From Multipartisanship to Skill Development, Civic Fellows Learn Lessons for Life

“My time as a Fellow allowed me to realize that everyone has a passion of their own, and there is space for everyone to make a positive change in their community.”

Every September, Close Up welcomes into its ranks a new class of Civic Fellows, a group of recent college graduates who spend the next nine months building experience in the world of civic education. Civic Fellows help lead our student programs, collaborate with Close Up leadership to improve our educational content, engage in ongoing professional development, and build valuable relationships with nonprofit leaders, policy experts, and elected officials as they set off on their careers.   

It was this program that brought Charlotte Thomson (Civic Fellow, 2024) to Close Up and even inspired her to stay on as the Foundation’s partnerships coordinator. Read on to learn about Charlotte’s experience and the many lessons and skills she gained that she still carries with her. 

What inspired you to apply for the Civic Fellowship?  

My mom and my aunts went on Close Up in high school in 1989 and frequently mentioned it to me as a program that still impacts their lives today. I also knew that once I graduated college, I wanted to center my career around combatting increased partisan polarization and lost faith in democracy. When I saw the Civic Fellow opening at Close Up and the Foundation’s mission, I knew that Close Up was where I belonged, and I was excited to be a part of a cohort of similarly motivated individuals.    

How did your background, studies, or interests connect to this opportunity?  

I grew up in the D.C. area, so from a young age I was very primed to the world of politics. When I went to college in Minnesota, that passion only grew. I majored in biology and political science, with a focus in international relations. In my studies and experience beginning college shortly after George Floyd was killed in Minneapolis, I became hyperaware of the massive rift we have in our country between people who disagree politically and the growing apathy for our democracy. I knew that I wanted to begin my career path after college with a meaningful organization who was trying to combat this polarization, instead of feeding into it. Being a Civic Fellow at Close Up was the perfect way for me, a doer, to create positive and lasting impacts.  

What did a typical day or week look like?  

Once you begin as a Civic Fellow, you undergo 120 hours of in-depth training in multipartisan curriculum, conflict management, and storytelling. The training staff at Close Up met me where I was, making sure I and the other Fellows felt more than prepared and fully confident to work with students and engage them meaningfully. Training ends in late October, and my first program week instructing students was in early November. It’s very much an ease-in process once you begin instructing, which I found very beneficial. I had plenty of time to rework, reflect, and build my skills after my first 2-3 programs. Around the holidays, there is follow-up training to further hone in the skills we build as Fellows. The more regular program routine started in January, where I’d typically work three weeks “on” and one week “off” or on call.   

Was there a particular program or project that stood out?  

My favorite D.C. lesson of all time is the high school Mock Congress large-group activity and the Issues in Congress Workshop. Seeing students work together to make a team argument and model a civil debate, then take those skills and arguments into a Mock Congress setting, would always be the highlight of my week. They always pushed themselves out of their comfort zones to learn and grow, whether it was adopting a perspective they might have disagreed with or by stepping into a large-group speaking role. 

Were there any students, teachers, or colleagues who made a particular impact on you?  

I loved getting to instruct Close Up’s D.C. program supported by the Department of the Interior, where I got to teach Pacific Islanders from Guam, Palau, and the Marshall Islands. I also really loved getting to instruct two of Close Up’s Programs for New Americans in the summer. Both of these programs had such incredible students, and I was able to make really meaningful connections with these students that I still look back on today. Many came up to me at the end of the program and told me how devastated they were to leave; they just had the best time learning and making such great friends. That kind of community building is really what Close Up is about for students, and why I came in every week so motivated and encouraged to teach.   

What skills or perspectives did you develop through the experience?  

I developed a multitude of extremely valuable skills, but multipartisanship is the one that I think of the most. Before coming to Close Up, I had no idea what multipartisanship was, but it is something that I would say was hallmark to my Civic Fellow experience. For me, multipartisanship was not just being able to combat personal political biases and highlighting many political perspectives for students, but also a standard to which I held myself in my own personal life. As a Fellow and now, I use multipartisanship to challenge and deepen my own curiosity and understanding of the political world around me.   

