Imran Ahmed, the founder of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), giving evidence to joint committee seeking views on how to improve the draft Online Safety Bill designed to tackle social media abuse. Credit: House of Commons – PA Images / Contributor | PA Images
Imran Ahmed’s biggest thorn in his side used to be Elon Musk, who made the hate speech researcher one of his earliest legal foes during his Twitter takeover.
Now, it’s the Trump administration, which planned to deport Ahmed, a legal permanent resident, just before Christmas. It would then ban him from returning to the United States, where he lives with his wife and young child, both US citizens.
After suing US officials to block any attempted arrest or deportation, Ahmed was quickly granted a temporary restraining order on Christmas Day. Ahmed had successfully argued that he risked irreparable harm without the order, alleging that Trump officials continue “to abuse the immigration system to punish and punitively detain noncitizens for protected speech and silence viewpoints with which it disagrees” and confirming that his speech had been chilled.
US officials are attempting to sanction Ahmed seemingly due to his work as the founder of a British-American non-governmental organization, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).
“An egregious act of government censorship”
In a shocking announcement last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that five individuals—described as “radical activists” and leaders of “weaponized NGOs”—would face US visa bans since “their entry, presence, or activities in the United States have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences” for the US.
Nobody was named in that release, but Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy, Sarah Rogers, later identified the targets in an X post she currently has pinned to the top of her feed.
Alongside Ahmed, sanctioned individuals included former European commissioner for the internal market, Thierry Breton; the leader of UK-based Global Disinformation Index (GDI), Clare Melford; and co-leaders of Germany-based HateAid, Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josephine Ballon. A GDI spokesperson told The Guardian that the visa bans are “an authoritarian attack on free speech and an egregious act of government censorship.”
While all targets were scrutinized for supporting some of the European Union’s strictest tech regulations, including the Digital Services Act (DSA), Ahmed was further accused of serving as a “key collaborator with the Biden Administration’s effort to weaponize the government against US citizens.” As evidence of Ahmed’s supposed threat to US foreign policy, Rogers cited a CCDH report flagging Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. among the so-called “disinformation dozen” driving the most vaccine hoaxes on social media.
Neither official has really made it clear what exact threat these individuals pose if operating from within the US, as opposed to from anywhere else in the world. Echoing Rubio’s press release, Rogers wrote that the sanctions would reinforce a “red line,” supposedly ending “extraterritorial censorship of Americans” by targeting the “censorship-NGO ecosystem.”
For Ahmed’s group, specifically, she pointed to Musk’s failed lawsuit, which accused CCDH of illegally scraping Twitter—supposedly, it offered evidence of extraterritorial censorship. That lawsuit surfaced “leaked documents” allegedly showing that CCDH planned to “kill Twitter” by sharing research that could be used to justify big fines under the DSA or the UK’s Online Safety Act. Following that logic, seemingly any group monitoring misinformation or sharing research that lawmakers weigh when implementing new policies could be maligned as seeking mechanisms to censor platforms.
Notably, CCDH won its legal fight with Musk after a judge mocked X’s legal argument as “vapid” and dismissed the lawsuit as an obvious attempt to punish CCDH for exercising free speech that Musk didn’t like.
In his complaint last week, Ahmed alleged that US officials were similarly encroaching on his First Amendment rights by unconstitutionally wielding immigration law as “a tool to punish noncitizen speakers who express views disfavored by the current administration.”
Both Rubio and Rogers are named as defendants in the suit, as well as Attorney General Pam Bondi, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, and Acting Director of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement Todd Lyons. In a loss, officials would potentially not only be forced to vacate Rubio’s actions implementing visa bans, but also possibly stop furthering a larger alleged Trump administration pattern of “targeting noncitizens for removal based on First Amendment protected speech.”
Lawsuit may force Rubio to justify visa bans
For Ahmed, securing the temporary restraining order was urgent, as he was apparently the only target currently located in the US when Rubio’s announcement dropped. In a statement provided to Ars, Ahmed’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, suggested that the order was granted “so quickly because it is so obvious that Marco Rubio and the other defendants’ actions were blatantly unconstitutional.”
Ahmed founded CCDH in 2019, hoping to “call attention to the enormous problem of digitally driven disinformation and hate online.” According to the suit, he became particularly concerned about antisemitism online while living in the United Kingdom in 2016, having watched “the far-right party, Britain First,” launching “the dangerous conspiracy theory that the EU was attempting to import Muslims and Black people to ‘destroy’ white citizens.” That year, a Member of Parliament and Ahmed’s colleague, Jo Cox, was “shot and stabbed in a brutal politically motivated murder, committed by a man who screamed ‘Britain First’” during the attack. That tragedy motivated Ahmed to start CCDH.
He moved to the US in 2021 and was granted a green card in 2024, starting his family and continuing to lead CCDH efforts monitoring not just Twitter/X, but also Meta platforms, TikTok, and, more recently, AI chatbots. In addition to supporting the DSA and UK’s Online Safety Act, his group has supported US online safety laws and Section 230 reforms intended to protect kids online.
“Mr. Ahmed studies and engages in civic discourse about the content moderation policies of major social media companies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union,” his lawsuit said. “There is no conceivable foreign policy impact from his speech acts whatsoever.”
