logo
Democracy Upside Down

Democracy Upside Down

The Atlantic5 days ago
Last month, President Donald Trump's administration scrapped a long-standing Texas law that provided access to financial aid for 'Dreamers'—undocumented immigrants, brought into this country as children, who grew up here, graduated from local high schools, and are committed to becoming permanent residents. The administration's allies tried and failed to persuade the state legislature, which is controlled by Republicans, to repeal the law, which has had nearly a quarter century of bipartisan support. So the administration made an end run around Texas's democratic process: The Department of Justice hatched a plan with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to kill the law, filing a joint motion that asked a federal court to declare the Texas Dream Act unconstitutional. A judge approved the motion the very same day. The whole process took just six hours. Whatever one's views are on Dreamer policy, the fact is that this maneuver went against the will of the people of Texas.
The organization I lead, Democracy Forward, has, along with several other groups, filed a motion to defend the law. Texans deserve to have the constitutionality of their Dream Act judged in court, not killed off via a collaboration between the president and the state attorney general. And even more alarming than the Trump administration's dismantling of this law is that it's part of a broader effort to short-circuit democracy at the state level.
State-level democracy is essential to America's federalist system. During another time in U.S. history when a majority of the Supreme Court was imposing barriers to the public's ability to self-govern, Justice Louis D. Brandeis famously observed, 'It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.' Later, Justice William Brennan argued that states have the 'power to impose higher standards' under state law 'than is required under the Federal Constitution.' Throughout America's long history, state-level innovations have pushed the country forward: Some states abolished slavery long before the Civil War, granted women the right to vote before the Nineteenth Amendment was adopted, and legalized marriage equality years before the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling.
Of course, states have not always been on the side of human freedom and progress. Appeals to 'states' rights' have served as rallying cries for enslavers, segregationists, and others seeking to deny the rights of people and communities since the nation's founding. 'No state,' the Fourteenth Amendment proclaimed after the Civil War, shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' When America's system of government works as it should, the federal government steps in to prevent states from undermining human freedom.
David Frum: The courts won't save democracy from Trump
That's what America saw in 1957, when President Dwight Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard to implement a Supreme Court ruling to desegregate schools; the governor, an avowed segregationist, had refused to comply. President John F. Kennedy similarly federalized the Alabama National Guard to carry out desegregation orders at the University of Alabama, again over the objection of a pro-segregation governor.
Now the president and his political appointees, not a state's governor, are ignoring federal-court orders. In April, a federal court found that the government had exhibited 'a willful disregard for its Order' that planes carrying migrants who had been denied basic due process be turned around until the court could hear the migrants' case. (Democracy Forward and the ACLU represent the migrants in that matter.) Two months later, in early June, Trump federalized the California National Guard and deployed active-duty Marines to Los Angeles without the approval of Governor Gavin Newsom, who argued that local law enforcement was fully capable of managing anti-ICE protests. Trump's move was a federal flex that made a mockery of state sovereignty and democracy, and created more chaos than it solved. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said that what she saw in a local park 'looked like a city under siege, under armed occupation.'
To justify its actions in California, the administration invoked Eisenhower's 1957 move to enforce federal-court orders on civil rights. Yet Trump's actions aim for the opposite of Eisenhower's. Instead of using federal power to protect people's rights, Trump is misusing federal power to undermine them. That is democracy upside down.
Similarly, when Maine insisted that it would defend transgender athletes' participation on women's college-sports teams, the president brazenly interfered. Maine was following the law as it argued was set forth in Title IX and the state's Human Rights Act, but Trump sought to force a new interpretation of the federal law through executive actions, including a February order. That month, Trump pronounced, 'We are the federal law,' at which point the administration began a process to cut off funding to Maine's public-school meal programs as punishment—funds appropriated by Congress to help children in need. 'See you in court,' Maine Governor Janet Mills told the president. She did, and Maine won.
The administration has also attempted to usurp the power that the Constitution provides both Congress and the states. Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution mandates that only states and Congress can make or alter the 'times, places, and manner' of holding federal elections. Ignoring that, Trump, in an executive order, has sought to impose federal time, place, and manner requirements that create barriers to the ballot box. Much of this executive order has been blocked by two federal courts in response to litigation filed by 19 states, among other parties. One federal judge found that the requirements Trump is seeking to impose would create time-consuming burdens on states and could chill voter participation— 'the antithesis of Congress's purpose in enacting' federal election laws. (The Trump administration is also pressuring Texas Republicans to redraw congressional districts in the middle of the decade, outside the normal cycle, to skew the midterm elections.)
Adam Serwer: Trump is wearing America down
The Trump administration has called lawsuits filed against its actions 'frivolous' and 'vexatious.' But as with so many of Trump's attacks, this is really a confession. The Texas ploy is just one of many ways the administration is undercutting the checks and balances in the U.S. constitutional system. The administration has eviscerated agencies and programs created by Congress, attacked judges and the legal profession as a whole, and attempted to stifle a free and open press through intimidation tactics. It's all in keeping with a theme: To empower one man, you need to disempower everyone else, everywhere else—including in states where laws are counter to the president's political agenda.
What's happening in Texas, California, Maine, and other states goes beyond normal political disagreements or turf spats. This isn't the typical tug-of-war of federalism. The Trump administration is undermining foundational democratic principles and turning what are supposed to be 'laboratories of democracy' into laboratories of repression—something that should have no place in a nation founded on the promise of human freedom and the pursuit of happiness.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell pardon would give him ‘pause,' won't get ahead of Trump
Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell pardon would give him ‘pause,' won't get ahead of Trump

