
right to a speedy trial, was an extension of the fifth amendment
○​ Gideon v Wainwright (1963) was a landmark courtcase that established the principle that
every criminal defendant is entitled to legal counsel, even if they cannot afford one
■​ The court held that the sixth guarantees the right to counsel in both state and
federal criminal trials, and that the states are required to appoint an attorney for
defendants who cannot afford one
■​ This decision has had a significant impact on the criminal justice system and has
helped to ensure that all defendants have access to legal representation,
regardless of their financial circumstances
■​ Its important to note that SCOTUS has held that the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth does not require states to appoint counsel in civil cases they are only
necessary for criminal cases
○​ SCOTUS has not established a hard-and-fast rule for a speedy trial, rather it is a more
flexible standard that depends on the specific circumstances of each case and it applies to
both federal and state criminal trials
■​ SCOTUS has developed a test to determine whether an individual's right to a
speedy trial has been violated, which takes into account the length, reason and
prejudice caused by the delay
■​ It is true that prosecutors and defendants can request extensions in certain cases,
however, if a defendant's right to a speedy trial is violated, the court can make it
up to the defendant by either dismissing the charge or excluding certain evidence
■​ Overall, the right to a speedy trial is an important aspect of the criminal justice
system, and helps to ensure that individuals are not subjected to unreasonable
delays or denied a fair and impartial trial

Chapter 17-Social Movements

●​ The Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees rights such as citizenship, due process, and equal
protection for all citizens at the state and federal level, is a refining the fifth amendment
○​ The fourteenth also incorporated elements of BoR, which originally applied only to the
federal government, in other words, it is an example of selective incorporation
○​ The Fourteenth declared that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are
citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” effectively overturning
the ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford that black people were not citizens of the US
○​ Additionally, the amendment established the Due Process Clause - natural rights of a
citizen cannot be taken without the due process of law - and the Equal Protection
Clause, no person can be deprived of their natural rights due to their race
●​ A social movement is collective actions taken by individuals or groups to bring about social,
political, economic, or cultural change - are possible due to the equal protection clause (ex:/ Civil
Rights Movement, Women's Suffrage Movement, and LGBTQ+ Movement…)
●​ The response of the government to social movements can vary depending on its nature, the goals
of its participants, and the political and cultural context in which it takes place
○​ In the case of reform, the government may respond by implementing reforms aimed at
addressing the grievances raised by the movement - this often includes changes to laws,
policies, or programs to ensure greater equality and justice
○​ However, in the case of suppression, the government may respond with repression, such
as through the use of force, arrests, or censorship - this response is often seen when
movements challenge the status quo or the power of the government
○​ Additionally, in the case co-optation, the governments may respond by co-opting the
goals and demands of the movement, but without fully implementing them - this can
involve creating committees or other bodies to give the appearance of reform, while
actually maintaining the status quo
○​ In the worst case scenario, the government may implement neglect, when a government
chooses to ignore the movement and not respond to their demands at all - this can occur
when movements are seen as unimportant or lacking in political power
●​ The Letter from Birmingham Jail, a letter written by MLK, was a response to the clergy who
were sending racially-involved newspapers around Birmingham
○​ The letter critiqued the idea that civil rights demonstrators should wait until a later time to
pursue racial justice and that it was immoral for protesters to break the law
○​ MLK argued that there are two types of laws—justs laws and unjust laws— and that “one
has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”
○​ In other words, MLK is telling the nation that we the people have the moral responsibility
of “breaking” unjust laws and taking direct action rather than waiting potentially forever
for justice to come through the courts
●​ Brown v. Board of Education (1954), a landmark courtcase that outlawed segregation when
comes to public education, became a crucial victory for the civil rights movement
○​ Oliver Brown, the father of Linda Brown, sued Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas
because his daughter was forced to attend a segregated elementary school despite the
white elementary being closer
○​ Under the leadership of Thurgood Marshall, the NAACP sought to prove with this case
that segregated public schools violated the equal protection clause
○​ SCOTUS agreed with NAACP and ruled that “in the field of public education, separate
but equal has no place”
●​ The Brown decision set up a new precedent in the nation and it led to a domino effect with many
new cases and presidents, such as JFK and LBJ, passing legislation to further its effects
○​ Voting Rights Act (1965), which banned the use discriminatory practices/procedures for
voting, was a landmark federal legislation that aimed at addressing the issues with voting
rights for minority groups (banned literacy tests, poll taxes…)
■​ The impact was massive, many African Americans were now able to register to
vote and legislation was now forced to represent the newly established group
■​ The act was so effective in the fight against discrimination that Congress would
amend the act instead of making new acts for every different issue involving
discrimination
 ○​ Title IX (1972) was an amendment to the Voting Rights Act that aimed at addressing the
issues with sex discrimination in educational programs/activities that receive federal
funding (admission, financial aid, athletics, employment…)
■​ The amendment applies to all grades from Kindegarden to grad school and
addressed everything from adding a female side to athletics in schools to
addressing sexual harrasment/assault that occured in educational institutes
■​ However, unlike the discrimination of races, discrimination of sex is still an
issue, thus woman do not have an equal opportunity in the realm of education
