Teacher’s Guide

© 2019 iCivics, Inc. You may copy, distribute, or transmit this work for noncommercial purposes only. This copyright notice or a legally valid equivalent such as “© 2019 iCivics Inc.” shall be included in all such copies, distributions or transmittals. All other rights reserved. Find this lesson and other materials at www.iCivics.org.

Step by Step

You Be the Judge - SimulationTime Needed: 2-3 class periods

Materials: • Student Handouts• Simulation Teacher’s Instructions• Sort It Out Kahoot!

Handouts (Copies): • Starter Activity (½ page; class set) • Reading & Activities (4 pages; class set)• Case Introduction (3 pages; class set)• Guiding Questions (2 pages; class set)• Decision Log (1 page; class set)• Exit Ticket (½ page; class set)

Objectives: Students will be able to...• Identify and describe the steps the Supreme

Court takes in deciding a case• Explain how constitutional provisions, laws,

precedents, and attorneys’ briefs inform a Supreme Court decision

• Apply the Supreme Court decision-making process to a set of facts in a simulated Supreme Court conference

PrePare by familiarizing yourself with the readings, activities, and judicial conference Simulation Teacher Instructions. As time permits, we recommend completing the readings and activities on Day 1 and the conference simulation on Day 2.

anticiPate by having students complete the starter activity How Do You Make Group Decisions? half-sheet individually. Then have students discuss in pairs or as a class. Ask: What similarities or differences did you notice in your approaches? What are the benefits and difficulties of having a group make a decision?

Distribute the two-page reading to the class. Complete the reading as a class or have students read independently.

Distribute the activity pages. Check for understanding using the Order in the Court!, Supreme Court Summary, and Sort It Out! activities. (The Sort It Out Activity is also available as a Kahoot!) Allow time for students to complete the activities. Save time to review students’ answers.

tell students that in the next portion of the lesson they will take on the role of a Supreme Court justice, learn about a case, meet in a conference, and render a decision.

Distribute the three-page Case Introduction, which explains the facts, lower court rulings, precedents, and arguments in the case Florida v. Jardines (2013). Pause to ask and answer questions or have students annotate key information as they read. (*Optional: If you feel students need an introduction to the Fourth Amendment, consider showing a short video like Search and Seizure: Crash Course Government and Politics #27, available on YouTube, before the simulation to prepare.)

ProceeD with the judicial conference simulation according to the instructions for facilitation on the Simulation Instructions page (found with the other Teacher Guide pages at the end of the lesson). Allow time for students to complete the simulation and reflect on their experiences.

close by asking students to share what they learned about the Supreme Court’s decision-making process by completing the Exit Ticket half-sheet.

Find digital alternatives for this lesson on the web at

www.iCivics.org

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

You Be the Judge Name:

You Be the Judge Name:

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

Starter Activity

Starter Activity

How Do You Make Group Decisions? It’s Saturday night. You and your friends have just ordered pizza and are trying to decide on a movie to watch. Check all of the steps that might help the group choose the best movie. (We won’t attempt to discuss how you might decide which PIZZA to order!)

Narrow choices to a particular genre, such as comedy or horror.

View the preview of a movie to determine if it’s worth watching.

Ask people who’ve already seen the movie choices what they thought of it first.

Research the proposed choices on websites like Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB.

Explain to your friends why a certain movie is entertaining or informative.

Vote on which movie to watch and let the majority determine the result.

Let the person who’s house you’re at choose.

How Do You Make Group Decisions? It’s Saturday night. You and your friends have just ordered pizza and are trying to decide on a movie to watch. Check all of the steps that might help the group choose the best movie. (We won’t attempt to discuss how you might decide which PIZZA to order!)

Narrow choices to a particular genre, such as comedy or horror.

View the preview of a movie to determine if it’s worth watching.

Ask people who’ve already seen the movie choices what they thought of it first.

Research the proposed choices on websites like Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB.

Explain to your friends why a certain movie is entertaining or informative.

Vote on which movie to watch and let the majority determine the result.

Let the person who’s house you’re at choose.

Reading ̶ Side A© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

You Be the Judge Name:

Imagine you have just been offered a prestigious job that you are guaranteed to keep for the rest of your life. There are perks: You have a nice office and a fancy robe. But you’re also tasked with making complex and often emotional decisions with eight other people, and those decisions affect millions. You can disagree with your coworkers, but you must remain cordial and cooperative. Will you accept the job? Today, you’ll take on the role of a Supreme Court Justice and discuss and decide a case! Here are the questions you’ll need to know that guide the Supreme Court in hearing cases and rendering their decisions.

