1. State court systems often allow more than one court system available to protect a person’s rights. Dual court system provides alternate venues in which to appeal for assistance. “State courts vary in the degree to which they take on certain types of cases or issues, give access to particular groups, or promote certain interests.” State courts can handle a wide array of issues for an individual, both civil and criminal, where federal branches and courts often take from previous rulings, there is more room for varying degrees of outcomes in a case without needing to have precedent.

2. Federal judges are appointed by the President at the time when a vacancy opens up. The president can use this to select judges whose views align more with their own. I think in terms of the Supreme Court, whose duty it is to make sure that certain cases held in lower courts uphold the constitution, it is understandable that the president oversees who is involved in that. However, I don’t agree that these positions should not have term limits. Presidents should not be able to decide who will serve as a federal judge for sometimes decades, because I do think it is undemocratic for one person to have such a long-standing influence over political decisions despite no longer holding office themselves.

1. In Betty Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs in the case: Betty Dukes and 1.5 Million other female War-Mart employees, were not considered a protected class. They decided that because the discrimination happened in multiple different stores and was perpetrated by “individuals” rather than Wal-Mart as a whole, there was no basis for a class-action lawsuit.

1. Martin Luther King Jr. states that a just law should always be followed, and those laws are laws that uplifts human personality, and “squares with the moral law or the law of God.” He defines an unjust law is a law that degrades and damages human personality, distorts the soul, and gives someone the feeling of inferiority. Unjust laws are morally unsound should not be followed.
2. I agree with MLK’s distinction between just and unjust laws. People should not always comply with something just because it is “the law.” Laws should be looked at, reviewed often, and changed to meet the evolving needs of society.
3. An example of a just law would be that someone should not operate a vehicle under the influence of drugs or alcohol. This law is morally sound and protects an individual as well as others. An unjust law is that women are denied abortions under any and all circumstances (looking at you, Texas). This law is unjust because it does not always protect and individual and can directly goes against the best interest of the person that is pregnant. This law can cause mental health damage, physical damage, and even death, as well as many, many other issues.

1. P. Williams states that by framing the enemy of war as “terror” it is a war “against unruly if deadly emotionalism – rather than as a war against specific bodies, specific land, specific resources.” The difference is that there is no specific target in this war, it’s not really one side vs the other it is the US government vs whoever they think may possibly be perpetuating a feeling of “terror” or terror acts.
2. The roving wiretaps can violate the fourth amendment by tapping people who may not necessarily be involved in any crimes without their consent.
3. “Sneak and peak” warrants may be in violation of the unlawful search and seizure part of the fourth amendment. By allowing police and/or government officials to enter and remove things from a property that may be suspected to be involved in possible criminal activity, it opens the door for misuse and puts people at risk of having their privacy invaded and things taken from them with no probably cause.

1. The First Amendment can be broken down into two parts, and the establishment clause is the first part. The establishment clause guarantees our freedom against a government sponsored religion by restricting the federal government and state governments from creating, promoting, or favoring one religion above others.
2. Yes, burning the flag is considered constitutional and protected by freedom of symbolic speech: a First Amendment right. This was determined in the 1984 case of Texas v. Johnson where a man was arrested for burning a US flag and charged with “desecration of a venerated object” and The Supreme Court ruled that flag burning is a protected act.
3. “Taking the fifth” is a provision in the fifth amendment against self-incrimination. It is the right to remain silent.

1. The roles of citizens vary amongst unitary, confederation, and federal governments. Under a unitary government, such as in Japan, France, Sweden, and the UK, power is concentrated in the national government and states are dependent on that. Citizens have less say in government representation. In a confederation government it is the opposite where power is concentrated in individual states and national government can only act with the consent of the state. In a federal government, like in the US, Canada, and India, power is split between state and national government and citizens vote for representation.
2. The US government is divided on a federal level between three branches: the executive, judicial, and legislative. the legislative branch is responsible for making laws, the executive enforces the laws, and the judicial interprets the laws. Beyond that the government is also split between national and subnational. The national level refers to the federal government that is responsible for handling matters that affect the nation as a whole such as national security and economic prosperity. The subnational level refers to individual state governments and handles matters in specific regions that pertain to things like education, public services, and health care.
3. The federal government can provide financial and military assistance to a state when necessary. During the Covid-19 pandemic, local governments were given federal resources that helped to distribute the vaccine. Military services were employed in some areas as well.

