Sen. Budd,

I’m writing you not just as a North Carolinian but as someone who deeply values the strength and integrity of our military. The confirmation of this Defense nominee—a man whose record reads more like a commentator than a commander—is a slap in the face to every service member who has put on the uniform with honor.

This isn’t theoretical anymore. This nominee has used an unofficial messaging app to discuss highly classified military matters, even going so far as to invite a reporter into the conversation. Worse, in a separate Signal chat, he added his wife—who holds no security clearance—along with his brother and personal attorney, both of whom work for the Pentagon but had no need-to-know for the operations being discussed. And now, we find out he used a dirty internet line for Defense Department communications—a completely irresponsible act that jeopardizes operational security.

This is not the time for political gamesmanship or for handing out titles to appease fringe popularity. This is the time for sober, steady, and qualified leadership. North Carolina's military bases are on the frontlines of American readiness, and we need leaders in Washington who treat that responsibility with the gravity it deserves.

Rep. Don Bacon has already done the right thing and called for this nominee’s resignation. I ask you to do the same. The longer this situation continues, the greater the risk to our national security.

Please, show the courage to push back on this. Our state, our soldiers, and our nation deserve far better.

TildenM

Subscribe now

Sen. Tillis,

As a constituent who is outraged by your decision to confirm this individual, I am shocked and disappointed that the Senate confirmed a nominee so blatantly unqualified to lead the Department of Defense. North Carolina is home to one of the largest military populations in the nation—this decision directly affects our communities, our bases, and our families.

This individual has neither the professional discipline nor the strategic foresight required for such a critical post. Even more disturbing are the documented reports that he used an unofficial messaging app to discuss top-secret operations, invited a reporter into these conversations, and in a separate Signal chat, included his wife—who lacks any security clearance—as well as his brother and personal lawyer. While the brother and lawyer work for the Pentagon, neither had any operational need to access the classified discussions being held. And now, we learn that he conducted official communications using a dirty internet line—an unacceptable exposure that endangers operations and lives.

This isn’t just unprofessional—it’s reckless and dangerous. Our service members deserve a Secretary of Defense who commands respect through competence, not media antics or political favoritism. This isn’t a symbolic role—it’s about protecting American lives and leading the strongest fighting force in the world.

So far, only one Republican—Rep. Don Bacon—has had the courage to call for this nominee’s resignation. I urge you to follow that lead and demand his immediate removal. Our military cannot be led by someone so cavalier with our most sensitive secrets.

Our troops are counting on you to stand up, speak out, and do what’s right.

TildenM

Subscribe now

Sen. Budd,

I write to you not as a partisan, but as someone who believes government should serve the people - not enrich politicians. The announcement that President Trump is hosting a private dinner for top holders of his personal cryptocurrency, at the White House no less, is a shocking display of self-dealing. It turns public trust into a product for sale.

That’s not leadership - it’s corruption. And if we don’t call it out now, we invite more of it. I know many of your constituents value integrity, honesty, and accountability. They expect those values to guide you, even when it’s politically uncomfortable.

This isn’t about left or right. It’s about right and wrong. Please speak out. Make it clear that no president - past, present, or future - should be able to monetize public office for personal profit.

TildenM

Subscribe now

Sen. Tillis,

As a North Carolinian who believes deeply in public service rooted in principle, I am stunned by the news that President Trump is personally profiting from a cryptocurrency dinner hosted at the White House. When Americans entrusted him with that office, it wasn’t so he could auction off access to the highest bidder. That dinner is not a campaign rally. It’s not a fundraiser. It’s a business deal - on government property - for personal gain.

This crosses a line. If we allow public office to be used this way, what’s to stop any future president - of either party - from doing worse? If Republicans won’t stand up against this kind of transactional government, who will? This isn’t about politics. It’s about restoring respect for the office and protecting it from abuse.

Senator, the people of North Carolina are watching. Please don’t be silent.

Tilden Moschetti

Subscribe now

Sen. Budd,

Donald Trump said he’d end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours — on Day One of his presidency. That was January 20. It’s April 23. Where’s the magic peace plan?

Turns out, the only “solution” he’s offering is to hand over Ukraine’s land to Russia — just give it away. Because it makes him look tough. Because it makes him feel like the kingmaker he’s always wanted to be.

You’ve tied yourself so tightly to Trump that I don’t even know if you believe in anything anymore. But let me be crystal clear: what Trump is pushing is not peace. It’s betrayal. It’s weakness. It rewards aggression, and it makes the U.S. look like a country that bows to strongmen — foreign and domestic.

Sen. Budd, if you’re going to stand for anything — anything at all — make it this: we don’t sell out free nations just to pad Trump’s ego. If you can’t even do that, then stop pretending you care about America’s strength.

TildenM

Sen. Tillis,

You’ve said you support Ukraine. You’ve said America stands with our allies and stands for freedom. Well, now is the time to prove it — by standing up to Donald Trump.

Trump promised he’d end the war in Ukraine on his “first day in office” — that was January 20, 2025. It’s April 23. The only “solution” he’s pushing is one where Ukraine gives up its land to Vladimir Putin — so Trump can look like a big shot on TV.

That’s not peace. That’s surrender. And any Senator who goes along with it is selling out everything this country is supposed to stand for. Ukraine’s not asking for our soldiers — they’re asking that we don’t betray them to appease a failed businessman who thinks bullying is diplomacy.

Sen. Tillis, I expect you to stand up and say: America will not force a free nation to give up its land to make Donald Trump feel powerful. You’ve stood for Ukraine before — I’m asking you to do it again, even if it means standing against Trump. Because if we won’t stand up to tyrants abroad or at home, what do we even stand for?

TildenM

Sen. Budd,

There are roughly 90,000 active-duty military personnel in North Carolina. They and their families rely on strong leadership, not reckless showboats with a Fox News pedigree and a signal group chat addiction.

Pete Hegseth leaked sensitive operational details about a U.S. military strike in Yemen to his wife, brother, and lawyer—none of whom had any clearance, much less a need to know​. He was explicitly warned not to share such information and did it anyway. You confirmed this man. Against all logic and, I suspect, against your better judgment, you helped put him in charge of the Pentagon.

This isn't a mistake. It’s a violation of the standards that every service member understands better than Hegseth ever could. Leaking flight schedules and operational timelines isn't just a lapse—it's a threat to lives, to alliances, and to morale. And your silence now would be complicity.

Stand with your state’s military families and call for his resignation. You helped put him there. Do the honorable thing and help remove him before more damage is done.

TildenM

Sen. Tillis,

I am writing to you not just as a constituent, but as someone furious that a man with access to some of our most vital military operations betrayed that trust and continues to hold office. Pete Hegseth’s reckless decision to share sensitive Yemen operation details in a private Signal chat—including jet flight schedules—with his wife, brother, and lawyer shows contempt for the very institutions he's been entrusted to lead.

You confirmed him. You looked past every warning sign and handed a man with zero senior defense experience the keys to the Pentagon. And now, you’ve got 90,000 active-duty service members in North Carolina left to wonder whether their lives are in the hands of a man playing military dress-up with his family group chat.

