JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Where Democrats can aim for the 2026 midterms: House Edition
After two months into Donald Trump’s second presidency, many voters and Congresspeople are already eyeing the 2026 Congressional elections. The November 3rd elections could mark a pivotal moment in President Donald Trump’s second term.
The Reasons We’ve Had a Department of Education
The U.S. Department of Education (DOE), established in 1979 under President Jimmy Carter, operates to promote student achievement, ensure equal access to education, and enforce federal laws prohibiting discrimination in federally funded programs. Historically, the DOE controls policies related to federal financial aid, collects education data, and administers funding for education research. It notably manages Pell Grants, student loans, Title I programs (support for low-income students), special education through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and oversees compliance with federal civil rights laws in educational institutions.
A Fear-based Immigration Policy (Immigration Policy Brief #142)
Trump’s mass deportation efforts remain ongoing across the U.S., capturing headlines with the arrests of student activists like Mahmoud Khalil and Rumeysa Ozturk, and the deportation of alleged Tren de Aragua members/Venezuelans legally here on asylum, not to Venezuela but El Salvador, including a U.S. resident misidentified as a gang member. Despite the high-profile raids and fiery rhetoric, government data shows that deportations under Trump still lag behind levels seen under the Biden administration.
A Court’s Options To Enforce Compliance With Court Orders
Under Rule 3.3 of the American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct, titled “Candor Toward the Tribunal,” a lawyer has a number of duties when dealing with a court of law. Rule 3.3(a)(1) states “A lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer. Additionally, Rule 3.3(a)(3) provides “A lawyer shall not knowingly offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. While these are model rules, each state has a version of these rules, including the section on “Candor Toward the Tribunal,” that all lawyers must abide by when dealing with a tribunal or court.
Trump Administration Changes to the Civil Service
The United States federal civil service stands as the backbone of our nation’s governance, ensuring the implementation of public policies and the delivery of essential services. In recent years, however, this institution has faced unprecedented challenges, with political maneuvers threatening its foundational principles. Understanding the intricacies of civil service employment—including hiring and firing procedures, reporting hierarchies, rights, responsibilities, benefits, and the distinction between civil servants and political appointees—is crucial, especially as these issues have come to the forefront in today’s political climate.
Ukrainians Views on the Trump-Zelensky Meeting in the Oval Office
Many Ukrainians closely followed President Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to Washington, where Ukraine and the United States planned to sign an agreement on rare earth metals. According to the American side, this deal was intended to pave the way for a ceasefire in Ukraine. However, a verbal spat between President Donald Trump, Vice President James Vance, and President Zelensky turned everything upside down.
Where Democrats Can Aim for in the 2026 Midterms: Senate Edition
After two months into Donald Trump’s second presidency, many voters and Congresspeople are already eyeing the 2026 Congressional elections. The November 3rd elections could mark a pivotal moment in President Donald Trump’s second term.
Tangled Part 1: How Trump uses Machiavelli to Win An Election
Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince provides a playbook for rulers to seize, hold, and consolidate power. Donald Trump’s second ascent to the Oval Office demonstrates that Machiavelli’s lessons are just as valid in 2025 as they were in 1515. The Prince is frequently summarized with the adage of “the ends justify the means”.
Introducing Gulf of America – from the person who gave us Trump Tower (Environmental Policy Brief #178)
For the last 475 years, the expanse of ocean from western Florida to southern Texas has been called the “Gulf of Mexico.” English geographer Richard Hakluyt referred to the “Gulfe of Mexico” in his work of 1589. With the stroke of a pen on February 9, 2025, the President of the United States signed Executive Order 14172 and renamed the body of water “Gulf of America.” In addition to “restoring American pride,” President Trump justified the name change by referencing territorial rights over much of the area and that those waters have “long been an integral asset to our once burgeoning Nation and has remained an indelible part of America.” Trump considers the Gulf a business asset.
Elon Musk: Innovation, Influence, and Ideological Evolution
Elon Musk: Innovation, Influence, and Ideological Evolution
Elections & Politics Policy #173 (Part One of a Two-Part Series) | By: Inijah Quadri | February 28, 2025
Featured Photo by REUTERS/Tingshu Wang
__________________________________
Elon Musk, born on June 28, 1971, in Pretoria, South Africa, has become a central figure in technology, business, and politics. As the founder and CEO of companies such as Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI, Musk has significantly influenced sectors ranging from electric vehicles to space exploration and artificial intelligence. He grew up under the sometimes tumultuous influence of his father, Errol Musk, and has spoken about being bullied in his early years—experiences that may have shaped his resilience and occasionally combative public persona. Musk did not originally found Tesla but joined early, invested heavily, and eventually steered it to prominence, benefitting from large government contracts and subsidies along the way. In 2025, he assumed leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under President Donald Trump’s administration, aiming to streamline federal operations; however, some reports point to DOGE’s “unauthorized” or secret initiatives that blur lines between private enterprise and public governance.
Musk’s personal life, including multiple marriages and an estranged relationship with his trans daughter, has also garnered significant public scrutiny. These diverse facets raise critical questions about the interplay between private innovation, public policy, and ideological stance—particularly when an influential immigrant entrepreneur publicly takes anti-immigrant positions, associates with far-right political parties in Europe, and is occasionally accused of making gestures reminiscent of the Nazi salute. Taken together, Musk’s multifaceted roles and controversies underscore the need to examine how individual ambition, political alliances, and social values converge in shaping both industry and governance.
Analysis
Musk’s ventures are driven by an overarching mission to expand human consciousness and ensure the long-term survival of humanity. He has articulated a “driving philosophy” centered on “expanding the scope and scale of consciousness that we may better understand the nature of the universe.” This vision is evident in his ambitious projects, such as SpaceX’s Mars colonization program, which aims to make humanity a multiplanetary species to mitigate existential risks on Earth. Propelled by a relentless work ethic, Musk has overseen innovations in reusable rocket technology and the broad adoption of electric vehicles under Tesla. Yet, embedded in this bold approach is an intricate layer of government dependence: from subsidies granted to Tesla’s EV projects to lucrative federal contracts that feed SpaceX’s expansion, Musk’s success has, in part, been intertwined with public funds.