Should We Take This Case?

The Supreme Court only hears cases in which it has jurisdiction, or authority. Original jurisdiction cases are those in which the parties are treated like V.I.P.s. These cases actually do involve V.I.P.s. Think states, ambassadors, consuls, and public ministers. Cases like these go directly to the Supreme Court. But most cases are heard because the Court has appellate jurisdiction—the ability to review a decision that a lower court has made. The Supreme Court can review cases involving the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties, or cases involving a dispute between parties from different states. The justices can only decide real issues between actual parties; they can’t propose a hypothetical case just to make a stand about a legal issue.

The Supreme Court is not required to review every case brought to its attention. In fact, it can’t! Each year, more than 7,000 cases are brought to the Supreme Court, but it only grants a full review (called a plenary review) for about 80 of those. Parties who lose in lower courts and want the Supreme Court to hear their case must ask the Supreme Court for acceptance in a written request called a petition for a writ of certiorari (pronounced: ser-shee-or-RARE-ee). In the petition, the parties argue why their case is important enough to command the Court’s time. The Supreme Court will typically agree to review it if it settles a conflict between lower courts which have reached different decisions on the same issue or if it addresses important legal questions with national significance. Some examples of those legal questions are whether students can engage in political protests at school, whether the federal government can ask about a person’s citizenship on a census form, and whether the Constitution guarantees the right to marry to same-sex couples. To grant a writ of certiorari, four of the nine justices on the Supreme Court must agree to accept the appeal.

What Guides Should We Consult for This Case?

Once the Supreme Court has accepted a case for review, work begins. Often, there has been a trial with a verdict and then an appeal before a case reaches the Supreme Court. The justices will review those records, as well as any relevant sections of the Constitution or federal laws. The Court will also look to precedent, principles and guidelines from its own past decisions relating to the legal issue in the case. While lower courts must follow precedents established by the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court can overrule its own past decisions. The Court generally hesitates to do this, though, in order to maintain stability and consistency in the law. The Supreme Court will also heavily consider the parties’ legal briefs, written arguments that both parties file explaining their position.

Brown v. Board of Education was a Supreme Court case that overruled

a past decision and ended racial segregation in America’s schools.

Sour

ce:

Libr

ary

of C

ongr

ess

Supreme Court of the United States in Washington, D.C.

Sour

ce:

US

Supr

eme

Cour

t

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

You Be the Judge Name:

Reading ̶ Side B

What Questions Do We Have About This Case?

After the Supreme Court reviews the case records, the applicable laws, the Constitution, its precedents, and the parties’ briefs, the Court is ready for oral arguments. This is when the attorneys for the parties come before the justices to highlight their most persuasive arguments and answer the Court’s questions. Each case is scheduled for one hour, which means that each side has only thirty minutes to convince the Court that they are correct. Attorneys for the petitioner (the party who brought the case to the Supreme Court) present their arguments first, followed by attorneys for the respondent (the party who won in the lower court). The justices almost always interrupt the attorneys with questions about the facts or laws in the case. In fact, attorneys spend most of their scheduled oral argument time answering the justices’ questions.

What Decision Will We Make?

After hearing oral arguments, the justices discuss each case in a conference. Discussing a legal issue in a group of nine might be difficult, right? But justices follow traditions to help them get through the conference without much conflict. First, the justices begin each conference as they do each courtroom session—with a traditional handshake. Each justice shakes the hand of every other justice to remind each other that their differences of opinion should never overshadow their common purpose. After this, the justices, without any other staff members present, sit down to frankly discuss each case. The Chief Justice goes first, then each justice gives his or her views and concerns in order of seniority—when they were appointed to the Court—and without interruption from the others. After each justice has spoken, they vote on the case, starting with the Chief Justice and again proceeding in order of seniority. The majority of the justices (five or more) determine the decision in a case. Having an odd number helps the Court avoid a tie decision.

Who Will Write the Opinion?

