For those of you who don't know, the Supreme Court's "season" runs from October to June. The Court hears cases from October to April and issues decisions in May and June. Traditionally they save their most important, controversial, and divisive decisions until the very end of their session in June. That means the court has already issued or is getting ready to issue MAJOR rulings this week on issues like abortion, gay marriage and Trump's travel ban.
 |
| Pictured: Old Mr. Toller? |
This year's Supreme Court season has been marked by controversy not just because of the cases before the court, but because of the court's newest member: Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch was appointed to the court by President Trump in 2017 in one of his first presidential actions. The appointment of Gorsuch was controversial because the open seat on the Supreme Court that Gorsuch was appointed to was "held hostage" by Senate Republicans throughout the 2016 presidential campaign. You see, Presidents have the ability to appoint justices to the Supreme Court, but the Senate has the power to confirm or reject them. In 2016 a seat on the Supreme Court opened up, and President Obama appointed Merrick Garland (a moderately liberal justice) to fill the seat, but the Republican controlled Senate (led by Senator Mitch McConnell) refused to confirm Obama's appointment of Garland until after the 2016 presidential election (denying President Obama his constitutional duty/power to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court). When Trump unexpectedly won the White House in 2016 he was able to appoint a much more conservative justice to the court that the Republican Senate was more than happy to confirm. That man was Neil Gorsuch.
So, as you can tell, the end of the court's term this year has been wracked with drama and importance.Below you will find two articles - the first is a good primer on the court's current ideological make-up and the second is an excellent summarized list of the major cases before the court. The articles includes embedded links that will help to explain anything you don't understand, so please click away!
The Articles:
Where Neil Gorsuch Would Fit on the Supreme Court - from The New York Times
The Supreme Court’s Biggest Decisions in 2018 - from The New York Times
Questions for Discussion:
Rather than giving you specific questions for each case I'm going to give you some general questions that you can use to help you write your comment about any of the cases in the article The Supreme Court’s Biggest Decisions in 2018.
- Do you agree with the court's decision in the case?
- How will the court's decision impact the country and it's citizens?
- How will the court's decision impact President Trump?
- How will the court's decision impact the 2018 Congressional elections?
Before you comment, look over both articles and the questions and decide which case or cases you would like to write about. Obviously, there are too many here for you to write about all of them in a well developed comment, so instead decided which you think you have the strongest opinion about.
DON'T FORGET TO READ MY POST ON CURRENT EVENT COMMENTS BEFORE YOU WRITE YOUR COMMENT!!
I agree with the supreme court's ruling to limit the government’s access to location and cell phone data. This decision will not only help to protect the privacy of the country and its citizens, it can also ensure that the government does not gain too much power. Would you want the government to have the ability to watch your every move? If the government had unlimited access to everyone's cell phone data, they would be able to see where you are and who you’re with at all and any times they please. The supreme court’s ruling against this will keep information about citizens private and protected. Only having access to this data in special circumstances, such as finding information about criminal activity, is the best way to keep everyone safe. Another decision made by the supreme court that I agree with is the upholding of President Trump's travel ban. This ban ensures that the citizens of our country are protected from potential danger. Although it is not ideal that innocent people are being kept out of the country, if just 2 out of every 5 immigrants allowed in the country are dangerous, then it is safer to just keep everyone out. The court's decision will help to keep the country safe.
ReplyDeleteAlaina,
DeleteGood first current event comment! I like that you thought about the impact of the court's decision on safety in each case. One question though, are these rulings related at all? Why is it OK for the Supreme Court to limit government power in investigation of criminal activity, but to expand it when it comes to immigration? Also, do you think the travel ban is discriminating?
Next, time try to think a little deeper about the current event and go beyond simply agreeing or disagreeing.
I agree with the Supreme court’s decision to favor the Colorado baker. It was a decisive case but in the end it would split many Americans opinion on how the care should have been handled. Many will take the sides of the gay couple, who were denied service by the baker, and many will take the side of the baker, saying that he was exercising his freedom of speech and his wanting to refuse service. The court would bring some Americans closer to President Trumps side because of his court defending the first amendment and other Americans farther away from him because of his siding with the so called discriminatory side. The congressional elections could change which way Congress sways, wether it is more conservative or more liberal leaning. This would impact the bills and laws passed by Congress and how the Congress works together and the chemistry of the congressmen and congresswomen. The court’s decision is decisive but striking, showing how they will run their court and how to handle other cases in this catergory.
