Breaking News: Diversity and Equality Now Anti-American

 The Trump administration has recently announced the decision to prohibit the use of federal funds to go toward diversity training. President Trump also threatened to defund public schools that teach the 1619 Project in history classes. 

Diversity training, formally known as diversity, equity, and inclusion training, is used by many companies to ensure that their workplace is inclusive and accepting to all types of people. Such training usually covers the effects of white privilege and the basics of race theory. Even with diversity training becoming more common in the workplace, there is still a significant wage gap between white and minority groups. With this in mind, it is difficult to understand why there is opposition to diversity training, aside from being racist and wanting to perpetuate racial inequality. 

Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, reasoned that diversity training “runs counter to fundamental beliefs for which our Nation has stood since its inception.” What “beliefs,” exactly, does vought refer to? Perhaps he is referring to the right for white men to make a dollar for every 62 cents black women make. The blatant racism displayed in this decision reflects the deep-rooted issues within the government. Without adequate diversity training, I believe, government officials cannot accurately represent all citizens. A government that does not acknowledge important issues facing the country will not solve them. A government limited in diversity and understanding is not an effective one. 

Training in the Federal Government  < the full directive that was released

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4 < read more about racial inequality in wages here

Trump Will Announce Supreme Court Justice Next Week

    Context for this post: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away on Friday (you can read more about that in Lorenzo's post), which leaves a seat open in the Supreme Court. 

    Today, Trump announced that he will choose a replacement for RBG next week and that the new justice will be a woman. According to a source close to Trump, two likely nominees are Amy Coney Barrett and Barbara Lagoa, both of which hold conservative ideals. Barrett in particular believes that “life begins at conception,” meaning that if appointed, she would most likely vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, the court case which effectively legalized abortions across the U.S.

    As you might already know, a Supreme Court justice is appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. My initial thought was that the Democrats could filibuster to delay the appointment of a right-leaning justice. Filibustering would be an attempt to stall approval until after the election, giving Democrats a chance to take office and appoint a liberal court justice. This is extremely important for people on the left, as the Supreme Court has the ability to informally change the meaning of the Constitution as we've discussed in class.

    However, filibustering is not a viable option at this point considering the precedent set by the 2017 appointment of Justice Gorsuch. The republicans utilized the "nuclear option," which basically changed the requirements of approving a justice to a simple majority in the Senate to stop filibustering. This, along with the fact that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell hypocritically announced that the Senate would vote through Trump's nominee, makes this whole situation even worse for people with liberal beliefs. And, even if Democrats are able to stall until after the election on November 3rd, there is still the "lame-duck" period in which incumbent politicians are able to vote through a justice before replacements are sworn in. 

Source 1: CNN

Source 2: NYTimes (1) (2)

Source 3: Politico

Source 4: National Geographic

Ruth Ginsburg, Supreme Court justice dead at 87, what does this mean for the country?

 

Justice Ginsberg being sworn into into the supreme court

Ruth Bader Ginsberg died late Friday night. Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg was an amazing woman who championed civil rights acts and fought for equality between men and women. She is only the 2nd ever woman to sit on the supreme court bench. So, what does this mean for our country? Justice Ginsberg was a liberal on the supreme court, and because of her passing, Donald Trump will have the power to decide who will fill her spot. Trump will put a conservative in place of Justice Ginsberg, which will affect the supreme court long after Trump is out of office. This gives conservatives a 6-3 majority over the liberals in the supreme court. Many are unhappy with the way things are panning out. Here is a quote from Maureen Dowd from the New York Times who said, “we have a president who takes those knitting needles and stabs the country mercilessly with them.” The death of Justice Ginsberg has brought up many emotions in people, which might be a sign of trouble due to our already fuming political climate.

