US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 225 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: President rings in Independence Day by signing his ‘big, beautiful’ bill into law

      by

      Donald Trump kicked off Independence Day by signing into law his sweeping tax and spending bill during a Fourth of July picnic at the White House.The president’s signature legislation, which he called the “big, beautiful bill”, introduces major changes including tax cuts, spending boosts for defence and more aggressive funding for an immigration crackdown.Trump says the changes will spur economic growth, but Democrats described the passage of the bill as a “dark day” for the nation, warning it will benefit the wealthy and hit low-income earners the hardest.Here are the key US politics stories at a glance.Trump signs tax and spending bill into law in major win for administrationThe president signed his sweeping spending package into law on Friday during a Fourth of July picnic at the White House, significantly cutting back on federal safety-net programs and increasing funds for aggressive immigration enforcement.During the picnic Donald Trump gloated about the bill’s passing. “It’s the most popular bill ever signed in the history of the country,” Trump said, while standing next to his wife, Melania Trump. “What we’ve done is put everything into one bill. We’ve never had anything like that before.”Read the full story‘Dark day for our country’: Democrats furious over Trump bill’s passageDemocrats have erupted in a storm of outrage over the passage of Trump’s budget bill, delivering scathing critiques that offered signs of the attack lines the party could wield against Republicans in next year’s midterm elections.Democratic leaders released a wave of statements reflecting their fury after the sweeping bill’s passage on Thursday.Read the full storyEl Salvador president denies Ábrego García was abused in prisonThe president of El Salvador has denied claims that Kilmar Ábrego García was subjected to beatings and deprivation while he was held in a notorious prison before being returned to the US to face human-smuggling charges.Nayib Bukele said in a social media post that Ábrego García, the Salvadorian national who was wrongly extradited from the US to El Salvador in March before being returned in June, “wasn’t tortured, nor did he lose weight”.Read the full storyUS judge clears path for eight immigrants to be deported to South SudanEight migrants lost their last-ditch effort to halt their deportation to South Sudan by the Trump administration on Friday, clearing the way for their imminent transfer after a judge in Massachusetts denied their request.Read the full storyDemocratic lawmakers denied entry to ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ immigration jailA group of Florida lawmakers were denied entry on Thursday into the new Florida-based immigration jail dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz”, one day after the first immigrant detainees began to arrive.Read the full storyTrump has ‘good conversation’ with Zelenskyy after heavy bombardment of Ukraine Donald Trump spoke with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, on Friday as the US president appears increasingly disheartened over his chances of fulfilling a campaign pledge to end the war between Russia and Ukraine.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      ‘Catastrophic’ flood in Texas kills at least 13, including children, with more missing from summer camp.

      Joey Chestnut regains title in New York hotdog eating contest.

      Lost Thomas Jefferson letter on arms and democracy resurfaces for Fourth of July sale.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened 3 July 2025. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Federal judge again halts deportation of eight immigrants to South Sudan

      by

      A federal judge has briefly halted the deportations of eight immigrants to war-torn South Sudan, the latest twist in a case that came hours after the supreme court cleared the way for the Trump administration to deport the men to a country where almost none of them have ties.On Thursday, the nation’s highest court affirmed that US immigration officials can quickly deport people to countries to which they have no connection. Then on Friday afternoon, in an extraordinary Fourth of July hearing, the district judge Randolph Moss sent the case north from Washington to another judge in Boston. Moss concluded that the judge best equipped to deal with the issues was Brian Murphy, whose rulings led to the initial halt of the Trump administration’s effort to begin deportations to the eastern African country.Moss extended his order halting the deportation until 4.30pm Eastern time, but it was unclear whether Murphy would act on the federal holiday to further limit the removal. Moss said new claims by the immigrants’ lawyers deserved a hearing.The eight men awaiting deportation are from countries including Vietnam, South Korea, Mexico, Laos, Cuba and Myanmar. Just one is from South Sudan. All have been convicted of serious crimes, which the Trump administration has emphasized in justifying their banishment. Many had either finished or were close to finishing serving sentences, and had “orders of removal” directing them to leave the US.A lawyer for the men have said they could “face perilous conditions” upon arriving in the country. South Sudan is enmeshed in civil war, and the US government advises no one should travel there before making their own funeral arrangements.The administration has been trying to deport the immigrants for weeks. The government flew them to the US naval base in Djibouti but couldn’t move them further because Murphy had ruled no immigrant could be sent to a new country without a chance to have a court hearing.The supreme court vacated that decision last month, and then Thursday night issued a new order clarifying that that meant the immigrants could be moved to South Sudan. Lawyers for the immigrants filed an emergency request to halt their removal later that night.The case was assigned to Moss, who briefly barred the administration from moving the immigrants from Djibouti to South Sudan until his afternoon hearing concluded. He slightly extended that bar after he sent the case to Murphy. The administration has said it expected to fly the immigrants to South Sudan sometime on Friday. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump expected to sign tax-and-spending bill in win for administration

      by

      Donald Trump is expected to sign his sweeping spending package into law on Friday during a Fourth of July picnic at the White House, setting up significant cutbacks on federal safety-net programs and increasing funds for aggressive immigration enforcement.Trump has touted the legislation’s passage as a “birthday present for America”, speaking before a crowd at a campaign-style rally in Iowa on Thursday evening, even as Democrats expressed their displeasure at the spending package.After months of deliberations, the bill passed by a single vote in the Senate and later passed the House with a 219 to 213 vote on Thursday, with only two Republicans voting against it. The sweeping legislation accomplishes what rightwingers have pushed for, for decades, as the Guardian explained this week, and provides Trump a huge legislative win.The bill, once signed into law, will significantly cut taxes, building on the 2017 tax cuts during Trump’s first term. Although temporary tax exemptions for tips, overtime pay and car loan interest are included, research from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows that the bill is skewed to the rich, with the wealthiest in the US benefiting the most from the tax relief.Additionally, the law, once signed by Trump, will add new restrictions to Medicaid, which provides healthcare to low-income and disabled people, and Snap, also known as food stamps, which helps low-income people afford food. Researchers estimate that the Medicaid cutbacks will leave as many as 11.8 million people without healthcare, while 8 million people will lose their Snap benefits. Critics say that the Medicaid cuts will have massive ripple effects on healthcare nationwide.“This is highway robbery,” the Democratic senator Raphael Warnock posted on X, formerly known as Twitter. “The bill Republicans just passed steals from you to give to the rich.”Proponents of the bill say that the Medicaid and Snap changes are designed to root out waste and abuse.Additionally, the spending package will allocate $170m to immigration enforcement, a monumental amount of money that will help support the Trump administration’s push to engage in “mass deportations”.“This disgraceful, anti-immigrant budget hands the Trump administration a blank check to further ramp up its shameful efforts to terrorize American communities and separate families,” said Nicole Melaku, the executive director of the National Partnership for New Americans, an immigrants’ rights organization. “Instead of safeguarding people’s access to healthcare and wellness, the bill gives tax cuts to big corporations and funnels billions of dollars to hire more immigration agents, build more immigration jails and deny people their fair day in court.”Already, the Trump administration has engaged in widespread attacks on immigrant communities, by increasing resources to immigration enforcement operations.“This budget promises to supercharge US Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests that disappear community members, leave children parentless and threaten constitutional and due-process rights for all of us,” said Meg McCarthy, executive director of the National Immigrant Justice Center, alegal organization.A recent Guardian analysis shows that undocumented immigrants without any criminal history have been arrested at an exponentially increasing rate, after top White House officials instructed agents to increase arrests.Trump temporarily walked back some of Ice’s aggressive immigration enforcement actions after complaints from leaders in the farming and hospitality industries: last month, the Trump administration engaged in a short-lived pause on raids at farms, restaurants and hotels. But at Thursday’s event, Trump again brought up the idea of pausing large-scale enforcement on farms.“If a farmer is willing to vouch for these people in some way, Kristi, I think we’re going to have to just say that’s going to be good, right?” Trump said to the secretary of homeland security, Kristi Noem. “We don’t want to do it where we take all of the workers off the farms.”In addition to tax cuts, restrictions on Medicaid and Snap and the aggressive supercharging of immigration enforcement, the bill seeks to end green energy incentives created under Joe Biden, seen as a further blow against efforts to combat the climate crisis.The US budget deficit will increase with this bill, leading to opposition by some Trump allies. The non-partisan congressional budget office estimates the bill will add $3.3tn to the country’s debt through 2034, leading to clashes with some rightwingers.One of the two Republicans who voted against the bill, Thomas Massie, said he opposed the spending bill “because it will significantly increase US budget deficits in the near term, negatively impacting all Americans through sustained inflation and high interest rates”.Elon Musk, the rightwing billionaire who established the federal government’s office tasked with slashing federal spending during the first few months of the Trump administration, has also publicly called out the spending bill. Days before Congress passed the bill, Musk repeated his call for the creation of a new political party to oppose the Republicans and Democrats. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Democratic lawmakers denied entry to ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ immigration jail

      by

      A group of Florida lawmakers were denied entry on Thursday into the new Florida-based immigration jail dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz” one day after the first immigrant detainees began to arrive.Five Democratic lawmakers attempted to enter the facility, which was previously toured on Tuesday by White House officials, but were stopped by law enforcement officers from local agencies, according to the state representative Anna Eskamani in an interview with CNN.“This is a blatant abuse of power and an attempt to conceal human rights violations from the public eye,” the five said in a joint statement.The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirmed that the first detentions at the facility began on Wednesday, but did not respond to questions regarding the number of people detained so far.The controversial Everglades jail was quickly set up in a partnership between the federal and Florida state governments. Sitting approximately 50 miles (80km) west of Miami, the remote facility is managed by the state but in large part funded the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema).“It might be as good as the real Alcatraz. A little controversial, but I couldn’t care less,” Trump said on Tuesday after touring the site. During the tour, Trump joked about immigrants being pursued by snakes and alligators if they attempted to escape.Since Trump took office, Florida has been assisting the administration’s goals in rounding up a large number of immigrants to be detained and deported. Through a program called 287(g), local law enforcement agencies partner with DHS and become deputized to carry out immigration enforcement operations. According to the state government, Florida has more 287(g) deputizations than any other state in the US, which has allowed it to engage in widespread operations targeting immigrant communities.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionImmigrants arrested by Florida law enforcement under the arrangement will be detained at the facility, DHS said.“You’ll have a lot of people that will deport on their own because they don’t want to end up in an Alligator Alcatraz, or some of these other places,” Florida governor Ron DeSantis said after touring the facility with Trump. “This is a model, but we need other states to step up.”Being undocumented in the US is not a crime; rather, it is a civil offense. Data analysis by the Guardian shows that there has been a dramatic nationwide increase in the arrest of undocumented immigrants with no criminal record. The White House has pressured immigration officials to arrest 3,000 people per day, with the reported goal of reaching one million a year.Two non-profit groups have sued DHS, claiming the site’s buildup is violating environmental policies. DHS said it expects the facility to expand quickly to 5,000 beds. More

    • 250 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk says he may launch his own party: but US history tells us that’s not a recipe for success

      by

      To paraphrase a very old joke, how do you make a small fortune in America? Start with a large fortune and fund a third political party. American political history is littered with the wrecks of challengers who thought they could break the two-party system and failed.

      This makes Elon Musk’s tease that he may launch his own new political party as an act of defiance following his falling out with Donald Trump even more intriguing.

      What do we mean by a two-party system though? Since the 1860s, the Democrats and Republicans have dominated the US political landscape, holding the presidency, Congress and the vast majority of elected positions. Attempts at third parties have usually floundered at the ballot box.

      Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

      Some have lasted only for a few electoral cycles, including the Progressive Party in the 1910s and the Citizens Party of the 1980s, while others like the Libertarian Party and Green Party have lasted decades and, in some cases, managed some electoral success at the local level.

      But this is where an important distinction has to be made between third parties and third-party candidates. Because the US system is so personality-driven rather than party focused compared to Europe, quite often third parties have been built around a single person.

      A good example is the previously mentioned Progressive Party. It was founded in 1912 by former president Theodore Roosevelt after he split from the Republicans. Without him it quickly faded away.

      Ross Perot: stood as an independent in 1992 and as the nominee for the Reform Party in 1996.
      Bob Daemmrich/Alamy Stock Photo

      The Reform Party was created by billionaire Ross Perot in 1995 after he managed to get 18.9% of the vote in the 1992 presidential election. While it continued without him for some years, it was a shell of its former self. Other parties like the Socialist, Libertarian and Green parties have sprung from more organic movements and thus have been more successful at a local or state level.

      When you look at recent polling though, it seems strange that the two parties continue to dominate. Public dissatisfaction with politics as usual seems at an all-time high. In a recent Pew Research poll when asked whether “I often wish there were more political parties to choose from” describes their views, 37% of respondents answered: “Very well” and 31% answered: “Somewhat well”.

      In another poll, 25% of respondents said that neither of the two main parties represented their interests.

      So if there is an appetite for some sort of change, why have so few challengers succeeded? The two main parties seem entrenched to the point where it resembles a cartel.

      Odds stacked against third-party insurgency

      The first and arguably most important reason is the electoral system. First past the post does not guarantee a two-party system (look at Britain, for instance). But political scientist Maurice Duverger argued that it does mean that the two main parties have a significant advantage. There are prizes for coming first and second, nothing for third place.

      Ralph Nader leveraged his public profile, rather than his wealth, to enter politics and stood as the Green Party candidate in the 2000 election.
      EPA/Shawn Thew

      Equally, many of the big prizes in American politics such as the presidency and state governorships are indivisible and cannot be shared. So it has become received wisdom that voting for anyone other than Democrats or Republicans is a wasted vote.

      In these cases, people either vote for what they perceive to be the lesser of two evils or stay at home, rather than voting for a candidate with no chance or that they may not support.

      The other multi-billion dollar elephant in the room is money. The sheer cost of running for elections in recent years means that any third party is unlikely to be able to raise the funds to be truly competitive. At the last election, the Democrats and Republicans spent hundreds of millions of dollars (which isn’t even counting all of the super-PAC money spent on their behalf).

      Whenever billionaires like Perot have attempted to self-fund a party, they have left themselves open to the accusation that it’s a vanity project, or lacks true mass appeal.

      There is also the fact that to run successfully you must have media coverage. The media tends to focus almost exclusively on the two main parties. This creates a “chicken and egg” situation where you need success to help raise money and media coverage, but it’s difficult to be successful without first having money and media coverage.

      The final reasons are that of the open primary and ideological flexibility of the main parties. Donald Trump briefly considered running as president for the Reform Party back in 2000. In 2016, the open primary system that both main parties use meant that he could impose himself on the Republican Party despite most of the party elite despising him.

      Why bother starting your own party when you can run for one that already exists? It could now be argued that the Republicans have effectively become the Trump or Maga party, although whether this will survive his presidency is open to debate.

      Money, money, money

      Elon Musk has, for the moment, money to burn. Whether he’s willing to invest in the long term to turn this into more than a vanity project remains to be seen.

      He also has charisma and a national platform to amplify his voice like few others. But, having been born outside America, he can’t run for president.

      If he’s serious about electoral success, he’d have to find someone to run, and that would mean, effectively, they’d lead his party. Musk’s public persona suggests that he does not play well with others.

      Founding a third party isn’t impossible, but unless there is a political earthquake it seems difficult to see how one could succeed. More

    • 163 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump has ‘good conversation’ with Zelenskyy after heavy bombardment of Ukraine by Russia

      by

      Donald Trump spoke with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, on Friday as the US president appears increasingly disheartened over his chances of fulfilling a campaign pledge to end the war between Russia and Ukraine.The call with Zelenskyy comes as Washington has halted its latest shipment of military aid to Ukraine including Patriot air defense missiles and other crucial munitions meant to support the country’s defenses, and hours after Russia launched a devastating air attack on Kyiv using a record number of drones and ballistic missiles.Zelenskyy called the conversation “important and useful” and said in a post said that he and Trump had discussed Ukraine’s air defense capabilities, joint defense production and “mutual purchases and investments”, all potentially avenues for Ukraine to restart aid from the United States by providing incentives for the Trump administration to rush crucial munitions to Kyiv.He said that the two sides had also agreed to “increase aerial protection”, a particular focus for Kyiv as Russia has increased bombardments of Ukrainian cities despite outrage from Trump and other world leaders.Yet it was not immediately clear if Zelenskyy had achieved any concrete progress with Trump and in his statement he did not mention the halt of aid shipments from the US or announce their resumption. Axios reported that a source described the call as a “good conversation”.Trump said he was “very disappointed” after a telephone call with Vladimir Putin on Thursday. A Putin aide told reporters that the Russian president was not willing to make concessions on what the Kremlin has called the “root causes” of the war with Ukraine, a list of grievances that includes Nato expansion and Ukraine’s desire to join western economic and security blocs.“I’m very disappointed with the conversation I had today with President Putin, because I don’t think he’s there,” Trump told reporters after holding a rally in Iowa on Thursday evening. “I don’t think he’s there, and I’m very disappointed. I’m just saying, I don’t think he’s looking to stop, and that’s too bad.”The US has said that it halted the shipments, some of which were already in Poland, due to a review of US military stockpiles that suggested that the country is running low on munitions for its own troops.Germany has said that it is in “intensive talks” to buy the Patriot missiles for Ukraine, although it’s unclear whether those stocks would be available immediately.“There are various ways to fill this Patriot gap,” a German government spokesperson told a news conference in Berlin on Friday. One option being considered was for the German government to buy the Patriot missile batteries in the United States and then send them to Ukraine.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“I can confirm that intensive discussions are indeed being held on this matter,” the spokesperson said.The shortage of Patriot missiles was further highlighted by the record bombardment of Ukraine in which Russia sent more than 550 drones and ballistic missiles at major cities in what Zelenskyy described as a “deliberate act of terror”.The strike immediately followed the call between Putin and Trump, Zelenskyy said, and was a “clear interpretation of how Moscow interprets diplomacy”. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      El Salvador’s president denies that Kilmar Ábrego García was abused in notorious prison

      by

      The president of El Salvador has denied claims that Kilmar Ábrego García was subjected to beatings and deprivation while he was held in the country before being returned to the US to face human-smuggling charges.Nayib Bukele said in a social media post that Ábrego García, the Salvadorian national who was wrongly extradited from the US to El Salvador in March before being returned in June, “wasn’t tortured, nor did he lose weight”.Bukele showed pictures and video of Ábrego García in a detention cell, adding: “If he’d been tortured, sleep-deprived, and starved, why does he look so well in every picture?”Ábrego García’s lawyers said last week that he had suffered “severe beatings”, sleep deprivation, malnutrition and other forms of torture while he was held in El Salvador’s notorious anti-terrorism prison, Cecot.Ábrego García said detainees at Cecot “were confined to metal bunks with no mattresses in an overcrowded cell with no windows, bright lights that remained on 24 hours a day and minimal access to sanitation”.His lawyers say he lost 31 pounds during his first two weeks of confinement.They said that, at one point, Ábrego García and four other inmates were transferred to a different part of the prison, “where they were photographed with mattresses and better food – photos that appeared to be staged to document improved conditions”.Bukele made no reference to whether the photos he showed to claim Ábrego García wasn’t mistreated were taken in a nicer part of the prison.Bukele recently struck a deal under which the US will pay about $6m for El Salvador to imprison members of what the US administration claims are members of MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, two gangs, for a year. According to Maryland senator Chris van Hollen, who traveled to El Salvador to meet with Ábrego García while he was detained there, the Trump administration intends to provide up to $15m to El Salvador for the controversial detention service.Bukele’s remarks came as the Tennessee judge in Ábrego García’s human-smuggling complaint ordered both sides to stop making public statements, after Ábrego García’s legal team accused the government of attempting to smear him without evidence as a “monster”, “terrorist” and “barbarian”.Lawyers for Ábrego García argued in a court filing that the government had violated a local rule barring comments that could be prejudicial to a fair trial.“For months, the government has made extensive and inflammatory extrajudicial comments about Mr Ábrego that are likely to prejudice his right to a fair trial,” Ábrego García’s lawyers said in a filing.“These comments continued unabated – if anything they ramped up – since his indictment in this district, making clear the government’s intent to engage in a ‘trial by newspaper’.”The US district judge Waverly Crenshaw issued the gag order in a two-sentence ruling.Ábrego García’s legal team has accused the government of trying to convict him in the court of public opinion since it acknowledged that it had mistakenly sent him to a prison in El Salvador despite a court order barring the move.“As Mr Ábrego’s plight captured national attention, officials occupying the highest positions of the United States government baselessly labeled him a ‘gangbanger’, ‘monster’, ‘illegal predator’, ‘illegal alien terrorist’, ‘wife beater’, ‘barbarian’ and ‘human trafficker,’” the filing said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe attorneys singled out the vice-president, JD Vance, who they said had lied when he called Ábrego García a “convicted MS-13 gang member”.They also said that Trump administration officials had made 20 more public statements about their client when he was arraigned, including in remarks by the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, and the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche.They also said the attorney general, Pam Bondi, accused their client of crimes he hadn’t been accused of, including links to a murder case. In sum, the statements had asserted Ábrego García’s guilt “without regard to the judicial process or the presumption of innocence”, the filing said.According to the documents filed on Wednesday, officials within the prison acknowledged that Ábrego García was not a gang member, and that his tattoos did not indicate a gang affiliation.“Prison officials explicitly acknowledged that plaintiff Ábrego García’s tattoos were not gang-related, telling him ‘your tattoos are fine’,” according to the filing, and they kept him in a cell separate from those accused of gang membership.The prison officials, however, threatened to move Ábrego García into a cell with gang members whom officials said “would ‘tear’ him apart”.Separately, US prosecutors have agreed with a request by Ábrego García’s lawyers to delay his release from Tennessee jail over fears that the Trump administration could move to deport the Salvadorian national a second time.In a filing on Friday, lawyers for Ábrego García asked the judge overseeing a federal complaint that he was involved in human smuggling to delay his release because of “contradictory statements” by the Trump’s administration over whether he’ll be deported upon release.The justice department has said it plans to try the Maryland construction worker on the smuggling charges, but also that it plans to deport him but has not said when. More

    • 263 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      How do we celebrate the 4th of July when American freedom is disappearing? | Deborah Archer, Song Richardson and Susan Sturm

      by

      The Fourth of July celebration of freedom rings hollow this year. The contradictions built into a national commemoration of our triumph over autocracy feel newly personal and perilous – especially to those who have, until now, felt relatively secure in the federal government’s commitment to democracy and the rule of law.But the contradiction is far from new. Black, brown and Indigenous communities have always seen the gap between the ideals of American democracy and the lived reality of exclusion. Frederick Douglass’s 1852 address What to the Slave is the Fourth of July? demanded that Americans confront the hypocrisy of celebrating liberty while millions were enslaved. Today, those contradictions persist in enduring racial disparities and policies that perpetuate segregation, second-class citizenship and selective protection of rights.And just as the nation seemed to be inching toward reckoning and repair, we are now witnessing a dangerous backslide. Our federal government is increasingly hostile to even the mention of race and racism, actively dismantling protections that were hard-won over decades. Each day brings new signs of an anti-democratic campaign –eroding civil rights, stoking racial division and weaponizing law to silence dissent and disempower communities. This inversion of democracy – where power flows upward, not outward – is bold and widespread.The chilling effects of federal overreach touch everyone. People of all races, backgrounds and positions have lost jobs, funding, and trust in institutions once seen as pillars of democracy. The backlash has laid bare a truth long familiar to marginalized communities: that America’s stated ideals often fail to match its realities.Still, despair is not a strategy. Democracy is not a spectator sport. It is built – and rebuilt – by people who show up in their communities, workplaces, schools and congregations, determined to make freedom real. The most powerful response we see is not top-down, but grassroots: people choosing to act, even in small ways, to defend democracy from where they stand.We write as three legal professionals – of different racial identities, vantage points, and approaches to justice – but united in our understanding of the urgency of this moment to ask a question that may feel counterintuitive to those trained in the law: What can people do to advance democracy and equity outside of the courts?First, we must not retreat. Rather, we must overcome our disillusionment, disheartenment and exhaustion and recognize our linked fate across race, class, generation and geography. Authoritarianism thrives on disengagement and disconnection.One way to remain connected and energized is recognizing that this moment of transition is also an opportunity to transform our democracy. We can envision the future we want, untethered from the limitations of the current moment. Then, from the vantage point of this future, assuming it has been achieved, we can ask ourselves what we did today to make that vision a reality. This perspective avoids asking “what should we do”, which limits us to thinking within our current circumstances, instead asking “what did we do”, which allows us to think beyond our current challenges and limitations and instead create new opportunities and possibilities.From the vantage point of the future, we can ask: where can I connect today? Where can I act today? What kind of change agent am I willing to be today to create the future I envision?Here are some ideas:We can engage those directly affected by injustice in the decisions that shape their lives. We must pay attention to who is thriving – and who isn’t – in our institutions, and do the hard work of reimagining our institutions and systems. That is democracy in action.One model comes from two Columbia Law students engaging high schoolers in Harlem and Queens to learn how local government works – a first step toward civic participation and transformation. Another comes from the artist-activist Tonika Johnson’s Folded Map project, which paired Black South Side Chicago residents with their white North Side “map twins” to explore stark neighborhood inequities. The project fostered real relationships, cross-racial learning and grassroots coalitions, while exposing the systemic racism behind dramatic disparities in infrastructure and investment.There is work happening under the radar, too. On campuses where formal DEI efforts have been banned or gutted, faculty and staff are creating informal coalitions to sustain equity-focused collaboration and resist institutional amnesia. In several states, even court systems are taking action, building partnerships between judges, lawyers and communities to address racial disparities in access to justice.Sometimes the opportunity for transformation comes in a policy window. In Indianapolis, the state’s plan to rebuild a major highway became a chance for the Rethink Coalition to shift the conversation – from road engineering to community renewal. Their vision? A process and outcome centered on repairing the harm done to historically Black neighborhoods when the highway was first built. But what made that vision powerful was not just the idea, it was the strategy. Rethink helped put tools, data and technical expertise directly into the hands of community members so they could fully engage in reshaping the project. By democratizing access to planning knowledge, they ensured that residents were not just consulted, but empowered to lead. That’s what it means to build toward the future now.This is the kind of work that keeps us grounded in radical hope – a belief in the possibility of transformation against the odds. It is the practice of democracy, not just its theory. And it’s available to all of us.As the attacks grow louder, more coordinated, more entrenched, we must be even more committed to acting where we are – with whoever we can – to not only defend the fragile, unfinished project of building a multiracial democracy, but to take the time to dream about what our more robust democracy would look like, and then to take the next best step in that direction, undeterred by the current moment.If enough of us engage – across differences and at every level – these efforts can add up to a reimagined nation. One that finally lives up to its promises. One that, someday soon, we can celebrate without contradiction.

      Deborah N Archer is the president of the ACLU, the Margaret B Hoppin professor of law at NYU Law School, and the author of Dividing Lines: How Transportation Infrastructure Reinforces Racial Inequality. L Song Richardson is the former dean and currently chancellor’s professor of law at the University of California Irvine School of Law. She previously served as president of Colorado College. Susan Sturm is the George M Jaffin professor of law and social responsibility and the founding director of the Center for Institutional and Social Change at Columbia Law School and author of What Might Be: Confronting Racism to Transform Our Institutions. More