He didn’t just violate protocol. He endangered American lives, undermined operational security, and has fractured the trust of our allies. You cannot stay silent. You cannot let this man, who called those of us with legitimate concerns “illegals, trans, and DEI”, continue to desecrate the Defense Department.

Call for Hegseth’s resignation. Not next week, not when the political temperature drops—now. It’s the bare minimum for the men and women who serve under the flag you claim to honor.

TildenM

The United States has begun deporting people to one of the most brutal prisons in the world.

Not after trials. Not after convictions. But based on suspicion. Tattoos. Fear.

Hundreds of Venezuelan men have been sent to CECOT, a mega-prison in El Salvador known for its harsh conditions and public displays of punishment. Many of them were never charged with a crime. Some were here legally. Some were seeking asylum. Most were deported without ever seeing a judge.

This is not a question of immigration policy.

This is a question of basic human rights.

This is a question about whether we are still the country that believes in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Here are six of them. Six non-gang members, non-violent offenders whose wives, children, friends, brothers, and families will probably never see again because the White House wanted to put on a show, and no one would stop them.

Andry Hernández

Andry Hernández is not a gang member.

He’s 31 years old and a makeup artist. He fled Venezuela because being gay there put him in danger. He came to the U.S. looking for safety and freedom. In Los Angeles, he found work, community, and a chance to live openly as himself. He was waiting on his asylum case - doing everything right.

But none of that mattered when the U.S. government decided to make an example out of someone.

Andry was taken without warning. No hearing. No lawyer. Just a cold decision based on a lie. Officials said he had gang ties. They gave no proof. They didn’t ask questions. They put him on a plane to El Salvador.

Now, he was inside one of the most brutal prisons in the world - El Salvador’s “Terrorism Confinement Center,” or CECOT.

He didn’t scream. Not at first.

When a guard shoved him to the ground, he started crying. When another guard grabbed him and began shaving his head, Franco folded his hands together like he was praying. His fingers trembled. His lips moved quietly, whispering to someone who wasn’t there.

That’s when he broke.

“I’m not a gang member,” he sobbed. “I’m gay. I’m a barber.”

He begged for his mother.

A photographer from TIME was there and saw it all. He wrote: “He began to whimper… folding his hands in prayer as his hair fell… asked for his mother and cried as he was slapped again.”

This wasn’t justice.

This wasn’t about public safety.

This was a show.

Andry was never part of a gang. His crime was being different. His crime was looking the way he does, loving who he loves, and wearing eyeliner in a country that treats brown skin and tattoos like evidence.

The United States sent him to hell for that.

Look at his face.

And ask yourself: Do you see a threat? Or do you see someone who should have been protected?

Because at this moment - on that prison floor, head bowed, lips shaking, asking for his mother - there was no one to protect him.

Franco José Caraballo Tiapa

Franco José Caraballo Tiapa was 26 years old.

He came to the United States from Venezuela with hope and a plan. He stayed out of trouble. He had no criminal record - not even a parking ticket. He lived with his wife, Johanny Sánchez, and their daughter. He was planning her fifth birthday party.

Then, one day, he was gone.

Franco had an immigration appointment scheduled. He was walking toward it when federal agents picked him up. They didn’t accuse him of a crime. They didn’t show a warrant. They didn’t let him talk to a lawyer.

They just took him.

Within days, he was deported to El Salvador - put on a secret flight to one of the most violent prisons in the world.

Now Johanny is alone. She has no answers. No update. No phone call.

And their daughter? She keeps asking where her dad is.

“She asked where he is, that she’s been looking for him and can’t find him,” Johanny told CBS News. “Next week, she turns five. She keeps asking about her little party that her dad was planning for her.”

There will be no party.

Because Franco is no longer in the United States. He’s not even in Venezuela.

He’s inside CECOT, a prison built for ganglords and killers. A place where people are stripped, shaved, beaten, and erased. A place where no one comes back.

Franco had no gang ties. No violent past. Some believe he was targeted simply for having tattoos. One of them was the word “Tren” - a common name in Venezuela and also part of a gang name immigration agents are now scanning for like a search term.

It didn’t matter who he was. It only mattered what he looked like.

Now, his wife has only a photo.

His daughter has only questions.

And Franco - who followed every rule, who showed up when he was told, who was trying to be a father - has become a ghost.

Inside CECOT: A Place You Don’t Leave

CECOT isn’t just a prison. It’s a place where people disappear.

The walls are tall and white, with razor wire curling across the top like claws. The inside is cold and colorless.

There are no windows.

No sunlight.

Just cameras, guards, and fear.

The men inside are stripped of everything. Their clothes. Their hair. Their names.

They are marched barefoot across the concrete floor, bent at the waist, chained wrist to wrist, ankle to ankle. They are made to sit in rows, hunched and silent, like livestock in a cage. They are not allowed to speak, stand, or look up.

Every hour of every day, they are watched. If they twitch, they are punished. If they speak, they are punished. If they cry, they are punished.

This is the place where the U.S. government is sending people like Andry and Franco.

People who never got a hearing.

People who committed no crime.

People who were never meant to come back.

Because no one leaves CECOT.

There is no court date.

No lawyer.

No appeal.

Once you’re inside, you are dead to the world.

The Trump White House knows this. So does El Salvador. That’s the whole point.

This is not about justice. It’s about erasing people quietly. Deporting them into a place where no one will ask questions and no one will ever have to see them again.

The men inside CECOT are not just prisoners. They are props in a political show.

A show meant to make MAGA die-hards smile.

A show meant to look “tough.”

A show that costs real human lives.

When you look at those photos - rows of men, shaved heads, backs bent - you might think it looks like something from a war zone.

But this is happening right now. And it’s being done with our permission.

These people are not coming back.

And that’s exactly how Donald Trump wants it.

Jerce Reyes Barrios

Jerce Reyes Barrios loves soccer. And he loves his daughters.

That’s it. That’s who he is.

He doesn’t get in trouble. “Jerce doesn’t even drink, he doesn’t smoke, he’s never been involved in any crime or bad situation! The only things he cares about are his daughters and soccer,” said his partner, Mariyin Araujo, from southern Mexico. She had come there with their girls, hoping to join Jerce in the United States.

But she never got the chance.

Because Jerce is gone.

He was picked up in the U.S. by immigration agents. The reason? A tattoo on his arm: the crest of Real Madrid, one of the most famous soccer teams in the world. But ICE agents said it looked like a gang tattoo. They didn’t ask what it meant. They didn’t investigate. They didn’t bring him before a judge.

They just decided.

And Jerce was deported.

Now, he’s locked in El Salvador’s CECOT prison - chained to the floor, shaved, surrounded by men accused of murder and torture. All for a soccer logo.

There was no evidence against him. No record. No warning. Just a tattoo and a system that doesn’t care if it gets it wrong - as long as it looks tough doing it.

Jerce was never a threat.

He was a dad trying to build a future.

He worked, saved, waited. He had already sacrificed time with his family to help them escape Venezuela’s collapse. His daughters - young, scared, clinging to their mother - thought they were getting closer to him.

Now they don’t know when they’ll see him again. Or if they will.

Because CECOT isn’t a place you leave. It’s a place built to make people disappear.

And now Jerce - a man who only cared about his family and the game he loved - has vanished into it.

All because someone looked at his arm and saw something he wasn’t.

