The Case of Mary Surratt: The Conspirator

The case of Mary Surratt, the only woman accused in the conspiracy to kill the President, Vice President, and Sec. of State, is an interesting and complicated case study in examining the right to a fair trial.  This movie presents the case from the perspective of Frederick Aiken, a young lawyer and war hero.  His perspective is particularly interesting and complicated, as it presents us with both moral and legal questions regarding wartime law, the use of the death penalty, and the role of revenge in punishment.


"'Equal justice under law' is not just a caption on the facade of the Supreme Court building.  It is perhaps the most inspiring ideal of our society."
-- US Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell, Jr

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury... and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witness against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
-- Sixth Amendment

Blog Post: Response to one of the following prompts.  In addition, respond to a classmate's blog post (it can be one the same prompt or not).  Clarify by the titles provided which prompt you are responding to.

1.) Military Tribunals: Using the example of Mary Surratt or others, describe and discuss the critical differences between a civil court and a military tribunal.  Why is the use of military tribunals with civilians controversial?  Do you think it is appropriate to try civilians in this way?  If so, in why circumstances?

2.) Trials in Wartime: Using the example of Mary Surratt or others, explain how war can change the processes of the legal system.  How does public opinion play a role in cases like Surratt's?  What differences do you notice about the trial due to its connection to the Civil War?

3.) Rights or Revenge?: Using the provided excerpt from Aiken's closing argument, discuss whether Mary Surratt's trial was about rights or revenge (or somewhere in between).  Explain Aiken's comparison of lawyers and soldiers.  Explain what you think Abe Lincoln meant in the quote used by Aiken.  Do you agree with Aiken that the commission has the choice of "preserving Surratt's rights, or revenge?"

• Excerpt from Frederick Aiken's closing argument: "For the lawyer as well as the soldier, there is an equally imperative command.  That duty is to shelter from injustice the innocent, to protect the weak from oppression and, when necessity demands, to rally to the defense of those being wronged.  'At what point shall we expect the approach of danger?  Shall some transatlantic military giant step the ocean, and rush at a blow?  Never!  I answer, if danger ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us.  If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher.  As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.'  Those words were spoken by a struggling young attorney.  His name? Abraham Lincoln.  Do not permit this injustice to Mary Surratt by sacrificing our sacred rights out of revenge.  Too many have given their lives to preserve them"

The Budget in an Election Year

Obama Renews Push for "Buffett Rule," Romney Pushs for Ryan Plan

Watch Obama Renews Push for Buffett Rule on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.

Listen to this NPR story about how Mitt Romney has embraced the "Paul Ryan budget."  The Paul Ryan budget - named after the Wisconsin Republican Congressman who is credited as the chief author and introduced it to Congress - characterizes current conservative fiscal thinking.  In short, it calls for significant cuts to spending while maintaining current tax cuts and extending new tax cuts.

The Obama budget, which characterizes liberal fiscal thinking, calls for a new tax on the super rich - the so-called "Buffett Rule," named after Warren Buffett, the billionaire who has suggested taxing the super rich at higher rates - while cutting less from domestic spending.

After you have an understanding of the practical and ideological differences between the Obama and Romney (Ryan) budget, write a reflection on (1) which budget is a better solution to the current fiscal situation, and (2) how these contrasting budgets will play a role in the 2012 presidential campaign.

Consider some of the following in your response;

• Which budget do you think will be more popular among independents and "swing voters?"
• How do these budgets reflect the ideology of their proponents?
• Where do you see the greatest strengths in each of these budgets (fiscally and politically)?
• Where do you see the greatest weaknesses of each of these budgets?
• Do you see any compromise here?  Do either of these plans deal with entitlements and mandatory spending?  Which plan is better?

Who Is Your Candidate?

Wondering whether President Obama or one of the Republican candidates best reflects your views and ideology?  Take this short quiz from USA Today.

A Guide to Political Contributions

The New York Times has an interactive guide to understanding several typical types of political donations.  By looking at fiscal electioneering from the perspective a billionaire wanting to donate $10,000 to help Democrats win back the House of Representatives, a college student looking to donate $25 to a candidate in need, or anything in between, we can learn a lot about how the actual donation process - including limitation and loopholes - actually work.

The site, which is updated to reflect ramifications of the Citizens United decision, is well worth the time.

