Former lawyer of President Trump, Michael Cohen, Testifies Today by Peyton O.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/trump-faces-hill-nightmare-michael-cohen-testifies-publicly-n976401

Former lawyer of President Trump, Michael Cohen, Testifies Today

Michael Cohen, the former lawyer of President Donald Trump testified in court today concerning his trial. During his testimony, Cohen stated that he was, “No longer protecting Mr. Trump.” He came out strongly against Trump, calling him a racist and pointed out other prejudiced remarks Trump has made in the past. Although he is attacking Trump to protect himself, media sources have been highly critical of him for doing so. Many news outlets say that even though he is trying to help himself by calling out Trump, he should still respect the authority of his position and give Trump the respect the President deserves. When questioned about the Russia investigation, Cohen made it clear that he had no evidence to prove that Trump had interacted in any way with Russia to further his campaign, but was suspicious. Although President Trump is currently in Vietnam for a nuclear summit, he did take the time to react and attack Michael Cohen for  the things he said about him in court and denied any claims made by Cohen. Despite his testimony today, Cohen is set to report to prison later this year for a three year sentence.

What did you think of Cohen’s testimony?

Do you think Cohen’s testimony will help in the Russia Investigation in any way?

Do you think Cohen was right to attack Trump to protect himself?

A Federal Judge Rules that the Male-Only Draft is Unconstitutional by Jesse F.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/24/us/military-draft-men-unconstitutional.html

Last Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Gray H. Miller of the Southern District of Texas took up a case filed by the National Coalition for Men, a men’s rights advocacy group, against the Selective Service. Previously, a Supreme Court ruling in 1981 concluded that only requiring men to register for the draft was reasonable because women weren’t allowed to serve in active combat roles in the military. 

However, since women can now serve in any combat roles they qualify for (a change introduced by the Pentagon in 2015), the NCFM claims that the Selective Service violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Judge Miller agreed, stating in his ruling that “While historical restrictions on women in the military may have justified past discrimination, men and women are now ‘similarly situated for purposes of a draft or registration for a draft.’”

David R. Segal, the founding director of the Center for Research on Military Organization at the University of Maryland, supported the decision, saying that “Since registration for selective service is one of the indicators of citizenship, I think we should at least say publicly that women and men have the same rights and responsibilities of citizenship.” However, the government’s side suggested that making women register for the draft could make them less likely to enlist by “increasing the perception that women will be forced to serve in combat roles.” Miller also considered the general physiology of men and women, claiming that “The average woman could conceivably be better suited physically for some of today’s combat positions than the average man, depending on which skills the position required. Combat roles no longer uniformly require sheer size or muscle.”

The court’s decision doesn’t demand immediate action from the government and was only a declarative ruling. But for the government to comply, it would appear that it would have to either remove the draft or require women from ages 18-25 to register for the draft as well as men.


Currently, the federal government (the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service specifically) is considering whether it should continue the draft and whether it should require women to register. What are all of the relevant aspects of this issue to take into account? Will it be necessary and reasonable for the Selective Service System to continue? If so, should both men and women be required to register for it? Why?

Cuts to Abortion Funding by Bethany F.

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/22/690544297/trump-administration-proposes-sweeping-changes-to-federal-family-planning-progra

The Trump administration is in the process of drafting changes to Title X, a $286 million program. These changes will prohibit funding to any establishment that promotes/provides/refers abortions to women. Critics cite that forcing doctors to withhold information from female patients violates medical ethics. Supporters of these changes say that abortions have no place in family planning institutions (what Title X directly regulates). Trump’s supporters who are largely pro-life appear to be pleased with this; however, the newly conservative leaning Supreme Court had denied attempts to defund Planned Parenthood just a month ago.

This gag rule of course most significantly affects Planned Parenthood. Many worry that this will negatively affect the reproductive care that lower income families are offered. Cutting funding to Planned Parenthood would make it difficult for them to provide their other services (STD prevention, cancer screenings, general patient care, etc.) that are not related to the termination of a pregnancy. Pennsylvania senator Bob Casey, a pro-life Democrat, has opposed this motion stating that it is “an attack on women’s health.” Although he is opposed to abortion, he sees the value in the other types of care that these clinics provide.

Do you think these changes to Title X are a good idea? Do you think the new procedures regarding doctor-patient conversation would be ethical? Do you think these changes will be approved or met with legal resistance?

