It is this state of unrest in which United States National Guardsmen have been deployed by President Donald Trump to the streets of cities all across the country: currently Los Angeles, Memphis, Tennessee, Washington, D.C. and Portland, Oregon, with attempts to send guardsmen to Chicago.

But why? National Guard deployments — at least those ordered by Trump during his second term — have been to defend United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities and suppress the protests, riots and violence that have plagued America. This violence has arisen from attempts to interfere with or prevent ICE operations, primarily those that involve the deportation of those living in the United States illegally.

Although it may seem surprising, laws such as the Insurrection Act, Code § 12406 and Section 2 of the Militia Act, allow the president to federalize the normally state-controlled National Guard. However, this is only legal in unique circumstances such as open rebellion or when it is impossible or impractical to enforce the law via other means. 

Based on these laws, it is clear to see that the legality of President Trump’s deployments of the National Guard hinge on whether or not he is able to efficiently enforce the law with the resources traditionally available to him. 

Now, it is indisputable that ICE agents have faced remarkable amounts of violence and rioting in response to their operations, which, setting aside the ethics of said ICE operations, are impediments to the enforcement of the law. Armed rioters have attacked ICE facilities with varying levels of force. Some have used rocks or fireworks with others using firearms. Larger scale riots have also broken out in Los Angeles; involving arson, vandalism and attacks on police officers, although these particular riots have been for all intents and purposes quelled. The riots in Los Angeles lasted from June 6 to July 15, 2025.

It should go without saying that rioting, omnipresent agitators and consistent violence makes it almost impossible to properly and efficiently enforce the law. But the question still remains whether or not this violence is enough to invoke the Insurrection Act and similar provisions. 

However history gives a clear answer, in the form of the 1794 Whisky Rebellions. In response to the institution of an unwanted tax, numerous Americans responded to tax collectors with violence, and in response the federal government deployed thousands of militiamen — the historical equivalent of the National Guard — to quell the violence. 

There are numerous other similar examples from across US history, such as when the National Guard or historical equivalent (such as the aforementioned state militias) including in 1954 to enforce desegregation of schools, riots following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968 and riots over police brutality in 1992 among others. 

One of the most recent examples of National Guard deployment as law enforcement and riot control was in Los Angeles in 1992. After a high speed car chase in an attempt to evade arrest, Rodney King was pulled over by four police officers and brutally beaten. 

In response to a video of the incident, people across Los Angeles rose up, attacking citizens and property with whatever improvised weapons they could, ranging from molotov cocktails to their fists. In order to end the riots, President George H.W. Bush invoked the Insurrection Act, deploying thousands of Guardsmen and other federal forces to restore order. All told, the riots lasted three days, with damages totalling more than 60 deaths and $1 billion in property damage. 

Although the 1992 Los Angeles riots and the current situation are not identical, the idea is similar, and the allowance of National Guard deployment can be used as a precedent for the moment at hand. And the precedent is for all intents and purposes the same, as they both involved use of the National Guard to counteract significant violence. Although the current violence is not quite as significant as that of past situations, it is still clear that President Trump is within his power to federalize the National Guard.

Of course, the ideal would be that the country isn’t in a place where National Guard deployments on domestic targets are even considered, but here we are. And although the thought of using the U.S. military on my fellow Americans rightfully leaves a foul taste in my mouth, we are a nation of laws, not one where violent rioters are the arbiters of justice, and if the military is the only way of enforcing this, then so be it.

The post The National Guard Has Been Deployed to American Cities. Here’s Why It’s Legal appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

As a member of Gen Z, the generation born between the late 1990s and early 2010s, I have grown up amid near-constant crises: a post-9/11 surveillance state, financial recession, climate change, mass shootings, political upheaval, a global pandemic and escalating global tensions, including renewed fears of military conflict. It’s no wonder our default coping mechanism has become a brand of humor that leans heavily on absurdism, detachment and fatalism.

This isn’t simply a quirk of internet culture. Dark or ironic humor can be a defense mechanism for anxiety or a sense of powerlessness.  However—or perhaps because of—our immersion in global events via digital media, Gen Z embodies a paradox: high awareness but inconsistent civic action. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, only 44% of 18 to 24-year-olds voted in the 2022 midterms, compared to approximately 67.6% of voters over 40. While Gen Z’s number was higher than in previous years, the gap highlights a generational divide between awareness and mobilization.

It’s undeniable that my generation has been flooded with information, and our propensity to peruse online platforms has made us highly opinionated on a wide range of topics. So, if we’re so passionate about the issues around us, why are we not voting? 

Gen Z’s lack of civil engagement can lead to what some call “performative nihilism,” a mindset where serious issues are acknowledged but treated as inevitable and unsolvable. This response may be shaped by years of watching institutions fail to meet challenges, from stalled climate policy to deepening economic inequality. 

The result is a kind of learned helplessness. Gen Z is politically literate, highly connected and fluent in the language of critique, but often skeptical of traditional forms of engagement. Online discourse becomes the outlet, but without coordinated offline action, the energy dissipates into apathy. We could make a thousand TikToks about why an issue matters, and although we may be spreading the word, it’s not making much of a difference. 

This is not to say Gen Z is politically inert. Many of us have participated in protests, and youth-led movements like March for Our Lives and the Sunrise Movement show that when activated, Gen Z can be a powerful force. But these efforts remain fragmented, often disconnected from broader political infrastructures and voter participation.

The challenge ahead is not only about registering more young voters or coaxing them into political parties. It’s about rebuilding trust, creating tangible pathways for agency—real, accessible steps for activism, from volunteering with impactful organizations to attending community meetings or protests—and bridging the gap between online consciousness and real-world impact. 

