‘Nothing like this in American history’: the crisis of Trump’s assault on the rule of law

The Guardian, 3.9.25

A New Day is Coming. But we have to work very hard for it…

Countdown to the U.S. Midterm Election

November 3, 2026

Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds

Democrats take the Majority in the US House of Representatives and begin the arduous task of revesing Trump's follies, mayhem and his hateful reign of terror

January 3, 2027

Why we need the change now! And how you can be a part of it

Elon Musk

Elon Musk

“The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy.”

The Ultra Rich Billionaire may have an ulterior motive for his vast government cut-backs that include favoritism for contracts on pet projects such as the fool's errand to send humans to Mars where he can populate the planet with the progeny of his current 14 children. To do that he will need an enormous amount of funding: thus reducing or removing social programs altogether to put all the money toward his impossible dream.

Why you need to fight him

  1. Potential Erosion of Public Services: DOGE’s aggressive cost-cutting measures are leading to the dismantling of essential public services, adversely affecting vulnerable populations who rely on government support.
  2. Conflict of Interest: Elon Musk’s leadership of DOGE raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest, given his extensive business ventures that may benefit from deregulation and reduced government oversight.
  3. Transparency and Accountability: The ambiguity surrounding DOGE’s authority and decision-making processes has led to apprehension about the potential for unchecked power and a lack of accountability in implementing significant governmental changes.
  4. Labor Rights: Reports indicate that DOGE’s initiatives have led to significant job cuts within federal agencies, raising alarms about workers’ rights and the potential weakening of unions.
  5. Constitutional Legitimacy: The establishment and actions of DOGE have sparked debates about their constitutional validity, with critics arguing that such restructuring efforts should involve legislative oversight to prevent overreach.

These concerns have prompted activists and organizations to protest against DOGE’s initiatives, advocating for the protection of public services, labor rights, and governmental transparency.

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

Elon Musk is the wealthiest person in the world with a soaring $400,000,000,000 net worth. His achievements are rarely of his own design, but he is clever at buying out ideas that have been run into the ground and resurrecting them, such as PayPal, Tesla, SpaceX and Twitter.

Due to his high-roller donations to Trump's campaigns and PACs, Musk now wields enormous influence over the president elect.

Having hollowed out Twitter in a repubnantly smug reign of terror, he aims to do the same to the US Government employees. While taking dollars away from nearly every department and agency in the Government, old contracts, contract impediments, and new contracts are being funneled to his companies.

One wonders why, unless it is for his desire to send humans to Mars, an unlikely to succeed endeavor bourne out of watching too many science fiction dramas like Gravity, The Expanse and Dune.

Social Security

The Department of Government Efficiency is sifting through $1.6 trillion worth of Social Security payments -- records that include a person's name, birth date and how much they earn -- in an anti-fraud effort that has advocates worried the Trump administration could start denying payments to vulnerable older Americans.

Ultra-conservative perspectives on Social Security often advocate for significant reforms, reflecting concerns about the program’s sustainability and alignment with limited government principles. Key positions include:

  • Raising the Retirement Age Proposals suggest increasing the full retirement age from 67 to 69 over an eight-year period starting in 2026, effectively reducing lifetime benefits for future retirees.
  • Benefit Reductions Some plans aim to restore Social Security’s solvency entirely by reducing benefits, focusing on cost-cutting measures rather than increasing revenue.
  • Privatization Advocates propose allowing younger workers to opt out of the current system in favor of private retirement accounts, shifting responsibility from the government to individuals.

Why you need to fight this

Right-wing proposals to cut, privatize, or restructure Social Security under initiatives like Project 2025 would weaken the program, increase poverty among seniors, and break the promise of retirement security. Here are the strongest progressive arguments against these proposals:

  1. Raising the Retirement Age is a Benefit Cut
    • Some right-wing proposals suggest raising the full retirement age from 67 to 69—which effectively cuts benefits since workers would have to wait longer to receive full payouts.
    • Not everyone can work longer—this disproportionately harms blue-collar workers, those in physically demanding jobs, and those with health issues.
    • Life expectancy is not increasing equally—wealthier Americans live longer, while lower-income workers (especially minorities and rural populations) may not even reach the higher retirement age.
  2. Privatization Would Be Risky and Benefit Wall Street, Not Workers
    • Some conservatives advocate allowing younger workers to invest part of their Social Security taxes into private accounts instead of the traditional system.
    • Stock market volatility could mean huge losses for retirees, especially during economic downturns like the 2008 crash.
    • Privatization benefits Wall Street, not retirees, as banks and investment firms would profit from fees while workers take on all the risk.
    • Countries that have privatized pensions (like Chile and the UK) saw major failures, forcing governments to step in and restore benefits.
    3. Read More
  3. Benefit Cuts Would Harm Millions, Especially the Most Vulnerable
    • Some right-wing proposals suggest reducing benefits by changing the way cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) are calculated, leading to smaller increases over time.
    • Seniors rely heavily on Social Security—for 40% of retirees, it provides 90% or more of their income.
    • Cuts would increase poverty, forcing more elderly Americans to work into their 70s or rely on family and social services.
  4. Social Security is Not Going Broke—It Can Be Strengthened
    • Conservatives often claim that Social Security is running out of money, but progressives argue the system can be fixed by lifting the payroll tax cap.
    • Currently, income over $168,600 is not taxed for Social Security—meaning millionaires stop paying after just a few months.
    • Lifting the cap (so the wealthy pay the same rate as everyone else) could fully fund Social Security for decades without cutting benefits.
  5. Social Security is a Social Contract, Not a Welfare Program
    • Right-wing politicians sometimes frame Social Security as an “entitlement” or “handout”, but workers pay into it their entire lives—it’s earned.
    • The program keeps over 20 million Americans out of poverty, including disabled workers, widows, and children of deceased parents.
    • Weakening Social Security would break America’s promise to workers who paid in and planned their futures around it.

Recent headlines

Bottom Line

Right-wing Social Security reforms prioritize cost-cutting over retirement security, disproportionately harm workers, seniors, and the most vulnerable, and open the door to risky privatization schemes that benefit Wall Street more than retirees. Instead of cuts, progressives propose lifting the payroll tax cap, protecting benefits, and expanding Social Security to ensure financial stability for all retirees.

Medicare

The 2025 plan advocates for making Medicare Advantage—the privatized arm of Medicare—the default option for all enrollees. This shift aims to increase competition and reduce costs but may limit beneficiaries’ choice of healthcare providers and require prior authorizations for certain services. Additionally, Project 2025 recommends repealing provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, including caps on insulin prices and out-of-pocket drug costs, potentially increasing expenses for beneficiaries.

Why you need to fight this

There are several strong arguments against the proposed Medicare changes in Project 2025, particularly the shift toward Medicare Advantage as the default option and the repeal of cost-saving measures from the Inflation Reduction Act:

  1. Limits Choice and Access to Care
    • Medicare Advantage plans are run by private insurers, which often restrict access to certain doctors, hospitals, and specialists.
    • Traditional Medicare allows unrestricted provider choice, whereas Medicare Advantage requires enrollees to use networks and often seek prior authorizations for treatments.
    • Seniors in rural areas could suffer most, as many providers don’t accept Medicare Advantage plans.
  2. Increases Out-of-Pocket Costs
    • The repeal of prescription drug price caps (like the $35 insulin cap and the $2,000 annual out-of-pocket limit) could drastically increase medication costs for seniors.
    • Medicare Advantage often offers lower upfront premiums but comes with higher copays, deductibles, and surprise billing for complex or chronic health conditions.
    • Many Advantage plans deny or delay necessary care to cut costs, shifting the burden back onto patients.
    3. Read More
  3. Reduces Consumer Protections and Oversight
    • Traditional Medicare is directly regulated by the government, ensuring fair pricing and access to care.
    • Medicare Advantage plans are private and for-profit, meaning they can increase restrictions, deny coverage, or change benefits annually to maximize profits.
    • A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that Medicare Advantage plans wrongly denied care 13% of the time, creating barriers for seniors.
  4. Could Increase Long-Term Federal Costs
    • While privatization is framed as a cost-cutting move, Medicare Advantage often costs taxpayers more than traditional Medicare due to higher per-patient spending and overbilling practices.
    • Private insurers receive higher reimbursements from the government and have been found to inflate patient risk scores to secure larger payments.
  5. Political and Public Backlash
    • Medicare is one of the most popular government programs, and past attempts to privatize it have met strong bipartisan resistance.
    • A major shift toward Medicare Advantage could provoke a political firestorm, especially among seniors who rely on traditional Medicare.

