
JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Trump Leaves the WHO: A Dangerous Era for Our Health
No one in this world deserves to get sick. It is a condition that ranges from a day-long tedium to the unfortunate conclusion of one’s life. From both extremes and everything in between, illness is a state of being humanity could live without, or at least with a reduced frequency.
Week That Was: Global News in Review
US-Russia Talks in Saudi Arabia, Civil War in Sudan Nears Two Year Anniversary, China Restricts Certain Ethnic Groups from Leaving the Country, and Argetina’s Crypto Scandal
Federal judiciary changes over the past 8 years
Over the past 8 years, the federal judiciary system has changed drastically. Landmark rulings, overturning past precedents, and a dramatic shift in the makeup of justices in the Supreme Court have significantly changed the judiciary system as a whole. This Brief explores how this change in composition has affected the judiciary system and policy action and will for years to come.
Gazans Face a Precarious and Uncertain Future
Israel’s assault on Gaza has decimated its people and infrastructure. Rebuilding will take decades, and in the meantime, the population remains dependent on international aid. Not only has Israel put drastic new restrictions on United Nations aid, but Donald Trump is pulling US funding for UN aid programs, suggesting that Palestinians should be forced out, the US take over and “build a Middle East Riviera there.
Exploring Different Types of Immigrants & Immigration Realities (Immigration Policy Brief #140)
The Trump administration has recently begun redefining its view on what it sees as the appropriate options for gender in the education system. The newly released Trump executive order on “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling” released on January 29 seeks to prohibit federal funding for schools that are teaching gender ideology and critical race theory in the classroom.
The Dangers for Schools Amid the Trump Gender War
The Trump administration has recently begun redefining its view on what it sees as the appropriate options for gender in the education system. The newly released Trump executive order on “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling” released on January 29 seeks to prohibit federal funding for schools that are teaching gender ideology and critical race theory in the classroom.
Trump on USAID: The End of American Soft Power
In the three weeks of Donald Trump’s second term as President of the United States, he has singlehandedly stunted America’s ability to project soft power. Taking actions like ending most foreign aid and withdrawing from treaties like the Paris Climate Agreement, Trump’s America First isolationist policies will be devastating to the United States’ credibility and strength, and to the rest of the human race’s ability to remain safe, healthy, educated, and alive.
Who’s Being Deported? Our Neighbors, Friends, and the Workforce (Immigration Policy Brief #139)
Given the start of the Trump era and ICE raids occurring across the country it is timely to remind people who immigrants are and more importantly who they are not. The initial figures released by ICE at the start of the new era of raids on immigrants reported that they had arrested 472 people on average in the first 3 days.
Ownership in Emerging Frontiers: Outer Space and Cyberspace
The ownership of outer space and cyberspace has become a critical issue as humanity expands its activities into these domains. Outer space, once the realm of government-led exploration, is now increasingly commercialized with private companies launching satellites, planning lunar missions, and pursuing asteroid mining


It’s Tempting To Do Nothing But
It’s Tempting To Do Nothing But
February Op Ed | February 13, 2025
Featured Photo By: npr.org
__________________________________
We are only two + weeks into the Trump administration. Despite the administration’s onslaught of deeply troubling and misguided policies. People feel tired from the hard fought election campaign. It is too soon to do anything they surmise; it is tempting to do nothing; better sit back and chill for a while and wait for a later date to re-engage.
This appears to be a path many people are choosing. This despite the onslaught of wicked administration actions such as the release 1,500 people convicted of helping overturn the government on January 6; the termination of department Inspector Generals, and leaders of the FBI, the Justice Department and other agencies; the purging of demographic language on the websites of the CDC, NIH, and other health agencies; the suspension of foreign assistance; the efforts to deport thousands of migrants; the imposition of tariffs on Canada, Mexico and other countries; and so much more. A concerning shift towards authoritarianism appears to be hardening while the spicket of democracy is turning off
Despite all this there has been little pushback. Few efforts to voice opposition.
At US RESIST NEWS we feel it is not too soon to take action, to speak out. But how do we do that? What can we do? Here are some suggestions both for individual citizens and concerned organizations.
- Develop a new platform that targets the needs of working class Americans, including youth, women, seniors ,and those living in rural areas; don’t abandon the Democrat’s long-standing commitment to civil rights but stress issues that cut across racial, ethic, and gender lines, such as basic economic fairness and moral decency.
- Make full use of the courts. Just as Trump used the courts; use the courts to register complaints about Trump’s actions; request injunctions to halt the implementation of administration policies. And appeal any rejections of claims that the courts might hand down; delay delay delay, and during the delays speak out.
- Take to the streets; maybe in small numbers at first; but organize marches and demonstrations that request a halt to unjust policies; mobilize those most affected to participate, e.g. often African-American, Latino and other minorities. Plan and organize at least one mega -march in Washington.
- Make a call for leadership : Many people wonder “where are our leaders?” Why aren’t those established leaders like Presidents Obama, the Clintons, and others saying more doing more? And where are the leaders on the so-called deep bench that the Democrats are supposed to have like Josh Shapiro, Corey Booker, and others? Why can’t we hear them? We need to call out to them to do more.
- Engage religious leaders: Given the overwhelming immorality of the new administration, it is important to counter their actions and policies with a moral voice. Leaders from our country’s different spiritual traditions need to come together and speak out against the immorality of the new administration. Look at the attention that was given to a Episcopalian Archbishop of Washington, Reverend Budde, who spoke out against Trump to his face. We need to hear more from spiritual leaders like Reverend Budde.