Our humor is not inherently a bad thing. Laughter has always been important. But if we want to shape the world we inherit—rather than merely survive it—it’s time to turn away from joking about global conflicts and start working to prevent them. The stakes are no longer theoretical, and the future will be decided by those who show up.

The post Gen Z Laughs in the Face of War appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

As Öztürk departed from her off-campus apartment, the 30-year-old Fulbright Scholar was detained by an entourage of black-clad agents from the Department of Homeland Security. In a minute-long video captured by nearby security cameras, Öztürk was handcuffed and marched away, leaving any semblance of normalcy on the sidewalk behind her.

Öztürk, who was pursuing a doctoral degree in Child Study and Human Development at Tufts University prior to her arrest, is only one in a disturbing series of student deportations under the Trump administration. The crackdown began on March 8, when pro-Palestinian activist and former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil was detained at his home in New York City and moved to an ICE detention center in Louisiana. At the time, Khalil had a valid green card and his wife, an American citizen, was eight months pregnant.

Since then, the alarming phenomenon has spread nationwide, impacting nearly 1,700 students at Columbia, Stanford and numerous other institutions. Some, like Öztürk and Khalil, have been detained by immigration officials. Others have gone into hiding or “self-deported” due to the resounding fear of arrest.

At a glance, the individual cases seem disconnected, no more than a series of moves in Trump’s ongoing war on immigration. However, when one looks closer, many of the students whose visas have been revoked share one remarkable similarity: association with the pro-Palestine movement.

Khalil, of course, was a leader of the cause during his time as a graduate student at Columbia. Yunseo Chung, a Columbia undergraduate whose visa was revoked on March 10, and Momodou Taal, a Cornell graduate student who has fled the country, were members of similar protest groups. Özturk’s involvement is much less substantial, though she did co-author an op-ed in Tufts’ student newspaper demanding that the school recognize Palestinian oppression and cut financial ties with Israel.

While the administration has yet to share its reasoning in some of the visa revocations, many of the cases are brought under an obscure clause of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which states that “an alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable.”

Though the law has never been challenged in the Supreme Court, a 1996 lower court ruling from Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, Trump’s elder sister, found it unconstitutional. In the ruling, she stated that the passage affords far too much power to the Secretary of State and poses a major risk to the freedom and futures of immigrants, even those who live in the country legally. So long as this law remains in place, immigrants must live in fear, terrified that they may soon meet Öztürk or Khalil’s fate.

Judge Trump Barry’s decision closely echoes the claims of the clause’s modern opponents, including the 19 state attorney generals who have urged a federal judge to block further visa cancellations: The wording is simply too vague, allowing for unfettered executive power over deportations and interfering with personal freedom in the process. After all, how can a democracy constructed on the idea of self-determination allow a single man, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, to determine the futures of the nearly 48 million immigrants in our country? That doesn’t sound like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to me.

More specific threats to freedom, namely those laid out in the Constitution, must also be taken into consideration. The First Amendment, a document which largely shapes our country’s democracy and legal process, sets aside five crucial rights: free speech, free press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and the freedom to petition the government. 

Was Khalil not exercising his Constitutional right to free speech and assembly when he participated in pro-Palestine protests at Columbia? Was Öztürk’s op-ed not protected under freedom of the press? America is built on the ideal of freedom, but if our country was truly free, participating in a protest or co-authoring an article in a student newspaper would not be considered a threat to national security.

Beyond the blatant constitutional violations, the detentions of Öztürk, Khalil and others set an unfortunate precedent for our colleges and universities, whose school environments are enriched by the presence of international students. By threatening the students’ ability to study in the United States, the Trump administration has jeopardized the incredible exchange of cultures and knowledge that occurs on America’s college campuses.

“For me, it’s pretty sad, because I feel like having a chance to study abroad is just amazing,” said Maëlys Wayaffe, a Belgian exchange student attending Summit High School. “You share cultures, languages, and I just think it’s a really great thing.”

Without international students, our universities will be missing a richness of perspectives that they cannot live without. These students remind us that the world is so much wider than the borders of the United States. They remind us that there is more to the pursuit of knowledge than simply reaffirming our own opinions. Perhaps the Trump administration could learn a valuable lesson from them.

The restriction of international students from our campuses is more than a threat to education — it directly undermines  the ideals on which our nation is built. It is a threat to free speech and freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and the freedom to learn as we please. Khalil, Öztürk and the hundreds of other international students who have been threatened with deportation may not be citizens of our country, but we must protect them nonetheless. After all, if their fundamental freedoms are ignored, then what will prevent the administration from ignoring the freedom of all immigrants or, perhaps, all Americans?

The post Student Deportations Call First Amendment Into Question appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

Immigration: “Believe me, it’s gonna work. Walls work.”

Within a week and a half of being in office, Trump has already signed multiple executive orders and acts that will change and endanger the lives of immigrants living in the United States. On Jan. 20, his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order to end birthright citizenship, a decision that he had mentioned during his first term in office. However, District Judge John Coughenour blocked the order and called it “blatantly unconstitutional.” It has been in the U.S. Constitution since 1868 that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Getting rid of this constitutional right would require amending the Constitution, which has not happened since 1992. 

