Government_Ch8_Homework-1

=**Government Chapter 8 Homework #1**= Use the readings below to answer the following:

1. For much of our history, Americans have cherished the belief that we are a nation of immigrants - a melting pot of many ethnicities and races. An alien is a person who is living in a nation but is a citizen of another nation. In America, an alien can become a citizen through the naturalization process. It might be said that the first immigrants were the nomadic people who crossed the land bridge between Asia and Alaska in prehistoric times. Much later, the Spanish populated the Southwest, while the British settled along the East Coast. Between 1815 and 1914, waves of Germans, Irish, Italians, Russians, and other Europeans arrived. Most immigrants settled in large cities, especially in the Northeast and Midwest. Sometimes Americans were afraid that immigrants would change their world. Prejudice was often involved. In the 1840s, many Americans were upset when large numbers of Irish Catholics arrived. A strong anti-immigrant movement developed in the period between 1880 and 1910 when there was a huge influx of Catholic and Jewish immigrants from southern and eastern Europe and Russia. By the 1960s, Latinos and Asians began to make up a big percentage of the immigrant population. Latinos, who can be of any race, have become the largest group of immigrants. This is partly because the term Latino covers immigrants from many countries - Mexico, Cuba, and all the countries of Central and South America. A major concern today is illegal immigration. This has made immigration a major issue. There are millions of undocumented immigrants (a name that political correctness calls illegal immigrants) in the U.S. Since 9/11 Americans are more nervous about the fact that so many people can enter the country illegally. Competition for jobs is another reason for concern over immigration. The Constitution gives Congress the power over immigration policy. There were restrictions on immigration through the 1880s especially with Chinese immigration as they were excluded in an 1882 law. The Industrial Revolution at the end of the 1800s into the early 1900s increased the need for immigrants. Ellis Island had been set up as the immigration headquarters and was located in New York City. Angel Island was the headquarters in San Francisco. A quota system was put in place in the 1920s. Each nation was limited to 2% of foreign-born residents from the 1890 census. This formula favored groups that had been in the U.S. for a long time. Immigration dropped sharply over the next 40 years. The quota system was abolished in 1965 as part of an impact of the Civil Rights Movement. The new law passed put on limits from regions of the world. Another law passed in 1986 specifically to deal with illegal immigration. Basically, illegal immigrants were allowed to stay in the U.S. and the Congress, therefore, promised to secure the Southern border. This is a promise that was not kept, yet illegal immigrants were free to stay as of 1986. Illegal immigration is a major point of concern today as politicians debate securing the border versus allowing illegal immigrants to be free to stay. In recent years, the U.S. government has increased border patrol and have a partial border fence. Still, the problem is something that needs addressed. Farming in the American Southwest has often hired illegal immigrant labor at low cost - lower than minimum wage, but more than the illegal immigrant would make in his/her home country. Many low skilled American workers fear that if illegal immigrants became legal immigrants and were paid more as a result that it would hurt employment of Americans here legally. Even bigger than the work issue is drugs being smuggled across the border being illegals. The issue is difficult. Tracking down and deporting millions of illegal immigrants would be extremely costly and difficult since illegals would not voluntarily admit to being here. On the other hand, allowing them to stay would be amnesty - a pardon for a whole group who broke the law. Another issue is that of "anchor babies," or children of illegal immigrants who are born in the U.S. and therefore considered U.S. citizens and would not be deported. This is due to the 14th amendment, which says a citizen is a person born in the U.S. or naturalized. This amendment was ratified in 1868 specifically to ensure freed slaves were considered citizens by Southern states. A refugee is different than an alien. A refugee is a person escaping danger or persecution in their home nation. A refugee may seek to come to America due to war, famine, or facing persecution due to religious or political beliefs.
 * A person who is living in a nation but is a citizen of another nation is a(n) (A) immigrant (B) alien (C) refugee (D) naturalized resident (E) all (F) none**


