Executive Orders, A Travel Ban on Hold, and Separation of Powers

Executive Powers

Article II of the US Constitution generally describes the office of the president of the United States. During the constitutional convention of 1787, the drafters created this new kind of executive official, one that would be head of state and government but whose powers would be constrained. Over time, presidents have expanded their powers not by having the Constitution amended but simply by taking on more power. An example of this is the executive order compelling governmental agencies to act in certain ways specified by the order. There is no mention in the Constitution of a specific power to issue executive orders, but the power itself has been determined to be a constitutional exercise by presidents. If, however, any president over-reaches in the exercise of this power, the courts can, via separation of powers (judicial review), declare an executive order unconstitutional or illegal.

Soon after inauguration, President Trump issued an executive order (Executive Order 13769, titled Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States) suspending the admission of refugees into the United States and barring the entry of individuals from seven predominantly Muslim nations. The original executive order was replaced by another in March (Executive Order 13780, titled Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States); a “watered-down, politically correct version” of 13769, according to the president. The modification was the result of several federal district and appellate courts barring the enforcement of the executive order. Recently, President Trump asked the United States Supreme Court to take up the issue for a final determination about the legality and enforceability of the executive order.

The so-called (by President Trump) “travel ban” raises a number of questions about the exercise of executive power, the courts, civil liberties, civil rights, and foreign policy. For background information, please read this article from the British newspaper The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/25/trump-travel-ban-blocked-federal-appeals-court (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Please feel free to consult other sources of information should you need further background. There are Wikipedia articles that do a good job providing details about the actions of the several courts that have been involved in this issue (and I have no problem with students consulting Wikipedia, though it is not a reference one should use for academic research).

Instructions

Your Discussion response will focus on the relationship of civil liberties and civil rights to the travel ban in addition to some of the separation of powers issues that the topic raises. Specifically:

• In what ways is this a civil liberties issue?
• In what ways is this a civil rights issue?
• Do you believe the federal courts will ultimately rule against President Trump’s executive order or do you believe the president can modify it in such a way that it will pass judicial review?
• If the Supreme Court rules that President Trump’s executive order is enforceable, how do you think it will influence US Foreign policy?
• What have you learned by doing this assignment?

I recommend organizing your essay into five paragraphs that address each of the elements of the assignment listed above. This structure will keep you focused on what is required and it will ensure that you respond fully. This is an essay that requires you to think about the topic, the assigned readings from chapters 4, 5, 12, 13, 17. The textbook does not provide answers; rather, it provides information and context from which you develop a response that demonstrates to me your understanding of course content. There is no one correct response.

The minimum word count for your essay is 270 (this translates to one page, double-spaced, 12-point Ariel font, one-inch margins). If you fail to meet the minimum word count the highest scores you will earn is 60% of possible points (15/25). All students have the opportunity to earn full credit—100% of possible points (25/25)—if all instructions are followed carefully, you proofread your response to minimize writing errors, and you submit on time.

Remember, you must write in your own words—no quotes or paraphrases or plagiarism from any other source. You do not need to cite the Guardian article because it provides the background for the assignment. Do provide a works referenced list from any other source you consult when preparing your response.

ASSIGNMENT 1

This concept is introduced to you early on in this week’s readings and two characters are mentioned in detail: Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller. Both were captains of industry and financial geniuses, earning millions upon millions and expanding their business empires across the country.

My questions for you are:

Carnegie invented “Vertical Integration” and Rockefeller invented “Horizontal Integration.” What were the advantages and disadvantages of each?

More importantly, do you think that these business practices were ethical?

