Overview

Lesson Procedure

65-75 minutes of class time across 5 phases.

1. Warm-Up10 minutes
2. Direct Instruction20 minutes
3. Guided Practice15 minutes
4. Independent Practice15-20 minutes
5. Closure5-10 minutes

1. Warm-Up10 minutes

   Put three reports of the same invented event on the board and ask students who wrote each one.

   Warm-Up Prompt

   "(1) The motion of the respondent school district is denied, and the petitioner's claim may proceed. (2) A judge ruled Tuesday that a Riverside student can take his fight over a canceled graduation speech to trial. (3) The school lost. He gets his day in court." Which one was written by a court, which by a newspaper, and which by a friend texting you? Circle two words in each that gave it away.

   Collect the circled words in three columns. Students usually point to "respondent" and "petitioner" (words with a legal meaning), "fight" (a word with feeling attached) and "day in court" (a phrase not meant literally). Name the three kinds of meaning RI.9-10.4 asks about, technical, connotative and figurative, and tell students that today they will see how many such choices add up to a tone.

2. Direct Instruction20 minutes

   Part 1: Kinds of meaning. Present Diagram 1 and the table. Stress that a word's meaning is determined "as it is used in a text": the same word can be technical in one text and everyday in another.

   What RI.9-10.4 asks students to determine

   Kind of meaning	Question to ask	Where to look
   Technical	What does this word mean in this field (law, science, government)?	Definitions in the text, the sentences around it, a specialized dictionary
   Connotative	What feelings or associations does the word carry beyond its dictionary meaning?	Compare it with a near-synonym: would "lost" feel different from "stripped of"?
   Figurative	Is the word used beyond its literal sense? What picture does it create?	Images of seeing, moving, holding, building; idioms
   Cumulative impact	What do many choices, taken together, do to meaning and tone?	Patterns: repeated kinds of words across a paragraph or text

   Part 2: The case. In 1909 Ethel Mackenzie, born in California, married Gordon Mackenzie, a British subject living in San Francisco. A 1907 federal law said an American woman who married a foreigner took her husband's nationality. In 1913 the San Francisco election board refused to register her to vote. She sued, and in December 1915 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled against her. Read the opening of the opinion aloud and model worked examples 1-3.

   1Mandamus prosecuted by plaintiff in error as petitioner against defendants in error, respondents, as and composing the Board of Election Commissioners of the city and county of San Francisco, to compel her registration as a qualified voter of the city and county, in the appropriate precinct therein.

   2An alternative writ was issued but a permanent writ was denied upon demurrer to the petition.

   3The facts are not in dispute and are stated by Mr. Justice Shaw, who delivered the opinion of the court, as follows:

   4"The plaintiff was born and ever since has resided in the State of California. On August 14, 1909, being then a resident and citizen of this State and of the United States, she was lawfully married to Gordon Mackenzie, a native and subject of the kingdom of Great Britain. He had resided in California prior to that time, still resides here and it is his intention to make this State his permanent residence. He has not become naturalized as a citizen of the United States and it does not appear that he intends to do so. Ever since their marriage the plaintiff and her husband have lived together as husband and wife. On January 22, 1913, she applied to the defendants to be registered as a voter. She was then over the age of twenty-one years and had resided in San Francisco for more than ninety days. Registration was refused to her on the ground that by reason of her marriage to Gordon Mackenzie, a subject of Great Britain, she thereupon took the nationality of her husband and ceased to be a citizen of the United States."

   5Plaintiff in error claims a right as a voter of the State under its constitution and the Constitution of the United States.

   6The constitution of the State gives the privilege of suffrage to "every native citizen of the United States," and it is contended that under the Constitution of the United States every person born in the United States is a citizen thereof. The latter must be conceded, and if plaintiff has not lost her citizenship by her marriage she has the qualification of a voter prescribed by the constitution of the State of California. The question then is, Did she cease to be a citizen by her marriage?

