Miranda Rights

The picture above depicts three terrorist within the past years. Recently, the youngest suspect of the Boston Marathon Bomber was detained. He was not detained with his Miranda Rights read to him. An issue has arose in whether he could possibly be trialed or any of the information related to his arrest can be used in the trial.

 

This cartoon is pertinent to a persons rights upon arrest. Upon arrest, according to the Bill of Rights, a person has the right to know what he is being arrested for after the court case Miranda v. Arizona. Miranda was arrested without his rights read and was dismissed of all charges. In Tsarnov’s case, authorities have decided that he will still be under arrest and will face trials but since the Miranda Rights have not been read to him, then no evidence from the scene of arrest will be used against him. This still does not mean that he can not be proven guilty because there is still plenty of information to prove his guiltiness. Although a person has his rights upon arrest, if it is not read to him, this does not mean his crimes will be dismissed. (Bardes, 2009)

 

Bardes, Barbara A., Mack C. Shelley, and Steffen W. Schmidt. American government and politics today: the essentials. 2009-2010 ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.

 

 Cagle, Daryl. “Miranda Rights: All of Them” http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/041b4efd-e748-4cf3-a60e-27804f1d26e6.html, 2013. 

 

“Friendly” Fire

Over the years, the military has seen many cases of sexual assaults. Though arrests, laws suits and many other preventative measures have taken place and occurred, non have officially come from the government itself. According to USA Today, the manner in which the military deals with these sexual assaults are “clumsy” especially on the frontline. Humans have a sex drive especially men on the front who according to USA today have a higher level of tetosterones and emotions which only fuel this behavior.

Because this issue is becoming so large and prevalent at hand, the media has brought it to light in hopes of having Congress recognize that this is an issue to be dealt with. The first part of any policymaking process is identifying the issue (Bardes 2009). Here we can see that the media is already a step ahead and identifying the problem in which Congress should set on their agenda  to solve. Congress can apply its last step “policy evaluation” to review what the military has done in the past and recognize that it is not the best means in solving the dilemma of sexual assaults. Congress must realize that the military is there to carry out assaults on the enemy, not females fighting on the same team.

Bardes, Barbara A., Mack C. Shelley, and Steffen W. Schmidt. American government and politics today: the essentials. 2009-2010 ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.

Marguiles, Jimmy. “Military sex assaults on the rise”,http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/e9ceb64e-cb4f-4d1f-b324-4b8893c1f586.html, 2013.

 

NASA’s Sunset

Towards the end of December last year, Congress ended NASA’s shuttle program. The International Space Station had been completed and the use of shuttles became too expensive for the government too fund. Although the Shuttle Program had been shut down, NASA still thrives. The shuttle program is only one of many extraterrestrial scientific research NASA has currently has going on.

The ending of the shuttle program back in December shows Congress’s power and control of bureaucratic agencies. According to the sunset legislation, Congress is obliged to review bureaucratic agencies and their programs to see if whether there needs to be any modification or termination of a program. Because of this the shuttle program has come to an end after many decades of exploration in space. Even if NASA fought to continue the program, because bureaucracies are funded by Congress which holds the power of the purse, it would have no funds to support itself. (Bardes, 2009)

Bardes, Barbara A., Mack C. Shelley, and Steffen W. Schmidt. American government and politics today: the essentials. 2009-2010 ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.

 

Parker, Jeff.  “NASA Turnaround” http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/526da755-f6c2-4637-9cde-5a55ce5c758d.html, 2012.

 

Supreme Court Sends Gay Marriage Back to States

The United States supreme court after many days finally came to the decision of transferring the jurisdiction of homosexual rights from the federal government to the state government. The picture above shows a boy progressing through life. In each box it shows that he is “coming out of the closet” to what appears to be his mom, dad and the supreme court. He appears to bring his case to every single one of them who were not able to believe or hear what head to present. Although many Americans support gay rights, there is still a large population spread out throughout the nation who do not support gay marriage. The courts decision to pass the burden onto the state was wise in the sense that they knew that each state had the capability of knowing how their citizens feel about gay marriage and rights.

 

 

 

The fight for gay rights have finally reached the supreme court because it has finally become a constitutional question: “Can states deny marriage between a homosexual couple?” The picture above subtly shows the power and affect the court has over the nation. Whatever the court decides must be incorporated into the laws of each state. Whatever the court decides become the supreme law of the land and has importance over all state laws (Bardes,2009). The court understood the impact that their jurisdiction could make upon 50 states, many which are republican and do not support gay rights and many being democratic which condone gay rights. With this decision, the Roberts court seems to lean towards a more conservative view, although not too far from being liberal otherwise the court would have ruled against gay marriage. Until the Supreme Court decides in favor or against the gay marriage rights, the state Supreme Court will decide and the jurisdiction of each will only apply as supreme law to the state in which it was decided.

 

Bardes, Barbara A., Mack C. Shelley, and Steffen W. Schmidt. American government and politics today: the essentials. 2009-2010 ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.

 

 Zyglis, Adam. “Gay Marriage.” 2013. JPG file. http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon.aspx?id=5fa98b75-f670-4188-b1af-ad5cb4d32759

 

Congressional Powers and Absurdity

After the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting and the Boston Marathon bombing, the government, especially Congress has been considering tightening laws in regards to obtaining weapons. The picture above satires the government. This picture was most likely taken from a Republicans point of view because of its desire for a more hands off government. Because of recent massacres, the government has been considering to write new laws that some may even consider absurd, especially tedious background checks for weapons and other items that have the potential of causing a volatile event in society.

 

 

 

This picture exhibits Congress’s main power, the power of litigation. The only way for Congress to implement background checks for weapons, in this case a pressure cooker, is amend certain gun control laws. In a way it may be considered legislative oversight because Congress is reexamining current laws and trying to find holes in them which congress can patch. The likely hoods absurdity of such laws being passed are not as high considering that the legislative body is bipartisan. Such laws may not even pass the House considering that it is a majority of Republicans. Republicans are more government hands off. If it does pass the House, it is inevitable that it will pass the Senate and the President because both are of the Democratic parties who already believe in a tighter gun control law. If the law does pass, there is little the court can do as a check and balance on the Legislative system. As long as the screening process does not violate reasonable privacy, it stays constitutional. The court cant exactly declare judicial review on a law just because it protects citizens. The law ultimately would not be infringing on 2nd amendment rights. (Bardes, 2009)

Bardes, Barbara A., Mack C. Shelley, and Steffen W. Schmidt. American government and politics today: the essentials. 2009-2010 ed. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.

Chappatte, Patrick. “After Boston.”PoliticalCartoons.com Homepage. N.p., 24 Apr. 2013. Web. 2 May 2013. <http://www.politicalcartoons.com/cartoon/1de00c6d-59ed-4454-b874-3cb47e6d9102.html&gt;.