#libraryofcongress — Public Fediverse posts

"Soul Man" is a 1967 song written and composed by #IsaacHayes and #DavidPorter, first successful as a number 2 hit single by #AtlanticRecords #soul duo #SamAndDave, which consisted of #SamuelSamMoore and #DavidDavePrater. In 2019, "Soul Man" was selected for preservation in the #NationalRecordingRegistry as "culturally, historically, and aesthetically significant" by the #LibraryOfCongress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTWH1Fdkjow

"Soul Man" is a 1967 song written and composed by #IsaacHayes and #DavidPorter, first successful as a number 2 hit single by #AtlanticRecords #soul duo #SamAndDave, which consisted of #SamuelSamMoore and #DavidDavePrater. In 2019, "Soul Man" was selected for preservation in the #NationalRecordingRegistry as "culturally, historically, and aesthetically significant" by the #LibraryOfCongress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbXw4EFioRI

"Soul Man" is a 1967 song written and composed by #IsaacHayes and #DavidPorter, first successful as a number 2 hit single by #AtlanticRecords #soul duo #SamAndDave, which consisted of #SamuelSamMoore and #DavidDavePrater. In 2019, "Soul Man" was selected for preservation in the #NationalRecordingRegistry as "culturally, historically, and aesthetically significant" by the #LibraryOfCongress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM0TUtqddpg

Library of Congress Blogs: 2026 Designing Storage Architectures for Digital Collections. “This year’s event attracted 172 of the world’s leading experts in data storage infrastructure, best practices, innovation, and future projections of the digital preservation ecosystem. The Library’s DSA organizers arranged a robust agenda to foster open discussion of current challenges in digital […]

What To Watch On YouTube Right Now – Part 138

Welcome back my readers, YouTube viewers and all others who followed this series of articles focused on YouTube videos worth watching.

Have you been searching for something fun or interesting to watch on YouTube? Do you feel bored right now and you crave for something to see on the world’s most popular online video destination?

I recommend you check out the following videos I found.

#1 How To Get The Strongest And Most Optimized Spaceship Crew In Starfield – This year, Bethesda launched several important updates to make their 2023 science fiction role-playing game Starfield better and they also offered new DLC for those who crave for new content. One of the more defining aspects of the game is space travel and this includes setting up your own crew for your spaceship and there is impact on its functions and capabilities. If you want to learn how to get the stronger and most optimized crew for your ship, I encourage you watch the video below.

https://youtu.be/vy8iOx7eqVU?si=gn7W1mZxTOQ4SSrd

#2 Mari Iijima And The Defining Song of Macross: Do You Remember Love? – I really love watching the 1984 anime feature film Macross: Do You Remember Love? Apart from the great animation, the spectacle, the memorable characters and the solid storytelling, the movie also has a great soundtrack made to delight the long-time Macross fans. Still, the movie has its very own song performed by none other than Mari Iijima (Minmay) and it is a classic among Macross fans. In the videos below, you will see Mari Iijima perform the song live in a 1980s TV broadcast and the song playing with selected footage of Macross: Do You Remember Love? Enjoy these!

https://youtu.be/OfuW_Wbt73c?si=Q1DE8eJxo4Zk90pc

https://youtu.be/uJBMYV9e1Nc?si=veDGYU4r7s0flQ_H

#3 The Tuna City In Japan Is Changing With Tourism In Mind – If you plan to visit Japan at all, you might want to discover Miura City located in Kanagawa Prefecture. Miura City is famous for its fresh tuna and in recent times there has been a series of changes as several room-only hotels and new trends have sprouted as the locality is finding new ways to turn visitors into overnight guests. This is a place I would like to visit someday if ever I get the opportunity to return to Japan. Watch and learn from the Nippon TV video below.

https://youtu.be/fUPP30fYH78?si=MrC6Dml3IRVe7fcV

#4 Women’s Rights Activist Marries Islamist And Things Went Wrong – Did you notice that there is a gradual rising number of feminists and women’s rights activists who not embrace Islam (wicked and ugly) but also marry Islamists believing that things will be alright and they can just continue their activism. Of course, many of them activists and feminists do not fully understand Islam nor the full content of the Quran. As such, when things go very wrong, they are get into deep trouble. Watch and learn from the video below.

https://youtu.be/bx3YvoyP6cw?si=omxqhyR8CQfpfhYK

#5 Islamists Violate Hindu Women In India And Get Arrested – Let’s be very clear here. Islamists are oriented to conquer others even though they may not be numerous within a locality. Believe it or not, a group of such people who wielded power inside a business violated the Hindu women (plus at least one male employee) with regards to cultural norms and doing things that go against their faith. Even forced religious conversion happened. Watch and learn from the video below.

https://youtu.be/9xjFS-3Vuws?si=xuDIivIonrp9tQux

#6 Meatballs Reaction And Retrospective – When it comes to cinematic comedy, Bill Murray is iconic and his early work in 1979’s Meatballs already involved the late Harold Ramis and the late director Ivan Reitman. That said, there is something about Meatballs – produced for less than $2 million – that helped it achieve tremendous commercial success with ticket sales of $70 million. Remember, three of the creative minds behind the classic Ghostbusters are involved in this old movie and you will see how You, Me and The Movies react to it in the video below. Be aware that as of this writing, there are not too many movie reaction videos about Meatballs on YouTube. Also posted below is an in-depth retrospective about Meatballs by GoodBadFlicks.

https://youtu.be/nhR9xUCvpAI?si=Zh6gjAX0SdIrtSfT

https://youtu.be/D0BS-K3K_vE?si=HtyR_VThLUKv0Wj6

#7 Ashleigh Burton Reacts To The Thin Man – Have you ever heard of The Thin Man? It’s not a UFO reference. It’s the 1934 American pre-Code comedy-mystery movie that was eventually named to the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress having been deemed “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant” in 1997. Apart from its reputation in American film history, The Thin Man also resulted in five sequels. If you want to discover the 1934 movie but you don’t have the time nor resources to watch the movie, watch Ashleigh Burton’s reaction video and see how it impacts her.

https://youtu.be/IJRQXuw–20?si=mSYY7_Eb4EK6reBY

+++++

Thank you for reading. If you find this article engaging, please click the like button below, share this article to others and also please consider making a donation to support my publishing. If you are looking for a copywriter to create content for your special project or business, check out my services and my portfolio. Feel free to contact me with a private message. Also please feel free to visit my Facebook page Author Carlo Carrasco and follow me on Twitter at @CarloCarrascoPH as well as on Tumblr at https://carlocarrasco.tumblr.com/ and on Instagram athttps://www.instagram.com/authorcarlocarrasco

"Soul Man" is a 1967 song written and composed by #IsaacHayes and #DavidPorter, first successful as a number 2 hit single by #AtlanticRecords soul duo #SamAndDave, which consisted of #SamuelSamMoore and #DavidDavePrater. In 2019, "#SoulMan" was selected for preservation in the #NationalRecordingRegistry as "culturally, historically, and aesthetically significant" by the #LibraryOfCongress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_OX2HwWy-o

"Soul Man" is a 1967 song written and composed by #IsaacHayes and #DavidPorter, first successful as a number 2 hit single by #AtlanticRecords soul duo #SamAndDave, which consisted of #SamuelSamMoore and #DavidDavePrater. In 2019, "#SoulMan" was selected for preservation in the #NationalRecordingRegistry as "culturally, historically, and aesthetically significant" by the #LibraryOfCongress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ahzPFYyYtI

Her groundbreaking sea floor discovery was dismissed as 'girl talk.' But science proved her right.

https://web.brid.gy/r/https://www.upworthy.com/marie-tharp-tectonic-discovery

Supreme Court has empowered Trump. How much further will it go? – The Washington Post

Supreme Court has expanded presidential powers under Trump. How far will it go?

The justices will hear arguments Wednesday on the legality of most of the president’s tariffs — the first in a series of tests of sweeping claims of authority.

November 2, 2025 at 8:36 a.m. EST, Today at 8:36 a.m. EST, 10 min

By Justin Jouvenal

For nine months, in a flood of emergency orders, the Supreme Court has allowed President Donald Trump to expand his power.

The justices have permitted Trump to slash the federal bureaucracy, fire the heads of nominally independent agencies and exercise powers traditionally ascribed to Congress.

How much further will the court go?

That will be the overriding question Wednesday when the court hears arguments on the legality of most of the president’s tariffs — the first case to reach the justices in a series of high-stakes tests of Trump’ssweeping claimsof authority.

His asserted tariff powers are uniquely dear to Trump, who has repeatedly warned of economic devastation if the court were to rule against one of his signature policies. But the other tests of presidential power could also have major impact.

In November, the court will considerwhether to strike down a 90-year-old precedent that insulates independent agencies from White House interference. In January, it will explore whether Trump can remake the Federal Reserve, with its vast powers over the economy.

Taken together, the cases will determine the extent to which the Supreme Court will embrace Trump’s view of a presidency constrained by few checks and wielding the type of authority typically only seen in times of war or national crisis. Decisions are expected in the cases by the summer.

“I think the court so far has been more deferential to President Trump than most Supreme Courts in modern times,” said Matthew Dallek, a political historian at George Washington University. “It’s very hard to point to a significant way in which the court has said ‘stop’ to the White House. It raises the pressure on the court, and it raises the stakes for the term ahead.”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement the high court’s rulings have corrected erroneous decisions by “far-left liberal activist judges” and thatthe president is doing what he was elected to do.

“The President will continue implementing the policy agenda that the American people voted for in November and will continue to be vindicated by higher courts when liberal activist judges attempt to intervene,” Jackson said.

Trump’s claim that he can unilaterally impose massive tariffs, a cornerstone of his economic agenda, is among his most aggressive moves to date. His assertion rests on a 1977 law that grants the president emergency powers to regulate international commerce. Trump’s argument that the law can be used for tariffs is one no other president has made in the statute’s 50-year history.

The administration has asked the justices to overturn federal court rulings that found the law did not convey authority to impose tariffs. Trump said the levies, some of which he announced at an event he dubbed “Liberation Day,” will help stem the flow of fentanyl across the border and restore America’s manufacturing base.

Small businesses and states have sued to block the levies, arguing they will cause widespread economic harm.

Arguably, no institution has set the stage for Trump’s efforts to expand his poweras much as the Supreme Court and in particular its chief justice. John G. Roberts Jr. has written decisions in recent years declaring the president a uniquely powerful figure.

In a 2020 ruling, Roberts wrote the “entire ‘executive Power’ belongs to the President alone.” He has also intimated the president should have a free hand to fire low-level government employees and made it easier for the president to remove the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Supreme Court has empowered Trump. How much further will it go? – The Washington Post

#2025 #America #ChiefJustice #ConservativeMajority #DonaldTrump #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Politics #Resistance #Roberts #SCOTUS #SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStates #TheWashingtonPost #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UncheckedPower #UnitedStates

Trump’s Unauthorized East Wing Demolition – A Special Report – October 24, 2025

Trump’s Unauthorized East Wing Demolition

DrWeb Editorial:

I was afraid this might be long. So I’ll be brief.
Like the flickering TV and ads and social media posts and messages that fly by like so much dust in the wind (we used to call it a firehose). And in these times, (I have take to calling it Trump2.XKNGS) –some Americans accept the shutdown, some look away, some wait, some hesitate, some ignore. But, I go off on a tangent.
The sudden, complete destruction of American history, the complete East Wing –shows us much is wrong with American Democracy –our protections for it; our legal system for it; our states’ rights to their protections, in a federal system. We are weaker than I thought, less capable of fighting authoritarianism, corrupt and cruel leaders starting with Trump. We need to fix Democracy, too, after his failed administration fails, and he is gone.
Most Americans know that if One Man can do this, and worse, and kill “suspected” drug dealers in the Caribbean –he can do whatever he wants. That is not Democracy.
Oh, he and his broken circle will try to corrupt and disturb the 2025 November elections –trial run for Presidential election in 2028– so they will be monitored by the states and Democratic coverage.
This is an example of our failures –to modernize our government; to ensure protections exist for Trump-like attacks, balance the Supreme Court and enlarge it for balance, reduce Presidential authority over Congress 100%. We have a system with flaws, and GOP and Trump and ghost figures like Musk, Bannon, and Miller and the dark ones in the shadows, and we failed clearly to see Project 2025’s actions were not imaginary after all.
The East Wing Destruction (EWD) is a metaphor for all that’s wrong. In real time. We saw what HE seems to be allowed to do. Today (October 25), I see lawsuit is filed, perhaps more to follow. These are the darkest days of our nation and Democracy since the Nazis. We all allowed some of this darkness to descend. Let’s learn, pull on our asbestos suits, and fight like Hell for the nation WWII and since showed America’s strength. We need that strength now. –DrWeb

Top Ten Major Media Stories – The East Wing

1. BBC – “Satellite images show extent of demolition at the White House” (October 24, 2025)1
2. CBS News – “Where is debris from the White House East Wing demolition being taken?” (October 24, 2025)2
3. PBS NewsHour – “The East Wing of the White House has been demolished. Here’s a look at its history” (October 24, 2025)3
4. ABC News – “White House East Wing demolished, new images appear to show” (October 23, 2025)4
5. CNN – “See the White House’s East Wing demolition from satellite images” (October 23, 2025)5
6. NBC News – “White House’s East Wing demolition finished as Trump makes way for new ballroom” (October 23, 2025)6
7. CNN – “Why Trump’s sudden East Wing demolition is extraordinary” (October 22, 2025)7
8. Reuters – “White House East Wing will be torn down fully to make way for Trump ballroom” (October 22, 2025)8
9. The New York Times – “See the White House as It Stood and What Trump Envisions” (October 22, 2025)9
10. USA Today – “Trump exposed a ‘loophole’ to demolish the White House East Wing” (October 23, 2025)10

Best Five Images – Major Media

1. CNN Photo Gallery – “In pictures: Trump’s East Wing demolition” – Complete visual documentation of the demolition process11
2. Getty Images – “Trump To Demolish Entire East Wing” collection – 23 professional images12
3. ABC News Australia – Satellite imagery showing complete demolition13
4. PBS NewsHour – “PHOTOS: White House starts East Wing demolition”14
5. Yahoo News Canada – “Photos reveal shocking destruction of East Wing” – Ground-level destruction images15

What in World is Trump Doing Now?
Why Would He Do This?

