ap gov argumentative essay electoral college

AP® US Government

Electoral college: ap® us government crash course.

• The Albert Team
• Last Updated On: March 1, 2022

What is the Electoral College?

Because it is unique to our political system, the AP® US Government & Politics exam is almost certain to test you on your knowledge of the Electoral College. What is the Electoral College, again? No—it’s not somewhere you get accepted to if you get a lot of 5’s on your AP® exams.

You’re probably too young to remember the 2000 presidential election, but you’ve certainly heard about it, and probably talked about it in class. George W. Bush, was elected despite losing the national popular vote (popular meaning, the most votes) because he was awarded Florida’s electoral votes.

Electoral College Origins

The Founding Fathers didn’t have much faith in the voters to pick the president without some help from their leaders. They felt that the public had a limited grasp of the issues. So the Electoral College was designed to balance the popular will with political leaders’ wisdom. The voters’ choices would be filtered through state legislatures.

In a presidential election, each state legislature sends a slate of electors—the number of electors based on a state’s number of congressional districts plus two (for its senators) to go to Washington and elect a president.

Most state legislatures selected electors who would vote for the candidate the voters chose—but the Constitution (Article II, Section 1) does not require this.

Then, the candidate who received the majority of the electoral vote became president. Usually—but not always—this candidate also happened to have won the popular vote.

There have been three presidential candidates who won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College vote:

1. Samuel Tilden losing to Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876

2. Grover Cleveland losing to Benjamin Harrison in 1888

3. Al Gore losing to George W. Bush in 2000

There have been a number of elections that came close to having the same mixed result. For example, in 2004, John Kerry lost to George W. Bush by over three million popular votes, but the flip of one state—Ohio—would have made Kerry president. (Surely, the irony would not have been lost on Bush.)

Effects of the Electoral College

The AP® US Government & Politics exam will want you to know what the effects of the Electoral College are.

One effect is that which is mentioned above—sometimes the Electoral College flouts the will of the public. Today, all of the state legislatures (with the exceptions of Maine and Nebraska, which award by congressional district) award all of their state’s electoral votes to the popular vote winner in that state.This is referred to as the “winner-take-all” system.

This means that, even if a Republican candidate get millions of votes in California, or a Democrat gets millions in Texas, they still lose all of that state’s electoral votes.

This dynamic has the additional effect of leading candidates to only spend money and campaign in swing states—states where either party’s candidate has a chance of winning the state’s popular vote.

This is why states like Ohio, Virginia and Florida, which are fairly evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, get so much attention from candidates.

How are Electoral College Votes Apportioned?

As mentioned, each state receives a number of electoral votes equivalent to its number of senators and representatives, for a total of 538 electoral votes. The votes are apportioned the same way congressional districts are—every ten years by the Census. A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to become president.

The most populous states have the most electoral votes. In 2016, for example, California will have 55 electoral votes, Texas will have 38, Florida and New York will have 29, and Illinois and Pennsylvania will have 20. It is possible for a candidate to win the presidency with the electoral votes of only the ten most populous states.

On the other hand, sparsely populated states like Montana and Vermont only have three electoral votes. Still—the electoral vote gives these states more influence than a popular vote-based system would. Three electoral votes can change the result in a close electoral vote.

Criticisms of the Electoral College

There are lots of criticisms of the Electoral College.

The most common complaint is that whoever represents the popular will—the winner of the popular vote—should be president. Half a million more voters voted for Al Gore in 2000 than voted for George W. Bush.

The other criticism is that by focusing the presidential contest on the swing states, the Electoral College deprives voters in solidly partisan states (like Republican Texas or Democratic California) from being heard.

It is also said that minority party voters in these states (e.g., Democrats in Texas or Republicans in California) have little incentive to vote, since their votes won’t affect the outcome of the election at all.

There have been many efforts to amend the Constitution and do away with the Electoral College over the years, but none of them have picked up much steam.

The Electoral College in Action

The electors meet at state capitols in December to cast their ballots. The ballots are then sealed and sent to Congress, where the president of the Senate—the vice president—opens and counts the ballots in January.

The media is allowed to ask electors how they voted in December, and they typically answer. Most states require electors to cast their ballot for the candidate they were chosen to represent—but some don’t.

In 2000, for example, since New Hampshire doesn’t require electors to vote for the candidate the voters chose, some pundits thought the state’s electors, pledged to Bush, might defect and vote for Gore. They didn’t.

If no candidate wins a majority of Electoral College votes—possible in an election with three or more major candidates—the House selects from the top three presidential candidates, and each state gets one vote. D.C. does not get a vote. The winner must get 26 or more state votes, with the House re-voting until this happens.

The Senate selects from the top two vice presidential candidates, and each senator gets one vote. The majority vote winner (51 votes) is sworn in as vice president.

Now let’s take a look at a free-response question about the Electoral College.

A Sample Free Response Question

1. Describe the winner-take-all feature of the Electoral College.

2. Explain one way in which the winner-take-all feature of the Electoral College affects how presidential candidates from the two major political parties run their campaigns.

3. Explain one way in which the winner-take-all feature of the Electoral College hinders third party candidates.

4. Explain two reasons the Electoral College has not been abolished.

It’s easy to answer (a) – discuss how, for all states except Maine and Nebraska, the winner of the popular vote in a state gets all of its electoral votes.

For (b), you want to discuss the concept of ‘swing states’ – parties closely divided between the states whose electoral votes are up for grabs. Candidates spend time and money here at the expense of solidly partisan states.

Part (c) will require you to discuss the dominance of the two parties, Democratic and Republican, and how third parties are unlikely to get any electoral votes at all—and thus no voice in the Electoral College—unless they outperform the two larger parties.

Part (d) will require you to discuss the amendment process—the only way the Electoral College can be abolished—and how the swing states are unlikely to support decreasing their voice in presidential elections. You will also want to discuss fears that a popular vote-based election would favor big cities and major population centers at the expense of rural and sparsely populated areas. (The argument here is that candidates would only spend time in money in places with lots of votes to be had.)

The Wrap Up

Remember, you are likely to encounter questions about the Electoral College on the AP® US Government exam.

The Electoral College is unique to our democracy. The most important points to remember about it are:

1. The Electoral College was created by the Founding Fathers because they believed voters weren’t well-informed enough to choose the president on their own

2. The Electoral College uses a winner-take all system

3. The Electoral College encourages candidates to campaign in ‘swing’ states where the parties are closely matched

4. Occasionally, the winner of the Electoral College (and thus, the presidency) actually loses the popular vote.

Remember, the Electoral College is not as complex as it might seem at first blush. Americans technically vote for electors who support their favored candidate. These 538 electors then convene the month after the election to vote for the president. If you can grasp this idea and the bullet points above, you will be well prepared for Electoral College questions on the US Government & Politics exam.

Looking for AP® US Government practice?

Kickstart your AP® US Government prep with Albert. Start your AP® exam prep today .

Interested in a school license?​

Popular posts.

AP® Score Calculators

Simulate how different MCQ and FRQ scores translate into AP® scores

AP® Review Guides

The ultimate review guides for AP® subjects to help you plan and structure your prep.

Core Subject Review Guides

Review the most important topics in Physics and Algebra 1 .

SAT® Score Calculator

See how scores on each section impacts your overall SAT® score

ACT® Score Calculator

See how scores on each section impacts your overall ACT® score

Grammar Review Hub

Comprehensive review of grammar skills

AP® Posters

Download updated posters summarizing the main topics and structure for each AP® exam.

AP United States Government and Politics : Argumentative Essay - The Electoral College

Your Response:

More AP United States Government and Politics Free Response Questions

We have over 2 million resources across various exams, and subjects to refer to at any point.

• View all (124)
• Unit 1: Foundations of American Democracy (25)
• Unit 2: Interactions Among Branches of Government (25)
• Unit 3: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights (24)
• Unit 4: American Political Ideologies and Beliefs (25)
• Unit 5: Political Participation (25)

Argumentative Essay - Bill of Rights

Answer the following AP Government and Politics Argumentative Essay Question

Argumentative Essay - Checks and Balances

Argumentative Essay - Federalism and State Sovereignty

Argumentative Essay - Separation of Powers

Argumentative Essay - The Electoral College

Concept Application: Barriers - Andrew Yang

Entrepreneur Andrew Yang ran for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States in the 2020 election with a platform centered around the concept of a Universal Basic Income (UBI), which he branded as the 'Freedom Dividend.' Yang's campaign aimed to address the economic challenges posed by automation and artificial intelligence, proposing a monthly payment of $1,000 to every American adult. Despite generating significant online support and raising awareness about the impact of technology on jobs, Yang faced challenges related to his lack of political experience and difficulty in gaining media coverage compared to more established candidates. Yang's unique policy proposals and outsider status attracted a diverse following, but his campaign struggled to translate online enthusiasm into tangible support in early primary states. Additionally, Yang's focus on UBI sometimes overshadowed his other policy positions, making it difficult for him to be seen as a well-rounded candidate. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Andrew Yang to achieve his goal of winning the Democratic nomination. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Andrew Yang could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss the role of media coverage in presidential primaries.

Concept Application: Barriers - Bernie Sanders

Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, ran for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States in 2016 and 2020. Sanders' platform, which included Medicare for All, free public college tuition, and a $15 minimum wage, appealed to a significant portion of the Democratic base, particularly younger voters. However, Sanders faced challenges in expanding his appeal beyond his base, particularly among older voters and moderate Democrats. His identification as a democratic socialist also led to concerns about his electability in a general election against a Republican candidate. Sanders' campaign was notable for its reliance on small-dollar donations and a grassroots organizing model, which allowed him to compete effectively in early primary states. Despite these strengths, the consolidation of moderate candidates around Joe Biden following the South Carolina primary and Super Tuesday significantly impacted Sanders' momentum. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Senator Bernie Sanders to achieve his goal of winning the Democratic nomination. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Senator Sanders could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss the impact of candidate consolidation on a primary election.

Concept Application: Barriers - Elizabeth Warren

In the 2020 United States presidential election, Senator Elizabeth Warren faced significant challenges in her campaign for the Democratic nomination. Warren, a progressive candidate known for her detailed policy plans and advocacy for substantial financial regulation, aimed to distinguish herself in a crowded field of candidates. Her platform included proposals for a wealth tax, Medicare for All, and the dismantling of large financial institutions, which she argued were necessary to address income inequality and corporate influence in politics. Despite her efforts, Warren struggled to gain traction among certain demographic groups and faced skepticism about the feasibility and cost of her proposals. Her campaign also contended with questions about electability and concerns that her progressive policies might alienate moderate voters in a general election against President Donald Trump. Additionally, Warren's campaign navigated the complexities of a primary process that included caucuses and primaries with varying rules and delegate allocation methods. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Senator Elizabeth Warren to achieve her goal of winning the Democratic nomination. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Senator Warren could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain how the primary process can impact a candidate's strategy for winning the nomination.

Concept Application: Barriers - Kamala Harris

Senator Kamala Harris announced her candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States in the 2020 election with a campaign that emphasized her background as a prosecutor and her commitment to justice reform. Despite initial enthusiasm, Harris' campaign faced challenges related to her prosecutorial record, which some progressive voters viewed as being at odds with the current movement for criminal justice reform. Additionally, Harris struggled to carve out a distinct position within a crowded field of candidates, many of whom shared similar policy goals. Harris' campaign also contended with issues of race and gender, as she was one of the few candidates of color and the only African American woman in the race. Despite these challenges, Harris remained a prominent figure in the Democratic Party and was later selected as Joe Biden's running mate. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Senator Kamala Harris to achieve her goal of winning the Democratic nomination. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Senator Harris could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain the significance of race and gender in the context of political campaigns.

Concept Application: Barriers - Pete Buttigieg

Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, entered the 2020 Democratic presidential primary as a relatively unknown figure on the national stage. Despite this, Buttigieg's campaign gained momentum, propelled by his articulate speech, moderate policy positions, and status as the first openly gay major presidential candidate. However, Buttigieg faced challenges in connecting with African American voters, a key demographic within the Democratic Party. His tenure as mayor was scrutinized, particularly his handling of police-community relations, which some critics argued had not adequately addressed systemic issues affecting the African American community in South Bend. Buttigieg's campaign also contended with questions about his experience, given his relatively young age and the small size of South Bend compared to the national stage. Despite these obstacles, Buttigieg achieved notable success in early primary contests, including a narrow victory in the Iowa caucuses. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Mayor Pete Buttigieg to achieve his goal of winning the Democratic nomination. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Mayor Buttigieg could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain the importance of connecting with key demographic groups in a primary election.

Concept Application: Constitution - Digital Privacy

In recent years, technological advancements have led to an increase in government surveillance capabilities. A whistleblower leaks information showing that a federal agency has been collecting vast amounts of digital communication data from American citizens without their consent. The revelation sparks a nationwide debate over privacy rights and government overreach. Critics argue that the surveillance program violates citizens' constitutional rights, while supporters defend it as a necessary measure for national security. Legal experts point to the complex interplay between individual rights and collective safety, noting the absence of explicit references to digital privacy in the Constitution. Given this scenario, the immediate questions are: How does the Constitution protect citizens' privacy rights in the context of digital communications, and what constitutional arguments could be made against the federal agency's surveillance program?

