# data[].attributes.body
Themes from the book “1984” are still occurring today.The society of Iraq and 1984 are similar in a few ways.One similarity being the lack of freedom on social media and control.

In the article “Tik Tok Star Is Killed in Third Death of Social Media Influencer in Iraq” created by Alissa J. Rubin, explains how a, 30-year-old woman whose name on social media was Um Fahad was murdered because of her activities on social media.An example quote from the article “They won her some 460,000 followers, but also drew the eyes of conservatives in Iraqi society and in the government.” What the author is trying to explain is that the government is watching, and this woman caught their attention.The government then saw this woman as a bad influence and not good for the country, so they assassinated her, or what people believe because of facts and recurring events.People only started to believe this because this isn't the only assassination in Iraq, there had been plenty more like “Noor Alsaffar, 23, a man who posted videos of himself wearing women’s clothes and makeup.”.The government didn't like that Noor was feminine, because they also had the country’s anti-prostitution law which targeted gay, bisexual and transgender Iraqis and made it a crime that could get you up to 15 years old jail time. But now we understand that the invasion of freedom in Iraq is similar to the invasion of freedom in 1984.

The book of 1984 George Orwell, also shows the idea of invasion of freedom with its marriages, love life, and overall basic human rights.An example quote from 1984, “All marriages between party members had to be approved by a committee appointed for the purpose, and though the principle was never clearly stated permission was always refused if the couple concerned gave the impression of being physically attracted to one another.”.This quote clearly explains how the government is invading and takings people's freedom to choose who they want to be with, and even disliked lgbtq and would kill them like in Iraq.Winston’s neighbors, the Parsons, can help us understand the freedom people lacked in 1984. Like the article “Dating, North Korean Style”, where the government controlled the society's relationships, the Parsons's relationship wasn't their own selves choice, but the government's, because they made “good comrades”, also stated in both the article and 1984.They didn't like each other romantically, and rather only coped because if they didn't then they would most likely be killed by the government for refusing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TikTok Star Is Killed in Third Death of Social Media Influencer in Iraq

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The shooting of Ghufran Mahdi Sawadi, known online as Um Fahad, comes amid tightening laws and increasingly conservative attitudes in the country.

# data[].attributes.body
The book 1984 by George Orwell relates to real world situation more than you might think. Control over the people, speech, food, education, etc is common knowledge about the book of 1984. Book control is no exception. In both the real world and in 1984, book banning is no strange occurrence. In the youtube video above titled “Book bans in America are rising. Here’s a look at what’s lost.” posted by the Washington Post channel talks about how books in the United States are being commonly banned due to the fact they were written by or about, LGBTQ+ and/or black people. Books were also being banned for mentioning things such as racism, slavery, segregation, etc. Children's books that are trying to teach children important and real life lessons are also banned, because the Senator or the government is trying to distract from the real issue. Even to demonize materials and books that are actually helpful and educational to children and be able to operate in this highly unequal and multiracial world. Even today books are still being requested to be removed off shelves of classrooms. The practice of book banning is finding new life, and growing to include both classic novels and newer works.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Book bans in America are rising. Here's a look at what's lost.

# data[].attributes.body
Something that is happening now and can relate to the novel “1984” is called book banning. In the novel of 1984, there was a lot of things that were against the government rule. Some things are romance/dating and marriage, writing a diary, and thinking for yourself. These are just some examples of “bad” and “worse” things in the book. An article titled , “Book Bans Continue to Surge in Public Schools” written by Alexandra Alter that talks about book banning. She said in her article that “more than 4,300 books were removed from schools across 23 states.” they said that Florida has become the highest state of book removals and book banning when possible. Controlling what individuals can do and read, shows that these districts can be very controlling. Just like the head of the Party in the novel. This article on New York Times shows that something like this, can relate to 1984. Limiting people to certain ideas or things can cause a very strong lack of self-direction.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Book Bans Continue to Surge in Public Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More books were removed during the first half of this academic year than in the entire previous one.

# data[].attributes.body
The  article from the new york times talks about china's data security law that gives the government sweeping powers to monitor and control digital information. It can relate to the novel because “the big brother” government in 1984 and the chinese government can now monitor citizens digital activities and communications more . The article illustrates how authoritarian tendencies and expansions of state power over information as warned about in 1984 are playing out in the real world today. The parallels between this law and the dystopian surveillance state of 1984 are striking and concerning for civil liberties.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Four Takeaways From a Times Investigation Into China’s Expanding Surveillance State (Published 2022)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Times reporters spent over a year combing through government bidding documents that reveal the country’s technological road map to ensure the longevity of its authoritarian rule.

# data[].attributes.body
The book 1984 written by George Orwell is similar to the movie the girl in the basement produced in 2021 by Elisabeth this movie is based on the true story of Elisabeth Fritzl case, how she had gotten kidnapped on August 28th 1984 by her father Josef Fritzl, her mother had said that she probably had ran away and not to go looking for her. At the time police did not know that she was in there basement where her father had kept her. Police had later found her in 2008 and her father was put into custody and later had been charged. This is similar to 1984 by the extreme forms of control, manipulation and ones individual freedom taken away, in Elisabeths case she had been held against her will by her father for 24 years watching her and making sure she doesn't leave or do anything, this is similar to the people of Oceania are controlled by their government monitoring there every move. Another example of these two is the manipulation of the truth in 1984 the people are lied to and manipulated by all the propaganda and all the changing of the events going on this is somewhat similar to how Elizabeth's father had manipulated the truth, making up this false story for her and her children that were born into the captivity he was controlling all the information that they were getting and creating a false view of the outside world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Girl in the Basement revolves around Sara (Stefanie Scot), a teenager who is held captive by her father Don (Judd Nelson) in their family basement.

Don tells his wife Irene that Sara has run away and holds her captive in the basement for decades, torturing and raping her underground.

The film is inspired by elements from the real-life case of Josef Fritzl, though speaking to TheWrap, Röhm said the film was also based on multiple other stories.

"It's a horrible thing to be able to say that this did not just happen once," she explained. "The film is a call to action to put the spotlight on the monster that lives within any household, who is not confronted and goes with no accountability because the mother or children or the wife is turning a blind eye to behaviour that, when it's ceded, can grow into a monster like this.

"Lifetime has broken boundaries with this movie by telling a story that's a call to action about abuse on a very significant level."

Want to know more about the case? Read on for everything you need to know about the true story behind Girl in the Basement.

Girl in the Basement true story: How many children did she have?

Josef Fritzl. Photo Handout by APA via Getty Images

While the film changes names, locations and doesn't strictly follow the exact events that occurred in real life, it is tragically based on a true story.

In the film, Sara is a stand-in for Elisabeth Fritzl, an Austrian girl who went missing on 28th August, 1984, at the age of 18.