However, Musk’s methods and ideological shifts have sparked considerable controversy. His hands-on role at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been criticized for potentially undermining traditional civil service structures. Numerous reports have highlighted DOGE’s significant autonomy—raising concerns about accountability, transparency, and the erosion of established governmental processes. Critics argue that while the drive for efficiency can be laudable, it should not eclipse democratic principles or bypass regulatory safeguards. These criticisms tie back to how Musk actually built Tesla into a major player—with both visionary zeal and a reliance on federal contracts that conflict, some say, with his more libertarian-leaning rhetoric.
Musk’s personal experiences have also profoundly influenced his public stance on social and political issues. The gender transition of his child, Vivian Wilson, reportedly contributed to his strong opposition to what he terms the “woke mind virus,” reflecting a shift toward conservative viewpoints. Likewise, Musk’s multiple marriages and publicized family disputes, including issues involving his trans daughter and her mother, underscore the complexity of a public figure who intertwines his personal life with his professional and political actions. Observers point out the paradox between Musk’s global ambitions and his occasional anti-immigrant statements despite being an immigrant himself. Meanwhile, his association with Donald Trump and high-profile political donations have raised questions about whether he uses his considerable wealth to curry favor with politicians.
Beyond Tesla and SpaceX, Musk’s involvement in xAI and his attempts to reacquire a controlling stake in OpenAI highlight his ambition to direct the trajectory of artificial intelligence. While he is hailed as a visionary driving innovation forward, concerns linger over the concentration of power and whether such dominance stifles competition. Even in the realm of space exploration, questions have been raised about the extent to which private interests should direct humanity’s efforts to colonize other planets—particularly when billions of dollars in government contracts contribute to these enterprises.
Understanding Elon Musk requires a nuanced examination of his ambitions, achievements, and controversies. Recent headlines note his purported backing of far-right political parties in Europe, alongside accusations in some media outlets of Musk gestures akin to the Nazi salute—claims Musk denies but which continue to surface in public discourse. Simultaneously, his recurrent calls for exploring space and perfecting artificial intelligence position him as a key figure in humanity’s technological evolution. As Musk’s reach spans from electric cars to Mars-bound rockets to AI governance, it becomes ever more important to probe how personal history, familial influence, political alliances, and substantial government support factor into his contentious role in shaping the future.
Engagement Resources
-
“Elon Musk” by Walter Isaacson (https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Elon-Musk/Walter-Isaacson/9781982181284): A comprehensive biography that offers an in-depth look into Musk’s life, motivations, and the controversies surrounding his ventures.
-
“Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future” by Ashlee Vance (https://www.harpercollins.com/products/elon-musk-ashlee-vance?variant=40990196043874): This book provides insights into Musk’s entrepreneurial journey and his impact on technology and industry.
-
“Elon Musk’s 40 Greatest Motivational Speeches” (https://open.spotify.com/episode/2rv9HLfGO26fW5vhHazT5I): A compilation of speeches that showcase Musk’s perspectives on innovation, work ethic, and his vision for the future.
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.
An Update on Trump’s Mass Deportation Efforts (Immigration Policy Brief #141)
An Update on Trump’s Mass Deportation Efforts
Immigration #141 | By: Morgan Davidson | March 6, 2025
Featured Photo: AP Photo/Matt Rourke
__________________________________
As we enter the second month of Donald Trump’s return to office, his stance on immigration remains as hardline as ever—if not more extreme. He has ramped up his rhetoric against so-called “criminals,” but communities across the country are feeling the tangible effects of his deportation policies. Friends, neighbors, workers, and community members are being forcibly removed, leaving behind fractured families and economic instability.
Beyond just rhetoric, Trump has resorted to extraordinary measures, including the deportation of detainees to former terrorist prison camps such as Guantánamo Bay. He claims that only the “worst of the worst” are being sent there—cartel members, rapists, and felons—but the reality is starkly different. The administration is struggling to find enough violent criminals to justify its heavy-handed approach because, contrary to Trump’s claims, millions of criminals are not flooding the border daily.
ICE operations have surged across the country, leading to the detention of more than just violent offenders. Due to pressure to meet quotas set by Trump, ICE agents have been rounding up non-violent individuals, including long-time residents with families and jobs in the U.S. Horror stories have begun to emerge, such as the tragic case of Jocelynn Rojo Carranza, an 11-year-old girl from Texas who took her own life after being bullied over her parents’ legal status and deportation. These stories underscore the human cost of Trump’s policies and highlight the broader impact of his administration’s targeting and persecution of immigrants.
Analysis
Since Trump took office, arrests of undocumented immigrants have surged dramatically. In late January alone, ICE arrested an average of 872 people per day—more than three times the 255 daily arrests under Joe Biden. However, deportations have not kept pace. The daily deportation rate stands at 600, which is lower than the 750 per day recorded last year under Biden.
According to Reuters, Trump deported 37,660 individuals in his first month—far below the monthly average of 57,000 seen during Biden’s final year. February’s arrest numbers also dropped sharply from 141,000 in February 2024, declining further from 29,000 in January. Meanwhile, over 3,000 detainees have been released back into the country, complicating the administration’s aggressive immigration strategy.
Under Biden, deportation efforts focused primarily on border crossers, with fewer interior arrests. Trump’s administration has shifted the focus, closing off much of the border and ramping up interior enforcement, leading to a sharp increase in ICE raids and detentions within U.S. communities. While more undocumented immigrants are being detained, deportations remain slow due to logistical bottlenecks and legal challenges.
With increased arrests, the detention system is nearing crisis levels. The number of detained immigrants has grown by more than 4,000 in just one month, pushing the total to nearly 44,000. Unlike under Biden—when many detainees were released under parole or bond—Trump’s ICE has significantly curtailed these releases. As a result, detention centers are overcrowded, and backlogs in processing cases continue to mount.
Although Trump initially pledged to prioritize violent criminals for deportation, the data tells a different story. The percentage of detainees with no criminal record has jumped from 6% to 16% since mid-January, suggesting that non-violent individuals are being disproportionately targeted. This raises serious concerns about the fairness and efficiency of the administration’s immigration enforcement policies.
Despite Trump’s vow to deport millions of undocumented immigrants, the numbers suggest this goal is unrealistic unless enforcement efforts escalate drastically. Republicans in Congress are calling for increased funding, and Trump is expanding military involvement in immigration enforcement, which could intensify removals in the coming months.
The individuals most affected by Trump’s policies include undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, and those previously protected under programs like Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The administration has targeted Haitians, Mexicans, and Panamanians, stripping away protections and rounding up individuals indiscriminately. Contrary to Trump’s initial claims, long-term residents are being arrested alongside recent arrivals, often without regard for their criminal history.