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

Project 2025’s Medicare plan prioritizes insurance companies over patients, increases out-of-pocket costs, reduces choice, and jeopardizes healthcare for seniors. The shift toward privatization could weaken protections, raise government spending in the long run, and leave vulnerable populations struggling to afford care.

Medicaid

The initiative suggests converting federal Medicaid funding into block grants or per capita caps. Currently, the federal government matches state Medicaid expenditures at a fixed percentage; under the proposed changes, states would receive a predetermined federal funding amount regardless of actual costs. This restructuring could lead to reduced coverage and benefits, increasing economic and health insecurity for millions.

Why you need to fight this

The Project 2025 proposals for Medicaid focus on restructuring federal funding by introducing block grants or per capita caps, which would limit how much money states receive regardless of actual healthcare costs. Here are the strongest arguments against these proposals:

  1. Millions Could Lose Coverage
    • Medicaid currently expands automatically when more people need it (e.g., during economic downturns, pandemics, or public health crises). Block grants and per capita caps would set fixed funding limits, making it harder for states to cover everyone in need.
    • States facing budget shortfalls would be forced to cut benefits, reduce eligibility, or impose enrollment caps, leading to millions losing access to healthcare.
    • Children, seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income families would be hit hardest.
    2. Read More
  2. Reduced Benefits and Quality of Care
    • States relying on fixed federal funds would have to cut services like long-term care, maternity coverage, mental health services, and substance abuse treatment.
    • Medicaid recipients could face higher out-of-pocket costs, even though the program is designed for those who cannot afford private insurance.
    • Rural hospitals and clinics, which depend on Medicaid funding, could face closures, reducing healthcare access in already underserved areas.
  3. Higher Costs for States and Taxpayers
    • Currently, Medicaid is a federal-state partnership, where the federal government covers a percentage of costs (ranging from 50% to 90%).
    • With block grants, states would receive a fixed amount, forcing them to cover any shortfalls—likely leading to higher state taxes or budget cuts elsewhere (like education or infrastructure).
    • Per capita caps would not account for rising healthcare costs (e.g., inflation, new treatments, public health emergencies), leaving states with insufficient funds over time.
  4. Worsening Health Outcomes
    • Medicaid expansion under the ACA significantly reduced uninsured rates, leading to better health outcomes and lower mortality rates—Project 2025’s proposals could reverse this progress.
    • Studies show that reducing Medicaid access leads to increased ER visits, untreated chronic conditions, and higher long-term healthcare costs.
    • Cuts to Medicaid for children could impact lifelong health, education outcomes, and economic mobility.
  5. Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Populations
    • People with disabilities could lose access to in-home care, wheelchairs, and essential medical services, forcing them into institutional care or leaving them without support.
    • Seniors in nursing homes—over 60% rely on Medicaid—could be forced out due to funding cuts. Where will they go, out on the streets where they unhoused population is already a majority of seniors?
    • Low-income working families who rely on Medicaid for preventive care, maternal health, and childcare coverage would struggle to afford private insurance.
  6. Inefficiency and Administrative Burden
    • Block grants shift financial risk to states, forcing them to spend more on bureaucracy to ration care and determine who gets coverage.
    • A capped system discourages innovation—states may avoid investing in preventive care or cost-saving programs because funding is limited.
    • Health crises (like COVID-19, opioid addiction, or natural disasters) could quickly overwhelm state budgets, leading to widespread suffering and delayed care.

Bottom Line

Project 2025’s Medicaid proposals prioritize cost-cutting over healthcare access, disproportionately harm low-income, elderly, and disabled populations, and could force states into tough budgetary decisions that reduce overall care quality. The shift toward block grants or per capita caps does not account for rising healthcare costs, economic downturns, or public health crises, making the system less responsive and less effective at serving those in need.

Federal Workers

Throughout the Trump administration and under the ausipices of the spurious Department of Government Efficiency lead by non-US employee, non-vetted, non-confirmed appointee Elon Musk, mass layoffs of employees are taking place with often less than a single business day notice. The mayhem this is causing reaches not only the families of those who are now in despair, but the carnage is dimantling the workings of the governemnt itself in no uncertain terms, leaving citizens stranded and without a safety net: from the FAA that runs the air space to the VA that gives care to our Veterans. The situation appears to only be beginning and is a dire proposition.

Why You need to fight this

The Trump administration has been aggressively pursuing policies that will make travelers’ odds inevitably worse.