 * A person escaping danger or persecution that comes to a nation is a(n) (A) immigrant (B) alien (C) refugee (D) naturalized resident (E) all (F) none**


 * What is the process of an alien becoming a citizen called?**


 * Why is solving the illegal immigration issue a difficult issue? What is your position on the issue?**

2. Use the images below to answer the questions:


 * Where do most immigrants come from? (A) Mexico and Latin America (B) Asia (C) Africa (D) Europe (E) all (F) none**


 * Which states gets the most illegal immigrants (mostly because they don't enforce immigration laws there)? (A) California (B) Arizona (C) Texas (D) New York (E) all (F) none**

3. The Constitution only mentioned citizenship as a basis for holding national office because citizenship was also a state by state issue. However, due to the ending of slavery the 14th amendment needed to be passed in 1868 to give more of a definition of slavery since former Confederate states were not willingly giving the freed slaves citizenship rights. An American citizen is one born in the U.S. or one who goes through naturalization, which is the process of an alien becoming a citizen. A third way is being born to a U.S. citizen. Like most other nations, the US. follows the principle of jus soli, a Latin phrase for "law of the soil," which focuses on where a person was born. The federal government has the power to grant citizenship or take it away, although a state can deny a convicted criminal some privileges of citizenship like voting, but it cannot deny citizenship itself. At the end of the naturalization process, the naturalized citizen will have all of the same citizenship rights and responsibilities as a citizen who was born in the U.S. Immigrants who apply for naturalization must be 18 or older, have lived in the U.S. for 5 years (3 years if married to a citizen), pass a basic test on English, history, and civics, and then take an oath of allegiance. Losing one's citizenship is possible. Aliens who want to become citizens must show good moral character (American law doesn't tolerate criminals as immigrants). Expatriation is when a person gives up his or her citizenship by the act of leaving the U.S. and becoming a citizen of another country. A second way to lose citizenship is to be convicted of serious federal crimes, such as treason or taking part in a rebellion against the U.S. Also, a naturalized citizen can lost his or her citizenship in an administrative process called denaturalization. This occurs when it is proved that fraud, deception, or error occurred during the original naturalization. The ability to exercise one's rights depends on being aware of those rights. A constitutional democracy, therefore, needs citizens who are knowledgeable about the laws that govern society, but this respect depends on knowledge of the law. In addition to schools, a number of organizations help citizens learn more about their rights, laws, and government - legal aid societies, consumer protection groups, and tenants' rights organizations. Civic duties include obeying the law, paying taxes, and not committing acts of treason (treason is fighting against your nation and its principles). Civic responsibilities include voting, being informed on issues, respecting the rights of others as well as understanding that many Americans have different opinions and ways of life. Moreover, many states now require that government regulations be written in everyday language so people can understand them. The American ideal has always been to stress each citizens' duty to participate in political life. By doing this, citizens are governing themselves. Each individual learns to put aside personal concerns and preferences and to consider the political goals and needs of others. The American ideal has always been to stress each citizen's duty to participate in political life. By doing this, citizens are governing themselves. Each individual learns to put aside personal concerns and preferences and to consider the political goals and needs of others (however, recently voters put their own personal concerns ahead of the nation - not good). The hope is that in the process, policies will be shaped that are in the best interest of the public. Thus, participation teaches people about the key elements of a democratic society - majority rule, individual rights, and the rule of law. Voting is the most common way that a citizen participates. Voting affirms a basic principle of American political life that was inscribed in the Declaration of Independence - "the consent of the governed." Voting is also a way to express one's support for democracy. Voting allows Americans to share responsibilities for how their society is governed. By contrast, anyone who does not vote could be implying that he or she does not support democracy. Besides voting, citizens can affect the political system by campaigning for a candidate, distributing leaflets on an issue, or working at the polls on election day. The rights and privileges of citizenship also include activities outside of elections. A veteran might lobby to improve benefits for veterans who are disabled by combat. Students might sign a petition to achieve change in the education system. Sharing your opinions through writing letters to newspapers is also a way to participate.
 * Duties of citizens include (A) obeying the law (B) paying taxes (C) being loyal to American government (D) being loyal to American principles (E) all (F) none**


