Weekly Education and Analysis on Current Events

Zinnia

Zinnia

Tag: Politics

  • Update: Majority of Gaza Under “No-Go” Zones as Israel Continues to Block Entry of Humanitarian Supplies

    Update: Majority of Gaza Under “No-Go” Zones as Israel Continues to Block Entry of Humanitarian Supplies

    Between March 18 to April 14, the Israeli military issued 20 displacement orders, forcibly relocating and displacing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to ever decreasing zones within the Gaza strip. Over two thirds of the Gaza strip are now under these “No-Go” zones, cutting off connections within the strip and with Egypt as well, which has historically been the only crossing in and out of the Gaza strip not controlled by Israel, and a crucial crossing point for humanitarian aid.

    The displacement zones also disconnect cities such as Rafah, Khan Younis, and Gaza city from each other within the stip. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz has stated that Israeli military forces will remain in the designated security zones that it has established within the Gaza strip through seizure of Palestinian land. These zones will serve as corridors for the Israeli Military to occupy the Gaza Strip and will allow the military to further monitor and control the movement of Palestinians.

    Additionally, Katz has declared that “all of Rafah will be evacuated and there will be a security zone”. This is especially concerning as Rafah has served as a shelter for Palestinian refugees fleeing Israeli-caused destruction elsewhere in the Gaza strip, also serving as a reception point for humanitarian aid, and as a connection to the Egyptian border for those seeking emigration.

    Defense Minister Israel Katz has also stated: “Gaza will become smaller and more isolated, and more and more of its residents will be forced to evacuate from the fighting zones.”

    In conjunction with the implementation of these displacement zones, Israel has been blocking the entry of any humanitarian aid into Gaza. The UN has shared that the Palestinian Refugee Agency (UNRWA) has humanitarian supplies stockpiled outside of the Gaza strip. The only barrier to delivery is the refusal by the Israeli government to allow that aid to enter. The UNRWA has has warned that “supplies inside Gaza are nearly all gone, with food stocks running dangerously low and only 250 food parcels left”. Israel has blocked the entry of any food, medicine, and other humanitarian aid since March 2.

    U.S. foreign policy has played a crucial role in the development of this conflict and can play a crucial role in pressuring a ceasefire. U.S. arms manufacturers and foreign policy diplomats provide Israel with a majority of its military and economic support, allowing the Israeli military to conduct its actions on the scale that it currently operates. As many have pointed out, the administration in power in the U.S. can pressure ceasefire negotiations by withholding said military and economic aid. However, this is a power not exercised by U.S. administrations.

  • U.S. Senator Van Hollen Shows Power that the Democratic Party Should Use More Often

    U.S. Senator Van Hollen Shows Power that the Democratic Party Should Use More Often

    On April 18, 2025, Senator Chris Van Hollen pressured the Salvadorian government to allow him to meet with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident who the Trump administration admitted to wrongfully and illegally deporting.

    Van Hollen elaborated in a press conference on how he obtained a meeting with Abrego, stating that he requested visitations and calls with Abrego, petitioning as well for the Salvadorian government to allow him some contact with his lawyers or family as well.

    After repeated no’s from Salvadorian Officials, Van Hollen drove to CECOT, where he was stopped by soldiers and was told that he could not proceed. Upon preparing to leave the country, Van Hollen stated that he received word that he would be allowed to meet with Abrego.

    El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele shared photos on X of the meeting, stating that they had allegedly been drinking margaritas. It’s clear that Bukele gave in to the pressure that a U.S. Senator can procure.

    The lesson to be learned here is that party officials, including Senators, do indeed have lots of power to demand attention to an issue, to pressure action and response from government officials, and to push back against misinformation and injustice.

    The sad reality is that this is a power that is all too often forgotten by Democratic Party leaders. By making the issue unavoidable to the press, party officials can garner the media attention required to push back on harmful and false narratives, can lead the way for positive policy development.