If the majority of justices agree on a decision and the reasoning behind it, they issue a majority opinion. The most senior justice in the majority decides who gets to write it. If those in the majority agree on the result in the case, but for different reasons, the Court issues a plurality decision, and the justices in the majority may write a concurring opinion explaining their reasoning. What about the justices who disagree with the result? Any justice in the minority may write a dissenting opinion explaining why he or she disagrees with the decision of the Court. The Supreme Court announces its opinions in open court and releases its written opinion to the public on the same day as the announcement.

Sour

ce:

Smith

soni

an

People aren’t allowed to take photos of a trial in the Supreme Court, but

a courtroom sketch artist can draw the scene.

MAJORITY

OPINION PLURALITY

DECISION CONCURRING

OPINION DISSENTING

OPINION

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

You Be the Judge Name:

Activity ̶ Side A

A. Order in the Court! Put the steps the Supreme Court takes when deciding a case in the correct order, from 1 to 6.

______ The parties write their legal arguments in briefs and submit them to the Court.

______ The Supreme Court sits down in a conference to discuss and vote on the case.

______ A party loses a case in a lower court and asks the Supreme Court to review the lower court’s decision in a petition for a writ of certiorari.

______ The Supreme Court announces its decision in open court and issues a written opinion on the same day.

______ Attorneys for the parties appear before the justices for an hour of oral arguments, during which the justices question the attorneys about the case.

______ The justices write opinions explaining the reasoning behind their decisions.

B. Supreme Court Summary. Using the word bank, help summarize the Supreme Court’s decision-making process in this fictitious case. (Hint: Not every term will be used, but no term will be used more than once!)

plenary review

original jurisdiction

petitioner

majority opinion

appellate jurisdiction

precedent

respondent

oral arguments

dissenting opinion

legal brief

concurring opinion

petition for a writ of certiorari

Orville was arrested for protesting on a public sidewalk about the need to stop global warming.

His lawyer argued that the arrest was unconstitutional because the First Amendment gives Orville the

right to speak freely and petition the government. A jury found Orville guilty and sentenced him to

twenty years in prison. The appeals court affirmed (agreed with) the jury’s decision. Orville’s attorneys

filed a _____________________________ with the Supreme Court, asking them to hear Orville’s

case under its _________________________ authority. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case,

beginning its _______________________ process. As attorneys for the ________________________,

Orville’s attorneys had to file their ________________________ first.

At the ____________________________, Orville’s attorneys argued

forcefully that Orville’s rights had been violated and the Supreme Court

justices asked many questions. After discussing the case in a conference,

the Supreme Court decided unanimously that Orville’s First Amendment

rights had been violated. Later that month, the Supreme Court issued its

____________________________ overturning the lower court decisions and

setting Orville free!

STOP GLOBAL WARMING

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

You Be the Judge Name:

Activity ̶ Side B

C. Sort it Out! Which term goes with which definition?

____ plenary review

A. Attorneys for the parties appear before the Supreme Court to present their strongest arguments and answer the justices’ questions

G. The party who won in the lower court but must present its arguments so the Supreme Court will affirm, or agree with, the lower court’s decision

B. An opinion disagreeing with the majority in a Supreme Court ruling

H. Principles and guidelines from prior Supreme Court decisions

I. A full consideration of a case, including legal briefs, oral arguments, and a decision

C. An opinion written by one (or more) justices who agree with the majority decision of the court but for a different reason

D. The authority to hear a case before any other court does. J. Five or more justices who agree on a

decision write this type of opinion

E. The authority of the court to review a lower court’s decision K. The party who lost in the lower court

and is bringing the case to the Supreme Court for review

F. A formal written request to the Supreme Court that it review a lower court decision

L. Written legal arguments that parties file with the Supreme Court

____ original jurisdiction

____ appellate jurisdiction

____ majority opinion

____ precedent

____ respondent

____ petitioner

____ oral arguments

____ dissenting opinion

____ petition for a writ of certiorari ____ concurring decision

____ legal briefs

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

case introDuction: You Be the Judge Justice:

Case Introduction – Side A

The Facts

In December 2006, police in Miami, Florida, received an anonymous tip that a man was illegally growing marijuana plants in his home. The police approached the house in question with Franky, a trained drug-detection dog. They brought the dog up to the front door of the residence. Franky sniffed at the front door and immediately sat down, indicating that he detected the smell of marijuana from inside the home. On the basis of Franky’s alert, the police obtained a warrant and returned to the house to conduct a search. They found a large growing operation inside the house with over 175 live marijuana plants with a street value of over $700,000. Police then arrested Mr. Jardines, the occupant, and charged him with marijuana trafficking.