●​ Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was a landmark courtcase that ruled that the “Separate but Equal”
Doctrine was not a violatation of the Fourteenth, meaning it was legal to sanction “segregation”
in public places as long as their is an “equal” opportunity to reach a similar public place
○​ SCOTUS’ interpretation of the Constitution can change over time, and it can be
influenced by whoever is “in power”
○​ In the Brown decision, the court ruled that race-based school segregation violates the
equal protection clause, overturning Plessy
○​ But in the Shaw decision, the court ruled in favor of the majority, arguably at the expense
of minority rights, by placing limits on majority-minority redistricting
○​ The justices in the Brown decision held more liberal positions, while in the Shaw
decision, eight of the nine justices were more conservative
●​ Affirmative Action is any effort related to improving the opportunities for underrepresented or
disadvantaged groups, especially in relation to employment or education
○​ Its purpose is to address past discrimination and promote diversity by giving special
consideration to historically underrepresented groups, such as women and minorities
○​ SCOTUS has upheld the use of race as a factor in college admissions, but made limits on
the extent to which races are used and emphasized a need for narrowly-tailored
programs: any program that involves affirmative action and are specifically designed to
address past discrimination, all while not utilizing reverse discrimination
■​ Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) was a landmark courtcase which upheld the
University of Michigan Law School's use of race as a factor in its admissions
process, ruling that the law school's policy was narrowly tailored to achieve
diversity and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause (pro-affirmative action)
■​ Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) was a landmark courtcase that struck down the
undergraduate admissions policy in the University of Michigan, as they believed
it was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause - the court found the policy too
mechanical and inflexible and felt it did not adequately consider the
circumstances of each applicant (anti-affirmative action)
○​ However, today its a controversial issue, many wonder if our efforts are effective and fair,
while others belive in the “Colorblind” Constitution, a belief that the Constitution
already protects all races so affirmative action is unnecessary
Chapter 18-American Attitudes and What Affects It
●​ American Political Culture, the values that influence individuals’ attitudes and beliefs about the
relationship between citizens and the federal government, is built by four core ideals
○​ In the US, individualism, the principle of valuing individual rights over those of the
government, places a strong emphasis on individual initiative and responsibility
1.​ Liberals believe that individuals should be protected by the government's actions
2.​ Conservatives believe that individuals should be protected from government
actions
○​ Equality of Opportunity is the belief that each person should have the same opportunities
to advance in society
1.​ Liberals believe that the government is responsible for correcting inequalities
2.​ Conservatives believe that it is a personal responsibility to maximize one’s
opportunities
○​ Limited Government is the political system in which there are restrictions placed on the
government to protect individual rights and liberties
1.​ Liberals believe in Due Process
2.​ Conservatives believe in Law and Order
○​ Rule of Law is the principle that government is based on a body of law applied equally
and fairly to every citizen, not on the whims of those in charge, and that no one is above
the law, including the government
1.​ Liberals believe that some government regulations are needed
2.​ Conservatives believe the market should be run by individuals
●​ Political Socialization - the process by which a person develops political values, through the
interactions between family, school, peers, religious and civic groups, and the media - can drive
our political attitudes
○​ Children will OFTEN hold the same or similar political opinions that were held by their
family, for example, most of the new voters tend to vote the same as their parents did
○​ There are significant data proving that schools, especially, history classes, can shape the
political attitudes of children (ex:/ racism seems to be dying off)
○​ Social interactions with peers can influence how we develop our political attitudes, a peer
wants to conform and hold similar ideologies as their friends so that they can “fit in”
○​ Now that the US is, to the most part, fully integrated into the digital revolution, the media
can play a huge role in shaping politcal attitudes (ex:/ ads about supporting gay rights)
○​ The social environment that surrounds us, the civic organzations we join, and the
religious organization we attend can all affect our political attitudes (ex:/ an organization
may teach its members about the evils of abortion, while another may do the opposite)
○​ Globalization, the growth of an interconnected world economy and culture, is fueled by
lowered trade barriers between nations and advances in communication-technology; this
can change our beliefs since new ideas will now reach our shores and be spread
throughout the nation (ex:/ people feel that the need for rights has increased after looking
at how screwed up North Korea is)
●​ Generational Effects are the experiences shared by a group of people who came of age together
(such as baby boomers) that affect their political attitudes
○​ Wars and economic recessions that hit one generation particularly hard have lasting
effects on the political attitudes of that generation as its members progress through life
○​ During the Great Depression, many people experienced economic hardship and poverty,
and this may have led them to believe that government intervention was necessary to help
people in need, while those living during WW2 may see the power of government to
mobilize resources and protect citizens, leading to a belief in a strong central government
●​ Lifecycle Effects are the changes over the course of an individual’s lifetime, which affect their
political attitudes and participation; as individuals develop from young people to adults to senior
citizens, their concerns and values change
○​ Young people are often more idealistic, open-minded, and willing to embrace change
(liberal) - but as people age, they shift toward conservative views
○​ Older adults now have families of their own and they feel that they must ensure their
children’s future - the way of life allowed them to live prosperously, so why change it?
