Tag Archives: Tenth Amendment
When ‘pockets of resistance’ arise in these rural towns, the federal government dispatches yet more contractors who produce propaganda films and entire assimilation public relations programs to force compliance, if not silence in communities that resist. Meanwhile, states like Texas, … Continue reading
As the nationwide collapse of ObamaCare has earned the growing ire and mistrust of voters, the Obama administration is now seemingly trying to minimize the political fallout in upcoming elections with an audacious plan: challenging state efforts to curb voter fraud. Spearheading this effort is Attorney General Eric Holder and a Justice Department increasingly famous for playing hardball politics in court.
With its polarizing policies on a range of hot-button issues, the Obama administration has sharply divided the American electorate. This has breathed new vigor into federalism, as these initiatives have invited a backlash at the state level on a comparable array of issues. In turn, these challenges to federal authority have resurrected hoary theories of such luminaries as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and largely forgotten political figures at the very opposite end of the ideological and historical spectrum where the current president sits.
On April 2, 2013, the United Nations General Assembly voted to approve a treaty supported by the Obama administration that will restrict the export of firearms to countries with poor human rights records. The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is being described as a gun control measure that will keep firearms out of the hands of insurgents, terrorists and organized crime.
The death penalty is itself experiencing a slow death. This demise is the product of the same alliance of criminal-defense lawyers and activist judges who have done so much in recent decades to undermine public safety. In few arenas is the success of their joint handiwork clearer that in their effort to slow down executions with endless appeals, to the point that capital punishment is becoming all but meaningless.
In its current term, the U.S. Supreme Court will weigh in on many crucial and emotionally charged issues affecting the nation. These range from voting rights to same-sex marriage to race-based college admissions policies. The intensity of these disputes was on full display on February 27 during the court’s oral argument on the Voting Rights Act. Unusually visceral questioning from Justices Antonin Scalia and Sonia Sotomayor, representing opposite ends of the court’s ideological spectrum, offered a glimpse into the raw conflicts coming to a boil before the high court.