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell pardon would give him ‘pause,' won't get ahead of Trump

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, said he believes Ghislaine Maxwell, a key associate of Jeffrey Epstein currently serving 20 years in prison for conspiring to sexually abuse minors, should face "a life sentence." "If you're asking my opinion, I think 20 years was a pittance," Johnson told NBC's Kristen Welker on "Meet the Press" July 27. "I think she should have a life sentence, at least." His remarks to NBC come as many, including supporters of President Donald Trump, clamor for testimony from Maxwell. Some followers of the case have proposed a pardon in exchange, but Trump told reporters on July 25 he hadn't considered the move. "I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about," the president said. Epstein was charged with sexually trafficking minors and died by suicide while in detention in 2019. Maxwell, his longtime girlfriend, has been accused of recruiting minors for the disgraced financier's predation. Maxwell maintains her innocence and is appealing her 2021 sex-trafficking conviction. Johnson in his interview with NBC reiterated that pardons aren't up to him, telling the outlet, "obviously that's a decision of the president." "I won't get in front of him," Johnson said. "That's not my lane." But, later in the interview he noted, "It's hard to put into words how evil this was, and that she orchestrated it and was a big part of it." "So, again, not my decision," he added, "but I have great pause about that, as any reasonable person would." The Trump administration for weeks has faced backlash over its handling of Epstein's case. Critics from Democratic lawmakers to prominent Republicans and slices of Trump's voter base accuse the president and other officials of not being transparent with the American people. The speaker has faced his own ongoing Epstein-related criticism, as some House Republicans have zeroed in on the Justice Department's recent review of Epstein's case and are calling for related documents to be released publicly. Democrats in Congress have piled on too. Reps. Ro Khanna, D-California, and Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, introduced a bipartisan measure to force the Trump administration's hand in releasing the federal government's files. Also on "Meet The Press," the pair split on pardoning Maxwell. "That would be up to the president," Massie said. "But if she has information that could help us, then I think she should testify. Let's get that out there. And whatever they need to do to compel that testimony, as long as it's truthful, I would be in favor of." Khanna disagreed, saying Maxwell shouldn't receive a pardon. "Look, I agree with Congressman Massie that she should testify," the California Democrat said. "But she's been indicted twice on perjury. This is why we need the files. This is why we need independent evidence." Contributing: Bart Jansen and Aysha Bagchi, USA TODAY This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Mike Johnson reacts to possible pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell

Democrats self-own bragging about inflation shows the left has learned NOTHING
Democrats self-own bragging about inflation shows the left has learned NOTHING

New York Post

time25 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Democrats self-own bragging about inflation shows the left has learned NOTHING