The Trump administration’s stated rationale centers on a complaint –that no one made–about inadequate space for large-scale diplomatic functions16. Trump also argues –though again, no one said this anywhere–the federal government has lacked adequate space for large gatherings at the White House for 150 years16.
It’s a home, a house, a symbol, a residence, a meeting space for small gatherings, the First Lady’s staff and space. The new 90,000-square-foot ballroom will accommodate nearly 1,000 guests, compared to the East Room’s 200-person capacity14.

However, critics question the timing and priorities. The project costs an estimated $300 million during a government shutdown that has lasted nearly three weeks [as of 10/24/2025], halting most government expenditures16, including damaging Americans health care and food support.

Christina Hurt, director of government ethics at Santa Clara University, questioned whether it’s “justifiable for an administration to embark on costly, primarily aesthetic projects while ordinary Americans are experiencing financial hardships and federal employees are going unpaid”16.

–Christiana Hurt’s view

The funding comes from private donations and corporations, including major defense contractor Lockheed Martin and tech giants like Amazon and Google16. Ethics experts warn this fundraising approach could foster corruption, with companies “clearly doing so to curry favor with the government,” according to Richard Painter, former chief ethics lawyer during George W. Bush’s administration16.

Best Editorial Quotes – Suggested by Perplexity and approved

“This encapsulates Trump’s presidency in a single image. Illegal, destructive, and not beneficial to you.”
— Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)17

“Oh you’re trying to say the cost of living is skyrocketing? Donald Trump can’t hear you over the sound of bulldozers demolishing a wing of the White House to build a new grand ballroom.”
— Senator Elizabeth Warren18

“I didn’t know draining the swamp meant Donald Trump building a $200 million ballroom for billionaires to bend the knee for special favors.”
— Senator Elizabeth Warren19

“The people’s house is basically being sold to the highest bidder. It is corruption at its core.”
— Former White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre20

“The companies providing funds are clearly doing so to curry favor with the government and enhance their visibility among federal officials.”
— Richard Painter, Corporate Law Professor and Former Ethics Lawyer16

MLA Bibliography – Thanks Perplexity!

1. BBC News. “Satellite Images Show Extent of Demolition at the White House.” BBC, 24 Oct. 2025, www.bbc.com/news/videos/c4gkrnn4892o.

2. CBS News. “Where Is Debris from the White House East Wing Demolition Being Taken?” CBS News, 24 Oct. 2025, www.cbsnews.com/news/white-house-east-wing-demolition-debris/.

3. PBS NewsHour. “The East Wing of the White House Has Been Demolished. Here’s a Look at Its History.” PBS, 24 Oct. 2025, www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/the-east-wing-of-the-white-house-has-been-demolished-heres-a-look-at-its-history.

4. Hutzler, Alexandra, and Isabella Murray. “White House East Wing Demolished, New Images Appear to Show.” ABC News, 23 Oct. 2025, abcnews.go.com/Politics/new-images-show-entire-white-house-east-wing/story?id=126800684.

5. CNN. “See the White House’s East Wing Demolition from Satellite Images.” CNN, 23 Oct. 2025, www.cnn.com/2025/10/23/us/east-wing-white-house-satellite-photos-invs.

6. NBC News. “White House’s East Wing Demolition Finished as Trump Makes Way for New Ballroom.” NBC News, 23 Oct. 2025, www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/white-house-east-wing-demolished-new-ballroom-rcna239399.

7. CNN. “Why Trump’s Sudden East Wing Demolition Is Extraordinary.” CNN, 22 Oct. 2025, www.cnn.com/2025/10/22/politics/white-house-east-wing-demolition-trump.

8. Reuters. “White House East Wing Will Be Torn Down Fully to Make Way for Trump Ballroom.” Reuters, 22 Oct. 2025, www.reuters.com/world/us/white-house-east-wing-will-be-torn-down-fully-make-way-trump-ballroom-official-2025-10-22/.

9. The New York Times. “See the White House as It Stood and What Trump Envisions.” The New York Times, 22 Oct. 2025, www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/10/22/us/politics/east-wing-trump-ballroom.html.

10. USA Today. “Trump Exposed a ‘Loophole’ to Demolish the White House East Wing. Here’s What We Know.” USA Today, 23 Oct. 2025, www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/10/23/trump-white-house-east-wing-demolition-explained/86837471007/.

11. CNN. “In Pictures: Trump’s East Wing Demolition.” CNN Politics, 22 Oct. 2025, www.cnn.com/2025/10/22/politics/gallery/east-wing-white-house-demolition.

12. Getty Images. “Trump To Demolish Entire East Wing To Build White House Ballroom.” Getty Images, 2025, www.gettyimages.com/editorial-images/news/event/trump-to-demolish-entire-east-wing-to-build-white-house-ballroom/776405723.

13. Allison, Charmayne. “Satellite Images Show the White House’s East Wing Has Been Demolished.” ABC News Australia, 24 Oct. 2025, www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-24/white-house-east-wing-demolished-trump-ballroom/105930582.

14. Associated Press. “PHOTOS: White House Starts East Wing Demolition to Build Trump’s Ballroom.” PBS NewsHour, 21 Oct. 2025, www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/photos-white-house-starts-east-wing-demolition-to-build-trumps-ballroom.

15. Yahoo News Canada. “Photos Reveal Shocking Destruction of East Wing as Crews Work to Build Trump’s $300M Ballroom.” Yahoo News, 22 Oct. 2025, ca.news.yahoo.com/photos-reveal-shocking-destruction-east-193833511.html.

16. Deutsche Welle. “Trump’s White House Ballroom Sparks Criticism Amid Shutdown.” DW, 23 Oct. 2025, www.dw.com/en/trump-ballroom-project-white-house-renovations-shutdown/a-74478671.

17. The New York Times. “The White House Wrecking Ball.” The New York Times, 22 Oct. 2025, www.nytimes.com/2025/10/22/us/politics/trump-white-house-demolition.html.

18. Benzinga. “Elizabeth Warren Says Trump Is Deaf To Cost Of Living ‘Over The Sound of Bulldozers.'” Benzinga, 21 Oct. 2025, www.benzinga.com/news/politics/25/10/48320523/elizabeth-warren-says-trump-is-deaf-to-cost-of-living-over-the-sound-of-bulldozers-knocking-down-white-house-wing-for-new-grand-ballroom.

19. QuiverQuant. “Press Release: Senator Elizabeth Warren Critiques Donald Trump’s $200 Million Ballroom for Billionaires.” QuiverQuant, 15 Oct. 2025, www.quiverquant.com/news/Press+Release:+Senator+Elizabeth+Warren+Critiques+Donald+Trump’s+$200+Million+Ballroom+for+Billionaires.

20. Fox News. “Trump White House Ballroom Sparks Liberal Outrage Over Demolition.” Fox News, 24 Oct. 2025, www.foxnews.com/media/democrats-liberal-media-figures-fume-over-trump-demolishing-white-house-east-wing-ballroom.

Additional Citations – Added October 25, 2025

What’s Been Lost In Donald Trump’s Teardown Of The East Wing To Build A White House Ballroom – Analysis- https://deadline.com/2025/10/trump-white-house-east-wing-demolition-1236595980, October 23, 2025

White House East Wing demolished, new images appear to show – https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/new-images-show-entire-white-house-east-wing/story?id=126800684 October 23, 2025

The Daily, New York Times’ podcast, “The Trump administration completed its demolition of the East Wing of the White House on Thursday to make way for a new presidential ballroom” – https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/24/podcasts/the-daily/demolition-white-house-east-wing-ballroom.html October 24, 2025

Google News – Lawsuit(s) East Wing – https://news.google.com/search?q=lawsuits%20east%20wing&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen October 25, 2025

#2025 #America #Demolished #Demolition #Destroyed #DonaldTrump #DrWebEditorial #EastWing #Education #Health #History #Images #LawSuits #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #PerplexityAI #Politics #Resistance #Science #SpecialReport #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates #WhiteHouse

Opinion – How media lost power in the age of Trump and the internet – The Washington Post

Opinion

By George F. Will

What killed print media — and what died with it

The waning of newsprint is about cultural changes more momentous than digital publishing’s arrival.

October 17, 2025, 4 min

A sound of morning silence is coming to Atlanta. The sound of newspapers landing on sidewalks in residential neighborhoods will vanish when, at year’s end, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, joining a national trend, stops publishing print editions.

Turning trees into paper, marking it with ink, trucking it to people who deliver it to readers — soon this laboriousness might be as forgotten as men with tongs lugging large slabs of ice for home iceboxes. The waning of the 400-year era of newspapers is, however, about cultural changes more momentous than the efficiency and convenience of written words presented digitally.

The Economist reports that the share of American adults who read for pleasure has fallen 40 percent in 20 years, and students’ ability to read in quantity, with comprehension, is in parallel decline. An Oxford professor of English says students “struggle to get through one novel in three weeks.” Students lack, another professor says, “habits of application and concentration.”

The sentences that are being read are shorter and simpler. The Economist says an analysis of hundreds of New York Times bestsellers “found that sentences in popular books have contracted by almost a third since the 1930s.” Readers, if they can be called such, who are mentally wired for driblets of 280 characters cannot cope with Charles Dickens’s “Bleak House” (1.9 million characters). Can people unable to decipher sophisticated prose manage sophisticated political ideas?

But sophistication is not in the repertoire of journalism devoted to what Andrey Mir, a Canadian, calls the retribalizing of society. In his epigrammatic 2020 book “Postjournalism and the death of newspapers,” Mir, a self-described “media ecologist,” says the media lost agenda-setting power when the internet enabled crowdsourced agenda-setting.

As advertising dollars migrated to the internet, newspapers, which hitherto were funded from above by selling readers to advertisers, became funded from below by selling themselves to readers. Newspapers encouraged readers to think of subscriptions as donations to political causes. Subscribers enjoy their “slactivism,” outsourcing their activism through “donscriptions” — subscriptions thought of as donations.

Mir says “the last newspaper generation” was born in the early 1980s. It came of age as the internet did. Soon journalism stopped being about informing people to make them citizens, and began to be about making them agitated.

The new business model depends on polarization, amplifying readers’ irritations and frustrations. “A newspaper,” wrote Vladimir Lenin, “is not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organiser.”

“Americans,” Mir says, “consume media 12 hours per day. Counting weekends, this is twice as much as a full-time job.” Because there is insufficient news to fill the time, emphasis has shifted to “expertise, commentaries, and opinions.”

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Opinion | How media lost power in the age of Trump and the internet – The Washington Post

#2025 #AgeOfInternet #America #CNN #DonaldTrump #Education #Film #GeorgeWill #Google #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Media #Opinion #Politics #PrintMedia #Resistance #Science #Technology #Television #TheWashingtonPost #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates #YouTube

Harrison Ford’s $276M Sci-Fi Sequel Is Still a Modern Masterpiece 8 Years Later

By Ben Morganti, Published 7 hours ago

Ben Morganti is a film and television critic at CBR, where he brings a filmmaker’s eye and a deep understanding of cinematic craft to his analysis. With experience producing independent features and short films, Ben combines practical industry knowledge with a passion for storytelling across genres—including crime, science fiction, horror, and the works of directors such as Quentin Tarantino and Martin Scorsese.

If there is one genre that director Denis Villeneuve has proven to have complete command over, it is science fiction. Over the last number of years, audiences have learned a lot about the up-and-coming sci-fi auteur, especially as he continues to make modern movie masterpieces in the genre. Garnering a fanbase, Villeneuve has brought to life unique concepts seen in Arrival or adapted popular sci-fi universes in films like Dune and Dune: Part Two. Villeneuve has also admitted to being primarily a sci-fi filmmaker, which is why when a sci-fi IP is in development, studios turn to him first and foremost to see if he is interested, as was the case with Blade Runner 2049.