How did the Civic Fellowship change the way you think about leadership, community, or civic life?  

Prior to beginning the Civic Fellowship, it was very easy to feel hopeless about the current state of political polarization and sympathize with other people I knew that would often say things like, “Why vote? There’s no point.” However, my time as a Fellow allowed me to realize that everyone has a passion of their own, and there is space for everyone to make a positive change in their community—whether that be through government or otherwise. This realization was fundamentally shaped by my students. Hearing them talk about the issues they cared about, experiences in their communities, and how they’re processing the politics around them gave me so much hope that young people want to make a difference. They’re just often not given the proper tools to see how they can do it, which is why Close Up is so important.   

How did it influence your career path or studies?  

After my time as a Civic Fellow, I knew that I wanted to remain at Close Up to continue the incredible work that we put out into the world. I also realized once I began teaching that I wanted to go back to school to pursue a master’s degree. At the end of the Fellowship, I began a full-time position as a partnerships coordinator in Close Up’s Development Department, where I am now. I am also in my first year of my Master of Public Policy at George Washington University. 

What lessons or habits from your time as a Civic Fellow do you still carry with you?  

The biggest lesson I learned from my time as a Civic Fellow is not to make assumptions about others. “Assuming positive intent” is one of the community guidelines we go over with our students every week, and I’ve adopted it as a big guiding principle in my life since then. It’s such an essential habit to hold for public servants and people who want to make meaningful change, because you have to put in the effort to get to know people as they are, not who you might assume them to be.  

Fill out an interest form if you’re interested in joining the 2026-27 class of Close Up Civic Fellows! Or, if you’re looking to begin your career with Close Up sooner, check out our civic program instructor positionapplications are now open for a February 2026 start! 

 

Poll: Young Americans See U.S. Civic Discourse as a Major Problem

Young Americans highly value civic education and are actively looking for more of it, according to the results of the 2025 Sine Institute Poll, Reimagining Higher Education: Young Voices, New Visions, which was published on October 28.  

The poll, which was designed by the Sine Institute of Policy & Politics at American University, Close Up, Future Caucus, and AU’s Kogod School of Business, and based on interviews conducted by Generation Lab in early September, surveyed 1,214 Americans aged 18-35 to assess their views on higher education, artificial intelligence (AI), and civic discourse, among other issues. 

Even prior to the assassination of conservative political activist Charlie Kirk in September 2025, a substantial majority of the poll’s respondents said they believed the state of civic discourse was a major problem. Sixty-nine percent of those surveyed described the current level of civic discourse in the United States as “a crisis” or “a serious problem.”   

So, how are young Americans looking to change the tone and content of our national dialogue? A majority of respondents (57%) emphasized respectful engagement with different viewpoints as the key objective of civic discourse as opposed to striving for a uniform agreement. They emphasized that “respect” and “open-mindedness” are the two most essential skills for improving our dialogue around politics, followed by “empathy,” “active listening,” and “self-awareness.”  

Learn more about how Close Up builds discourse skills in students nationwide through our NextGen Roundtable deliberationsCivil Discourse Credential, and professional development for educators 

Many respondents also outlined several steps to strengthen American civic engagement, including encouraging news outlets to focus on fact-based reporting over opinion-driven reporting, urging elected officials to model respectful disagreement over the demonization of opponents, and motivating Americans to seek out a diverse array of news sources.  

Additional poll findings show that young people are wanting increased access, affordability, and representation of political viewpoints in their colleges and universities. Seventy percent of respondents reported that they are “confident” or “very confident” in American higher education; 60% said they view college as an essential part of the American Dream. However, they tended to rank financial security, meaningful jobs, and home ownership as higher in importance than earning a college degree. These young Americans expressed that the primary responsibilities of higher education should be to develop critical thinking skills, to prepare students for the job market, and to ensure accessibility. Survey results provided additional proof that affordability remains the biggest obstacle for attending college, with nearly 70% of respondents identifying that cost is the biggest deterrent of pursuing higher education.  

