Assignment 9- The Judiciary

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 9- The Judiciary

      The assigned reading for the week of 11/21/15 were 1803’s Marbury v. Madison, 1906’s Swift & Co v. United States (U.S.), 1919’s Schenck v. U.S. , 1954’s Brown v. Board of Ed. , 1967’s Loving v. Virginia, 1973’s Roe v. Wade, 1976’s Buckleyv. Valeo, and 2005’s Gonzalez v. Raich. In this discussion, I will discuss Schenck v. U.S. as presented in oyez.org, oyez.org write the “facts of the case” are:

“During World War I, Schenck mailed circulars to draftees. The circulars suggested that the draft was a monstrous wrong motivated by the capitalist system. The circulars urged "Do not submit to intimidation" but advised only peaceful action such as petitioning to repeal the Conscription Act. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and to obstruct recruitment.”

       I humbly disagree with the conclusion of the case. As a citizen in a democratic country one would think our freedom of speech is protected, but the reality is that it is not if it goes against the current political campaign. As it is portrayed in this court ruling, Schenck was simply informing fellow citizens of their options to refuse and peacefully argue back for their rights. It is evident from this court ruling that our opinions and actions are controlled, and a person’s honor and respect could be questioned. The minority or majority opinion will get little air time if is different from the narrative the political agenda coming from Washington D.C. has outlined. 

      

       I choose this passage because I think there is only minor difference between the freedom of speech in the USA and the oppressive actions that are taken in “communist” countries.  I think the minor difference is that in the “communist” country, they fear people organizing against the state and in the USA they do not fear as much. The USA is less fearful as they have figured out how to orchestrate political campaign and how to manipulate the population to not listen to those acting out against the government. There are many who yet trust the mass media/ social media and does not realize they are been fed biased sensationalized reports instead of critically looking at both sides of a story. In conclusion, the population in a democratic country have to learn how rhetoric, propaganda, slogans, sensationalized reporting, researching both sides to the story, campaigns and marketing work in our every day lives.

Reference

Schenck v. United States. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved November 27, 2015, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/249us47

Assignment 8- Presidency

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 8- Presidency

     The assigned reading for the week of 11/14/15 were John F Kennedy’s 1961 Inaugural Address, Kennedy’s 1963 American University Commencement Address, Ronald Reagan’s 1981 Inaugural Address & 1984’s State of the Union Address, Barack Obama’s 2004’s Keynote speech, Obama’s 2008 Speech on a Race: A More Perfect Union, Obama’s 2008 Father’s Day Speech, Obama’s 2008 Victory speech and lastly Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Address. In this discussion, I will discuss an excerpt of Kennedy’s 1963 American University Commencement Address, he states:

           “I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in 

           an age where great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear

           forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an

           age where a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force 

          delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age

           when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind

          and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.”

        I am in agreement with President Kennedy as nuclear war fare is something to be feared and be worrisome about. One may not recognize the dangers that are possible through nuclear war fare. In 1945, the United States was the first and still the only nation to use atomic weaponry during wartime when it drops an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima (History.com, 2009). This ignited the nuclear arms race, this is the content in which President Kennedy is speaking in. The USA atomic bombing occurrence has been cited as the end of world war 2, and the beginning of the cold war by many historians (History.com, 2009). The atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima killed approx. 80,000 people and caused catastrophic secondary effects to survivors and near by villages (History.com, 2009).

       I choose this passage to speak about previous occurrence surrounding Kennedy’s speech. I think if one does not know the history of nuclear weapons his speech can be less understood for what it is meant to be. I think the occurrence of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima was a terrible act, that put those living in the USA in great danger as the world knows what happen and it was not that long ago. I believe this is why our federal government works hard to keep the USA as a leader in foreign negotiations because there is great fear of the unknown. 

Reference

Kennedy, J. (1963, June 10). American University Commencement Address. Retrieved Nov 14, 2015        from http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkamericanuniversityaddress.html

History.com Staff (2009). August 06, 1945 : Atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima

     Publisher A+E Networks. Access Date Novemeber 16, 2015 Retrieved from URL        http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/atomic-bomb-dropped-on-hiroshima.

