practice ap gov argumentative essay

• Teacher Opportunities
• AP U.S. Government Key Terms
• Bureaucracy & Regulation
• Campaigns & Elections
• Civil Rights & Civil Liberties
• Comparative Government
• Constitutional Foundation
• Criminal Law & Justice
• Economics & Financial Literacy
• English & Literature
• Environmental Policy & Land Use
• Executive Branch
• Federalism and State Issues
• Foreign Policy
• Gun Rights & Firearm Legislation
• Immigration
• Interest Groups & Lobbying
• Judicial Branch
• Legislative Branch
• Political Parties
• Science & Technology
• Social Services
• State History
• Supreme Court Cases
• U.S. History
• World History

Log-in to bookmark & organize content - it's free!

• Bell Ringers
• Lesson Plans
• Featured Resources

Lesson Plan: AP Government: Argumentative Essay Practice

The Federalist Papers

Boston College professor Mary Sarah Bilder gives a brief overview backgrounding the Federalist Papers

Description

This is intended as an end-of-course review activity for practice with the argumentative essay format included on the AP United States Government and Politics exam since the 2018 redesign. Eleven practice prompts are provided, reflecting content from Units 1-3.

ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY PROMPT ANALYSIS

• Review the provided Argumentative Essay Prompts in either an individual or jigsaw format.
• Write a thesis statement for your selected prompt(s) and identify the selection you would make from the provided list and the second piece of evidence you would choose.
• If there are prompts for which you struggle to develop a thesis, or items on the bulleted lists with which you are not conversant, use the hyperlinked C-SPAN Classroom resources to extend your understanding of the required founding documents and SCOTUS cases that you found challenging.

ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY

• Chose one or more of the provided Argumentative Essay Prompts , as assigned, and use the planning and exploration you did above to write a full essay in response to your designated prompt(s) in 25 or fewer minutes , since that's the time limit you'll face on the AP Exam!
• Exchange essays with a classmate and evaluate each others' work.
• 1st Amendment
• Branches Of Government
• Constitution
• House Of Representatives
• Separation Of Powers
• Supreme Court

AP US Government FRQ

Ap government free response.

Check out the following resources for the AP Gov FRQ. Be sure to watch these strategy videos and work through all of the free response practice questions.

Official Sample FRQ

Frq strategy videos, how to write ap gov frqs, argumentative essay.

AP Government | Practice Exams | FRQ | Notes | Videos |  Flashcards |  Study Guides

Find what you need to study

2024 AP US Government & Politics Exam Guide

11 min read • july 12, 2023

Your Guide to the 2024 AP US Government & Politics Exam

We know that studying for your AP exams can be stressful, but Fiveable has your back! We created a study plan to help you crush your AP Government and Politics exam. This guide will continue to update with information about the 2024 exams, as well as helpful resources to help you do your best on test day. Unlock Cram Mode for access to our cram events—students who have successfully passed their AP exams will answer your questions and guide your last-minute studying LIVE! And don't miss out on unlimited access to our database of thousands of practice questions. FYI, something cool is coming your way Fall 2023! 👀

Format of the 2024 AP US Gov Exam

Going into test day, this is the format to expect:

📃 55 multiple-choice questions with 80 minutes to complete them.

There will be ~30 individual, stand-alone questions.

All the other questions will be put together into sets. You may be asked to complete a quantitative, qualitative, or visual analysis in these questions.

✍ 4 free-response questions with 100 minutes to complete them. You should devote ~20 minutes to each response.

Question 1 is always a concept application question.

Question 2 is a quantitative analysis question, where you will analyze data and come to a conclusion.

Question 3 is a Supreme Court case comparison essay. You will compare a required court case with a nonrequired one, explaining how they are related.

Lastly, question 4 is an argumentative essay .

👉 Check out the 2023 AP US Government and Politics Free-Response Section posted on the College Board site.

Scoring Rubric for the AP US Government Exam

View an example set of questions and the corresponding scoring guidelines (page 186) from the College Board to get an idea of what they look for in your responses! You can also focus in on the argumentative essay (free response #4) and take a look at that rubric here .

Check out our study plan below to find resources and tools to prepare for your AP US Government exam.

When is the 2024 AP Gov Exam and How do I Take it?

Tests will be taken in person at your school. Here is what we know from College Board so far:

The exam date will be in-person and on paper at your school on Monday, May 6, 2024 at 8 am, your local time.

You have 3 hours to take the exam. We will have more updates from College Board soon, but as of now, this is what we know!

How Should I Prepare for the AP Gov Exam?

First, you need to take stock of your progress in the course so far so that you can build your study plan according to your needs. Download the AP Government and Politics Cheatsheet PDF —a single sheet that covers everything you need to know—so that you can see a map of the entire course and quickly spot the weak areas that you need to focus on.

Then, create your study plan by focusing on your learning styles and areas to improve. Which types of questions do you need to practice more? We've put together the study plan found below to help you study between now and May. This will cover all of the units and essay types to prepare you for your exam. Pay special attention to the units that you need the most improvement in.

Study, practice, and review for test day with other students during our live cram sessions via Cram Mode . Cram live streams will teach, review, and practice important topics from AP courses, college admission tests, and college admission topics. These streams are hosted by experienced students who know what you need to succeed.

Finally, build your study schedule in advance! We highly suggest making your study schedule ahead of time so that you can easily join interactive study sessions such as live streams, voice chats, and study groups.

Pre-Work: Set Up Your Study Environment

Before you begin studying, take some time to get organized.

🖥 Create a study space.

Make sure you have a designated place at home to study. Somewhere you can keep all of your materials, where you can focus on learning, and where you are comfortable. Spend some time prepping the space with everything you need and you can even let others in the family know that this is your study space. 

📚 Organize your study materials.

Get your notebook, textbook, prep books, or whatever other physical materials you have. Also create a space for you to keep track of review. Start a new section in your notebook to take notes or start a Google Doc to keep track of your notes. Get yourself set up!

📅 Plan designated times for studying.

The hardest part about studying from home is sticking to a routine. Decide on one hour every day that you can dedicate to studying. This can be any time of the day, whatever works best for you. Set a timer on your phone for that time and really try to stick to it. The routine will help you stay on track.

🏆 Decide on an accountability plan.

How will you hold yourself accountable to this study plan? You may or may not have a teacher or rules set up to help you stay on track, so you need to set some for yourself. First set your goal. This could be studying for x number of hours or getting through a unit. Then, create a reward for yourself. If you reach your goal, then x. This will help stay focused!

🤝 Get support from your peers.  

There are thousands of students all over the world who are preparing for their AP exams just like you! Join  Rooms 🤝 to chat, ask questions, and meet other students who are also studying for the spring exams. You can even build study groups and review material together!

AP US Government & Politics 2024 Study Plan

🏛️ unit 1: foundations of american democracy, big takeaways:.

Unit 1 introduces the concept of democracy and its various forms. The documents that first started the United States are analyzed by looking at the challenges and promises associated with each. The division of power within our government: individual rights vs government authority and state vs federal government powers are at the heart of this unit and discussed within each founding document. 

Definitely do this:

🎥 Watch these videos:

Intro to American Government, models of Representative Democracy : A full review of the types of democracy, the difference between government and politics as well as the functions of government are discussed. 

Foundational Documents Review : A deep dive into the foundational documents you need to know for the exam.

Ratification of the Constitution: Constitutional Convention : A review of the compromises leading to the ratification of the Constitution. 

📰 Check out these articles:

Unit 1 Overview: Foundations of American Democracy 

1.1 Ideals of Democracy  

1.2 Types of Democracy 

1.3 Federalist No. 10 & Brutus 1 Summary 

1.4 Challenges of the Articles of Confederation

1.5 Ratification of the US Constitution

1.6 Principles of American Government

1.7 Relationship Between States and the Federal Government

1.8 Constitutional Interpretations of Federalism

1.9 Federalism in Action 

1.10 Required Founding Documents

✍️ Practice:

Best Quizlet Deck: AP Gov Unit 1 by bryce_s

If you have more time or want to dig deeper:

👻 Check out Too Late to Apologize: An Ode to the Declaration of Independence (YouTube)

Types of Federalism Part 1 - Dual vs Cooperative

Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland and US v. Lopez

The Powers - Expressed, Implied, Concurrent, Denied...

⚖️ Unit 2: Interactions Among Branches of Government

Unit 2 dives into the separation of powers between our three branches of government. It looks at the specific powers of each branch as outlined in the Constitution and how each branch has grown in power through the years. The system of checks and balances and the role each branch plays in holding the other accountable is analyzed. 

Legislative and Judicial Branch Review : This stream provides a review of the legislative and judicial branches including their powers and role within the federal government.

Powers of the Presidency : This stream provides a review of the executive branch including its powers and role within the federal government.

Separation of Powers/Checks and Balances : This video from Crash Course reviews the separation of powers between the three branches of government. It also looks at the ways each branch “checks” the other. 

Unit 2 Overview: Interactions Among Branches of Government

2.1 Congress : The Senate and the House of Representatives

2.2 Structures, Powers, and Functions of Congress

2.3 Congressional Behavior

2.4 Roles and Power of the President

2.5 Checks on the Presidency

2.6 Expansion of Presidential Power

2.7 Presidential Communication

2.8 The Judicial Branch

2.9 Legitimacy of the Judicial Branch

2.10 The Court in Action

2.11 Checks on the Judicial Branch

2.12 The Bureaucracy

2.13 Discretionary and Rule-Making Authority

2.14 Holding the Bureaucracy Accountable

2.15 Policy and the Branches of Government

Best Quizlet Deck: Unit 2 – AP Gov by k8te13

Bill to Law Process

Review and Application of Iron Triangles and Issue Networks

Selection and Nomination of Federal Judges

✊ Unit 3: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights

Unit 3 takes the principles of our government established in Units 1 and 2 to analyze maintaining those principles while balancing liberty and order. The role of the Bill of Rights and the 14th amendment in guaranteeing civil rights and liberties for all citizens is at the heart of this unit.  

