This lesson is based on the Annenberg Classroom video âA Call to Act: Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.,â which tells the law-changing story behind the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. Students gain insight into law-making process, consider how statutory decisions made by the Supreme Court can prompt better laws, and learn about the rights and responsibilities they will have when they enter the workforce.

The estimated time for this lesson is four days.

A challenging, fun card game that helps students learn about their rights under the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. The game offers three levels of play: Easy, Normal, Difficult.

We've all had that experience, the one where we start arguing with someone and find that we disagree about pretty much everything. When two people have radically different background beliefs (or worldviews), they often have difficulty finding any sort of common ground. In this lesson, students will learn to distinguish between the two different types of background beliefs: beliefs about matters of fact and beliefs about values. They will then go on to consider their most deeply held background beliefs, those that constitute their worldview. Students will work to go beyond specific arguments to consider the worldviews that might underlie different types of arguments.

This game immerses students in the workings of our three branches of government. Players take on the roles of legislator, president and Supreme Court justice to get constitutional laws enacted. Players must juggle several bills at once while holding press conferences and town hall meetings.

This documentary tells the story of Lilly Ledbetter, whose fight for equal pay for equal work eventually involved all three branches of government. Her U.S. Supreme Court case, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., turned on the interpretation of the 180-day statute of limitations for filing a discrimination complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After losing at the Supreme Court, Ledbetter urged Congress to start the 180-day clock for filing a complaint on the date an employee learned of the discrimination. The result was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009.

Closed captions available in English and Spanish.

This lesson will focus on the case Korematsu v. U.S. in comparison with other times in U.S. history when the government was faced with the challenge of how to protect the country during war and, at the same time, protect individual freedoms. Using primary sources, students will examine five events in which U.S. citizens were forced to give up their civil liberties in times of war, highlighting the tension between liberty and security. Students will analyze these events to determine what groups were affected and the reasoning for and against the government action to decide if the government action was justified. Students will be able to form an opinion on the essential question: Is our government ever justified in restricting civil liberties for the security of the nation?

The Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause gives the accused the right âto be confronted with the witnesses against himâ at a criminal trial. This film uses the U.S. Supreme Court case Crawford v. Washington to help explain the history and importance of the confrontation clause and why the framers knew it would be crucial to an effective system of justice.â

This lesson plan focuses on the essential question: How does philosophy affect the way a judge reads the Constitution and what is the effect of that? Teachers will use the Annenberg Classroom video âA Conversation on the Constitution: Judicial Interpretationâ in which Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia, a strict constructionist, and Stephen Breyer, an evolutionist, debate how the Constitution should be interpreted.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and a group of students discuss the U.S. Supreme Court: its history and evolution; how the justices select, hear and decide cases; and the role of an independent judiciary and other issues crucial to a healthy democracy today.

Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy leads a discussion with students about the Miranda v. Arizona case, which established that criminal suspects, at the time of their arrest and before any interrogation, must be told of their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney. The decision led to the familiar Miranda warning that begins "You have the right to remain silent..."

Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and a group of high school students discuss the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure in the context of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio and the importance of the exclusionary rule, which says that evidence gathered in an illegal search cannot be used in court.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer and a group of high school students discuss separation of powers among the three branches of government in connection with the pay discrimination case Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. that resulted in a 2009 law called the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer talks with high school students about the role and importance of dissenting opinions when the U.S. Supreme Court decides cases.

Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Anthony M. Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor and students discuss students' free speech rights in the Supreme Court cases Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District and Morse v. Frederick. In the Tinker case, students wore black armbands to school in silent protest of the Vietnam War. The three students were sent home. In the Morse case, a student held up a sign that said âBong Hits 4 Jesusâ at a school-supervised parade and was subsequently suspended for 10 days

High school students join Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Anthony M. Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor to discuss why an independent judiciary is necessary and the way the Constitution safeguards the role of judges so that they in turn can safeguard the rights of minorities and those with unpopular views.

Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy discuss the history and responsibilities of juries and the role they play in the U.S. judicial system.

Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Stephen G. Breyer and Anthony M. Kennedy and high school students discuss the Sixth Amendment right to trial by an impartial jury in the context of Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co. In this landmark jury selection case, the Court ruled that under the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause, parties in civil cases cannot use race-based peremptory challenges to reject potential jurors.

Before an audience of high school students, Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Antonin Scalia debate their different theories on how to interpret the Constitution and how they are applied to cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Scalia describes his textualist, strict constructionist philosophy while Justice Breyer explains his developmentalist, evolutionist philosophy.
Closed captions available in English.

Three key components of the Fourteenth Amendment – due process, equal protection, and privileges and immunities – are explored in this lesson, which centers on the video âA Conversation on the Constitution: The Fourteenth Amendment.â In the video, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg speaks with high school students about the Fourteenth Amendment and the protections it offers.

This lesson explains the structure and function of the judicial branch. Students will learn how the Supreme Court originated, how cases are selected, and why it is an important institution. In the accompanying Annenberg Classroom video "A Conversation on the Constitution: The Origin, Nature and Importance of the Supreme Court," Chief Justice John G. Roberts answers students' questions about the Supreme Court and his role as chief justice of the United States.