 The book is Visions of America: A history of the U.S by Keene et al

Here are some: vast or large vs small republics; how is tyranny best controlled (via centralized or decentralized power); does the constitution adequately protect the rights of states and individuals (unamended, with no bill of rights); which group was the most ‘prophetic’ about the future of american politics in your view; does the national government institutions (president or congress or courts) create a central government that is too powerful?
For this week, read the following:

•       Read Anti-Federalist Papers: Patrick Henry’s Speech (June 5, 1788) http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1786-1800/the-anti-federalist-papers/speech-of-patrick-henry-(june-5-1788).php

•       Read Anti-Federalist Papers Centinel 1: http://www.constitution.org/afp/centin01.htm

Brutus 1:  https://docs-of-freedom.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/document/attachment/440/Brutus_No_1_Excerpts_Annotated_Proof_3__1_.pdf

Read Federalist Papers 47 and 84

•       Read Anti-Federalist Papers John Dewitt II: http://www.constitution.org/afp/dewitt02.htm

•       Read Federalist Papers 10, 14, 15, 45, and 51

All the federalist papers can be found here:

 http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/federalist-papers

The use of squad cars and preventive patrol strategies was associated with a move toward police professionalism and a rejection of favoritism and corruption. After all, if the officer simply patrols the city in his or her car and reacts or responds to crimes as they occur, then there is no opportunity for the officer to indulge in corruption or to develop relationships with the citizenry that could compromise his or her objectivity and impartiality. A police officer dispatched to a dispute between neighbors or neighboring shopkeepers, neither of whom the officer has met, will presumably be able to bring a sense of objectivity to the dispute that one would expect of a neutral, noninvested third party.

Then, the community policing model was introduced. Officers were told to get out of the cars and get to know shopkeepers and residents.

Proponents of community policing argue that the rapport established with friends and acquaintances will allow the officer to resolve a dispute in a quicker, more informal, and less dramatic ways then would be the case otherwise. However, a police officer dispatched to a dispute in which the officer knows one or more of the parties may have a difficult time being neutral and objective. It may be difficult for the officer to tell a citizen who happens to be a friendly acquaintance of the officer that he or she is wrong, or worse, that he or she is going to get a citation or is going to jail.

Using the Argosy University online library resources, find at least two articles on community policing. To read more about community policing refer to the title “Police Executive Research Forum (PERF)” in the Webliography. This is a premier federally funded research organization and think tank incorporated in 1977. Some of policing’s most significant empirical studies, such as the Kansas City preventive patrol experiment and the San Diego experiment on one- vs. two-officer squad cars, were sponsored by the PERF.

Submission Details:

 in a minimum of 250 words, post to the Discussion Area your response to the following:

• Is there a possibility of corruption when officers develop working or friendly relationships with members of the public as part of a community policing strategy? Why?
• Are officers likely to treat citizens impartially when they’ve interacted informally with them on a regular basis? Or is the pursuit of an impartial, “just the facts, ma’am” kind of relationship with the public a mistake on the part of policing?
• Do impartiality and barrier-of-police professionalism result in a lack of communication with the public, resulting in inefficient problem solving and effectiveness? On the other hand, are officers who have invested time and energy into building personal relationships with people better communicators and, therefore, more effective as police officers?

Be sure to support your positions by citing your research.

Throughout this unit, you have learned about many changes and social problems that impact families. In this Assignment, you will choose one of the three following social problems that impact families: divorce, one-parent families, family violence.

Project Specifics:

Part I: Begin your paper with a discussion of the social problem you have chosen and explain why you have chosen this particular social problem.

Part II: As human services professionals, it is important to be able to view social problems from multiple perspectives. There are often many people involved in a social problem. Some of the different people involved in social problems like divorce, one-parent families, and family violence are the mother, the father, and children. All of these people will be impacted by the problem in a unique way, and they may have different perspectives about what is occurring. With Part II, you are going to have the opportunity to examine the social problem you chose from multiple perspectives.

If you chose divorce or one-parent families, discuss how the parents and the children involved view the issue. If you chose family violence, discuss how the abused woman, and the children involved view the issue.

Part III: Conclude your paper by discussing how society views the social problem that you wrote about. In addition, discuss your role as an advocate. How can you work to create awareness and teach others about diversity and multiculturalism.

Apa style