On the first day of his second presidential term, President Donald J. Trump issued Executive Order No. 14160. This executive order is popularly known as the birthright citizenship executive order which purports to make changes to the Birthright Citizenship rule embodied in the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. That rule declares, with modest exceptions, that children born within the geographic territory of the United States are instantly granted United States citizenship. That constitutional rule was later affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark. However, with the ongoing national debate on immigration and immigrants in the United States, President Trump made a campaign promise to abolish the rule in order to try and stem the flow of immigrants from Latin American and South American countries to the United States.
Civil Rights
The Role of the Judiciary Against The Other Branches of Government – A Historical Background (Civil Rights Policy Brief #244)
Just this week a number of reports have surfaced that detailed President Trump’s frustration with the Supreme Court and both the federal and state level judiciary in general.
The Distinction Between Law and Policy And The Role of The Courts
he beginning of President Trump’s second term saw a slew of executive orders on a number of policies and also saw numerous responses to those orders. More than two hundred legal challenges have been brought to oppose the implementation of these executive orders. The results have been mixed.
The Department of Justice Voting Section’s Shift In Priorities
A number of news outlets have recently reported that the United States Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Civil Rights Division Voting Section has changed their mission statement and its priorities.
Resistance is Not Futile: Upholding Civil Rights and Constitutional Norms to withstand Trump’s Autocratic Aims
In his first 100 days in office, President Trump has pursued a sinister goal of autocracy by relentlessly attacking any and all forms of opposition and repressing civil rights and liberties.
The Administration Efforts to Avoid a Judicial Ruling
On April 9, 2025 the House of Representatives voted on the No Rogue Rulings Act bill. The bill was sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA). H.R. 1526 would prohibit a federal district court judge from issuing an injunction or prohibition regarding a case unless the injunction or prohibition only applied to the parties of the particular case before the district judge’s court. The bill passed the House by a vote of 219 – 213 in favor of the bill, almost exclusively on party lines. One Republican voted against the bill, Rep. Mike Turner from Ohio.
A Court’s Options To Enforce Compliance With Court Orders
Under Rule 3.3 of the American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct, titled “Candor Toward the Tribunal,” a lawyer has a number of duties when dealing with a court of law. Rule 3.3(a)(1) states “A lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer. Additionally, Rule 3.3(a)(3) provides “A lawyer shall not knowingly offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. While these are model rules, each state has a version of these rules, including the section on “Candor Toward the Tribunal,” that all lawyers must abide by when dealing with a tribunal or court.
The Pettiness of President Trump Targeting Law Firms For Revenge
On February 25, 2025 President Donald Trump signed an executive order suspending the security clearances of lawyers and staff at the Washington, D.C. law office of the international law firm Covington & Burling. The firm had provided legal services to former Special Prosecutor Jack Smith.
A Comparison of Biden and Trump’s January 20th Pardons
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution provides: The President…shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”
Jack Smith’s Honorable but Frustrating Journey to Prosecute Trump ; January 2025
Jack Smith made sure to state when he resigned that Mr. Trump engaged in an ‘unprecedented criminal effort’ to overturn his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. Additionally, Jack Smith stated that the evidence was there to convict Donald Trump. The only reason why the trials did not go forth was because of DOJ policy that prohibits prosecuting a sitting President.
An Explanation As To Why Special Prosecutor Jack Smith Asked To Dismiss Trump’s Two Criminal Cases
An Explanation As To Why Special Prosecutor Jack Smith Asked To Dismiss Trump's Two Criminal Cases Civil Rights Policy Brief #233 | By: Rod Maggay | December 27, 2024 __________________________________ Policy Summary: On November 25, 2024 Special Prosecutor Jack Smith...
The Right To Vote in the U.S. Constitution – Part Three
In this third part of our series on voting rights, we dive into the role of individual voters who have driven change through ballot initiatives and referendums. From early suffrage movements to recent ballot measures aimed at restricting or expanding voter access, this article explores how citizens have taken the power of voting rights into their own hands—and the impact they’ve made.