Rigging The Vote, Thanks To A Rogue Court

A number of pundits have pointed out that Donald Trump is a prime example of projection; that when he accuses someone of bad behavior, it is almost always behavior in which he, himself, has engaged. His current effort to get Red states to redistrict mid-cycle is a perfect example. Ever since he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden, Trump has insisted that he couldn’t possibly have lost “fair and square,” that the election had been rigged. So, in typical Trump fashion, he is engaging in an effort to rig the upcoming midterms.

As Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo has recently written,

Texas Republicans are in the midst of making their state even more of a mockery of the concept of representative democracy than it already was. In an attempt to preserve the GOP’s narrow House majority in the 2026 midterms, lawmakers are tinkering with the boundaries of the state’s 38 congressional districts to create five more safe Republican seats, forcing several Democratic incumbents to seek re-election next year in districts that are suddenly, alarmingly red. Scrambling the map in this manner would ensure that in a state in which Trump earned 56 percent of the vote in 2024, Republicans would lock up 80 percent of the state’s representation in Congress for the rest of the decade.

The effort to give Republican candidates unearned advantages isn’t limited to Texas–Trump is currently leaning on other Red states, notably Florida and Indiana–to engage in the same gerrymandering, which he clearly believes will forestall a Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives. (He really shouldn’t be so confident; in a special election just last Tuesday, a Democrat won a seat in the Iowa legislature with 55% of the vote–in a district that Trump had carried by 11 points. But recognition of nuance and complexity aren’t among Trump’s very limited intellectual skills.)

As Marshall quite correctly notes, “you can draw a straight line between this frantic gerrymandering arms race and a mind-bendingly stupid decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.” That “mind-bendingly stupid decision” was a 5-4 ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause, a 2019 case in which the five Republican justices held that partisan gerrymanders are a “political question”—that is, an issue that must be left to the democratic process. “Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that the Constitution yields no workable standard for determining when a given gerrymander goes too far to be legal.”

In what is, in my view, still one of the most embarrassing paragraphs to appear in the pages of the United States Reporter, Roberts wraps in Rucho by noting that the holding constrains only federal courts; Congress, he says, would remain free to enact anti-gerrymandering legislation, as would lawmakers at the state level. The argument here is that voters who are dissatisfied with corruption in the political process don’t actually need John Roberts’s help, because they can always seek redress of their grievances via the aforementioned corrupt political process. This is roughly analogous to the fire department pulling up to a burning house, attaching the hoses to fire hydrants, and then politely informing the owner that it could rain any minute.

As Marshall points out, and as I have previously written, there definitely are standards the Court might have applied. The decision was clearly partisan. Republicans control 59 of the 99 state-level legislative chambers, and both the legislature and the governorship in 24 of those states. That compares with just 15 for Democrats. Despite the fact that most Blue states have significantly larger populations than the more numerous Red states, Republicans have power over the line-drawing process in more places than the Democrats–a power that allows the GOP to win elections despite garnering fewer votes overall.

It’s hard to argue with Marshall’s conclusion that what is happening in Texas and California and elsewhere right now “demonstrates just how vapid and hollow the reasoning in Rucho always was. You do not have to have a law degree to understand that a Texas map that transforms a 56-42 advantage into a 79-21 blowout is not, in any meaningful sense, fair.”

But it isn’t just Rucho. The Roberts Court will go down in history (assuming we have a history) as a disgraceful, rogue Court in which a blatantly partisan majority enabled an autocrat and undermined the democratic process in multiple decisions contrary to years of judicial precedents.

If and when the Democrats control Congress, they need to impose term limits on the justices, and expand the Court.

Comments

The Best Thing That’s Happened To the Nazis

Last week, a friend alerted me to a Reuters article exploring the recent rise of explicitly Nazi organizations–a rise attributed to the favorable climate produced by the Trump administration. The lede really says it all:

HOCHATOWN, Oklahoma – Wearing cargo shorts, flip-flops and a baseball cap shading his eyes from the sun, Dalton Henry Stout blends in easily in rural America.

Except for the insignia on his hat. It bears the skull and crossbones of the infamous “Death’s Head” SS units that oversaw Nazi Germany’s concentration camps – and the initials “AFN,” short for Aryan Freedom Network, the neo-Nazi group Stout leads with his partner.