Her mother Rosemarie filed a missing-persons report, but her father, Josef Fritzl managed to fool everyone by getting Elisabeth to write a letter claiming that she had run away and didn't want to be found.

In reality, Fritzl knew exactly where Elisabeth was - in the basement of her family home where he had imprisoned her.

While in the film Don keeps Sara imprisoned for 20 years, in real life Elisabeth was kept in captivity for 24 years, during which time she was repeatedly raped and abused and gave birth to seven children.

Three remained in the cellar and were tortured alongside Elisabeth, while one died shortly after being born. Fritzl brought three of the children up to live with him, planting them on the doorstep of the family home and pretending they'd been sent by Elisabeth.

She was discovered and freed in 2008. In 2009, Josef Fritzl pleaded guilty on all counts to the charge of manslaughter by negligence of his grandchild, and charges of false imprisonment, incest and rape of Elisabeth. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and remains in prison.

Elisabeth and her six children now live safely in an undisclosed location and are guarded by Austrian authorities.

Who stars in Girl in the Basement?

The film stars Judd Nelson (The Breakfast Club) as Don, while Stefanie Scott (Insidious: Chapter 3) plays Sara.

The rest of the cast is rounded out by Joely Fisher, Emma Myers, Braxton Bjerken, Jake Nuttall and Emily Topper amongst others.
If you've been affected by any of the issues raised in this article, you can find help, support and more information at Rape Crisis and Victim Support. Girl in the Basement is available to watch on My5. If you're looking for more to watch, check out our TV Guide. Visit our Drama hub for all the latest news. Try Radio Times magazine today and get 10 issues for only £10 - subscribe now. For more from the biggest stars in TV, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Girl in the Basement true story: Horrific real-life case behind Lifetime movie

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Girl in the Basement tells the harrowing story of a young girl Sara imprisoned by her father. Is it based on a true story?

# data[].attributes.body
On the article “Hardwired for propaganda: North Korean homes inspected for working speakers by Gyu” Gyu talks about how all North Korean authorities go door to door to make sure each house has a speaker to hear government propaganda. This propaganda includes directions from the government and bad news about South Korea and the United States. This means that all North Koreans will have to hear  propaganda weather they want to or not. We can also see something similar in George Orwell “1984” “The instrument (the telescreen, it was called) could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off completely.”(Orwell 4) We can see that they had something similar to radio screens but instead it was a telescreen and it always broadcasted propaganda to influence the minds of the citizens.

# data[].attributes.body
Charlie savage in new york times “ N.S.A DISCLOSURE OF U.S. Identities in Surveillance Reports Nearly Tripled In 2023” talks about the massive increase in identities in surveillance since 2023.Such as “ in recent years ,F.B.I officials have repeatedly conducted searches using identifiers of American, e-email addresses, that were later found to have violated standards for such queries of the repository of intercepts”.This is similar to what is happening in 1984 with the tele screens and hidden cameras watching every where.Sooner or later this would be a reality with the fbi doing un standard searches and unwarranted surveillance which violates our privacy and security. the book will continue to become a reality in so many ways for the future of the country.There will be no privacy sooner or later without phone public camera face recognition,and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
N.S.A. Disclosure of U.S. Identities in Surveillance Reports Nearly Tripled in 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The sharp increase of so-called unmaskings, to more than 31,300 times, arose from attempts by foreign hackers to infiltrate the computer systems of critical infrastructure.

# data[].attributes.body
A current event that relates to Orwells ideas is Florida’s book banning incident that happened this year. Both the novel and the article don’t allow their people to have freedom of speech. A county in Florida challenged several books to ban them due to “inappropriate” themes. “[The] removals have disproportionately affected books that address racism and LGBTQ relationships” (wbur 3). When the author writes they tell us that Florida's Escambia county banned books that deal with racism and LGBTQ realtionships because some parents and teachers thought this was bad or inappropriate for students to have access to in a schools library. One of these books that were on the list was “Out Of Darkness”. The book was being challenged because of a romantic teenage relationship between a mexican girl and a black boy in Texas during the 1930s. The author, Ashley Hope Perez believes that her book is being targeted due to book removal books. In the book 1984 it is said that the Party banned a book from Goldstein which has ideas against the party. “Goldstein’s book, you understand, as soon as possible… [The Thought Police hunts them down and destroys them almost as fast as we can produce them]” (Orwell pg 146). Goldstein was the enemy of the party because he had different ideas from the party. Goldstein had a book and the party does not want its members to know about these ideas because they want their members to be loyal to them only. The books from Goldstein are immediately destroyed because they want the people to not have an opinion of their own or have separate ideas similar to the Florida case. The people want these books to be banned so they aren't conscious of what's happening in reality or they want them to be unaware of what's happening. Banning books isn’t the only freedom of speech we should also be worried about. We should be worried about being able to have and set our own ideas and opinions without having someone to choose these ideas for us.  -Mariana Fernandez

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Penguin Random House and 5 authors are suing a Florida school board over book bans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Officials in Escambia County, Fla., removed 10 books from school libraries and restricted access to more than 150 others. Writers’ advocacy group PEN America calls the lawsuit the first of its kind.

# data[].attributes.body
Comparing both sources of media, The real world Article “Map: Where Critical Race Theory Is Under Attack” by Sarah  Schwartz compared to The Novel 1984 by George Orwell both similarities are in the form of government control on education.The Critical Race theory, the topic of the article is a category of education that tackles ideals such as racism and politics. It  believes  that racism is not only social, but systematic. In many states across or country the theory has has been through many battles to keep itself available for students. As of now nine states within the country have created legislation surrounding the Topic. Including, Idaho, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Arizona, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi and North Dakota. Such as how in The Novel “1984” By George Orwell the society has more extremist bans on knowledge and books within their territories. By rewriting old literature    to agree with the belief of the party. As stated here  “The whole literature of the past will have  been  destroyed.  Chaucer,  Shakespeare,  Milton,  Byron  they’ll  exist  only  in  Newspeak  versions,  not  merely changed  into  something  different,  but  actually  changed into something contradictory of what they used to be.” Pg 68. Many people believe that the education of CRT (Critical Race Theory) is in important to development of good thinking minds. While others believe it it’s a form of criminalizing history and brainwashing. Since the mrder of George Floyd in 2020 Political movements and  conversations of social constructs in America skyrocketed. Bringing more attention to the classroom. Pushing more and more for a basic education of racism. Many teachers across states where the lesson is banned have si’d for “free speech and equal rights “. As stated in The Article “Map: Where Critical Race Theory Is Under Attack”  “Lawsuits have been filed in Oklahoma and New Hampshire claiming that the laws deprive teachers of free-speech and equal protection rights.” PG 12.Misinformation of the topic seems to be its highest  contender. Some states believe that the theory in itself is.  The Argument of CRT is still prevalent in today's education. Where both sides have opposite ideas of what it means. One believes that the government has been inherently not equal and should be taught in schools. And one side believes that the theory is extreme and not right for children. Winston hopes one day that the proles world will one day become conscious and take over the country, but without the education they never knew it’d be possible. In conclusion both countries struggle with what’s “appropriate” for children. Both on a path to create a perfect lesson plan of their own ideologies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Republican state lawmakers continued their crusade against "critical race theory" through the 2022 legislative session, passing new legislation in Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, and other states that further regulates how the nation's teachers can discuss racism, sexism, and issues of systemic inequality in the classroom.