A little over a week later Trump signed a memorandum on Jan. 29 to prepare Guantánamo Bay in Cuba to house thousands of immigrants. Trump stated that “We have 30,000 beds in Guantánamo to detain the worst criminal illegal aliens threatening the American people. This will double our capacity immediately.” The facility is currently used to house Muslim militants and terrorist suspects and is known for torture and injustice. In an article published by Amnesty International last March, a former prisoner, Mansoor Adayfi, who was kidnapped and taken to Guantánamo Bay as a teenager described it as “a crime against humanity. People died there. People were tortured. People were paralyzed. All kinds of torture, abuse, physical, mental, psychological.” 

The president of Cuba, Miguel Diaz-Canel also called Trump’s decision an “act of brutality” and mentioned how the immigrants would be placed next to the torture and illegal detention that the facility is known for. 

Trans rights: “It is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality.”

One of the most glaring changes in the wake of Trump’s inauguration is the rapid and devastating erosion of transgender rights. Trump launched his term by releasing an executive order establishing two sexes and refuting the idea that one’s gender identity can contradict their sex assigned at birth. This order is particularly damaging to the nonbinary community. Those who exist outside the gender binary, and intersex people, whose sex characteristics do not fit the traditional definitions of male and female. The blatant erasure of these groups sends a clear message: they will not be welcome under the Trump administration.

The same clear exclusion can also be seen in an executive order signed Monday, which prevents transgender Americans from serving in the armed forces. This order claims that “radical gender ideology” has weakened our country’s military and that simply existing as a trans person “is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member.”

On Tuesday, Trump signed a third executive order preventing transgender teens across the country from receiving gender-affirming care. This blanket ban, which follows a series of state-level attacks on gender-affirming care for trans youth, claims that the treatment is based on “junk science” and likens it to “a stain on our Nation’s history.” U.S. v. Skrmetti, a Supreme Court case deciding the constitutionality of such restrictions, will be decided in June. Until then, Trump’s order will have disastrous impacts on trans youth, many of whom rely on gender-affirming care for their mental health and happiness.

The language of the orders appeals to two of the most polarizing arguments against trans rights: women’s safety and protecting children. However, Trump does not care about women. He does not care about children. These orders have one goal, and that goal is to restrict the rights of trans people. In his less than two weeks in office, the president has clarified his vendetta against the trans community, and we should expect many more harmful regressions to come.

Climate Change: “We will drill, baby, drill!”

January 20, 2025—aka American Doomsday. While the political Doomsday clock may have run out of time, the Climate Clock dwindles by the second. Immediately following his inauguration declaration, Trump declared a national energy emergency, just one of the landside executive orders carried out on Capitol Hill. Trump revoked a ban imposed by President Joe Biden on new offshore oil and gas development along a majority of the country’s coastlines. Oil companies appear to embrace his agenda but don’t align with correlating radical propositions.

This active threat to the American people from high energy prices is exacerbated by our Nation’s diminished capacity to insulate itself from hostile foreign actors. In his executive order, President Trump proclaimed: 

“Energy security is an increasingly crucial theater of global competition. In an effort to harm the American people, hostile state and non-state foreign actors have targeted our domestic energy infrastructure, weaponized our reliance on foreign energy, and abused their ability to cause dramatic swings within international commodity markets.” 

In recent years, the Trump administration’s energy policies have unveiled a striking paradox: an emphasis on national energy independence while simultaneously exacerbating global climate concerns. His declaration is clearly a strategy to justify ramping up fossil fuel production at a time when renewable energy sources are rapidly advancing. The United States should not return to a reliance on oil and gas when innovations in solar, nuclear and other renewable technologies are providing cleaner, more sustainable alternatives.

Pulling out of the Paris Agreement was a significant setback in climate initiatives sought to minimize. It sends a dangerous message at a time when collaborating global efforts produce the only significant progress in the last decade. Historically, the U.S. remains the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, the only agreement that will be upheld through 2029. 

A forward-thinking energy policy should embrace the potential of renewables, not sacrifice clean land for top profit. Instead of fostering an era of retrograde drilling and withdrawal from global agreements, the Trump Administration should be funding organizations and foundations focused on efficient, yet renewable energy. The future demands a commitment to sustainability, not a fleeting embrace of fossil fuels.

The World Health Organization: “Ooo, that’s a big one” 

Trump’s longstanding dissatisfaction with the World Health Organization (WHO) culminated on the president’s first day back in office in his executive order to withdraw the United States from the organization. This decision is rooted in criticism of WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and carries momentous implications for both national and international health. 

The WHO provides critical research for fighting diseases, from tuberculosis to maternal mortality. By withdrawing, the U.S. not only loses invaluable information, but WHO loses its biggest funder—something determined by a country’s population and gross domestic product (GDP). 

Although this decision is unlikely to affect us directly, at least in the immediate future, the WHO has played a key role in major health milestones, including eradicating smallpox. Without this resource, another pandemic may be far more deadly. This is particularly concerning in light of the current and rapidly-evolving threat of bird flu, which so far caused 67 confirmed cases and one death in the U.S.

Ending DEI: “Discriminatory diversity, equity and inclusion nonsense” 

On Jan. 20 and Jan. 27, Trump signed into effect two executive orders abolishing DEI programs within the federal government and in the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense. Soon after, he ordered all diversity, equity and inclusion staff within the federal government to be put on paid leave and eventually laid off.

While Trump is unable to require the same from corporations, and therefore these executive orders won’t have a direct effect on Bendites, many are following his lead. The decisions of brands like McDonald’s, Meta and Walmart to dissolve DEI programs may lead to more local changes. McDonald’s, as a common location for youth workers, is leading these effects, as they’ve already planned to disband a program that increased minorities in leadership positions and promoted diversity training.