    It can be extremely effective in combatting misinformation about migrant crime (when in reality migrants in the U.S. commit less crimes per capita than U.S. born citizens), or in combatting narratives about student protests “supporting terrorists”, or to bring attention to conflicts or ongoing genocide, etc.

    Rather, there are numerous instances where party officials capitulated to the right on their narratives and their framing, from a supposed immigration crisis, to supporting genocide, to outright agreeing with the Trump administration on the suppression of free speech, among various other cases.

    Chris Van Hollen’s actions showed the power that a single U.S. senator can have in shifting the narrative about an issue, simultaneously combatting misinformation and raising awareness, which can ultimately have effects on policy or even elections. By making a situation unavoidable to the press, elected party officials can procure the means to shift the narrative about import issues in society, and can use their power to advocate for just policy and positive change.

  • Opinion: Why Kilmar Abrego’s Case Could Pose a Threat to Our Constitution

    Opinion: Why Kilmar Abrego’s Case Could Pose a Threat to Our Constitution

    Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s case has presented the Trump administration with unprecedented circumstances which could put into question our constitutionally protected right to due process, and the system of checks and balances intended to prevent authoritarian control by any branch of government. This comes after Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele’ visit to Washington and his stated unwillingness to send Abrego back to the U.S. Let’s take a look at what’s at sake.

    Due Process

    Abrego, who had been granted withholding of removal, was deported to El Salvador without due process. The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that the federal government cannot deprive one of “life, liberty or property without due process of law.” This applies to all persons within the U.S., including non-citizens.

    Due process is understood as the obligation that our government has to give someone who has been accused of a crime the right to a fair trial, which was denied to Kilmar Abrego. Not once before getting sent to CECOT did Abrego have an opportunity to argue his defense, to present to a court his valid immigration status, or to refute the baseless claims about ties to MS-13.

    This administration has shown its willingness to punish someone without abiding by the constitutionally guaranteed right to due process, which should ring an alarm for anyone who has an interest in protecting our rights. The administration has also presented a dangerous model to imprison anyone without due process by sending detainees to countries outside of the jurisdiction and claiming they can do nothing about it. It provides a framework for authoritarian jailings beyond the power of U.S. citizens.

    This presents a loophole to undermine any person’s constitutional rights. It establishes a framework for an authoritarian government to arrest anyone, ship them off to a foreign prison and claim that the individual is outside of U.S. jurisdiction and that nothing can be done.

    As the Fifth Amendment does not pertain solely to citizen or non-citizen, these actions put at risk the right that all people have to due process as we know it. It could also potentially set precedent for the government to take action against anyone for any reason, imprisoning anyone without providing a fair trial.

    💡
    Following the meeting with Trump and Bukele in Washington on April 14, 2025, Trump has reportedly claimed that “home-grown’s are next”.

    Checks and Balances

    While the Supreme Court has upheld the decision by a lower court to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the constitution provides no way for the courts to enforce their decision. The separation of powers and system of checks and balances relies on the recognition of the court’s authority by the other two branches and in this case, the Executive.

    The administration has argued that US officials cannot compel the Salvadorian government to return him. However, the deportation of prisoners to El Salvador is a paid agreement between the two countries, an agreement which theoretically may be terminated. The funds which the U.S. has given El Salvador are reportedly to assist in the funding of the Salvadorian Prison system, which the U.S. government could use as leverage to pressure Abrego’s return.

    Additionally, while Bukele states that he does not have the power to return him to the United States, the Salvadoran Government has extradited Salvadoran citizens to the U.S. allowing the U.S. government to fulfill it’s constitutionally mandated duty to provide due process. The U.S. and El Salvador also have an extradition treaty, giving both governments full power to send Abrego back should this administration have full intent to engage in its constitutional responsibilities.

    This goes to show the multiple different avenues and historical legal precedent which the administration can use to follow the court’s orders, which should be quite easy for an “expert negotiator”.