What gives Trump the right to vote in the next justice? Through our checks and balances, the president can vote in the next justice. He picks whom he sees the best fit, and the Senate must consent to vote in that justice. Since we have a majority of Republicans in our Senate, they will likely consent to the conservative candidate that Trump puts on the bench. I can see why this can anger those that hold liberal beliefs. It seems like the Republican party is slowly taking over the entire government, and due to voting, which is in favor of the majority, Republicans, Democrats are not being heard. One way Trump could go about this is by putting a Democrat in place of Justice Ginsberg. If Trump puts in a Democrat, then I am sure the liberals who feel suppressed will feel more heard. Though it is unlikely he will go this route if he does, it will be a proper tribute to democracy.

It wouldn't feel right to finish this blog post without paying respect to Justice Ginsberg. She lived a beautiful life, and has helped countless people. What a powerful woman she was.

May she rest in peace.

Who do you think Trump should vote in?

Do you think this is going to be fuel to the fire that is our political climate?

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Trump responds to Western wildfires

 Last week, the West coast was taken over by wildfires and poor air quality. While firefighters and local officials fought to control the fires and prevent more damage from happening, millions of acres still burned. Both presidential candidates had a lot to say about the causes of the fires.

Check out Harbani’s post from last week for specific information about the fires themselves

President Trump’s response to the fires was not unexpected. In an interview on Monday, President Trump concluded that poor forest management was the main cause of the fires, and neglected to mention climate change as the real problem. There are several flaws to the president's reasoning, however. Firstly, much of the forest land in California is owned by the federal government, meaning that it is also the job of the federal government to care for and manage. The Trump administration had the power and responsibility to. At the same time, “cleaning” a forest to prevent the spread of fire is difficult and costly. With the natural landscape of Central California being dry and grassy during the summer, there is a tendency for fires to occur naturally and spread rapidly, even without human presence.

On the other hand, presidential candidate Biden took a critical stance on the effects of climate change. Biden called attention to the country’s immediate need for climate reform, while also attacking President Trump’s indifference on the issue. Biden cited the unusually severe weather, which includes drought and thunderstorms, as evidence to support the need for environmental reform.

After this encounter, it is clear that this is only one of many issues between republicans and democrats that have become Increasingly polarized. Trump and Biden’s stances on the environment could not oppose each other more. Biden has already pushed his plans for a strong environmental reform program, while Trump has made it clear throughout his presidency that he does not believe climate change is an issue at all. Though I am inclined to agree with Biden's take on things (and the general consensus in the scientific community), both parties’ unwillingness to compromise could preventing any solution from arising altogether. With policies and views that contradict so extremely, the likelihood of any compromise or any decision being made at all is unlikely.

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Political Cartoon

Hysterectomies in Georgia ICE Facility

    Last Monday, a whistleblower complaint was filed against an ICE detainment facility located in Georgia. The complaint makes the claim that the facility carries out an unnecessary amount of hysterectomies (removal of the uterus / parts of the uterus rendering the patient unable to bear children), and in many cases, without the informed consent of the patient. Many of the patients do not speak English and were not provided with proper translators to fully understand what was happening to them (and why they even needed surgery to begin with).

    The complaint caught the attention of many government officials, each calling for an investigation of the facility. Bob Trammell, a representative of Georgia, made this statement on Twitter:

    The situation depicted in the complaint is disgusting and should definitely not be allowed to happen. There is seemingly no reason to strip detainees of their ability to bear children, especially without their consent. It is oddly similar to the other cases of forced sterilization in American history, which targeted minorities and lower income families because they were deemed unfit to reproduce (you can read about that here if you want). It's eugenics, and if the investigation proves the whistleblower complaint correct, ICE should be held accountable. ICE already separates children from their families, and with COVID, conditions have become even worse; the complaint also states that the facility doesn't follow proper virus protocol and is putting detainees at risk of getting severely sick. Hopefully the government will stop filibustering and do something immediately to cease this breach of human rights; however, it is probably idealistic to think this way.