Everybody makes mistakes. Not everyone makes the same mistakes over and over again. Last week, the geniuses in charge of maintaining the Democratic Party's social media picked at a fresh wound — and showed, again, exactly why it lost the 2024 election. The blue team's official X account shared a line chart showing the change in the price of various groceries — meat, dairy, produce, etc. — over time, and asserting that 'prices are higher today than they were on [sic] July 2024.' 'Trump's America,' read the caption. The problem? The last part of the line barely went up. The blue team's official X account, with the caption 'Trump's America,' shared a chart showing the change in the price of various groceries, asserting that 'prices are higher today than they were on [sic] July 2024.' Eric Daugherty, /X And what it actually showed was a massive increase in prices between 2021 and 2024. In other words: over the course of former President Joe Biden's White House tenure. 'I would just advise Democrats not to post about inflation given their track record,' suggested conservative influencer A.G. Hamilton. 'Might save them the embarrassment of having to delete their posts after getting dunked on' — which is exactly what they did. 'This is the gang that couldn't shoot straight!' marveled Fox Business host Stuart Varney. And of course Team Trump got in on the action. The problem with the chart was that it actually showed a massive increase in prices between 2021 and 2024 – when Biden was president. RapidResponse47/X What's notable about the braindead blunder, though, is not the blunder itself. It was that it represented yet another admission, eight and a half months after they surrendered the presidency to Donald Trump for the second time in three election cycles, that the Democrats still haven't made a sincere effort at diagnosing the reasons for their unpopularity — much less addressing them. A new Wall Street Journal poll found that their party continues to suffer as a result — to the point that just 33% of Americans hold a favorable view of it, and 63% view it unfavorably. Both Donald Trump (-7) and the GOP (-11) are also underwater, but may as well be polling as well as ice cream compared to the Democrats. The same holds true of the public's view of various issues; voters still trust the GOP more than the alternative when it comes to the economy, inflation, immigration and foreign policy. If that doesn't wake Democrats up to the provenance of all their political pain, nothing will. The Left has long relied on comforting fallacies to numb the discomfort that accompanies defeat. After 2016, elected Democrats and their media allies insisted that Trump's shocking victory was only possible thanks to Russian meddling. And now, they're laboring under the misimpression that return to power can be attributed to Republicans' superior, but decepting messaging — an almost supernatural ability to compel Americans to believe that which isn't so. If only they could convince the public of the truth, they'd surely prevail. But the cold, hard truth is that it's always been about the substance, stupid — as the unflattering data they so proudly shared last week demonstrates. Kamala Harris was deposited into the dustbin of history because she was the top lieutenant in an administration that had proven a miserable failure long before her boss's implosion last summer. Americans spent the entirety of the Biden years telling pollsters that their lives were demonstrably, palpably worse as a result of historic price hikes. Biden & Co. responded to these pleas for relief by denying the existence of inflation until they couldn't any longer. Then, when they finally did implicitly admit to the effects of the nearly $2 trillion boondoggle they passed in 2021, they slapped the name 'Inflation Reduction Act' on yet another profligate spending bill that every layman in America knew would only compound the problem. There are similar stories to be told about Americans' dissatisfaction with Biden's approach to foreign policy, his abdication of his duty to secure the border, and his championing of a radical social agenda that maintains up is down, left is right, and black is white. Their stubborn refusal to grapple with this incontrovertible truth is also reportedly set to be reflected in an upcoming 2024 autopsy conducted by the DNC. The New York Times reports that it will 'steer clear of the decisions made by the Biden-turned-Harris campaign,' and instead 'focus more on outside groups and super PACs that spent hundreds of millions of dollars aiding the Biden and Harris campaigns through advertising, voter registration drives and turnout efforts.' It's like watching a restaurant serving inedible food invest in new plateware. The gripe has never been with the Democrats' presentation or voters' tastes. It's with the product itself.

Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell should serve 'life sentence,' opposes potential pardon
Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell should serve 'life sentence,' opposes potential pardon

USA Today

time25 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell should serve 'life sentence,' opposes potential pardon

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, said he believes Ghislaine Maxwell, a key associate of Jeffrey Epstein currently serving 20 years in prison for conspiring to sexually abuse minors, should face "a life sentence." "If you're asking my opinion, I think 20 years was a pittance," Johnson told NBC's Kristen Welker on "Meet the Press" July 27. "I think she should have a life sentence, at least." His remarks to NBC come as many, including supporters of President Donald Trump, clamor for testimony from Maxwell. Some followers of the case have proposed a pardon in exchange, but Trump told reporters on July 25 he hadn't considered the move. "I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about," the president said. Epstein was charged with sexually trafficking minors and died by suicide while in detention in 2019. Maxwell, his longtime girlfriend, has been accused of recruiting minors for the disgraced financier's predation. Maxwell maintains her innocence and is appealing her 2021 sex-trafficking conviction. Johnson in his interview with NBC reiterated that pardons aren't up to him, telling the outlet, "obviously that's a decision of the president." "I won't get it in front of him," Johnson said. "That's not my lane." But, later in the interview he noted, "It's hard to put into words how evil this was, and that she orchestrated it and was a big part of it." "So, again, not my decision," he added, "but I have great pause about that, as any reasonable person would." The Trump administration for weeks has faced backlash over its handling of Epstein's case. Critics from Democratic lawmakers to prominent Republicans and slices of Trump's voter base accuse the president and other officials of not being transparent with the American people. The speaker has faced his own ongoing Epstein-related criticism, as some House Republicans have zeroed in on the Justice Department's recent review of Epstein's case and are calling for related documents to be released publicly. Democrats in Congress have piled on too. Reps. Ro Khanna, D-California, and Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, introduced a bipartisan measure to force the Trump administration's hand in releasing the federal government's files. Also on "Meet The Press," the pair split on pardoning Maxwell. "That would be up to the president," Massie said. "But if she has information that could help us, then I think she should testify. Let's get that out there. And whatever they need to do to compel that testimony, as long as it's truthful, I would be in favor of." Khanna disagreed, saying Maxwell shouldn't receive a pardon. "Look, I agree with Congressman Massie that she should testify," the California Democrat said. "But she's been indicted twice on perjury. This is why we need the files. This is why we need independent evidence." Contributing: Bart Jansen and Aysha Bagchi, USA TODAY

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