DEI programs have allowed for the federal government to reflect our diverse nation and set an example for the leaders of corporations to do the same. The abolition of these programs will return our nation’s workplace to something disastrous, and the start of it, as seen in the federal government laying off all DEI employees, is already here. 

Changes in Government: “A Very Common Thing to Do”

Within a week, the federal government has been drastically changed, including the removal of the government watchdogs who keep authorities in check. At least 17 Inspector Generals were fired from 12 major federal agencies, although this action was unlawful in regards to the Inspector General Act that was imposed by Congress in 1978 . Inspector Generals conduct objective audits within their agency and investigate allegations of abuse of power, waste and fraud. These removals are unlawful, as Congress must be informed of the action by the president 30 days before it would be carried out, and Trump did not abide.

Jan. 6: “A Day of Love”

Trump has seemingly turned 180 degrees since the events of Jan. 6, 2021. He has transitioned from his once firm stance that the rioters should be held accountable, to now issuing a proclamation immediately pardoning all those involved in storming the capitol four years ago, keeping one of his driving campaign promises. Of the 1,500 or so pardoned people, the most significant are the leaders of the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, two far-right groups who played a major role in the violence that ensued following President Joe Biden’s election in 2020. They are to be released from prison following the executive order. 

This is yet another example of Trump changing his viewpoints purely out of convenience–and perhaps even a blatant attempt to assert his power over the judiciary. To issue pardons on such a large scale diminishes its value, and is an abuse of the pardon power. 

Since Trump has taken office this past month, he’s already shaken things up in the federal government. However, not all of his executive orders have been approved and acted upon. As of today, the White House has responded to Trump’s executive order to freeze federal grants by rescinding the proposal. When proposing this order, he claimed that the freeze would not affect Medicaid, Social Security, food stamp programs and student loans or scholarships. 

When it comes to education, the effects would be detrimental. Cuts to federal funding would mean fewer resources for students, including textbooks, technology and free school lunches, and would also reduce school programs, such as arts, theatre, music and other extracurricular activities. With these factors in play, students’ opportunities and resources are in harm’s way, making it harder for students to further their education and plan for their future. This carries even greater significance for students who go to lower income schools, because they’re especially reliant on the federal government’s funding and this would make almost all their opportunities nonexistent. 

Another important executive order implemented Jan. 29 is “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schools,” which revolves around the specific issues in the U.S. education system that “erode critical thinking.” The “indoctrinations” Trump plans on ending regards things such as allowing students to get surgical or chemical changes regarding their gender without parental consent or involvement, and the implementation of critical race theory into classroom lessons. Trump’s reasoning for such ideas are his protection of laws and amendments such as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), which give parents control over their students health records and allow them to be involved when making decisions about their mental and physical health. By implementing more control over students in schools, he is preventing many students from being able to freely express themselves and is taking away freedoms which students believe they should have.

Renaming American Landmarks: “Restoring Names that Honor American Greatness”

During his first day in office, Trump officially ordered the Secretary of the Interior to rename Denali and the Gulf of Mexico to Mt. McKinley and the Gulf of America respectively. Following the deluge of orders over the past week, surrounding everything from immigration to environmental policy, name changes first appear of minimal concern. However, it is important to emphasize the immense weight titles carry, recognizing who has power and where they assign value. Through this order, Trump makes one thing clear: a commitment to a dominant America.

However, this appeal to patriotism and tradition comes at the cost of honoring international unity and traditions which predate our founding, as Alaska State Senator Lisa Murkowski emphasized in her condemnation of the Denali name change. 

“Our nation’s tallest mountain, which has been called Denali for thousands of years, must continue to be known by the rightful name bestowed by Alaska’s Koyukon Athabascans, who have stewarded the land since time immemorial,” said Murkowski.

Moving south, it is important to note that the name change of the Gulf of Mexico will not be recognized abroad. This order makes no substantive change, acting as a political tool to place the US above all else and appealing to easily abused nationalistic tendencies. Through this action, Trump only emphasizes the immense power of the presidency, sending a clear message of U.S. dominance at the cost of delegitimizing others’ history and tradition, ideals he is purported to hold dear.

Final Thoughts

In an earlier editorial, we predicted that Trump’s election would rock the foundations upon which our country is built. In the past week and a half, we have been proven correct, and as Trump’s term unfolds, there is no doubt that the president will continue to bring drastic changes to the United States. Trump’s actions are an indicator of egoism and an overinflated sense of his own power, but he is not our king. Our only hope is that citizens and authorities alike will band together and prevent him from destroying the rights and values we hold dear.

The post As Future Journalists of America, We Are Scared appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

What if you didn’t have the opportunity to vote?

Waking up the morning after and seeing the results, along with the many reposts of people around the nation, I realized that many of the thoughts I was seeing were from teenagers unable to vote. Teens who wanted Harris to win were strongly opinionated about the loss and wrote things on social media about how they “lost their human rights” or “can’t believe that he won” and even went as far as telling people who voted for Trump to “go ahead and unfollow”. On the other hand, those who were leaning more Republican were thrilled by the new president’s election and posted things telling people to not let politics change their friendships. 

The news and opinions were shared in schools, with people talking during lunch about their thoughts and what they think will happen now. Some argued that it would be over in four years and “it is what it is,” while others strongly disagreed and said that he will now have the power to change even more laws for the worse of the people. Many students have fears of how his election will affect them personally, along with women and those in the latino community. These teenagers don’t have the ability to vote yet, but it is important for the country that many of them care about the outcome and will vote when they have the chance.

Will Trump keep his campaign promises?