 * Responsibilities of citizens include (A) voting (B) being informed on issues (C) respecting the rights of others (D) respecting different opinions and ways of life (E) all (F) none**


 * Which is NOT a requirement to become a naturalized citizen? (A) be of good moral character (not a criminal) (B) declare support for American principles (C) read, write, and speak basic English (D) show basic knowledge of U.S. history and government (E) all (F) none**

4. The 14th amendment says that no state can "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Equal protection is also addressed in the 5th amendment. The general meaning of the equal protection clause is that state and local governments cannot draw unreasonable distinctions among different groups. The key word is unreasonable. All governments (meaning all levels) must draw some distinctions among people in legislation. If a citizen challenges a law, the issue is not whether a classification is being made, but whether it is reasonable. The Supreme Court uses three basic guidelines for considering whether a law or an action violates the equal protection clause. The rational basis test asks if the classification is reasonably related to an acceptable government goal. In other words, is unequal treatment okay in a situation given. For example, the Court upheld a Wisconsin state law that imposed longer prison sentences on people committed a hate crime, or a crime based on a prejudice. A second test the Court uses takes place when special circumstances are involved in which the Court uses strict scrutiny of a law since race or ethnicity is involved. The Court used this test to strike down Jim Crow era laws in the 1950s and 1960s. The third test is the fundamental rights test, which are rights that go to the heart of the American system. The Court has declared that fundamental rights include all first amendment rights as well as the right to travel freely around the nation and the right to vote. Laws that classify people unreasonably are said to discriminate. Discrimination exists when individuals are treated unfairly solely because of their race, gender, ethnicity, age, physical disability, or religion. Such discrimination is illegal, but difficult to prove. What happens if a law does not classify people directly but it still classifies them? For example, suppose a law requires that applicants for police jobs take a test. Suppose members of one group usually score better than members of another group. Can discrimination e proven simply by showing that the law has a different impact on people of different races, genders, or national origins? In 1976, the Supreme Court rules that to prove discrimination in a state law, one must prove that the state was motivated by an intent to discriminate. The Court has used the "intent to discriminate" principle in other cases besides race. Discrimination and segregation had been ruled legal by the Supreme Court in 1893 in the case //Plessy v. Ferguson//, when the Court upheld the Jim Crow laws in the South saying that blacks could be segregated but not necessarily considered to be unequal in their "separate but equal" ruling. The Civil Rights Movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. in the 1950s and 1960s led to the end of the Jim Crow laws that had segregation (separating people from a large social group) and discrimination in the South. King led the SCLC, or the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. His group led the Montgomery Bus Boycott after Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a white man on a public bus. Even a year before this event, the Supreme Court desegregated the schools in //Brown v. Board of Education//. King continued to lead marches and gave his famous I Have a Dream speech in August of 1963. He later wrote his //Letter from a Birmingham Jail//, which was the best statement of his movement's goals. King wanted to be judged based on the "content of character" not the color of one's skin.
 * What does equal protection mean? (A) can't draw distinctions among groups (B) all have a chance to be a judge (C) citizenship (D) all get treated the same (E) all (F) none**


 * When individuals are treated unequally because of race, gender, ethnicity, age, physical disability, or religion, it is (A) discrimination (B) prejudice (C) segregation (D) unequal protection (E) all (F) none**


 * What is segregation?**


 * What is discrimination?**


 * What movement ended discrimination and segregation as being legal?**


 * Who was this movement's leader?**


 * The Supreme Court desegregated the schools in the case - v. - -- -, which overturned "separate but equal" from -- v. **

