Search Results: should I call

Gift article: No paywall

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/28/opinion/supreme-court-emergency-rulings.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Z08.Irh-.kt6JIwxPFdWD&smid=nytcore-android-share

"The credibility of judges depends on their ability to offer public explanation for the legal basis of their decisions. When judges show their work, the public can assess it by the standards the judiciary sets for itself — reasoning grounded in law and judicial precedent. Without that, judges risk their legitimacy. Clear explanation is especially important for the Supreme Court, which sets national rules. When the court fails to make these rules clear, confusion can set in.

The current Supreme Court is creating precisely this problem by issuing many important rulings as brief, unsigned orders on its so-called emergency docket. On this shadow docket, the votes among the nine justices are not public, and the majorities typically offer little explanation for their decisions. Yet the justices have used the emergency docket this year to hand down a series of rulings allowing President Trump to expand executive power and alter the structure of government.

In following this path, the justices are ducking one of their crucial responsibilities: making persuasive public arguments.

The first problem is the lack of explanation, which leaves the public unable to assess the justices’ reasoning and lower courts and policymakers uncertain about the full meaning of the rulings.

The second problem is the perception of Supreme Court partisanship, which the emergency docket exacerbates via speculation & lack of individual accountability.

The third problem is that the Supreme Court is using this docket to make itself more powerful, too, deciding many of the country’s most pressing political questions in real time. This is a power grab, in which the justices reduce the role of lower courts, where judges are more evenly divided between Republican and Democratic appointees than the justices are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/22/climate/trump-national-park-service-history-changes.html?unlocked_article_code=1.YU8.7cjA.Wof8PF3e0RLq&smid=nytcore-android-share

Gift article - no paywall

Do the following National Park placards need editing of any kind or do you find them historically accurate.

This is the text inset in image 3:

“The artwork depicts George Washington’s hands in the foreground; one with the Fugitive Slave Act, the other with a quill signing the Act, in the background a posse of white men are depicted with clubs and guns shooting at four black men (one who has been shot in the head) presumably. "

In an executive order in March, the president instructed the Park Service to review plaques, films and other materials presented to visitors at 433 sites around the country, with the aim of ensuring they emphasize the “progress of the American people” and the “grandeur of the American landscape.”

Employees had until last week to flag materials that could be changed or deleted, and the Trump administration said it would remove all “inappropriate” content by Sept. 17, according to the internal agency documents. The public also has been asked to submit potential changes.

In response, a coalition of librarians, historians and others organized through the University of Minnesota has launched a campaign called “Save Our Signs.” It is asking the public to take photos of existing content at national parks and upload it. The group is using those images to build a public archive before any materials may be altered. So far, it has more than 800 submissions.

The directive led by Trump to promote a more positive view of the nation’s history. In his executive order, the president also took aim at the Smithsonian Institution, claiming that it had promoted “narratives that portray American and Western values as inherently harmful and oppressive.”