Unconstitutional Draft by Ethan D.

https://fox59.com/2019/02/24/federal-court-rules-male-only-draft-unconstitutional/

Last Friday, February 22, 2019, a federal judge out of Houston, Texas ruled that the male-only draft is unconstitutional, saying “historical restrictions on women serving in combat may have justified past discrimination, men and women are now equally able to fight”. This judge, US District Court Judge Gary Miller, rejected the 1981 Supreme Court ruling and opted to Justice Ginsburg’s recent women’s rights rationale. This 1981 ruling had said that women could be excluded from the draft because they weren’t “similarly situated”. Even though the draft was ended in the 1970s and is no longer around, men aged 18-25 are still required to file their name to the Selective Service System. This recent decision is the biggest blow to the Selective Service System since the 1981 ruling. Miller relayed that this male-only registration was not substantially related to Congress’s objective of raising and supporting armies, and therefore was not constitutionally acceptable. However, this ruling does not have an immediate impact. If this would be appealed it would first go to the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals, and then to the Supreme Court if needed. In addition, the Selective Service System has urged Miller to reject this case, due to a National Commission, appointed by Congress, that is already studying this male-only registration. 

Do you agree that the male-only draft is constitutional?

No More Cruel and Unusual Punishments by Grace F.

On February 20, 2019, the Supreme Court decided that states aren’t allowed to issue excessive fines for criminal punishments. The case centered around a convicted Indiana drug dealer whose Land Rover was taken in rem pay off his $10,000 fines, though the vehicle was worth $40,000. The state justified the action because the asset was involved in the crime. The plaintiff asked the Supreme Court * “[w]hether the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause is incorporated against the States under the Fourteenth Amendment.” *

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered the court’s unanimous answer: protection against excessive economic sanctions is “fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty.”  SCOTUS didn’t provide standards for settling whether a particular fine is unconstitutionally excessive. So, when is a confiscation exorbitant? Does Indiana’s seizure of Timbs’s Land Rover meet this measure?

This landmark incorporation case could have dramatic and far-reaching effects. The foundation of America is built on freedom from government oppression and civilians’ civil liberties being protected above all. Now that the excessive fines clause in the Eighth Amendment has been incorporated, what could this mean moving forward for perhaps the most excessive/cruel and unusual punishment of all, the death penalty?

https://www.jurist.org/news/2018/11/supreme-court-hears-arguments-on-whether-eighth-amendment-excessive-fines-clause-applies-to-states/

Death Penalty for Texas Inmate is Ruled Out by Kalli B.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-02-19/supreme-court-rules-out-death-penalty-for-texas-inmate
https://www.courthousenews.com/texans-death-penalty-reinstated-after-high-court-halt/

In a longstanding legal battle, the Supreme Court has ruled that a Texas inmate who has been on death row since 1980 may not be executed. The reasoning behind this ruling is that the inmate is intellectually disabled. The justices came to this conclusion in a 6-3 ruling over the case of the inmate Bobby James Moore.

Bobby James Moore is responsible for the 1980 murder of a Houston grocery store clerk. Moore shot the clerk in the head with a shotgun during a bungled robbery. It is said that in his younger years, he was called dumb and beaten by his father when he was held back twice in school and could not spell simple words at age 14. For years after the incident occurred, his lawyers argued that Moore was intellectually disabled, but the claims were rejected by Texas’ top criminal appeals courts. Even after the 2017 suggestion by the Supreme Court that Moore was intellectually disabled and could not be executed, the appeals courts still refused to accept those claims. Later, the Houston district attorney agreed that Moore should be spared the death penalty, which may result to a sentence of life in prison.

What do you think about his sentence? Does he deserve the death penalty or do you think he is really intellectually disabled? What is your opinion about the death penalty?

President Trump’s National Emergency by Logan W.

The National Emergencies Act was enacted on September 14, 1976. This act enables the President to gain more power in a time of a crisis. This act has been used by every President after it was enacted in 1976 with Bill Clinton declaring the most with 17. One of the most well known times the National Emergencies Act was used was when President Obama declared a national emergency to set Obamacare into action.