5. Affirmative action is a set of policies developed in the 1960s to remedy, or make up for, past discrimination. The policies are carried out by federal, state, and local governments, as well as by private employers with government contracts. Often the policies involved the targeted recruitment of women and minorities. The hope was that these groups will then be represented in jobs and in higher education in roughly the same proportion that they are in the population. Most affirmative action is required by the federal government or the courts, but many businesses use it voluntarily. A problem with affirmative action, however, is that it could lead to reverse discrimination since minorities would be admitted into college or get a job more because of race than qualifications. In a 1978 case, a white male student named Alan Bakke sued because he was twice rejected for medical school. He claimed that the University of California had practiced reverse discrimination because a certain number of slots were guaranteed to minorities. In //Regents of the University of California v. Bakke// the Supreme Court ruled that colleges and universities could not use a quota system, although they could consider race in admissions. Race could not be the one and only sole reason for admission into college, but could be on a list of criteria. In 2007, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District was about a Seattle school district that allowed students to apply to any school in the district (big cities have numerous schools in a district). Race was a tiebreaker to keep diversity since often times there were more applicants for a school than there was room. The non-profit group sued for violation of the Equal Protection Clause. In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that this type of affirmative action was unconstitutional. "Accepting racial balancing as a compelling state interest would justify the imposition of racial proportionality throughout American society, contrary to our repeated recognition that at the heart of the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection lies the simple command that the government must treat citizens as individuals, not as simply components of a racial, religious, sexual, or national class. Allowing racial balancing as a compelling end in itself would effectively assure that race will always be relevant in American life, and that the ultimate goal of eliminating entirely from governmental decision making such irrelevant factors of a human being’s race will never be achieved." Affirmative action wasn't totally eliminated, but it was curtailed by the 2007 ruling. Discrimination against women was looked at in //Reed v. Reed// in 1971 when the Court ruled that a state law that automatically preferred a father over a mother as executor of a son's estate violated the 14th amendment. This ruling set a basis against arbitrarily classifying men and women separately. Gender discrimination was being looked at in Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan 1982. Hogan, a male, wanted to go to the university for an advanced nursing degree, but was denied. The Supreme Court agreed saying women traditionally didn't lack ability to get into nursing school so affirmative action wasn't a good argument for the university. Justice O'Connor even said allowing it would perpetuate the stereotype that nursing was solely for women. It was a 5-4 decision. In United States v. Virginia Military Institute 1996 the court had to rule on VMI being a male-only college. The Supreme Court ruled against VMI. Males and females cannot be treated separately just because of gender when it comes to wages (equal pay for equal work), hiring, and any area where separation is arbitrary. There can be all-male or all-female schools, prisons could hire just males in male prisons and vice versa. The right of citizens and the press to know what the government is doing is essential. Only informed citizens can make a democracy function properly. However, the government is able to keep much information top secret and classified especially if it's for national security purposes. The Freedom of Information Act requires federal agencies to give citizens access to unclassified records on request. If people are denied access, then they can sue the government. The Sunshine Act set up the Sunshine laws which said that government meetings had to be made public and had to give the public advance notice. If a closed session is permissible, then a record must be kept and made available to the public. Americans also have the right to privacy as stated in //Griswold v. Connecticut// in 1965. New issues arise with the Internet. Government surveillance in the age of terrorism has also become an issue. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) lays out the guidelines for government surveillance for national security purposes.
 * The Freedom of Information Act says all citizens have the right to (A) not be discriminated (B) be at public meetings (C) fair hiring (D) have access to public records (E) all (F) none**


 * The Sunshine Act says all meetings have to be (A) held regularly (B) public (C) able to have records accessible (D) attended by the voters (E) all (F) none**


 * //Griswold v. Connecticut// says -- is protected (A) desegregation (B) public records (C) privacy (D) information (E) all (F) none**


 * Giving preference to minorities and women to make up for past discrimination is (A) affirmative action (B) reasonableness standard (C) desegregation (D) non-discrimination (E) all (F) none**