ReplyDeleteBen,
DeleteGood first comment. Next time don't just try to answer the questions in the order they appear. Also, you need to think a little more critically about the court's decision. WHY do you agree with the decision? It is a complicated case with multiple points of view - you need to address some of them.
I do not agree with the courts decision in many of the cases, such as the online sales tax or both of the immigration cases. These decisions will make many American citizens happy, due to the fact they agree with the judges. Other citizens will be very angry, uncomfortable, and motivated to protest against the courts ruling. These decisions will and are helping the president to ¨Make America Great Again¨. And with these rulings, it will prove in a way the president is responsible. The courts rulings will most likely push more liberals to vote for congress.
ReplyDeleteAngel,
DeleteYour current event comments need to include MUCH more analysis than this. You spend 5 sentences trying to discuss multiple cases. Better for you to focus on 1 case and discuss in depth. There is just not enough analysis here.
I do agree with the court's decision that government workers who choose not to join the union may not be required to help pay for collective bargaining. The reason behind this is because it provides them an option to whether or not if they want to participate. Every employee has a choice if they want to participate. Not every employee will be able to participate because they may have personal or family obligations to attend to. For example, buying food, paying bills, etc. Not everyone has has the same financial status. Others may have the funds for it and if they want they can help pay for the collective bargaining. This decision may impact the country and its citizens by affecting other business that are involved with the labor union throughout the United States. This decision is an example that will have an affect on other labor unions throughout the U.S. Not only this decision is impacting the country and its citizens, but its impacting President Trump too. By this it limits the power of the union. Such as limiting money to organize against him in the next presidential race, and less money towards the labor union to organize labor. The court's decision in this case could affect the 2018 Congressional election also. This is because the union will have lessen their power by the loss of participation of the union members. Overall, I do agree with the supreme court's decision whether or not people want to help pay for collective bargaining.
ReplyDeleteCarmela,
DeleteGood first comment! You've chosen an important, but a difficult case to comment on. Next time, be sure to look up what some of these terms mean, like collective bargaining, so that you can get a better sense of the impact of the case. You need to provide more analysis than simply agreeing or disagreeing with the court's decision.
I do agree with the court's decision to go against California's law that requires pregnancy facilities to speak about abortion to mothers-to-be. In my opinion abortion is wrong unless it is completely dangerous for the mother to give birth to a child. It is taking a human life away without even giving them a chance. This law does affect many citizens because they believe the parents should have the choice no matter what places believe. But this decision is just not requiring places to promote abortion. This can impact President Trump in the way that people to believe in his decisions because he does support the court. This can lead to major disputes in the country. The people who believe that abortion should be promoted no matter what will probably try to elect a more liberal Supreme Court because those who voted for the blocking of the law were mostly conservative.
ReplyDeleteJaylnn,
DeleteGood first comment! This is a controversial case, and you state your opinion clearly - good! Just remember though that the court doesn't make decisions just based on what they personally think - they interpret the constitution. So you need to think the same way. How does this case impact the future of abortions in the U.S. and how does it impact the right to an abortion promised by the Court in the case Roe v. Wade?
The Supreme Court case that I have chosen is the decision where "government workers who choose not to join unions may not be required to help pay for collective bargaining" (New York Times). First of all, I chose this case because it occurred very recently, just last week which means that debate is still fresh in everyone's minds. I agree with this ruling that the court made. Unions, in the eyes of many (in the eyes of the court as well), violate the Constitution of the United States of America, in fact that many organizations require their employees to join them. The employee then must surrender a portion of their paycheck to the Union so it can organize certain functions and conduct themselves. It is first important recognize that the purpose of Unions in general are to "give workers the power to negotiate for more favorable working conditions and other benefits through collective bargaining" (Utility Workers Union of America). Though this may be a brilliant idea, in fact that it ensures that workers can work in bearable and comfortable conditions, thus limiting the number of sweatshops in this country, it is a flawed idea. Or it was a flawed idea. It was recently fixed by the Supreme Court last week. By forcing the workers to join the Union, the First Amendment is broken, in which the free speech rights of nonmembers are violated because they are compelled to "subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern" said Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. The Constitution is the foundation for our country's government and any action going against must be fixed. The courts decision impacts the country and citizens because the workforce now has the choice whether to join a Union or not. This means more money for the individuals themselves because that sum of money is no longer going towards something else (a union). This may also weaken Unions around the country as employees now have the opportunity to opt out of it, meaning less money for the Unions. This court decision effects President Donald Trump because he now has more influence on the court cases, as the majority of the Justices are Republican. He was also in favor of the court's decision. Finally, the court's decision impacts the 2018 Congressional elections because the employees now are not subject to the influence of their union's political party and therefore can vote for any politician they choose.