Source 1: Statement from Nancy Pelosi

Source 2: The Intercept

Source 3: CNN

Source 4: NPR

Lawmakers release bipartisan bill to change sexual harassment reporting in military

           People gather at the mural of the young Mexican-American, Vannessa  Guillen

   

A new bill has been passed, which takes a strong stance against sexual harassment in the military. This bill was passed after 20-year-old Vanessa Guillén was murdered in an armory by a fellow soldier. The murderer was found out to be Aaron David Robinson, who murdered Vanessa in Fort Hood, Texas. Before she disappeared, she told her mom that she was experiencing sexual harassment from an Army sergeant but was concerned about the backfire of filing a complaint.  This bill makes sexual harassment a punishable crime under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It will also permit those who were sexually harassed or assaulted to file claims within the Department of Defense for compensation. 

 

 This bill and the story of Vanessa Guillén have given a lot of women the power to speak up about their experiences with sexual harassment. Though truly devastating was Guillén's death, a lot of great things have come from it. Hundreds of survivors went to the media to express their sorrow for Vanessa. Their stories spread throughout social media with the hashtag #IAmVannessaGuillén. It is remarkable that all these women are open about what they have been through, and now with this bill in place to protect them, our government can convict those who are guilty.

 It is incredible that when confronted with a problem in our government, we have the steps in place to fix it. To get this bipartisan bill enacted, both sides of the political spectrum have agreed on its content. It was passed by both the Senate and the president to be enacted. The bill is an excellent example of what checks and balances can accomplish. This bill makes me feel more confident in our government's ability to keep our troops safe and the government's ability to adapt to our country's current problems.

What other issues in our country need to be addressed?

Who do we convict or blame for those problems?

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Link to the bill

Rochester Mayor Fires Police Chief Over Needless Killing

   Rochester mayor Lovely Warren has fired police chief La'Ron Singletary over the death of Daniel Prude. Last week, Singletary announced his decision to resign by the end of the month after facing public backlash over Prude's death following the release of the police footage of the incident.

    On March 23rd, Prude's brother called the police due to concern over Prude's mental health. Rochester police arrived to find Prude incoherent in the street and intoxicated with PCP. The officers covered Prude's face with a "spit sock" hood, which are intended to protect police officers from saliva as protection from COVID-19. Prude was held face down in the street until he stopped breathing and was later placed under medical care. He was declared brain dead and died at a hospital a week later.

    Warren cited the police system's mishandling of Prude's death as the reason for Singletary's termination. Even though an autopsy declared the cause of death as asphyxia, official police reports adduce it as a drug overdose. Warren also made the claim that she was unaware of Prude's death until months later, attributing it to the fact that his "death was not taken as seriously as it should have been by those who reviewed the case throughout City government at every level."

    Protesters, however, are calling for Warren herself to resign as well. Many people are making the claim that Warren knew about the nature of Prude's death before she let on and that she did not take action until after the incident was made public. Additionally, her decision to fire Singletary even though he already planned to resign by the end of the month can be interpreted as a publicity stunt to make herself look better. But, even if it is all for publicity, if it helps push for institutional change in Rochester's policing system and forces the administration to investigate the incident then it is ultimately worth it.

Source 1

Source 2 

Source 3

Source 4

Coronavirus: A Rocky Start to the Beginning of the School Year

With Coronavirus cases on the decline in the US, and many students in the thick of online learning, there has been a recent push for schools to reopen. Simultaneously, cramped college towns have been the cause of numerous deadly outbreaks.

Check out this article for an interactive map like the one above.

A look into the college town of Athens, Georgia reveals the scary reality of COVID-19 outbreaks. After nearly 40,000 students began the school year, around 2,600 students at the University tested positive for coronavirus in the following few weeks. The University of Georgia is one of the most extreme examples of campus outbreaks, although there have been many similar occurrences throughout the country. Even if to a lesser degree, such outbreaks reveal that returning to school in-person isn't the best decision considering the current situation. While college students may be more capable of online and self-guided learning, the same cannot be said about younger, elementary school students.

