Trump Threatens to Revoke Flag Burner’s Citizenship

In the early morning of November 29th, Trump tweets “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag- if they do, there must be consequences- perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail”. Trump proposed the idea that any Americans who protest against government policies such as burning the flag could lose their citizenship (along with other rights such as voting rights) as punishment. The tweet quickly spread throughout the internet and people were furious by his quote. Opposing views asserted that First Amendment allowed flag burning as a form of political expression. Flag burning has been a controversial action since the mid 1900s. In 2005, there was an attempt to pass the Flag Protection Act, however it was denied because some argued that it interfered with the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Questions:

1. What does Trump’s tweet reveal about his knowledge regarding the Constitution?
2. Why is Trump’s tweet so controversial and infuriated many people?
3. Should burning flags be banned ? Why or why not?
4. The Congress almost passed the legislation on banning flag desecration in 2006 (was one vote short), do you think the legislation will ever be passed in the future? Why?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/us/politics/trump-flag-burners-citizenship-first-amendment.html?_r=0

How Trumps Presidency Will Effect The Supreme Court

After the election was over and Trump had one, one of the main concerns of Democrats was who he would appoint to fill Scalia's seat.

Republicans now control the Congress, The Executive Branch, and soon will control the Supreme court once one of Trumps Supreme Court nominations are confirmed. Yet that is not the only issue, as two historically liberal judges are becoming very old. They are Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is 83, and Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who is 78. Yet some say that the judges Trump is appointing are more traditional and conservative than he is and that because of this, they will not grant Trump a free pass on policies that could threaten the constitution. Despite the fact, the United States is still faced with a very possible scenario that 2 additional seats could open up and that there would be a 7-2 ratio of conservatives to liberals. The final though from Mr Shapiro from the Cato institute is that what will happen when Trump realizes that in many situations, the conservative judges he is appointing may often rule against him?

Questions:

1. Do you think that appointing ultra-conservative judges is the right move for Trump? Why or why not?

2. Do you think Congress will try to push more aggressive legislation knowing that they have support from the Supreme Court?

3. Elaborate on the scenario of a 7-2 judicial ratio. What do you think would happen if this were to become a reality?

Link

What is at stake in the first Supreme Court case on transgender rights

This is Gavin Grimm, who is suing is local school over his Bathroom use

Three years ago, Gavin Grimm, then a high-school freshman in Virginia, struggled with his gender identity. Deemed a girl at birth, but feeling like a boy, Gavin’s stress was so great that he often found himself skipping class. After talking to a psychologist and receiving a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, Mr Grimm began to live as a boy, with a treatment plan that asked others to treat him “as a boy in all respects, including when using the restroom.  This did not go over well with other parents of students and the complaints lead the school board to make this statement: "male and female restroom and locker room facilities...shall be limited to the corresponding biological genders”.  Grimm decided to sue the school board and the case eventually made it to the supreme court. In August, the Supreme Court stayed this ruling, keeping Mr Grimm out of the boys’ restroom at the beginning of his senior year while the justices decided whether to take the case. However, in October the court announced it would consider the matter during its current term.

What do you believe is at stake for this specific supreme court case?

What do you think the supreme court will rule on this case and why?

What is your stance on Transgender rights?

Roe v. Wade

What Might Happen to Abortion Rights if Roe v Wade is Overturned

Roe v. Wade was the landmark Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion, however, under Donald Trump's presidency, the ruling could be overturned. With a vacancy in the Supreme Court, Trump could appoint a justice who is "pro-life"who would reverse the decision made in 1973. However, the Supreme Court is at a 5-3 majority supporting abortion, therefore, even with a new justice, the majority still stands with abortion rights. If Roe v. Wade was overturned, abortion would be come a state matter and leave the decision to state legislatures. In many Republican states, abortion clinics have already been closed forcing women to go to great distances to receive an abortion or other services. Jennifer Dalven, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Reproductive Freedom Project argues that this presents a large burden for low-income women and others who cannot afford to travel. Additionally, without access to abortion providers, women would seek to self-induce an abortion. Vicki Saporta, the president of the National Abortion Federation stated it won't be "easy to overturn Roe... [w]omen in this country would not stand for it."

