POLI 1001 – American Government and Politics Essay

POLI 1001  week 2 American Government and Politics Essay

Keely Gibbons-Bassett
Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Oz, 90210
[Date]October 25, 2015
The Honorable Bill Nelson
State Senator – D
716 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington D.C. 20510

ORDER  HERE A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

The Honorable Bill Nelson,
I’m writing this letter in response to the Sanctuary Cities Bill that will soon be considered by the senate and I would like to urge you to support this bill. It is my understanding that this bill will hold sanctuary jurisdictions accountable for defying the federal law, to increase the penalties for individuals who illegally re-renter the United States after they have already been removed, and to provide protections for the state and local law enforcement officers who cooperate with federal law enforcement.
I support this bill because I believe it is a bill that will improve safety in communities and also help to lower the overall crime rates. This country was founded by immigrants, however, the difference in these situations is the criminal activity. If we want to preserve our nation we cannot let it be run over by illegal aliens who can’t play by the rules.
There are currently over 200 jurisdictions that do not honor U.S. immigration and customs enforcement requests for detention. I realize the theory behind sanctuary cities is to create trust and peace between law enforcement and immigrants. While it is intended to create a safe environment, nearly one fourth of arrested illegal aliens have a felony charge or conviction. (PR, N. 2015). Roughly 1,900 of released offenders will reoffend within an eight month period which accounts for 7,491 new crimes.
The outrage of the murder of Kathryn Steinle by an illegal alien with seven felony convictions and five prior deportations has started a new wave of anger through America. (PR, N. 2015). That is the basis of the importance of this bill going before the senate. The amount of crime in America is overwhelming and I feel that we need to take any steps we can to prevent future crimes.

POLI 1001  week 3 American Government and Politics Essay

Landmark Cases that Impact Society Today
As a strong supporter for equal rights among those historically deemed less than worthy the two landmark cases that stick out the most are United States v Windsor and Obergefell v Hodges. Both cases were decided within the last 5 years, which is a long time coming since the Stonewall Riot in 1969. Homosexuals and transgenders have been struggling for equality for decades simply wanting the same basic rights and protections as every other citizen in America. Since 2010 when don’t ask don’t tell was repealed the wheels to equality finally started gaining speed for rapid changes for this minority.
In October of 2012 the decision came down for United States v Windsor and it was a landmark case that gave Obergefell v Hodges a fighting chance in the Supreme Court. The decision in the Windsor case struck down section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, giving federal benefits and rights to same sex couples who were married in states that had marriage equality. While this was an important step to those couples who had obtained a legal marriage on a federal level, it did nothing for a person who could not travel to a equality state and it also gave no state protections to the couples who traveled to marry but did not live in an equality state. (Wagner, M. 2015). This ruling came at a 5 to 4 majority decision and was decided that article three of the Defense of Marriage Act denied the liberty of the person protected by the 5th Amendment. The majority opinion believed that the constitution prevented the federal government from treating a state sanctioned heterosexual marriages differently than state sanctioned same sex marriages. (Duignan, B. 2014).
In June of 2015 the decision came down for Obergefell v Hodges and it was a landmark case that finally granted equal rights, benefits, and protections to same sex couples who wished to marry. The decision came down that any bans on same sex marriage were unconstitutional and were therefor no longer valid. (Soronen, L. 2015). This decision has left the nation in a fury of debates- some of which are whether or not the Supreme Court had the right to rule, and other debates about whether or not the decision created law, which the Supreme Court cannot do, or struck down laws that were in existence based on the unconstitutionality of them. Many of the presidential hopefuls are promising to repeal this decision and once again deny rights to a specific group of Americans. This decision came at a 5 to 4 majority opinion. The majority opinion was based on the 14th Amendment and the protection of due process and equal protection and the precedence of the Loving v Virginia case. The argument was that Loving did not seek rights to inter-racial marriage, but just the rights to marriage – and they were granted- so in this case, Obergefell (and others) was not seeking the right to same-sex marriage but just the right to marriage. (Soronen, L. 2015)
The cases have more in common than just giving rights to a minority – in both cases the President was Obama and the Chief Justice was John Roberts. Other similarities include that Chief Roberts was not a part of the majority decision and Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote both of the majority opinions. Anthony Kennedy was a 1988 Reagan nominee. John Roberts was a 2005 George Bush nominee. In both cases Robert wrote dissents as to why he disagreed with the majority opinion, who ultimately believes that these decisions should be made by state and not by the federal government. (Mazzie, 2015)
These decisions have a huge impact on society as now the right of marriage is between two consenting adults regardless of their genders. On one side of the line there are people who support this and see this as a win for Love, and on the other side of the line are people that believe this is redefining God’s definition of marriage as one man and one woman. Since the ruling the topic has not stayed out of the news for one reason or another. The advocates are further pushing for more rights and protections to the LGBTQ minority and adversaries are pushing to have this right repealed because they believe it goes against nature. This will likely remain a sore subject for the next couple years but, just like inter-racial marriage, will eventually become normal. These cases extend the same basic rights to all married couples and removes the classification of one group being better than the other.

References
Duignan, B. (2014). United States v. Windsor. Encyclopædia Britannica,

Mazzie L. (2015). The Initial Appeal of Chief Justice John Roberts’ Dissent in Obergefell v. Hodges. From http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2015/07/08/the-initial-appeal-of-chief-justice-john-roberts-dissent-in-obergefell-v-hodges/

Soronen, L. (2015). Cases with Consequences: Recent Supreme Court rulings were game-changers for the states–and not just because of the decisions on health care and same-sex marriage. State Legislatures, 41(8), 19-21.

Wagner, M. (2015). Same-Sex Marriage Ruling. Plan Adviser, 2. POLI 1001 – American Government and Politics Essay