The trend has proved to be an ongoing minefield for teachers and school districts, some of whom have already faced challenges to lessons and professional development courses in states where these laws have passed.

In Oklahoma, for example, the state board of education downgraded the accreditation for two school districts that it claimed violated the state's law targeting critical race theory. In July, a Tennessee parent group sued local and state education leaders over a curriculum it claims the state law prohibits.

These laws and their consequences are just one manifestation of the increased scrutiny schools are facing in teaching about any issues that could be deemed controversial. Even in states without CRT legislation, school boards and parent groups have challenged curriculum choices, sought to remove library books, and called for teachers to take down flags or banners supporting social justice causes.
Since January 2021, 44 states have introduced bills or taken other steps that would restrict teaching critical race theory or limit how teachers can discuss racism and sexism, according to an Education Week analysis. Eighteen states have imposed these bans and restrictions either through legislation or other avenues.
Throughout the 2021 legislative session, most of these bills were centered on a list of prohibited "divisive concepts." This list has its origins in a September 2020 executive order signed by then-President Donald Trump, which banned certain types of diversity training in federal agencies. (For more on the origins of this state legislative movement, see this story.)

The order, which has since been revoked by President Joe Biden, prohibited trainings that promoted certain ideas-for example, that one race or sex is inherently better than another, that all people of a certain race have unconscious bias, or that the United States is a fundamentally racist or sexist country.

It was written in response to the anti-racism and anti-bias trainings that many workplaces-including schools-began after the murder of George Floyd in 2020. Pundits, advocacy groups, and parents-mostly conservative, but some across the political spectrum-fiercely opposed these exercises, along with other efforts schools were making to diversify curricula and materials. They argued that schools were placing too much of a focus on race, causing white children to feel guilty, and overemphasizing the dark, difficult chapters of American history at the expense of fostering patriotism. They labeled these kinds of activities "critical race theory."

The term refers to a decades-old academic theory that holds that racism is systemic, perpetrated by structural forces rather than individual acts of bias. But over the past two years, the phrase has been warped from its original meaning, used by opponents to refer to anything that makes race or gender salient in conversations about history, current events, or literature.

Several of the state bills proposed in the 2021 legislative session describe Trump's list of "divisive concepts" as critical race theory, even though scholars of the framework maintain that it doesn't teach that certain races are better than others, or that individuals are inherently racist.

With this fuzziness around terminology, teachers and school leaders in states where these laws have passed have reported widespread confusion about what kind of instruction is and is not allowed. For example, while many proponents of these laws claim that they shouldn't curtail discussions of events in U.S. history, one parent group in Tennessee invoked the state's law in attempts to pull a book about the civil rights movement.

Meanwhile, some of the laws passed during the 2021 legislative session have already faced legal challenges. Lawsuits have been filed in Oklahoma and New Hampshire claiming that the laws deprive teachers of free-speech and equal protection rights. See the table below for more information on some of the measures and variations from state to state.
Download the Data
Related

How to Cite This Page

Map: Where Critical Race Theory Is Under Attack (2021, June 11). Education Week. Retrieved Month Day, Year from http://www.edweek.org/leadership/map-where-critical-race-theory-is-under-attack/2021/06

Visualizations by Emma Patti Harris and Eesha Pendharkar

For media or research inquiries about this page, contact library@educationweek.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Map: Where Critical Race Theory Is Under Attack

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Education Week summarizes where state policymakers are attempting to censor the way teachers talk about racism and gender.

# data[].attributes.body
This article related to 1984 by it showing and explaining how people don’t have freedom of speech to be able to protest in what they believe is right to them. Students are trying to protest to help other show what is going on in gaza and spread awareness. The police are preventing the students for saying what they want people to be heard. in the novel 1984 by George orwell, people do Not have the freedom to say what they want to say or say what they feel, They are not allowed to think in a negative way or have negative thoughts about someone or something that is against the party. If the do, they can get sent to a forced labor camp or get killed or arrested. In the article, the police had threatened the students that they could be subjects of rubber bullets and chemical agents if they did not stop the protest. This article and the novel oth contain similar ways on how people do not have their own freedom of speech.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ending a weeklong siege, police on Tuesday arrested at least 25 protesters at Cal Poly Humboldt, where Gaza war demonstrators had occupied buildings and forced the campus to close.

The move came as pro-Palestinian protesters, who are demanding divestment from Israel and an end to the country's military actions in Gaza, set up several new tent encampments at colleges and universities across California as tensions escalated.

Police were in a standoff with protesters on the Humboldt campus Monday night, telling more than 100 they had to leave. Demonstrators, some wearing goggles and helmets and carrying makeshift shields, spent the night chanting and playing music. At 9 p.m., a police vehicle drove by and announced they could be subject to rubber bullets and chemical agents. Some faculty members, who were told by the university they should not enter campus, massed just outside, observing.

Shortly after 2 a.m. Tuesday, police moved in and made the arrests. The university said "those arrested faced a range of different charges depending on individual circumstances, including unlawful assembly, vandalism, conspiracy, assault of police officers and others. In addition, students could face discipline for conduct violations while any university employees arrested could face disciplinary action."

As part of the operation, officers said they cleared Siemens Hall and Nelson Hall East. No injuries were reported.

"This is a difficult day. It breaks my heart to see it, and truly nobody wanted to see things come to this. We've all watched this with great concern, and always with the sincere hope that it would be resolved peacefully," Cal Poly Humboldt President Tom Jackson Jr. said in a statement. "Unfortunately, serious criminal activity that crossed the line well beyond the level of a protest had put the campus at ongoing risk."

Many protesters and faculty thought the closure of campus was unnecessary and that the university had escalated the situation for unwarranted reasons. The occupation of one building did not seem to merit a complete lockdown, they said.

Many demonstrators also bristled at allegations that they were violent, firing back that they were peaceful while it was police who had been violent.

It is unclear when the campus will reopen.

One of the activists arrested, assistant professor Rouhollah Aghasaleh, vowed to reject any bond and embark on a hunger strike until he and all his students were released.

"I refuse to accept the label of criminal for standing up for an ethical reason," he wrote in a statement before his arrest. "Our arrest on a stolen land and in a place that we consider home is an act of violence."

