1. What’s the connection between “whiteness”  and racism according to Gilmore’s point?

The connection between “whiteness” and racism are connected because white people have been treated as the one with more power for a long time. It gives more safety and opportunities. Racism by putting the people of color at a disadvantaged. When Gilmore state “white people disappeared from the story” she means that the system is building around white people needs. White people will always have their experiences put first. This makes it harder for POC because the norm is whites getting treated better. Racism is still continuing.

 2. How does the prison system create ‘criminals’? Do you agree?

According to Gilmore the prison system creates more criminals by giving a label on that sticks with them forever. If a person is arrested or being put in jail, society as a whole see and label them as a criminal with or without completing their sentence. It makes harder for people to get jobs, housing, or an education. This makes people to go back to doing bad crimes because that’s all they know and have a “better” life in prison. I agree with her because many return to prison because society doesn’t give them a fair chance to restart their life.

3. What does Gilmore mean by “liberation struggle”?

“Liberation struggle” is working together to change the system that hurts them. This include racisim, prison, disadvantaged with the government rules. Gilmore means creating a wild where people aren’t trapped in their consequences where they can’t live their life. Buy when communities can unite and support each other, stand against the injustice system we can create a better and fairer for everyone

1. What did the Supreme Court decide in the Wal-Mart case? And more importantly, how did it justify its decision? (HINT: the key word here is “commonality” (and how it related to “class-action lawsuit”). Try to understand what this legal terms means, as it is key to the court’s decision).

In Wal-Mart v Dukes, the Supreme Court say that the women wasn’t able to join together in one big class because they didn’t share a clearer problem. The court explained that every Wal- Mart store and manager behaved differently, so the women couldn’t prove that company was influencing one rule or policy that affected all of them. Yes their situation was different but the lawsuit couldn’t move forward. For example, if Amazon or Doordash workers trying to sue the company tiger and each worker had a different manager there’s different rules, etc. The court might deny the case due to many people coming together to sue in one lawsuit. Unless you show there’s proof of harm being done.

1. In what ways is the court system better suited to protect the individual, than are the elected branches of government (such as Congress and the President; or the Mayor of NYC and the NYC City Assembly)? Give an example to illustrate your argument.

The court system is better at protecting individual rights because judges are supposed to help focus on the constitution, not public opinions. Judges don’t have to make decisions to please the people but electors do often about what the voters might want. And they may also make choices that helps their party to stay in power. This can cause them to ignore the unpopular groups. Courts are different because they look at what is fair and legal for everyone to follow. For example, lets take a city they make a rule to stop certain groups from protesting. This might make some of the people in the city support the rule while other won’t. But the court can step in and say these rules breaks the constitution (freedom of speech). This shows the court protects the group right to protest.

2. Think about how federal judges get to become judges – unlike Presidents, Mayors and members of Congress (and other legislatures), they are not elected, but rather appointed. Many Americans have thus called the federal courts system, and especially the Supreme Court, anti-democratic PLACES IN OUR GOVERNMENT. Do you agree that the Supreme Court, for example, is an anti-democratic part of our government? What could be the reason for this way of choosing judges in federal courts? (HINT: think about our discussion of “Federalist #10”, and which social class plays a leading role in our government system.)

Some people think the supreme court is “anti-democratic” because judges aren’t elected and people don’t vote for them. The president is the one who picks and the senate approves. This is why the court is less democratic than the other branches. If judges had to run for office they might make the poplar choice instead of following the constitution. By serving for life, they can make a tough choice that still protect the people rights. This all ties to Federalist #10 which warns us against powerful groups. So yes although the supreme court is less democratic, it’s designed to stay fair, protect people rights and stop making larger group hold so much power.

MCM shows how capitalist keep and grow their wealth. The first M is for money. C is for commodities like resources, tools and workers. The use to make products And the second M is for more money they make from the products they sell. For example, for a bakery the commodity includes flour, eggs, ovens, etc. then the baker sells the sweets for money they made before. To make extra profit business owners often decide on ways to lower their costs while still selling higher prices. They use cheaper materials to make more of their earnings. Spend less and earn more and thats how captalists make more in their rotation.