   Part 3: The same case in the newspaper. Read the San Francisco Chronicle's report of the decision, printed in 1916 in a journalism textbook as a model news story. Model worked examples 4-5, then show Diagram 2 and ask what one repeated choice, legal role or name, does to the reader's sense of her.

   1The Supreme Court of the United States has decided in the case of Mrs. Ethel Coope Mackenzie of San Francisco that the federal expatriation law of 1907 is constitutionally applicable to women that continue to live in this country after marrying foreigners as well as to those that marry foreigners and live abroad.

   2The ruling settles finally a test case that has become internationally famous in suffrage circles. In effect, it is much more sweeping than the bare recorded fact would indicate, including in its wide range a host of women, in and out of states where they have the vote, who are married to men not citizens of the United States.

   3It means, applied locally, simply this: A woman born in California, herself a citizen of the United States with the right to vote, automatically relinquishes her citizenship and that right the moment she becomes the wife of a foreigner, whether the foreigner is a resident or not.

   4Mrs. Mackenzie, who brought the test case, is the wife of Gordon Mackenzie, known on the concert platform as Mackenzie Gordon, the Scotch tenor. Her husband, who is a nephew of the late Sir Morell Mackenzie, a famous English surgeon, has been a resident of San Francisco for the last twelve years. He has lived in this country for more than twenty years. She was herself born in California, the daughter of J. F. Coope of Santa Cruz, a well known California pioneer. But the fact that her husband, born a British subject, has never taken out citizenship papers in this country, makes Mrs. Mackenzie, by the ruling of the supreme court, an alien in the eyes of the law of the United States.

   5A curious feature of the unusual case is that Mrs. Mackenzie was one of the most ardent of the workers for suffrage during the campaign which resulted in the women being given the vote in California.

   6The ruling affects also, in sweeping fashion, a large number of other women socially prominent in San Francisco. It includes Baroness Van Eck, who was Miss Agnes Tillman and who is still a resident of this state; Baroness Von Brincken, formerly Miss Milo Abercombie, also living here; Countess Von Falkenstein, who was Miss Azalea P. Keyes; Mrs. John Hubert Ward, who was Miss Jean Reid, and a great number of others.

   7Mrs. Mackenzie, who, since her marriage to the famous tenor in August, 1909, has been living at 2832 Jackson Street, was among the first to appear at the polls after the state had enfranchised its feminine population. She was refused the privilege of voting. The California courts, in which the case was instituted, decided against her. Now the ruling of the highest tribunal in the country upholds the lower courts.

   8“It was something of a shock,” she said, “to learn that after two years of hard work to bring suffrage to California I could not enjoy the right I had helped to give other women. Investigation showed, of course, that I could gain my citizenship and my right to vote, and also retain my husband, by his application for naturalization papers, but I did not wish to accept citizenship on those terms, and so I brought a test case.

   9“My husband kindly delayed his citizenship until my case might be presented in the courts. Now that it is decided, he will become a citizen. This means that I shall be received back into the fold, but only because I am his wife.”

   • Technical meaning: naming the parties

     "Mandamus prosecuted by plaintiff in error as petitioner against defendants in error, respondents, as and composing the Board of Election Commissioners" (Text 1, paragraph 1).

     Result: Mandamus is a court order commanding an official to perform a duty; here it would order the board to register her. A plaintiff in error brings a case to a higher court claiming the lower court made a legal error. The sentence tells a trained reader who sued whom and for what, and it names no person at all.

   • Technical meaning from context

     "An alternative writ was issued but a permanent writ was denied upon demurrer to the petition. The facts are not in dispute" (Text 1, paragraphs 2-3).

     Result: A demurrer is a reply that says: even if every fact you state is true, you have no legal claim. The next sentence is the context clue: the facts are not in dispute, so the whole case turns on what the law means. The technical word tells the reader what kind of fight this is.

   • Word choice and tone in the opinion

     "The latter must be conceded, and if plaintiff has not lost her citizenship by her marriage she has the qualification of a voter ... The question then is, Did she cease to be a citizen by her marriage?" (Text 1, paragraph 6).

