6. The Supremacy Clause tells us that the laws and treaties of the United States Constitution are the "Supreme Law of the Land."Do you agree the laws and treaties of the United States should be the "Supreme Law of the Land" (as opposed to the states' laws)? So should the United States be able to invalidate a state law? And tell me why you think the way you do.

7. The owner of a company that makes and sells pornography (photos, videos, and magazines) wants to pay the going rate to lease out a government civic building for a pornography expo - he will sell his products and display samples of his images inside the government building to try and sell materials. The government employee who runs the government building refuses to allow the pornographic business owner to lease the space because he hates pornography. The owner of the pornographic business claims his First Amendment rights are being violated because these images are protected under the First Amendment. If the owner files suit against the government claiming his First Amendment rights are being violated what do you think will happen? Are his First Amendment rights being violated? Fully explain your answer and analyze the First Amendment issue(s) and reach a conclusion on what would happen in this case.

8. You are a United States Federal Judge. A case comes before you where a federal employee who is in charge of issuing marriage licenses is refusing to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. Her claim is that her religion does not support same sex marriage and by forcing her to issue marriage licenses the government is interfering with her first amendment rights by forcing her to do something against her religion. She is the only person in the office in her small town so there is no one else that can issue the licenses. You must decide the case in light of the First Amendment issues. What is your opinion and FULLY EXPLAIN the First Amendment issues involved to support your opinion.

9. Joe is walking down the street minding his own business and doing nothing wrong. A police officer pulls him aside, puts handcuffs on him, and searches him. The officer was bored and had nothing better to do and thought it would be fun to harass Joe. Now that Joe is detained, the officer begins to question Joe as to whether he has done anything wrong or violated any laws. Joe becomes very nervous and states he killed his wife - he confesses right there! The officer takes him into custody. He waits a week for a bail hearing. He is denied bail because of the heinousness of his crime of killing his wife and the fact he is a career criminal. He never gets a grand jury to hear his case but is indicted.Joe waits two years for a trial.Joe requests a jury trial and the judge refuses to give Joe a jury trial and Joe gets a trial by the judge. He is forced to testify against himself in the trial.Joe is denied the right to call any witnesses on his behalf. Joe is not allowed to question any of the witnesses that provide testimony against him.Joe is found guilty. His punishment is to be stoned to death in front of City Hall.

Go in order of the scenario above and tell me which Amendments in the Bill of Rights are implicated, determine if they are being violated, and explain why or why not.

10.This is Critical Thinking Question taken from American Governmetn 3e at www.openstax.org: "Which is a better approach to civil rights - a peaceful, gradual one that focuses on passing laws and winning cases in court, or a radical one that includes direct action and acts of civil disobedience? Why do you consider this to be the better solution?"