JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Twitter Layoffs Spark the Latest Accusations of Sexism in Tech
Brief #76 – Technology Policy
By Mindy Spatt
Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter has sparked outrage, layoffs and lawsuits. But the news of a sex discrimination suit by laid off employees is no surprise; it is not the first for Musk or Twitter, and the tech industry is notorious for its unequal treatment of women.
Ukraine’s Effort to Maintain Its Infrastructure
Brief #161 – Foreign Policy
By Yelena Korshunov
There is another day in the city of Odessa when people are surviving without water, power, and heat. It is 34F on the streets and a little bit warmer in apartments. Adults throw extra blankets on children and wrap themselves in another layer. How long have they been living in this cold and darkness, just trying to survive? A week, a month? In the chilly morning some of them go to work. It’s cold there as well. However, power generators work 7/24 in hospitals, precincts, and some stores.
House Republicans’ Inability to Select a Speaker Foreshadows How They Will Govern
Brief #48 – Elections & Politics
By Ian Milden
The new terms for members of Congress will start in a few weeks. Current House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has yet to secure enough votes to become the next Speaker of the House. This brief will explain why he doesn’t have the votes yet and what it could mean for the next two years in the House of Representatives.
The Week That Was # 1
Brief #160 – Foreign Policy
By Abran C
President Biden hosted a US-Africa summit last week with 49 African leaders in Washington DC. It is the first such gathering in eight years, it comes after a strenuous time with African leaders’ relationships with former president Trump’s who alienated many leaders with controversial policy decisions and insulting comments. Africa, a continent with 1.2 billion people, only accounts for just over 1% of US foreign trade.
The Ukraine Crisis: Situation Update #17
Brief #159 – Foreign Policy
By Abran C
The US military has announced that it would be expanding its training of Ukrainian military personnel in Germany. Pentagon spokesman Brigadier General Patrick Ryder said the new training would include approximately 500 Ukrainians per month and would not require any increase in US troop deployments to Europe. Additionally, this week the US also announced it would send the Patriot air defence system to Ukraine, something Ukrainian President Zelensky has sought out for some time.
Legislative Priorities for the New Congress, Part 2
U.S. Resist News Op Ed
U.S. Resist News
Legislative Priorities for the New Congress, Part 2 – The US Mid-Term Elections resulted in a near political stalemate. Democrats will continue their control of the Senate. Republicans will have a slim majority in the House. Many observers think it will be next to impossible to get anything done in this environment.
On the other hand, there seem to be a sprinkling of Congresspersons on both sides willing to cross over on specific issues. Therefore we are hopeful that the next session of Congress, as well as the current lame-duck session, will result in some meaningful legislation
Court of Appeals For The Eleventh Circuit Takes Down Judge Cannon’s Mar – a – Lago Rulings
Brief #198 – Civil Rights
By Rodney A. Maggay
On December 1, 2022 the United States Court of Appeal for the Eleventh Circuit issued its ruling in the case Trump v. United States of America. The case was an appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and is popularly known as the Mar – a – Lago documents case.
Morocco and the World Cup
Brief #158 – Foreign Policy
By Reilly Fitzgerald
The tournament is set for an intriguing and compelling final few matches. The last time a South American nation won the World Cup was Brazil in 2002; and the last time Argentina has won a World Cup was 1986. Argentinian superstar Lionel Messi will lead his team into their semi-final match tomorrow against Croatia, a team that has never won the World Cup, but finished in second place in the last World Cup hosted in Moscow in 2018.
Legislative Priorities for the New Congress
Us Renew News Op Ed
U.S. Resist News
The US Mid-Term Elections resulted in a near political stalemate. Democrats will continue their control of the Senate. Republicans will have a slim majority in the House. Many observers think it will be next to impossible to get anything done in this environment.
On the other hand, there seem to be a sprinkling of Congresspersons on both sides willing to cross over on specific issues. Therefore we are hopeful that the next session of Congress, as well as the current lame-duck session, will result in some meaningful legislation.
America’s Minimum Wage Debate: Is It Time for an Increase?
America’s Minimum Wage Debate: Is It Time for an Increase?
Economic Policy Brief #134 | By: Inijah Quadri | August 21, 2022
Header photo taken from: The All-Nite Images / Flickr
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more economic policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Hyre
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The current federal minimum wage in the United States is $7.25 an hour. Despite being below the poverty line for a country like the USA, the minimum wage has not seen any increase since 2009.
There has been some level of advocacy at the federal level, such as we had with President Obama in 2015, but nothing really was done to raise wages, even after his rallying cry. This has led to even more advocacy for an increase in the federal minimum wage, as increases regularly happen at the state level without any issues.