It was time to explore new stories that could be told in the Blade Runner universe, which hadn’t seen another film since the original was released. Fans have the same reactions to sequels nowadays. They either want as much of something as they can possibly get, or they want studios to relax and stop making so many sequels, reboots and spin-offs. When Blade Runner 2049 was announced, it was a mixed bag of reactions, but the one thing that people seemed to agree on was that it was in good hands with Denis Villeneuve attached to direct. Still, no one could have known how great the film would be, and it has, in fact, remained a great sci-fi hit many years later, having a lasting impact that people could not have foreseen.

Blade Runner 2049 Works as Its Own Story and as a Sequel

When it comes to doing sequels to his previous successes, Harrison Ford is not exactly the first person to jump at the opportunities when they present themselves. He’s right to believe that some things should just be left alone. Nonetheless, he does agree to get involved if the script is good and the material is in the right hands. However, returning to Blade Runner meant having a different role as Villeneuve crafted a new narrative entirely, not just to honor the film that came before, but to expand on the exploration of human themes present in this particular world.

This put Ryan Gosling at the center of Blade Runner 2049 as Joe/Officer K, who represents an incredible shift in the evolution of people and replicants by being a replicant blade runner who goes around decommissioning his own kind. This brings into question an even deeper element of morality while exploring themes of identity, reality and existentialism in ways that transcend the original 1982 film. How Villeneuve balances his own story with the original is the key to its success. On one hand, he is telling an individual story about Officer K, who is meant to represent the humanity that exists within the replicant community.

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Harrison Ford’s $276M Sci-Fi Sequel Is Still a Modern Masterpiece 8 Years Later

#2025 #America #BladeRunner #BladeRunner2049 #CBR #ComicBookResources #Education #Film #Films #HarrisonFord #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Movies #RyanGosling #Technology #Television #UnitedStates #WarnerBrothers #YouTube

"Soul Man" is a 1967 song written and composed by #IsaacHayes and #DavidPorter, first successful as a number 2 hit single by #AtlanticRecords soul duo #SamAndDave, which consisted of #SamuelSamMoore and #DavidDavePrater. In 2019, "#SoulMan" was selected for preservation in the #NationalRecordingRegistry as "culturally, historically, and aesthetically significant" by the #LibraryOfCongress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdfImB4iOLo

Senator Whitehouse Recalls Heated Slanging Match with Pam Bondi | US Politics | 4K Video | N18G – YouTube

Senator Whitehouse Recalls Heated Slanging Match with Pam Bondi | US Politics | 4K Video | N18G

68 views Premiered 70 minutes ago
#SenatorWhitehouse #PamBondi #PoliticalFeud
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse shares details about his memorable slang exchange with former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. Watch this exclusive clip highlighting their political clash and the intense back-and-forth that made headlines

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Senator Whitehouse Recalls Heated Slanging Match with Pam Bondi | US Politics | 4K Video | N18G – YouTube

Editor’s Note: Here are a couple more videos of the hearing, it was something.

#2025 #America #CNN #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #PamBondi #PoliticalFeud #Politics #Resistance #Science #SenatorWhitehouse #Technology #Trump #TrumpAdministration #USSenatorAmyKlobuchar #UnitedStates #YouTube

How and Why Did Democrats Say They Chose Shutdown over Trump – October 5, 2025 – A Special Report

Special Report: Democrats, the 2025 Shutdown, and Trump’s Embrace of Project 2025

By DrWeb — October 5, 2025

DrWeb’s view in context and the thrust of the decision by Democratic leaders during the 2025 Federal Shutdown. This report examines how the Democratic strategy unfolded, the stakes of the standoff, and how former President Donald Trump is now openly embracing the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 as the blueprint for his second term. The adoption of this plan, once denied during the campaign, is reshaping the contours of the shutdown fight and raising questions about the balance of power.

Overview & Stakes

As the shutdown entered October, Democrats framed it as both a test of political resolve and a defense of core healthcare and social programs. They argue that Republicans, under Trump’s renewed influence, are using the budget process as a wedge to force acceptance of Project 2025’s sweeping proposals: mass layoffs, dismantling of federal agencies, and consolidation of executive power.

The stakes are immediate and long-term. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers face lost pay. Public services from healthcare research to postal delivery are curtailed. At the same time, the ideological battle now centers on whether Trump can leverage the crisis to sidestep Congress and implement a 900-page partisan blueprint outside normal democratic checks.

Key Quotes & Excerpts (Chronological)

“The shutdown pain would be ‘caused by the Democrats.’”

Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/25/trump-shutdown-pain-blame-democrats-00580824

“The shutdown is being wielded not just as a bargaining chip but as a lever to rewire the federal government.”

Time. https://time.com/7323278/trump-project-2025-government-shutdown/

“National parks will remain mostly open in shutdown.”

Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/30/national-parks-will-remain-mostly-open-in-shutdown-main-00589074

“About 750,000 federal workers have been furloughed or are working without pay, impacting HHS, CDC, and NIH.”

LMT Online. https://www.lmtonline.com/local/article/cuellar-federal-workers-solidarity-paycheck-forgo-21081996.php

“Welcome to the shutdown.”

Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/01/welcome-shutdown/

“Trump is no longer distancing himself from Project 2025. He is now staffing his administration with its architects.”

AP News. https://apnews.com/article/trump-project-2025-russ-vought-shutdown-2d1ea5e6e32c583ddf6b8a8164e523c3

“Mass federal layoffs could begin imminently, leveraging the shutdown to impose reductions in force.”

Time. https://time.com/7323278/trump-project-2025-government-shutdown/

“Trump marked the Navy’s 250th anniversary during the shutdown, declaring: THE SHOW MUST GO ON!”

AP News. https://apnews.com/article/926e1f114b704bc069dd9ad8fff449e0

“Trump now openly backing Project 2025 during government shutdown.”

AP News. https://apnews.com/article/trump-project-2025-russ-vought-shutdown-2d1ea5e6e32c583ddf6b8a8164e523c3

“The GOP says it’s winning the shutdown. Some fear Trump’s cuts may change that.”

AP News. https://apnews.com/article/republicans-trump-vought-shutdown-congress-democrats-transportation-0dff71ebe4f115feb8649a045646cb5c

“Trump Administration Halts $2.1 billion in Chicago Infrastructure Projects Amid Government Shutdown.”

Time. https://time.com/7322946/trump-administration-funding-cuts-democratic-cities-government-shutdown/

“Slash and burn: Trump budget chief relishes chance to cut, fire and cancel.”

The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/02/trump-russ-vought-government-shutdown

“Why this shutdown is different and what Trump is getting out of it.”

PBS / Washington Week. https://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/video/2025/10/why-this-shutdown-is-different-and-what-trump-is-getting-out-of-it

“Trump’s vast federal cuts create distrust on Capitol Hill.”

AP News. https://apnews.com/article/trump-shutdown-congress-budget-project-2025-abba67746a7c74c88962def177759b44

“House Speaker Mike Johnson insisted it was Democrats blocking funding, while Democrats accused Trump of sabotaging negotiations.”

The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/05/mike-johnson-democrats-government-shutdown

“Democrats are embracing the risky politics of a government shutdown to rein in president, activists say.”

The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/05/democrats-healthcare-government-shutdown

“White House: Mass layoffs will start if shutdown talks ‘going nowhere.’”

Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/white-house-says-layoffs-will-start-if-trump-sees-shutdown-talks-going-nowhere-2025-10-05/

Analysis

Democrats’ strategy has been to draw a sharp line against Project 2025, framing it as an existential threat to constitutional checks and balances. Yet some critics say Democrats are risking political backlash by embracing a shutdown.

Trump’s use of the shutdown to advance layoffs and executive consolidation shows how a budget impasse can morph into a constitutional stress test. With Russell Vought at the center, the administration is turning Heritage’s proposals into operational reality — while Democratic leaders like Hakeem Jeffries and Adam Schiff try to keep their caucus united.

Works Cited

• Associated Press. “Trump no longer distancing himself from Project 2025 as he uses shutdown to further pursue its goals.” AP News, 2 Oct. 2025. https://apnews.com/article/trump-project-2025-russ-vought-shutdown-2d1ea5e6e32c583ddf6b8a8164e523c3
• Associated Press. “Trump celebrates the Navy’s 250th anniversary in the midst of the shutdown.” AP News, 3 Oct. 2025. https://apnews.com/article/926e1f114b704bc069dd9ad8fff449e0
• “Democrats are embracing the risky politics of a government shutdown to rein in president, activists say.” The Guardian, 5 Oct. 2025. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/05/democrats-healthcare-government-shutdown
• “House speaker says Democrats aren’t serious about shutdown negotiation …” The Guardian, 5 Oct. 2025. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/05/mike-johnson-democrats-government-shutdown
• Cuellar, Henry. “Cuellar forgoes salary during government shutdown …” LMT Online, 1 Oct. 2025. https://www.lmtonline.com/local/article/cuellar-federal-workers-solidarity-paycheck-forgo-21081996.php
• “Trump Touts Meeting With Vought to Discuss Cuts …” Time, 2 Oct. 2025. https://time.com/7323278/trump-project-2025-government-shutdown/
• “Trump Administration Halts $2.1 billion in Chicago Infrastructure Projects Amid Government Shutdown.” Time, 3 Oct. 2025. https://time.com/7322946/trump-administration-funding-cuts-democratic-cities-government-shutdown/
• “Slash and burn: Trump budget chief relishes chance to cut, fire and cancel.” The Guardian, 3 Oct. 2025. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/02/trump-russ-vought-government-shutdown
• “Why this shutdown is different and what Trump is getting out of it.” PBS / Washington Week, 4 Oct. 2025. https://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/video/2025/10/why-this-shutdown-is-different-and-what-trump-is-getting-out-of-it
• “Trump’s vast federal cuts create distrust on Capitol Hill.” AP News, 4 Oct. 2025. https://apnews.com/article/trump-shutdown-congress-budget-project-2025-abba67746a7c74c88962def177759b44
• Politico. “Trump says shutdown pain would be Democrats’ fault.” 25 Sept. 2025. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/25/trump-shutdown-pain-blame-democrats-00580824
• Politico. “National parks to stay open in shutdown.” 30 Sept. 2025. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/30/national-parks-will-remain-mostly-open-in-shutdown-main-00589074
• Washington Post. “Welcome to the shutdown.” 1 Oct. 2025. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/01/welcome-shutdown/
• AP News. “The GOP says it’s winning the shutdown. Some fear Trump’s cuts may change that.” 3 Oct. 2025. https://apnews.com/article/republicans-trump-vought-shutdown-congress-democrats-transportation-0dff71ebe4f115feb8649a045646cb5c
• Reuters. “White House: Mass layoffs will start if shutdown talks ‘going nowhere.’” 5 Oct. 2025. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/white-house-says-layoffs-will-start-if-trump-sees-shutdown-talks-going-nowhere-2025-10-05/

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #DrWeb #DrWebSDomain #Education #FederalShutdown #Health #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #October2025 #Opinion #Politics #Resistance #Science #SpecialReport #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: The Architect of Conservative Jurisprudence – A Special SCOTUS Series

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: The Architect of Conservative Jurisprudence – Here’s a look at our Chief Justice, his life, background, and how he influences our legal challenges, legal issues, from his conservative views. This report was prepared by Perplexity Pro, and edited by DrWeb.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: The Architect of Conservative Jurisprudence

John Glover Roberts Jr. has served as the 17th Chief Justice of the United States since September 29, 2005, presiding over one of the most transformative periods in Supreme Court history. As the youngest chief justice in over a century at age 50, Roberts has authored landmark conservative decisions while attempting to balance institutional preservation with ideological advancement over his two decades of leadership.

Early Life and Formation

Born on January 27, 1955, in Buffalo, New York, Roberts was the second of four children to John (Jack) G. Roberts Sr., a Bethlehem Steel Corporation executive, and Rosemary Roberts (née Podrasky). The family’s Catholic faith would prove formative, as would their move to Long Beach, Indiana, in the early 1960s when Roberts Sr. received a promotion to work at a new steel plant.

Roberts excelled academically from an early age, graduating first in his class from La Lumiere School, a Catholic boarding school in Indiana, where he also captained the football team. To help pay for college, he worked summers in a steel mill, an experience that grounded him in working-class values despite his later elite academic trajectory. His early ambition was to become a historian, reflecting an intellectual curiosity that would later influence his judicial approach to constitutional interpretation.

Academic Excellence and Early Career

Roberts completed his undergraduate degree at Harvard University in just three years, graduating summa cum laude in 1976 with a major in history. He remained at Harvard for law school, where he served as managing editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude in 1979. These academic achievements established him as one of the brightest legal minds of his generation.

Following law school, Roberts secured two prestigious federal clerkships that would shape his career trajectory. From 1979-1980, he clerked for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, one of the most respected federal judges of his era. He then clerked for Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist during the 1980 term, establishing a mentorship that would profoundly influence his judicial philosophy.

