This article talks about the debate about how to deal with the gun control law after the Florida School shooting event happened. However the Supreme Court kept silence and they claim there are limits existed in the gun laws. The bias I noticed is the sentence "What exactly were those limits? The court didn’t really say." It seems like to put the Court on the place where they cannot clearly clarify what they are trying to do. The article is about legislative branch and the judicial branch restraining each other on the gun control law. I think it is effective because everyone is focusing on this event and they are having debate about the law.
This article mainly focused on the reformation of Obamacare. It talks about the argument in the Supreme Court and analyzed the spending of the Obamacare. The bias I noticed is "Only 14 states and the District of Columbia set up their own exchanges, meaning that the 4.7 million who signed up for subsidized health coverage through HealthCare.gov could be affected." It seems to give people an impression of not very much people agree on this Healthcare. I think this is judicial branch is restraining the legislative branch to set and reform the HealthCare. I think it is not effective because it does not pass the law and it seems not a lot of Supreme Court Judge agree with this.
This article mainly talks about the issue and debate of Donald Trump's "build a wall" proposal and it is approved by some government people. This relates to the Judge from Supreme Court. The paragraph starts with "Laws and norms, ethics and principle? Meaningless concept" seems to be bias that criticize Donald Trump's political decisions. This did not talk to much about the power restraining, but more about the Judge inside the court have argument about issue. I think it is effective because it seems it is a victory to Trump's plan but it is hard to say for other people.
The article talked about the oral argument about pregnancy crisis that provide solutions to women other than abortions. This will challenge the government requirement of state funded abortion and unlicensed center provides services. The quotation of justices' words might be bias because these quotations cannot represent their opinions completely. I think this is the power restraining between judicial branch and executive branch, because if the law of restraining abortion is passed, then the government requirements made before might be challenged. I think it is not effective, because it seems like there will be an endlessly argument for this and it is a moral issue not just about law.