James Fallows has an excellent newsletter today discussing Trump’s successful “shock and awe” campaign that left the political establishment, indeed the whole country, reeling with the overwhelming number of atrocities committed in a short period of time. It’s a bracing recitation. But he notes that the resistance is forming among the institutions at long last and lists some of the examples:
The Big 10
Yes, that Big 10, the university conference that was once centered in the Midwest and now has some 18 members located coast to coast.
Three weeks ago, the faculty senate at Rutgers (which joined the Big 10 a decade ago) led the way with a resolution endorsing a “mutual defense compact” among allied universities. The idea is, essentially, NATO for higher ed, with the Trump team playing the role of Russia. An attack on one is an attack on all.
For the original NATO, the main goal was deterrence. For this Big 10-NATO, it’s about institutional survival too. Maybe Harvard can bear the financial cost of standing up to Trump. One by one, no Big 10 institution could dare. But together they can make a stand, and share the burdens of self-defense if the worst occurs. Each of them is stronger and braver, from knowing that none of them is alone.
Since then the idea has spread rapidly (as reported in the higher-ed press, and elsewhere including last night on Rachel Maddow). Faculty-senate endorsements range from the University of Nebraska at Lincoln, to Indiana University at Bloomington, to UMass Amherst (not in the Big 10). That’s not the same as university presidents announcing this as official policy. But it’s an important start.
The state of California.
Yesterday the nation’s most populous and productive state officially filed a federal lawsuit to block Trump’s destructive tariffs, using the most basic argument against them. Namely, that Trump has no legal power to impose these taxes, as his own one-man wrecking crew for the world economy.
You can read all the details here1 The essence of California’s claim is found in the US Constitution, which plainly lays out that Congress, not the president, will be in charge of tariffs. As put in Article I, Section 8 (emphasis added):
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises…[and] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.
We know that constitutional niceties are not Trump’s strong suit. In theory he also has no legal power to fire inspectors-general, to feed federal agencies into the wood chipper, to nullify trade agreements, or take other such steps. He has done what he wants, until someone has stopped him.
Now a state’s leadership has officially stood up. Given California’s scale and resources, this is the federal equivalent of Harvard saying No.
And, speaking of California lawsuits: A few hours ago Gavin Newsom announced that the state would also sue the Trump team for another wantonly cruel and destructive move, eliminating AmeriCorps. Here was the announcement from the governor’s office in Sacramento:
Governor Newsom responds to DOGE’s dismantling of AmeriCorps: ‘Middle finger to volunteers. We will sue’
That’s the spirit.
Two Republican campaign veterans.
I’m speaking of Karl Rove, from the GWB era, and Stuart Stevens, of the John McCain and Mitt Romney presidential campaigns (and now of the Lincoln Project).
Karl Rove has attacked Trump for years, and has kept underestimating his electoral strength. But his column today in the WSJ said what Trump fears more than being called cruel or dishonest: That his act has gotten old. The column’s headline was “America Gets Trump Fatigue.”
Rove has been wrong about Trump before. But maybe this time?
Stuart Stevens is a friend of Deb’s and mine, and is an accomplished writer. Today I saw one of his comments via the Lincoln Project:
This isn’t a battle of your choosing. But it is the battle for which you will always be judged. This is the moment you must show the world and history which side of the Edmund Pettis Bridge you are standing on.
Will that change anyone’s mind? I don’t know. But it’s worth noting in the moment.
One Republican judge:
A judge named J. Harvie Wilkinson III is now age 80. When he was still in his 30s, he was enough of a conservative rising-star that Ronald Reagan appointed him to the Fourth Circuit federal appeals court.2
All these decades later, Wilkinson is still on the Fourth Circuit. And today he issued a blistering condemnation of the Trump team’s refusal to bring Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador.
The PDF of his whole ruling is here. A sample:
It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter. But in this case, it is not hard at all.
The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done.
This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.
And
If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home?
The time-capsule importance of this verdict is not just the clarity of the warning. It’s that it comes from J. Harvie Wilkinson III, as conservative a jurist as you are going to find.
For those not around during the Reagan era, it’s like hearing that Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas joined in condemning the Trump deportations. If the Trump DOJ has lost Wilkinson’s vote, its legal arguments are in trouble.
One Democratic senator:
Cory Booker shook things up with his 25-hour oration.
Chris Van Hollen of Maryland shook things up in these past two days.
What makes this truly interesting is this:
This is just part of the chronicle of this one day. Less than 90 days into this new era.
I would add this to that list:
Conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks is widely seen as a measured figure who frequently calls out anything radical or removed from the center — but that’s decidedly not the tone he struck in his latest article, calling for a “civic uprising” to defend American values against the assault of the Trump administration.
“Over the centuries, people built the sinews of civilization: Constitutions to restrain power, international alliances to promote peace, legal systems to peacefully settle disputes, scientific institutions to cure disease, news outlets to advance public understanding, charitable organizations to ease suffering, businesses to build wealth and spread prosperity, and universities to preserve, transmit and advance the glories of our way of life,” wrote Brooks. “These institutions make our lives sweet, loving and creative, rather than nasty, brutish and short.”
The Trump agenda, he continued, stands in opposition to all of that — pursuing only “power for its own sake” as it seeks to “make the earth a playground for ruthless men,” tearing down any institution or cultural values that get in the way of that. This is the mindset with which Trump has forced universities, law firms, and media companies to bend to his will.
All those things (except Booker) happened yesterday. It’s a good sign.