○​ Additionally, they are now financially secure due to their jobs, they do not want anything
to jeopardize all of their gains in life
○​ Lastly, they are going to retire soon and they planned for this their entire lives - but if the
world keeps changing then would that not add an extra variable to the equation and what
if the variable is unexpected and ruins the person’s retirement plan (they’ll be pissed!!)
●​ According to sociologists, our political opinions “crystalize” in our formative years (18 to 24),
however, there are some exceptions with the main being political events (3 main types…)
○​ Wars can lead many to question the validity of their nation’s supposed values, for
example, the Vietnam War would deeply divide the American public
■​ Many supported the war and saw it as a necessary war so that they can prevent
the spread of Communism - however, this perspective was led by the older
generations who had more conservative views
■​ The opposition, which was led by the younger individuals, saw the conflict as a
pointless and devastating waste of life - the movement led to a countercultural
movement that challenged the US’s dominant cultural/political values of the time
■​ The war had a profound effect on American society/politics, by sparking a
national conversation about the role of government and helped shape the political
attitudes of a generation of Americans (more liberal)
○​ Political scandals can lead many to question the honesty and integrity of their leaders, for
example, the Watergate Scandal would shake the American public to its core
■​ Imagine finding out that your leader has committed a heinous crime and then
attempted to cover it up, would you trust your leader?
■​ Many would advocate for more government transparency and accountability, and
many others felt disillusioned by the scandal
○​ The state of the economy can lead many to question their government’s involvement in
the economy, for an example just look at the Millenials after the Great Recession
●​ Some political events can affect the country so profoundly that they cause a seismic shift in the
American electorate, or in other words, a party realignment, for example, The Great Depression
led the African Americans to abandon the Republicans and turn to the Democrats
Chapter 19-Polling
●​ Public Opinion - or how people feel about issues, candidates, and public officials - is most
commonly measured through the use of polls (there are five main types of polls)
○​ Opinion Polls, which are used to gather information about an individuals' views on
various issues, can help provide insight into the the public's opinions on specific topics
■​ The poll can be used by a political leader to better understand how popular or
unpopular he is within the nation
■​ It can also be used for better understanding the public’s view on social and
political issues - this will help the legislative pass laws accordingly
○​ Benchmark Polls, which are used to provide the campaign with a basis for comparison
for later polls, so that the candidate can see if their likelihood of winning the office is
increasing or decreasing
■​ The poll can be used for political campaigns to determine the views of the
electorate and shape their campaign strategies accordingly.
■​ The polls can also be used to better understand the public's views on specific
issues and adjust accordingly
○​ Entrance and exit polls are used during election day so that the nation can have a better
understanding of how the election should end - they simply ask the voter how they voted
■​ Entrance Polls are performed on Election Day and are taken as voters enter their
voting location
■​ Exit Polls, which are performed on Election Day and are taken as voters exit
their voting location, are used by the media to determine election results before
the ballots are counted
○​ Tracking Poll are performed repeatedly with the same group of people to check and
measure changes of opinion so that the lawmakers can respond accordingly and the
campaigners can have a better understanding of how the public sees them
●​ However, for a poll to be legitimate it must have a scientific backing to it - to do this the
following process is taken…
1.​ If a person wishes to understand the mindset of the population, the overall group of
people the pollster wishes to study, he must first narrow the population down to just a
sample, a small group of the population to make the experiment more manageable
a.​ The sample must be a representative sample of the population (same
characteristics as the population the poll is testing)
b.​ The members within the sample must be given an equal chance of being selected
to be put into the sample, in other words, a random sample
2.​ The experiment can now be tested and the findings must be generalizable, and able to
truly represent the population, if not then there is probably a Sampling Error, when the
sample is not EXACTLY representative of the population
a.​ Sampling Error is not always a bad thing, for example, a plus or minus three
sampling error is regarded as a good poll
b.​ To avoid a sampling error, the pollsters can ask neutral questions (questions
without trigger words)
 3.​ There are also two different types of ways for a government to “dip their feet” into an
issue to understand public opinion on it
a.​ The most common type is a mass survey, a way to measure public opinion by
interviewing a large sample of the population, while a focus group is a small,
diverse group of people assembled for an in-depth group discussion used to
understand how the public may react if xyz is done
i.​ A mass survey can be more cost-effective and can offer quantitative data
that can be easily analyzed, however, they tend to be less personal
ii.​ A focus group can encourage good discussions but can be
time-consuming and costly, plus the data garnered can be hard to analyze
●​ However, polls can be wrong, for example, in the 2016 election the candidate who should have
won - if polls are correct - should have been Clinton but Trump won in the end, so are polls truly
representative of the public opinion?
