The resistance is rising! The “No Kings Day” protests over the weekend were tremendously successful. Major media (inexplicably) continue to downplay the number and scale of the protests. However, widespread reports from across the nation have proven that there have been more and larger protests than expected. Planned protests consistently exceeded expectations, while spontaneous protests emerged where none were planned.
I invite readers to review the Comments section for Today’s Edition on Sunday. (Link to Sunday’s Comment section is here.) Readers of this newsletter report enthusiastic protests in towns and cities nationwide. Their descriptions of the pro-democracy rallies are uplifting–even heartwarming. If you want to feel better about where we are as a nation on April 21, spend 10 minutes reading the Comment section. You will be inspired!
If you would prefer photographic proof, see Mother Jones, We Asked You to Share Protest Photos. Wow, You Delivered.
True, some readers noted occasional lack of organization and attempts to divert the pro-democracy / anti-Trump protests into debates over the intractable issues in the Middle East. But occasional lack of organization or drifting “off message” comes with the territory of a grassroots movement that is not waiting for permission or instructions. Instead, “We, the people,” are taking democracy into our own hands at the most organic level possible. That is a positive sign, and we need more of it–even if spontaneity can be messy.
Based on my unscientific “WAG” survey methodology, it appears that the number of “negative” interactions decreased over the weekend. Very few readers mention being the object of crude hand gestures from passersby. My wife and I did not see any obscene gestures on Saturday, which was not true of prior protests in the same location.
At a time of significant political uncertainty and unsatisfactory legal answers, we should have faith in the ability of sustained, widespread, and massive protests to shape the destiny of our nation. We must continue the protests without fail; indeed, we must double our efforts every few weeks until the major media cannot maintain their risible reporting that “thousands” or “tens of thousands” joined protests when the true numbers are in the “hundreds of thousands or millions.”
Many readers commented positively on an op-ed by David Brooks in the New York Times, What’s Happening Is Not Normal. America Needs an Uprising That Is Not Normal. (This article is accessible to all.)
Brooks writes,
So far, we have treated the various assaults of President Trump and the acolytes in his administration as a series of different attacks. In one lane they are going after law firms. In another they savaged U.S.A.I.D. In another they’re attacking our universities. On yet another front they’re undermining NATO and on another they’re upending global trade.
But that’s the wrong way to think about it. These are not separate battles. This is a single effort to undo the parts of the civilizational order that might restrain Trump’s acquisition of power. And it will take a concerted response to beat it back.
I don’t agree with Brooks’ assertion that “we” have treated Trump’s agenda as a series of “different attacks.” It is true that congressional leaders, business leaders, law firms, and universities have retreated into silos, but that certainly isn’t true of the grassroots movement, which has recognized the true threat from Trump’s first day in office. (As Brooks admits, “I’m really not a movement guy. I don’t naturally march in demonstrations or attend rallies.”)
That qualification aside, I agree with Brooks’ conclusion: It will take a concerted response to stop Trump’s agenda. Brooks continues:
It’s time for a comprehensive national civic uprising. It’s time for Americans in universities, law, business, nonprofits and the scientific community, and civil servants and beyond to form one coordinated mass movement. Trump is about power. The only way he’s going to be stopped is if he’s confronted by some movement that possesses rival power.
Brooks is absolutely correct. It will take all of us to stop this threat—and it will require a coordinated effort in which we mutually pledge our lives, honor, and fortunes to one another.
Harvard University is a perfect example. I doubt that Harvard wanted the fight in which it finds itself. But at the moment of truth, the leaders at Harvard chose the path of principle and courage rather than accommodation and surrender. Harvard may have embarked on its path reluctantly and regretfully, but having done so, Harvard deserves the support of every American college and university—and beyond.
The same applies to law firms, businesses, states, museums, libraries, and business roundtables. As I write on Sunday evening, there are reports that Trump will issue a series of executive orders in the coming week targeting organizations that seek to protect the environment or otherwise engage in non-profit activities that promote the common good. See Trump May Target Environmental Nonprofits in Executive Orders - Inside Climate News and Trump’s war on nonprofits – Politico.
We will defeat Trump’s agenda. We will do so by banding together in common cause. The sooner that everyone understands that fact and gets on board, the sooner the day when Trump’s agenda will collapse. We must do everything, everywhere, all at once. Some efforts must be coordinated to be effective (e.g., law firms and universities defending their members), while others must be mass movements that rise from the ground up. See The Guardian, Anti-Trump protesters in the US might look to the Czech Republic: ‘We are an example’.