With President Trump’s recent threats to declaring a national emergency to get funding for the southern border wall many states have sued to try to stop the President. These 16 states are suing because they view his executive power as unconstitutional. The main problem the states, like Colorado and California, find with President Trump’s plan is the pulling of money from other federal programs to fund the southern border wall. If President Trump can get past these court battles the only thing stopping him is the Judicial Branch.

Do you think President Trump’s national emergency would be unconstitutional?

Do you think we should keep the National Emergencies Act or get rid of it?

Does the United States need a stronger southern border wall or is our southern border fine the way it is?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/national-emergency-do-state-lawsuits-have-chance-against-trump-n973061

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/424314-yes-trump-has-authority-to-declare-national-emergency-for-border-wall

Jussie Smollett Fake News by Daniel W.

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/02/19/jessie-smollett-letter-brothers-attack/
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollett-controversy-proves-media-has-its-own-agenda-ben-shapiro
https://www.vox.com/2019/2/17/18228444/jussie-smollett-hoax-hate-crime-claims-explained
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXLx5OY21Bk

More than 150 types of guns have been banned in Chicago since 2013. Almost 3,000 people were shot in Chicago last year. These people never received as much attention from the mainstream media as a relatively minor assault that Jussie Smollett claimed to have happened three weeks ago. Smollet, a gay black actor, reported to Chicago police that he had been attacked by two white males wearing MAGA hats on January 29. He claimed that the men yelled, “This is MAGA country.” Smollet had two minor scratches on his face and a rope around his neck. The media ate it up faster than OJ Simpson’s white Bronco. A Washington Post Analyst said, “It adds to sort of the atmosphere of menace that African Americans in particular and people of color in general have felt since the advent of the Trump administration.” One CNN anchor added with a serious tone, “This is America in 2019.” As a crime story, it did not make much sense. Many became skeptical of Smollett; he responded: “If I had said that the attacker was black or Muslim, more people would have supported me.” This past weekend two black men that are acquaintances of Smollett came out and explained how Smollett staged the attack. This is an important example of the media’s role as a gatekeeper. Most of the media focused on this false attack instead of real issues. Opinions may be expressed however the media wants, but facts to support their opinions are being faked, e.g. Nick Sandmann and Donald Trump being a Russian spy. Whatever “facts” the media puts out largely impacts government policy, and they will continue to use their power to influence people. If this 36-year-old man hadn’t been exposed, it would have impacted policymaking and voters. People stereotype a whole group based on a few’s actions, so it would have caused many to separate themselves from the MAGA movement. Americans shouldn’t be surprised when something like this happens again, and they need to be more careful about where they receive their news.

Do you believe fake news is becoming more common, or is it just covered more now? Do you believe celebrities have used their power like this more often than people know? Do you think this situation delegitimizes anti-black and anti-gay attacks or has it brought more attention to the issue? Why do you believe the media covers somewhat known actors or “celebrities” instead of real issues and real people being attacked in the U.S.?

16 States File Law Suit Against National Emergency by Madison S.

 https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/18/politics/xavier-becerra-lawsuit-national-emergency/index.html

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/california-leads-16-us-states-in-lawsuit-against-trumps-wall-emergency-declaration-2019-02-19

On Monday, February 18th, 2019, sixteen states filed a lawsuit against President Trump’s national-emergency declaration. The lawsuit was lead by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra. He told CNN, "We're going to try to halt the President from violating the Constitution, the separation of powers, from stealing money from Americans and states that has been allocated by Congress, lawfully," It’s possible that the case goes all the way to the supreme court and last through the 2020 election. By declaring a national-emergency Congress will fund President Trump’s wall. Within the lawsuit, it states that President Trump has “veered the country toward a constitutional crisis of his own making.” The founders of the lawsuit are say that President Trump is trying to declare a national-emergency to fund a project. It has everyone confused because no president has tried to do this. People don't want the wall because it would be “stealing” money from the people to build it. It scares them.
How will the lawsuit end? Do you think it will get all the way to the Supreme Court? Do you think the lawsuit will carry through the 2020 election? Do you think the government will shut down again, and will President Trump declare a national-emergency?

