Looking At This Week With Joyce Vance

The Week Ahead

April 26, 2026

Joyce Vance

Stay with me tonight. This one runs a little long, but it’s all information you’ll need.

It’s likely that much of this week will be overshadowed by investigation into what happened Saturday night at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, where Cole Thomas Allen, a 31-year-old California man with a master’s degree from Cal Tech, approached the ballroom at the Washington Hilton armed with a shotgun, a handgun and knives, and attempted to sprint through the magnetometer security checkpoint. He was stopped there. A Secret Service agent was shot, but was fortunately protected by a bulletproof vest. It’s not clear who shot him.

The White House Press Corps, still dressed in tuxedos and ball gowns, trooped into the press briefing room at the White House to hear from the President, who appeared, flanked by acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel, and others. They, too, were still in tuxedos from the event.

It’s not clear who the “designated survivor” for the event was. CBS’ Margaret Brennan pointed out Sunday morning that “Five of the top six officials in the presidential line of succession were in attendance: Vice President JD Vance, House Speaker Mike Johnson, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.”

Trump was in good spirits as he spoke, complimenting the press and laughing about the speech he had hoped to give after dinner. It was a much more affable Trump than we’ve seen in the course of the last year as he interacted with members of the media he has often been sharply critical, or dismissive of, during his first year in office. Trump went on the attack against the press even before his January 2025 inauguration, as we discussed at the time.

This was a different Trump who spoke in a very measured fashion, far more measured than usual, almost as if he saw this incident as providing the opportunity for a reset. He respectfully took questions from reporters like CNN’s Kaitlin Collins and NBC’s Garrett Haake. He was kindly toward the press; that’s the only way to characterize it. Whether that was a momentary blip or it suggests he will try to convince the media to rebuild its relationship with him remains to be seen. He did say that the Correspondents’ Dinner would be rescheduled within a month, without seeming to understand that the Correspondents’ Association puts on the dinner and controls the event.

At the press conference, Trump was asked why this keeps happening to him—this was the third attempt on his life since he announced his run for the presidency ahead of the 2024 election. He responded that he “has studied assassinations” and that it’s the “people who do the most” that assailants go after, using Abraham Lincoln as an example. Trump said that it “only happens to impactful people” and that he didn’t want to say he “was honored” by the repeated attempts on his life, but he let the implication hang in the room.

But he did not abandon politics. As he began his comments, Trump said the incident demonstrated why the ballroom he is building at the White House is needed.

Trump reiterated his comments in a Sunday morning post on Truth Social, claiming presidents have been demanding a ballroom like the one he’s building for 150 years.

His amen corner all took up the chant on Twitter, on cue.

But, as we noted above, the dinner is run by the Correspondents’ Association, not the White House. There is no reason to believe they would use a White House ballroom for a dinner designed to celebrate freedom of the press and its independence from government. Trump can make the argument he needs a safe space to entertain, but it’s a disconnect from the event last night.

Miles Taylor commented on Threads that “The WHCD shooter will be used to justify things that have nothing to do with the WHCD shooter. Mark this moment.” That seems likely.

The immediate investigation will focus on whether the shooter was a lone wolf, as it appears, or whether there is an ongoing threat. There is reporting today that Allen was a member of a group called The Wide Awakes, who appear, based on their web presence, to be committed to “radically” reimagining the future, but look to be a group of creative, peaceful people. Law enforcement will want to determine whether someone or something radicalized Allen and directed him toward violence.

There are sure to be, and there should be, questions about the Secret Service and how this happened. Asked about that during the press conference, Trump responded that he was “very impressed by the Secret Service.” But this is the third time a would-be assassin has gotten close to Trump, and one would have expected them to tighten ranks after the first attempt. Trump, however, does not seem to have viewed any of it as a failure by the Service and he was complimentary of the D.C. police, as well, in a phoner on Fox News.

It’s important to note that the Secret Service stopped Allen at the perimeter they had established. They succeeded in that sense. The real question will be whether the perimeter should have been set further back. I’ve attended the dinner multiple times and one observes layers of security that require guests to walk up the hill to the circular drive in front of the Washington Hilton before entering the hotel, but there are parties and receptions occurring in advance of the perimeter before entering the ballroom area, and, as we now know, Allen avoided scrutiny as a guest who checked into the hotel the day before the dinner. There are real questions that will have to be confronted here to ensure protection for future dinners, to say nothing of the scads of parties that happen in connection with this dinner, and other national events that are held at the Hilton.