Neri Alvarado

This is Neri Alvarado, a baker from Dallas.

He’s 25 years old. In the photo, he’s standing next to his little brother, Nelyerson, who is 15 and lives with autism. Neri adores him. He used to teach swimming lessons to children with developmental disabilities, just like his brother. He didn’t do it for money or recognition. He did it because he cared.

To show that love, he got a tattoo - a ribbon for autism awareness, inked onto his skin. A symbol of pride, not violence. A tribute, not a threat.

But to the U.S. government, it became a reason to deport him.

Two months ago, immigration agents showed up at Neri’s apartment in Texas. They were checking people with tattoos. Neri was honest. He told them what the tattoo meant. He even showed them his phone. An agent reviewed everything and told him, “I’m going to put down here that you have nothing to do with Tren de Aragua.”

In other words: You’re cleared. You’re good to go.

Then something changed.

An ICE office in Dallas held Neri anyway, without telling him why. He thought maybe he’d be sent back to Venezuela. But he never arrived.

His family waited. Days passed. No word.

Then, they saw it.

Neri’s name appeared on a list of deportees sent to El Salvador. Not just anywhere - but to CECOT, one of the most violent prisons in the world.

A prison built to terrify. To erase.

No hearing. No court. No explanation. Neri was disappeared by a government that decided a tattoo was enough.

His sister, María, told reporters: “Anyone who’s talked to Neri for even an hour can tell you what a great person he is… He’s someone who, as they say, wouldn’t even hurt a fly.”

Take a good look again at that photo. You can just tell, this is a good guy.

His friends from the Orcirus Club, where he helped with neurodiversity therapy, are begging for his release. His brother John made a video, asking for Neri’s freedom, saying: “He is a very honest boy… He was my daughter’s teacher. An excellent, respectful person. He does not deserve to be in that place.”

But there is no answer. No path home.

Today, Neri is suffering inside CECOT - chained, shaved, silenced. For a ribbon. For love.

This is not a policy.

This is cruelty with a flag on it.

This is what happens when compassion gets punished and silence gets rewarded.

This is what happens when a government decides that kindness looks suspicious.

And now a brother waits. A sister cries. A family watches every headline, hoping that someone, somewhere, still cares.

Carlos Daniel Terán

Carlos Daniel Terán was just a kid.

He wasn’t in a gang. He wasn’t violent. He wasn’t tough. He was soft-spoken, anxious, and scared. That’s what his family remembers most - that scared look on his face when he got caught up in something far bigger than he understood.

Carlos came to the United States from Venezuela like so many others - hoping for a better future. But he never got the chance to build one.

He was picked up by immigration officials and labeled a gang member without proof. Not because of anything he did. Not because of anything anyone saw. Just a quiet note in a file. A guess.

No one spent even a second checking to see if it was true.

His family was shocked. They said Carlos wouldn’t even know how to join a gang if he tried. “He’s just a simple kid,” they said. Nervous. Gentle. He barely even spoke up for himself, let alone posed a threat.

But it didn’t matter.

Under the Alien Enemies Act, no trial was needed. No lawyer. No hearing. Just suspicion.

And then he was gone.

Now Carlos is believed to be inside CECOT - the massive prison in El Salvador where people are shackled, shaved, beaten, and forgotten. A place for criminals. For killers. For monsters.

But Carlos isn’t any of those things.

He’s just a boy who never stood a chance.

The government didn’t just make a mistake. They didn’t even care enough to ask if it was a mistake.

They saw a scared kid - and they threw him away.

Mervin José Yamarte Fernández

We don’t have to wonder what happened to Mervin José Yamarte Fernández.

We’ve seen the photo:

His head is shaved. His face pulled tight. His body yanked backward by guards who posed him like a prize. He’s inside CECOT, the El Salvador mega-prison known around the world for its cruelty.

This isn’t a guess. It’s not a rumor.

He’s there.

His wife and 4-year old daughter recognized him immediately. They then knew.

One day, the government decided he fit the profile. That was all it took.

Mervin had no criminal record.

No violent past.

He wasn’t on any gang list.

He was a Venezuelan man living in the United States - quietly, peacefully. He came here solely to support his wife and daughter.

He was picked up without warning. Deported without a trial. Sent not to his home country, but to a prison made to destroy people.

His family didn’t even know where he was until they saw his name on a list.

Then they saw his face.

A still image. Head bent. Shoulders hunched. A man stripped of his story and turned into a symbol.

For what?

He wasn’t a threat. He wasn’t a criminal. But under the Alien Enemies Act, no one needed to prove anything. Just suspicion. Just silence. Just enough fear to get him on the plane.

Now he’s one of the many locked inside CECOT - a place designed not for justice, but for spectacle.

Mervin’s story is no longer a warning. It’s a reality.

This is what happens when no one stands up.

When men like Mervin - kind, innocent, undocumented but not dangerous - are turned into political props.

We know where he is.

And that’s exactly what makes it so horrifying.

The Alien Enemies Act: A Law for War, Abused for a Lie

There is no war (for there to be a war, Congress must issue a Declaration of War). There is no invasion (an invasion means an incursion by a mass of armed soldiers crossing the border together with the intent to attack the country itself). But the Trump administration is using a 226-year-old law as if there is.

It’s called the Alien Enemies Act. It was passed in 1798. Back then, it was meant for times of war. If America was being attacked by another country, the president could detain or remove people from that enemy nation - but only with limits.

The law says this clearly:

• It only applies during a declared war or an actual invasion. There is no invasion now - no army, no enemy flag, no declaration of war.

• It says people must be given “reasonable time” to leave the country voluntarily.

• And it says anyone detained under the Act must be treated according to the Constitution and given due process.

But that’s not what’s happening.

In March, the Trump White House issued a public order calling the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua an invading force. They claimed this gang was part of an "ongoing invasion" of the United States and used that claim to activate the Alien Enemies Act.

But there is no invasion. There is no war. There is no legal basis for this. That’s not just opinion - it’s the judgment of constitutional scholars, civil rights groups, and legal experts. Using this law to mass-deport immigrants is illegal and dangerous.

And even if the law did apply, it requires due process. But these men - Andry, Franco, Jerce, Neri, Carlos, Mervin - were given none. No hearings. No lawyers. No chance to leave on their own. Just orders, flights, and prison cells.

This isn’t national defense. It’s political theater wrapped in legal lies.

The Alien Enemies Act is not a blank check. It is not a weapon for mass removal. And it was never meant to be used like this.

But under Trump, it’s become exactly that: a tool to disappear people quickly, without the burden of proof or the bother of truth.

Due Process: The Right Everyone Is Supposed to Have

In the United States, before the government takes away your freedom, you’re supposed to get a chance to defend yourself.

That’s not about being “nice.” It’s about being a country where the law means something.

It’s called due process, and it’s written into the Constitution. It means you get to know what you’re being accused of. You get to see the evidence. You get to speak. You get a hearing. A lawyer. A fair shot.

That’s how we’re supposed to make sure the government doesn’t punish the wrong person.

But in these deportations, none of that happened.

People were picked up, labeled as gang members, and deported without a trial. No questions. No evidence. No defense.

Franco was walking to his immigration appointment.

An ICE agent told Neri he was “clean.”

