Closed-notes recall
In the final week, use closed-notes recall to identify what still needs review. Try to state each power, case, document, clause, threshold, or causal sequence from memory, then return only to the material you cannot reconstruct accurately. The review is organized by the information you need to recall on the exam rather than by chapter order.
Rebuild the five units from memory
Before checking any table below, try stating in one sentence each what Units 1 through 5 are about: the constitutional foundation and federalism, the three national institutions and their interactions, civil liberties and civil rights, political ideology and belief formation, and political participation. If any one sentence is hard to produce, that unit deserves a closer look before exam day, not just a page turn.
| Document | Core claim |
|---|---|
| Declaration of Independence | Legitimate government rests on natural rights and the consent of the governed |
| Articles of Confederation | A weak national government dependent on state cooperation for money and enforcement |
| Constitution | Divides and structures national power through enumerated powers, separated branches, and checks |
| Brutus No. 1 | A large national republic will weaken representation and let federal power expand at state expense |
| Federalist No. 10 | An extended republic dilutes factions across many competing interests |
| Federalist No. 39 | The Constitution is genuinely republican and mixes national and federal features |
| Federalist No. 51 | Separated institutions with competing incentives check one another |
| Federalist No. 70 | A single energetic executive supports accountability and decisive action |
| Federalist No. 78 | Judicial independence lets courts enforce constitutional limits without electoral pressure |
| Gettysburg Address | Reasserts equality and popular sovereignty as founding principles during a national crisis |
| Letter from a Birmingham Jail | Defends disciplined nonviolent direct action against persistent, real injustice |
| Emancipation Proclamation | Declared enslaved people in rebellious areas free, a wartime measure, not the act that ended slavery nationwide |
| Core principles from Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations (1776) | Markets generally allocate resources well, though government still has defense, justice, and select public roles |
Know the required cases by constitutional principle
Group the fourteen required cases by the constitutional question each one answers, rather than by the order this course covered them. Marbury and judicial review. McCulloch and Lopez together, defining the reach and the limit of implied national power. Engel and Yoder, the two religion clauses. Schenck and Brandenburg's later standard, and Tinker and New York Times Co. for speech and press. Gideon and McDonald for incorporation. Baker v. Carr and Shaw v. Reno for representation and Equal Protection. Brown for equal protection directly. Citizens United for campaign finance.
| Case | Constitutional question it answers |
|---|---|
| Marbury v. Madison | Do federal courts have the authority to review government action against the Constitution |
| McCulloch v. Maryland | How far does Congress's implied power reach |
| United States v. Lopez | Where does that implied power stop |
| Engel v. Vitale | Can government sponsor an official prayer |
| Wisconsin v. Yoder | When does a law burden religious exercise too heavily |
| Schenck v. United States | Historical wartime speech restriction standard |
| Tinker v. Des Moines | How far does student political expression extend |
| New York Times Co. v. United States | How heavy is the burden to justify prior restraint |
| Gideon v. Wainwright | Does the right to appointed counsel apply to the states |
| McDonald v. Chicago | Does the right to keep and bear arms apply to the states |
| Baker v. Carr | Can federal courts hear a malapportionment claim |
| Shaw v. Reno | When does race in district design violate Equal Protection |
| Brown v. Board of Education | Does racial school segregation violate Equal Protection |
| Citizens United v. FEC | Are independent political expenditures protected speech |
Reconstruct branch powers and checks
Without looking back, try to state one formal power specific to each branch and one check each branch faces. Congress can pass legislation and override a veto with two-thirds of both chambers; it faces judicial review of the statutes it passes. The president can veto legislation and command the armed forces; the president faces Senate confirmation of appointments and impeachment. Courts can declare government action unconstitutional; courts depend on other institutions for appointment, jurisdiction, and enforcement of their rulings.
Rebuild the four FRQ jobs without looking back
- Concept Application: read the three lettered parts and obey each task verb. The sequence is not fixed as identify-explain-apply. Use the scenario and explain a political mechanism whenever asked how or why.
- Quantitative Analysis: read the legend, variables, denominator, time period, and scale; identify or describe the requested pattern; draw only conclusions supported by the data; and connect the pattern to a course concept when asked. Be ready for tables, graphs, maps, and infographics.
- SCOTUS Comparison: three lettered parts, four total points. Identify the shared constitutional basis when asked; use accurate required-case knowledge; explicitly compare the facts and holdings for full Part B credit; then connect the nonrequired case to the named political concept in Part C.
- Argument Essay: one thesis point, up to three evidence points, one reasoning point, and one alternate-perspective point. For the top evidence score, use two specific relevant pieces and make at least one a foundational document listed in the prompt.
A closed-notes check
Core closed-notes retrieval is limited to required CED content: the required cases, required foundational documents, constitutional provisions, institutions, political processes, data skills, and the four FRQ scoring jobs. Answer each question in the practice set from memory before checking the response.
Current cases for context
These cases can help with current examples, but they are not part of the fourteen required-case list. They are useful if a prompt makes them relevant, but they should not compete with the fourteen required cases for memory priority.
- Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) overruled the older Chevron deference framework: courts now interpret an ambiguous statute an agency administers independently, rather than automatically deferring to the agency's own reading.
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) set the current historical-tradition methodology for evaluating a specific firearm regulation, and United States v. Rahimi (2024) clarified that the test requires a well-established and representative historical analogue, not an identical historical twin. Both answer a separate, later methodology question from the incorporation question McDonald answered.
- Wolford v. Lopez (2026) applied the Bruen framework and held unconstitutional a state default rule barring licensed carry on private property open to the public absent the owner's express authorization. It does not change McDonald's required-case role.