Calling for only remote learning, especially regarding elementary and middle schoolers, comes from a place of privilege and elitism. Prolonged online school would be yet another win for the elite. A young student, with a single, working parent will be left behind as other students, who have the help of private tutors and parents who don’t work minimum wage, 9 to 5 jobs, will have an educational head start. On top of that, the fees of daycare facilities will weigh on lower-income families. The parents at one nashville elementary school proposed that parents receive financial compensation in the form of “educational dollars,” in order to level the playing field for parents of young children. With this system, the cost of daycare or tutors would be covered for those that need it. School with a global pandemic is not a problem that can be solved with a straightforward solution. Careful consideration and creative thinking will be required to suit each individual community, family, and student.

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

SF District Attorney wants DoorDash workers reclassified as employees

 As millions of Americans have been stuck at home for the last 6 months, with limited options for eating at restaurants, getting take-out or shopping in person, food and grocery delivery services like Postmates, Grubhub, DoorDash and Instacart have seen a massive uptick in business. The problem with delivery services like this, regardless of their obvious convenience, is that their labor practices are usually lacking in ethics. San Francisco's District Attorney Chesa Boudin announced last month that he is working on reclassifying the delivery workers that are employed by DoorDash as employees rather than "independent contractors" so the companies they work for will have to follow the state's labor laws and have access to benefits, higher wages, etc.

Many workers employed by delivery companies are immigrants or members of vulnerable populations, and are being exposed to potentially risky environments by coming in contact with customers or spending lots of time in public places. As of now, an organization like Postmates allows some partner restaurants to keep the full amount of money that the meal cost from the order instead of taking a high commission, but restaurant owners are worried that new laws mandating that delivery workers earn more once reclassified as employees will change that business model.

DoorDash has been one of the leading food delivery services in the U.S. for the last couple of years, and it's possible that SF's new motion could set an example for other companies to follow. Its current business model makes a profit by charging restaurants a 20% fee on orders, as well as a service and delivery fee for customers. "Dashers," their contracted workers, are paid based on how much they work, the distance they travel, other promotions put out by the company, and tips from customers. According to salary reports on Glassdoor, DoorDash workers make between $10 and $15 an hour, which is at or below the minimum wage in California. The reclassification of workers can help them be protected under California law, and eligible for protections they're not currently being given. 

Questions:

1. How could companies like DoorDash restructure their business models to pay workers more?

2. Do you think the government should be able to control how they classify their workers?

3. Is it likely that the Attorney General's motion will pass? Why or why not?

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Covid Vaccine Trials Halt: An Assurance of the Checks and Balances System?

    

    After the genetic sequence of Covid-19 was publicized on January 11, 2020, vaccines have been in the works. One particular pharmaceutical company, AstraZeneca, has made impressive progress in creating an effective vaccine, as it is on the Phase 3 level testing. This is raising the hopes of millions of Americans. 

    The Guardian reports that ahead of the 2020 election "Trump's seeming ability to manipulate the key federal agencies involved in vaccine approval has given credibility to the scenario of a vaccine surprise," thus implying that politicians are pressuring a quicker-than-usual release of a vaccine. The article goes on the state that the hope for the vaccine can "convince enough swing voters" thus influencing the 2020 election. Because of this, many worry that pressure applied by politicians has rushed the creation of a vaccine, thus compromising safety.

    Last week increased such safety concerns when AstraZeneca halted all progress in Phase 3 Testing. While AstraZeneca and any affiliated parties have not publically issued an explanation, The New York Times reports that in a closed meeting, it was revealed that a patient given the vaccine "experienced serious neurological symptoms." 

    Some individuals had a positive outlook on this: Marie-Paule Kieny of INSERM said this pause in testing "shows that there are functioning checks and balances, in spite of political pressure" and safety is being regulated in this way.

    Yesterday, Sept. 14 at 14:20 BST, AstraZeneca released a statement stating that "Clinical trials for the AstraZeneca Oxford coronavirus vaccine, AZD1222, have resumed."