Jerce had a tattoo of a soccer team.

Carlos was scared and quiet, and no one even bothered to check if he was in a gang.

No one looked. No one listened. No one cared.

That’s what due process is for. It’s not some luxury we give to people we like. It’s a guardrail. It’s what stops the government from making mistakes - or worse, from abusing its power on purpose.

Because once due process is gone, it’s not just about them anymore.

It could be you.

You could be the one with a tattoo that gets misread. Or a name that gets flagged. Or a background that someone doesn’t understand.

And once you’re on that list, it’s too late.

You are a citizen, you say?

No one is checking twice.

They’ll put you on a plane. They’ll send you to CECOT. And no one will ask if they got it wrong until you’re already shaved, chained, and gone.

That’s why this matters.

Due process doesn’t exist to protect criminals. It exists to protect the innocent.

And right now, it’s being erased.

Cruel and Unusual: When We Know What We’re Doing - and Do It Anyway

The Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is supposed to protect everyone from cruelty. It says clearly:

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

That line was written in 1791. It was meant to apply to anyone the U.S. government touches.

And it still applies today.

So here’s the question: What do you call it when the U.S. government knowingly sends people into a prison that breaks them - body and soul?

Because that’s exactly what happens inside CECOT.

CECOT is not a prison built for justice. It is a stage for punishment. Thousands of men - many of them never charged or convicted - are crammed into overcrowded cells. They are shaved bald. They are chained together, bent at the waist for hours. They sleep on the floor. They are denied sunlight, legal contact, and medical care. They are beaten. They are starved. They are silenced.

We have photos. We have videos. We know.

And yet the Trump administration is sending people there - people who were never tried, never convicted, and in many cases, never even accused of anything real.

Legal scholars and human rights organizations have said it plainly: this is cruel and unusual punishment by proxy. The U.S. may not be running CECOT, but it is knowingly funneling people into it, fully aware of what awaits them inside.

That is a violation of the Constitution.

We do not get to export our cruelty just because we don’t want to see it up close.

And these aren’t dangerous criminals.

These are people like Neri, who taught kids with autism to swim.

Like Franco, who was walking to an immigration appointment.

Like Jerce, who loved soccer and his daughters.

This isn’t national security. It’s vengeance without a crime.

The 8th Amendment is supposed to draw a line.

What happens at CECOT crosses it.

And we are the ones sending them there.

This Isn’t a Solution, It’s a Distraction

If the goal was to fix immigration, this isn’t it.

The U.S. immigration system is in chaos. Courts are overloaded. The border is strained. People are waiting years just to have their asylum cases heard. Nothing is moving the way it should.

Now, President Trump is trying to make it look like he’s “cracking down.” But it’s not working. It’s not even real.

A recent report by Newsweek shows just how bad things really are. Despite all the tough talk, deportation numbers are low. ICE doesn’t have the staff, the space, or the legal backing to actually carry out the kind of mass removals Trump promised. Even with all the noise, the machinery is breaking down.

So, what does the administration do instead?

They put on a show.

They grab people with tattoos or old records. People who look “suspicious.” They skip the courts. They use old wartime laws to push them out the door. And they send them to foreign prisons where no one ever gets out.

It doesn’t fix anything.

It doesn’t stop border crossings.

It doesn’t make anyone safer.

It just turns pain into a performance.

This isn’t immigration policy. It’s a cover-up.

A desperate distraction from a broken system - using human lives as props.

What Kind of Country Are We Becoming?

Andry Hernández is not coming back.

Neither is Franco.

Or Jerce. Or Neri. Or Carlos. Or Mervin.

They’ve been disappeared - sent to a prison built to make people vanish. No charges. No trials. No way back.

Most Americans want strong borders. Most Americans want real immigration policy. Nearly all of us agree: actual gang members don’t belong here.

But we have to be sure they are gang members. That’s not a small thing. That’s everything.

Due process isn’t about being nice. It’s about being right.

It’s the line that keeps them from picking you up by mistake. It’s the difference between law and power. And once we give it up, we don’t get it back.

I’m not too concerned about the few who’ve landed in CECOT who are real killers. I don’t love the conditions - but sadly, too many things are going wrong to make it a top 10 issue for me.

This article is not about them.

It’s about:

Andry, who was here legally - and now whimpers on a prison floor, asking for his mother.

Franco, a husband and father seeking a better life. Maybe he should’ve been deported - but to hell? Never.

Jerce, a professional soccer player, sent into torture because he loved Real Madrid.

Neri, a gentle baker, punished for an Autism Awareness tattoo he got to honor his little brother.

Carlos, a quiet, shy teenager, tossed into a cage of killers without a second thought.

Mervin, another baker, another father, who had done everything right - and was sent, not home, but into a concrete abyss.

This is cruelty. And we cannot be a country built on cruelty.

We tell ourselves we’re different - that we follow the law, that we value fairness, that we protect the innocent. That’s what makes America worth believing in.

But when we throw those values away just to look tough, we don’t scare the world.

We dishonor ourselves.

We must not become a nation where fear beats fairness. Where silence replaces justice. Where people disappear, and no one cares why.

We can’t fix immigration by destroying the rule of law.

And we won’t stay a great country if we stop acting like one.

Subscribe now

North Carolina lawmakers are attempting to pass House Bill 72 (H72) and Senate Bill 58 (S58), a measure that would strip the state’s Attorney General of the ability to challenge presidential executive orders in court. This law would prohibit any legal action against executive orders at both the state and federal levels, further limiting North Carolina’s ability to contest federal policies that may negatively impact the state. This bill builds on an existing law that already restricts the Attorney General from challenging state laws in out-of-state courts, tightening control over the office and reducing its capacity to act independently. By preventing the Attorney General from opposing executive orders, lawmakers are effectively tying the hands of the state’s top legal official and reducing North Carolina’s ability to push back against federal overreach.

This legislation is not just unnecessary—it is absurd. It represents a voluntary surrender of North Carolina’s legal authority. While states like Texas and California frequently challenge federal executive orders to defend their interests, North Carolina would be taking itself out of the fight altogether. The lawmakers pushing this bill appear to be attempting to align themselves with Trump, hoping to gain favor despite having little chance of securing his attention. Instead of protecting North Carolina’s interests, they engage in political posturing that weakens the state’s ability to govern itself effectively.

The consequences of this bill are significant. Presidential executive orders often directly and profoundly impact state economies, healthcare, education, and environmental policies. Without the ability to challenge these orders, North Carolina could not defend itself against harmful federal mandates. Other states actively engage in litigation to protect their interests, yet North Carolina’s lawmakers are choosing to silence themselves. This unprecedented move would weaken the state’s ability to maintain a balance of power with the federal government, undermining the very principles of federalism that allow states to operate independently. If passed, H72 and S58 would leave North Carolina vulnerable to unchecked federal authority, setting a dangerous precedent for the erosion of state sovereignty.

An Assault on North Carolina's Sovereignty

The consequences of this bill are significant. Presidential executive orders often directly and profoundly impact state economies, healthcare, education, and environmental policies. Without the ability to challenge these orders, North Carolina could not defend itself against harmful federal mandates. Other states actively engage in litigation to protect their interests, yet North Carolina’s lawmakers are choosing to silence themselves. This unprecedented move would weaken the state’s ability to maintain a balance of power with the federal government, undermining the very principles of federalism that allow states to operate independently. If passed, H72 and S58 would leave North Carolina vulnerable to unchecked federal authority, setting a dangerous precedent for the erosion of state sovereignty.