○​ According to theories, there is a chance that the pollsters did not choose a truly
representative and random sample, rather they may have missed a group or two
○​ This example leads to no negative consequences, however, what if this were to occur in a
poll that wishes to bring about change in regards to a new law or practice?

Chapter 20-Political Ideology

●​ Today the US is split mainly by the Democrats and the Republicans, both of which seem to be
polar opposites of each other
○​ The Democratic Party - usually considered the liberal party - usually fights for social
aspects of society, tend to favor federal oversight in the economy, and believe the military
does not need to be that strong
■​ In the social aspect, Dems are pro-choice, pro affirmative action, pro-gun
controls, they see crimes as a social issue rather than blaming the crime
completely on the “criminal,” and tend to favor the defendant’s rights
■​ In the economic aspect, Dems favor taxing, spending (on social programs), and
favor federal oversight in the economy
■​ In the military aspect, Dems feel that the military does not need to be a large
force, rather it should be “basic” as we do not need a large army
○​ The Republican Party - usually considered the conservative party - usually fights
“against” social aspects of society, tend to disagree with federal oversight in the economy,
and believe the military needs to be stronger
■​ In the social aspect, Reps are pro-life, anti affirmative action, pro-gun rights, and
believe criminals should be given consequences and they want the laws to be
strengthened
■​ In the economic aspect, Reps are against taxing, anti-spending (except for the
military), and are against federal oversight in the economy
■​ In the military aspect, Reps feel that the military needs to be a large force, heck
they want it to grow in strength because if the US wants to keep the title of
strongest nation then it needs to constantly grow and modify
 ●​ The United States is a melting pot of many different ideas, and these ideas can come into conflict
with the norms of the day or with each other
○​ Policy Mood, a measure of the public's preferences toward policy choices, can change
with time - sometimes the citizens want more government, other times they want to rely
on the private businesses instead
○​ As the policy mood evolves, the political parties follow suit - if the parties did not evolve
then the political attitude will not be alligned with the party and so the party will lose
many of its “followers” - they evolve by using opinion polls
○​ A valance issue, an issue most voters will agree with, such as economic prosperity or
caring for the elderly, will lead to party cooperation - but a position issue, an issue that
divides voters, such as gun control or the death penalty, will lead to competition
○​ James A. Stimson has found that presidents lose support for their ideological positions
the longer they're in office - in other words, the longer a president is on the job, the more
the public desires a new approach—thus favoring the ideology of the opposite party

Chapter 21-Economic Ideology

●​ A single person cannot contribute to whether or not the American economy will be booming or
lapsing into recession, and so government involvement is required
○​ Fiscal Policy, government decisions about how to influence the economy by taxing and
spending, can be used to stimulate economic growth during recessions, by increasing
government spending and reducing taxes, or to cool down an overheating economy, by
reducing government spending and increasing taxes
○​ Monetary Policy, Government decisions about how to influence the economy using
control of the money supply and interest rates, is determined by the Federal Reserve, an
INDEPENDENT federal agency that determines US monetary policy with the goal of
stabilizing the banking system and promoting economic growth
●​ Keynesian Economics encourages government spending (through the creation of jobs or the
distribution of unemployment benefits) in order to promote economic growth
○​ They believe that the government should increase spending during recessions to stimulate
demand and boost economic growth and encourage the use of monetary policy, such as
lowering interest rates, to encourage borrowing and spending
○​ ex:/ During the Great Recession, Barack Obama used a Keynesian approach to stabilize
the economy by increasing infrastructure spending, supporting struggling industries, and
using monetary policies to lower interest rates
●​ While supply-side economics encourages tax cuts and deregulation in order to promote economic
growth
○​ They encourage the government to cut taxes/regulations to encourage investment and
economic growth, which should increase the incentive to work and it will allow
businesses to operate more efficiently leading to economic growth
○​ ex:/ Ronald Reagan used a supply-side approach, called Reaganomics, to stimulate the
economy by reducing taxes for businesses and high-income individuals and cutting
regulations - this approach is credited with boosting economic growth in the 80s and 90s
Chapter 22-Social Ideology
●​ The many ideologies have different views on social policy - public policy related to health care,
human services, criminal justice, inequality, education, and labor
○​ A libertarian, those who want as little government involvement as possible, tend to keep
the same belief when it comes to social policy
■​ In an economic aspect, the libertarians lean to the conservative side
■​ In social issues, the libertarians lean more to the liberal side
○​ A liberal believes that government intervention is required so that social and economic
aspects of life are equal (requires change in some way; anti-abortion is liberal technically)
■​ They believe the government should not involve themselves too much
■​ A person has the right to marry who ever they want, they can have an abortion if
they wish, and maurajuana use should be legalized (these are ALL stereotypes)
○​ A conservative believes that government intervention is not required, but they believe
they are neccessary in certain social dilemmas (pro-abortion can be conservative)
■​ The government should step in to stop people from marrying others of their same
sex and the government should make abortions illegal
■​ However, the government should step out when it comes to gun ownership rights
and religion and education because they see them as personal matters
●​ The greatest example of the conservatives and liberalists coming toe-to-toe in a social policy was
the Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which legalized same-sex marriage across the United States

Chapter 23-Voting
●​ Suffrage, the right to vote, is a fundamental aspect of the United States, it is so important that
there are have been many amendments that were focused solely on the suffrage movements…
○​ The Fifteenth Amendment prohibited the federal government from denying any MAN
from voting due to their “race, color, or any previous condition of servitude”
○​ The Seventeenth Amendment, which established the direct election of senators by the
people, was a response to the people asking the government to be more accountable and
representative of the people
○​ The Nineteenth Amendment prohibited the federal government from denying any
PERSON from voting on the basis of sex
○​ The Twenty-Third Amendment granted people living in DC the right to vote in
presidential elections because they are not represented by any members in the electoral
college - they pay federal taxes so why can they not vote?