Bernie Sanders 2020? by Daniel E.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/19/politics/bernie-sanders-2020-presidential/index.html

On Tuesday, (February 19, 2019) Bernie Sanders announced his second presidential run for 2020. The independent is running under the Democratic party and is trying to get the Democratic nomination. Sanders made the announcement in an interview with Vermont Public Radio Tuesday morning. Sanders enters the 2020 race as one of the frontrunners which is a remarkable turn for the democratic socialist who, three years ago, was viewed as a protest candidate from the political fringe. Today, Sanders is one of the most popular politicians among Democratic voters and his policy agenda. He wants a progressive proposals to expand health care, broaden the social safety net and make higher education free and has been embraced by many of the Democratic party’s leading figures. Though he has joined the race now earlier than he did at this point in 2015, Sanders’ entry comes in the wake of about a dozen others running for the highest office, like Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Sanders has spent much of the past few years spreading his message and developing relationships with like-minded officials and activists during exhaustive travels around the country. But in January, he was forced to publicly confront allegations of sexual harassment by staffers on his 2016 campaign.

Do you think these allegations of sexual harassment could harm his run? Do you think he will have a chance up against other highly know Democratic nominees? If he wins the Democratic nomination, will he win against trump? Bernie 2020?

Virginia Delegate Looking for Impeachment by Elizabeth B.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/10/politics/virginia-delegate-impeachment-fairfax/index.html

Virginia delegate Patrick Hope has a plan to offer up articles of impeachment against Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax.  Hope plans to file for the impeachment Monday morning.  He believes that Fairfax’s actions cause for a removal.  Fairfax was accused of sexually assaulting two women, including raping one of the women.  After the accusations were made Fairfax released a statement acknowledging the women, but saying that both interactions were consensual.  

Hope making this step would be the first part of the removal process.  It will begin at the House and then with the majority vote it will move on to the Senate who will make the final decision.  How the House and Senate plan to handle this situation will affect the nation in the future.  In the nation today lots of women have been coming forward with their experiences with sexual assault.  So how this plays out will determine how in the future the nation will handle high powered men being in situations like this.

Fairfax’s spokeswomen came out with this statement, “It is especially important in the most difficult of times that we pay attention to our fundamental Constitutional values.”

Do you think Fairfax should be impeached? Is this a growing problem in our nation today?

Denver Teacher Strike by Gabby S.

Teachers in Denver, Colorado have gone on strike for the first time in 25 years after failed negotiation talks to raise the minimum base salary. The teachers say their current payment plans prevent them from being able to accurately plan for the future. On Monday, all across Denver, teachers went on strike outside their own schools to protest the insufficient wages teachers are paid.

This comes a decade after teachers advocated for the performance-based pay system that was supposed to encourage teachers to take on harder classes and teach with incentive. However well this was supposed to be for the teachers, it has turned into “a monster of unintended consequences,” according to Ms. Wilson, an English teacher who went on strike Monday. These teachers are working with a union to help raise awareness for the teachers in the area.

This issue has been on the table several times before in American politics. Teachers are our very basis of learning and spreading knowledge, yet in many cases, their salaries aren’t even enough to cover the basics of life. These teachers have taken to using their right to free speech to change the laws in their area.

What do you think should be done to improve the lives of teachers in Denver and across the United States? Do you think this is an effective way to change the system?

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/02/11/denver-teachers-strike-monday/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/11/us/denver-teacher-strike.html

Kirsten Gillibrand Runs for President by Hannah T.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/us/politics/kirsten-gillibrand-president-feminist.html

Kirsten Gillibrand, a senator for the state of New York has made the decision to run for the upcoming 2020 presidential election. Kirsten Gillibrand is running for the Democratic political party. After Trump was elected back in the previous election in 2016, she attended a Women’s March where she was given the inspiration to run for president. Because of this, her candidacy is very focused on women as a whole. She believes that the United States would be a lot stronger of a country if women’s voices were heard by more.

Throughout her political career, Kirsten Gillibrand has made it a duty of hers to call out suspects of sexual misconduct, such as Bill Clinton and Al Franken. She’s also made it a dity of hers to call out sexism from others. She is very clearly not afraid to do whatever it takes to defend women as a whole.

How do you feel about Kirsten Gillibrand running for president? Would she be the best choice to be the first female president of the United States? What kinds of issues do you feel she would focus the most on? What kind of issues do you feel she would focus the least on?

Republicans and Democrat’s Dispute Over Border Security- and the possibility of another shutdown by Dougie D.

https://apple.news/Akvx8q18fSPys6Zx3AxImEQ

On December 22nd, after a deal could not be made for Trump’s border wall, the government was shutdown until January 25th after Trump announced a plan to reopen the government. The plan stated that if a deal wasn’t reached in three weeks, the government would shutdown again.