 * What is the major argument against this? (A) it doesn't do enough to make up for past discrimination (B) reverse discrimination (C) it doesn't end discrimination (D) it doesn't end segregation (E) all (F) none**


 * What case limited this?**


 * What did //Reed v. Reed// stop? (A) gender discrimination (B) racial discrimination (C) age discrimination (D) disabilities discrimination (E) all (F) none**

6. Law is the set of rules and standards by which a society governs itself. In democratic societies, law resolves conflict between and among individuals and groups and protects the individual against government power. The earliest known laws or rules were based on practices in tribal societies. One such written code was the Code of Hammurabi, the king of Babylonia from 1792 to 1750 B.C. The code categorized crimes and provided 282 examples and their punishments. Today, we categorize law into categories such as criminal law, property law, and family law to name a few. The Ten Commandments of the ancient Hebrews with Moses is another example of a law code written down. According to the Bible, Moses received the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai. The Ten Commandments emphasize justice as well as individual and communal responsibility. Our legal heritage in America comes from four basic classifications. Constitutional law comes from the Constitution, which is the most fundamental and important source of law in the U.S. It laws out the framework of how our government works and sets forth basic rights. There is a U.S. Constitution and all 50 states have state constitutions as well. When there is a question of power between the branches of government or about individual rights, constitutional law is usually at play. A second source of our legal heritage is statutory law. A statute is a law that is written by a legislative branch of government. Statutes passed by city or borough councils are called ordinances. Most federal court cases deal with statutory law. A third category is administrative law, which come from the rules and regulations of the large number of federal bureaus and agencies that make up the executive branch. A fourth source is common law, also called case law. It is law made by judges as they resolve individual cases. The American legal system has several principles. One principle is equal justice under the law, or the principle that all Americans are treated fairly under the law regardless of race, gender, or ethnicity. A second principle is due process of law, or fairness in the manner in which the law is carried out on people. Everyone must go through the same legal process regardless of race, gender, and ethnicity. An adversary system of justice is a third principle. This means that the courtroom is an area in which lawyers for the opposing sides are adversaries and that the lawyer who makes the better case will win. A fourth principle is the presumption of innocence. This means that the burden of proving an accusation falls on the prosecution, not the defendant.
 * When agencies and bureaus issue rules and regulations - such as IRS tax rules, FCC radio rules, the FDA's rules for food and medicine, or the EPA with environmental rules, this is what type of law? (A) Constitutional (B) Statutory (C) Administrative (D) Common (E) all (F) none**


 * A case dealing with a civil liberty from the Bill of Rights would fall under which type of law? (A) Constitutional (B) Statutory (C) Administrative (D) Common (E) all (F) none**


 * When a law is passed by Congress, or an ordinance passed by a city council, it falls under which type of law? (A) Constitutional (B) Statutory (C) Administrative (D) Common (E) all (F) none**


 * Which is an example of due process of law? (A) innocent until proven guilty (B) fining someone for speeding and allowing the next person to go with just a warning (C) arrest, arraignment, and trail the same for everyone (D) having lawyers argue (E) all (F) none**


 * What is the law code of the ancient Hebrews that is a moral code for us today? The T-- C---**

