Rudy Giuliani: An Analysis

The United States has had numerous presidents varying in political parties, beliefs, and ethical values. And in a country as diverse in race, religion, and culture as the U.S. is, it does not come as surprise that the country has yet to elect a president in which everyone supports. Every president has their flaws and every action of the White House is controversial and scrutinized. Martin Luther King Jr. once said “The ultimate measure of a man is not of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy”. With every presidency comes controversies which can define the legacy of that president and their impact on the country. Following more present day presidencies, President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration is an extremely controversial topic around the world right now. Using an executive order President Trump has temporarily banned travel from seven countries.

Movies that are based on a book are not always the same. In social studies class, we read a book called Our America. The book is about two boys named LeAlan jones and Lloyd Newman becoming reporters and interviewing people in their neighborhood to show people what it’s like in the ghetto life. The movie that went with the book was very different. In the movie and the book Our America, there were many differences such as Principal Williams momentarily becoming an antagonist, Davis Isay was more important, and Lloyd’s life was focused on more in the movie.

Regarding Erwin Chemerinsky’s article from January 29, 2017, “Op-Ed Trump's cruel, illegal refugee executive order,” I am happy to see this issue raised publicly. I believe Trump’s banned order is unacceptable because it is discriminate, unconstitutional, and inhumane. Firstly, it is discriminate because no one should be banned from entering the Unit States of America base on the nationality. This means any banned nationals with immigrants are not allowed and discriminated with voided visa. Secondly, it is unconstitutional because this order is breaking the first amendment which allows an individual’s region should not favor over another. In the article, Trump also told Christian news that will give Christians a greater help. Thirdly, it is

There are no social injustices that go without affecting the public, and Executive Order 13769 has impacted many people not only in our nation, but also in the periphery, in many different countries around the world. The victims of this social injustice are primarily those from the seven countries, especially Muslims, but anyone who has put their faith in American idealism will experience the fallout from this destruction of our constitutional values. When it comes to accepting refugees now, the White House is essentially prioritizing Christians over Muslims from the Middle East. In fact, in an interview with the Christian broadcasting network a few days after the immigration ban was instated, Donald Trump claimed he would favor Christian refugees as an exception to the executive order (Yulas). People with dual citizenship are being affected now as well by not being able to travel freely outside the country without worry they may not be allowed to return. A specific victim of this injustice, Thon Maker, a rookie on the Milwaukee Bucks, is a native of Sudan, one of the seven countries that Trump has banned for travel (Reports). The National Basketball Association is now concerned with Maker’s ability to travel with his team to Toronto for future games (Reports). The immigration limitation not only affects people living in the seven countries, but also those who care about upholding our values and human rights

Every day in my middle school eighth grade social-studies classroom, I often found myself asking the questions, “Why study history; shouldn’t we let go of the past; why is studying the past important?” Oddly enough, I found my answer to these very questions in a quotation in my social studies textbook. The quote profoundly stated, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” After reading the article, “Then Came War”, the story of unjust racial prejudice against Japanese-Americans in WWII, the answer to my question finally clicked. The story of Japanese Americans in WWII has brought forth many lessons, can be applicable to prejudicial events of our time, and has explanations and the impact of racial prejudice and stereotypes.

Sixty five years after it first became law, the act still remains a cornerstone of the United States foreign affairs. In the text, it states that “whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may… suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants.” This part of the law is what has caused much controversy today. President Trump argues his right to ban muslims using this section of the law. The law is now outdated and the people that living in the country agree the law is in desperate need of a new edition. The 2017 election is not the first time Americans have called out the law. In 1965, President Johnson signed an amendment to the law and was quoted saying “for over four decades, the immigration policy of the United States has been twisted and has been distorted by the harsh injustice of the national origins quota system.” Although he argued as much as he could, Johnson never saw a change in the amendment and although he signed a law eliminating the discriminatory imbalances, the door for people in need was still not wide open. The amendment still never specifically ruled the president unable to deny someone access as Mae Ngai, an immigration historian at Columbia University said, “it doesn’t matter what the reason is,” meaning that though the

I. Newly inaugurated President Donald Trump has recently approved a ban involving the restriction of travel into the United States of immigrants from seven Muslim countries. Since this ban is only for up to 90 days, this is just the beginning of a potentially longer or even permanent ban. This is not the first time he has demonstrated the lack of regard with social equality.

