In spite of a scorched-earth campaign by Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Neil Gorsuch has been confirmed to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s untimely death last year. Gorsuch’s nomination was one of the most significant actions of the Trump presidency so far, and his confirmation will now have profound implications for our nation over the next several decades. Here are four reasons why American citizens—especially Evangelical conservatives—should consider Gorsuch’s confirmation a great victory and why he might be better even than Scalia, whose place on the bench he would take. 1.
What is DACA? DACA is a program created by Barak Obama to aid undocumented immigrants, specifically children who were brought in by their parents illegally. How does DACA help immigrants? They are helped by being allowed to work, have a driver license, and potentially own a home. How are these opportunities granted?
Betsy DeVos’ name is starting to get attention. She is, after all, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for the next United States Education Secretary. But Betsy DeVos may be getting negative attention instead of a positive one. In Florida, teachers are already planning to protest against Trump’s pick.
The United States just elected a new president recently. This is a major event, because this is a country that values the citizens right to vote above many other rights and privileges. The months and weeks leading up to the election were very divisive and showed how humans have a long way to go before reaching a peaceful resolution of
After nearly fifty days in the White House, President Trump has done an excellent job. On his second day in office he vowed to destroy the Islamic State, and on his ninth day he fulfilled his promise of a 5 year-ban on officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government, and a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government, which was a promise kept. (foxnews.com) My favorite quote by my President Trump is “My policy is to learn from the past, focus on the present, and dream about the future. " I think that this quote describes him perfectly as a president.
Betsy Devos is a very controversial person who has a lot of problems. Many wonders if she is a good pick for Secretary of Education because if she doesn’t understand the difference between growth and proficiency what will keep her from failing. The other side argues that she is no different then from Obama's picks. Unlike other candidates, she has a big love for kids of all ages. It is very well known that Betsy Devos is very unqualified for the job from the article called Betsy Devos still loves Common Core.
Option 1 Bill Clinton was 46 years old when he went into office, making him the youngest President since John F. Kennedy. He was also the second U.S. President to be impeached; however, not just bad things happened during his time in office. Clinton was President from 1993 to 2001, and he accomplished many things for the United States during that time. For example, he was able to create more jobs and drop the unemployment rate significantly. He also played close attention to issues in the education system.
With a new President comes a new cabinet full of new faces and new ideas. Although some individuals bring advantageous ideas to the table, that is not the case for all cabinet members. Betsy DeVos, Education Secretary, has imposed several new educational principles in her time in office which have upset the community. Although she claims her ideas are going to be beneficial to society, the changes are making a negative impact on the schooling system. Betsy DeVos was President Donald Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Education, and until this past election, she has had no experience with education or making educational changes.
Freedom of expression is one of the laws the forefathers of America made to empower its citizens and also enables them to live in peace amongst themselves. In most countries around the world, freedom of expression does not exist, so there is always war in those countries. In the article “Why the First Amendment (and Journalism) Might Be in Trouble”, the authors, Ken Dautrich, chair of the Public Policy at the University of Connecticut and John Bare, who is the vice president for strategic planning and evaluation at the Arthur M. Blank Family foundation in Atlanta, conducted a research study on the importance of freedom of speech. They used their research findings to support freedom of expressions. They employed claim of policy, claim of fact and also appeal to pathos and logos in their argument of the importance of the freedom of speech.
It’s that time again, election time! Time for both Democrats and Republicans to debate and campaign for what they believe and stand for. This can bring up a lot of serious issues that both parties have different views on. Everybody has a different opinion and some believe that the Republican party has offended minorities in America, Latino’s, homosexuals, women, etc. There is a reason for this and not just an offensive generalization.
DACA immigrants have contributed to society by paying taxes which support the American economy. DACA immigrants have work permits that allow them to have a social security number. With this social, they work legally and, like Americans, pay taxes. In reality “1.3 million young undocumented immigrants [...] eligible for DACA contribute an estimated $2 billion a year,” (State & Local Tax Contributions). Contrary to many American beliefs, these undocumented immigrants do not just live in the country; they live in the country and help the economy.
This example shows the irony of President Trump giving certain standards to journalists than himself, this discredits him and makes him appear to not know what he is talking about. The second example from the article was, “The Russian-style domination of the press came only a few hours after the president told CPAC: “I love the First Amendment; nobody loves it better than me. Nobody.’” (Dowd) This example shows that even within hours Trump can contradict himself, by ridiculing the media for what they say and then claiming he is a firm believer in the First Amendment.
The press is not free to do anything they want, they have special rights to get and disseminate information while facing certain restrictions. The first amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press: or the right of people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (Zelezny, 2011:41). The amendment is not interpreted by the courts absolutely or literally. There are restrictions on speech and the press.
One of the biggest controversies in the United States today is immigration. This is a huge topic in the country today because there is numerous people on both sides of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform that present great evidence about it. This reform is impacting millions of immigrants that are working and living in the Unites States today, but it also affects the people that are citizens of the United States. In this paper I am going to present arguments from both sides of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform, then come to a conclusion on which side I choose to place my opinion. There are a lot of worthy things that this reform is going to accomplish for immigrants in the United States.
Rule: The first amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.” Analysis: No, the rights of those staff members were not violated. The two pages that were excluded from the newspapers final publication included articles on teenage pregnancy and the impacts of divorce on students. The principal that removed the two pages acted reasonably as the newspaper is an extension of a journalism class and is subject to being under control a faculty member.