Assignment 7- Congress

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 7- Congress 

          The assigned reading for the week of 11/07/15 were Christopher Ingraham May 2014 Washington Post Newspaper articles “America’s Most Gerrymandered Congressional Districts”  and “What 60 years of Political Gerrymandering Looks Like”.  Ingraham’s  in these article addressed the practice of  gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is  explained in the articles to be congressional district are redrawn to manipulate the boundaries of an electoral constituency  in a way it is in favor of a group either a political party or economic class. In “What 60 years of Political Gerrymandering Looks Like”, he states :

              “What does all this mean? It means states can actually control the extent of

              gerrymandering. Take New York, for example. It's the one state among the 

             eight that has shown a meaningful decrease in the level of gerrymandering 

             across multiple congressional terms. New York also has also set up an independent

              advisory commission that recommends congressional and state redistricting plans

             to the state legislature. This commission was set up in 1978, and shortly thereafter

              the level of gerrymandering in the state peaked and has been declining ever since.”

            I am in agreement with New York state setting up independent advisory commission to provide recommendation when is time to redraw the district. The oversight is necessary when power and influence is at stake. The act of gerrymandering when used for its intended purpose is one of good. As a minority population does not want to end up with their voices not being heard in a district; therefore, is preferable to have a district that doesn’t look geometrical but have people in them with a similar cause.

            I choose this passage to review because it highlights a solution for the troubles associated with gerrymandering. If gerrymandering is not utilized as supposed to and is used to ring election of house of representatives, then it is an assault to our “democracy”.  I see it necessary to have oversight of leaders redrawing congress district. The oversight is needed to assess the items pointed out by Seth Masket from the Pacific Standard, in the article “equal population size, absence of racial discrimination, compactness and contiguity of districts, preservation of county or municipal boundaries and preservation of communities of interest”. There is hope that other states will look at the initiates being carried forward in NY.

References

Ingraham, C. (2014, May 15). America’s most gerrymandered congressional districts. Retrieved            November 7, 2015, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/15/americas-most-gerrymandered-congressional-districts/

Ingraham, C. (2014, May 21). What 60 years of political gerrymandering looks like. Retrieved             November 7, 2015, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/05/21/what-60-years-of-political-gerrymandering-looks-like/

Assignment 6- Equal Rights

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 6- Equal Rights 

             The assigned reading for the week of 10/31/15 were Frederick Douglass’s 1852 "What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” and T.H Marshall’s 1949 "Citizenship and Social Class”.

In this discussion, I will discuss an excerpt of Douglass’s piece. Frederick Douglass addressed in a speech the state of the nation on 4th of July, 1852, he states:

          

“ “At the very moment that they are thanking God for the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, and for the right to worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences, they are utterly silent in respect to a law which robs religion of its chief significance and makes it utterly worthless to a world lying in wickedness. Did this law concern the "mint, anise, and cummin"-abridge the right to sing psalms, to partake of the sacrament, or to engage in any of the ceremonies of religion, it would be smitten by the thunder of a thousand pulpits. A general shout would go up from the church demanding repeal, repeal, instant repeal!-And it would go hard with that politician who presumed to so licit the votes of the people without inscribing this motto on his banner. Further, if this demand were not complied with, another Scotland would be added to the history of religious liberty, and the stern old covenanters would be thrown into the shade. A John Knox would be seen at every church door and heard from every pulpit, and Fillmore would have no more quarter than was shown by Knox to the beautiful, but treacherous, Queen Mary of Scotland. The fact that the church of our country (with fractional exceptions) does not esteem "the Fugitive Slave Law" as a declaration of war against religious liberty, implies that that church regards religion simply as a form of worship, an empty ceremony, and not a vital principle, requiring active benevolence, justice, love, and good will towards man. It esteems sacrifice above mercy; psalm-singing above right doing; solemn meetings above practical righteousness. A worship that can be conducted by persons who refuse to give shelter to the houseless, to give bread to the hungry, clothing to the naked, and who enjoin obedience to a law forbidding these acts of mercy is a curse, not a blessing to mankind. The Bible addresses all such persons as "scribes, pharisees, hypocrites, who pay tithe ofÝ mint, anise, and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith.” ”

             I am in strong agreement with the Honorable Frederic Douglass. In this excerpt,  Douglass notes the hypocrisy of the United States at the time branding Independence Day, as the day they became free from British rule when slaves are still held captive. He in this speech said many truths of were humanity and government stands in contrary to the reality of what was happening in many states of the south. This speech highlights to me what men and women are capable of doing when told by their government. If slavery violated the humanity of the people and took a war to dismantle it, imagine other offense the government creates that are not particularly affecting our conscious. I can only imagine the challenge a citizen faces when against the system for minor/ major offenses that do not affect our soul but are yet challenging to our every day lives such as mass incarceration of the USA population. 