Government Service and Private Practice

Roberts’s early career alternated between high-level government service and elite private practice. From 1981-1982, he served as Special Assistant to Attorney General William French Smith, then moved to the White House as Associate Counsel to President Ronald Reagan from 1982-1986. During this period, he helped craft conservative legal positions that would later inform his judicial decisions, including memoranda expressing skepticism about discrimination remedies and civil rights enforcement.

In 1986, Roberts joined the prestigious law firm Hogan & Hartson as an associate, becoming a partner within a year. His appellate practice was extraordinarily successful, focusing on Supreme Court litigation and complex constitutional issues. From 1989-1993, he returned to government as Principal Deputy Solicitor General, the second-in-command in the Office of the Solicitor General, where he argued numerous cases before the Supreme Court.

Marriage and Family Life

Roberts married Jane Marie Sullivan in 1996, a fellow attorney and Harvard Law School graduate whom he met during his government service. The couple has two adopted children, Josephine and John, and their family life reflects Roberts’s commitment to balancing professional demands with personal relationships. Jane Roberts has maintained her own successful legal career, though she has faced scrutiny for potential conflicts of interest related to her legal recruiting work while her husband serves on the Court.

Path to the Supreme Court

President George H.W. Bush first nominated Roberts to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 1992 when he was just 37, but the Democratic-controlled Senate never held a confirmation vote. Roberts returned to private practice during the Clinton years, also teaching at Georgetown University Law Center.

In 2001, President George W. Bush renominated Roberts to the D.C. Circuit, and he was finally confirmed in May 2003. During his brief two-year tenure on the appeals court, Roberts wrote approximately 50 opinions that demonstrated his conservative judicial philosophy and exceptional legal craftsmanship.

Bush initially nominated Roberts in July 2005 to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, but when Chief Justice Rehnquist died in September, Bush elevated the nomination to Chief Justice. Roberts’s confirmation hearings featured his famous “umpire” analogy: “Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules, they apply them… I will remember that it’s my job to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat.” The Senate confirmed him by a vote of 78-22 on September 29, 2005.

Judicial Philosophy and Constitutional Interpretation

Roberts advocates for judicial restraint, originalism, and textualism in constitutional interpretation. He believes judges should apply law neutrally rather than engage in creative lawmaking, though critics argue his major decisions have often advanced conservative policy goals. His approach combines respect for precedent with willingness to overturn liberal rulings he views as constitutionally flawed.

As Chief Justice, Roberts has consistently emphasized institutional integrity and incremental change over revolutionary jurisprudence. However, his leadership has coincided with the most conservative Supreme Court in nearly a century, creating tension between his institutionalist instincts and ideological objectives.

Major Opinions and Legal Impact

Healthcare and Federal Power

Roberts authored the pivotal decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), upholding the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate as a constitutional tax. This decision surprised conservatives but demonstrated Roberts’s complex approach to federal power and his occasional willingness to break with conservative orthodoxy to preserve institutional legitimacy.

Civil Rights and Voting

In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), Roberts authored the majority opinion striking down key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, arguing that federal oversight of state voting laws was no longer necessary. This decision enabled numerous states to implement voting restrictions, fundamentally altering American voting rights protections.

Presidential Power

Roberts has authored several opinions expanding executive authority, including Trump v. Hawaii (2018) upholding the Muslim travel ban and Trump v. United States (2024) establishing broad presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. These decisions reflect his deference to executive power in areas of national security and foreign policy.

Race and Education

Roberts authored Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023), ending race-based college admissions programs nationwide. This decision fulfilled a long-standing conservative goal and demonstrated Roberts’s willingness to overturn decades of precedent when advancing originalist constitutional interpretation.

Leadership Style and Court Dynamics

As Chief Justice, Roberts assigns majority opinions when he votes with the majority, a power he has used strategically to shape legal doctrine and maintain control over controversial decisions. His leadership style emphasizes consensus-building and narrow rulings, though the Court’s 6-3 conservative majority has enabled broader conservative decisions than Roberts might prefer.

Roberts has presided over significant constitutional developments including marriage equality, religious liberty expansions, Second Amendment jurisprudence, and abortion rights. He also presided over President Trump’s first impeachment trial in 2020, maintaining judicial decorum during highly partisan proceedings.

The Roberts-Barrett Partnership: Mentorship and Judicial Alliance

A defining aspect of Roberts’s tenure has been his evolving relationship with Justice Amy Coney Barrett, whom he has cultivated as a key ally in advancing conservative jurisprudence while maintaining institutional credibility. Since Barrett joined the Court in 2020, Roberts has strategically assigned her significant majority opinions, including the landmark Trump v. CASA decision that expanded executive power while limiting federal court authority to issue nationwide injunctions.

Roberts’s mentorship of Barrett reflects both personal and strategic considerations. Early in her tenure, he assigned her a complex property rights case where she initially drafted a majority opinion but later changed positions—a bold move that could have antagonized the Chief Justice but instead demonstrated her independent judicial thinking. Rather than penalizing this judicial evolution, Roberts has continued to entrust Barrett with increasingly important assignments, including cases involving Native American rights and religious liberty.

Barrett’s judicial philosophy closely mirrors Roberts’s own approach to constitutional interpretation. Both justices embrace originalism and textualism, seeking to interpret constitutional and statutory language according to its original public meaning rather than evolving contemporary understanding. Like Roberts, Barrett demonstrates judicial restraint and institutionalist concerns, often preferring narrow rulings over sweeping constitutional pronouncements. Their shared commitment to incremental conservative change has made them frequent collaborators in cases where Roberts needs a reliable fifth or sixth vote for majority coalitions.

The Chief Justice appears particularly attentive to Barrett’s contributions during oral arguments and conference discussions, recognizing her potential as a swing vote who can attract liberal justices to conservative positions. In several high-profile cases, Roberts and Barrett have joined with liberal justices to constrain Trump administration overreach, demonstrating their shared concern for judicial independence and separation of powers. This partnership has frustrated some conservatives who expected Barrett to be more ideologically rigid, but it has enhanced Roberts’s ability to control controversial decisions and maintain Court legitimacy while still advancing conservative legal principles.

Legacy and Long-Term Impact

After twenty years as Chief Justice, Roberts has fundamentally transformed American constitutional law through conservative jurisprudence while maintaining the Court’s basic institutional framework. His tenure has seen the steady advancement of originalist constitutional interpretation, limited federal regulatory power, expanded religious liberty protections, and strengthened executive authority.

Critics argue that Roberts has enabled a “constitutional revolution” that contradicts his stated commitment to incremental change and judicial restraint. Supporters contend he has restored constitutional text and original meaning to Supreme Court jurisprudence while preserving essential democratic institutions.

Roberts continues to navigate the tension between conservative legal advancement and institutional preservation as he enters his third decade of service. His ultimate legacy will depend on whether his leadership produces lasting constitutional change or triggers backlash that undermines judicial authority. As both the youngest Chief Justice in over a century and one of the longest-serving, Roberts’s influence on American law will extend far beyond his eventual retirement.

Bibliography and Sources

Primary Sources:

• Current Members. Supreme Court of the United States. July 12, 2017.
• 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary. Supreme Court of the United States. 2024.

Government and Institutional Sources:

• Judicial Nominations – Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. George W. Bush White House Archives. August 7, 2008.
• Roberts, John Glover, Jr. Federal Judicial Center. June 29, 2022.
• John G. Roberts, Jr. Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law.
• Chief Justice John Roberts. Justia Supreme Court Center. September 28, 2005.

Academic and Scholarly Sources:

• Biography and Judicial Philosophy of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. Seton Hall University Scholarship.
• Chief Justice John Roberts and the Combination of Conservatism and Institutionalism. Illinois Law Review. August 30, 2023.
• The Philosophy and Jurisprudence of Chief Justice Roberts. University of Utah College of Law.
• The Judicial Philosophy of Chief Justice John Roberts. Emory International Law Review. February 3, 2021.
• In the Balance: Law and Politics on the Roberts Court. William & Mary Law School.
• “In Search of Justice: An Examination of the Appointments of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito”. William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal. April 22, 2014.
• Federalism Rebalancing and the Roberts Court. Harvard Law Review. May 1, 2025.

News and Analysis Sources:

• John G. Roberts, Jr. | Biography, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Britannica. August 14, 2025.
• The Current Court: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. Supreme Court Historical Society. March 27, 2022.
• In 20 years under John Roberts, a dramatic rightward turn for the US Supreme Court. Reuters. September 8, 2025.
• This Is the Presidency John Roberts Has Built. The Atlantic. July 21, 2025.
• The Life and Turbulent Times of Chief Justice John Roberts. Aspen Ideas Festival. August 19, 2025.
• Understanding John Roberts: A Conservative Institutionalist. JURIST. July 30, 2020.

Roberts-Barrett Relationship Sources:

• Initially wary of Trump, Roberts and Barrett offer the former president a victory. CNN. June 28, 2025.
• The behind-the-scenes power John Roberts wields to shape Supreme Court decisions. CNN. July 2, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett Is The Most Interesting Justice On The Court. Original Jurisdiction (Substack). July 2, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett and John Roberts Become a Thorn in Trump’s Side. Newsweek. March 6, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett’s Biggest Supreme Court Allies Revealed. Newsweek. July 15, 2025.
• Supreme Court’s Roberts turns court to the right as Barrett becomes influential. NPR. July 1, 2024.
• How Amy Coney Barrett Is Confounding the Right and the Left. The New York Times. June 15, 2025.
• Opinion | Trump resistance needs Amy Coney Barrett and John Roberts. The Washington Post. March 27, 2025.
• Closing the book on the term. SCOTUSblog. June 30, 2025.
• Amy Coney Barrett. Wikipedia. May 7, 2017.

#2025 #America #AmyConeyBarrett #ChiefJustice #Conservative #DonaldTrump #Education #Health #History #JohnRoberts #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Politics #Resistance #RightWingConservative #Science #SupremeCourt #Trump #TrumpAdministration #USSupremeCourt #UnitedStates

Top 7 Sources: US Elections 2025–2026 News Summary – DrWeb’s Domain

Top 7 Sources: US Elections 2025–2026 News Summary

1. 2026 United States elections overview
   Comprehensive Wikipedia summary: federal, statewide, local races; generic ballot polling; mayoral/county races; opinion polling tables.
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_elections
2. August 2025 Harvard CAPS / Harris Poll results
   Trump approval rating, top voter issues, polarization, inflation vs. immigration priorities, policy support splits.
   https://harvardharrispoll.com/press-release-august-2025/
3. Sabato’s Crystal Ball: Ballot model: Democrats favored
   Conditional forecasts for House/Senate seat change; regression analysis; impact of seat exposure and generic ballot.
   https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/generic-ballot-model-gives-democrats-strong-chance-to-take-back-house-in-2026/
4. Nate Silver Bulletin: Trump approval rating aggregator
   Daily composite Trump approval/disapproval; historical net approval vs. previous presidents at same point; reliability notes.
   https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-silver-bulletin
5. USAPP Blog: LSE ‘The road to the 2026 midterms’ series
   Calendar of 2025–2026 elections; special/primary/off-year races; Senate seat analysis and party control implications.
   https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2025/06/04/the-road-to-the-2026-midterm-elections/
6. Ballotpedia: Special Elections to the 119th Congress (archival)
   Dates, districts, results, implications for House/Senate control. Note: direct fetch unsuccessful; refer to Ballotpedia main page.
   https://ballotpedia.org/Special_elections_to_the_119th_United_States_Congress_(2025-2026)
7. Generic ballot poll aggregation – RCP/DDHQ, opinion data
   RealClearPolitics, Decision Desk HQ, poll aggregators cited via Wikipedia and Crystal Ball articles for current generic ballot, party lead.

   See references/links inside Wikipedia and Sabato’s Crystal Ball cited above.

Prepared for DrWeb’s Domain and updated by ChatGPT.

#2025 #2025Elections #2026Elections #AI #America #DonaldTrump #DrWebSDomain #DWD #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #NewsUpdates #Politics #Resistance #Science #SourceChatGPT #Trump #TrumpAdministration #USElections #UnitedStates

Monthly U.S. Elections Summary: August 2025

Monthly U.S. Elections Summary: August 2025

Here is the August 2025 summary update on major U.S. news and political trends as the nation heads toward the November 2026 elections, with current charts for Trump’s approval and congressional control signals. This report is prepared monthly by Perplexity Pro especially for and edited by DrWeb’s Domain.

Politics

• The 2026 midterm elections will decide all House seats, over a third of Senate seats, dozens of governorships, and many local offices, making it a pivotal contest for both parties.
• Democrats are currently leading in generic congressional ballot polling by 3–4 points, indicating an early advantage for potential House gains, while Senate forecasts favor notable Democratic advances due to Republican seat exposure in competitive states.

Economy

• Inflation remains voters’ top concern in late August 2025, with public mood sensitive to rising prices and economic performance, both likely to heavily influence campaign agendas in the coming months.

Social Issues

• Crime and immigration are high-profile topics for the electorate, matched by significant attention to global events such as conflict in Ukraine and the Middle East.
• Persistent partisan and demographic divides are evident in polling, suggesting continued polarization on key issues and strategies targeted by both parties.

Key Events

• Special congressional elections and 2026 primary dates are in motion, with each new cycle update potentially affecting momentum and party margins going into next year.

