Understanding the Minnesota Judiciary: Legislators and Judges areDifferent
LessonPlan
Abstract:Studentswill learnthatjudgesandlegislators havedifferentrolestoplayinour systemof government byanalyzingacasestudy thatdescribesthedevelopmentandapplicationof theMinnesota MoveOvertrafficlaw,which requiresthat drivers move overalanewhen approachingasquadcar involved inatrafficstop. Studentswillstoryboardthesteps takenas thelaw movesfromthelegislature throughthethreelevelsofthe courtsystemandthenbackto thelegislature. Lessonincludesastudent readingandcomparisonchart.
Objectives:
1. Thestudentswill describe thedifferencesbetween judgesandlegislatorsandthefunctions each performs.
2. Thestudents willunderstandhowlawsaredevelopedbythelegislatureandapplied and
interpretedbythecourts.
3. Thestudents will understandthedifficultyofwritinglawsthatareclearlyunderstood.
4. Thestudents will understandthedifficultyofinterpretinglawsthatcanbegivendifferent interpretations.
GradeLevel:HighSchool
Time to Complete:Oneto twoclassperiods
MaterialsNeeded: StudentHandouts:Legislators andJudgesare DifferentandtheTrafficLawCase Study;Constructionpaper,colored pencils,markers,Minnesota Constitution, MinnesotaLegislative Manual, Move Over Card,
Procedure:
1. Introducethe topic bydiscussinghowcitizensgotodifferentbranchesof governmentwithconcerns. Howarethebranchesdifferentintheway theydo their work?Howarethelegislatorsandjudges different?Havestudentsreviewpowers delegatedinthe MinnesotaandUS Constitutions.
Suggested lesson talkingpoints:
Legislators lookforwardandjudgeslookback:limitedtousingarecorddevelopedbyparties, applyingprecedents, lookingfor legislativeintent.
Legislators canpursuepolicyinterests andagendas;judgestakecasesbroughtto them. Judgesapplythe lawwrittenbylegislators,evenwhentheymightpersonallydislikethelaw. Legislators changethelawwhen theydon’tlikeit.
Legislators representconstituent interests;judgesapplythelawtothefactsof a case. Theydo notrepresent constituent interests andsometimesdecidecasesagainstthewillof themajority of citizens.
Thereareno educationrequirementstobealegislatorandthelegislature includes peoplefrom all backgrounds andwalksof life. Judgeshavethesameeducational background: theymustbe
learned inthelawandhavea licensetopractice law.
2. Havestudentscompletetothebestof theirabilitythe“Legislators andJudgesare Different“chart.
Theywillreturnto this attheend of thelesson.
3. OptionalWarmUpActivity
1. Misunderstandings:Walkaroundtheclass andtalkto otherstudentsaboutatimewhenyou or someoneyouknowmisunderstoodthemeaningofsomething. Changepartners often.
2. Chat: Inpairs/groups, decidewhichofthesetopicsorwordsthatwillbein thereadingare mostinterestingandwhicharemostboring. Haveachataboutthetopics youlike.
Prosecutor/alcoholconcentrationlevel/exclusionaryrule/reasonable interpretation/ DWI
4. StoryboardActivity.Dividestudentsintogroupsof sixforthe “TrafficLawCaseStudy” storyboardingactivity.Astoryboard is avisualrepresentationthat depicts(explains)what is sequentiallyhappeningin awritten story.
5. Ineachgroupof six,assignonestudent toeachof thefirstsixchaptersofthe“Traffic LawCase Study”. Thecasestudyincludessix chaptersplus afinal seventh chapterthatwillbeconsidered at the endof thestoryboardingactivity.
Plotlinesofcasestudy
Chapter 1 –Thelawis developed
Chapter 2 –Thestoryof thecase
Chapter 3 –ThecasegoesbeforetheDistrictCourt
Chapter 4 –TheCourtof Appeals hearsthe appeal
Chapter 5 –Thecaseis appealed againtotheMinnesota SupremeCourt
Chapter 6 –TheFixbytheLegislature
Chapter 7 –Studentspredictfuturesituations
6. Provideinstructions for storyboarding.
a. When creatingastoryboardusinganon-media source,students shouldbeprovided with at leasta12x18sheetof constructionpaper. Havestudentsfoldtheir paperinhalf lengthwise.Next,havestudentsfoldtheir paperintothirds. Havestudentsunfoldtheir paper. Thestudent’spaper will nowbedivided intosix equal squares.
b. Havestudentsread theirassignedchapterofthe story. Usingastoryboardvisuallyshow what ishappeningin thechapter.Makesuretouseall sixsquaresofthestoryboard. Pictures shouldbeneat, clear, andbeable tohelpexplainwhatisgoingonin thechapter.
Storyboardoptions:Picturesfrommagazines, books,internet,and/orother published materials maybeused.A storyboardcanalsobecreatedusingaPowerPoint.
7. Havestudentssharetheir storyboardswithothermembersoftheir group. Intheirgroups, have studentspredictwhatmighthappen next. Askstudentstorepresenttheir predictions inapicture with ashortdescription. Theymay each dotheirownpredictionor produceonepredictionforthe group.
8. Havestudentssharetheir storyboardswith thelargegroup. Presentfirstsixchaptersfirst. Afterthe wholeclass has shared,havethempresent theirChapter Sevenpredictions.
9. Reviewthe rolesplayed bythe legislativeandjudicialbranches in thecasestudy.Havestudentsreviewtheir“Legislators and JudgesareDifferent” chart,makingcorrectionsandadditions.
10.Optional Activity:Discuss qualifications/personalitytraits thatwouldbedesirable forlegislatorsand judges. Howaretheythesame,different?Describeperfectcandidatesforeach.
This lessonplan was developed as partof acurriculum-development workshopthat wassponsored by the MinnesotaSupremeCourtHistorical Society,withthe assistanceoftheMinnesota SupremeCourt, the MinnesotaStateBarAssociationCivic EducationCommittee,andtheLearningLawandDemocracy Foundation.Lessondevelopmentwassupportedin partwith funds fromtheArtsandCultural Heritage Fund of the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy Amendment to the Minnesota Constitution, which Minnesotans passed into law via the 2008 general election ballot.
STUDENTHANDOUT: LegislatorsandJudgesareDifferent
RolesofLegislatorsandJudgesAreDifferent
Legislatorsand judgesplay different rolesinour system ofgovernment. To showyou understand this, fill in the chartusingthephrasesbelow.Placeall phrasesthat describeconcepts/rolesof the legislatureinthecolumn titled LegislativeBranch and all concepts/roles ofthejudiciary inthe column JudicialBranch. All blanksinthechart will not be filled.
PhraseBank:
LookforwardLookback
ApplyprecedentsChangelawstheydon’tlike PursuepolicyNo educational requirements Takecasesbroughttothem Chooseproblems toworkon
Comefromavarietyofoccupations/jobsApplythe lawwithoutregardtopersonalviews
Elected totwo orfouryeartermsMustbelearned inlaw/havelicensetopracticelaw
RepresentinterestsofconstituentsWritesstatutes
WritesopinionsthatexplainreasoningElected tosixyear terms
Governorcanappointtofill vacancy
Roles
LegislativeBranch / JudicialBranchTrafficLawCaseStudy
Chapter One:The Law
"Ted Foss"Move OverLaw
InAugust2000, StateTrooperTedFosswas killedwhenasemi-truckaccidentally crashedinto hissquad carandanother carstoppedonthesideof theroad.
Asaresultof thiscrashandothersimilarones,theMinnesota Legislaturepassed the“TedFoss”MoveOverLaw in 2002. In order tokeep officerssafe,thislaw requires driversto movetheircarsalane overwhen theyaredrivingnearan officer whois makingatrafficstop.
2002 MinnesotaStatutes§169.18,subd.11,reads:
“When approaching andbeforepassing anauthorized emergency vehicle thatisparked or otherwisestopped onor nextto astreetorhighwayhavingtwoormorelanesin the samedirection,the driver ofavehicle shallsafelymove thevehicle toa laneawayfrom the emergency vehicle.”
Toteachthe publicaboutthelaw, theMNDept ofPublicSafetywroteabrochure that put thelaw insimple terms:
Ifyouaretravelingonaroadwaywithtwo ofmorelanes,youmustkeepalaneawaywhenpassing astoppedambulance,firetruck,or law enforcementvehicle. Ifyouarenotableto safelymovealane away,reduceyourspeed.
Ifyoufailtotaketheseactionsyou couldreceiveacitation.
Ignoringthislaw endangersthelawenforcementofficers,firefighters,emergency medicalpersonnel,andtowtruckdriverswhoprovidecritical—and sometimeslifesaving— servicesonMinnesota roadways.
Thenexttimeyouseeflashing lightsupahead,remembertomoveover.Obeyingthis little-known lawcouldmakea bigdifference.
Alwaysrememberto buckleup.
ChapterOne Review Questions:
Pleaseansweronaseparate sheetof paper.