Throughout Trump’s campaigning, he has made multiple promises on what he’s going to do to “Make America Great Again.” The question now with him winning over 72,170,356 votes is, will he follow through? 

Human rights are a key issue many people are concerned over after hearing news of Trump’s endorsement. The fear for what’s to come for women’s rights is specifically concerning all women of America. Trump has said he will not be banning abortion on a national level, as the overturn of Roe v. Wade is federal enough. Rather he is keeping it up to the state governments to decide their views on an abortion ban. Still, Trump also has not made clear whether, if the issue were to arise, if he would veto national abortion restrictions. 

Along with women’s rights, many people are concerned for LGBT rights. The most concerning being that Trump has promised to end “boys in girls sports” and vice versa. Considering Kamala Harris was very supportive of LGBT rights, even promising to give transgender people in prison access to gender-affirming care, this switch in perspective is very prominent between the two. 

Trump’s impact on the economy provokes immense fear, as well as excitement for citizens. He promises to make the economy the best it has ever been during these coming four years. Two of his most prominent points include his No Tax on Tips and No Tax on Overtime Wages. This is especially appealing to those who work in the service industry because, without a tax on tips, the lower classes and middle/upper classes are able to establish savings that would have otherwise been spent on decent service. The idea of no tax on overtime wages is also appealing to those who take on extra hours or shifts to work are now able to take home whole funds rather than just a fraction. 

The turnout for the past election has left many people unweary of the future of America, however, it’s clear that Trump’s policies are potent in theory, yet some pose drastically unrealistic given the length of his term. 

What will become of women’s and reproductive rights?

When we heard about Trump’s win in the presidential election, it brought forth a grave realization that as women, we no longer have a say in our bodies and our future. This instilled a fear that greatly exceeded the fear from the overturn of Roe V. Wade in 2022. Now it is legally and physically dangerous to access abortion. Trump’s opinion and plans regarding reproductive rights are very much directive and leave little room for persuasion. 

From a purely societal standpoint, there is worry as well, for we now know that sexism is still very prevalent, even with how far we’ve come. From picketing to unions to rallies in the streets, women have been fighting for years just to be treated and considered equal to men. It turns out that we still have a long way to go. Someone’s mother, someone’s daughter, someone’s sister; women are half of the population and still are treated as if they do not create the entire population. 

We are not only women, we are women striving to make change within the community and beyond it. Our rightful purpose cannot happen if there is no passion behind our efforts, and it seems that no matter how much there is, we still cannot overthrow this supreme patriarchy. This was proven the night of Nov. 6, when we watched as the blue washed away like yet another temporarily bothersome occurrence. As journalists, we bring these situations to light for those unable to speak up and access what should be rightfully theirs. 

Will Trump further damage religious freedom and the separation of church and state?

Despite the Bill of Rights’’ protection of freedom of religion, there are many examples of the ever-eroding wall between church and state. From the call of Oklahoma … Ryan Walters to mandate bible lessons in grades five through twelve to Trump’s recent advocacy for Christian nationalism, our supposed protections continue to falter. 

As students whose religious affiliations drastically differ, we find that the separation of church and state is necessary for an education system without prejudice. To have a government promote one set of views over another would subjugate the freedom of young people.

How will Trump change the U.S. healthcare system?

Throughout Trump’s former presidency, he promised, and failed, to dismantle the Affordable Care Act (ACA, also known as Obamacare) which makes health insurance more affordable to low-income households and holds health insurance companies accountable. Although Trump has pivoted from this stance, promising to replace the act instead of removing it, as said in posts on a Trump-owned social media site (Truth Social) and the presidential debate, his plans remain dangerously vague. 

Additionally, Trump promised to appoint Ronald F. Kennedy Jr., a vocal anti-vaccine advocate, in charge of health agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). As teens whose childhoods have been marked by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the possibility of reduced vaccine access, and resulting outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease, is terrifying. 

Will Trump dumb down American education?

A second Trump administration will likely escalate scrutiny towards colleges and universities, empowering students and faculty to advocate for reform during a time of insecurity for American higher education. As student debt and tuition deter enrollment and the aftermath of negative coverage of campus protesters and international policies, Trump voices transformative implications toward the future of secondary education. Rather than improving education systems through gradual adaptation and revision, Trump established hostile policies concerning federal student financial aid.  

According to Trump’s Republican Platform, the Republican Party will support the creation of “more affordable alternatives to a traditional four-year college degree” and pledges to prioritize affordability and “reduce” the cost of higher education. His agenda suggests the Department of Education (ED) work with Congress to amend the Home Equity Agreement (HEA) to eliminate negotiated rulemaking, and at a minimum, Congress allowing the ED to officiate public hearings over rulemaking negotiations. He aims to return to a financing where private lenders, backed by federal guarantees, would compete to offer student loans.

Yet this only tackles vague economic concerns and proposes unreliable patronage.

Trump also pledges to “deport pro-Hamas radicals” and increase college campus safety, making the majorly independent institutions “patriotic again.” To Trump, separation of church and state and the First Amendment are unpatriotic. He promises to cultivate “great” K-12 education leading to “great” jobs and “great” lives for young people. While he’s making America great again, the “great” young people will be moving to university out of Republican-dominant states and even out-of-country. 

To high school seniors and even current college students, attending foreign schools thousands of miles away from friends and family is a far better option than remaining in the U.S. and distancing themselves from fundamental rights.

With Trump’s outlook on higher education, he won’t simply be deporting “illegal” immigrants, he’s deporting the future of America.

Will the trend of political violence continue?

Political violence is something that has devastated America before, although the 2024 election showed a new perspective on political violence. 

