|
PROCEDURE
Viewing the Video
Discussing the Video
The Video and the Filmmaker
Assigning Cases and Roles
Sequence
Researching the Cases
Viewing the Video
Prepare the class to view the segment from IN THE LIGHT OF REVERENCE about the Wintu, an American Indian nation in California. It begins approximately 46 minutes into the video with images of serene mountains, followed by scenes of a radio-broadcasting studio. This segment runs until the end of the video (approx. 73 minutes). Tell students that the video they are about to watch involves conflicting opinions about what should happen to land the Wintu hold sacred. A spring, essential to their religious rituals, is on land now managed by the Forest Service, a division of the Department of Agriculture.
Another religious group, spawned by the New Age Harmonic Convergence, wants to use this site for their religious ceremonies as well. In addition, a third party, a realty developer, would like to open a ski resort on land near the spring.
Ask students if they have ever been aware of a dispute in their community over how a piece of public (or private) land should be used. Who wanted to build something? Who opposed the new use of land, and on what grounds?
Tell students that you would like them to sort out what Constitutional issues are at stake, and for whom, as they watch the video. Ask students to focus especially on Amendment I, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Print out Activity Sheet 1 for students
to fill in as they watch the video. Tell them that they are not expected
to follow every argument; even general impressions of who wants what and
why will be useful.
Discussing the Video
Ask students the following questions after they have filled in their charts:
- For purposes of religious freedom under the First Amendment, is it important that we define what a religion is? If so, who should define it and on what basis?
- Would it be easier to accord the Wintu their religious rights if their religious practices were just like those practiced by a majority of Americans?
- Would it be easier to accord the Wintu their rights if they were a tribe recognized by the U.S. government?
- How did California history conspire to make it very unlikely that the Wintu would have either the land or population of more powerful recognized nations such as the Hopi or Sioux?
- Should the Wintu's religious practices be safeguarded by the First Amendment? Should the religious practices of the group spawned by the New Age Harmonic Convergence also be safeguarded?
- What if two religions come into conflict with one another? On what basis would you decide whether the Wintu have a claim to the Mount Shasta spring which might take precedence over the claims of "New Age" religions?
- Mount Shasta is on Federal land, administered by the Forest Service. The First Amendment guarantees the separation of church and state. Should the Federal government therefore prohibit all religious groups from worshipping on federal land? Some groups but not others? What rights would you accord or deny realty developers to Mount Shasta, and on what basis?
The Video and the Filmmaker
Now ask students the following questions:
- Why do you think the filmmaker made this film?
- Do you think the filmmaker has a personal point of view about the issues raised in the video?
- Does the filmmaker present differing viewpoints in a fair light?
- Now ask students to go the companion website of the video to learn about the
filmmaker and how this film was made. What does the web site add to
your assessment of how and why the film was made?
Ask students to imagine several scenarios in which
the disputes discussed in this video went to court. For example, the Wintu
might claim that their First Amendment rights were being violated if the
Forest Service did not allow them to worship at their spring, or permitted
its use in ways that interfered with their practices. The New Age Harmonic
Convergence might sue the Forest Service if it gave preference to one
religion (the Wintu) over another (theirs). The realty developer might
sue the Forest Service if he felt he were denied the right to develop
a ski resort because the Federal government was protecting any religion
on Federal land, under the claim that this would violate the principle
of separation of church and state.
Now review with students Article III Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution
under which "The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and
Equity, arising under this Constitution." Review with students how cases
are appealed from lower courts up to the Supreme Court which then chooses
which cases it will and will not hear.
Tell students that they are going to stage several court cases based on
ones that were actually heard before the Supreme Court. All involve the
First Amendment. Write on the board: "Congress shall make no law respecting
an establishment of religion." Write next to it "the Establishment Clause"
and explain that this clause guarantees the separation of church and state.
Then write "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Write next to it
"Free Exercise Clause" and explain that it ensures that individuals are
free to practice religion as they choose.
Establishment Clause or Free Exercise Clause?
Print out and distribute Activity Sheet
2 to help students distinguish how each of these two important clauses
functions to protect religious freedom. Leave the above definition on
the board. Tell students that next to each case they must answer if the
issue at stake is primarily one regarding the Establishment Clause or
the Free Exercise clause.
Assigning Cases and Roles
Divide the class into groups of five. Each group will present a case before
a "Supreme Court" of fellow students. Each group of five will then role
play a court which serves to decide a case brought to it by a different
team of five students. (Note: Teachers accommodating different class sizes
can vary these numbers. For example, you may wish to have students either
present a case or judge a case, but not do both. Groups presenting a case
can be composed of only two lawyers per case, rather than four. Or, you
may wish to find more cases to use from the web sites listed later in
the lesson.)
Assign to each group of five students one of the five cases listed above.
One student will serve to introduce the case (up until it reaches the
Supreme Court) in a dramatic monologue. The student can role-play one
of the petitioners in the case, or simply re-tell the events leading up
to the trial.
Two students will act as lawyers for the petitioner(s) and together prepare
one brief.
Two students will serve as lawyers for the respondent(s) and together
prepare one brief.
The role play (insofar as possible) will enact the way in which a case
is actually heard before the Supreme Court. Remind students that it does
not matter how the real case was adjudicated. The Supreme Court has reversed
itself many times. Dissenting opinions have later become the basis of
a reversal, and so forth.
Sequence
The petitioners and the respondents will research the case using the web
sites listed below.
