
JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Tackling the Thirst: Water Scarcity and the Rise of Innovative Conservation Technologies
Brief #169 – Environment Policy Brief
by : Inijah Quadri
Water scarcity, exacerbated by factors such as climate change and population growth, poses a significant threat to over 2 billion people worldwide. Innovative conservation technologies offer hope in mitigating the effects of water scarcity, from precision agriculture to smart water management systems.
Will Artificial Intelligence Save California… or Ruin It?
Brief #111 – Technology Policy Brief
by : Mindy Spatt
Artificial intelligence holds the potential to both revive California’s tech industry and jeopardize the integrity of its elections, as Supervisor Dean Preston cautions. With groundbreaking AI legislation on the line and facing intense opposition from industry players, California stands at a critical juncture in shaping its future.
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
Brief #144 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Ibrahim Castro
This week’s global news highlights significant events, including the Biden administration’s new asylum ban at the US-Mexico border and Human Rights Watch’s alarming report on mass killings of Ethiopian migrants by Saudi border guards. Additionally, unrest in New Caledonia over French electoral reforms and Haiti’s ongoing crisis under interim Prime Minister Garry Conille draw international attention.
The Effect of Unpaid Student Loans on the Economy
Brief #92 – Education Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem
Explore the economic ramifications of unpaid student loans amid the backdrop of the CARES Act and subsequent policy measures enacted by Presidents Trump and Biden. Delve into the complexities of student loan forgiveness proposals, legal challenges, and the efficacy of existing relief programs like the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) initiative.
Navigating Inflation: A Comprehensive Analysis
Brief #61 – Economic Policy Brief
by: Arvind Salem
As inflation rates surge, consumers face mounting pressure on their wallets, with prices soaring in key sectors like housing and groceries. Amidst political debates and policy clashes, understanding the root causes and potential solutions becomes critical for navigating the economic landscape.
History of the Upside Down Flag and the Justice Alito Controversy
Brief #224 – Civil Rights Policy Brief
by: Rod Maggay
The controversy surrounding Justice Samuel Alito stems from reports of an upside-down American flag and a Pine Tree Flag flown at his properties, symbols recently adopted by far-right groups protesting the 2020 election results. This incident raises significant concerns about his impartiality and adherence to the Supreme Court’s Code of Conduct, prompting calls for his recusal from related cases and potential congressional censure.
Autocracy Now! Examining the Global Surge in Authoritarianism
JUNE OP ED
by: U.S. Resist News (Ibrahim Castro)
Free and fair democratic governance is facing unprecedented challenges worldwide, with a disturbing rise in authoritarianism across various continents. This brief delves into the reasons behind this trend, examining economic inequality, globalization, and technological advancements as key drivers.
Ocean Coral’s White Skeletons Send a Stark Message
Brief #168 – Environment Policy Brief
by : Todd J. Broadman
Ocean coral reefs are facing an unprecedented crisis, with mass bleaching events threatening the survival of these vital ecosystems. As ocean temperatures rise, the vibrant reefs are turning into graveyards of white skeletons, sending a stark message about the urgent need for climate action and coral conservation.
Story of Pulitzer winner Vladimir Kara-Murza, an oppositionist imprisoned in Russia: Part 1
Brief #143 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Yelena Korshunov
Vladimir Kara-Murza, a prominent Russian oppositionist and historian, has been awarded the 2024 Pulitzer Prize for his courageous columns written from prison, where he has been held since 2022 on charges of treason. Despite severe health issues and isolation, Kara-Murza continues to advocate for democracy and expose human rights violations in Vladimir Putin’s Russia.


‘BURN BOOK’ Review: Kara Swisher’s Memoir Covering the Tech Industry and the Billionaires It Made
‘BURN BOOK’ Review: Kara Swisher’s Memoir Covering the Tech Industry and the Billionaires It Made
Technology Policy Brief #110 | By: Mindy Spatt | April 16, 2024
Featured Photo: www.thelettertwo.com
__________________________________
Kara Swisher’s ‘Burn Book’, subtitled “A Tech Love Story” recounts her glamorous and successful career covering the tech industry. It is filled with interesting tidbits of conversations and her insights into the personalities of Elon Musk, Steve Jobs and other tech celebrities, but fails to address the political power the industry has amassed, or how to rein it in.
ANALYSIS
When I went searching for Kara Swisher’s new book in San Francisco and found it was sold out at all of the bookshops I normally frequent I imagined it was filled with elegant prose, smoking hot exposes and salacious anecdotes. When I finally got my hands on a copy I found it a bit disappointing. Much of the book describes already published interviews and repeats fairly well known critiques of Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, and the evolution of Steve Jobs.
Swisher starts us off with a meeting that occurred at Trump Tower shortly after the disastrous 2016 election. This meeting, she states, was when things “went off the rails.” On finding out that Elon Musk, Peter Theil, Jeff Bezos, the CEOs of Oracle and Microsoft and many others were going to meet with Donald Trump Swisher phones them all and explains why it would be a bad idea to do so. By this point in her career Swisher is so connected to the industry she covers that she’s not only asking questions of the tech industry titans, she’s offering them her mostly unsolicited advice.
She correctly concludes the reason industry leaders didn’t take her advice on not taking the meeting was because they care far more about making money than they do about Trump’s immigration policies or misogyny. But why is Swisher surprised? They had already become a well-funded lobbying juggernaut fighting vociferously against any form of regulation or consumer protection. Wasn’t it off the rails when they crushed all attempts to regulate them? Or when Zuckerberg and the other young, clueless and privileged tech bros became the billionaires?
Swisher doesn’t return to that moment or that meeting. Only at the end of the book does she touch on the need for the tech industry to be “reined in”, but despite her insider knowledge and expertise she doesn’t say a word about how to do that, or call out their lobbying efforts and influence. Since she notes in the final chapter she’s decamped Silicon Valley for Washington DC, this would seem like a logical direction for her to go in.