7. Civil law touches nearly every phase of daily life - from buying a house to getting married. About 90% of state court cases are civil cases. There are four important types of civil law. A contract is a set of voluntary promises, enforceable by the law, between parties who agree to do or not to do certain things. We enter into contracts all the time when we join a club, buy a car, marry, or agree to do a job. In an expressed contract, the terms are specifically stated by the parties, usually in writing. In an implied contract, the terms are not stated but can be inferred from what people do and the circumstances. What makes a contract valid? First, each party must be mentally competent. Usually they must be adults, and finally, the contract's terms cannot involve any illegal activity. Typically a contract has three basic elements: an offer, an acceptance, and a consideration (money paid for the offer). For example, the auto shop agrees to fix your bumper for $500 (the offer). You agree in writing or orally (the acceptance). Finally, you and the auto shop make the exchange - repair for money. A second type of civil law is property law, which deals with the use and ownership of property. Real property is land and whatever is attached to or growing on it (houses, trees, etc.) while personal property is all other property including movable items that you buy and intangible items like stocks and bonds. Issues could arise when renting or selling property. Dealing with a mortgage, a loan to pay for the house, is a property law issue. A third type of civil law is family law, which includes laws dealing with marriage, divorce, child abuse, child custody and child support issues. The fourth type deals with torts and civil wrongs. A tort is any wrongful act (other than breaking a contract) for which an injured person can sue for damages in a civil court. An intentional tort is a deliberate act that harms a person or property. Slander and assault and battery are intentional torts that are tried in civil courts (assault and battery could also be tried under criminal law as well). Un unintentional tort is doing harm without intending to, but still the resulting harm was predictable. An example would be negligence - not putting up a wet floor sign, then a person falls or not salting the sidewalks when there's ice. There are several steps in a civil court case. The plaintiff is the person who brings charges in a lawsuit, which is the complaint. The person against whom the suit is brought is the defendant. The plaintiff seeks damages, or money due to the complaint. In some cases an injunction might be issued, which is a court order that forbids the defendant from taking or continuing a certain action. The first step is to hire a lawyer. Then, the complaint is filed. The defendant will receive a summons, or an official notice with the date, time, and place of the initial court appearance. The defendant files an answer, or formal response to the complaint. The third step is the pretrial discovery when both sides check the facts and gather evidence. Sometimes there is resolution without a trial when mediation takes place in which both sides try to reach an agreement before a trial has to happen. If mediation or arbitration don't work, then the trial takes place. In PA, a civil case has 12 jurors and 10 of the 12 have to agree on a verdict (in a criminal case all 12 jurors have to agree in PA). The final step is the award or what the plaintiff gets if the plaintiff wins. Most states have created small claims courts as a legal alternative to the expensive and lengthy trial process. In such courts, no lawyers are necessary because judges decide the cases.
 * Which would be covered under family law? (A) issues with a marriage license (B) custody of children in a divorce (C) laws against child abuse (D) whether or not a couple can adopt a child (E) all (F) none**


 * Not putting up a wet floor sign would be (A) intentional tort (B) felony (C) negligence (D) petty offense (E) all (F) none**


 * Which would be dealt with in small claims court? (A) burglary (B) dispute between a landlord and a tenant (C) murder (D) rape (E) all (F) none**

8. Tort reform issue: The American legal system has long allowed someone to sue a person or a business for tort, or personal injury. People sue for damages, usually a monetary payment, to compensate them for financial suffering due to a physical injury (a workplace injury, or medical malpractice as examples) or some sue due to emotional distress. The possibility of being sued is meant to encourage better services and products, but are too many unfounded lawsuits filed...are there too many frivolous lawsuits (such as suing McDonald's blaming them for being obese)? Do such lawsuits drive up the costs of services and professional practices for everyone? Is there need for tort reform - reform in terms of lawsuits? Right now you can sue - if you win you get money, if you lose, oh well you tried. Reform would mean if you file a frivolous suit - just trying to get money - you'd get punished by paying the court costs to discourage people from suing for no good reason.
 * YES - The federal government needs to intervene to reform tort law because the costs of frivolous, or unfounded, lawsuits are out of control. Successful lawsuits often involve not only awards for losses and medical costs, but additional punitive awards for pain and suffering. While they are mean tot punish the injurer, they are often excessive because lawyers play upon the jurors' sympathies. To avoid high damage awards, companies often settle with a plaintiff before a trial can begin. This may prevent a large settlement, but it only encourages more lawsuits. Torts have had an especially bad effect on the health care industry. Doctors are often worried about a lawsuit so often order more tests than are necessary just to ensure diagnosis, which drives up health care costs. Excessive damage awards have led to high rates for malpractice insurance and so doctors must charge more. These high costs, in turn, are passed on to consumers. The federal government should set limits on damages in order to discourage frivolous lawsuits.
 * NO - People who have suffered injury should be able to seek justice without restrictions. This goal is met by the current system. Tort suits force the injurer to reexamine and improve the safety of products and practices. Although the number of medical malpractice lawsuits has dropped in states where payouts are capped, this does not prove that there were too many frivolous lawsuits. There does not need to be any changes in the system.
 * Which side do you agree with? Why?**

