Resembling ourselves is critical
The Nebraska Department of Education. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner)
Oh, those pesky social studies standards.
Nebraska's once vaunted but now diminished rivalry with Oklahoma has come to a shuddering halt. What was born on the gridiron years ago has now expired, as those charged with educating children in the Sooner State have proposed an educational standard with no pedagogical foundation nor semblance of the truth.
If adopted, the state's high school students, in their study of the presidential election results from 2020, would be required to 'identify discrepancies' in the process. Except there weren't any.
Sure, some insisted the integrity of the election of Joe Biden was tainted. But no tangible, verifiable evidence was found nor exists today to prove that the election had 'discrepancies.' Nor does wishing, hoping, believing or offering debunked conjecture to the contrary make it so. Or worse, make it part of the public school curriculum.
If the standard is accepted, Oklahoma students will be learning a lie. Game over. Huskers win.
That's because to my knowledge, Nebraska's social study standards entertain no such nonsense. Nevertheless, as we've seen before on other fronts, culture war creep is a thing, a reality that can show up anywhere, including Nebraska's classrooms. See book banning for details.
The standard's news was among a spate of happenings from the silly to the serious during the last week connected to social studies, history, economics, whatever social science is to your liking. Oklahoma's potential capitulation, which raises conspiracy theories to the level of actual American history, was only part of the story.
A bill introduced in Congress would codify President Trump's notion that the Gulf of Mexico hitherto be known as the Gulf of America. His executive order did as much early in his second term, but EOs do not carry the weight or the permanence of an actual law. As you know, laws are what Congress passes, although you'd be hard pressed to find an example of that with the current confab now meeting in the Capitol.
Enter H.R. 276, which would change the name of the Gulf of Mexico permanently and compel all federal agencies to update their maps and documents to reflect such an alteration. I imagine that would also require a rewrite of state social studies or geography standards. The bill's sponsor is U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga.
Oy, vey! Where to begin? Let's start (and stop) with this: Why? Yeah, I can't think of anything either.
Nebraska U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., thought the entire episode was rather childish: 'It just seems juvenile. We're the United States of America. We're not Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany or Napoleon's France. … We're better than this. It just sounds like a sophomore thing to do.' Bacon's nay in the name-change vote was a welcome development despite the measure passing the House. Perhaps Republican U.S. Reps. Mike Flood and Adrian Smith have an answer to why.
A better idea would have been to let the silliness languish, never to be heard from again. The House — and the rest of us — face more pressing matters, not the least of which is the looming crisis over whether or not we are a democratic republic that honors the principle of due process. Enshrined in two Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, due process is the bedrock on which a nation of laws is built.
Here's a quick review of those details, all of which should be the social studies standard for anyone who calls America home: The Fifth Amendment says no one shall be 'deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.' The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of the states. Due process gives us legal procedures (processes), so the government cannot infringe on our individual rights.
More to the point in the current discussion is this: Due process applies to anyone — citizen or not — being adjudicated in the U.S., too, its language using 'person' rather than citizen.
Nevertheless, both the president and his Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, sidestepped the due process question recently. That is, do they believe in it? Trump told NBC's Kristin Welker he 'didn't know' because he isn't an attorney. Noem simply would not answer the question during a congressional hearing.
The nation's history, like high school social studies, is replete with stories that essentially reveal who we are as a country, what we value — principles such as due process. They are the nation's standards.
But when they get their corners knocked off, when we fail to live up to them, we no longer resemble ourselves. That's a standard too far.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DHS wants National Guard to search for and transport unaccompanied migrant children
A Department of Homeland Security request for 21,000 National Guard troops to support "expansive interior immigration enforcement operations" includes a call for troops to search for unaccompanied children in some cases and transport them between states, three sources briefed on the plan tell NBC News. Having National Guard troops perform such tasks, which are not explained in detail in the DHS request, has prompted concern among Democrats in Congress and some military and law enforcement officials. The tasks are laid out in a May 9th Request for Assistance from the Department of Homeland Security to the Pentagon. The document states that, 'this represents the first formal request by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for the deployment of National Guard personnel in support of interior immigration enforcement operations.' The request calls for National Guard troops to be used for 'Search and Rescue for UACs [Unaccompanied Alien Children] in remote or hostile terrain,' and 'Intra- and inter-state transport of detainees/ unaccompanied alien children (UACs)," without clearly explaining what that would entail. Most of the troops, about 10,000, would be used for transporting detained individuals, the DHS said. Roughly 2,500 troops would be used for detention support but the document does not specify where. Another 1,000 troops would be assigned to administrative support, such as processing detainees. The request also asks for up to 3,500 troops to 'Attempt to Locate — Fugitives' and to conduct 'surveillance and canvassing missions,' as well as 'night operations and rural interdictions.' It also asks for support for ICE in 'joint task force operations for absconder/fugitive tracking,' according to the three sources familiar with the plans. NPR first reported the details of the DHS request. Democrats in Congress and military and law enforcement officials have expressed concern about the use of National Guard troops to perform what they say are civilian law enforcement duties. One characterized the plan as the Trump administration 'finding a way to get the National Guard into the streets and into American homes,' saying, 'I fear it's going to look like a police state.' A second source said, 'Trump has said he wants to use the National Guard for law enforcement, and the Pentagon and other entities have always said, 'Oh, don't worry, it will never come to that.' But this is it.' Defense officials say the request has not been approved and is being evaluated by Pentagon policy officials, the General Counsel's office, and other Pentagon leadership. The officials say the most likely course of action would be for some parts of the request to be approved and others rejected. But one source briefed on the plans said that Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth is close to approving some elements of the request and considering which state governors to approach first regarding National Guard units. 