To her credit, Swisher acknowledges that she is ambitious and, as she puts it, “a capitalist.” And she’s justifiably proud of her success in an area of journalism that was almost exclusively male when she entered it. She describes the genesis of her popular and profitable Recode conferences and other projects and acknowledges that she became an insider, enjoying the status and perks that came with that status while remaining confrontative and incisive in her work.
One insider anecdote she does describe isn’t salacious but gives a visual image to a problem she raises repeatedly, the immaturity of the young techno billionaires. At a baby shower for Google co-founder Sergey Brin, guests wore diapers (over their clothes) and baby hats, and refreshments included “an ice sculpture of a woman whose breast was oozing White Russians…..” But that was then, 2008 to be exact, and this is now. She doesn’t say whether they’ve changed or matured, especially after becoming parents, or, for that matter, whether she has. In the few somewhat offhand references to her personal life, she mentions 2 teenage sons and two younger children, but there’s nothing about balancing those responsibilities with a high-powered job or her home life. After seeing how phenomenally well this book is selling, perhaps she’ll write something more juicy in the future.
Engagement Resources:
- “Burn Book: A Tech Love Story” by Kara Swisher, Simon and Schuster 2024.
- An Ugly Truth, Inside Facebook’s Battle for Domination By: Sheera Frenkel & Cecilia Kang, Harper Collins 2024.
- Like War, The Weaponization of Social Media By: P. W. Singer & Emerson T. Brooking, Harper Collins, 2018.
Join our community of informed citizens and stay connected with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is absolutely vital in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you resonate with our mission and value our content, we invite you to make a donation today. Together, let’s continue to protect democracy and empower citizenship!

An Unconstitutional and Dangerous State Trend: Chaplains as School Counselors
An Unconstitutional and Dangerous State Trend: Chaplains as School Counselors
Civil Rights Policy Brief #223 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | April 10, 2024
Featured Photo: www.expressnews.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary: In May 2023, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 763, which permitted school districts in the state to use unlicensed religious chaplains in lieu of traditional trained and credentialed school counselors. The bill was finally passed after attempts to amend the bill failed. The defeated amendments were a requirement that the chaplains be credentialed to provide support services (similar to requirements when chaplains work in prisons), a requirement that the chaplains be barred from trying to convert a student from one religion to another and a requirement that the student’s parents provide consent for the student to speak with a chaplain. The Texas bill required all of the school districts in Texas to vote whether their district would allow religious chaplains to provide counseling services in their school districts. In an unexpected outcome, twenty – five of the largest school districts in Texas, accounting for more than one – third of the public school students in Texas, rejected the chaplaincy program for their school district.
However, the bill from Texas inspired similar legislation. In thirteen states – Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma and Utah – similar school chaplaincy bills have been introduced. A common feature of these bills is that these religious chaplains would be permitted to handle counseling services even if they do not possess the same qualifications and credentials of traditional school counselors and other school support staff.
In Florida in March 2024, the state legislature passed their version of the school chaplaincy program bill. Governor Ron DeSantis is expected to sign the bill. In response, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) marshalled an effort to push back on the Florida bill in conjunction with other faith groups and community leaders. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis: The state bills inspired by Texas Senate bill 763 are naked unconstitutional attempts to try to force religion, specifically Christianity, on to impressionable public school students.
Many of these state legislators have been emboldened by recent Supreme Court cases that have been more accommodating to religion than in decades, even centuries, past. The perception is that states and legislators can now try to pass more religious based bills that favor, and even promote Christianity, because of the belief that the U.S. Supreme Court will not strike down these laws.
Even with the turn towards more religious accommodation at the Supreme Court, it is still a fundamental principle of the First Amendment that there is a separation of church and state that cannot be invaded by government entities. Rachel Laser, CEO and president of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State responded to these bills by stating, “The constitutional promise of church-state separation requires that students and parents – not public school officials, state legislatures or government-imposed religious leaders – get to make their own decisions about religion.” By allowing unlicensed chaplains into the classroom there is a very real possibility that these chaplains will take advantage of students who need legitimate support services for mental health and social issues. The priority and purpose of these chaplains would be to impose their religious belief on the student or converting the student to the chaplain’s preferred religion. This is a situation that the First Amendment was designed to prevent against – the imposition of religious beliefs sponsored by the government. These bills are likely unconstitutional based on the centuries of tradition and history of the First Amendment’s religious clauses.
State legislators have tried to defend the school chaplaincy bills in their state with the argument that students who are exposed to religion will be better off to handle many of the emerging issues of the day. But this rationale is at best vague. There are no specifics as to how a religious person would best be positioned to help a student facing a mental health crisis, academic issues or bullying situations. A feature of these bills that is receiving much of the criticism is that it allows anyone to be a school chaplain without any requirement of being trained and credentialed as a traditional school counselor. The chaplain would be placed in a position to provide school counseling services. This is a scenario that can escalate very quickly into a dangerous situation.
Simply identifying as a religious person does not give the person the tools or know how to manage an ongoing mental health crisis. Nor does it qualify the religious person to handle the complexities of gender identity issues. Especially when a good number of religious persons are opposed to LGBQT persons. The lack of any training requirements or counseling credentials is going to create an environment where someone who is least qualified to manage a crisis will end up “counseling” students in a manner that is ill – suited to bring about the best outcome. The perception of these bills shows that these legislators are not interested in pursuing the best possible outcome for students struggling with issues in school but are instead trying to impose religious viewpoints on as many students as possible, regardless of what the student wants or desires. Some of the biggest school districts in Texas have already rejected Senate Bill 763 and it is hoped that the similar bills in other states will be rejected as well. LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- Tallahasee Democrat – article illustrating the arguments for and against the Florida school chaplaincy bill, including whether Satanists would be allowed to provide counseling services.
- American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – statement from non – profit group explaining the legal and practical flaws in school chaplaincy bills.
- Austin – American Statesman – article detailing why some religious groups in Texas oppose the school chaplaincy program bill.
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 Democracy 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!

Former President Trump’s Criminal Court Cases: Taking Stock
Former President Trump’s Criminal Court Cases: Taking Stock
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #127 | By: Courtney Denning | April 09, 2024
Featured Photo: www.washingtonpost.com
__________________________________
Former President and current expected Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, is the defendant in multiple civil and criminal court cases across the country. This is the first time that a former US president has been charged with a criminal offense.