Lower Court Decisions

The Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments which grant civil rights the government may not violate. The Fourth Amendment regulates how authorities can find and preserve evidence of a crime. It states that people have the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” If authorities want to search a person’s body, house, car, or other personal belongings, they must have probable cause (a reason to believe someone may have done something illegal) and they must obtain a warrant (a legal document authorizing permission) from a judge before conducting a search. If they fail to do so, any evidence they acquire may not be used in court, as it was unlawfully obtained.

The Issue Before the Court

When police bring a trained narcotics detection dog to sniff at the front door of a home in which they suspect marijuana is being grown, is that a Fourth Amendment search?

Attorneys for the state of Florida appealed and

argued that bringing a dog to a home’s front door did not constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment. The Florida Appellate

Court agreed, finding the sniff

and the subsequent warrant and search

to be legal.

At trial, Mr. Jardines’ attorney argued that the dog’s sniff at the front door was a search

under the Fourth Amendment and so the police should have

had a warrant to bring the dog up to Mr. Jardines’ front door. According to Jardines’

attorney, without a warrant for the dog’s sniff, the subsequent

search was illegal, and the police should not be able

to use any of the evidence obtained in the search. The trial court agreed and threw

out the evidence.

Mr. Jardines’ attorney appealed and once again argued that bringing a

drug-detection dog onto private property and

right up to a front door constitutes a search. A

divided Florida Supreme Court agreed with Mr.

Jardines’ attorney and the original trial court judge.

Once again, the state of Florida appealed, this

time to you, the Supreme Court. You have agreed to

hear the case.

Florida Trial Court Decision

Florida Appellate Court Decision

Florida Supreme Court Decision

© 2019 iCivics, Inc. Case Introduction ̶ Side B

case introDuction: You Be the Judge Justice:

Supreme Court Precedents. With your fellow justices, read the precedents previously issued from the Supreme Court. Mark important information and jot relevant notes on the side.

1. Katz v. U.S. (1967) Notes

The FBI suspected that Charles Katz was placing illegal bets from a public telephone in Los Angeles to gambling operations in Miami and Boston. They placed a listening device outside the public phone booth and, using the recordings, convicted Katz of illegal gambling. Katz’s attorneys argued that the FBI had invaded his right to privacy and conducted a warrantless search and seizure, requiring the court to throw out any information the FBI acquired through the listening device. The Supreme Court agreed in this landmark case, finding that the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places, and that when an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, the government’s invasion of that privacy constitutes a search.

2. U.S. v. Place (1983) Notes

Authorities seized luggage from a man at an airport in New York and brought a trained narcotics dog to perform a “sniff test” on his luggage. The Supreme Court held that when authorities have specific facts supporting a reasonable belief that a traveler’s luggage contains narcotics, the government may seize it briefly to pursue further investigation. The Supreme Court also decided that the trained dog’s sniff of the luggage did not constitute a “search” under the Fourth Amendment because the luggage was located in a public place, and the sniff only makes known the presence or absence of narcotics; it did not reveal anything about the lawful, private items hidden from view inside it.

3. California v. Ciraolo (1985) Notes

Police in Santa Clara, California, received a tip that Dante Ciraolo was growing marijuana in his backyard. Unable to see into the yard because of a tall fence, the police hired a private plane and flew over Ciraolo’s backyard at a low altitude and confirmed that he was growing marijuana. On the basis of their observations in the plane, the police obtained a search warrant and the next day seized 73 marijuana plants from Ciraolo’s yard and arrested him. Ciraolo’s attorneys claimed that the aerial inspection of his backyard was a search requiring probable cause and a warrant. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding that the officers’ actions were not intrusive, the observation took place within public airspace, and any person flying above Ciraolo’s yard would have observed exactly what the officers saw.

© 2019 iCivics, Inc. Case Introduction ̶ Side C

case introDuction: You Be the Judge Justice:

Supreme Court Precedents Continued...