     Result: "Must be conceded" hides who concedes; the passive voice and the conditional "if" keep the Court at a distance. The paragraph then narrows everything to one plain question. Together these choices give a deliberate, impersonal tone: the Court presents itself as reasoning, not reacting.

   • Connotation and figurative language in the news story

     The Chronicle writes that the ruling "is much more sweeping than the bare recorded fact would indicate" and that it makes Mrs. Mackenzie "an alien in the eyes of the law" (Text 2, paragraphs 2 and 4).

     Result: "Sweeping" connotes force and reach, like a broom clearing a floor; "bare" suggests the official record hides the human cost. "In the eyes of the law" treats the law as a person looking at her, and "alien" carries a sense of strangeness that "noncitizen" does not. The words make the ruling feel large and personal.

   • Court opinion vs. newspaper (the official example)

     Opinion: "Registration was refused to her on the ground that by reason of her marriage ... she thereupon took the nationality of her husband" (Text 1). Chronicle: "She was refused the privilege of voting" and "It was something of a shock," she said (Text 2).

     Result: The opinion gives the legal ground, in the vocabulary of status ("nationality," "ground," "by reason of"). The Chronicle gives the experience: "privilege" stresses what she lost, and her own word "shock" adds feeling. Repeated across both texts, these choices make one a measured legal record and the other a human-interest story.

3. Guided Practice15 minutes

   Pairs reread paragraphs 5-9 of the Chronicle story (Text 2) and complete a three-column chart: word or phrase, kind of meaning (technical, connotative, figurative), what it adds. Give three starters: "A curious feature of the unusual case" (paragraph 5), "socially prominent" (paragraph 6) and "received back into the fold" (paragraph 9). Circulate and push past labels: "connotative" is a start; "'ardent' makes her sound devoted and warm, so losing the vote she worked for feels unjust" is analysis.

   Debrief with one question: Mrs. Mackenzie says she will be "received back into the fold, but only because I am his wife." A fold is a pen for sheep. What does the image suggest about how she sees her position, and why does "only" matter? Students should see the irony: she returns as a dependent, not as a citizen in her own right. Then run Activity 1.

4. Independent Practice15-20 minutes

   Students read the closing paragraphs of the Mackenzie opinion (Text 3) and the opening of a Duluth Herald report on a Minnesota supreme court decision in a lawsuit against the city (Text 4). They answer quiz questions 1-20 on their own with both texts open. Remind them to use the sentences around a word before reaching for a dictionary.

   1It would make this opinion very voluminous to consider in detail the argument and the cases urged in support of or in attack upon the opposing conditions. Their foundation principles, we may assume, are known. The identity of husband and wife is an ancient principle of our jurisprudence. It was neither accidental nor arbitrary and worked in many instances for her protection. There has been, it is true, much relaxation of it but in its retention as in its origin it is determined by their intimate relation and unity of interests, and this relation and unity may make it of public concern in many instances to merge their identity, and give dominance to the husband. It has purpose, if not necessity, in purely domestic policy; it has greater purpose and, it may be, necessity, in international policy. And this was the dictate of the act in controversy. Having this purpose, has it not the sanction of power?

   2Plaintiff contends, as we have seen, that it has not, and bases her contention upon the absence of an express gift of power. But there may be powers implied, necessary or incidental to the expressed powers. As a government, the United States is invested with all the attributes of sovereignty. As it has the character of nationality it has the powers of nationality, especially those which concern its relations and intercourse with other countries. We should hesitate long before limiting or embarrassing such powers. But monition is not necessary in the present case. There need be no dissent from the cases cited by plaintiff; there need be no assertion of very extensive power over the right of citizenship or of the imperative imposition of conditions upon it. It may be conceded that a change of citizenship cannot be arbitrarily imposed, that is, imposed without the concurrence of the citizen. The law in controversy does not have that feature. It deals with a condition voluntarily entered into, with notice of the consequences. We concur with counsel that citizenship is of tangible worth, and we sympathize with plaintiff in her desire to retain it and in her earnest assertion of it. But there is involved more than personal considerations. As we have seen, the legislation was urged by conditions of national moment. And this is an answer to the apprehension of counsel that our construction of the legislation will make every act, though lawful, as marriage, of course, is, a renunciation of citizenship. The marriage of an American woman with a foreigner has consequences of like kind, may involve national complications of like kind, as her physical expatriation may involve. Therefore, as long as the relation lasts it is made tantamount to expatriation. This is no arbitrary exercise of government. It is one which, regarding the international aspects, judicial opinion has taken for granted would not only be valid but demanded. It is the conception of the legislation under review that such an act may bring the Government into embarrassments and, it may be, into controversies. It is as voluntary and distinctive as expatriation and its consequence must be considered as elected.