Protests have intensified at universities across the nation. At Columbia University, dozens of protesters took over a building, barricading the entrances and unfurling a Palestinian flag out of a window.

In a statement Monday, Sacramento State President J. Luke Wood said the campus "remains open and fully operational" while demonstrators camp in the Library Quad.

"As a public university, we are committed to creating and fostering safer conditions to support student engagement in constitutionally protected activities," he wrote. University officials, he said, are "currently focused on ensuring that campus remains safe, and that instruction and other critical operations can continue."

UC Riverside

A UC Riverside spokesperson said in a statement that "all operations on campus are proceeding as usual."

Students have demanded that universities explicitly acknowledge the suffering in Gaza.

On Monday, UC Riverside Chancellor Kim Wilcox, in a letter to the campus community, said that "the suffering in Gaza since the start of this war has been unimaginable - more than 30,000 deaths, millions of people displaced, and hunger that is bordering on famine."

"The crisis has affected many on our campus in a personal and profound way," Wilcox wrote.

While the university supports free speech, Wilcox wrote, "speech and activity that disrupts campus operations is not protected." Large signs and banners will be removed, and the blocking of access to campus venues will not be tolerated, the statement read.

UC Irvine

At UC Irvine, campus police and local law enforcement stood by, monitoring an encampment that was erected Monday morning.

About a dozen tents stood on the pavement between John V. Croul Hall and Rowland Hall. Green barricades enclosed the encampment, and signs on the partitions read "Free Palestine" and "Bothered by encampment? Look away like you do 4 genocide."

Em Wang, a fourth-year student, said the encampment was modeled on those being used by refugees in Gaza.

"We want all eyes on Gaza, and we don't want our encampments to be a distraction from Gaza," she said.

"We recognize that our educational institutions and our universities are complicit in the genocide of Palestine."

Although officers with the campus and Irvine police departments and the Orange County Sheriff's Department stood nearby Monday afternoon, they mostly did not intervene and were not dressed in riot gear.

Sarah Khalil, 21, a fourth-year student, said protesters are prepared to stay in the encampment as long as it takes for the university to negotiate with them.

"It is a humanitarian cause, and it's a genocide that's killed over 30,000 people," said Khalil, who noted that she is Palestinian and her family was forced to leave their country.

The group posted a banner listing their demands: End "violent extremism" funding, promise amnesty for student protesters, commit to an academic boycott of Israel and remove what the group calls "Zionist programming."

UC Irvine Chancellor Howard Gillman said in a statement Monday night the encampment is set up in a space that "violates the law, violates our policies and disrupts our mission."

"We have reached out to the students in the existing illegal encampment and have made it clear to them that if they believe they need an encampment space on campus to peacefully express their views, then we will work with them to find a space that is appropriate and non-disruptive," Gillman said.

Occidental College

At Occidental College, which has fewer than 2,000 students enrolled, about 60 students set up an encampment around 4 a.m. Monday, working in the darkness to avoid potential issues with campus security, said co-organizer Matthew Vickers, a junior studying diplomacy and world affairs.

"We wanted to be as clandestine as possible to not be interrupted," said Vickers, a member of the Occidental chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine.

Dozens of tents occupied the quad at the center of campus. Students lounged on the grass, chatted with friends and worked on laptops in tents. Vickers said that campus security officers stopped by Monday morning but were respectful and did not interfere.

In an email to faculty and staff Monday afternoon, Occidental President Harry J. Elam Jr. said the encampment had "so far engaged in peaceful demonstration" and the college would "remain steadfast in [its] commitment to ensure that any dialogue or demonstration remains safe and peaceful."

Vickers said protesters will occupy the space until the college addresses their demands, which include divesting from Israel and calling Israel's military campaign against Gaza a genocide.

Protesters at Pitzer College, another small school with about 1,200 undergraduates enrolled, have spent several days inhabiting a tent city called the "Palestine Solidarity Encampment."

USC

At USC, where Los Angeles police arrested 93 people on trespassing charges last week as they cleared an encampment at the center of campus, a reestablished camp site was mostly quiet on Monday.

Each day at the encampment starts with a daily briefing and includes teach-ins, poetry readings hosted by professors, yoga and crafts. Volunteers have provided enough food for campers to have three meals a day.

Participants declined to provide their names, citing safety concerns.

"I think the narrative is that we're a security issue or we're scaring other people, when in reality it is a place of care and love," said one participant who is involved with the USC Divest from Death Coalition. "We are all here because at the end of the day, we believe in humanity."

Columbia University and elsewhere

At Columbia, protesters locked arms in front of Hamilton Hall early Tuesday and carried furniture and metal barricades to the building, one of several that was occupied during a 1968 civil rights and anti-Vietnam War protest on the campus, video showed. Posts on Instagram shortly after midnight urged people to protect the encampment and join them at Hamilton Hall. A "Free Palestine" banner hung from a window, according to the Associated Press.

Dozens of people were arrested Monday during protests at universities in Texas, Utah, Virginia and New Jersey, while Columbia said hours before the takeover of Hamilton Hall that it had started suspending students. Columbia has canceled its main graduation event.
Times staff writers Garrison reported from Arcata, Fry from Irvine, Jarvie from Atlanta and Ahn, Peterson and Petrow-Cohen from Los Angeles. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Police swarm Cal Poly Humboldt, arresting at least 25 and ending weeklong siege over Gaza war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pro-Palestinian encampments have sprung up on the campuses of UC Irvine, UC Riverside, Occidental College, Sacramento State and San Francisco State, among others.

# data[].attributes.body
The novel 1984 by George Orwell is one of the most controversial books in our nation.  George Orwell's book relates to Putin’s Russia with the fabrication of history.  In the book of 1984 by George Orwell it states “The messages he had received referred to article or news items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, as the officials phrase had it, to rectify.”(page.35).  This quote shows how the party or government in 1984 would falsify the information it had in order to make itself look better in the eyes of their people.  This shows the fabrication of history, in both the past and present.  The authority in the book which in this case is called Big Brother makes sure that what they think is not up to their standards is rectified, to not put or pin anything against them in the future.  The articles states “Vladimir Putin’s pinning for the Soviet Union, falsifying history and distorting current events to wage a war against Ukraine show the continued relevance of Orwell’s work…”(War and Peace-, Pg.1, 1984 And George Orwell Live Again In Putin’s Russia, Stuart Anderson, Sep 27.2023).  This quote from the article shows that like in the novel 1984 the Soviet Union distorted information to make them at favor for something that is beneficial for them.  It is the country using its power in a totalitarian way to get something that is biased to only to Russia.  This shows that the falsification of ones history by the government purposely was not only usedin 1984 but in current times.  This information helps me prove my claim because it shows how in both of the passages the authors write down the fact the the governments have enough control to falsify information about the past.  They have all the power scaring people so they can not say anything, as both governments disorientate their people into blindly believing the information without question.  This book can be seen as something that is far away from our reality in the world we live in but, this is happening in many places in current times.  Most people do not notice what is happening and the reasons why but if you pay attention to the news around the whole world you will see that their are many thing happening that compare to the novel. This is just one of the many topics that are the same, or that can compare to the book 1984.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1984 And George Orwell Live Again In Putin’s Russia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Orwell’s message to Russians is that freedom and happiness go together, and dictators lie to promote tyranny over liberty.