    If the Administration should proceed to resist, this may put into question the extent of the power that the Judiciary has. It could set extremely dangerous precedent which undermines the systems of checks and balances designed by the constitution and creates a framework for the authoritarian imprisonment of anyone, citizen or not, without a trial.

  • Why the Working Class Should Be Worried About the Case of Khalil Mahmoud

    Why the Working Class Should Be Worried About the Case of Khalil Mahmoud

    Khalil is a legal permanent resident of the United States. Both legal and undocumented people within the U.S. territories are entitled to Constitutional protections such as the First, Fifth and Sixth Amendments (freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable search and seizures, due process and right to counsel).

    Khalil was arrested on March 8, 2025 and set to be deported. The government claimed that he was a threat to the United States due to his involvement in anti-war protests in support of Palestine. The government claimed that Khalil was engaging in anti-semitism and supporting Hamas, an organization deemed a terrorist organization by the U.S. government. The Judge presiding over Khalil’s case ordered the government to produce evidence for its detention and potential deportation of Khalil.

    On April 10, 2025, the government submitted a memo signed by Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, in support of its position to deport Khalil. The memo essentially states that under INA section 237(a)(4)(C)(I), the Secretary of State must personally determine that the “alien’s” presence or activities would compromise a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest, and deem the person deportable.

    This is clearly a subjective test as to what constitutes an activity or presence that compromises a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest.

    Although, this would be subject to a court’s review, it nonetheless raises serious concerns about the reach of the government. If the government is allowed to subjectively label a person’s presence or activities as compromising a compelling U.S. foreign interest, it opens the door to authoritarianism.

    If the government is allowed to violate a lawful permanent resident’s first amendment rights, will this then transpire to U.S. citizens? The answer is yes! If the government is allowed to prioritize so-called foreign policy interests over lawful permanent residents then it takes us a step closer to allow the government to prioritize “foreign policy interests” over U.S. citizens.

    Although in this case the consequence is detention and deportation, the alternative for a U.S. citizen could easily be detention and/or prohibition of their first amendment rights.

    How does this affect the working class?

    There was a time in the U.S. when being associated with the communist party or even communist beliefs led to government persecution and deportations. This period is referred to as the “Red Scare of the 1920’s.” Most importantly, labor strikes were considered a sign of communist influence and labor unions were targeted. It may appear that Unions would not be a target in the present day, as they are now widely accepted. However, Trump has shown his lack of support for labor unions.

    If labor unions were to organize and there is a rise of labor unrest and/or strikes, we can see how easily the government can deem the strikes as compromising compelling U.S. foreign policy interests, as it relates to trade and tariffs. This would significantly reduce the power and influence of the working class.

    These fears extend to anybody beyond the labor movement as well. Should any American be deemed a threat for any reason, even without evidence, they may be subject to the interests of the state without proper constitutional protections.

  • March on Washington over U.S. support for Israeli Genocide of Palestinians

    March on Washington over U.S. support for Israeli Genocide of Palestinians

    On Saturday April 5th 2025, thousands showed up in Washington D.C. to protest the ongoing genocide by Israel against the Palestinians. The event featured many speakers who highlighted the history and struggles of the Palestinian people as well as the goal for Palestinian liberation. The march was hosted by a series of organizations under the “March on Washington” banner, saying this about their movement:

    “This movement is made of students, workers, teachers, artists, activists, healthcare workers, tech workers and people of conscience all over the world who will not back down in the face of repression and intimidation, and will never back down so long as Gaza is under attack. That’s why on April 5th we are standing up to Trump and his ethnic cleansing plan for Gaza, we are standing up to repression, and we are standing up to the US’s continued facilitation of the genocide in Gaza. We demand a permanent ceasefire and an arms embargo now!”