No Kings Day was a positive sign that we are heading in the right direction. We must act with greater urgency and numbers to hasten the day when we can fully re-establish the rule of law and the democratic norms of justice, decency, and dignity.
What to make of the Supreme Court’s late-night order enjoining the deportation of migrants to El Salvador.
I would like to briefly explain the legal precedent and procedure that justifies the Supreme Court’s order on early Saturday morning enjoining the Trump administration from deporting additional migrants to El Salvador without due process.
But I can’t. Indeed, I don’t think anyone can give a cogent legal explanation of the Court’s early morning order. But that is not a criticism of the Court.
To be sure, we can construct an explanation that seeks to fit the ruling into a procedural context, but there is simply no precedent for what the Supreme Court did in the early morning hours on Saturday, which is a very good development.
The best explanation is the simplest: The Court understood that the Trump administration attempted to prevent judicial review and circumvent its order in Abrego Garcia v. Trump. Faced with bad faith disobedience and gamesmanship by the Trump administration, the Supreme Court issued an order that preserved a role for the Court in the controversy. Without such an order, the Trump administration would circumvent the Court repeatedly, effectively excising the Court from the Constitution.
As explained by Mark Joseph Stern in Slate,
A federal judge in the Southern District of Texas had already blocked their removal—but the government sought to evade this order by busing the migrants into the Northern District of Texas, where the restraining order would not apply.
And as Ian Millhiser wrote in Vox,
Though it is just one order, Saturday’s post-midnight order suggests that the Court may no longer tolerate procedural shenanigans intended to evade meaningful judicial review.
The fight between the administration and the Supreme Court over the deportations to El Salvador is just beginning. Let’s hope that Saturday morning order marks the limit of the Court’s willingness to tolerate procedural and substantive bad faith by the Trump administration. I will not hold my breath waiting for the Supreme Court to save us. But if it shows up in the fight to save democracy, we should welcome that result with a warm embrace.
Secretary of Defense shared battle plans regarding Yemen in second Signal chat.
The NY Times is reporting that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth shared details of battle plans against the Houthis in Yemen in a second Signal chat. The second chat included his wife, his brother, and his personal lawyer—among a dozen friends and colleagues who were included in the Signal chat. See New York Times, Hegseth Said to Have Shared Attack Details in Second Signal Chat (Accessible to all.)
Per the NYTimes, the group involved in the second Signal chat included a dozen political advisers and friends of Hegseth’s:
Unlike the chat in which The Atlantic was mistakenly included, the newly revealed one was created by Mr. Hegseth. It included his wife and about a dozen other people from his personal and professional inner circle in January, before his confirmation as defense secretary, and was named “Defense | Team Huddle,” the people familiar with the chat said. He used his private phone, rather than his government one, to access the Signal chat.
The Pentagon issued a carefully worded denial that amounted to an admission. See Axios, Pentagon denies reports Hegseth shared attack details in 2nd Signal chat. The Pentagon said,
"There was no classified information in any Signal chat, no matter how many ways they try to write the story.”
It does not matter if the information was officially “classified.” Battle plans are “national defense information” that are protected from disclosure without regard to classification. Moreover, the real issue is whether disclosure of the information could have endangered the pilots flying missions to Yemen. The answer to that question is unequivocally, “Yes.”
Hegseth is a menace to national security. Even among Trump’s manifestly unqualified cabinet appointees, Hegseth stands out as reckless, immature, and ignorant. He needs to be fired, ASAP.
Trump reportedly to target State Department
In another strong signal that Trump is doing Putin’s bidding, reports are circulating within the administration that Trump will slash functions and departments within the State Department. See Politico, ‘Bonkers crazypants’: American diplomats shaken by reports of possible cuts.
Concluding Thoughts
The coming week may be another challenging one. There will be significant legal activity surrounding immigration, a new flurry of executive orders directed at non-profits and environmental organizations, lies regarding the national security breaches by the Secretary of Defense, and growing storm clouds on the international trade and domestic security markets fronts.
Over the last few weeks, I have received an uptick in emails and calls from readers who are saying, “I have to look away; I can’t follow the news anymore.” That is a perfectly understandable and rational response to what is happening. We must all take care of ourselves so that we can take care of others in our lives.
If you are able to do so, join with others in community and action. I am also receiving more messages that are some version of, “I attended my first protest ever and I feel better for having taken action.” It can seem trite to say, “Action is the antidote to anxiety.”
The tide is turning, the resistance is rising. We can see the cracks in Trump’s support; we must press our advantage and redouble our efforts. We will win. It is just a question of time.
Talk to you tomorrow!
Daily Dose of Perspective
From Today’s Edition Newsletter via this RSS feed