Late Saturday evening, D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro announced that Allen would be arraigned on Monday. She said he will be charged with one count of assault on a federal officer using a dangerous weapon and two counts of using a firearm during a crime of violence. That could be fluid as officials learn new information. But the charges she identifies are found at 18 USC 111, which carries a 20-year maximum penalty, and 18 USC 924(c), which carries a 7-year penalty if a firearm is brandished and a 10-year penalty if it’s fired.

The motive seemed to be coming into focus throughout the day as some of Allen’s anti-administration writings were released. On Meet the Press, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said authorities believed the suspect may have been targeting Trump administration officials, including Trump himself. The basis for that belief appears to have been examination of electronic devices and some writings. But Blanche told CNN’s Dana Bash they were still looking at the motive.

As I heard seasoned journalists, many of them friends, discuss how frightening the shooting was on air Saturday night and Sunday morning, I couldn’t help but reflect on how much worse it is for America’s children. How many of them still suffer a lingering sense of trauma from the moment a shooter crashed into their classroom or their place of worship? If there’s ever been a time to pass sensible gun control laws, it’s now. If we’re going to play politics, as Trump did with immediately pivoting to justifying his ballroom, let’s play that kind and make some good trouble.

There will be in court developments in other matters to track, as well, this week:

This Wednesday will be the last regularly scheduled day for the Supreme Court to hear oral argument this term. The Court will take up two consolidated cases, Mullin v. Doe and Trump v. Miot, and consider whether the Trump administration acted properly when it revoked protected status for Syrians and Haitians living in this country. The cases involve decisions from New York and Washington, D.C., barring the administration from stripping more than 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians of protected legal status that protects them from deportation.

The cases hit the court just last month, on March 16. The Court allowed the lower courts’ decisions to remain in place, preventing deportations, determining that it would hear the case promptly, allotting an hour for oral argument. This has all happened very quickly, with the final brief being filed just last week on Monday.

There is also news on the voting front. Friday evening, Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves announced that he was calling a special session of the legislature so that new maps could be drawn.

This redraw would be limited to state Supreme Court districts. A federal court found Mississippi’s state Supreme Court districts violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and required the legislature to pass a remedial map. But it failed to do so during the regular session. A court hearing was scheduled for this week, and the court would have likely adopted its own map. So the Governor is calling this special session in hopes the court will hold off until the legislature has time to act.

In the election last November, voters ended the Republican supermajority in the legislature, but Republicans still hold a majority of the seats in both chambers and should be able to pass a map of their own devising. So the governor likely believes a map that comes out of the legislature will be superior to one created by the court.

And finally, the SAVE Act isn’t quite dead yet. We need to stay alert to any resurgence and be prepared to call our members of Congress to demand they resist its resuscitation. Trump is again demanding that his party end the filibuster and pass the Act, saying that not doing so will “lead to the worst results for a political party in the HISTORY of the United States Senate.” It reads as an acknowledgment that only voter suppression can save the Republican Party in the midterm elections.

Utah Senator Mike Lee followed up on Trump’s command with this tweet. Lee is not up for reelection until 2028. But he, too, seems to sense that this will be a dangerous election for Republicans. The SAVE Act is one of the last-ditch efforts Republicans have to suppress the vote and hold onto power this year and again in 2028. There is no mention of crafting policies designed to win the hearts and minds of American voters. It’s just about keeping eligible American citizens from voting. We must do everything we can to resist that.

If you’ve found this useful, it’s exactly the work I do every week—reading the filings, tracking the arguments, and explaining what it means before it becomes obvious. The headlines will keep coming, but understanding them takes more than a glance. That’s what this space is for. My goal is to give you clear, careful analysis you can rely on. If that’s the kind of work you value, I hope you’ll choose to subscribe.

We’re in this together,

Joyce

Let’s talk about the new Trump-GOP DC gerrymander plan….

Things We’ve Likely Forgotten About Public Schools

Well, This Has Happened

Person in custody after Trump evacuated in shooting incident at White House correspondents’ dinner

Event ended suddenly with loud gunshots and immediate commotion, and will be rescheduled

Donald and Melania Trump were evacuated from the White House correspondents’ dinner on Saturday evening after the event was interrupted by loud gunshots.

