# data[].attributes.headline
Federalism:  State Marijuana Laws Clash With Federal Marijuana Laws 

# data[].attributes.subject
Federalism:  State Marijuana Laws Clash With Federal Marijuana Laws 

# data[].attributes.body
An ongoing issue that America has been facing for the past few years is marijuana legalization. According to the current federal law, marijuana is illegal nationwide. However, every state has taken a different approach to the marijuana situation, and it has created a somewhat confusing and chaotic dilemma. In some states, marijuana is totally illegal, in other states, marijuana is available for special medical purposes, and in very few states, marijuana is totally legal and available for purchase. People in states where marijuana is illegal complain because they think it should be legal for medical uses. People in states where special uses of marijuana are legal are content, but are at risk of getting too close to other surrounding states where they could be criminalized for having marijuana. In states where marijuana is completely legal, the people who sell marijuana are at risk of being robbed of their cash because federal banks do not take "drug money". In states where marijuana is legal however, the government has accepted the states' decisions and agreed to leave them alone. Therefore, although the situation is confusing, the government has allowed the states to remain in charge of their own marijuana laws.

# data[].attributes.headline
Popular Sovereignty: Voter ID Laws In Kansas

# data[].attributes.subject
Popular Sovereignty: Voter ID Laws In Kansas

# data[].attributes.body
In the Obama vs. Romney election, many people claimed that Governor Romney was at a disadvantage to Obama, who is said to have cheated in the election by using voting fraud tactics. There was an uproar among Republicans, who don't think illegal aliens should be allowed to vote or that people should be able to vote multiple times. Some state governments tried to take action to stop voting fraud, including Kansas.  Kansas tried to require proof of identification in order to vote, which would make voting fraud alomost impossible.  However, people opposing voter ID requirements made the argument that this law was targeting minority groups, including African and Mexican Americans.  Targeting minority groups to prohibit people from voting in elections is against the popular sovereignty principle, so therefore the proposed Voter ID Laws were ruleed out.  This shows that even though voting fraud could be stopped by these laws, popular sovereignty will not be compromised by laws that make it more difficult for certain people to vote.

# data[].attributes.headline
Limited Government:  Hillary Clinton Benghazi and Email Scandals

# data[].attributes.subject
Limited Government:  Hillary Clinton Benghazi and Email Scandals

# data[].attributes.body
The Limited Government principle in the Constitution is based around the idea that everybody, including people holding powerful government positions, have to follow the same laws as everybody else in the United States. Just because a person is the President, the law of the U.S. still applies to him/her. A good example of this principle is the Clinton Foundation. Hillary Clinton has been involved in two very heated disputes over actions she made, in which many people believe she committed crimes. While Clinton served as Secretary of State, she used a personal email account to view and share classified information, rather than an account protected by the government. She and many people know this is illegal. During that time as Secretary of State, she also failed to protect the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, which resulted in the death of four Americans. As of right now, October 20th, 2015, Hillary Clinton is preparing for her trial, which is tomorrow, 10-21-15. This goes to show that nobody is above the United States's law... not even Hillary Clinton.

# data[].attributes.headline
Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers: Obama Administration's Gun Control

# data[].attributes.subject
Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers: Obama Administration's Gun Control

# data[].attributes.body
Since Obama became the President in 2008, he has spent a substantial portion of his time and effort trying to overuse his power to throw aside the Second Amendment and impose tougher anti-gun laws on the American people. If Obama had everything his own way and could make every decision without the consent of the judicial and Legislative branches, who knows? He may have already completely outlawed guns in America. Thankfully, the government was set up to prevent the President's irrational decisions from having a negative impact on the people. Because the President's Executive Action is limited, he has to have the backing of the Legislative and Judicial branches to create any long-lasting laws, decisions, or procedures that would affect such a large percentage of the people. Therefore, Obama has been unable to tear down the Second Amendment and take the American citizens' Right To Bear Arms.

# data[].attributes.headline
Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers: Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage

# data[].attributes.subject
Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers: Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage

# data[].attributes.body
On June 27th, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court took the initiative to make a nationwide decision on the controversial issue of legalizing gay marriage. For a long time, gay couples had felt like their rights were unequal to the rights of normal couples because many states had not made the decision to legalize gay marriage. However, the Judicial Brach took this issue on unilaterally without the consultation of the Executive and Legislative branches, and legalized gay marriage across the country in a 5-4 victory. There was nothing the other two branches could have done if they had had a problem with the outcome of this case.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1973, a woman in Texas (Roe) wanted to get an abortion. However, Texas state law outlawed abortions. Roe felt this was unfair. Women in other states around the U.S. were able to get abortions legally according to other state laws. Roe decided that according to the 4th, 9th, and 14th amendments, she and the women in Texas deserved to have equal protection under the law as women in other states. Roe took the case to the Supreme Court, and she won her case with a vote of 7-2. This Supreme Court case ruled that any woman in the U.S. could legally get an abortion within the first trimester of their pregnancy (first 3 months) but that after that abortions were a risk to the mother and the child, which at that point is much more developed.

# data[].attributes.body
Before the second half of the 19th Century, Presidents did not have restricted term limits. One President, Franklin Roosevelt, stayed in office four terms. People started having concerns that a presidents that were in charge for that length of time could become too powerful, and act more of as a Dictator than a President. This concern of Presidents having unlimited terms was a large enough problem to be brought up in Congress. On March 21, 1947, Congress passed the 22nd Amendment. 36 of the 48 states ratified the amendment, which officially limited the U.S. Presidents to two terms in office. This shows that even though the writers of the Constitution didn't think about the President being in office for too long of a time, the country was able to adapt to current times by adding to the Constitution.

# data[].attributes.headline
Limited Government: Obama's Iran Nuclear Deal

# data[].attributes.subject
Limited Government: Obama's Iran Nuclear Deal

# data[].attributes.body
Recently, in September 2015, Obama used his executive power to make a deal with Iran with the purpose of preventing Iran to build a nuclear bomb. There are a few disadvantages to the deal, including the fact that American nuclear inspectors are prohibited from inspecting Iran's nuclear sites and the deal boosted Iran's economy by 150 million dollars. This amount of power is not often taken advantage of by the presidents, but the Constitution allows presidents to make monumental decisions like this on their own in order to benefit the safety and wellbeing of the country without taking the time to consult Congress. The Constitution allows presidents to take Executive Action like this when they are in a pinch to make a huge action in a small amount of time.

# data[].attributes.body
The examples on this side of the poster show how the principles in the Constitution have held strong to stabilize the country and prevent drastic change.

# data[].attributes.body
The examples on this side of the poster demonstrate how the United States's government principles have allowed it to be dynamic and change when change is needed.