Policy Analysis
Arguments for and Against an Increase
Arguments for a minimum wage increase typically fall into one of two categories: economic and moral. The economic argument is that a minimum wage increase will help to reduce poverty and inequality, while the moral argument is that a minimum wage increase is morally right because it gives workers a fair day’s pay for an honest day’s work.
However, there are also arguments against a minimum wage increase, chief among them being that it will lead to job losses and decreased economic growth. However the strength of this argument diminishes as the length of time without a minimum wage increase lengthens and the cost of living index climbs.
How Much Does the Minimum Wage in the USA Compare to Other Countries?
As we just noted, in the United States, the minimum wage is currently $7.25 an hour. This is far below the necessary cost of living in all American states. While some other developed and developing countries may have a lower or higher minimum wage on paper, the cost of living is very important to consider.
A worker in a European country like Poland, for example, would need to earn Poland’s minimum wage of 18.3 zloty (about $4) to maintain an average standard of living. The same goes for a country like Japan, where despite having a minimum wage of 961 yen (about $7.30) per hour, this minimum wage is enough to live an average life.
The key differences lie in the fact that America’s federal minimum wage isn’t indexed to inflation, which means that it hasn’t kept up with inflationary changes over time.
Photo taken from: Al Schaben, Los Angeles Times, Getty Images
(click or tap to enlargen)
State Minimum Wages in the USA
When it comes to minimum wage, the United States is an absolute mess. There are currently 30 different states that have a minimum wage above the federal minimum wage, which stands at $7.25 an hour. This arrangement creates an incredibly confusing and chaotic landscape for employers and workers alike—not to mention it’s crazy that one country has so many different minimum wages.
It is important to note that not all states have increased their minimum wages at the same rate; some have done so more slowly than others. Some use the federal minimum wage, and other states have a minimum wage lower than the federal minimum.
For example, California has a statewide minimum wage of $15 an hour, Washington has a rate of $13.50 an hour, and Oregon has a rate of $13.50 an hour. Meanwhile, the federal rate is still well below the amount required to support a family without working full-time.
Photo taken from: economics.org
Should the Federal Minimum Wage Be Increased?
As we just mentioned, the federal minimum wage in the United States is not enough to live on. In fact, a full-time worker earning the federal minimum wage would only earn $15,080 per year. This is not enough to support a family. As such, the minimum wage should be raised to help low-income families.
As you have seen, many states have already increased their minimum wages above the federal level, and more are considering doing so. These types of wage-increase policies have been put in place by these states to help improve the lives of low-income Americans and make sure they have enough money to live on.
What Are Some Possible Solutions to the Minimum Wage Debate?
A sudden increase in the minimum wage would increase the paychecks of low-income workers, but it could also lead to job losses. As such, a possible solution would be to increase the federal minimum wage over a period of several years. Since the higher of the two minimum wages (State or Federal) is what is paid to staff all across the USA, this is a plan that would work all across the country. By increasing minimum wages slowly until it keeps pace with inflation, workers will benefit greatly.
Additionally, businesses wouldn’t have to make a large change all at once and they could adjust as needed.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is clear that the minimum wage debate is one that will rage on for some time to come. States are continuing to pass their own minimum wage laws, each with its own set of mandates and exceptions. The adequacy of the current $7.25 per hour federal minimum wage in the face of today’s inflationary economic pressures may be a proposition endorsed by a few conservative economists. However, there is no question that something needs to be done to help those struggling to make ends meet.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Investopedia.com: (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080515/minimum-wages-can-raise-unemployment.asp)
National Conference of State Legislatures: (https://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/state-minimum-wage-chart.aspx#:~:text=Landon%20Jacquinot-,Summary,wage%20of%20%247.25%20per%20hour)
Patriot Accounting, LLC.: (https://www.patriotsoftware.com/blog/accounting/average-cost-living-by-state/)
Pew Research Center: (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/20/the-u-s-differs-from-most-other-countries-in-how-it-sets-its-minimum-wage/)
The White House Archives: (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/raise-the-wage)
Protecting Digital Privacy With the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act
Protecting Digital Privacy With the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act
Civil Rights Policy Brief #193 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | August 22, 2022
Header photo taken from: Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability (PPSA)
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more civil rights policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: NBC News
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In early 2020 the Wall Street Journal first broke a story claiming that federal agencies were acquiring cellphone data information to be used for enforcement of immigration policies.
In response to the story, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agencies for the release of documents related to how the government acquires cell phone location information. The ACLU subsequently brought a lawsuit to compel production of the information and eventually added the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Coast Guard and other DHS departments to the list of agencies from which the ACLU was requesting information.