First and Second Amendments : This stream looks at what the first and second amendments say, how they have been interpreted and some of the major Supreme Court cases around them.

Civil Liberties and Civil Rights : This video from crash course provides a review of the civil liberties and civil rights guaranteed to US citizens. It also looks at the way the Bill of Rights has been interpreted since its inception in relation to liberties and rights.

The 14th Amendment : This stream breaks down the 14th amendment and many of the key terms associated with it: due process, equal protection, incorporation, citizenship, and privileges or immunities clause. 

Required Supreme Court Cases from 1st-10th Amendments : This stream reviews Supreme Court cases about the 1st-10th Amendments and how they protect civil liberties today!

Unit 3 Overview: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights

3.1 The Bill of Rights

3.2 First Amendment: Freedom of Religion

3.3 First Amendment: Freedom of Speech

3.4 First Amendment: Freedom of the Press

3.5 Second Amendment: Rights to Bear Arms

3.6 Amendments: Balancing Individual Freedom with Public Order and Safety

3.7 Selective Incorporation & the 14th Amendment

3.8 Amendments: Due Process and the Rights of the Accused

3.9 Amendments: Due Process and the Right to Privacy

3.10 Social Movements and Equal Protection

3.11 Government Responses to Social Movements

3.12 Balancing Minority and Majority Rights

3.13 Affirmative Action

Best Quizlet Deck: AP Gov – Civil Liberties and Rights by Sandy_Midgley

📜 Check out Bill of Rights and Bill of Rights (YouTube)

Civil Liberties and Civil Rights (Fiveable stream)

🐘Unit 4: American Political Ideologies and Beliefs

Unit 4 focuses on political ideology - the idea that there are different and consistent patterns of beliefs about political values and the role of government within the context that we live in. This unit will discuss the different American ideologies and how major parties influence them.

Political Socialization and Political Ideology : This stream discusses what influences people's political views and a few different dominant political ideologies.

Political Parties and Their Platforms : This stream dives into the major beliefs and ideologies of the Republican and Democratic party platforms, the history of political parties, their impact on voters and the government, and third parties were also discussed.

Economic Ideology - Keynesian vs Supply Side : In this stream we dived into fiscal economic theory and policy, looking at the liberal take on Keynesian theory and the conservative look at supply-side theory. 

Unit 4 Overview: American Political Ideologies and Beliefs

4.1 American Attitudes about Government and Politics

4.2 Political Socialization

4.4 Influence of Political Events on Ideology

4.5 Measuring Public Opinion

4.6 Evaluating Public Opinion Data

4.7 Ideologies of Political Parties

4.8 Ideology and Policy Making

4.9 Ideology and Economic Policy

4.10 Ideology and Social Policy

Best Quizlet Deck: AP GOV Unit 4 by MARGARET_CYLKOWSKI

A Review of Public Policy (Social Policy)

A Review of Public Policy (Economic Policy)

Social Security, Healthcare, and Education Policy

🗳Unit 5: Political Participation

This unit focuses on how we, citizens, can participate in politics as well as how the media, finance and other factors play a part in our government and policy-making. 

Voting and Voter Behavior : Who votes and why do they vote? This stream answers these questions and explains the process of voting in the US in this stream.

Campaign Finance : Campaign finance isn't as scary as you think! This stream looks at the Federal Elections Campaign Act, hard vs soft money, Buckley vs Valeo, Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, Citizens United vs FEC, 501(c)s, and more!

Media Ownership and Bias :  This steam discusses the growing concentration of media companies and how bias in media affects both policy-making and public interest.

Critical Elections: Realignments and Dealignment : Often, students are confused on the differences between a party realignment and dealignment. This stream covers those around the five critical elections in US history. 

Unit 5 Overview: Political Participation

5.1 Voting Rights and Models of Voting Behaviour

5.2 Voter Turnout

5.3 Political Parties

5.4 How and Why Political Parties Change

5.5 Third-Party Politics

5.6 Interest Groups Influencing Policy Making

5.7 Groups Influencing Policy Outcomes

5.8 Electing a President

5.9 Congressional Elections

5.10 Modern Campaigns

5.11 Campaign Finance

5.12 The Media

5.13 Changing Media

Best Quizlet Deck: AP Government - Political Participation by Carpenter-Economics

🧐AP US Government - Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ)

AP US Government Multiple Choice Questions

AP US Government Multiple Choice Help (MCQ)

🏛️AP US Government - Free Response Questions (FRQ)

Breaking Down the Supreme Court Case Comparison Essay : This stream discusses how exactly to write the Supreme Court Case Comparison Essay, FRQ #3, on the AP Gov exam! We talked about the elements of a good response, and wrote one ourselves!

Writing Workshop on the Argumentative Essay : This stream explores the Argumentative Essay, looking at the rubric and then using the remainder of the time to practice our skills. 

AP US Government Free Response Help - FRQs

FRQ: Conceptual Analysis

FRQ: SCOTUS Application

AP Gov FRQ: Argument Essay Review (2020)

AP Gov FRQ: Quantitative Analysis Review (2020)

AP Gov SAQ Practice Prompt Answers & Feedback

AP GoPo Free Response Questions (FRQ) – Past Prompts

AP Gov Federalism Practice Prompt Answers & Feedback

Stay Connected

© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, the complete guide to ap us government frqs.

Advanced Placement (AP)

Free-response questions, or FRQs, on the AP US Government exam are more straightforward than those on some other AP tests, but they can still be tough if you're not ready for them. In this guide, we will lay out a simple step-by-step method for answering AP Government FRQs , go through a real example, and tell you where you can find additional practice resources.

AP Government Free-Response Section Format

The free-response section lasts one hour and 40 minutes and consists of four questions , each of which is worth 12.5% of your total score. So as a whole, the free-response section accounts for half your total AP Gov score (the other 50% comes from the multiple-choice section). Each FRQ is worth 3-6 raw points.

Here are the four types of FRQs you'll get on the AP Government exam:

• Concept Application (3 raw points)
• Quantitative Analysis (4 raw points)
• SCOTUS Comparison (4 raw points)
• Argument Essay (6 raw points)

The free-response questions will ask you to integrate your knowledge of the various content areas covered by the course. This includes analyzing political events in the US, discussing examples, and demonstrating your understanding of general principles of US government and politics. You'll also be asked to examine data from charts, define key terms, and explain the roles that different parts of our government play in the political system.

The following chart shows specifically what you must do for each FRQ on the AP Government test. All info below comes from the 2020 AP US Government and Politics Course and Exam Description .

AP Government FRQs: 5-Step Solution Process

This section provides a step-by-step process for answering any question on the AP US Government exam. Here's a sample question from the 2020 AP Gov Course and Exam Description that I'll reference throughout so you can see how these steps might work in practice:

Step 1: Read the Introductory and Concluding Sentences

Free-response questions #1 and #3 will include passages, while question #2 will have an image or a chart with data. Skim the first and final sentences of the passage (or title of the graphic for #2) before you get to the tasks (labeled A-C or A-D). This will help you get a rough sense of what to expect in the rest of the question.

It's a good idea to read the intros and conclusions to all the FRQs before choosing which one to begin with. Doing this might help build up your confidence and improve your efficiency to start with a question that's easier for you.

In the sample question above, you would read the title of the graphic ("Public Education Spending: Amount Spent per Pupil by State in 2014") and then skim the image itself to get a sense of what it's asking you to analyze.

Step 2: Identify (and Underline, If You Want) the Command Verb

For each task in each FRQ, you're given specific instructions on the type of answer that is expected; these instructions include command verbs that tell you what to do. It's important to be aware of exactly what the question is asking so you can earn full points.

These command verbs are the first words you should zero in on as you approach a question. If you think it'll help keep you focused, you can underline these verbs .

Here are the most commonly used task verbs, as described in the AP Gov Exam Description :

Compare: Provide a description or explanation of similarities and/or differences.

Define: Provide a specific meaning for a word or concept.

Describe: Provide the relevant characteristics of a specified topic.

Develop an argument: Articulate a claim and support it with evidence.

Draw a conclusion: Use available information to formulate an accurate statement that demonstrates understanding based on evidence.

Explain: Provide information about how or why a relationship, process, pattern, position, situation, or outcome occurs, using evidence and/or reasoning. Explain "how" typically requires analyzing the relationship, process, pattern, position, situation, or outcome, whereas explain "why" typically requires analysis of motivations or reasons for the relationship, process, pattern, position, situation, or outcome.

Identify: Indicate or provide information about a specified topic, without elaboration or explanation.

In part A of the sample question, the command verb is "identify," indicating that you need to correctly interpret the data in the image. In part B, the command verb changes to "describe," which means you'll need to go one step further and interpret and analyze data in the graphic that you have found.

Part C starts with "draw a conclusion," meaning that you will need to tie together the evidence you found in part B to come up with a final (accurate) statement on what this means. Finally, part D begins with the task verb "explain," showing that you must make a clear connection between the data in this graphic as a whole and the principle of federalism.

Step 3: Know Where You'll Earn Your Raw Points

In general, each part in a question (A, B, C, and D) will correspond to 1 raw point , but not all questions are like this.

After finding the task verb in the part of the question you're answering, take note of how many examples or descriptions you need to provide , as each will likely correspond to a point in your raw score for the question. There might also be more than one task verb in a question, in which case you'll likely get at least 2 raw points for it.