H72 and S58 directly attack North Carolina’s sovereignty, stripping the state of its ability to defend itself in federal court. The Attorney General is supposed to be the state’s chief legal advocate, yet this bill would take away a fundamental part of that role. The Attorney General would be legally barred from action if an executive order threatens North Carolina’s economy, environmental policies, or public health. This unprecedented move severely diminishes the state’s ability to push back against federal overreach.

This bill removes an essential check on federal power by explicitly forbidding legal challenges to executive orders. If the president issues an executive order that is unconstitutional or harmful to the state, North Carolina would be forced to accept it without question. This weakens the Attorney General’s ability to fight for the state’s interests and protects federal mandates from legal scrutiny, even when they violate constitutional principles. Other states regularly challenge executive orders when they believe their rights are being trampled. North Carolina, on the other hand, would be choosing to remain silent.

The bill also sets a dangerous precedent for future administrations. It restricts legal action regardless of which party is in power, meaning a future president—whether Democrat or Republican—could issue harmful executive orders that North Carolina would be unable to fight. Historically, governors from both parties have relied on the Attorney General to challenge harmful federal actions. This bill removes that safeguard, leaving North Carolina powerless in legal matters that affect its people. States such as Texas and California have fought against federal overreach through lawsuits. These bills would prevent North Carolina from ever doing the same.

This legislation is a self-inflicted wound. It reduces North Carolina to a passive role in federal legal matters, forcing the state to accept whatever executive orders come its way. The Attorney General’s office exists to protect North Carolina, but this bill would strip it of one of its most critical functions. Rather than standing up for the state’s rights, lawmakers are choosing to surrender them for political posturing. The people of North Carolina deserve leaders who will fight for the state’s autonomy, not ones who willingly weaken it.

Subscribe now

The Political Motivations Behind This Capitulation

The motivations behind H72 and S58 have little to do with protecting North Carolina and everything to do with political theater. The lawmakers pushing this bill attempt to align themselves with the President, hoping to gain his favor. However, Trump has shown little interest in North Carolina’s legislators, making this move largely symbolic. Even among conservative states, this bill is an outlier—Texas and Florida have retained their authority to challenge federal executive orders, recognizing the importance of state sovereignty. By contrast, North Carolina’s lawmakers are choosing to weaken their own government for the sake of political allegiance.

This bill is not just an attack on state sovereignty but on the Attorney General’s office itself. Regardless of the Attorney General’s political affiliation, this bill imposes unnecessary restrictions that make it harder for the state’s top lawyer to act in North Carolina’s best interests. The role of the Attorney General is to defend the state against federal overreach, yet this legislation weakens that capacity. In states like Florida and Texas, attorneys general regularly challenge federal executive orders without political interference. North Carolina lawmakers, however, are undermining their own Attorney General, ensuring that no matter who holds the office, they will lack the power to challenge harmful policies.

There is no logical justification for North Carolina willingly surrendering its legal authority. Even supporters of the current federal administration should recognize the importance of preserving the state’s ability to challenge executive actions when necessary. A future president could issue executive orders that negatively impact North Carolina, and by then, the state will have already forfeited its ability to respond. These bills dos not protect North Carolina—it actively harms its ability to govern itself. If passed, this bill would turn North Carolina into one of the weakest states in the nation when it comes to defending its interests. This is not leadership; it is a self-imposed gag order that benefits no one.

Subscribe now

The Legal and Constitutional Issues with House Bill 72 and Senate Bill 58

H72 and S58 directly contradicts the principles of dual sovereignty, a fundamental aspect of the U.S. federal system. The Constitution allows states to retain autonomous powers to protect their interests, yet this bill strips North Carolina of that ability. Lawmakers are forcing the state to accept federal directives without legal recourse by prohibiting the Attorney General from challenging executive orders. This weakens North Carolina’s position within the federal system and reduces its ability to function as an independent governing entity.

Beyond the erosion of state sovereignty, these bills raises serious constitutional concerns. It may violate the separation of powers by restricting the Attorney General’s constitutional duties. Limiting the state’s participation in the legal system could render the bill unconstitutional, making it susceptible to judicial invalidation. Historically, courts have overturned laws undermining state authority, and these bills, if they became law, could face the same fate. If challenged, courts may find that restricting the Attorney General in this way exceeds the legislature’s authority and disrupts the balance of power within the state government.

This bill is also flawed in its broad, indiscriminate application. It prevents challenges to all executive orders, regardless of their impact on North Carolina. No distinction between executive actions may benefit or harm the state—under this law, the Attorney General would be unable to take action in either case. While other states actively defend their interests, North Carolina would be voluntarily relinquishing its voice. The lack of any rational justification for this surrender of power further highlights how misguided and damaging House Bill 72 and Senate Bill 58 truly are.

Subscribe now

The Ramifications of Silencing North Carolina's Legal Advocacy

The passage of H72 and S58 would have devastating consequences for North Carolina. Presidential executive orders can shape key industries, and North Carolina could face significant economic harm without legal recourse. If an executive order negatively impacts healthcare, energy, or labor policies, the state cannot act, leaving businesses and residents at risk. Without an advocate at the state level, North Carolina citizens would have no protection against federal mandates that may not align with the state’s best interests.

By willingly giving up its ability to challenge federal executive orders, North Carolina lawmakers are opening the door for even greater restrictions on state authority. H72 and S58 set a dangerous precedent that could be used to justify further limitations on the Attorney General’s role, such as restricting challenges to federal agencies or congressional actions. Once the state legislature begins stripping its government of power, there is little stopping future efforts to erode North Carolina’s independence further. This bill is not just about the present—it could reshape the state's ability to govern itself for years.

North Carolina would isolate itself while other states continue to fight for their interests. Texas, California, and Florida frequently sue the federal government to protect their economies and residents, yet North Carolina would be standing by, unable to take action. Instead of leading, North Carolina would become one of the only states voluntarily surrendering its right to defend itself. Without the ability to challenge executive orders, North Carolina would have to rely on other states or private entities to take legal action, leaving its citizens vulnerable and dependent on outside forces. This bill is a surrender, not a strategy, and will leave North Carolina weaker in the face of federal decisions that impact the state’s future.

Subscribe now

Pathetic and Self-Destructive Bills

H72 and S58 is almost certain to be vetoed by Governor Josh Stein, preventing it from becoming law. However, the mere fact that Republican lawmakers introduced and supported this bill is deeply troubling. It signals a dangerous willingness to abandon state sovereignty for political posturing. If this is the direction North Carolina Republicans intend to take, the state’s ability to govern itself will continue to erode. This bill is not just a misguided proposal but a warning sign of what could come next.

The lawmakers pushing this bill are actively selling out North Carolina’s interests. No rational justification exists for surrendering the state’s ability to challenge harmful executive orders. The sponsors prioritize performative loyalty to Trump over protecting their constituents. Even conservative-led states like Texas and Florida challenge federal overreach when necessary, yet North Carolina’s legislators are deliberately weakening their government. This bill does not make North Carolina stronger; it makes it defenseless.