Charts

Trump’s Approval Ratings (August 2025)

• Trump’s approval: 44.1%
• Trump’s disapproval: 52.4%

Chart: Trump approval vs disapproval trend line for August 2025

House and Senate Control Signals (2026 Outlook)

• Democrats lead House polling by +3.7 points
• Senate models project Democratic net gains (+5 seats)

Chart: Bar chart showing current indicators for congressional control by party

This update tracks the latest polling, major issues, and election process milestones, with charts refreshed monthly through November 2026.

Top 7 Sources for Reference

1. 2026 United States elections overview
   Comprehensive Wikipedia summary: federal, statewide, local races; generic ballot polling; mayoral/county races; opinion polling tables.
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_elections
2. August 2025 Harvard CAPS / Harris Poll results
   Trump approval rating, top voter issues, polarization, inflation vs. immigration priorities, policy support splits.
   https://harvardharrispoll.com/press-release-august-2025/
3. Sabato’s Crystal Ball: Ballot model: Democrats favored
   Conditional forecasts for House/Senate seat change; regression analysis; impact of seat exposure and generic ballot.
   https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/generic-ballot-model-gives-democrats-strong-chance-to-take-back-house-in-2026/
4. Nate Silver Bulletin: Trump approval rating aggregator
   Daily composite Trump approval/disapproval; historical net approval vs. previous presidents at same point; reliability notes.
   https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-silver-bulletin
5. USAPP Blog: LSE ‘The road to the 2026 midterms’ series
   Calendar of 2025–2026 elections; special/primary/off-year races; Senate seat analysis and party control implications.
   https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2025/06/04/the-road-to-the-2026-midterm-elections/
6. Ballotpedia: Special Elections to the 119th Congress
   Dates, districts, results, implications for House/Senate control.
   https://ballotpedia.org/Special_elections_to_the_119th_United_States_Congress_(2025-2026)
7. Generic ballot poll aggregation – RCP/DDHQ
   RealClearPolitics, Decision Desk HQ, poll aggregators for current generic ballot and party lead data.
   See references/links inside Wikipedia and Sabato’s Crystal Ball cited above

Monthly summary compiled August 26, 2025. Next update: September 2025.

#2025 #America #August2025 #DonaldTrump #DrWebSDomain #Elections #Health #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #Opinion #Politics #Reading #Resistance #Science #Trump #TrumpAdministration #USElections #UnitedStates

Alina Habba ‘unlawfully’ working as US attorney in New Jersey, judge rules – POLITICO

• Europe
• Pro
• E&E News

Alina Habba ‘unlawfully’ working as US attorney in New Jersey, judge rules

As a result, Habba cannot participate in prosecutions by the office.

Alina Habba, former lawyer for President Donald Trump, is at the center of battle to lead New Jersey’s U.S. Attorney’s Office. | Mary Altaffer/AP

By Ry Rivard and Matt Friedman08/21/2025 03:37 PM EDTUpdated: 08/21/2025 05:36 PM EDT

A federal judge rejected President Donald Trump’s use of a loophole to keep Alina Habba in place as New Jersey’s top federal prosecutor.

In a 77-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann said Thursday that Habba “is not lawfully holding the office of United States Attorney” and has been in the position without legal authority since July 1.

Editor’s Note: The PDF ruling document is embedded at the end of this article.

As a result, Habba, who had previously worked as Trump’s personal attorney, cannot run the office the president attempted to keep her in charge of after her 120-day interim appointment expired. The Trump administration employed a series of maneuvers to try to retain Habba’s control of the office after district judges ousted her in July.

“Faced with the question of whether Ms. Habba is lawfully performing the functions and duties of the office of the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, I conclude that she is not,” Brann wrote.

Brann put his ruling on hold, pending the Trump administration’s possible appeal, but the fallout could be a staggering mess across the executive branch. Brann said Habba’s actions in New Jersey for the past seven weeks “may be declared void” and Habba must be disqualified from participating in any of the office’s cases as its leader. The office handles thousands of criminal and civil cases at any given time.

The ruling by Brann — a Republican and Obama appointee who sits in Pennsylvania’s Middle District — could also have wider implications for other U.S. attorney’s offices in Los Angeles, Nevada, New Mexico and upstate New York, where the administration has effectively sidestepped or overridden both the Senate confirmation and judicial appointment processes for selecting U.S. attorneys.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said the Justice Department would “immediately appeal.”

She said on social media Habba “is doing incredible work in New Jersey — and we will protect her position from activist judicial attacks.”

A spokesperson for Habba did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Brann’s ruling came in response to legal challenges to Habba’s authority by defense attorneys trying to get charges against their clients thrown out by arguing the Trump administration illegally kept her on and without being confirmed by the Senate.

Those challenges came amid days of confusion over who is leading the office because of complex and contested rules over filling vacancies when there isn’t a Senate-confirmed leader.

The judge declined to throw out the charges against the defendants, Julien Giraud and Cesar Pina, but said anyone who prosecutes them “under the supervision or authority of Ms. Habba” would be subject to disqualification.

Brann’s formal order only applies to the defendants in the case before him, but his opinion is written to broadly apply to everything Habba does.

“I think it would be deeply irresponsible for the department to move forward with Alina Habba as the highest Justice Department official signing indictments or other pleadings,” said James Pearce, an attorney who represents the Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey in the case.

Brann said that allowing stacked interim appointments would effectively void the need for confirmation. “Taken to the extreme, the President could use this method to staff the United States Attorney’s office with individuals of his personal choice for an entire term without seeking the Senate’s advice and consent,” he wrote.
His ruling also has findings that could embolden those who want to check Trump’s moves to strengthen the White House’s grip on government.
“Congress is expected to speak clearly when it rebalances the separation of powers, and courts should be chary of Executive branch interpretations of structural enactments that result in greater arrogation of power to the President,” Brann wrote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/21/alina-habba-new-jersey-us-attorney-ruling-00518559

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, the No. 2 official at the Justice Department, has started putting his name on some of the New Jersey office’s work in recent days, an unusual move that appears designed to head off challenges to the authority of those prosecutions if they were signed by Habba alone.

Brann’s ruling also has implications for other agencies, said Anne Joseph O’Connell, a Stanford Law School professor who studies the appointments process. She said modern agencies run on the delegation of authority in the face of a broken Senate confirmation process and that some of the particulars in Brann’s ruling would affect other administration officials, like the current head of FEMA.

“If upheld on appeal, this ruling would upend common practice of acting officials under Democratic and Republican Administrations,” Joseph O’Connell said. Editor’s Note: Below is the judge’s opinion in full, courtesy of Politico.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Alina Habba ‘unlawfully’ working as US attorney in New Jersey, judge rules – POLITICO

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #FederalJudge #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #MatthewBrann #Opinion #Politico #Politics #Resistance #Science #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

Trump-Putin summit starts on red carpet, ends in confusion

• Newsletters

• Axios Live

Trump-Putin summit starts on red carpet, ends in confusion

By Dave Lawler

Friday’s summit in Alaska began as a superpower spectacle, then abruptly ended without any indication of what was achieved or where things go from here.

Why it matters: President Trump didn’t get the ceasefire he came for, or the public commitment he wanted from Vladimir Putin to meet next with Volodymyr Zelensky. The leaders scrapped a planned lunch and departed early — but not before both declared the meeting a success.

Between the lines: It’s not hard to see why Putin likely left Anchorage satisfied. Images of Trump applauding as he walked down the red carpet were beamed back to Russia, and around the world.

• “They spent three years telling everyone Russia was isolated, and today they saw the beautiful red carpet laid out for the Russian president in the U.S.,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova noted.
• For now at least, Putin seems to have reset a relationship with Trump that had been splintering. Their brief joint press conference was short on substance but long on mutual praise.
• And Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that new oil sanctions for Russia — which were imminent until Putin proposed the meeting — were now probably off the table for a few weeks.

The other side: Trump insisted that progress was made on a number of issues, though not on the “biggest” one, without offering any specifics.

• En route to Alaska, Trump told Fox “I won’t be happy” if Putin doesn’t agree to a ceasefire.
• But afterwards, Trump said he was happy. “I think the meeting was a ten,” he told Hannity.
• Still, Trump was somewhat downbeat during the joint appearance. While Putin claimed an unspecified “agreement” had been reached, Trump brushed that off and said “we didn’t get there.”

Friction point: The inconclusive outcome might be most vexing to the party that was not in the room.

• While Trump warned of “very severe consequences” for Putin ahead of the summit if clear progress was not made, he pivoted to pressuring Ukraine once it was over.

• Trump told Hannity it was now “up to President Zelensky to get it done,” and later said “Russia is a very big power, and they’re not.”

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Trump-Putin summit starts on red carpet, ends in confusion

#2025 #Alaska #America #Axios #DonaldTrump #EuropeanNations #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Politics #Putin #Resistance #Science #Summit #Travel #Trump #TrumpAdministration #Ukraine #UnitedStates

On Politics: Why Trump wants to meet Putin

August 13, 2025

Trump’s Washington

How President Trump is changing government, the country and its politics.

Good evening. Tonight, our veteran national security correspondent, David Sanger, guides us through the stakes of President Trump’s upcoming summit with Vladimir Putin. We’re also looking at how the administration’s science funding cuts will affect research into health care disparities, and how Trump is exerting his influence over culture. We’ll start with the headlines.

• A federal appeals court ruled that the Trump administration can withhold billions in funding intended for foreign aid groups.
• Europe’s leaders say they’ve agreed with Trump on a strategy for his talks with Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, on Friday.
• The Trump administration urged a federal court to uphold its sweeping global tariffs or risk an economic depression. Experts dispute the severity of that claim.
• Trump’s deployment of federal troops in Washington has begun. Here’s what it looks like.

The meeting on Friday will be the first for an American president since the Western world isolated Russia following its invasion of Ukraine. New York Times photographs by Doug Mills and Nanna Heitmann

At stake in Alaska: two egos, and a continent’s future

by Jess Bidgood and David E. Sanger

There is nobody with more confidence in President Trump’s deal-making abilities than Trump himself.

Yet, as his Friday meeting in Alaska with President Vladimir Putin of Russia draws near, he and his top aides are lowering expectations, suggesting it’s not Trump’s job to make peace between Moscow and Ukraine and calling the summit little more than a “listening exercise.”

Statements like that belie the enormous stakes of the first meeting between Trump and Putin since the Russian invasion, particularly for the parties who aren’t expected to be present, which includes the leadership of Ukraine and of the European nations that have been living with the war on their doorstep. For Trump, though, the motivation is personal — it’s a chance to reset a relationship he has long boasted about but has lately become rocky, while bringing his personal brand of deal-making to the world’s biggest stage.

There’s a lot going on here. So I called David Sanger, who has covered the White House and national security for decades and who has written books about superpower conflict, before he boarded a series of flights to Anchorage earlier today.

He walked me through the calculus of risk and reward around this meeting — and why Putin can claim a modest win before it even starts.

As you’ve written, it used to be normal for an American president to meet with the Russian leader. George W. Bush met with Putin roughly two dozen times. Joe Biden met him only once, in 2021. But Trump’s meeting will be the first for an American president since the Western world isolated Russia following the invasion of Ukraine. What does he stand to gain from it?

Trump sees himself as a peacemaker, and this is tied up very much in his oft-expressed desire to win the Nobel Peace Prize, which he usually combines with some kind of comment to suggest that the Nobel Committee would never give it to him.

He has taken credit for a cease-fire between India and Pakistan, although the Indians have a different version of that story. He took a direct role in a peace pledge signed between Armenia and Azerbaijan, at the White House, and there have been other regional conflicts in which he’s played an important role. The big ones, though, have evaded him.

Those, of course, are the Israel-Hamas war and the Russian war with Ukraine, which he famously declared that he would solve in 24 hours, on the basis of his long and, in his view, respectful relationship with Putin. He has now come to question whether that relationship is what he thought it was, or at least what he portrayed it as, because Putin has held a series of perfectly friendly, constructive phone calls with him and then continued on the same battle plan that he was on before, with considerable recent success.

If the president comes out of Alaska without an immediate or imminent cease-fire plan, I think it’s going to be difficult for him to portray this as a win. But a cease-fire alone won’t be enough.

Who has the most at stake here?

The country with the most at stake, of course, is Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, who wasn’t invited. The second-most at stake is President Trump and the countries that make up the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. Let me explain.

For Ukraine, the risk is that Trump will push for something he’s been referring to as a “land swap.” He doesn’t say that Russia would simply get the land that it has already taken militarily, which would be problematic enough, because it would reward Moscow and Putin for invading a sovereign state.

Trump’s use of the phrase “swaps” leaves you with the impression that he might be willing to award the Russians territory that they have not gained militarily, in return for something else.

Tell us about the risks for Trump.

The big risk for Trump is that whatever comes out of Alaska is just a delaying action. Putin may calculate that what he needs most is a relaxation of sanctions, a reopening of trade and time to rebuild his force so that a few years from now, he can attempt a re-invasion of the rest of Ukraine and use the territory he’s gained as a launchpad to drive toward Kyiv. That’s a huge risk, and the Ukrainians are rightly worried about it.