A suspect was in custody, the FBI said, after the annual black tie dinner honoring the White House press corps was suddenly interrupted by confusion and chaos. Journalists ducked under tables as authorities rushed the president and members of his cabinet out of the room.

There were reports that the US Secret Service had guns drawn as White House pool reporters were rushed out of the room and Secret Service agents yelled “shots fired”.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump praised the Secret Service and law enforcement and said the shooter had been apprehended.

The FBI confirmed later on Saturday that a suspect was apprehended.

The Secret Service said in a statement that the shooting incident occurred near the main magnetometer screening area at the hotel.

Weijia Jang, president of the White House correspondents’ dinner, told the room that the president is planning a press conference from the White House later Saturday and that he wants to reschedule the dinner in the next 30 days.

“Thank God everyone is safe, and thank you for coming together tonight,” she said. “We will do this again.”

Guardian reporters in the room said there were initially mixed messages about whether press and guests should stay in the room. Many people who stayed in the ballroom said the program was scheduled to resume, although the presidential seal was removed from the podium.

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer reported that he saw someone with a gun at the event.

“I did see the gunman on the ground after he started shooting,” he said. “Police officers threw him to the ground.”

Guests had just started eating dinner when the commotion began. The atmosphere in the room was tense as journalists waited to hear what happened and what to do next.

Jamie Raskin, a Democratic congressman from Maryland, who was attending the dinner said he never saw a shooter, but “I think a Secret Service agent threw me to the ground and on top of some other people and people were screaming and yelling”.

“I heard some loud noises but I don’t know if that was people reacting or if that was something outside, it was hard to know, but people very quickly were saying that was a shot, that was the gunshot,” he added. “People were terrified; people seem to be relieved now.”

Outside the hotel, helicopters circled overhead.

This year’s dinner was already tense given the presence of Trump and top members of his cabinet, including Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, and Marco Rubio, the secretary of state. Trump agreed to attend this year’s dinner after refusing to attend last year and during his first term. The correspondents’ dinner tradition began in 1921, though the tradition of a presidential guest started in 1924, when Calvin Coolidge attended.

Some Toons: Clay Jones, Open Windows

The WH Correspondents’ Dinner

Unethical and tone deaf

Ann Telnaes

Never a good idea for journalists to become chummy with politicians and people in power but this year particularly, it’s allowing an autocrat to continue his attack against the free press.


Tucker Treason

Tucker’s breaking MAGAt hearts

Clay Jones

Right-wing commentator, white nationalist, Vladimir Putin fan, former Fox News host, and former bowtie aficionado, Tucker Carlson, is now sorry that he helped elect Donald Trump to the presidency.

Tucker, who was often at Trump’s side during the presidential campaign in 2024 and who was a huge lobbyist to get JD Vance on the ticket, now says he will long be “tormented” for helping Donald Trump get to the White House and start a war with Iran.

Tucker is just one of several right-wing goons who have gone from being full-fledged MAGAts to personal enemies of Donald Trump. They include not just Tucker, but Marjorie Taylor Greene, Alex Jones, Megyn Kelly, and Candace Owens. (snip-MORE)


Prediction Markets

Are you betting on a Crystal ball?

Clay Jones

I was surprised a year or so ago when I learned that people were betting on professional wrestling. As you are probably aware, professional wrestling matches are pre-determined, as in, they are fake. I guess the only thing that prevents a writer of the matches from cleaning up is that the stakes are very low.

When I was a kid, my mother told me that people could not bet on who shot JR from the TV show Dallas because one of the writers could go to Vegas and place a large wager on it. That would have been insider trading. That’s not allowed, right?

Yesterday, a U.S. Army special forces soldier involved in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela was charged with using classified information to bet on events related to the mission. The soldier made more than $400,000 by betting on the prediction markets that the capture would happen. (snip-MORE)

Take A Look!

A Morning Read:

Congressional Republicans, You Are Running out of Time

Tick-tock motherfuckers!

Ali Davis Apr 24, 2026

Ali Davis invited us to reprint this post from The Camelopard. As always, we said yes.

Hello, Goopers!

Wow, things are getting wild, huh? Did you ever think, during all those long years when you boosted him and covered for him, that the Trump Train would be plowing through so many guardrails? Rumor has it — or at least a Gateway Pundit writer has it — he tried to use nukes last Saturday!

