View student writing samples for the practice AP United States Government prompt and corresponding feedback provided by Fiveable teacher Nicole Johnston. It is important to practice with prompts like these and learn how other students respond to them to improve your own political science writing.
Important note: This is not an official AP Exam-format FRQ. It is a content-review short-answer exercise on federalism, implied powers, and the Commerce Clause.
On the current AP U.S. Government and Politics exam, the free-response section has 4 different question types:
- Question 1: Concept Application
- Question 2: Quantitative Analysis
- Question 3: SCOTUS Comparison
- Question 4: Argument Essay
The official court-case question on the exam is FRQ 3: SCOTUS Comparison. You get 20 minutes, and it is scored on a 4-point rubric. Strong answers accurately explain the constitutional principle involved, correctly describe the required Supreme Court case, explain the non-required case in the prompt, and make a clear comparison tied to the Court’s reasoning.
Even though the practice below is not in the exact official format, it still helps you build useful skills for court-case writing: accurate case explanation, federalism analysis, and comparison of Supreme Court reasoning.
FRQ Prompt
- What are two constitutional questions addressed in McCulloch v. Maryland? What impact did the ruling have on the development of the growing nation?
- How does the interpretation of the Commerce Clause in the majority opinion in United States v. Lopez compare to the interpretation of the Commerce Clause in Gibbons v. Ogden?
FRQ Submissions and Feedback
Practice Submission 1
- The two constitutional questions addressed in McCulloch v. Maryland were if Congress had the power to establish a national bank based on the necessary and proper clause and if states could tax the federal government. The ruling was in favor of the Bank of the US by stating that Congress can create the bank and the states did not have the power to tax the federal government based on the supremacy clause. This case greatly increased the power of the federal government in the growing nation.
- Though both US v. Lopez and Gibbons v. Ogden both involve the commerce clause, US v. Lopez limited the power of the federal government while Gibbons v. Ogden increased it. The ruling in US v. Lopez declared that possession of a firearm in a school zone doesn’t constitute an economic activity. The government’s argument that the possession of firearms will lead to crime and lower the economy is not supported by the Commerce Clause: it’s more or so an overreach. This case showcased that Congress exceeded its authority and that the Commerce Clause does not give them unlimited power. The ruling in Gibbons v. Ogden showcased selective exclusiveness: that only the national government could regulate interstate commerce. In Gibbons v. Ogden, the Court held that navigation and the commercial movement of people and goods across state lines count as interstate commerce, so Congress has the power to regulate it. Therefore New York couldn’t give a monopoly to a ferry service that operates between New York and New Jersey.
Teacher Feedback
Strong overall comparison: you correctly note that Lopez limits congressional use of the Commerce Clause while Gibbons supports broad federal power over interstate commerce. Be careful with your wording about Gibbons—the case did not say a traveler is “a piece of trade.” A more accurate explanation is that navigation and commercial movement across state lines are part of interstate commerce and can be regulated by Congress.
Practice Submission 2
- Who has more power? Can the state government tax federal government banks? It showed that the nation had more power than the states.
- The commerce clause in United States v. Lopez was interpreted as the state government cannot regulate intrastate commerce. The commerce clause in Gibbons v. Ogden was interpreted as the federal government can regulate interstate commerce.
Teacher Feedback
In your first response, make sure to include the key concepts of the necessary and proper clause as well as the supremacy clause. Try not to answer with questions. For your second answer, be careful: Lopez did not say that state governments cannot regulate intrastate commerce. Instead, the case held that Congress could not use the Commerce Clause to regulate simple possession of a gun in a school zone because that activity was not sufficiently connected to interstate commerce. Go beyond just giving the rulings of the cases—explain why a different ruling was issued and how the cases were similar and different.