by Mick Rhodes | editor@claremont-courier.com

Want to become a U.S. citizen?

Up until recently one avenue, enshrined in the Constitution since 1868, was to be born here. More on that later. Another way — unless you’re like Melania Trump and deemed eligible as a fashion model to receive a coveted EB1A visa, often referred to as an “Einstein visa” — is to pay $760, submit a multitude of documents, sit for an interview, and complete a 100-question oral citizenship test. The first question on the test, under the heading “American Government,” subheading “Principles of American Democracy,” is “What is the supreme law of the land?”

The answer, of course, is “the Constitution.”

Is it though? Today, on the Fourth of July, when we celebrate our independence from the then once all-powerful British, this question — so fundamental our government puts it first on its citizenship test — is up for debate.

After all, the Fifth Amendment to that same hallowed document guarantees every person on U.S. soil — including non-citizens — the right to due process. Let’s ask the thousands of people, including U.S. citizens, who’ve been tackled, handcuffed, and thrown into unmarked vehicles by Donald Trump’s unidentified, masked goons how that’s going for them.

Question 6 under “Principles of American Democracy” asks, “What is one right or freedom from the First Amendment?” and lists “speech, religion, assembly, press, and petition the government” as possible answers. One could argue Trump’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian protesters eliminates the “petition the government” option from consideration. But no, that’s a right too. In fact, the Constitution guarantees all of those possible answers as rights. I guess it’s a trick question, made imminently trickier by Trump’s disregard for our mother document.

Under “System of Government,” question 14 poses this head scratcher: “What stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful?” The answers, of course, are “checks and balances, and “separation of powers.” That sounds familiar, but we’re clearly in America’s post “checks and balances” period. The Supreme Court — packed with conservative activist judges who in this term largely granted Trump permission to do as he pleases, essentially placing him above the law — has driven that point home, most recently on June 27, when it voted to uphold the president’s executive order banning birthright citizenship, narrowing the power of lower courts to issue injunctions to stop government actions that may be illegal or unconstitutional.Like that one. And Congress, that other backstop to executive overreach, has thus far been nothing but a rubber stamp factory for Trump 2.0’s initiatives, no matter how harmful or unpopular.

So, yeah, it’s the Fourth of July. Yay. I’ve never been less excited about Independence Day.

But maybe I’m just looking at this wrong. Perhaps there’s another way to feel good about America right now.

Maybe instead of barbeques, parades, and blowing stuff up, protest is the new patriotism. Apparently a lot of folks have this same idea, as Claremont will join like-minded folks on the Fourth of July as part of the nationwide “free America” anti-Trump protests. Claremont’s takes place from 4:30 to 6 p.m. at Indian Hill and Foothill boulevards, site of the massive No Kings demonstration on June 14.

It’s an apt designation, “free America,” because it sure feels a lot less free around here these days. And as Claremont’s 5,000 strong No Kings protest made clear, a big ol’ righteous dose of joy and community is the antidote to hopelessness. Saddle up, patriots: we ride … at 4:30.

First Amendment coming in hot
Speaking of the Constitution, the Courier will publish a new special edition in September focusing on the First Amendment. You may be familiar: it’s one of the big ones, guaranteeing freedom of the press, religion, speech, assembly, and the right to petition the government to address grievances.

And with all the grievancing going on these days, and the president attacking and suing news organizations that write or air stories he’s unhappy with, it seems an opportune time to explore this fundamental addition to our suddenly fragile national rulebook.

We will of course be localizing this issue as best we can, tapping the vast resources of the Claremont Colleges for constitutional scholars and political scientists.

We hope you will agree it’s a fascinating topic, especially now.

Have an opinion on this plan? A finger to wag? An attaboy? Let’s talk. As always, my email is editor@claremont-courier.com. I look forward to hearing from you.