Republicans suddenly hate john Roberts' Supreme Court

Date- 7/17/15
Link-http://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-approval-ratings-john-roberts-2015-7


Recently, Justice Roberts has been in the news concerning the issue of Gay Marriage and his decision shaped what many people thought of him and the supreme court has fallen out of favor with republicans.  The approval rating of the Supreme Court has dropped to a record-low 18 percent with voters while the democrats are roughly around 75 percent approval rating which is a very large gap.  Justice John Roberts joined the liberals so that the Affordable care act could passed and then he did it again when he was the swing vote that legalized same-sex marriage.  Since Bush brought in Justice Roberts, he has been very liberal recently with his views. Do you think it is right for the republicans to turn their backs on Roberts? Explain?  

California Court OKs Ban on U.S. Flag Shirts

https://www.thomasmore.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/The-United-States-Supreme-Court-Declines-to-Hear-Thomas-More-Law-Center---s-Case-Challenging-School-District-Ban-on-American-Flag-Shirts.png

Link - http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/27/justice/california-school-american-flag-shirts/

Date - March 3, 2014

Summary - In 2010, On Cinco de Mayo, the principal of Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill asked students wearing American flag T-shirts to turn their shirts inside out or take them off in order to keep them safe in this "climate of racial tension" . After politely being asked, the students refused to do what the principal requested. As a result, the students filed a "civil rights suit against the school and two administrators, arguing that their rights to freedom of expression, equal protection and due process had been violated" (CNN). 
             At Court, Judges faced the difficult question of whats more important: the student's rights to free speech or the school's safety concerns. Ultimately, the court reached the conclusion that safety concerns are prioritized.

Questions - Do you think schools should have the right to control what students can and cannot wear? 
To what extent should schools be able to do so without violating our right of freedom of expression?
Name one parallel between the Tinker V. Des Moines case and this case.

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

                                                                                                             Photo by Jonathan Ernst/Reuters
Link-http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/06/fisher_v_university_of_texas_the_supreme_court_might_just_gut_affirmative.html
Date- June 29, 2015 

Summary:  Abigail Fisher (a white female) in 2008 got rejected from University of Texas at Austin. In response to her rejection letter, she sued the university for rejecting her and blamed the admission process for considering "race and ethnicity in a 'holistic view' of certain candidates" (Bouie). After 7 years of going through a  long legal process with the district and circuit court, she finally got her the approval by the United States Supreme Court to take on her case (7-1 ruling).  UT Austin has countered to her by appealing that "Of the 841 students admitted under these criteria, 47 had worse AI/PAI scores (a combination of the holistic measure, grades, and test scores) than Fisher, and 42 of them were white. On the other end, UT rejected 168 black and Latino students with scores equal to or better than Fisher’s" (Bouie). 

Question(s): Do you think the public university system for selecting students is fair?  To what extent is Abigail Fisher's points are valid?

 

Appeals court reverses ruling that found NSA program illegal

Link - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/appeals-court-reverses-ruling-that-found-nsa-program-illegal/

Date- 8/28/2015

Summary - A federal appeals court, in a somewhat surprising move, overwhelmingly reversed a lower appeals court decision in May that said the NSA Surveillance Program was excessive.  The NSA program was created following 9/11, but the extent of phone collection was unclear until Edward Snowden's revelations in 2013 that the NSA collected the phone numbers of all calls made and received as well as the length of each call.  In 2013, a US District Judge ruled that collection was likely unconstitutional but allowed the program to continue while under appellate review.  The DC Circuit is the highest appeals court and all three of its judges spoke negatively of the case.  One judge said the government wouldn't provide the necessary information to help the challenge to the program while another judge said the challengers needed to show they were targeted by the surveillance program.

This decision is especially interesting because Congress passed a law in June that phases out the bulk collection of phone records by the NSA, even though the FISA (double secret classified court) court claimed the USA Patriot Act of 2001 allowed the program.  The new law from Congress requires phone companies to keep all phone records and allows the government to search the records without any warrant.  Any further judicial decisions are irrelevant as the program shifts according to the new law, however, big brother will be collecting all phone records until then.

Question (s) - Do you know what the NSA does?  Are you willing to give up some freedoms in order to have more security?  Is the mass collection of phone records worthwhile?

Obama Immigration 2015: Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Lawsuit Dismissed By Court, Citing ‘Unsupported Speculation’

Link - http://www.latintimes.com/obama-immigration-2015-sheriff-joe-arpaios-lawsuit-dismissed-court-citing-unsupported-335464

Date - 8/17/2015

Summary - President Obama announced an Executive Order on immigration in November of 2014.  His 2012 Order dealt with DACA, deferred action on children, in which the INS would not deport children brought illegally before the age of 18.  The 2014 Order dealt with DAPA, deferred action on parents, in which parents who entered illegally, but whose children are citizens, would not be deported.  A notoriously conservative and outspoken sheriff from Phoenix, Joe Arapaio, brought a suit against Obama by claiming DAPA would lead to an increase in crime.  The D.C. District Court of Appeals dismissed the suit, claiming that Arapaio does not have standing in the case, which means he cannot prove injury.  Arapaio's lawyer hopes the U.S. Supreme Court will agree, though the next step is the 5th Circuit Court in New Orleans.  Interestingly, the 5th Circuit is currently deciding a case brought by Texas against Obama for DAPA.  The Texas suit has been granted standing and a federal court issued a ruling in February against Obama's plan.  Texas reasoning was based on the claim immigrants will cost more money for public services, such as driver's licenses.  While the 5th Circuit has not rendered its final ruling, it did rule in May against lifting the hold on DAPA, arguing "public interest favors maintenance of the injunction" against DAPA.

Question(s) - Was Obama within his constitutional powers in implementing an action that is widely popular?  Why did Obama pass this executive order (what does cartoon say)?


By the way, here is a funny video on the bill, I mean executive action.