SLATE, March 3, 2025

Recent mass firings of U.S. federal employees and contractors under the Trump administration and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have sparked significant controversy. Critics present several compelling arguments against these actions:

  1. Disruption of Essential Public Services
    • Reducing the federal workforce can lead to diminished public services. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) warns that such layoffs could result in longer waits at Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, fewer food safety inspections, reduced medical research, increased air travel risks, and delays in Social Security and passport processing.
  2. Legal Challenges and Overreach
    • A federal judge ruled that the mass firings of probationary employees were unlawful, stating that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) exceeded its authority by terminating employees from other agencies. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also criticized the layoffs, emphasizing that they threaten essential services and undermine the checks and balances provided by civil servants.
    3. Read More
  3. Economic Impact on Families and Local communities
    • Mass layoffs of federal workers can adversely affect families and local economies. Communities with a high concentration of federal employees may experience economic downturns due to reduced consumer spending and increased unemployment.
  4. Loss of Institutional Knowledge
    • The departure of experienced federal employees results in a significant loss of institutional knowledge, hindering the government’s ability to address complex issues effectively. This gap can lead to inefficiencies and challenges in policy implementation.
  5. Potential for Increased Privatization and Automation
    • The reduction in federal workforce sets the stage for greater privatization and automation of government services. While this may lead to short-term cost savings, it raises concerns about data security, biases in artificial intelligence systems, and the digital divide, potentially leaving many Americans without access to essential services.
  6. Negative Impact on Employee Morale and Public Perception
    • The abrupt nature of these layoffs has damaged the federal government’s reputation as a stable employer, leading to decreased morale among remaining employees. This environment may deter talented individuals from pursuing public service careers, affecting the quality of governance in the long term.

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

The mass firings of federal employees and contractors pose risks to public service delivery, legal integrity, economic stability, and the effective functioning of government operations.

Migrant Workers

The indescriminant corraling of immigrants with or without documentation, can lead to collapse of entire industries, notably crop harvesting, maintainance, landscaping, building upkeep, construction, and many others.

Is the idea to remove the immigrants and then force those receiving benefits such as Veterans, the disabled, the needy and the elderly by removing their promised pensions and social contracts to work in the fields and construction sites, and to clean the buildings immigrants have traditionally helped with?

Why You Need to fight this

  1. Humanitarian Concerns
    • Many undocumented immigrants have deep ties to their communities, including U.S.-born children, homes, and jobs. Deporting them en masse can break up families, causing trauma and hardship.
    • Some asylum seekers and refugees who lack documentation could face life-threatening dangers if sent back to their home countries.
  2. Economic Impact
    • The U.S. economy relies heavily on immigrant labor, particularly in industries like agriculture, construction, and service work. Mass deportations could cause severe labor shortages and disrupt supply chains contributing to recession, deep recession or depression.
    • Studies suggest that undocumented workers contribute billions in taxes and Social Security without being eligible for most benefits, meaning their removal could hurt public revenue.
    3. Read More
  3. Cost of Enforcement
    • Large-scale deportations require significant government spending on enforcement, detention, legal proceedings, and transportation. The cost of forcibly removing millions of people could be enormous, diverting funds from other critical needs.
  4. Civil Rights & Due Process
    • Mass deportations risk racial profiling and civil rights violations, as law enforcement may disproportionately target people based on appearance or accent rather than legal status.
    • Rapid deportation processes can bypass due process, leading to wrongful removals, including of legal residents or even U.S. citizens.
  5. Historical Precedents & Moral Considerations
    • Previous mass deportation efforts, such as “Operation Wetback” in the 1950s, led to human rights abuses and wrongful deportations. Many progressives argue that repeating such actions would be both unethical and ineffective.
    • The U.S. has historically been a country of immigrants, and mass deportations contradict the values of inclusion and opportunity.
  6. Mistakes
    • Falling into bureaucratic errors, such as losing status due to paperwork issues or policy changes.
    • There have also been cases of legal residents and even U.S. citizens being mistakenly detained or deported due to flawed databases or administrative mistakes.

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

Comprehensive immigration reform, including pathways to legal status, is a more humane, fiscally responsible and practical solution.

USAID

Foreign aid across the globe has staved off starvation, thirst, war refugee sanctuary, conflict resolution, medical help to end outbreaks including Ebola and Mpox. It is crucial not only for compassionate and humanitarian reasons, but helps entire cultures with gratitude toward the US for being there in time of need.