To forestall that, the Europeans and Zelensky are insisting on security guarantees and continued arms shipments to Ukraine, as well as making sure that Trump doesn’t make any concessions about where NATO forces can be deployed in Eastern Europe. All of those issues are as important — and over the long term, perhaps more important — than where you draw the boundaries between Russia and Ukraine.

And there’s one more risk for NATO. Will Putin use this meeting to drive a wedge between Trump and the NATO allies? That is Putin’s greatest dream.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: On Politics: Why Trump wants to meet Putin

Original article: View source

#2025 #AlaskaMeeting #America #DonaldTrump #EuropeanNations #Health #History #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Peace #Politics #Putin #Resistance #Science #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #Ukraine #UkraineWar #UnitedStates

The Origins of the Political Power Grab in Texas – On Politics – The New York Times

August 4, 2025

Trump’s Washington: How President Trump is changing government, the country and its politics.

The Texas power grab didn’t start with Trump

By Jess Bidgood

The cutthroat political maneuvering in Texas seemed to begin quietly in June, when President Trump’s political team urged Republican leaders in the state to squeeze more G.O.P. seats out of the state’s already-lopsided congressional map.

Trump, my colleagues J. David Goodman and Shane Goldmacher wrote at the time, wanted them to be “ruthless.”

Barely two months later, Texas Republicans have used a special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott to advance a plan they hope will help their party pick up five seats in the narrowly divided House — and dozens of Democratic legislators have fled the state to try to stop it from becoming law. It’s a gambit that could shape the outcome of next year’s midterm elections, and turn the nation’s redistricting battles into an all-out war.

Trump is getting the bare-knuckle tactics — and most likely the five more favorable districts — that he wanted. The groundwork for this moment, however, was laid well before June. Today, I’ll explain how we got here, and why Democrats looking to fight fire with fire may have their hands tied.

By Ashley Cai

A pivotal Supreme Court decision

Gerrymandering is nothing new. The term itself goes back to 1812, when Gov. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, one of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence, signed a bill that created Boston-area State Senate districts so contorted, one was said to look like a salamander. Partisan map-drawing reduced competitiveness, turning more and more races into blowouts for one party or the other. By 2024, just 8 percent of congressional races were decided by fewer than five percentage points, according to an analysis by my colleagues this year.

A key moment came in 2019, though, when the Supreme Court — which at that point had a narrow Republican majority — ruled that federal courts were powerless to hear cases about partisan gerrymandering. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged that the results of “excessive partisanship” in drawing districts “reasonably seem unjust,” but said that ultimately, the issue was political rather than constitutional.

My colleague Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court and wrote about that case at the time, explained to me that the case effectively allowed the court to wash its hands of the issue and leave the matter to states, which take vastly different approaches to redistricting.

The dissenting justices warned that the ruling’s consequences for democracy could be dire. “The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote.

A lopsided fight

With federal courts essentially out of the business of reviewing partisan gerrymandering, it was up to state laws and state courts to determine what was allowed — and there, Republicans had an advantage, one stemming from years of gains they had made in state legislatures.

By the 2022 redistricting cycle, Republicans controlled congressional mapmaking in 19 states, while Democrats did so in just seven, according to a 2022 analysis by the Brennan Center.

Democrats aggressively gerrymandered some of those states, including Illinois, Maryland and the politically purple Nevada.

But in several states where Democrats are in a position of power, including Arizona, California, Colorado and Michigan, voters have established independent commissions to draw fair maps, which will make it harder for them to try to cancel out Texas’ gains by drawing new maps elsewhere. In New York, an aggressive attempt at gerrymandering was thrown out by a court in 2022; the party ultimately drew a fairly restrained map in 2024.

The whole thing has prompted some soul-searching among Democrats who have spent years trying to fight gerrymandering, including former Attorney General Eric Holder. Last week, he said he believed Democrats needed to respond to Republican gerrymandering in kind.

“We’ve got to take these extraordinary steps, with the hope that we can then save democracy and ultimately heal it,” he told my colleague Nick Corasaniti.

Where next?

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, told Shane and Nick that what comes next is a “race to the bottom.”

Trump and his allies are pushing for more gains. Republicans have total legislative control in states like Florida, Indiana, Missouri and New Hampshire, which could make them targets for the push to remake their own maps.

Democrats are trying to do the same — although some of them may have to find ways around their states’ own reforms first.

On Monday, standing alongside some of the Texas Democrats who had left the state, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York vowed to follow suit and redraw the maps in New York — even if that required her to amend the state’s Constitution to kill her state’s independent redistricting commission. (Any such effort, though, would be deeply complicated and may not take effect until after the midterms.)

“I’m tired of fighting this fight with my hand tied behind my back,” Hochul said. “With all due respect to the good-government groups, politics is a political process.”

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed a public vote on new maps this fall — although he would keep plans in place for independent mapmaking in 2030.

IN HIS WORDS

‘Woke is for losers’

Trump is jumping on another culture war bandwagon. My colleague Minho Kim, who keeps an eye on his social media feeds, explains.

For nearly two weeks, parts of the internet have blown up over Sydney Sweeney — a Hollywood actress known for her ubiquitous ad presence — and a controversial American Eagle ad that declared she had “great jeans.”

The president, who has been busy traveling overseas and reordering the global trading system, left the matter untouched — until today.

The advertisement was criticized by some who believed it teetered onto the territory of eugenics. Online, apparently MAGA-affiliated accounts rallied around her.

On Monday, the president himself chimed in, calling Sweeney’s ad the “hottest.”

“Go get ‘em Sydney!” he cheered on Truth Social.

He then quickly pivoted to throwing shade at other brands that he found too “woke,” including Jaguar, the British carmaker whose rebranding efforts featured racially diverse fashion models, and Bud Light, which faced backlash after an Instagram promotion featured a transgender celebrity.

And he didn’t forget to downplay Taylor Swift, who endorsed Kamala Harris last year, calling her “no longer hot.”

“The tide has seriously turned,” he proclaimed. “Being woke is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be.”

IN ONE GRAPHIC

President Trump’s top officials said they would initially prioritize the deportation of criminals, and since January, ICE has routinely publicized the deportation of migrants convicted of crimes or accused of belonging to gangs.

But a review of cases and new data analyzed by The New York Times underscores how the crackdown quickly expanded to those without legal status, whether or not they had been convicted of a crime.

In New York City, more than half of immigrants arrested had no criminal charges or convictions on their record, my colleagues Luis Ferré-Sadurní and Ashley Cai reported.

ONE LAST THING

When society loses a ‘mirror’

President Trump shocked economists when, late last week, he fired the person responsible for producing monthly jobs numbers he didn’t like. He hasn’t yet named her replacement.

My colleague Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The Times, took a deep look at the perils of political leaders meddling in government data. He spoke with several former officials around the world who were themselves responsible for producing unbiased data — and they helped explain why the episode matters.

One of them in particular stuck with me. Andreas Georgiou took over Greece’s statistical agency in 2010, and found that the country had been severely understating its budget deficits — much to the chagrin of Greek authorities, who tried to have him prosecuted.

Georgiou described government statistics as “a mirror that society holds up to itself.”

“If society cannot see itself clearly, then it cannot identify its problems,” he said. “If it cannot identify its problems, then it cannot find the right solutions. It cannot find the right persons to solve these problems.”

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #GOP #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #Newsletter #OnPolitics #Opinion #Politics #Redistricting #Republicans #Resistance #Science #Texas #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

The Origins of the Political Power Grab in Texas – On Politics – The New York Times

August 4, 2025

Trump’s Washington: How President Trump is changing government, the country and its politics.

The Texas power grab didn’t start with Trump

By Jess Bidgood

The cutthroat political maneuvering in Texas seemed to begin quietly in June, when President Trump’s political team urged Republican leaders in the state to squeeze more G.O.P. seats out of the state’s already-lopsided congressional map.

Trump, my colleagues J. David Goodman and Shane Goldmacher wrote at the time, wanted them to be “ruthless.”

Barely two months later, Texas Republicans have used a special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott to advance a plan they hope will help their party pick up five seats in the narrowly divided House — and dozens of Democratic legislators have fled the state to try to stop it from becoming law. It’s a gambit that could shape the outcome of next year’s midterm elections, and turn the nation’s redistricting battles into an all-out war.

Trump is getting the bare-knuckle tactics — and most likely the five more favorable districts — that he wanted. The groundwork for this moment, however, was laid well before June. Today, I’ll explain how we got here, and why Democrats looking to fight fire with fire may have their hands tied.

By Ashley Cai

A pivotal Supreme Court decision

Gerrymandering is nothing new. The term itself goes back to 1812, when Gov. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, one of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence, signed a bill that created Boston-area State Senate districts so contorted, one was said to look like a salamander. Partisan map-drawing reduced competitiveness, turning more and more races into blowouts for one party or the other. By 2024, just 8 percent of congressional races were decided by fewer than five percentage points, according to an analysis by my colleagues this year.

A key moment came in 2019, though, when the Supreme Court — which at that point had a narrow Republican majority — ruled that federal courts were powerless to hear cases about partisan gerrymandering. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged that the results of “excessive partisanship” in drawing districts “reasonably seem unjust,” but said that ultimately, the issue was political rather than constitutional.

My colleague Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court and wrote about that case at the time, explained to me that the case effectively allowed the court to wash its hands of the issue and leave the matter to states, which take vastly different approaches to redistricting.

The dissenting justices warned that the ruling’s consequences for democracy could be dire. “The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote.

A lopsided fight

With federal courts essentially out of the business of reviewing partisan gerrymandering, it was up to state laws and state courts to determine what was allowed — and there, Republicans had an advantage, one stemming from years of gains they had made in state legislatures.

By the 2022 redistricting cycle, Republicans controlled congressional mapmaking in 19 states, while Democrats did so in just seven, according to a 2022 analysis by the Brennan Center.

Democrats aggressively gerrymandered some of those states, including Illinois, Maryland and the politically purple Nevada.

But in several states where Democrats are in a position of power, including Arizona, California, Colorado and Michigan, voters have established independent commissions to draw fair maps, which will make it harder for them to try to cancel out Texas’ gains by drawing new maps elsewhere. In New York, an aggressive attempt at gerrymandering was thrown out by a court in 2022; the party ultimately drew a fairly restrained map in 2024.

The whole thing has prompted some soul-searching among Democrats who have spent years trying to fight gerrymandering, including former Attorney General Eric Holder. Last week, he said he believed Democrats needed to respond to Republican gerrymandering in kind.

“We’ve got to take these extraordinary steps, with the hope that we can then save democracy and ultimately heal it,” he told my colleague Nick Corasaniti.

Where next?

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, told Shane and Nick that what comes next is a “race to the bottom.”

Trump and his allies are pushing for more gains. Republicans have total legislative control in states like Florida, Indiana, Missouri and New Hampshire, which could make them targets for the push to remake their own maps.

Democrats are trying to do the same — although some of them may have to find ways around their states’ own reforms first.

On Monday, standing alongside some of the Texas Democrats who had left the state, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York vowed to follow suit and redraw the maps in New York — even if that required her to amend the state’s Constitution to kill her state’s independent redistricting commission. (Any such effort, though, would be deeply complicated and may not take effect until after the midterms.)

“I’m tired of fighting this fight with my hand tied behind my back,” Hochul said. “With all due respect to the good-government groups, politics is a political process.”

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed a public vote on new maps this fall — although he would keep plans in place for independent mapmaking in 2030.

IN HIS WORDS

‘Woke is for losers’

Trump is jumping on another culture war bandwagon. My colleague Minho Kim, who keeps an eye on his social media feeds, explains.

For nearly two weeks, parts of the internet have blown up over Sydney Sweeney — a Hollywood actress known for her ubiquitous ad presence — and a controversial American Eagle ad that declared she had “great jeans.”

The president, who has been busy traveling overseas and reordering the global trading system, left the matter untouched — until today.

The advertisement was criticized by some who believed it teetered onto the territory of eugenics. Online, apparently MAGA-affiliated accounts rallied around her.

On Monday, the president himself chimed in, calling Sweeney’s ad the “hottest.”

“Go get ‘em Sydney!” he cheered on Truth Social.

He then quickly pivoted to throwing shade at other brands that he found too “woke,” including Jaguar, the British carmaker whose rebranding efforts featured racially diverse fashion models, and Bud Light, which faced backlash after an Instagram promotion featured a transgender celebrity.

And he didn’t forget to downplay Taylor Swift, who endorsed Kamala Harris last year, calling her “no longer hot.”

“The tide has seriously turned,” he proclaimed. “Being woke is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be.”

IN ONE GRAPHIC

President Trump’s top officials said they would initially prioritize the deportation of criminals, and since January, ICE has routinely publicized the deportation of migrants convicted of crimes or accused of belonging to gangs.

But a review of cases and new data analyzed by The New York Times underscores how the crackdown quickly expanded to those without legal status, whether or not they had been convicted of a crime.