Concept Application: Constitution - Free Speech Rally

In a small town in the United States, a controversial figure known for their divisive views on immigration announced plans to hold a rally in the town square. The announcement immediately sparked a heated debate among the town's residents, with some supporting the figure's right to speak and others vehemently opposing their views and presence in the community. As the rally date approached, the town council held an emergency meeting to discuss the situation. The council members were divided, with some advocating for the rally to be allowed in the name of free speech, while others argued for its cancellation, citing concerns over public safety and the potential for violence. The debate within the council mirrored the broader national conversation about the balance between free speech and public safety, highlighting the complexities of governing a diverse society. Given the scenario, the immediate questions are: How does the Constitution protect the controversial figure's right to hold a rally, and what limitations, if any, can the town council legally impose on the rally?

Concept Application: Constitution - Gun Control Legislation

In response to a series of tragic mass shootings, a state legislature passes a new law imposing strict regulations on firearm ownership, including mandatory background checks and waiting periods. Gun rights advocacy groups quickly file lawsuits challenging the law, arguing that it infringes upon the Second Amendment rights of citizens. The case rapidly ascends through the courts, drawing national attention and sparking a heated debate over the balance between public safety and constitutional rights. Legal experts and commentators discuss the historical context of the Second Amendment, its interpretation in recent Supreme Court decisions, and the implications of the state's law on future gun control measures. The controversy highlights the ongoing struggle to define the limits of individual rights in the face of collective concerns. Given this scenario, the immediate questions are: What does the Second Amendment protect, and how might the state's gun control law be constitutionally justified?

Concept Application: Constitution - National Emergency Powers

Amidst a period of unprecedented national crisis, the President of the United States declares a state of emergency and assumes broad powers to address the situation. These powers include the suspension of certain civil liberties, the deployment of the military within the country's borders, and the control over communication networks. Legal scholars and civil rights organizations raise concerns about the constitutionality of these actions, arguing that they infringe upon fundamental rights and exceed the powers granted to the executive branch. The situation leads to widespread debates about the limits of executive power, the role of Congress in checking the President's authority, and the protections afforded by the Constitution during times of emergency. Critics of the emergency measures call for judicial review, while supporters argue that extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. Given this scenario, the immediate questions are: What constitutional provisions limit the President's emergency powers, and how might Congress and the judiciary check these powers?

Concept Application: Constitution - Voting Rights Act

Following a landmark Supreme Court decision that struck down key provisions of the Voting Rights Act, a state legislature passes a new set of voting laws. These laws include strict voter ID requirements, reduction of early voting days, and the closure of numerous polling places in predominantly minority neighborhoods. Civil rights organizations challenge the laws, arguing that they disproportionately affect minority voters and violate the Constitution's guarantees of equal protection and voting rights. The case becomes a focal point for a broader national debate over voting rights, access to the polls, and the role of government in ensuring fair elections. Advocates for the new laws argue they are necessary to prevent voter fraud and ensure the integrity of elections, while opponents see them as efforts to suppress the votes of certain groups. Given this scenario, the immediate questions are: What constitutional protections exist for voting rights, and how could the new voting laws be challenged on constitutional grounds?

Concept Application: Misc - Federalism and the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique challenge to the federal structure of the United States, with both the federal government and individual states taking various approaches to public health measures, economic support, and vaccine distribution. This scenario highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of federalism, as states had the autonomy to implement measures based on their specific needs, but also faced challenges in coordinating a unified national response. In this context, analyze the role of federalism in managing the COVID-19 pandemic, including the interaction between state and federal governments and the impact on public policy and health outcomes.

Concept Application: Misc - Federalist and Anti-Federalist Debates

The debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists was pivotal in shaping the United States Constitution. The Federalists, including figures such as Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, argued for a strong central government and the ratification of the Constitution. They believed that a strong central government was necessary to maintain order and prevent tyranny. The Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, feared that a strong central government would lead to tyranny and advocated for stronger state governments. In a modern context, a group of political scientists is analyzing the impact of these debates on current federal and state government relations. They are particularly interested in how these historical debates inform contemporary discussions on states' rights, federal overreach, and the balance of power between state and federal governments. Given this scenario, analyze the impact of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist debates on the development of the United States Constitution and its influence on modern federalism.

Concept Application: Misc - Separation of Powers

The United States Constitution establishes a system of government based on the separation of powers among three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. This system was designed to prevent any one branch from gaining too much power, with a series of checks and balances in place to ensure cooperation and prevent tyranny. In a contemporary scenario, a high school civics class is conducting a mock government exercise to understand how the separation of powers functions in practice. Students are assigned roles within the legislative, executive, and judicial branches and are tasked with passing a new law regarding environmental protection. Given this scenario, explain the roles of each branch in the legislative process and how the system of checks and balances operates to ensure a balance of power.

Concept Application: Misc - The Articles of Confederation

Following the American Revolution, the newly independent states faced the challenge of forming a national government. The Articles of Confederation, adopted as the nation's first constitution, established a confederation of sovereign states with a weak central government. This arrangement led to numerous problems, including difficulties in trade, defense, and internal rebellion, most notably Shays' Rebellion. In response to these challenges, a convention was called to revise the Articles, which ultimately led to the drafting of the new Constitution. This scenario highlights the transition from a confederation to a federal system of government and its implications for American governance. Analyze the transition from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution and its impact on the structure and powers of the federal government.

Concept Application: Misc - The Electoral College

The Electoral College is a unique feature of the American presidential election system, where electors, rather than the general populace, officially elect the President and Vice President of the United States. This system has been the subject of debate and controversy, particularly in instances where the Electoral College outcome differs from the national popular vote. In a recent election, a presidential candidate won the popular vote by a significant margin but lost in the Electoral College, leading to widespread discussions about the relevance and fairness of the Electoral College in modern democracy. Given this scenario, analyze the role of the Electoral College in the American electoral system, its impact on presidential elections, and the arguments for and against its continuation.

SCOTUS Comparison - Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States

In Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States (1964), the owner of the Heart of Atlanta Motel challenged the constitutionality of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, arguing that Congress exceeded its power under the Commerce Clause by prohibiting racial discrimination in places of public accommodation. The Supreme Court upheld the Act, stating that Congress had the power to regulate interstate commerce and could prohibit racial discrimination by private entities engaged in interstate commerce. The majority opinion, delivered by Justice Clark, emphasized, 'The power of Congress to promote interstate commerce also includes the power to regulate the local incidents thereof, including local activities in both the States of origin and destination, which might have a substantial and harmful effect upon that commerce.' Compare Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States to United States v. Lopez.

SCOTUS Comparison - National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), multiple parties challenged the constitutionality of several provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), including the individual mandate, which required individuals to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. The plaintiffs argued that the mandate exceeded Congress's powers under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. The Supreme Court, in a majority opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, upheld the individual mandate as a valid exercise of Congress's taxing power, stating, 'The Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance. However, it does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance.' Compare National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius to McCulloch v. Maryland.

SCOTUS Comparison - Printz v. United States

In Printz v. United States (1997), sheriffs Jay Printz and Richard Mack challenged the constitutionality of the interim provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which mandated that local chief law enforcement officers conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchasers. The plaintiffs argued that this federal mandate infringed upon states' rights, claiming it compelled state officers to execute federal laws, thus violating the principle of federalism. The Supreme Court ruled that the provision of the Brady Act commandeering local law enforcement to conduct background checks was unconstitutional. The majority opinion, delivered by Justice Scalia, emphasized that the Federal Government may not compel states to enact or administer a federal regulatory program, stating, 'The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States' officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.' Compare Printz v. United States to United States v. Lopez.

SCOTUS Comparison - Shelby County v. Holder

In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), Shelby County, Alabama, challenged the constitutionality of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which contained a coverage formula determining which jurisdictions were required to obtain preclearance before changing their voting laws or practices. The plaintiffs argued that the formula was outdated and imposed unfair and unequal treatment on the states. The Supreme Court ruled that Section 4(b) was unconstitutional because it was based on data over 40 years old and thus did not reflect current needs. The majority opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Roberts, stated, 'Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.' Compare Shelby County v. Holder to Baker v. Carr.

SCOTUS Comparison - South Dakota v. Dole

In South Dakota v. Dole (1987), the state of South Dakota challenged the constitutionality of a federal statute that withheld a portion of federal highway funds from states that did not raise their legal drinking age to 21. The Supreme Court upheld the federal law, stating that Congress could use its spending power to encourage states to enact laws that align with federal objectives, as long as the conditions for receiving federal funds are related to the federal interest in national projects and are clearly stated. The majority opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Rehnquist, noted, 'Our decisions have recognized that the spending power is subject to several general restrictions: the exercise of the spending power must be in pursuit of the general welfare.' Compare South Dakota v. Dole to McCulloch v. Maryland.

Argumentative Essay - The Effectiveness of Gerrymandering

Argumentative Essay - The Impact of Congressional Committees

Argumentative Essay - The Power of Judicial Review

Argumentative Essay - The Role of Congressional Oversight

Argumentative Essay - The Role of Filibusters

Concept Application: Barriers - Age Restrictions in Political Office

Samantha Lee, a 24-year-old activist with a strong passion for political reform and social justice, decides to run for the House of Representatives. Samantha has been involved in various social movements and has a large following among young adults. She believes that her fresh perspectives and commitment to change can bring much-needed innovation to Congress. However, upon announcing her candidacy, Samantha faces immediate legal challenges due to her age. The Constitution requires that members of the House of Representatives be at least 25 years old at the time of taking office, putting Samantha's eligibility into question. Despite her qualifications and the support of her community, Samantha's campaign is overshadowed by debates about her eligibility based on her age. This legal barrier not only hampers her campaign efforts but also sparks a broader conversation about age restrictions in political office and the representation of younger generations in government. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Samantha Lee to achieve her goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Samantha Lee could use to still have an influence. Part C: Evaluate the rationale behind age restrictions for political office and their impact on young candidates and representation.

Concept Application: Barriers - Campaign Finance Hurdles

John Smith, a community organizer with a strong background in public service and advocacy for campaign finance reform, decides to run for the Senate. John has been a vocal critic of the influence of big money in politics and has pledged to run his campaign on small individual donations, rejecting any contributions from Political Action Committees (PACs) and large corporations. His platform includes promoting transparency in campaign finance, reducing the influence of special interest groups, and enacting stricter regulations on campaign contributions. Despite his popularity and the grassroots support he has garnered, John faces significant challenges in his campaign. The incumbent senator, a well-established politician with deep ties to various large corporations and PACs, has amassed a substantial campaign war chest, dwarfing John's fundraising efforts. The disparity in campaign funds has made it difficult for John to compete effectively, limiting his ability to advertise, organize large-scale events, and mobilize voters. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for John Smith to achieve his goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that John Smith could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss the potential impact of campaign finance laws on the electoral success of candidates like John Smith.

Concept Application: Barriers - Gerrymandering Challenges

In a recent election cycle, a rising political star, Maria Gonzalez, decides to run for a seat in the House of Representatives. Maria, a member of the minority party in her state, has spent years building a strong grassroots campaign, focusing on issues such as education reform, healthcare access, and environmental protection. Her campaign quickly gains momentum, attracting a diverse group of supporters from across her state. However, after the most recent census, the state legislature, controlled by the majority party, undertook a redistricting process that significantly altered the boundaries of several congressional districts, including the one Maria intended to run in. The new boundaries were drawn in such a way that the majority of Maria's supporters found themselves in a different district, significantly diminishing her base. This redistricting effort was widely criticized as an example of gerrymandering, designed to dilute the voting power of the minority party and protect the incumbents of the majority party. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Maria Gonzalez to achieve her goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Maria Gonzalez could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain how gerrymandering can affect the representation of minority groups in Congress.

Concept Application: Barriers - Navigating Red Tape for Ballot Access

Alex Kim, an independent candidate with a strong following among young voters, decides to run for a U.S. Senate seat. Alex's platform focuses on climate change, affordable education, and healthcare reform. Despite having a significant online presence and grassroots support, Alex encounters numerous bureaucratic hurdles related to securing a spot on the ballot. The state's election laws, designed with traditional party candidates in mind, require independent candidates to gather a large number of signatures within a short timeframe. Additionally, the rules for signature collection are complex and vary significantly across different counties within the state. Faced with these challenges, Alex's campaign must navigate the intricate web of regulations and deadlines to ensure ballot access. The campaign mobilizes a network of volunteers to gather signatures and seeks legal advice to comply with the varying county requirements. Despite these efforts, the complexity of the process and the risk of disqualification due to technical errors loom as significant barriers to Alex's candidacy. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Alex Kim to achieve his goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Alex Kim could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss the implications of ballot access laws for independent and third-party candidates.

Concept Application: Barriers - The Incumbency Advantage

Emily Johnson, a local business owner and community leader, decides to challenge the incumbent representative in her congressional district. Emily has been active in her community, serving on several local boards and advocating for small business interests and education reform. She believes that her experience and dedication to the community make her a strong candidate. However, the incumbent has held the seat for multiple terms and benefits from high name recognition, established relationships with key stakeholders, and access to significant campaign resources. Emily's campaign faces the challenge of overcoming the incumbent's advantage. Despite her efforts to engage with the community and present her platform, she finds it difficult to gain the same level of attention and support as the incumbent. The incumbent's ability to leverage their office for visibility, along with their established network of donors and supporters, poses a significant barrier to Emily's campaign. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Emily Johnson to achieve her goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Emily Johnson could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain how the incumbency advantage can affect electoral competition.