Why you need to fight this

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

The Environment

Why You Need to Fight this

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

Scientists

Why you need to fight this

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

LGBTQIA+ Rights and Marriage Equality

Trans persons' rights disssolution across the government including being fired from the military and all departments across the government, enduring State Department removal of sex identification, penal incarceration allowances and bathroom identification as well as person pronoun preference removal have terrified and suppressed and already vulnerable and accosted US citizenry.

But make no mistake, this is just the start of persecuting all non-white, non-straight members of society. Republican Houses are attacking marriage equality at an alarming rate.

Why You need to fight this

In the first quarter of 2025, as Republican lawmakers in various states are intensifying efforts to challenge same-sex marriage rights, advocates continue to present compelling arguments in favor of marriage equality:

  1. Fundamental Human Rights and Equality

    Marriage is considered a basic human right, and denying same-sex couples the ability to marry constitutes discrimination based on sexual orientation. Upholding marriage equality ensures that all individuals receive equal treatment under the law, aligning with principles of justice and fairness.

  2. Legal and Economic Stability

    Marriage provides couples with numerous legal protections and benefits, including inheritance rights, tax advantages, and decision-making authority in medical situations. Allowing same-sex couples to marry ensures they have access to these critical safeguards, promoting financial and social stability.

    3. Read More
  3. Social Acceptance and Mental Health

    Recognizing same-sex marriages fosters social acceptance and reduces stigma against LGBTQ+ individuals. This recognition contributes positively to the mental health and well-being of LGBTQ+ people by affirming their relationships and identities.

  4. Strengthening Families and Communities

    Marriage equality supports the formation of stable family units, which are foundational to healthy communities. Same-sex couples often raise children, and legal recognition of their unions provides a supportive environment for child-rearing, benefiting society as a whole.

  5. Public Support and Societal Progress

    Public opinion has increasingly favored same-sex marriage over the years, reflecting societal progress toward inclusivity and acceptance. Upholding marriage equality aligns with contemporary values and the democratic principle of respecting the will of the majority.

    Despite these arguments, recent legislative actions indicate a renewed push to challenge same-sex marriage rights:

    • State-Level Legislative Actions: Republican lawmakers in several states have introduced measures aiming to challenge and overturn the federally protected right to same-sex marriage. For instance, in Oklahoma, state senators have proposed bills promoting traditional family structures and seeking to contest the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. Similarly, Idaho legislators have petitioned the Supreme Court to reverse its ruling on same-sex marriage.
    • Project 2025: This initiative, supported by conservative groups, outlines plans that could undermine LGBTQ+ rights, including marriage equality. Advocates warn that such projects pose existential threats to the LGBTQ+ community by attempting to dismantle established protections.

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

In light of these developments, proponents of same-sex marriage emphasize the importance of vigilance and advocacy to protect marriage equality. They argue that any regression in LGBTQ+ rights not only harms individuals directly affected but also undermines the broader principles of civil rights and social justice.

Rights of Trans People to Exist

If you or your loved ones are part of the LGBTQ community, there are steps you should take to protect yourself.

Transgender individuals are currently facing significant challenges due to policies and initiatives from both the Trump administration and the conservative-led Project 2025. These measures include:

  1. Redefinition of Gender in Federal Policies

    The Trump administration issued an executive order mandating that all federal agencies define sex strictly as male or female, based solely on biological attributes at birth. This order effectively nullifies recognition of transgender and nonbinary identities within federal policies, leading to the rollback of existing protections against discrimination in areas such as healthcare, education, and employment.

  2. Restrictions on Gender Marker Updates

    The administration has halted the process for transgender individuals to update gender markers on passports and other federal identification documents. This abrupt policy change has left many with inaccurate identification, complicating daily activities that require ID verification and increasing vulnerability to discrimination and harassment.

    3. Read More
  3. Erasure of Gender Identity Data Collection

    The U.S. Census Bureau, aligning with the administration’s directives, has sought to remove questions related to gender identity from national surveys. This action impedes the collection of vital data necessary to understand and address the unique challenges faced by transgender individuals, potentially hindering the development of informed policies and allocation of resources.

  4. Project 2025’s Anti-Transgender Proposals

    Spearheaded by conservative organizations, Project 2025 outlines plans to enforce a binary definition of sex in federal law, effectively denying the existence of transgender identities. The project proposes policies that could criminalize the acknowledgment and support of transgender individuals, equating “transgender ideology” with obscenity and suggesting punitive measures against educators and librarians who provide transgender-inclusive materials.