# data[].attributes.body
The novel 1984 by George Orwell relates to the real world much more than we think it does. The book might come off as fictional, but it shows the truth of most governments in today's world. In chapter 1 of 1984 it is stated that the Ministry of truth concerns itself with the news, entertainment, education and fine arts. In chapter 4 of 1984 Winston describes his job in the ministry of truth, and how his job consists of rewriting history and changing words into more abbreviated words, so its citizens don’t learn anything nor do they try to. In an article called Book Banning written by Susan L. Webb. it is stated that “Book banning is the most widespread form of censorship in the United States, with children's literature being the primary target. Advocates for banning a book or certain books fear that children will be swayed by its contents, which they regard as potentially dangerous(p.2).”This is the exact reason on why the Party in 1984 had began banning certain books, and changing words of certain book. They fear that their citizens will begin fighting against their government. In the article also states that there have been great surges in book banning, “with 4,349 recorded instances of book bans from July through December of 2023.” So there are many relations between George Orwell's novel 1984 and our real world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Book banning, a form of censorship, occurs when private individuals, government officials or organizations remove books from libraries, school reading lists or bookstore shelves because they object to their content, ideas or themes. Those advocating a ban complain typically that the book in question contains graphic violence, expresses disrespect for parents and family, is sexually explicit, exalts evil, lacks literary merit, is unsuitable for a particular age group, or includes offensive language. Other complaints have been that the book is written by or deals with sexual orientation or gay issues or brings up topics like slavery that might make individuals uncomfortable.

Children's literature is top target of book bans

Book banning is the most widespread form of censorship in the United States, with children's literature being the primary target. Advocates for banning a book or certain books fear that children will be swayed by its contents, which they regard as potentially dangerous. They commonly fear that these publications will present ideas, raise questions and incite critical inquiry among children that parents, political groups, or religious organizations are not ready to address or that they find inappropriate.

Most challenges and bans prior to the 1970s focused primarily on obscenity and explicit sexuality. Common targets included D. H. Lawrence's "Lady Chatterly's Lover" and James Joyce's " Ulysses." In the late 1970s, attacks were launched on ideologies expressed in books.

Surge to remove books from school libraries arises again in 2020s

In September 1990, the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression declared the First Amendment to be "in perilous condition across the nation" based on the results of a comprehensive survey on free expression. Even literary classics, including Mark Twain's "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and Maya Angelou's "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings," were targeted. Often, the complaints arose from individual parents or school board members. At other times, however, the pressure to censor came from such public interest groups as the Moral Majority.

A new surge in book banning have arisen in recent years, with 4,349 recorded instances of book bans from July through December of 2023 (Blair 2024). Most book challenges have come from the ideological right, with Moms for Liberty being particularly active in challenging books (Alter 2024). Often such organizations challenge multiple books at a time. Depending on the state, librarians might have to read and respond to challenges to each book, although some might decide that it is simply easier to remove books. When such books are challenged in public meetings, those opposed to a book may cite isolated lurid passages that may or not be representative of the content of the book as a whole.

Although challenges have occurred throughout the nation, a large majority of such challenges have been concentrated in Texas and Florida. Florida's governor, Ron DeSantis, gained political notoriety with his "Don't Say Gay Bill" restricting teaching about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grades. He also is known for his challenge to accepting advanced credit for African American history absent certain changes in the offering, and by his attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts.

Similarly, Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas supported and signed a bill in 2023 that banned books that were sexually explicit. One historian has identified laws that seek to suppress information about slavery as being based on the notion (often attributed to liberals) of "fragilism," or the fear of "extreme sensitivity among the children they aim to protect" (Holton 2024, 202).

Censorship - the suppression of ideas and information - can occur at any stage or level of publication, distribution, or institutional control. Some pressure groups claim that the public funding of most schools and libraries makes community censorship of their holdings legitimate.

To counter charges of censorship, opponents of publications sometimes use the tactic of restricting access rather than calling for the physical removal of books. Opponents of bans argue that by restricting information and discouraging freedom of thought, censors undermine one of the primary functions of education: teaching students how to think for themselves. Such actions, assert free speech proponents, endanger tolerance, free expression, and democracy.

Community standards may be taken into account in book banning

Although censorship violates the First Amendment right to freedom of speech, some limitations are constitutionally permissible. The courts have told public officials at all levels that they may take community standards into account when deciding whether materials are obscene or pornographic and thus subject to censor.

They cannot, however, censor publications by generally accepted authors - such as Mark Twain, for example, J. K. Rowling, R. L. Stine, Judy Blume, or Robert Cormier - in order to placate a small segment of the community. Cormier's "Chocolate War" was one of the American Library Association's Top 10 Banned Books for 2005 and 2006.

Opponents of removing books from schools emphasize student rights

Those who advocate removing books from school libraries often focus on parental rights. This becomes problematic, however, when parents of one child seek to prescribe what is appropriate for other children or when public library patrons who do not care to check out a book seeks to deny access to those who do.

Those who oppose book banning emphasize that the First Amendment protects student rights to receive information and express ideas, an idea that was highlighted in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), when the Supreme Court recognized the right of students to wear black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War.

In the one case to reach the Supreme Court over removing books from school libraries, Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico (1982) the court ruled 5-4 that public schools can bar books that are "pervasively vulgar" or not right for the curriculum. But consistent with other rulings related to content discrimination, they cannot remove books "simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books." The Supreme Court's decision was, however, narrow, applying only to the removal of books from school library shelves.

Courts more likely to allow limits on age-appropriate material

It is important to recognize that courts are more likely to accept rules limiting school libraries to age-appropriate materials than they are to accept broad bans in public libraries that serve adults. As a practical matter, it might also be worth noting that both children and adults likely have far greater access to controversial materials through online sources than they do through public libraries.

The American Library Association's Office for Intellectual Freedom documents censorship incidents around the country and suggests strategies for dealing with them. Each September, the American Library Association, the American Booksellers Association, the American Society of Journalists and Authors, the Association of American Publishers, and the National Association of College Stores sponsor Banned Books Week - Celebrating the Freedom to Read.