I would write something about you being the last hope and your duty to your country, but that’s clearly no incentive, so here’s something that will hit.

You have a very small window to act before your name is on the Bad Guys list forever.

You must remove Trump before a) he goes undeniably off the rails or dies or b) another country’s investigation turns up his full involvement with Jeffrey Epstein and child sex trafficking. If you don’t, you, personally, go down in history as a willing toady to evil. Your name and your failure to act will be preserved forever. Family members will change their last names or claim no relation. Corporations will find hiring you too big a risk. No more political career, no cushy lobbying job, no lucrative TV punditry. Just burned relationships and strangers asking why the hell you didn’t stop it when you had the chance, right before they spit on you.

You see how Tucker is scrambling to position himself as A Guy Who Sees the Light and Wants to Stop Trump? Do you think he had a deep change of heart, or do you think he noticed the way the wind is blowing and is doing everything he could to save his own ass and future? You should study those instincts.

Tucker knows that he will need to be able to point, however ludicrously, however tenuously, to how he saw that Trump was dangerous and spoke up.

You need to do more than that. You must remove Trump from office before his own body removes him or you go on the Forever Trumpers list.

If you don’t have real moral fortitude, try to develop the sense and eyes that God gave a potato and read a few polls while you’re at it. Trump is losing, so you need to act like him one more time: Switch to the winning team and pretend you were always wearing that jersey.

Do it fast if you ever want to keep seeing your grandchildren after they’re old enough to understand this moment in history and what you failed to do.

Oh, there’s no evidence that Mr. Trump ever —

Look into your soul and be real for a moment. At best — at best — he knew exactly what Epstein was up to and winked at it. The birthday card. The famous quote where he said “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” The constantly changing stories about when and why Epstein was removed (was he?) from Mar-a-Lago.

Trump knew. He at least knew.

Now factor in the purchase of a teen beauty pageant and the founding of a model management company, two perfect ways to move underage girls across international lines. His own on-air brag that he liked to burst into the changing rooms of teenage pageant contestants. The time he speculated on his dating prospects with a child on an escalator.

We may never know everything, but we will know more. You can be one of the heroes who bravely stood up to stop Trump, or you can be one of the craven sleazebags who went all out to shield an aspiring dictator and bunch of wealthy child molesters. Every moment you don’t choose the first one will itself be a black mark against your name, so you might want to hurry up and flip a coin or something.

But I’m being blackmailed.

I have news for you: There has never been a better time to get out from under being blackmailed. The crimes in the Epstein Files are so heinous that even Swalwell and Gonzales’s horrifying conduct barely made a blip. Make your peace with your family, take some responsibility, and hope that whatever the regime has on you isn’t as hilarious as what someone had on Kristy Noem’s husband.

Need a little more incentive? Not that I am diagnosing anyone, but people who become disinhibited as a part of their cognitive decline have an increasing tendency to just … blurt things out. Do you want to have a nice, preplanned statement to the press about respecting your privacy during this challenging time, or do you want the most personal thing you can imagine barfed out randomly during an official statement on the soybean trade?

I will also mention that people with some types of dementia have a tendency to fill in memory gaps with invented details. Do you really want to explain to the nation that yes, the thing about the carnival is overall true, just not the part about the plate spinner and the Tilt-a-Whirl?

Besides, if enough of you move quickly and work together, you might just get off scot-free.

Surely you’ve heard the broad hints about Congressional Republicans being physically threatened.

I have news for you, Sparky: We are all being physically threatened. A man who has never in his life experienced a consequence has access to nuclear weapons and is eager to use them.

Move quickly. Get your family somewhere safe, choose a Democrat as a point person — do not trust your fellow Republicans, you know full well how craven they can be — and let the opposition party count up the votes. Move together, publicly report the threats, and save yourself by bravely impeaching the sumbitch.

But what if no one believes us? What if reporting gets us ridiculed or puts us more at risk?

Well, now you know what it’s like to be a victim of a powerful serial sex offender. Please use that perspective wisely in the future if you have any shreds of a political career left.

For real though — a lot of Trump’s power comes from the perception that he is powerful. Puncture that and the whole thing deflates.

You want to save your own tail? Help the Democrats start prosecuting him and his cronies immediately after impeachment. No professional courtesy, no putting this all behind us so we can move forward, no honoring the frantic pardons of a rogue President. Everything comes out and everyone gets real consequences. Seize and freeze assets, put Trump’s thugs and cronies on the no-fly list, and start the trials. Nobody squeaks by, not even the very wealthy ones.