The ACLU did receive a significant amount of information from the agencies, which resulted in a surprising discovery. Based on its review of information received the ACLU found that DHS was spending millions of dollars to buy cell phone location tracking information from a number of non – government data broker companies.
A data broker, or information broker, is a company that collects data or information from any public source, and sometimes from private transactions, and then sells the information to a third party. The sale of this information to the government occurs without any legal protections such as a search warrant and does not prohibit the government from using the purchased data as part of a criminal investigation.
In response to the investigation by the Wall Street Journal and the FOIA request by the ACLU, Senators Ron Wyden of Oregon and Rand Paul of Kentucky introduced the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. This bill proposes to close the gap in the law that permits data brokers to sell personal information of American citizens to the government without any court oversight. LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
The Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act is an important bill because it will close a legal loophole that has emerged with the rise of private digital information.
The bill was sponsored in both houses of Congress by a significant number of members from both sides of the aisle indicating broad bipartisan support. Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure issues is one that appeals to both parties because of privacy issues and the desire to keep law enforcement from unneccessarily digging into a person’s intimate information without a proper search warrant.
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that people have a right against “unreasonable searches and seizures” and that a search warrant shall only be issued based on probable cause. In 2018, the Supreme Court decided Carpenter v. U.S., which decided that the U.S. Government must have a search warrant in order to acquire cell phone tracking records from a third party.
However, the government has found a way to avoid the warrant requirements required by the Fourth Amendment. What the Wall Street Journal investigation and the ACLU’s FOIA request has shown is that the government was using a work around in order to bypass getting a search warrant to acquire cell phone tracking information.
Instead of having to apply to a court for the cell phone tracking information – which would have taken time to compile evidence for a probable cause determination by a judge – the government decided to just buy the information from two data broker companies, Venntel and Babel Street.
The actions by the government, while not in violation of any specific law, still goes against the abuses that the Fourth Amendment was designed to protect against.
Photo taken from: Electronic Frontier Foundation
(click or tap to enlargen)
That amendment was designed to protect the privacy of all persons from unreasonable searches and seizures and intrusions into their private lives and affairs without a warrant supported by a showing of probable cause.
By buying cell phone tracking information from data brokers the government can seize large troves of information to go through without having to show the requisite probable cause, without having a neutral judge scrutinize the evidence and make a decision whether a warrant should issue and allows the government to look without limitations through so much digital info that might not even be relevant or connected to a specific investigation.
The government might never need to apply for a search warrant ever again if it would be permitted to go down this road of buying cell phone tracking info and other digital info from third parties.
Photo taken from: security.org
Luckily, a bipartisan group of Senators and Representatives have recognized this problem and have introduced a bill to fix this legal loophole that government agencies are exploiting. Under the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act the bill will require a court order to force data brokers to reveal the data they’ve compiled, prohibits the purchase of data of American citizens by the government from third parties and extends privacy laws to companies that own data cables and cell towers.
This is significant because it brings into line with Fourth Amendment law the curious situation that had developed with the purchase of digital data by the government. There is a specific framework that government and intelligence agencies had to follow whenever they sought personal private information of persons in their investigations. It just so happened that data purchases from third parties were not adequately addressed in the law. With the rise of massive digital information that people put online and carry with them on their cell phone and in cloud based services, it became inevitable that the government would need to access information platforms in the course of their investigative duties.
This bill, if passed, will ensure that the government does not get a free pass in acquiring digital data. Now it will only get the information they want through accepted procedures such as applying to a judge for a search warrant. And it ensures that other privacy safeguards will be in place whenever the government deals with cell phone tracking technology and other digital data available from data and information brokers. Due to the broad support in Congress the bill looks likely to pass with a close vote not expected at all. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact rodwood@email.com.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Office of Senator Ron Wyden – Oregon – press release on the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – information on the case ACLU v. Department of Homeland Security.
Powder Keg – How the War in Ukraine Could Disrupt the Global Skiing Industry!
Powder Keg – How the War in Ukraine Could Disrupt the Global Skiing Industry!
Foreign Policy Brief #144 | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | August 16, 2022
Header photo taken from: snowonly (.com)
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: TBA
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
The war in Ukraine has had an impact on global markets. Ukraine is a mass producer of wheat and other food items. They also are a manufacturing hub for alpine and cross country skis with a factory in Mukachevo, Ukraine, owned by Austrian-based company, Fischer Sports. Fischer is one of the leading manufacturers of skis and other skiing-related items such as ski boots and ski poles.
