Blog #2- the Supreme Court

         

It's fair to say the supreme court receives far less press than the presidency and congress. Yet the court still wields considerable power in 21st-century America. However, it wasn't always this way. The judicial system was practically an afterthought of the founding fathers until 1801 when John Marshall became Chief Justice. His leadership of the highest court in the land came to the spotlight in Marbury v Madison (1803) when he ruled that Madison's actions of denying Marbury his commission for appointment as a judge was illegal but that it was also unconstitutional for Marbury to bring his case to the court itself. Marbury should have petitioned a lower court. Thus by restraining the court's power in this case, Marshall actually granted it far more power for the future through the principle we now know as judicial review. Judicial review examines the actions of the other branches of government and deems if these actions are in line with the constitution. 

The role of the SCOTUS has vastly grown in the two centuries that have followed. However, not all of this expansion of power has benefited the country. In particular, the reconstruction period following the Civil War saw the court apply some of the new amendments in some not-so-just ways. The 14th amendment in particular underwent substantive due process as the Court started to peel back some of congress' original intentions. The privileges and immunities clause was stricken following the Slaughterhouse cases (1873) since the Court found it pertained to federal citizenship but not state citizenship. Furthermore, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. (1886) twisted this amendment to apply to corporations having the right to free speech. The nail in the coffin came from the principle of "separate but equal" in Plessy v Ferguson (1896), which established a precedent for the continued maltreatment of African Americans that lasted throughout the Jim Crow era and beyond.

Today, the Supreme Court is polarized along ideological lines similar to congressional representatives. A cases's ruling can typically be predicted before the hearings, but there are some exceptions. Some justices such as interpret the constitution in a straightforward manner as the founding fathers intended. Others, such as the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, choose to see it as a breathing document which evolves with the country, "We don't have the constitution that was written 1787 or even 1791...'We the People' composed of a very small part of the people." Despite its checkered past, the Supreme Court of the United States remains the most influential judicial branch in the world. 

P.S. If you are ever curious about a particular case and want to get a condensed summary of its proceedings, I definitely recommend Oyez! 

https://www.oyez.org/

Sources: 

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/5us137

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/83us36

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/118us394

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/163us537

Blog#1- Josh's Five Sources of News

 Josh's Five Sources of News

Why I read the News

There's no denying that we live in a politically-polarized country. Rarely ever do Democrats and Republicans vote off their party line or even consider to hear counter-arguments. Worse, major news stations have seemingly lost their objectivity and now relay information in opinionated fashion reflecting one party or the other. Despite this, it's still important to stay in the loop of current events. I read the news so I can get as much information as possible then formulate an opinion of my own. 

How I read the News

I have a bad habit of sometimes just reading the headline and the blurb underneath it. While this does make consuming news quick, it is incomplete in providing me details or the big picture implications listed in the body text. In order to combat this, when a headline catches my eye I will examine the story by reading the lead followed by the associated quotes. This way, I get the reporter's point of view which I can match against the words of someone involved in the story. If a story is particularly engaging, I will try and find more stories about it to see if a different publication has any new information. 

1. Twitter

Twitter is my favorite social media platform in general. I spend lots of time sifting through entertaining tweets but it is also the first place I go whenever I catch word of something major happening in the world. Since the platform functions as one big blog space, you can see the official news (for example: NYT's account "Reports of violence at the Capitol building") accompanied by people's reactions ("This is all Trump's fault!"). The best part about twitter is that it elevates the voices of the average person. I would go so far as to say the majority of tweets that show up in the timeline tend to be valid, reasoned arguments or statements from everyday folks rather than political parties or news stations.  

https://twitter.com

2. Instagram 

I didn't really consider Instagram a news source until this past summer. In the midst of the racial injustice protests going on, I saw accounts across the platform partake in #blackouttuesday on June 2. The following months on the platform featured primarily election content in the forms of voter registration links, protest meeting details, and other politically-relevant information. I think the biggest difference between Twitter and Instagram when it comes to sharing political news is that twitter tends to be a place for reactions whereas Instagram just tries to get the word out about what is happening. Instagram also tends to have more attention-grabbing graphics on people's stories which appeal to us as younger audiences. 

https://www.instagram.com/

3. CNN/Fox News

I would describe myself as fairly moderate on the political sphere as an issue-by-issue kind of voter. I don't think only one party always has the answers.  Even though both CNN and Fox News appear to have their own agendas on how they cover the news, I try to view both in my consumption of a daily news cycle. Admittedly, sometimes I seek confirmation bias from either network to validate my opinions. Plus, it's a bit concerning that the same event could be covered two completely different ways on these networks. Yet by viewing both it becomes clearer in determining that the real truth is likely somewhere in the middle. Even if I may completely disagree with the network's anchors' opinions, hearing where someone else is coming from better equips me to understand the issue at hand. 

https://www.cnn.com/

https://www.foxnews.com/

4. Morning Brew

I usually don't have enough time to sit down and watch the TV news before class or late in the evenings. Instead, I read Morning Brew, a free daily email service partnered with the Motley Fool, a private financial advising company, which mainly focuses on business news but also highlights what's happening in the world of politics since the two are often intertwined. It has definitely illustrated to me through the past few months that the economy and the stock market are definitely NOT the same thing. Reading it from top to bottom takes only five to ten minutes and gives me a sense of what the latest buzz is in corporate America as well as what other big stories are breaking on a daily basis.

https://www.morningbrew.com/daily/subscribe

5. Apple News 

I have the Apple News app notifications turned on because the headlines that appear usually drive me to read the article and turn to Twitter. The app publishes its own content but I use it primarily as means of grouping all channels (newspapers, networks, etc.) into one basket and pull intriguing stories from there. This again allows me to get word from both sides of the political aisle whenever a development takes place. Plus, sometimes non-political headlines will surface and I like to give those read as an alternative to the polarized rhetoric I see so often. If you have an iPhone and want variety in your news digestion, then I recommend turning on the notifications.  

https://www.apple.com/apple-news/