When it comes to AI, young Americans acknowledge the role it will have in transforming American industries and the workforce—75% of respondents said that responsible AI education is necessary for career development. Respondents were more mixed when it came to their opinions on AI impacting career options, with a slight majority saying AI will likely limit their career options. The data suggested that people who use AI more regularly tend to be more optimistic about how it will impact their careers.  

The East Wing of the White House is Demolished

Kevin Dietsch/Getty ImagesLast month, President Donald Trump had the entire East Wing of the White House demolished to prepare for construction of a 90,000-square-foot ballroom.1 The White House made the announcement and released renderings of the ballroom three months prior, noting that the current building lacked space large enough “to host major functions honoring world leaders and other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building entrance.”2 The president later spoke to reporters from the roof of the White House while surveying the grounds.3

President Trump initially said that the project “won’t interfere with the current building” and “will be near it but not touching it.”4 However, after the demolition, he said that “in order to do it properly, we had to take down the existing structure.”5 The East Colonnade, which connected the East Wing to the White House, was also demolished, along with the Jacqueline Kennedy Garden and several historic magnolia trees.6 The $300-million-project will be funded by private donors, which include Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Lockheed Martin.7

What Was the East Wing?

The East Wing housed offices for the first lady and her staff, a movie theater, and an underground bunker called the Presidential Emergency Operations Center.8 The White House Military Office and Office of Legislative Affairs were also located there.9 The East Wing served as a ceremonial and public-facing space, where 500,000 visitors entered the White House annually and where the first lady decorated the hallways for Christmas.10

The East Wing was originally built as a carriage entrance in 1902 under President Theodore Roosevelt before it was renovated into its modern form by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt 40 years later.11 The White House Historical Association (WHHA) explains that the expansion “to house additional staff and offices” reflected “the growing complexity of the federal government during World War II.”12

Construction of the East Wing while the country was at war was itself controversial. “Congressional Republicans labeled the expenditure as wasteful, with some accusing Roosevelt of using the project to bolster his presidency’s image,” the WHHA explains. “The secretive nature of the construction, tied to military purposes, further fueled suspicions.”13 Despite the initial criticism, the East Wing came to be seen as a necessary addition the White House. 

President Trump’s Changes to the White House

As a real estate developer, Trump reached out to President Barack Obama’s administration in 2010 about adding a ballroom to the White House—a proposal which ultimately went nowhere.14 In his second term, President Trump has already transformed much of the White House to match his personal tastes.

He added gilded embellishments to the Oval Office and Cabinet Room, paved over the lawn of the Rose Garden to create a patio, installed large flag poles on the North and South Lawns, and renovated the bathroom off the Lincoln Bedroom with marble features.15 Along the West Colonnade, he created a “Presidential Walk of Fame” with portraits of each president (though, as a jab to his predecessor, President Joe Biden’s portrait was replaced with a photo of an autopen).16 President Trump added portraits of himself throughout the White House, replacing those of President Obama and First Lady Hillary Clinton, whom he views as his greatest political rivals.17 He also unveiled plans for a large victory arch between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery in honor of America’s 250th birthday next year.18

The Rationale for Redevelopment

The Trump administration and other supporters of the project say a proper ballroom is long overdue. The White House does not have space to host large-scale events without erecting tents outside.19 Its largest rooms can fit only 200 people, but up to 900 people will be accommodated by the new ballroom.20 When state dinners are set up outside, the “only bathroom facilities for a tent are porta-potties,” says Gahl Hodges Burt, who served as President Ronald Reagan’s social secretary. “Setting up a kitchen out there is hugely expensive. When the tent is up, the helicopter can’t land. And the grass dies.”21

Supporters also note that past presidents across the political spectrum have made their own changes to the building to fit their needs, especially as the roles and responsibilities of the office of the president have grown. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “Nearly every single president who has lived in this beautiful White House … has made modernizations and renovations of their own.”22

Major changes made to the White House include the additions of the North Portico, the West Wing, the Oval Office, and the Truman Balcony, plus the East Wing itself.23 And under the Truman administration, the entire interior of the White House was gutted and renovated to reinforce the crumbling building after decades of neglect.24

Iconic features of the White House today were once disparaged when their construction required the demolition of something else. When the Victorian conservatories (greenhouses) attached to the White House were destroyed in 1902 to make way for the West Wing, The Washington Post declared that President Theodore Roosevelt’s “attempt to ‘modernize’ [the White House] has destroyed its historic value and does not seem to have made it much more desirable as a residence.”25 Criticism about cost, necessity, design, and what is lost has been a constant as the White House has changed over the last two centuries.

