Moving Backwards

     On February 23, 2017 the Editorial Board published an article for the New York Times entitled, "President Trump Breaks a Promise on Transgender Rights". This article is a commentary on actions to take away transgender rights. Jeff Sessions, the attorney general for the Trump administration whose made it his prerogative to halt transgender students rights in using the bathroom that corresponds with their gender identity; has championed this cause. The Editorial Board confers that this act on part of Sessions goes against what Trump promised the LGBTQ community during his campaign- to protect their rights.  It's hardly unusual for politicians to not stick to their word once elected but Trump, who has founded his campaign on getting his campaign promises done, has not only failed to retain the rights of LGBTQ citizens, but taken away the very rights he stood to protect. The article mentions that the rationale for the dismissal of transgender rights is that to executively order schools to protect these students, violates the sanctity of states' rights. This same argument has been used in the past to justify the protection of Jim Crowe laws and opposition of Women's Rights. While I agree with the author's point of view, president Trump IS as big a flake as ever, I don't understand the point of reading an article that enforces the views you already hold. The bias of this article is clearly very left-leaning, which means it will only reach people who tend to lean left politically. I think it's more important to read articles that are more objective than biased in order to form an educated opinion. The same is true of engaging in political discussion on a personal basis. If you only discuss politics with people who agree with you, then your scope will be too narrow and enacting change will be slow to occur. 

The Trump Travel Ban

    On Friday, NPR posted an article summarizing the U.S. circuit court of appeals decision to block an executive order on immigration. The article titled, "5 Key Points From the Appeals Court's Travel Ban Ruling", reviews the specifics of the travel ban and the ruling to appeal it. The travel ban terminates the admission of new refugees for 120 days and bars migrants from seven majority Muslim countries- Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan,Libya, and Somalia- for ninety days. The lower court ruled to temporarily block the executive order on the following grounds, a) there is not enough evidence to support that the ban would prevent "irreparable injury", b) the government was being shifty about the exact terms of the ban, c) the Trump administration was arguing that the courts did not have the authority to arbitrate the executive action, d) states' opposed the action on the grounds that it would interfere with businesses and universities, and e) religious discrimination is unconstitutional. I think that this is an interesting and important article for all to read because it's important to stay educated about the acts of discrimination in order to combat them. The final line of our pledge of allegiance is "with liberty and justice for ALL", and any administration that tries to challenge the foundations of our country must be stopped.