As a reminder, here is the maximum number of raw points you can earn for each question (don't forget that each question is still worth the same percentage of your score: 12.5%):

Take care to answer the question thoroughly but directly , addressing all points in a way that will make it easy for graders to assess your response. Remember that you don't need to write an essay for the first three FRQs, so just go straight for the answer to avoid any ambiguity.

In the sample question, we know there will be 4 raw points you can earn. And since the tasks are divided into four parts (labeled A-D), we can assume that each part will be worth 1 raw point .

You can see more sample FRQs and how they're graded with the official scoring guidelines here .

Step 4: Reread Your Answer

Once you've come up with an answer, reread what you wrote to ensure it makes sense and addresses the question completely . Did you give the correct number of descriptions or examples asked of you? Does your answer directly respond to what the question is asking?

If you're satisfied, move on to the next part of the question and return to step 2!

Step 5: Pace Yourself

The final step is to keep track of time so you can be sure you're pacing yourself effectively and are not spending too much time on any one question. As a reminder, you'll have one hour and 40 minutes for the entire free-response section of the AP Government exam.

It's suggested that you spend the following amounts of time on each FRQ:

As you can see, you should spend about an equal amount of time on the first three FRQs and save most of your time for your essay , which will likely require the most effort of the four.

A Real AP Government FRQ Example + Analysis

Now, let's go through the answers to a real AP Government free-response question from the 2019 released questions to show you what your responses should look like. This question is an example of a Concept Application question on the exam, meaning it's worth 3 raw points (1 point each for parts A, B, and C).

This question is all about the Johnson Amendment, which does not allow religious organizations to engage in political activities and contribute money to political campaigns. As this passage explains, the Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious group, encourages pastors to challenge this law by participating in an annual event called Pulpit Freedom Sunday.

Below, we go through how to answer each of the three parts correctly using the scoring guidelines .

Part A—1 Point

Part A asks you to come up with an example of a specific action Congress could take to address the concerns of the Alliance Defending Freedom. In other words, what could Congress do to allow groups such as the Alliance Defending Freedom to speak freely about political campaigns?

Note that the command verb used here is "describe," meaning you must "provide the relevant characteristics of a specified topic," or elaborate on what you're proposing and why it would work.

There are two possible answers you could put down here, according to the scoring guidelines:

• Congress could pass a law that would reverse the Johnson Amendment.
• Congress could pass a law to allow religious organizations to participate more directly in politics.

Part B—1 Point

Part B asks you to go into more detail about what you proposed in part A . You must talk about how partisan divisions (i.e., differences in political parties among politicians) could stop whatever you proposed in part A from going into effect (whether that's a new law altogether or a reversal of the original Johnson Amendment).

The task verb used here is "explain," so you must use evidence to show how the action you wrote down in part A could be blocked or reversed.

Here are two possible answers , according to the scoring guidelines:

• Partisan divisions make it more difficult to pass a law because parties adhere to different ideological points of view.
• If Congress and the president are from different political parties, the president might threaten to veto the legislation.

Part C—1 Point

The final part of this free-response question asks you to examine the scenario again, this time from the perspective of the Alliance Defending Freedom , or the religious group in question.

How might the Alliance argue that the Johnson Amendment, which prevents them from speaking on political issues and contributing money to political campaigns, is taking away their rights?

The key here is to first think about what rights these could be . Perhaps freedom of speech or freedom of religion? As you probably noticed, the task verb is "explain," so once again you must use plenty of evidence to show why this contentious relationship exists between the Alliance and the Johnson Amendment/the US government as a whole.

Here are examples of answers you could write, according to the official scoring guidelines:

• The Alliance Defending Freedom and other religious groups might argue that their First Amendment rights are being violated.
• The Alliance Defending Freedom and other religious groups might argue that their freedom of speech/religion is being violated.

Essential Resources for Practicing AP US Government FRQs

There are several resources you can use to hone your skills for answering AP Government FRQs.

Official College Board Resources

The College Board website hosts free-response questions from previous tests that you can use for practice. I recommend starting with the 2019 FRQs (unfortunately, they don't come with sample student responses), as these will look the most like the questions you'll get on test day.

Once you've used those, you can look at FRQs from the 2018 test and earlier; most of these come with sample student responses so you can see what a good response looks like.

If you're hoping to practice FRQs in the context of a full-length test, here are some links to past AP Government exams you can download (as always, prioritize the most recent tests):

• 2018 Practice Test
• 2013 Practice Test
• 2012 Practice Test
• 2009 Practice Test
• 2005 Practice Test
• 1999 Practice Test

These are by far the best sample AP US Government free-response questions you can get because they most accurately represent what you'll see on the real test.

AP Government Review Books

AP Government review books are also solid resources for free-response practice, though they vary a lot in quality.

The Princeton Review's prep book for AP Gov includes five full-length practice tests , so there should be tons of free-response questions you can use to hone your skills. Barron's AP US Gov review book also has some useful practice tests and free-response questions.

If you use these unofficial free-response questions for practice, just be sure to intersperse them with official questions from the College Board so that you maintain an accurate sense of what to expect on the real test.

Recap: Everything to Know About AP US Government FRQs

The four free-response questions on the AP US Government and Politics exam can be approached methodically to earn the maximum number of points.

Read the intro and conclusion to the question first so you can get your bearings. Then, for each of the separate parts, identify the task verb, figure out where you'll earn your raw points, and double-check your answer for any missing pieces or careless errors.

You should also pace yourself so that you're spending no more than 20 minutes each on the first three questions and 40 minutes on the essay.

I suggest practicing at least a few free-response questions before heading into the AP exam. The best resource to use is the College Board website, which contains an archive of past questions accompanied by scoring guidelines and sample student responses. These questions are pretty simple compared to the free-response questions on other AP tests once you get the hang of them!

What's Next?

Not sure where to begin in your AP prep? Our five-step plan will prepare you to take on any AP test .

If you're missing some of your notes that you need to study for AP Gov, check out this article with links to all the content you need to know for the test . You can also learn about the test as a whole with our comprehensive AP Government and Politics review guide .

Do you have a target score in mind for this exam? Learn more about what it takes to earn a 5 on an AP test and whether you should aim for one yourself.

These recommendations are based solely on our knowledge and experience. If you purchase an item through one of our links, PrepScholar may receive a commission.

Samantha is a blog content writer for PrepScholar. Her goal is to help students adopt a less stressful view of standardized testing and other academic challenges through her articles. Samantha is also passionate about art and graduated with honors from Dartmouth College as a Studio Art major in 2014. In high school, she earned a 2400 on the SAT, 5's on all seven of her AP tests, and was named a National Merit Scholar.

Student and Parent Forum

Our new student and parent forum, at ExpertHub.PrepScholar.com , allow you to interact with your peers and the PrepScholar staff. See how other students and parents are navigating high school, college, and the college admissions process. Ask questions; get answers.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

How to Write the AP Lang Argument Essay + Examples

What’s covered:, what is the ap language argument essay, tips for writing the ap language argument essay, ap english language argument essay examples, how will ap scores impact my college chances.

In 2023, over 550,148 students across the U.S. took the AP English Language and Composition Exam, and 65.2% scored higher than a 3. The AP English Language Exam tests your ability to analyze a piece of writing, synthesize information, write a rhetorical essay, and create a cohesive argument. In this post, we’ll be discussing the best way to approach the argumentative essay section of the test, and we’ll give you tips and tricks so you can write a great essay.

The AP English Language Exam as of 2023 is structured as follows:

Section 1: 45 multiple choice questions to be completed in an hour. This portion counts for 45% of your score. This section requires students to analyze a piece of literature. The questions ask about its content and/or what could be edited within the passage.

Section 2: Three free response questions to be completed in the remaining two hours and 15 minutes. This section counts for 55% of your score. These essay questions include the synthesis essay, the rhetorical essay, and the argumentative essay.

• Synthesis essay: Read 6-7 sources and create an argument using at least three of the sources.
• Rhetorical analysis essay: Describe how a piece of writing evokes meaning and symbolism.
• Argumentative essay: Pick a side of a debate and create an argument based on evidence. In this essay, you should develop a logical argument in support of or against the given statement and provide ample evidence that supports your conclusion. Typically, a five paragraph format is great for this type of writing. This essay is scored holistically from 1 to 9 points.

Do you want more information on the structure of the full exam? Take a look at our in-depth overview of the AP Language and Composition Exam .

Although the AP Language Argument may seem daunting at first, once you understand how the essay should be structured, it will be a lot easier to create cohesive arguments.

Below are some tips to help you as you write the essay.

1. Organize your essay before writing

Instead of jumping right into your essay, plan out what you will say beforehand. It’s easiest to make a list of your arguments and write out what facts or evidence you will use to support each argument. In your outline, you can determine the best order for your arguments, especially if they build on each other or are chronological. Having a well-organized essay is crucial for success.

2. Pick one side of the argument, but acknowledge the other side

When you write the essay, it’s best if you pick one side of the debate and stick with it for the entire essay. All your evidence should be in support of that one side. However, in your introductory paragraph, as you introduce the debate, be sure to mention any merit the arguments of the other side has. This can make the essay a bit more nuanced and show that you did consider both sides before determining which one was better. Often, acknowledging another viewpoint then refuting it can make your essay stronger.

3. Provide evidence to support your claims

The AP readers will be looking for examples and evidence to support your argument. This doesn’t mean that you need to memorize a bunch of random facts before the exam. This just means that you should be able to provide concrete examples in support of your argument.

For example, if the essay topic is about whether the role of the media in society has been detrimental or not, and you argue that it has been, you may talk about the phenomenon of “fake news” during the 2016 presidential election.

AP readers are not looking for perfect examples, but they are looking to see if you can provide enough evidence to back your claim and make it easily understood.