9. Criminal law defines criminal acts (when a law is broken) and spells out punishments. The criminal justice system is the system of state and federal courts, judges, lawyers, police, and prisons responsible for enforcing criminal law. There are several types of crimes. Petty offenses are minor crimes such as parking illegally, littering, disturbing the peace, minor trespassing, and drving over the speed limit. The punishment for a petty offense is often a ticket, or citation, rather than arrest. Misdemeanors represent more serious crimes such as vandalism, stealing inexpensive items, writing bad checks for modest amounts of money, or being drunk and disorderly. Punishments can be fines or jail sentences, usually for a year or less. Felonies are serious crimes such as burglary, kidnapping, arson, rape, fraud, forgery, murder, or manslaughter (killing someone but less serious than murder - heat of the moment or being reckless). For a felony, prison is usually over a year and as high as life in prison or the death penalty. There are several steps in the criminal justice system. The first step is the investigation and arrest. The police gather evidence to convince a judge to issue a warrant to arrest a suspect. A valid arrest warrant lists the suspect's name and the alleged crime. Police also can arrest people without warrants if they catch them committing a crime. In certain circumstances, it is enough if the police have only a reasonable suspicion that a person has broken the law. The arrest person is taken to a police station where the charges are "booked" or recorded. A suspect is also given his or her right to a lawyer. Whenever someone is arrested, he or she must be brought before a judge as quickly as possible to be charged, usually within 24 hours. The judge explains the charges to the defendant and reads the rights to the person arrested. The judge could require bail, which is the sum of money that the accused leaves with the court until he or she returns for trial, to keep the person from fleeing. The third step is the preliminary hearing or the grand jury stage. A grand jury is a group of citizens who review the charges to determine whether there is enough evidence to "hand up" an indictment, or formal criminal charge. Grand jury hearings are conducted in secret and may consider types of evidence not allowed in trials. If the grand jury feels there is enough evidence to go to trial, they issue an indictment, or a formal criminal charge. A preliminary hearing is similar, but is before a judge. The judge decides if there's enough evidence to go to trial. Once official charges are filed, plea bargaining is often a next step. In about 90% of all criminal cases plea bargaining leads to a guilty plea and no trial. In a plea bargain, a defendant might agree to plead guilty to a lesser charge or fewer charges (if multiple charges) in return for the government not prosecuting the more serious or additional crimes. If there is no plea bargain, then after an indictment, the next step is arraignment, which is when the judge reads the formal charges against the defendant. The defendant then enters a plea of guilty, not guilty, not guilty by insanity, or in some states no contest, which is basically admitting guilt without it being written as admitting guilt. After the plea, there is a trial. A jury is the group of citizens who hear evidence during a trial to decide on guilt or innocence. Jury selection takes place before the trial when a large pool of citizens are called in for jury duty. Attorneys on both sides choose jurors. Both sides do their best to avoid choosing jurors who might be unsympathetic to their client. Once the trial is concluded, the juror makes its decision, or verdict. If a jury is unable to agree to a verdict, the court declares a mistrial due to a hung jury and a new trial would have to happen with a new jury. If the defendant is found not guilty, the final step is sentencing, or the punishment given.
 * Give an example of real property and personal property.**


 * What is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony?**


 * What is the basic process of the criminal justice system?**

10. The chart below shows that the percentage of people who believe crime is worse now than a year ago is much higher than the number of people who feel that crime is lower now. **Do you think crime is getting worse or is there less crime? Why do you think the way you do?**

Back to the Chapter 8 main page