These trials have received ongoing national attention. Here is an overview of the current state of each case:
New York Civil Court Case
On Feb. 16, 2024 a judge ruled that Trump must pay a $454 million penalty for lying on financial statements, claiming that he was more wealthy than he was in order to make loans and deals. Trump appealed the case, claiming that the judge committed errors and acted outside of his jurisdiction. That appeal hearing is expected to take place in September, during the final weeks of the presidential campaign.
As a condition for allowing the appeal, Trump was required to put up $175 million in bail money in order to stop the state from seizing his assets. Trump paid this on April 1. However, the state’s Attorney General has requested that this bond be “justified,” and has asked Trump to prove that he has the money and assets required to pay it.
Judge in the case: Arthur Engoron
Current trial date: Unscheduled, expected Sept. 2024
Amount of Trump delay time requested and granted, to date: Appeal will delay the potential penalty by 6 months, granted
Key legal issue decided: Did Trump lie on his financial records? Did Judge Engoron handle the trial properly?
Penalty: $363.9 million plus interest, totaling $454 million at the time of the initial ruling
Odds of conviction: Currently found liable, pending appeal
New York Criminal Court Case
Trump was indicted on March 30, 2023 for allegedly falsifying business records in order to pay hush money to two women whom he reportedly had extramarital affairs with. Prosecution claims this happened in 2016 as a way to protect Trump’s public image during his run for presidency.
Throughout the course of the trial, Trump’s lawyers have used what many consider to be stalling tactics, including calling for the case to be moved from a state court to a federal one. Trump’s lawyers also asked that the judge presiding over the case be replaced due to suspicion of bias. Both of these requests were denied.
However, on March 15, Trump’s lawyers asked for the trial to be postponed due to an influx of new evidence, which was granted.
As part of his efforts to undermine the charges against him, Trump repeatedly criticized people involved in the case, causing the judge to issue a gag order on him on March 26. This order was expanded on April 1 to also include the families of those involved in the case following a statement made by Trump about the judge’s daughter on his social media site, Truth Social.
Trump requested that the trial be postponed until after the Supreme Court hears his arguments for presidential immunity on April 25. However, the judge rejected this request and is scheduled to begin hearing the case on April 15.
Judge in the case: Juan M. Merchan
Current trial date: April 15
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: Requested 21 days, granted
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump falsify business records in order to bury allegations of extramarital affairs?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of four years in prison
Odds of conviction:
DC Criminal Court Case
In August, Trump was charged with election interference for his alleged involvement in the January 6 Capital riot. Prosecutors claim that he intentionally disseminated lies about the “stolen election” and attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
Much like the New York criminal case, the judge in this trial issued a gag order on Trump to prevent him from making disparaging public comments about people involved in the trial. Trump has also claimed that as a former president, he is immune from trial. These claims were dismissed by both the presiding judge and the appeals court, but the Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments over whether Trump is entitled to immunity on the week of April 22.
Judge in the case: Tanya Chutkan
Current trial date: Unscheduled, awaiting immunity decision
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: Requested indefinite delay, 36 days granted thus far
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump interfere in a federal election?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of 20 years in prison
Odds of conviction:
Georgia Criminal Court Case
Trump has also been charged with election interference in Georgia over claims that he meddled in the process of choosing electors and harassed election workers. Some of these charges were filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act while the rest are other assorted conspiracy charges. The charges were filed on Aug. 14 and Trump’s mugshot was released as a result of this case the following week.
Four of Trump’s associates who were also indicted in this trial have pleaded guilty to the charges, reaching a plea deal. In January, reports of an inappropriate romantic relationship involving the District Attorney caused a special prosecutor to eventually step down from his position in March. During this conflict, three of Trump’s charges were dropped, but the District Attorney was allowed to continue in her prosecution of the case. Trump has asked the court of appeals to review this decision, claiming that this inappropriate romantic relationship still presented a conflict of interest even after one party dismissed himself.
Judge in the case: Scott McAfee
Current trial date: Unscheduled
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: Requested indefinite delay, granted thus far
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump interfere in Georgia’s presidential election?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of 20 years in prison
Odds of conviction:
Florida Criminal Court Case
The last case against Trump is the claim that he was harboring classified documents at his estate in Mar-a-Lago. These charges were filed in June and additional accounts of conspiring to cover up this alleged crime were filed in July.
The hearings for this case are scheduled for May 20, but delays are expected according to the presiding judge. There has been some controversy over the jury because the case is scheduled to pull from a pool of jurors that reside in a county that heavily favored Trump in the 2020 presidential election.
Judge in the case: Aileen Cannon
Current trial date: May 20
Amount of delay time requested by and granted to Trump, to date: None requested thus far
Key legal issue to be decided: Did Trump keep classified documents at his private estate and attempt to hide his possession of them?
Potential penalty: Maximum sentence of 10 years in prison per count
Odds of conviction: Likelihood of Trump serving the full sentence is low, even if he is found guilty of all 30 charges
Analysis:
Because these cases are being heard during a presidential election season, their results have the potential to significantly affect the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. The numerous appeals and postponings in each of these trials is likely part of an effort by Trump to delay the verdicts, buying him more time to secure the presidency and pardon himself if he reaches office again. And while political motives should not interfere with criminal court case proceedings, reasonable concerns over the trials must be considered by the judicial branch in order to maintain their credibility. Reaching a verdict in each trial must come quickly but cannot come at the expense of due diligence.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy 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.

With thousands of jobs promised, $6 billion in ‘green’ industry funding was an easy sell: The Pros and Cons of New Government-Sponsored Green Jobs
With thousands of jobs promised, $6 billion in ‘green’ industry funding was an easy sell: The Pros and Cons of New Government-Sponsored Green Jobs
Environment Policy Brief #166 | By: Todd Broadman | April 08, 2024
Featured Photo sourced from: www.vox.com
__________________________________
A portion of the already approved Bipartisan Infrastructure Law ($430 million) and the Inflation Reduction Act ($5.46 billion) has been directed by President Biden to a program that aims to “accelerate the emissions reductions of heavy-emitting industries.” This program will be managed by the Department of Energy (DOE) under Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. Funding for these carbon-reducing projects took the form of competitive grants totaling around $6 billion dollars. Awards have been decided, and though the money will go towards a wide range of industry sectors, the common thread is that in each case the DOE deemed decarbonization as “hard-to-abate.”
