1. GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN ENTERS SECOND WEEK

The federal government has been shut down for nearly two weeks, and the situation is worsening. About 600,000 federal employees have been furloughed, meaning they have been sent home without pay. President Trump, blaming Democrats for the impasse, has started to lay off workers outright. A Reuters report says job cuts were under way at agencies such as the Treasury Department, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, the Commerce Department and the Department of Homeland Security’s cyber division. More than 4,200 workers across seven agencies received layoff notices, including over 1,400 at the Treasury and at least 1,100 at Health and Human Services. Some 300,000 additional civil servants were already scheduled to leave this year because of a downsizing campaign. Many Democrats are furious. Senators Tim Kaine and Mark Warner of Virginia, a state with nearly 150,000 federal workers, normally favor compromise but say their constituents feel under attack and want them to stand firm. Kaine said he might accept a short extension if Republicans promise not to tear up any deal and agree to more health care funding and protections for Medicaid. Warner added that federal employees have felt like they are “in a continuous shutdown” for months. Democrats across Congress argue that the layoffs and threats to deny back pay amount to political extortion, and they refuse to back down until Republicans agree to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies and reverse proposed Medicaid cut. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said Republicans “own this — every job lost, every family hurt”. Labor unions have filed a lawsuit to stop the layoffs, calling them illegal during a shutdown. Republicans counter that Democrats are holding up funding legislation, and some hope that the missed paychecks will pressure them to compromise. Senator John Thune, the Republican majority leader, said that layoffs were delayed to give Democrats time to “come to their senses” but that as paychecks are missed, the situation is “getting real.” Others, like a military spouse calling into C SPAN, expressed frustration with Republican leadership for failing to ensure troops get paid. As the standoff drags on, both parties appear entrenched, and federal workers, military families and citizens who depend on government services face increasing hardship. Write an editorial in which you argue either for or against the use of federal worker layoffs as a tactic during a government shutdown. Begin by summarizing the current situation: mention how many employees have been furloughed and that President Trump has ordered more than 4,200 layoff notices across several agencies. Then, consider the positions of both parties. What do Senators Kaine and Warner say about their constituents’ feelings and what conditions do they demand before accepting a temporary funding deal? How do Republican leaders justify the layoffs and what pressures are they trying to apply? Finally, take a clear stance: should elected leaders be allowed to lay off public employees during a budget dispute to gain leverage, or is this tactic harmful to workers and democracy? Support your argument with at least two facts from the article.

2. CRITIQUING THE SHADOW DOCKET

In a rare public critique, dozens of lower court judges are expressing alarm over how the Supreme Court handles its “emergency docket,” sometimes called the shadow docket. The New York Times surveyed more than 400 federal judges and received 65 responses; of those, 47 said the court is mishandling emergency orders since President Trump returned to office, while only 12 thought the court’s approach was appropriate. Judges from both parties took part, including 28 appointed by Republican presidents and 37 by Democrats. Many described the orders as “mystical,” “overly blunt,” “incredibly demoralizing” or even “a slap in the face to the district courts”. Overall, 42 of the judges said the Supreme Court’s actions were harming public confidence in the judiciary. The emergency docket allows the Supreme Court to quickly decide whether controversial policies can remain in effect while cases move through lower courts. Though the orders are technically temporary, they have had sweeping real-world consequences. For example, emergency rulings have allowed the Trump administration to deport tens of thousands of people, discharge transgender military service members, fire government workers and slash federal spending. Critics argue that because the orders often offer little or no reasoning, lower courts struggle to interpret them and the public perceives the process as opaque. At least one district judge likened his court’s relationship with the Supreme Court to “a war zone”. Some Supreme Court justices have defended their approach, noting that presidents now make policies by executive order more often, which requires quicker judicial responses. However, other legal experts warn that frequent, unexplained emergency rulings could undermine the separation of powers and erode trust in the courts. Write a short analysis evaluating the benefits and drawbacks of the Supreme Court’s increased reliance on its emergency docket. In your essay, explain what the emergency docket is and how it has been used to keep federal policies in place. Discuss why many judges are concerned about the lack of explanation in these orders and how this could affect public trust and the rule of law. Then consider arguments on the other side: Why might the court feel pressured to act quickly when presidents issue sweeping executive orders? Conclude by proposing one or two reforms—such as requiring brief written justifications or setting stricter standards for emergency applications—that could help balance the need for speed with the need for transparency.