○​ The Twenty-Fourth Amendment, which declared poll taxes unconstitutional in federal
elections, was a response to the South using the poll tax to block out the AA votes and
was an integral part of the Civil Rights Movement in the 60s
○​ The Twenty-Sixth Amendment, which extended suffrage to 18-year-olds, was a response
to the ongoing anti-war movement who, among other things, were mad that a person can
be drafted into a war before they can be allowed to vote
○​ The National Voter Registration Act (1993), or the "Motor Voter Act," makes it easier
for voters to register to vote by requiring states to allow citizens to register when applying
for their driver's license
●​ Only about 2/3rds of the population engage in Political Participation, the ways that voters get
involved in the political process, can be affected by a number of phenomenon…
○​ Rational Choice Theory describes someone voting in their best interest, supporting the
candidate whose platform will give them the most favorable outcomes
○​ Retrospective Voting describes voting based on the recent record in office of a candidate
or others in their party
○​ Prospective Voting describes voting based on how a citizen thinks a candidate will act
and perform if elected to office
○​ Party-line Voting describes consistently voting for candidates of the same political party
at all levels of government
●​ Since the Constitution took a lot of powers from the states, the federal government allows the
states to determine the time and locations of most elections, develop their own ballots and
registration requirements, and draw district lines for congressional elections
○​ States that choose to allow the citizens to register to vote on the same day as the polls are
tallied have seen a high voter turnout then those who have to registrar by a prior deadline
States can choose between implementing or not implementing voter ID laws, however,
states that do not require an ID to vote have a higher voter turnout
○​ Lastly, voter turnout seems to increase when there is an option to do the voting online, as
it is viewed as more convenient
●​ Far more voters show up for presidential elections than the midterm elections, the House and
Senate elections that occur in the middle of a president’s term, which is the result of many
different effects
○​ Some find it difficult to take time off of work, others have children and can’t find
childcare, while others simply see their vote as inconsequential (or low political efficacy)
○​ Varying levels in Political engagement, the interest in politics and participation, and
political efficacy, belief that political participation can affect the policies of government,
have the possiblity of creating voter apathy, lacking interest in voting
○​ ex:/ many Republican voters in Democratic states are less motivated to participate in
elections since their party’s preferred candidate is unlikely to win statewide elections
●​ Gender, race, and age can all play a role in voter behavior…
○​ Women tend to vote in slightly higher numbers than men and tend to support the
Democratic Party because many of their views align with it’s platform
○​ Men tend to support the Republican Party due to their more extreme views on criminal
punishment and conservative fiscal policy
○​ The lowest voter turnout is among voters between the ages of 18-30, while the highest
turnout is among older voters because they’re usually better informed and have more to
lose (investments, property, social security, and Medicare payments) than younger voters
○​ Black, Hispanic, and Asian voters tend to support the Democratic Party, while white
voters tend to support the Republican Party
○​ Protestants, especially whites in the South and Midwest, strongly support the Republican
Party, while Catholics have historically supported the Democratic Party - however, this
gap has diminished recently with increased support for the Republican Party
Chapter 24-Linkage Institutions
●​ Linkage Institutions are groups in society that connect people to their government and its
processes
○​ They are like an intermediary between us and the government who take our concerns and
convert them into political questions to add to the governmental agenda
○​ There are four types of linkage institution… political parties, interest groups, elections,
and the media

Chapter 25-Political Parties

●​ Political Parties, are organizations with similar political ideologies that seek to influence public
policy by getting its candidates elected, are a conerstone of American democracy
○​ Party Platform, the list of goals outlining a party’s positions on issues and political
priorities, is usually how they gain their “base” or the people that will support them
simply because they have the same ideologies
○​ The party is composed of the party organization - the structure that creates a platform,
recruits candidates, and helps to manage candidates’ campaigns by providing a
fundraising and media strategy - party in government, the elected officials, and the party
in the electorate, the people who identify with the party (the base)
●​ Back then the central part of any party was the party organization, the party in government would
only become the central part of a party in the 30s
○​ These days, the electorate have shifted away from the party they support and now they
focus on the individual running for the position of power
○​ Additionally, this has led to an increase in voter engagement as they now feel they have a
personal connection with the candidate - this is thanks to media - now the elected can talk
to the people and directly influence the minds of the citzens
○​ However, a downside is that this has made parties weaker in the sense that the candidates
are no longer dependent on the party, and if this rate continues, political parties could
fade away and independent runners can become the norm
●​ Additionally, a party will constantly change their platform so that they can always be “current
with the time” and be able to appeal to a larger audience
○​ Their goal is to bring in the max amount coalitions, a demographic group, to support their