   3Judgment affirmed.

   1Eighteen months have elapsed since little Florence Lemoine, a pretty, dark-eyed dancer of 18 years, fell from a sidewalk on West Fourth street and sustained an injury to her back and spine which has left her a helpless and lifelong paralytic. Unconscious of her true condition and hopeful of the future, the once popular little vaudeville performer lies on her cot at her father’s ranch near Moscow, Idaho, planning theater engagements she will never fill and dreaming of new gowns and dances.

   2Yesterday the Minnesota supreme court handed down a decision which affirms the judgment of the district court of this city where, a few months ago, a $5,000 verdict was obtained against the city of Duluth in her favor. A jury last April awarded her damages in that amount, but the city asked for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Judge Kesler denied the motion and an appeal was taken by the city to the supreme court, the municipality denying its liability. The higher tribunal held that the city was liable.

   3On Aug. 17, 1913, Florence stepped off a sidewalk on the lower side of West Fourth street between Lake and First avenues west. The accident occurred during the evening while Mrs. Jane Lemoine was escorting her two daughters, Florence and 15-year-old Grace, to the Happy Hour theater, where they were filling an engagement. The sidewalk at this point is elevated several inches above the abutting property and at the time of the accident was unprotected by a rail.

   4Florence slipped and fell on her back. Her injuries at first were believed to be of a slight nature. Later surgeons pronounced her suffering from spinal trouble and paralysis of the lower limbs. She was taken to her room at the Frederick hotel, where the Lemoines were stopping, and there remained until after the trial of the suit against the city last April. The Lemoines left for Moscow, Idaho, about six months ago. Denny & Denny, attorneys for Frederick Lemoine, the girl’s father, who brought suit on behalf of his injured daughter, recently received word that the girl’s condition was not much improved. She is still in bed. Since her accident Florence has been of a cheerful frame of mind, probably because her true condition has been carefully withheld from her.

5. Closure5-10 minutes

   Exit ticket: "Pick one word from the opinion and one from the Chronicle that name the same thing (for example, her loss of the vote). Write one sentence on the meaning of each and one sentence on how the difference changes the tone." Sort the tickets into "defines only" and "explains the effect on tone" to plan the next lesson.

   Teacher note on historical language. The texts are quoted exactly as printed in 1915 and 1916. The closing of the opinion (Text 3, paragraph 1) defends what remained of coverture, the old common-law doctrine of marriage, and says it "worked in many instances for her protection"; present it as the law of 1915, not as a view students are asked to share. The Chronicle speaks of the state's "feminine population"; the Duluth Herald calls an injured young woman "a helpless and lifelong paralytic." Treat these two phrases as word choices with connotations that readers today would avoid, and use neutral terms, such as "a person with paralysis," in discussion. The rule in the case itself was largely ended by the Cable Act of 1922.

   Homework passage. A Brooklyn Eagle story on a New York appeals court decision about an employer's responsibility for an employee. It mixes the reporter's words with a long quotation from the court's opinion, so students can compare the two kinds of language inside one text.

   1That an employer is not responsible for the acts of his servant that cause damage to another when those acts are not committed in furtherance of the master’s business, was the decision of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Division, when it reversed a case which the lower court had decided against a Manhattan department store. The reversal in favor of the department store was given by the court on an appeal taken by the attorney, Abraham Oberstein, of 299 Broadway, Manhattan.