ReplyDeleteNick,
DeleteExcellent first comment! I really like that you clearly thought about the decision of the court and even did some outside research to understand it better. You lose a bit of steam at the end - it looks like you may have had trouble with the last couple questions, so just remember that you do not need to answer every question.
I do agree with the Courts decsion to not give immigrants in detention the right to periodic hearings. The reason behind this is that the immigrants in detention have been caught doing illegal activities such as sneaking over the borders and many other things. They are breaking the law when they arent even citizens so why should we give them a second chance. I think this will benifit our society by reducing the chance of troubled immigrants from harming our economy and other things. This decsion will help donald trump seek new and other ways to resolve the issue on immigrants breaking the law. This decision will change thhe 2018 election dramatically because canidates can express their beliefs on the situation and they can be voted in based on what others think of their ideas.
ReplyDeleteJake,
DeleteGood first comment! Next time you need to provide more analysis of the court decision - what exactly did they rule? Why did they rule that way? Also,don't feel like you need to answer every discussion question, especially if you don't have an answer. "This decision will change thhe 2018 election dramatically because canidates can express their beliefs on the situation and they can be voted in based on what others think of their ideas." isn't really telling me anything about the 2018 midterm elections.
I agree with most of the decisions that Court has made especially the cell phone location privacy. In my opinion the government tracking the location of people’s phones is absolutely not okay unless it is completely necessary in terms of a crime being committed. It invades privacy and that is not okay. Citizens of the U.S. should not be tracked by their cellphones wherever they go. This decision impacts the country and citizens because it ensures privacy of where they are going and will keep people protected. Like I said before, our cellphones should only be tracked if a serious crime had been committed and the user was involved. But if not that then trackers should not be used. This decision will impact president Trump because it will cause him not to be able to search and track cell phones of people he doesn’t trust unless a serious act has taken place. The courts decision will impact the 2018 elections because people will trust the candidates more because they believe that people should have privacy.
ReplyDeleteKaila,
DeleteGood first comment! Make sure to be really clear about what the court is ruling on before writing about it. In you comment you said, "government tracking the location of people’s phones ", but this isn't really what the court's decision was about. Be sure to have a clear idea about a current event before writing about it, and if you're having trouble you can always try a different one or do some extra research.
I agree with the courts decision siding with the baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for the gay couple. The baker had a right to refuse service to the couple because his sincere religious beliefs. The couple could have also easily gone to another bakery and get a cake. The lgbtq community along with other Americans probably disagree with the courts ruling. But there is probably the same if not more Americans who agree with the courts ruling. This will impact president Trump because he feels very strong about free speech and he probably supports the courts decision. This would ultimately affect what decisions are made by congress when it comes to passing laws and when people go to vote.
ReplyDeleteRyan,
DeleteGood first comment! Next time expand on what the court ruled and why and also how the public will react to the opinion. "The lgbtq community along with other Americans probably disagree with the courts ruling. But there is probably the same if not more Americans who agree with the courts ruling" is a really vague statement that you need to build on.
I strongly agree with the ruling on Cellphone Location, and Digital Privacy as a whole. The government should not need to know everyone's location and as the article said "... the time-stamped data provides an intimate window into a person’s life, revealing not only his particular movements, but through them his ‘familial, political, professional, religious and sexual associations.’” This sort of information is not acceptable for EVERY citizen. However the law should be an exception for criminals who have been convicted of serious felonies. Every person who has never been in a serious and dangerous conflict with the law deserves personal privacy. If a person has a legitimate reason for an unlimited government access in their whereabouts, such as a suspected kidnapping for example, this rule should be implemented. Just not in unsuspicious innocent citizens. This ruling against Government having unlimited digital access will insure people that they have complete privacy and will make the country a more free place, as promised. That being said, technology and cellphones have become a necessity for everyone around the world. People should have complete privacy if they're not a known criminal or not a person with criminal suspicion. People should have the right to walk around and live their lives with complete privacy and freedom. Then, the USA can remain a free place for their citizens.
