Republican-led House voted to impeach President Bill Clinton on charges of lying under oath and obstruction of justice. House Judiciary Committee had relied on a four-year investigation into several alleged scandals, including sexual harassment. On Dec. 19, the House impeached Clinton of lying under oath and obstruction charges, their two other counts failed, including one accusing Clinton of abuse of power. I found no bias in this article, only facts of what happened. The restraining of this article is the legislative branch checking the executive branch. I found this effective since the president had many offfenses and was not trusted by the house. It is important for the president to be in check, he is looked up to and needs to be kept honest and loyal to his job.
President Donald Trump said that he will nominate Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. The article says that Trump and Republicans chose him because of the opportunity to confirm someone who could cement the conservative direction of the court for decades. The republican senate held Obama from choosing someone to fill the spot, and rejoiced over Trump's unexpected win. I did not find any bias in this article. In this article, the president appointed a supreme court judge. I think that this was effective, it fair that the executive branch keeps the supreme court in check. This way, presidents can make sure that there are a balanced amount of parties in the court, even though they will most likely choose someone from their party.
The House and Senate voted to override President Obama’s veto of a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia. The House overrode the veto with a 348-77 vote, senate overrode it with a 97-1 vote. The president was worried about the bill affecting the military and service members. The article was biased towards Obama's choice to veto the bill. This article was an example of the legislative branch checking and balancing the executive branch. It override the president's veto. I thought that this was effective, since so many people disagreed with the president.
Federal district judge William Orrick permanently blocked enforcement of President Donald Trump’s executive order cutting off federal funds to sanctuary cities. The judge concluded that the order is unconstitutional because it violates principles of federalism and separation of powers. Looking to still do something about the immigration issue, they determined that the order only affects federal funds that are already conditioned by Congress on federal immigration enforcement efforts. So, the president was able to take money from these cities, but he was not able to stop all funding. I did not detect any bias. In this article, there was an example of the judicial branch checking on the executive branch. I thought this was effective, that it would not be constitutional to take away all funding. I believe that the compromise was good enough, that if the sanctuary cities did not enforce immigration, they will not get funding for that area.