logo
Quakers march against Trump's crackdown on immigrants, carrying on a long tradition

Quakers march against Trump's crackdown on immigrants, carrying on a long tradition

PRINCETON, N.J. — A group of Quakers is marching more than 300 miles from New York City to Washington to demonstrate against the Trump administration's crackdown on immigrants.
The march extends a long tradition of Quaker activism. Historically, Quakers have been involved in peaceful protests to end wars and slavery and support women's voting rights, in line with their commitment to justice and peace. More recently, Quakers sued the federal government this year over federal immigration agents' ability to make arrests at houses of worship.
Organizers of the march, which set out May 4 and is due to reach its destination May 22, say their protest seeks to show solidarity with migrants and other groups that are being targeted by President Trump's administration.
'It feels really daunting to be up against such critical and large and in some ways existential threats,' said Jess Hobbs Pifer, a 25-year-old Quaker and march organizer, who said she felt 'a connection' to the faith's long history of activism.
'I just have to put one foot in front of the other to move towards something better, something more true to what Quakers before us saw for this country and what people saw for the American experiment, the American dream,' she said.
Their goal is to walk south from the Flushing Quaker Meeting House in Queens — across New York, New Jersey, Maryland and Pennsylvania — to the U.S. Capitol to deliver a copy of the Flushing Remonstrance — a 17th century document that called for religious freedom and opposed a ban on Quaker worship.
Quakers say it remains relevant in 2025 as a reminder to 'uphold the guiding principle that all are welcome.'
'We really saw a common thread between the ways that the administration is sort of flying against the norms and ideals of constitutional law and equality before the law,' said Max Goodman, 28, a Quaker who joined the march.
'Even when they aren't breaking rules explicitly, they're really engaging in bad faith with the spirit of pluralism, tolerance and respect for human dignity that undergirds our founding documents as Americans and also shows up in this document that's really important in New York Quaker history.'
The Religious Society of Friends — best known as the Quakers — originated in 17th century England.
The Christian group was founded by George Fox, an Englishman who objected to Anglican emphasis on ceremony. In the 1640s, he said he heard a voice that led him to develop a personal relationship with Christ, described as the Inner Light.
Fox taught that the Inner Light emancipates a person from adherence to any creed, ecclesiastical authority or ritual forms.
Brought to court for opposing the established church, Fox tangled with a judge who derided him as a 'quaker,' in reference to his agitation over religious matters.
Following the faith's core beliefs in nonviolence and justice, Quakers have demonstrated for the abolition of slavery, in favor of the suffrage movement, against both World Wars, and the U.S. roles in the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, said Ross Brubeck, 38, one of the Quaker march organizers.
They also joined anti-World Trade Organization protests in Seattle and the Black Lives Matter demonstrations after the 2020 murder of George Floyd by police.
'Within the DNA of Quakerism is actions speaking out against authority,' said Brubeck, who was marching along a trail in New Jersey with companions waving an upside-down American flag, signifying the nation in distress.
'Quakers have had a central role in opposition to repression within the United States since its founding,' Brubeck said.
The basic unit of Quaker organization is the weekly meeting, which corresponds to the congregation in other churches. Quakers gather for silent worship in meeting houses, where they wait for a message from God to move through them until they speak.
When Brubeck and his group reached downtown Princeton, they were met by members of the local Quaker group, who praised them for their effort and guided them to their meeting house. After taking their shoes off their blistery feet, some rested on wooden pews and later prayed in silence, holding hands in a circle in preparation for another long walk.
'I felt humbled by their presence knowing what a long way they've been walking,' said Casey Oware, a member of the Princeton Friends Meeting. 'And also a sense of connection knowing that we're fighting for the same thing.'
Her friend, Marae McGhee, a retired teacher and fellow member of the group, agreed: 'It's such a disturbing time, and I think a lot of people feel that there's little they can do. But these folks are doing it — they're giving their feet and their energy.'
Quaker practices and beliefs vary from a more Bible-centered Christianity, with pastors as worship leaders, to a more liberal approach with less structured worship and a wide range of teachings.
One the most well-known Quakers was William Penn, who founded Pennsylvania, following the faith's emphasis on religious tolerance. The group became influential in Philadelphia — where Penn's statue today presides atop City Hall overlooking downtown — and other cities.
But members of the group have also faced scorn for refusing to join wars due to their belief in pacifism and nonviolence. Some were persecuted and even killed for trying to spread their religious beliefs.
Earlier this year, five Quaker congregations filed a lawsuit challenging a Trump administration move giving immigration agents more leeway to make arrests at houses of worship.
The Quaker groups were later joined by the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and a Sikh temple. After that, more than two dozen Christian and Jewish groups representing millions of Americans — including the Episcopal Church, the Union for Reform Judaism and the Mennonites — filed a similar lawsuit, but a federal judge ruled against them last month.
During the presidential campaign, Trump repeated that immigrants were an existential threat to America. Immigration into the U.S., both legal and illegal, surged during President Biden's administration, and Trump assailed that influx in ways that proved persuasive among voters.
Since returning to the White House, Trump has launched a campaign of immigration enforcement that has pushed the limits of executive power and clashed with federal judges who have ruled against him.
'Immigrants are the ones experiencing the most acute persecution in the United States,' Brubeck said. 'The message to Trump is that the power is not his to make.'
Henao writes for the Associated Press.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump calls on Fed Governor Cook to resign
Trump calls on Fed Governor Cook to resign