Concept Application: Constitution - Congressional Oversight and Executive Agencies

In recent years, a significant controversy has emerged over the operations of a major executive agency, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Concerns have been raised about the agency's handling of environmental regulations and its responsiveness to congressional oversight. In response, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform launched a comprehensive investigation into the EPA's regulatory processes, compliance with congressional mandates, and overall effectiveness in protecting the environment. The investigation involved a series of public hearings where EPA officials were called to testify, along with environmental experts and representatives from various industries affected by EPA regulations. The committee sought to assess the agency's performance, its adherence to legislative intent, and the impact of its regulations on economic and environmental outcomes. The hearings were highly publicized and sparked a national debate on the balance between environmental protection and economic growth. Given this scenario, what constitutional mechanisms are at play in ensuring the EPA's accountability to Congress, and how does this reflect the principles of checks and balances within the federal government?

Concept Application: Constitution - Gerrymandering and Representation

Following the most recent census, the state legislature of a politically divided state has undertaken the redistricting process to redraw congressional district boundaries. The majority party in the legislature has been accused of gerrymandering, manipulating the district boundaries to dilute the voting power of the minority party and secure more seats for themselves in future elections. This has led to legal challenges and public protests, with critics arguing that the gerrymandering undermines democratic principles and equal representation. The case eventually reaches the Supreme Court, which is tasked with determining the constitutionality of the redistricting plan. The controversy highlights the tension between state authority in determining electoral districts and the constitutional protections for fair and equal representation. Evaluate the constitutional issues raised by gerrymandering and its implications for democratic governance and the principle of "one person, one vote."

Concept Application: Constitution - Impeachment Process

A high-ranking federal official has been accused of serious misconduct, including abuse of power and obstruction of justice. The allegations have led to a national outcry for accountability and transparency in government. In response, the House of Representatives initiates an impeachment inquiry to investigate the claims and determine whether there is sufficient evidence to impeach the official. The inquiry involves collecting evidence, interviewing witnesses, and holding public hearings to assess the validity of the allegations. The process culminates in a vote by the House of Representatives, where a simple majority is required to impeach. If impeached, the case moves to the Senate for a trial, where a two-thirds majority is necessary to convict and remove the official from office. The situation has sparked a heated debate about the constitutional provisions for impeachment and the standards for removing a federal official from office. Analyze the constitutional basis for the impeachment process and its role in maintaining the integrity of the federal government.

Concept Application: Constitution - The Filibuster and Legislative Process

In an effort to pass significant healthcare reform, a bill has been introduced in the Senate that promises to overhaul the current system. However, the bill faces strong opposition from a minority of senators who are determined to prevent its passage. Utilizing the Senate's unique rules, these senators engage in a filibuster, a prolonged debate intended to delay or block the vote on the bill. The majority party, eager to advance their legislative agenda, considers invoking the cloture rule, which requires a three-fifths majority to end debate and proceed to a vote. The use of the filibuster and the potential invocation of cloture have sparked a debate about the democratic principles underlying the legislative process, the rights of the minority versus the will of the majority, and the Senate's role in shaping national policy. Discuss the constitutional underpinnings of the Senate's legislative procedures, including the filibuster and cloture, and their impact on the balance of power within Congress.

Concept Application: Constitution - The War Powers Act

The President of the United States has initiated military action in a foreign country without prior approval from Congress. Citing threats to national security and interests abroad, the President argues that quick action was necessary and that waiting for Congress could have resulted in missed opportunities to neutralize the threats. The action has led to widespread debate across the nation, with some supporting the President's decision as a necessary step for national security, while others argue it undermines the constitutional balance of power between the executive and legislative branches. Congress responds by referencing the War Powers Act, asserting its authority to check the President's military engagements. The situation escalates as debates over the constitutionality of the President's actions and the applicability of the War Powers Act dominate political discourse. In this scenario, assess the constitutional tensions between the President's role as Commander in Chief and Congress's authority to declare war and fund military actions.

Concept Application: Misc - Gerrymandering and Electoral Fairness

Following the most recent census, the state legislature of Jefferson, controlled by the Republican Party, undertakes the redistricting process. Critics accuse the legislature of engaging in partisan gerrymandering, alleging that the new district maps significantly dilute the voting power of Democratic-leaning urban areas while concentrating Republican voters to ensure the party's dominance in future elections. A coalition of voters and civil rights organizations files a lawsuit, claiming that the redistricting plan violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case quickly ascends to the Supreme Court, which agrees to hear arguments. Legal experts predict that the Court's decision could have far-reaching implications for the standards governing redistricting and the prevention of partisan gerrymandering. In light of this scenario, analyze the constitutional and legal issues at stake, the role of the Supreme Court in addressing gerrymandering, and the potential consequences of the Court's ruling for electoral fairness and representation.

Concept Application: Misc - Impeachment and the Separation of Powers

The House of Representatives votes to impeach President Jordan Ellis on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of justice, stemming from allegations of soliciting foreign interference in an upcoming election. The case moves to the Senate for a trial, where the political divisions are stark. The Senate's role as a jury in the impeachment trial becomes a focal point of national attention, with debates centering on the constitutional criteria for impeachment, the evidentiary standards required for conviction, and the implications for the separation of powers and future presidential conduct. As the trial progresses, both sides present their arguments, call witnesses, and submit evidence. The outcome of the trial is uncertain, with senators deeply divided along party lines. The nation watches closely, aware that the Senate's decision will have lasting effects on the presidency, the balance of power among the branches of government, and the integrity of democratic institutions. Given this scenario, analyze the constitutional framework for impeachment, the role of the Senate in conducting the trial, and the potential consequences of the trial's outcome for the separation of powers and democratic governance.

Concept Application: Misc - Presidential Powers and Congressional Oversight

During a period of heightened international tension, President Alex Martinez decides to deploy troops to a volatile region without seeking congressional approval, citing an urgent need to protect national security interests. This action sparks a heated debate among lawmakers, with some arguing that the president overstepped their constitutional authority, while others defend the decision as a necessary measure under the president's role as Commander in Chief. In response to the controversy, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee schedules a series of hearings to examine the president's decision, inviting military leaders, foreign policy experts, and administration officials to testify. The hearings aim to assess the justification for the deployment, its alignment with U.S. foreign policy objectives, and the implications for congressional oversight of military actions. Given this scenario, analyze the constitutional powers at play and the role of congressional oversight in this context. Consider the implications of the president's action for the separation of powers and the potential outcomes of the Senate's investigation.

Concept Application: Misc - The Legislative Process and Interest Group Influence

A new bill aimed at reforming healthcare is introduced in the House of Representatives. The bill has generated significant public interest and has become a battleground for various interest groups, each attempting to influence the legislative outcome in favor of their constituents. The House Committee on Health and Human Services schedules hearings to gather expert testimony and public opinions on the proposed reforms. During these hearings, representatives from the pharmaceutical industry, healthcare providers, insurance companies, and patient advocacy groups present their positions. As the bill moves through the legislative process, it undergoes several amendments, reflecting the competing interests and the influence of powerful lobbying efforts. The role of interest groups in shaping the final version of the bill becomes a point of contention among lawmakers. Given this scenario, analyze the role of interest groups in the legislative process, the potential effects of their influence on the bill's content, and the implications for public policy and democratic representation.

Concept Application: Misc - The Role of the Supreme Court in Social Policy

The Supreme Court agrees to hear a landmark case challenging a federal law that restricts the rights of a specific minority group. Advocates for the group argue that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and have mobilized a significant public awareness campaign to highlight the case's importance. Legal experts and social activists anticipate that the Court's decision could redefine the rights of minority groups and set new precedents for social policy in the United States. As the case proceeds, both sides present their arguments, with the government defending the law's constitutionality and the challengers seeking its overturn. The justices' questions during oral arguments suggest they are deeply divided on the issue. The nation awaits the ruling, aware that it will have profound implications for civil rights, social justice, and the role of the judiciary in shaping public policy. Given this scenario, analyze the constitutional issues at stake, the Supreme Court's role in adjudicating social policy disputes, and the potential impact of the Court's decision on civil rights and social justice.

SCOTUS Comparison - Bush v. Gore

In Bush v. Gore (2000), the Supreme Court was faced with a dispute over the counting of votes in Florida during the 2000 presidential election. The plaintiffs argued that the lack of a uniform standard for recounting votes violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court, in a 5-4 decision, held that the varying standards used for vote counting in different counties created unequal treatment of voters, violating the Equal Protection Clause. The majority opinion stated, 'The recount was inconsistent with the minimum procedures necessary to protect the fundamental right of each voter.' Compare Bush v. Gore to Marbury v. Madison.

SCOTUS Comparison - Gill v. Whitford

In Gill v. Whitford (2018), the plaintiffs challenged Wisconsin's state assembly district map, arguing it was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander that diluted the electoral influence of Democratic voters, in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The Supreme Court unanimously held that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated standing to challenge the statewide map, remanding the case for further proceedings to allow plaintiffs to demonstrate the specific harm caused by particular district boundaries. Justice Roberts, writing for the unanimous court, emphasized the need for a 'concrete and particularized' injury. Compare Gill v. Whitford to Shaw v. Reno.

SCOTUS Comparison - Reynolds v. Sims

In Reynolds v. Sims (1964), the plaintiffs challenged the apportionment of the Alabama legislature, arguing that the state’s failure to redraw its legislative districts to reflect population shifts discriminated against urban voters. The Supreme Court was asked to consider whether the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause required states to apportion legislative districts so that each district contained roughly the same number of people. The Court ruled in an 8-1 decision that the Equal Protection Clause demands 'no less than substantially equal state legislative representation for all citizens, irrespective of where they reside within a State.' The majority opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Earl Warren, emphasized that 'Legislators represent people, not trees or acres. Legislators are elected by voters, not farms or cities or economic interests.' Compare Reynolds v. Sims to Baker v. Carr.

SCOTUS Comparison - Rucho v. Common Cause

In Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), plaintiffs challenged North Carolina's congressional district map, arguing that it was drawn to give undue advantage to Republicans, in violation of the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and Article I of the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that claims of partisan gerrymandering present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts, thereby removing federal judiciary from the equation of resolving such disputes. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, stated, 'We conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts.' Compare Rucho v. Common Cause to Shaw v. Reno.

SCOTUS Comparison - Vieth v. Jubelirer

In Vieth v. Jubelirer (2004), the plaintiffs challenged Pennsylvania's congressional redistricting plan, claiming it was an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander that violated the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court, in a plurality decision, held that claims of partisan gerrymandering were nonjusticiable because no clear, manageable standard for adjudicating such claims existed. Justice Scalia, writing for the plurality, stated, 'No judicially discernible and manageable standards for adjudicating political gerrymandering claims have emerged.' Compare Vieth v. Jubelirer to Baker v. Carr.

Argumentative Essay - Balancing Free Speech and Public Safety

Argumentative Essay - The Establishment Clause and Religious Freedom

Argumentative Essay - The Right to Privacy

Argumentative Essay - The Role of the Second Amendment in Modern Society

Concept Application: Barriers - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, often referred to by her initials AOC, has quickly become one of the most recognized names in American politics. As the youngest woman ever to serve in the United States Congress, her election to the House of Representatives in 2018 was seen as a significant victory for progressive politics. Ocasio-Cortez's advocacy for policies such as the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and tuition-free public colleges has positioned her as a leading voice within the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. However, Ocasio-Cortez's rise has not been without its challenges. Her progressive policy positions have sometimes put her at odds with more moderate members of her party, leading to tensions and complicating her efforts to advance her legislative agenda. Additionally, her status as a young, Latina woman in a predominantly older, male-dominated Congress has presented its own set of barriers. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Ocasio-Cortez to achieve her political goals. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Ocasio-Cortez could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss the potential impact of Ocasio-Cortez's identity as a young, Latina woman on her approach to civil liberties and civil rights.

Bernie Sanders, an Independent senator from Vermont, has been a prominent figure in American politics for decades. Known for his progressive policies, Sanders has advocated for issues such as universal healthcare, a higher minimum wage, and tackling climate change. Despite his long tenure in Congress and widespread support among young voters, Sanders has faced challenges in his bids for the Democratic nomination for President in both 2016 and 2020. One of the main barriers Sanders has encountered is the perception that his progressive policies are too radical for the general electorate, potentially making him unelectable in a general election. This perception has been a significant obstacle in gaining support from more moderate Democrats and party insiders. Additionally, Sanders's independent status, while appealing to some voters, has sometimes put him at odds with the Democratic Party's establishment. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Sanders to achieve his political goals. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Sanders could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain how Sanders's policy positions could impact his approach to civil liberties and civil rights.

Elizabeth Warren, a senator from Massachusetts, has been a vocal advocate for economic reform, consumer protection, and addressing income inequality. Her policy proposals, including the implementation of a wealth tax and the expansion of healthcare coverage, have made her a prominent figure within the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Warren's bid for the Democratic nomination in the 2020 Presidential Election highlighted her as a candidate focused on substantive policy changes. However, she faced barriers related to perceptions of her electability, her policy proposals being seen as too progressive by some, and challenges in garnering support from minority voters. Warren's campaign brought attention to the systemic barriers women face in politics, particularly when seeking higher office. Her experience and policy focus also positioned her as a candidate who could potentially bridge the gap between the progressive and moderate factions within the Democratic Party. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Warren to achieve her political goals. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Warren could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain how Warren's policy proposals could impact her approach to civil liberties and civil rights.