'We are so much closer to this being real,' said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. DHS is requesting the National Guard troops under Title 32 status, which means they would remain on state active duty under the command of their governor but would be federally funded. Title 32 status generally allows National Guard troops to conduct law enforcement activities without violating the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 law that bars the use of federal troops in law enforcement operations. A National Guard member who opposes troops performing such tasks told NBC News, 'I plan to leave the National Guard soon over this.' The Pentagon is also being asked by DHS to pay the full cost of deploying the 21,000 National Guard troops. That comes amid growing tension between the Pentagon and DHS over the cost of border and other immigrant-related operations. The DHS request for National Guard troops arrives when the Pentagon is already footing a $23-million-a-month bill to hold as many as 2,500 undocumented immigrants in a military facility in Texas. Defense officials say they are frustrated that the camp is holding far fewer individuals than they were told to expect and they would like a reprieve. The Defense Department is in a contract with the DHS to help support DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, officers who are under pressure from Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to arrest 3,000 undocumented immigrants a day. But it has been slow going for ICE agents, resulting in fewer arrests of undocumented immigrants across the country. That has resulted in many empty beds at facilities like the one in El Paso, owned and operated by the Defense Department. Military officials say the facility has been holding an average of 150 undocumented immigrants each day over the last several weeks — a fraction of its 2,500 beds. On one recent day, they said, the facility housed fewer than 80 people. Pentagon officials are asking to cut the number of beds in the facility from 2,500 to about 1,000, which they say would save $12 million per month. It is not clear if the DHS request for National Guard troops will increase the need for beds in the El Paso facility. The DHS request also comes as the Pentagon is struggling to fund critical projects to support U.S. troops. 'Congress is aware that the department is redirecting funds from existing military construction projects like barracks improvements for lower enlisted personnel and longstanding infrastructure projects elsewhere in the world in favor of southwest border missions,' a Senate aide who spoke on condition of anonymity told NBC News. 'They are pretty frustrated with the way that the department is ordering them to support DHS out of their own pockets for a grossly disproportionate cost compared to what ICE facilities would cost the government,' added the aide, referring to military officials. Last month, the Pentagon notified Congress that it planned to transfer more than $1.74 million in the current DOD budget to the southwest border mission, as step that will take money away from renovating barracks and base facilities. Service member advocacy groups have criticized the move. Rob Evans, the founder of Hots&Cots, where services members can post reviews of barracks, dining areas and other facilities, says he sees evidence daily of barracks with sewage leaks, mold, failing HVAC systems, and more. 'When funding is pulled from this line, troops pay the price in real ways: delayed repairs, worsening conditions, and a growing sense that their well-being comes second to optics and operations,' Evans said. 'Service members deserve clean, safe, and dignified living conditions. They've earned at least that much.' This article was originally published on
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US tariffs, export controls not directed at Singapore, says Rubio in meeting with Vivian
SINGAPORE – Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan has raised the impact of America's tariffs and export controls with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said these were not directed at Singapore. 'Nevertheless, there is a lot of work in the next few months to ensure that there are no adverse secondary impacts on Singapore, so we will have to continue to engage the administration very, very closely in the months ahead,' said Dr Balakrishnan in a statement after they met on June 4. Dr Balakrishnan is in Washington on a working visit. He and Mr Rubio had a 'substantive and wide-ranging discussion' on bilateral ties and international developments, said the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). It added that Dr Balakrishnan registered the impact of the US' tariff policy on Singapore as a small and open economy that is highly dependent on trade, and the Republic's commitment to constructive engagement with the US to find mutually beneficial arrangements, including on pharmaceutical exports. In May, Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong said preferential or even zero tariffs on Singapore's pharmaceutical exports to the US are possible concessions that emerged in ongoing talks between the countries. However, the secondary impact has already hit the Republic, with Singapore's factory activity contracting for a second month in May off the back of US President Donald Trump's tariffs continuing to threaten the global economy. The majority of Mr Trump's sweeping global tariffs have been paused for 90 days, with the pause expected to expire at the start of July. On June 4, Mr Trump signed an order to double tariffs on steel and aluminium imports from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. During their meeting, Dr Balakrishnan and Mr Rubio also reaffirmed the longstanding and substantive bilateral relationship between the two countries in traditional areas of the economy, defence and security, as well as emerging areas such as critical technologies, energy and artificial intelligence. MFA said they also discussed other potential areas for collaboration, such as when the US holds the presidency for the Group of 20 major economies in 2026 and how Singapore can contribute to US priorities in meaningful and practical ways. In a separate statement, a spokesperson for Mr Rubio said he reaffirmed the strength of the US-Singapore strategic partnership and the shared commitment of both countries to a 'safe, secure and prosperous Indo-Pacific region'. Dr Balakrishnan is on a working visit to London and Washington from June 3 to 7, aimed at advancing bilateral cooperation in traditional and emerging areas of mutual interest. His visit to Washington – where he will meet senior administration officials, members of Congress and other senior personalities – is the first ministerial visit from Singapore to the US following both governments' new terms in office. He will also participate in a fireside chat hosted by US think-tank Hudson Institute, to discuss how the US can deepen engagement with Singapore and the region. Anjali Raguraman is a correspondent at The Straits Times. She covers politics, as well as consumer stories spanning tourism, retail and F&B. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction Discover how to enjoy other premium articles here


CNN
28 minutes ago
- CNN
Protesters confront authorities following ICE raids in Los Angeles
Federal immigration operations in Los Angeles were met by protests. ICE declined to discuss the details of its operations.