While arrests are soaring, deportations remain sluggish. Those who are deported can find themselves sent to countries like Panama, regardless of whether they are originally from there. Challenges with repatriation agreements and legal barriers have also led to cases where deportees are placed in dangerous conditions upon arrival.
Reports have surfaced of migrants being detained at Guantánamo Bay, sparking alarm over offshore processing and human rights concerns. The use of third-country detention centers—such as Panama—has led to international legal debates about the treatment of detainees and the ethics of outsourcing deportations.
While border crossings have declined, it remains unclear whether this is due to Trump’s immigration crackdown, Mexico’s National Guard deployments, or broader geopolitical shifts. Meanwhile, legal battles and grassroots resistance are growing, with communities mobilizing to protest the detainment and deportation of their neighbors, friends, and family members.
Politically, Trump’s approval ratings have taken a hit as his extreme immigration policies face mounting backlash. The economic and social repercussions of mass deportations are still unfolding, but they risk creating more instability than deterrence. The key question remains: is Trump’s crackdown a sustainable solution, or will it ultimately lead to greater challenges for the United States?
Engagement Resources
- National Public Radio (NPR) – analysis of whether a President can ignore court orders and rulings.
- Brennan Center for Justice – non – profit group’s analysis of the ignoring court orders debate.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! 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.
American Dream
American Dream
Guest Op Ed By: Stephen Azarro | March 4, 2025
Featured Photo: istockphoto/rarrarorro
__________________________________
Our United States of America stands as a beacon of unity, prosperity and shared purpose in the pursuit of a better life. Here, diversity is accepted and celebrated as our greatest strength. Americans, regardless of background, work together to build a future where all can thrive, knowing that individual success is tied into the well-being of the entire community.
Education is the bedrock of our nation. From bustling city streets to quiet farmlands, every child and adult flourishes through access to world-class education. Every person has the right to make choices, pursue dreams, and shape their own destiny. We cultivate a culture of mentorship, innovation, and lifelong learning, ensuring that citizens of all ages can contribute meaningfully to society. Our communities, from the smallest towns to the largest cities are vibrant hubs of opportunity and ingenuity.
Our economy thrives for the many. Small businesses are nurtured, entrepreneurship is encouraged, and corporations operate with cutting-edge technology and a commitment to responsibility—toward workers, sustainable cities, clean energy, and environmental restoration. No one is left behind. Fair living wages, universal healthcare, and a strong social safety net make the American Dream attainable for all, ensuring a life of dignity, security, and purpose.
Technology serves as a tool for empowerment. Artificial intelligence and advanced infrastructure are revitalizing work making it more meaningful and rewarding. Our communities are strong, and our environment is in a state of sustainable renewal. Ingenuity, perseverance, and generosity guide us toward a future where comfort and security are realities for all.
In politics and human relationships, common ground prevails. Our shared values—love of country, respect for one another, and a collective drive for progress—shape our actions and conversations. Our leaders rise by inspiring hope and fostering respect. Dialogue and compromise are the cornerstone of our republic, strengthening the bonds that unite us.
Faith and culture coexist harmoniously. Whether in churches, synagogues, mosques, temples or community centers people come together to celebrate what unites them. There is no “us” and “them”—only “we.” Our diverse tapestry of cultures and beliefs weaves an inclusive society where every voice is heard, valued, and cherished.
In our America, every person has an equal opportunity to thrive in an inclusive society. Families are treasured, the elderly are honored, the young are empowered and those in need are supported. Compassion and strength walk hand in hand. Patriotism is defined by progress, empathy, and a deep commitment to the well-being of all.
This is our United States of America—a republic that upholds its highest ideals: OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE. We have learned from our past, thrive in the present, and move forward together as one nation, united in the radiant celebration of our shared dream. Through hard work, perseverance, determination, and dedication we continue to embody the promise of our national motto: “Out of Many, One.”
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.
Over a month of Trump: An explanation of new US Foreign Policy
Over a month of Trump: An explanation of new US Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy #192 | By: Abran C | March 5, 2025
Featured Photo: President Donald Trump meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House in Washington, D.C., Feb. 28, 2025. Brian Snyder/Reuters
__________________________________
It has been over a month now of the reelected Trump administration, in only a short time Donald Trump has managed to completely rewrite US foreign policy. Old allies are now possible enemies, old enemies are allies. There’s the possibility of the United States annexing and taking land by force, trade wars are on the rise and US soft power and global aid are now a thing of the past.
Shutting down USAID
Countries around the world are already feeling the impact of the Trump administration’s decision to eliminate more than 90% of foreign aid contracts and cut $60 billion in funding that provided humanitarian and development assistance to over 100 countries. President Trump has accused the agency of widespread waste and members of his administration have criticized the funding of programs that do not align with current US foreign policy goals.
Many of the programs are in fragile countries that are highly reliant on international aid to support health systems, nutrition programs and keep their populations from falling into famine. For example, In Ethiopia, food assistance has stopped for more than 1 million people, according to the Tigray Disaster Risk Management Commission. The Ministry of Health was also forced to terminate the contracts of 5,000 workers across the country focused on HIV and malaria prevention and vaccinations. In Bangladesh, 600,000 women and children will lose access to critical maternal health care, protection from violence, reproductive health services and other lifesaving care, according to the United Nations Population Fund.
The agency was set up by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 at the height of the Cold War. Its supporters say it helps save lives, strengthen civil society, assist the needy and promote and preserve democracy. It presented a gentler version of the US, as a global superpower that was willing to aid and help some of the world’s most vulnerable.
Warming ties with Russia and antagonizing Ukraine
Donald Trump made it clear from the outset of his reelection campaign that he would not assist Ukraine in the way the Biden administration had and would seek a peace deal with Russia. Just that has come to pass, with few surprised and many scrambling because of the manner in which Trump has been pursuing his stated goal of ending the Ukraine war. The now infamous clash between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and Donald Trump plunged ties between Kyiv and Washington to a new low. Ukraine had received strong support from the previous administration including funding, weapons and a promise of a pathway to NATO membership. All of which are now no longer in the cards for Ukraine with the Trump administration.
The Trump administration has pushed for a minerals deal with Ukraine, citing the billions given to the country to fight against Russian forces over the course of the war as the reason. The proposed deal would give the US wide access to rare earth minerals in Ukraine as repayment. The US, since the change of administrations, has twice sided with Russia in votes at the United Nations to mark the third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. First joining Russia in voting against a Europe-backed Ukrainian support resolution. Then abstaining from voting on the US’ own resolution after Europeans amended it to be more critical of Moscow. Trump has called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a “dictator,” falsely accused Kyiv of starting the war and warned that Zelensky “better move fast” to negotiate an end to the conflict or risk not having a nation anymore.
