The Supreme Court decided that the women suing Wal-Mart could not be part of a class-action lawsuit. The reason was lack of commonality. This means their cases were too different from each other — they worked in different stores, had different managers, and there was no clear company policy that affected all of them the same way. Because of this, the Court said they had to file separate lawsuits, not one big one together.

1. Why the Court System is Better Suited to Protect the Individual

The court system, particularly the federal judiciary, is better suited to protect individual rights because it is designed to be independent of political pressures. Unlike elected officials who may be swayed by popular opinion or special interests to secure re-election, judges—especially at the federal level—are appointed for life. This job security allows them to make rulings based on the Constitution and the law, not on what is politically expedient.

A clear example of this is Brown v. Board of Education (1954). In that case, the Supreme Court declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, even though the decision was unpopular in many parts of the country. Congress and local governments had failed to act, but the courts protected the constitutional rights of individuals who were being denied equal treatment.

2. Is the Supreme Court Anti-Democratic?

While it’s true that federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, are not elected, this does not necessarily make the system anti-democratic—it makes it counter-majoritarian. According to Federalist #10, one of the main goals of the Constitution is to prevent tyranny of the majority, where the rights of minority groups can be overridden by popular will. By insulating judges from elections, the framers ensured that the courts could stand up for minority rights, even when it’s unpopular.

The appointment system is meant to ensure that judges are highly qualified and not driven by the need to win votes. The founders believed that an educated elite should interpret the law and protect the Constitution. So while the court system may not be democratic in the traditional sense, its role is to preserve the long-term values of the republic, even against short-term majoritarian demands.

P. Williams writes that the war on terror is a new type of war because it doesn’t have a clear enemy or battlefield. Traditional wars are usually between countries, with soldiers fighting in specific places. But the war on terror is against individuals or groups that can be anywhere, even inside the United States. This makes it harder to tell who is a threat and where the fight is happening. It also means that regular laws and rules for war don’t always apply the same way.

The “Roving Wiretaps” in the Patriot Act seem to violate the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unreasonable searches and requires a specific warrant. Roving wiretaps let the government listen to someone’s conversations on any phone or device without always naming the exact device or place. This means they can spy on people without being very specific, which goes against the idea of needing a clear, limited warrant.

“Sneak and Peek” warrants also raise concerns about the Fourth Amendment. These allow law enforcement to enter someone’s home or property without telling them right away. In normal cases, people are supposed to be notified when a search happens. But with Sneak and Peek, the person may not know for weeks or months. This can feel like a secret invasion of privacy and takes away the chance to challenge the search in real time.

The Establishment Clause is part of the First Amendment, and it means the government cannot create or support an official religion. It keeps church and state separate. The Lemon Test comes from a court case called Lemon v. Kurtzman. It’s used to check if a law breaks the Establishment Clause. A law must have a clear, non-religious purpose, must not help or hurt religion, and must not make the government too involved with religion. If it fails any part, it’s unconstitutional.

Burning the US flag is protected by the First Amendment as a form of free speech. This was decided in the case Texas v. Johnson (1989). The Supreme Court ruled that even though many people find flag burning offensive, it’s still a form of political expression, and the government can’t punish someone just because their message is unpopular.

When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth,” they are using their Fifth Amendment right to remain silent so they don’t have to say something that could get them in trouble. This is the right against self-incrimination. It means they don’t have to answer questions in court or during police questioning if it could be used against them.

In a federal system, power is shared between national and state governments, and citizens participate in both. In a confederation, states have most power, and citizens engage mainly with state governments. In a unitary system, the national government holds all authority, and citizens have little direct influence on local decisions.

The division of power refers to how authority is split between different levels of government. The U.S. federal system divides power between the national and state governments, with some exclusive federal powers (like defense), some shared (like taxation), and some reserved for states (like education).

During COVID-19, the federal government influenced New York by providing funding (CARES Act, stimulus packages), issuing health guidelines (CDC mask mandates, distancing rules), supporting emergency response (National Guard assistance), and negotiating policies with state officials.