           I choose this paragraph because as I read this speech. I noted the way humans are pack animals. We try to congregate, organize and we can be so mislead by groups and our environment to do wrong. I say this because slavery was obviously wrong, but the people were desensitized and placed moral values before monetary gain. The majority of churches commission of “the fugitive slave law” further illustrates my perception.  We still see this form of desensitization occurring today with the wars that we are blind to in the name of oil or power gain.  We must definitely pray for humanity because we continue to prove to be destructive. I am one to believe, there is good people but get “watered down” by the bad ones.

References

Douglass, F. (1852, July 5). The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro by Frederick Douglass.        Retrieved October 31, 2015, from http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/douglassjuly4.html

Assignment 5 Fundamental American Liberties

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 5  Fundamental American Liberties 

             The assigned reading for the week of 10/24/15 were Henry David Thoreau’s 1848 “Civil Disobedience”,  Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s 1848 "Declaration of Rights and Sentiments”, and Frederick Douglass’s 1855 "A Lecture on the Anti-Slavery Movement”. In this discussion, I will discuss an excerpt of Thoreau’s piece. Thoreau states in  “Civil Disobedience”:  

          

“ “ Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. It is there that the fugitive slave, and the Mexican prisoner on parole, and the Indian come to plead the wrongs of his race, should find them; on that separate, but more free and honorable ground, where the State places those who are not with her, but against her — the only house in a slave State in which a free man can abide with honor. If any think that their influence would be lost there, and their voices no longer afflict the ear of the State, that they would not be as an enemy within its walls, they do not know by how much truth is stronger than error, nor how much more eloquently and effectively he can combat injustice who has experienced a little in his own person. Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible. If the tax-gatherer, or any other public officer, asks me, as one has done, "But what shall I do?" my answer is, "If you really wish to do anything, resign your office." When the subject has refused allegiance, and the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is accomplished. But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a sort of blood shed when the conscience is wounded? Through this wound a man's real manhood and immortality flow out, and he bleeds to an everlasting death. I see this blood flowing now.” ”

              I am in strong agreement with the first sentence. As the common perception is those who go to jail have done wrong and are further negatively labeled as criminals. As a population, we are taught to respect the law and not taught enough how to critically question it.  As a community or group many do not even give it two thoughts regarding what are people in jail for or question the judicial system we are under. The rhetoric states “We are in the land of the free”, but how free are we when minor offenses can land us in jail. There may be more liberties than in more conservative countries but we are not free. I speak of nonviolent “crimes” such as graffiti, parking violation, jay walking and so forth. The AfroAmerican community is aware of the faults of the judicial system but many new immigrants may not recognize the systems in place that can be detrimental to our communities. 

              I choose this paragraph because I have high hopes for the future. Many of the marginalized populations, are securing leaders to speak for them and advocate. I am for Bernie Sanders, because he speaks of a political revolution where people involve themselves in the change. We can all affect change, but an education is necessary to some extent.  There is a current debate regarding mass incarceration, decriminalizing marijuana, wealth inequality, and political awareness such as “black lives matter” movement which I believe are healthy to our country. 

References

Thoreau, H. (1948). Thoreau's Civil Disobedience - 2. Retrieved November 15, 2015, from      http://thoreau.eserver.org/civil2.html

Assignment 4- Debating the Constitution

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment 4- Debating the Constitution

          The assigned reading for 10/3/15 week is “Another Stab at the Constitution,” published by The New York Times (NYT’s) on July 8, 2012. This article is a compilation of ten University professor providing their opinion regarding what they will suggest to change in the constitution. In this discussion, I will further analyze Jamal Greene, professor of law at Columbia Law School, position regarding setting term limits for Federal Judges. 