According to the Cross Country Ski Areas Association, based in Vermont, Ukraine produces half of the skis sold globally each and every year; globally there are around four million skis manufactured each year. This is not just a problem for Fischer but for most major ski companies who allow Fischer to manufacture at least some of their skis for them, these brands include Rossignol, Alpina, and Scott.
According to Planet Ski, there are many other ski manufacturing factories inside of Ukraine that have been impacted by the war. Rossignol, though they use the Mukachevo facility owned by Fischer, has a factory outside of Lviv; and Technica also has a factory in-country. These factories all ceased operations directly after the war broke out in Ukraine. However, they have slowly started to come back online as the Russian military has been pushed eastward and much of the invasion stalled.
Policy Analysis
The war in Ukraine has had major consequences in terms of disrupting the global supply chains and also impacting consumers by seeing price hikes globally; and most notably, at the gas pump.
According to the New Hampshire Business Review, Fischer has a company presence in New Hampshire with about a dozen or so employees. The war has disrupted their business in Ukraine because trains that, were once used to move goods, are being used to move people or supplies for the war effort.. The NH Business Review also cites that the largest import from Ukraine to New Hampshire is ski-related goods, which usually brings in around $8 million to the state economy.
This is not the first time that the Fischer factory in Mukachevo had to cease operations; back in early October, 2020, there was a fire in the facility which halted operations. However, the timing of that issue was late enough in the year that most of the skis for that year had been manufactured and shipped globally. The fire did not help the manufacturing of skis; but neither did the COVID-19 Pandemic, which saw demand for all sporting goods increase dramatically.
The Cross Country Ski Areas Association discussed the role of the “bullwhip effect”, in one of their reports; which suggests that the increase in demand that retail shops are seeing from consumers (which has increased since the start of the pandemic) is leading those shops to order more hard goods from manufacturers and those manufacturers are having a difficult time meeting those demands.
Photo taken from: fasterskier.com
(click or tap to enlargen)
This difficulty in meeting demands often leads to late shipments or extremely long wait-times for the consumer to receive their goods, which may lead consumers to spend their money elsewhere, and potentially on an entirely different sport; and once the manufacturers produce more goods to meet that extra demand, the need for the demand is gone and retailers are left with goods that no one wants to buy anymore.
Some of the major ski manufacturing companies have factories in other countries in Europe, like Austria for example, and also in China. These companies are able to absorb some of the issues that have arisen out of the closing of the Ukrainian factories; however, some of these factories specialize in specific skis.
For example, Rossignol has a facility in China that they use to make beginner or entry-level ski goods. According to an article by the SF Ski Club, retail goods could be delayed until October for their arrival to ski shops around the world. The article also included the perspective of a Nordic ski store owner in Missoula, Montana, who said that they are not seeing much of these disruptions occurring because they sell the high-end skis that are often produced in the companies’ home country, for Fischer that would be Austria.
It is unclear how these disruptions and increased demand will play out this coming ski season. However, consumers should plan ahead and be patient when buying new skis, as the estimates for when skis could arrive are as early as late August or as late as mid-October.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Cross Country Ski Areas Association ( https://ccsaa.org/ )
Planet Ski ( https://planetski.eu/ )
Sporting Goods Intelligence Europe ( https://www.sgieurope.com/ )
Who’s Missing from the Roe v. Wade Conversation?
Who’s Missing from the Roe v. Wade Conversation?
Health & Gender Policy Brief #141 | By: Chelsea Dade | August 16, 2022
Header photo taken from: Simone Noronha / NBC
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health and gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Boston University
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Turn on the news and at least one of the segments will bring up the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. You might briefly hear about the case that got us to this point, Dobbs vs Jackson. When the Supreme Court issues its decision that the US does not confer a right to abortion, it overruled Roe v. Wade, as well as a related case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey. What happens next is states are left with the decision of whether to ban abortion. But at least 13 states had “trigger laws” in place, which allowed abortion to be immediately banned if Roe v. Wade was no more. And now the impact of this overturning has begun.
But I guarantee you didn’t know that in 2019, the nationwide abortion rate was 23.8 per 1,000 Black women compared with 6.6 per 1,000 white women (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021). While mainstream media may be showcasing wealthy white women on your TV in reference to abortion rights, the issue will disproportionality hurt Black women and trans and nonbinary people. This is one of the insidious ways that disparities start, in biased coverage that overlooks the full story. So, let’s dig into who’s missing from the Roe v. Wade discussion.