      I think that an important question remains, are "checks and balances" enough to ensure the safe creation of vaccines? Are companies actually rushing their creation? 

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4

Source 5

Inmates are contracting the coronavirus at higher rates than average Americans

                     

In January, 61-year-old Daniel Ruiz was imprisoned on a minor, nonviolent drug charge.  Months later, he was set to be released on good behavior. Instead, more susceptible because of his age and asthma, Ruiz contracted the coronavirus and passed away in prison. Now his family is filing a claim against California's prison systems, saying Ruiz's death was wrongful and the incompetence of prison systems in the face of the pandemic is responsible. One of the family's lawyers, Attorney Michael Haddad, told KTVU that "the tragedy of this is that this could have been avoided if people like Mr. Ruiz were simply treated like human beings."

Ruiz is one of 59 Californian inmates who have died from the coronavirus, and 11,388 who have contracted it. Those numbers are even higher nationally, with 121,217 American inmates reporting cases. An outbreak at San Quentin, where Ruiz was imprisoned, caused 2,000 infections and 19 deaths alone, as reported by NPR and The Marshall Project. Many inmates were released to avoid infection, but less fortunate inmates continued to be held at prisons that quickly became hotspots.

The spread can largely be traced back to a lack of regular testing and the transferring of large groups of inmates to different prisons once the pandemic had already begun. Some Democratic politicians like Senator Elizabeth Warren, Patty Murray and Cory Booker introduced legislation last month that would make jails across the country publicly report on the spread of coronavirus within the institutions. As of now, inmates are five times more likely to contract the coronavirus and three times more likely to die from it than the overall population. With little ability to social distance or having any control over where they go or who they interact with, the safety of inmates is at the whim of the institutions imprisoning them.

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Questions

1. How could prisons have handled the spread of the coronavirus better?

2. Do you think our current prison system is set up fairly? How does it work and how does it not work?

3. What populations is the coronavirus hitting the hardest? How is this exemplified in people who are currently in our prison systems, contracting the disease?

TikTok's Deadline Is Fast Approaching

 

TikTok, the social media app, is one of the most popular social media platforms, having over 2.3 billion downloads, and 100 million U.S. users. Additionally, rising stars on the app such as the D’Amelio sisters show how prevalent the app has become amongst America’s youth.

However, on Aug. 6th, President Trump issued an executive order which stated that ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company, had 45 days to sell TikTok to an American company. If the company does not make a deal by Sept. 15, the app will be banned in the U.S.A. This date is fast approaching. 

“The spread in the United States of mobile applications developed and owned by companies in the People’s Republic of China (China) continues to threaten the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States,” President Trump’s executive order states. TikTok debunked concerns regarding the security risks that the administration claims comes with the app. In a statement shared with USA Today, they state: “‘US user data is stored in the US, with strict controls on employee access’ and the company's "biggest investors come from the US.’” CNN’s Nikki Carvajal and Caroline Kelly claim that evidence suggesting TikTok’s safety is unclear. “While TikTok could become a clear threat to US security under certain scenarios... The danger is currently largely hypothetical or indirect,” they stated. 

With four days left, TikTok’s sale seems highly unlikely. President Trump has stated that he won't change the requirements for the sale stated in his executive order.

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Source 4

Source 5

 

Holding companies accountable for climate change and dangerous weather patterns

 

From destructive tropical storms to intense periods of drought, natural disasters have been hitting the planet with more extremity and frequency than ever before. New York is anticipating one of the worst hurricane seasons ever, and California was slammed with record-breaking heat waves last week. It's hard to deny that all of these events are linked to the acceleration of climate change, due to centuries of deforestation, fossil fuel combustion, or oil drilling, overwhelmingly done at the hands of companies.

