Tag Archives: Fox News

Supreme Court of the United States

Established by the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court began to take shape with the passage of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and had its first assembly in 1790. The Supreme Court is the final judge in all cases involving laws of Congress, and the highest law of all — the Constitution.

“The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”

– Article III, Section 1, United States Constitution

The Supreme court is what our country is built on. Cases that make their way all the way up to the Supreme court shape the laws we must all follow. The Supreme Court plays a very important role in our constitutional system of government. First, as the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those looking for justice. Second, due to its power of judicial review, it plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power. Third, it protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm and/or take undue advantage of unpopular minorities. It serves to ensure that the changing views of a majority do not undermine the fundamental values common to all Americans, i.e., freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and due process of


(photo from https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/courtbuilding.aspx)

USA Today list the top 21 Supreme Court Cases you can see some votes were unanimous and some are very close. These cases have divided our country and brought our country together. Cases are heard on a number of items. Race, voting, marriage, marijuana, education, health insurance, slavery and so much more.

Supreme Court Judges hold highest power in our country. So why would we want someone who doesn’t hold our countries laws, morals or values high? We are in a historical time in America. We have an opening on the Supreme Court and it is a controversy like not other in American history.

The sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh date back to his high school and college years — decades ago. There have been several female’s to come forward and say they have had encounters with Kavanaugh that show he should not be on the highest court.

Suddenly it is a he said/she said case. How long is “too long” to be sexually assaulted and come forward?

A “#Why I didn’t Report” movement is being backed my both male and female victims of sexual violence after President Trump questioned the length of time from one accuser. Seven out of 10 victims of sexual assault do not go to authorities.

One google search and you can see both sides posting their opinions. News media coverage on both sides. Each side claiming fake news reports. Blue vs Red. Liberal vs Conservative. We all see the battles. CNN vs FOXNEWS. Each website has their own agenda and projects their own version of the same situation. What can anyone believe anymore? We are so quick to judge, so quick to talk, not a quick to listen and hear the other side. We have an obligation to research and sift through the information out there.


I ask you a question.

Is this about IF he did this?


Is this about the morals and values of a position on the highest court in the US?

What have we become that we are so angry and unable to look at the real question here? What standards do we have for the judges on the highest court in the US?

Interested in our Supreme Court Case History?

Read the cases that have made their way to the Supreme Court. Do these court cases affect you? Do you want someone in our court system that can change these decisions? What rights do you value? What rights are you willing to loose just to stand by a political party that would not stand by you?

Marbury v. Madison, 1803 (4-0 decision)

Established the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review over Congress.

Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857 (7-2 decision)

Denied citizenship to African American slaves.

Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896 (7-1 decision)

Upheld “separate but equal” segregation laws in states.

Brown v. Board of Education, 1954 (9-0 decision)

Separating black and white students in public schools is unconstitutional.

Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963 (9-0 decision)

Criminal defendants have a right to an attorney even if they cannot afford one.

Miranda v. Arizona, 1966 (5-4 decision)

Prisoners must be advised of their rights before being questioned by police.

Roe v. Wade, 1973 (7-2 decision)

Women have a constitutional right to an abortion during the first two trimesters.

United States v. Nixon, 1974 (8-0 decision)

President cannot use executive privilege to withhold evidence from criminal trial.

Bush v. Gore, 2000 (5-4 decision)

No recount of the 2000 presidential election was feasible in a reasonable time period.

District of Columbia v. Heller, 2008 (5-4 decision)

Citizens have a right to possess firearms at home for self-defense.

United States v. Windsor, 2013 (5-4 decision)

Federal government must provide benefits to legally married same-sex couples.

Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015 (5-4 decision)

Same-sex marriage is legalized across all 50 states.

Blog post # 2

Overwhelming Inconsistency

When browsing the internet, I often come across things I agree with and thing that I disagree with. Rarely do I run into any sort of argument that truly baffles me, and it finally happened.

