Civic Leadership in Action: AP Government Students Simulate Supreme Court Confirmation Hearing

Often, the most effective learning happens through lived experience—or, in this case, a thoughtfully designed simulation. That belief guided Charles Jordan’s approach to teaching his AP Government students about the Supreme Court Justice confirmation process.

On February 9, 2026, students in his class gathered in Merion Mercy Academy’s conference room for a simulated confirmation hearing. One student in each section of his course, Christina Flanagan ‘26 and Katherine McLaughlin ‘26, assumed the role of the nominee, while their classmates portrayed U.S. Senators tasked with questioning them. To bring authenticity to the exercise, Mr. Jordan created detailed fictional records for each senator, assigning political affiliations and crafting timely, party-aligned questions for the nominee to address. Topics included the separation of powers, presidential overreach, the liberal interpretation of privacy rights and the right to protest, constitutional interpretation, and federalism applied in the present context.

“I want students to have a strong understanding of the process,” Mr. Jordan explains. “It’s one thing to read about it or watch the hearings, but it’s another to truly participate in the process.” Through the simulation, students experienced the many moving parts of a confirmation hearing—watching as the nominee advocated for herself while senators fulfilled their constitutional responsibility to provide “advice and consent.”

While the student questioning remained civil and respectful, Mr. Jordan used the exercise to highlight a defining feature of modern Supreme Court nominations: increasing political polarization. For much of U.S. history, confirmation hearings were largely procedural, with nominees receiving overwhelming Senate support. Today, however, they are often deeply contentious. “Part of what this simulation is designed to elicit,” Mr. Jordan notes, “is an understanding of how much politics factors into the hearing process, even if that wasn’t the original intent behind the constitutional framework.”

Grounded in Merion Mercy’s Mercy values, the simulation also emphasized respectful dialogue, thoughtful listening, and the dignity of differing perspectives. Students were challenged not only to argue their positions, but to do so with integrity and civility—skills essential to principled leadership and meaningful civic engagement.

As an educator, Mr. Jordan sees this work as central to forming engaged citizens. “I feel a great responsibility to prepare our students to be informed voters,” he says. “Simulations like these help students place themselves within the broader political system and recognize the power and responsibility they carry as participants in a democracy.”