    The goal is to encourage the U.S. government to withdraw its support as the primary supplier of military and financial aid to the Israeli government, which provides the Israeli Government with the means to conduct military operations in civilian centers. The U.S. government supplies Israel with about 69% of its arms, including bombs, missiles, jets, ammunitions and small arms, to include a few.

    The U.S. withdrawal of that support would mean the inability for the Israeli government to conduct its military operations on its current scale, which has resulted largely in civilian causalities, leading to about 50 thousand deaths of children, parents, reporters, and first responders.

    Additionally, U.S. funding to Israel has reached about $18 billion in military aid and counting since October 7th 2023, not including what the U.S. has given the Israeli government previously, costing the American tax payers billions while our schools, libraries, and public assistance programs struggle for proper funding.

    Many of the speakers called for a U.S. embargo on military aid, demands of justice for political prisoners, and for an end of Israeli occupation of historically Palestinian lands.

    One event speaker, Taher Dahleh from the Palestinian Youth Movement said: “Politicians in government everyday either choose to meet the people’s needs in housing, in healthcare, education, in access to food, or they can choose to continue sending billions of dollars to Israel for its war of extermination”.

    The Trump administration has continued its support for Israel, approving $7 billion in an arms package in February of 2025.

    Monadel Herzallah from U.S. Palestine Community Network says about Palestinian Liberation: “It’s about what kind of world that we are going to be living in, and what kind of world we leave behind for our children. That is what’s at stake. We will not accept to live in a world where genocide is normal.”

  • The Working Class will bear the brunt of the Liberation Day tariffs

    The Working Class will bear the brunt of the Liberation Day tariffs

    On Wednesday evening, President Trump announced a series of tariffs that will be placed on imports from over 180 countries. While Trump has claimed that this will make America wealthy, the effects of the tariffs say otherwise. The tariffs will be reaching far into the pockets of working class Americans. Let’s take a look at a few of the coming consequences, leading to increased prices on all goods, both foreign and domestic.

    HOW TARIFFS INCREASE THE PRICES OF ALL GOODS

    While it may seem at first that the tariffs will be imposed on foreign companies, the price of the tariff quickly passes down to the consumer. We’ll follow the ladder down from point of import to point of purchase by the consumer

    • Manufacturers (think automakers, tech producers, etc), wholesale companies, or big retailers (think Target, Walmart, etc.) import materials to produce or import goods from abroad. Increased tariffs mean manufacturers and retailers must now pay an additional “tax” on all items coming in from abroad.
    • In order to protect their profit margins after paying increased prices on imported goods and materials, the business passes off the cost to the next buyer, this increases prices of products. Manufacturers pass off the cost to the distributor and the distributor to the retail stores, and retailers to consumer.
    • Example: Big Retailer purchases televisions from supplier country for $100. Tariffs now impose a 30% cost increase on TVs from supplier country, raising the cost to $130. Big Retailer, looking to protect their profits, now sells the TVs for 30% more, which the consumer ultimately buys for $130 instead of $100.

    Increased tariffs don’t just impact imported goods and materials either. Domestic retailers will also inevitably join in on the increased prices. If foreign TVs now cost $130, domestic producers will be inclined to join in and sell theirs for $120, taking advantage of the inflated market to increase profit margins, which has historically been the case.

    Such wide sweeping tariffs on almost every nation, virtually every product will be affected, as they are either constructed with materials from these countries, or are assembled in these countries. You will be hard pressed to find a product whose materials were mined, assembled, and sold entirely with the U.S., subjecting almost all goods to increased prices.

    Even if the expressed intent is to increase American manufacturing, almost every manufacturer relies on imported raw materials. We rely on foreign lithium, iron, cobalt, bauxite, rubber, etc. Not only would the U.S. now have to ramp up manufacturing immediately, but it would also have to ramp up production of every raw material on earth. Unless the U.S. can completely source all materials and manufacture all goods within the nation, the working class will be subjected to ever increasing prices on nearly every product on the market and worsening inflation.