- Organize big picture electoral system reform campaigns: It’s time the democrats and others coalesce in support of reforms that are distorting our election system such as the need for the President to be elected by popular vote, not the electoral college. Our favorite would be a campaign to reverse Citizens United and get big money out of politics. In an age of oligarchy, where the divide between what those at the top and those at the bottom make, such a campaign would be likely to succeed.
- Organize for the mid-term elections; compile a list in every Congressional district of democratic Congressional candidates; organize events for them such as rallies, debates, and house parties.
- Use the media and the social media; create ads in support of key issues such as abortion, access to housing, education, and healthcare; make constant use of pro-democrat social media posts; emphasize personal stories; hire a good PR/advertising firm and start advertising now
- Organize boycotts of right-wing products and services, such as X, Fox News, Trump Hotels. It is tempting right now to sit back and do nothing. It is tempting to say” what will be will be; you get what you voted for.” But if we take this posture we run the risk that what the new administration is starting to do will harden into something much deeper and difficult to dislodge. The time to start to push back is now.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.

The Hypocrite in Chief’s War on Women
The Hypocrite in Chief’s War on Women
Health & Gender Policy #178 | By: Evan Wechman | February 8, 2025
Featured Photo By: Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images
__________________________________
Trump has been president for under a month, and he is already going to great lengths to restrict a woman’s right to an abortion. At first, after the 2022 Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court that Trump helped assemble, it appeared that abortion would be left to the states.
However, Trump has gone further by promising to be the most pro-life president the country has ever had. Just hours after addressing the annual anti-abortion March for Life in a prerecorded video, he signed executive orders restricting a woman’s right to choose.
With the power of the pen, President Trump is enforcing the Hyde Amendment, ending the use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund or promote abortion. This is in direct contrast to former President Biden, who allowed federal funds for groups to discuss abortion as an option. In addition, the former president used taxpayer funding for elective abortions by categorizing it as healthcare and permitted Medicaid funding to pay for travel care for abortions.
Also, Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum reinstating the Mexico City Policy which prohibits foreign organizations receiving U.S. global health funding from providing or mentioning abortion as an option with other sources of financing.
According to The White House Facts Sheet released on January 25th, “President Trump promised to protect and defend a vote of the people, from within the states, on the issue of life. Today’s executive actions build on the long list of accomplishments from the first Trump Administration to support the sanctity of every human life and prevent taxpayer funding of abortion. “
Analysis
It’s one thing to be personally opposed to abortion, but it’s a different story to decide for the entire nation that abortion is unacceptable. Trump at first said he was going to let the states decide whether abortion would be legal in their province. However, like many other positions, Trump seems to be singing a different tune now.
Through his new enactments, he is making it much more difficult for women to make their own reproductive decisions. For instance, a woman who lives in a state with restrictive abortion laws can no longer use Medicaid to help her travel to a state that allows more rights to reproductive freedom.
Even groups dedicated to women’s health like Planned Parenthood are in jeopardy of not even being able to discuss abortion as an option since they receive federal funds.
Trump is dictating the health and safety of all women based on his personal beliefs. This will eat away at the fabric of the country, which has always been about personal freedom. If a pregnant woman wants to consider abortion, Trump is having his values override her choice.
The reality is if Trump gets his way and there are no legal abortions in the nation, then we will return to a time where women are forced to seek help from bad doctors performing services in dark alleys. But abortions will still happen. The safety however of these women will be in jeopardy.
Likewise, a 2022 study by The National Academy of Sciences found that Trump’s anti-abortion restrictions led to approximately 108,00 deaths of women and children in poor nations during his first term. This is because Trump cut funding for non-profits that provided health services for sexually transmitted diseases with U.S. taxpayer money but used other revenue streams to provide abortions.
Trump’s actions are beyond hypocritical. He is attempting to take the moral high ground by acquiescing to pro-life groups, but he is in no position to impose his ethics on others. He pardoned about 1500 defendants involved in the January 6, 2021, insurrection.
This dangerous attempt to overturn the election led to the loss of life, various injuries, and the overall safety of our country. It is beyond logic for Trump to pardon friends of his whose actions resulted in death but continue to strip away a woman’s right to choose, putting her safety and welfare at risk.
But for President Trump, this is not about logic. It is about power.
Engagement Resources:
-
About Us – Reproductive Freedom for All Organization of over 4 million members who fight for access to abortion, birth control, and protections from pregnancy discrimination.
-
Planned Parenthood | Official Site Planned Parenthood works to protect and expand access to sexual and reproductive healthcare and education.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.

Jack Smith’s Honorable but Frustrating Journey to Prosecute Trump ; January 2025
Jack Smith’s Honorable but Frustrating Journey to Prosecute Trump; January 2025
Civil Rights Policy Brief #234 | By: Rod Maggay | Submitted: January 17, 2024
__________________________________
Policy Summary: Per Department of Justice (DOJ) regulations, Special Prosecutor Jack Smith issued two final reports to Attorney General Merrick Garland. The reports were regarding two federal cases that the Special Prosecutor was pursuing – one in South Florida regarding Mr. Trump’s mishandling of classified documents and a second one in Washington, D.C. accusing Mr. Trump of election interference in the 2020 election.