In his complaint, Ahmed alleged that Rubio has so far provided no evidence that Ahmed poses such a great threat that he must be removed. He argued that “applicable statutes expressly prohibit removal based on a noncitizen’s ‘past, current, or expected beliefs, statements, or associations.’”
According to DHS guidance from 2021 cited in the suit, “A noncitizen’ s exercise of their First Amendment rights … should never be a factor in deciding to take enforcement action.”
To prevent deportation based solely on viewpoints, Rubio was supposed to notify chairs of the House Foreign Affairs, Senate Foreign Relations, and House and Senate Judiciary Committees, to explain what “compelling US foreign policy interest” would be compromised if Ahmed or others targeted with visa bans were to enter the US. But there’s no evidence Rubio took those steps, Ahmed alleged.
“The government has no power to punish Mr. Ahmed for his research, protected speech, and advocacy, and Defendants cannot evade those constitutional limitations by simply claiming that Mr. Ahmed’s presence or activities have ‘potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States,’” a press release from his legal team said. “There is no credible argument for Mr. Ahmed’s immigration detention, away from his wife and young child.”
X lawsuit offers clues to Trump officials’ defense
To some critics, it looks like the Trump administration is going after CCDH in order to take up the fight that Musk already lost. In his lawsuit against CCDH, Musk’s X echoed US Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) by suggesting that CCDH was a “foreign dark money group” that allowed “foreign interests” to attempt to “influence American democracy.” It seems likely that US officials will put forward similar arguments in their CCDH fight.
Rogers’ X post offers some clues that the State Department will be mining Musk’s failed litigation to support claims of what it calls a “global censorship-industrial complex.” What she detailed suggested that the Trump administration plans to argue that NGOs like CCDH support strict tech laws, then conduct research bent on using said laws to censor platforms. That logic seems to ignore the reality that NGOs cannot control what laws get passed or enforced, Breton suggested in his first TV interview after his visa ban was announced.
Breton, whom Rogers villainized as the “mastermind” behind the DSA, urged EU officials to do more now defend their tough tech regulations—which Le Monde noted passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and very little far-right resistance—and fight the visa bans, Bloomberg reported.
“They cannot force us to change laws that we voted for democratically just to please [US tech companies],” Breton said. “No, we must stand up.”
While EU officials seemingly drag their feet, Ahmed is hoping that a judge will declare that all the visa bans that Rubio announced are unconstitutional. The temporary restraining order indicates there will be a court hearing Monday at which Ahmed will learn precisely “what steps Defendants have taken to impose visa restrictions and initiate removal proceedings against” him and any others. Until then, Ahmed remains in the dark on why Rubio deemed him as having “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences” if he stayed in the US.
Ahmed, who argued that X’s lawsuit sought to chill CCDH’s research and alleged that the US attack seeks to do the same, seems confident that he can beat the visa bans.
“America is a great nation built on laws, with checks and balances to ensure power can never attain the unfettered primacy that leads to tyranny,” Ahmed said. “The law, clear-eyed in understanding right and wrong, will stand in the way of those who seek to silence the truth and empower the bold who stand up to power. I believe in this system, and I am proud to call this country my home. I will not be bullied away from my life’s work of fighting to keep children safe from social media’s harm and stopping antisemitism online. Onward.”
Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.
Everyone in tRump’s admin can see him failing and each one is pushing hard to get their personal desire / goal / profit done before he gets so bad the public can see he is not really making the decisions. This is one of these. Plus tRump is driven to put his name on every thing, every building, every aspect of government because he is terrified that people will realize how failing / stupid / bad / and scared he is of being forgotten because he never really accomplished anything naming worthy. But we have to remember that each member of his cabinet and inner circle have their own goals and things they want to do under tRump’s name. They realize they are fast running out of time. Hugs
The Trump administration is extending its wrecking ball to yet more historic buildings in Washington as the president’s pet projects — including his golden ballroom and triumphal arch — press forward.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem appears before the House Committee on Homeland Security on Capitol Hill on Dec. 11, 2025.Mark Schiefelbein / AP Photo
The Trump administration is looking to tear down more historic buildings in Washington as the president, nearly a year into his final term, looks for ways to leave his mark on the District of Columbia.
This includes the destruction of the East Wing of the White House to make way for the president’s grand ballroom, which he now says will cost some $400 million, as well as a massive so-called arc de Trump.
But a memo uncovered by The Washington Post on Tuesday shows the administration using a new justification (that is, other than Trump’s vanity) to explain its latest effort to raze a part of D.C.’s history: a so-called emergency.
The Post reports Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose agency has engaged in some rather lavish spending on her behalf this year, issued a memo earlier this month “seeking to fast-track the demolition of more than a dozen historic buildings at St. Elizabeths in Southeast Washington,” which officials have been converting into a sprawling headquarters for DHS over more than a decade in accordance with historic preservation of treasured landmarks.
Per The Post:
‘Demolition is the only permanent measure that resolves the emergency conditions,’ Noem wrote in the memo. A risk assessment report undertaken by her agency ‘supports immediate corrective action,’ she wrote. The assessment report, which Noem included with her memo, concludes the vacant buildings ‘may be accessed by unauthorized individuals seeking to cause harm to personnel.’ The structures ‘provide a tactical advantage for carrying out small arms or active shooter scenarios,’ the report states.