Three weeks from then is this Friday and a deal still hasn’t been passed- yet. A potential deal was announced by some House and Senate lawmakers. Under the deal, the wall will get $1.4 billion dollars in funding, 17% of the $5.7 billion Trump originally asked for. Trump expressed his negative feeling on the deal, saying “I’m not happy about. It’s not doing the trick. But I’m adding things to it. I will add whatever I have to add.”

In order to prevent another government shutdown, the bill must face scrutiny from both parties, win over the White House, and be passed into law by midnight Friday. If another shutdown happens, like it’s predecessor, 800,000 federal workers will be affected, leaving them doing work unpaid until a deal is reached.

Do you think a deal will be passed soon enough to prevent another shutdown? If not, how long do you think the new government will last?

Amy Klobuchar announces Presidential Run by Graysen G.

A new presidential candidate for the Democratic party has recently stepped into the scene. On February 10, 2019 Amy Klobuchar announced her Presidential run on a snow covered stage in Minneapolis. Klobucher is a third-term Minnesota senator who hopes her moderate politics, midwestern roots and carefully cultivated history of bipartisanship will appeal to voters of the 2020 election. On this stage, Amy said she will “focus on getting things done” during her Presidency and reverse some of Trump’s famous policies. Klobuchar says, if elected, that on her first day in office the United States will rejoin the Paris Climate agreement. The Paris Climate Agreement will deal with greenhouse-gas emissions mitigation, adaption, and finance starting in the year 2020. This could greatly affect not only America, but Earth's entire climate. 

Klobuchar believes that her small minnesota politics will give her the advantage over other potential President elects. Amy believes that she will have more voters in Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania due to the swing these states did during the 2016 Presidential election. Klobuchar hopes her Bipartisan ideology will help unify America and reduce political strife. As well as helping the environment, Amy has the potential to be the first female president which would be a huge step in the right direction for female empowerment.
Which of Trump’s policies do you think Amy Klobuchar will want to reverse? How will she reverse these policies? Do you think Klobuchar will have a good chance to win the Presidential election? How do you personally feel about Amy?

New Law That Could Limit College Response to Off-Campus Sexual Assaults by Liberty C.

In November, a proposal was issued that could change the schools’ obligation to investigate off campus sexual assault allegations. This would let campuses only investigate allegations that “occur during their programs or activities.” This would exclude off campus cases. The current rule encourages campuses to investigate claims that “disrupts a student’s education” regardless of where the misconduct took place. 

With this new rule, schools could investigate outside of their programs. However, there is conflicting language. Some schools thought that they would be barred from investigating these allegations. The rule says that schools could investigate “at their own discretion.”  This was never cleared up. Until such time, it gives students legal grounds to get the case dismissed. It also allows the accused to question the accuser through a representative. 
This could drastically change the way sexual assault, harassment, and misconduct is handled in a college setting. Many fear that this would cause students not to come forward. It would narrow the definition of sexual harassment, and cause the drop out rate to increase. 

1.) How will this affect the college dropout rates?
2.) Will students be more hesitant to come forward if any sexual misconduct occurs?
3.) Will this give offenders “piece of mind” or make them think that it is easier to get away with the crime?

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/02/12/us/politics/ap-us-campus-sexual-assault.html

State of the Union by Ethan D.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/2019-state-of-the-union-live-stream-donald-trump-democratic-rebuttal-live-updates/

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/newt-gingrich-president-trumps-state-of-the-union-changed-history

On Tuesday, President Trump took part in his second State of the Union address during his presidency. As usual, this came with much backlash and “fact checking” as many people want to point out his flaws. President Trump hit major points, such as, economic growth, border protection, and trade talks with other countries. He finished the address with a hopeful message to create bipartisanship, and stating that the best is yet to come. In addition, 76 percent of American viewers had said that they approved of this address, with 43 percent of all viewers being Republican. In another motion, Trump mentioned the increase of jobs, and that women had filled approximately 58 percent of these new jobs. After he had said this, the Democratic congresswomen in attendance, all dressed in white in remembrance of the 100th anniversary of the women's suffrage, began to stand up and cheer.