   2This case is of considerable importance to employers, for the reason that their employes often get into altercations with employes of other concerns, damages sometimes ensue, and then the question arises whether the employer is responsible for the acts of his servant. As the justices of the Appellate Division view the question, the issue is not whether an inflicter of damages was in the employ of a certain firm, but whether he was promoting the firm’s interest in inflicting the damages. If he was, then the master is responsible, providing it was within the scope of the employer’s duties, and if it was not, then the master is not responsible, no matter how grievous or serious the injury inflicted may be.

   3Adolph Miller, through his guardian, instituted suit for assault against Attorney Oberstein’s client. Miller was a driver in the employ of another concern, and was about to deliver goods at the store when one of the latter’s drivers asked for the berth Miller was entitled to. Miller refused. The other driver, he alleges, assaulted him. Then he directed suit against the department store concern, under the employers’ liability act. The lower court decided for Miller, but Lawyer Oberstein appealed and the Appellate Division reversed the decision, saying that Miller’s suit should have been dismissed.

   4The opinion, written by Presiding Justice Gildersleeve and concurred in by Justice McLean, says:

   5“The test of liability in such cases depends upon the question whether the injury was committed by the authority of the master, expressly conferred, or fairly inferable from the nature of the employment and the duties incident thereto. The mere statement of this rule answers the question in favor of the defendant in this case. The act of the driver was a wilful and malicious act. It was not done in furtherance of his master’s business and was in no way connected with or incident to the performance of any of the duties intrusted to him as a driver, or which could be considered as promoting the defendant’s interests. The rule as stated in Gervin vs. N. Y. Central R. R. Co., 166 N. Y. 289, is as follows: ‘If a servant goes outside of his employment and, without regard to his service, acting maliciously or in order to effect some purpose of his own, wantonly commits a trespass or causes damage to another, the master is not responsible.’ The plaintiff failed to prove any liability on the part of the defendant and the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint should have been granted.”

Differentiation Strategies

Assessment Guidance

1. Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Text 3, paragraph 2: Congress's power is challenged because of "the absence of an express gift of power." What does "express" mean here?

   ASent quickly, as in an express delivery BStated directly, in so many words CHeartfelt, as in expressing a feeling DKept private between the parties

2. Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   "But there may be powers implied, necessary or incidental to the expressed powers" (Text 3, paragraph 2). An implied power is one that

   Athe justices create because they approve of a law Bbelongs to the states and not to Congress Cfollows from powers the Constitution states outright Dhas been used so long that no one questions it

3. Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   "Therefore, as long as the relation lasts it is made tantamount to expatriation" (Text 3, paragraph 2). The sentence before says marriage "has consequences of like kind" as leaving the country. "Tantamount to" means

   Aequivalent in effect to Ba first step toward Ca punishment worse than Dan exception to

4. Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   "We should hesitate long before limiting or embarrassing such powers. But monition is not necessary in the present case" (Text 3, paragraph 2). Using the sentence before it, "monition" most nearly means

   Aa payment of money Ba vote of the full Court Ca warning or caution Da detailed history

5. Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   "Having this purpose, has it not the sanction of power?" (Text 3, paragraph 1). What does "sanction" mean here?

   AA penalty placed on a nation BLegal authority or approval CA religious blessing DA delay in carrying out a law

6. Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   "As a government, the United States is invested with all the attributes of sovereignty" (Text 3, paragraph 2). "Invested" is used figuratively. Which reading fits best?

   AThe United States spent money to acquire its powers BThe United States risked its powers in hope of a gain CThe United States earned its powers over many years DThe United States was formally clothed with its powers

7. Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   The Court writes, "we sympathize with plaintiff in her desire to retain it and in her earnest assertion of it" (Text 3, paragraph 2), just before "But there is involved more than personal considerations." What is the effect of "sympathize" and "earnest" here?

   AThey signal that the Court will rule in her favor BThey show respect for her just before the Court rules against her CThey mock her, because the Court means the opposite of what it says DThey are technical terms that define her legal claim

8. Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   The opinion calls marriage "a condition voluntarily entered into, with notice of the consequences" (Text 3, paragraph 2). How does this wording help the Court's argument?