Prominent amongst the grantees are steel, aluminum and cement firms, representing industries that contribute approximately 25% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Under the DOE, this Industrial Demonstrations Program has related goals to “create healthier communities” and to “help strengthen and secure America’s global leadership in clean manufacturing for decades to come.” To further guide these goals, the DOE has assigned three of its divisions to oversee implementation: Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED), the Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC), and the Industrial Efficiency and Decarbonization Office (IEDO).
Not only did this funding witness uncharacteristic bipartisan approval, it went further in winning widespread support from both industry and environmental groups. “I think the United States can be a leader here,” said Mike Ireland, president and CEO of the Portland Cement Association, a non-profit that promotes cement and concrete. He also anticipates that the resulting technology has significant export potential. Christina Theodoridi, industrial policy director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, was equally optimistic: “If done right, these projects can put us on the path to cleaner production of core products of the modern economy, while spurring the creation of good jobs.”
Uniquely challenging is the aluminum sector. The U.S. imports 40% of its aluminum, much of it from China. The manufacturing process is extremely energy intensive. There is even an “aluminum director,” Annie Sartor, at Industrial Labs, an organization that lobbies for green technology. Sartor explained that “these [aluminum] facilities have historically been located near cheap fossil energy. And today, 21st century coal, or coal and gas, are no longer cheapest.” The largest funding allocation is going to Century Aluminum, $500 million to build a 100% clean energy aluminum plant, and once in operation is expected to double domestic production.
Before declaring bankruptcy, the Magnitude 7 aluminum company was the largest single user of electricity in the state of Missouri. Their financially turbulent history highlights the risks of trying to keep these large industries afloat. 40% of the cost of aluminum is attributed to the cost of electricity. The U.S. cannot compete with lower-cost energy producers overseas. Current domestic production of aluminum is less than 20% of what it was in 1980. The cost of energy, in this instance, seems a more critical factor than the CO2 emissions associated with its manufacture. These economics are revealing, especially given that 2 percent of the world’s carbon emissions are attributed to making aluminum.
ANALYSIS
The Biden administration scores bipartisan points with this program and can claim progress towards its goal of reducing carbon emissions 50% by 2030. Underlying political support for the $6 billion expenditure of taxpayer dollars though, is reminiscent of Pentagon military contractor allocations in so far as they are sold as net job creators. This intent is echoed by Lane Boldman who heads Kentucky Conservation Committee, who is pitching his state to Century Aluminum: “Kentucky has always represented some of the hardest working Americans when it comes to industry and energy. We are hopeful that their new facility will find a home in Kentucky, and provide good jobs along with healthier air and water quality while supporting a critical industry for the state.”
President Joe Biden did not miss the opportunity to secure United Steelworker union support with employment promises – a 1,000 new jobs – tied to this decarbonization program. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm went as far as to say that the new low-carbon technologies are “replicable,” “scalable,” and will “set a new gold standard for clean manufacturing in the United States and around the world.” Followed by a litany of unverifiable claims made by White House climate adviser Ali Zaidi that this funding “aims to eliminate 14 million metric tons of pollution each year, equivalent to taking about 3 million cars off the road.”
Among the 33 companies that were approved for funding (and not mentioned above) are:
- Constellium in Ravenswood, West Virginia, who makes parts for cars and planes, is going to operate a first-of-its-kind zero-carbon aluminum casting plant, and install low-emission furnaces that can use clean fuels such as hydrogen.
- Kraft Heinz will install heat pumps, electric heaters and electric boilers to decarbonize food production at 10 facilities, including in Holland, Michigan.
- Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation in Middletown, Ohio, will retire one blast furnace, install two electric furnaces, and use hydrogen-based ironmaking technology. The project aims to eliminate 1 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year from the largest supplier of steel to the U.S. automotive industry.
- Heidelberg Materials US, Inc. will build a system that captures and stores carbon underground at its plant in Mitchell, Indiana. The project aims to capture at least 95% of the carbon dioxide released by the cement plant, which will prevent 2 million tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere each year.
- SSAB AB received the largest award, $500 million, to build the first commercial-scale facility in the world to make fossil-fuel-free steel using 100% hydrogen in Perry County, Mississippi.
- Vale SA received as much as $283 million to build a plant on the US Gulf Coast that makes iron ore briquettes with less industrial heat than traditional pellets.
Important to note that along with the patriotic claims of America leading the globe in efforts to decarbonize, some of the largest grantees are not American companies. SSAB (Sweden) and Heidelberg Materials (Germany) and Vale SA (Brazil) are not headquartered in the U.S. and do most of their manufacturing in other parts of the globe. To add further perspective, recipients of taxpayer dollars under this program such as Exxon and Kraft Heinz, have substantial profits and can afford to make these green investments without taxpayer funding. Others, like startup Brimstone cement, are well-backed by venture capital funding (Bill Gates among them). Certainly, a boon for Wall Street which has been pressing for federal funding to back their investments.
As a fundamental policy question: why are billions being directed at individual company manufacturing processes rather than into the generation of renewable energy itself? Are there not jobs there as well?
Engagement Resources:
- ESG Today https://www.esgtoday.com/ dedicated to covering Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) issues for investors.
- GreenBiz https://www.greenbiz.com/ a passionate media team that builds and empowers communities to confront the threats of climate change and solve the thorniest challenges of our time
- Natural Resources Defense Council https://www.nrdc.org/ combines the power of more than 3 million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and other environmental specialists to confront the climate crisis, protect the planet’s wildlife and wild places, and to ensure the rights of all people to clean air, clean water, and healthy communities.
Don’t miss out on the latest insights from our dedicated reporters – subscribe to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is vital in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you value our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.

