Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Trump Nominates Neil Gorsuch into Supreme Court, Giving Convservatives the One-Up


Summary:
On January 31st, 2017, Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch into the Supreme Court to replace Antonin Scalia, who died in February, 2016. If Gorsuch is inducted, this can mean a lot of different things for future of the court because he is conservative. Following Scalia's death, there had been a 4-4 split in democrats versus republicans in the Supreme Court system. This caused many setbacks, as judgments often would result in ties on various cases. However, with the possible addition of Gorsuch, he supplies conservatives and republicans alike with the power to overrule democrats' votes, and ultimately win many cases in favor of the right wing.
Connection:
This connects to when we studied the aspects of the three different branches of government. The Supreme Court is a part of the Judicial Branch; the branch of government that interprets the laws. This nomination, and possible induction, will directly impact how the laws will be interpreted in the future based off of this man's opinion, as he can sway the court since he will supply the conservatives with one extra vote to possibly win over future decisions.
Questions:
  • How do you think democrats and liberals will react to this? (Will they support or disagree with this decision?)
  • How do you think republicans and conservatives will react to this? (Will they support or disagree with this decision?)
  • How do you think having this "one-up" in favor of republicans will play out in the future of the Supreme Court and in the future of America?
  • Why do you think Trump wants this "one-up" within the Supreme Court?

Friday, January 27, 2017

Senate Democrats may block Trump's plan to fund border wall

Link: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/border-wall-funding-senate-democrats/index.html

Image result for trumps wall

Summary: Trumps decision to build a wall between the US and Mexico is being blocked by senate democrats. Trump has disguised that the overall cost could be upwards of 15 billion and that he is expecting mexico to pay for the wall. But many republicans and democrats are skeptical that Mexico will pay for the wall as the country has insisted that it would not foot the bill. And it's unclear how Trump's funding package will be paid for or if it would be offset by new spending cuts. With the tension between US and Mexico it is unlikely that Mexico will ultimately reimburse the United States for the project. Along with the wall, Trump also was considering a 20 percent tax on Mexican imports, but later said it was just one option under consideration. Trump also proposed the idea to have the American middle-class pay for the wall. The costs for everything from groceries, to cars, to office supplies would go up by 20% causing many Americans to struggle buying basic supplies.

Connection: This controversy over building a wall or not and the details of the funding is a very prevalent issue witch impacts our daily life. This also exemplifies how opinionated people are on the decisions that the president is making.

Question: Do you agree or disagree with Trumps decision to make a wall? Do you think this will harm our relationship with mexico? Do you think this will hurt our image of a nation that is accepting of all races?

      Tax Plan Sows Confusion as Tensions With Mexico Soar

      Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/26/us/politics/mexico-wall-tax-trump.html?_r=0



      Summary: Tension rises between The US and Mexico about the installation of a wall along the southern border of the US. Causing Enrique Nieto, Mexico's president, to cancel the visit to the white house. After, Trump then plans on taxing 20% on all imported goods. This then causes even more tension between Trump and Nieto. There has been tension with both of these two for months concerning the wall. Nieto then delivered a twitter video about the wall. He says, "I regret and condemn the United States' decision to continue with the construction of a wall that, for years now, far from uniting us, divides us". He obviously does not agree with the wall, not only because it stops immigration, but it separates us. A while after, Trump then responds with a tweet saying, "If Mexico is unwilling to pay foe the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting". This is mainly what cancelled the meeting with the two of these leaders. As of now, there is a lot of conflict between these countries and it still soars.  

      Connection: This article connects to the event of the Mexican Cession. This event relates to this article because there was high tension and conflict between Mexico and U.S. These both are related and they both revolve around land, because the wall would take up a good amount of New Mexico, and the Mexican Cession was about the confusion over land.

      Questions:
      1. Do you think they should install the wall?
      2. Do you think Mexico will ever agree to build the wall?
      3. What do you think of the two leaders communicating over Twitter? Why?