On the other hand, Trump was criticized for “mistakes” that were made during his speech. For example, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi criticizes Trump for not mentioning and ignoring the gun violence in America, as well as, for supposedly “assaulting” the LGBT community. In addition, Pelosi criticizes Trump for hurting the state of the American middle class and enriching the wealthiest 1 percent. 

Did you approve of Trump’s speech, why or why not? 
What should Trump have focused on more or less?
Do you believe Trump assaulted the LGBT community or was it a misunderstanding?

Senate Passes Pro- Israel Bill by Gavin S.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/05/us/politics/senate-middle-east-bill-bds.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-congress/senate-passes-pro-israel-bill-measure-also-rebukes-trump-idUSKCN1PU2KP

On Tuesday the Senate passed a Middle Eastern policy bill allowing states to penalize businesses that take part in boycotts of Israel. According to the bill, state and municipal governments will be allowed to legally punish companies that “boycott, divest from, or impose sanctions on Israel.” In addition, the bill contained an amendment that opposed President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw troops from Syria. The amendment called for the Trump administration to certify a certain set of criteria required before any significant withdrawal from Syria could occur. On top of that, the bill includes provision to place new sanctions on Syria and reauthorize $3.3 billion in military finance to Israel. 

The bill passed through the Senate with a 77- 23 vote. Despite this, the bill must pass through the House of Representatives in order to become law. Skeptics are unsure as to whether or not the bill will pass through the House due to the Democratic majority. House Democrats are expected to pass the provisions relating to the security and military funding of Israel but are expected to reject the anti- boycott provision, citing boycott as a right of free speech protected by the Constitution. Nevertheless, it seems that the bill has support and opposition from both House Republicans and Democrats.

Do you think that the bill will successfully pass through the House of Representatives? If so, how do you think it will affect relations between the U.S. and Israel? Should the U.S. withdraw troops from Syria?

Alabama officer who mistakenly killed man at mall on Black Friday won't be charged by Gunner F.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/05/us/alabama-mall-shooting-no-charges/index.html

https://www.foxnews.com/us/gunman-opens-fire-inside-crowded-alabama-mall-injures-2-before-killed-by-police

On Thanksgiving night on November 22, 2018 in a Birmingham - area mall in Alabama, a police officer shot and killed Emantic Bradford Jr. During a Black Friday shopping event, when  there were reports of an active shooter. Emanitc Bradford Jr. was at the mall shopping in the middle of the incident. Bradford had a carry permit to have a gun and  had his firearm out attempting to help with the possible active shooting. Police officers mistook him for the active shooter before shooting him in the back. Some of the witnesses at the mall that night said, police officers told him multiple times to put down his gun, yet he failed to do so. After several warnings, he was shot. On Tuesday, February 5th, it came out that the police officer that shot Emantic Bradford Jr. would not be charged criminally for his actions. 

I think that it is a good thing that the police officer is not getting charged. It is unfortunate for Emantic Bradford Jr. and his family however, the police officer who shot him was just doing his job to protect himself and other shoppers in the mall. This incident could possibly affect our nation’s gun laws and law enforcement. 


Do you think that citizens with a permit should be allowed to carry their firearm in shopping centers on big shopping days like Black Friday? Do you think that the police officer should get charged for this shooting? How do you think that this incident will affect any of our nation’s gun laws?

The Governor Who Partied Like It’s 1884! By: Daniel E.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/03/arts/-blackface-governor-northam.html

If you are wondering about the picture above, the man in “Black Face” is Governor Ralph Northam who dressed up as a parody of country-club casual. The person who is standing next to him in a Klu Klux Klan robe who was one of his friends at the time. Who both at the time were going to a 1980’s something dance contest. He probably never thought he would have to tell the folks of the state that he'd eventually govern that he did this. The reason Mr. Northam had to disclose this to anybody is because in a news conference he was asked about this photo who has just came into light. It came from his personal page of the 1984 yearbook of Eastern Virginia Medical School.Even though he says it was he who allowed the picture to shown in his yearbook page, Mr. Northam swears neither of the people in it is him. According to him, back when such a photo would have been taken, he would have known what a problem blackface is because of the time he tried to be “Michael Jackson”.  The governor didn’t say that he’s ashamed now for having partaken in a 19th-century American blackface tradition.  


What do you think should be done? Should he resign? Do you think this should be discarded because this happened in the past? Do you believe that this makes our country look bad?