4. Create a strong thesis statement

The thesis statement will set up your entire essay, so it’s important that it is focused and specific, and that it allows for the reader to understand your body paragraphs. Make sure your thesis statement is the very last sentence of your introductory paragraph. In this sentence, list out the key points you will be making in the essay in the same order that you will be writing them. Each new point you mention in your thesis should start a paragraph in your essay.

Below is a prompt and sample student essay from the May 2019 exam . We’ll look at what the student did well in their writing and where they could improve.

Prompt: “The term “overrated” is often used to diminish concepts, places, roles, etc. that the speaker believes do not deserve the prestige they commonly enjoy; for example, many writers have argued that success is overrated, a character in a novel by Anthony Burgess famously describes Rome as a “vastly overrated city,” and Queen Rania of Jordan herself has asserted that “[b]eing queen is overrated.”

Select a concept, place, role, etc. to which you believe that the term “overrated” should be applied. Then, write a well-developed essay in which you explain your judgment. Use appropriate evidence from your reading, experience, or observations to support your argument.

Sample Student Essay #1:

[1] Competition is “overrated.” The notion of motivation between peers has evolved into a source of unnecessary stress and even lack of morals. Whether it be in an academic environment or in the industry, this new idea of competition is harmful to those competing and those around them.

[2] Back in elementary school, competition was rather friendly. It could have been who could do the most pushups or who could get the most imaginary points in a classroom for a prize. If you couldn’t do the most pushups or win that smelly sticker, you would go home and improve yourself – there would be no strong feelings towards anyone, you would just focus on making yourself a better version of yourself. Then as high school rolled around, suddenly applying for college doesn’t seem so far away –GPA seems to be that one stat that defines you – extracurriculars seem to shape you – test scores seem to categorize you. Sleepless nights, studying for the next day’s exam, seem to become more and more frequent. Floating duck syndrome seems to surround you (FDS is where a competitive student pretends to not work hard but is furiously studying beneath the surface just like how a duck furiously kicks to stay afloat). All of your competitors appear to hope you fail – but in the end what do you and your competitor’s gain? Getting one extra point on the test? Does that self-satisfaction compensate for the tremendous amounts of acquired stress? This new type of “competition” is overrated – it serves nothing except a never-ending source of anxiety and seeks to weaken friendships and solidarity as a whole in the school setting.

[3] A similar idea of “competition” can be applied to business. On the most fundamental level, competition serves to be a beneficial regulator of prices and business models for both the business themselves and consumers. However, as businesses grew increasingly greedy and desperate, companies resorted to immoral tactics that only hurt their reputations and consumers as a whole. Whether it be McDonald’s coupons that force you to buy more food or tech companies like Apple intentionally slowing down your iPhone after 3 years to force you to upgrade to the newest device, consumers suffer and in turn speak down upon these companies. Similar to the evolved form of competition in school, this overrated form causes pain for all parties and has since diverged from the encouraging nature that the principle of competition was “founded” on.

The AP score for this essay was a 4/6, meaning that it captured the main purpose of the essay but there were still substantial parts missing. In this essay, the writer did a good job organizing the sections and making sure that their writing was in order according to the thesis statement. The essay first discusses how competition is harmful in elementary school and then discusses this topic in the context of business. This follows the chronological order of somebody’s life and flows nicely.

The arguments in this essay are problematic, as they do not provide enough examples of how exactly competition is overrated. The essay discusses the context in which competition is overrated but does not go far enough in explaining how this connects to the prompt.

In the first example, school stress is used to explain how competition manifests. This is a good starting point, but it does not talk about why competition is overrated; it simply mentions that competition can be unhealthy. The last sentence of that paragraph is the main point of the argument and should be expanded to discuss how the anxiety of school is overrated later on in life. 

In the second example, the writer discusses how competition can lead to harmful business practices, but again, this doesn’t reflect the reason this would be overrated. Is competition really overrated because Apple and McDonald’s force you to buy new products? This example could’ve been taken one step farther. Instead of explaining why business structures—such as monopolies—harm competition, the author should discuss how those particular structures are overrated.

Additionally, the examples the writer used lack detail. A stronger essay would’ve provided more in-depth examples. This essay seemed to mention examples only in passing without using them to defend the argument.

It should also be noted that the structure of the essay is incomplete. The introduction only has a thesis statement and no additional context. Also, there is no conclusion paragraph that sums up the essay. These missing components result in a 4/6.

Now let’s go through the prompt for a sample essay from the May 2022 exam . The prompt is as follows:

Colin Powell, a four-star general and former United States Secretary of State, wrote in his 1995 autobiography: “[W]e do not have the luxury of collecting information indefinitely. At some point, before we can have every possible fact in hand, we have to decide. The key is not to make quick decisions, but to make timely decisions.”

Write an essay that argues your position on the extent to which Powell’s claim about making decisions is valid. 

In your response you should do the following:

• Respond to the prompt with a thesis that presents a defensible position. 
• Provide evidence to support your line of reasoning. 
• Explain how the evidence supports your line of reasoning. 
• Use appropriate grammar and punctuation in communicating your argument.

Sample Student Essay #2:

Colin Powell, who was a four star general and a former United States Secretary of State. He wrote an autobiography and had made a claim about making decisions. In my personal opinion, Powell’s claim is true to full extent and shows an extremely valuable piece of advice that we do not consider when we make decisions.

Powell stated, “before we can have every possible fact in hand we have to decide…. but to make it a timely decision” (1995). With this statement Powell is telling the audience of his autobiography that it does not necessarily matter how many facts you have, and how many things you know. Being able to have access to everything possible takes a great amount of time and we don’t always have all of the time in the world. A decision has to be made with what you know, waiting for something else to come in while trying to make a decision whether that other fact is good or bad you already have a good amount of things that you know. Everyone’s time is valuable, including yours. At the end of the day the decision will have to be made and that is why it should be made in a “timely” manner.

This response was graded for a score of 2/6. Let’s break down the score to smaller points that signify where the student fell short.

The thesis in this essay is clearly outlined at the end of the first paragraph. The student states their agreement with Powell’s claim and frames the rest of their essay around this stance. The success in scoring here lies in the clear communication of the thesis and the direction the argument will take. It’s important to make the thesis statement concise, specific, and arguable, which the student has successfully done.

While the student did attempt to provide evidence to support their thesis, it’s clear that their explanation lacks specific detail and substance. They referenced Powell’s statement, but did not delve into how this statement has proven true in specific instances, and did not provide examples that could bring the argument to life.

Commentary is an essential part of this section’s score. It means explaining the significance of the evidence and connecting it back to the thesis. Unfortunately, the student’s commentary here is too vague and does not effectively elaborate on how the evidence supports their argument.

To improve, the student could use more concrete examples to demonstrate their point and discuss how each piece of evidence supports their thesis. For instance, they could discuss specific moments in Powell’s career where making a timely decision was more valuable than waiting for all possible facts. This would help illustrate the argument in a more engaging, understandable way.

A high score in the “sophistication” category of the grading rubric is given for demonstrating a complex understanding of the rhetorical situation (purpose, audience, context, etc.), making effective rhetorical choices, or establishing a line of reasoning. Here, the student’s response lacks complexity and sophistication. They’ve simply agreed with Powell’s claim and made a few general statements without providing a deeper analysis or effectively considering the rhetorical situation.

To increase sophistication, the student could explore possible counterarguments or complexities within Powell’s claim. They could discuss potential drawbacks of making decisions without all possible facts, or examine situations where timely decisions might not yield the best results. By acknowledging and refuting these potential counterarguments, they could add more depth to their analysis and showcase their understanding of the complexities involved in decision-making.

The student could also analyze why Powell, given his background and experiences, might have come to such a conclusion, thus providing more context and showing an understanding of the rhetorical situation.

Remember, sophistication in argumentation isn’t about using fancy words or complicated sentences. It’s about showing that you understand the complexity of the issue at hand and that you’re able to make thoughtful, nuanced arguments. Sophistication shows that you can think critically about the topic and make connections that aren’t immediately obvious.

Now that you’ve looked at an example essay and some tips for the argumentative essay, you know how to better prepare for the AP English Language and Composition Exam.

While your AP scores don’t usually impact your admissions chances , colleges do care a lot about your course rigor. So, taking as many APs as you can will certainly boost your chances! AP scores can be a way for high-performing students to set themselves apart, particularly when applying to prestigious universities. Through the process of self-reporting scores , you can show your hard work and intelligence to admissions counselors.

That said, the main benefit of scoring high on AP exams comes once you land at your dream school, as high scores can allow you to “test out” of entry-level requirements, often called GE requirements or distribution requirements. This will save you time and money.

To understand how your course rigor stacks up, check out CollegeVine’s free chancing engine . This resource takes your course rigor, test scores, extracurriculars, and more, to determine your chances of getting into over 1600 colleges across the country!

Related CollegeVine Blog Posts

Tabloid Publisher Testifies Trump Asked Him to ‘Help the Campaign’

The jury heard testimony about what prosecutors say was a conspiracy to bury negative news, including a porn star’s claim of a sexual encounter with Donald Trump. The longtime publisher of The National Enquirer will resume his testimony on Thursday.

• Share full article

Jesse McKinley and Kate Christobek

Five takeaways from the sixth day of Trump’s criminal trial.

Tuesday’s session of Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial began with a heated clash between Justice Juan M. Merchan and Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer over a gag order . It ended with an insider’s look into a tabloid newspaper practice known as “catch and kill.”

Prosecutors said that Mr. Trump had “willfully and blatantly” violated a gag order barring him from attacking jurors and witnesses, among others. They said he had done so in comments outside the courtroom and online and should be found in contempt of court.

Mr. Trump’s top lawyer said in response that Mr. Trump was simply defending himself from political attacks. Justice Merchan did not rule, but he scolded the lawyer, Todd Blanche, saying, “you’re losing all credibility with the court.”

