scholarly journals THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT, THE FEDERAL COURTS, AND THE CONSTITUTION IN THE UNITED STATES

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (1, 2 & 3) ◽  
pp. 2006
Author(s):  
Judith A. Garber
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Christian Right ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Equal Rights ◽  
White House ◽  
Moral Majority ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Jerry Falwell

Twenty-five years have passed since the newly formed Moral Majority helped put Ronald Reagan in the White House and a Republican majority in the United States Senate. The Moral Majority was one organization (and its founder, the Reverend Jerry Falwell, one figure) at the centre of an emerging evangelical Protestant social movement. This movement was galvanized by two aims: defeating the Equal Rights Amendment,3 which Congress submitted to the states for consideration in 1972, and contesting the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade4 ruling, which recognized a constitutional right to abortion. In the early 1980s, “New Christian Right” was an accurate description of the first widespread public engagement of evangelicals in half a century.

Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and the Ronald Reagan Administration in the United States

Istoriya ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (11 (109)) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
German Gigolaev
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Reagan Administration ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
White House ◽  
Draft Convention ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Law

The USA, as well as the USSR, initiated the convocation of the III UN Conference on the Law of the Sea (1973—1982). However, after the Ronald Reagan administration came to the White House, American diplomacy significantly changed its policy toward the Conference, which eventually resulted in US refusal to support the draft Convention on the Law of the Sea, which was worked out during the Conference. This behavior was in line with policy course of the Reagan administration — more aggressive than that of their predecessors. The article considers the American policy regarding Law of the Sea negotiations in the first months of Reagan's presidency, during the Tenth Session of the III UNCLOS.

Catholics, Evangelicals, and US Policy in Central America

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cangemi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Central America ◽  
Political Violence ◽  
Catholic Church ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Peace Processes ◽  
Evangelical Protestants ◽  
Jerry Falwell ◽  
The Cold War

During the Cold War’s earliest years, right-wing governments and oligarchic elites in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua fostered closer relationships with the Catholic Church. Dictatorial leaders like Guatemala’s Carlos Castillo Armas and dynastic regimes like Nicaragua’s Somoza family regarded the Church as an ally against supposed Marxist influence in the region. Those ties began to fray in the late 1960s, as the Second Vatican Council’s foundational reforms moved Catholicism farther to the political and social left around the globe. This shift was especially prominent in Central America, where Catholics like El Salvador’s Archbishop Óscar Arnulfo Romero and Guatemala’s Father Stanley Rother were among Central America’s most visible critics and reformers as political violence increased across the region during the 1970s. Relatedly, evangelical Protestants, particularly Pentecostal groups based in the United States, flooded Central America throughout that decade. Their staunch anticommunism and established ties to influential policymakers and political lobbyists in the United States, among other factors, gave evangelical Protestants greater influence in US-Central American relations. Their influence was strongest during the early 1980s, when José Efraín Ríos Montt, an ordained Pentecostal minister with Eureka, California’s Verbo Ministries, seized Guatemala’s presidency via a coup in March 1982. Notable US evangelical leaders like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson praised Ríos Montt’s regime for its rabid anticommunist ideology, while President Ronald Reagan claimed that the dictator had received a “bum rap” in the global press. Concurrently, some US evangelical missioners and pastors also foregrounded the Sandinista government’s anti-Protestant activities as additional justification for US support for Nicaragua’s Contra forces. Religious actors were also instrumental to Central America’s peace processes after the Cold War, as Catholic and Protestant leaders alike worked closely with regional governments and the United States to end decades of political violence and enact meaningful socioeconomic reforms for the region’s citizens.

scholarly journals The Great Communicators and political reconstruction: A comparative study between President Ronald Reagan and President Barack Obama

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Micheal D. Warren
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Hispanic Americans ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
President Obama ◽  
White House ◽  
American Children ◽  
To Come

<p>Presidents come into office wanting to make America a better place, and Stephen Skowronek’s recurring model of presidential authority is perfectly suited when comparing one president to another, across political time. President Ronald Reagan was categorised as a reconstructive president alongside Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D Roosevelt, according to Skowronek’s model; at the end of his first term, President Obama’s has the potential to be remembered as the sixth president of reconstruction. While the nature of reconstruction has changed and has become more superficial with the ageing of the United States political system, Obama’s reconstructive potential is no less potent than that of Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln.  The passing of Health Care reform is Obama’s biggest achievement of his presidency to date and is one of the biggest domestic reforms undertaken since the 1960s. Looking ahead to Obama’s second term, further progress looks possible to enhance his reconstructive potential. If Obama can secure immigration reform, then he will give 12 million illegal immigrants the chance to come out from the shadows and work toward residency and legally live the American dream.  With the election and re-election of Obama by an emerging majority made up of women, African Americans, Hispanic Americans and young Americans, the Age of Reagan that existed, has now been replaced by a more diverse coalition. If a democrat can win the White House in 2016, it will truly mean that the Age of Obama has begun.  Obama’s most potent legacy will become more evident in the years to come as many Americans will not remember what the unemployment rate was when he assumed office or what it was when he left office. The partisan bickering that dominated for much of Obama’s first term will have faded into distant memory, but what will shine through from the Obama presidency is opportunity. Americans will never forget how Obama changed the limits of possibility for generations to come. Today there are ten year old African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American children all over the United States who believe that, because of the Obama presidency, they too can one day become president. That in itself is hugely reconstructive and by being elected President, Obama has achieved something more potent than any other reconstructive presidents could have ever achieved.</p>

scholarly journals The Great Communicators and political reconstruction: A comparative study between President Ronald Reagan and President Barack Obama