I was looking up recent topics that are currently pretty contentious and I came across a video clip from Fox News regarding the fad known as “the tide pod challenge”. This video clip was of a segment titled “Tomi Lahren’s Final Thoughts” where Tomi Lahren talks about certain issues that are occurring in the United States. As mentioned before, Lahren seems as though she is talking about this “tide pod challenge” but later turns around and starts talking about much more, and in far too little detail.

Lahren’s tactics for explaining why this fad occurs is not filled with any sort of supportive evidence or greater analysis, she basically just says “this is why” and uses large labels. She bashes her own generation for having bad ideas after praising it. She labels the tide pod challenge as a political and parenting issue but says nothing about how or why. Lahren primarily uses contrast between modern day society and parenting methods and more “traditional” methods.

Lahren’s biases show through very clearly and even uses it as a point of attraction for viewers who agree. She has an obvious bias for more traditional thinking and ideas. At the end, Lahren says “The Left, which dictates popular culture, brainwashes young people into believing they live in a world where 64 gender options are up for selection. Everything is free. Beyonce is a God Queen, and eating detergent is funny.” which just brings up completely irrelevant information for the sake of making her non-factual argument, seem more valid in the eyes of those who agree with her views because it is juxtaposed with other contentious topics. These references to other topics shows that she has a very strong bias and is more interested in getting people on her side than sharing news with viewers.

Overall, Tomi Lahren’s inconsistency with topics, lack of supportive evidence or any deeper analysis, and focus on gaining fans over reporting news, makes it tough for me to see why anyone would listen to her for real news.

One of my final thoughs: I don’t even know if she actually thinks these things, she could be an act to please a crowd for all I know. Either way, she is interesting to observe.

LINK TO ARTICLE: http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/01/26/tomi-lahren-tide-pod-challenge-pay-attention-parents-and-do-better

Fox News Doctor Must be High

Of all the blog tasks given to me in class this semester, this was the most challenging. “Find something to criticize.” The sheer volume of B.S. on the internet made it hard to choose just one.

I decided to go for an easy target — Fox News. I watched my fair share of Fox News during the Bush years. It was a great place to gauge points of view contrary to my own. Like being a fly on the wall of my metaphorical political enemy’s bunker.

Running the issues of the day through my head, I wanted something current and relevant.

How about medical marijuana?

Here is an issue I clearly come down on one side of, and I base that decision on the scientific evidence available to us all.  Medical marijuana is safe and effective. I had a feeling that Fox News would take the opposite approach, and boy was I right.

I found an instance of a Fox News “Medical A-Team” member, Dr. David Samadi associating marijuana with heart attacks and crack babies. That’s right — “crack babies.”

I can only assume he means “infants born addicted to crack cocaine” but if he does, it certainly makes no sense to pin the blame on pot. Here is an excerpt of his comments:

We’re seeing in Colorado that we had 13 kids that came to the emergency and ended up in the ICU as a result of overdose from marijuana. Now we have crack babies coming in because pregnant women are smoking this whole marijuana business.

Many bloggers, commenters and journalists have already pointed out the flaws in this asinine argument. One Reddit commentator summarized the views of Fox News’ medical staff:

  • Crack babies are apparently not caused by crack.
  • Death is apparently not a good way to measure if something is dangerous.
  • Some kids OD’d on marijuana which is crazy because he’s the only person in the world they told and that also defies every experiment done in the last 50 or so years. So he should release an actual report or something.
  • Which might be hard because he’s a urologist and has almost literally nothing to do with any medical field that should actually be reporting on cannabis.

Needless to say, my conclusion matches that of the commenter above, though I may not ever be able to state it so eloquently. Let me just say that Fox News, as they often do, had someone commenting way out of their depth about an issue they do not understand.

It’s hard to say if it is ignorance, bias or some ulterior motive. When journalistic standards are so low, it truly could be anything. Consume Fox News at your own peril.