Final Examination - Famous Trials - Review Sheet

Tuesday, May
8th, 9-11am

Part I: Identification - you will be given eight of the words below and asked to identify five of your choice. Most have been defined in lecture or the readings, but you should also use Doug Linder's web site, when appropriate, to flesh out your identification.

Fred Korematsu

Gordon Hirabayashi

Jeanne Wakatsuki


Tule Lake

John L. DeWitt

Executive Order 9066

Ex parte Endo

Rabbit in the Moon


Klaus Fuchs
Hollywood 10
Emanuel Block
Venona Cables
Dennis Case
Irving Saypol
McCarran Act
Irving Kaufman
Loyalty Board
Joseph McCarthy
Alexsandr Feklisov

Alger Hiss
Whittaker Chambers
Brown I
McLaurin v.
Thurgood Marshall
Sweatt v. Painter
Kenneth Clark
Joseph Albert DeLaine
Plessy v. Ferguson
Charles Houston
Brown II

William Calley
Ernest Medina
My Lai
Peers Report
Hugh Thompson
Ronald Ridenauer

Frank Collin
fighting words
Bernard Decker
critical race theory
Sol Goldstein
David Goldberger
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire
Colin v. Smith


Part II: Essay - I will select TWO of the following FOUR essays and you will select ONE of these two on which to write.

1.  In Skokie in 1977, town officials sought an injunction against the Nazis march and passed three ordinances regulating the right to march in Skokie. Drawing on this case explain what limits, if any, you think should be placed on the 1st Amendment right to free speech. What lessons, that is, does this story about threatening demonstrations teach?

2. Discuss and evaluate the strategy the NAACP pursued in trying to overturn Plessy v. Ferguson and that culminated in Brown v. Board of Education.
3. Compare the involvement of William Calley, Ernest Medina, Varnardo Simpson (or any other enlisted man present at My Lai -- your choice), and Lt. Col. Frank Baker in the My Lai incident.  What role did each play?  What explanation or motivation for their behavior might one give?  Did they commit crimes and if so, what penalty would have been appropriate? 

4. The Bill of Rights has not afforded the same protection in times of war and hysteria 
as in peace.  Using the World War II Japanese internment cases discuss how politicians, the public,
and the courts weighed majoritarian concerns and individual freedoms on the scale of