Cryptocurrencies: Economic Implications and Challenges
Cryptocurrencies: Economic Implications and Challenges
Economic Policy Brief #60 | By: Inijah Quadri| April 08, 2024
Featured Photo: www.cawnetworkusa.com
__________________________________
The rise of cryptocurrencies has ushered in a new era in the global financial system. With Bitcoin, Ethereum, and thousands of other digital currencies gaining traction, the potential for a seismic shift in how transactions are conducted, wealth is stored, and investments are made is increasingly evident. This transition towards a more digitized economy presents significant opportunities, including enhanced transactional efficiency, financial inclusion for the unbanked, and the reduction of transaction costs. However, it also poses profound challenges, such as regulatory hurdles, market volatility, security concerns, and its impact on traditional banking and monetary policy.
Before delving deeper into the implications of cryptocurrencies, it is essential to understand what they are. Cryptocurrencies are digital or virtual currencies that use cryptography for security and operate on a technology called blockchain, making them decentralized by nature. Unlike traditional digital currencies issued by governments (fiat), cryptocurrencies operate independently of a central authority. This fundamental difference highlights the unique nature of cryptocurrencies and sets the stage for their potential to revolutionize the financial system.
Analysis
Cryptocurrencies offer a decentralized alternative to traditional fiat currencies, operating independently of central banks and governmental oversight. Despite their intangible nature, cryptocurrencies are ‘real’ in the sense that they represent value and can be used for transactions. They don’t have a physical form like coins or notes but exist as digital entries in a blockchain. Blockchain technology is a decentralized ledger that records all transactions across a network of computers, ensuring security and transparency. Cryptocurrencies are created through a process called mining, where individuals or companies use powerful computers to solve complex mathematical problems that validate transactions and add them to the blockchain, earning cryptocurrencies in return.
For instance, consider a simple cryptocurrency transaction using Bitcoin. Alice wants to send Bitcoin to Bob. She initiates the transaction by entering Bob’s digital wallet address and the amount to send. This transaction request is broadcast to the blockchain network, where miners verify the transaction and add it to a new block in the blockchain. Once the transaction is confirmed, Bob receives the Bitcoin. This process eliminates the need for a central authority, like a bank, facilitating direct and efficient transfers. These fundamental aspects have implications for monetary sovereignty, as the control over the money supply and interest rates could shift away from national authorities. The adoption of cryptocurrencies on a large scale could undermine the ability of countries to implement effective monetary policies, potentially destabilizing economies.
Market volatility also remains a significant challenge. The price of cryptocurrencies can experience dramatic fluctuations, as seen in the Bitcoin price surge to nearly $65,000 in April 2021 before halving in value just months later. While the price at the time of this writing has risen to yet another high, such volatility can be attributed to speculative trading, and regulatory news, and are often swinging from time to time. This unpredictability poses risks for both individual investors and the broader financial system, particularly if cryptocurrencies become intertwined with traditional financial institutions.
Security concerns also loom large. The decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies makes them targets for hackers and cybercriminals. High-profile incidents, such as the $530 million hack of the Coincheck exchange in 2018, underscore the vulnerabilities in digital currency exchanges and wallets.
Despite these challenges, the transition to cryptocurrencies holds promise for enhancing financial inclusion. Over 1.5 billion adults worldwide remain unbanked, with no access to a traditional bank. This is not limited to poor countries, as a sizeable percent of the US adult population is unbanked too. Cryptocurrencies, accessible via smartphones, could bridge this gap, offering a means to store value, make payments, and access credit without the need for a bank account.
Regulatory clarity is essential for the continued adoption and integration of cryptocurrencies into the global economy. The case of Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX, underscores the urgent need for regulatory oversight. His arrest and the subsequent collapse of FTX highlighted the risks of mismanagement and fraudulent activities within the cryptocurrency space. This incident serves as a cautionary tale, emphasizing the importance of transparency, regulatory compliance, and robust security measures to protect investors and maintain market integrity.
The current regulatory scenarios for cryptocurrencies are varied, ranging from outright bans to comprehensive legal frameworks aimed at integrating them into the financial system while addressing concerns such as fraud, money laundering, and market stability. Governments and financial institutions are grappling with how to regulate digital currencies to prevent money laundering, protect consumers, and ensure financial stability without stifling innovation. An optimal regulatory approach involves balancing the need for innovation and the protection of consumers and the financial system. For example, regulations could require cryptocurrency exchanges to implement standard security measures, disclose risk factors to users, and obtain licenses to operate, ensuring a safer ecosystem for digital currencies. The European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation, proposed in 2020, exemplifies efforts to create a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets.
The transition to cryptocurrencies presents a paradigm shift with far-reaching implications for the global economy. While the potential benefits are significant, navigating the accompanying challenges will require thoughtful regulation, robust security measures, and continued innovation. As this transition unfolds, stakeholders across the financial spectrum must engage in open dialogue and collaboration to harness the benefits of digital currencies while mitigating their risks.
Engagement Resources
- Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Regulation 2021, Global Legal Insights (https://www.globallegalinsights.com/): Provides insights into the regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology across various jurisdictions.
- Coin Center (https://www.coincenter.org/): A non-profit research and advocacy center focused on public policy issues facing cryptocurrencies and blockchain technologies.
- The World Bank – Financial Inclusion (https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/financialinclusion/overview): Offers resources and research on how digital financial services, including cryptocurrencies, can enhance financial inclusion globally.
- Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/faculty-research/centres/alternative-finance/): Conducts research on the rapidly growing area of alternative finance, including cryptocurrencies, to inform policy and practice.
- International Monetary Fund (IMF) – Digital Currencies (https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Policy-Papers/Issues/2023/04/12/IMF-Approach-to-Central-Bank-Digital-Currency-Capacity-Development-532177): The IMF provides analysis and policy advice on the macroeconomic implications of digital currencies and their impact on the global financial system.
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.