Kamala Harris, a prominent figure in American politics, has had a trailblazing career. As the first woman of color to hold the office of Vice President, her journey to this position was not without its challenges. Harris's political career began in the San Francisco District Attorney's office, eventually becoming the District Attorney of San Francisco, then the Attorney General of California, and later a United States Senator from California. Her diverse background and policy stances on criminal justice reform, healthcare, and civil rights have made her a significant figure within the Democratic Party. In the 2020 Presidential Election, Harris initially ran for the Democratic nomination but faced several barriers, including skepticism about her prosecutorial record, concerns about her electability, and the challenge of standing out in a crowded field. Despite these obstacles, she was chosen by Joe Biden to be his running mate, and they went on to win the election. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Harris to achieve her political goals. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Harris could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain how Harris's background and policy stances could affect her approach to civil liberties and civil rights.

Pete Buttigieg, the former Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, made history by being one of the first openly gay candidates to run for the Democratic nomination for President in the 2020 election. His campaign gained significant attention and support, particularly for his moderate policy positions, articulate speech, and military service. Despite these strengths, Buttigieg faced barriers related to his sexual orientation, relative inexperience on the national political stage, and difficulty connecting with African American voters. Buttigieg's candidacy represented a significant step forward for LGBTQ+ representation in American politics, but the challenges he faced underscore the barriers that still exist for LGBTQ+ individuals in seeking higher office. His moderate policy positions also positioned him in a complicated space within the Democratic Party, which has seen a growing divide between its progressive and moderate wings. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Buttigieg to achieve his political goals. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Buttigieg could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss how Buttigieg's identity as an openly gay man might influence his approach to civil liberties and civil rights.

Concept Application: Constitution - Equal Protection Under the Law

In the state of Equality, a new law was passed that prohibited individuals from a specific ethnic minority from owning property in certain areas of the state. Maria Gonzalez, a member of the affected community, filed a lawsuit against the state, arguing that the law was discriminatory and violated her constitutional rights. The case garnered significant public attention, with various civil rights organizations offering their support to Gonzalez. The state defended the law, claiming it was intended to preserve historical neighborhoods and prevent overpopulation. Gonzalez argued that the law unfairly targeted her community and denied them equal protection under the law. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects individuals from discrimination based on race. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Assess the impact of discriminatory property laws on affected communities and societal integration.

Concept Application: Constitution - Freedom of Assembly

In the city of Unity, a new policy was implemented by the local government requiring all public demonstrations to obtain a permit 60 days in advance. Additionally, these permits were only granted if the demonstration was deemed to have a 'positive message' by a city-appointed committee. A group of activists, led by Michael Rivera, planned to hold a peaceful protest against this policy, arguing it infringed upon their constitutional rights. The activists submitted their permit application, which was promptly denied based on the committee's judgment that their message was 'potentially divisive.' Rivera and his group decided to proceed with their demonstration without a permit, leading to their arrest for violating the city's policy. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the right to assemble. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Evaluate the potential impact of requiring a 'positive message' for public demonstrations on freedom of speech and assembly.

Concept Application: Constitution - Freedom of the Press

The national government recently enacted a law that requires all news outlets to submit their articles and reports for government review before publication. The law was justified as a measure to prevent the spread of 'fake news' and protect national security. The Daily Truth, a major newspaper, refused to comply, arguing that the law constituted a violation of their First Amendment rights. The newspaper published an investigative piece on government corruption without submitting it for review, leading to a legal showdown. Government officials claimed that the law was a necessary step to ensure the accuracy of information disseminated to the public and safeguard against external threats. The Daily Truth contended that the law imposed undue censorship and was a direct attack on journalistic freedom and the public's right to know. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects freedom of the press. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Analyze the potential consequences of government pre-publication review on journalistic integrity and public trust.

Concept Application: Constitution - Second Amendment Rights

In the state of Freedonia, a new law was passed that banned all citizens from owning firearms, citing a recent increase in violent crime as the justification. John Smith, a local gun shop owner, filed a lawsuit against the state, arguing that the law infringed upon his Second Amendment rights. The case quickly gained national attention, with various advocacy groups joining the legal battle on both sides. The state argued that the law was a necessary measure to ensure public safety and reduce crime rates. Smith, however, contended that the law was an overreach of state power and violated the constitutional rights of Freedonia's citizens to bear arms for self-defense. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the right to keep and bear arms. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Discuss the potential effects of a total ban on firearm ownership on individual rights and public safety.

Concept Application: Constitution - The Right to Privacy

In the small town of Libertyville, the local government passed an ordinance requiring all residents to install government-provided surveillance cameras inside their homes to combat rising crime rates. The ordinance stated that the footage would only be accessed if there was reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Many residents, including a well-known civil rights lawyer, Jane Doe, argued that this ordinance violated their constitutional rights. Jane Doe decided to challenge the ordinance in court, arguing that it infringed upon her rights under the United States Constitution. She presented a case that highlighted the importance of individual privacy and the limitations of government power within private residences. The town defended the ordinance by claiming it was a necessary measure for public safety and crime prevention. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the right to privacy. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Discuss how the concept of 'reasonable suspicion' might conflict with the constitutional right to privacy.

Concept Application: Misc - Affirmative Action and Civil Rights

A prestigious university has been sued by a group of applicants who claim that the institution's affirmative action policies unfairly discriminated against them based on their race. The university's admissions policies aim to increase diversity within the student body by considering race among many factors in its holistic review process. The plaintiffs argue that this practice violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by giving preferential treatment to applicants of certain races over others. The case has attracted widespread attention, with various organizations and individuals weighing in on both sides of the debate. Proponents of affirmative action argue that it is necessary to address historical inequalities and create a more diverse educational environment. Opponents, however, contend that any consideration of race in admissions processes is inherently discriminatory. Part A: Analyze how the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment could be applied to this scenario. Part B: Discuss the potential impact of this case on affirmative action policies in higher education. Part C: Compare this scenario to a previous Supreme Court case related to affirmative action and the Fourteenth Amendment.

Concept Application: Misc - Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Workplace Discrimination

A large corporation has recently been sued by a former employee, who alleges that they were denied a promotion due to their race. The employee, who has worked for the company for several years and has a strong performance record, claims that a less qualified candidate of a different race was chosen for the position. The lawsuit cites the Civil Rights Act of 1964, arguing that the company's decision constitutes racial discrimination and violates the employee's civil rights. The company has denied the allegations, stating that the decision was based on a variety of factors unrelated to race. However, internal emails and documents have surfaced that suggest race may have played a role in the decision-making process. The case has received media attention, sparking a broader conversation about racial discrimination in the workplace. Part A: Explain how the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to this scenario. Part B: Analyze the potential impact of this case on the company and its policies if the court finds in favor of the employee. Part C: Discuss the significance of this case in the context of ongoing efforts to combat workplace discrimination.

Concept Application: Misc - Digital Privacy and the Fourth Amendment

In the wake of a high-profile cyberattack, the federal government has enacted a new law that grants law enforcement agencies expanded powers to monitor and collect digital communications without a warrant. The law is intended to help prevent future cyberattacks by allowing for the swift identification and apprehension of cybercriminals. However, privacy advocacy groups have raised concerns that the law goes too far and infringes upon citizens' Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The groups have filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law, arguing that it violates the privacy rights of individuals by allowing for the mass collection of digital communications without probable cause or a warrant. The case has sparked a national debate over the balance between national security and individual privacy rights. Part A: Analyze how the Fourth Amendment could be applied to digital privacy in this scenario. Part B: Discuss the potential consequences of this case for future government surveillance programs. Part C: Compare this scenario to a previous Supreme Court case involving the Fourth Amendment and privacy rights.

Concept Application: Misc - School Prayer and First Amendment Rights

In a small town in the Midwest, a public high school has recently implemented a policy where each day begins with a teacher-led prayer over the school's intercom system. The prayer is non-denominational, but it explicitly references God and asks for guidance and protection throughout the day. This new policy was introduced by the school's principal, who argues that it promotes moral values and unity among students. Several students and their families, however, have raised concerns about this practice. They argue that the mandatory broadcast of a prayer violates their personal religious beliefs and those who do not wish to participate feel marginalized. A group of parents has decided to take legal action against the school district, claiming that the policy infringes upon the students' First Amendment rights. The case has garnered attention from various civil liberties organizations, which have offered their support to the families involved. Part A: Explain how the First Amendment could be applied to this scenario. Part B: Analyze the potential impact of this case on the school and its policy if the court rules in favor of the students and their families. Part C: Compare this scenario to a previous Supreme Court case related to the First Amendment and school policies.

Concept Application: Misc - Second Amendment and Local Gun Control Laws

In a large metropolitan area, the city council has passed a new ordinance that significantly restricts the ability of residents to carry concealed firearms in public spaces. The ordinance cites increasing concerns over public safety and a recent uptick in gun violence as the primary reasons for its implementation. The law requires individuals to obtain a special permit to carry concealed weapons, which involves passing a rigorous background check and completing a firearm safety course. Gun rights advocacy groups have criticized the ordinance, claiming it infringes upon citizens' Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. They argue that the new requirements are overly burdensome and effectively limit the ability of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves. In response, the advocacy groups have filed a lawsuit against the city, seeking to have the ordinance overturned. The case has attracted national attention, with both sides presenting arguments related to constitutional rights and public safety. Part A: Analyze how the Second Amendment could be interpreted in the context of this ordinance. Part B: Discuss the potential implications of this case for local governments' ability to regulate firearms. Part C: Compare this scenario to a previous Supreme Court ruling on gun control and the Second Amendment.

SCOTUS Comparison - Grutter v. Bollinger

In Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of affirmative action in higher education admissions. Barbara Grutter, a white applicant, sued the University of Michigan Law School for denying her admission, arguing that the school's use of race as a factor in admissions decisions violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the University of Michigan, holding that the law school's interest in obtaining a diverse student body was compelling enough to justify the narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions. The Court stated, 'The Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit the Law School’s narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.' Compare Grutter v. Bollinger to Brown v. Board of Education.

SCOTUS Comparison - Loving v. Virginia

In Loving v. Virginia (1967), the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of Virginia's laws prohibiting interracial marriage. Richard and Mildred Loving, an interracial couple, were sentenced to a year in prison for marrying each other. Their case challenged the conviction on the grounds that it violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional, stating, 'Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.' Compare Loving v. Virginia to Brown v. Board of Education.

SCOTUS Comparison - Obergefell v. Hodges

In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the Supreme Court addressed whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriages. The case consolidated several challenges to state bans on same-sex marriage, arguing that these bans violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the petitioners, holding that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, same-sex couples may not be deprived of that right and that liberty. The Court stated, 'The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty.' Compare Obergefell v. Hodges to Brown v. Board of Education.

SCOTUS Comparison - Reed v. Reed

In Reed v. Reed (1971), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of gender discrimination in the administration of estates. Sally and Cecil Reed, a divorced couple, both sought to be the administrator of their deceased son's estate. Idaho law automatically preferred males over females in appointing estate administrators. Sally Reed challenged this law, arguing that it discriminated against her based on gender, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Idaho law's automatic preference for males over females was unconstitutional, stating that 'To give a mandatory preference to members of either sex over members of the other, merely to accomplish the elimination of hearings on the merits, without regard to competence and suitability, is to make the very kind of arbitrary legislative choice forbidden by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.' This case marked the first time the Court struck down a law for gender discrimination. Compare Reed v. Reed to Brown v. Board of Education.

SCOTUS Comparison - Romer v. Evans

In Romer v. Evans (1996), the Supreme Court addressed an amendment to the Colorado state constitution that prevented any city, town, or county in the state from taking any legislative, executive, or judicial action to protect individuals based on their homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual orientation. The amendment was challenged for violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the amendment lacked a rational relationship to legitimate state interests and struck it down, stating, 'It is not within our constitutional tradition to enact laws of this sort.' Compare Romer v. Evans to Brown v. Board of Education.

Argumentative Essay - Influence of Media on Public Opinion

Argumentative Essay - Role of Political Socialization

Argumentative Essay - The Effectiveness of Public Opinion Polls

Concept Application: Barriers - Incumbent Advantage

In the upcoming mayoral race in the city of Springfield, incumbent Mayor Lisa Green faces a tough reelection campaign against a rising star in local politics, Michael Roberts. Mayor Green has been in office for two terms and is known for her effective leadership during crises and her initiatives to improve public infrastructure. However, her tenure has also seen controversies, including accusations of favoritism in city contracts and a publicized dispute with the local teachers' union. Michael Roberts, on the other hand, brings fresh energy and ideas to the race, focusing on transparency in government, education reform, and economic development. While Mayor Green has the advantage of incumbency, including greater name recognition and established relationships with key stakeholders, the controversies and public dissatisfaction with certain aspects of her administration present significant challenges to her campaign. Given the scenario, Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Mayor Lisa Green to achieve her goal of being reelected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Mayor Lisa Green could use to still have an influence. Part C: Analyze how the incumbent advantage might play a role in Mayor Green's campaign strategy, considering the challenges she faces.

Concept Application: Barriers - Rural Candidate

In the small, rural town of Clearwater, a local politician, Emily Johnson, has decided to run for a state legislative position. Clearwater is known for its conservative values, and Emily, while sharing many of these values, identifies as a moderate with a mix of conservative and liberal views. Her campaign focuses on issues such as improving local education, supporting small businesses, and moderately increasing state funding for healthcare, which are important to her but not traditionally conservative priorities. Emily's campaign faces challenges in gaining traction due to the deeply conservative nature of her rural district. The majority of her potential constituents have historically voted for candidates who align closely with conservative ideologies, making it difficult for Emily, with her moderate stance, to appeal to the base that dominates her district. Additionally, her proposals for increased state funding for healthcare have been met with skepticism from voters who prefer minimal government intervention. Given the scenario, Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Emily Johnson to achieve her goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Emily Johnson could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss how Emily Johnson's moderate political ideology might affect her campaign strategy in a predominantly conservative district.