Designed to "emphasize that imposing information restraints on a free people is far more dangerous than any ideas that may be expressed in that information," the week highlights banned works, encourages citizens to explore new ideas, and provides a variety of materials to promote free speech events.

The American Library Association publishes the bimonthly Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom, which provides information on censorship, as well as an annual annotated list of books and other materials that have been censored.

Current laws on removing books may be challenged as too vague

In some cases, movements to ban books have stimulated counter movements to preserve access to them. Many of the current laws outlining procedures for banning books are subject to challenge for being overly vague - many, for example, use the term "obscenity" in a much broader fashion than the Supreme Court has recognized in Miller v. California (1973) - or for being overly broad or for having a chilling effect on other publications. Some proposed laws, for example, could be interpreted as allowing for the removal of medical books, or even dictionaries, that might contain depictions, definitions, or descriptions of sexual organs or conditions.

In other cases, like licensing laws that have been struck down, book banning laws may vest undue discretion in public officials. Still other laws, especially those seeking to restrain exposure to discussions of slavery or other historical issues, will likely fail the test of content neutrality. Librarians who face criminal penalties or loss of jobs for failing to remove books, might further be able to raise issues of fair notice and due process.
This article was originally published in 2009 and updated in April 2024 by John R. Vile, a professor of political science and dean of the Honors College at Middle Tennessee State University. Susan Webb was an adjunct librarian at Southeastern Oklahoma State University.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Book banning, the most widespread form of censorship, occurs when books are pulled from libraries, school reading lists, or bookstores because someone objects to their content.

# data[].attributes.body
The events that happen in George Orwell’s 1984 and current events that are happening in our world are similar in many ways. One of these ways being the spread of misinformation and disinformation between the novel and our current world. In the George Orwell’s 1984, citizens are often fed misinformation and are made to believe it as true, in our current world, the spread of misinformation is a very large problem when it comes to social media presences and it can even influence decisions that we make. In the article “How Russia’s disinformation campaign seeps into US views.” written by Tatiana Vorozhko, she talks about how the spread of misinformation and disinformation is now affected the people of the US and how they think and react about certain topics. In the article, Vorozhko states "I believe that Russia's best chance for victory is not on the battlefield, but through information operations targeted on Western capitals, including Washington." In this quote, the author supports the idea that the spread of misinformation can be detrimental to the ideas of the people and can help to support the people who are spreading it. This quote can be related to 1984 as Winston works in a place that deals with this sort of situation. Winston rewrites and destroys pieces of information that make the Party look bad or incorrect, he helps in the spread of the misinformation that the Party feeds to its members. Another example of how the spread of misinformation in Russia is related to George Orwell’s 1984 is in the quote, “He says the disinformation seeks to reinforce already held beliefs such as the wastefulness of aid to Ukraine, or fuels existing anger and energizes opposition to sending assistance.” this quote tells us how the disinformation helps to support people's beliefs or can make the people angry. This quotes can relate to the novel 1984 as the spread of misinformation and disinformation helps to install the party’s beliefs into the members. Another place where this can be seen is in the 2 minute hate party members participate in. The misinformation they are given make them angry towards the ones against the Party and help to keep them under their control. With these examples, you can see how the events in George Orwell’s 1984 and our current events are still related even today. Through the spread of misinformation, Russia and the Party can be seen as very similar, with this, we are still experiencing events from 1984, even now.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Russia’s disinformation campaign seeps into US views

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Researchers say Kremlin talking points are being repeated in US as lawmakers debate $60 billion in aid for Ukraine

# data[].attributes.body
In the novel 1984 by George Orwell, we can find many similarities in present events in our world today. In the article, “The People Who Turned in Their Parents for Their Role in the Capitol Attack”, written by Maya Yang on January 7, 2022 talked about teenagers not agreeing with what their parents are doing. A 19 year old, Jackson Reffitt, called the FBI weeks before his father stormed the capital. After Jackson’s father stormed the capitol and been charged with numerous crimes, Jackson lives far away from his family and doesn’t communicate much with them. We see the similarity in chapter 2 in 1984, Winston is with Mrs.Parson and when her child show up, Winston explains how she seemed nervous and he knows children can be spies and have a strong loyalty to the party. Winston says. “All their ferocity was turned into ungoverned little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the party.” (Orwell 31) Children in 1984 will turn in their own parents just like Jackson did to his father. This is a something both 1984 and our world today have in common.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A year on from the Capitol attack by loyalist supporters of Donald Trump, many families are still reeling from members outing each other to law enforcement and offspring traumatized by their parents' involvement in the insurrection.

Jackson Reffitt, a 19-year old from Texas, called the FBI weeks before his father, Guy Reffitt, stormed the US Capitol on January, saying that his father had been hinting at doing "something big", Teen Vogue reported.

In text messages obtained by the magazine, Jackson's younger sister texted their father in a family group chat, writing: "Dad, please be safe!! You know you are risking not only your business but your life too."

Guy Reffitt replied: "I have no intention on throwing it away. I love ALL of you with ALL my heart and soul. This is for our country and for ALL OF YOU and your kids. God bless us, one and all ... "

Guy Reffitt has since been charged with numerous crimes.

The charges relate to obstruction of an official proceeding, obstruction of justice for threatening his children, transporting firearms with the intention of using them during the mob attack on the Capitol, and a misdemeanor charge of accessing Secret Service-protected grounds without lawful authority.

While in jail awaiting trial, the senior Reffitt texted news reports to the family group chat that featured photos of himself at the riots.

Jackson told Teen Vogue that as the attacks unfolded, live on television, he received a phone call from the FBI, asking him to confirm his father's identity and he confirmed that it was his father at the riot.

Jackson now lives away from his family and rarely communicates with them.

"He used to be one of the best dads ever," he told the magazine. "He made me the man I am today. He taught me to be honest, not to steal, all that cliche stuff. I believe he brought me up to do what I did."

When Jackson does talk to his mother, she calls him "the Gestapo", referring to Nazi secret police. His older sister, Sarah, 24, reportedly remains in disbelief towards Jackson.

According to Sarah, she knows that their father loves Jackson, which in turn makes her even more upset to accept the fact that her brother turned him in to the FBI.

"It's hard not to condemn Jackson in defending my father," she said. "I'm not gonna call [my dad] a hero for going [to the Capitol]," she added, but said: "He's a hero to me because he's my dad, but not for that."

Sarah also does not think her father should be jailed as he awaits trial. Unlike the judge in Guy Reffitt's case, she does not see her father as a danger to the community.

In a jailhouse letter obtained by ProPublica, Guy Reffitt wrote: "January 6 was nothing short of a satirical way to overthrow a government. If overthrow was the quest, it would have no doubt been overthrown."

On Thursday, Joe Biden, and Liz Cheney, the Republican congresswoman and the co-chair of the Capitol attack select committee, spoke about how close the mob came to violently overturning the election result - but failed.