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Micheal D. Warren
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Hispanic Americans ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
President Obama ◽  
White House ◽  
American Children ◽  
To Come

<p>Presidents come into office wanting to make America a better place, and Stephen Skowronek’s recurring model of presidential authority is perfectly suited when comparing one president to another, across political time. President Ronald Reagan was categorised as a reconstructive president alongside Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D Roosevelt, according to Skowronek’s model; at the end of his first term, President Obama’s has the potential to be remembered as the sixth president of reconstruction. While the nature of reconstruction has changed and has become more superficial with the ageing of the United States political system, Obama’s reconstructive potential is no less potent than that of Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln.  The passing of Health Care reform is Obama’s biggest achievement of his presidency to date and is one of the biggest domestic reforms undertaken since the 1960s. Looking ahead to Obama’s second term, further progress looks possible to enhance his reconstructive potential. If Obama can secure immigration reform, then he will give 12 million illegal immigrants the chance to come out from the shadows and work toward residency and legally live the American dream.  With the election and re-election of Obama by an emerging majority made up of women, African Americans, Hispanic Americans and young Americans, the Age of Reagan that existed, has now been replaced by a more diverse coalition. If a democrat can win the White House in 2016, it will truly mean that the Age of Obama has begun.  Obama’s most potent legacy will become more evident in the years to come as many Americans will not remember what the unemployment rate was when he assumed office or what it was when he left office. The partisan bickering that dominated for much of Obama’s first term will have faded into distant memory, but what will shine through from the Obama presidency is opportunity. Americans will never forget how Obama changed the limits of possibility for generations to come. Today there are ten year old African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American children all over the United States who believe that, because of the Obama presidency, they too can one day become president. That in itself is hugely reconstructive and by being elected President, Obama has achieved something more potent than any other reconstructive presidents could have ever achieved.</p>

Fighting the Educational Monopoly

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert N. Gross
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Private Education ◽  
Private Schools ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Public Regulation ◽  
Private Schooling ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Right

Chapter 6 describes how federal courts, by sanctioning public regulation, saved private education from outright abolition. In 1922 voters in Oregon approved an initiative, aimed at Catholics, that criminalized attendance in private schools. The National Catholic Welfare Conference challenged the law’s constitutionality and, in Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925), the Supreme Court struck it down. Throughout the legal proceedings, Catholic lawyers, led by William D. Guthrie, argued that abolishing private schools was unnecessary because states routinely exercised broad powers of regulation. The Court agreed, asserting that because Oregon possessed significant authority to supervise and manage private schools, states could not legally strip them of their property through abolition. While the case later became a pillar for the constitutional right to privacy, the ruling represented a strong assertion of public authority. Public regulation aided rather than hindered the development of private schooling in the United States.

“I’m Not going to the f***ing White House”: Twitter Users React to Donald Trump and Megan Rapinoe

2020 ◽  
pp. 216747952095077
Author(s):  
Evan L. Frederick ◽  
Ann Pegoraro ◽  
Samuel Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Critical Race Theory ◽  
Black People ◽  
The United States ◽  
Critical Race ◽  
Race Theory ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
White House ◽  
Twitter Users ◽  
Inductive Analysis

When asked if she would go to the White House if invited, Megan Rapinoe stated, “I’m not going to the fucking White House.” The next morning, President Donald Trump posted a series of tweets in which he criticized Rapinoe’s statements. In his tweets, Trump introduced issues around race in the United States and brought forth his own notion of nationalism. The purpose of this study was to conduct an analysis of users’ tweets to determine how individuals employed Twitter to craft a narrative and discuss the ongoing Rapinoe and Trump feud within and outside the bounds of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and nationalism. An inductive analysis of 16,137 users’ tweets revealed three primary themes: a) Refuse, Refute, & Redirect Racist Rhetoric b) Stand Up vs. Know your Rights, and c) #ShutUpAndBeALeader. Based on the findings of this study, it appears that the dialogue regarding racism in the United States is quickly evolving. Instead of reciting the same refrain (i.e., racism no longer exists and systematic racism is constructed by Black people) seen in previous works, individuals in the current dataset refuted those talking points and clearly labeled the President as a racist. Additionally, though discussions of nationalism were evident in this dataset, the Stand Up vs. Know Your Rights theme was on the periphery in comparison to discussions of race. Perhaps, this indicates that some have grown tired of Trump utilizing nationalism as a means to stoke racism.

Implications of the 2012 U.S. Election for U.S. Policy in Africa’s Great Lakes Region

2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-191
Author(s):  
Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Great Lakes ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Lakes Region ◽  
Security Sector ◽  
White House ◽  
Republic Of The Congo ◽  
The U.S

Abstract:While Africans are generally satisfied that a person of African descent was reelected to the White House following a campaign in which vicious and racist attacks were made against him, the U.S. Africa policy under President Barack Obama will continue to be guided by the strategic interests of the United States, which are not necessarily compatible with the popular aspirations for democracy, peace, and prosperity in Africa. Obama’s policy in the Great Lakes region provides an excellent illustration of this point. Since Rwanda and Uganda are Washington’s allies in the “war against terror” in Darfur and Somalia, respectively, the Obama administration has done little to stop Kigali and Kampala from destabilizing the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and looting its natural resources, either directly or through proxies. Rwanda and Uganda have even been included in an international oversight mechanism that is supposed to guide governance and security sector reforms in the DRC, but whose real objective is to facilitate Western access to the enormous natural wealth of the Congo and the Great Lakes region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document