      Thursday, January 26, 2017

      Obama and Abe Make Historic Visit to Pearl Harbor


      Link: https://newsela.com/articles/abe-obama-pearl-harbor/id/25328/

      Summary: Our former President Barack Obama and the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe came together on December 27, 2016 to remember those who passed on the tragic day of the infamous attack. Their meet was a sign that our country's relationship with Japan is mended, as both leaders agree to "never repeat the horrors of war again". The leaders' time of remembrance was also a time to ensure their countries will never have to suffer like they did in the past, as Abe and Obama both tossed lily wreaths and purple flower petals into the battle waters and respectfully gave a few moments of silence. Ultimately, Obama and Abe came to a conclusion to ensure peace between countries and to remember the notorious day.

      Connection: This news article connects to our topic of the Pearl Harbor bombing. I think this is a great article to show the transition in terms of relationship with Japan and how both countries have learned to cope and join together through the traumatic and unforgettable past.

      Questions: Do you think this was a good ending to former President Obama's term? Do you think Japan and the US will maintain peaceful throughout the next years? Will there be any change between the countries' relationship because of our new president? If so, why?



      The Blackmail of San Francisco 

      Federal Regulation of Sanctuary Cities

      Image result for sanctuary cities map




      Definition:
      Sanctuary City: A City that protects the rights of undocumented immigrants by not prosecuting them for not

      Links:
      https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/25/presidential-executive-order-enhancing-public-safety-interior-united
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/01/26/constitutional-problems-with-trumps-executive-order-on-sanctuary-cities/?utm_term=.0757d7abd06f

      Summary:
      With his executive power, Trumo has decided to stop sanctuary cities from existing, because he claims that "Sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States." He has signed an executive order that will "direct executive departments and agencies to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States." If said cities do not comply to this order then they"are not eligible to receive Federal grants" (Whitehouse.gov).

      If the Government jargon confused you here is a quick summary: Trump signed an order that requires sanctuary cities to stop protecting undocumented citizens, else they will not get any money from the government. 

      Side Note:
      This violates the 10th amendment. Since the constitution does not explicitly require cities to purge themselves of immigrants, the states have the right to choose. It is the job of the federal government to enforce immigration laws, not the states, therefore states can't be required to enforce such laws.

      Connection:
      This relates to when we learned about the Constitution and the framework in the government. The sanctuary cities are on the sides of the Anti-federalists, in which they want states rights to be upheld, while Trump is on the side of the federalists, wanting all the power in the federal government.

      Question:
      Should Governors like Jerry Brown accept these demands and stop sheltering undocumented immigrants? Or should he fight to uphold states rights and the state given equal rights of foreign born inhabitants?  Do you think Trump will send in federal agents to remove immigrants? If so what will be the response?


      Should Juveniles Be Charged As Adults In The Criminal Justice System?

      http://www.americanbar.org/publications/litigation-committees/childrens-rights/articles/2016/should-juveniles-be-charged-as-adults.html

      Image result for should juveniles be charged adults in the criminal justice system

      Summary: On June 3, 2016, a fourteen year old boy attended one of Donald Trumps  political rally's in New Mexico.  Prosecutors say that he was later charged with 2 felonies, and was tried as an adult for throwing a rock at the police.  The police later stated "We don't want to make an example out of a 14-year old. We want to guide him in the right direction." It is clear that the governments idea of the penal system was to educate and rehabilitate juveniles so as to attack what were believed to be roots of juvenile delinquency-a lack of moral education and standards.

      Connection: Throughout the U.S, the women march occurred as the First Step to take in action opposing the new president.  Many civilians united by fear and rage that Donald Trump has caused people to stress. Just like the boy, people felt the right to rage and come together because of how they felt.

      Question:  Although the 14 year old boy was in the wrong by throwing a rock at authorities, do you think he should have been charged with 2 felonies and tried as an adult? 