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump calls on Fed Governor Cook to resign

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday called on Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook to resign, citing a call by the head of the U.S. Federal Housing Finance Agency urging the Department of Justice to probe Cook over alleged mortgage fraud. Representatives for Cook could not be immediately reached for comment on the allegations posted by FHFA Director Bill Pulte on X earlier on Wednesday. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

Trump thinks owning a piece of Intel would be a good deal for the US. Here's what to know
Trump thinks owning a piece of Intel would be a good deal for the US. Here's what to know

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump thinks owning a piece of Intel would be a good deal for the US. Here's what to know

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — President Donald Trump wants the U.S. government to own a piece of Intel, less than two weeks after demanding the Silicon Valley pioneer dump the CEO that was hired to turn around the slumping chipmaker. If the goal is realized, the investment would deepen the Trump administration's involvement in the computer industry as the president ramps up the pressure for more U.S. companies to manufacture products domestically instead of relying on overseas suppliers. What's happening? The Trump administration is in talks to secure a 10% stake in Intel in exchange for converting government grants that were pledged to Intel under President Joe Biden. If the deal is completed, the U.S. government would become one of Intel's largest shareholders and blur the traditional lines separating the public sector and private sector in a country that remains the world's largest economy. Why would Trump do this? In his second term, Trump has been leveraging his power to reprogram the operations of major computer chip companies. The administration is requiring Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices, two companies whose chips are helping to power the craze around artificial intelligence, to pay a 15% commission on their sales of chips in China in exchange for export licenses. Trump's interest in Intel is also being driven by his desire to boost chip production in the U.S., which has been a focal point of the trade war that he has been waging throughout the world. By lessening the country's dependence on chips manufactured overseas, the president believes the U.S. will be better positioned to maintain its technological lead on China in the race to create artificial intelligence. Didn't Trump want Intel's CEO to quit? That's what the president said August 7 in an unequivocal post calling for Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan to resign less than five months after the Santa Clara, California, company hired him. The demand was triggered by reports raising national security concerns about Tan's past investments in Chinese tech companies while he was a venture capitalist. But Trump backed off after Tan professed his allegiance to the U.S. in a public letter to Intel employees and went to the White House to meet with the president, who applauded the Intel CEO for having an 'amazing story.' Why would Intel do a deal? The company isn't commenting about the possibility of the U.S. government becoming a major shareholder, but Intel may have little choice because it is currently dealing from a position of weakness. After enjoying decades of growth while its processors powered the personal computer boom, the company fell into a slump after missing the shift to the mobile computing era unleashed by the iPhone's 2007 debut. Intel has fallen even farther behind in recent years during an artificial intelligence craze that has been a boon for Nvidia and AMD. The company lost nearly $19 billion last year and another $3.7 billion in the first six months of this year, prompting Tan to undertake a cost-cutting spree. By the end of this year, Tan expects Intel to have about 75,000 workers, a 25% reduction from the end of last year. Would this deal be unusual? Although rare, it's not unprecedented for the U.S. government to become a significant shareholder in a prominent company. One of the most notable instances occurred during the Great Recession in 2008 when the government injected nearly $50 billion into General Motors in return for a roughly 60% stake in the automaker at a time it was on the verge of bankruptcy. The government ended up with a roughly $10 billion loss after it sold its stock in GM. Would the government run Intel? U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC during a Tuesday interview that the government has no intention of meddling in Intel's business, and will have its hands tied by holding non-voting shares in the company. But some analysts wonder if the Trump administration's financial ties to Intel might prod more companies looking to curry favor with the president to increase their orders for the company's chips. What government grants does Intel receive? Intel was among the biggest beneficiaries of the Biden administration's CHIPS and Science Act, but it hasn't been able to revive its fortunes while falling behind on construction projects spawned by the program. The company has received about $2.2 billion of the $7.8 billion pledged under the incentives program — money that Lutnick derided as a 'giveaway' that would better serve U.S. taxpayers if it's turned into Intel stock. 'We think America should get the benefit of the bargain,' Lutnick told CNBC. 'It's obvious that it's the right move to make.' Michael Liedtke, The Associated Press