4. Kyllo v. U.S. (2001) Notes

Police officers in Florence, Oregon, suspected that Danny Kyllo was growing marijuana in his apartment and so they used a thermal-imaging device to detect heat emanating from high-intensity lights used in marijuana growing operations. The thermal scan took only a few minutes and was conducted from a car parked across the street from Kyllo’s residence. Based on the thermal imaging results, police obtained a search warrant, found more than 100 marijuana plants in Kyllo’s residence, and arrested him. Kyllo’s attorney argued that the use of the thermal-imaging device on a private home was a Fourth Amendment “search,” and so police should have had probable cause and a warrant to use the device. The Supreme Court agreed, finding that a person’s right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion in his or her home is “the very core” of the Fourth Amendment. According to the Court, the use of the device was a search because the device was a specialized tool that allowed police to explore the interior contents of Kyllo’s home that they would have normally only observed by physically entering the home.

5. Illinois v. Caballes (2005) Notes

Illinois state troopers pulled over a car for speeding and walked a drug-detection dog around the car. The dog signaled that there were drugs in the trunk. The officers searched the trunk, found marijuana there, and arrested Mr. Caballes for drug trafficking. Caballes’ attorney argued that because the dog’s sniff was performed without any specific suspicion of drug activity, the use of the dog turned the routine traffic stop into an unlawful search and seizure. The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that the Fourth Amendment does not require a specific suspicion of drug activity to justify using a drug-detection dog during a lawful, reasonable traffic stop.

How has the Supreme Court treated Fourth Amendment searches in the past?

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

GuiDinG Questions: You Be the Judge

Guiding Questions – Side A

Justice:

Guiding Questions. How closely did you read the Florida v. Jardines case? Answer the questions below.

1. Who are the parties involved?

2. What are the important facts in this case?

3. Which constitutional right is involved in this case?

4. How did the Florida Supreme Court rule?

5. Which party is bringing this appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court? (In other words, which party lost in the Florida Supreme Court?)

6. Which two precedents do you think are most similar to this case, and why?

Source: Supreme Court of Florida

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

Let’s Hear the Arguments!

The following is a list of arguments the parties raised in their briefs filed with the Supreme Court

in Florida v. Jardines. Read through each argument and decide whether it supports Florida (F) or Jardines (J). Write the appropriate letter beside the argument in the space provided. Then circle the two arguments you find most persuasive.

1. The Caballes and Place cases clearly establish that a sniff of a trained drug detection dog does not constitute a Fourth Amendment search because a sniff is much less intrusive than a typical search and only reveals whether there are narcotics or not. The mere change of location of the sniff from an airport or roadway to the outside of a home does not make it a search.

2. Even though Franky and the officers never entered Jardines’ home, Franky’s sniff within inches of the front door was a significant intrusion on Jardine’s sacred right of privacy in his own home, and he has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his home and immediately around it.

3. The scent of marijuana was in air particles outside of Jardines’ home, and Franky smelled the scent while legally outside the front door with the officers, like a delivery person or Girl Scout selling cookies. Therefore, the sniff did not invade the privacy of Jardines’ home.

4. Using a dog’s trained nose is just like using a flashlight—it is a low-tech tool that humans ordinarily use to enhance what they can observe through their senses. Also, it only detects whether or not narcotics are present. On the other hand, a thermal-imaging device such as the one in Kyllo is a high-tech piece of technology that can detect legal as well as illegal activity.

5. Allowing police to bring drug detection dogs to the door of any home without a warrant could result in neighborhood-wide sweeps of private homes without prior suspicion of any illegal activity.

6. The Caballes and Place cases involve luggage and a car in public places, not an intrusion revealing details about activities inside of a home that the government could not have obtained without entering it. Therefore, their rulings don’t apply to this case.

7. According to the Kyllo decision, when police use a tool to get information about activities inside of a home, their actions intrude upon a reasonable expectation of privacy and therefore constitute a Fourth Amendment search. Following Kyllo, the sniff of a highly trained drug detection dog at the front door of a residence is a Fourth Amendment search.

8. The police and their dog were not trespassing on Jardines’ property; it is a well-established principle that people may enter onto another’s property at reasonable hours and in a customary manner; in fact, a person using a marked path to the front door of a house may be considered to be an invited guest.

Guiding Questions – Side B

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

Wow, that’s a good one for

Jardines!

Excellent point in favor of Florida.

GuiDinG Questions: You Be the Judge Justice:

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

Decision loG: You Be the Judge

Decision Log

Supreme Court Conference Simulation Instructions

Your group of justices will now meet in a conference to decide the Florida v. Jardines case.