  5. International Criticism of Anti-Transgender Policies

    The United Nations human rights chief has expressed deep concern over the U.S. administration’s shift towards policies that undermine anti-discrimination protections, particularly those affecting transgender individuals. These policies contribute to a climate of fear and anxiety among marginalized communities and are viewed as a regression from established human rights standards.

Bottom Line

Collectively, these actions represent a concerted effort to marginalize transgender individuals by stripping away legal recognitions and protections, thereby exacerbating social stigmatization and discrimination.

Why you need to fight this

  1. Violation of Human Rights and Civil Liberties
    • Government Overreach

      The policies dictate personal identity, limiting individual freedoms and violating the right to self-determination.

    • Discrimination

      Rolling back legal protections denies transgender people equal rights in employment, housing, healthcare, and education, contradicting principles of fairness and equality.

    • International Backlash

      UN and other human rights organizations have condemned these policies as violations of fundamental rights, putting the U.S. at odds with global democratic norms.

    2. Read More
  2. Constitutional and Legal Challenges
    • 14th Amendment – Equal Protection Clause

      Targeting transgender individuals with restrictive policies denies them equal protection under the law.

    • First Amendment Concerns

      Proposals to criminalize discussions of transgender identities in schools and libraries infringe on free speech and access to information.

    • Legal Precedents

      The Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) affirmed that discrimination based on gender identity is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII, making some of these policies legally dubious.

  3. Harm to Public Health and Well-Being
    • Mental Health Crisis

      Studies show that denying transgender people access to affirming healthcare and legal recognition increases rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide.

    • Barriers to Medical Care

      Banning gender-affirming care contradicts recommendations from major medical organizations (e.g., American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics) and prevents doctors from following best practices.

    • Increased Violence and Harassment

      Anti-trans policies fuel stigma and embolden hate groups, leading to higher rates of violence against transgender individuals.

  4. Economic and Workforce Consequences
    • Job Discrimination Harms the Economy

      Restricting workplace protections for transgender individuals leads to job loss, reduced productivity, and economic instability.

    • Talent Drain

      Anti-LGBTQ+ policies make the U.S. a less attractive place for skilled workers, investors, and businesses, particularly in industries that value diversity and inclusion.

    • Burden on States

      States with anti-trans laws often face costly legal battles and lose revenue from tourism, businesses, and conventions boycotting discriminatory policies.

  5. Threat to Parental Rights and Personal Freedoms
    • Government Interference in Families

      Efforts to ban gender-affirming care for minors contradict conservative principles of parental rights, as they take medical decisions out of the hands of parents and doctors.

    • Privacy Violations

      Laws requiring gender to be based on assigned sex at birth could lead to invasive monitoring, such as forced disclosure of medical history or identity checks.

  6. Political and Social Backlash
    • Unpopular with the Public

      Polls show most Americans support protections for transgender people. Extreme policies risk alienating moderate and younger voters.

    • Corporate Opposition

      Major companies, including tech firms, banks, and healthcare providers, have opposed anti-trans policies, warning that they hurt innovation and workplace inclusivity.

    • Legal Defeats

      Many states have already faced court challenges over anti-trans laws, with judges ruling that these policies violate constitutional rights.

Recent Headlines

Bottom Line

These policies are unconstitutional, harmful to public health, damaging to the economy, and inconsistent with conservative values of limited government and individual freedom. Such measures create unnecessary legal battles, economic losses, and social division, while ultimately failing to address any real societal concerns.

Organizations

These organizations are at the forefront of court challenges to the unnaceptable unilateral decisions made by the current administration.

We are a group of citizens impelled to act. We have no affiliation with the organizations listed other than to donate to them ourselves and support their important work. We hope you consider the same. Even a $5 donation makes a difference.

ACLU

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is an American nonprofit civil rights organization founded in 1920.

ACLU provides legal assistance in cases where it considers civil liberties at risk. Legal support from the ACLU can take the form of direct legal representation or preparation of amicus curiae briefs expressing legal arguments when another law firm is already providing representation. In addition to representing persons and organizations in lawsuits, the ACLU lobbies for policy positions established by its board of directors.

Wikipedia ÷ Website

Democracy Forward

Democracy Forward Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit legal services and public policy research organization in Washington, D.C. Founded in 2017, the organization works to expose and litigate corruption in the Executive Branch of the United States government.