1. To me, when I read Madison’s definition of a faction in the Federalist Paper #10, I thought of the working class proletariat vs the upper class bourgeoisie. I could see it as relating to different political ideologies as well.
2. I interpreted what Madison was saying in the Federalist Papers #10 that if the population is separated into faction, those within and outside of a faction will hold different opinions. Madison says that it is impossible to destroy a faction because in order to do that you would have to a) remove the freedom of the people in the faction, which is irrational, or b) force everyone to have the same, uniform opinion. Madison says it is unwise to do this because differences in opinion is what separate property owners and others. So essentially differing opinions which are connected to one’s self-interests and lifestyle is what separates the wealthy class from the working class. I interpret that as if everyone had the same political opinions then we would all be entitled to the same things, meaning there would be no separation of class which does not work under capitalism.
3. I don’t necessarily agree with it but it does explain why and how our country functions this way, as it has been this way since the very beginning.
4. Madison states the core mission of government is to protect differing opinions among citizens. I think on the surface that seems rational, but it also worked in interest of the founding fathers who were wealthy, property owning men. By protecting the right of different opinions at all costs but still giving the majority of the power to those in a specific class, it ensured that there will always be two competing factions and very little likelihood of actual democracy. I think that rings true today.
5. I touched on this a bit in my last response but no, I am not surprised that Madison, a wealthy white man with political power, is in favor of furthering his own political interests, wealth, and power.

1. The writers of the constitution were the wealthy and powerful white upper class that owned property and had social influence. The lower class/working class including poor artisans, farmers, indentured servants, women, and slaves were not represented. The lower class did not own land typically and were deeply in debt.
2. I would say that early society class differences are very similar to ours today in that the elite have a heavy hand in government and political decisions and our politicians are typically wealthy themselves. One difference would be that women and people of color can now have a say in government.
3. The constitution writers feared democracy because they believed that giving a voice to those in the common class would go against their interests. They held the opinion that democracy was “the worst of all political evils” and that by giving any power to the lower class they risk losing their own power. in reference to the constitution, George Washington claims it is necessary “to contain the threat of the people rather than to embrace their participation and their competence,” lest “the anarchy of the propertyless would give way to despotism.”

1. The means of production is everything that goes in to making a product, including the labor. It includes equipment, a facility to work in, supplies, etc. Labor, to my understanding is the actual physical act of producing a product and is the only thing that can increase the value of the product. Labor is measured in time and, under capitalism, is exchanged for money.
2. Value is how much something is worth in market and depends on how much labor is necessary to make the product.
3. Labor and value are related because the amount of labor it takes to produce something under normal conditions determines its value. Time is money, so if a product requires more labor, or requires a specialized skill that takes time to develop, it is more expensive. If you can automate the manufacturing process it can make a product cheaper because the product requires less labor.
4. I understand labor power as the requirements that go into being in a physical position to be able to labor, such as food, clothing, and rest. There is cost to maintain those things, so when you are actively laboring, there is a certain amount of money you have to make in order to break even on what you put in to yourself in order to labor in the first place.
5. Surplus value is essentially additional value that is made before the laborer has broke even on their cost of labor power. This additional value goes directly to the owner of the product and not the laborer.

1. “The top 1 percent own between 40 and 50 percent of the nation’s total wealth (stocks, bonds, investment funds, land, natural resources, business assets, and so on), more than the combined wealth of the bottom 90 percent.” This both surprised me and didn’t surprise me. I didn’t expect such a large stake of ownerships, 50% is an outrageous amount for such a small amount of the population to have. It disgusts me.
2. I personally haven’t spent a lot of time in the graces of the super rich, and the times that I have it was in servitude to them. What I have seen is the completely different plane of reality and life people like that often live in. The fact that a small group of people, such as in the case of the Rockefeller family, can personally manipulate politics, the economy, the media, the environment, etc. is terrifying to me. I fear companies buying other companies and creating a monopoly so that we no longer have a choice on who we want to give our money to, or what products are best for our families. I already see that in electric companies (something everyone uses and needs), entertainment such as streaming services, cell phone companies, etc. The job of these companies is to acquire more and more and more, at the cost of the environment, at the cost of the workers producing their products, at the cost of people in general. When the people who make all the money off of the backs of the working class are also in charge of what the market is worth, as we have seen in recent years, it can become impossible to live. When the people with all the money insert themselves in politics and decide where our elected officials interests actually lie, it can become impossible to change anything. If the super rich can put us in a tight enough bubble where we work for them all day simply to pay rent and feed our families, while convincing us that if only we worked harder or smarter we could be like them, while we pump our money back into their companies and their products, it puts society in a cycle where nothing changes and all we can do is sit back and watch while things get worse.