The state of Delaware, suffering from coastal flooding among other issues, is suing 31 fossil fuel companies for deceiving the residents of the state about the environmental damage they would cause. Two of the companies being sued are Chevron and Exxon Mobil, who are numbers 2 and 4 of the 10 companies most responsible for greenhouse gas emissions globally. Delaware has the lowest average elevation in the country, and tens of thousands of residents are being affected by coastal flooding, predominantly residents living under the poverty line. Rising sea levels are also affecting the state's agricultural systems, flooding fields with saltwater, not to mention crop damage from irregular weather patterns.

Similar to how Delaware's lower income populations are disproportionately affected by coastal flooding, California's lower income and more vulnerable residents were hit by last week's heat waves much harder than most, already suffering from wildfire smoke and evacuations. On Sept. 6, it reached 120 degrees in Palm Springs, 121 in Chino and 122 in Solvang, the hottest day ever recorded in many cities. An opinion article in the LA Times argued that heat waves are just as deadly as wildfires, with power outages, extreme heat and lack of refuge hit people with pre-existing conditions or less financial resources the hardest, and that the government isn't doing enough to help them. The opinion column suggests that citizens need to take it on themselves to plant trees or other cooling methods in low-income neighborhoods, but it seems impossible to make any tangible change if it's not on a systematic level that would drastically alter how things work. Placing the responsibility on average citizens to fix climate change (a problem caused mostly by giant corporations) by being conscious consumers even though it's expensive and inaccessible is irresponsible and frankly a little cruel. I think that Delaware's Attorney General is setting a good example of how to hold companies accountable for the damage they've caused, but it's entirely possible that it's too little too late.

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Growing Californian Wildfires Cause Apocalyptic Skies

As an Aragon student, it is likely that many have had an outlandish experience today. Today, Sept. 9, thousands of communities across California were greeted with a smoky haze that covered the sky, leading to an orange darkness.

This 2020 California Wildfire season has been the most destructive in history, already destroying over 2.5 million acres compared to the 259,823 acres burned in 2019. “The worst fire conditions in three decades persist,” Gov. Kate Brown of Oregon said.

The Bear Fire, located near Chico, California, exploded, notably on the night of Sept. 8, burning 254,000 acres. As of Sept. 9 at 4:00 p.m., although contained at ~38%, it expands at a rapid rate.

The fire’s smoke emits large amounts of ash and ice known as pyrocumulunimbus clouds into the atmosphere. Pushed by the wind, these clouds have reached the Bay Area. These smoke clouds, refracting sunlight, have left us with darkness and an orange glow. As fires persist, the National Weather Service forecasts that the smoke will lower in altitude “lead[ing] to darker skies and worsening air quality.”

Gov. Newsom expressed his frustration over the worsening situation in a tweet: “We do not have time to deny the reality of climate change.” However, politicians such as President Trump deny that the California wildfires are due to climate change. Rather, he states that fires are a result of the lack of cleaning: “You’ve got to clean your floors. You’ve got to clean your forests,” he said.

I have observed that multiple politicians in the government don't consider scientific findings or principles seriously, some instead labeling phenomena such as climate change as a hoax, despite its strong evidence. This can be frustrating, especially now, when California is experiencing deadly wildfires. This mindset stunts progress to mitigate such situations from happening in the future. The federal government should take drastic short term and long term steps: aid California in combating the wildfires and creating policies to take steps in mitigating the effects of Climate Change.

Questions

1. Do you think the federal government should be taking any action in response to the wildfires? If so, what?

2. Do you think the Calfornia Wildfires present an exigence to take drastic action in regards to Climate Change?

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

The Supreme Court's Unprecedented Influence in the Upcoming 2020 Elections

 

In light of the upcoming 2020 Presidential Elections, many claim that the judicial branch-- more specifically, the Supreme Court-- will be the decider, more so than ever before, of who declares victory on Nov. 3rd: Trump or Biden.

