+
opinion
KANSAN.COM/OPINION MONDAY, JUNE 27, 2016
OPINION
KANSAN.COM
Illustration by Roxy Townsend
Liston: Global isolationist attitudes will lead to more economic and social strife
RYAN LISTON
@rliston235
Due to the tie, the immigration plan will remain blocked by an appeals court ruling. The case was brought to the Supreme Court after 26 states, including Kansas, filed a lawsuit against the President's executive action.
A tie is an acceptable way to end a soccer match or a game of tic-tac-toe, but it is not acceptable for a Supreme Court ruling. On June 23, the Supreme Court reached a 4-4 tie in a case regarding a 2014 executive action that protected five million undocumented immigrants from deportation and allowed them to work in the US legally. These immigrants were either parents of citizens or of lawful permanent residents.
Immigration has already been a hot button issue in this presidential election cycle, and this ruling has elevated the issue once again. Since Senate Republicans refuse to consider Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama's appointee, it will likely be up to the next president to fill the empty Supreme Court seat.
Policies of isolationism not only tear apart families, they are harmful to the economy. On June 21, Britain voted to leave the European Union, and the global economy has already suffered, with little certainty of what the future holds.
One of the driving factors behind the Brexit was to slow the flow of immigrants into Britain. These sentiments echo Donald Trump's "build a wall" policy for dealing with Mexican immigration and his proposition to ban all Muslims
from entering the country.
As a world power, the United States cannot shut itself off from the rest of the world. The failure of the Supreme Court to reach a decision on President Obama's immigration plan will only be the first step in a wave of isolationist policies if Donald Trump is elected president.
We cannot allow xenophobia to drive our policy decisions like it did in Britain. The ramifications would be devastating not only to the lives of those seeking freedom, asylum or opportunity; but to the national and global economy as well.
Ryan Liston is a sophomore from Lawrence studying journalism.
Clough: Punishing animals acting on instinct is inexcusable
▶ MATTHEW CLOUGH
@ mcloughsofly
Nearly 10 years ago, the zoo in my hometown of Wichita added an exhibit housing a handful of Humboldt penguins. It was one of the zoo's most anticipated events ever, and I remember the awe of being able to visit one of my favorite animals face-to-face in the heart of the Midwest. But I haven't returned to that zoo (or any other) since
the penguin exhibit opened
Perhaps part of my newfound aversion to wildlife exhibits has come with age - the childhood magic simply isn't there anymore. But more significantly, I feel sorry for animals when I see them in places they clearly don't belong. While this sentiment is definitely present when considering zoos, it's even more pressing in light of recent events. Around the world, the consequences of relegating
wild animals into conditions unnatural to them has been shown over and over.
On June 20, a jaguar was shot and killed in Brazil after it escaped from its handlers during an Olympic torch relay event. Hearing about this made me sad for the jaguar, but my greatest response was anger. Why was a wild animal - especially one of a species considered "near threatened" - present at all?
The live jaguar served as
a representation of Brazil's own Olympic mascot, a cartoon jaguar named Ginga. But there was no good reason to remove a wild animal from its natural habitat for the sake of entertainment during an event, especially when that event proves to be lethal for the animal simply acting on natural tendency.
This hasn't been the only perilous event for animals recently. A few weeks ago a gorilla at a zoo in Cincinnati was killed when a child fell into its enclosure. Last week, a bear thought to have attacked a marathon runner in New Mexico was captured and put to death. While these events are tragic for the humans involved, the animals can hardly be blamed for their actions.
The responsibility is on us, whether it be for entrapping animals where they don't belong (as in the cases of the jaguar and gorilla), or for tracking down those
in the wild likely acting on self-defense. While some zoos do commendable work with conservation and rehabilitation, we should be wary of removing animals from their habitats. And if we do, the responsibility is also on us to stop killing them when they act as their nature inclines them to.
Matthew Clough is a senior from Wichita studying English and journalism.