The court system is better at protecting individual rights than the elected branches of government because judges do not need to win votes or stay popular. Their job is to follow the Constitution, not public opinion. That gives them more freedom to protect people, especially those in the minority. For example, in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation in schools was unconstitutional. Many elected officials at the time were too afraid to go against public opinion, especially in the South. But the Court made a decision based on justice and equal rights, even though it was unpopular.

Federal judges are not elected like the president or members of Congress. Instead, they are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Since they are not chosen by the public, some people say the Supreme Court is anti-democratic. I agree to an extent because regular people do not get a direct say in who becomes a judge, and once someone is appointed, they serve for life. That gives them a lot of power without being held accountable through voting.

But the reason it was designed this way goes back to Federalist Number 10. James Madison and the other framers of the Constitution were afraid of majority rule turning into mob rule. They did not want the majority to be able to take away the rights of the minority, especially the wealthy class they were part of. So, they made the court system more independent from voters. Judges were meant to act as a balance to protect the Constitution, even when it goes against public opinion.

The problem is that this system also gives a lot of power to the people already in control. Judges are chosen by presidents and confirmed by senators, who are often influenced by big donors and wealthy groups. So even though the courts can protect individual rights, they are still shaped by the interests of the upper class. That is why the courts can seem fair at times, but also disconnected from what most people want.

In the Wal-Mart v. Dukes case, the Supreme Court decided that the group of women could not move forward with their class action lawsuit. The main reason was that the court said the women did not meet the requirement of commonality. This legal term means that people in a group lawsuit must all share the same problem and that the solution could apply to all of them.

The Court said that the 1.5 million women had different experiences at different stores and under different managers. Since there was no clear company-wide policy that directly caused discrimination, the Court believed that the women’s claims were too different to be treated as one case. Even though the women showed patterns of unequal pay and promotion, the court said that these patterns were not enough to prove that they all experienced the same type of unfair treatment.

Because of this decision, each woman would have to file their own case instead of joining together. This made it harder for workers to take action as a group against large companies. The Court’s choice focused more on technical rules than on the bigger issue of discrimination in the workplace.

The Establishment Clause is part of the First Amendment and it means the government is not allowed to make or support any official religion. It helps keep religion and government separate so that one religion does not get special treatment. This protects everyone’s right to believe what they want or not believe at all.

To make sure the government follows this rule, the courts use something called the Lemon Test, which came from the case Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971. The Lemon Test has three parts. First, any law or government action must have a non-religious purpose. Second, it must not help or hurt any religion. Third, it must avoid too much involvement between the government and religion. If a law fails even one of these, it is considered unconstitutional.

Burning the U.S. flag is protected by the First Amendment because it is considered a form of symbolic speech. In the case Texas v. Johnson in 1989, the Supreme Court ruled that even though many people find flag burning disrespectful, it is still a way to express a political opinion. Gregory Lee Johnson burned a flag during a protest, and even though he was arrested, the Court said his actions were protected under the First Amendment. The government cannot punish someone just because others dislike what they are saying or doing if it is a peaceful form of expression.

When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth,” they are using their right under the Fifth Amendment to stay silent. It means they do not have to answer questions or testify if doing so could get them in legal trouble. This right helps protect people from being forced to say something that could be used against them in court. It is a way to avoid self-incrimination and is often used in legal or police situations.

P. Williams explains that the War on Terror is very different from traditional wars. In regular wars, countries fight each other with clear battle lines, soldiers, and usually an end goal. But the War on Terror doesn’t have a specific country or military enemy. Instead, it’s a fight against a general idea (terrorism) which makes the enemy anyone considered a threat, even without solid proof. This makes it easier for the government to act based on fear and suspicion, sometimes at the cost of people’s rights.

Roving Wiretaps allow the government to monitor someone’s phone, emails, or other devices without needing a separate warrant for each one. This goes against the Fourth Amendment, which protects us from unreasonable searches and requires specific warrants. The problem is that roving wiretaps don’t clearly say which device or person is being watched. This means innocent people could be spied on just for using the same phone or internet connection as a suspect. Some also argue it violates other amendments like the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth, because it can limit free speech, due process, and privacy.

Sneak and Peek warrants are another issue. These let police search someone’s home or belongings without telling them right away. Normally, people have the right to know when their property is being searched. The Fourth Amendment was meant to prevent secret searches. Even though the government says this helps stop crimes like terrorism, it takes away people’s ability to know and challenge the search. Some worry that this kind of power could be misused, especially in non-terror cases.

The Constitution was written by wealthy white men from the upper class. These were landowners, merchants, bankers, and slaveholders who had money, education, and political power. They wanted to create a government that would protect their property, wealth, and status. According to Reading 6.1, most of them had business investments and were part of the elite in their states. Reading 6.2 shows that the poor and working class were completely left out. This included enslaved people, women, Native Americans, and poor white men who did not own land. They were not allowed to vote or have any say in the decisions that shaped the country.