Concept Application: Barriers - Social Media Influencer

Jordan Lee, a popular social media influencer known for their progressive views on environmental issues, decides to run for city council in their moderately conservative city. Jordan has a large following online, where they advocate for green policies, sustainable living, and climate change action. Their campaign is built around implementing aggressive environmental policies at the local level, including transitioning public transportation to electric vehicles and banning single-use plastics. Despite Jordan's popularity online, they face significant barriers in translating their social media influence into political support within their city. Many local voters are wary of the economic implications of Jordan's environmental policies, fearing that such changes could lead to increased taxes or harm small businesses. Additionally, Jordan's progressive stance puts them at odds with the moderate to conservative political climate of the city. Given the scenario, Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Jordan Lee to achieve their goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Jordan Lee could use to still have an influence. Part C: Explain how Jordan Lee's use of social media might play a role in overcoming the barriers to their campaign.

Concept Application: Barriers - Third-Party Candidate

Alex Martinez, a charismatic leader with a strong following, decides to run for the presidency as a third-party candidate under the banner of the Green Progressives. Alex's platform focuses on comprehensive environmental reform, social justice, and an overhaul of the electoral system to include proportional representation. Despite a growing dissatisfaction among the electorate with the two major parties, Alex faces significant obstacles in gaining visibility and legitimacy in a political system dominated by Democrats and Republicans. The structural barriers inherent in the U.S. electoral system, such as the first-past-the-post voting mechanism and the difficulty of securing a spot on the ballot in all fifty states, severely limit Alex's chances of making a significant impact in the presidential race. Moreover, the lack of media coverage and exclusion from major debates further marginalizes their campaign. Given the scenario, Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Alex Martinez to achieve their goal of being elected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Alex Martinez could use to still have an influence. Part C: Discuss the potential impact of Alex Martinez's campaign on the political landscape, even if they do not win the presidency.

Concept Application: Barriers - Veteran Politician

Sarah Thompson, a long-serving member of Congress, has built her career on championing healthcare reform and workers' rights. Over the years, she has gained a reputation as a steadfast advocate for progressive policies. However, as the political climate shifts towards a more centrist and conservative stance, Sarah finds her reelection campaign challenged by a newcomer who appeals to the changing demographics and political preferences of the district. Sarah's extensive political experience and her commitment to progressive ideals, while once her greatest assets, now pose a barrier to connecting with newer constituents who prioritize economic growth and security over expansive healthcare reform. The changing political landscape of her district, characterized by an influx of younger families and business professionals, calls for a reevaluation of her campaign strategy. Given the scenario, Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Sarah Thompson to achieve her goal of being reelected. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Sarah Thompson could use to still have an influence. Part C: Assess how the changing demographics and political preferences in Sarah Thompson's district might influence her policy priorities and campaign messaging.

Concept Application: Constitution - Free Speech and Public Protests

In recent years, the rise of social media platforms has significantly amplified the ability of individuals and groups to organize and express their political beliefs. A notable example occurred when a large group of citizens, dissatisfied with certain government policies, organized a peaceful protest in a major city's public square. The protest aimed to draw attention to their cause and demand change. However, the city government, citing concerns about public safety and order, imposed strict regulations on the protest, including limiting the number of participants and requiring the organizers to obtain expensive permits. The organizers argued that these restrictions infringed upon their constitutional rights, sparking a nationwide debate on the balance between public safety and the freedom of speech. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the right to organize and participate in protests. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Discuss how social media platforms have influenced the organization and impact of political protests.

Concept Application: Constitution - Freedom of Religion

In a small town in the United States, a new religious group sought to establish a place of worship. The group purchased a piece of land and submitted the necessary applications to the local government for building permits. However, the town council, citing zoning regulations that were ambiguously worded, denied the permits. Members of the religious group felt that the denial was based not on zoning laws but on prejudice against their faith. The case quickly gained national attention, with various civil liberties organizations stepping in to support the religious group's right to practice their faith freely. This incident sparked a broader conversation about religious freedom and the role of government in regulating places of worship. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the right to freely practice one's religion. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Explain the potential impact of local government decisions on the practice of religious freedom.

A local newspaper published a series of articles criticizing the mayor's handling of city finances, alleging mismanagement and corruption. The mayor, claiming that the articles were defamatory and harmed his reputation, sought a court injunction to prevent the newspaper from publishing further articles on the subject. The newspaper argued that their reporting was protected under the First Amendment and that the injunction would constitute prior restraint, violating their freedom of the press. The case quickly escalated, garnering attention from media outlets nationwide and sparking a debate on the limits of press freedom. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the freedom of the press. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Discuss the significance of the concept of 'prior restraint' in relation to freedom of the press.

Concept Application: Constitution - Right to Privacy

The advent of advanced technology has raised significant concerns regarding privacy rights. In a landmark case, a citizen sued a tech company for collecting and selling personal data without explicit consent. The case highlighted the tension between technological advancement and the right to privacy. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the actions of the tech company violated constitutional protections. The case brought to the forefront the question of how modern interpretations of the Constitution apply to digital privacy and the extent to which individuals can expect privacy in the digital age. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects an individual's right to privacy. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution, even though digital privacy was not a concern at the time. Part C: Evaluate the challenges of applying traditional privacy protections in the context of digital technology.

Following a series of high-profile incidents involving gun violence, a state legislature passed a law imposing strict regulations on firearm ownership, including mandatory background checks, waiting periods, and restrictions on certain types of firearms. Advocates for gun control praised the legislation as a necessary step to protect public safety, while opponents argued that it infringed upon their Second Amendment rights. The debate intensified when a group of citizens, supported by a national gun rights organization, filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law. The case was set to be heard by the Supreme Court, which would determine whether the state's regulations were a permissible exercise of government power or an unconstitutional infringement on the right to bear arms. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the right to bear arms. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Analyze the implications of the Supreme Court's potential ruling on the balance between individual rights and public safety.

Concept Application: Misc - Ideological Polarization

In a closely divided town, local elections have become increasingly contentious, with candidates and their supporters often engaging in heated debates over policy issues. The town's political landscape is sharply divided along ideological lines, with conservative and liberal residents supporting candidates who align with their respective beliefs. This polarization has led to a series of public forums where community members passionately discuss and sometimes clash over issues such as local taxes, education reform, and environmental policies. Despite the tension, these forums have also provided an opportunity for residents to articulate their positions and engage in the democratic process. Analyze the causes of ideological polarization in this town and its effects on the political climate and community relations. Additionally, discuss the potential benefits and drawbacks of such polarization for democratic engagement.

Concept Application: Misc - Media Influence on Public Opinion

During an election year, a major news organization decides to conduct an in-depth investigation into the voting records and policy positions of the leading candidates. The investigation reveals significant discrepancies between some candidates' campaign promises and their previous actions in office. The news organization publishes a series of articles and broadcasts detailing their findings, accompanied by expert analysis and historical context. The coverage quickly goes viral on social media, sparking widespread discussion and debate among the electorate. Given the role of the media in shaping public opinion, assess the potential impact of this investigative reporting on the candidates' public images and the election outcome. Additionally, consider how the candidates might respond to mitigate any negative effects of the coverage.

Concept Application: Misc - Political Socialization

A high school civics teacher decides to conduct a class project that explores students' political beliefs and the factors that have influenced them. Students are asked to complete a survey that includes questions about their political ideology, party affiliation, and the sources of their political beliefs, such as family, education, media, and social networks. After collecting the surveys, the teacher notices a strong correlation between students' political ideologies and those of their parents. Additionally, the influence of social media on students' political beliefs is significantly higher than that of traditional news sources. Analyze the role of family and social media in the political socialization process of these students. Discuss the implications of these findings for understanding the formation of political beliefs among young people.

Concept Application: Misc - Public Opinion and Policy Making

In the midst of a heated debate on healthcare reform, a group of senators have decided to conduct a series of public opinion polls to gauge the nation's stance on various proposals. The first poll focuses on the public's support for expanding Medicare to cover all citizens, regardless of age. The second poll examines attitudes towards implementing stricter regulations on pharmaceutical companies to lower drug prices. Both polls utilize stratified random sampling to ensure representation across different demographics. The results show a clear divide, with younger populations strongly supporting Medicare expansion, while older demographics express concerns over potential tax increases. On the issue of pharmaceutical regulations, there is overwhelming support across all age groups. Given the results, the senators are contemplating how to proceed with drafting legislation that reflects the public's preferences while also navigating the complexities of party politics and interest group pressures.

Concept Application: Misc - The Role of Referendums

A state government is considering the legalization of recreational marijuana and has decided to put the issue to a public vote through a referendum. Leading up to the vote, various interest groups launch campaigns both in support of and against the measure. Pro-legalization groups argue that legalization will reduce crime, generate tax revenue, and allow for regulation of the drug. Opponents raise concerns about public health, safety, and the moral implications of legalization. The debate intensifies as the referendum approaches, with both sides using social media, public forums, and advertising to sway public opinion. Analyze the use of a referendum in this scenario as a tool for measuring public opinion on the issue of marijuana legalization. Discuss the implications of the referendum's outcome for state policy and the broader political climate.

SCOTUS Comparison - District of Columbia v. Heller

In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court addressed whether a District of Columbia handgun ban violated the Second Amendment rights of individuals to keep and bear arms for self-defense in their own homes. The plaintiff, Dick Anthony Heller, argued that the ban on handgun possession in the home and the requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense violated the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Heller, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Compare District of Columbia v. Heller to McDonald v. Chicago.

In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), Dick Heller, a D.C. special police officer, filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the District of Columbia's handgun ban, claiming it violated the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Heller, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The majority opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, emphasized that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms. This decision marked a significant interpretation of the Second Amendment, focusing on the right of an individual to bear arms for self-defense. Compare District of Columbia v. Heller to McDonald v. Chicago.

SCOTUS Comparison - Griswold v. Connecticut

In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court addressed whether Connecticut's law criminalizing the use of contraceptives by married couples violated the Constitution. Estelle Griswold, the executive director of the Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, and Dr. C. Lee Buxton opened a birth control clinic in New Haven, Connecticut, and were arrested and fined for violating the law. They argued that the statute was unconstitutional because it violated the right to marital privacy. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Griswold, holding that the Constitution protected the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on contraception. The Court found that the right to privacy in marital relations is within the penumbra of specific guarantees of the Bill of Rights. Compare Griswold v. Connecticut to Engel v. Vitale.

SCOTUS Comparison - Lawrence v. Texas

In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Supreme Court addressed whether a Texas statute making it a crime for two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual conduct violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. John Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner were arrested in Lawrence's home and convicted of deviate sexual intercourse under the Texas statute. They argued that the statute was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lawrence and Garner, holding that the statute violated their liberty to engage in private consensual sexual conduct under the Due Process Clause. The Court's decision in Lawrence explicitly overruled Bowers v. Hardwick, a previous decision that upheld a similar statute. Compare Lawrence v. Texas to Wisconsin v. Yoder.

In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed out-of-state. The plaintiffs argued that the states' bans on same-sex marriage and refusal to recognize legal marriages performed in other jurisdictions violated the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantees of equal protection and due process. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, holding that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, same-sex couples may not be deprived of that right and liberty. Compare Obergefell v. Hodges to Brown v. Board of Education.

In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), several same-sex couples sued state agencies in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee to challenge the constitutionality of those states' bans on same-sex marriage or refusal to recognize legal same-sex marriages that occurred in jurisdictions that provided for such marriages. The plaintiffs argued that the states' statutes violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses by denying them the right to marry or have marriages lawfully performed in another state given full recognition. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, holding that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, same-sex couples may not be deprived of that right and liberty. The Court's majority opinion, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, emphasized that the Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity. Compare Obergefell v. Hodges to Brown v. Board of Education.

SCOTUS Comparison - Reed v. Town of Gilbert

In Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of sign regulations imposed by the town of Gilbert, Arizona, which differentiated between types of signs based on their content, applying different restrictions to political, ideological, and directional signs. The plaintiffs, including a church that used temporary signs to direct people to its services, argued that the town's sign code was a content-based regulation of speech that violated the First Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Reed, holding that the sign code did indeed impose content-based restrictions on speech and thus was subject to strict scrutiny, which it failed to pass. The majority opinion, delivered by Justice Thomas, emphasized that government regulation of speech is content-based if a law applies to particular speech because of the topic discussed or the idea or message expressed. Compare Reed v. Town of Gilbert to Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.

Argumentative Essay - The Effectiveness of Lobbying in Shaping Policy

Argumentative Essay - The Effectiveness of Primary Elections

Argumentative Essay - The Impact of Voter ID Laws on Democratic Participation

Argumentative Essay - The Influence of Political Action Committees on Elections

Argumentative Essay - The Role of Third Parties in the US Political System

Concept Application: Barriers - Campaign Finance

In the upcoming senatorial race, a newcomer to politics, Alex Martinez, decides to run as an Independent candidate in a state traditionally dominated by one of the major parties. Alex, a local entrepreneur with a strong background in community service, aims to address issues such as economic inequality, education reform, and healthcare access. Despite a growing base of support from the community and a compelling platform, Alex faces significant challenges in competing against well-established candidates from the major parties. One of the primary barriers Alex encounters is securing sufficient campaign funds. Major party candidates benefit from established fundraising networks, support from Political Action Committees (PACs), and access to party resources. In contrast, Alex struggles to gain financial backing, limiting the reach of his campaign and his ability to effectively communicate his message to a broader electorate. Part A: Identify ONE barrier related to campaign finance that would make it harder for Alex to compete effectively in the senatorial race. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Alex could use to still have an influence on the election or political discourse. Part C: Explain how the current campaign finance system could potentially affect the diversity of candidates and ideas in political races.