           In the NYT’s article one of the compilation “Revisiting the Constitution: We Need Term Limits for Federal Judges”,  Greene states:

 “In a democracy, no one person should wield so much power for so long. Article III of the Constitution provides that federal judges ‘shall hold their offices during good behaviour.’ In practice this language means they serve for life absent voluntary retirement or impeachment. Were we to draft the Constitution today, we would be wise to reconsider this provision.” 

I am in agreement with Greene’s observation, regarding limiting judges to a set number of years in office either by mandating a retirement age or an 18 year term assignment as suggested in the reading. I agree with this amendment change due to the lack of choices if the judge is not doing a satisfactory job. For example, if a judge is doing a non satisfactory job in the majority public opinion, then there is very little the public or those in office can do unless the judges commits ‘bad behavior’. The term ‘bad behavior’ is up for different translation that may not be in concern with the way he/she may be interpreting the law. Let’s take for instance the same sex marriage debate, which was decided by the US supreme court who mandated for all states to recognize same-sex marriage. If the US Supreme Court would have decided otherwise and other decision  were maintained very conservative, then a citizen or public officials would have to wait till the judges begin to retire before potential change can happen in the courts jurisdiction. 

            I choose this part of the article to review due to my interest with the differences between federal and state judiciary courts. As the federal and state courts handle different matters and the judges are elected differently. As for the State court judges are chosen in a number of ways either by election or appointment for a given number of years/ life or a combination of both. In conclusion, the term limit for judges can provide potential awareness of public opinion in the court room decisions which can entice the populations to be aware of who is in office and if they should go or stay.  

Reference

Comparing Federal & State Courts. (n.d.). Retrieved October 8, 2015, from            http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure/comparing-federal-state-courts

Greene, J. (2012, July 8). Revisiting the Constitution: We Need Term Limits for Federal Judges.                  The New York Times. Retrieved October 6, 2015 from   http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/07/08/another-stab-at-the-us-constitution/revisiting-the-constitution-we-need-term-limits-for-federal-judges

MOSENDZ, P. (2015, September 4). Why Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Can't Be Fired for Refusing                 to Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses. Newsweek. Retrieved October 8, 2015 from http://www.newsweek.com/why-kim-davis-cant-be-fired-marriage-licenses-368902

Assignment #3 The Politics of the American Founding

Shylene Mejia

Class: POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

Assignment # 3 The Politics of the American Founding 

             The assigned reading for 9/26/15 week included the Declaration of Independence, 1776; Constitution of the United States, 1787; The Federalist Papers #s 10 and 51, 1787-88 .  The Declaration of Independence 1776 discussed some of the reason why a separation from Great Britain was necessary. The constitution although not the confederation initial agreement upon the separation from Great Britain, it is the one that is used today. The initial agreement between the states was the Article of Confederation 1781 which was changed for the constitution due to not providing a firm state of federalism, and a separation of power. The separation of power was thought to assist with the check and balance at the different level of government. Furthermore, The Federalist Papers were 85 essays written to persuade state support of a federalist government. 

              In The Federalist # 10 written Nov 22, 1787 by James Madison discussed how a federalist government will avoid disruption of  small or large dissenting groups in state government politics. The Federalist # 10 is titled The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection. In the below passage in the federalist # 10 it says:

“The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary.”

Upon reviewing this passage, it was as to say that a firm national government and separation of power would prevent dissenting groups successfully organizing against the government and overthrowing it. In the essay, it explains the reality at that time was that the “most considerate and virtuous citizen” would have the tendency to complain. This complain by common folks if organized together will force the government to act upon their interest not as the rule of justice suggest. The article suggest domestic faction is the disease of a democracy and the cure in this case is the separation of government into local, state and national, as a conflict in state/ local will  not easily reach national level before it is contained or a solution agreed upon.

                  In conclusion, the politics surrounding the initiation of the federalist government was not an easy transition as persuasion for state support was necessary. I choose this passage to discuss as it made sense of why there had not been any overthrown government in the United States, which it was clear that the separation of government was useful in preventing that from happening and as described in the passage when a population is this large, there will be a large democracy where different point of views interact with each other. The responsibility of living in a democracy is that every individual has to be involved politically or their rights can be undermined by a louder more persuasive point of view in the political arena.