In New York City, more than half of immigrants arrested had no criminal charges or convictions on their record, my colleagues Luis Ferré-Sadurní and Ashley Cai reported.

ONE LAST THING

When society loses a ‘mirror’

President Trump shocked economists when, late last week, he fired the person responsible for producing monthly jobs numbers he didn’t like. He hasn’t yet named her replacement.

My colleague Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The Times, took a deep look at the perils of political leaders meddling in government data. He spoke with several former officials around the world who were themselves responsible for producing unbiased data — and they helped explain why the episode matters.

One of them in particular stuck with me. Andreas Georgiou took over Greece’s statistical agency in 2010, and found that the country had been severely understating its budget deficits — much to the chagrin of Greek authorities, who tried to have him prosecuted.

Georgiou described government statistics as “a mirror that society holds up to itself.”

“If society cannot see itself clearly, then it cannot identify its problems,” he said. “If it cannot identify its problems, then it cannot find the right solutions. It cannot find the right persons to solve these problems.”

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #GOP #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #Newsletter #OnPolitics #Opinion #Politics #Redistricting #Republicans #Resistance #Science #Texas #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

The Origins of the Political Power Grab in Texas – On Politics – The New York Times

August 4, 2025

Trump’s Washington: How President Trump is changing government, the country and its politics.

The Texas power grab didn’t start with Trump

By Jess Bidgood

The cutthroat political maneuvering in Texas seemed to begin quietly in June, when President Trump’s political team urged Republican leaders in the state to squeeze more G.O.P. seats out of the state’s already-lopsided congressional map.

Trump, my colleagues J. David Goodman and Shane Goldmacher wrote at the time, wanted them to be “ruthless.”

Barely two months later, Texas Republicans have used a special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott to advance a plan they hope will help their party pick up five seats in the narrowly divided House — and dozens of Democratic legislators have fled the state to try to stop it from becoming law. It’s a gambit that could shape the outcome of next year’s midterm elections, and turn the nation’s redistricting battles into an all-out war.

Trump is getting the bare-knuckle tactics — and most likely the five more favorable districts — that he wanted. The groundwork for this moment, however, was laid well before June. Today, I’ll explain how we got here, and why Democrats looking to fight fire with fire may have their hands tied.

By Ashley Cai

A pivotal Supreme Court decision

Gerrymandering is nothing new. The term itself goes back to 1812, when Gov. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, one of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence, signed a bill that created Boston-area State Senate districts so contorted, one was said to look like a salamander. Partisan map-drawing reduced competitiveness, turning more and more races into blowouts for one party or the other. By 2024, just 8 percent of congressional races were decided by fewer than five percentage points, according to an analysis by my colleagues this year.

A key moment came in 2019, though, when the Supreme Court — which at that point had a narrow Republican majority — ruled that federal courts were powerless to hear cases about partisan gerrymandering. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged that the results of “excessive partisanship” in drawing districts “reasonably seem unjust,” but said that ultimately, the issue was political rather than constitutional.

My colleague Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court and wrote about that case at the time, explained to me that the case effectively allowed the court to wash its hands of the issue and leave the matter to states, which take vastly different approaches to redistricting.

The dissenting justices warned that the ruling’s consequences for democracy could be dire. “The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote.

A lopsided fight

With federal courts essentially out of the business of reviewing partisan gerrymandering, it was up to state laws and state courts to determine what was allowed — and there, Republicans had an advantage, one stemming from years of gains they had made in state legislatures.

By the 2022 redistricting cycle, Republicans controlled congressional mapmaking in 19 states, while Democrats did so in just seven, according to a 2022 analysis by the Brennan Center.

Democrats aggressively gerrymandered some of those states, including Illinois, Maryland and the politically purple Nevada.

But in several states where Democrats are in a position of power, including Arizona, California, Colorado and Michigan, voters have established independent commissions to draw fair maps, which will make it harder for them to try to cancel out Texas’ gains by drawing new maps elsewhere. In New York, an aggressive attempt at gerrymandering was thrown out by a court in 2022; the party ultimately drew a fairly restrained map in 2024.

The whole thing has prompted some soul-searching among Democrats who have spent years trying to fight gerrymandering, including former Attorney General Eric Holder. Last week, he said he believed Democrats needed to respond to Republican gerrymandering in kind.

“We’ve got to take these extraordinary steps, with the hope that we can then save democracy and ultimately heal it,” he told my colleague Nick Corasaniti.

Where next?

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, told Shane and Nick that what comes next is a “race to the bottom.”

Trump and his allies are pushing for more gains. Republicans have total legislative control in states like Florida, Indiana, Missouri and New Hampshire, which could make them targets for the push to remake their own maps.

Democrats are trying to do the same — although some of them may have to find ways around their states’ own reforms first.

On Monday, standing alongside some of the Texas Democrats who had left the state, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York vowed to follow suit and redraw the maps in New York — even if that required her to amend the state’s Constitution to kill her state’s independent redistricting commission. (Any such effort, though, would be deeply complicated and may not take effect until after the midterms.)

“I’m tired of fighting this fight with my hand tied behind my back,” Hochul said. “With all due respect to the good-government groups, politics is a political process.”

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed a public vote on new maps this fall — although he would keep plans in place for independent mapmaking in 2030.

IN HIS WORDS

‘Woke is for losers’

Trump is jumping on another culture war bandwagon. My colleague Minho Kim, who keeps an eye on his social media feeds, explains.

For nearly two weeks, parts of the internet have blown up over Sydney Sweeney — a Hollywood actress known for her ubiquitous ad presence — and a controversial American Eagle ad that declared she had “great jeans.”

The president, who has been busy traveling overseas and reordering the global trading system, left the matter untouched — until today.

The advertisement was criticized by some who believed it teetered onto the territory of eugenics. Online, apparently MAGA-affiliated accounts rallied around her.

On Monday, the president himself chimed in, calling Sweeney’s ad the “hottest.”

“Go get ‘em Sydney!” he cheered on Truth Social.

He then quickly pivoted to throwing shade at other brands that he found too “woke,” including Jaguar, the British carmaker whose rebranding efforts featured racially diverse fashion models, and Bud Light, which faced backlash after an Instagram promotion featured a transgender celebrity.

And he didn’t forget to downplay Taylor Swift, who endorsed Kamala Harris last year, calling her “no longer hot.”

“The tide has seriously turned,” he proclaimed. “Being woke is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be.”

IN ONE GRAPHIC

President Trump’s top officials said they would initially prioritize the deportation of criminals, and since January, ICE has routinely publicized the deportation of migrants convicted of crimes or accused of belonging to gangs.

But a review of cases and new data analyzed by The New York Times underscores how the crackdown quickly expanded to those without legal status, whether or not they had been convicted of a crime.

In New York City, more than half of immigrants arrested had no criminal charges or convictions on their record, my colleagues Luis Ferré-Sadurní and Ashley Cai reported.

ONE LAST THING

When society loses a ‘mirror’

President Trump shocked economists when, late last week, he fired the person responsible for producing monthly jobs numbers he didn’t like. He hasn’t yet named her replacement.

My colleague Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The Times, took a deep look at the perils of political leaders meddling in government data. He spoke with several former officials around the world who were themselves responsible for producing unbiased data — and they helped explain why the episode matters.

One of them in particular stuck with me. Andreas Georgiou took over Greece’s statistical agency in 2010, and found that the country had been severely understating its budget deficits — much to the chagrin of Greek authorities, who tried to have him prosecuted.

Georgiou described government statistics as “a mirror that society holds up to itself.”

“If society cannot see itself clearly, then it cannot identify its problems,” he said. “If it cannot identify its problems, then it cannot find the right solutions. It cannot find the right persons to solve these problems.”

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #GOP #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #Newsletter #OnPolitics #Opinion #Politics #Redistricting #Republicans #Resistance #Science #Texas #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

The Origins of the Political Power Grab in Texas – On Politics – The New York Times

August 4, 2025

Trump’s Washington: How President Trump is changing government, the country and its politics.

The Texas power grab didn’t start with Trump

By Jess Bidgood

The cutthroat political maneuvering in Texas seemed to begin quietly in June, when President Trump’s political team urged Republican leaders in the state to squeeze more G.O.P. seats out of the state’s already-lopsided congressional map.

Trump, my colleagues J. David Goodman and Shane Goldmacher wrote at the time, wanted them to be “ruthless.”

Barely two months later, Texas Republicans have used a special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott to advance a plan they hope will help their party pick up five seats in the narrowly divided House — and dozens of Democratic legislators have fled the state to try to stop it from becoming law. It’s a gambit that could shape the outcome of next year’s midterm elections, and turn the nation’s redistricting battles into an all-out war.

Trump is getting the bare-knuckle tactics — and most likely the five more favorable districts — that he wanted. The groundwork for this moment, however, was laid well before June. Today, I’ll explain how we got here, and why Democrats looking to fight fire with fire may have their hands tied.

By Ashley Cai

A pivotal Supreme Court decision

Gerrymandering is nothing new. The term itself goes back to 1812, when Gov. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, one of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence, signed a bill that created Boston-area State Senate districts so contorted, one was said to look like a salamander. Partisan map-drawing reduced competitiveness, turning more and more races into blowouts for one party or the other. By 2024, just 8 percent of congressional races were decided by fewer than five percentage points, according to an analysis by my colleagues this year.

A key moment came in 2019, though, when the Supreme Court — which at that point had a narrow Republican majority — ruled that federal courts were powerless to hear cases about partisan gerrymandering. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged that the results of “excessive partisanship” in drawing districts “reasonably seem unjust,” but said that ultimately, the issue was political rather than constitutional.

My colleague Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court and wrote about that case at the time, explained to me that the case effectively allowed the court to wash its hands of the issue and leave the matter to states, which take vastly different approaches to redistricting.

The dissenting justices warned that the ruling’s consequences for democracy could be dire. “The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote.

A lopsided fight

With federal courts essentially out of the business of reviewing partisan gerrymandering, it was up to state laws and state courts to determine what was allowed — and there, Republicans had an advantage, one stemming from years of gains they had made in state legislatures.

By the 2022 redistricting cycle, Republicans controlled congressional mapmaking in 19 states, while Democrats did so in just seven, according to a 2022 analysis by the Brennan Center.

Democrats aggressively gerrymandered some of those states, including Illinois, Maryland and the politically purple Nevada.

But in several states where Democrats are in a position of power, including Arizona, California, Colorado and Michigan, voters have established independent commissions to draw fair maps, which will make it harder for them to try to cancel out Texas’ gains by drawing new maps elsewhere. In New York, an aggressive attempt at gerrymandering was thrown out by a court in 2022; the party ultimately drew a fairly restrained map in 2024.

The whole thing has prompted some soul-searching among Democrats who have spent years trying to fight gerrymandering, including former Attorney General Eric Holder. Last week, he said he believed Democrats needed to respond to Republican gerrymandering in kind.

“We’ve got to take these extraordinary steps, with the hope that we can then save democracy and ultimately heal it,” he told my colleague Nick Corasaniti.

Where next?

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, told Shane and Nick that what comes next is a “race to the bottom.”

Trump and his allies are pushing for more gains. Republicans have total legislative control in states like Florida, Indiana, Missouri and New Hampshire, which could make them targets for the push to remake their own maps.

Democrats are trying to do the same — although some of them may have to find ways around their states’ own reforms first.

On Monday, standing alongside some of the Texas Democrats who had left the state, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York vowed to follow suit and redraw the maps in New York — even if that required her to amend the state’s Constitution to kill her state’s independent redistricting commission. (Any such effort, though, would be deeply complicated and may not take effect until after the midterms.)

“I’m tired of fighting this fight with my hand tied behind my back,” Hochul said. “With all due respect to the good-government groups, politics is a political process.”

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed a public vote on new maps this fall — although he would keep plans in place for independent mapmaking in 2030.

IN HIS WORDS

‘Woke is for losers’

Trump is jumping on another culture war bandwagon. My colleague Minho Kim, who keeps an eye on his social media feeds, explains.

For nearly two weeks, parts of the internet have blown up over Sydney Sweeney — a Hollywood actress known for her ubiquitous ad presence — and a controversial American Eagle ad that declared she had “great jeans.”

The president, who has been busy traveling overseas and reordering the global trading system, left the matter untouched — until today.

The advertisement was criticized by some who believed it teetered onto the territory of eugenics. Online, apparently MAGA-affiliated accounts rallied around her.

On Monday, the president himself chimed in, calling Sweeney’s ad the “hottest.”

“Go get ‘em Sydney!” he cheered on Truth Social.

He then quickly pivoted to throwing shade at other brands that he found too “woke,” including Jaguar, the British carmaker whose rebranding efforts featured racially diverse fashion models, and Bud Light, which faced backlash after an Instagram promotion featured a transgender celebrity.

And he didn’t forget to downplay Taylor Swift, who endorsed Kamala Harris last year, calling her “no longer hot.”

“The tide has seriously turned,” he proclaimed. “Being woke is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be.”

IN ONE GRAPHIC

President Trump’s top officials said they would initially prioritize the deportation of criminals, and since January, ICE has routinely publicized the deportation of migrants convicted of crimes or accused of belonging to gangs.