Trump’s plan to take over Gaza
Since returning to office, the new US president has made several alarming threats regarding the annexation of foreign territories. In his inaugural address, he even declared that the United States would expand its borders during his second term. One of his more hostile proposals involves ethnically cleansing (moving) 2.1 million Palestinians out or Gaza and transforming the strip into a “Riviera” to be owned by the United States. This plan has met with support from Far-Right Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who constantly threatens to resume the war in Gaza at any moment.
In response to Trump’s plan to “own” Gaza, Arab leaders gathered last month in Riyadh to devise a collective plan. Neighboring countries are deeply concerned about the potential ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, who would not be allowed to return and are expected to be absorbed into the populations of surrounding nations. The leaders are set to meet again in Cairo this March to finalize their strategy, which they will likely present to Trump. Additionally Israel has been expanding its hold over territory in Syria after the fall of the Assad regime and has ramped up activity in the West Bank in preparation for annexation. Trump refused to guarantee that Israel would not annex the occupied West Bank.
Trump and Latin America
In his first term Trump created a less than favorable relationship with many of the US’ Latin American neighbors, and this time around appears to be no different. Trump devoted a significant part of his inaugural address to demanding that Panama return control of the Panama Canal to the US, threatening to take it by force if it wasn’t handed over. Less than a week into his presidency, he threatened tariffs and visa restrictions on Colombia, a longtime close US ally, after the country’s president, Gustavo Petro, blocked military aircraft from returning migrants deported from the United States. Later Trump’s “envoy for special missions” Richard Grenell traveled to Venezuela. There he met with the country’s autocratic president, Nicolás Maduro, who is not even recognized as the country’s legitimate leader by the US government, and reached an agreement for the country to accept Venezuelan deportees. Donald Trump has also continued antagonizing Mexico with actions such as renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, threatening and imposing tariffs and beginning military activity such as flying reaper drones within Mexican territory.
Trump visas
Trump unveiled a new pathway to citizenship, a “gold card” aimed at wealthy foreigners who are willing to pay millions for the right to live in the US. The new program comes as the Trump administration moves to change the country’s rules for who can legally live, work and gain citizenship in the US. The administration’s plans include tightening restrictions on many types of immigration in the US and pushing to end birthright citizenship, the constitutionally protected right to citizenship for anyone born on US soil. When asked by reporters if Russian oligarchs could qualify for the visa, Trump responded, “Possibly… Hey, I know some Russian oligarchs that are very nice people. It’s possible. They’re not as wealthy as they used to be. I think they could afford $5 million”.
Tariffs
New 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada have taken effect after being implemented by the Trump administration. The move could upend nearly $2.2 trillion in annual trade between the countries.Trump declared that the tariffs were necessary because the US’ top trading partners had failed to do enough to stem the flow of fentanyl and its precursor chemicals into the US. Both Mexico and Canada have announced retaliatory tariffs on the United States. Trudeau warned that a trade war would be costly for both countries. Trump has announced he would move ahead on April 2nd with plans for reciprocal tariffs on any countries around the world that he sees as treating the US unfairly.
Conclusion
These actions reflect Trump’s overarching foreign policy goal of prioritizing American interests, often at the expense of traditional alliances and multilateral cooperation. Trump has been very active on the global stage but is making enemies out of old allies and causing rifts that may change those allyships and friendly relations forever. The US’ image, influence and credibility on the world stage has been greatly altered again for a second time and it is unlikely that it will ever recover. Trump has sped up the clock on a non-US dominated world as more countries become wary of working with the United States under Donald Trump.
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.
Civil Rights; Will The Supreme Court Have The Last Word On Trump Executive Orders and Policies?
Civil Rights; Will The Supreme Court Have The Last Word On Trump Executive Orders and Policies?
Elections & Politics Policy #237 | By: Rodney Maggay | February 28, 2025
Featured Photo by New York Times
__________________________________
On February 10, 2025 U.S. District Judge John McConnell, Jr. ruled that the Trump Administration has continued to freeze federal funds in violation of a temporary restraining order. The temporary restraining order was issued at the end of January 2025 to restrain the Trump Administration from implementing its pause on federal payments.
The federal funds should have been disbursed for use in grants and other federal programs. However, the Trump Administration had begun a review of government programs and possible wastefulness of government funds in connection with the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), headed by Trump ally Elon Musk. Because of the efforts of DOGE, the distribution of many federal funds was paused. This resulted in a lawsuit against the Trump Administration from a coalition of twenty-two state attorneys general and the District of Columbia seeking to challenge Trump’s federal funding pause. Judge McConnell’s order ordered the administration to “immediately restore frozen federal funding” and “immediately end any federal funding pause.”
This order came one day after Vice – President J.D. Vance sent out a controversial tweet on what a judge may or may not be permitted to do with regard to the executive branch. In his tweet, the Vice – President stated, “Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”
Soon afterward, a number of organizations and news outlets have openly questioned whether the Trump Administration would ignore court rulings that were decided against them and what options would be available to judges to enforce their orders and rulings.
Analysis
To be fair, the Trump Administration has not openly stated that they would not follow a judge’s order or court ruling. The day after Judge McConnell’s court ruling President Trump responded to a question asking him if he would comply with a judge’s order and the President responded, “I always abide by the courts. Always abide by them, and we’ll appeal.” While that statement is dubious given Mr. Trump’s personal history, it should have at least tempered the concerns about what the President might do should he receive another unfavorable court ruling. Especially considering the statement the Vice – President put out on his X/Twitter account.
But there is another angle that some organizations and news outlets have missed that needs to be examined. While there is the possibility that President Trump could try to ignore unfavorable court rulings it is quite possible that the administration is trying to play a long game that ends in the United States Supreme Court.
With a 6 – 3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court it is quite possible that President Trump is simply signing executive orders and taking unusual actions in order to set up a legal fight. He may very well be aware that some of his policies are unpopular and likely illegal. But if he can get people and groups angry enough to file a lawsuit against his administration and take him to court, President Trump can then let the court case play out with appeals to various appeals courts. The endgame would be a case that lands before the Supreme Court with its current conservative leaning composition.