1. Whichbranch ofgovernmentisatworkhere?
Circleone: LegislativeExecutiveJudicial
2. Whatactiondidthebranch take?
3. Whatisyourunderstandingofwhat thelaw says?Summarizeit.
4. Why wasthelawpassed?
5. Whatisthepurposefor thelaw?
Chapter Two:The Case
OnFebruary7, 2003,aUniversityof Minnesotapolice officerpulledoveracarforatrafficviolationonUniversityAvenuein Minneapolis.UniversityAvenueisaone- way streetwiththreelanesof traffic.Thereisapavedbicyclelanenextto therightcurb.Theofficerparkedhissquadcarbehindthestopped carand turnedonhisemergencylights. Indoingso,hissquadcarpartiallyoccupied therightlane of traffic.The officergotout of hissquadcarandwenttotalktothedriverof thestopped vehicle.
Whilewalkingbacktohis squadcar,theofficer sawavehiclecomingtowardhim onUniversityAvenuein the centerlane. Thisapproachingvehicle,drivenbyAnderson (thedefendant),hadsignaledalane changeandmoved into thecenterlaneto avoidthe officerandhissquad car.
Believing that Anderson’s vehiclepassed tooclose tohimand his stopped squad car,theofficergotinto hissquadcar,pursuedAnderson,and thenstopped him.The officertoldAndersonthat he broketheMoveOverLaw (Minn.Stat.§169.18,subd. 11). TheofficerbelievedthatAnderson wasinviolationofthis lawbecausehethought itwas illegalforAnderson to pass thestoppedsquadcarwithout allowing“abuffer(extra)
laneof traffic”between thetwovehicles.
Whentheofficer wastalkingtoAnderson,hethoughtthatAndersonmightbe drunkandgavehimabreathtesttobe sure.Duetothetestresult,theofficer arrested Andersonforimpaireddriving. The statechargedAndersonwithDrivingWhileImpaired (DWI)intheFourthDegree(driving withanalcoholconcentrationof.10or more,2002 law). He wasnot chargedwithbreakingtheMoveOverLaw.
FactsfromMinnesotav.Anderson,MNSupremeCourtA03-290.July29,2004.
ChapterTwoReview questions:
1. Drawthesceneof thetrafficstoponaseparatesheetofpaper.
2. Whichbranch ofgovernmentisatworkhere?
Circleone: LegislativeExecutiveJudicial
3. What wastheofficerdoing whenAndersondroveby?
4. Whydidtheofficer stopAnderson?
5. Whydidtheofficer arrestAnderson?
6. WhyisAndersongoingto court?
Chapter Three:TheDistrict Court
Andersonpleaded notguiltytotheDWIchargeinDistrictCourt.Inapre-trial hearing,Anderson’s lawyerand thestate’slawyer(prosecutor) madeargumentsbefore a districtcourtjudgeaboutwhetherornot thebloodtestresultsshould be allowedas evidenceagainstAnderson inthetrial.
Anderson’s lawyerarguedthat theblood test resultsshouldnotbeallowedas evidencein histrial becausethepoliceofficerdid nothaveavalid reasonfor stopping hiscar.Iftheofficerdid nothaveavalidreasonto stopthecar,thejudgecanapply the exclusionaryrule whichwould keepoutof thetrialany evidenceobtainedduringthe invalidstop.
TheofficertestifiedthathepulledAndersonoverbecausehefailedtomoveover totheproperlane requiredby theMoveOverLaw.Andersonarguedthathewasinthe “laneaway”even thoughit wasn’t thefurthestlane.
Theprosecutorarguedthattheevidenceobtained(alcohol concentrationlevel) shouldbe allowed attrial becausethepoliceofficer hadmadeavalid stop.He said the officerbelievedthelaw requiredAndersonto leaveabufferlaneandthathis reasonable interpretationofthelaw’s meaning wasavalid reasonto stopthecar.
Thedistrict courtjudgeruledin favorof Anderson.Hedecidedtherewasno validbasisfor thestopbyconcludingthat Minn.Stat.§169.18,subd.11isclear whenit says “alaneaway”and does not requiremotorists toprovidea bufferlanebetween themselvesandparkedemergencyvehicles.
Statev.Anderson,671N.W.2d900(MinnApp.2003)grantingmotiontostrikeHennepinCountyDistrict
CourtFileNo.03009871.
ChapterThree Review questions:
Pleaseansweronaseparate sheetof paper.
1. WhichMinnesotacourtis decidingthisquestion?
2. Whatisthequestionthecourtmustdecide?
3. What constitutionalprotectionisinvolvedin thiscase?
4. Ifthepoliceofficerbreakstherules,what happenstotheevidence?
5. Whoarethepeoplearguingbeforethejudge?
6. Whoisthe winner inthefirstcase?Why?
Chapter Four:TheMinnesota Court ofAppeals
The statedisagreedwiththeconclusionof the DistrictCourtandaskedahigher courttolookatthecase(appealed).InDecemberof 2003,theMinnesotaCourtof Appealsreversed thedistrictcourt’sdecisionand ruled that theofficer’sstop waslegal becausehehadareasonableinterpretation of the“moveover”law.