MS NOW has not independently confirmed the memo. A spokesperson for the General Services Administration, which is overseeing development of the St. Elizabeths campus, confirmed to The Post that the agency had been alerted by the DHS about “a present security risk to life and property” at the campus “that may require us to demolish buildings.”
The report notes the push is being opposed by multiple preservationist groups, including the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which has also sought to thwart Trump’s ballroom project.
It’s yet to be seen whether there’s any true risk in need of being resolved by Trump’s demolition of yet more historic buildings. But if past is prologue, there’s certainly reason to doubt the administration’s “emergency” claims here: namely, the president’s obvious desire to remake the nation’s capital and his administration’s tendency to use claims of “emergencies” to impose a slew of radical policies.
Another more than $200 million in medical debt has been wiped out for Arizonans.
And the recipients are going to know who to thank: Gov. Katie Hobbs.
The new figure was announced Monday by Allison Sasso. She’s the president and CEO of Undue Medical Debt, a company that agreed earlier this year to use some $10 million in state American Rescue Plan COVID relief dollars to buy up medical debt from hospitals and doctors for a few pennies on the dollar, eliminating a negative mark on the credit reports of those who racked up the bills.
All totaled, according to the governor’s office, the program has so far erased $642 million owed by more than 485,000 Arizonans.
And under a deal the state cut with Undue Medical, the beneficiaries all get letters crediting not just United Medical but also the governor.
What’s behind all this is a program that United Medical has been offering across the nation.
Established in 2014, it uses government funds and private donations to acquire portfolios of medical debt from health care providers or debt buyers.
What makes the money go farther, according to company officials, is the debt has reached the point where those holding the rights are willing to sell them for pennies on the dollar.
People can’t actually apply. Instead, Undue Medical has to find them. It starts with eligibility.
The program is aimed at those whose medical debt whose income is less than 400% of the federal poverty level. That is currently $128,600 for a family of four.Also eligible are those whose debt is 5% or more of their annual income. That would aid those who have higher income levels than the cutoff—but much higher debt than they may be able to handle.
Undue Medical works with a credit reporting agency, buying what it calls “relevant income data” from them. That’s how it gets the names of individuals who owe money.
That is then compared with the information it gets from medical providers and others who are the holders of past-due debts.
Once the bills have been paid off, the patient gets a letter in an Undue Medical envelope informing for the first time that the obligation has been wiped out and the credit bureau has been notified.
But the recipients do get some inkling at that time of who to credit.
The deal Hobbs cut with the charity when she first signed the deal in 2024 requires that beneficiaries know that the financial relief is happening because governor’s action: It spells out that any fliers, advertisements, press releases or other marketing materials to include “logos or insignia as required by the governor’s office and approved by the governor’s office before publication.”
Gubernatorial press aide Christian Slater, in defending that provision when the program was announced in July, said that is appropriate. He said the letters are designed to tell people not just that their medical debt was relieved but “how it happened.”
And why do they need to know that the governor gets credit?
“The medical debt relief would not be possible without the governor’s leadership and focus on lowering costs and delivering economic opportunity for every Arizonan,” Slater said.
Undue Medical said what’s also crucial is that the patient starts from scratch.
Generally speaking, when a debt is forgiven, it can be considered income for tax purposes. But Courtney Story, the charity’s vice president of government initiatives, said in July that doesn’t apply when the money comes from a “disinterested third party.”
“Because we’re a nonprofit, we’re not part of the health care system, we count as a disinterested third party, as does the government,” she said.
Ditto, Story said, with private donors, though they have the option of remaining anonymous or disclosing their names to recipients.
In the press release Monday, Hobbs included the anonymous comments of three Arizonans who said they were thankful that the debt had been wiped out.
She got them because the contract the state has with Undue Medical said that “patient stories and related insights shall be shared with the governor’s office on a regular basis.”
As to what the governor can do with those testimonials, a company spokesman said when the program was announced that, “to my knowledge, there isn’t a restriction on how they can be used.”
In unveiling the plan in 2024, Hobbs insisted that there’s nothing illegal about the state using money it has received from the federal government to pay off the medical debts of private Arizonans.
A provision of the Arizona Constitution makes it illegal to “make any donation or grant, by subsidy or otherwise, to any individual, association or corporation.”
“I can assure you we would not be taking this action if we weren’t fully confident in the legality of it,” Hobbs said.
Anyway, she said, Arizona wouldn’t be the first jurisdiction to use COVID dollars from the American Rescue Plan Act in this way.
Undue Medical has provided press releases from other jurisdictions that have taken advantage of the program, with recent press releases from Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer, Gov. Ned Lamont of Connecticut, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, and one from the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for a local program.
Texans voting at Our Redeemer Lutheran Church in Dallas, Texas. (AP Photo/Emil Lippe)
When Dallas County Republicans announced they would hand count every ballot cast in the upcoming GOP primary election in March, state party chairman Allen West described the effort as a “highly visible initiative to restore confidence in an electoral process.”
“Not only are the eyes of Texas upon us, but the eyes of America,” West said in a social media post earlier this month. The former GOP congressman concluded by quoting Gene Kranz, “a famed Texan” and the NASA flight director who oversaw the moon landing: “failure is not an option.”
