New York State’s Executive Order 157 (2016) prohibits a single political group from receiving state funds: supporters of Palestinian Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS), a civil movement aimed at influencing Israeli government policy. This article analyzes the constitutional validity of New York’s order and similar official sanctions on BDS throughout the United States. I argue that Executive Order 157 runs afoul of the First Amendment in two ways. First, it targets BDS because of its communicative intent, in violation of the First Amendment’s “hard stop” on government regulation with the improper purpose of suppressing a specific message. Second, it fails to comport with the First Amendment’s limits on restrictions of government contractor speech, overburdening contractors’ and the public’s right to make and hear political speech without valid justification. Executive Order 157 embodies a troubling trend toward state condemnation of disfavored political opinion and its clear disregard for constitutional mandates urges legal challenge.
The discriminatory laws, practices, and policies promised and delivered by President Trump have social, political, and economic ramifications. First, they reinforce misconceptions about Islam as an inherently violent religion. Second, they breed intolerance, fear, and hostility among the general population
"It's important to note that scholars have long observed that political discourse and political events can contribute to the frequency of bias incidents. In fact, this phenomenon has a name today. It's called the Trump Effect."
Experts discuss legal developments and related ramifications one year after President Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S. Southern Border with Mexico in order to build a wall.
Do new domestic terrorism laws put Black Lives Matter supporters, anti-war protestors, and/or animal rights activists at risk? Do they presently incorporate sufficient safeguards against such misuse and abuse?