Questions:
1) Do you think Roe v. Wade could be overturned? Why or why not?
2) Do you think Roe v. Wade will be a large factor in future elections?
3) If the Supreme Court vacancy is filled by a conservative justice, how could this change future rulings?

Trump University Settlement

Donald Trump Agrees to Pay $25 Million in Trump University Settlement

On 11/18, Trump settled his various Trump University lawsuits, including two federal class-action cases in San Diego and a lawsuit by New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman. Claims that Trump University "used high-pressure sales tactics and employed unqualified instructors" to cheat students "out of thousands of dollars in tuition through deceptive claims about what they would learn" sparked these lawsuits, and finally they have been settled: Trump must pay $25 million. Although these lawsuits have been around for months, Trump had not previously settled because he wanted to fight the allegations on "principle" and even denounced the California cases supposedly because of the judge's Mexican heritage. Now, as one of Trump's lawyers stated, the "resolution of these matters allows President-elect Trump to devote his full attention to the important issues facing our great nation."

Questions:

1. If this settlement were reached a month ago, do you think it would have had an impact on the presidential election? Why or why not?
2. Should he have paid more for this settlement?
3. Will this have an effect on how people currently view Trump? Will this resolution be viewed negatively, positively, or will it be mostly ignored?

Senate Democrats’ Surprising Strategy: Trying to Align With Trump

The Democrats elect Chuck Schumer as their new minority leader in the Senate. He will lead the democrats in the Senate on their future agenda.

On November 8, 2016, the Democrats suffered an unexpected but heavy defeat after losing the President elections, Senate elections, and the House of Representatives elections. Now, the Congressional Democrats are constructing an agenda to align with some of the policies of newly elected president Donald Trump. The Democrat's plan is to regain the trust of white working-class voters that Trump had stolen in the 2016 election. Unlike more conservative Republicans, Trump has actually advocated for some issues that the Democrat Party have long called for, such as more spending on infrastructures, punishing offshoring, and paid maternity leaves. However, Democrats will still oppose Trump's decision on tax cuts for the wealthy and plan to deport millions of illegal immigrants.

Source to original article: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/17/us/politics/democrats-house-senate.html?_r=0

Questions:

1) Was the Democrats defeat in the 2016 elections really "unexpected" despite the backlash against Obamacare, Obama doubling the national debt, and Clinton's email controversy?

2) If you were a member of Congress as a Democrat, would you try to win the majority by siding with Trump to bring back the white working-class voters or oppose Trump in an attempt to strength the support from minority and young voters? And why?

3) Do you believe the Democrats have a chance in the 2018 midterms elections or will the Republicans countinue their success?

Senator Barbara Boxer's Electoral College Bill

 Note

Sen. Barbara Boxer to introduce bill to end Electoral College

This past Tuesday, the retiring Democrat senator from California, Barbara Boxer announced that she was planning on introducing a bill to abolish the Electoral College. During the presidential elections, Boxer was an avid supporter of Hillary Clinton and recently tweeted that "The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts." In a GOP-controlled Senate, it is very unlikely that such a bill would past, in addition to the 3/4 states ratification it would need, in order to amend the Constitution. However, such a bill further exemplifies the strong political divide within our nation, post-presidential election. 

1. Donald Trump has previously tweeted AGAINST the Electoral College (before he won, of course). Is this in anyway a partisan issue? Or is it simply a party reaction to undesired results?

2. Do you believe we should abolish the electoral college? If so, what would be a better system? Note: Trump has proposed a "simple votes" system. In his 60 minutes interview he said, "I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win."   

Prop 64 Legalize it?

