Trump to sign executive order to 'protect and vigorously promote religious liberty'

Unit of Study: Unit 6, civil liberties

In early May of 2017, President Donald Trump signed another executive order. The reason this order was established was for the goal to "protect and vigorously promote religious liberty" and "alleviate the burden" of a law designed to prohibit religious leaders from speaking out about politics, according to senior administration officials. This order was implemented to make it easier for those employers with religious objections not to include contraception coverage in workers' health care plans, although it would be up to federal agencies to determine how that would happen. Donald Trump's main reason for this was to appeal to the conservatives that have supported him and not necessarily what would be best for the country as a whole. Many civil liberties groups are furious and are ready to fight this executive order. “It would create an unprecedented license to discriminate with taxpayers’ funds, undermine women’s health care and elevate one narrow set of religious beliefs over all others,” said Sarah Warbelow, legal director for the Human Rights Campaign, of the previous leaked draft. This order will directly affect the John Amendment which states that tax-emempt, religious organization can't be involved with political action. This amendment can't even be touched by Donald Trump because it is a law which must go through congress.

Civil liberties are legal and constitutional protections that American citizens have from the federal and state governments. There have been many Supreme Court cases involved with civil liberties in the past and with this order, the possibility for another one may arise. A president does not have any power to change a current amendment himself because it must go through the amendment process which is controlled by Congress.

Click here to read more

How Does the Travel Ban Interfere with the Supreme Court?

Unit of Study: Executive and Judicial Branch

Donald Trump signed an executive order titled, "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States" on January 27th, 2017. This order was set to ban people from six Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. However, there has been many legal challenges and obstacles presented to the President and his team regarding this order. On May 25th, 2017, the Supreme Court took a further look at the comments made by Donald Trump as a candidate and president, the government's national security justifications, and the role of the courts. The newly sworn in Attorney General Jeff Sessions promised to "seek review" on this issue. "This opinion relies on principles that should be exceptionally persuasive to the Supreme Court," said Joshua A. Matz, who filed a brief in support of the challengers, "though, of course, it is possible that the justices will see things differently than the lower court."Key points that the 4th Circuit ruling the justices could review are:The Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment - it is clearly stated that government shall not establish any religious orthodoxy, or favor or disfavor one religion over another. Even though power was granted to the President by Congress to deny entry of those from foreign countries, there is the potential to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation.

I believe that the Supreme Court has the right and power to get involved with this executive order that President Trump signed. The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from "establishing" a religion. However, The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest. This ban specifically targets countries that are predominately Muslim due to the recent uproar in terrorist attacks. I can see the issue and controversy on this order because it comes down to morals and and principles. American has always been accepting of aliens coming to American for a better life but that halts those who are trying to escape their homelands that are continuously being bombed and targeted. The Supreme Court deals with cases that interfere with The Constitution and that is why this order has been hard to get set in place.

Click here to learn more

Trump Signs Executive Order Unwinding Obama Climate Policies

Date: (3/29/2017)
Unit of Study: President

Trump Signs Executive Order Unwinding Obama Climate Policies

Synopsis: On Tuesday, March 28th, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that would ultimately change and reverse Obama's climate change and environmental issue policies. According to President Trump, this new order will "eliminate federal overreach, restore economic freedom and allow our companies and workers to thrive, compete and succeed on a level playing field for the first time in a long time." This order will focus on domestic policies and this is very worrisome to other countries. One of Trumps biggest goal is to revive the coal industry and while addressing his new order he made a statement to the Environmental Protection Agency to go ahead and begin the process to remove the Clean Power Plan that Obama had placed while in office. The Clean Power Plan would have closed hundreds of coal-fired power plants, frozen construction of new plants and replaced them with vast new wind and solar farms. Scientist have made it clear that it is dangerous for people to change the environmental and climate change plans set in place if they want to preserve the planet for many years to come. With President Trump wanting to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, this could only make matters worse and make goals harder to achieve. Many people are worried that the Paris Agreement is eventually going to fall apart. 

I think its okay that Donald Trump wants to create his own policies regarding the environment. I don't think he fully understands the affects this order can have on his own behalf and regarding other countries. An executive order is when there is a rule or regulation issued by the president that has the effect of law. In this situation, President Trump was fulfilling his role as chief legislator which means he influences the making of laws. A downfall to this executive order is that one reason why it was created was because President Trump wanted to withdraw from this Paris Agreement. The withdrawal from the agreement could potentially hurt his relations with other countries. As chief diplomat, the president needs to make decisions that will keep him in ties with his allies. 

Click here to read more

Click here to read more

Democrats will filibuster Gorsuch nomination

Date: (3-27-2017)
Unit of Study: Congress

Democrats will filibuster Gorsuch nomination

President Donald J. Trump recently nominated Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court. Currently Gorsuch sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. Many Democrats are opposed to this nominee because he is a Republican and will only strengthen the power for Republicans. On March 23rd, 2017, Senate hearings were held on account for Neil Gorsuch and ended up resulting in a filibuster from the Democrat leaders. Under the rules of the Senate, it requires 60 votes to confirm a nominee and so far 49 Democrats have voted against him. Even though a filibuster delays a debate/hearing, there is the possibility for defeat of the filibuster and Senators can vote to proceed with the confirmation. Senior Republicans have vowed that Gorsuch will be confirmed no matter what — a threat to Democrats that they might use the nuclear option to change the way senators confirm Supreme Court justices.

Click here to read more

A filibuster is used during any debate or hearing in order to delay the vote. Democrats are not happy with Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch because he shares similar views to Scalia and is also very young. Not many people in the Senate are as young as his is (49) so that means he has a long time to stay in office. Since Donald Trump won as a Republican and has many Republicans supporting him inside Congress, I do not think that this filibuster will ultimately prevent Neil Gorsuch from becoming a Supreme Court Justice considering the Senate is mainly run by Republicans. There is a strong possibility for a cloture being made but I do not see how this will fail when there is a party era going on for the Republicans in both the executive and legislative branches. I believe that this has created tensions between parties which is not necessary because more than likely, Neil Gorsuch will become the next Supreme Court Justice.  

Effects of Racial Gerrymandering in Texas

Date: (3-26-2017)
Unit of Study: Gerrymandering

Court says Texas congressional districts gerrymandered to hurt minorities

Synopsis: In Texas, Republican legislatures have been known to draw district lines in order to prevent minority votes from growing more influential. It was found that three congressional districts in Texas were affected by gerrymandering. Even though they found this problem, no solution has been proposed but will most likely result in redrawing the district lines. The congressional redistricting plan was drawn by the legislature in 2011, the same year that then-Gov. Rick Perry (R) signed a voter ID law that a federal appeals court ultimately found discriminates against minorities. Three judges agreed that minorities such as Latinos and many Spanish-speaking people were packed into these districts but none of the judges could decide if this was racial gerrymandering or simply partisan gerrymandering.

I find it strange that there was not a presented resolution given to Texas legislatures for proper redistricting. It was obvious to me that the lines were drawn around specific races and that this case is strictly based on racial gerrymandering. If nothing is done for the citizens, they may decide to go through the litigation process and demand the equal representation they deserve. Racial gerrymandering can really affect a legislator if they do get in trouble. When they go up for re-election, people (especially minorities) will not vote for them to be re-elected for office. 

Click here to read more