Trump and his allies know that not all of them will end up at the Supreme Court but if only a handful do then that’s a win for Trump even if not all are approved. They don’t care that some of his orders are illegal and/or unconstitutional as long as the Trump Administration can get the discussion moving through the courts. It can probably be analogized to being a baseball hitter. You might only hit .333 as a batter but that’s considered successful in baseball. If Trump gets only 1/3 of his executive orders upheld by the courts, then he can claim success even if his other 2/3 fail in the courts or are overruled. It may very well be likely that the President is banking on the Supreme Court to hear the cases and then simply issue a ruling upholding his controversial executive orders and policies. Or even overrule long – standing Court precedent as what might occur with the birthright citizenship executive order the President signed. (The birthright executive order was temporarily blocked because it conflicts with a 120 year old Supreme Court case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark. The administration is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court to ask the Court to overrule Wong Kim Ark.) This may take a couple of years but it is a development that should be monitored for the current challenges to Mr. Trump’s executive orders and policies and for the executive orders and policies that this administration will put forth in the coming months and years. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- National Public Radio (NPR) – analysis of whether a President can ignore court orders and rulings.
- Brennan Center for Justice – non – profit group’s analysis of the ignoring court orders debate.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! 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 Eyes of Texas Are Upon You: A Tribe’s Response to the Measles Outbreak
The Eyes of Texas Are Upon You: A Tribe’s Response to the Measles Outbreak
Health & Gender Policy #179 | By: Morgan Davidson | February 28, 2025
__________________________________
Seminole, Texas is where I graduated high school, where I met my best friends, where I played football, and where I drank my first beer. Seminole is where I learned to pick myself up by the bootstraps, that no one is better than me, and that hard work coupled with perseverance will get you far. Seminole is where I learned the value of a handshake, that a person is only as good as their word, how to overcome adversity, and that it takes a Tribe to solve our biggest problems.
Seminole is where ag and oil is the economy, football is religion, republican is the language, and Tucker Carlson is the entertainment. Seminole is home to gun-loving, god-fearing, and red-blooded Americans. Seminole is where I tell people I am from and where I call home.
Seminole is home to one of the highest vaccine exemption rates in the state among school-aged children. Seminole is also now ground 0 zero for the largest measles outbreak in the state of Texas in the last 30 years, with no signs of stopping.
Analysis
Our town has always been a tribe—not just in name but in the way we show up for each other. Being a tribe means embracing community, supporting one another, and fostering resilience. But it also means making choices that protect the most vulnerable among us.
The first reported child death from measles dropped on February 26th, with a school-aged, unvaccinated child passing in Lubbock, TX (the area’s largest medical hub). This preventable death comes on the heels of the Senate confirmation for RFK, a notable vaccine skeptic. Speculation on further cases and deaths is outside my purview. I direct readers, specifically those in my hometown, to qualified medical experts in the region to calculate & minimize risk.
I’ve participated in discussions about vaccines on social media with various members of my community. When I respond to posts expressing vaccine skepticism, my goal isn’t to argue for the sake of arguing but to provide a broader perspective and highlight missing facts. I urge readers to be cautious of meme-style posts that spread misinformation about vaccines or unverified quotes from so-called “doctors.” Instead, I encourage people to seek reliable information from sources like the CDC, WHO, or, better yet, trusted local doctors and medical experts.
That said, the science of vaccines is well-established. Numerous studies confirm that the MMR vaccine’s efficacy reaches 97% after two doses. Vaccines do not cause autism; what has changed is our ability to diagnose and understand the spectrum more accurately. When weighing the risks, the dangers of measles far outweigh any rare side effects of the vaccine. These arguments have been made time and again, and they will continue to be.
However, this article isn’t about rehashing that debate. Instead, it’s about something the media and even medical teams on the ground may be overlooking—a local issue that requires a local perspective: the unfair treatment and discrimination faced by the Mennonite population in the wake of this outbreak.
Mennonites are an ethnic minority within the county. Contrary to stereotypes, they are not Amish, though some are more adherent to traditional values and dress associated with the church than others. The Mennonites fled persecution from Germany to Russia, then Canada, Mexico, and Central/South America before settling in America. Their history is one largely of discrimination, pressures to conform, and persecution for their religious beliefs.
Many Mennonites remain unvaccinated, not because they believe in conspiracy theories but due to a longstanding tradition of minimal reliance on modern medicine, instead placing their trust in community and religious support. While their position may not align with public health recommendations, it is rooted in tradition rather than misinformation.
That said, I strongly encourage everyone to get vaccinated to prevent avoidable illnesses like measles. Public health is a shared responsibility, and vaccination remains one of the most effective ways to protect ourselves and others.
At the same time, I condemn in the strongest terms the resentment and hostility I am hearing toward our Mennonite neighbors in Seminole. If this were simply a Mennonite-only problem, then we would not have seen the explosive growth of measles in the country and across the state.
The dynamic unfolding is similar to that of COVID, where the virus was referred to as the “China” or “Wuhan” virus by President Trump. As a result, we saw an increase in hate crimes against Asian Americans. The world already has too much hate in it for the virus to tear apart my community. On the global stage, we see discrimination, racism, and mis/disinformation run rampant as my home now sees unfolding on the local scale.
To my friends & neighbors, I ask that you take the time to come together as one tribe, to fight against the disease rather than one another, and to love and support those who are undoubtedly struggling as their children fall ill. Be the difference in a world that fosters a negative environment for hate and ignorance. Be the example of how communities, states, and nations should handle serious issues and not be plagued by societal ills on top of a serious sickness.
I urge you to remember that as this outbreak continues to spread, the eyes of Texas—and the entire nation—are upon you. Your words and actions matter now more than ever. Just as our students and athletes represent more than just themselves when they compete, you also represent more than just yourself—you represent the town of Seminole. I ask you to embody the values and beliefs that this community instilled in me rather than the hate and bigotry that have taken center stage in today’s polarized political climate.
Be a Tribe & do not fall into tribalism. Respecting differences is important, but public health is a shared responsibility. Getting vaccinated isn’t just a personal choice—it’s a commitment to keeping our community safe. The frustration some feel over this outbreak is understandable, but resentment toward our Mennonite neighbors is not the answer. We can advocate for public health while still engaging with understanding and respect. Let’s live up to what it truly means to be a tribe—one that protects, uplifts, and stands together.