On Tuesday, the nation looked on as West admitted that failure was very much an option, announcing that the Dallas County Republican Party (DCRP) will now forgo the hand count.
“This approach reduces the liabilities of DCRP and protects the organization, while affording us an opportunity to maintain better control,” West said. “In this case, discretion is the better part of valor.”
The DCRP voted on a resolution in September to authorize a hand count if they could secure funding and volunteers. But that proved tougher than the party expected.
When he announced the hand count decision three weeks ago, West said the party had raised $400,000 for the count and had 1,000 volunteers at the ready. But on Tuesday, he cited lingering concerns over staffing, funding, and the logistics of finding enough “additional tables and chairs,” to go through with the laborious undertaking.
Under state law, counties are required to report results within 24 hours of the polls closing — an additional hurdle that a hand count would struggle to clear.
West’s new statement says the DCRP will go ahead with “a precinct-based, community, separate Election Day electoral process.”
The DCRP’s decision will still prevent Dallas County voters — including Democrats — from being able to cast their ballots on Election Day at countywide vote centers, a flexibility that typically allows anyone registered in Dallas to vote at any county polling location. Instead, Dallas voters will need to vote at their assigned voting locations, as Texas law requires both parties to use neighborhood precincts if one does.
The DCRP announced it planned to do a hand count shortly after President Donald Trump published a social media post on Dec. 2, in which he mistakenly wrote that “Dallas County, Texas, just went to all PAPER BALLOTS.”
Trump apparently was referring to the DCRP’s vote to authorize a hand count. Like 98% of electoral jurisdictions, Dallas already uses paper ballots.
While election administration experts recommend paper ballots, which allow for count audits and provide an extra layer of protection against tampering, that preference does not extend to hand counts, which are slower, more expensive, and less accurate than machine counts. But hand counts are nonetheless popular among right wing conspiracy theorists who claim, without evidence, that the 2020 election was stolen.
As the DCRP’s decision to stick with a machine count demonstrates, they are difficult to implement.
On X, Stephen Richer, a Republican lawyer who previously served as the top election official in Maricopa County, Arizona, said the DCRP’s failure emphasizes the folly of demanding hand counts in general elections.
“Party can’t even get enough volunteers to hand count it’s [sic] own small, simple ballots. Now imagine trying to hand count more than 50 million ovals, in Dallas County alone, in bipartisan teams,” he wrote. “Sorry guys. It’s not going to happen.”
Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)
Thursday, January 01, 2026 at 12:36:07p EST
(Kenneth Fowler/CNN)
This article is going to explain what we’re actually facing, lay out its four preconditions, and show you that America meets every single one. It will then explain why knowing this is important, and what we can do once equipped with that knowledge.
There’s a name for what’s happening: electoral autocracy. Elections happen. Multiple parties compete. But the system is rigged to favor one faction through gerrymandered maps, voter suppression, captured courts, and media control. When the wrong side wins anyway, those captured courts block them from governing. Hungary operates this way. So do we.
Start with gerrymandered maps. The Brennan Center’s September 2024 analysis found Republicans hold approximately 16 extra House seats due to favorable district lines.¹ Republicans drew 191 congressional districts while Democrats drew 75.¹ Only 69 of 435 House seats are rated competitive.² The Senate is worse. California’s 39 million residents have the same representation as Wyoming’s 579,000, a ratio of 68 to 1.³ The 50 Republican senators who confirmed Trump’s Supreme Court justices represented 43.5 percent of the American population. Their 50 Democratic colleagues represented 56.5 percent.⁴ The last time Republican senators represented a majority of voters was 1996.⁵
Rigged maps only work if the right people show up to vote. That’s where voter suppression comes in. The evidence includes confessions. During floor debate on Montana’s HB 176 in 2021, a Republican state representative explained he wanted to end Election Day registration because young voters are “not on our side of the aisle.”⁶ The bill passed. In oral arguments before the Supreme Court that same year, Arizona Republican Party attorney Michael Carvin was asked what interest his party had in maintaining voting restrictions. His answer: eliminating them “puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats.”⁷ When the Fourth Circuit struck down North Carolina’s HB 589, the court found the legislature had requested data on voting practices broken down by race, then restricted exactly those practices disproportionately used by Black voters. The law, the court wrote, “targeted African Americans with almost surgical precision.”⁸ North Carolina enacted that law less than two months after the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v. Holder. Between 2021 and 2024, states passed 79 restrictive voting laws, nearly three times the number passed between 2017 and 2020.⁹
Gerrymandering and voter suppression tilt the playing field. Media control ensures tens of millions of Americans never realize the game is rigged. Sinclair Broadcast Group owns or operates 178 television stations reaching approximately 40 percent of American households.¹⁰ The company requires stations to air “must run” segments including commentary from Boris Epshteyn, a former Trump White House official, nine times per week.¹⁰ In March 2018, Deadspin compiled footage of nearly 200 Sinclair anchors reading identical scripts warning about “fake news” at other outlets.¹¹ You can watch the video. Sinclair executive chairman David Smith reportedly told Trump in 2016: “We are here to deliver your message.”¹² When your local news is owned by a conservative media conglomerate pushing partisan content through trusted local faces, voters cannot punish leaders for policy failures they never learn about.
