Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
Two containers, one with a U.S. flag and another with Canada's flag.

Just the Facts: U.S.–Canada Tariff War Escalates As Trump Raises Stakes

Close up of U.S. Army and American flag patches on a uniform

Veterans Day Betrayal: ICE Detains U.S. Military Veterans Under Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

After ICE Raid, Wisconsin’s Dairy Labor Crisis Deepens

After ICE Raid, Wisconsin’s Dairy Labor Crisis Deepens

An illustration of a megaphone with a speech bubble.

A Small College Faculty Takes Unprecedented Action to Stand Up for Democracy

A person putting on an "I Voted" sticker.

The Voting Rights Act Is Under Attack in the South

Long-shot constitutional amendment to restrict campaign financing introduced

The Fulcrum
By The FulcrumMay 09, 2019
The Fulcrum
The Fulcrum staff.
See More Writings by author

The most ambitious proposal for curbing money in politics, an amendment to the Constitution, has resurfaced in Congress. Its short-term prospects are statistically zero.

Just nine Democratic House members signed on as sponsors Wednesday when Californian Adam Schiff formally proposed an amendment to permit Congress to regulate campaign finances notwithstanding the Supreme Court's landmark Citizens United decision saying donations are a form of highly protected First Amendment free speech.

Throughout the last Congress, only 19 Democrats agreed to co-sponsor the same proposal. And amending the Constitution requires two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate (meaning plenty of Republican support, which is now non-existent) plus the approval of three quarters of the states.

Latest news

​The Edmund Pettus Bridge, in Selma, Alabama, was the scene of violent clashes as Martin Luther King led a march from Selma to Montgomery.
Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Facing the Past, and Confronting Generations of Racism in Alabama

Congress Bill Spotlight: Remove the Stain Act
Governance & Legislation

Congress Bill Spotlight: Remove the Stain Act

The Recipe for a Humanitarian Crisis: 600,000 Venezuelans Set to Be Returned to the “Mouth of the Shark”
Governance & Legislation

The Recipe for a Humanitarian Crisis: 600,000 Venezuelans Set to Be Returned to the “Mouth of the Shark”

Tour Group Company Works to Increase Accessibility to Diverse Colleges
Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Tour Group Company Works to Increase Accessibility to Diverse Colleges

Read More

A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

The Supreme Court’s stay in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem restores ICE authority in Los Angeles, igniting national debate over racial profiling, constitutional rights, and immigration enforcement.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Public Safety or Profiling? Implications of Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem for Immigration Enforcement in the U.S.

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in September 2025 to stay a lower court’s order in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the balance between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections. The decision temporarily lifted a district court’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area, allowing agents to resume certain enforcement practices while litigation continues. Although the decision does not resolve the underlying constitutional issues, it does have significant implications for immigration policy, law enforcement authority, and civil liberties.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

The Supreme Court’s stay in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem restores ICE authority in Los Angeles, igniting national debate over racial profiling, constitutional rights, and immigration enforcement.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

Public Safety or Profiling? Implications of Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem for Immigration Enforcement in the U.S.

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in September 2025 to stay a lower court’s order in Vasquez Perdomo v. Noem marks a significant development in the ongoing debate over the balance between immigration enforcement and constitutional protections. The decision temporarily lifted a district court’s restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the Los Angeles area, allowing agents to resume certain enforcement practices while litigation continues. Although the decision does not resolve the underlying constitutional issues, it does have significant implications for immigration policy, law enforcement authority, and civil liberties.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2025