A former ally of Mr. Trump, David Pecker, the ex-publisher of The National Enquirer, later testified to buying and burying unflattering stories about Mr. Trump during his 2016 run for president, an arrangement he called “highly, highly confidential.”

Mr. Trump, 77, faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to hide a payment to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, made to cover up a sex scandal that threatened to derail his campaign. Ms. Daniels, who may testify, has said that she and Mr. Trump had a brief sexual encounter in 2006, something the former president denies.

Mr. Trump has pleaded not guilty. If convicted, the former president — and presumptive Republican nominee — could face probation or up to four years in prison.

Here are five takeaways from Mr. Trump’s sixth day on trial:

Pecker describes “catch-and-kill.”

Taking the stand for a second day, Mr. Pecker outlined a decades-old friendship with Mr. Trump, a relationship that he said deepened in 2015.

It was then, Mr. Pecker said, that he, Mr. Trump and Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, met at Trump Tower in Manhattan to hatch a plan to write promotional stories about Mr. Trump and negative stories about his political opponents.

Mr. Pecker said he acted as the campaign’s “eyes and ears,” notifying Mr. Cohen about possible scandals, particularly regarding women in Mr. Trump’s life.

Mr. Pecker on Tuesday walked through one of the “catch-and-kill” deals. He said that The National Enquirer learned that a doorman who had worked at a Trump building was looking to sell a story about Mr. Trump fathering a child out of wedlock. The tabloid discovered that the story was apparently false, but paid $30,000 anyway, “because of the potential embarrassment” it could have caused Mr. Trump, Mr. Pecker said.

Who Are Key Players in the Trump Manhattan Criminal Trial?

The first criminal trial of former President Donald J. Trump is underway. Take a closer look at central figures related to the case.

Pecker paints a portrait of a bygone era.

Mr. Pecker’s testimony depicted an anachronistic New York, with landlines, powerful supermarket tabloids and must-see network television, including “The Apprentice,” which made Mr. Trump nationally famous.

It also shed light on Mr. Pecker’s editorial tactics, including getting tips from Mr. Trump about who was getting kicked off “The Apprentice,” in line with Mr. Trump’s penchant for feeding dirt to tabloids.

Mr. Pecker said that he called Mr. Trump “Donald,” and that they had “a great relationship,” adding that he went so far as to start a magazine called Trump Style. When he proposed the magazine, Mr. Pecker said, Mr. Trump’s biggest question was, “Who’s going to pay for it?”

Trump’s short leash could get shorter.

Christopher Conroy, a prosecutor with the Manhattan district attorney’s office, argued that Mr. Trump had repeatedly violated the gag order that the court imposed on him. One alleged violation included a nine-minute diatribe outside the courtroom on Monday during which he attacked Michael Cohen, his former fixer and a key witness against him.

“He did it right here,” Mr. Conroy said.

But Mr. Blanche said that the former president was “facing a barrage of political attacks” from several potential witnesses and needed to strike back.

“He’s running for president,” Mr. Blanche said. “He has to be able to respond to that.”

Justice Merchan has chastised Trump once so far, for muttering in front of a prospective juror. If he holds him in criminal contempt, it will mark a serious escalation. For their part, prosecutors said they were not seeking to jail Mr. Trump, but wanted him to be fined.

A frustrated Trump

Mr. Trump sat stoically while prosecutors argued that he violated the gag order. But he grew animated during the interplay between Mr. Blanche and Justice Merchan. On several occasions, the former president sharply turned to his other lawyers and whispered.

When Mr. Blanche finished his argument, Mr. Trump immediately beckoned him over before he snatched a piece of paper off the defense table.

Mr. Trump posted on Truth Social right after the hearing, accusing Justice Merchan of taking away his “right to free speech” and claiming that he was “not allowed to defend myself.”

Thursday will be a big day for Trump in two courts.

Court is not in session on Wednesday, but prosecutors will continue their direct examination of Mr. Pecker on Thursday.

While Mr. Trump is expected to be in court in Manhattan that day, he may be a little preoccupied: In Washington, some of his other lawyers will be arguing in front of the Supreme Court that Mr. Trump should receive presidential immunity from prosecution in a federal election interference case.

Mr. Trump had sought to take a day away from his New York case to watch those arguments, but Justice Merchan denied his request.

Matthew Haag and Michael Rothfeld

Here’s how The National Enquirer quashed a doorman’s Trump tip.

David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, revealed during Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial on Tuesday how a team of reporters chased down a potentially explosive news tip called into the publication in 2015 that evolved into a catch-and-kill deal.

Dino Sajudin, a former doorman at a Manhattan building managed by the Trump Organization, called the tabloid’s tip line late in 2015 and said he had overheard other employees claiming that Mr. Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock with a woman who previously worked for him.

While the claim appeared to be false, the allegation could have damaged Mr. Trump during the campaign if it ever became public, Mr. Pecker testified in Manhattan Criminal Court on Tuesday.

“I made the decision to buy the story because of the potential embarrassment it would have to the campaign and Mr. Trump,” Mr. Pecker said, adding that it was important to have it “removed from the market.”

The Enquirer initially reached a deal with Mr. Sajudin that would pay him $30,000 if the tip turned into a story. A contract with Mr. Sajudin was shown to the jury on Tuesday, featuring the words “Donald Trump’s illegitimate child.”

Mr. Pecker did not immediately alert Mr. Trump or his longtime fixer, Michael D. Cohen, about the tip, but instead dispatched a team of reporters to investigate the claim. They returned saying that it appeared totally false, in part because the child strongly resembled the man she knew as her father, a Trump Organization driver.

Mr. Cohen eventually heard about the allegation and called the tabloid’s editor, angry that its reporters would even consider the claim had merit. Mr. Pecker testified that Mr. Cohen also called him to say that Mr. Trump had offered to take a DNA test and could not be the child’s father.

The original deal with Mr. Sajudin was nonetheless amended to pay him the $30,000 whether the story was published or not, and adding a confidentiality provision requiring him to pay the publisher $1 million if he disclosed the tip elsewhere.

According to Mr. Pecker, Mr. Cohen told him that “the boss would be very pleased.”

Mr. Sajudin was released from the confidentiality agreement in December 2016, a month after Mr. Trump won the election, which prosecutors say reveals the deal’s true objective.

Advertisement

Nate Schweber

A day after Trump issued a call for more supporters to gather outside the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse, the number reached its nadir. The number of identifiable Trump fans across the street in Collect Pond Park on Tuesday sank to the mid-single digits, after hovering at about a dozen for a week.

Trump continues to receive favorable treatment from the New York City Police Department. For a week, a large N.Y.P.D. dump truck has parked in the intersection of Hogan Place and Centre Street, with a uniformed driver sitting inside. Minutes before Trump's arrival each morning, the dump truck has pulled a half-car length forward, blocking news photographers’ views of him entering the side door of the courthouse. And this afternoon, like those before it, the driver did the same maneuver for Trump’s 2:37 p.m. departure.

Jim Rutenberg

The National Enquirer’s help for Trump broke norms, even for a tabloid.

The National Enquirer was more than a friendly media outlet for Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016. It was a powerful, national political weapon that was thrust into the service of a single candidate, in violation of campaign finance law.

The tabloid’s former publisher, David Pecker, testified nonchalantly on Tuesday about how the tabloid operated in tandem with the Trump campaign, “catching and killing” potentially damaging stories and running elaborate and false hit pieces on Mr. Trump’s opponents. But its practices were unusual even in the wild supermarket tabloid news game.

By the admission of The Enquirer’s own publisher — first made to federal prosecutors years ago during the prosecution of Mr. Trump’s fixer, Michael Cohen — the tabloid was operating with the full intention of helping Mr. Trump’s campaign.

Under the First Amendment, newspapers are permitted to support candidates. But The Enquirer’s support went beyond journalism: The publication paid $150,000 for a story a Playboy model, Karen McDougal, was preparing to tell about an affair she said she had with the candidate. Then, it published nothing.

That sort of deal is not unusual in the tabloid news trade, even if it violates journalistic standards followed by mainstream American outlets like this one, which have rules against paying sources.

But before 2016, there had never been a known catch-and-kill deal to aid a presidential campaign. In that context, The Enquirer’s payment violated federal campaign laws prohibiting corporations from donating to presidential candidates — who are limited to receiving direct donations of $4,400 per person — and forbidding them to coordinate election-related spending with campaigns.

As The Enquirer’s parent company at the time, American Media, admitted in a “non-prosecution” deal with the federal government in 2018: “AMI knew that corporations such as AMI are subject to federal campaign finance laws, and that expenditures by corporations, made for purposes of influencing an election and in coordination with or at the request of a candidate or campaign, are unlawful.”

The deal helped secure Tuesday’s testimony.

(The Federal Election Commission later hit The Enquirer’s parent company with fines of $187,000; Mr. Trump’s campaign escaped sanction .)

The Enquirer was also providing a hidden value to Mr. Trump: By giving over its cover to his political needs, Mr. Pecker gave him the equivalent of free advertising space at most major supermarket checkout lines in the country, where the tabloid had long ago secured prime placement.

One expert said at the time that such exposure could be worth as much as $3 million a month.

Worth potentially even more: The Enquirer’s agreement to keep from the checkout line not only Ms. McDougal’s story but the cache of Trump dirt it had in its own files — “tabloid gold” that would never see the light of day.

Jonah Bromwich

We end the day without a final decision from the judge on whether Trump will be held in contempt and fined for violating his gag order. Justice Merchan could issue a written ruling at any point, or rule from the bench on Thursday or later. There is no deadline.

