3
STOP THE SUPREME COURT, KEEP ROE V. WADE In a document leaked by Politico on May 3, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to overturn the 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade. This landmark ruling stated that abortion rights were to be federally protected, resulting in all 50 states having some level of abortion legality. The official vote to overturn Roe v. Wade has not yet occurred in court, but if it does, the choice to permit abortions or not would be surrendered to individual states. In some states, it is guaranteed that the personal right of access to abortions would be severely limited. In addition to attacking private rights, this potential decision highlights the dangerous, unilateral power of the Supreme Court to freely interpret the Constitution. 13 states such as Texas have trigger laws that would immediately criminalize abortion — and in some cases make it equal to homicide — if Roe v. Wade is reversed. Many others like Arizona do not currently have these laws, but are projected to follow suit (National Public Radio). The National Broadcasting Company also reports that along with banning abortions, several states like Idaho are looking to ban birth control methods such as Plan B. Severely limiting people’s bodily autonomy like these actions threaten to is unjust and deserves to be condemned. But perhaps most importantly, overturning the abortion rights protected by Roe v. Wade would put the U.S. on a slippery slope regarding the excessive power of the Supreme Court to decide what is constitutional. Despite the system of checks and balances, the judicial branch is the only section that had any effective say in this decision. The Supreme Court’s ruling overruled the executive branch, where President Joe Biden emphasized his belief that somebody should choose if they want an abortion. It is true that the
THE PEN PALOS VERDES PENINSULA HIGH SCHOOL
legislative branch had a chance on May 11 to codify abortion rights, but failed to reach the requisite 60% majority in the Senate to do so, with only 49 of the 100 Senators voting in favor of it (Consumer News and Business Channel). However, this chance does not mean the legislative branch had any meaningful power — with 50 Republicans and 50 Democrats currently in the Senate, it is highly unlikely that a 60% majority would be reached regarding any divisive matter among parties. The alarming consequences of this singular power is apparent in the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Justice Alito implies that any ruling “not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions” and to which “the Constitution makes no reference” should be abolished. What constitutes a value as “deeply rooted” in the U.S. is incredibly subjective, and establishing that as a standard for court rulings is dangerous, particularly for BIPOC and LGBTQ+ individuals. For much of American history, marginalized communities have had their identities denied by government institutions. LGBTQ+ rights are certainly not enshrined by the Constitution, and samesex sexual conduct was only decriminalized by the Supreme Court in 2003. Basing rulings on societal ideals of the 1700s is absurd considering how quickly civil rights advanced in the past century alone. As systemic inequalities are recognized by society, constitutionality must adjust accordingly. Therefore, youth-led movements are currently working toward protesting this decision. Generation Ratify, an organization that focuses on achieving gender equality, coordinated school walkouts in Virginia, and a protest in Malaga Cove on May 14 featured many local students. These movements must continue in full strength to block the reversal of Roe v. Wade and show that the Supreme Court can no longer use their unilateral power to enforce archaic social norms.
27118 Silver Spur Road, Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 EDITORS IN CHIEF Jeremy Kim Audrey Lin MANAGING EDITOR Nomi Tsogmagnai HEADS OF DESIGN Shai Becker Sakura Sasaki HEAD OF BUSINESS Makayla Lui ADVISER Jaymee DeMeyer PUBLICITY PUBLICITY MANAGER: Victoria Rhodes WEBSITE MANAGER: Savanna Messner Rodriguez OPINION EDITOR: Zahra Habib WRITERS: Leigh Fitch Angelina Wang NEWS EDITOR: Juliette Lin WRITERS: Aarushi Chaudhari Clara Reckhorn
MUSK’S MASTER PLAN FOR CONTENT MODERATION Billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk recently announced his plans to transform the social media company Twitter, once he buys it for a proposed $44 billion. Musk aims to increase Twitter’s annual revenue and boost usership. He also intends to take Twitter private, meaning the company would no longer have to report its financial information or changes to the government. He accuses Twitter of currently having excessive content moderation and political bias; he plans to undo Twitter’s current regulations and thus create an unregulated platform that he believes would help preserve free speech. However, content moderation creates a safe environment for users; although it is not a perfect system, it allows people to receive accurate information more often than not (The Conversation). Without content moderation, Twitter could potentially become an untrustworthy platform and fall into disuse. According to the Pew Research Center, about 70% of Twitter users get their news from the site. Instead of traditional news outlets — which are typically extensively fact checked — people use Twitter or other forms of social media as an important source of information for current affairs and politics (Frontiers in Psychology). “Everyone our age gets their information from social media,” freshman Rhys Ota said. “[Its influence is] especially evident with [Musk], as his posts about economics influence the market. [When Musk] tweeted about Dogecoin, [it] resulted in its [stock] price increasing drastically.” With Twitter’s heavy influence, it is important that the app’s content is moderated so people can receive accurate information before making decisions. If Musk removes all content moderation on Twitter, more false information than facts will be spread (The Conversation). Musk also believes that people should not be banned on Twitter, and to him, that includes reversing the ban on
former President Donald Trump, which began after the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Twitter permanently banned Trump because the two tweets he posted that day violated Twitter’s Glorification of Violence policy. “I disagree with a lot of things Trump has said and done as president,” sophomore Pradyuman Raja said. “[However], I do not think that it is a justification for banning him from the platform. The fact that [Musk] wants to unban people from the [political] left and the right will benefit the platform.” While some consider Trump’s banning as Twitter silencing the voices of people on only one end of the political spectrum, Trump should remain banned from Twitter due to his selfish intentions and negative influence on his followers. Trump was banned for a reason — he incited great violence with his platform largely because he lost the 2020 presidential election. The people he addressed on Twitter were then motivated to storm the Capitol, causing injuries for about 140 law enforcement officers (New York Times). Even though some argue that Trump being banned on Twitter violates his right to free speech, keeping him banned will benefit society more than harm it. Ultimately, what Musk plans for Twitter might not happen. On May 13, Musk tweeted that his deal with Twitter has been placed on hold until more details about spam and fake accounts emerge (Twitter). However, he did add that he is still committed to the acquisition of Twitter because if he backs out of the contract now, the company can sue him for up to $1 billion (Consumer News and Business Channel). If he does follow through with his changes, Twitter may become an untrustworthy and unreliable platform. “[Many] people make claims that what they say is fact, but it turns out they [do not show the full story].” Economics and Advanced Placement Economics teacher Allen Aronson said. “If [information on Twitter] is more in the middle and we get to the truth of topics instead of [having] selective research, I am okay with [Musk’s changes to Twitter].”
FOCUS EDITOR: Alena Rhoades WRITERS: Hannah Corr Brian Park STUDENT LIFE EDITOR: McKenna McCallister WRITERS: Jacelyn Chen Tessa Kang ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT/SPORTS EDITOR: Josie Kwak WRITERS: Jenna Long Neha Sambangi GRAPHICS Hana Fujii Kiara Lee Jihee Seo Lynn Takahashi Brooke Vo ADS Hana Rivera Priya Thakor
“The Pen” is the student newspaper produced by the advanced journalism students of Palos Verdes Peninsula High School. It is published eight times per year. Advertising inquiries may be directed to Head of Business Makayla Lui at (310)753-9550. Copyright © 2022 COVER DESIGN BY SAKURA SASAKI