Concept Application: Barriers - Gerrymandering

In the upcoming congressional elections, a district has been redrawn in a manner that critics claim is an example of gerrymandering. The new district boundaries seem to favor the incumbent party by grouping together voters of the opposing party into a single district, thereby diluting their influence in surrounding districts. Sam Johnson, a candidate from the opposition party, decides to run in one of the newly drawn districts. Despite having strong support within the district, Sam faces challenges due to the gerrymandered boundaries that appear to limit the competitiveness of the race. Sam's campaign focuses on reaching out to voters across the district, emphasizing the importance of fair representation and the need for electoral reform. Part A: Identify ONE barrier to fair competition in the election as described in the scenario. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Sam could use to still have an influence on the election or political discourse. Part C: Explain the potential impact of gerrymandering on the democratic process and voter engagement.

In a highly anticipated mayoral race in a large city, incumbent Mayor Johnson seeks reelection against a relatively unknown challenger, Jamie Lee. Mayor Johnson has held the position for several terms and enjoys widespread name recognition, access to a large network of donors, and the support of the city's major political party. Jamie, on the other hand, is a community organizer with a strong vision for the city but lacks the resources and visibility of the incumbent. Despite these challenges, Jamie's campaign gains traction through grassroots efforts and a focus on local issues such as affordable housing and public transportation. Jamie's message resonates with many city residents who feel their concerns have been overlooked. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Jamie to win the election. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Jamie could use to still have an influence on the election or political discourse. Part C: Discuss the potential effects of incumbent advantage on electoral competition and the diversity of political representation.

Concept Application: Barriers - Third Party Challenges

In the 2024 presidential election, the Green Party decides to run a candidate who has a strong environmental platform, aiming to challenge the dominance of the Democratic and Republican candidates. The Green Party candidate, Dr. Sierra Verde, is a well-respected environmental scientist with a passionate following among young voters and environmental activists. Dr. Verde's campaign focuses on climate change, renewable energy, and environmental justice, attracting attention from various media outlets and gaining momentum on social media platforms. Despite the enthusiasm surrounding Dr. Verde's campaign, she faces significant obstacles in her quest for the presidency. The electoral system, designed to support a two-party system, presents a structural barrier to third-party candidates. Additionally, the lack of name recognition and limited access to campaign funds compared to the Democratic and Republican candidates further complicates her campaign efforts. Part A: Identify ONE structural barrier as described in the scenario that would make it harder for Dr. Verde to achieve her goal of winning the presidency. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific strategy or countermeasure that Dr. Verde could use to still have an influence on the election or political discourse. Part C: Discuss the potential impact of third-party candidates like Dr. Verde on the outcomes of presidential elections.

Concept Application: Barriers - Voter ID Laws

In a recent state election, a new law requiring voters to present specific forms of photo identification at the polls was implemented. This law was introduced with the intention of reducing voter fraud, but it has raised concerns among various groups. Critics argue that the law disproportionately affects minority communities, the elderly, and low-income individuals who may have difficulty obtaining the required identification. Maria Gonzalez, a local community organizer and advocate for voting rights, has been actively working to address the challenges posed by this new law. Maria's efforts include organizing workshops to assist individuals in obtaining the necessary identification, raising awareness about the law's impact on voter turnout, and lobbying state legislators to reconsider the requirements. Part A: Identify ONE barrier to voter participation introduced by the new voter ID law. Part B: Despite the barrier named in part A, identify ONE specific action Maria could take to help mitigate its impact on voter turnout. Part C: Discuss the potential consequences of voter ID laws on the overall fairness and inclusivity of elections.

Concept Application: Constitution - Freedom of Speech

At Westside High School, a group of students decides to wear black armbands to school as a form of protest against a new school policy they believe unfairly restricts student freedoms. The school administration, citing the need to maintain a distraction-free learning environment, bans the wearing of armbands and threatens disciplinary action against any student who defies the ban. The students, feeling that their rights have been violated, organize a peaceful sit-in in the school's courtyard. The situation escalates when the school calls in local law enforcement to disperse the students, leading to a public debate about the limits of free speech in educational settings. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects freedom of speech. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Evaluate the school administration's actions in the context of the constitutional right described in Part A.

In recent years, the town of Fairview has seen a dramatic increase in public interest journalism, with the local newspaper, The Fairview Gazette, at the forefront of investigative reporting. The Gazette has published a series of articles exposing corruption within the town council, leading to public outcry and demands for accountability. In response to the negative attention, the town council proposes a new ordinance that would require all local media outlets to submit their reports for review by a council-appointed committee before publication. The council argues that this measure is necessary to protect the reputation of the town and its officials and to ensure that all information disseminated to the public is accurate and fair. The Gazette's editor, Alex Johnson, sees this as a direct attack on the freedom of the press and vows to challenge the ordinance, arguing that it violates fundamental constitutional protections. The newspaper publishes an editorial condemning the proposed ordinance and calls for public support to defend the right to free and independent journalism. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects freedom of the press. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Discuss the potential impact of the proposed ordinance on the relationship between the government and the media.

Concept Application: Constitution - Right to a Fair Trial

In the city of Justiceburg, a high-profile case has captured the nation's attention. John Doe, a local business owner, has been accused of embezzlement and fraud. The case has been sensationalized by the media, leading to widespread public opinion against Doe before the trial even begins. Concerned about the potential for bias, Doe's legal team files a motion for a change of venue, arguing that the intense media coverage and public opinion have compromised Doe's right to a fair trial. The prosecution opposes the motion, claiming that the local community has a right to see justice served in their own jurisdiction and that adequate measures, such as juror screening and instructions, can mitigate potential biases. The judge is faced with a difficult decision, balancing the rights of the defendant against the interests of the public and the integrity of the judicial process. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects an individual's right to a fair trial. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Analyze the challenges in ensuring a fair trial in cases that receive intense media coverage.

In the digital age, the city of Technoville has implemented an advanced surveillance system in public spaces, including parks, streets, and public buildings. The system uses facial recognition technology to identify and track individuals in real time. The city council argues that this system is a necessary tool for enhancing public safety and preventing crime. However, a group of concerned citizens, the 'Privacy Advocates,' argue that the surveillance system infringes on their right to privacy and could lead to abuse of power by the authorities. They file a lawsuit against the city, claiming that the surveillance system violates constitutional protections. The case gains national attention, sparking a debate about the balance between public safety and individual privacy rights in the modern world. The court is tasked with determining whether the city's use of surveillance technology constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure and if it infringes upon the citizens' right to privacy. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects an individual's right to privacy. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Discuss the implications of the city's surveillance system on the constitutional right described in Part A.

Concept Application: Constitution - The Right to Assemble

In the small town of Libertyville, a group of citizens has grown increasingly concerned about the state of their local environment, particularly the pollution of a nearby river that is a popular spot for fishing and swimming. The group, calling themselves 'Clean River Now,' decides to organize a peaceful demonstration at the town square to raise awareness and demand action from local authorities. The demonstration is well-attended, with participants carrying signs, distributing informational pamphlets, and giving speeches about the importance of protecting the river. The event is peaceful, but it draws the attention of the local government, which claims that the group did not obtain the necessary permits to hold a public gathering. The town council argues that the demonstration could have obstructed emergency services and disrupted local businesses. As a result, the council issues fines to the organizers and seeks to prevent future gatherings without proper authorization. Part A: Using information from the passage, describe the enumerated power in the United States Constitution that protects the right to assemble. Part B: Identify ONE reason why the founding fathers may have intended for the enumerated power stated in part A to be a part of our constitution. Part C: Explain how local regulations on permits for public gatherings could both support and potentially infringe upon the constitutional right described in Part A.

Concept Application: Misc - Campaign Finance Reform

In the midst of a heated presidential campaign, a new political action committee (PAC), named 'Future Bright,' emerges with the intention of supporting a candidate who promises significant educational reform. The PAC quickly garners attention for its aggressive fundraising tactics and substantial ad buys in key swing states. Within weeks, 'Future Bright' raises millions of dollars, much of it from a few wealthy donors who are passionate about education. The PAC's activities spark a national conversation about the influence of money in politics, particularly the role of super PACs and their ability to collect unlimited funds from individuals, corporations, and unions, as long as they do not coordinate directly with the campaigns they support. The controversy intensifies when a leading national newspaper publishes an investigative report revealing that several of the PAC's major donors have business interests that could benefit from the educational reforms proposed by the candidate 'Future Bright' supports. The report raises questions about the potential for conflicts of interest and the impact of wealthy individuals and corporations on election outcomes and policy decisions. Critics argue that the current campaign finance system allows for undue influence on the political process, while supporters of 'Future Bright' defend the PAC's activities as a legitimate form of political expression and advocacy. Given this scenario, analyze the role and impact of political action committees and super PACs in the American political system. Consider the implications of unlimited fundraising and spending by these groups on elections and policy making.

Concept Application: Misc - Electoral College Debate

Following a presidential election, a significant controversy arises when the candidate who wins the popular vote loses the Electoral College and, consequently, the presidency. This outcome leads to widespread protests and calls for reform of the Electoral College system. Advocates for reform argue that the current system is outdated and undermines the principle of 'one person, one vote' by giving disproportionate influence to smaller states. Opponents of reform, however, contend that the Electoral College is a foundational element of the American federal system, designed to protect the interests of smaller states and ensure a broad consensus for the presidency. The debate intensifies as a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduces legislation to abolish the Electoral College in favor of a direct national popular vote for president. The proposal sparks a heated discussion about the constitutional, political, and practical implications of such a change. Supporters of the legislation argue that it would make presidential elections more democratic and reflective of the will of the people, while opponents raise concerns about the potential for regional polarization and the marginalization of rural areas. Given this scenario, analyze the arguments for and against the abolition of the Electoral College. Consider the implications of switching to a direct national popular vote for the presidency on the American political system.

Following a decennial census, the state legislature in a politically divided state undertakes the process of redistricting. The majority party in the legislature uses its control to redraw congressional and state legislative district boundaries in a way that significantly advantages its candidates in future elections. This practice, known as gerrymandering, leads to oddly shaped districts that divide communities and dilute the voting power of the minority party's supporters. As a result, the majority party is able to secure a disproportionate number of seats in both the state legislature and Congress, despite receiving only a slim majority of the total vote in the state. The redistricting process and its outcomes spark outrage among voters, political analysts, and civil rights organizations, who argue that gerrymandering undermines the principles of democratic representation and electoral fairness. Legal challenges are filed against the new district maps, claiming that they violate constitutional rights and protections. The controversy brings national attention to the issue of gerrymandering and its impact on the American political system. Given this scenario, analyze the effects of gerrymandering on electoral fairness and democratic representation. Consider the legal and political challenges to gerrymandering and the potential solutions to address this issue.

Concept Application: Misc - Third Party Impact

In a closely contested presidential election, a third-party candidate, Dr. Maria Gonzales, gains significant traction among voters dissatisfied with the major party candidates. Dr. Gonzales, running on a platform focused on comprehensive healthcare reform and environmental protection, manages to secure a substantial percentage of the popular vote. Her campaign draws support from a diverse coalition of voters, including young people, healthcare professionals, and environmental activists. As the election approaches, analysts predict that Dr. Gonzales's candidacy could potentially sway the outcome by drawing votes away from one of the major party candidates, leading to concerns about the 'spoiler effect.' The election results reveal that Dr. Gonzales did not win any electoral votes but had a significant impact on the popular vote in several key swing states. This outcome leads to a renewed debate about the role of third parties in the American electoral system and the challenges they face, such as ballot access restrictions, lack of media coverage, and the winner-take-all electoral system. Advocates for electoral reform argue that the current system discourages third-party participation and limits voter choice, while opponents claim that it ensures stability and prevents fragmentation. Given this scenario, analyze the impact of third-party candidates on presidential elections and the challenges they face in the American electoral system. Consider the arguments for and against electoral reform to encourage greater third-party participation.

Concept Application: Misc - Voter ID Laws

In the lead-up to a critical midterm election, several states enact new voter ID laws requiring voters to present specific forms of photo identification at the polls. Proponents of the laws argue that they are necessary to prevent voter fraud and ensure the integrity of elections. However, critics contend that these laws disproportionately affect minority, elderly, and low-income voters, who are less likely to possess the required forms of ID. As a result, numerous civil rights organizations launch campaigns to challenge the laws in court and to assist affected voters in obtaining the necessary identification. The controversy escalates when a study released by a non-partisan think tank finds that the new voter ID laws could potentially disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of eligible voters in the affected states. The report sparks a national debate about the balance between securing elections and protecting voting rights. In response to the outcry, some states begin to reconsider their laws, while others double down, citing concerns about election security. Given this scenario, analyze the impact of voter ID laws on voter turnout and the electoral process. Consider the arguments for and against these laws and their potential effects on different segments of the population.

