By Nathan Smith, New Generation Voters
It has been over two years since former President Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. He would have taken on the massive responsibility of replacing Justice Antonin Scalia. The Republican-controlled Senate, led by Mitch McConnell, stalled, complained, and fought the president when the nomination was announced. The Republicans believed that it would be improper to vote on a Supreme Court nominee in an election year. Historically, this situation had come up during the Reagan administration, where a Democratic-controlled Senate confirmed Anthony Kennedy in an election year. Despite the efforts of certain Republican Senators, McConnell won out, allowing the nomination to expire by the end of the 114th Congress in January 2017.
Continue reading “New Generation Voters: Another Seat, Another Contentious Hearing”
Nathan Smith, New Generation Voters
May 11, 2018
In the summer of 2015, the European Union, China, Russia, and the U.S. sat down to construct a deal that would prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. For years prior, Iran had been slowly trying to gather the materials necessary to make the bomb, while Israel and the rest of the world watched with concern. A nuclear Iran would threaten the stability of the region even more, as they continue to threaten Israel and compete with Saudi Arabia. Since Russia, China, the United States, the UK, and France had acquired nuclear weapons, it had been the goal to prevent other countries from getting the same capability. Unfortunately, India, Pakistan, Israel, and at this point North Korea all possess nuclear weapons. While North Korea is an entirely different issue, the world’s nuclear powers were determined to reach a deal that would at least hamper Iran’s ability. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), settled in 2015 by the Obama administration, lifted the economic sanctions from Iran, while Iran was forced to limit their uranium enrichment, and close a number of their centrifuge facilities.
Continue reading “Israel, Iran, and Syria: Is War Up Ahead?”
The enumerated objects over which the federal government was given its jurisdiction during the ratification debates in 1787-89 have been heavily disputed within the court system to this day, with such disagreements frequently appearing before the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court itself. The debate over the separation of the sovereignty of the states from the sovereignty of the national government itself still remains unresolved today (see Federalist No. 39). In Printz v. United States, specifically, the issue at hand involved whether the federal government could issue directives to state law enforcement officers in Montana and Arizona to uphold and enforce federal background checks as required under The Brady Handgun Prevention Act passed by Congress in 1993, which created a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) in order to track the potential criminal histories of consumers wishing to purchase firearms. Upon a writ of certiorari, the Supreme Court agreed to review the issue in greater depth.
Continue reading “Printz v. United States (1997): Scalia, Madison and the Original Intent of Federalism’s Paradigm”
Our hearts go out to the families of the 17 victims who, just two weeks ago, were murdered in the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida. The shooter, nineteen-year-old Nikolas Cruz, had several guns in his possession, including an AR-15 which he used in the attack. Questions surrounding the shooting abound and many people are demanding to have stricter controls placed upon the purchase of firearms, with many desiring to ban assault weapons altogether. Continue reading “Gun Control is Not the Answer”