None of this would hold without the final piece: captured courts that enforce the rigged system and block any attempt to change it.
The Biden administration asked the Supreme Court to decide whether federal district judges have the power to issue nationwide injunctions blocking presidential policies. The Court declined to hear the case.¹³ The Trump administration asked the same question. The Court took it, ruled in Trump’s favor, 6-3.¹⁴
Same legal question. Same Court. Different answer depending on who asked.
The judiciary abandoned neutrality decades ago. Bush v. Gore stopped votes from being counted. Shelby County gutted voting rights. Citizens United flooded elections with dark money. What we’re watching now is the endgame.
The Niskanen Center analyzed the Court’s treatment of lower court injunctions and found that within the first six months of Trump’s second term, the Supreme Court lifted approximately 77 percent of injunctions blocking administration actions. For the Biden administration over four years, the Court lifted 10 percent.¹⁵ Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck documented that in the first 20 weeks of Trump’s second term, the administration sought emergency action from the Supreme Court 19 times. That equals the total number of requests the Biden administration made over four years.¹⁶ The Court sided with Trump nearly every time.
In July 2024, the Court ruled 6-3 that presidents enjoy absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts within their core constitutional authority, and presumptive immunity for all other official acts.¹⁷ The Court held that Trump’s discussions with the Acting Attorney General about overturning the 2020 election fell within his exclusive constitutional authority and were therefore absolutely immune.¹⁷ Courts cannot inquire into a president’s motives. An action does not become unofficial merely because it violates the law.¹⁷ Justice Sotomayor wrote in dissent that the decision makes the president “a king above the law.”¹⁷
A president can now direct the Justice Department to prosecute political enemies. He can order federal law enforcement to investigate, harass, and charge anyone he designates as a threat. He can pardon co-conspirators before, during, or after any scheme. He can fire any official who refuses to comply. If these actions fall within his official duties, he faces no criminal liability. The Court manufactured this immunity from whole cloth. No statute authorized it. No constitutional text required it. No precedent compelled it. Six justices simply declared that presidents need this protection to act “boldly.”
The Court is simultaneously dismantling the independence of federal agencies. In Trump v. Slaughter, currently before the Court, the administration argues that the president can fire Federal Trade Commission commissioners at will, eliminating the for-cause removal protections that have governed independent agencies since 1935.¹⁸ The D.C. Circuit has already ruled that Trump’s firings of Merit Systems Protection Board and National Labor Relations Board members were lawful.¹⁸ If Humphrey’s Executor falls, the Federal Reserve, the FTC, the SEC, the NLRB, and every other independent agency comes under direct presidential control. A president could fire the Fed chair for refusing to cut interest rates before an election. He could purge every agency of anyone who might resist.
Criminal immunity for official acts. Direct control of every federal agency. And now, with the nationwide injunction ruling, illegal orders take effect everywhere except in the specific jurisdictions where individual plaintiffs have standing to sue. The Court has built a legal architecture in which a Republican president operates with essentially no constraint.
Now consider what the same Court does when a Democrat holds office. In June 2023, the Court struck down President Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, a $430 billion initiative affecting over 40 million borrowers.¹⁹ Chief Justice Roberts invoked the “major questions doctrine,” holding that agencies cannot make decisions of vast economic significance without explicit congressional authorization.¹⁹ The previous year, the Court used the same doctrine to strike down the Clean Power Plan.²⁰ In June 2024, the Court overturned Chevron deference entirely, eliminating the 40-year principle that courts should defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes.²¹ The six-justice majority handed every conservative federal judge in the country a veto over Democratic governance.
The student loan program and the Clean Power Plan were not radical initiatives. They were exercises of delegated authority that prior courts would have upheld without controversy. This Court invented new doctrines to stop them. As Justice Kagan wrote in dissent, the Court’s approach “overrules Congress’s decisions about when and how to delegate” and makes the Supreme Court itself “the arbiter, indeed, the maker, of national policy.”²²
SCOTUSblog’s analysis calls this the “who-what duality” of the Roberts Court: expanding presidential power over personnel while restricting presidential power over policy.²³ But that framing is too neutral. The personnel expansions let a Republican president fire anyone who might resist. The policy restrictions prevent a Democratic president from using the administrative state to do anything at all. One president gets to destroy. The other gets blocked from building. This is not judicial philosophy. It is collaboration.
None of these tools will transfer. A Democratic president attempting to invoke the immunity ruling, the removal power, or the elimination of nationwide injunctions would discover new limits, new doctrines, new procedural barriers. We know this because we already have the data. Seventy-seven percent versus ten percent. Nineteen emergency requests in twenty weeks versus nineteen in four years. Same questions, different answers, depending entirely on who is asking.
Here is what all of this means in plain terms. One faction wins elections while losing the popular vote, governs without constraint, and installs lifetime judges who validate the structures that enabled minority rule. The other faction needs supermajorities to win, cannot govern when it does, and watches every policy achievement get struck down by courts it cannot reform. The gears turn freely toward authoritarian consolidation. Try to turn them back and the teeth catch.