But a review of cases and new data analyzed by The New York Times underscores how the crackdown quickly expanded to those without legal status, whether or not they had been convicted of a crime.

In New York City, more than half of immigrants arrested had no criminal charges or convictions on their record, my colleagues Luis Ferré-Sadurní and Ashley Cai reported.

ONE LAST THING

When society loses a ‘mirror’

President Trump shocked economists when, late last week, he fired the person responsible for producing monthly jobs numbers he didn’t like. He hasn’t yet named her replacement.

My colleague Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The Times, took a deep look at the perils of political leaders meddling in government data. He spoke with several former officials around the world who were themselves responsible for producing unbiased data — and they helped explain why the episode matters.

One of them in particular stuck with me. Andreas Georgiou took over Greece’s statistical agency in 2010, and found that the country had been severely understating its budget deficits — much to the chagrin of Greek authorities, who tried to have him prosecuted.

Georgiou described government statistics as “a mirror that society holds up to itself.”

“If society cannot see itself clearly, then it cannot identify its problems,” he said. “If it cannot identify its problems, then it cannot find the right solutions. It cannot find the right persons to solve these problems.”

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #GOP #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #Newsletter #OnPolitics #Opinion #Politics #Redistricting #Republicans #Resistance #Science #Texas #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

The Origins of the Political Power Grab in Texas – On Politics – The New York Times

August 4, 2025

Trump’s Washington: How President Trump is changing government, the country and its politics.

The Texas power grab didn’t start with Trump

By Jess Bidgood

The cutthroat political maneuvering in Texas seemed to begin quietly in June, when President Trump’s political team urged Republican leaders in the state to squeeze more G.O.P. seats out of the state’s already-lopsided congressional map.

Trump, my colleagues J. David Goodman and Shane Goldmacher wrote at the time, wanted them to be “ruthless.”

Barely two months later, Texas Republicans have used a special session called by Gov. Greg Abbott to advance a plan they hope will help their party pick up five seats in the narrowly divided House — and dozens of Democratic legislators have fled the state to try to stop it from becoming law. It’s a gambit that could shape the outcome of next year’s midterm elections, and turn the nation’s redistricting battles into an all-out war.

Trump is getting the bare-knuckle tactics — and most likely the five more favorable districts — that he wanted. The groundwork for this moment, however, was laid well before June. Today, I’ll explain how we got here, and why Democrats looking to fight fire with fire may have their hands tied.

By Ashley Cai

A pivotal Supreme Court decision

Gerrymandering is nothing new. The term itself goes back to 1812, when Gov. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, one of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence, signed a bill that created Boston-area State Senate districts so contorted, one was said to look like a salamander. Partisan map-drawing reduced competitiveness, turning more and more races into blowouts for one party or the other. By 2024, just 8 percent of congressional races were decided by fewer than five percentage points, according to an analysis by my colleagues this year.

A key moment came in 2019, though, when the Supreme Court — which at that point had a narrow Republican majority — ruled that federal courts were powerless to hear cases about partisan gerrymandering. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts acknowledged that the results of “excessive partisanship” in drawing districts “reasonably seem unjust,” but said that ultimately, the issue was political rather than constitutional.

My colleague Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court and wrote about that case at the time, explained to me that the case effectively allowed the court to wash its hands of the issue and leave the matter to states, which take vastly different approaches to redistricting.

The dissenting justices warned that the ruling’s consequences for democracy could be dire. “The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote.

A lopsided fight

With federal courts essentially out of the business of reviewing partisan gerrymandering, it was up to state laws and state courts to determine what was allowed — and there, Republicans had an advantage, one stemming from years of gains they had made in state legislatures.

By the 2022 redistricting cycle, Republicans controlled congressional mapmaking in 19 states, while Democrats did so in just seven, according to a 2022 analysis by the Brennan Center.

Democrats aggressively gerrymandered some of those states, including Illinois, Maryland and the politically purple Nevada.

But in several states where Democrats are in a position of power, including Arizona, California, Colorado and Michigan, voters have established independent commissions to draw fair maps, which will make it harder for them to try to cancel out Texas’ gains by drawing new maps elsewhere. In New York, an aggressive attempt at gerrymandering was thrown out by a court in 2022; the party ultimately drew a fairly restrained map in 2024.

The whole thing has prompted some soul-searching among Democrats who have spent years trying to fight gerrymandering, including former Attorney General Eric Holder. Last week, he said he believed Democrats needed to respond to Republican gerrymandering in kind.

“We’ve got to take these extraordinary steps, with the hope that we can then save democracy and ultimately heal it,” he told my colleague Nick Corasaniti.

Where next?

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, told Shane and Nick that what comes next is a “race to the bottom.”

Trump and his allies are pushing for more gains. Republicans have total legislative control in states like Florida, Indiana, Missouri and New Hampshire, which could make them targets for the push to remake their own maps.

Democrats are trying to do the same — although some of them may have to find ways around their states’ own reforms first.

On Monday, standing alongside some of the Texas Democrats who had left the state, Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York vowed to follow suit and redraw the maps in New York — even if that required her to amend the state’s Constitution to kill her state’s independent redistricting commission. (Any such effort, though, would be deeply complicated and may not take effect until after the midterms.)

“I’m tired of fighting this fight with my hand tied behind my back,” Hochul said. “With all due respect to the good-government groups, politics is a political process.”

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed a public vote on new maps this fall — although he would keep plans in place for independent mapmaking in 2030.

IN HIS WORDS

‘Woke is for losers’

Trump is jumping on another culture war bandwagon. My colleague Minho Kim, who keeps an eye on his social media feeds, explains.

For nearly two weeks, parts of the internet have blown up over Sydney Sweeney — a Hollywood actress known for her ubiquitous ad presence — and a controversial American Eagle ad that declared she had “great jeans.”

The president, who has been busy traveling overseas and reordering the global trading system, left the matter untouched — until today.

The advertisement was criticized by some who believed it teetered onto the territory of eugenics. Online, apparently MAGA-affiliated accounts rallied around her.

On Monday, the president himself chimed in, calling Sweeney’s ad the “hottest.”

“Go get ‘em Sydney!” he cheered on Truth Social.

He then quickly pivoted to throwing shade at other brands that he found too “woke,” including Jaguar, the British carmaker whose rebranding efforts featured racially diverse fashion models, and Bud Light, which faced backlash after an Instagram promotion featured a transgender celebrity.

And he didn’t forget to downplay Taylor Swift, who endorsed Kamala Harris last year, calling her “no longer hot.”

“The tide has seriously turned,” he proclaimed. “Being woke is for losers, being Republican is what you want to be.”

IN ONE GRAPHIC

President Trump’s top officials said they would initially prioritize the deportation of criminals, and since January, ICE has routinely publicized the deportation of migrants convicted of crimes or accused of belonging to gangs.

But a review of cases and new data analyzed by The New York Times underscores how the crackdown quickly expanded to those without legal status, whether or not they had been convicted of a crime.

In New York City, more than half of immigrants arrested had no criminal charges or convictions on their record, my colleagues Luis Ferré-Sadurní and Ashley Cai reported.

ONE LAST THING

When society loses a ‘mirror’

President Trump shocked economists when, late last week, he fired the person responsible for producing monthly jobs numbers he didn’t like. He hasn’t yet named her replacement.

My colleague Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The Times, took a deep look at the perils of political leaders meddling in government data. He spoke with several former officials around the world who were themselves responsible for producing unbiased data — and they helped explain why the episode matters.

One of them in particular stuck with me. Andreas Georgiou took over Greece’s statistical agency in 2010, and found that the country had been severely understating its budget deficits — much to the chagrin of Greek authorities, who tried to have him prosecuted.

Georgiou described government statistics as “a mirror that society holds up to itself.”

“If society cannot see itself clearly, then it cannot identify its problems,” he said. “If it cannot identify its problems, then it cannot find the right solutions. It cannot find the right persons to solve these problems.”

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #GOP #History #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #Newsletter #OnPolitics #Opinion #Politics #Redistricting #Republicans #Resistance #Science #Texas #TheNewYorkTimes #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

How I wrote the newest Sherlock Holmes novel – The Spectator World

By Gareth Rubin

How I wrote the newest Sherlock Holmes novel

It wasn’t so elementary, Watson, Wednesday, July 23, 2025

I don’t think anyone has ever come up with a word to describe an authorized author. It’s not quite a tautology. The writer, who has been invited to write a novel continuing the body of work of another, might, possibly, be an example of literary parthenogenesis. Or, more pejoratively, karaoke.

Who knows? But either way, it’s a growth industry. You will have seen the new authorized James Bond novels, the recently crafted Miss Marple and George Smiley outings that have appeared on the bookstore shelves over the past few years to some fanfare – despite the fact that those characters’ creators are very much pushing up the daisies. No, the mortality status of said celebrated novelists is no barrier – perhaps it’s even an incentive – to fans of the series rushing out and handing over their cash for the work featuring their favorite sleuth or spy.

In those cases, the literary estate of Ian Fleming, for instance, will have authorized the new book in return for a cut of the proceeds. But sometimes – perhaps more strangely – the originators are alive and kicking but don’t fancy another ten months in front of their laptop, and so they subcontract the work. Hence, Lee Child can still introduce his latest smash-hit Jack Reacher thriller to a hungry readership, without hiding the fact that the actual words were written by his brother Andrew. Either way, the arrangement leaves everyone content and fulfilled.

I know whereof I speak. When it was announced that the Conan Doyle literary estate had authorized me to write a new Sherlock Holmes novel, the first question I was publicly asked was whether I thought I was up to the job. After all, Holmes is a uniquely popular character, listed in the Guinness World Records as the most-portrayed human literary creation, with hundreds of films and television shows about him. But I do, as it happens, think I’m up to it. I wouldn’t have written it otherwise, would I?

Holmes and Moriarty was published in the US this past May, with near-simultaneous publication in a wide range of European countries. My literary agent, Jon, came up with the idea. He had previously published the last two authorized Holmes novels, written by Anthony Horowitz, and was therefore in touch with the Conan Doyle estate, made up of Sir Arthur’s descendants. They were interested in finding a new author to continue their ancestor’s legacy, and my previous Gothic-tinged Victorian-set mystery, The Turnglass, had been a Sunday Times bestseller, so they wanted to know what I would do with Holmes.

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: How I wrote the newest Sherlock Holmes novel – The Spectator World

#2025 #America #ArthurConanDoyle #Books #Libraries #Library #LibraryOfCongress #Novels #Reading #SherlockHolmes #TheSpectator #TheSpectatorWorld #UnitedStates #Writing

‘A privilege and a great pleasure’: inside the 5,000-item Stephen Sondheim collection
#LibraryOfCongress #SpecialCollections #StephenSondheim
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2025/jul/22/a-privilege-and-a-great-pleasure-inside-the-5000-item-stephen-sondheim-collection

Letters from an American – Heather Cox Richardson – July 16, 2025

After years of covering Donald J. Trump, I am used to seeing stories that would have sunk any other president simply fade away as he hammers on to some new unprecedented action that dominates the news. So I am surprised by what appears to be the staying power of the recent Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

That Trump is panicked by the threat of the release of material concerning convicted sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein seems very clear. After the backlash against the Department of Justice’s decision not to release any more information and to reiterate that Epstein died by suicide, Trump tried first to downplay Epstein’s importance and convince people to move on. When that blew up, he posted a long screed on social media last Saturday saying the files were written by Democrats and other supposed enemies of his.

This morning, Trump posted another long message on social media blaming “Radical Left Democrats” for creating the story of the Epstein files. “Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax,” he wrote, and then he turned on his own supporters for demanding the administration release the files. “[M]y PAST supporters have bought into this ’bullsh*t,’ hook, line, and sinker. They haven’t learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years. I have had more success in 6 months than perhaps any President in our Country’s history, and all these people want to talk about, with strong prodding by the Fake News and the success starved Dems, is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax. Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats work, don’t even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don’t want their support anymore! Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

July 16, 2025 by Heather Cox Richardson

Read on Substack

#2025 #America #DonaldTrump #Health #HeatherCoxRichardson #History #July16 #LettersFromAnAmerican #Libraries #LibraryOfCongress #MAGA #Politics #PresidentialBehavior #Resistance #Science #Substack #Trump #TrumpAdministration #UnitedStates

@susankayequinn @bookstodon @digyoursoul

For #audiobooks , I choose Libro.fm because it supports my #local #indie #bookstore.

That is, for books I can't get through the #LibraryOfCongress #TalkingBooks program.

I also accept free trials from #audible and use those to grab exclusives.

I tried Libby and it was confusing. It's been a minute, so maybe I should try again.

"Soul Man" is a 1967 song written and composed by #IsaacHayes and #DavidPorter, first successful as a number 2 hit single by #AtlanticRecords soul duo #SamAndDave, which consisted of #SamuelSamMoore and #DavidDavePrater. In 2019, "#SoulMan" was selected for preservation in the #NationalRecordingRegistry as "culturally, historically, and aesthetically significant" by the #LibraryOfCongress.
https://youtu.be/S_OX2HwWy-o