Michael Gold

Trump, speaking in the hallway outside the courtroom, says he thinks the gag order is unconstitutional. He’s holding a stack of printed articles that he says he’s not sure he’s allowed to share because of the gag order, which only pertains to a limited set of issues. While in the middle of talking to reporters, he says, “I’d love to talk to you people, I’d love to say anything that’s on my mind, but I’m restricted.”

He again criticized the trial as an attempt to interfere with his presidential bid. He complained that President Biden was free to campaign while he was stuck in a courtroom, “sitting up as straight as I can all day long.”

David Pecker is done testifying for the day. The judge gives jurors customary warnings, as well as one we haven’t heard before, about reporting anyone who seeks to violate jury integrity — making it sound almost as if someone has approached a juror inappropriately. Then they leave the courtroom.

Karen McDougal, by the way, was selling a story of having had an affair with Trump. Pecker concluded the day’s testimony by saying that Michael Cohen was becoming increasingly agitated as The National Enquirer editor, Dylan Howard, traveled to hear her story. “It looked like he was getting a lot of pressure to get the answer, like, right away,” Pecker says of Cohen.

David Pecker tells the courtroom that he asked Dylan Howard, the former editor of The National Enquirer, to investigate Karen McDougal’s story and that he told Cohen he had done so. He seems to indicate his conversations with Cohen soon increased in frequency and the two men began to talk multiple times daily. Cohen said they should communicate over Signal, an encrypted app, which is often used for conversations that a person wants to keep private.

Maggie Haberman

The jury is quite alert for this portion of Pecker’s testimony.

Kate Christobek

Trump’s body language changed when Pecker started testifying about the catch-and-kill deal involving McDougal. He started moving his head, squinting and pursing his lips, and then crossed his arms over his chest.

Pecker says he advised Trump to purchase McDougal’s story directly. “I think you should buy it,” he recalls having said to Trump, who was then a candidate for president. He says Trump said he’d think about it and have Cohen call Pecker back.

Matthew Haag

David Pecker laid out how he helped Trump’s campaign.

David Pecker, a former publisher of The National Enquirer, on Tuesday testified about the mutually beneficial relationship between Donald J. Trump and the supermarket tabloid that started decades ago and buoyed Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Mr. Pecker said that the pivotal moment was an August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower in Midtown Manhattan. “I received a call from Michael Cohen telling me that the boss wanted to see me,” Mr. Pecker said, adding that he did not know the nature of the meeting before he showed up.

Mr. Trump had announced his presidential campaign a few months before in the same place, and Mr. Pecker said he arrived to meet not just Mr. Trump but also Mr. Cohen, his fixer at the time.

Mr. Trump and Mr. Cohen asked him how he could “help the campaign,” according to Mr. Pecker, underscoring prosecutors’ argument that the hush-money payments were made to help Mr. Trump get elected.

An outcome of that Trump Tower meeting were negative headlines attacking Mr. Trump’s rivals and positive stories that promoted him. Prosecutors said that negative coverage included stories about Ben Carson, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio while they were seeking the Republican Party’s nomination.

During the campaign, Mr. Pecker said he worked closely with Mr. Cohen, who would feed him information. Mr. Cohen would call him after Republican debates and ask for negative coverage to be directed at whichever candidate had been most successful onstage.

In turn, The Enquirer would “embellish” the stories, Mr. Pecker said, essentially confessing that it published “fake news” to help Mr. Trump.

Mr. Pecker also said that the tabloid arranged to suppress negative information, especially pertaining to “women selling stories” about Mr. Trump, who Mr. Pecker said was known as “the most eligible bachelor and dated the most beautiful women.”

We are fifteen minutes — at most — away from the end of the day. Steinglass, the prosecutor, appears to be putting a bow on the story of the doorman who sought to sell Trump’s story. But he moves on immediately to the second catch-and-kill deal, which involved the former Playboy model Karen McDougal. She, too, had a story about Trump to sell.

Prosecutors like to end the day with the most intriguing question-and-answer series they can. I’d expected Steinglass to finish with the doorman, and perhaps allow the jurors to leave early. But by moving onto this next deal, he could be setting up a nice cliffhanger to leave jurors with, that he'll pick back up when we return Thursday morning.

Steinglass, the prosecutor, is asking Pecker why he paid so much for this story. “I made the decision to buy the story because of the potential embarrassment it would have to the campaign and Mr. Trump,” Pecker responds. This is catch-and-kill in a nutshell and Pecker just said several times in different ways that he was acting on Trump’s behalf.

Regardless of whether the allegation about Trump fathering the child was true or not, the jury is now being shown a contract the National Enquirer reached with Dino Sajudin, the doorman, in which the words “Donald Trump’s illegitimate child” feature prominently. Things like that can leave a mark.

Pecker says Cohen called him furiously denying that the child in question was Trump's, saying that he offered to take a DNA test and that because he was German-Irish and the woman was Hispanic, it was impossible for the child to be his.

To be clear, Pecker appeared to be saying that Cohen indicated that a child with a Hispanic mother couldn’t be Trump’s.

Trump has often talked about “good genes” and blood lines. While running for president, he has denigrated immigrants from Latin American countries and said undocumented immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country.”

On the other hand, Pecker did not clarify whether “the woman” he was referring to was the mother of the child or the child herself, who by then was in her 20s.

Pecker is now being asked about Dino Sajudin, a doorman who worked at a Trump building and looked to sell a story — which was apparently false — about Trump fathering a child out of wedlock. This is the first of three catch-and-kill deals that Pecker is expected to describe and we will likely get a fair amount of detail on each of them.

This story clearly bothers Trump. Just like yesterday when it came up during opening statements, he frowned and shook his head.

Pecker says the love child story would have been a big story, and he believed it was important to have it “removed from the market.” Cohen told him “the boss would be very pleased.”

To catch you up, David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, has been testifying for nearly two hours, detailing a mutually beneficial relationship between Trump and his publication. Pecker said that at the direction of Trump and his fixer, Michael Cohen, The Enquirer published negative coverage about Trump’s political rivals and positive stories that promoted him. The National Enquirer benefited too, with increased newsstand sales. The tabloid also arranged for negative stories about Trump to be suppressed through “ catch-and-kill ” schemes.

The symbiotic relationship existed for years, Pecker said, stretching back to when Trump hosted the reality television show “The Apprentice.” But it picked up during the presidential campaign after Trump, Cohen and Pecker met at Trump Tower in August 2015.

Trump pulls down the lapels of his jacket sharply and walks out, again looking frustrated. To me, he’s looked far angrier yesterday and today than he did during all of last week, during jury selection.

Trump’s lawyers have objected all along to prosecutors couching Trump’s relationship with Pecker and Michael Cohen as a conspiracy — after all, Trump is not facing a conspiracy charge. But Joshua Steinglass, one of the prosecutors, just noted for the first time in court that one of the election statutes the case is based on does in fact have a conspiracy provision. That could prove important later when the jury is instructed on the laws they must consider in reaching a verdict.

We are taking a short break, though the lawyers and Trump are staying put. From our perspective, it seemed as if the jurors needed it. A few looked like they were flagging. We have no lunch break today — usually it’d be about a half hour away — and this is a lot of information to absorb. Jurors often feel a special responsibility to understand what they’re being told, given their role. It can be very tiring, regardless of the subject matter.

Pecker is now being asked about being introduced to Steve Bannon, Trump’s top campaign strategist, in October 2016. He recalls Trump saying, “I believe you and Steve would get along really well.” Bannon told Pecker that he went through some of the Enquirer articles and liked them, and had some other ideas. Pecker said he would give him old issues to study.

It’s worth recalling that this happened around the same time as the Wikileaks email dump, after a hack of Clinton’s top adviser John Podesta’s account, and the Trump team used that material frequently.

Prosecutors just showed several examples of the negative headlines about Trump's opponents, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson and Marco Rubio.

Pecker is being asked about an infamous Enquirer story linking Ted Cruz’s father to the John F. Kennedy assassination. He says it originated with Dylan Howard, The Enquirer’s editor.

Pecker said that after the Republican debates, Cohen would call him and direct him to focus the negative coverage on whichever candidate had been most successful onstage.

It should be pointed out that Pecker’s testimony isn’t just damaging to Trump. He is, in effect, laying waste to his own professional career by going through headline after headline and suggesting he attacked Trump’s rivals to aid Trump.

Pecker is asked about the nature of Cohen’s relationship to the Trump campaign. Pecker says Cohen always said he didn’t work for the campaign, and that he was instead “Mr. Trump’s personal attorney.” But jurors just heard that Cohen was central to feeding the tabloid negative information about campaign opponents.

“Michael was physically in every aspect of whatever the campaign was working on,” Pecker says. He adds that because Cohen wasn’t officially employed by the campaign, he may have heard things “informally” or “injected himself into it.”

Pecker finally says something mildly helpful to the defense. He says he doesn’t know who Cohen spoke to, and adds that Cohen may have essentially been freelancing, acting of his own volition as he tried to get more involved with the campaign.

Now, we are discussing negative headlines attacking three of Trump's Republican opponents in 2016, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, which prosecutors argue illustrate the outcome of the agreement reached during the Trump Tower meeting. Pecker says that Cohen would feed him negative information and that The National Enquirer would “embellish” and add onto it.

Trump jumped on the negative coverage of Ted Cruz, especially about his father, in 2016. The campaign promoted it like it had come about organically and Trump was simply responding to it.

Trump just leaned in toward the monitor in front of him and squinted to look closer at a collection of headlines from The National Enquirer that praised him. They included: “Donald Trump — Cruzin to victory! Ted endorses Donald” and “Obama’s Half Brother — Cheering on Donald at Debate.”

Prosecutors call Trump’s echo of a Fox News host’s remarks ‘troubling.’

As prosecutors argued Tuesday that former President Donald J. Trump had repeatedly broken a gag order, they called one episode “very troubling” — his sharing of a commentator’s quote disparaging prospective jurors as clandestine operators for the left.