Once you find some rudimentary bits of calcium spinning around your spinal nerve, you may even discover that you like using them in the service of something good.

But you must act immediately.

Trump is spinning out and trying to take the world with him. You can help put a stop to it, or you can forever be on the list of people who had the power but were too evil or craven to do anything about it.

You can choose the story that other people will tell about you.

But you’d better make it quick. (snip)

From Erin: Dems +13 On Non-Binary Issues-

Fox News Poll: Democrats +13 On Transgender Issues

For the second time in 2026, Fox News’s own poll finds voters trust Democrats over Republicans on transgender issues by 13 points.

Erin Reed

The Trump administration has made attacking transgender people one of its signature priorities. It has issued a orders threatening to defund hospitals that provide gender-affirming care to trans youth, targeted children’s television through the FCC for including transgender characters, and spent millions in taxpayer resources pursuing anti-trans executive orders across the federal government. But according to the latest Fox News poll, released this week, the American public is not on board. Voters say Democrats would do a better job on transgender issues by a 13-point margin, 56 to 43 percent—the second consecutive Fox News poll this year to show a significant Democratic advantage on the issue.

The finding is consistent with the January Fox News poll, which showed Democrats with a 22 point advantage on transgender issues. While the margin has narrowed somewhat, the direction has not changed: voters across nearly every demographic subgroup continue to say they trust Democrats more than Republicans on this issue.

The demographic breakdown is significant. Black voters backed Democrats on transgender issues by a 54-point margin, 77 to 23 percent. Hispanic voters favored Democrats 59 to 40 percent. White voters—a group Republicans depend on for their electoral coalition—sided with Democrats 53 to 46 percent. Every age group favored Democrats, with the strongest support coming from voters under 35, who backed the Democratic approach 61 to 39 percent. But the finding was not limited to young voters: Americans 65 and older also preferred Democrats on the issue, 58 to 38 percent—a 20-point margin among seniors.

Self-identified moderates backed Democrats 60 to 38 percent—a 22-point margin that suggests anti-trans messaging continues to backfire outside the Republican base. Liberals preferred Democrats 86 to 13 percent. Even among self-identified conservatives, nearly a third—31 percent—said Democrats would do a better job. And among 2024 Trump voters, 27 percent crossed over to say they trusted Democrats more on the issue—more than one in four of the president’s own supporters.

The geographic breakdown was equally striking. Urban voters backed Democrats 68 to 31 percent and suburban voters—the decisive battleground in American politics—preferred Democrats 57 to 43 percent. Rural voters were the only geographic group to favor Republicans, 52 to 46 percent, but even that margin was narrow. Democrats also led among Catholics (54-45), white Catholics (51-48), Protestants (50-48), and military voters (54-44). White evangelicals were the only religious group to side with Republicans.

(snip-MORE, with more charts)

A Couple Of Current Events Short Videos



America At 250, From The 19th

Present at our nation’s founding — but excluded from its promise

Elizabeth Freeman demanded her rightful place among this country’s founders and helped forge a tradition of forcing America to live up to its ideals.

This story was originally reported by Errin Haines of The 19th. Meet Errin and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

In the lead-up to our country’s 250th anniversary, Errin Haines is writing a series of columns to contemplate the complicated expansion of our democracy. Subscribe to The Amendment newsletter.

This story was co-published with Nonprofit Quarterly and #WeTheCivic: America 250, a narrative movement centering the multiracial nonprofit and civil society workers, organizations, and communities in America 250 narratives.

In 1776, a group of White male landowners in the original Thirteen Colonies wrote that all men were created equal — words that denied most of their fellow colonists the same certain unalienable rights. 

The real founders of our democracy were those who took the promises in the Declaration of Independence literally, the people who rejected the hypocrisy of its ideals and declared that its words would have meaning in their lives, too. Two hundred and fifty years later, that declaration is still being made. 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That anyone outside of themselves — the other, the unfamiliar — deserved the same rights proclaimed in our founding documents was not a self-evident truth to the original founders. The phrase “all men are created equal” implied inclusivity, but was not intended as a universal promise. It was a boundary defining who was entitled to life, liberty and happiness — and who was not.

