We the Teachers

Saturday Webinar: Tinker v. Des Moines

 

| Open Player in New Window

The latest in our Landmark Supreme Court Cases Saturday Webinar series focused on Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), the landmark case that decided a school-based case about expressive speech and political protest. At the height of the Vietnam War, high school students in Iowa sought to protest America’s involvement in the war by wearing black arm bands, and were mary-and-johnprevented from doing so by school administration. Four years later, in 1969, the case was decided by the Supreme Court, changing American legal views on free speech, protest, and how these things could be expressed in a public schools.

Questions raised by the audience of teachers focused on Justice Black’s dissent, original intent of the Founders, and the power of the Supreme Court to interpret language and law.

Access the full archives of the program on its original page on TAH.org, and subscribe to our iTunes Podcast.

Saturday Webinar: Miranda v. Arizona

 

| Open Player in New Window

Drs. Chris Burkett, Stephen Tootle, and Jeff Sikkenga discussed the background, constitutional questions, politics, and immediate and long-range impact of the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona (1966) during 7 JAN 2017’s Saturday Webinar.

miranda-v-arizona

Access the full archives here.

Saturday Webinar: Gideon v. Wainwright

 

| Open Player in New Window

gideon

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) was the subject of December’s Saturday Webinar. guest hosted by Dr. Jason Stevens of Ashland University. The case, which overturned a previous USSC case and forced states to provide legal counsel to defendants in criminal cases. Although a majority of states already required this, those that did not were required to do so, from this point forward. The panelists discussed not only the interesting background of the case, including Betts v. Brady (1942), but also the complex situation of determining the “special circumstances” mentioned in that decision that states had to somehow work through in each case. An interesting point brought up was that some 22 states filed amicus briefs in support of a single federal ruling, essentially asking the court to provide a single standard for them instead of the open-ended (and difficult) question left to them by the Betts decision.

The broader discussion also looked at the Warren court in general, the concept of incorporation, and the original intent behind the ideas in the Bill Rights.

Resources mentioned include…

Access the archives, including our YouTube recording and podcast, on the permanent program page here.

Saturday Webinar: Brown v. Board of Education

 

| Open Player in New Window

TAH.org’s latest episode in our Landmark Supreme Court Cases webinar series took place on Saturday, 19 November, and was hosted by Dr. Chris Burkett, with Drs. Emily Hess and Jason Stevens as panelists. Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was discussed as both the repudiation of Plessy v. Ferguson as well as what many see as the formal start to the post-WW2 Civil Rights era. The two cases’ legal reasoning, constitutional foundations, and outcomes were discussed as a an integrated whole, making for an interesting and informative discussion of African-American Civil Rights, as playing out over generations.

For those interested in additional readings on the subjects, the panelists recommended the following books.

View the archive of the program here.

Saturday Webinar: Dred Scott v. Sandford

 

| Open Player in New Window

The latest episode of TAH.org‘s Landmark Supreme Court Cases Saturday Webinars aired live on Saturday, 15 October 2016, with Dred Scott v. Sandford as the focus. Prof. Chris Burkett of Ashland University moderated the discussion between Profs. Lucas Morel and Jonathan White, and included a live teacher audience of over 100. In addition to the background of the case itself, the panelists discussed the following question, most of which were posed by teachers from the audience:roger-taney-in-1858

  • Did Justice Taney believe that the decision in the case would put an end to sectional differences over slavery?
  • Were there political motives behind Taney’s decision?
  • What were the main points of the dissenting opinions?
  • How did Taney justify and rationalize his decision?
  • How did the decision reflect or relate to the positions of other leaders of the time, including Stephen Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, and Alexander Stephens?

An interesting point related to the case is that of the perceptions of the Founder’s intent. Essentially, Taney asserted that the Founders never intended for African-America526px-dredscottns to be treated and seen as anything but property, and that they were truly lesser beings. If anyone believed otherwise, Taney’s response would be that they misunderstood the Founders’ true intentions. Alexander Stephens, on the other hand, asserted that although the Founders did promote equality of all people, they were wrong by including, even if only by implication, non-whites, and that the Southern view of the races, based in ‘science,’ was the correct one. Finally, it was Lincoln who believed that the Founders did include non-whites as people and therefore entitled to certain natural rights, and that if anything, it was the generations of leaders since who’d failed to continue to reach for those goals.

Saturday Webinar: McCulloch v. Maryland

 

| Open Player in New Window

Drs. Chris Burkett, Jeremy Bailey, and Dan Monroe discussed the historical context, constitutional connections and reasoning, and legal and political legacy of the second in our Landmark Supreme Court Cases webinars, McCulloch v Maryland (1819). Access the archives of the program here and subscribe to our iTunes podcast.

Saturday Webinar: Marbury v. Madison

 

 

| Open Player in New Window

Marbury_v_Madison_John_Marshall_by_Swatjester

On Saturday 27 August 2016, TAH.org hosted its first Saturday Webinar of the 2016-17 school year, on Marbury v. Madison. This year’s theme of Landmark Supreme Court cases got off to a great start with a thoughtful discussion of the politics and constitutional aspects of the at the time it was decided, and the legal and constitutional legacy in the years since. Scholars also discussed the case as related to the concepts of both judicial review and judicial supremacy, and the extent to which the Constitution was seen as a legal, rather than political document.

You can visit the archive page of this program here.

Saturday Webinar 2016-17 Season: Landmark Supreme Court Cases

Announcing the 10 LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES Webinar Series

Building on the success of our last two years of Saturday WebinarsAmerican Controversies and American Presidents – we invite you to join our 10 Landmark Supreme Court Cases webinar series during the 2016-2017 academic year.

Drawing from our list of 50 Core Documents and related sources, TAH.org’s Saturday Webinar series is designed to help teachers develop a deeper understanding of the historical, political, constitutional, and social dimensions of 10 of America’s most important Supreme Court cases. Each month a different panel of scholars – experts in their fields –discuss the topic at hand, with Dr. Chris Burkett of Ashland University as moderator, and a live online audience of teachers.

Document links will be updated throughout the season, at least a month in advance of each episode.

Register for the 2016-17 season

50 Documents That Tell America’s Story

Required reading for students, teachers, and citizens.

Access Now

TeachingAmericanHistory.org is a project of the Ashbrook Center at Ashland University

401 College Avenue | Ashland, Ohio 44805 (419) 289-5411 | (877) 289-5411 (Toll Free)

info@TeachingAmericanHistory.org