Criticism and Concern

A Yahoo News/YouGov poll found that 57 percent of Americans disapprove of the East Wing demolition while 26 percent approve of it.26 Critics agree that the White House has often been a work in progress since construction began in 1792, but they worry about the pace of the project, lack of transparency, and historic preservation. The East Wing was demolished less than three months after the ballroom plans were made public. Former presidents who made sweeping changes to the White House, like President Truman, worked with many stakeholders and advisory groups.

“Working with the House and Senate, Mr. Truman appointed a bipartisan, six-person commission to oversee the project,” The New York Times notes. “He consulted the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Commission of Fine Arts, which approved sketches made by Lorenzo S. Winslow, the White House architect, as well as smaller details like fabric samples and color schemes. Funds for the project—more than $5 million at the time—were approved by Congress after significant debate.”27

The current project has no congressional involvement or oversight, and the private funds used to finance it are not subject to transparency laws.28 After the demolition of the East Wing, President Trump fired all six members of the Commission of Fine Arts, which would review designs and provide recommendations, though the White House would not be compelled to adhere to them.29 The White House, along with the Supreme Court and Capitol Building, is exempt from the National Historic Preservations Act of 1966, which requires a review process for construction projects.30

Former First Lady Michelle Obama noted that presidents and their families are only temporary residents of the White House; it is often referred to as “The People’s House” to symbolize that the building—and its power—belongs not just to the president, but to the American people.31 She also characterized the East Wing demolition as disrespectful to the Office of the First Lady, saying that “to denigrate it, to tear it down, to pretend like it doesn’t matter—it’s a reflection of how you think of that role.”32 Others, including former Vice President Kamala Harris, call attention to the optics of this situation, criticizing the president as out of touch.33 As they see it, President Trump’s priority in the middle of the longest government shutdown in U.S. history was to tear down a historic part of the White House to build a ballroom as millions of Americans were concerned with health care, housing, and hunger.34

Discussion Questions

  1. What are the strongest arguments that support the demolition of the East Wing of the White House? What are the strongest arguments against it?
  2. What are the benefits and drawbacks to funding the project entirely with private donations, rather than with congressionally appropriated funding?
  3. Should the construction of a ballroom be a priority for the Trump administration?
  4. Do you think the White House should be covered under the National Historic Preservations Act of 1966 and require approval for any changes made to it?
  5. How do you think the White House should balance historic preservation with the needs of the 21st-century presidency?

Other Resources

  • For more examples of significant modifications made to the White House, see An Ever-Changing White House by WHHA President Stewart McLaurin.

As always, we encourage you to join the discussion with your comments or questions below.

 