party - but each of these coalitions can have different goals in mind (ex:/ retired want
stability (conservative), while the young want social change (liberal))
○​ Additionally, while drawing in new coalitions is the main goal of the party, they also need
to make sure that they keep their current “base” at “check” - to do this the party can make
small moves that favor a different coalition, and since the move is small, the base will not
realize it (ex:/ Republicans had Richard Grenell, a gay conservative, say a speech in the
2020 Republican National Convention - it was a small speech, but had a large impact)
○​ However, not all coalitions can be “taken,” the goal is not to take all of the coalitions,
rather its to have the MOST coalitions
●​ A party realignment, when a large swath of voters switch to “the other side,” is similar how the
election of FDR led to the New Deal Coalition, when African Americans, farmers, immigrants…
switched to the Democratic side
 ●​ The US has, throughout history, been a two-party system, however, there have always been more
than two parties existing for the past 200 years of American history
○​ Third-Parties never win, and when a strong third party emerges one of the two previous
parties fade away - so there have always been only two parties at any point in US history
○​ Although third-parties never win elections, they still have had a huge impact on
American politics, for example, the US does not engage in a system of majority, the
person out of TWO players who gets the most “points” wins, rather the US uses a system
of plurality, the person out of MANY players who gets the most “points” wins
○​ Additionally, if a third-party emerges, the two parties in power MUST do everything in
their power to destroy the third-party as soon as possible, which is the reason why
third-parties are, to the most part, impossible in the US
●​ Lastly, its important to note that the US will always have at least two parties, because its
impossible to appeal to every single coalition out there…(not even FDR could)

Chapter 26-Interest Groups

●​ Interest Group, an association of people seeking to influence governmental policy in favor of
their interests, may represent social causes, economic and corporate interests, or religious and
ideological interests
○​ Many of our founding fathers feared interest group, which they called factions, because
they feared each interest group would form their a self-interest and threaten democracy
○​ Many Americans view interest groups as concerning due to the potential for bribery,
misuse of funds… however, the first amendment defends the creation of these groups
●​ There are four reasons why interest groups exist…
○​ The groups educate the populous and officials about the issue they are representing,
which is useful because there are too many different political/social issues to remember -
ex:/ balloon council recently spent 60k on teaching populous about the helium crisis
○​ The groups engage in lobbying, to hold meetings with elected officials to gain their
support on an issue and to pass legislation, for example, in the balloon example one of the
factions persuaded officials to pass an anti-balloon act since balloons were found in the
oceans - balloon council persuaded 47 of the states to repeal the anti-balloon act
○​ The groups can draft legislation because, like said before, bills can be drafted by anyone
but only introduced by legislators, so since these members are specific to these issues,
they are the best bet in building a bill in their issue (ex:/ anti-balloon act)
○​ The groups can also mobilize their members to apply pressure and work with the
government, for example, the balloon council can call for a protest or ask its members to
pepper the officials with emails
●​ However, when interest groups compete with one another, then the issues that Madison was
worried about would occur - one faction will be suppressed and the other is strengthened
○​ If one party has too much money, then they will subsequently have too much power as
money speaks louder than words (i.e. lobbying)
○​ Additionally, a phenomenon, known as free rider problem, can occur - when a
non-member coalition profits from the hard work an interest group puts in (ex:/ retired
individuals profit off of the NRA due to some of their lobbying efforts)
Chapter 27-Media
●​ The media plays an influential role in how citizens learn about political issues and events and
affects the formation of policy agendas by raising awareness of certain topics
○​ Media has played a defining role in politics throughout history, from the use of pamphlets
in the 1800s, to the occasional tv broadcasts in the 80s, to the use of social media today
○​ Media is so important today that some political scientists refer to it as the “fourth branch
of government”
●​ The framers of the Constitution purposely made sure the media had as much power as possible, as
their main job is to be a watchdog agency, meaning they must hold the government accountable
○​ The first break through in media history was the introduction of the newspaper, which
was second to none, with their production rate being one of the highest worldwide
○​ Then the introduction of the telegraph finally allowed messages to be sent back-and-forth
in an instant, and soon after the radio, the first mass media, would be created and would
most famously be utilized by FDR in his “Fireside Chats” during the Great Depression
○​ Then the introduction of television allowed the American populous to listen to the first
media outlets and were even allowed to see what their public leaders actually look like -
most famously television showed the horrors that were occurring in Alabama during the
Civil Rights Movement and all of a sudden a huge swath of people joined the movement
○​ However, the biggest revolution in media was the introduction of the internet and social
media both of which have profoundly changed how the public learns about their “daily
cup of politics” - people are more involved in politics then ever before (dumb ppl too!!)