Meanwhile, Robyn Sweet, the 35-year-old daughter of a Virginia man, Douglas Sweet, is dealing with being the daughter of a Capitol Hill insurrectionist.

Douglas Sweet, a staunch Donald Trump supporter, has been sentenced to 36 months' probation with one month of home detention, fined and ordered to perform community service.

Robyn Sweet said that once, when she was protesting against schools being named after Confederate generals, she saw her father across a parking lot, standing under a Confederate flag with his friends.

"It's like we're living these mirrored lives," Robyn told the magazine. When a friend sent her a link to a news report that mentioned her father as one of the rioters arrested on 6 January, Robyn said she felt relieved because she knew he was safe.

Since then, Robyn and her father have limited their conversation topics to only light ones.

"We can't even talk about religion, politics or current events," she said.

While Jackson and Robyn continue to remain in touch with their families, albeit to different extents, 19-year-old Helena Duke has not spoken to her mother, Therese Duke, since the day she found out that her mother was part of the Capitol mob.

After a video showing Therese harassing a Capitol police officer and then being punched in the face surfaced online, Helena tweeted, in what has become a viral post: "Hi mom, remember the time you told me I shouldn't go to [Black Lives Matter] protests because they could get violent ... this you?"

Helena has since moved across the country from her mother and says that they are barely in contact.

"It horrifies me to this day that she did such a thing. I've attempted to close the last chapter of my life in order to heal fully," Helena said.

Nevertheless, Helena mourns the relationship that she used to have with her mother. "As a child, my mother was my idol. She was the 'fun mom' who all my friends adored. She was so loving and full of life. I wish people knew how painful it is to grieve the life of a parent who is still living," Helena said.

Since the riots, federal prosecutors have brought cases against 727 individuals over their involvement in the deadly riots.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The people who turned in their parents for their role in the Capitol attack

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many young Americans are still reeling from their parents' involvement in the violence of a year ago - and some reported them to the police

# data[].attributes.body
1984 is a novel known for the control the government has over the citizens, including their jobs, words, and food. Even books were controlled, with them being completely banned. In the video “Why Are People Banning Books in Schools” by Myles Bess from Above the Noise on YouTube, Bess talks about how books that involve sensitive and important topics are banned which stop people from learning about them. In the states of Oklahoma and Texas, State representatives and senators both attempted to and succeeded in banning books containing topics like racism, LBGTQ+, and even some books which involved the students legal rights. As said by Bess “Who were they to consider what is dangerous for young people to know their rights, and what are they afraid of?” In 1984 The Party are the ones who are banning books, no matter what's inside. The Party bans books, censoring anything that could prove the Party wrong, or give the citizens an idea of something that directly goes against The Party. Any books that do exist, are altered to fit The Party’s words and history, and anyone who does act against The Party maybe based of what they read, they’re punished. Although books can contain disturbing topics, it helps people learn more, and think of each other as human.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFJMpihW1y4

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Are People Banning Books in Schools?

# data[].attributes.body
Roe vs Wade was a huge step back in society. Abortion was up to the mother and their own situation and how they felt. Now, in some places they can't do that. They don't have the freedom to do something that they want to do, with their own body. Yes it may be wrong in some peoples minds, but that is for religious reasons or just their own opinion. Like in the book 1984, this situation is where the big parties are pushing the fact that they don't like something so you are not allowed to do it. If you do, you will get punished and put in jail. Some states will even put you in jail if you go out of state to get the procedure and then come back to the state you live in. The strictness of these policies reminds me of 1984. The party, or the state, has control over what people do with their own lives and bodies. In the book 1984, they aren't allowed to have sex with someone they even find attractive because they don't want anyone to fall in love. This on the other hand, may not be as extreme as the party but it is similar. In the article it states, “One open question was whether the Constitution required exceptions to abortion bans for the life or health of the mother, for victims of rape or incest or for fetal disabilities. The majority opinion noted that Mississippi law made exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities, but it did not say that those exceptions were required.” Some women had a medical excuse for being eligible to get the procedure done but others were still not allowed to. In the book Winston explains how they are not allowed to have any relations and they are only allowed to have sex to have children, they do not have the autonomy to do what they want with their own bodies in this way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
June 24, 2022, 10:16 a.m. ET

Abortion rights protesters demonstrating in front of the Supreme Court after the decision was released on Friday. Credit... Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times

Follow the latest abortion news and the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to abortion after almost 50 years in a decision that will transform American life, reshape the nation's politics and lead to all but total bans on the procedure in about half of the states.

"Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority in the 6-to-3 decision, one of the most momentous from the court in decades.

Bans in at least eight states swiftly took effect after they enacted laws meant to be enforced immediately after Roe fell. More states are expected to follow in the coming days, reflecting the main holding in the decision, that states are free to end the practice if they choose to do so.

The decision, which closely tracked a leaked draft opinion, prompted celebrations and outcries across the country, underlining how divisive the topic of abortion remains after decades of uncompromising ideological and moral battles between those who see making the choice to terminate a pregnancy as a right and those who see it as taking a life.

The outcome, while telegraphed both by the leaked draft opinion and positions taken by the justices during arguments in the case, nonetheless produced political shock waves, energizing conservatives who are increasingly focused on state-by-state-fights and generating new resolve among Democrats to make restoring abortion rights a central element of the midterm elections.

Protests swelled across the country on Friday evening. Outside the Supreme Court, thousands of abortion rights supporters demonstrated alongside small groups of celebrating anti-abortion activists, who blew bubbles. Throngs spilled into the streets in large cities like Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia, and smaller crowds gathered in places like Louisville, Ky., and Tallahassee, Fla.

Speakers at some rallies exhorted abortion rights supporters to take their anger to the polls during the midterm elections in November, a point echoed by President Biden, who said the court's decision would jeopardize the health of millions of women.

"It is the realization of extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court," Mr. Biden said.

Anti-abortion activists celebrated in front of the Supreme Court after the ruling. Credit... Shuran Huang for The New York Times

The ruling will test the legitimacy of the court and vindicate a decades-long Republican project of installing conservative justices prepared to reject the precedent, which had been repeatedly reaffirmed by earlier courts. It will also be one of the signal legacies of President Donald J. Trump, who vowed to name justices who would overrule Roe. All three of his appointees were in the majority in the ruling.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. voted with the majority but said he would have taken "a more measured course," stopping short of overruling Roe outright. The court's three liberal members dissented.

The case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, No. 19-1392, concerned a law enacted in 2018 by the Republican-dominated Mississippi Legislature that banned abortions if "the probable gestational age of the unborn human" was determined to be more than 15 weeks. The statute, a calculated challenge to Roe, included narrow exceptions for medical emergencies or "a severe fetal abnormality."