• First, you should engage in the traditional handshake with each other. Each justice should politely greet and shake the hand of every other justice.

• Second, each of you, starting with the Chief Justice and then proceeding from most senior to least senior, will discuss your concerns and views about the case. You may NOT interrupt each other. Be open-minded. You may change your mind based on another justice’s views and reasoning.

• Third, each of you should record your decision and reasoning in your Decision Log. (Do this independently. Your vote is your own.)

• Fourth, following the same order of seniority, state your decision in the case and share at least two arguments to support your decision with the group. This is the formal vote. Keep track of each vote.

• Fifth, the most senior justice in the majority will decide which justice will announce to the entire class your group’s majority opinion, including the reasoning behind that decision. Dissenters should also have time to present their views and reasoning.

Decision Log

Case Name

Constitutional Provision at Issue

Issue Before the Supreme Court

My Decision (This may not necessarily be your group’s majority decision.)

My Reasoning (Write down at least two persuasive arguments supported by precedent, the Constitution, and the facts of the case. Be sure to include the names of any precedent cases that support your decision.)

Majority Opinion

We, the Justices of the Supreme Court, reject / affirm (circle one) the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. It is so ordered.

Justice:

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

You Be the Judge Name:

You Be the Judge Name:

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

Exit Ticket

Exit Ticket

Exit Ticket. Write a review of your group’s decision or decision-making process. Did you agree with or reject the decision, and why? What made the process

easy or difficult?

Exit Ticket. Write a review of your group’s decision or decision-making process. Did you agree with or reject the decision, and why? What made the process

easy or difficult?

You Be the Judge

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

** TEACHER GUIDE **

Simulation Instructions

Simulation Instructions (Teacher Only)Follow these instructions to facilitate the Judicial Conference Simulation

1. Divide students into groups of any odd number of justices, to avoid a tie.

2. Distribute one Guiding Questions and one Decision Log handout to each justice.

3. Assign student groups to complete the Guiding Questions about the Jardines case together to check understanding and prepare for their conference. Circulate and offer help as needed.

4. Preview the Supreme Court procedure listed on the Decision Log with students.

5. Instruct students to complete the Guiding Questions handout and follow the Court's procedure for their conference. Allow time for students to conference and come to a decision. (For groups of 5, reserve 25-30 min. to complete this portion of the lesson.)

6. Allow groups to deliver their majority and any dissenting opinions with the class.

7. Discuss the experience with the class.

*Optional: Assign cooperative grouping roles to justices. Tasks may include keeping time, monitoring speaking time and voting seniority, ensuring that group members follow the conference procedure rules, note-taking, presenting or Q&A.

*Questions to Consider Asking: What was this process like for you? For your group? How easy or difficult was it to reach a decision? Why do you think Supreme Court justices make decisions this way? What factors did your group consider? Did you think about the consequences of your decision? What do you think Supreme Court justices consider?

*Note: For classroom management purposes, we suggest groups of five, but you may include anywhere from 3-9 justices per group. For each group, choose a “Chief Justice” and assign seniority to the other justices.

• Primary Source Practice: Have students listen to the oral argument or read the actual opinions of the Supreme Court in the case of Florida v. Jardines. The justices wrote majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions. Pull excerpts for students to read where they can analyze the reasoning used to support one or more of the opinions. Have students compare the actual opinions to their group’s opinion and discuss similarities and differences.

• Writing: Assign students to formally write their opinion after conferencing with their group. Outline a structure for students to follow such as (1) the issue; (2) background and lower court rulings, (3) explanation of the right in question, (4) the reasoning supporting the decision, (5) the decision.

• Got another case you’d like for students to explore? Consider using the Guiding Questions and Decision Log as templates for another mock conference.

Optional Extensions

You Be the Judge

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

** TEACHER GUIDE **

Activity ̶ Side A

A. Order in the Court! Put the steps the Supreme Court takes when deciding a case in the correct order, from 1 to 6.

______ The parties write their legal arguments in briefs and submit them to the Court.

______ The Supreme Court sits down in a conference to discuss and vote on the case.

______ A party loses a case in a lower court and asks the Supreme Court to review the lower court’s decision in a petition for a writ of certiorari.