      President Barack Obama's Farewell Warning

      http://www.usnews.com/opinion/thomas-jefferson-street/articles/2017-01-10/president-barack-obamas-farewell-address-was-a-warning-about-illiberalism

      Summary: Barack Obama has led this nation for 8 years strong. On a Tuesday night, he said farewell to the nation as well as telling them what he thinks should be the next step. Obama's speech was very inspirational, personal, and balanced. Like a few remembered farewell addresses, Obama's farewell address was more of a warning about the future than a celebration of the past. Like George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower, they were speeches that showed danger to their people and how they cannot resolve it. Obama has spent the majority of his farewell address speaking about the growing threats that are coming to America. In the end of his farewell address, he lets the nation know that he is optimistic in what good things are going to happen.

      Connection: In the many efforts to make US great again, many have let the nation ponder about what will happen next. Like Eisenhower and Washington, they have warned the people of the growing threats and let them know what is happening in their farewell addresses. President Obama's farewell address is warning the nation about what is happening. Eisenhower and Washington have known that they could not make independence during their years of presidency, so they warned the people to have them guard their sovereignty and warn about the military complex.

      Questions: Why are there so few presidents that would warn us about the upcoming threats? How is Obama's farewell address like George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower's? Why did Obama warn us about what is happening?

      Wednesday, January 25, 2017

      Women's March in Oakland and other cities.

      Link: http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Women-s-March-is-just-the-1st-step-in-making-a-10875467.php

      Image:


      Summary: On Saturday about 100,000 people from all over the bay area attended the Women's March held in Oakland. This march was called the "First step" into taken action in opposing the new president. Many people became united by fear that the new president has caused people to feel. People held hands, posters, and wore pink. The march was joyful and the people who attended were happy. Most people did not want any "nastiness" at the march, like what there was during the election. There were also no arrest made in Oakland during this event. This event was also beneficial to bart and some downtown restaurants.

      Connection: This connects to the women's suffrage in 1848. Women had to fight in order to get educated and to work. Women are once again fighting to be treated with respect, among other things.

      Questions: Do you believe the Women's March is effective? Do you agree with what women are doing? What do you believe the next steps should be for America?

      Trump considers meeting with Kim Jong un


      http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/25/asia/ambassador-north-korea-defector-interview/index.htmlSummary:North Korea. For many centuries, North Korea has had tensions with the United States and the rest of the world with their system of running their country. Defector Thae Yong Ho escaped the North Korean Embassy with his family. He explains that the longer the United States continues to keep their current terms and conditions affiliated with North Korea, the bigger North Korea's nuclear firepower increases. Because Kim Jong Un and his fathers before him have always had the system of eliminating any threats to their country, Thae believes that change and relations between both countries would have to be the change of power in North Korea.Despite all of This, Trump has offered a meeting with the leader of North Korea after his election. Thae explains that if Trump is to have a meeting with Kim Jong un, he is providing "legitimacy" for the leader. No country has met with Kim Jong Un yet. In March, sanctions have been passed through the United Nation's Security council.

      Connection: The Conflict between North Korea and the United States has been one of the longest tensions between two countries along side Cuba. The United States and North Korea have Nuclear warfare tensions between each other that are only getting bigger. The agreement between the two countries has been assisted By the United Nations, as we have studied in history.This agreement would be another example of the power and effect of the UN.

      questions:should The US be the first country to be involved with sanctions with North Korea?What should the Us do with the increasing Nuclear war tensions? Will the legitimacy of North Korea will be a bigger problems than existing tensions?

      Trump Orders Mexican Border Wall and Drafts Order for The Halt on Refugee Intake

      Article Link
      Link to Outline

















      Summary: Donald Trump has signed an order to begin building the wall on the border of the United States and Mexico. Trump also has plans to round up and deport an estimated eleven-million illegal immigrants. Additionally, Trump's draft of his plan to halt the intake of any refugees from any country for 120 days; Trump is expected to issue the order as early as Thursday.

      Connection: In our study on immigration during the late 1800s and early 1900s, the public opinion of the American people on immigration was that there were too many immigrants allowed. During the study of immigration laws, we learned that the United States did output several laws based on the people's opinion to limit and restrict certain people or characteristics, and we also learned about the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882 which restricted a whole ethnicity. This relates to the order Trump is drafting right now because he is thinking of restricting any and all immigration into the country for 120 days.