Despite facing criminal charges in these two trials, Donald Trump won the 2020 presidential election. As a result of his win and his return to the White House in January 2025, Special Prosecutor Jack Smith made the decision to wind down the two criminal cases and voluntarily dismiss the cases before the cases would come up for trial. On January 10, 2025, Jack Smith resigned from the position of Special Prosecutor with the DOJ. But before he departed, he submitted to Attorney General Merrick Garland two final reports on his investigations. The report on the classified documents case was split in two – one detailing the evidence against Donald Trump and a second one detailing the evidence against two other men who were charged with Mr. Trump in that case. Because the two other men – Walt Natua and Carlos de Oliviera – are still facing ongoing prosecution in the case, AG Garland has decided not to release the final report regarding that case. However, the final report about the investigation into Mr. Trump’s election interference case was eventually released prior to Mr. Trump’s inauguration. LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis: The resignation of Jack Smith marks the end of a journey that could be deemed as incomplete. For the last two years, Jack Smith and his prosecutorial team investigated the events of President Trump’s efforts to interfere in the 2020 presidential election. They pursued the facts and researched the law. Yet the election interference case (and the classified documents case) never made it to trial. It would be very easy to assume that this did not happen because Mr. Trump was not responsible or guilty of trying to interfere in the election. That was not the case. Jack Smith made sure to state when he resigned that Mr. Trump engaged in an “unprecedented criminal effort” to overturn his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. Additionally, Jack Smith stated that the evidence was there to convict Donald Trump. The only reason why the trials did not go forth was because of DOJ policy that prohibits prosecuting a sitting President.
While that is an unfortunate turn of events, it begs the question as to what evidence Jack Smith and his team compiled. The release of the final report in the election interference case (but not the classified documents case) provides some fascinating details at what President Trump would have faced in court. Trump’s tweets were not immediately provided to Jack Smith’s team for months because of delays from Elon Musk. It also took Smith more than a year to acquire incriminating text messages between Representative Scott Perry and Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark which provided an outline of how to subvert the election. Additionally, there were witnesses who Trump tried to prevent from testifying, including then Vice – President Mike Pence. And, Smith released how specific statements by Trump led to a response from the mob of rioters on January 6th. Specifically, Trump’s statements and tweets singled out Vice – President Mike Pence for his refusal to overturn the election. These communications led to those at the rally to go look specifically for the Vice – President before he was ushered to safety. The report makes clear that all of the evidence collected by the Special Prosecutor and his team would have been more than enough to present to a jury and more likely enough to convict the former President of trying to subvert the 2020 election.
One interesting revelation, which would not have been presented to a jury, was Jack Smith’s decision to not charge Donald Trump with the grave charge of “inciting insurrection.” The federal insurrection charge had not been used in more than a century. And its previous use had been against outsiders trying to overthrow a lawful government as opposed to a current politician trying to retain power. It was not clear if the federal statute would have applied to a President (or other politician trying to remain in power). In the end, Jack Smith decided not to charge the former President under this statute. This clearly demonstrates that Jack Smith was interested more in following where the facts and law took his investigation rather than following a partisan course based on revenge or retribution. While he probably could have charged Trump with “inciting insurrection” Jack Smith made the noble decision to not charge Trump, allowing only charges that were warranted and supported by evidence.
But in the end it was all for naught. Jack Smith’s investigation was halted when Trump won election back to the White House. But the evidence he compiled is now there for all to see. But in his court filing dismissing the case Jack Smith made sure to state that even if the prosecution did not go forward it did not change “the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution[’s case].
Engagement Resources
- U.S. Department of Justice – full text of Jack Smith’s final report on the election interference case.
- Politico – news site’s analysis of Jack Smith’s final report on the 2020 election interference case.
- CBS News – news site’s analysis of the classified documents case and its current status.
This brief was compiled by Rod Maggay. If you have comments or want to add the name of your organization to this brief, please contact rodwood@email.com.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!

The Uncertainty of the Student Loan Crisis in the Age of Trump
The Uncertainty of the Student Loan Crisis in the Age of Trump
Education Policy Brief #198 | By: Evan Wechman | January 26, 2024
Photo by Good Free Photos on Unsplash
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
Former President Joe Biden was passionate about providing access to student loans so anyone, regardless of financial status, could pursue higher education. Throughout his term, he successfully forgave the student loan debt of over 5.3 million borrowers, totaling over $188.8 billion.
These forgiveness programs were primarily for low-income earners who would be saddled with debt for many years after finishing their education. He also excluded any debt from students who were defrauded by for-profit universities.
However, if the debt could not be discharged, he at least sought to make the payments easier through his SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education) plan. SAVE cut many payments in half and forgave other debts altogether.
But many Republicans argued this was a clever way around the U.S. Supreme Court’s ban on a complete student loan forgiveness program. Therefore, many provisions are on hold as Democrats and Republicans plan to battle it out in court.
The Biden administration also made it easier for individuals seeking bankruptcy protection to include student debt under their new guidelines. For years before former President Biden took office, it was nearly impossible to walk away from student debt when filing for bankruptcy.
Now that President Trump has taken the reigns again, many of the successes of the Biden team in this realm remain uncertain. From outright student loan forgiveness to tax deductions for student debt, many Republicans on Team Trump are seeking to roll back much of Biden’s proposals.
Though President Trump has not been very specific about how we will attack the student loan issue, he did describe Biden’s debt forgiveness efforts as “vile” and “not even legal.”
Policy Analysis:
To predict how the Trump administration will handle both student loan forgiveness and modification, one must look only at his track record.
The President has not only called for the elimination of the Department of Education but has ridiculed Biden’s attempts at helping individuals navigate their student debt.
The well-respected quote from Maya Angelou should be remembered. “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time,” she said.
Trump and his allies have shown time, and again they are interested in protecting their rich, upper-class allies while neglecting people with fewer resources. For example, the dismantling of the Department of Education will set back public education for the public which consists of many families just trying to help their children achieve a good education.
Likewise, when Trump refers to Biden’s efforts to help those manage their student debt as “vile,” we should take him at his word. He sees nothing positive in helping people with few options create a better life rather than being saddled with debt as adults.