Justice Alito's majority opinion not only sustained the Mississippi law but also said that Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the 1992 decision that affirmed Roe's core holding, should be overruled.

The reasoning in Roe "was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences," Justice Alito wrote. "And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's elected representatives."

Six justices voted with the majority, while three dissented. Credit... Erin Schaff/The New York Times

Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett joined the majority opinion.

In an anguished joint dissent, Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan wrote that the court had done grave damage to women's equality and its own legitimacy.

"A new and bare majority of this court - acting at practically the first moment possible - overrules Roe and Casey," they wrote, adding that the majority had issued "a decision greenlighting even total abortion bans."

The dissent concluded: "With sorrow - for this court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection - we dissent."

The decision left important questions unanswered and revealed tensions among the five justices in the majority.

One open question was whether the Constitution required exceptions to abortion bans for the life or health of the mother, for victims of rape or incest or for fetal disabilities. The majority opinion noted that Mississippi law made exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities, but it did not say that those exceptions were required.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Kavanaugh indicated that an exception for the life of the mother may be required, but he did not say so in so many words. "Abortion statutes traditionally and currently provide for an exception when an abortion is necessary to protect the life of the mother," he wrote. "Some statutes also provide other exceptions."

But some of the recent state laws were close to categorical, the dissenters wrote.

"Some states have enacted laws extending to all forms of abortion procedure, including taking medication in one's own home," the dissenting opinion said. "They have passed laws without any exceptions for when the woman is the victim of rape or incest. Under those laws, a woman will have to bear her rapist's child or a young girl her father's - no matter if doing so will destroy her life."

Another open question is whether other precedents are now at risk.

Justice Alito said the court's ruling was limited.

"To ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized," he wrote, "we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right."

But Justice Thomas, a member of the majority, issued a concurring opinion that sent a different message. He wrote that it was strictly true that the majority opinion addressed only abortion, but he said that its logic required the court to reconsider decisions about contraception, gay sex and same-sex marriage.

"We have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents," he wrote, quoting an earlier opinion.

Justice Kavanaugh took the opposite approach in his concurring opinion, saying the precedents identified by Justice Thomas were secure.

The dissenters, noting that Justice Thomas "is not with the program," said that "no one should be confident that his majority is done with its work."

Promises, the dissenters said, were pointless.

"The future significance of today's opinion will be decided in the future," they wrote. "And law often has a way of evolving."

Chief Justice Roberts, who voted with the majority but did not embrace its reasoning, said he would have discarded only one element of Roe: its prohibition of abortion bans before fetal viability.

The right to abortion, he wrote, should "extend far enough to ensure a reasonable opportunity to choose, but need not extend any further - certainly not all the way to viability."

The chief justice added: "The court's decision to overrule Roe and Casey is a serious jolt to the legal system - regardless of how you view those cases. A narrower decision rejecting the misguided viability line would be markedly less unsettling, and nothing more is needed to decide this case."

Justice Alito, once a close ally of the chief justice, said that was a recipe for turmoil.

"If we held only that Mississippi's 15-week rule is constitutional, we would soon be called upon to pass on the constitutionality of a panoply of laws with shorter deadlines or no deadline at all," he wrote.

Jackson Women's Health Organization is the only remaining abortion clinic in Mississippi. Credit... Gabriela Bhaskar/The New York Times

In challenging the law, Mississippi's sole abortion clinic focused on the 14th Amendment, which says that states may not "deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law." Justice Alito wrote that the amendment, adopted in 1868, had not been understood to address abortion, which he said was at the time a crime in most states.

The joint dissent responded that only men had participated in the adoption of the amendment. "So it is perhaps not so surprising," they wrote, "that the ratifiers were not perfectly attuned to the importance of reproductive rights for women's liberty, or for their capacity to participate as equal members of our nation."

These days, Justice Alito wrote, women have political clout. "In the last election in November 2020, women, who make up around 51.5 percent of the population of Mississippi, constituted 55.5 percent of the voters who cast ballots," he wrote.

In his concurring opinion, Justice Kavanaugh wrote that states could not forbid their residents from traveling to other states to obtain abortions. That was scant comfort for women too poor to travel, the dissenters responded.

They added that the majority had left open the possibility that Congress could enact a nationwide ban. Were that to happen, "the challenge for a woman will be to finance a trip not to New York [or] California but to Toronto."

When the court decided Roe in 1973, it established a framework to govern abortion regulation based on the trimesters of pregnancy. In the first trimester, it allowed almost no regulations. In the second, it allowed regulations to protect women's health. In the third, it allowed states to ban abortions so long as exceptions were made to protect the life and health of the mother.

The court discarded the trimester framework in 1992 in the Casey decision but retained what it called Roe's "essential holding" - that women have a constitutional right to terminate their pregnancies until fetal viability.

Two years ago, in June 2020, the Supreme Court struck down a restrictive Louisiana abortion law by a 5-to-4 margin, with Chief Justice Roberts providing the decisive vote. His concurring opinion, which expressed respect for precedent but proposed a relatively relaxed standard for evaluating restrictions, signaled an incremental approach to cutting back on abortion rights.

But that was before Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died that September. Her replacement by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative who has spoken out against "abortion on demand," changed the dynamic at the court.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
In 6-to-3 Ruling, Supreme Court Ends Nearly 50 Years of Abortion Rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
June 24, 2022, 10:16 a.m. ET Follow the latest abortion news and the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade . WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v.

# data[].attributes.body
1984 has a lot of similarities to the world we live in Today, such as censorship. The news article NPR for example says that Russia isn’t letting the Russian journalists say that the war on Ukraine is an invasion. The article states “In order to control what the Russian public knows about the invasion of Ukraine, president Vladimir Putin has signed a law that imposes stiff sentences on journalists who air “false information””. This shows that Russia is trying to control what the public knows, just like how in 1984 the party tries to censor anything that isn’t viewed as positive for the party. For example on page 103 the book states “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed”. These two quotes already show that both 1984 and Russia is trying to keep real information away from the public and trying to control what the citizens know about what is going on.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In order to control what the Russian public knows about invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin has signed a law that imposes stiff sentences on journalists who air "false information."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Russian law bans journalists from calling Ukraine conflict a 'war' or an 'invasion'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In order to control what the Russian public knows about invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin has signed a law that imposes stiff sentences on journalists who air "false information."

# data[].attributes.body
The article I found brings up North and South Korea's opinion on censorship. The article states “ North Korea deleted much of its online presence, with eight websites going offline and most of its social media accounts disappearing.” I think this relates to the book because of how they alter school textbooks, and public books. The point of this is to be portrayed as the good guy from every side in history, and to make sure some opinions/thoughts are prevented. This is how I think both the book and article relate.