Deborah Daniels: There is no rational justification for redistricting
The approach is devoid of reason or fair play: “They cheated, so we have to cheat.”
The approach is devoid of reason or fair play: “They cheated, so we have to cheat.”
We have a DOJ that obeys a vengeful president rather than following the rule of law.
Revealing the truth demonstrates how far we have come as a nation since the days of slavery.
He appreciated the role of the media, which often criticized him.
Someone might forcibly take your purse, your car or your diamond tiara, but it is still robbery.
My own college education was invaluable in teaching me to think critically, problem-solve and collaborate.
Might the vast overreaction on the right not have occurred but for the dogmatic insistence on DEI quotas on the left?
The good news is, it’s a fun time to watch late-night comedians.
While the concepts might have merit, the execution has been abysmal.
This ‘Friday night massacre,’ seemingly contrary to Mr. Trump’s stated desire to ensure honest government, will have clear consequences.
There are also countless stories about the IOC turning a blind eye to cheating by, in particular, totalitarian countries.
We will soon learn whether this nation still has constitutional checks and balances, when the Senate is called upon to execute its important advise-and-consent role.
What we want above all from our justices is their commitment to the rule of law and their fairness and impartiality in the pursuit of justice.
Chief Justice Rush, and the court as a whole, are recognized as national models of what a chief justice and a supreme court should be.
Multiple failings have combined to cause these outcomes.
We are just not where we should be at this point in our nation’s history.
At the point where the people no longer believe the judicial system is fair, we are headed toward autocracy.
These unfounded allegations undermine the confidence of the public in the judicial system, a bedrock of our democratic society.
Why is the party of law and order … doing this? It is pandering to Trump at the expense of world stability.
Whatever one’s doubts about the likely benefits of these projects, the question is whether state government should interfere in local government decision-making.