Sources

Featured Images: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
[1] PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/the-east-wing-of-the-white-house-has-been-demolished-heres-a-look-at-its-history
[2] The White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/07/the-white-house-announces-white-house-ballroom-construction-to-begin/
[3] The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/05/us/politics/trump-white-house-stroll.html
[4] PolitiFact: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2025/oct/22/donald-trump/white-house-east-wing-demolition-flip-flop/
[5] Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/white-house-east-wing-will-be-torn-down-fully-make-way-trump-ballroom-official-2025-10-22/
[6] Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/24/trumps-ballroom-renovations-uproot-jackie-kennedy-garden-00621916
[7] PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/whos-paying-for-trumps-300-million-ballroom
[8] CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/26/politics/white-house-east-wing-history
[9] The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/24/briefing/so-long-east-wing.html
[10] White House Historical Association: https://www.whitehousehistory.org/an-ever-changing-white-house
[11] CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/26/politics/white-house-east-wing-history
[12] White House Historical Association: https://www.whitehousehistory.org/an-ever-changing-white-house
[13] White House Historical Association: https://www.whitehousehistory.org/an-ever-changing-white-house
[14] NPR: https://www.npr.org/2025/07/31/nx-s1-5487590/trump-ballroom-white-house
[15] NPR: https://www.npr.org/2025/07/31/nx-s1-5487590/trump-ballroom-white-house
[16] PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-snubs-biden-with-autopen-photo-in-new-white-house-portrait-collection
[17] X: https://x.com/IsaacDovere/status/1935394734970699918
[18] NPR: https://www.npr.org/2025/10/16/nx-s1-5576506/president-trump-arch-us-250th-anniversary
[19] The White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/07/the-white-house-announces-white-house-ballroom-construction-to-begin/
[20] The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/24/briefing/so-long-east-wing.html
[21] The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/24/briefing/so-long-east-wing.html
[22] CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/26/politics/white-house-east-wing-history
[23] White House Historical Association: https://www.whitehousehistory.org/an-ever-changing-white-house
[24] White House Historical Association: https://www.whitehousehistory.org/collections/president-trumans-renovation
[25] White House Historical Association: https://www.whitehousehistory.org/an-ever-changing-white-house
[26] CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/29/politics/white-house-ballroom-east-wing-trump
[27] The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/us/politics/white-house-renovations-trump-ballroom.html
[28] The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/us/politics/white-house-renovations-trump-ballroom.html
[29] NPR: https://www.npr.org/2025/10/29/nx-s1-5589793/white-house-fired-arts-commission
[30] PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/the-east-wing-of-the-white-house-has-been-demolished-heres-a-look-at-its-history
[31] The Hill: https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/5590650-michelle-obama-white-house-east-wing-trump-ballroom-colbert-late-show/
[32] The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/09/us/politics/michelle-obama-east-wing.html
[33] The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/02/trump-cost-ballroom-government-shutdown
[34] NPR: https://www.npr.org/2025/11/05/nx-s1-5598315/government-shutdown-longest-history

 

President Trump’s Tariffs Go to Court

This morning, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, a case which was consolidated with Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc. The cases challenge whether a president can use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)—a Cold War-era statute—to impose sweeping tariffs on imports by declaring an economic “emergency.”1

Here’s how we got here: In 2025, President Donald Trump’s administration announced broad “Liberation Day” tariffs on most imported goods, citing national security and trade deficits as the emergency. Importers—including the Illinois education-toy company Learning Resources—sued, arguing that IEEPA doesn’t let a president use emergency powers to create general revenue-raising tariffs.2 Lower courts issued conflicting rulings and stays,3 and the Supreme Court agreed to take the dispute on an accelerated schedule this fall.4

Learning Resources’ Argument

Learning Resources and allied challengers make two big points:

  • First, they say IEEPA doesn’t authorize tariffs like these because the law is about blocking or regulating specific transactions tied to an “unusual and extraordinary threat,” not rewriting the entire tariff schedule for most imports.5
  • Second, if IEEPA did allow that much, it would raise separation-of-powers problems—letting the president exercise Congress’ taxing and trade powers without clear limits (a nondelegation concern). Their briefs and supporters’ filings stress that Congress must speak clearly before handing over such economy-wide authority.6

Observers also note that challengers are likely to invoke the Supreme Court’s “major questions doctrine,” which requires clear congressional authorization for executive actions with “vast economic and political significance.” If billions or even trillions of dollars in tariffs are at stake, they argue, IEEPA’s general emergency language can’t carry that load.7

The Trump Administration’s Argument

The Trump administration defends the tariffs by reading IEEPA broadly: when a president declares a national emergency tied to foreign commerce, the statute lets the president regulate imports—including by imposing tariffs—to respond to the threat. They point to historic precedents where presidents used related authorities in economic emergencies and say courts should defer to the executive on national security judgments.8

Supporters also suggest that doctrines limiting agencies (like major questions) shouldn’t hamstring the presidency itself in foreign-affairs or national-security contexts—an area where the executive traditionally enjoys broader discretion.9

What Observers and Experts Are Saying

Legal commentators across the spectrum see these cases as a separation-of-powers test. Some, including conservative and libertarian scholars filing amicus briefs, argue that allowing IEEPA to support sweeping tariffs would gut Congress’ constitutional role over taxes and trade. They underscore nondelegation concerns and warn that broad emergency powers can’t replace precise statutes.10