Rahma’s Journey: Navigating Pregnancy Amidst Hardship in Gaza
Rahma’s Journey: Navigating Pregnancy Amidst Hardship in Gaza
Foreign Policy Brief #135 | By: Aziza Taslaq | April 05, 2024
Featured Photo: www.middleeastmonitor.com
__________________________________
In Gaza, life resembles a relentless uphill climb, especially for soon-to-be mothers like Rahma, who, at seven months pregnant, faces each day as if scaling a mountain. Rahma, a 25-year-old resident of Khan Younes, confronts the formidable challenges of pregnancy amidst the turmoil of Gaza. This marks her first pregnancy, with no prior experience of motherhood. Compounded by the uncertainty surrounding her husband’s whereabouts as a civil defense member, Rahma finds solace amidst the rubble with her mother, two sisters, and a young brother in Rafah. Their familial bond serves as a beacon of hope amidst the destruction wrought by an Israeli airstrike, which razed not only their home but also that of Rahma’s husband’s family.
First off, there’s not enough food to go around. Rahma finds it really tough to get her hands on good, nutritious food that she and her little one need. Vitamins? Forget about it. And during Ramadan, when she’s fasting, it’s even harder. It’s like trying to run a marathon without proper fuel. Clean water is also hard to come by, which makes things even trickier.
On top of all that, Rahma can’t even get the important medical tests she needs to make sure her baby is healthy. Imagine not being able to see a doctor when you’re worried about your little one! It’s because the hospitals don’t have the right tools. So, she’s left feeling really anxious about any problems that might pop up during her pregnancy. Plus, her body aches all over, but she can’t get the treatment she needs to feel better.
Looking ahead, Rahma faces additional challenges in the process of giving birth and feeding her newborn. With no access to hospitals, Rahma is uncertain about how she will navigate childbirth. The traditional method, involving the assistance of a “Dayeh” at home, may be her only option, adding to her anxiety about the safety and well-being of herself and her baby. Furthermore, the scarcity of food in Gaza presents obstacles to breastfeeding, raising concerns about how Rahma will nourish her newborn. While she may seek assistance from charities for formula milk, the availability and accessibility of such support remains uncertain.
But it’s not just the physical stuff that’s weighing Rahma down. The constant fear of violence and not knowing what’s going to happen next is really tough on her mind. She’s always worrying about how she’s going to keep her baby safe in such a dangerous place. Seeing all the scary stuff that happens during wars has left her feeling really scared and unsure about the future.
Rahma’s not alone in all this. There are lots of other moms-to-be in Gaza going through the same struggles. Can you believe that over 52 thousand women are in danger? That’s a lot of moms facing the same tough times, but even in the darkest of days, Rahma finds strength in her community. They stick together and help each other out, which gives her hope that she can make it through this tough time.
Rahma’s journey is a reminder that even when things seem really hard, there’s always hope. She’s like a shining light in the darkness, showing us that even in the toughest times, people can find strength and keep going. She’s a real hero for all the moms out there facing tough times.
For more articles and in-depth analysis on the conflict in Gaza, click here. Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy 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.

Is Judge Cannon Tilting The Classified Documents Case In Trump’s Favor?
Is Judge Cannon Tilting The Classified Documents Case In Trump’s Favor?
Civil Rights Policy Brief #222 | By: Rodney A. Maggay | April 05, 2024
Featured Photo by Indy Silva for U.S. Resist News, 2024
__________________________________
The Honorable Aileen Cannon is a federal district judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida who was appointed to the bench by President Trump in 2020. The jurisdiction of the court covers nine counties in Southern Florida including Broward, Miami – Dade and West Palm Beach. Cases that are appealed are heard in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Judge Cannon has been the presiding judge in two cases involving former President Donald Trump. She presided over the civil case Trump v. United States (2022), which was the case where President Trump challenged the FBI search of his Mar – a – Lago residence in August 2022. And in 2023 Judge Cannon was assigned the criminal case United States v. Trump which was about the former President’s mis – handling of sensitive national defense documents. Judge Cannon has been accused of issuing orders that mischaracterize the law and the facts of the case in order to give the former President an unfair advantage in both court cases.
On December 1, 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ordered Judge Cannon to dismiss the civil case brought by the former President. The court reasoned that Judge Cannon improperly exercised jurisdiction by hearing the case and that the Judge even improperly raised legal positions that the President’s lawyers did not mention.
In 2023, Judge Cannon issued a number of orders that inexplicably created a delay in the criminal case. Special Prosecutor Jack Smith and his team have pushed for a trial schedule but have instead seen Judge Cannon take more than a month to grant a hearing on the trial schedule issue and suspend the deadlines for motions related to the use of classified information in the case. When the prosecutors requested a December 18, 2023 deadline for a response to a motion from the former President’s legal team, Judge Cannon inexplicably denied the special prosecutor’s request even though the defense attorneys had not even responded yet.
Recently, Judge Cannon issued an order regarding jury instructions in the case that was considered premature since a jury had not even been impaneled yet. (Jury instructions are only requested when a jury is selected, as a jury may not even be needed due to a case settling or being dismissed). Her order requested two sets of jury instructions that rest on an inaccurate reading of two statutes at issue in the case – the Presidential Records Act and the Espionage Act.
Due to these orders and scheduling delays imposed by Judge Cannon on the case, it is being discussed whether Judge Cannon is intentionally trying to help the former President by delaying the trial or even tilting it in Mr. Trump’s favor. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Policy Analysis
Judges are ordinarily given a reasonable amount of discretion as to how to manage cases, especially when it comes to scheduling a trial and scheduling deadlines for when motions must be filed. They are constrained in their actions and what they can rule on by the law – the statutes and case law – which often provides a general framework as how a trial will generally proceed. What has made discussion around Judge Cannon’s handling of the two Trump cases that have appeared in her courtroom significant is that her orders are orders that should never have been made in these kinds of cases, according to national defense attorneys who are familiar with these specialized cases. It is highly unlikely that any other judge in the U.S. would have disregarded established law or taken an inordinate amount of time to issue an order as Judge Cannon has. Because of her actions, it has become a talking point among the public if Judge Cannon is trying to intentionally delay Trump’s criminal trial until after the November 2024 election.