Trump doesn’t have to worry about how student debt will affect his cronies. The likes of Elon Musk and other billionaires will not have to fret about how their children will pay back high-interest loans.
Even smaller efforts like enabling student debt to be included in bankruptcy protection are not important to this administration. Trump has no problem with many of his businesses using bankruptcy laws to protect their assets, but when it’s for the working class, he and other Republicans question the legality of such measures.
During Trump’s first term, he tried to eliminate Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) but failed. Since PSLF is a Congressional program, Trump may try to sway his allies in the House to end the program, which helps qualify more individuals for student loan forgiveness.
As for how the new administration will handle debt incurred by fraudulent for-profit universities, one must only remember the controversy surrounding Trump University where they manipulated students into spending money on courses with little substance.
We as a nation can’t afford to trust someone who would prey on young people trying to better themselves.
Engagement Resources
- Student Debt Crisis Center (SDCC) | A people-powered movement representing over 2 million supporters: A non-profit organization dedicated to ending the student debt crisis through advocacy, education, and outreach.
- StudentLoanJustice.Org – Student Loan Justice: Oldest and largest citizen group fighting to end all federally owned student loans by executive action, and the return of bankruptcy protection to all student loans.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.

Disaffection and Abandonment: The European Far-Right Drift
Disaffection and Abandonment: The European Far-Right Drift
Foreign Policy Brief #175 | By: Damian DeSola | January 24, 2025
Photo by Mika Baumeister on Unsplash
__________________________________
The far-right in Europe is rising once again. Following a trend that has taken ahold of much of the modern democratic world, Europe’s various national and supernational far-right populist parties have shown a dramatic surge in popularity. With a range of social and economic effects, along with the ossified and ineffectual traditional parties, the extreme has become greatly appealing to Europeans. Populists use familiar concepts, stoking hate for immigrants, lashing against supposed decadent social justice, and highlighting the overall alienation Europeans feel from their governing officials.
Examples of this are found across the continent.
In France, the National Rally party, led by Marine Le Pen, earned a shocking 31% of the European Parliament’s elections. This was followed by the decision of current French president Macron to call a snap election, which was won only because competing left-wing and centrist candidates tactically stepped aside in the second round of elections to avoid splitting their tickets.
For both Germany and Austria, far-right parties have had their best showing in their electorates since World War II. In Germany, The Alternative for Germany (AfD), has won a state election for the first time in its history. While still unpopular with most Germans, 19% of Germans view the party favorably, a record high for AfD. The Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) won 29% of the parliamentary vote in 2024, positioning the party’s leader, Herbert Kickl, to potentially become the Austrian Chancellor.
This past year, Reform UK has also achieved five parliamentary seats, the first in its history. Under a month later, violent riots broke out in July and August of 2024; these riots were sparked by a mass stabbing in Southport, which was followed online by false claims that the attacker was a Muslim immigrant. The riots lasted six days, fueled by online fascists, Islamophobic organizations, and neo-Nazis.
Furthermore, in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, and Finland have all seen elections, both local and national, resulting in far-right parties gaining positions in government.
Analysis
Why are these far-right parties gaining so much traction in Europe? The answer will be familiar to Americans. The main factors can be traced to xenophobia, cost of living, and an overall feeling of disconnection from traditional parties.
Much of this reaction comes from the rapid increase in the cost of living that has come with the aftereffects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic turmoil caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine. Slow growth, rising inflation, and increases in the cost of housing, energy, and food, which is exasperated by massive wealth inequality, have set the stage for discontent across the continent.
Turmoil and climate change in Africa and the Middle East has resulted in a massive influx of immigrants to Europe from both regions. Hundreds of thousands have made the perilous journey across the Mediterranean to escape war and dictatorship. Unfortunately, Europe was woefully unprepared, and it countries have been incapable of managing the crisis. The presence of an “other”, along with economic turmoil, has resulted in Europeans turning their stress into hate. Hence, a massive uptick in racist attacks and nationalist rhetoric by far-right parties.
While healthy democracies would be capable of managing a rise in far-right nationalism, establishment center-left and center-right parties have been more focused on maintaining their positions of power. By refusing to acknowledge or take meaningful action on issues of wealth inequality and cost of living, establishment parties should not be astonished that their voter bases have become disaffected.
It is a troubling trend. As ideas of populism, majoritarianism, and isolationism continue to grow unchecked by usual democratic institutions, liberal political foundations are increasingly under threat. Assumptions of equality under the law, freedom of speech, free and fair elections, freedom of religion, gender equality, racial equality, and many other liberal ideals that have been taken for granted could very well be dissolved across the European continent.
A prime example is found in Hungary, a nation that can be referred to as an “illiberal democracy.” It is in this small nation where the framework for modern European nationalism can be found. The ruling party, Fidesz, crushes all opposition through the stifling of free press, corruption of elections, the promotion of Hungarian nationalism, Euroscepticism, and even visions of Hungarian territorial expansion.
The European Union and local democratic powerhouses (e.g. Germany, France) have done little more than writing a strongly worded letter to Hungary. The leading parties of what are meant to be local defenders of European democracy have proven incapable of implementing policy that can effectively combat the rising tide of illiberal influence on the continent.
Instead of shrugging shoulders, alarm bells should be ringing across liberal Europe. Europeans must rapidly organize, debate, and implement solutions to combat the massive threat of illiberalism. The people and leaders of Europe that consider themselves defenders and advocates for civil liberties and democracy must stand up now, lest they sleepwalk into a new era of European autocracy and division.