North Carolina deserves leaders who will defend its sovereignty, not surrender it for political gain. H72 and S58 do not protect the state—they actively harm it by tying the hands of its Attorney General. If lawmakers truly cared about North Carolina’s well-being, they would work to strengthen the state’s ability to resist federal overreach, not eliminate it. The people of North Carolina must demand representatives who stand up for their state, not those who willingly give away its power for empty political loyalty.

In a shocking statement, Vice President JD Vance claimed, "Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power." This is not only wrong - it is absurd. Any student who has taken a basic constitutional law class knows this. I assume Vance, a Yale Law School graduate, knows this, too. In fact, on the first day of law school, students learn about Marbury v. Madison, the 1803 Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review. That decision, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, made it clear: "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is." This means that courts have the power to decide whether an action by the executive branch is legal. The president is not above the law, no matter what JD Vance says.

Throughout history, courts have stepped in to block unconstitutional executive actions. President Nixon was forced to hand over the Watergate tapes after the Supreme Court ruled against him in United States v. Nixon. President Biden has had multiple executive orders blocked, including his vaccine mandate for federal contractors and his student loan forgiveness plan. Even President Trump’s first term saw numerous executive orders halted by the courts, including his travel ban, his attempts to block asylum seekers, and his efforts to exclude undocumented immigrants from the Census. This is not new. Courts have checked presidents many times before and are doing so again now.

But here is the real danger: JD Vance’s statement is not just a reckless misunderstanding of history. It is part of a larger strategy to justify ignoring court rulings. The Trump administration has already signaled reluctance to reinstate affected employees and comply with judicial decisions. Over 40 lawsuits have been filed against Trump's executive orders, covering issues from immigration to budget freezes. The refusal to comply with court orders is not just a bureaucratic delay but a direct challenge to the rule of law. If the executive branch refuses to follow legal rulings, the entire system of checks and balances is at risk.

This moment demands action. There are historical parallels to past crises, such as Nixon’s defiance during Watergate, but Trump’s recklessness goes beyond what we have seen before. Nixon, for all his corruption, ultimately obeyed the Supreme Court. Trump, however, has repeatedly shown a willingness to challenge every norm and legal constraint. His strategy is clear: overwhelm the system, ignore the courts, and see if anyone stops him. If the judiciary is disregarded, democratic governance itself is at risk. We cannot afford to wait - we must act now to ensure the rule of law is upheld.

Trump and his closest allies, including JD Vance, are testing how far they can push the limits of judicial enforcement. He will continue if he believes he can ignore the courts without consequence. The courts may hold the line for now, but how long can they if the executive branch refuses to obey?

Order #1: Stopping the USAID Purge

Judge Carl Nichols issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) blocking the Trump administration’s effort to gut the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The administration had attempted to place 2,200 employees on administrative leave and force an additional 1,400 foreign service officers to return to the United States on an expedited timeline. The judge found that these actions posed serious risks to national security, endangered employees, and violated congressional authority over agency restructuring.

The court ruled that the administration’s actions violated the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024, which requires congressional approval before major agency reorganizations or downsizing. The judge noted that the government failed to provide a legitimate reason for the mass firings and evacuations, rejecting their vague claims of “corruption and fraud” within the agency.

Beyond harming thousands of civil servants, the administration’s reckless decision disrupted vital humanitarian aid programs, leaving vulnerable populations without food, medicine, and shelter. Charities and aid organizations have warned that lives are at risk due to this sudden cutoff of funding, with one official calling it a "life or death" crisis. The United States made commitments to assist struggling nations, and breaking those promises overnight is not only cruel but also damages America’s credibility abroad.

While this ruling temporarily halts the administration’s actions, whether Trump will comply remains to be seen. The administration has already signaled reluctance to reinstate affected employees, raising concerns that they may ignore the court order entirely. This creates a dangerous confrontation between the judiciary and an executive branch that appears willing to defy the rule of law.

Order #2: Blocking the Birthright Citizenship Order

A federal court has blocked Trump’s executive order attempting to revoke birthright citizenship, ruling it unconstitutional. The order sought to deny U.S. citizenship to children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants and certain legal immigrants. This directly contradicts the 14th Amendment, which plainly states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside".

The court firmly rejected Trump’s attempt to reinterpret this foundational principle. In his ruling, Judge John C. Coughenour, a Reagan-appointed judge, wrote, "Citizenship by birth is an unequivocal Constitutional right." He stated, "The President cannot change, limit, or qualify this Constitutional right via an executive order". This decision is consistent with long-standing Supreme Court precedent, including United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), which affirmed that birthright citizenship applies to children born on U.S. soil, regardless of the immigration status of their parents.

Trump’s effort to challenge the Constitution through executive fiat is unprecedented and dangerous. If this order had been allowed to stand, it would have stripped citizenship from countless Americans, creating stateless individuals and widespread legal chaos. It is expected that Trump will appeal this decision, likely taking the case to the Supreme Court, where the fate of birthright citizenship could become a legal battleground.

Order #3: Halting the Budget Freeze

A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to freeze $3 trillion in federal funding, ruling that the action was unconstitutional and a blatant violation of Congress’s control over government spending. The court found that the freeze would have halted funding for essential programs, including disaster relief, Medicaid, housing assistance, and food aid. The administration attempted to justify the freeze as a necessary financial review, but the judge ruled that only Congress can determine how federal funds are allocated.

Despite this ruling, the White House has already signaled resistance, raising concerns that agencies may continue to delay releasing funds. The administration’s defiance threatens a broad range of essential services relied upon by millions of Americans. Courts reaffirmed that the power of the purse belongs solely to Congress, not the president. If Trump refuses to comply, it will be another step toward unchecked executive authority.

Order #4: Protecting January 6 Investigators

A federal court has blocked the Trump administration from releasing the names of FBI agents involved in the investigation of the January 6 insurrection. The ruling prevents the Department of Justice from handing over a list of agents to Trump loyalists, citing serious safety concerns and the potential for retaliation.

The court recognized that publicizing these names would put law enforcement officials at risk. Many of these agents have already faced threats and harassment from extremist groups, and exposing their identities could lead to further violence. The judge emphasized that these officials were simply doing their jobs - investigating an attack on democracy - and should not be subjected to intimidation.

But that is what Trump wants. He wants to invite vigilantism. Why else would he pardon 250 violent Jan 6th criminals?

This attempt to release their names is unprecedented. No past president has ever sought to expose law enforcement officials investigating their supporters. Legal experts warn that this is a clear effort to undermine ongoing prosecutions and deter future investigations into Trump and his allies. The court’s ruling sends a strong message that the judicial system will not allow the administration to weaponize federal agencies against law enforcement.

Despite this ruling, the administration has signaled its intent to challenge it. There is growing concern that Trump may attempt to bypass the court order through appeals or by directing officials to ignore it. This case highlights the broader effort by the administration to obstruct accountability and weaken the rule of law.

Order #5: Restricting Political Appointee Access to Treasury Systems

A federal court has blocked the Trump administration from granting political appointees and Trump allies access to the Treasury Department’s payment systems. The court found that the administration’s attempt to bypass standard security protocols and allow unvetted individuals access to sensitive financial records posed a serious national security risk.