      Discussion: How do think this order will affect you and/or your family? Do you agree with the order? Why (not)? How do you think this will affect foreign relations?

      Monday, January 16, 2017

      Women's march an 'entry point' for a new activist wave

      -Image:
      Macintosh HD:Users:jjohnson:Desktop:Screen Shot 2017-01-09 at 7.44.49 PM.png

      -Summary/Reaction to the ArticleThis article details the Women’s March which is scheduled to take place the day after the Trump inauguration.  The idea for the march was started by a Facebook page and has since reached women all over the country who are planning on traveling to DC to join the march and paying for the trip on their own.  More than 100 different groups have pledged to join the march and many key women leaders have also joined.  There is not one single message of the march though many women participating are hoping to bring to light many challenges women might face under the Trump administration.   

      -US History Connection: In our study of the 19th Amendment, we discussed the actions of Alice Paul and other women suffragists as they protested for the right to vote.  According to this article, this many women have not protested in DC since a protest for the right to vote back in 1913.  The women’s march scheduled for January 21 is hoping to gain national attention by protesting in DC just as women did prior to the 19th Amendment being passed.  

      -Question(s) for Discussion: Why do you think so many women have pledged to join the march?  Do you think the march will have positive impacts?  Do you think these marchers will be treated the same or different from those women who protested for the right to vote prior to 1920 (hint: think hunger strikes, etc)?  

      Donald Trump's tiny America: A look inside his Twitter following

      -Image:
      Macintosh HD:Users:jjohnson:Desktop:Screen Shot 2017-01-09 at 7.59.21 PM.png

      -Summary/Reaction to the ArticleThis article presents an argument about President-elect Trump and his use of social media to communicate with the American people.  The article argues that while Trump has many followers on social media sites such as Twitter, many of these followers might be fake accounts and/or represent non-Americans. Trump has been using social media to communicate with the mainstream media, rather than holding traditional news conferences where reporters have the ability to ask questions, clarify statements, etc.  A reporter who is frustrated that Trump is not speaking to reporters and instead using social media to make statements and share his opinions wrote this article.  

      -US History Connection: In our study of the Great Depression, we learned that President Franklin D Roosevelt tried a new form of communication – the fireside chat.  FDR went on the radio once a week to talk with the American people and update them on New Deal programs.  Similar to methods currently being used by Trump, FDR was able to make statements and share his opinions on the radio directly with the people rather than speaking with and taking questions from reporters.  

      -Question(s) for Discussion: How has social media changed the way that politicians communicate with voters?  Is this a positive change?  How should politicians communicate with their constituents?    

      Rights Battles Emerge in Cities Where Homelessness Can Be a Crime

      -Image:
      Macintosh HD:Users:jjohnson:Desktop:Screen Shot 2017-01-09 at 8.09.19 PM.png

      -Summary/Reaction to the ArticleThis article describes the many tent encampments of homeless Americans that appear in cities all over the country.  There is a debate about the camps – is it a violation of rights to shut down a tent encampment or it is necessary due to community health risks, etc.?  This article states that tents are especially prevalent in western cities such as San Francisco and that in November San Francisco voted to ban tents on sidewalks and giving the city the power to remove them with 24 hours notice.  The homeless community in the US saw some support under the Obama administration and there is fear amongst homeless advocates that the Trump administration will be more authoritative.  

      -US History Connection: In our study of the Great Depression, we studied Hoovervilles.  We specifically looked at the Hooverville built by the Bonus Army that was destroyed by the US military at the order of the President.  Tent encampments in US cities today could be considered the modern equivalent of Hoovervilles in the 1930s.  

      -Question(s) for Discussion: How should communities address issues surrounding homelessness?  Should tent encampments be allowed?  Should they be regulated?  Should communities search for alternative solutions to the homeless problem?