Engagement Resources
- Politico.eu mapping of the far-right rise in Europe
- Change in freedom map from the Freedom House Index
- Podcast covering the far-right resurgence in Europe from the Center for a New American Security
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.

The Impact of Autonomous Drones on Privacy and Security
The Impact of Autonomous Drones on Privacy and Security
Social Justice Policy Brief #171 | By: Inijah Quadri | January 23, 2025
Photo by Kaleb Kendall on Unsplash
__________________________________
Policy Issue Summary
Autonomous drones have rapidly integrated into various sectors, including delivery services, agriculture, surveillance, and emergency response. Equipped with advanced technologies such as high-resolution cameras and artificial intelligence, these drones operate with minimal human intervention. While they offer numerous benefits, their proliferation raises significant concerns regarding privacy and security.
The ability of drones to capture detailed images and data from the environment poses potential infringements on individual privacy. Instances of drones capturing images of individuals without consent have been reported, leading to public discomfort and legal challenges.
Moreover, the autonomous nature of these drones introduces security vulnerabilities. Unauthorized access or hacking of drones can lead to misuse, including unauthorized surveillance or data breaches. The increasing use of drones by governmental agencies for surveillance purposes further complicates the balance between security and civil liberties.
Analysis
Autonomous drones are incredibly useful in many situations. For example, they are used for deliveries, like Amazon Prime Air, and during natural disasters. Drones equipped with thermal imaging can locate stranded individuals and deliver essential supplies to hard-to-reach areas. However, there have been reports of drones capturing images of people without their consent, which has caused public discomfort and raised legal concerns.
While regulations exist, the integration of autonomous drones into civilian airspace has often outpaced the development of comprehensive regulatory frameworks. In many regions, existing laws do not adequately address the unique challenges posed by autonomous drone technology. This regulatory gap allows for potential misuse and raises questions about accountability and oversight.
Privacy concerns are paramount. Drones can inadvertently or deliberately capture images and data of individuals in private settings without their knowledge or consent. Such intrusions can lead to a sense of surveillance and erode public trust in technology. The psychological impact, which may be referred to as “drone anxiety,” reflects the societal unease with pervasive surveillance capabilities.
Security risks are equally pressing. Drones are susceptible to hacking, which can result in unauthorized control and potential harm. While the FAA requires commercial drone operators to obtain a Remote Pilot Certificate, recreational drone use is more loosely regulated, raising concerns about accountability and misuse by untrained individuals. The accessibility of drone technology further adds to the challenge. With DIY drone kits widely available, even hobbyists can create sophisticated devices, bypassing traditional regulatory oversight. Indeed, the use of drones for malicious purposes, such as smuggling contraband into restricted areas, has been documented, highlighting the need for robust security measures.
While manufacturing does not require a license, drones remain subject to FAA registration rules. As of 2024, over 850,000 drones have been registered in the U.S., underscoring their rapid proliferation and potential for misuse.
Addressing the privacy and security challenges posed by autonomous drones requires a multifaceted approach that balances innovation with safeguarding individual rights. Policymakers must establish clear, enforceable guidelines for drone operations, including stringent privacy safeguards, mandatory data encryption, and restricted use of surveillance technologies. Public awareness campaigns are essential to inform citizens about their rights and the capabilities of drone technology, while transparency initiatives, such as public disclosure of drone usage policies, can build trust and encourage community engagement.
Additionally, investment in robust cybersecurity measures, such as encrypted communication channels and anti-hacking technology, is crucial to prevent security breaches when drones are in use. Governments and private entities should also prioritize developing counter-drone technologies to neutralize malicious drones and ensure public safety without hindering legitimate use. There is a need to align drone deployment with societal values and human rights principles.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on the resource URL to visit links where available:
- Electronic Frontier Foundation (https://www.eff.org/): A leading nonprofit organization defending civil liberties in the digital world, including issues related to drone surveillance.
- Center for Democracy & Technology (https://cdt.org/): Focuses on policy analysis and advocacy concerning privacy and security in emerging technologies.
- Future of Privacy Forum (https://fpf.org/): An organization that addresses privacy concerns in the context of new technologies, including autonomous drones.
- International Association of Privacy Professionals (https://iapp.org/): Provides resources and education on privacy issues, relevant to understanding the implications of drone technology.
- Drone Service Providers Alliance (https://dspalliance.org/): An organization dedicated to promoting safe and secure drone operations through education and advocacy.
_______________________________________________________________
Wanna stay in-the-know? Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.

TikTok CEO Is Trump’s Latest Billionaire Buddy
TikTok CEO Is Trump’s Latest Billionaire Buddy
Technology Policy Brief #125 | By: Mindy Spatt | January 24, 2025
__________________________________
Summary
Predictably, a law banning TikTok was in effect for only a few hours on January 19. The Biden administration’s case against the app as a security threat was weak, but that’s not why the ban didn’t materialize. Even before taking office, Donald Trump rescinded it. He will try to broker a deal for a partial sale of the app, most likely to one of his billionaire buddies.
Analysis
Whether you like TikTok or not- I don’t- the swiftness with which Donald Trump, even before taking office, ignored the decisions of Congress and the Supreme Court doesn’t bode well for the future.
Trump took advantage of a giant loophole in the law passed by Congress requiring Tik Tok to sell part ownership or shut down, allowing the company a 90-day reprieve if negotiations for such a sale were in progress. TikTok’s owner, ByteDance, has repeatedly said it is not open to such a sale.