______ The Supreme Court announces its decision in open court and issues a written opinion on the same day.

______ Attorneys for the parties appear before the justices for an hour of oral arguments, during which the justices question the attorneys about the case.

______ The justices write opinions explaining the reasoning behind their decisions.

B. Supreme Court Summary. Using the word bank, help summarize the Supreme Court’s decision-making process in this fictitious case. (Hint: Not every term will be used, but no term will be used more than once!)

plenary review

original jurisdiction

petitioner

majority opinion

appellate jurisdiction

precedent

respondent

oral arguments

dissenting opinion

legal brief

concurring opinion

petition for a writ of certiorari

Orville was arrested for protesting on a public sidewalk about the need to stop global warming.

His lawyer argued that the arrest was unconstitutional because the First Amendment gives Orville the

right to speak freely and petition the government. A jury found Orville guilty and sentenced him to

twenty years in prison. The appeals court affirmed (agreed with) the jury’s decision. Orville’s attorneys

filed a _____________________________ with the Supreme Court, asking them to hear Orville’s

case under its _________________________ authority. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case,

beginning its _______________________ process. As attorneys for the ________________________,

Orville’s attorneys had to file their ________________________ first.

At the ____________________________, Orville’s attorneys argued

forcefully that Orville’s rights had been violated and the Supreme Court

justices asked many questions. After discussing the case in a conference,

the Supreme Court decided unanimously that Orville’s First Amendment

rights had been violated. Later that month, the Supreme Court issued its

____________________________ overturning the lower court decisions

and setting Orville free!

petition for a writ of certiorari

appellate jurisdictionplenary review petitioner

legal brief

oral arguments

majority opinion

STOP GLOBAL WARMING

4

1

6

3

5

2

You Be the Judge

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

** TEACHER GUIDE **

____ plenary review

____ original jurisdiction

____ appellate jurisdiction

____ majority opinion

____ precedent

____ respondent

____ petitioner

____ oral arguments

____ dissenting opinion

____ petition for a writ of certiorari ____ concurring decision

____ legal briefs

Activity ̶ Side B

C. Sort it Out! Which term goes with which definition?

C

K

J

H

G

A

F

BL

A. Attorneys for the parties appear before the Supreme Court to present their strongest arguments and answer the justices’ questions

G. The party who won in the lower court but must present its arguments so the Supreme Court will affirm, or agree with, the lower court’s decision

B. An opinion disagreeing with the majority in a Supreme Court ruling H. Principles and guidelines from prior

Supreme Court decisions

I. A full consideration of a case, including legal briefs, oral arguments, and a decision

C. An opinion written by one (or more) justices who agree with the majority decision of the court but for a different reason

D. The authority to hear a case before any other court does

J. Five or more justices who agree on a decision write this type of opinion

E. The authority of the court to review a lower court’s decision

K. The party who lost in the lower court and is bringing the case to the Supreme Court for review

F. A formal written request to the Supreme Court that it review a lower court decision L. Written legal arguments that parties file

with the Supreme Court

I

D

E

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

** TEACHER GUIDE **

Guiding Questions ̶ Side A

Guiding Questions. How closely did you read the Florida v. Jardines case? Answer the questions below.

1. Who are the parties involved?

2. What are the important facts in this case?

3. Which constitutional right is involved in this case?

4. How did the Florida Supreme Court rule?

5. Which party is bringing this appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court? (In other words, which party lost in the Florida Supreme Court?)

6. Which two precedents do you think are most similar to this case, and why?

The parties are police in Miami, Florida (and their drug-detection dog) and Mr. Jardines.

They ruled in favor of Mr. Jardines, indicating that this was a 4th Amendment violation.

4th Amendment: Police need a warrant to search a person for a suspected crime. A warrant can only be received if police have “probable cause” to suspect someone of a specific crime.

The state of Florida

Answers will vary; accept all reasonable answers.

Police were at Mr. Jardine’s home because they suspected him of illegally growing marijuana; Franky was brought to the house to confirm the smell of marijuana; the police got a warrant to search Mr. Jardines’ house because the dog indicated that he smelled marijuana inside the house; after searching Mr. Jardines’ house, police found that he was growing a large amount of marijuana (worth a lot of money) illegally; Mr. Jardines was arrested after the search.

Source: Supreme Court of Florida

GuiDinG Questions: You Be the Judge Justice:

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

** TEACHER GUIDE **

Let’s Hear the Arguments!

