Unit 1 - Checks and Balances
The Beagle in Chief
This week's scenario is ripped straight from this week's headlines. Read it, then answer all three parts like it's the real AP exam. You've got 15 minutes. Go.
📐 Connects to: Unit 2 — Checks and Balances / Senate Confirmation Power
🗞️ Today's Scenario
In the summer of 2026, President Trump nominated Todd Blanche to serve as U.S. Attorney General. His confirmation was expected to move smoothly through a Senate controlled by his own party. But during the confirmation process, two Republican senators announced they were withholding their support, citing concerns about a Justice Department settlement connected to the President personally. Because a simple majority of the full Senate is required to confirm a Cabinet nominee, and Democrats were unanimously opposed, those two Republican defections were enough to put the nomination in serious jeopardy. Facing likely defeat on the floor, the White House began considering whether to withdraw the nomination rather than let it fail in a formal vote.
Based on real reporting from NPR and Democracy Now!, week of July 27, 2026. Source links: NPR Politics · Democracy Now! Headlines
A
Describe the constitutional power that gives the Senate a role in this scenario.
1 Point
B
In the context of the scenario, explain how the actions of the two Republican senators demonstrate a check on presidential power.
1 Point
C
Explain how the scenario reflects the constitutional principle of separation of powers, such as by explaining how a unified government (one party controlling both the presidency and the Senate) does not guarantee that a president's nominees will be confirmed.
1 Point
15:00
✅ Scoring Guideline — 3 Points Total
PART A1 PT
Award the point if the response correctly identifies/describes the Senate's power of advice and consent under Article II, Section 2 — the requirement that a majority of the full Senate approve presidential nominations to executive branch and judicial positions, including Cabinet officers like the Attorney General.
PART B1 PT
Award the point if the response explains that senators — including members of the president's own party — can act as a check on executive power by withholding the votes needed for confirmation, and that this can stall or block a president's nominee even without united opposition-party control.
PART C1 PT
Award the point if the response explains that separation of powers/checks and balances means the executive branch cannot unilaterally staff itself, and that unified party control of the presidency and Senate does not eliminate this check — individual senators retain independent power to withhold consent, consistent with Madison's Federalist No. 51 argument that ambition must counter ambition.