In The Economist’s article, “The Supreme Court May Tip the 2020 Elections,” they predict that the Supreme Court, given its conservative tilt, will influence the 2020 elections by limiting voting capabilities on a national scale, an action that is largely believed to benefit the Republican Party. They have compelling evidence that shows how the Supreme Court has already started to do this; One such instance is when it limited voting opportunities for around 1 million Floridian ex-convicts by requiring that they must pay all fines before voting, which individuals like Justice Sonia Sotomayor called “condon[ment of] disenfranchisement,” as it prohibited as many as 1 million ex-convicts, who could otherwise vote according to Florida’s Constitution, from voting.

Individuals such as Barabak from The LA Times believe that a potential Supreme Court seat vacancy ahead of the election will influence its outcomes. A similar situation in the 2016 election provides support for this claim: due to a Supreme Court vacancy, Trump promised to put a “redoubtable conservative” as justice. According to Pew Exit Polls, 20% of Trump voters thought of this action as the “most important factor in their decision” to vote for Trump. With Ruth Bader Ginsburg now in chemotherapy, many believe in the possibility that she may leave her position in the Supreme Court ahead of the election, thus predicting a similar phenomenon to occur in the 2020 election.

Meanwhile, Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times claims that the Supreme Court will likely evaluate the legitimacy of the election, essentially deciding its outcome. Because of already arising issues, such as Trump’s claim that an increase in mail-in voting will cause voter fraud, Greenhouse predicts legal disputes between the presidential candidates will surface the day of the election, and the Supreme Court will have to make a last-minute call on the legitimacy of the election, just as they did in the Bush v. Gore case in 2000.

In regards to our class discussions of the Consitution, I think that the judicial branch has significantly deviated from its initial purpose. The American Government is deviating from its system of the separation of power. Rather than checking the powers of the legislative and executive branches, the judicial branch seems to be aligning and consolidating its power with the executive branch by becoming extremely partisan. In this case, by limiting voting abilities nationally, the Supreme Court is promoting the Republican and President’s agenda rather than taking an unbiased approach to the issue at hand. 

Questions

1. Given the following claims, in which way do you predict the Supreme Court will influence the 2020 elections, if at all?

2. Given the Supreme Court's actions taken on voting accessibility, do you think that the Supreme Court has become too partisan? Why or why not?

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3

Trump questions the legitimacy of mail-in voting as the Postal Service struggles

 

As we approach the 2020 election season, it’s clear that the coronavirus will prove to be a significant barrier to commonplace election practices. Many people are worried about casting ballots in person due to waiting in long lines, touching machines and inevitable contact with other people. As the U.S. Postal Service prepares for the largest influx of mail-in ballots in American history, they’re facing budget cuts, a lack of resources and harsh criticism from President Trump. Trump has publicly doubted the Postal Service’s ability to process ballots without inserting political bias, and openly encouraged Americans to vote in person or send in a ballot in the mail as well as voting in a polling place in order to test its validity — something that is legally considered voter fraud. Many Republicans have gone against Trump’s urging to vote in public, knowing that their elderly voter base is unlikely to go vote in person and having them wary of mailing in a ballot might lose their vote completely. Facebook and other social media platforms are trying to counter misleading claims by putting pop-ups on their platforms encouraging users to check their registration status and providing information on how to vote early or through the mail.

With so many voters getting ready for November, a separate problem lies in the Postal Service’s lack of funding. The Postal Service doesn’t use any taxpayer money to operate and has been losing a significant amount of money (several billion dollars of loss a year, according to Postmaster General Louis DeJoy). DeJoy was recently called before Congress to testify to the organization’s ability to process ballots for the election, where his bias was questioned as he’s a registered Republican and frequent Trump donor. DeJoy assured the committee that no political bias would interfere with the election, but that a lack of funding would make it difficult for quick results. Congress approved a $25 billion dollar package to pay for mail-sorting machines, employee salaries and other necessities. Laws in different states can also determine how difficult it is to receive a mail-in ballot and a large number of ballots are tossed out every election cycle because of messy signatures or other factors. 

Source 1

Source 2

Source 3