Political Awareness

Note: Political Awareness never authorizes any candidate or their committees to publish its communication.

National Policy Roundup

National Policy Roundup explains which legislation Congress is currently considering. The cases held by the Supreme Court, and actions taken by the Executive branch each week. The goal of this column is to break down the important legislation. To help our readers better understand how current happenings in the federal government can and will affect their lives. As well as what they can do to help influence their representatives actions. 

Bills of Note Coming to the Floor in Congress~

H.R. 14: John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2025

The resolution was introduced in the House on June 24, 2025, by Rep. Clay Higgins (R–LA-3).As a privileged resolution, it compelled consideration upon return from the August recess. Latest action: On September 3, 2025, the House, by a vote of 215–207 with 2 voting “present,” agreed to table the resolution—effectively halting its passage for now

Summary of the Resolution:

This House resolution seeks to formally censure Representative LaMonica McIver (D–NJ) and simultaneously remove her from the Committee on Homeland Security due to alleged misconduct.

Key provisions include:

Censure: Representative McIver is to be officially reprimanded, required to appear in the well of the House for a formal reading of the censure by the Speaker. 

Removal from Committee: McIver would be immediately removed from her seat on the House Committee on Homeland Security, which oversees immigration and national security matters. 

Background rationale:

• The resolution centers on an incident on May 9, 2025, at the Delaney Hall immigration detention facility in Newark, NJ. Where McIver is indicted on three counts: assaulting, resisting, impeding, and interfering with federal officers. 
• Video and body-camera evidence purportedly show that McIver “slammed her forearm into the body” of a Homeland Security Investigations officer and “forcibly grabbed him,” and interfered with an ICE deportation officer performing official duties 
• Proponents argue her actions violated House rules requiring members to “behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House,” and that her continued service on a committee overseeing federal immigration enforcement represents a “significant conflict of interest”. 

Support & Opposition:

Supporters (primarily Republicans led by Rep. Higgins) view the measure as a necessary disciplinary action addressing serious misconduct and conflicting responsibilities.

Opponents, including all Democrats and a few Republicans, argue that McIver is entitled to due process, pointing out that House Ethics investigations and her pending trial (scheduled for November 2025) should play out before punitive action

Sponsor:

•  Clay Higgins: Representative for Louisiana’s 3rd congressional district. Republican.

H.R. 3486: Stop Illegal Entry Act of 2025

The House Majority Leader indicated on Sept. 4, 2025 that this bill may be considered in the week ahead.

Summary of the Bill:

This legislation aims to strengthen criminal penalties under the Immigration and Nationality Act for unauthorized entry and reentry into the U.S., especially in cases involving prior removals or criminal convictions. It introduces or escalates mandatory minimums and maximum imprisonment terms for various scenarios:

1. Unauthorized entry + felony conviction

Creates a new offense for non-citizens who improperly enter—or attempt to enter—the U.S. (e.g., circumventing inspection, using false statements) and then are convicted of a felony.

Penalty: Mandatory minimum of 5 years, with the possibility of life imprisonment.

2. Repeat improper entry

Increases the maximum punishment from 2 years to 5 years for repeated illegal entry.

3. Reentry after removal

Raises the maximum term for reentry violations from 2 years to 10 years.

If the individual had three or more specified misdemeanors prior to removal, the sentence increases to up to 15 years.

4. Multiple removals and reentries

An individual removed or denied entry three or more times. Who later attempts to reenter, may face up to 10 years imprisonment and/or fines.

5. Aggravated felony or repeated reentry

For those convicted of an aggravated felony, any felony (federal, state, tribal, local), or someone convicted twice under the reentry provisions prior to removal, the bill mandates at least 10 years in prison and allows for a life sentence.

Support & Opposition:

Support:

Advocates of stricter immigration enforcement likely support the bill as a way to deter reentry and reinforce consequences for cross-border violations.

Opposition & Criticisms:

Critics warn the bill will result in mass incarceration and high costs without improving border security. They see it as fueling mass incarceration and criminalizing immigrants. The Sentencing Project also warns that the bill represents an overbroad, double punishment system that would dramatically increase the federal prison population without benefiting public safety. It heavily critiques the expansion of Kate’s Law provisions as unnecessarily harsh. 

Sponsor:

• Stephanie Bice: Representative for Oklahoma’s 5th congressional district. Republican.

Legislation of Note from the Supreme Court~

Doe v. Lexington-Richland School District Two

Decision date: September 10, 2025

What happened: The Supreme Court declined to grant an emergency appeal from South Carolina officials seeking to block a lower-court ruling allowing a 14-year-old transgender student (“John Doe”) to use the boys’ bathroom at school.

Summary of case: The student argued that the district’s restrictions violated Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. By refusing to intervene, the Court let the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling stand for now, granting the student bathroom access. However, this decision does not resolve the broader constitutional question of transgender rights in education.

Context: This continues a line of cases addressing transgender rights, including Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board (2020), where the Court previously sided with a transgender student.

Status: The lower-court order allowing bathroom access remains in effect while the underlying case proceeds.

USAID v. Biden (Foreign Aid Withholding Case)

Decision date: September 9, 2025

What happened: The Court issued a temporary stay halting a lower-court order that required the Trump administration to release nearly $5 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid.