Despite that, Trump granted a sale reprieve for 75 days, parting ways with some of his right-wing republican allies. Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, chairman of the Senate’s Intelligence Committee, urged the ban to go forward. In a press statement on January 17, he said “ByteDance and its Chinese Communist masters had nine months to sell TikTok before the Sunday deadline. The very fact that Communist China refuses to permit its sale reveals exactly what TikTok is: a communist spy app. On the 19th another release, jointly issued with Senator Pete Ricketts (R-Nebraska) stated that once the law has taken effect, there was “no legal basis for any kind of ‘extension’ of its effective date.”
In his first term, Trump tried to ban TikTok and another Chinese-owned app, WeChat, but lawsuits succeeded in stopping those efforts. Still, when a ban started gaining traction in Congress during the Biden administration, Trump didn’t get on board. Commentators have speculated this gained him points with young voters, but do TikTok aficionados follow the news that closely or care that much? More likely Trump realized his support of the company could be profitable.
Byte Dance has so far been silent on Trump’s proposal for a shared ownership model. But TikTok CEO Shou Chew has visited Trump at Mar A Lago and was proudly front and center at his inauguration. On January 19 TikTok praised the (then) former president and credited him with its triumphant return after 15 hours offline. All users saw this message: “As a result of President Trump’s efforts, TikTok is back in the U.S.!,”
The brief shutdown sparked some whining among users, but also some relief. Comments included:
I kind of internally panicked for a bit before a wave of calm descended.
I already knew how addictive, toxic, and wasteful it can be, but would still find myself mindlessly scrolling. This was a forced reckoning of sorts.
I’m going to delete it, stop consuming short-form content, and limit my consumption of long-form content.
A few potential buyers have been mentioned in press reports. One is billionaire businessman and real estate mogul Frank McCourt, former owner of the LA Dodgers, who, along with Shark Tank investor Kevin O’Leary, made an offer.
Former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has also announced his interest and is putting together an investment group. When Mnuchin was Treasury Secretary he tried to force the sale of a large stake in TikTok to US companies.
Several other names have been floated as possible buyers, including Tesla CEO and Trump BFF Elon Musk. Others who would likely be able to afford to buy the app, estimated to be worth well over $100 billion, might include Trump donors and crypto billionaires the Winklevoss brothers or perhaps Mark Zuckerberg who has lambasted TikTok’s Chinese ownership as a security threat even while Meta’s apps have routinely sold user data to foreign companies, including Chinese ones.
Read more on the real dangers of TikTok below.
Resources:
- TikTok executives know about app’s effect on teens, lawsuit documents allege, by Bobby Allyn, Sylvia Goodman and Dara Kerr, National Public Radio, Oct.11, 2024
- The Dangers of TikTok That Are Worth Your Attention By Johanna Neeson, Readers Digest, May 17, 2024
- US: TikTok Ban Won’t Solve Big Tech Harms, Amnesty International, Jan. 17, 2025
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.

Understanding Trump’s Expansionist Threats
Understanding Trump’s Expansionist Threats
Foreign Policy Brief #174 | By: Ibrahim Castro | January 20, 2025
__________________________________
Since his election victory, Donald Trump has made international headlines with a series of comments suggesting possible annexation and military action against neighbors and allies of the United States. Although the international rules based order established by the US at the end of World War II sought to end illegal land grabs and territorial annexations, President Trump has shown interest in returning to a time of territorial expansion. The countries caught in the crosshairs of Trump’s threats include Canada, Panama, Greenland, and Mexico.
As is often the case with Trump, his comments have sparked division. Some dismiss his suggestions as mere hyperbole, while others see them as a clear demonstration of his disregard for international norms. Leaders from Panama, Canada, Mexico, and Denmark have publicly rejected the notions of ceding territory or allowing military intervention in their territories.
Trump’s threats include using military force to seize control of the Panama Canal and Greenland, incorporating Canada as the 51st state of the U.S., and deploying American troops to Mexico to combat drug cartels. Below is a closer examination of these threats and the relationships between the US and the targeted countries.
Panama
President Trump has threatened to use the US military to take control of the Panama Canal. The canal, constructed between 1904 and 1914, was funded and organized by the US, which controlled a six-mile zone on either side until 1999. The canal’s transfer to Panama followed a 1978 agreement brokered by President Jimmy Carter.
The construction of the canal involved the labor of roughly 150,000 workers, many of whom were of African descent from the Caribbean. Most came from Jamaica and Barbados, but others hailed from islands such as St. Lucia and Grenada.
Trump’s grievances appear to stem from what he called “ridiculous” fees charged to U.S. vessels. In reality, these fees are calculated based on vessel type, size, and cargo, and have increased for all international ships due to a severe drought in Panama beginning in late 2022. By early 2024, the drought was described as the worst in the canal’s history, leading to bottlenecks and reduced vessel transits to conserve water. Far from the “Chinese-controlled conspiracy” Trump alleges, the increased fees reflect logistical challenges rather than actions against the US.
Greenland
Trump has repeatedly claimed that the US should acquire Greenland, describing the move as “absolutely necessary for national security and global freedom.” Although geographically part of North America, Greenland is politically linked to Europe, as a territory of Denmark.
European leaders, including those in Denmark, have expressed their dismay at Trump’s remarks, emphasizing that annexing an ally’s territory by force would violate international law. The US has maintained a presence in Greenland for decades; in 1946 President Harry Truman offered to purchase the island for $100 million, a proposal Denmark rejected. Years later though a deal was made to allow the US military to retain permanent installations there.
Notably, Moscow has used Trump’s rhetoric to justify its own actions in Ukraine. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov pointed to Trump’s comments as a precedent, suggesting that Greenland’s population should decide its own fate over joining the US— citing the widely discredited referendums held in Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine as an example of self determination for territory sought after by another state.