These include a self-proclaimed white supremacist and a guy who was fired from his last job for giving away corporate secrets!

The lawsuit, brought by 19 state attorneys general, argued that Trump’s executive action violated the Administrative Procedure Act and exceeded the Treasury Department's statutory authority. The judge agreed, ruling that granting politically appointed individuals access to Treasury’s financial systems, which contain confidential taxpayer data, undermined the integrity of federal financial oversight.

One of the greatest concerns raised by the court was the heightened risk of financial manipulation. By allowing unqualified political figures access to these systems, the administration opened the door to potential misuse of taxpayer funds. This decision is particularly alarming given Elon Musk’s reported involvement in efforts to reshape government policies to benefit his business interests.

The ruling bars the Treasury Department from providing payment system access to anyone other than vetted civil servants with proper security clearances. The judge emphasized that financial oversight must remain independent from political influence, warning that unchecked access by Trump’s allies could set a dangerous precedent.

Despite the court’s order, there are indications that the administration may attempt to circumvent this ruling. Legal experts caution that continued defiance would escalate constitutional concerns and destabilize confidence in U.S. financial institutions. This case underscores the broader effort by Trump’s administration to erode institutional safeguards and place political loyalty above national security.

The Signs of Defiance

The Trump administration is already showing clear signs of defying court orders. Compliance has been slow or nonexistent despite multiple rulings against key executive actions. Agencies have been given quiet directives to stall implementation, delaying the reinstatement of employees and the release of funds that courts have ordered restored.

Trump loyalists in the executive branch may refuse to carry out court orders. Political appointees in key positions - especially those overseeing budgets, law enforcement, and federal agencies - can obstruct compliance by creating bureaucratic roadblocks. There are reports of officials dragging their feet in restoring federal funds that courts have ordered unfrozen.

JD Vance and other Trump allies are laying the groundwork to justify outright defiance. Their statements rejecting judicial authority are not just rhetoric - they prepare the public for a scenario in which court orders are ignored. This effort conditions Americans to accept a reality where the executive branch operates without legal limits. If this rhetoric continues unchecked, it could embolden agencies and officials to refuse compliance under the guise of executive independence.

The country will face a full-blown constitutional crisis if defiance becomes official policy. The courts rely on the executive branch to enforce their rulings. If Trump orders agencies to ignore the judiciary, there will be no clear mechanism to ensure accountability. The U.S. Marshals Service, which typically enforces federal court orders, falls under the Department of Justice - an agency already under heavy political influence. If federal law enforcement is directed not to act, judicial authority itself could be meaningless.

The Supreme Court, with its conservative majority, will play a crucial role in determining whether Trump’s defiance of judicial authority is allowed to continue. The question remains: will the Court uphold the limits of executive power, or will it enable an unchecked presidency?

The Trump administration may gamble that the conservative justices, three of whom were appointed by Trump himself, will side with the executive branch. The Court has historically shown deference to presidential authority, but there are limits. In United States v. Nixon, a unanimous Court ruled that even the president must comply with judicial subpoenas. If a similar ruling were to come down against Trump, it would test whether he would obey or escalate his defiance.

If the Supreme Court does rule against Trump, the next question is whether he will comply. Given his past behavior, there is significant reason to doubt that he will simply accept an unfavorable ruling. Instead, he may continue delaying compliance, using legal maneuvers to run out the clock, or outright refusing to adhere to the Court’s decision. This would present the greatest constitutional crisis in modern history.

The legitimacy of the judiciary itself is at stake. If Trump disregards a Supreme Court ruling, it would mark a fundamental breakdown of the separation of powers. The courts rely on their authority being respected - if a president openly defies them and faces no consequences, the judicial branch could be rendered powerless. This would set a dangerous precedent, signaling that future presidents can rule without legal limits, further eroding American democracy.

Share

Five Actions We Must Take Now to Defend the Rule of Law

The threat to the rule of law is no longer theoretical - it is happening now. Trump and his allies are openly challenging the legitimacy of the courts, ignoring judicial rulings, and conditioning the public to accept executive overreach as normal. If we do nothing, we risk allowing the foundations of democracy to erode beyond repair. But this fight is not lost. We still have the power to act, to push back, and to ensure that no president - regardless of party - can place themselves above the law.

This moment demands bold action, and there are clear steps we must take to defend our democracy. Congress must reaffirm the judiciary's authority, the public must mobilize, legal institutions must challenge overreach, state governments must take a stand, and the American people must make their voices heard at the ballot box. These five actions are not optional; they are necessary to preserve the principles of our Constitution and protect the future of democratic governance.

Action #1: Contact Congressional Leaders

Congress must take a stand against executive defiance. Lawmakers must publicly affirm that court rulings are binding and that ignoring them is unacceptable. They should push for emergency legislation reinforcing judicial enforcement mechanisms, ensuring that no president can override the courts unilaterally. Additionally, congressional committees must launch investigations into executive defiance, holding hearings on officials who obstruct judicial rulings. If necessary, contempt of court charges must be considered to hold those responsible accountable.

Action #2: Mobilize Public Protests

History has shown that peaceful public demonstrations can serve as a powerful check on government overreach. Americans must take to the streets to demand compliance with court rulings. A strong, visible show of force will counteract the administration’s attempt to normalize judicial defiance. Lawmakers must see that the public will not tolerate an unchecked executive. Ensuring widespread media coverage will also help keep pressure on both elected officials and government agencies to comply with the law.

Action #3: Strengthen Legal Challenges

Legal organizations must be fully supported in their efforts to challenge executive overreach. Funding and resources should be directed toward groups filing lawsuits to uphold the Constitution. Courts must act swiftly to issue contempt rulings against officials who refuse to comply with judicial orders. Bipartisan legal action is essential - Democrats and Republicans must unite to defend constitutional governance. Every available legal tool must be used to slow Trump’s unlawful actions and reinforce the judiciary's authority.

Action #4: Demand Action from State Governments

State leaders have a vital role to play in resisting illegal executive actions. Governors must refuse to implement any orders that courts have ruled unconstitutional. State attorneys general should coordinate legal strategies to challenge federal overreach. State legislatures can pass resolutions affirming their commitment to judicial authority. Additionally, states can take direct action to protect programs that Trump’s administration seeks to dismantle, ensuring that vital services remain available to residents despite federal obstruction.

Action #5: Prepare for the 2026 Elections

The upcoming elections will be a referendum on the rule of law. Every candidate running for office must take a clear stand in defending the courts. Voters must prioritize judicial independence as a central campaign issue. Supporting candidates who are committed to holding the executive accountable is crucial. Above all, voter turnout must be maximized to reject those who enable authoritarianism. The electorate can send a strong message: no president is above the law, and defying the judiciary will not be tolerated.

Share

This Is the Fight for Democracy Itself

Trump’s strategy is not new, but its scale is unprecedented. While past presidents have tested the limits of executive power, none have so openly defied the judiciary or encouraged others to do the same. The courts hold the line but cannot do it alone. Without public support and action, judicial rulings risk becoming meaningless.

The choice is stark: Accept a lawless executive or fight to preserve democracy. The rule of law is not self-enforcing - it requires people willing to stand up and demand accountability. We must act now before the damage to our institutions becomes irreversible. Democracy survives only when its defenders refuse to back down.