From a modest ranch house in Texas, the couple oversee a network they say has been turbocharged by President Donald Trump’s return to the White House. They point to Trump’s rhetoric – his attacks on diversity initiatives, his hardline stance on immigration and his invocation of “Western values” – as driving a surge in interest and recruitment.

Trump “awakened a lot of people to the issues we’ve been raising for years,” Stout told Reuters. “He’s the best thing that’s happened to us.”

As the article reports, Trump’s re-election turbo-charged the activism of America’s neo-Nazi organizations. Trump’s rhetoric, especially, has served to galvanize far-right and white supremacist activists, and encouraged growth in their numbers. That growth has been abetted by a variety of Trump’s actions: his pardons of the January 6 rioters, his use of ICE and federal law enforcement to terrorize and “disappear” immigrants of color, the virtual abandonment of federal investigations into white nationalism–and, of course, the administration’s consistent attacks on diversity and inclusion.

The Trump administration has scaled back efforts to counter domestic extremism, redirecting resources toward immigration enforcement and citing the southern border as the top security threat. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has reduced staffing in its Domestic Terrorism Operations Section. The Department of Homeland Security has cut personnel in its violence prevention office.

The article also reported what most observers (especially those of us who once called ourselves Republican) have seen; Ideas that were once considered ridiculous, unAmerican and fringe, have moved into the mainstream of Republican politics.  Election denialism and rhetoric portraying immigrants as “invaders”–joined by Trump’s public support and pardons for far-right figures–have served to normalize those views with today’s Republican voters. There is no longer a bright line between “mainstream Republicanism” and the neo-fascist far right.

That shift has coincided with a surge in white nationalist activity. White extremists are committing a growing proportion of U.S. political violence, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data project, a nonprofit research outfit that tracks global conflicts. In 2020, such groups were linked to 13% of all U.S. extremist-related demonstrations and acts of political violence, or 57 of the events ACLED tracked. By 2024, they accounted for nearly 80%, or 154 events.

The article reports that Stout’s beliefs, and the beliefs of many of the neo-Nazi groups, are rooted in the Christian Identity movement. That movement claims that white Europeans, not Jews, are the true Israelites of the bible and are therefore God’s chosen people. They also claim that Black Americans, under Jewish influence, are leading a Communist revolution – a fusion of racial supremacy ideology with far-right conspiracy theories.

The pseudoscientific notion of a superior white Aryan race – essentially Germanic – was a core tenet of Hitler’s Nazi regime. AFN gatherings brim with Nazi memes: Swastikas are ritually set ablaze and chants of “white power” echo through the woods. AFN’s website pays specific tribute to violent white supremacist groups of the past, including The Order, whose members killed a Jewish radio host in 1984.

The article documents the relationship of these emerging neo-Nazi groups to the KKK, and documents both their recent growth and their advocacy of race war.

When Stout was asked about why he believes these groups have been gaining momentum, he offered a chilling explanation:
“Our side won the election.”

Yes, it did.

Comments

L’Etat, Ce Moi

“L’etat, ce moi”–meaning,  “the state, it is me– is a French phrase attributed to King Louis XIV, who probably never said it. Nevertheless, it represents the foundational concept of absolute monarchy, a regime in which the king has total authority over the state. 

I am confident that Donald Trump, the least educated President in history, never encountered the phrase, but its meaning clearly animates his conception of the Presidency. Law–in Trump’s limited and inaccurate view–is whatever he says it is. It certainly doesn’t exist as a separate framework.

In recent articles, the New York Times has outlined how this wholly unAmerican approach to the Presidency is undermining the rule of law, as our would-be monarch decides what rules should be ignored in the corrupt interests of his pocketbook and those of his plutocratic cohorts. 

 The most vicious and far-reaching attempts to thwart the laws of the land have come as part of Trump’s racist efforts to root out D.E.I. and other measures aiming to ameliorate discrimination.  Trump has ordered government offices to simply stop enforcing numerous civil rights provisions. According to a Times  newsletter (link unavailable), the Labor Department will no longer investigate employers who allegedly underpaid women or awarded promotions based on race. The administration has  abandoned hundreds of pending cases under the fair housing law–abandoning efforts to prosecute landlords who keep out gay people or owners who refuse to sell to people of a different faith. Trump has also instructed the government to nix the “disparate-impact” test, which looked at whether minority groups were affected differently by criminal background checks, credit checks, zoning regulations and other facially neutral laws.