Mr. Trump posted the remark by Jesse Watters, a Fox News commentator, on his social media site Truth Social last week, as jury selection was underway in his hush-money trial. Mr. Trump quoted Mr. Watters as saying, “They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury.”

Mr. Trump’s post embellished the actual remarks made by the commentator, adding the phrase “in order to get on the Trump Jury” when Mr. Watters had not said that on air. A few hours later, however, Mr. Watters posted on X the exact statement as shared by Mr. Trump.

No juror or potential juror has been identified as a liberal activist.

In that Fox News segment, Mr. Watters also shared personal details about the jurors in his segment. The day after that post, the judge in the case, Juan M. Merchan, ordered reporters to withhold some information that could identify jurors.

“What happened here was exactly what this order was meant to prevent and the defendant doesn’t care,” a prosecutor, Christopher Conroy, said in court Tuesday.

A lawyer for Mr. Trump, Todd Blanche, argued that Mr. Trump was simply sharing a quote, a common argument used by Mr. Trump to put distance between him and reposts of other people’s comments.

Judge Merchan did not appear to buy that argument. “It’s not passive,” Mr. Merchan said about how a post is published on Truth Social.

Mr. Conroy said the timing of the “liberal activists” post was important. The next morning, a juror came into court and asked to be excused, saying that friends and colleagues had been able to identify her as a member.

Mr. Watters hosts the nightly program “Jesse Watters Primetime” and is a co-host on “The Five,” a weekday afternoon chat show. He rose to prominence on Fox News for his ambush-style interviews on the street, which included a 2016 segment in which he mocked Asian people in New York City’s Chinatown that was widely seen as trafficking in stereotypes and veering into racism.

Pecker asked that the “catch-and-kill” arrangement be kept secret. Steinglass asks him to explain why. Pecker says he was helping the campaign, and didn’t want it to “leak” that his publication was aiding Trump. He wanted it “very confidential,” he says. Steinglass, satisfied, moves on.

A hearing turns heated as judge considers citing Trump for contempt.

The judge overseeing former President Donald J. Trump’s trial in Manhattan held a fiery hearing on Tuesday about whether to find Mr. Trump in criminal contempt for repeatedly violating the provisions of a gag order.

While the judge, Juan M. Merchan, did not issue an immediate ruling, he engaged in a heated back-and-forth with one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, scolding him for his failure to offer any facts in his defense of the former president.

“You’ve presented nothing,” Justice Merchan told the lawyer, Todd Blanche, adding soon after: “You’re losing all credibility with the court.”

Justice Merchan’s rebuke came moments after prosecutors in the Manhattan district attorney’s office had complained that Mr. Trump willfully violated the gag order by making 10 public statements on social media and on his campaign website that attacked two likely witnesses and the jury.

The prosecutors pointed to Mr. Trump’s attacks on Michael Cohen, a lawyer who had helped Mr. Trump arrange hush payments to a porn star to stop her from speaking about a sexual encounter she said she had had with Mr. Trump. The prosecutors also told Judge Merchan that a post Mr. Trump had made going after the woman, Stormy Daniels, violated the gag order.

Prosecutors flagged another post for Justice Merchan, saying it was even more troubling. In it, Mr. Trump had quoted a Fox News commentator, Jesse Watters, denigrating potential jurors in the case as “undercover liberal activists.”

Justice Merchan imposed the order on Mr. Trump in late March, barring him from public statements about any witnesses, prosecutors, jurors or court staff. But within a week, after Mr. Trump had found a loophole in the order and repeatedly attacked the judge’s daughter, Justice Merchan expanded it to cover the relatives of court staff members and relatives of lawyers working on the case.

Christopher Conroy, a prosecutor, told Justice Merchan on Tuesday that Mr. Trump had broken the order “repeatedly and hasn’t stopped.” Mr. Conroy added that the former president had made statements violating it even “right here in the hallway” outside the courtroom.

“He knows what he’s not allowed to do,” Mr. Conroy said of Mr. Trump, “and he does it anyhow.”

Mr. Blanche rejected that argument, telling the judge that Mr. Trump had never willfully violated the order. Mr. Blanche instead tried to paint his client’s statements as legitimate responses to “a barrage of political attacks.”

“Mr. Cohen in particular, and also Ms. Daniels, have ramped up their political attacks and their attacks on him as candidate in the weeks leading up to the trial,” Mr. Blanche said. His argument to Justice Merchan was that Mr. Trump should be allowed to respond.

The judge was skeptical, all but pleading with Mr. Blanche at one point to make a more substantive legal argument.

“I hate to keep coming back to this, but you’re not offering me anything to support your argument,” he said.

Prosecutors have asked Justice Merchan to fine Mr. Trump $1,000 for each of his violations of the gag order. They have also asked the judge to warn Mr. Trump that if he continues to violate the order, he could face jail time.

Matthew Haag and Alan Feuer

New York’s court system is publishing daily transcripts of Trump’s trial.

If you want to follow Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial in detail but can’t make it to the Lower Manhattan courthouse in person, you can still read every word of the proceedings.

The New York State Court system will publish a transcript of each day’s court action by the end of the following day on its website. The transcripts can be found here under People v Donald J. Trump (Criminal).

The trial is not televised nor is there live audio, so the transcripts provide the only way to read what is said in the courtroom, word for word.

The court system does not normally release daily transcripts for public consumption and in most cases, seeing transcripts for a court proceeding can be costly. But the court system’s chief administrative judge, Joseph A. Zayas , believed it was the right thing to do.

“This measure is in the interest of the public good and aligns with the court system’s commitment to judicial transparency and its ongoing efforts to enhance public access to, and understanding of, the courts and justice system,” said the judge, who made the decision to publish the transcripts.

In addition to the transcripts, the court website also includes various documents from the hush-money trial, including the 42 questions asked of prospective jurors during jury selection. The site also includes some documents from Mr. Trump’s civil fraud case as well as the previous criminal fraud case against Allen Weisselberg , the former chief financial officer of the Trump Organization.

Jonah E. Bromwich and Ben Protess

Here’s the latest on the trial.

A key witness in Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial pulled back the curtain Tuesday on what prosecutors say was a conspiracy to influence the 2016 presidential election, describing how he used his tabloid to aid Mr. Trump’s campaign.

The witness, David Pecker, the longtime publisher of The National Enquirer, described a 2015 meeting with Mr. Trump and his fixer at the time, Michael D. Cohen. Prosecutors described the meeting, which took place at Mr. Trump’s Midtown Manhattan headquarters, as the “Trump Tower conspiracy.”

Prosecutors say that meeting is where the trio hatched their efforts to conceal several sex scandals during the 2016 campaign. One of those efforts, a $130,000 hush-money payment Mr. Cohen made to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, is at the heart of the case.

Before court adjourned for the day, Mr. Pecker testified that Mr. Cohen and Mr. Trump had asked him what he and his magazines could do “to help the campaign,” a crucial statement that supports the prosecution’s argument that the men were not just protecting Mr. Trump’s personal reputation, but aiding his presidential bid.

“I would be your eyes and ears,” Mr. Pecker recalled telling them, as he explained the tabloid practice of “catch and kill,” in which an outlet bought the rights to a story, only to never publish it.

Mr. Pecker is expected to return to the stand when the trial resumes on Thursday. Court will not be in session on Wednesday.

During roughly three hours of testimony on Tuesday, the tabloid publisher described how Mr. Cohen communicated with him to protect Mr. Trump from negative stories, including a doorman’s apparently false claim that Mr. Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock. Mr. Pecker testified that Mr. Cohen had told him “the boss would be very pleased” to have that story suppressed.

Mr. Pecker also described working with Mr. Cohen to generate negative coverage of Mr. Trump’s political rivals, saying that Mr. Cohen would feed him information and that The National Enquirer would sometimes “embellish” and add onto it.

Mr. Pecker also said that Mr. Cohen was “physically in every aspect of whatever the campaign was working on.” But, in what may have been a positive moment for the defense, he testified that Mr. Cohen, who always insisted that he was not a campaign employee but Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, may have “injected himself” into the campaign at times.

Mr. Trump, who repaid Mr. Cohen for the hush money, is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records. Each charge reflects a check, invoice or ledger that prosecutors say disguised the true purpose of his reimbursement of Mr. Cohen, who is expected to be a key witness against him.

Mr. Pecker’s testimony on Tuesday came after a bruising hearing for Mr. Trump and his legal team, as prosecutors argued that Mr. Trump’s attacks on witnesses and jurors posed a “threat” to the trial. They urged the judge to hold him in contempt of court over what they said were 11 violations of the gag order barring him from attacking witnesses, prosecutors, jurors and court staff, as well as their relatives.

A prosecutor, Christopher Conroy, rattled off various statements from Mr. Trump that the district attorney’s office believes crossed the line, including calling Mr. Cohen and Ms. Daniels “sleaze bags” and reposting an attack on the jury pool, which came the night before a juror who had already been seated asked to be excused.

“What happened here was exactly what this order was meant to prevent, and the defendant doesn’t care,” Mr. Conroy said.

Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Todd Blanche, argued that Mr. Trump’s posts were political in nature, and said they did not violate the order because he was simply responding to “a barrage of political attacks,” including from Mr. Cohen.

Prosecutors have asked the judge, Juan M. Merchan, to fine Mr. Trump $1,000 for each violation. Justice Merchan, whose daughter has been among Mr. Trump’s targets, did not immediately rule.

But he appeared skeptical of the defense’s claims. At one point, after Mr. Blanche told the judge that Mr. Trump was trying to comply with the order, Justice Merchan replied, “You’re losing all credibility with the court.”