●​ Media outlets present the public with three different types of media…
○​ News Events, anything that is news worthy, can be anything from the George Floyd
incident to the Mount St. Helen Eruption (must have an impact)
○​ Investigative Journalism is deep, original investigation on a specific topic, often
conducted over a long period of time and sometimes involving the exposure of secret
information - in other words, trying to expose the government for any wrongdoing
■​ These journalists were famously called muckrakers by Teddy Roosevelt, this is
because these journalists can be a major thorn in the side of a official
■​ ex:/ Upton Sinclair famously wrote and published a book titled the Jungle which
exposed the unsanitary conditions in the meatpacking industry which led the
public to go in uproar and force Congress to pass the Pure Food and Drug Act
○​ Election Coverage / Political Comentary allows the public to understand who's running
for office and what our leaders are doing to fix the nation - however, this can lead to
horserace journalism, journalism that focuses on who is winning or ahead in the polls
rather than on candidates' policy agenda or debates
●​ However, today our media is biased and most media outlets are partisanship-related…
○​ Back then media outlets were ordered by the fairness doctrine to introduce all angles of a
particular issue, however, when the public realized cigarettes were terrible for one’s
health and the tobacoo industries said media had to be fair and show the good side of
cigarettes as well, Congress would the end of the fairness doctrine
○​ Its necessary to point out that all of these outlets are for profit organizations, meaning
they need to get the juiciest information, not the correct information, so that they can stay
ahead of their competitors (CNN, FOX, and NBC care more for money than content)
Chapter 28-Presidential Elections
●​ For a president to reach the election stage, they must first win the primary elections, an election
that decides which candidate a party will send on to a general election
○​ Some states use open primaries or when any registered voter, regardless of their political
affiliation, can participate in the primaries and vote for the candidate of their choice
○​ In other states a closed primary or when only registered voters who are affiliated with a
particular political party are eligible to participate and vote in that party's primary
○​ Some states use the caucus system, in which party members meet in town hall meetings
in their local communities to discuss and argue over their preferred candidates,
culminating in a vote at the end of the night, has a lower voter turnout than primaries
●​ Once delegates win the primaries they are sent to the parties National Convention, a meeting of
delegates from a political party to decide the officials platform and cabinet members, and the
party members can still deviate from the candidate and choose a different representative
○​ The incumbency advantage is a phenomenon in which the incumbent has a higher
chance of winning
○​ They succeeded the first time so why not use them again and the president is well known
so the people know what to expect from him/her
○​ Additionally, the incumbent already has the support from many volunteers and
fundraisers
●​ Once everything is set in stone, the party finalizes their choice for candidate and presents them
before the world to set up for the general election, which decides which party candidate wins
○​ Its important to note that the people do not directly participate in the general election,
rather the electoral college elects the president
○​ However, the people can still indirectly influence the election - they can participate in the
primaries and the electoral college can be influenced by their constituents
○​ Each state gets two electoral votes, and the “bonus” votes depend on the number of
representatives in the house in x state
●​ Most states utilize a winner-takes-all type of general election, in which an electoral system in
which the candidate with the most votes is elected, however, Nebraska and Maine utilize

Chapter 29-Congressional Elections

●​ Congressional elections, which occur every two years, are not as popular as the presidential
elections
○​ 1/3rd of all senators are up for reelection every two years, while all House members are
up for reelection every two years
○​ This means that these reelections will occur in the same year as the presidential election
and will also occur middle of the president’s term hence its called a midterm election
●​ The incumbency advantage also works for congressional elections, however, the advantage is
more pronounced in congressional elections - 90% of incumbents win
○​ Simply put, the reason why this phenomenon occurs is because people have more apathy
in these elections and name recognition is key for congressional races
○​ However, name recognition can lead to some issues and that is usually due to their track
record, or what the incumbent did during their term
 ●​ Additionally, the incumbent will have established funding, meaning they have preexisting support
from volunteers and PACs
○​ More volunteers means more votes for them - remember house and senators are elected
into power directly by the people
○​ More support from PACs means more money, and more money means more ads,
campaign fundraisers, and etc
●​ Safe-District, any district where someone is guaranteed to win, is the product of gerrymandering -
if more people of the opposite party emerge in your district, then simply redraw the boundaries
and split the opposing votes between your “allies” thus nulling those votes