And recognizing that direct orders are not the only way to stymie the enforcement of laws on the books, Trump has slashed budgets and head counts, which has a similar effect. As the Times accurately noted, laws work only if people are there to enforce them. So the EPA has been eviscerated under this administration; its ability to enforce environmental measures crippled. Employment at the IRS has been cut, severely limiting the ability of that agency to pursue tax cheats (like the President himself). Etc.

Mainstream media sources routinely describe measures taken by the Trump administration as “authoritarian.” That is, of course, accurate–but it tends to obscure the effects of the measures described above (and the many similar ones)–tends to make the very real harms seem somewhat abstract. (Theoretically, after all, an authoritarian leader could impose measures that advanced the public good–authoritarianism is the process, not the consequence.)

The same problem arises when pundits and bloggers like yours truly bemoan the daily assaults on the rule of law. Rule of law, too, is an abstraction. What isn’t abstract is when ICE thugs ignore the constitutional rights of those they are intimidating and snatching off the streets, or when the administration refuses to comply with the terms of its prior research grants.

A significant body of research confirms that a troubling percentage of the American public actually wants an authoritarian government–a ruler who relieves them of the burden of exercising thoughtful and responsible citizenship. Whether that desire to be ruled rather than governed is a result of inadequate civic education or personal intellectual/emotional deficit is unknown; it is also unknown whether those who prefer a monarchy to a democracy approve of the way the current Mad King and his Congressional enablers/courtiers are conducting–or refusing to conduct– the affairs of state. 

That Times newsletter did readers a favor by discarding the abstractions and pointing out the specifics of an authoritarianism that manifests its contempt for fundamental fairness and the rule of law every day.

MAGA cult members are likely to be surprised when their chosen authoritarian’s “policies” further enrich the plutocrats while tanking the economy, instituting stagflation, closing rural hospitals and throwing grandma off Medicaid. That’s the problem with allowing someone–anyone, but especially this bloated, ignorant and embarrassing buffoon–to believe that he is “the state.”

Comments

It’s About Time!

Regular readers of this blog know that, when I address the threats posed by Christian Nationalism, I always put quotation marks around the word Christian. I do so because the movement we call Christian Nationalism seems–to this non-Christian–incredibly unChristian. I have several friends in the clergy, and they are admirable humans who follow a very different religious path from the proponents of bigotry and White Supremacy who have appropriated the title.

But because I do know wonderful people who identify as Christian, I have been frustrated by what I have seen as a tepid response by the genuinely Christian community to the usurpation of their identity. I would have expected members of the kind and thoughtful congregations that I know are “out there” to respond forcefully to those who are militarizing and distorting the tradition, but until very recently, there has been minimal pushback from people who are entitled to call themselves Christian.

It wasn’t until 2019 that Christians Against Christian Nationalism was formed, the first welcome sign of organized resistance of which I’m aware. And now, in an equally welcome response to ICE and its efforts to rid the country of Black and Brown people by categorizing them as “illegal immigrants,” a network of 5000 churches has organized to protect worshippers.

As The Bulwark has reported, a network of five thousand faith communities is now disseminating a blueprint for clergy and lay leaders who want to push back against what Trump and the agents of his newly emboldened ICE are doing to immigrants across the country.

This rapid-response action plan for churches and faith communities to protect people during ICE raids is the brainchild of evangelical pastor Doug Pagitt and his group Vote Common Good, which is not only providing these resources to the faith communities in his network, but also sending an open letter to the White House Faith Office calling for justice and compassion for immigrants, and slamming plans to open more detention centers like Florida’s Everglades detention facility. Thousands of faith leaders and congregations cosigned the letter.

The plan includes formation of rapid-response teams of volunteers willing to monitor reports of raids, verify them, and show up to raids as “moral witnesses.” They also coordinate shelter, transportation, and legal aid for vulnerable immigrants.

The activism of these congregations is largely in reaction to Trump’s over-reach: Churches are no longer safe from ICE incursions. But whatever the trigger, my reaction is “better late than never.”