Canada
Trump has suggested using “economic force” to pressure Canada into becoming the 51st state of the US. After only recently meeting with the now outgoing Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, at Mar-a-Lago, Trump has mocked Trudeau by referring to him as “Governor Trudeau”. Trudeau, who recently announced his resignation as Prime Minister, responded via X , saying, “There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States.”
Trump has also floated the idea of imposing 25% tariffs on Canadian goods to force compliance, a move that drew widespread criticism from Canadian leaders and citizens alike. Such economic threats have only served to deepen the rift between the two neighbors.
Mexico
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Mexico remains a frequent target of Trump’s antagonism. From his initial campaign remarks labeling Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists to his promise to build a southern border wall, Trump’s rhetoric has consistently strained relations with the US’ southern neighbor.
Recently, Trump proposed designating Mexican cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and threatened military intervention to combat them. While such a designation would not authorize military action, it raises fears of escalating tensions. Trump has also suggested bombing drug labs and deploying special forces to eliminate cartel leaders.
Trump has also proposed renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America,” calling the idea “beautiful”. Mexico’s President, Claudia Sheinbaum, rebuked Trump’s threats, promising retaliatory measures against any trade war tactics. She also countered Trump’s naming proposal by suggesting that North America be renamed “América Mexicana” or Mexican America.
Conclusion
Trump’s expansionist rhetoric has caused an uproar in the international community. If any of these threats were acted upon, they could destabilize the already fragile international rules based order. Such actions would also set dangerous precedents, undermining global norms against territorial annexation.
Ironically, the isolationist, anti-immigrant, “America First” president and his supporters now entertain ideas of expansion that would bring more diverse populations, more people of varied backgrounds, races, and beliefs within the United States. This contradiction exemplifies the arrogance and hypocrisy of far-right nationalism, which seeks to deport millions to keep the country pure, while simultaneously laying claim to foreign lands and their people.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.

Why is LA on Fire?
Why is LA on Fire?
Environment Policy #178 | By: Arvind Salem | Submitted: January 13, 2025
Photo Credit: LAFD Photo | Cody Weireter
__________________________________
Policy Summary
The latest round of fires, something that has been plaguing Los Angeles, is a scary combination of three smaller fires that together are ravaging Los Angeles: The Palisades Fire, The Eaton Fire, and The Hurst Fire. Beyond these three, there are additional smaller fires.
The exact cause of the fires is still unknown. Investigators and officials have been able to rule out certain common causes that often cause fires, including lightning, arson, and utility lines. While the cause of the initial fire is uncertain, California’s abundance of kindling wood helped the fire spread (California also had an abundance of rain followed by an exceptional dry spell in L.A., meaning that there is a lot of dry vegetation to feed a fire). Additionally, there were strong winds during this period that helped the fire spread. However, while these short-term causes garner attention, experts also point out that climate change is a key factor that has created extreme wet and dry spells, which allow fires to spread. In Southern California, fires are largely expected from May to October, but climate change is extending that window throughout the year.
In terms of damages, the fires have burned nearly 40,000 acres of land so far, with the bulk of the damage coming from the Palisades fire burning 23,713.4 acres. Even worse, that fire is only 14 percent contained, meaning that it will likely continue to rage on and damage more land. Over 150,000 people are under evacuation notices, and that number has stretched to nearly 200,000 during intense periods of the fire. Sadly, there have already been 24 victims of this series of fires. The fires have ravished high-end, densely populated areas in LA, burning over 12,000 structures. A preliminary AccuWeather estimate of the likely damages was between $250 to $275 billion, with this number likely to grow as the fires still rage on. The exact breakdown of the methodology and estimates is proprietary, but AccuWeather included variables that are not immediately obvious (such as long-term health effects and the effect of fires on company valuations in the LA area).
For comparison, the final AccuWeather damage estimate for Hurricane Helene was $225 to $250 billion. The fact that the LA fires exceed the damages of a Hurricane that ravaged multiple states, while being confined to “only” a single city demonstrates its debilitating economic impact on the LA area. With such damages, this will likely be the costliest wildfire in modern California, and U.S., history.
Policy Analysis:
The governor asked the legislature to provide $2.5 billion, with $1 billion for immediate responses and $1.5 billion for greater wildfire preparedness in the future. This comes amid renewed criticism for the governor famously spending money on the homeless population, while wildfire prevention received less money. Newsom also waived certain environmental regulations to help speed up the fire recovery and rebuilding process.
In regards to the long-term future, this is once again a reminder that climate change can lead to more extreme natural disasters. With Hurricane Helene and now these wildfires, the United States is experiencing some of the consequences of climate change, which will likely get more extreme as time goes on. While California cannot change this as just a state, investing in wildfire prevention and firefighters can help create an infrastructure to mitigate the worst damages of future fires. Just as COVID-19 sparked a seminal re-evaluation and renewal of the nation’s public health apparatus, these wildfires need to encourage the same in California.
While the LA wildfires have certainly damaged many expensive properties and high-end areas, they have also had a deep negative impact on minority and low-income areas as well. The poster child for this tragic effect is Altadena, a majority-minority neighborhood that includes houses that minorities have owned for generations, which has been burned to the ground. Even worse, California already has a well-documented problem dealing with homelessness and high housing prices (especially in the L.A. area). These fires raise home insurance rates, pricing the most vulnerable out of the market and leaving them unable to buy a new house after their old house burns down.