This is why nothing ever gets better. Two-thirds of Americans support raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.²⁴ Seventy-three percent believe the healthcare system needs major change or a complete rebuild, including 67 percent of Republicans.²⁵ Exposed to policies without party labels, supermajorities support them. Yet the federal minimum wage has not moved since 2009. Healthcare remains broken. Housing stays unaffordable. Climate action stalls. Not because these policies are unpopular. Because the system is designed to prevent the popular will from becoming law. Gerrymandered legislatures will not pass them. If they pass, captured courts strike them down. If courts uphold them, the next minority-elected president dismantles them.
Every precondition is met. This is not a warning about where we are headed. We are already here.
The federal government will not save us. It has been captured. Any strategy for preserving democratic governance must begin by acknowledging what we are actually facing. What remains is the ground we still hold at the city and state level, and the willingness to use it.
The Introduction to Soft Secession booklet explains exactly what that looks like: public banking, interstate compacts, criminal prosecutions of federal officials under state law, and revenue strategies that reduce dependency on a captured federal government. It’s free at BuyMeACoffee.com/TheER, along with the Educate Activate Recruit Repeat Method for actually getting these policies passed, Being Dangerous: How to Go from Activist to Operative, a printable trifold you can hand out, and Conservatism: America’s Personality Disorder, the full book explaining how we got here. Physical copies and merch at TheExistentialistRepublic.com.
Why I do these posts. This is three days of Joe My God that got away way from me. So why do I do these long news posts? Because I comb the Joe My God comment section for the best memes and snarkiest comments. It dawned on me I could post his news articles for those that want to read them. But three days is a lot to go throw and it is much easier just to quickly scan and snatch the comments rather than post them. So I need some inputs from everyone. Are these posts worth it? Or would you rather go to Joe My God yourselves. Or I can keep doing these. Up to you. Hugs
—————————————————————————————————————————-
tRumps Grifts / Scams / Ripping off the rubes / tRump’s ego / tRump’s Crimes / tRump’s health / Republican grifts & payouts for supporting tRump / other trump scammers
The Trump Golf Tracker estimates that the president’s golf trips have cost taxpayers some $110,600,000 so far in 2025. But that estimate, which was based on a 2019 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on four golf trips during his first term, doesn’t even take into account the month of December.
The right wing media / the media arms of the GOP & Republican Party / The over the top thuggery and complete disrespect for common decency / Ask if you would like your child to act this way …. because maga does want their kids to be this crass as it makes them feel good / Kennedy Center debacle
The video was shared by Vice President JD Vance. FBI director Kash Patel said he is aware of the video and the FBI is investigating. The YouTuber says he is uncovering new fraud in Minnesota, but media outlets like KSTP reported more than a year ago about more than 62 investigations into Minnesota child care centers.
What this is really about is they are afraid Walz will run for office and win as he is so well liked. They are trying to gin up a fake scandal to Benghazi him like they did with Hillary Clinton. I posted yesterday how fake and full of lies / misinformation the “report” the YouTuber did was. In the article above this one you can see how the Republican Party had a hand in helping the right wing influencer to push a fake story. The state has been investigating these things for several years. Hugs
$175 billion for a “golden dome” that experts doubt would actually work, but only $2 billion in humanitarian aid for the United Nations. It’s what Jesus would want.
Space based weapons are forbidden by treaties that the US signed. That said do we have space based weapons … well I was sending commands somewhere for something when I was in the Army Sat coms / intel unit. You decide. Hugs
Maga hate fail / tRump lost in court / tRump supporters doing what they do not want you to know about / ICE lies / tRump’s DOJ / Misinformation / Trying to change history by spewing & omitting facts or what really happened
The emails, which were made public as part of a newly unsealed judicial order, largely reflected communications about the case that Robert E. McGuire, the acting U.S. attorney in Nashville, had with members of his staff and with Aakash Singh, a top official in Mr. Blanche’s office. They raised serious questions about whether the Justice Department had misled Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr., who is overseeing the case, by telling him that local prosecutors had acted alone in charging Mr. Abrego Garcia.
Hate / Bigotry / DEI / White Supremacy / Christian Nationalism / US aid to only white countries or white dominated areas / US Healthcare / For Profit drug prices rip off the US public /
The civil probes are proceeding under the umbrella of the False Claims Act, which has traditionally been used to go after contractors who bill the government for work that was never performed or inflate the cost of services rendered.
The U.S. slashed its aid spending this year, and leading Western donors such as Germany also pared back assistance as they pivoted to increased defense spending, triggering a severe funding crunch for the United Nations.
U.N. data shows total U.S. humanitarian contributions to the U.N. fell to about $3.38 billion in 2025, equating to about 14.8% of the global sum. This was down sharply from $14.1 billion the prior year, and a peak of $17.2 billion in 2022.
The idea behind the legislation originated with the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal advocacy group that has gained prominence for its work to incorporate religion in public spaces.
West last appeared here for his bill that would create a database of abortion patients.
In 2024, we heard from West for his bill to ban Pride flags at public schools and government buildings.
He appeared here in 2023 for his bill that would make it a felony to perform drag in the view of minors. His bill called for a $20,000 fine and up to two years in prison.
West first appeared here in 2021 when Gov. Kevin Stitt signed his bill making it legal to run over protesters.