Policy Analysis
Trans and Non-binary people
Abortion doesn’t only impact “women,” but most coverage forgets this. The current reproductive rights conversation fails to cover how the overturning of Roe v. Wade hurts transgender and non-binary people. As people who can become pregnant, they have an equal say in this fight. When the overturning news broke , the ACLU eloquently responded with, “The fight for abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights go hand in hand because they are both ultimately about protecting our bodily autonomy” (ACLU, 2022).
Black women
I’ve already pointed out that Black women are largely missing from the current Roe v. Wade overturn conversation. Now let’s talk about why. And get this… the answer is complex. There are a handful of Black-led reproductive justice organizations who have been sounding the alarm on the chance that R v. W could be no more for decades. Did anyone listen? Probably not or else we might be in a different situation.
Photo taken from: Graphic House / Hulton Archive / Getty Images
(click or tap to enlargen)
Reproductive justice issues historically impact Black women and racialized women and non-binary people, yet most repro organizations are run by cis-gender white women. So decision-making power remains out of reach for people of color, in essence, maintaining the legacy of “white feminism”.
If you regularly see a white-centric viewpoint when it comes to abortion rights, it’s because the leadership that promote this viewpoint is also white.
Black women and trans and non-binary people are missing from discussions around Roe v. Wade due to a history of overlooking reproductive equity and centering cisgender and wealthy white women. But just because this is the case doesn’t mean that there is nothing you can do to help rewrite this narrative.
Follow and attend events led by reproductive justice organizations (listed below) and reach out to your local and state legislators.
- National Network of Abortion Funds
- National Women’s Law Center
- National Women’s Law Center
- SisterSong Women of Color
- New Voices for Reproductive Justice
- New Voices for Reproductive Justice
- SisterLove, Inc
- SisterReach
- SPARK Reproductive Justice NOW
- The Afiya Center
- Women With a Vision
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
The National Network of Abortion Funds can point you to your local organization. Donate to an abortion fund now.
Are the Handcuffs Tightening Around Trump?
Are the Handcuffs Tightening Around Trump?
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #43 | By: Maureen Darby-Serson | August 11, 2022
Header photo taken from: CBS
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more elections & politics policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: CNN
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
As many know, former President Donald Trump has several investigations opened against him currently. However, are you aware that the actual amount of the major investigations is seven?
He is currently dealing with 7 major state and federal investigations, some related to the 2020 elections, some related to the January 6th riots, and some related to his handling of White House documents, as we saw with the recent FBI search of his Palm Beach Resort at Mar-a-Lago. What is that status of each of these investigations and how close are these to nailing Trump to the wall?
Policy Analysis
Manhattan District Attorney Investigation – The Manhattan DA is currently investigating Donald Trump and the Trump Organization for white collar crimes.
This investigation stalled briefly when two individuals on the case resigned but the DA assured the public that the case continues and that grand juries are still being held to bring potential charges against the former President and/or his organization.
January 6th Riot DOJ Investigation – The US Department of Justice is investigating the January 6th riots and the former president’s involvement in the attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
They have been using evidence from the January 6th committee investigations and hearings, among investigations of their own, to file subpoenas and get warrants for records. This investigation is currently ongoing, and the DOJ is interviewing and going over documents every day.
Investigation into Trump’s Finances and Tax Returns – There are several investigations into Donald Trump’s finances and tax returns, both on the federal and state level, with the Manhattan District Attorney investigation being one of them.
Photo taken from: The Hill / AP Photo / Mary Altaffer
(click or tap to enlargen)
Congress has also been trying to get their hands on his tax returns since he began his presidency.
Earlier this week, a court ruled that the US House panel had a right to Trump’s tax returns, so these investigations are still in the works and moving forward.
NY Attorney General investigation into Trump’s Finances – Earlier this week, Donald Trump refused to answer any questions from the NY Attorney General regarding his business practices and information regarding his organization.
The NYS AG is investigating the Trump Organization and Trump businesses for various fraud related activities that allowed Trump to obtain favorable loans. He allegedly only answered questions about his name and invoked his 5th amendment right more than 400 times. The NY Attorney General now has to decide whether to move forward with suing him or seeking a monetary penalty settlement.
January 6th Committee investigation – The January 6th Committee is still holding public and private hearings. They are interviewing people daily and working on getting more information into Donald Trump’s culpability into what happened on at the Capital on January 6th.
Georgia 2020 Election Interference Investigation – While Donald Trump has not been a direct target of this investigation yet, last month Georgia officials toyed with the notion of seeking his testimony in their investigation into what happened in their state during the 2020 election. In the meantime, they have taken aim at those around Trump. For example, one of Trump’s closest advisors, Rudy Giuliani, was ordered to testify in the Georgia investigation.