The State of the Union Is up to Us Newsweek, 3/5/25

Wikipedia ÷ Website

Public Citizen

… is an American non-profit, progressive[2] consumer rights advocacy group, and think tank based in Washington, D.C.

Public Citizen advocates before all three branches of the United States federal government. Its five divisions include Congress Watch; Energy; Global Trade Watch; the Health Research Group; and Public Citizen Litigation Group, a nationally prominent public interest law firm founded by Alan Morrison and known for its Supreme Court and appellate practice.

Wikipedia ÷ Website

American Oversight

Since our launch in March 2017, we have obtained and published tens of thousands of documents from federal, state, and local government agencies. Records uncovered by American Oversight have supported congressional inquiries, investigative journalism, and independent actions by partner organizations — and our work has been featured in hundreds of news stories around the country.

WHAT WE DO

We are open records specialists

We act where corruption and government power overlap. From the federal Freedom of Information Act to state transparency laws, we use carefully crafted records requests to extract information from the government — information they often don’t want the public to have. When the government fails to respond as required by law, our team has the legal expertise to take them to court and enforce the public’s right to hold our leaders accountable.

Public records belong to the public

We believe in transparency and in sharing our work with others who are working to promote accountability in government. Through our online documents library, we make available the requests we submit, the lawsuits we file, and the government records we receive in response. We’ve published more than one million pages of records, and we’re obtaining and posting more every week.

Our priorities

We were founded in 2017 in response to the unprecedented challenges that the Trump administration posed to our nation’s democratic ideals and institutions. Today our work spans more than two dozen states, focusing on core priorities including Attacks on Democratic Institutions, Threats to Civil Rights and Liberties, Abuses of Power, and Erosion of Government Transparency.

WHO WE ARE

American Oversight is a team of more than 35 lawyers, researchers, communicators, and more working across the country to expose misconduct and hold government accountable.

Website

Project Hope

With over 1,000 employees in more than 25 countries across five continents, we work hand-in-hand with local health workers and health systems to provide urgent relief and transformative solutions that drive lasting impact.

At our core is a shared humanity and compassion that stretches across the work we do. We believe that everyone deserves hope, that health is a fundamental human right, and that together we can strengthen access to care around the world.

In the face of unprecedented challenges, we believe hope has the power to change lives — because we see it every day.

Others

Many organizations have filed lawsuits against the current administration. Here are just a few.

  • Catholic Charities of Fort Worth This Texas-based nonprofit is suing the administration for withholding $36 million in federal refugee funds, which has led to significant staffing reductions and halted essential services for refugees from countries such as Afghanistan, Cuba, and Ukraine.
  • Haitian Americans United and the Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts These immigrant rights organizations have filed a lawsuit challenging the administration’s decision to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Haitian and Venezuelan migrants, arguing that the actions are based on racial prejudice and violate constitutional protections.
  • Chicago Women in Trades (CWIT) A nonprofit serving a diverse group of women in skilled trades, CWIT has filed a lawsuit challenging executive orders that severely restrict Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, asserting that these orders harm their mission and participants.
  • National Urban League, National Fair Housing Alliance, and AIDS Foundation of Chicago These civil rights organizations have collectively filed a lawsuit challenging executive orders that ban DEI programs and erase protections for transgender individuals, arguing that these orders infringe upon free speech and due process rights.
  • American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and American Foreign Service Association These labor unions have sued the administration over mass firings of probationary federal employees, contending that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) lacked the authority to order such widespread terminations.
  • 27 Religious Organizations A coalition including the Mennonite Church, the Episcopal Church, the Union for Reform Judaism, and the Unitarian Universalist Association has filed a lawsuit challenging the administration’s immigration enforcement policies, arguing that these policies violate their religious principles and the rights of immigrants.

Bottom Line

These lawsuits reflect widespread legal challenges to various policies and actions undertaken by the current administration, encompassing issues such as immigration, civil rights, labor practices, and diversity initiatives.

News

Online portals and creatives presenting up-to-the-minute details and analysis of value. We have no affiliation with these other than support and interest.

Social Platforms

Our Starter Pack includes our go-to content creators

  • Bluesky

    For the moment, largely liberal-minded ppl who fled Twitter.

  • Substack

    Plenty of free content, or paid perks with your favorites.

  • Reddit

    A plethora of active conversations. The home of "AMA: Ask Me Anything"

Newspapers and Bureaus