What is notable about Judge Cannon’s actions in the case is that she is taking longer than necessary to issue rulings. One theory about this is that her deliberate slow pace might be a tactic to prevent the Special Prosecutor’s team from appealing her order and ruling, thus delaying the case even further. If there is no ruling on an important issue, then there is no legal basis to make an appeal yet. Judge Cannon had been forcefully overruled in the prior Trump civil case that she presided over and she may be hesitant to issue a ruling now that could be overruled again. Additionally, an appeal could also start the process of having her forcefully removed from the case, which could be something she would want to avoid.
Even with all of those lingering questions, Judge Cannon issued another order, which raised the question whether she was competent to oversee the case. Judge Cannon requested two sets of jury instructions from the parties. That was an odd request in and of itself since it was premature to request jury instructions when a jury had not even been seated yet. But what made her request even more bizarre was when she asked for instructions as to whether, under the Presidential Records Act, the classified documents at issue are “personal” or “presidential.” This is completely irrelevant as that statute only lists how documents are classified and has no bearing on Trump’s hoarding of documents. By mentioning it in her courtroom, Judge Cannon is trying to make it an issue when it has no connection to Trump’s criminal trial. But if her request for these bizarre jury instructions proceed, it could distort the trial and make the trial about the minor issue of how presidential documents are categorized instead of what is really the heart of the case – whether Trump violated the law by willfully retaining sensitive national security documents that he should have never have kept after his presidency ended. Trials are events that are specifically focused on a set of issues and not a place to inject irrelevant discussions on issues that are minor at best, like how documents are categorized. For Judge Cannon to focus on these trivial issues for trial plays into Trump’s hand to delay and obfuscate what the case is really about.
The case is still ongoing with many potential avenues to go down but Judge Cannon’s actions in the case deserve close scrutiny as the case proceeds. LEARN MORE, LEARN MORE
Engagement Resources
- The Hill – article on Florida procedures and how Judge Cannon was assigned the Trump classified documents case.
- United States Courts – infopage on how to file a judicial complaint against a judge.
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 Democracy 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!

Do States Have the Right to Deport Immigrants? A Look at Texas Immigration Law
Do States Have the Right to Deport Immigrants? A Look at Texas Immigration Legislature
Social Justice Policy Brief #160 | By: Devyne Byrd | April 03, 2024
Featured Photo: www.nytimes.com
__________________________________
The courts continue to fight over the constitutionality of Texas’s new immigration law which is being criticized as the harshest immigration policy in modern US history. Texas Governor Abbot signed what is known as SB4 in December 2023, which made illegally entering Texas a state crime and authorized state law enforcement to stop, arrest, and jail migrants. It also grants de facto deportation powers to state judges by allowing them to deport migrants to avoid prosecution. The law has currently been blocked by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals after they granted a preliminary injunction. This comes after the Supreme Court denied emergency motions filed by the Biden Administration to block enforcement.
President Biden and the Justice Department have adamantly opposed the bill, stating it is unconstitutional and that immigration enforcement is exclusively under federal authority. The administration cites the Supremacy Clause, the doctrine that federal law preempts conflicting state laws, as the prevailing Constitutional objection. They also emphasize the foreign relation disputes the bill has caused with the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemning SB4, saying it “categorically rejects any measure that allows state or local authorities to exercise immigration control, and to arrest and return nationals or foreigners to Mexican territory.” Mexico has stated that they will not accept the migrants Texas deports into their territory.
Following the short window that Texas was allowed to enforce the immigration law, Republican-controlled states moved to follow suit, considering bills that would echo the immigration policies in SB4. Louisiana legislators will consider Bill 388 which allows local and state law enforcement to arrest people on suspicions that they crossed the border illegally where they would face up to a year in prison. Oklahoma, Tennessee, and New Hampshire have all put similar bills into motion.
Civil and immigrant rights organizations have criticized SB4 and the follow-up immigration laws in other states over concerns that the laws are very likely to lead to racial profiling. Law enforcement would be empowered to question someone’s immigration status without cause or justification which will likely lead to Hispanic populations being heavily profiled and policed. The law does not specify any additional training or knowledge of the immigration process that would expand on the context surrounding the inquiry into immigration status other than suspicion.
Engagement Resources
- Inspired by Texas, Republicans in Other States Eye Immigration Bills – An article discussing the domino effect SB4 has had in other Republican-led states.
- Extreme Texas immigration law stays paused, but SCOTUS may have the last word – An article covering the legal journey of SB4 through the appeals and Supreme Court
Wanna 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 Chilling Effect of Republican Education Policy
The Chilling Effect of Republican Education Policy
Education Policy Brief #90 | By: Rudolph Lurz | April 02, 2024
Featured Photo: www.pen.org
__________________________________
The term “chilling effect” is relatively new. It entered the modern legal vernacular in the 1950s and 60s during the Red Scare, as policy makers like Joseph McCarthy sought to find hidden communists in the public sphere. It is now ubiquitous in legal briefs, and a central part of any 1st Amendment course at American law schools. The Free Speech Center of Middle Tennessee State University defines the term as “deterring free speech and association rights protected by the First Amendment as a result of government laws or actions that appear to target expression.”
Generally speaking, when legal experts and policy makers analyze bills and executive actions, it is not a positive thing to receive a chilling effect label. It is a warning that the proposal requires revision. It signals that an action can have a harmful effect if it progresses. The prudent response to a chilling effect accusation is to return to the drawing board and make sure the language contained in the proposal is clear, unambiguous, and will not have the unintended consequence of stifling free speech or individual liberty.
Recent policy initiatives from conservative policy actors have run through the red-light warnings of chilling effect designations. Florida’s Parental Rights in Education Act, commonly referred to as the “Don’t Say Gay” law, is one recent example of chilling effect becoming policy. The designed outcome of that legislation was to prevent the instruction of gender identity or sexual orientation in K-3 classrooms.
The language contained within the legislation was purposely vague. What constitutes “instruction”? Is it a classroom discussion? A storybook on the bookshelf that has a character with two moms? A rainbow paperweight on the teacher’s desk?