Photo taken from: Adele Morgan / Wall Street Journal
Classified documents DOJ investigation – As most of us saw recently, the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago, looking for classified White House documents that Donald Trump allegedly took with him after his presidency ended. Trump has previously turned over boxed of documents to the National Archives that he took from the White House after his presidency that he should not have taken to Mar-a-Lago, which is what prompted the discussion on whether he had more documents.
According to the Wall Street journal, there may have been an insider who told the FBI that Trump still had documents, some of which could have been classified, at Mar-a-Lago, prompting the raid.
In addition, the DOJ released the search warrant and information related to the raid on Friday. The FBI went in looking for documents related to nuclear weapons and recovered various boxes filled with classified and top-secret documents.
To sum it all up, there is a lot going on. Only time will tell where all of these investigations go. We will have to keep an eye on them all and it is important to do so as the 2024 elections grows closer.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Investigations: https://www.npr.org/2022/08/11/1116800904/trump-investigations
Wall Street Journal Article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-quest-for-trump-documents-started-with-breezy-chats-tour-of-a-crowded-closet-11660169349?mod=hp_lead_pos2
Search Warrant:
DOJ, Trump, and Jan 6th: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/justice-department-investigating-trumps-actions-part-jan-6-probe-rcna40167
Supreme Court Abortion Decision Sparks New Privacy Concerns
Supreme Court Abortion Decision Sparks New Privacy Concerns
Health and Gender Policy Brief #140 | By: Alexandra Ellis | August 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: The Houston Chronicle
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health and gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Kaiser Health
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
On June 24, 2022, the United States Supreme Court released the published opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.19-1392, 597 U.S. ___. In a 6-3 majority opinion, a group of unelected officials stripped people bare of the right to choose whether they will carry a pregnancy to term and left this determination up to the states.
In the wake of this decision, people who have the capacity to carry a baby to term are increasingly worried about how their personal data will be used against them. People are afraid that their personal cellphone, social media, or purchasing data will be tracked to inform the state or federal government whether or not they are pregnant.
Policy Analysis
Photo taken from: BuzzFeed
Overturning Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, is an assault not just on the right to bodily autonomy, but on privacy itself. The 9th amendment provides, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” In overturning Roe v. Wade, people are asking what is actually private anymore?
As the Supreme Court ruling is being questioned, a mass panic has arisen online. People are posting tips on how to contact app companies asking them to delete personal data obtained from the app.
For example, Houston women are deleting period tracking apps, citing privacy concerns: Many are concerned the personal health data could be obtained as part of an investigation or a lawsuit related to a prohibited abortion, Houston Chronicle ( July 1, 2022) https://www.houstonchronicle.com/lifestyle/renew-houston/health/article/Period-tracking-apps-spark-panic-after-Roe-v-17279151.php. Other conversations of panic center on how data from credit cards, stores, or online shopping will be used against women in ways that might indicate someone was pregnant.
Through this, a conversation has developed concerning the right to privacy to one’s own data – a conversation that has long lingered in the public conscience as online ads become more personal and targeted. Specifically, people are concerned that States with abortion bans will use their period tracking data against them in potential litigation.. Is that crazy?
After a century long assault, unelected officials got to decide whether or not someone can bring a pregnancy to term. They did this with little judicial precedent and in truth showed their hands as judicial activists. The now question becomes after Roe v. Wade has been overturned, what does the right to privacy still entail?
Misinformation Money
Misinformation Money
Technology Policy Brief #64 | By: Maureen Darby-Serson | August 9, 2022
Header photo taken from: Stephen Maturen / Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more technology policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: The New York Times / Briana Sanchez
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Last month, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones was ordered to pay the families of the Sandy Hook massacre over $49 million in damages for spreading false claims that the mass shooting was a hoax. He was forced to pay to a group of parents that sued him and to an individual parent that sued him separately. And this is just one recent instance of a conspiracy theorist being forced to face the music after making hurtful claims about individuals or events.
Recently, there has been a significant increase in the number of defamation cases over misinformation and fake news. Many of these cases end in the defendant paying large sums to the plaintiffs for damages. How and why are these conspiracy theorists being told to pay this much money?
Policy Analysis
Defamation suits are lawsuits where one party (the plaintiff) sues another party (the defendant) because they have been “injuring their reputation”. So, Sandy Hook parents sued Alex Jones for saying that the mass shooting was staged and that they were all paid actors. The parents argued that this hurt their reputations. They won this argument.
How can Alex Jones pay that much money? Because he has made his $135 million fortune off selling misinformation to anyone who would listen. Many of the past defamation suits for defamation have been with major money makers.