Summary of case: The administration attempted to withhold the funds using a rarely invoked “pocket rescission” under the Impoundment Control Act. Aid groups and several states sued, arguing that the executive branch cannot unilaterally override congressional appropriations.

Context: The dispute highlights a growing constitutional clash over separation of powers and executive authority in controlling foreign aid.

Status: The temporary stay remains in place while the Court considers whether to grant full review. Briefs from opposing parties are due later this month.

American Steel Assn. v. United States (Trump Tariffs Case)

Decision date: September 9, 2025

What happened: The Court agreed to fast-track review of a challenge to President Trump’s sweeping global tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Oral arguments are scheduled for November 2025.

Summary of case: Lower courts previously ruled that the tariffs exceeded presidential authority. Siding with U.S. businesses and trade groups that claimed significant financial harm. The administration argues that the tariffs are justified under emergency national security powers.

Context: This case could have far-reaching implications for presidential control over trade policy, potentially reshaping executive economic authority.

Status: Case accepted for full review with expedited scheduling; oral arguments expected in early November.

Los Angeles v. Department of Homeland Security (ICE Enforcement Case)

Decision date: September 5, 2025

What happened: In a 6-3 emergency ruling, the Supreme Court lifted a lower-court injunction in Los Angeles that had restricted ICE agents from conducting “roving” immigration stops based on race, language, or neighborhood demographics.

Summary of case: The injunction stemmed from a lawsuit alleging racial profiling after U.S. citizens were swept up in immigration raids. The Court’s majority opinion allowed ICE enforcement to resume immediately. Justice Kavanaugh concurred, writing that ethnicity cannot be the sole basis for a stop but can be “one relevant factor among many.” Justice Sotomayor, joined by Kagan and Jackson, dissented sharply, warning that the decision undermines Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.

Context: This ruling significantly broadens federal immigration enforcement powers and narrows judicial oversight of racial profiling claims.

Status: The injunction is lifted, and ICE may resume expanded operations in Los Angeles while the case continues in lower courts.

Executive Actions of Note

1. “Declaring a Crime Emergency in the District of Columbia”

Action date: August 11, 2025 (Effective through September 10)

What happened: President Trump issued an executive order under section 740 of the Home Rule Act to federalize control of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and deploy approximately 2,000 National Guard and federal law enforcement officers to Washington, D.C. The order placed the MPD under the control of Attorney General Pam Bondi and directed the DOJ and federal agencies to assist in policing efforts.

Summary of action:

• The administration declared a “crime emergency,” citing rising violent crime—though crime data indicated that violent crime was at a 30-year low in the city.
• Over 40% of arrests were immigration-related, with many individuals detained lacked criminal records, raising concerns that the operation disproportionately targeted immigrant communities.
• Widespread reports of racial profiling, fear within immigrant-heavy neighborhoods, and civil liberties critiques followed.

Context & development:

• Order expiration and aftermath: The emergency declaration expired on September 10, 2025, reverting MPD control back to local authorities. However, federal law enforcement presence—including ICE, FBI, Border Patrol, and National Guard—remains in place.
• Local response: On September 2, 2025, Mayor Muriel Bowser issued an executive order mandating indefinite coordination between D.C. and federal law enforcement, aiming to retain some operational harmony while defending local autonomy.
• Legal challenge: D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb filed suit on constitutional grounds—including violation of the Home Rule Act and the Posse Comitatus Act—seeking to end what was described as an unlawful military occupation.

2. “Further Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates to Reflect Ongoing Discussions with the People’s Republic of China” (Executive Order 14298)

Action date: August 11, 2025

What happened: Trump signed an executive order extending a 90-day suspension of previously imposed high reciprocal tariffs on Chinese goods. Under the order, the temporary 10% reciprocal tariff remains in place through November 10, 2025.

Summary of action:

• The extension prevents tariffs from spiking as high as 145% on Chinese imports and 125% on U.S. exports to China—a potential trade lockdown avoided.
• It provides a critical window ahead of the holiday shopping season and offers negotiators time to push toward a lasting trade agreement.

What You Can Do

Your Voice Matters in Our Federal Government!

Crucially, democracy works best when you participate. Whether you’re passionate about climate action, education, healthcare, or civil rights. Getting involved gives your voice power.

✅ Contact Your Representatives
Call, email, or write to your senators and House representative. Share your opinions on legislation, ask questions, and urge them to act on issues that matter to you.

✅ Stay Informed
Follow Political Awareness’s newsletter, current legislation, committee hearings, and policy debates. To take it a step further. Websites like Congress.gov or GovTrack make it easy to track bills and see how your representatives vote.

✅ Vote in Every Election
Federal, state, and local elections all shape the laws and policies that affect your life. To participate, register to vote, learn about the candidates, and show up on Election Day, or vote early or by mail.

✅ Join Civic Organizations
For example, whether it’s advocacy groups, nonprofits, or political organizations, joining a cause you care about can amplify your impact and connect you with others working for change.

✅ Spread the Word

By speaking up on social media, in conversations, or at community events, others will be motivated to get involved.

✅ Take Action Today

Find your representatives at house.gov and senate.gov, and let them hear from you. Remember, democracy doesn’t end at the ballot box—it begins with you raising your voice.