As legal challenges to the law unfolded, Florida’s educators were caught in a chilling effect no man’s land. The law, despite the rationale of protecting young learners, was quickly expanded to all K-12 classrooms in the state. Florida’s educators, not wanting to risk losing their jobs or licenses, removed any potentially controversial materials or covered their bookshelves with construction paper.
Other initiatives added to the deep freeze taking place in the Sunshine State. HB 1069 made it easier for books to be challenged for containing pornographic content. The Stop W.O.K.E. Act targeted the instruction of controversial content that would make students upset, such as critical race theory. The end result was districts removing thousands of books from library bookshelves, and teachers walking on proverbial eggshells as they wrote and executed lesson plans in their own classrooms.
From classrooms to libraries to courtrooms, the message is clear. A chilling effect is the end goal for Republicans. As conservatives blow past legal stop signs, any efforts to reverse the deep chill through litigation will always run behind the laws going into effect.
Analysis
Politically, these measures are wise. Republicans, and most sane people for that matter, are generally opposed to pornographic content in elementary schools. Parents want to protect their kids. Most folks would like to be assured that little Johnny is learning about mathematics, science and history instead of debating gender identity in the classroom.
The actual implementation of these initiatives is more complicated. What defines “pornography”? Associate Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart famously stated, “I know it when I see it,” when referring to obscene content.
The various school and library laws being implemented across the country provide just as much ambiguous leeway when challenging educational materials as pornographic or obscene.
If a lesbian kiss or a gay protagonist expressing romantic feelings for a crush can be challenged as pornographic content, then it is not surprising to see districts removing books by the thousands from school libraries.
It is safer for public school districts to bring books down than leave them up and face lawsuits and brigades of out-of-town partisans turning school board meetings into screaming matches.
Just this month, and well over a year after “Don’t Say Gay” became Florida law, a settlement was reached that clarified how the law was to be implemented. That settlement made clear that discussion of LGBTQ+ issues was acceptable, along with individual teachers’ expressions of their own beliefs, such as a picture with their same-sex spouse or a rainbow flag displayed in the classroom, as long as they were not formal topics of instruction in the curriculum. Governor DeSantis considered it a win, because the law was not repealed.
Why shouldn’t he consider it a win? Don’t Say Gay was signed into law almost two years before the legal settlement that thawed some of the chilling effects on expression and discussion. It might be months or years before further judicial decisions put books labeled as “pornographic” back on library bookshelves.
The goal of conservative policy actors is to freeze any so-called “woke” content in schools and society at large. Since they cannot legally do that, the best they can do is pass purposefully vague legislation which forces people to self-regulate their speech and behavior.
By self-regulate, let me be clear, I mean stifle or repress.
Since the courts will always be months or years behind the policies, the chill will remain in effect long before the legal thaws arrive to make freedom of expression safe again.
Educators, students, and free thinkers are left out in the cold.
Engagement Resources
- Initial Guidance from Florida Education Association (Florida’s largest teachers’ union), on implementation of the Parental Rights in Education Act can be found here.
- PEN America. (2023 ). Educational Intimidation [Report].
- Full terms of court settlement can be found here.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy 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.

Former President Donald Trump’s Gag Order
Former President Donald Trump’s Gag Order
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #126 | By: Arvind Salem | April 02, 2024
Featured Photo: www.bloomberg.com
__________________________________
On April 15th, the first criminal trial of a former president will begin. Donald Trump will defend himself from allegations that he falsified business records to cover up hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. For more information and analysis beyond these essential details, readers are welcome to read my original coverage of this trial here.
However, just because the trial hasn’t begun doesn’t mean that the sparring on this case hasn’t commenced, and the result of one of those battles was recently made clear when a judge issued a gag order on former President Donald Trump, barring him from publicly attacking or directing anyone to attack any witnesses, jurors or prosecutors serving on the case. This includes Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, a key witness in this case and someone that former President Donald Trump is prone to disparaging. Notably, the order does not prevent Trump from attacking District Attorney Alvin Bragg or Judge Juan Merchan, who are both public figures.
Rationalizing this order, the judge pointed to Trump’s history of making “threatening, inflammatory, denigrating” statements against people involved in his cases. Punishments for violating the order include being held in contempt of court, fined or even jailed.
Former President Donald Trump has publicly blasted the judge for this ruling, even attacking Judge Merchan’s daughter. Trump posited on Truth Social that: “Maybe the Judge is such a hater because his daughter makes money by working to ‘Get Trump’ and when he rules against me over and over again, he is making her company, and her, richer and richer. . .How can this be allowed?” Trump’s attack refers to the fact that the Judge Merchan’s daughter is a Democratic political consultant, who of course has a vested interest in seeing him convicted and losing the election.
Policy Analysis:
Supporters of Trump have been quick to point out the obvious implications of limiting freedom of speech for someone who could very well be the President of the United States in a few months. Yet this very line of argument illustrates the complications of prosecuting a president, but also how former President Donald Trump’s team may be trying to have it both ways. In the courtroom, they rightfully want the President to be treated like anyone else and not adversely affected by the political baggage that he carries. But if former President Trump is to be divorced from his political history inside the courtroom then why is he using political motivations as a scapegoat for why this gag order was issued to him? He actively attempts to shoehorn political implications into the case whenever it benefits him (such as arguing that he needs full free speech rights in order to fully campaign).
In fact, the judge was more lenient with him due to this unique situation as he did not want to “trample his ability to defend himself publicly.” If former President Donald Trump gets the benefit of the extra leeway being a candidate provides, he also has to realize that incendiary language that comes from him can easily translate into action, or at least massive influence whenever he expresses any opinion.
Engagement Resources:
- ActBlue: ActBlue allows people to donate to a host of Democratic organizations, candidates, and causes. Readers are likely to find organizations that are supporting the Trump indictment on this site and may wish to donate money to further that cause.
- Winred: Winred allows people to donate money to Republican candidates to support their campaign. Readers interested in supporting former President Donald Trump or other members of the Republican party may find that this is a useful way to convey their support and help the Republican cause.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy 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.