Repealing EPA's endangerment finding will cause a public health nightmare
Repealing EPA's endangerment finding will cause a public health nightmare

The Hill

time17 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Repealing EPA's endangerment finding will cause a public health nightmare

As America faces increasing health threats from wildfire smoke, summer heat waves and rising cases of asthma and other respiratory illnesses, the last thing we need is to reverse laws that protect U.S. air quality. Yet, that's precisely what the Trump administration intends to do by proposing a repeal of a central scientific finding that serves as the basis for the Clean Air Act — legislation that has saved millions of American lives and been responsible for monumental advancements both to our environment and public health. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced last month the agency plans to end a long-held 'endangerment finding' that asserts carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases present a risk to human health. If that happens, it will neutralize the federal government's ability to combat climate change and enforce laws intended to protect America's wellbeing. One of those laws is the Clean Air Act. Enacted in 1970, it has been one of the most successful public health policies in U.S. history. It's credited with reducing six of the most common air pollutants in the U.S. by nearly 80 percent while saving over 230,000 early deaths and avoiding over 120,000 emergency room visits every year. It has reduced chronic bronchitis, infant mortality and prevented millions of cases of asthma exacerbation as well. These statistics aren't conjecture: They're sourced directly from the EPA's own website, the same agency now leading the charge to turn the clock back on these remarkable achievements. Zeldin's announcement claims that the reversal of the endangerment finding will 'undo the underpinning of $1 trillion in costly regulations.' But the positive U.S. economic impact from the Clean Air Act alone far exceeds this figure. By reducing hospital visits, sick days and treatment of costly respiratory-related disease, the EPA estimates the Clean Air Act has created $2 trillion in U.S. economic benefit as of 2020 — twice the amount Zeldin asserts the endangerment finding's repeal would create. Further, clean energy has proven itself to be a source of strong job creation. The Department of Energy found that jobs in renewable energy grew more than twice as fast as the vibrant 2023 U.S labor market. And the science couldn't be clearer: Clean air is critical to public health. 'Decades of research have shown that air pollutants such as ozone and particulate matter increase the amount and seriousness of lung and heart disease and other health problems,' the EPA states. Worse, those pollutants are disproportionately burdened by communities of color. A 2024 Milken Institute of Public Health study found that marginalized communities have eight times the number of pediatric asthma cases and a 30 percent higher chance of dying early from pollution exposure. That same study attributed this inequality to the close proximity many minority communities share with industrial manufacturing facilities. Imagine what those numbers would be if the endangerment finding is reversed and the U.S. can no longer enforce Clean Air Act provisions. Zeldin referred to the EPA action as 'driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion,' and that it would be 'the largest deregulatory action in the history of America.' But doing so will only cause greater sickness in America and inundate an already stressed U.S. health care system. Increased exposure to air pollution will result in higher numbers of emergency room visits, increased rates of chronic illness and heightened health care costs. The medical and environmental advocacy community agree greater exposure to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas is a bad idea. Groups such as the American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, American Thoracic Society, World Wildlife Fund, along with nursing organizations and medical societies all stand in strong opposition to the EPA's proposed action. Zeldin's proposal follows another questionable deregulatory move by the EPA in recent weeks to reintroduce dicamba, a weed killer used on soybeans and cotton. Use of the pesticide was halted by a federal court last year. A 2020 study in the International Journal of Epidemiology found that exposure to dicamba was reportedly 'linked to some cancers, including liver cancer and a type of leukemia affecting the blood and bone marrow.' But the EPA has argued it 'has not identified any human health or dietary risks of concern.' The U.S. government's job is to protect America's citizens. The Clean Air Act has saved millions of lives, safeguarded our skies and proven that environmental laws and economic progress can peacefully coexist. Repealing the endangerment finding will set America on a dangerous path and put the health and welfare of every American at risk.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store