SCOTUS Comparison - Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett

In Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett (2011), the Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of Arizona's public financing law, which provided additional funds to publicly financed candidates who were outspent by privately financed opponents. The plaintiffs argued that this law penalized them for exercising their First Amendment rights by spending money on political speech. The Court ruled that the law substantially burdened political speech and was not justified by a compelling state interest to prevent corruption. This decision further underscored the Court's stance on protecting political speech in the campaign finance context. Compare Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

SCOTUS Comparison - Buckley v. Valeo

In Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of campaign finance in the wake of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974. The plaintiffs argued that the Act's limitations on individual contributions to political campaigns and candidates, as well as its mandatory spending limits, infringed upon First Amendment rights of free speech and association. The Supreme Court ruled that while limits on individual contributions to campaigns were constitutional to prevent corruption or the appearance of corruption, mandatory spending limits on campaigns were unconstitutional because they restricted the quantity of political communication. Compare Buckley v. Valeo to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

SCOTUS Comparison - Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.

In Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. (2007), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether issue advocacy ads could be prohibited under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act's ban on corporate and union-funded electioneering communications close to an election. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. argued that their issue advocacy ads were not express advocacy for or against a candidate and thus should not be subject to the ban. The Court ruled that the First Amendment protected these types of ads as long as they were genuine issue ads and not the functional equivalent of express advocacy for or against a specific candidate. Compare Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

SCOTUS Comparison - McCutcheon v. FEC

In McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (2014), the Supreme Court addressed federal aggregate limits on how much money an individual can donate to all federal candidates, political parties, and political action committees combined, over a two-year period. The plaintiff, Shaun McCutcheon, argued that these aggregate limits violated the First Amendment by restricting the amount of political speech an individual could support. The Court ruled that the aggregate limits did indeed infringe upon the First Amendment rights, as they did not serve a direct role in preventing corruption or the appearance of corruption, unlike base limits on individual contributions to specific candidates. Compare McCutcheon v. FEC to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

SCOTUS Comparison - Speechnow.org v. FEC

In Speechnow.org v. Federal Election Commission (2010), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit addressed the issue of limits on contributions to independent expenditure-only groups, also known as super PACs. Speechnow.org argued that limits on contributions to groups that only made independent expenditures violated the First Amendment's free speech protections. The court ruled that the government had no anti-corruption interest in limiting donations to independent expenditure groups, as these groups were prohibited from coordinating directly with candidates or parties. This decision expanded upon the Citizens United ruling by allowing unlimited contributions to super PACs from individuals, corporations, and unions. Compare Speechnow.org v. FEC to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

• Teacher Opportunities
• AP U.S. Government Key Terms
• Bureaucracy & Regulation
• Campaigns & Elections
• Civil Rights & Civil Liberties
• Comparative Government
• Constitutional Foundation
• Criminal Law & Justice
• Economics & Financial Literacy
• English & Literature
• Environmental Policy & Land Use
• Executive Branch
• Federalism and State Issues
• Foreign Policy
• Gun Rights & Firearm Legislation
• Immigration
• Interest Groups & Lobbying
• Judicial Branch
• Legislative Branch
• Political Parties
• Science & Technology
• Social Services
• State History
• Supreme Court Cases
• U.S. History
• World History

Log-in to bookmark & organize content - it's free!

• Bell Ringers
• Lesson Plans
• Featured Resources

Lesson Plan: AP Government: Argumentative Essay Practice

The Federalist Papers

Boston College professor Mary Sarah Bilder gives a brief overview backgrounding the Federalist Papers

Description

This is intended as an end-of-course review activity for practice with the argumentative essay format included on the AP United States Government and Politics exam since the 2018 redesign. Eleven practice prompts are provided, reflecting content from Units 1-3.

ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY PROMPT ANALYSIS

• Review the provided Argumentative Essay Prompts in either an individual or jigsaw format.
• Write a thesis statement for your selected prompt(s) and identify the selection you would make from the provided list and the second piece of evidence you would choose.
• If there are prompts for which you struggle to develop a thesis, or items on the bulleted lists with which you are not conversant, use the hyperlinked C-SPAN Classroom resources to extend your understanding of the required founding documents and SCOTUS cases that you found challenging.

ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY

• Chose one or more of the provided Argumentative Essay Prompts , as assigned, and use the planning and exploration you did above to write a full essay in response to your designated prompt(s) in 25 or fewer minutes , since that's the time limit you'll face on the AP Exam!
• Exchange essays with a classmate and evaluate each others' work.
• 1st Amendment
• Branches Of Government
• Constitution
• House Of Representatives
• Separation Of Powers
• Supreme Court

Find what you need to study

2024 AP US Government & Politics Exam Guide

11 min read • july 12, 2023

Your Guide to the 2024 AP US Government & Politics Exam

We know that studying for your AP exams can be stressful, but Fiveable has your back! We created a study plan to help you crush your AP Government and Politics exam. This guide will continue to update with information about the 2024 exams, as well as helpful resources to help you do your best on test day. Unlock Cram Mode for access to our cram events—students who have successfully passed their AP exams will answer your questions and guide your last-minute studying LIVE! And don't miss out on unlimited access to our database of thousands of practice questions. FYI, something cool is coming your way Fall 2023! 👀

Format of the 2024 AP US Gov Exam

Going into test day, this is the format to expect:

📃 55 multiple-choice questions with 80 minutes to complete them.

There will be ~30 individual, stand-alone questions.

All the other questions will be put together into sets. You may be asked to complete a quantitative, qualitative, or visual analysis in these questions.

✍ 4 free-response questions with 100 minutes to complete them. You should devote ~20 minutes to each response.

Question 1 is always a concept application question.

Question 2 is a quantitative analysis question, where you will analyze data and come to a conclusion.

Question 3 is a Supreme Court case comparison essay. You will compare a required court case with a nonrequired one, explaining how they are related.

Lastly, question 4 is an argumentative essay .

👉 Check out the 2023 AP US Government and Politics Free-Response Section posted on the College Board site.

Scoring Rubric for the AP US Government Exam

View an example set of questions and the corresponding scoring guidelines (page 186) from the College Board to get an idea of what they look for in your responses! You can also focus in on the argumentative essay (free response #4) and take a look at that rubric here .

Check out our study plan below to find resources and tools to prepare for your AP US Government exam.

When is the 2024 AP Gov Exam and How do I Take it?

Tests will be taken in person at your school. Here is what we know from College Board so far:

The exam date will be in-person and on paper at your school on Monday, May 6, 2024 at 8 am, your local time.

You have 3 hours to take the exam. We will have more updates from College Board soon, but as of now, this is what we know!

How Should I Prepare for the AP Gov Exam?

First, you need to take stock of your progress in the course so far so that you can build your study plan according to your needs. Download the AP Government and Politics Cheatsheet PDF —a single sheet that covers everything you need to know—so that you can see a map of the entire course and quickly spot the weak areas that you need to focus on.

Then, create your study plan by focusing on your learning styles and areas to improve. Which types of questions do you need to practice more? We've put together the study plan found below to help you study between now and May. This will cover all of the units and essay types to prepare you for your exam. Pay special attention to the units that you need the most improvement in.

Study, practice, and review for test day with other students during our live cram sessions via Cram Mode . Cram live streams will teach, review, and practice important topics from AP courses, college admission tests, and college admission topics. These streams are hosted by experienced students who know what you need to succeed.

Finally, build your study schedule in advance! We highly suggest making your study schedule ahead of time so that you can easily join interactive study sessions such as live streams, voice chats, and study groups.

Pre-Work: Set Up Your Study Environment

Before you begin studying, take some time to get organized.

🖥 Create a study space.

Make sure you have a designated place at home to study. Somewhere you can keep all of your materials, where you can focus on learning, and where you are comfortable. Spend some time prepping the space with everything you need and you can even let others in the family know that this is your study space. 

📚 Organize your study materials.

Get your notebook, textbook, prep books, or whatever other physical materials you have. Also create a space for you to keep track of review. Start a new section in your notebook to take notes or start a Google Doc to keep track of your notes. Get yourself set up!

📅 Plan designated times for studying.

The hardest part about studying from home is sticking to a routine. Decide on one hour every day that you can dedicate to studying. This can be any time of the day, whatever works best for you. Set a timer on your phone for that time and really try to stick to it. The routine will help you stay on track.

🏆 Decide on an accountability plan.

How will you hold yourself accountable to this study plan? You may or may not have a teacher or rules set up to help you stay on track, so you need to set some for yourself. First set your goal. This could be studying for x number of hours or getting through a unit. Then, create a reward for yourself. If you reach your goal, then x. This will help stay focused!

🤝 Get support from your peers.  

There are thousands of students all over the world who are preparing for their AP exams just like you! Join  Rooms 🤝 to chat, ask questions, and meet other students who are also studying for the spring exams. You can even build study groups and review material together!

AP US Government & Politics 2024 Study Plan

🏛️ unit 1: foundations of american democracy, big takeaways:.

Unit 1 introduces the concept of democracy and its various forms. The documents that first started the United States are analyzed by looking at the challenges and promises associated with each. The division of power within our government: individual rights vs government authority and state vs federal government powers are at the heart of this unit and discussed within each founding document. 

Definitely do this:

🎥 Watch these videos:

Intro to American Government, models of Representative Democracy : A full review of the types of democracy, the difference between government and politics as well as the functions of government are discussed. 

Foundational Documents Review : A deep dive into the foundational documents you need to know for the exam.

Ratification of the Constitution: Constitutional Convention : A review of the compromises leading to the ratification of the Constitution. 

📰 Check out these articles:

Unit 1 Overview: Foundations of American Democracy 

1.1 Ideals of Democracy  

1.2 Types of Democracy 

1.3 Federalist No. 10 & Brutus 1 Summary 

1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation

1.5 Ratification of the US Constitution

1.6 Principles of American Government

1.7 Relationship Between States and the Federal Government

1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism

1.9 Federalism in Action 

1.10 Required Founding Documents

✍️ Practice:

Best Quizlet Deck: AP Gov Unit 1 by bryce_s

If you have more time or want to dig deeper:

👻 Check out Too Late to Apologize: An Ode to the Declaration of Independence (YouTube)

Types of Federalism Part 1 - Dual vs Cooperative

Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland and US v. Lopez

The Powers - Expressed, Implied, Concurrent, Denied...

⚖️ Unit 2: Interactions Among Branches of Government

Unit 2 dives into the separation of powers between our three branches of government. It looks at the specific powers of each branch as outlined in the Constitution and how each branch has grown in power through the years. The system of checks and balances and the role each branch plays in holding the other accountable is analyzed. 

Legislative and Judicial Branch Review : This stream provides a review of the legislative and judicial branches including their powers and role within the federal government.

Powers of the Presidency : This stream provides a review of the executive branch including its powers and role within the federal government.

Separation of Powers/Checks and Balances : This video from Crash Course reviews the separation of powers between the three branches of government. It also looks at the ways each branch “checks” the other. 

Unit 2 Overview: Interactions Among Branches of Government

2.1 Congress : The Senate and the House of Representatives

2.2 Structures, Powers, and Functions of Congress

2.3 Congressional Behavior

2.4 Roles and Power of the President

2.5 Checks on the Presidency

2.6 Expansion of Presidential Power

2.7 Presidential Communication

2.8 The Judicial Branch

2.9 Legitimacy of the Judicial Branch

2.10 The Court in Action

2.11 Checks on the Judicial Branch

2.12 The Bureaucracy

2.13 Discretionary and Rule-Making Authority

2.14 Holding the Bureaucracy Accountable

2.15 Policy and the Branches of Government

Best Quizlet Deck: Unit 2 – AP Gov by k8te13

Bill to Law Process

Review and Application of Iron Triangles and Issue Networks

Selection and Nomination of Federal Judges

✊ Unit 3: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights

Unit 3 takes the principles of our government established in Units 1 and 2 to analyze maintaining those principles while balancing liberty and order. The role of the Bill of Rights and the 14th amendment in guaranteeing civil rights and liberties for all citizens is at the heart of this unit.  

First and Second Amendments : This stream looks at what the first and second amendments say, how they have been interpreted and some of the major Supreme Court cases around them.

Civil Liberties and Civil Rights : This video from crash course provides a review of the civil liberties and civil rights guaranteed to US citizens. It also looks at the way the Bill of Rights has been interpreted since its inception in relation to liberties and rights.

The 14th Amendment : This stream breaks down the 14th amendment and many of the key terms associated with it: due process, equal protection, incorporation, citizenship, and privileges or immunities clause. 

Required Supreme Court Cases from 1st-10th Amendments : This stream reviews Supreme Court cases about the 1st-10th Amendments and how they protect civil liberties today!

Unit 3 Overview: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights

3.1 The Bill of Rights

3.2 First Amendment: Freedom of Religion

3.3 First Amendment: Freedom of Speech

3.4 First Amendment: Freedom of the Press

3.5 Second Amendment: Rights to Bear Arms

3.6 Amendments: Balancing Individual Freedom with Public Order and Safety

3.7 Selective Incorporation & the 14th Amendment

3.8 Amendments: Due Process and the Rights of the Accused

3.9 Amendments: Due Process and the Right to Privacy

3.10 Social Movements and Equal Protection

3.11 Government Responses to Social Movements

3.12 Balancing Minority and Majority Rights

3.13 Affirmative Action

Best Quizlet Deck: AP Gov – Civil Liberties and Rights by Sandy_Midgley

📜 Check out Bill of Rights and Bill of Rights (YouTube)

Civil Liberties and Civil Rights (Fiveable stream)

🐘Unit 4: American Political Ideologies and Beliefs

Unit 4 focuses on political ideology - the idea that there are different and consistent patterns of beliefs about political values and the role of government within the context that we live in. This unit will discuss the different American ideologies and how major parties influence them.