3. LONG-AWAITED PRISONER SWAP

A fragile cease-fire between Israel and Hamas entered its third day with hopes of ending two years of brutal conflict. Under the first phase of the agreement, Hamas is expected to release all 20 living hostages still held in Gaza in exchange for Israel freeing about 2,000 Palestinian prisoners. The swap includes around 1,700 detainees seized during the war without charge and roughly 250 prisoners serving sentences for attacks on Israelis. Israeli officials also said they would return the remains of 26 hostages who died in captivity, though details about two other captives are unclear. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the exchange “a historic event that blends sorrow over the release of murderers and joy over the return of hostages,” while cautioning that significant security challenges remain. On the ground, the truce has allowed some relief. Israeli forces withdrew to a new defensive line inside Gaza, and aid deliveries began increasing: about 400 trucks from Egypt crossed the border on Sunday, with plans for that number to rise to 600 a day. The U.N. World Food Program announced it would triple the number of bakeries it supports in Gaza. Still, the human toll is staggering: Gaza’s health ministry estimates that around 67,600 people have been killed, half of them women and children. Most of the enclave’s two million residents have been displaced. Israel’s withdrawal has allowed thousands of Palestinians to return to shattered neighborhoods, but food, medicine and shelter remain scarce. The cease-fire faces many uncertainties. Both Israel and Hamas remain far apart on key issues: Israel demands Hamas’s complete disarmament, while Hamas insists on a full Israeli withdrawal and questions about who will govern Gaza after the war are unresolved. An international stabilization force proposed by President Trump has yet to materialize, and Israel’s defense minister says destroying Hamas’s extensive tunnel network is still a priority. Trump, who helped broker the deal, is scheduled to visit Israel to meet hostage families and then travel to Egypt for a summit with Arab leaders. Analysts warn that if fighting resumes or Israel continues intermittent strikes, international patience may wear thin. Write a short essay analyzing the potential benefits and risks of the hostage-prisoner exchange and the broader cease-fire. Begin by explaining the terms of the deal, including the number of hostages and prisoners involved and the humanitarian measures such as increased aid deliveries. Discuss why some Israelis welcome the return of hostages but worry about releasing prisoners convicted of deadly attacks, and why many Palestinians see the release of detainees as justice after widespread detentions. Then examine the unresolved issues—such as disarming Hamas, rebuilding Gaza and determining who will govern the territory—and assess how they could affect long-term peace. Conclude by comparing this exchange to at least one historical prisoner swap or peace agreement (for example, the 2011 Gilad Shalit exchange) and reflect on what lessons these past events might offer for the success or failure of the current cease-fire.

4. TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TARGETS LETITIA JAMES

New York Attorney General Letitia James, the first Black woman elected statewide in New York, was indicted by the Justice Department on a charge of bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution. The case centers on a 2020 home purchase in Norfolk, Virginia, where James signed a “second home rider” promising to use the property primarily for personal use for at least one year. Prosecutors claim she rented the house to another family and thereby obtained favorable loan terms not available to investors. The indictment was presented to a grand jury by Lindsey Halligan, a former Trump aide newly appointed as U.S. attorney, after a veteran prosecutor who resisted filing charges was removed. James denounced the prosecution as “weaponization of our justice system,” noting that it came after she successfully sued Donald Trump and his company for fraud. Many civil rights leaders and legal experts view the case as part of a broader campaign against high-profile Black women. At the New York NAACP’s state convention—where James was scheduled to speak before the indictment—organizers said the charges underscore the need to build political power to protect civil rights. L. Joy Williams, head of the NAACP’s New York conference, urged members to “defend against what is happening now” and work toward a stronger democracy. Shavon Arline-Bradley of the National Council of Negro Women noted that attacking a Black woman’s home invokes a painful history: homeownership has been one of the few paths to wealth for Black families, and the racial wealth gap remains wide. Critics like Representative Yvette Clarke, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, argued that the indictment amounts to political retribution and undermines faith in the rule of law. Supporters of the prosecution, including U.S. Attorney Halligan and Attorney General Pam Bondi, counter that “no one is above the law” and that there must be “one tier of justice for all Americans”. The case against James echoes other mortgage fraud probes pursued by the Trump Justice Department—such as investigations into Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook and Congressman Adam Schiff—raising questions about whether the Justice Department is being used to settle political scores. Legal scholars say mortgage fraud charges are rarely brought unless there is a pattern of deceit or harm to the lender, and they note that using a second home occasionally as a rental is common practice. As the legal battle unfolds, supporters of James emphasize the need to protect Black leaders from what they view as targeted attacks, while the administration insists that it is simply enforcing the law. Write a short word essay exploring whether criminal investigations of elected officials can be carried out impartially in a highly polarized political climate. Begin by summarizing the facts of Attorney General Letitia James’s indictment, including the nature of the mortgage fraud charge and the arguments on both sides. Then discuss why many civil rights advocates see the case as part of a pattern of targeting Black women and how property ownership has historically been central to Black economic advancement. Consider the Justice Department’s position that “no one is above the law” and evaluate whether pursuing charges against political rivals risks undermining public trust in the justice system. Finally, propose at least two reforms—such as independent special counsels or stronger oversight of prosecutorial appointments—that could help prevent political retribution while ensuring accountability.

5. SUPERINTENDENT UNDER SCRUTINY

An Associated Press investigation reveals that Des Moines superintendent Ian Roberts blurred the lines between his public role and private business ties. Shortly after taking the job in 2023, Roberts sought emergency board approval for $116,000 in contracts for “culturally responsive coaching.” District officials discovered that one contract was earmarked for Lively Paradox—a consulting firm that markets Roberts as a coach, sells his books and boosts his reputation—so the meeting was canceled. Despite warnings of a conflict of interest, Des Moines later paid Lively Paradox $6,476 for a two-hour board retreat; Roberts could approve that expense without a vote, and the board was unaware of staff concerns. Roberts had listed himself as an executive leadership coach for Lively Paradox on his résumé, and founder Nicole Price had co-authored books with him and promoted him as a transformative educator. The investigation found that wherever Roberts worked—from St. Louis Public Schools to charter schools in Oakland and districts in Pennsylvania—Price’s firm secured lucrative contracts. Roberts now sits in federal custody after his arrest by immigration agents amid allegations that he lacked legal work authorization and used false credentials. Price insists their collaboration was mission-driven, but the Des Moines school board has called for a review of all spending related to the former superintendent. Research your local school district’s policies on conflicts of interest and outside employment for administrators. Write an essay that summarizes those policies and why they exist, compares them to the situation described in this article, and proposes at least two recommendations to prevent similar issues. Use credible sources—such as district policy documents, state ethics codes and reputable news reports—to support your analysis, and discuss how transparency and oversight can build public trust in educational institutions.