Each team will then write one brief which should be concise, logically
arranged, and free of irrelevant or immaterial matter. Five copies must
be made of each brief.
The five justices who will hear the case must each read the brief written
on behalf of the petitioner and the one written on behalf of the respondent.
They are to prepare questions to ask both the lawyers for the petitioner
and the respondent.
Oral arguments will be heard in front of the justices and the rest of
the class. As with the actual Supreme Court, it will be frowned upon to
read from a prepared text. The lawyers should have a written outline from
which to speak. The lawyers for the petitioner have 7 minutes in which
to present their case. The lawyers for the respondent have 7 minutes in
which to present their case. (In Supreme Court cases 30 minutes is allotted.)
All meaningful points must be made in these speeches as there will be
no time set aside for rebuttal. The petitioner's lawyers go first.
During the oral arguments, the justices may interrupt the lawyers and
ask questions. The questions and the time the lawyers take to answer them
will be deducted from the 7 minutes allotted to each side.
It should take approximately two class periods for all cases to be presented.
During the third class period, the justices who heard each case will meet
as a team. (Note: the same group which may have presented a case (e.g.
Allegheny v. ACLU) may then be the group that acts as justices for another
case (e.g. the group that presented Employment Division v. Smith.)
Each group of five justices will meet to deliberate on the case presented
before it. The eldest member of the court acts as Supreme Court Justice.
Members must speak beginning with the second eldest and working down to
the youngest. (This mimics the rule of seniority that actually governs
who speaks in what order in Supreme Court deliberations.)
The justices will deliberate and then vote on the merits of the case.
The majority will write a majority opinion citing the Constitution or
other relevant cases bearing on this one. (The Chief Justice should take
a leading role in writing the majority decision, or assign members who
will do so.) If any one in the majority so wishes, he or she may write
a concurring opinion which agrees with the majority but does so on a different
legal basis from that of the majority. If any members dissent, they shall
write a dissenting opinion citing the Constitution and any other relevant
cases. (Technically, a decision may affirm a lower court ruling, remand
it for further discussion or elaboration to a lower court, or reverse
the lower court.)
The entire class will reconvene. Each group of justices will go before
the class and read its majority, concurring and dissenting opinions.
Legal Terms Used in the Lesson
Legal Brief:   A concise statement of a client's case that
sets forth the main contentions with supporting statements and evidence.
Docket:   Calendar or agenda of court cases.
Abstract:   A summary of a legal case.
Syllabus:   A summary outline of a legal case usually made
by a law clerk after a case has been decided.
Petitioner:   The party that makes a formal written request
to the court.
Respondent:   The party that answers the petitioner in various
legal proceedings.
Amicus Brief:   A case made by a "friend of the court," a person,
organization, etc. represented by a lawyer who speaks with the consent
of the petitioner or respondent.
Majority Opinion:   The legal ruling which the Supreme Court
hands down with the assent of at least five of the nine justices. One
justice, often the Chief Justice, writes the majority opinion.
Concurring Opinion:   An opinion written by a justice who agrees
with the majority, but who does so for different reasons.
Dissenting Opinion:   An opinion written by a member of the
court who voted against the majority position. It expresses the legal
reasoning behind the dissent.
Vacate:   To make legally void. The Supreme Court may make
legally void the ruling of a lower court.
Remand:   To send back to a lower court for further explanation
or consideration.
Reverse:   To overthrow, set aside or make void a legal decision
by a lower court.
Researching the Cases
All students should start researching their cases with the Dockets and
Abstracts at the Oyez Project web site
. The Web site has an excellent virtual
tour of the Supreme Court along with oral clips of Supreme Court arguments,
dockets and abstracts of many cases, as well as the decisions. For less
advanced students, the dockets and abstracts themselves will suffice.
Students can search the Oyez site for similar cases to their own which
they may want to cite as precedents for their cases. They can search for
similar cases using the subject index search. An excellent list of Supreme
Court cases involving freedom of religion is available at http://w3.trib.com/FACT/1st.religion.html.
Also see the ACLU Web page on Religious Liberty at http://www.aclu.org/issues/religion/hmrf.html.
Advanced classes can move on to research each case in greater depth, either
at the Oyez site or at the Supreme
Court Collection of Cornell Law School. Click on "search" for a variety
of ways to look for cases. At this site the most useful route for advanced
students is to click on the Syllabus of a case which is written by a court
reporter to summarize the decision after it has been made. From the syllabus,
students can click on "Opinions" for both majority and dissenting opinions.
Below are Abstracts from the Oyez Project for the cases used in this lesson:
Lyng
v. Northwest Indian CPA
Employment
Division v. Smith
For
a similar case go to Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah 1993
At the end of IN THE LIGHT OF REVERENCE the American Indian Religious
Freedom Act of 1978 is discussed. It was passed "to protect and preserve
for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express,
and exercise the traditional religions, including but not limited to access
to sites." The full text can be accessed at http://
http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/laws/religious.htm. A subsequent
amendment to the act was made by Congress in 1994: http://www.lectlaw.com/files/drg25.htm.
An Executive Order relating to Native American sacred sites was made in
1996, http://www.cr.nps.gov/local-law/eo13007.htm.
Allegheny
County v. ACLU
For a related case see Lynch
v. Donnelly 1984
Santa
Fe Independent School District v. Doe
Wisconsin
v. Yoder
BACK
TO TOP
|