Democracy Forward的动态

BE PRESENT Protecting the vulnerable and preserving our rights and liberties will require a great deal of hard work by people who believe in our Constitution, democracy, and the rule of law. It will be up to us — the American people who still cherish democracy — to protect and preserve our system of self-government. As difficult as it is to fully accept what we are up against, the first step is to acknowledge it and not lose hope in our future. https://lnkd.in/esPVXy4i #democracymatters

STANDING FOR THE PEOPLE There are clear distinctions between those of us standing to be Independent MPs and those who are members of the legacy political parties. One of these is that we are STANDING FOR THE PEOPLE. Each political party member, by definition, stands FOR THEIR PARTY, not The People. They must tick the party's box and they must take the party's whip. They always will be controlled because they want to be liked and promoted; they fear to be challenged, or critcised by the party's hierarchy or fellow members. Thus, if they want to be "independent" of any policy approach of the party that might detrimentally affect their constituents, they take a risk that few are willing to do, and for which they face consequences. This is one of several reasons why British party politics is a legacy that 2024's General Election should recognise as the most damaging to British democracy, and be relegated to history's refuse bin of really bad ideas. And never be recycled. #greaterbritain #chanabrahamchangingbritainforgood Cliff Findlay (MCIM) Andrew Bridgen Andrew Pearce Charles McLachlan Christopher Wells Chris Arnold Chris Romilly Anna Nuttall Tanushka Marah Ammar Waraich, MD MPP Akef Akbar Rachel Elnaugh

Trump v. United States: Revisiting Marbury and the Risks of Legal Precedent —— Check the full article here: Jadetimes.com | Political News —— Visit the link in our bio. #JadeTimes #PoliticalNews #TrumpVsUS #LegalPrecedent #MarburyVMadison #USPolitics #supremecourt

This is a powerful post, stating facts!

Democracy 101 Democracy should defend itself when things go south

You need to go. Here is ???? to ???? and ????

Excellent and coherent decision...

Please repost and call Congress to vote No on this legislation as currently written. This legislation could give the new incoming administration the ability to revoke tax-exempt status of so-called “terrorist supporting” organizations. Trump has repeatedly referred to legitimate protest movements and organizations as “terrorist” for simply not supporting him politically nor his political agendas, e.g., Black Lives Matter. And clearly under Project 2025 organizations such as Planned Parenthood may be labeled “terrorist” by Trumpist anti-reproductive rights activists. While there can be a legitimate need to revoke status for truly domestic terrorist organizations such as White Nationalist organizations that advocate, support, finance, and/or carry out racist violence, these are organizations for which Trump has vocally expressed sympathy and support, e.g., Proud Boys. The new incoming administration cannot be trusted to accurately target “terrorist supporting” organizations, nor trusted not to just use this to target legitimate, non-violent political opponents, imho.

Your right to free speech comes directly from the First Amendment in the United States Constitution. But is your free speech ever limited? The Supreme Court of the United States came up with a standard known as “clear and present danger” in a 1919 case called Schenck v. United States. Read more about this historic case in our blog and learn how it applies to your right to free speech in the state of Utah: https://lnkd.in/daMFwsMK