Faction reminds us of the idea of different social classes with opposing interests, like the wealthy landowners and merchants versus poor farmers and laborers.

According to Federalist #10, the source of wealth (private property) comes from the “diversity in the faculties of men.” Faculties refer to people’s abilities, intelligence, and skills. Madison argues that some people have better abilities to acquire wealth, while others do not, which leads to inequality.

Whether or not I agree depends on whether I believe wealth is only based on personal abilities or if other factors, like social conditions and opportunities, play a role.

The core mission (“first object”) of the U.S. government is to protect private property and the ability of people to acquire wealth. This might be surprising because today, many people believe the government’s role is to serve and protect all citizens equally, not just protect the wealthy.

It is not surprising that Federalist #10 is against direct democracy and supports a Republican form of government. The wealthy feared that in a pure democracy, the majority (poor people) would vote to take away their wealth. By having a republic, power stays in the hands of elected representatives, who were mostly from the upper class.

The Constitution of the United States was written by the wealthy, property-owning class, including large landowners, merchants, and bankers. These men had significant economic interests and wanted a strong central government to protect their property and wealth. The classes excluded from the process included enslaved people, indentured servants, women, Native Americans, and poor white men who did not own property. They had no voting rights or political representation and were not considered in the decision-making process.The social class structure in early America was different from today. Back then, the gap between rich and poor was vast, and only a small percentage of people had political power. Today, while inequality still exists, more people have voting rights and political participation, though economic disparities remain.The people who wrote the Constitution were afraid of democracy because they feared that the poor majority would take away their wealth and power. They believed that the “common people” were too unpredictable and could pass laws that would cancel debts or redistribute land. To prevent this, they designed a government that protected the interests of the wealthy while limiting the direct influence of ordinary citizens.

The statistic that shocked me the most was that the top 1% owns between 40-50% of the nation’s total wealth, while the bottom 90% has little or no net assets​. This shows how extreme wealth inequality is in the U.S. and how most people struggle financially while a small group holds enormous wealth.

Implications of Huge Wealth Inequality
When a few people control most of the wealth, the rest struggle to afford basic needs like housing, healthcare, and education. It also means fewer opportunities for upward mobility, making it harder for poor or middle-class people to improve their lives.

Examples in Everyday Life
You can see this in cities where rent keeps increasing, and many people work multiple jobs but still can’t afford housing. Meanwhile, billionaires buy luxury homes and avoid taxes. Another example is how big companies make record profits while many workers barely earn a living wage.

The M-C-M’ formula explains how capitalists stay rich and grow their wealth.

M (Money): A capitalist starts with money.

C (Commodity): They use that money to buy something—like materials, factories, or labor—to create a product.

M’ (More Money): They sell the product for more than they spent, making a profit (M’ is greater than M).

The extra money (M’ – M) is called surplus class which mostly comes from paying workers less than the full value of what they produce. By repeating this cycle over and over, capitalists keep increasing their wealth.

Means of Production & Labor
The means of production are the tools, machines, factories, and materials needed to make things. For example, a bakery’s ovens and ingredients are part of the means of production. Labor is the work people do to produce goods or services. A baker mixing dough and baking bread is an example of labor.

What is Value?
Value is how much something is worth. According to the video, value comes from the labor put into making something. The more work and time it takes, the more valuable it is.

Labor and Value Connection
Labor creates value. Without labor, raw materials wouldn’t become useful products. The more labor it takes, the more valuable a product usually becomes.

Labor vs. Labor Power
Labor is the actual work done, like making a chair. Labor power is the ability to work, which workers sell to employers in exchange for wages.

Surplus Value
Surplus value is the extra money businesses make after paying workers. It’s important because it shows how workers create profit but don’t get the full value of what they produce. For example, if a worker makes shoes worth $100 but only gets paid $20, the rest is surplus value for the company.