"Creative Cartography" - A Closer Look at Gerrymandering

It just so happens that gerrymandering - the politicized process of redrawing congressional district maps after a census - is still a lingering issue.  While the last census, which is done every 10 years, was done in 2010, the political battles over redrawing the maps in many states continues.  That, in short, is why the issue stays in the news.  The fight is especially intense in Texas, where the Supreme Court has decided to step in, Arizona, Florida, where they are just getting started, and even here in Wisconsin.



To best understand the current battles and likely outcomes, we need to rewind and take a closer look at the 2010 midterms.  While - like the upcoming 2012 election - unemployment and the economy in general were viewed as the most significant issues in the minds of voters, the opportunity to redistrict - the golden political opportunity that comes a long once a decade - also rested on that election.  When we look across the nation and we see that it is often Democrats crying foul about largely Republican-friendly maps, we remember that 2010 was a big Republican victory.

In considering the exceptional impact of these maps, it could certainly be argued that the 2010 midterms were much more important to national politics than was recognized by the electorate, as midterms traditionally do not attract the attention of a presidential election.

In 2010, The New York Times ran an article called "How to Tilt an Election Through Redistricting" that is especially helpful in understanding the strategies used by politicians and their consultants in gerrymandering.  Take a look at the article, especially the example maps that demonstrate "packing," "cracking," and other strategies.

Generation Gap

On November 3, NPR featured a story on the Pew Research Center's report on how different generations currently view politics.  As the story points out, older generations (such as the "silent generation") tend toward more conservative politics, and younger Americans (the "millennials," the generation including you) lean liberal.  A simple explanation, as we discussed in class, is that liberals tend to see change as progress and conservatives tend to view current policy as tried and tested.  The data provided by the study, however, adds to our understanding.

The following day, NPR followed up with a story suggesting how this might impact the upcoming presidential election.  As this story explains, the millennial generation - despite the general observation that younger Americans are disengaged from the political process - was significantly involved in Barack Obama's election.  Obama's support from the youngest group of voters was unprecedented and an important element of his success in 2008.  Not only did young voters tend to vote for Obama, they turned out to vote like never before, and they volunteered and supported Obama beyond their votes.

After listening to (or reading) both these stories, write a brief reflection on what it helps us understand regarding the role of age in politics.  In your response, consider the some of the following:

• Why do you think Obama was successful in motivating young voters when past presidents has struggled to gain their support or have even neglected them as a demographic?
• How will the current political agenda affect who turns out to vote?  What issues will Obama or the Republican candidate need to emphasize to motivate their base constituents?
• Based on your answer to that, who do you think will be more effective?
• How can we explain the significant differences between how the different generations view and trust government?  Why is their such a difference in how the generations view America in the world? (see American exceptionalism)
• Makes some predictions about the upcoming election.  Is there a Republican candidate who you see as best situated to capitalize on what these studies suggest?  Is this good news for either party?
• Any other observations or conclusions?  What in these studies is most important, interesting, or surprising?

Frontloading

If you have been following the news of the Republican presidential primaries, you may have noticed discussion about states moving the dates of their primaries.  Unlike the general election, states do not hold primaries on the same day; the separation of primary elections allows for a more drawn out nomination process, gives candidates a chance to work specific states critical to their overall political strategy, and gives all (or at least, most) states an opportunity to receive particular attention from the candidates.

These may be good reasons to separate the primaries, but there are some apparent downsides to organizing a presidential nomination process in this way.  For one, it makes the entire process resemble horse race coverage by the media.  Sometimes, it's almost as if you can hear the fast-talking race announcer shouting about how another horse just pulled into the lead!

In addition to the downsides of horse race coverage by the U.S. media, there are concerns about the current trend toward frontloading.  Frontloading - a procedure in which the states increasingly schedule their primary earlier in the campaign to receive more attention and have a greater impact in the overall nomination - is a trend that continues.  This year, South Caroline and Florida have already adjusted their primary schedules to assert greater control in deciding the nomination.

Based on the cartoon above and basic research on frontloading, write a response to your thoughts on the frontloading of presidential primaries.

• What is the motivation to move your primary?  What are the downsides?  What are some of the unintended consequences?
• What are the pros and cons of horse race media coverage?  Consider the implications for lesser-known candidates, candidates with more extreme position, and mainstream candidates.
• What effect do you think the schedule has on voter turnout? political efficacy? trust in political parties and the government?
• If you see this as a problem, what solutions might alter the situation?  If not, why do you think is the best scenario?