Missouri students complete in finals of MO Bar-sponsored We the

Daily Record and the Kansas City Daily News-Press, Feb 11, 2005 by Staff Writer

In what ways are the establishment and free exercise clauses similar and dissimilar?

What historical lessons and personal experiences of the Founders led them to safeguard these rights in the First Amendment?

How might these two clauses come into conflict, and what criteria do you think should be used to ease this conflict?

This is just one set of challenging questions that faced the 213 students from across Missouri who competed in the Missouri Bar- sponsored We the People state finals on January 31 in Jefferson City.

The students, representing nine high schools, left their American government classrooms behind to spend the day acting as experts, discussing complicated historical and current constitutional issues before volunteer judges at the competition's mock congressional hearings.

During each round of the competition, the four-person teams had to be ready to respond to any one of six questions having to do with American government. For example, one set of questions addressed by each team this year was: What are the basic purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection and due process clauses? How are the equal protection and due process clauses related to the principle of limited government? What are some specific examples of how the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment have been used to expand the protections of the Constitution?

Judges for this year's state competition consisted of congressional staff people, judges of the Supreme Court of Missouri, constitutional scholars from Missouri's public and private universities, Missouri lawyers and alumni of the We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution program.

The Missouri Bar's Advisory Committee on Citizenship Education became the state coordinator for the We the People competition several years ago. Support for the program also comes from the Young Lawyers' Section of The Missouri Bar, which contributes $10,000 to help the winning team travel to Washington, D.C. to represent Missouri in the national competition later this spring.

We the People is a national constitutional curriculum program for grades 4-12 that is developed and distributed by the Center for Civic Education, a federally-funded program. Research shows that 83% of alumni ages 18-25 of the We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution curriculum vote, compared to the national 21% average for that age group.

The winners of this year's Missouri competition were:

First place - Ken Boesch's Advanced Placement U.S. Government and Politics class from Westminster Christian Academy in Ladue.

Second place - Nancy Hequembourg's We the People class from Jefferson City High School.

Third place - Will Keczkemethy's Advanced Placement Government class from Joplin High School.

Other schools participating in the 2005 We the People state competition were: Arcadia Valley High School, Ironton; Center High School, Kansas City; Jefferson Jr. High, Columbia; Platte County R- III, Platte County; St. Charles High School, St. Charles; and Versailles High School, Versailles

consideration, I would like to thank the members of the task force for their analysis of a timely, complicated, and vitally important issue confronting our nation's criminal justice system, and look forward to what I expect will be a lively and interesting debate.

The report accompanying the proposed policy notes that United States v. Booker essentially created an innovative sentencing model that combines mandated sentences for ordinary cases with judicial discretion in more unique ones. Sentencing judges are now required to consider guidelines ranges, but are permitted to tailor sentences in light of other statutory concerns as well. This makes the guidelines effectively advisory. Appellate review of sentences will now be under a more deferential standard of review-one of overall reasonableness.

The proposed ABA policy calls upon Congress to avoid adopting legislation in response to Booker for at least one year in order to determine the effectiveness of this new sentencing regime.

In the meantime, the proposal calls upon Congress to direct the U.S. Sentencing Commission to assemble and analyze all available data regarding sentences imposed under Booker and submit a report to Congress within one year. The task force also recommends that Congress conduct hearings and solicit input from all constituents within the federal criminal justice system about how the new sentencing system compares to state guideline systems and other available legislative options.

Finally, should Congress ultimately decide to revise the new sentencing system, the proposed new ABA policy urges Congress to consider the following actions:

* Simplify the guidelines by adding a limited number of critical culpability factors as elements of each offense to be determined by the jury or by directing the Commission to identify sentencing factors to be determined by the jury;

* Revise the 25% rule to allow expanded sentencing ranges derived from the jury verdicts;