For example, Fox News reached a settlement in 2020 to pay the family of a Democratic National Committee staffer who was shot during a robbery gone bad. But Fox News reported that this staffer was behind the 2016 presidential election leaked emails and he was murdered for leaking those emails. The leak turned out to have been carried out by Russian hackers.
Photo taken from: Matt Miller / The Washington Post / Getty Images
(click or tap to enlargen)
The question of why misinformation like this gets spread cannot be answered but at least the courts are getting it right and awarding the large sums of money conspiracy theorists make off of the pain of others to those who suffer the most.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Monkeypox: Is the Biden Administration Learning from COVID-19 Mistakes?
Monkeypox: Is the Biden Administration Learning from COVID-19 Mistakes?
Health & Gender Policy Brief #139 | By: Geoffrey Small | August 8, 2022
Header photo taken from: Mario Tama / Getty Images
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more health and gender policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: The U.N. Report Preventing the Next Pandemic
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
A 2020 United Nations report outlined multiple factors contributing to the likelihood that the world will experience another pandemic. Global issues such as unsustainable agriculture, population growth, and climate change will have a significant impact on the severity and frequency of the next zoonotic diseases like monkeypox and COVID-19. The report recommended better overall international coordination.
This includes investing in the One Health perspective, where the public health response is coordinated across multiple disciplines, organizations, and sovereigns. Strengthening relationships with the WHO (World Health Organization) and improving international emergency response is necessary. Also, One Health promotes protections of marginalized groups from the unmitigated spread of disease.
On July 23rd, the WHO Director General declared that the global monkeypox outbreak is a public health emergency of international concern. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the Trump Administration’s lack of cooperation during the initial outbreak. The question remains whether or not the Biden Administration has learned from past mistakes when responding to monkeypox.
Policy Analysis
Photo taken from: The U.N. Report Preventing the Next Pandemic
The U.N. One Health approach also emphasizes protections and support for marginalized groups. This strategy can decrease the likelihood of an unmitigated spread of disease in certain communities with accessibility issues.
Marginalized groups are also more likely to be stigmatized and become targets of hate during an outbreak. It is well known that Asian minorities have become victims of discrimination and violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The LGBTQ community is now at risk with the spread of monkeypox. Equality California and three other major LGBTQ organizations recently sent a letter to the Director of the CDC requesting expanded testing and more vaccines.
The letter also advocates for a change in the name. It states the name monkeypox is discriminatory and misleading, as the U.S. version has no clear link to the original West African strain.
The letter cites CDC and WHO’s reported concerns that the majority of confirmed transmissions are in transgender, gay, and bisexual communities.
Despite the delay, the Biden Administration may have offered a reprieve by declaring a nation-wide public health emergency, which can expand access to vaccines and testing that the LGBTQ community needs. However, the consequences of the delay remain uncertain.
Organizations like Equality California and GLAAD are spreading awareness about monkeypox in the LGBTQ community. Biden is taking steps to embrace The U.N. One Health perspective more than the Trump administration.
However, Biden’s delay in declaring a public health emergency lacked international coordination. Donating to these organizations can help encourage The U.S. to be more proactive in protecting the LGBTQ community from unchecked spread of monkeypox and discrimination.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on resource URL to visit links where available
Advance with Caution: Analyzing the Implications of Potential Supreme Court Reforms
Advance with Caution: Analyzing the Implications of Potential Supreme Court Reforms
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #42 | By: Ian Milden | August 8, 2022
Header photo taken from: Jeff Swensen / Getty Images – Interest Groups
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more elections & politics policy briefs from the top dashboard
Photo taken from: Mandel Ngan / Getty / The Atlantic
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
In wake of the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health decision overturning Roe v Wade, there have been calls to reform the Supreme Court. In this brief, I will examine the implications of potential reforms. Specifically, I will look at reforms to the nomination process, expanding the court, and term limits.
Policy Analysis
Reforming the Nomination Process
Currently, the President of the United States nominates someone to be a Supreme Court Justice. The Senate gets to evaluate the nominee and choose to confirm or reject a nominee.
This system helps maintain the system of checks and balances between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. If you take the power to nominate a Supreme Court Justice away from the President, that removes the Executive Branch check from the Judicial Branch. “The President is also unlikely to give up that power as Presidents view Supreme Court appointments as an important part of their legacy. Presidents have had a recent tendency to nominate people with experience as judges in lower courts or state courts.
Some activists have called for reforms focused on the involvement of interest groups in the selection of nominees.