The last assassination attempt in American history was 61 years ago when John F. Kennedy was killed. Typically, America has been associated with having little to no political violence within our borders. America has been a country based on democracy, freedom of speech and the pursuit of happiness.

This election has been an abnormality of uncertain proportions. 

The first attempt on Trump’s life during this election cycle was attempted by a registered Republican at a rally for his campaign. There was also an attempt during his leisure time at a golf course. Considering that Trump is a very controversial man even among proud Republicans, this isn’t too surprising. 

Not only that, but multiple ballot boxes have been destroyed this election season. Of course, ballot box concerns were already on concerned citizen’s radars amidst the hurricanes threatening the South. People’s doctor appointments had to be moved to different locations due to security fears with nearby ballot boxes. This concern is particularly Relevant around our area, as ballot box burnings only happened in the Pacific Northwest and Arizona. 

Considering these legitimate fears, it makes sense that overall America is unsteady right now. Between America handling foreign affairs poorly, the economy being disarray for most Americans and the topic of rights coming into play, this will be a new chapter in America’s history. Only time will tell where this political turmoil will lead us in the future as a democracy. 

Will political bias in local Central Oregon classrooms impede education?

While diversity is a key component in Madras’s success, the clashing opinions can be confusing for everyone. When recently finding out that President Trump won the election while living in a predominantly republican area and having to go to school, I knew that it would be tough. Some people will let their political views get in the way of not just theirs but others’ education, and my first day of school after the election proved just that.

As soon as school starts, one can hear a teacher ask their class if they saw who won the election. And in my next period, I overheard a white student stating “I don’t like Mexicans” in a group of Hispanic students. As they had been showing how the person they were talking to was pro-Trump and how they have been posting to vote for him. Just after the student had stated that an argument broke out and you can hear the teacher say just remember the last four years 

After hearing controversial and harmful opinions in an educational space, it creates a sense of hostility that is concerning not just for local students but for those threatened across the country.

Our final statement

For many of us, the moment Kamala Harris lost the election was a moment of grief and unbridled terror. What will happen to our country? How will we continue moving forward with a president so determined to drag us back? When Trump takes office in January, the state of our society will change. Our First Amendment freedoms are at risk, as well as our rights to control our own bodies. For girls and women, journalists and members of many minority groups, the prospect of four years under Trump is unimaginable. 

Whether or not we can imagine it, we will soon be forced to live it. However, we must not lose hope. There is always light, and if America has proved one thing throughout its history, it is that this country is capable of great change but also the conservation of democracy. And after all, the 22nd Amendment guarantees that Trump will be out of office before most of us are old enough to drink.

The post Looking to the Future appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

Sisters High School English teacher Brittney Hilgers illustrated her thoughts after being questioned on the effects of assigned reading in high schools.

“The amount of kids who want to read differs from place to place, but there’s always a reluctance. My ultimate goal is to put books in front of kids, so in a perfect world I wouldn’t have to assign reading notes,” said Hilgers.

Hilgers has been teaching for over 10 years and discusses her relationship with reading as a college student. 

“You have to choose to be a reader. In college, I was burnt out and I forgot to pick books that I would like. It wasn’t until after I had kids that I got back into it,” said Hilgers.

In 2016, it was reported that the average number of 12th graders that read a book or newspaper every day dropped from 60% in the late 1970’s to 16%. There are numerous theories as to why, with most linking to the evolution of technology and social media that consumes the average teenager.

Many young readers are losing interest in reading due to a lack of connection with the texts they are assigned. The classic books taught in high schools, while excellent examples of literature, are often several decades old. In today’s rapidly changing society, it’s common for young readers to feel disconnected from the characters and themes in these older works.

“I think assigned reading can dampen the reading experience. I know my brother used to love reading when he was younger, but now because he associates it with school he doesn’t,” said Sisters High School sophomore Brooke Duey. “I used to like to read, but now I’m so busy I can’t find the time. I feel like most students have a commitment outside of school, whether it’s sports, dance or something else.”

There are a multitude of potential theories on why reading becomes less popular throughout teenage years, but after interviewing these students, a couple of things were made clear. 

Reading isn’t for everyone; attention spans range and the capacity to consume more difficult vocabulary varies. Being told to read usually sucks the fun out of it, especially when it includes seemingly over-analyzing the text. Books have the potential to give you a new perspective on life, but it can also be challenging to relate to characters that you can’t see yourself in at all.Knowing this, don’t be afraid to pick up a book that looks fun when you see it. Not all books follow the pipeline of “To Kill a Mockingbird” or “The Great Gatsby.” If you give reading a chance again and pick out books that truly interest you, you might even find yourself liking it.

The post Assigned Reading and Its Long-Term Effects on Students appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

The primary season for the 2024 election began on Jan. 15 in New Hampshire and will end in June. Over that six-month period, eligible voters across the country place their ballots, choosing candidates for everything ranging from the president to state governors and local positions. Many states hold their primaries on Super Tuesday, which generally occurs in March.

The Republican National Convention takes place in July this year, and the Democratic National Convention will follow soon after in August. At both events, delegates from each state will choose the party nominations, based on the primary votes.

However, the way the primary system is set up gives states with earlier primaries far more say than those with later ones, such as Oregon. By the time that Oregon voters cast their ballots, candidates for party nominations have been decided already. Winning the Republican nomination requires 1,215 delegates out of 2,429 in total. Currently, Trump has gained 2,015. 

Similarly, the Democratic nomination for president requires 1,968 votes out of 3,934 possible. Biden has also surpassed this threshold, currently holding 3,386 pledges. In short, the elections for presidential candidates have already been decided.

