Student Blog

This piece argues that U.S. immigration policy has long reinforced racial hierarchy rather than serving as neutral regulation. Drawing on Tichenor, Masuoka and Junn, Spiro, and Wong, it shows how measures like the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Immigration Act of 1924 transformed racial anxieties and eugenic ideas into legal rules governing entry and citizenship. Tracing the link between whiteness and belonging from the Naturalization Act of 1790 through the quota system, it demonstrates how law codified a racially preferred vision of Americanness. This piece concludes that contemporary immigration debates still reflect this legacy, as racialized assumptions continue to shape policy and citizenship in the United States.

Abby Raysman
Digital Writer '25 - '26

This piece evaluates the Trump Administration’s proposal to cut the U.S. International Affairs Budget by 85 percent, arguing that the reduction represents both a humanitarian setback and a strategic miscalculation. Drawing on research in global health and economic development, it contends that U.S. foreign aid improves public health outcomes, encourages domestic investment in recipient countries, strengthens national security, and expands export markets. Ultimately, the piece frames humanitarian assistance not as charity, but as a core instrument of American stability and prosperity that the proposed cuts would dangerously undermine.

Caid Campbell
Digital Writer '25 - '26

This piece challenges the claim that dictatorships outperform democracies economically by avoiding gridlock. Drawing on North, Wallis, and Weingast’s framework, it argues that the real difference lies not in average growth but in stability. Authoritarian regimes may achieve rapid short-term gains, yet weak property rights and limited competition make growth volatile. Democracies, by contrast, foster durable prosperity through impersonal institutions, credible commitments, and competitive markets that support innovation and reduce severe downturns.

Abby Raysman
Digital Writer '25 - '26

This piece examines whether a president can remove a Federal Reserve Board member or chair, using President Trump’s public threats toward Jerome Powell as a case study. It places the dispute within the principle of central bank independence and analyzes statutory and constitutional limits on removal power. Drawing on the Federal Reserve Act and Supreme Court precedent, including Humphrey’s Executor and Seila Law, it argues that a Fed chair may be removed only “for cause,” not over policy disagreements. It concludes that frustration with monetary policy alone is insufficient grounds for removal.

Liam Peterson
Digital Writer '25 - '26

This reflection connects research on second-class citizenship and legal consciousness to recent immigration policy shifts under the Trump administration, examining how executive actions reshape both formal legal status and everyday lived experience. It argues that these policies intensify insecurity for mixed-status families by reinforcing uncertainty around rights, belonging, and legal protection. At the same time, the piece highlights how this instability complicates immigration scholarship, as citizenship increasingly functions as a fluid and contingent condition rather than a stable legal category in the United States.

Anna Hull
UWJPS Editor '25 - '26

The piece examines student lobbying as an effective response to political polarization, emphasizing its capacity to promote civic engagement, dialogue, and constructive policy change. Through historical examples such as Title IX and contemporary initiatives like Huskies on the Hill, it demonstrates how student advocacy brings together individuals across disciplines and political perspectives. In doing so, the piece argues that student-led lobbying not only influences legislation but also strengthens democratic participation by fostering compromise, communication, and mutual understanding between citizens and lawmakers.

Kaitlyn O'Connor

UWJPS Editor '25 - '26

This piece examines the uncertain future of antitrust enforcement under a second Trump administration, contrasting Trump’s prior selective approach to Big Tech with the more aggressive antitrust agenda pursued during the Biden administration. It explores how shifts at the DOJ and FTC, a business-friendly stance on AI regulation, and the involvement of figures like Elon Musk may signal a rollback of robust enforcement, raising broader questions about whether antitrust policy will be driven by market principles or political considerations.

Isaac Grey
UWJPS Director of Public Relations  '25 - '26

This piece argues that Grants Pass v. Johnson enables the criminalization of homelessness by dismantling prior Eighth Amendment protections that limited punitive camping bans when no shelter was available. It contends that the Court’s reasoning obscures how such ordinances effectively punish the status of being unhoused, rather than discrete conduct. More broadly, the decision is framed as reflecting a cultural and political willingness to marginalize unhoused individuals by removing them from public view instead of addressing the structural causes of homelessness.

Dylan Bianchi 

UWJPS Editor '25 - '26

This reflection on a disability studies course examines how disability is understood across cultures in the Global South, emphasizing relativist and intersectional approaches to rights-based advocacy. Through case studies of organizations such as CREA and VIHEMA, it argues that effective international disability work must be community-driven, culturally responsive, and led by disabled individuals themselves. The piece concludes that meaningful progress depends on resisting Western universalism and respecting local social models of disability.

Julia Blount 

Assistant Editor '25 - '26