○​ Its difficult to replace a party out of power in a district, however, its not difficult to
replace the running candidate, because before the senator/house can reach the general
election they need to deal with the primaries
○​ Also its important to note that there are certain states that can switch between two parties
quite easily, these states are called swing states and both political parties put all of their
money and time into influencing these states

Chapter 30-Campaigning
●​ As history progressed, our nation started to move farther and farther away from centering our
vote around the party and more toward the candidate representing the party
○​ Back then, having a seat of office was not the most ideal profession to undergo, it was
mainly for the older generations since they are too old to do a regular job
○​ However, eventually having a seat of office became more appealing as the nation grew
stronger and stronger
●​ To win the “campaign battle” the candidate requires a staff so that the process can be both simpler
and more efficient
○​ These consultants will bring a wealth of knowledge to the table and they are well versed
in campaigning strategies
○​ They will connect the candidate to the media, which will allow the candidate to spread
their message far and wide
○​ Lastly, they are more likely to understand the fundraising side of campaigning then the
candidate will
○​ However, the consultants can also be a burden on the candidate as they can cost a hefty
amount, these consultants can have a conflict of interests (do they truly care about you
winning the election), and a candidate who depends on their consultants will likely
become withdrawn from their constituents which will harm their “picture”
●​ Social media has also played a large role in campaigning…
○​ FDR was the first president to use the radio, JFK was the first to use television, and
Obama was the first to use social media to advance their campaigns
○​ Each of these presidents would win their election mostly by the use of the more advanced
communication devices, while their opponents would fail to use the devices and would
subsequently lose their bids for office (always stay ahead when it comes to media)
●​ Modern campaigns can cost a lot of money and many of the candidates lack the sufficient amount
of money to “run,” and so outside sources of wealth are required if a candidate wishes to win
 ○​ They can run campaign events with high entrance fees, they can ask their constituents to
donate a sum of money, and can make their platform appeal to the wealthy
○​ Additionally, a candidate can appeal to political action committees (PACs), organizations
whose main function is to donate money to candidates so that their ideals can be
expressed in their platform, are basically interest groups that give candidates money
●​ The amount of money required for a campaign has increased every single year since holding a
position of government became a favorable profession
○​ This is mainly due to the fact that the amount of time spent campaigning has increased
gradually in our nation, mainly because the earlier you start campaigning, the more likely
you are too win (so if your competition starts early, then you need to start
early…meaning a new precedent is created every single campaign)
○​ For example, in the 2016 election, many people speculated that Joe Biden would run,
however, he turned it down saying he was too late to join the campaign race
●​ Congress passed the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), and amended the law in 1974
with more specific limitations on individual and PAC donations
○​ The 1974 law created the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to implement the law and
in the Buckley v. Valeo (1975), SCOTUS upheld most of the FECA regulations, but also
ruled that Congress can’t limit a candidate’s donations to his or her own campaign
○​ In the Buckley decision, the Court basically agreed with Congress with the idea that
unlimited monetary donations in elections do more harm than good
●​ However, PACs and candidates have found “loopholes" around FECA and the Buckley decision
○​ Hard Money, funds given DIRECTLY to a candidate, was regulated by the legislation in
the 70s, however, soft money allows interest groups to perform advertisements on behalf
of the candidate, but not directly for the candidate making it a “loophole”
○​ Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (2002), also known as BCRA or McCain-Feingold
Act, was a form of legislation which aimed to decrease the amount of hard money given
to a candidate and increased the amount of “overlook” on soft money
○​ BCRA added the Stand by Your AD Provision, which basically required all candidates to
say “I am … and I approve this message” in all ads related to the candidate
●​ Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) was a landmark courtcase that dealt with
the regulation of political campaign spending by corporations and labor unions
○​ Citizens United sought to air a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton during the
primaries, however, the FEC ruled that the film was in violation of the BCRA, as it
constituted an illegal corporate expenditure - Citizens United sued the FEC, arguing that
the ban on corporate expenditures violated its rights to free speech
○​ In a 5-4 decision, SCOTUS agreed that the ban on corporate expenditures was
unconstitutional and that corporations have the same first amendment rights as
individuals - the government can not restrict speech based on the speaker's identity
○​ Thus, SCOTUS struck down provisions of the McCain-Feingold Act that required
disclosure and disclaimer requirements for corporate and union political expenditures