The primary election does matter for more locally-centered matters, however. In Oregon, the gubernatorial candidates will be decided through the May 21 primary, as will positions such as the county commissioner. 

In addition, several levies are also on the May ballot. Levies are taxes that would add small amounts to the taxes that Oregonians already pay. This year, the levies would benefit the La Pine Fire District and the Bend-La Pine School District, among others. 

One La-Pine Fire District levy proposes that 64 cents out of every $1,000 is collected in property tax, dependent on a home’s worth. The funds would go towards operating costs for the Fire Department, including staffing 21 firefighter paramedics, and would raise a combined total of $7.5 million within the next five years.

La Pine has also proposed a second levy that would tax property owners 23 cents for every $1,000 worth of property to maintain and replace firefighting equipment. Both Fire District levies have successfully passed in recent years and are currently up for renewal. The levy estimates that $5.6 million will be raised in the next 10 years.

The Bend-La Pine Schools Learning Levy proposes that one dollar out of every $1,000 in assessed property value goes towards maintaining programs across the district that would otherwise be cut in the 2024-25 school year due to decreased state funding. Otherwise, as many as 180 teaching, student support, and administrative positions would have to be cut within the next two years to accommodate the funding shortfall. Classes would grow in size by an average of about four students across elementary, middle, and high schools. 

In addition, elective classes and programs would also be eliminated. Some of the key departments under fire are high school theater programs, which has caused an outcry of support from students, staff, and families alike. If passed, the levy is estimated to raise $22.5 million over the next five years. 

The post Do Oregon Primaries Actually Matter? appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

When I moved here, it wasn’t all that big, and it wasn’t all so overwhelming to find parking. At the same time, there wasn’t super interesting cuisine, either. Five years of my life have most likely been devoted to sitting in various, identical breweries. Blindfold me and walk me into a brewery, and I wouldn’t be able to tell them apart until you walked me to the bathroom. I’m not sure how to think about Bend-that-was, because my old Bend was someone’s new Bend.

There’s this old thought experiment about the Ship of Theseus: after Theseus slayed the Minotaur and returned to Athens, his ship was kept in its pristine condition by replacing various planks once they’d rotten. In time, the ship was all replaced, bit by bit, so that it wouldn’t rot in the harbor. Everybody wanted to know if it was the same ship, even if it was made from different materials–even though Theseus had never touched the bow, even if it wasn’t the same planks that had carried him home. It still looked like the ship, and it still sat where the ship had sat.

It happened slowly, and I wasn’t angry about it. There was an influx of people, which led to some of the best friends I’ve ever had. In fact, I was a part of the earliest wave of newcomers. There were new restaurants, new stores, new roads, new neighborhoods. I loved some, hated more, and am currently harboring a personal vendetta against the boutiques that seem to pop up like unfortunate pimples. 

But at the same time, it was disorienting. I’d look around me in school assemblies and not recognize anyone. Going to familiar restaurants, I’d leave once I saw the crushing crowd of people waiting in line. Later, I would watch everyone in my neighborhood move out, selling their now-coveted homes for double the price. I’m sure the faithful who’ve lived here all their lives are experiencing an even greater shock. Nowadays, people who have lived here for generations are slowly watching their town turn into a major tourist destination. 

My last full year living here, and all I see when I go anywhere is the memory of my childhood home, like ghosts clouding my vision. It wasn’t all great, but at least we could go to the river in relative solitude. 

When I go grocery shopping, I still mess up and say “Food 4 Less” instead of its new name, which has already slipped my mind. Traffic detours are my nightmare, and new neighborhoods mess up my sense of direction. The land they were built on were places I took my dog out, away from the bustle of the street. 

My dog loved sniffing that tree, I would think, as I drove past construction workers chopping it down. We loved to walk under it.

I remember the small pockets of land that would end up getting bulldozed for more houses, more people, more boutiques. In my own personal act of spite, I enjoy letting my dog pee in their grass. 

It’s not their fault, but it’s mine for my inability to move on. Old Bend is dead, and maybe that’s a good thing. Maybe we’re just growing apart. When I move on, I’ll just shrug my shoulders whenever someone asks me what Bend is like. How should I know, anymore? And anyways, Theseus ended up getting crushed by the rotting planks of an old ship that wasn’t his, so I guess I shouldn’t think about it too hard.

The post Your Bend is Not My Bend appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

Zach Bryan, an explosive country artist who has amassed fans from all genres in recent years, released his long awaited self-titled album on Friday. Bryan had spent months teasing songs during concerts and on his social media accounts, and the album was exactly what he aimed for; it was authentically him. 

After reaching over 17 million monthly listeners and more than a billion combined streams, Bryan had a lot to live up to. Recently, Bryan headlined the Farewell Festival that brought over 25,000 visitors to Central Oregon last month. 

Bryan started his music career by accident while he was in the Navy. He uploaded a few videos to Twitter and went so viral that his superiors honorably discharged him due to his success. The fact that a discharge for music hadn’t happened since Elvis Presley speaks volumes to his success. 

This album wasn’t made to top the charts or follow in the footsteps of his hits, it was just supposed to be a collection of songs that Bryan thought represented himself. And in a release he said, “all I pray is that someone out there relates enough to not feel alone.” Though, there are several songs and big-name features that could be hits.

That idea of authentic feeling was carried throughout the album where Bryan touched on love, heartbreak, joy, grief, hope and self destruction, giving something for everyone. Bryan set this tone with an emotional spoken word poem reflecting on the ups and downs of life and facing fear. 