   AIt shows the Court believes the marriage was forced on her by others BIt suggests the law was kept secret from the public CIt presents the loss as the result of her own informed choice DIt hints that the marriage was not legally valid

9. Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Text 3 repeats hedges such as "we may assume," "it may be, necessity," "It may be conceded" and "it may be, into controversies." What is their cumulative effect on tone?

   AAngry: the Court is losing its patience with the plaintiff's case BDoubtful: the Court is unsure whether its own judgment is right CPlayful: the Court is joking with its readers DCautious: the Court qualifies its claims so it sounds careful

10. Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    "The identity of husband and wife is an ancient principle of our jurisprudence" (Text 3, paragraph 1). In this legal sense, "identity" means

    Athe law treating husband and wife as a single unit Bthe identification papers each spouse carries Ceach spouse's sense of who he or she is Da husband and wife sharing one family name

11. Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    The Duluth Herald calls Florence "little Florence Lemoine, a pretty, dark-eyed dancer of 18 years" and "the once popular little vaudeville performer" (Text 4, paragraph 1). What do "little," "pretty" and "once popular," taken together, do?

    AThey state the court's official findings about her BThey make readers doubt that her injury was as serious as claimed CThey show that she was a young child, under the age of twelve DThey make her seem small, charming and fallen, inviting pity

12. Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    "Yesterday the Minnesota supreme court handed down a decision" (Text 4, paragraph 2). The phrase "handed down" is

    Aliteral: a justice physically passed a paper down to the reporter Ban idiom for issuing a decision officially, from higher to lower Ca technical term meaning the decision was reversed Dslang that shows disrespect for the court

13. Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    "...but the city asked for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Judge Kesler denied the motion" (Text 4, paragraph 2). What did the city ask for?

    AA ruling for the city despite the jury's verdict BA new trial before a different jury CSmaller damages, because it accepted the verdict DPermission to settle out of court

14. Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    Compare the first paragraph of the Duluth Herald story (Text 4) with the Supreme Court's closing paragraphs (Text 3). Which statement best describes the difference?

    ABoth texts use impersonal legal terms and keep all strong emotion out BThe opinion uses more emotional and vivid words than the newspaper does CThe newspaper stresses suffering; the opinion stays impersonal and legal DThe newspaper uses far more technical legal vocabulary than the opinion

15. Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer

    "Their foundation principles, we may assume, are known" (Text 3, paragraph 1). Explain what "foundation principles" means here and why the Court can "assume" readers know them. What does this tell you about the audience of a court opinion?

    Show model answer

16. Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer

    "...this relation and unity may make it of public concern in many instances to merge their identity, and give dominance to the husband" (Text 3, paragraph 1). Explain the figurative meaning of "merge" and the connotation of "dominance." How might a reader in 1915 and a reader today react differently to this wording?

    Show model answer

17. Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer

    Text 4, paragraph 1 ends: "planning theater engagements she will never fill and dreaming of new gowns and dances." Explain how this closing phrase shapes the tone of the story, and why a court opinion on the same case would leave it out.

    Show model answer

18. Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer

    Paragraph 2 of Text 4 uses "damages," "appeal" and "liability." Explain the meanings of two of these words in context, then explain why the reporter switches to this vocabulary after paragraph 1.

    Show model answer

19. Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer

    Rewrite "This is no arbitrary exercise of government" (Text 3, paragraph 2) as the headline of a 1915 newspaper story that sides with Mrs. Mackenzie. Then explain which words you changed and how the tone changes.

    Show model answer

20. Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer

    The Chronicle explains the ruling in paragraph 3 of Text 2: "It means, applied locally, simply this: ..." The Court ends its opinion by saying the marriage "is as voluntary and distinctive as expatriation and its consequence must be considered as elected" (Text 3, paragraph 2). Explain how each text's word choices frame the loss of citizenship, and the cumulative effect on tone.

    Show model answer

These standards connect to RI.9-10.4: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.

Standard text: Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy. © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.