Other analysts focus on the Supreme Court’s consistency: having used the major questions doctrine to strike down big Biden-era actions, will the justices apply the same standard to a Republican president’s tariff program? Vox’s preview calls the dispute a “loyalty test” for the Court’s stated principles. Meanwhile, SCOTUSblog frames the argument as both economically massive and a crucial check on presidential power.11

Conservative Washington Post columnist George Will adds that the ruling could either bolster or weaken the Court’s role in policing the boundaries between Congress and the president.

What Different Rulings Could Mean

If the Supreme Court sides with Learning Resources: Wide-ranging tariffs imposed under IEEPA could be struck down or limited, forcing the administration to seek new, specific authority from Congress. The decision might also strengthen major questions and nondelegation limits, signaling that presidents (of either party) can’t rely on general emergency laws for huge economic policies. Businesses could see tariff relief and more predictability—but future presidents could have less unilateral leverage in trade fights.

If the Court sides with the administration: The ruling could expand presidential latitude to use emergency powers in trade policy, at least where the executive asserts national security reasons. That outcome might weaken the major questions doctrine in the presidential (as opposed to agency) context and encourage future administrations to use emergency statutes for big economic moves without fresh congressional approval. Markets could face more uncertainty as tariff policy and economic policy shift with each administration.

If the Court issues a narrow decision: The justices might resolve only part of the dispute—e.g., reading IEEPA to permit some targeted trade measures but not across-the-board tariffs—or send issues back to lower courts, leaving short-term uncertainty but clarifying which tools presidents can use and where Congress must act.12

Discussion Questions

  1. What have you heard about tariffs? How have they impacted you, your family, and your community?
  2. What are the strongest points in Learning Resources’ argument against a president’s authority to impose tariffs? Do you find them convincing? Why or why not?
  3. How does the Trump administration justify using IEEPA for its tariff policy? Do you find it convincing? Why or why not?
  4. How does this case reflect the Constitution’s system of checks and balances between the legislative and executive branches?
  5. What does this case reveal about how emergency powers can be used—or potentially abused—in a democracy?
  6. The major questions doctrine says that major economic decisions require clear congressional approval. Do you think the Supreme Court should apply this doctrine equally to all presidents? Why or why not?
  7. If you were a Supreme Court justice, how would you decide this case? What principles or values would guide your reasoning?

As always, we encourage you to join the discussion with your comments or questions below.

 

Sources

Featured Images: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
[1] Supreme Court of the United States, November 2025 Argument Calendar: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalNovember2025.pdf
[2] Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-declines-speed-up-decision-taking-up-fight-over-trump-tariffs-2025-06-20/
[3] Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/b9c77788211d96f59d253f6c011d69cb
[4] SCOTUSblog: https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/learning-resources-inc-v-trump/
[5] U.S. Supreme Court Docket, No. 24-1287, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-1287.html
[6] Ibid.
[7] Petitioners’ Certiorari Filing: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1287/363370/20250617121408066_No-___Learning_Resources_Petition_For_A_Writ_Of_Certiorari_Before_Judgment.pdf
[8] U.S. Supreme Court Docket, No. 24-1287, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-1287.html
[9] SCOTUSblog: https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/10/trumps-tariffs-face-supreme-court-scrutiny/
[10] Ibid.
[11] Vox: https://www.vox.com/politics/466510/supreme-court-trump-tariffs-loyalty-test-major-questions
[11] Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2025/24-1287

 

Samoa News | Close Up Foundation members attend 12th Annual Summit in American Samoa

The 12th Annual Close Up Summit opened with a blend of tradition, inspiration, and civic pride as Governor Pulaali”i Nikolao Pula joined a panel of guests and student delegates from high schools across the territory. Held at the Governor H. Rex Lee Auditorium, the summit was hosted in partnership with the American Samoa Department of Education, bringing together students, educators and leaders to explore foundations of leadership, public service, and hold discussions on government issues and collaborate on solutions.

READ FULL ARTICLE >