Engagement Resources
- The CDC provides extensive fact-checked information on measles- https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/index.html
- The CDC provides extensive fact-checked information on the MMR vaccine- https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html
- The NIH has a study debunking vaccine skeptic claims- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8222972/
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.
AI Wars Are Escalating: The US vs. China, Elon Musk vs. Sam Altman, and JD Vance vs. the World.
AI Wars Are Escalating: The US vs. China, Elon Musk vs. Sam Altman, and JD Vance vs. the World.
Technology Policy #126 | By: Mindy Spatt | March 9, 2025
Featured Photo: HBR Staff/Unsplash
__________________________________
JD Vance’s appalling speech at the Paris Artificial Intelligence Summit announcing that the US will not agree to minimal international safety standards or consumer protections was not surprising given the Trump administration’s deregulatory fervor and fervent billionaire support. But with lucrative government contracts hanging in the balance, two of those billionaires are feuding. Sam Altman, CEO of Open AI, recently said no to Elon Musk’s offer of $97.4 billion to purchase his company. Musk also heard no from 21 technology workers at DOGE, formerly the US Digital Service, who quit their jobs saying they refused to use their skills to “dismantle critical public services.”
Analysis
JD Vance’s debut on the world stage put the US squarely at odds with the majority of the 100 countries that attended the Paris summit. His announcement wasn’t unexpected but was still greeted with alarm. Signatories to the Summit’s Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable AI, included Canada, the European Commission, India and China. The Statement is mostly one of principles, including “ensuring AI is open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure and trustworthy, taking into account international frameworks for all” and “making AI sustainable for people and the planet”.
“We believe that excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry just as it’s taking off,” Vance stated, urging the other representatives likewise to reject the document. The United Kingdom did so, insisting its rejection of the Statement was completely independent of Vance’s.
The US has mostly appeared to be the dominant country in AI, but China is poised to overtake it with the global launch of DeepSeek, an AI chatbot similar to ChatGPT but based on a cheaper and more efficient AI model. Chinese companies are seeking a surge in investor interest while the bump Trump’s election initially created for Internet-related stocks and bitcoin here in the US is cooling.
A Battle of Billionaires
Who better to take on China than Trump’s buddy Elon Musk? Despite his many responsibilities at DOGE, Tesla, SpaceX, and Tesla, Musk recently offered to buy Open AI for $97.4 billion. Musk was among a handful of co-founders of Open AI in 2015 and claims to have invested $45 million in the company. But he and current CEO Altman had a falling out, with much of their animosity being aired publicly on social media and in court. His numerous suits against the company prompted US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rodriguez to call his disputes with Open AI a battle of “billionaires versus billionaires.”
I feel for the guy,” said Altman, who, like most tech billionaires, switched his allegiance from the democratic party to Trump last fall, but hasn’t changed his tune on Musk. “I don’t think he’s, like, a happy person.”
Engagement Resources
- Vice President Vance Lays Out AI Vision Very Different from Biden Administration’s, Deepa Shivaram, Feb. 12, 2025, NPR, https://www.npr.org/2025/02/12/nx-s1-5290257/vice-president-vance-lays-out-ai-vision-very-different-from-biden-administrations
- Paris AI Summit: Why won’t US, UK Sign Global Artificial intelligence Pact?, Feb. 12, 2025, Al Jazeera, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/12/paris-ai-summit-why-wont-us-uk-sign-global-artificial-intelligence-pact
- Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence for People and the Planet, February 11th 2025, AI Action Summit, https://www.politico.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/11/02-11-AI-Action-Summit-Declaration.pdf
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.
Navigating Global Governance in a Multipolar World: U.S. Strategy Amid Changing Power Dynamics
Navigating Global Governance in a Multipolar World: U.S. Strategy Amid Changing Power Dynamics
Foreign Policy #191 | By: Inijah Quadri | February 28, 2025
__________________________________
The global power structure is undergoing a significant transformation, shifting from a unipolar system dominated by the United States to a multipolar landscape where multiple nations, including China, Russia, India, and regional entities like the European Union, exert substantial influence. This evolution challenges the traditional U.S.-centric order and necessitates a reassessment of America’s foreign policy and global governance strategies to effectively navigate the complexities of a multipolar world.
Analysis
Historically, many of the international norms, institutions, and alliances we have today emerged from collective efforts by the Allied powers following World War II, with the United States later taking on the mantle of “leader of the free world” to help implement and uphold these norms. Over time, U.S. leadership contributed to creating and reinforcing structures such as the United Nations, Bretton Woods institutions, and security alliances like NATO.
However, recent developments suggest that the U.S. role is being recalibrated. Under President Donald Trump’s administration, there has been a discernible shift toward prioritizing national interests—often at the expense of traditional alliances and multilateral engagements. This approach is exemplified by a preference for bilateral negotiations over multilateral commitments, tepid support for NATO, and direct talks with adversaries like Russia that can leave longstanding allies feeling sidelined.
Furthermore, the administration’s shift toward protectionist economic policies has led to strained trade relations and cutbacks in anti-corruption efforts and foreign aid, creating vacuums that other nations (particularly China) are eager to fill.
Critics of “America First” argue that the global economy now functions through highly integrated “ecosystems.” In complex industries like high-tech manufacturing, automotive production, and pharmaceuticals, no single country can efficiently handle every stage of product design, sourcing, and assembly on its own. When tariffs or isolationist policies disrupt these cross-border supply chains, they can drive up costs, reduce U.S. competitiveness, and prompt other countries to seek new trade partners—diminishing American influence.
Moreover, economic “bullying” undercuts the trust that underpins global commerce. Thomas L. Friedman’s recent opinion piece highlights how strategic collaboration, rather than unilateral tariff imposition, better aligns with the realities of a multipolar world, where the U.S. must harness (rather than alienate) partners to remain at the forefront of innovation. A more open, multipolar approach can also foster diverse alliances, spread risk across multiple regions, and strengthen the U.S. position in addressing transnational challenges like climate change and pandemics. In essence, being part of shared value chains and adhering to rules-based systems can ultimately enhance American power and prosperity, rather than weaken it.
The following proposals have been put forward by various policy experts, but they may be difficult to realize given the administration’s continued “America First” stance. Nonetheless, they outline potential strategies for the U.S. to remain influential in a multipolar context:
1. Re-engage with International Institutions and Alliances
While skepticism toward multilateralism persists, some experts argue that strengthening commitments to groups like NATO and the UN helps the U.S. maintain leadership in global norms. However, given recent moves—such as proposed deals involving Ukrainian minerals, the Panama Canal, Greenland, and Canada—there is little indication the administration will reverse course.