The tweet below refers to West’s attempt to pass this same bill earlier this year.
tRump’s attack on Colorado because they won’t bow to the whim of the tyrant. His withholding money is illegal but no republican will stand up to the demented king.
One of the things that shocked me when I started following politics was how racist so many of the republican party members are and to be honest a few democrats as well. They finally drove Steve King out due to his over the top hate for black people and constant promotion of whites as the only salvation for the country. But I saw this in Reagan in the 1980s and it has gotten much worse. So many openly racist people are now in the US congress and they are not just men; at least one is a woman from the south who openly hates Black people. First let me be clear, I have heard the arguments made up by white supremacists with their false made up claims, but when I got the chance to work with people of a different skin tone I found two things. One was there was no difference between us in mental ability or the way we did our jobs, and second … Sorry but some of the nonwhite guys I knew were hot and made me horny as hell. Now having said that I of course respected everyone’s boundaries, and I won’t say if I had a few interesting 4 day passes with persons of a different skin tone than mine. But just say I did I can honestly report the melanin in their skin did not change their reactions or our pleasures on those passes … if they happened. OK, yes, they did and I loved it. So did they. But you get my point. The only difference between them and me at that age in that situation was our skin color and I saw how soft bigotry worked. Two young white guys going into a motel in South Carolina raised no eye browes, but when I went to that same hotel with a dark skinned companion, we had to show our military IDs, give my license plate information, and plenty of other things. That was my go to place because they had a nearby amusement park which we could pretend was what we were there for … not the hot sex happening in the hotel room. So even then racism was real in the 1980s and every time it happened I saw the person I was with shrink a bit more inside themselves. Something I understood as an abused child. We really need to do more to fight it. Hugs
This AG was not elected to any office, he was handpicked and given his job by DeathSantis. Both are Christian nationalist who feel it is great to force their religion on others even as they do not live by their own church doctrines in any way. They seem to feel forcing the public to live by their church doctrines or what ever view they think their god endorses is perfectly fine regardless if others disagree. They are the first to scream the loudest if their rituals or they think their rights to oppress others is interfered with, but they also seem unable to give others the same rights they demand for themselves. Hugs
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier (R) is urging the Pensacola City Council to shut down a Christmas-themed drag show, which he has deemed “demonic” and “harmful” to children, despite how it is exclusively for adults over the age of 18.
The city’s Saenger Theatre plans to host “A Drag Queen Christmas” on December 23. The website says fans should “expect a fabulous remix of classic Christmas hits, dazzling themed variety performances, and interactive moments to share your Christmas cheer.”
A letter from Uthmeier claimed the show “openly mocks one of the most sacred holidays in the Christian faith” and expressed horror that some of the queens evoke “satanic imagery” in their outfits or characters. He also decried the fact that it will be playing at the same time as the city’s family-centered Winterfest.
“So, while Penscola children are taking pictures with Santa, men dressed as garish women in demonic costumes will be engaged in obscene behavior mere feet away,” he ranted, even though the drag show will take place inside a theater where the children at the festival won’t be able to see it.
The Pensacola city attorney has reportedly refused to cancel the show, saying it would violate the drag show production company’s First Amendment rights and the city’s contract with the theater’s management company.
Uthmeier, however, said the city – which owns the theater – has a legal right to supersede the management company’s decision to put on the show if it deems a performance detrimental to public health or safety. He said the drag show meets this criterion because it will be taking place near children at Winterfest, even though they won’t be able to see it.
“While the First Amendment safeguards freedom of expression, it does not require a city to platform and endorse disgusting, obscene content that denigrates its residents’ religious beliefs,” Uthmeier concluded.
He claimed it may even amount to religious discrimination and could cause legal issues for the city, especially if one of the “deranged performers” were “to expose themselves to the kids” nearby. The preposterous idea that LGBTQ+ people are inherently a danger to children has long been used by the right to fearmonger and stir anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment.
The letter comes after a group of churches in the city launched a campaign to pressure the Pensacola City Council to cancel the drag show. The controversy has caused an uproar in the community, the Pensacola News Journal reported, where pro- and anti-LGBTQ+ residents continue to clash over whether the drag show should be permitted to go on.
At a packed and contentious city council meeting in early October, resident Jermaine Williams called out the hypocrisy of those claiming to oppose the show on religious grounds.
“I mean, we see how y’all vote,” Williams said. “Half of these people that spoke today wouldn’t know Jesus if they stared him in the face.”
Another resident, Stephen McCollum, gushed that drag queens are “more than entertainers.”
“They’re small business owners. They’re advocates and they’re educators who use creativity to uplift others and welcome all. They welcome all, demonstrating that this art form is more than just a performance. It’s a form of connection, and it’s a form of community, and it’s a form of hope.”
Uthmeier has long used his position to vilify and terrorize LGBTQ+ people. Earlier this year, he launched a crusade against a Life Time Fitness in Palm Beach Gardens after discovering that the private business had a trans inclusive policy. State law requires people use facilities aligned with their sex assigned at birth, but that does not apply to private businesses.
Uthmeier, however, claimed otherwise in a letter sent to the gym. He falsely claimed that trans inclusion leads to “assaults, exploitation, and fear” and that he was merely doing this to protect women and girls.
