Political Research Paper #4: The Issue - To Research And Dis

Political Research Paper #4 The Issue: To research, and discover credible reliable information and be able to ascertain the truth and not be manipulated or persuaded without being educated.

This research assignment requires an in-depth analytical exploration of a specific political topic, emphasizing credible and reliable information to discern truth and avoid manipulation. Students must thoroughly research all provided sections, utilize multiple political sources from varying perspectives, and adhere to the syllabus's specific formatting and submission guidelines. The core tasks include discussing a Civil Liberty and arguing for its constitutional protection, analyzing the history of civil rights through congressional votes, evaluating political issues such as mandatory vaccines and governmental limits on constitutional rights from both sides, and reflecting on personal learnings from the assignment.

Students are expected to write a comprehensive, original paper that synthesizes research, offers critical analysis, and supports arguments with credible evidence. The paper must be at least three pages long, single-spaced, formatted according to MLA standards, and avoid plagiarism—quoting definitions is discouraged unless approved by the instructor. This work forms a significant portion of the course grade and must be submitted in class or on Blackboard by the specified deadline; late submissions are not accepted.

Paper For Above instruction

The overarching purpose of this assignment is to cultivate a nuanced understanding of American political issues through rigorous research and critical examination. By engaging with different perspectives, students develop a more comprehensive view of civil liberties, civil rights, and contemporary political debates, such as vaccination mandates and governmental authority over individual constitutional rights. Such analysis is essential not only academically but for fostering informed citizenship.

Understanding Civil Liberties and Their Constitutional Protections

Civil liberties are fundamental rights protected by the U.S. Constitution, primarily found in the Bill of Rights. Among these, the First Amendment, which guarantees freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, and petition, is often considered pivotal. Protecting civil liberties ensures that citizens can express dissent, practice their religion freely, and assemble peacefully without undue interference or suppression by the government. The constitutional protection of civil liberties is vital for a functioning democracy, safeguarding individual freedoms against encroachment by state power.

For instance, freedom of speech allows citizens to critique government policies and advocate for change, which is essential for democratic accountability (Berman, 2009). The First Amendment's protections have been tested in numerous landmark Supreme Court cases like Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), affirming students' rights to free speech in schools, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), which addressed political spending and free expression. These cases underscore the importance of constitutional safeguards in preserving civil liberties against potential government overreach.

Arguing for the protection of civil liberties involves recognizing their role in maintaining democratic principles, promoting social justice, and enabling individual autonomy. Constitutional protections serve as legal guarantees that prevent the government from arbitrarily infringing on personal freedoms, thus fostering a society where diverse viewpoints and lifestyles can coexist peacefully (Shields, 2014).

The History of Civil Rights and Congressional Votes

The history of civil rights in the United States is marked by both struggles and legislative victories, often reflected through congressional votes. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 stands as a landmark law, outlawing discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The act was passed with bipartisan support, although notable opposition existed, particularly from Southern legislators (Carson, 1993). The Senate vote was 73-27 in favor, while the House vote was 290-130, illustrating the contentious but ultimately decisive legislative process.

Historically, opposition to civil rights legislation was often rooted in racial and political ideologies aimed at preserving segregation and inequality. For example, many Southern Democrats and Republicans opposed the Civil Rights Act, citing states' rights and fears of federal overreach. Conversely, advocates argued that such legislation was essential for ending systemic discrimination and advancing equality (Fisher, 2014). These voting patterns reveal the deep-rooted political divisions surrounding civil rights and the importance of federal intervention to ensure civil liberties are protected equally for all citizens.

Subsequent legislation, such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965, further illustrates the evolving political landscape. It aimed to eliminate voting barriers for minorities, with congressional support reflecting a recognition of civil rights as fundamental to democracy. The historical record of congressional votes underscores the ongoing political struggle to balance individual rights and political power, highlighting the essential role of legislative action in shaping civil rights progress.

Political Issues from Multiple Perspectives: Vaccines and Constitutional Rights

Contemporary political debates often involve complex issues like mandatory vaccination and governmental control over constitutional rights. These debates reveal divergent viewpoints rooted in differing philosophical, legal, and scientific perspectives.

Mandatory Vaccines

Proponents argue that mandatory vaccinations are necessary for public health, especially during pandemics. They emphasize the state's interest in protecting citizens from preventable diseases and argue that individual rights may be justifiably limited to achieve collective safety (Gostin & Salmon, 2020). Courts have upheld vaccine mandates, citing precedents like Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), which upheld the authority of states to enforce vaccination laws to protect public health.

Opponents contend that mandatory vaccines infringe upon personal autonomy and bodily integrity, constitutional rights protected under the due process clause. They raise concerns about potential side effects, religious exemptions, and individual liberty. Cases like Zucht v. King (1922) affirm that states can mandate vaccinations, but ongoing legal and ethical debates continue regarding the scope of government authority in this domain (Larson & Hellie, 2021).

Control Over Constitutional Rights

The question of whether a person, entity, agency, or government can control, modify, or prohibit U.S. citizens from exercising their constitutional rights is highly contentious. Supporters of government authority argue that in certain circumstances—such as protecting public health, safety, or national security—restrictions are justified (Boonin, 2021). Conversely, opponents stress that constitutional rights are fundamental and inviolable, and any infringement must be rigorously scrutinized and justified within a legal framework.

The balance between individual rights and collective interests is at the heart of debates over governmental power. The courts traditionally employ a proportionality test, weighing the importance of the right against the state's interest, and require that restrictions be narrowly tailored (Klein, 2018). Recent controversies, such as the restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, exemplify these tensions, raising questions about the limits of government authority and the importance of safeguarding civil liberties in times of crisis.

Reflections and Conclusions

Completing this research has reinforced the importance of understanding the complex interplay between civil liberties, civil rights, political actions, and legislative history. It highlights the necessity of vigilant protection of civil liberties through constitutional measures and legislative oversight. The examination of historical voting patterns demonstrates how political divides influence the trajectory of civil rights advancements and the role of government in protecting or restricting individual freedoms.

The contemporary debates surrounding vaccines and governmental control reveal enduring tensions between collective wellbeing and personal autonomy, emphasizing the importance of legal safeguards to prevent overreach. As a student and citizen, I have learned that an informed understanding of these issues is essential for responsible participation in democracy. Critical engagement with diverse perspectives and credible sources is vital for fostering a nuanced, well-rounded view of political challenges and ensuring the protection of fundamental rights.

References

• Berman, S. (2009). Freedom of Speech: A Comparative Perspective. Oxford University Press.
• Boonin, J. (2021). The Legal Challenges to COVID-19 Restrictions. Harvard Law Review.
• Carson, C. (1993). The Civil Rights Movement: A Brief History. Springer.
• Voting Rights and Legislative Politics. Routledge.
• Fisher, J. (2014). Voting Rights and Legislative Politics. Routledge.
• Gostin, L. O., & Salmon, D. A. (2020). Stemming the Tide of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy. JAMA.
• Klein, J. (2018). Constitutional Law and Public Policy. Yale University Press.
• Larson, H. J., & Hellie, S. (2021). Vaccines and Personal Autonomy. Vaccine Journal.
• Shields, C. (2014). Civil Liberties and Democratic Society. University of Pennsylvania Press.