Political Socialization and Political Ideology : This stream discusses what influences people's political views and a few different dominant political ideologies.

Political Parties and Their Platforms : This stream dives into the major beliefs and ideologies of the Republican and Democratic party platforms, the history of political parties, their impact on voters and the government, and third parties were also discussed.

Economic Ideology - Keynesian vs Supply Side : In this stream we dived into fiscal economic theory and policy, looking at the liberal take on Keynesian theory and the conservative look at supply-side theory. 

Unit 4 Overview: American Political Ideologies and Beliefs

4.1 American Attitudes about Government and Politics

4.2 Political Socialization

4.4 Influence of Political Events on Ideology

4.5 Measuring Public Opinion

4.6 Evaluating Public Opinion Data

4.7 Ideologies of Political Parties

4.8 Ideology and Policy Making

4.9 Ideology and Economic Policy

4.10 Ideology and Social Policy

Best Quizlet Deck: AP GOV Unit 4 by MARGARET_CYLKOWSKI

A Review of Public Policy (Social Policy)

A Review of Public Policy (Economic Policy)

Social Security, Healthcare, and Education Policy

🗳Unit 5: Political Participation

This unit focuses on how we, citizens, can participate in politics as well as how the media, finance and other factors play a part in our government and policy-making. 

Voting and Voter Behavior : Who votes and why do they vote? This stream answers these questions and explains the process of voting in the US in this stream.

Campaign Finance : Campaign finance isn't as scary as you think! This stream looks at the Federal Elections Campaign Act, hard vs soft money, Buckley vs Valeo, Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, Citizens United vs FEC, 501(c)s, and more!

Media Ownership and Bias :  This steam discusses the growing concentration of media companies and how bias in media affects both policy-making and public interest.

Critical Elections: Realignments and Dealignment : Often, students are confused on the differences between a party realignment and dealignment. This stream covers those around the five critical elections in US history. 

Unit 5 Overview: Political Participation

5.1 Voting Rights and Models of Voting Behaviour

5.2 Voter Turnout

5.3 Political Parties

5.4 How and Why Political Parties Change

5.5 Third-Party Politics

5.6 Interest Groups Influencing Policy Making

5.7 Groups Influencing Policy Outcomes

5.8 Electing a President

5.9 Congressional Elections

5.10 Modern Campaigns

5.11 Campaign Finance

5.12 The Media

5.13 Changing Media

Best Quizlet Deck: AP Government - Political Participation by Carpenter-Economics

🧐AP US Government - Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ)

AP US Government Multiple Choice Questions

AP US Government Multiple Choice Help (MCQ)

🏛️AP US Government - Free Response Questions (FRQ)

Breaking Down the Supreme Court Case Comparison Essay : This stream discusses how exactly to write the Supreme Court Case Comparison Essay, FRQ #3, on the AP Gov exam! We talked about the elements of a good response, and wrote one ourselves!

Writing Workshop on the Argumentative Essay : This stream explores the Argumentative Essay, looking at the rubric and then using the remainder of the time to practice our skills. 

AP US Government Free Response Help - FRQs

FRQ: Conceptual Analysis

FRQ: SCOTUS Application

AP Gov FRQ: Argument Essay Review (2020)

AP Gov FRQ: Quantitative Analysis Review (2020)

AP Gov SAQ Practice Prompt Answers & Feedback

AP GoPo Free Response Questions (FRQ) – Past Prompts

AP Gov Federalism Practice Prompt Answers & Feedback

Stay Connected

© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Jamelle Bouie

When Politicians Invoke the Founding Fathers, Remember This

By Jamelle Bouie

Opinion Columnist

As things stand now, 48 states are set to allocate their electors this November according to the winner of the popular vote in their state. Whoever gets the most votes — no matter the margin — gets all the electors.

In the remaining two states, Maine and Nebraska, the process works a little differently. There, electoral votes are partly divvied up on a proportional basis. In Nebraska, two of its five electoral votes are given to the winner of the statewide popular vote, and the other three are given to the victor in each of the state’s three congressional districts. In Maine, two of the state’s four electoral votes go to the winner of the popular vote, and the other two are split between its two congressional districts.

In the 2020 presidential election, for only the second time since it adopted this system in 1991, Nebraska split its electoral votes between the two candidates on the ballot. Donald Trump won the state and its First and Third Congressional Districts, and Joe Biden won the Second Congressional District, representing parts of Omaha and surrounding areas.

Biden won that election with 306 electoral votes; the Nebraska elector did not make a difference. But in an exceedingly close election — say, an election between an unpopular incumbent and an equally unpopular challenger (himself a former incumbent) — it could. Which is why Nebraska Republicans have begun an effort, backed by Trump , to end its quasi-proportional allocation of electoral votes.

Nebraska Republicans seem to know that this move is a vigorous exercise in partisan venality, which is why they’ve tried to defend it with a time-honored appeal to the founding fathers. “It would bring Nebraska in line with 48 of our fellow states, better reflect the founders’ intent and ensure our state speaks with one unified voice in presidential elections,” Gov. Jim Pillen, a Republican, wrote in a statement. (Trump called it “ a very smart letter .”)

It is well within the rights of the Nebraska Legislature to adopt the winner-take-all system that most other states use to allocate electors. But I am less interested in the substance of the change than I am in the justification for the decision. That is the common, even ubiquitous, idea that the current form of the Electoral College represents the original intent of the drafters and ratifiers of the Constitution. The problem is simple: It’s not true.

Any attempt to impute an original intent to the framers’ construction of the Electoral College runs into the basic problem that it was, even compared with everything else in the Constitution, a last-minute and hastily constructed compromise meant to get around a large set of almost intractable differences.

Delegates to the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 were consumed with argument over the method and mode of presidential selection. In the first vote taken on the issue, early in the convention, most delegates favored legislative selection. But several of the most influential delegates, among them James Madison of Virginia, thought that this threatened the separation of powers and thus the basic structure of the new government.

Madison observed in his notes that it was “a fundamental principle of free government that the legislative, executive and judiciary powers should be separately … and independently exercised.” As such, it was “essential, then, that the appointment of the executive should either be drawn from some source or held by some tenure that will give him a free agency with regard to the legislature.”

Madison and his like-minded allies — the Pennsylvanians James Wilson and Gouverneur Morris, for example — favored a national popular vote to choose the president. Direct election by “the people” (for the most part, property-owning white men) would guarantee executive independence and filter for men of “distinguished character or services.” On the other side were Southern delegates who thought a popular vote would put them on the losing side of presidential contests; the free population of the North was, of course, larger than the free population of the South. Still other delegates wanted the legislative option to prevail.

In “ Why Do We Still Have the Electoral College? ” the historian Alexander Keyssar writes that more than a few other ideas bubbled up over the course of that summer. Among them:

selection by the governors of the states or by state legislatures; election by a committee of 15 legislators chosen by lot (and obliged to act as soon as they were chosen, to avoid intrigue); a popular election in which each voter cast ballots for two or three candidates, only one of whom could be from his own state: nomination of one candidate by the people of each state, with the winner to then be chosen by the national legislature.

As the convention came to a close, the exhausted delegates finally made a choice: Someone else would have to choose. They turned the issue over to a committee on “postponed parts.” That committee, in turn, tried to chart a path of least resistance through the options at hand. First, it adopted an idea — introduced during the summer of discussion — to have electors act as intermediaries between the public and the selection of the president. In a concession to supporters of legislative selection, those electors would gather in a purpose-made body to make their decision. In a nod to the concerns of Southern delegates, the distribution of electors would be based on representation in the House and Senate.

The committee made its recommendation, and with one major modification — the House of Representatives, not the Senate, would decide in the event that no candidate earned a majority — the convention accepted it. The delegates had no real sense of how the Electoral College would work in practice. More than a few thought that most elections would be decided by the House. And in any case, they also knew that however the people chose a president, their first choice would be George Washington. To both the framers and the ratifiers, the mechanism was less important than the man.

In the first presidential elections of the American republic, the Electoral College worked mostly as designed. Some states held popular elections to choose electors; others had them selected by state legislatures. Electors cast their ballots for the man who would be president, Washington, and designated a candidate for vice president as well, John Adams (an effort that required some coordination, since until the ratification of the 12th Amendment, electors could not cast separate ballots for president and vice president). But with the full emergence of partisan politics during Washington’s second term and his departure at its conclusion, state legislatures, essentially acting as partisan political organizations, tried to game the system.

“States,” Keyssar notes, “took advantage of the flexible constitutional architecture to switch procedures from one election to the next.” They would move from legislative selection of electors to a district-based vote to a winner-take-all election (called the general ticket), depending on which option was more likely to secure victory for the legislature’s favored candidate. Virginia, for example, switched from district elections to winner-take-all in 1800 to help Thomas Jefferson win the presidency.

As formal political parties took shape — and center stage — in American politics, more and more state legislatures adopted winner-take-all allocation of electors, in addition to taking steps to ensure that electors would not be independent of the party that chose them. By the time of Jefferson’s battle for re-election in 1804, the framers’ Electoral College — a deliberative body that would filter candidates for selection by the House — was a dead letter. In its place was an effectively new system tailored to partisan reality.

As Keyssar writes:

Candidates for president and vice president were put forward by political parties, centered in Congress; the parties also coordinated the election campaigns. Nearly everywhere the strategic goal of these campaigns was to win legislative or popular majorities within entire states — since all but four (out of 17) delivered their full complement of electoral votes to one candidate. Those votes were physically cast by electors who gathered in state capitals and served simply as messengers: they did not deliberate, discuss or “think.”

The Electoral College as we know it is less a product of the insight or design of the framers and more a contingent adaptation to the political world that emerged out of the first decade of the American republic. That world would change again, in the 1820s and ’30s, with the rise of Andrew Jackson, universal white male suffrage and the mass political party. The electoral system would adjust; by 1837, not willing to lose any partisan advantage, every state (save South Carolina) would adopt winner-take-all allocation of electors by popular vote. The tally of popular votes took on new significance as well: It stood, for the winner, as a symbol of popular legitimacy, even if it didn’t contribute to the outcome of the election.

There is nothing in the Constitution that says Nebraska Republicans can’t change the way the state allocates its electoral voters. At most, if they made the change, Nebraska Republicans would be violating the informal rules of American politics, which strongly discourage this abuse of the process. Again, I think Nebraska Republicans know this, which explains their immediate appeal to the supposed intent of the framers. This is something Americans do. We use the framers — or more accurately, we use the myths and folk traditions we’ve developed around the framers — to legitimize our decisions in the present day and to try to delegitimize those of our opponents.

But whether as men or myths, the framers cannot do this. They cannot justify the choices we make while we navigate our world. The beauty and, perhaps, the curse of self-government is that it is, in fact, self-government. Our choices are our own, and we must defend them on their own terms. And while it is often good and useful to look to the past for guidance, the past cannot answer our questions or tackle our problems.

Novelty may disturb men’s minds, but we are still obligated to take our circumstances on their own terms, not those of an age long settled into dust.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here's our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

An earlier version of this article erroneously included a city in the area covered by Nebraska’s Second Congressional District. Lincoln is not part of the district.

How we handle corrections

Jamelle Bouie became a New York Times Opinion columnist in 2019. Before that he was the chief political correspondent for Slate magazine. He is based in Charlottesville, Va., and Washington. @ jbouie

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• March Madness
• AP Top 25 Poll
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Maine joins compact to elect the president by popular vote but it won’t come into play this November

FILE - Maine’s Democratic Gov. Janet Mills delivers her State of the State address, Jan. 30, 2024, at the State House in Augusta, Maine. Maine will become the latest to join a multistate effort to elect the president by popular vote with the Democratic governor’s announcement Monday, April 15, that she’s letting the proposal become law without her signature. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty, File)

• Copy Link copied

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Maine will become the latest to join a multistate effort to elect the president by popular vote with the Democratic governor’s announcement Monday that she’s letting the proposal become law without her signature.

Under the proposed compact, each state would allocate all its electoral votes to whoever wins the national popular vote for president, regardless of how individual states voted in an election.

But the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is on hold for now — and won’t play a role in the upcoming November election.

Gov. Janet Mills said she understands that there are different facets to the debate. Opponents point out that the role of small states like Maine could be diminished if the electoral college ends, while proponents point out that two of the last four presidents have been elected through the electoral college system despite losing the national popular vote.

Without a ranked voting system, Mills said she believes “the person who wins the most votes should become the president. To do otherwise seemingly runs counter to the democratic foundations of our country.”

“Still, recognizing that there is merit to both sides of the argument, and recognizing that this measure has been the subject of public discussion several times before in Maine, I would like this important nationwide debate to continue and so I will allow this bill to become law without my signature,” the governor said in a statement.

The compact would take effect only if supporters secure pledges of states with at least 270 electoral votes. Sixteen states and Washington, D.C. have joined the compact and Maine’s addition would bring the total to 209, the governor said. Other hurdles include questions of whether congressional approval is necessary to implement the compact.

In Maine, one of only two states to split their electoral votes under the current system, the debate in the Maine Legislature fell along partisan lines with Republican united in opposition.

Maine awards two of its four electoral votes to the statewide presidential winner along with one apiece for the winner of each congressional district. In 2016, the state split its electoral votes for the first time when Republican Donald Trump won a single electoral vote in the northern, conservative 2nd Congressional District. Trump collected an electoral vote again in his failed presidential bid in 2020.