The question that confronts adherents of all religions is deceptively simple: do you actively defend the core values of your faith, or do you simply wear the label? When that label is appropriated by people whose actions are diametrically opposed to the most fundamental values of your religion, what do you do? (It isn’t just American Christians who must choose a path under those circumstances; Jews in Israel who see Netanyahu’s actions as fundamentally inconsistent with Jewish values face the same decision.)

Of course, it isn’t just religious folks. When the fascists come calling, we are all obligated to choose a side. Lawyers must decide how dedicated they really are to the rule of law; university personnel must stand–or not–for intellectual freedom. These really are the times that try men’s (and women’s) souls–the times that challenge us to decide where our values really lie and how willing we are to defend them.

Pagitt, the founder of Vote Common Good, has been disappointed to see the way church groups have been co-opted and bullied during Trump’s second term. He isn’t the only one.

“Much to my sadness, we’ve seen faith communities quiver and shake and be afraid like universities and law firms and so many institutions,” he said. “We want to be on the other side of that and say to skeptical people of good conscience to not play the silent hypocrite card.”

It’s encouraging to see the real Christians begin to stand up. The rest of us need to emulate them.

Comments

Calling It What it Is

When Trump won a first term in 2016, virtually all pundits and traditional media outlets bent over backwards to give his voters the benefit of the doubt. They mostly attributed his support to economic anxiety, despite the fact that a significant majority of poorer Americans had voted for Hillary Clinton. 

Research in the wake of that election pointed to a very different motive for those votes: racism. Over the intervening years, it has become abundantly clear that what scholars delicately refer to as “racial resentment” is the glue holding MAGA together–and yet, the legacy media still seems reluctant  to call it what it is.

Non-“legacy” sources, however, increasingly point to the elephant in the room. (Pun intended.)

Heather Cox Richardson recently took on Trump’s efforts to cow museums into an alternate view of history, writing

When Trump says that our history focuses too much on how bad slavery was, he is not simply downplaying the realities of human enslavement: he is advocating a world in which Black people, people of color, poor people, and women should let elite white men lead, and be grateful for that paternalism. It is the same argument elite enslavers made before the Civil War to defend their destruction of the idea of democracy to create an oligarchy. When Trump urges Republicans to slash voting rights to stop socialism and keep him in power, he makes the same argument former Confederates made after the war to keep those who would use the government for the public good from voting.

Talking Points Memo has been equally blunt. In a recent Morning Memo titled “Trump Pushes White Nationalist Agenda Across Multiple Fronts,” Josh Marshall wrote that Trump’s anti-immigrant animus is

fundamentally a story about racism, xenophobia, and othering. It’s about preying on our fears, differences, and prejudices to create a villainous foe whom he can easily vanquish in repeated set-pieces. It’s about letting loose the worst of our impulses to heighten and sustain divisions among us.

The mass deportation agenda is just one part of a larger agenda in which white Americans are fronted as the real America and everyone else is second-class, unless they individually demonstrate in lavish ways a high enough degree of fealty to Donald Trump.

And at Lincoln Square, Stuart Stevens was even more direct, writing that Trump is a racist and that fact needs to be called out.

After decades of evidence — the dog whistles, the calls for innocent black men to be executed, the bizarre fixation on the Confederacy, his alliance with known Nazis and White Christian Nationalists — saying these things, that Donald Trump is a fascist, that he is a racist, should be the least controversial thing to say about him….

For seven months, he’s rounded up brown people for deportation, imprisonment, or total disappearance. He’s attempting to convince his base that slavery wasn’t so bad, after all. Some in his orbit are echoing this sentiment, going so far as to claim we shouldn’t actually blame white people for slavery.

He doesn’t like Black or brown people. Nearly every action is motivated by that dislike. Every breath he takes is flush with a fear and hatred of people who are not white.

What would you call that?

Ever since 2016, Americans of goodwill have tied ourselves in knots trying to understand why any sentient person would vote for Donald Trump–an ignorant buffoon with a limited intellect and unlimited self-regard. The answer to that question has always been obvious, despite a well-meaning desire that it not be so. 

James Carville was wrong. It isn’t “the economy, stupid.” It’s the racism, stupid! As my youngest son observed, way back in 2016, only two kinds of people voted for Donald Trump: those who shared his racism, and those for whom it wasn’t disqualifying.

The civil war really never ended. It just morphed.

Comments