1) The statistics that stood out to me was that the top was 1% of Americans earners/ had more wealth while the bottom was 90%. This shocked me because it is unfair how that small group has more than everyone else. This why it’s so hard for the regular people to move up because the wealthy will keep on becoming more wealthy.
2) Some of the implications of living in a society that has such huge wealth inequalities include differences in opportunities. For example, who can attend better schools, afford healthcare, safer neighborhoods, etc. In my neighborhood in Staten Island, some neighborhoods have houses and good schools while some have smaller houses and fewer resources to provide for their kids in schools or supermarkets

1. Reading 4.3 explains how owners are the people who control business, investments, etc. and make their money by what others produce. Employees are the ones who sell their labor to earn their wages. For example, an owner of a factory gains money from selling goods while the workers earn paychecks for making those goods.
2. Adam Smith’s quote is saying that labor is the real source of great wealth. Due to everything we by of use comes from someone’s hard work. It can be building, farming, etc. It stresses about without labor there would be no products at all.
3. Reading 4.4 says class is mot about what people call themselves but it’s about having the amount of work and money. All depends if someone owns a business or works for wages. I agree because people can say they’re middle class but don’t matter because it’s how they make their income.
4. “Class structures are built around a close form of dependency”? Means workers and owners need each other but not equally. Workers depend on owners to hire them by giving them a job while owners needs workers to do the work for them so they can make more money. For example, in a restaurant the owner needs cooks and servers and the workers need the owner to keep the business from shutting down.

1. P. Williams writes in her essay, that the war on terror is a new type of a war. What’s new about it, how is it different from traditional wars?

It’s new because it doesn’t follow the old traditional war rules . It’s different from traditional wars because back then when soldiers and countries use to go to war they would wear uniforms on the battlefield. Now you can easily we use stuff like technology to spy and know information on the opponent. instead of using weapons. which makes it harder because we don’t know who the enemy are and when the wars will end.

1. In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why?

The “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights. The 4th amendment protects people from unauthorized searches. Usually the government would need a warrant to be able to search your homes or property. However with the “roving wiretaps” they are able to listen to your phone calls, read your emails, read messages, without even knowing the specific phone you have. This goes against warrants. This doesn’t show respect to the people which protects them from stuff like this without a warrant.

1. What about “Sneak and Peek” Warrants?

“Sneak and Peek” warrants seem to also be connected with the 4th amendment also. It protects the people from unfair searches. Warrants are to allow police officers, FBI, etc. to secretly enter your home or property with or without you present. This allows them to invade your privacy then tell you weeks, months, or years after they had already searched. This makes it harder for people to even question what is going on, what are they searching for? Having a warrant I believe gives the government too much power because it gives them a leverage over you so you’re force to comply.

1. Describe how you understand the “Establishment Clause” and the related “Lemon Test”. 

The “Establishment Clause” was apart of the first amendment (U.S constitution) can’t establish any religion or preferably favor one over the other. This includes schools, courts, any government working jobs can’t force people to follow ay religious aspects. And as for the “Lemon Test” it comes from the Lemon v Kurtzman it helps letting us know if the government is violating the Establishment Clause. They have 3 criteria that help support this law.

1. The action or law must not lead to excessive government entanglement with religion; in other words, policing the boundary between government and religion should be relatively straightforward and not require extensive effort by the government.

2. The action or law cannot either inhibit or advance religious practice; it should be neutral in its effects on religion.

3. The action or law must have some secular purpose; there must be some non-religious justification for the law.

1. Is burning the US flag protected by the First Amendment? Explain by referring to the relevant court case discussed in the reading.

Burning the US flag is protected by the First amendment. It is used as a symbolic “freedom of speech”. It is used as an act of protesting. Some people see the flag as powerful nation which shows unity, freedom, and pride like how the Britain’s respect their kings and queens. Both the US and Great Britain have a federal government where they believe they should protect their flags from being treated disrespected. But many like us in the U.S use this as an act of disagreement. We burn, destroy, tear any form to share our opinions and make it known to others we don’t agree with their message.

1. What does it mean when someone says “I’m taking the Fifth”?

When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth” it means they are talking about the 5th amendment of the US constitution. “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” This protects the people from self-incrimination. This means they cant say something that could be used against them in court. This helps people from the pressure of being forced to “confessed.”

1. In a federal system, citizens share the power between the national and state government. They can also vote for the national and state leaders. The U.S is a country where the people can vote for both president and state governor. In a confederation system, the states have the higher power and the national government are not as strong. The citizens mostly follow the state leaders. For example, in today’s society countries like France or Russia where the government makes all the decisions.
2. The division of power means that government is break down into different levels. Here in the US we have the federal, local and state government. Each level has their own role and take care of their own responsibilities. The federal government handles the military, and the money. The state government handles stuff like school and money. While the local government are people like the police, fire stations, etc.
3. During the pandemic (COVID 19) the federal government was able to help New York. They’ve sent money through the CARES act and the American Rescue plan. This all helped us get the testing, vaccines, etc. we need. And other programs like the CDC gave advice on how we should wear mask, take the vaccines so we don’t experience worser symptoms, and how to regulate our own safety. And as for the federal emergency management agency’s helped pay for the hospitals and testings places. Especially since the death rates and hospital rates were so high. This lead to both government coming together and making sure everyone was safe.