Even after Life Time said it would comply with his demands, Uthmeier posted a video in which he visited the gym in person to make sure they are “not allowing trans women into women’s bathrooms, not in Florida,” and “actually following the law.”
“It appears they are,” he reported to followers, though it’s unclear how he could have confirmed this without major privacy violations of the individuals entering and exiting the locker rooms there.
This past October, Uthmeier also filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of a parental rights activist who dubiously claims her child’s middle school helped her child secretly transition. She has now petitioned the Supreme Court to take her case.
Uthmeier’s brief claims government officials across the United States “are fundamentally altering the upbringing of children and keeping parents in the dark” with “secret transition” policies.
These policies do not involve schools encouraging students to be trans or transition, but rather to support any students who willingly communicate that their gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth and to allow the student to choose when to share that private information with their parents. For some students with anti-trans parents, telling them could be dangerous.
Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.
After spending this year working to implement as much of its gargantuan right-wing policy agenda, Project 2025, as possible, the Heritage Foundation has unveiled its anti-LGBTQ+ goals for 2026.
Over the past month, the far-right think tank has been preparing for next year, releasing an ad campaign and doing multiple interviews about its plans. The activity has brought renewed attention on Heritage Foundation’s 2025-2026 policy priorities, which were titled “Restoring America’s Promise” when they were released in March. At the time, the group named nine key priorities, including “root[ing] out the deep state” and “counter[ing] the CCP [Chinese Communist Party].”
The bulk of its anti-LGBTQ+ goals lie in the priority titled “Put Family First,” in which the Heritage Foundation declares that “every child conceived deserves to be born to a married mother and father who will love, guide, and protect them throughout their lives.”
The organization goes on to claim that “family breakdown and rampant abortion tears at the soul of our country and saps it of strength and moral authority,” while “radical ideologies that deny social and biological truths about sexual embodiment, marriage, and unborn life poison our courts, our culture, and our laws.”
“The Heritage enterprise will advance policies at the state and federal level to restore the nuclear family to the center of American life and to reduce both the demand and supply for abortion at all stages of human development,” it concludes. This language appears to oppose same-sex marriage given its emphasis on children being born to a married father and mother. It also appears to oppose transgender identity given its condemnation of ideologies that “deny social and biological truths about sexual embodiment” — this falls inline with a longstanding Heritage Foundation fight against trans people.
Elsewhere, the Heritage Foundation indicates its anti-trans views in a priority titled “Expand Education Freedom,” in which the group declares that the education system is “failing our children” through “the scourge of woke ideas like critical theory and radical gender ideology.” The terminology “radical gender ideology” is often used by conservatives to refer to trans and nonbinary identities.
The Heritage Foundation has been around since 1973, when it was founded by conservatives who found President Richard Nixon too liberal and feared both fiscal liberalism and federal government expansion. It has been consistent in its campaigns against LGBTQ+ rights, from consulting with then-governor Mitt Romney to figure out ways around preventing the legalization of gay marriage from being implemented in Massachusetts to lobbying against Title IX protections for trans students implemented during the Obama administration.
More recently, the organization has made headlines for its 920-page policy blueprint Project 2025, which presents a far-right Christian vision for the second Trump administration that includes several anti-trans measures, as well as the dismantling of the Department of Education and undoing other federal checks and balances. Although the Heritage Foundation has been releasing regular “Mandate for Leadership” blueprints ahead of incoming presidential administrations since the 1980s, Project 2025 has received considerable attention given that the group staffed and advised the first Trump administration (in July 2024, a CNN review found that at least 140 people working for Trump were involved with the Heritage Foundation). One of Project 2025’s architects, Russell Vought, currently runs the Office of Management and Budget.
Following late-night host Jimmy Kimmel’s temporary removal in September, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr seemingly confirmed speculation that the Trump administration’s actions are a part of Project 2025. At the time, Glee star Kevin McHale shared an X post stating that “This was all in Project 2025,” after reposting another X post that framed right-wing attacks on media — which also include the Trump administration’s lawsuit against 60 Minutes, The New York Times, and Wall Street Journal — as First Amendment assaults. In response, Carr — who wrote Project 2025’s chapter on the FCC — shared a GIF of Jack Nicholson nodding in apparent confirmation.
(Kenneth Fowler/CNN)
Molly Sprayregen (She/Her)November 10, 2025, 11:00 am ESTFlorida Attorney General James Uthmeier speaks about the arrest of 28 members of the Mongols motorcycle gang during a press conference at the Stephen Saboda Training Center near Daytona Beach, Wednesday, July 2, 2025. | © Nigel Cook/News-Journal / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images
Tom Williams/Getty Images
After spending this year working to implement as much of its gargantuan right-wing policy agenda, Project 2025, as possible, the Heritage Foundation has unveiled its anti-LGBTQ+ goals for 2026.Over the past month, the far-right think tank has been preparing for next year, releasing an ad campaign and doing multiple interviews about its plans. The activity has brought renewed attention on Heritage Foundation’s 2025-2026 policy priorities, which were titled “Restoring America’s Promise” when they were released in March. At the time, the group named nine key priorities, including “root[ing] out the deep state” and “counter[ing] the CCP [Chinese Communist Party].”