From there, Bryan pivoted to the rest of the album that was full of his emotional, melodic and catchy singing. However, this album had a uniquely acoustic twist. Many times, listeners hear Bryan and his guitar singing about heavy topics, with a relatively simple guitar instrumental. Which makes for an intimate experience where one can really appreciate the poetic nature of his lyrics. 

A few songs in, this pattern of heavy acoustic solos is replaced with the deep bellowing voice of the R&B duo, The War and Treaty. In “Hey Driver,” Bryan and Michael Trotter, the primary vocalist, sing in unison about escape for a better place. This place in question seems to be the American South, but not for any tangible reason, instead because of an implied comfort in tradition and stability. This universal feeling is perfectly captured in this fluid duet where Bryan’s high baritone sound ends where Trotter picks up and pushes it to a goosebumps-inducing max. 

Further into the tracklist is another feature that is nothing short of a masterpiece. In “Spotless,” Bryan and Wesley Schultz from The Lumineers reflect on a turning point in a relationship. In this duo, Bryan seems to represent the optimistic thoughts of this individual contemplating the state of this relationship, whereas Schultz portrays the pessimistic side. This internal dialogue competes with the individual recalling good memories, as if they are trying to rationalize the relationship. In a catchy but serenading climax, the chorus is a smooth point where the turmoil presented from Bryan and Schultz reaches a point of agreement. This agreement happens once the individual accepts that no one is “spotless,” and that if the relationship is meant to be, they’ll work through it together. Not only does this feeling strike a chord with most people, it is also a departure for Bryan, when he normally sings about ruining relationships in one way or another. This feeling of agreement and acceptance is beautifully displayed as they sing individually, but also in a united way where both voices only serve to complement the other.

Despite these clear winners of the album, there is truly not a song that should be skipped. This journey of stories and emotions quickly distances itself from the Zach Bryan story, and instead becomes the human story. One where you can take or leave anything you want from it, but still enjoy the album even if you tune out the lyrics. This is exactly what Bryan wanted to do, and has done from the beginning, making the choice to self-title the album a wise one; this is Zach Bryan.

The post “Zach Bryan” the Album for All appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.

We’ve come to a point in our culture where we’re scared to move on. I talk about this broadly, because it can be applicable to just about anything we’ve been screaming about lately – fashion trends, news or popular media. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, either. Nostalgia keeps our memories fond, enables us to learn lessons from hard times, and inspires us to be creative in the future.

As the various graduation days for Central Oregon students creep up, many people have found themselves facing a similar dilemma: they’re blaming COVID-19 for the fear of leaving the nest, an explanation for a problem generations before us have faced. And while this isn’t applicable to every student – obviously, most graduates are ready to get their diplomas and ditch for the last time – it does seem to be a popular fear amongst our departing 2023 class. I know almost no one will openly admit this, but the idea of leaving security, your friends, your town, can be an exhilarating yet terrifying prospect. 

Much of the blame can be placed on the missed school due to COVID-19, from which our graduating class lost their freshman and sophomore year. But the COVID-19 pandemic isn’t a valid excuse anymore — instead, it’s a crutch to blame failure on, and a false explanation for perfectly valid feelings. These fears are normal, but should not be accepted without question. 

The class of 2034 will be the first to graduate without ever having known schooling before the pandemic. Societal expectations change with our times, and districts have adapted remarkably to online school, despite the challenges. 

But nowadays, the excuses, instead of being mostly about potential breakups and undecided majors, are lamenting a lack of knowledge and preparedness for life beyond high school. These are valid fears and concerns, but this shouldn’t hold you back from wanting to achieve in the future. COVID-19 isn’t the enemy—it is the fear that everyone goes through graduating high school.  

COVID-19 seems like a great way to foster insecurities: “I missed out on freshman year!” or “I’m stuck in 2019,” are phrases I often hear thrown around. 

I interpret this to mean, “I’m going to blame any failure experienced in my future on missing two years because of the pandemic.” But honestly, what did we do in freshman year? Whine and complain about two homework assignments a week? (Just kidding. I love you, freshmen. Please invest in some deodorant.)

Online school was a traumatic switch, for both students and teachers. No doubt, the pandemic’s effects will reverberate throughout our generation and those to come, and we will continue to see the effects on our children and our policies. Even though our world is changing, our excitement for the future should not! It is your ability to persevere, your ability to succeed and your passion that will bring forward the future you want for yourself. COVID-19 can’t hold you back anymore. And if you have the tools to do so, by all means, go ahead and grab your future. (Which all of you do.)

The pandemic does not have to define us as a “lost generation.” No matter the circumstances, those who have motivation will succeed. Leaving the nest is a rite of passage, one which should not be feared as much as it is right now. 

One of the most dependable places we can look to for advice is history. After the divisive 2016 Presidential election, we blamed many of our problems on our government, under new management. When Barack Obama left the White House for the final time in 2016, his speech addressed the American people – some ready, some not – calling for a peaceful transfer of power for the President-elect Donald Trump. In his speech, he asked his audience to take a chance, to embrace and shape the American spirit that so many of us argue over today.

“I’m asking you to believe,” Obama said. “Not in my ability to bring about change – but in yours.”

His words ring true, not just for politics, but for a monumental step in one’s life. Don’t be afraid to take a chance, like so many have before you. COVID-19 does not define your future, but let it shape you and encourage you to harness your potential. You have the chance to make your own future. Why not dive head first?

The post It’s Time To Stop Blaming Covid appeared first on Obsidian News | Oregon Youth Voices.