Activists tend to focus on the relationship between the Republican Party and the Federalist Society, which has recommended all of the current Justices who were appointed by Republican Presidents. Republicans will continue to take the advice of the Federalist Society because Republican voters view judicial nominations as an important voting issue.
Changes in voter behavior would be the most likely thing to discourage Republicans from selecting conservative nominees to the Supreme Court in the future.
Photo taken from: FiveThirtyEight
Expanding the Court
Some activists frustrated with the current makeup of the Supreme Court have called for adding additional Justices to increase the chances of getting their preferred verdicts.
In the early years of the country, Congress altered the number of Justices on the Supreme Court. However, this number has remained at nine Justices since 1869 and has become an accepted norm. In 1937, Franklin Roosevelt made the most notable attempt to expand the Supreme Court when he had a supermajority in Congress.
Not only did he fail to expand the court, but he also divided his party. Opposition from the American Public helped defeat Roosevelt’s plan to expand the Court and it remains unpopular among Americans according to a PBS/NPR poll.
Even if a plan to expand the Supreme Court passed, there would be little to prevent the Supreme Court from expanding again when Congress and the Presidency come under Republican control. Continual expansion of the Supreme Court dilutes the influence of Supreme Court Justices and harms the Judicial Branch’s ability to be an effective check on the Legislative Branch.
Term Limits
Proponents of term limits argue that this will allow for the easier removal of Justices that they don’t like. However, the consequences of term limits are not well-understood by the public. There have been peer-reviewed academic studies of term limits in state legislatures, which can provide some insight into the potential consequences of term limits on the Supreme Court.
A study examining the effect of term limits on polarization found that term limits led to an increase in partisan polarization because legislators who were termed out of office would be replaced by more partisan successors.
Legislators and candidates also became more dependent on party structures to get through critical tasks such as fundraising to get and maintain their positions. Additional studies on term limits find that term limits harm the capacity of legislators to build subject matter expertise and relationships with other legislators. If term limits were applied to the Supreme Court, the existing body of research on term limits suggests a more partisan and divided Supreme Court that may not have the expertise to handle complicated legal issues.
For an alternative approach to the issue of Supreme Court reform, please see the U.S. RESIST NEWS Op Ed “It’s Time to Reform the Supreme Court.
Assessing Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan
Assessing Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan
Foreign Policy Brief #143 | By: Abran C | August 8, 2022
Header photo taken from: Global Times
Follow us on our social media platforms above
Browse more foreign policy briefs from the top dashboard
Policy Summary
[SSB theme=”Official” align=”center” counter=”true” ]
Photo taken from: Handout / Getty Images
On Tuesday August 2, 2022, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi touched down in Taiwan, becoming the highest-ranking US official to visit the island since former Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1997. Her trip was not officially approved by the Biden administration as a diplomatic mission.
The Chinese government had warned against the visit to the island that it regards as a part of its territory. The US officially recognizes Taiwan as a part of China per the one China policy, yet the US also has a long-standing relationship with Taiwan independent of China, and is its major source of military equipment. The US position regarding Taiwan is known as “strategic ambiguity”, a strategy that’s purpose is to reassure and provide assistance to Taiwan while not enraging China.
As a result of the visit, Beijing announced on August 5, 2022 that it was cancelling major communication channels and cooperation with the US in matters regarding climate change, narcotics, and military action. Beijing also moved to sanction Speaker Pelosi and immediately began military drills, sending warplanes, naval ships, and firing missiles near the island. The US, Japan, Australia, the EU, and ASEAN condemned the military actions and called for calm.
Policy Analysis
The Chinese Foreign Ministry called the Speaker’s actions an “egregious provocation”. The visit has fueled an already escalating crisis, raising fears of conflict in the region, and increased tensions between the US and China.
At last week’s ASEAN meeting top Southeast Asian diplomats urged maximum restraint in the Taiwan Strait, as regional concern over a potential conflict has grown following Pelosi’s visit. Strategic ambiguity has been the U.S. policy toward Taiwan since the 1950s.
While it does not explicitly commit the U.S. to defending Taiwan, after Pelosi’s stop on the island last week, President Biden, when asked again, stated that the US would back Taiwan in the event of a Chinese takeover. Biden’s statements more clearly defining the US position and away from ambiguity likely were made to signal the more dominant US presence in the Asia Pacific that he has sought to establish.
Photo taken from: Li Bingyu / AP
(click or tap to enlargen)
It also displayed a commitment to detering an invasion by a larger power onto a smaller one to capture territory like the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine.
The military drills and show off force by China ended on Sunday and with the new week a new normal between China and Taiwan, and a world with more great power rivalry and less opportunity for cooperation between the two leading global actors has started.