OntheMinnesotaCourtofAppeals,athree-judgepanelreadsthelegal argumentsfrombothsidesandthen listens tobothlawyersmakeoralarguments.The judgesofteninterruptlawyersandaskquestionstobetterunderstandthecase.Then they meetandmaketheirdecision.
Inthis case,theCourtof Appealsissuedan opinion(awrittendecision explaining thecourt’s reasoning)thatsaid the MoveOverLaw is ambiguous (open to morethanoneinterpretation)and thephrase“alaneaway”could mean eitherin the nextlaneorafulllane away.The Courtconcludedthat itisnotclearwhatthe legislaturemeant.They ruled that theevidenceshould beallowedinAnderson’strial becausetheofficer’sinterpretation of theMoveOverLaw is areasonableone when consideringthetotalityofthe circumstances.
Statev.Anderson,671N.W.2d900(MinnApp.2003).
ChapterFourReview questions:
Pleaseansweronaseparate sheetof paper.
1. WhichMinnesotaCourt is decidingthisquestion?
2. Howmanyjudges makethedecision?
3. Whatarethesteps inmakingthe decision?
4.Whoisthe winneratthislevelcourt?Why?
Chapter Five:The Minnesota Supreme Court
The casewasappealed again. InJuly2004,thesevenjustices of theMinnesota SupremeCourt,the courtof finalreviewonMinnesota law,followeda processsimilarto that of theCourt ofAppeals,andissuedadecisionreversingtheCourtof Appealsand agreeingwiththeDistrictCourt.
TheMinnesotaSupremeCourt decided that the“naturaland obvioususage”of the phrase“alaneaway”is clear;it means“in thelanenextto”thestoppedemergency vehicle. SinceAnderson’s carwascompletely within thecenterlaneoftraffic,itwasin thelanenexttothelaneoccupiedbytheofficer’sstopped squadcar.Thecourt ruled thatAndersondid notviolatetheMoveOverLaw.
The Courtsaid thateveniftheofficer actedin“good faith,”heincorrectly interpretedtheMoveOverLaw anddid nothaveanobjectivebasistojustifythestop. TheMinnesotaSupremeCourt upheldtheDistrictCourt’sdecision toexcludethe evidenceobtainedasaresultof theinvalid stop.
Statev.Anderson,MinnSupremeCourtA03-290,decidedJuly29,2004
ChapterFiveReview questions:
Pleaseansweronaseparate sheetof paper.
1. DiagramtheMinnesotacourtsystemshowingallthree levelsofcourtsand who won ateach court.
2. Whatquestionis beforethis court?
3. Whoisthe winner atthislevelofcourt?Why?
Chapter Six:Fixingthe Law
During the2005legislativesession,the"MoveOverLaw" wasamended(changed). MinnesotaStatutes§169.18,subd.11,nowreads:
"(a) When approaching and before passing an authorized emergency vehicle with its emergency lights activated that is parked or otherwise stopped on or next to a street or highway have two lanes in the same direction, the driver of a vehicle shall safely move the vehicle to the lane farthest away from the emergency vehicle, if it is possible to do so.
(b)When approachingandbeforepassing anauthorized emergency vehiclewith its emergency lights activatedthatisparkedorotherwisestoppedon ornext to astreetorhighway havingmorethantwolanesin thesamedirection,the driverofavehicle shallsafelymove thevehicle so as to leave a full lane
vacant between the driver and any lane in which the emergency vehicle is completely or partially parked or otherwise stopped, ifitispossibletodoso."
Note:TheMinnesotaDepartmentofPublicSafetyupdated theTedFossMoveOver Law materialstoexplainthe2005change.Theofficialwebsitesays“When traveling on a road with two or more lanes, drivers must keep over one full lane away from stopped emergency vehicles with flashing lights activated — ambulance, fire, law enforcement, maintenance and construction vehicles.
ChapterSixReview questions:
Pleaseansweronaseparate sheetof paper.
1.Inwhatwaysdid theLegislaturechangetheMoveOverLaw?
2.Did the changessolve theproblem?
3.Doyou seeanynewproblemswiththelaw?
4. Doyouthinkthat thelanguageon theMinnesotaDepartment of Safety’s websitecorrectlyexplainsthechangesthelegislaturemadein thelaw? Please explain.
Chapter Seven:Youpredict what happens next
Whatisapossible nextchapterfortheMoveOverLaw? Storyboardyour ideaand explaininasmallparagraphwhat happens.