The following is a list of arguments the parties raised in their briefs filed with the Supreme Court

in Florida v. Jardines. Read through each argument and decide whether it supports Florida (F) or Jardines (J). Write the appropriate letter beside the argument in the space provided. Then circle the two arguments you find most persuasive.

1. The Caballes and Place cases clearly establish that a sniff of a trained drug detection dog does not constitute a Fourth Amendment search because a sniff is much less intrusive than a typical search and only reveals whether there are narcotics or not. The mere change of location of the sniff from an airport or roadway to the outside of a home does not make it a search.

2. Even though Franky and the officers never entered Jardines’ home, Franky’s sniff within inches of the front door was a significant intrusion on Jardine’s sacred right of privacy in his own home, and he has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his home and immediately around it.

3. The scent of marijuana was in air particles outside of Jardines’ home, and Franky smelled the scent while legally outside the front door with the officers, like a delivery person or Girl Scout selling cookies. Therefore, the sniff did not invade the privacy of Jardines’ home.

4. Using a dog’s trained nose is just like using a flashlight—it is a low-tech tool that humans ordinarily use to enhance what they can observe through their senses. Also, it only detects whether or not narcotics are present. On the other hand, a thermal-imaging device such as the one in Kyllo is a high-tech piece of technology that can detect legal as well as illegal activity.

5. Allowing police to bring drug detection dogs to the door of any home without a warrant could result in neighborhood-wide sweeps of private homes without prior suspicion of any illegal activity.

6. The Caballes and Place cases involve luggage and a car in public places, not an intrusion revealing details about activities inside of a home that the government could not have obtained without entering it. Therefore, their rulings don’t apply to this case.

7. According to the Kyllo decision, when police use a tool to get information about activities inside of a home, their actions intrude upon a reasonable expectation of privacy and therefore constitute a Fourth Amendment search. Following Kyllo, the sniff of a highly trained drug detection dog at the front door of a residence is a Fourth Amendment search.

8. The police and their dog were not trespassing on Jardines’ property; it is a well-established principle that people may enter onto another’s property at reasonable hours and in a customary manner; in fact, a person using a marked path to the front door of a house may be considered to be an invited guest.

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

____

Wow, that’s a good one for

Jardines!

Excellent point in favor of Florida.

F

J

F

F

J

J

J

F

Guiding Questions ̶ Side B

GuiDinG Questions: You Be the Judge Justice:

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

** TEACHER GUIDE **

Decision Log

Supreme Court Conference Simulation Instructions

Your group of justices will now meet in a conference to decide the Florida v. Jardines case.

• First, you should engage in the traditional handshake with each other. Each justice should politely greet and shake the hand of every other justice.

• Second, each of you, starting with the Chief Justice and then proceeding from most senior to least senior, will discuss your concerns and views about the case. You may NOT interrupt each other. Be open-minded. You may change your mind based on another justice’s views and reasoning.

• Third, each of you should record your decision and reasoning in your Decision Log. (Do this independently. Your vote is your own.)

• Fourth, following the same order of seniority, state your decision in the case and share at least two arguments to support your decision with the group. This is the formal vote. Keep track of each vote.

• Fifth, the most senior justice in the majority will decide which justice will announce to the entire class your group’s majority opinion, including the reasoning behind that decision. Dissenters should also have time to present their views and reasoning.

Decision Log

Case Name

Constitutional Provision at Issue

Issue Before the Supreme Court

My Decision (This may not necessarily be your group’s majority decision.)

My Reasoning (Write down at least two persuasive arguments supported by precedent, the Constitution, and the facts of the case. Be sure to include the names of any precedent cases that support your decision.)

Majority Opinion

We, the Justices of the Supreme Court, reject / affirm (circle one) the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. It is so ordered.

Justice:

Florida v. Jardines

4th Amendment

Was the Police use of a trained drug-detection dog to obtain a warrant a violation of the 4th Amendment?

Answers will vary.

Answers will vary.

Answers will vary.

JuDicial loG: You Be the Judge

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

You Be the Judge

© 2019 iCivics, Inc.

Justice:

Exit Ticket

Exit Ticket. Write a review of your group’s decision or decision-making process. Did you agree with or reject the decision, and why? What made the process

easy or difficult?

Answers will vary.