The Travel Ban marks a major turning point in the policies on immigration in the United States. Due to increased terrorist attacks and illegal immigrant numbers rising, it is believed that temporarily banning immigrants from particular countries is key to ensuring safety within the United States. Though many have expressed their concern towards the ban because of its similarity to previous discriminatory and unconstitutional acts. The ban has even been referred to as the “Muslim Ban”.

hoping to get a chance at a better life; others are refugees escaping persecution and civil wars in their home country. Krishnadev Calamur wrote about Donald Trump’s Executive Order 1187 and how Donald Trump had made it his goal to ban all Muslims from the start of his campaign and seeing that those countries were in Barack Obama’s visa-waiver program he took advantage and used it to ban all seven countries (5). The grand result of this ban ended in people coming together to protest at several airports across the country where people with valid documentation were detained. This ban had a great impact that a multitude of citizens, lawyers, demonstrators, and the media descended to witness the order’s impact, but Trump tried to dismiss the reality of the impact by tweeting, “Only 109 people out of 325,000 were detained and held for questioning.” (15), when it was a lot more than that. The S. 2458 introduced n Senate mentions, “To amend section 217(a) (12) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, relating to the restriction of the use of the Visa Waiver Program for aliens who travel to certain countries.” (3). This demonstrates what Hanson and Johnson have been trying to present; that there is no humane way of handling undocumented immigrants and that the day when government has made it possible to fix this problem is far from being created

Back in 2015, Republican Party nominee Trump made his opinion known about his proposals to temporarily ban immigration in the United States. In a press release statement, Trump called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." I see what Trump reasoning is and I think it could be reasonable, but I believe it is still unconstitutional. The Seattle federal judge that suspended Trump’s order, Gordon, states that “the court concludes that the government’s reasons, as provided in the [executive order], are facially legitimate are bona fide but unconstitutional.” I am somewhat in agreement about the ban being reasonable, but you can not say that people from a religion are considered “terrorist” or associate a religion with “terrorist” or terrorism, which Trump is doing. However, although he has a good reasoning it is not enough, because a good purpose doesn’t make anything

After the first week of Donald Trump’s presidency many changes have been occurring in the country. A continuous stream of executive orders signed by the President are causing extreme controversy. Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into The United States, the more moderate version of the “Muslim ban” that President Trump called for during his campaign was signed on Friday. Some people who were still in the air when Trump signed the order were detained or sent back to where they flew in from when they landed. This led to people being detained in airports sparking numerous protests at airports across the country, calling the order unconstitutional. On Saturday, a federal judge temporarily stayed the order, stopping people from being detained and deported from the country.

Ever since the birth of America we have been a country built by immigrants. Many immigrants today come from the war torn middle east and latin America. Unfortunately many associate these immigrants with problems the country is facing leading the Trump administration to take drastic measures to secure our borders. Since the first time Trump mentioned a Muslim ban in December of 2015 many have called into question the legality of his plan to keep the country and our borders secure. On January 27 Trump signed an executive order entry into the U.S from citizens from seven predominantly muslim countries which include Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. Ever since many problems have arisen regarding the legality of Trumps ban. In California Judge Dolly M. Gee ordered that Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan who had been deported to Iran be allowed to return to the U.S arguing that the order violated 14th Amendment and that it also violated one

But with the current scenario, people are being separated from their loved ones because they are born in a specific country! Banning young children and aging grandmothers from the six countries obviously isn’t the right move. Everyone knows that America always had strained relations with Muslim bearing countries and the ban deteriorates it even further. Notably, 97 tech companies suggest that this ban is bad for business (Reilly) Jared A Goldstein states that every president has deemed that anyone of any race, religion can become an American citizen as long as he/she upholds the Constitution (Goldstein) Based on the opposition received by the ban since day one, it is imperative that the people oppose it as much as they can.

The United States of America is a country composed of immigrants. Since its founding in 1776, the U.S. has been a desired place to emigrate due to its Constitutional values and people-elected government. However, as time has gone on, the U.S. has passed more and more acts and laws to restrict immigration. The first major act put in place to restrict immigration was the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, which suspended Chinese immigration for ten years (Guyette). Now, over a hundred years later, another law has been passed in order to limit and restrict immigration from certain countries in the Middle East. Executive Order 13769, supported by Trump, was introduced and put into place for a short time. This order, introduced in January, is highly controversial, as it exudes injustice towards peoples of the Middle East.

One of my favorite art works is La Molendera, or The Woman Grinding Maize, by Diego Rivera. The medium of this painting is oil paint on a horizontal canvas that measures 106.7 x 121.9 cm. When I first see this painting, the woman dressed in white with her hair split in two braids, grinding maize on a stone, is what stands out to me the most. It is traditional for women in Mexico that make tortillas to grind the maize, corn, on a rock. In the background I see three already made tortillas baking on top of a ceramic dish. The colors used in the atmosphere are cool toned, which gives you a sense of calm and a soothing sensation. The main colors used here