California Prop 64 proposes the legalization of Marijuana in California. The main reason here is to decriminalize Marijuana in order to reduce the amount of non-violent drug offenders. Voting yes would simply legalize it while voting no would cancel the proposition. Those who are for argue that it will open the doors for a new industry with large revenues while also ending the failed war on drugs. On the other hand those who are against argue that the proposition will increase DUI rates while also decimating small farmers. Most people consider the war on drugs a failure and Prop 64 is seen by many as a step away from the failed war on drugs. A lot of people however still see Marijuana as a dangerous gateway drug and therefore do not consider legalization a smart move.

Questions

1.  Will this Prop pass? Why/why not?
2. Do you think that Prop 64 will help end the war on drugs and reduce non-violent drug charges?
3. Do you consider Marijuana a gateway drug with serious consequences? Why/why not? Does this affect your stance on Prop 64?

California Proposition 58

Voting "yes" on Proposition 58 would repeal most of Proposition 227 from 1998. Proposition 277 established that students in the US must learn from teachers who speak only English, and that if a student is an English-learner, they must take English instruction for one year before taking English-only classes. If Proposition 58 is passes, schools will be able to include bilingual education, where teachers would speak both English, and the native language of the students.
For California, this would likely pertain to Spanish-speakers and some Asian languages. As we are on the eve of an election which has brought a lot of attention to Hispanic residents, this proposition ties in to the current discussion over acceptance of the many ethnic groups in the US. In particular, Mr. Trump has been noted as saying that "...I think that when you get right down to it, we're a nation that speaks English. I think that, while we're in this nation, we should be speaking English." As a result, Proposition 58 may become quite partisan. Donald Trump is the Republican candidate and by this statement vote against Proposition 58, while those who vote in favor of this proposition will more likely be Democrats, as many Hispanic and other ethnic groups affiliate with the Democratic Party.
Prop 58 Link

Questions:
1) Trump has been noted as saying that "...I think that when you get right down to it, we're a nation that speaks English. I think that, while we're in this nation, we should be speaking English." Do you think Proposition 58 will become partisan? Donald Trump is the Republican candidate and by this statement vote against Proposition 58, while those who vote in favor of this proposition will more likely be Democrats, as many Hispanic and other ethnic groups affiliate with the Democratic Party. 
2) Do you believe this proposition will be passed/not passed? Why? What does this mean?
3) If this proposition does pass, what will be the impacts? Will they be positive or negative (opinion + fact/evidence)?

The Death Penalty: Props 62 and 66

The Death Penalty is a punishment that can be assigned to extremely violent murderers, child rapists, and criminals against the state.  Prop 62, otherwise known as the Death Penalty Initiative, promises to save taxpayers' money by ending the death penalty and converting death sentences to life imprisonment without parole.  While terminating the death penalty may seem cheaper and more humane, critics claim that Capitol Punishment is the only means of guaranteeing justice.  These contenders often support Prop 66, which seeks to mend rather than end the Death Penalty.

Analyze the above cartoon regarding the Death Penalty.
1. Does the cartoon seem to support Prop 62 or 66, or does it completely disagree with both?
2. Pay particular attention to the race of the person sentenced to die and the method of execution.  Is the artist trying to appeal to a certain group?  What is he/she saying about the Death Penalty?

Why Democrats Are Set to Retake State Legislatures

Why Democrats Are Set To Retake State Legislatures

It is estimated the Democrats will retake state legislature from the Republicans.  Trump's unpopularity is a factor in this shift, but is not the only reason. One of the main reasons that the Democratic party is projected to do so well in the coming election is because they have lost the last four elections and simply have nowhere to go but up. Another reason is that the party that has been elected to the white house tends to lose state level legislative seats. The party majority will be affected by who wins the presidential election but it looks as though the Democrats cannot do any worse than they already are,  and Republicans have everything to lose because of the striking unpopularity of their candidate.
Questions:
1) How will the changing of party majority affect congressional gridlock?
2) How has the polarization of political parties played a role in the shift of party majority?
3)Do you agree that the democrats will retake state legislation?
4) How will redistricting in 2020 effect the party majority?