2. Promote Economic Diplomacy with Caution
Advocates of a more traditional approach suggest seeking fair and reciprocal trade agreements and remaining open to rejoining frameworks like the CPTPP. Yet, the current administration’s emphasis on protectionism and transactional deals makes such initiatives uncertain.
3. Recommit to Anti-Corruption and Transparency
Restoring global confidence in U.S. leadership could involve reviving anti-corruption efforts and promoting the rule of law internationally. Still, funding cuts and reduced foreign aid raise doubts about the likelihood of a broad return to such programs.
While numerous policy thinkers advocate a more collaborative, globally engaged U.S. foreign policy, the reality of the Trump administration’s track record and proposed initiatives—ranging from large-scale acquisitions to transactional deals—raises questions about the near-term feasibility of these recommendations.
Irrespective, it must be mentioned that maintaining an adaptive policy toolkit—one that acknowledges both shifting realities and enduring values—remains essential if the U.S. is to continue shaping global governance in the long run. Balancing national interests with a degree of global responsibility could allow the U.S. to shape, rather than be shaped by, the evolving power dynamics.
Engagement Resources
- Council on Foreign Relations (https://www.cfr.org): A leading think tank specializing in U.S. foreign policy and international affairs, offering in-depth analyses and policy recommendations.
- Center for Strategic and International Studies (https://www.csis.org): Provides strategic insights and policy solutions to decision-makers concerning global challenges.
- Brookings Institution (https://www.brookings.edu): Conducts research and education in the social sciences, primarily in economics, governance, and foreign policy.
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (https://carnegieendowment.org): A global network of policy research centers focused on advancing peace through analysis and development of fresh policy ideas.
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft (https://quincyinst.org): Advocates for a foreign policy centered on diplomatic engagement and military restraint.
- Stimson Center (https://www.stimson.org): A nonpartisan policy research center working to solve the world’s greatest threats to security and prosperity.
- RAND Corporation (https://www.rand.org): Provides research and analysis to the United States armed forces, offering insights into foreign policy and global security.
- Foreign Policy Magazine (https://foreignpolicy.com): Offers comprehensive coverage of global affairs, current events, and domestic and international policy.
- The American Interest (https://www.the-american-interest.com): A magazine focusing on America’s conduct in world affairs, including the forces shaping global developments.
- Foreign Affairs Magazine (https://www.foreignaffairs.com): Published by the Council on Foreign Relations, it provides articles and essays on international relations and U.S. foreign policy.
These resources offer diverse perspectives and analyses that can enrich understanding and inform discussions on the United States’ role in a multipolar world.
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.
UCI World Championships in Rwanda
UCI World Championships in Rwanda
Foreign Policy #190 | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | February 12, 2025
Featured Photo By: UCI
__________________________________
Africa has become a hot-bed for the sport of cycling. In recent years, there has been an increase in African representation in the pro peloton; and also an increase in Black Africans finding success at the highest levels of the sport. There is so much interest in cycling across Africa that the UCI is planning to host their World Championship road race in Kigali, Rwanda, for both men and women. However, the ongoing violence in the region between Rwandan-backed March 23 Movement (M23) rebels and the Congolese military has thrown doubt over whether the UCI World Championships should be held in Rwanda.
Analysis
The International Cycling Union (UCI) is the governing-body of cycling throughout the world. This year’s World Championships, held every four years, will take place in and around Kigali, Rwanda. The previous edition of the World Championships was held in the cycling-rich region of Flanders in Belgium. According to Velo, the planned route in Kigali is set to be the hardest course ever for a UCI World Championships. The men’s course is set to be a 268 kilometer slog through the Rwandan mountains (with more climbing than previous World Championships set in the European Alps) and the women’s race will be a similar slog through the mountains but a bit shorter at only 165 kilometers.
Cycling has always had dominant and powerful African riders who mostly came out of South Africa, and were white, such as Chris Froome (Kenyan-born 4-Time Tour de France champion); Robbie Hunter; Darryl Impey; Louis Meintjes; and more. However, over the past ten years, we have seen more African riders, who are black, participate in the highest levels of the sport. The first black African riders to race in the Tour de France was Daniel Teklehaimanot and Merhawi Kudus in 2015. More recently, in 2024, Biniam Girmay, of Eritrea, won the coveted “green jersey” at the Tour de France – the green jersey signifies the best sprinter over the course of the entire Tour de France (he won three stages in the Tour).
Rwanda also has been involved in a series of violent clashes over the decades since the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. Currently, the M23 rebels have captured the city of Goma inside of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC); the M23 are backed by the Rwandan military, according to Jeanne-Pierre Lacroix from the United Nations. Lacroix has said there is “no question that there are Rwandan troops in Goma supporting the M23”. The BBC reports that Rwanda has provided supervision, training, and weapons to the M23 rebels. The conflict has caused over 178,000 people to be displaced. The Associated Press has reported that since January 26, 2025, over 3,000 people have died and as many people have been hurt or injured in the violence. During the siege of Goma, hundreds of prisoners escaped Munzenze Prison. Horrifically, the male inmates were able to access the female side of the prison and raped over 100 female inmates and then burned them alive when the prison was set on fire.
The violence has many in the cycling world concerned about the safety of the route and the participants during the World Championships; and during this month’s Tour du Rwanda race (a 7-day stage race, and UCI sanctioned event). Security and safety concerns are being raised about the safety of the Tour du Rwanda as one of the stages will require teams to be housed in hotels just about six miles away from the violence, as the route will take the riders (and their teams) close to the DRC. World Tour team Soudal-Quickstep (one of the most successful teams in the world) is opting out of the Tour du Rwanda amid safety concerns. Meanwhile, individual cyclists may decide to opt out of racing in the World Championships on their own like reigning World Champion Mathieu Van Der Poel, of the Netherlands, winner of the 2023 World Championships; though his reasoning is due to the route not suiting his best skills as a racer, according to France 24.
As of right now, the UCI claims to not be willing to consider cancelling the World Championships; though, it is reported, on FloBikes, that if the World Championships in Rwanda are ultimately canceled that the event would be held in Martigny, Switzerland, instead.
Engagement Resources
- March 23 Movement Profile – https://acleddata.com/2023/03/23/actor-profile-m23-drc/
- Hardest Road Worlds Ever? (Velo) – https://velo.outsideonline.com/road/road-racing/hardest-road-worlds-ever-rwanda-reveals-crushing-climb-loaded-courses-for-2025-uci-world-championships/?scope=anon
- 5 Things to Know About the Fighting in the Democratic Republic of Congo (NPR) – https://www.npr.org/2025/01/31/nx-s1-5281422/congo-goma-fighting-m23-rwanda-drc
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 End of DEI in the Federal Government: Who’s Really Affected? (Social Justice Policy Brief #172)
The End of DEI in the Federal Government: Who’s Really Affected?
Social Justice #172 | By: Valerie Henderson | February 24, 2025
Featured Photo By: Karis Dunnam | The Independent Florida Alligator
__________________________________
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies in the United States trace their roots back to the civil rights movements of the 1960s, particularly through the enactment of Affirmative Action programs. Originally designed to correct historical injustices and systemic discrimination, Affirmative Action focused heavily on race and gender, especially in education and employment. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a key legislative milestone, prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Executive Order 11246, signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965, further cemented these principles by mandating nondiscriminatory practices in hiring and employment among federal contractors.
While Affirmative Action primarily used quotas and preferential treatment to ensure diverse representation, DEI emerged as a broader, more systemic approach. DEI goes beyond race and gender to include considerations like disability, age, veteran status, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic background. Importantly, DEI did not replace Affirmative Action but rather expanded its scope, focusing less on quotas and more on creating equitable systems, fostering inclusive workplaces, and addressing barriers to opportunity.
The modern DEI framework gained significant traction during the Obama administration and was formalized in the federal government under President Biden’s Executive Order 13985 (Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government), which institutionalized equity assessments across all federal agencies.
On January 20, 2025, the Trump administration issued an Executive Order to dismantle Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) programs across the federal government. Framing DEI efforts as discriminatory and wasteful, the administration ordered the immediate termination of DEI-related offices, training programs, and federal contracts. This marks a significant shift in U.S. civil rights policy.
The order directly targets the Biden administration’s DEI framework, rooted in Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” It accuses the initiative of promoting “illegal and immoral discrimination” and calls for the elimination of DEI considerations in federal hiring, funding, and workplace training.
While the public debate often frames DEI as primarily benefiting racial minorities, the scope of its impact is far wider. DEI frameworks aim to foster equal opportunity for all, focusing on gender, disability, veteran status, socioeconomic background, sexual orientation, age, and more. This policy reversal therefore affects a broad swath of American society—some of whom may not even realize they were protected under these initiatives.
Racial and ethnic minorities remain among the most significantly impacted, as DEI initiatives have played a vital role in addressing systemic racial disparities in employment, education, and federal contracting. These programs have created pathways for underrepresented groups to gain access to opportunities that have been historically out of reach. Women, too, face potential setbacks. DEI programs aimed at closing the gender pay gap and increasing women’s representation in leadership positions now face elimination, threatening progress made in workplace equity and gender-based protections.
DEI initiatives include workplace protections and inclusion efforts that support the LGBTQ+ community, ensuring fair treatment in hiring, healthcare access, and employee benefits. With these initiatives rolled back, this community may face renewed barriers in professional settings. Veterans and individuals with disabilities, often overlooked in DEI debates, are among those most directly affected. Federal DEIA policies have ensured accessibility, workplace accommodations, and specific hiring initiatives designed to integrate these groups into the workforce. Rescinding these protections could undermine the stability and security of veterans and disabled individuals who rely on them for equitable access to employment and services. Rural and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities, frequently underrepresented in government programs, will also feel the effects. There are several DEI programs focused on addressing systemic poverty and improving healthcare and educational opportunities in underserved geographic areas.
Discussions about DEI rollbacks overlook the fact that several key groups within Trump’s support base benefit from DEI initiatives. Such groups like low-income voters, a significant part of Trump’s base, gain from DEI programs focused on education, healthcare access, and job training. Military veterans, another core demographic, rely on DEI policies for job placement, healthcare, and workplace accommodations—support systems now at risk. Rural voters, often facing higher disability rates, could lose critical accessibility and healthcare benefits. Additionally, white non-college-educated women, may see setbacks in gender equity protections like pay equity and parental leave.
By eliminating DEI offices and defunding equity-centered grants and contracts, the order reduces representation of marginalized groups in government and federally funded organizations. It also mandates that federal agencies remove DEI considerations from hiring practices, performance reviews, and grant decisions, shifting focus strictly to merit-based assessments. While supporters argue that this promotes fairness, critics contend that it ignores systemic inequalities and undermines efforts to level the playing field.
The policy shift has broader societal implications as well. Civil rights organizations are expected to challenge the Executive Order, potentially leading to prolonged legal battles. Legal experts argue that the elimination of DEI programs could violate existing anti-discrimination laws, setting the stage for significant court cases that could redefine the scope of civil rights protections in the United States. Beyond legal challenges, the rescindment of DEI programs risks reducing workplace diversity—a factor that research has consistently linked to overall organizational success.
For marginalized communities, this rollback signals a retreat from commitments to equity and inclusion, potentially deepening existing social divisions. The decision may also intensify debates around identity politics and civil rights, shaping future legislative and electoral conversations. As states consider adopting their own DEI protections in response to the federal rollback, the U.S. could face a fragmented policy landscape where protections vary widely based on geography.
Ultimately, this Executive Order not only dismantles years of DEI-focused progress but also affects a surprising number of Americans—including many within Trump’s own support base. The long-term implications of this policy shift remain uncertain, but its immediate effects will be felt across communities that have relied on DEI initiatives to promote fairness, accessibility, and opportunity.
Engagement Resources
- The Center for American Progress (CAP)
CAP conducts extensive research on DEI policies, focusing on how they impact civil rights, economic opportunity, and social equity. Their reports analyze the benefits of workplace diversity, the role of DEI in education, and its effects on historically marginalized communities.
Center for American Progress – DEI Resources -
The National Equity Project
This organization specializes in helping institutions implement DEI strategies effectively, with a focus on systemic change in education, government, and corporate sectors. Their resources explore equity leadership, anti-racism practices, and how DEI initiatives can create more inclusive communities.
- Brookings Institution – Race, Prosperity, and Inclusion Initiative
-
Brookings provides comprehensive research on the intersection of DEI with economic mobility, education, and public policy. Their work offers data-driven insights into how inclusive policies contribute to long-term prosperity and reduce inequality.
https://www.brookings.edu/projects/race-prosperity-and-inclusion-initiative/
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.