In this crisis, the Fire Department has of course been a key factor in the emergency response. As the Department’s response has been closely watched, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass has come under scrutiny for decreasing the budget of the department by $17.6 million ( 2%) from the 2024-2025 year compared to the 2023-2024 fiscal year. LAFD Fire Chief Kristin Crowley wrote a memo outlining how this cut affected parts of their operations, including their capacity to respond to emergencies and brush clearance inspections. California Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman, whose district includes the Palisades, dismissed the cuts as a cause for the issue, noting that the cuts were meant for training in 2025 and did not impact readiness. This is not the only criticism of Mayor Bass, as she’s drawing heavy scrutiny for her travels to Ghana during the fires, especially after promising to not travel internationally (after that was a large part of her life when she was in Congress). This series of either bad optics or gross mismanagement has led to serious discontent, exemplified by an online petition with over 100,000 signatures, demanding Bass’s immediate resignation.
Engagement Resources
The following three sites are relief organizations for the wildfires. We encourage readers to help however they are able and share this link with those in their circle that may be in a position to help:
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.

Ski Patrollers Go On Strike
Ski Patrollers Go On Strike
Social Justice Policy Brief #170 | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | January 09, 2025
Park City Mountain base area at 11:00 a.m. on Sunday Dec. 29. Photo: Park City Mountain
__________________________________
Policy Summary
The last week of December and into early January, the holiday season and school vacation weeks, are often some of the busiest days at a ski resort in the United States. Park City Mountain Resort, the United States’ largest ski resort, is no exception. However, on Dec. 27, 2024, over 200 ski patrollers walked off the job in protest of their working conditions at Park City, outside of Salt Lake City, Utah; the resort is owned and managed by Vail Resorts. The Park City Professional Ski Patrollers Association demanded higher wages for their ski patrollers due, largely, to the exorbitant cost of living in Park City. The strike led to tremendously long wait lines for chair lifts, closed terrain, and even nonunion ski patrollers being brought in from other ski resorts. To make a long story short, the strike created a mess that left Park City skiers quite miserable over the holidays.
Analysis
Park City, Utah, is one of the most premier ski areas in the United States. It boasts a tremendous 350 trails with over 40 lifts to move skiers uphill and access the terrain. Park City Mountain Resort is one of over 40 ski resorts owned by Vail Resorts around the world. Other famous resorts owned by Vail Resorts are: Whistler Blackcomb in British Columbia, Canada; Crested Butte in Colorado; Crans-Montana in Switzerland (home to a FIS World Cup alpine ski race); and three ski resorts in Australia (and many others throughout the United States). Vail Resorts, in 2024, did $2.8 billion in net revenue and over $230 million in net income, according to Vail Resorts website.
Ski patrollers are an important group of people in the ski industry. They are, typically, well-trained emergency medical staff that provide aid to injured or hurt skiers and riders on the slopes; they also perform tasks, in areas like Utah, such as firing howitzers at slopes with potential avalanche risk to reduce the likelihood of an avalanche occurring. The Wasatch Mountains in Utah are well-known for their substantial amounts of snow and Utah is known, in the ski world, as a haven for the powder skier. This is all to say, ski patrollers are among the most important employees at a ski resort. The National Ski Patrol Association says that all ski patrollers have been certified in Outdoor Emergency Care (OEC) as a baseline certification, and also take courses in wilderness first aid, avalanche safety, mountain rescue, and more.
However, ski patrollers (and many other seasonal employees at ski areas) have had a history of not being paid very well. This long standing pattern of low pay is what, ultimately, led the Park City Professional Ski Patrollers Association to go on strike on Dec. 27, 2024, and 200 ski patrollers walked off the job.
The union’s largest gripe with the Park City Mountain Resort’s management is regarding pay. The union’s largest complaint being that wages have remained low at the resort for patrollers, and that the cost of living in Park City has increased dramatically – making it very hard for ski patrollers (and other mountain employees) to live in Park City. According to PayScale, the cost of living in Park City, Utah, is 66% higher than the national average; and cost of housing is 268% higher than the national average. Ski patrollers at Park City had been making about $21 per hour to start with the pay scale topping out after five years, according to the Associated Press; the resort also provided ski patrollers with over $1500 for purchasing gear. Vail Resorts says that they increased wages in 2022 from $13 per hour to the rate of $21 per hour. However, negotiators for the mountain wanted to offer a $2 hourly wage increase, while the union says that $27 per hour is the living wage for Park City.
The strike caused a tremendous amount of chaos at the Park City Mountain Resort. It was well reported that chairlift lines were over an hour long, and lots of terrain was closed down due to the lack of ski patrollers to clear the terrain for potential risks. On January 6th, it was reported that 25 out of the 41 lifts were operational (16 lifts closed), and 103 out of 350 trails were open (147 trails closed); and to make matters worse, the mountain received over two feet of new snow through the past week. To cope with the intense and chaotic conditions at the resort, Park City brought in nonunion ski patrollers from other ski areas.
It was announced on January 7th that the union and Park City’s management had come to an agreement to end the strike, and details were not revealed until January 9th. According to The Park Record, entry-level patrollers will be receiving a $2/hour raise (moving the starting wage to $23/hour) and more experienced patrollers would be receiving even higher raises (average wage raise across the union membership was $4 per hour); along with an enhancement of their already existing benefits such as parental leave and professional development. Ski patrollers came back to work on January 9th, marking the end of the strike.
As our country’s financial situation gets more and more expensive amid the rising cost of groceries, costs for housing, rising mortgage rates, and other increasing factors, it will be interesting to see if this strike is a one-off or if more seasonal workers push their employers for wage increases. This will become even more important as many states have exemptions for seasonal workers and their right to earn the federal minimum wage in the United States.
Engagement Resources
- National Ski Patrol Association – https://www.nsp.org/Web/NSPWebsite/Home.aspx
_______________________________________________________________
Wanna stay in-the-know? Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.