ReplyDeleteI agree with many decisions the Supreme Court has made, but not their decision to deny President Trump’s proposal for a law that “allowed the government to deport some immigrants who commit serious crimes” (according to the article). The Supreme Court justice, Neil Gorsuch claimed the law was “unconstitutionally vague”, which I understand. The law does not answer if the immigrants are legal/illegal and they’re purpose of living in our country (ex. possible work visa, fleeing war torn country etc). If the immigrants are illegal, and are convicted of serious crimes, then they should immediately be deported or sent to a detention facility until their deportation. If the immigrants are legal and commit serious crimes, they should be sent to a penitentiary, not released out of the country since they are technically citizens. Although the other side to this affecting the U.S. citizens is we have to pay in our taxes for the cost of imprisoning these criminals and for the cost of putting them through trial. But if they are legal U.S. citizens, then they should not be deported since they are not illegal. The court’s decision will make it harder for President Trump to address immigration issues without major backlash. He will have to be precise in everything he claims he will do to aid the immigration crisis. The court’s decision will affect the Congressional elections by forcing the voters to have to pay attention to the candidates views and their voting history, rather than strictly on just their political party affiliations. Overall I think the Supreme Court’s decision was reasonably argued, but I do not think striking down the law was the right way to go.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the courts decision to not require crisis pregnancy centers to provide information about abortion. By forcing these centers to provide information about abortion it can conflict with their beliefs. If someone is not comfortable supporting what they don't believe in they shouldn't be forced to. The court's decision will impact the country and citizens by helping those who don't believe in the idea of abortion, but also not supporting women who decide the idea of abortion is best for them. The decision will impact President Trump by deciding if he should allow abortion to take place or not. This decision will also impact the 2018 Congressional elections by making sure whoever is in the elected supports freedom of speech by choosing whatever you believe in or enforcing a law that makes sure people have the decision to have an abortion or not. Abortion is a serious matter because a person is being taken from the world and the decision to abort can change one's life drastically. As you can see, the Supreme Court's decision will impact the world for better by saving someones life and giving the people the right to believe in what they think is right.
ReplyDeleteI do not completely disagree with this new law, but not all of me agrees. First off, I believe abortion is not okay after 12 weeks when the brain of the baby begins to form, it is then a human. With that information, I believe that up until 12 weeks, doctors should let the mothers know that if they choose, they can be further educated on the choice to abort the unborn child. By requiring this, it can persuade parents into making a decision they can come to regret later on. With this law, many citizens are affected because they are put into a bad position. This can cause many issues throughout because if parents do indeed come to regret the decision they can sue the state or practice who provided this information for clouding their judgment and having their decision be affected by the information they provided, not their wanting for the child. This can also cause problem with Trump because if the people sue the doctors, the doctors can then come at Trump for letting it be passed. The court will probably contain liberals, I agree with Jalynn. This law is not completely terrible, but it should not be required, it should be better presented as an option to learn about.
ReplyDeleteI agree of the court ruling in favor of Jack Phillips refusing to make a cake for a same sex wedding because he believes that it is wrong to participate in a same sex wedding and it would be going against his freedom of religion if he were forced to make a cake for a gay wedding. The ruling made some citizens very upset and gay rights groups believe that a dangerous encouragement has been made by the court to deny gay people service but on the other side some business owners are happy because they don’t have to provide services for something that they don’t believe in. Trumps presidency will be effected because now even more of the left believes it his fault for the ruling and gays are probably going to feel like he’s oppressing them. In the upcoming congressional elections the gays and much of the left is going to vote for whoever agrees that Christian bakers should be forced to participate in event that is a sin in their religion.
ReplyDeleteI somewhat agree with the Supreme Court's decision to purge voting rolls. This case was that if citizens do not vote consistently than they can be taken off the voting roll. I personally think that this is unfair because some people may not have the chance to vote that day. They may be hospitalized, out of state, or doing other things where they are unable to make it to vote. This "law" goes against our right to vote. One should not be taken off the roll if they do not vote very single year. However, if these people who do not vote do get a letter asking if they are still eligible and they do not send it back within a reasonable amount of time than that is different because all they have to do it sign it to ensure that they do not get taken off. That might be a nuisance if you have to do it every other year. This will affect the country and its citizens because people are going to have a problem when they go to vote and they find out that they cannot. There will be many problems and protests if this occurs because as a United States citizen you have the right to vote. One cannot be forced to vote and one cannot be told they cannot vote. Overall, this will not benefit the country.
ReplyDelete