INTEGRITY IN WRITTEN AND VIDEO NEWS, featuring newsOS integration and a growing interactive community of interested and increasingly well-informed readers and viewers who help make us who we are… a truly objective news media resource with full disclosure of bias, fact-checking, voting, polling, ratings, and comments. Learn about our editorial policies and practices (below). Join us today by subscribing to either our FREE MEMBERSHIP plan, or our PLATINUM PAID SUBSCRIPTION plan; each plan offers an unparalleled suite of benefits to our subscribers. U.S. DAILY RUNDOWN:Your News, Your Voice.
The Impeachment of President Donald J. Trump: A Comprehensive Legal and Political Analysis
On December 18, 2019, the United States House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald J. Trump on two charges: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. This marked only the third time in American history that a sitting president had been impeached, following Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998. The impeachment stemmed from allegations that President Trump solicited foreign interference in the 2020 U.S. presidential election by pressuring Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden. Furthermore, it was alleged that President Trump obstructed the congressional investigation into this matter by directing executive branch officials to defy subpoenas and withhold documents.
Title: “Liberation Day Tariffs: Legal Foundations, Global Impacts, and the Future of U.S. Trade Policy”
On April 2, 2025, President Donald J. Trump declared a "national emergency" to address what he termed "large and persistent U.S. trade deficits," unveiling a sweeping tariff regime known as the "Liberation Day" tariffs. This policy imposed a universal 10% tariff on all imports, with higher, country-specific tariffs—some exceeding 50%—targeting nations with significant trade surpluses with the United States. The administration justified these measures under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), asserting that economic imbalances posed a threat to national security
Tennessee’s DEI Crackdown: A Constitutional, Legal, and Policy Analysis of Nashville’s Stand Against Statewide Prohibitions
In a contentious and evolving landscape at the intersection of education, governance, and civil rights, Nashville’s Metro Nashville Public Schools (MNPS) recently declared their intention to oppose new Tennessee state laws restricting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs. The clash comes as Republican state lawmakers, emboldened by broader national movements, seek to limit or prohibit DEI initiatives across public institutions, citing concerns over fairness, free speech, and government overreach.
Biden’s Asylum Restrictions: Constitutional Crossroads, Policy Dilemmas, and the Future of Immigration Law
On June 4, 2024, the Biden administration unveiled a new executive action significantly restricting asylum rights at the southern U.S. border. The directive authorizes U.S. immigration officers to swiftly deport migrants who cross illegally, even suspending the right to seek asylum protections during periods of high border crossings. This sweeping move represents a sharp pivot in U.S. immigration policy and touches a core nerve in America's legal and moral obligations toward refugees.
Federal Court Blocks Trump Voting Order: A Deep Dive into Constitutional Clashes and Policy Futures
On April 24, 2025, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction halting former President Donald J. Trump's recent executive order on election reforms, a directive that stirred an immediate national controversy. The executive order sought to impose sweeping new regulations on state-run voting systems, including mandatory voter ID verification, stringent mail-in ballot audits, and a prohibition on using electronic voting machines not certified under a federal protocol.
Disparate Impact Doctrine Under Siege: Analyzing the Legal and Societal Ramifications of President Trump’s Executive Order
On April 23, 2025, President Donald J. Trump signed Executive Order 14121, titled "Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy." The directive reconfigures the federal government’s approach to civil rights enforcement by eliminating the use of disparate-impact liability as a basis for identifying discrimination in federally administered programs. In essence, the order mandates that only intentional discrimination—rather than policies that produce disproportionate harm to protected groups—will be actionable under civil rights statutes moving forward.