If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

Main content

Course: AP®︎/College US Government and Politics > Unit 6

Lesson 2: For teachers: AP curriculum correlation guide
Arts and humanities
AP®︎/College US Government and Politics
About this AP US Government and Politics course
For teachers: AP curriculum correlation guide
© 2024 Khan AcademyTerms of usePrivacy PolicyCookie Notice

Unit 3: curriculum mapping by LO and EK

Google Classroom

AP US Government and Politics Unit 3: Civil liberties and civil rights

Curriculum mapping guide by LO and EK

This guide maps the content in Unit 3 of Khan Academy's AP US Government and Politics course to the learning objectives (LOs) and essential knowledges (EKs) covered by each instructional asset and exam-style, multiple-choice practice exercise.
Quick links

LOR-2

Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals.
Big Idea: Liberty and order
LOR-2.A Explain how the U.S. Constitution protects individual liberties and rights.
LOR-2.A.1 The U.S. Constitution includes a Bill of Rights specifically designed to protect individual liberties and rights.
LOR-2.A.2 Civil liberties are constitutionally established guarantees and freedoms that protect citizens, opinions, and property against arbitrary government interference.
LOR-2.A.3 The application of the Bill of Rights is continuously interpreted by the courts.
LOR-2.B Describe the rights protected in the Bill of Rights.
LOR-2.B.1 The Bill of Rights consists of the first ten Amendments to the Constitution, which enumerate the liberties and rights of individuals.
LOR-2.C Explain the extent to which the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First and Second Amendments reflects a commitment to individual liberty.
Lessons covering this LO:
LOR-2.C.1 The interpretation and application of the First Amendment’s establishment and free—exercise clauses reflect an ongoing debate over balancing majoritarian religions practice and free exercise, as represented by such cases as:
LOR-2.C.2 The Supreme Court has held that symbolic speech is protected by the First Amendment, demonstrated by Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), in which the court ruled that public school students could wear black armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War.
LOR-2.C.3 Efforts to balance social order and individual freedom are reflected in interpretations of the First Amendment that limit speech, including:
LOR-2.C.4 In New York Times Co. v. United States (1971), the Supreme Court bolstered the freedom of the press, establishing a “heavy presumption against prior restraint” even in cases involving national security.
LOR-2.C.5 The Supreme Court’s decisions on the Second Amendment rest upon its constitutional interpretation of individual liberty.
LOR-2.D Explain how the Supreme Court has attempted to balance claims of individual freedom with laws and enforcement procedures that promote public order and safety.
LOR-2.D.1 Court decisions defining cruel and unusual punishment involve interpretation of the Eighth Amendment and its application to state death penalty statutes over time.
LOR-2.D.2 The debate about the Second and Fourth Amendments involves concerns about public safety and whether or not the government regulation of firearms or collection of digital metadata promotes or interferes with public safety and individual rights.

LOR-3

Protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties
Big Idea: Liberty and order
LOR-3.A Explain the implications of the doctrine of selective incorporation.
LOR-3.A.1 The doctrine of selective incorporation has imposed limitations on state regulation of civil rights and liberties as represented by:
  • McDonald v. Chicago (2010), which ruled the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense in one’s home is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • Video: Selective incorporation
  • Video: McDonald v. Chicago
LOR-3.B Explain the extent to which states are limited by the due process clause from infringing upon individual rights.
Lessons covering this LO:
LOR-3.B.1 The Supreme Court has on occasion ruled in favor of states’ power to restrict individual liberty; for example, when speech can be shown to increase the danger to public safety.
LOR-3.B.2 The Miranda rule involves the interpretation and application of accused persons’ due process rights as protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, yet the Supreme Court has sanctioned a public safety exception that allows unwarned interrogation to stand as direct evidence in court.
LOR-3.B.3 Pretrial rights of the accused and the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures are intended to ensure that citizen liberties are not eclipsed by the need for social order and security, including:
LOR-3.B.4 The due process clause has been applied to guarantee the right to an attorney and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, as represented by:
  • Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which guaranteed the right to an attorney for the poor or indigent
  • The exclusionary rule stipulates evidence illegally seized by law enforcement officers in violation of the suspect’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures cannot be used against that suspect in criminal prosecution.
  • Article: Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
  • Lesson summary: Due process and the rights of the accused—lesson summary
LOR-3.B.5 While a right to privacy is not explicitly named in the Constitution, the court has interpreted the due process clause to protect the right of privacy from state infringement. This interpretation of the due process clause has been the subject of controversy:

PRD-1

The Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause as well as other constitutional provisions have often been used to support the advancement of equality.
Big Idea: Civic participation in a representative democracy
PRD-1.A Explain how constitutional provisions have supported and motivated social movements
PRD-1.A.1 Civil rights protect individuals from discrimination based on characteristics such as race, national origin, religion, and sex; these rights are guaranteed to all citizens under the due process and equal . protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution, as well as acts of Congress.
PRD-1.A.2 The leadership and events associated with civil, women’s, and LGBT rights are evidence of how the equal protection clause can support and motivate social movements, as represented by:
  • Dr. Martin Luther King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” and the civil rights movement of the 1960s
  • The National Organization for Women and the women’s rights movement
  • The pro-life (anti-abortion) movement
  • Video: Letter from a Birmingham Jail
  • Primary text: Letter from a Birmingham Jail

PMI-3

Public policy promoting civil rights is influenced by citizen–state interactions and constitutional interpretation over time.
Big Idea: Competing policy-making interests
PMI-3.A Explain how the government has responded to social movements.
PMI-3.A.1 The government can respond to social movements through court rulings and/or policies.

CON-6

The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the U.S. Constitution is influenced by the composition of the Court and citizen–state interactions. At times, it has restricted minority rights and, at others, protected them.
Big Idea: Constitutionalism
CON-6.A Explain how the Supreme Court has at times allowed the restriction of the civil rights of minority groups and at other times has protected those rights.
Lessons covering this LO:
Exam-style MCQ practice:
CON-6.A.1 Decisions affecting the rights of minority groups demonstrating that minority rights have been restricted at times and protected at other times include:
CON-6.A.2 The debate on affirmative action includes justices who insist that the Constitution is colorblind and those who maintain that it forbids only racial classifications designed to harm minorities, not help them.

Want to join the conversation?

Log in
No posts yet.