Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
To Fight or Fill - Will Democrats Fight or Fold as the Vetting of Neil Gorsuch Begins?
On Monday, the official vetting and nomination process to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court left vacant by the sudden passing of Justice Antonin Scalia began. Earlier this year, President Trump nominated conservative judge Neil Gorsuch to fill this seat – since then it has been met with much attention and controversy. Democrats in Washington have promised a detailed vetting and for President Trump’s nominee to expect strong opposition. But will it matter? Republicans control the Senate. They already have the votes in-hand to ensure as speedy and smooth a process as possible. Gorsuch is also viewed by many legal and political experts as a reasonable replacement for the late Scalia. The make-up of the Court won’t be drastically changed at all. Politically, this could offer a great opportunity for Democrats to grandstand and oppose Gorsuch’s past rulings and potential influence on the country as he will be a sitting judge for decades to come. They’ll be heard, but they won’t win. Or, is this not the hill for Democrats to die on? Like all things in Washington – politics will be at play. So, what will it mean, how will it play out and what can Americans expect if Gorsuch is finally appointed to America’s highest court? That’s where the experts at Augusta University can help. Dr. Martha Ginn is a political expert on the judicial process, constitutional law and the U.S. Supreme Court. She is an associate professor of Political Science at Augusta University and has spoken with media many times regarding the Supreme Court. She is available to speak to this very important issue. Click her icon above to arrange an interview. Source:
Is President Trump tearing down the wall that separates church and state in America?
Yesterday, President Trump promised to “totally destroy” a 60-year-old law banning tax-exempt churches from supporting political candidates. The Johnson Amendment prohibits tax-exempt nonprofits — including churches and other houses of worship — from “directly or indirectly” participating in a political candidate’s campaign. Overturning this requires an act of Congress. President Trump's comments were likely a reminder to all that this was a commitment he made during the election in an effort to cater to the religious right. But what will repealing the Johnson Amendment really mean? Is this meant to foster free speech or merely to access the vast cash-reserves that churches can provide? Will this see churches return to the times of serious political power and how could this be a game-changer for politicians, candidates and campaigns moving forward? Dr. Kevin Pybas is an associate professor of political science at Missouri State University. He is an expert in the fields of law, religion and politics, and is an opinion leader on this topic. Click on his icon to arrange an interview. Source:
Regulation, Sharing, Innovation
As Airbnb and Uber take America by storm, are cities in the right or wrong to clamp down, regulate and get their cut of the sharing economy? Emory’s Charles S. Goetz of the Goizueta Business School can help explain if government is in the right and how law makers need to adapt to the economic innovation and modern ways of doing business. Source:
