US politics

Subterms

    Latest story

    175 Shares12 Views

    ‘From all sides’: universities in red states face attacks from DC and at home

    by

    Days after the University of Michigan president, Santa Ono, announced that he was leaving his post to lead the University of Florida, his name was quietly removed on Wednesday from a letter signed by more than 600 university presidents denouncing the Trump administration’s “unprecedented government overreach and political interference” with academic institutions.As Ono is set to become the highest-paid public university president in the country, in a state that has often been at the forefront of the rightwing battle against higher education, the reversal, first reported on by Talking Points Memo, underscored the challenges of standing up against the government’s sweeping attacks on education in solidly red states.Many private colleges and universities have begun to push back against Donald Trump’s federal funding cuts, bans on diversity initiatives, and targeting of foreign students, while faculty at more than 30 universities, most of them public, have passed resolutions calling for a “mutual defence compact” – a largely symbolic pledge to support one another in the face of the government’s repressive measures. But in conservative states, where local attacks on higher education were in vogue before the US president took office, faculty trying to fight back find themselves fighting on multiple fronts: against state legislators as well as against Trump.Some have persevered, although for now that resistance has been limited to statements and resolutions calling on the universities themselves to put up a more muscular response. The faculty senate at Indiana University, Bloomington, voted in favor of a defence compact last month, days before Republican legislators passed a sweeping overhaul of the state school’s governance. In Georgia, Kennesaw State University became the first – and so far only – school in the US south to join the call for the solidarity pact, in part to protest the state scrapping a decades-old initiative to increase the college enrollment of Black men, which was pulled as part of the broader Trump-led crackdown on diversity initiatives. This week, faculty at the University of Miami in Ohio and at the University of Arizona – both states with Republican-majority legislatures – also passed resolutions in favor of mutual alliances among universities.The resolutions are nonbinding, as faculty senates play an advisory role at most universities, and so far no administrations have responded to the call. But the idea, those behind it say, is to send a message.“All universities in all states are under threat,” said Jim Sherman, a retired psychology professor at Indiana University, Bloomington, who proposed the resolution passed by faculty there. “If we don’t stand together and talk about what each of us is experiencing, how we’re dealing with it, and what the options are, then we’re standing alone, and that’s much more difficult.”Paul Boxer, a psychology professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey, first came up with the plan to organize faculty in the “Big Ten” conference, a group of 18 large, mostly public universities, to put up a united front against the Trump administration. But schools outside the conference showed an interest, and the solidarity effort quickly outgrew the consortium to include other, mostly public colleges and universities across the country. Boxer also praised other collective initiatives that have since emerged, including by a group of “elite” universities quietly strategizing to counter the Trump administration policies, but called on more universities to publicly unite in their resistance.“A lot of the attention has been on Harvard, and the Ivy Leagues, and the universities that Trump has name-dropped, and I’m glad that Harvard did what they did, obviously, but they’re sitting on a $50bn endowment, and they can do things that we can’t in a public university,” Boxer said, referring to the university’s public defiance of Trump’s demands and a lawsuit it filed against the administration.Large state universities – particularly those in blue states with sympathetic legislators – had other advantages, Boxer noted, including strong connections to alumni in local government and the broader community.That is a harder case to make in Republican-controlled states – some of which, like Florida, Texas, Iowa and Utah – had essentially drawn up a blueprint for attacking diversity initiatives and academic freedom in the years leading up to Trump’s election. In Indiana, the recently passed measures, which legislators attached to a budget bill at the last minute, would establish “productivity” quotas for tenured faculty and end alumnis’ ability to vote for the university’s board of trustees, which would fall under the full control of the state’s governor, Mike Braun.“There is a lot of anxiety,” said Sherman. “If Indiana is any indication, red states might even be more under threat from their state legislatures than they are from the federal government.”Taking a public stance in a climate of growing repression is not easy, faculty say. In Florida, where Ono is headed, the state’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, was an early champion of the battle against diversity initiatives and said this week that he expects the incoming president to abide by the state’s mission to “reject woke indoctrination”.In Georgia, at a statewide faculty leadership meeting this week, scholars from across the state’s universities debated how to defend programmes supporting Black students, help international students facing visa revocations, and prepare to fight proposed state legislation that would impose further restrictions on diversity initiatives and criminalize the distribution of some library materials.“Faculty want to do something, they want to respond, but they also see the inevitability of their university system and their lawmakers doing it. There’s no stopping that train here in Georgia,” said Matthew Boedy, a professor at the University of North Georgia who also leads the state’s American Association of University Professors conference.“There are state-level attacks, there are federal attacks,” he said. “We are taking it from all sides.” More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares

      in US Politics

      Pentagon orders military to pull books related to DEI and ‘gender ideology’

      by

      Military leaders and commanders at the Pentagon were ordered on Friday to go through their libraries and review all books that were related to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), in the US military’s latest anti-DEI move.Leaders were ordered to “promptly identify” materials that promote “divisive concepts and gender ideology [that] are incompatible with the department’s core mission”, according to a memo sent to leaders that was seen by the Associated Press. The department gave leaders until 21 May to remove the books.Also on Friday, the Pentagon sent a separate memo to the military’s training academies that the institutions should have “no consideration of race, ethnicity or sex” in their admission process and should focus “exclusively on merit”, though they can allow for students who show “unique athletic talent”, according to the AP. The department ordered the administrations to certify these standards by mid-June.The memo to leaders on books follows a similar order that was given to the military academies, including the US Naval Academy, that led to the removal of nearly 400 books from its library. Books that were withdrawn from the library included Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, novels by writers of color including the Palestinian American Etaf Rum, and academic books that examine race and gender.The department said that a temporary “academic libraries committee” would convene to help the other colleges and academies remove similar books from their collections. Librarians and staff were ordered to use search terms like “affirmative action”, “anti-racism”, “critical race theory” and “white privilege” when determining which books could be subject for removal.The book bans also affect K-12 school libraries that are on military bases around the world. A list of banned children’s books, including books about LGBTQ+ teens and others dealing with race, has been issued by the Department of Defense Education Activity, or DoDEA, which oversees the schools attended by the children of military families abroad.On the list is a New York Times bestseller chronicling the true story of a teenager set on fire by a fellow teenager while riding an Oakland, California, bus, as HuffPost reported. The list also includes a collection of poems and short stories by a New York Times bestselling author documenting the feelings and experiences of teenagers in love.The defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has vowed to purge DEI from the Pentagon, saying when he took office earlier this year that “our diversity is our strength” is “the single dumbest phrase in military history”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSince January, the Trump administration has been overseeing a widespread culling of anything the White House considers to be DEI within the federal government. The specific number of DEI roles that have been removed is unclear as the federal government isn’t keeping track or reporting which roles have been eliminated, but estimates say hundreds or possibly thousands of employees have been fired since the start of the year. More

    • 125 Shares11 Views

      in US Politics

      Judge orders White House to temporarily halt sweeping government layoffs

      by

      Donald Trump’s administration must temporarily halt its sweeping government overhaul because Congress did not authorize it to carry out large-scale staffing cuts and the restructuring of agencies, a federal judge in California said on Friday.US district judge Susan Illston in San Francisco sided with a group of unions, non-profits and local governments in blocking large-scale mass layoffs known as “reductions in force” for 14 days.“As history demonstrates, the president may broadly restructure federal agencies only when authorized by Congress,” Illston said.The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The ruling is the broadest of its kind against the government overhaul that has been led by Elon Musk, the world’s richest person who is also the chief executive officer of electric vehicle maker Tesla.Dozens of lawsuits have challenged the work of the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) on various grounds including violating privacy laws and exceeding its authority, with mixed results.Trump directed government agencies in February to work with Doge to identify targets for mass layoffs as part of the administration’s restructuring plans.The president urged agencies to eliminate duplicative roles, unnecessary management layers and non-critical jobs while automating routine tasks, closing regional field offices and reducing the use of outside contractors.“The Trump administration’s unlawful attempt to reorganize the federal government has thrown agencies into chaos, disrupting critical services provided across our nation,” said a statement from the coalition of plaintiffs.“Each of us represents communities deeply invested in the efficiency of the federal government – laying off federal employees and reorganizing government functions haphazardly does not achieve that.”Illston scheduled a hearing for 22 May to consider a longer-lasting preliminary injunction.She said that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on merits of some of their claims in their lawsuit, which was filed on 28 April and alleged Trump exceeded his authority. It also alleged the office of management and budget, Doge and the office of personnel management exceeded their authority and violated administrative law.Illston said plaintiffs are likely to suffer irreparable harm without the temporary restraining order, which she said preserves the status quo.Illston said the plaintiffs submitted more than 1,000 pages of evidence and 62 sworn declarations, and she highlighted some of the material.For example, she said the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and its Pittsburgh office, which researches health hazards facing mineworkers, had 221 of the department’s 222 workers terminated, citing the union. She gave similar examples at local offices of the Farm Service Agency, the Social Security Administration and Head Start, which supports early learning.“The court here is not considering the potential loss of income of one individual employee, but the widespread termination of salaries and benefits for individuals, families and communities,” Illston wrote in her ruling. More

    • 175 Shares19 Views

      in US Politics

      New bill aims to allow research to catch up with US’s increasing cannabis consumption

      by

      A recently introduced bill, if it passes, would allow research on cannabis despite its schedule I status, which some experts say could help policymakers “craft effective” legislation in the future and potentially allow more clinical research on medical cannabis.Representatives Dina Titus and Ilhan Omar introduced the Evidence-Based Drug Policy Act of 2025 (EBDPA) last week, which would radically ease research restrictions on cannabis and other schedule I substances.Omar said in a statement that the law would allow research to catch up with the US’s increasing cannabis consumption: “We need drug policy to follow the science and reflect the reality on the ground in states across the country.”Schedule I substances, including cannabis, heroin and MDMA, are legally defined as having “no accepted medical use” and a “high potential for abuse”. Medical cannabis proponents point out that cannabis’s federal schedule I status is contradictory, given that patients throughout the US already use cannabis for medical purposes.The Biden administration pushed for cannabis to be reclassified as a schedule III substance, which would alter its legal status and make cannabis-based medicines eligible for FDA approval.But the rescheduling process has continued to stall since Donald Trump reentered the oval office.Unlike rescheduling, the EBDPA would be simple to enact. In its current form, it repeals sections of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 that forbid federal funds from going towards research of schedule I substances, and that require the ONDCP to oppose any attempts to legalize schedule I substances.Still, there are questions as to whether this bill has the ability to pass.Katharine Neill Harris, a drug policy fellow at Rice University, says that the bill is a “modest proposal” and “it might be possible for it to gain the bipartisan support it needs to pass”.Cat Packer, director of Drug Markets and Legal Regulation at Drug Policy Alliance, notes that the bill “has the potential to attract bipartisan support as a modest but meaningful step forward” due to it prioritizing “evidence over ideology”.Though more comprehensive federal cannabis reform might be in the distant future, “the EBDPA should be seen as a neutral step that would enable policymakers to study what works – and be better prepared to craft effective, informed legislation in the future,” Packer added.On the other hand, Aaron Smith, CEO of the National Cannabis Industry Association, doesn’t feel as hopeful and that because of “the hyper-partisan times we live in, getting this bill, or any legislation, frankly, passed isn’t likely in the near term”.Packer hopes that policymakers will see that the bill is vital for shaping smart cannabis policy.“The federal government cannot meaningfully learn from the experiences of the 24-plus states that have legalized cannabis,” Packer says of the current state of affairs.There aren’t ways at the moment for the federal government to scientifically measure cannabis’ impact on youth consumption and health outcomes, arrest and incarceration rates, and who benefits economically from legal cannabis policies, versus who is left out.Existing policy is not only outdated, but there’s “an institutional blindfold that prevents the federal government from adapting to real-world conditions and designing effective, responsive policies”, Packer said.Ideally, Harris says the law would lead to “an increase in rigorous research to inform medical use practice”, noting that there are many questions when it comes to how cannabis functions as a medicine, about ideal doses, long term-impacts of different consumption methods, and whether certain strains work better for some conditions than others.While Omar and Titius have emphasized cannabis when promoting the bill, it would allow federal funding to go toward research on other schedule I substances as well.Smith said that “drug policy should be rooted in scientific fact” and that any step in that direction should be applauded. Harris echoed that sentiment, noting that research on other schedule I substances is “much needed,” given that “several substances in schedule I – psilocybin and MDMA in particular, seem to have therapeutic effects for some people with difficult-to-treat conditions”. Federally funded medical research on the efficacy of these drugs could advance medicine in the US.“If there is evidence to support FDA approval for a schedule I drug for therapeutic applications, this bill would mean that the Office of National Drug Control Policy would not have to reflexively oppose it,” Harris said.Should the bill pass, Harris is skeptical of how much federal funding will actually go to schedule I research as “the Trump administration, so far, has seemed opposed to federal research funding more broadly”.Still, she says: “This bill is an important and reasonable effort to improve the sensibility of federal drug policies, but the current climate could dampen its short-term effects.” More

    • 175 Shares16 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s latest Fox News hire looks even worse than Pete Hegseth | Margaret Sullivan

      by

      The revolving door between the Trump administration and rightwing Fox News took another wild spin this week, as America’s TV-obsessed president tapped Jeanine Pirro for a prominent legal post: top federal prosecutor for Washington DC.Pirro is unqualified, perhaps even more so than was her former Fox colleague Pete Hegseth when he was named Trump’s defense secretary a few months ago. In that crucial position, Hegseth has been a dangerous embarrassment, as his shockingly inappropriate communications have exposed national security secrets to the world.Pirro, although once a county-level district attorney, hasn’t held a government legal position in decades. But she has been opining on Fox for 14 years, mostly recently as a host on The Five, the network’s popular afternoon talkshow.But no matter. She “is in a class by herself”, Trump wrote on social media in announcing his intention to make her the interim (and perhaps permanent) prosecutor.His description may be accurate, but surely not in the way he intends.Pirro’s record at Fox is startlingly checkered, even for that propaganda outfit. She got in trouble with the network’s brass a few years ago for her eager promotion of Trump’s lies about supposed voter fraud in the 2020 election. (The voting-fraud lies became part of a defamation lawsuit against the network by a voting-systems company; Fox paid nearly $800m to settle the case and had to acknowledge that statements made on air were false.)Fox once suspended her for her ugly commentary on Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s wearing a hijab, which Pirro suggested was an adherence to “sharia lawm which in itself is antithetical to the United States constitution”. And she advocated for a “cleansing” of the FBI and the justice department because their ranks were full of people who “need to be taken out in handcuffs”.But none of this causes any real concern for the president, apparently, because Pirro has one huge thing going for her. Over the course of a long friendship and many visits to Mar-a-Lago, she has been relentlessly loyal to Trump.In fact, she has gone well beyond loyalty into straight-up sycophancy.On this score, Pirro has what it takes.“Since Trump returned to office, Pirro has kept busy by showering him with praise and lashing out at anyone who stands in his way,” wrote Matt Gertz, senior fellow at the progressive watchdog group Media Matters, noting that she is the 23rd former Fox employee whom Trump has tapped for his administration.Tom Homan, a former Fox contributor, became Trump’s “border czar”, aggressively carrying out the administration’s anti-immigrant policy, and Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and former host of a weekly Fox show, was named ambassador to Israel.Beyond her peerless cheerleading, Pirro would be useful to Trump in practical terms, noted the New York Times in a news story.She supports “Trump’s efforts to exact vengeance on his political enemies, has backed his challenges to federal judges who have questioned the legality of his immigration policies and spent months protesting the legitimacy” of Biden’s 2020 election to the presidency.Although Trump often doesn’t return the favor of loyalty, he has stepped up for Pirro’s family by pardoning her former husband (once Trump’s lawyer), who in 2020 was convicted of conspiracy and tax-evasion charges.All told, this is some serious symbiosis. In stepping away from her high-profile – and high-earning – TV job, Pirro may solve a sticky problem for Trump, whose earlier choice for the DC prosecutor’s position ran into trouble with Senate Republicans.It’s not clear if Pirro’s nomination will succeed, especially in the long term. Although Trump is nominating her on an interim basis, there’s little doubt he’d like it to be permanent. But even the interim appointment may run into a legal fight over just how many acting US attorneys the president can appoint consecutively.You might think that with Hegseth’s rocky and widely criticized start as defense secretary – where he oversees almost three million employees while maintaining a TV star’s firm jawline – the president would hesitate to choose another unqualified TV personality for a key role.But Trump clearly doesn’t see it that way.There’s hardly anything better, it turns out, than Fox News on one’s resume. Even better when it’s paired with a solid record of fealty to the Audience in Chief.

      Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

    • 125 Shares19 Views

      in US Politics

      Crass, flashy, outrageous: Trump media blitz redefines meaning of presidential

      by

      There was a disturbance in the Force. Donald Trump celebrated “Star Wars Day” this week with an AI-generated image of himself as a muscle-bound warrior holding a red lightsaber in front of two US flags and eagles.It seemed like a bit of fun but appeared on the White House’s official X account with a dark political message: “Happy May the 4th to all, including the Radical Left Lunatics who are fighting so hard to bring Sith Lords, Murderers, Drug Lords, Dangerous Prisoners, & well known MS-13 Gang Members, back into our Galaxy. You’re not the Rebellion – you’re the Empire. May the 4th be with you.”Star Wars nerds were quick to point out that a red lightsaber implies that Trump has embraced the Dark Side. Actor Mark Hamill, who played Luke Skywalker, wrote on social media: “Proof this guy is full of SITH.” But the joking-not-joking post was also indicative of a wider trend: a revolution in the way the White House communicates with the American public.Over the past three-and-a-half months, the US president and his team have launched a relentless media offensive based on crass language, flashy tactics, shock-value videos and social media memes and posts that are outrageous by design. They have used platforms and personalities to bypass traditional outlets and directly engage the Maga (Make America great again) base. They have found new ways to drown out critics, goad opponents and antagonise the world.The embrace of viral far-right culture has nurtured a parallel information ecosystem through pro-Trump outlets enjoying a significant growth in influence, access to power and financial investment. It is helping the president dominate the “attention economy” and reshape narratives around the economy, immigration and other policy issues. But it also alarms critics who warn that insults and lies are going unchecked.Tara Setmayer, a political commentator and former Republican communications director on Capitol Hill, said: “Donald Trump has always understood mass communication and the power of propaganda and his rise and success politically will go down in history as one of the most successful propaganda operations ever. He has completely upended any semblance of decency, of class, of gravitas when it comes to presidential communications.“It’s literally turning presidential methods of communication into the WWE – the imagery, the immaturity, the outrageousness. All of those things seem to be more important than truth or respect for the office and what it means to use the power of the bully pulpit to speak to the American people and the world.”Presidential communications have come a long way. Woodrow Wilson held the first presidential press conference in 1913. Franklin Roosevelt pioneered radio with his informal “fireside chats” during the Great Depression and the second world war, articulating policies such as the New Deal directly to citizens.View image in fullscreenJohn F Kennedy leveraged TV for live addresses – for example, during the Cuban missile crisis. Ronald Reagan, a former actor, relished televised addresses, earning the nickname “the great communicator”. Barack Obama was the first president to use platforms such as YouTube and Twitter extensively, hosting online town halls and bypassing old media.Over the past decade, Trump has combined the old with the new, holding traditional in-person rallies while also being prolific on Twitter during his first term – a single all-caps tweet could dominate headlines, move financial markets or upend global diplomacy – and now his own Truth Social platform.But only since returning to office has he turned the White House into a quasi-content provider in its own right, continuing the aggressive media strategy honed during his winning election campaign to achieve what his communications director, Steven Cheung, has called “full-spectrum dominance”.In January, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, posted a photo of men in chains boarding a plane and wrote: “Deportation flights have begun.” In February, the White House posted on X a Valentine’s Day card with the faces of Trump and “border czar” Tom Homan with the caption: “Roses are red, violets are blue, come here illegally and we’ll deport you.”It also posted a video of shackled immigrants being loaded on to planes, with the sounds of clanking chains and whirring jet engines in the background. The caption said “ASMR: Illegal Alien Deportation Flight”. In March, on the day of Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress, the White House’s rapid-response account posted more than 200 times to X, promoting clips and favourable reactions.Trump has spent his career living by the rule that, when he takes a hit, he hits back harder. That philosophy now infuses the White House. When the actor Selena Gomez posted an Instagram video in which she cried about the deportation of children, it quickly produced video interviews with the mothers of children killed by undocumented immigrants.When Kilmar Ábrego García, a Maryland man with protected legal status, was mistakenly deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador, Leavitt said “outrage” about the case by Democrats and the media “has been nothing short of despicable”. Dozens of posters of arrested undocumented immigrants were placed along the White House driveway, ensuring they would appear in the live shots of TV journalists.View image in fullscreenSome content is downright bizarre. The White House shared a photo of a fake Time magazine cover with Trump in a golden crown and the caption, “LONG LIVE THE KING”. Another post contained an AI-generated video that showed the Gaza Strip transformed into a luxurious, gilded resort called “Trump Gaza”. And earlier this month, Trump shared an AI-generated image of himself dressed as the pope as the mourning of Pope Francis continued.Setmayer, who now runs the Seneca Project political action committee, commented: “It’s so outrageous that it would be comical if it weren’t so serious. There’s nothing funny or comical about insulting one of the world’s largest religions and putting yourself in that role. It’s blasphemous. But it’s also a window into how Donald Trump views himself: this is part of that malignant narcissism.“He is so desperate for adulation and attention and being all-powerful that he would project himself in a cartoon-like rendering of positions of power using the White House platform to push it. This is something a maladjusted 12-year-old does. Not the most powerful man in the world.”The Trump White House has a symbiotic relationship with a new wave of podcasters, X users and YouTubers who enjoy access to the briefing room and presidential press pool, often asking Trump conspicuously sycophantic questions. Employees of outlets such as the National Pulse and the Daily Wire have been invited on foreign trips with cabinet officials. The exposure is leading to bigger advertising deals and distribution contracts.No one embodies the new era of White House communications better than Leavitt, who at 27 is the youngest-ever press secretary and probably the most zealously on-message. She has shown an uncanny ability to channel Trump’s political psyche, his relish for disparaging the so-called legacy media and his willingness to play fast and loose with facts.Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center thinktank in Washington, said: “She’s approaching it in a very different way than others have done. She is forthrightly being a person who communicates the message of the White House rather than responds to the questions of the press. You can query whether that’s the job she ought to be doing but she is doing it in an outstanding way.View image in fullscreen“She is mature beyond her years. She’s articulate. She both can deliver the message and respond in an interactive way, which is something that some press secretaries have difficulty with. If the job of the press secretary is to send the message of the administration on a regular basis in person, she is knocking the ball out of the park.”But Mike McCurry, who was White House press secretary under Bill Clinton, is among those who query whether that is what the job is about. He said: “She seems to be in nonstop belligerent mode and showing disdain for the reporters in the room. It’s nothing but a propaganda show. She’s not doing the job as it’s traditionally been defined. She’s got a whole different role in the Trump cosmos.”Leavitt presents a weekly “Maga Minute” roundup video on TikTok, YouTube and other platforms. Last week also saw the launch of White House Wire, a news-style website that publishes exclusively positive coverage. Its format closely resembles the Drudge Report, the rightwing site founded in the 1990s that broke the Monica Lewinsky scandal.When he was working for Clinton, McCurry initially tried to dismiss questions about Lewinsky by retorting: “Are you really going to ask a question based on something in the Drudge Report?” He acknowledges that today’s White House is operating in a very different media environment – but argues that is no excuse for its lack of accountability.McCurry said: “The concept is if you keep throwing stuff up against the wall all the time, the press tries to chase everything down and they get befuddled a little bit because they don’t have a way of focusing back on things that might truly matter in the world.“It’s a strategy to try to overwhelm all of the legitimate sources of discourse and just keep changing the tune every day to match whatever it is that you want to try to get done. It’s either completely malevolent or completely brilliant. It’s hard to know which.” More

    • 113 Shares25 Views

      in US Politics

      Patricia Clarkson: ‘When women make equal pay, everybody wins’

      by

      Patricia Clarkson, who portrays late equal pay activist Lilly Ledbetter in a biopic released this week, has a wish.The Oscar-nominated actor hopes her fellow American women collectively withhold sex from their partners – especially men in power – if the second Trump administration’s assault on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives ever takes aim at the gains won by the subject of her new film.“Do not go after this – do not because there will be a Lysistrata moment,” she told the Guardian in an interview recently, alluding to the ancient Greek comedy about women resolving to abstain from sex to compel the men in their nation to stop warring and sign a peace treaty. “We will put chastity belts back on.”Clarkson is only the latest in a long lineage to float the idea of a sex strike as a protest tactic. Nonetheless, what sets the Easy A and Sharp Objects star’s admonition and potential call to action apart is that it comes as her starring turn in Lilly coincides with the first months of a second Donald Trump presidency marked in large part by the rollback of policies meant to widen the professional opportunities of historically underrepresented groups.Directed by Rachel Feldman, Lilly dramatizes the struggles endured by a working-class mother from Alabama who began working at the tire manufacturer Goodyear in 1979 before becoming its only female supervisor and eventually realizing she was paid substantially less than her male colleagues, including much less experienced ones.She sued and at one point had been awarded nearly $4m in damages and backpay. But, in 2007, the US supreme court ruled that she had waited too long to sue, preventing her from ever collecting her award.Ultimately, with lobbying from Ledbetter and supporters that she picked up while pursuing her lawsuit, Congress enacted legislation early in Barack Obama’s presidency that afforded workers greater latitude to sue their employers over unequal and discriminatory pay.Clarkson said she did not get to meet Ledbetter before her death at age 86 in October. So Clarkson said she drew inspiration for her portrayal of the resolute Ledbetter in large part from her mother, Jacquelyn “Jackie” Brechtel Clarkson, who served several terms as a Democratic member of New Orleans’s city council and Louisiana’s state legislature during a political career regarded as legendary in their home town.She marveled at how her mother, who died at age 88 about four months before Ledbetter, never compromised raising five daughters – “all working women” – while facing down countless intense political battles.“They had similar DNA in ways that came to me as I was doing these scenes,” Clarkson said.To say the least, the political climate depicted in Lilly through Clarkson’s acting as well as through archival footage of prominent liberal American political figures who philosophically aligned themselves with her has changed seismically.In between Trump presidencies, the US supreme court eliminated the federal abortion rights established by Roe v Wade, a staggering blow to women’s reproductive rights.Trump has then spent his second presidency pushing his government to withhold funds from institutions which adhere to DEI practices that took hold nationally after the Minneapolis police’s murder of George Floyd in 2020.Less than two weeks before Lilly’s theatrical release, Trump’s defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, announced his intent to eliminate a program meant to promote women’s contributions and safety in global conflict zones. The announcement raised eyebrows given that it was implemented during Trump’s first presidency and had drawn a ringing endorsement from his daughter, Ivanka.Clarkson made it a point to deliver an impassioned defense of DEI measures in general, urging Americans to stay informed about the topic despite the other fights being stoked by Trump’s second presidency.“When we work with people of every race, creed, color, sexual preference – that’s the best part of this world we live in,” Clarkson said. “I refuse to live in the world” demonizing that concept.Speaking to the Guardian after accepting the New Orleans Film Society’s Celluloid Hero Award and hosting a local screening of Lilly in early April, Clarkson said she honestly could not envision the Trump administration turning its crosshairs on the equal pay progress that has become synonymous with Ledbetter.“Equal pay is not – it’s not a political issue,” Clarkson said. “It’s a human rights issue.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Wherever you live across this great country, whether you are Black or white or brown or young or old or whatever you are, Republican or Democrat – when women make equal pay, everybody wins.”Yet the New York City resident also fears nothing is truly off the table during a second Trump presidency that has already shattered political norms many could not imagine being vulnerable. And if the administration dares to test something as drastic as re-implementing a system where pay is based on gender, she said she hoped the public mounts commensurate resistance – from Ivanka herself trying to talk some sense into her father to a women’s sex strike if necessary.View image in fullscreen“How is it cool for anyone to want their spouse, the love of their life, to be paid less, and you’re still going to ask for sex?” said Clarkson, who once attained digital virality with an appearance in the music video to the Lonely Island song Mother Lover, an irreverent ballad of sorts to desirable moms. “I say, ‘Honey, there must be another bedroom I’m sleeping in.’”Clarkson was quick to point out that she has faith in the willingness of men to step up in the event that Ledbetter’s achievements are ever directly threatened. By way of evidence, Clarkson said she was glad Lilly spent a decent amount of its 93-minute run time exploring how Ledbetter’s husband of 52 years, Charles, steadily supported her professional goals and activism despite the backlash they generated for the couple and their two children.The decorated US army veteran, played by John Benjamin Hickey, never sought to persuade her to settle for less than she believed that she deserved in hopes of easing some of the pressure. He instead remained in her corner until his death at 73 in 2008, a little more than a month before the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act for which his beloved battled so hard became the first piece of legislation Obama signed as president.Clarkson said Charles Ledbetter’s unquestioning devotion to Lilly reminded her of the love the actor’s mother shared with her father, Arthur Alexander “Buzz” Clarkson Jr, a former medical school administrator to whom Jackie was married for more than 70 years.“My father wanted my mother to run this city,” Clarkson said while seated in the living room of an 18th-floor suite in downtown New Orleans’s Windsor Court hotel. “My father wanted my mother to make this city better.“Lilly’s husband wanted her to succeed. Charles … got caught up in her journey in realizing what she was sacrificing and the injustice of not being paid” adequately for the time she dedicated to making ends meet for her family.Clarkson has previously said that she chose to be unmarried and not have children. But she said she admired how her father and Charles Ledbetter were “kick-ass husbands that loved every single moment of their [wives’] lives”. And it positioned the women whom each of those men loved to thrive in the face of political adversity, providing an example Clarkson said she hopes more American spouses – especially husbands – emulate.As Clarkson put it: “These remarkable men stood by these women. And they wanted them.”

      Lilly is out in US cinemas now with a UK date to be announced More

    • 200 Shares27 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: White House doesn’t trust Hegseth to choose new chief of staff

      by

      Exasperated by the turmoil that has dogged Pete Hegseth’s office in recent weeks, the White House will block the US defense secretary’s choice of chief of staff and select a candidate of its own, according to two people familiar with the matter.Hegseth had suggested giving the chief of staff position to Marine Col Ricky Buria after the first person in the role, Joe Kasper, left last month in the wake of a contentious leak investigation that brought the ouster of three other senior aides. But the White House has made clear to Hegseth that Buria will not be elevated.Here are the key stories at a glance:White House block Hegseth choice for new chief of staffThe move to block Hegseth’s choice at this juncture is unusual and reflects Donald Trump’s intent to keep Hegseth by trying to insulate him from any more missteps.Read the full storyTrump mulls ending habeas corpusThe Trump administration is considering suspending the writ of habeas corpus, the legal right to challenge one’s detention, Stephen Miller, a top White House adviser, said on Friday.Suspending habeas corpus would be an extremely aggressive move that would dramatically escalate the Trump administration’s efforts to attack the rule of law in American courts as it tries to deport people without giving them a chance to challenge the basis of their removals.Read the full storyJudge orders release of detained Tufts studentA federal judge in Vermont on Friday morning ordered the release on bail of a Tufts University student arrested in March for her political speech and now held in Louisiana in what she and her lawyers argue is a breach of her constitutional rights.The judge had ordered Rümeysa Öztürk’s return to Vermont, where she was briefly held after being grabbed on the street by masked immigration agents near Boston, for hearings.Read the full storyTrump floats China tariff cut to 80%Donald Trump has floated cutting tariffs on China from 145% to 80% before a weekend meeting as he looks to de-escalate the trade war.Top US officials are expected to meet a high-level Chinese delegation this weekend in Switzerland in the first significant talks between the two nations since Trump provoked a trade war with stiff tariffs on imports.The US president wrote “80% Tariff on China seems right! Up to Scott B” on his social media account on Friday morning, referring to Scott Bessent, the treasury secretary.Read the full storyUS considers special status for GreenlandUS officials are discussing a plan to pull Greenland into America’s sphere of influence using a type of agreement that the United States has used to keep close ties with several Pacific Island nations, according to two US officials and another person familiar with the discussions.Under the plan being considered, the Trump administration would propose to Greenland’s leaders that the island enter into a so-called compact of free association, or Cofa, with the United States.Read the full storyLawyer who prosecuted Trump hauled in front of House judiciary committeeThe former special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt is expected to appear before the Republican-led House judiciary committee next week as it attempts to find instances of politicization in the federal criminal cases brought against Donald Trump, according to three people familiar with the matter.The deposition of Bratt, who led the criminal case over Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents as a top deputy to the former special counsel Jack Smith, has been scheduled for 10am ET next Wednesday, according to a notice reviewed by the Guardian.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      Donald Trump abruptly fired the librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden, on Thursday as the White House continues to purge the federal government of those perceived to oppose the Republican US president and his agenda.

      The US has granted refugee status to 54 white Afrikaner South Africans, who could arrive as soon as Monday in Washington DC, where they will be welcomed by government officials, according to media reports.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 8 May. More

    • 138 Shares17 Views

      in US Politics

      Lawyer who prosecuted Trump hauled in front of House judiciary committee

      by

      The former special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt is scheduled to appear before the Republican-led House judiciary committee next week as it attempts to find instances of politicization in the federal criminal cases brought against Donald Trump, according to three people familiar with the matter.The deposition of Bratt, who led the criminal case over Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents as a top deputy to the former special counsel Jack Smith, has been scheduled for 10am ET next Wednesday, according to a notice reviewed by the Guardian.Bratt’s appearance is the first known instance of a special counsel prosecutor being hauled before the judiciary committee since Trump took office vowing revenge and personally directing the firings of more than a dozen prosecutors who worked for Smith within days of his inauguration.It was not clear how long the deposition might last and whether Bratt planned to invoke any privileges to avoid testifying. A spokesperson for the judiciary committee did not immediately respond to questions about the deposition.Smith charged Trump in two cases: in Florida, for mishandling classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago club and defying a subpoena commanding their return; and in Washington, for attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election.The classified documents case was dismissed before it went to trial by the US district judge Aileen Cannon, who ruled that Smith had been unlawfully appointed because he was acting with the powers of a “principal officer” at the justice department, which requires confirmation by the US Senate.The topics that House investigators have prepared for Bratt were also not clear. But the judiciary committee, led by Republican chair Jim Jordan, has long believed that the special counsel cases were the result of political animus against Trump at the justice department.In repeated letters to the former special counsel last year, House investigators demanded information from Smith about contacts between the Biden White House and the justice department about the criminal cases, including when Bratt once travelled to the White House.They also sought documents and communications about meetings between FBI and justice department officials before the decision was made to ask a magistrate judge for a search warrant for Mar-a-Lago. Bratt is widely understood to have encouraged FBI leaders to obtain a warrant.The warrant later proved to be the basis for the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice charges against Trump; the FBI retrieved 101 classified documents despite Trump’s lawyers having previously claimed that they had complied with an earlier subpoena to return all classified materials.The House judiciary committee has also taken a special interest in a fraught and disputed meeting between then-Trump legal team attorney Stanley Woodward and Bratt at justice department headquarters during the height of the classified documents case in November 2022.The Guardian previously reported on the complaint that Woodward filed in federal district court in Washington about the meeting, where he alleged Bratt discussed Woodward’s application to be a judge while trying to get the cooperation of Walt Nauta, Trump’s valet and Woodward’s client.In the filing, Woodward alleged that Bratt told him he did not think Woodward was a “Trump guy” and that “he would do the right thing” and get Nauta to testify against Trump in the classified documents case.The allegation was that Bratt had engaged in possible misconduct by suggesting Woodward’s judgeship application might be considered more favorably if he convinced his client to flip. The matter was referred to the justice department’s office of professional responsibility but it does not appear as though any action was taken.The extent of any potential impact on the case was unclear, since the meeting did not appear to have directly affected any testimony Nauta gave to prosecutors, and Bratt would not have had the ability to influence such an application, which is handled by the White House counsel’s office. More