Here’s what to know on Day 6 of the trial:

The hearing over the gag order was heated at times, with Justice Merchan scolding Mr. Blanche for his failure to offer any facts in his defense of the former president. “You’ve presented nothing,” he said. Read more about the hearing.

One key issue in the hearing involved Mr. Trump echoing the remarks of a Fox News commentator , Jesse Watters, in a social media post. The full quote, as shared by Mr. Trump, said: “They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury.”

Yesterday, in its opening statement, the prosecution accused Mr. Trump, Mr. Cohen and Mr. Pecker of plotting to bury negative stories about Mr. Trump ahead of the 2016 election. Mr. Trump’s lawyer proclaimed that “President Trump is innocent.” Here’s a look back at the day in court.

Five takeaways from the fifth day of Trump’s criminal trial.

Monday marked another key moment in the criminal trial of Donald J. Trump: opening statements, during which the former president listened quietly to the prosecution’s allegations of crimes, and the defense’s counterargument that he was a simple man, wrongly accused.

The jury that will decide Mr. Trump’s case concentrated intently on the statements, which began the presentation of what will be weeks of testimony and other evidence, all in a tense courtroom in Lower Manhattan.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee once more, Mr. Trump, 77, is charged with falsifying 34 business records in an attempt to cover up a payment to a porn star, Stormy Daniels, in the days before the 2016 election. Ms. Daniels, who may testify, says that she and Mr. Trump had a sexual encounter in 2006, a claim the former president denies.

Mr. Trump has also denied the 34 felony charges, calling them orchestrated by Democrats; if convicted, the former president could face probation or up to four years in prison.

Here are five takeaways from Mr. Trump’s fifth day on trial:

The prosecution has a big story to tell.

The charges faced by Mr. Trump may sound bland — “falsifying business records” doesn’t really set the heart racing — but the prosecution made clear on Monday that it plans on painting a much broader picture.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, laid out in his opening statement a tale that touched on tabloid journalism , tawdry affairs and covertly recorded phone calls . Jurors will likely be told about events inside fancy hotel rooms, Trump Tower and even the Oval Office. And the stakes? The presidency.

All that suggests that the case will keep jurors wide-awake during the six or so weeks it is projected to take. Indeed, when asked if they wanted paper and pens to take notes, more than half of the people in the jury box (12 jurors and six alternates) raised their hands.

The defense wants to destroy prosecution witnesses.

Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer, Todd Blanche, used his opening statement to cast Mr. Trump’s actions leading to this case as run-of-the-mill business, and said that Mr. Trump is defending himself at trial, just as “any of us would do.”

He argued that the use of a nondisclosure agreement — the document Ms. Daniels signed after receiving the payment — was typical among the wealthy and the famous and “nothing illegal.” He continued that there was nothing wrong with trying to influence an election, adding: “It’s called democracy.”

Mr. Blanche also attacked Mr. Cohen, a former lawyer and fixer for Mr. Trump. He said Mr. Cohen, who pleaded guilty to federal campaign finance crimes in 2018, was a “criminal” who “can’t be trusted.” He added that Ms. Daniels was “biased” against Mr. Trump and made a living off her story about the sexual encounter.

He called the heart of the prosecution case just “34 pieces of paper” that don’t involve Mr. Trump.

Trump was muted during the abbreviated day in court.

On Mr. Trump’s way into the courtroom on Monday, he addressed reporters for about three minutes and blasted a range of perceived enemies, including New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, and the judge in a recent civil fraud case that resulted in a $454 million judgment against him.

But Mr. Trump’s behavior during opening statements reflected that he understood the gravity of the moment.

Mr. Trump made no outbursts during the prosecution’s opening statement, although he occasionally showed displeasure: He shook his head slightly at arguments that he orchestrated a scheme to corrupt the presidential election and then more strenuously when prosecutors said he was guilty of felonies.

During his own side’s opening statement, Mr. Trump sat largely motionless and expressionless watching his lawyer Mr. Blanche. Mr. Trump’s behavior was muted compared with his volatility during past Manhattan court appearances.

But at the conclusion of the trial day, Mr. Trump took his preferred spot in front of a television camera in the hallway, and spoke for more than nine minutes, attacking the prosecutor’s case — once again — as unfair.

David Pecker used to live on celebrity news. Now, he is the news.

Prosecutors’ first witness was David Pecker, the longtime publisher of The National Enquirer . He ambled to the stand and promptly gave a lesson in the ways of tabloid journalism, including the purchasing of articles — anything more than $10,000, he had to approve — and the significance of putting a famous face right out front.

“The only thing that was important is the cover of a magazine,” Mr. Pecker testified.

In about 30 minutes of testimony, Mr. Pecker also laid out trade secrets on sourcing, saying hotel workers and limo drivers could be a font of information on the rich and famous.

He seemed at ease: laughing at a prosecutor’s jokes, and sometimes directly addressing the jury just a few feet away.

We’re moving right along.

Over the past five trial days, the judge overseeing the case, Juan M. Merchan, has shown that he is eager to keep this trial on schedule. He seems serious about keeping his word to the jurors that the trial will last six weeks.

On Monday, truncated by a juror’s dental emergency and the Passover holiday, he decided to start with the first witness — Mr. Pecker — despite having only half an hour left on his schedule.

On Tuesday, the court will first consider a prosecution motion to hold Mr. Trump in contempt over recent comments that they say violated a gag order meant to keep him from attacking participants in the trial and their families.

Then, Mr. Pecker will continue on the stand, probably diving deeper into the “catch-and-kill” scheme used to buy up — and cover up — unflattering stories, a central element of the prosecution’s narrative.

Court will end early again, at 2 p.m., for further observance of Passover and then will have its weekly Wednesday break.

But there is little indication that as the weeks pass, Justice Merchan will let the pace slacken.

Michael Rothfeld

A look at how tabloids used ‘catch-and-kill’ to trade on the secrets of celebrities.

“Catch-and-kill” is a term coined by old-time tabloid editors for buying the exclusive rights to stories, or “catching” them, for the specific purpose of ensuring the information never becomes public. That’s the “killing” part.

Why would anyone want to spend money on a story that it never intends to publish? In the world of tabloid journalism, where ethical lines are blurry, deciding what to publish and why is often a calculus that covers favors doled out and chits called in.

David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, who also oversaw other tabloids such as Star and lifestyle publications such as Men’s Fitness, was a master of the technique , according to people who have worked for him.

In 2003, Mr. Pecker’s company, American Media Inc., bought several muscle magazines founded by a mentor of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the bodybuilding legend and movie star. When Mr. Schwarzenegger, who was often featured in those magazines, jumped into the recall election to replace California’s governor, Mr. Pecker ordered his staff to buy up negative stories about him in order to protect his investment, former employees said.

Staff members called it “the David Pecker Project.” American Media paid $20,000 to a former mistress of Mr. Schwarzenegger so that she would not speak about their affair — though news of it had previously been published. The company paid another $1,000 to her friend and $2,000 to a man who had a video of Mr. Schwarzenegger dancing lewdly in Rio de Janeiro 20 years earlier. Mr. Schwarzenegger was elected governor.

Mr. Pecker’s publications made deals with other celebrities as well, though not always for money. He traded away dirt about the golfer Tiger Woods in exchange for an exclusive interview in Men’s Fitness in 2007, according to people with knowledge of that episode.

And, according to the prosecutors in the Manhattan trial of Donald J. Trump, Mr. Pecker employed “catch-and-kill” tactics in the 2016 presidential election, paying a doorman and a Playboy model to suppress negative stories about Mr. Trump and boost the candidacy of his longtime associate.

Who is David Pecker, the trial’s first witness?

The first witness in Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial is David Pecker, who was the publisher of The National Enquirer, and had traded favors with Mr. Trump since the 1990s.

Mr. Pecker, who was sometimes referred to as the “tabloid king,” had long used his publications to curry favor with Mr. Trump and other celebrities, in exchange for tips or for business reasons. Staff members called Mr. Trump, like other favored stars who were off limits, an “F.O.P.” — “Friend of Pecker.”

Mr. Trump and Mr. Pecker, along with Mr. Trump’s former fixer Michael D. Cohen, hatched a plan in August 2015 to boost his upstart presidential campaign, prosecutors say. The former Trump allies are each expected to take a turn on the witness stand, giving testimony that could help make him the first president convicted of a felony.

Prosecutors for Alvin L. Bragg , the Manhattan district attorney, will try to show that the hush money payment to a porn star at the center of the trial was part of a larger effort to suppress negative news about Mr. Trump to sway the election. That scheme, they will contend, includes two other deals, both involving Mr. Pecker.

Mr. Trump had announced his presidential campaign in June 2015. The plan the men laid out two months later was simple, according to court documents, interviews with people involved in the events or familiar with them, private communications and other records.

Mr. Pecker would use The Enquirer to publish positive stories about Mr. Trump’s campaign and negative stories about his rivals. He would alert Mr. Trump, through Mr. Cohen, when The Enquirer learned of stories that might threaten Mr. Trump. The Enquirer could buy the rights to those stories in order to suppress them, a practice known in the tabloid world as “catch and kill.”

In late 2015, Mr. Pecker’s company paid $30,000 to suppress a claim by a former doorman at a Trump building who said he had heard Mr. Trump fathered a child out of wedlock — a rumor that was apparently untrue.

Then in August 2016, The Enquirer’s parent company paid $150,000 to a former Playboy model, Karen McDougal, to keep her account of an affair with Mr. Trump quiet. Two months later, Mr. Pecker and The Enquirer’s editor helped Mr. Cohen negotiate a $130,000 hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels, the former porn star who also said she had sex with Mr. Trump. He has denied both women’s claims.

Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to federal campaign finance crimes in 2018.

The Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc., made a deal that year to avoid federal prosecution, acknowledging that it had illegally tried to influence the election .