Here’s a self-evident truth: Women, the enslaved and Indigenous people were all present at the birth of this country, but they were also excluded from its promise and potential. The true birth of this nation is the longer, harder story of what they did next.

How one woman acted after hearing those words was as patriotic as anything that happened in Independence Hall on July 4, 1776. She would test whether democracy was a promise or a lie. And she would demand her rightful place among this country’s founders. 


In 1776, Elizabeth Freeman was an enslaved woman named Mumbet, working for the Ashley family in Sheffield, Massachusetts. At the dinner table, the Ashleys and their guests spoke of the Declaration. Present in a conversation about freedom that didn’t include her, Mumbet tried not to draw attention to herself as she went about her work. 

A few years later, Mumbet heard the words of the newly written Massachusetts Constitution of 1780, words that sounded much like the ones mentioned in those dinnertime conversations: “All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possession, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.”

One of its framers was Theodore Sedgwick, a lawyer and friend of her enslaver. Mumbet walked to Sedgwick’s office and asked, based on what he had written, if he would plead her case. Sedgwick agreed, asserting that slavery was unconstitutional under the ratified Massachusetts Constitution. 

On August 21, 1781, she became the first enslaved woman to have her self-proclaimed independence validated in a court of law. She changed her name to Elizabeth Freeman to reflect her new status. 

Freeman sued for her freedom and won. As a founding mother, she is the first example in a lineage, a creator of the tradition of forcing the country to answer its founding promises. She was among the first to show that the power of the Declaration was not that it frees anyone, but that its language gives us the power to demand equality and freedom for ourselves. 

Freeman’s case established a pattern that has repeated itself across American history: Hear the promise. Claim the promise. Force the law to answer it. From women’s suffrage to the civil rights movement, to the fight for marriage equality, immigrant rights and beyond, the work of perfecting the union has always been done by those who have had to imagine — and assert — their equal and rightful place within it.

Freeman’s life challenges us to interpret the Declaration of Independence for ourselves, and to continue the work of expanding the promise of our democracy to include those who are still left out.

“She is a founder and a revolutionary,” said Johns Hopkins University historian Martha Jones. “It takes no time for someone like Elizabeth Freeman to recognize that there are principles that have been articulated that have inspired elite White men that should apply to her. She is the person who gave new, unintended meaning to those terms. Why don’t we know her name or what she did?”

To be a founder of democracy is not just to declare equality or the right to freedom. It is to hold accountable those who claim to believe in these words and to compel them to go beyond just making a declaration. It is to do the work of making word and deed real. 

Throughout our nation’s history, Black women have done the work. They have challenged America to become her truest self and claimed freedom denied for themselves and others — freedom for which they are still fighting in the courts today.

At America’s 250th anniversary, a Black woman is, for the first time in our nation’s history, interpreting those same ideals as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. While Freeman asked the law to see her, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson now helps to define what the law sees and what equality means under the law today.

In October, civil rights lawyer and head of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Janai Nelson, appeared before the Supreme Court for the first time to argue a voting rights case, which challenged whether Louisiana’s congressional map discriminates against Black voters; a ruling is expected this spring. It was only the latest time Nelson has tested the question of whether the Constitution’s promise of equal citizenship applies to all.

“The language of the Declaration has power for marginalized people, which can be scary for those who have power,” said Adrienne Whaley, a lead curator at the Museum of the American Revolution in Philadelphia. “So you have this necessary tension between freedom and power and equality and inequality, which is part of what makes the Revolution ongoing.” 

It is a tension that is still shaping and defining our democracy. Just as the Declaration of Independence cannot remain a fixed document, but must be continuously interpreted to force inclusion, the American Revolution is not a fixed event in our history. It plays out daily, in courtrooms, communities, classrooms and movements. 

For 250 years, people who have been repeatedly excluded from America’s promise have insisted on their rightful and equal place. In this way, our nation is still being founded, not by the people who invoke the Declaration, but by those who test its meaning every day.

We must now insist, as Freeman insisted, that our founding words be made real for every American. She didn’t wait for permission to belong. She claimed her place by testing the idea of a nation against her reality — and compelled its authors to answer her.

The question for us at this milestone in our democracy is whether we are willing to be the kind of founders who do the same.

After reading, what came up for you? What has shaped your sense of belonging in this country — or challenged it? Send a note or voice memo.

Your response may help shape future editions of our Revolutionary project. I really look forward to hearing from you.