So there was a clear difference between the two classes. The upper class had power and made the rules. The lower class had no voice and was treated more like a problem than part of the nation. For example, Shays’ Rebellion showed how poor farmers were suffering and wanted help. But instead of listening, the wealthy leaders used the rebellion as an excuse to take even more control.

I think the social class system back then is pretty similar to what we have today. Even though more people can vote now and there are more rights for different groups, the rich still have most of the power. Politicians today are mostly wealthy. They own property, have college degrees, and raise huge amounts of money to run for office. Regular working people still struggle to be heard in the same way. So while there are more legal rights now, the system still favors the rich.

The people who wrote the Constitution were scared of democracy because they were afraid that poor and working class people would make decisions that threatened their power. They worried that if the majority got too much say, they might vote to cancel debts, give out land, or tax the rich. So instead of full democracy, they created a system that gave the illusion of fairness but still kept real power in the hands of the upper class. That is why we have things like the Electoral College and the Senate. These were built to protect elite interests and stop the majority from taking over.

The word faction reminds me of social classes because both are groups of people with similar interests that often clash with other groups. In the reading, Madison talks about how factions form when people have different opinions or goals, which is similar to how the rich and poor often have different needs and beliefs when it comes to money, power, and government.

According to Federalist 10, Madison says the source of wealth and private property comes from the different faculties of men. The word faculties means people’s talents, intelligence, and skills. He believed that because people are born with different abilities, some are naturally more successful and end up owning land or property, while others stay poor. So to him, inequality was normal and expected because people just had different strengths.

Personally, I do not fully agree with this view. I think talents matter, but so do opportunities, race, gender, family background, and access to education. Many people work hard and are smart but still struggle because of systems that keep them down. Not everyone starts in the same place, and success is not only about personal ability.

Madison says the first goal of the government is to protect private property. That did surprise me a little because I always thought the government’s main job was to help people, make sure things are fair, and provide basic services like education, health care, and safety. But his focus shows that the Constitution was made more to protect the rich than to serve everyone equally.

I am not surprised that Madison was against pure democracy and supported a republic. Since he was part of the upper class, it makes sense that he was worried the majority, mostly poor or working-class people, might vote for laws that take away wealth or power from the rich. A representative government helped limit the power of regular people and gave more control to educated elites. In the end, the system was designed to protect the interests of the wealthy minority and keep most of the power in their hands.

The main difference in how citizens are involved in federal, confederation, and unitary systems is based on how power is shared. In a federal system like the United States, people vote for leaders at both the national level and the state level. They have more ways to be involved because power is divided between different layers of government. In a confederation, the national government is very weak and the states hold most of the power. This means citizens mainly deal with their state or local governments, not a strong national one. In a unitary system, the central government has almost all the power. Local governments only exist to carry out what the central government wants, and citizens usually only vote or participate at the national level.

The division of power means that authority is spread out so no one part of government controls everything. In the U.S., this happens in two ways. First, power is divided between the federal and state governments. Second, the government is split into three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. Each branch and each level has its own role, which helps keep the government balanced and fair.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government influenced New York in many ways. They gave financial help through programs like the CARES Act and the American Rescue Plan. This money helped the state with things like testing, vaccine distribution, and support for hospitals and schools. The federal government also gave public health guidelines through agencies like the CDC. These rules were not forced, but New York chose to follow many of them when making state-level decisions like lockdowns and mask mandates. Without the federal government’s funding and guidance, New York would not have had the resources to respond as strongly as it did. At the same time, the state still had control over how to handle things based on what was happening locally. This shows how the federal system allows for both support from above and decision-making at the local level.

Two important concepts from the video are means of production and labor. The means of production refers to all the things used to make products like tools, machines, factories, land, and materials. For example, a factory and the machines inside it that make clothes would be part of the means of production. Labor is the human work or effort that goes into making those products. So the people working in that factory sewing or packaging the clothes would be the labor.

The video also talks about value, which is the worth of something. What gives something its value is mainly the labor behind it. The more time and effort it takes to make something, the more valuable it becomes. That is why a handmade item usually costs more than something made quickly in a factory. It took more human work.

Labor and value are connected because labor is what creates value. If nobody put in the time to make a product, it would not have any real worth. The more labor something needs, the more value it tends to have.

The video also explains the difference between labor and labor power. I understood it like this. Labor is the actual work someone does like baking a cake. Labor power is the ability or energy someone has to do the work. So it is more about the skills and strength someone brings to the job. Employers are not just paying for the work you do. They are paying for your labor power which is your ability to keep working.

Surplus value is the extra value that workers create beyond what they are paid. It is important because it shows how profit is made in capitalism. For example if a worker makes 200 dollars worth of clothes in a day but only gets paid 50 dollars the extra 150 dollars is surplus value. That goes to the business owner. Learning about this helps us understand how social classes and unfair systems work.