President Donald Trump has announced new tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, claiming they will help American industries. But the truth is, these tariffs act as a tax on American consumers and businesses. Instead of making other countries pay, they will raise prices on everything from groceries to cars to household goods.

The timing couldn’t be worse. Inflation was finally cooling down, but these tariffs will drive it back up. When businesses pay more for imported materials, they pass those costs on to consumers. That means families will see higher prices at the pump, grocery store, and essential goods. Workers may also face layoffs as companies struggle to balance rising costs.

Even more concerning, Trump is targeting America’s closest allies—Canada and Mexico. These are not hostile nations; they are partners in vital industries like agriculture and manufacturing. Tariffs disrupt supply chains, make trade more complex, and weaken relationships that have benefited Americans for decades. A trade war with trusted allies makes no sense.

Trump’s economic policy is reckless and short-sighted. These tariffs will lead to long-term financial instability, harming everyday Americans while doing little to protect domestic industries. Instead of boosting manufacturing jobs, history shows that tariffs tend to shift production elsewhere, leaving workers in limbo. The financial burden will fall hardest on middle- and lower-income families as billionaires and major corporations find ways to absorb costs or pass them down.

According to labor data, working families throughout North Carolina are already struggling to keep up with rising costs. Many households rely on stable trade with Canada and Mexico for job security, especially in the construction, transportation, and manufacturing industries. Disrupting these industries will have ripple effects, leading to job insecurity and financial strain.

Moreover, demographics show that middle-class families in North Carolina, where the median household income is already stretched thin, will be among the most brutally hit. With rising grocery and fuel costs, the average family’s disposable income will shrink, making everyday life more expensive for millions.

The international community's response has been swift. Canada and Mexico have already announced retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, further hurting American businesses that rely on exports. China has also vowed to take action, raising fears of an escalating trade war. Instead of improving economic conditions, these tariffs risk isolating the U.S. and making it harder to do business with our closest partners. Farmers, manufacturers, and small businesses will bear the brunt of these retaliatory measures, deepening the economic pain caused by Trump’s reckless decision.

This economic policy will not create jobs or improve trade fairness—it will strain household budgets, damage global relationships, and create market uncertainty. Instead of a strong economy, Trump’s tariffs threaten to push America toward higher inflation, weaker international ties, and a costly trade war. We should not be the ones paying for his economic gamble.

President Donald Trump’s recent executive order has stopped federal grants and loans, creating confusion and concern across the country. This decision affects trillions of dollars meant for important programs like healthcare, education, and disaster relief. The White House says this pause is needed to review spending and make sure it follows Trump’s new policies. However, no one knows which programs will restart or stay frozen. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has issued directives to federal agencies, requiring them to assess their programs and determine compliance with new executive orders. This has left many states, including North Carolina, uncertain how long the freeze will last and what services will be affected.

Democratic state attorneys general have already taken legal action. They argue that Trump does not have the power to withhold money that Congress has already approved. The U.S. Constitution grants Congress authority over government spending, and many see this freeze as an overreach of presidential power. Several states, including New York and California, have filed lawsuits to challenge the order, claiming it violates federal law. Even some Republicans in Congress are questioning this move, saying it could hurt communities that rely on federal aid. The backlash is growing as lawmakers from both parties push for clarity on what funding will be restored and when. North Carolina is monitoring the situation closely, as the freeze could have a major impact on the state’s economy and essential services.

North Carolina depends on federal funding for many essential services. Grants help pay for Medicaid, education, and rural development. Over a million people in the state rely on Medicaid, jointly funded by the federal and state governments. If funding delays continue, hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare providers may struggle to deliver care to low-income families. Similarly, federal funds support K-12 schools, Head Start programs, and Pell Grants for college students. Schools may face budget shortfalls without this money, affecting teachers, students, and infrastructure projects. The freeze also impacts rural development projects, including broadband expansion and small business grants critical to its many communities.

Past funding delays have already shown how damaging this can be. For example, previous government shutdowns and budget impasses have delayed payments for disaster recovery efforts following hurricanes and flooding. North Carolina, affected by natural disasters, relies heavily on federal aid for rebuilding efforts. If this freeze lasts too long, the state could face serious economic problems, particularly in rural areas where federal assistance is vital. Families, businesses, and local governments are all waiting to see what happens next, hoping for a quick resolution before the effects become more severe.

The Threat to Medicaid and Healthcare Access

The Medicaid freeze is already causing significant disruptions in North Carolina. The state’s Medicaid system serves over 2 million people, many of whom are low-income families, elderly individuals, and people with disabilities. Reports indicate that the online Medicaid payment portal, used by doctors and hospitals to receive reimbursements, has been shut down. Without access to these payments, healthcare providers may struggle to cover operating costs, forcing some clinics to cut services or shut down entirely. Rural healthcare providers already operating on thin margins are particularly at risk.

Hospitals and major healthcare institutions, including UNC Health and Duke Medical, rely on federal grants for research and patient care programs. The freeze delays critical funding for patient treatment, staffing, and medical research projects. Medical education programs at these institutions, which train future doctors and nurses, are also in jeopardy as federal funds are essential for their operation. Community health clinics, which serve uninsured and underinsured patients, face similar uncertainty, with many worried that a prolonged freeze will force them to reduce services or close entirely.

In addition to direct patient care, North Carolina has several major medical research institutions that depend on funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). This funding supports cancer, heart disease, and infectious diseases studies—research that could now be stalled or even canceled if the freeze continues. Without federal support, thousands of jobs in research institutions and laboratories across the state are at risk. The loss of funding could also weaken North Carolina’s position as a leader in biomedical research, potentially driving top scientists and medical professionals to other states with more stable funding.

The longer the freeze lasts, the greater the impact on the healthcare system. Patients, doctors, hospitals, and researchers are all feeling the strain, and the consequences could be severe without quick action to resolve the situation.

Education at Risk: Schools, Early Childhood Programs, and College Aid

The funding freeze is also threatening North Carolina’s education system. Programs that support early childhood education, K-12 schools, and higher education are all affected, creating uncertainty for students, teachers, and families across the state.

Head Start and Early Childhood Programs

Head Start centers across the state are struggling to stay open due to funding shortages. These centers provide essential preschool education for low-income families, helping children develop early learning skills before entering kindergarten. Without federal support, many Head Start locations may be forced to cut staff, reduce enrollment, or shut down entirely. This would leave working parents without affordable childcare options and could hinder early childhood development for thousands of children statewide.

Title I and School Nutrition Programs

Many public schools rely on federal Title I funding to support students from low-income families. This funding is used for classroom resources, teacher salaries, and student services. The freeze puts these programs at risk, forcing schools to find alternative funding sources or make brutal budget cuts. Additionally, school nutrition programs, including free breakfast and lunch initiatives, may be impacted, leaving many children without reliable meals during the school day. Local school districts are already under financial strain, and this disruption could make it even harder for them to meet student needs.

Higher Education and Student Financial Aid

While Pell Grants and federal student loans have not been directly affected, they remain under review, creating uncertainty for students relying on financial aid. North Carolina’s historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), which receive federal funding to support student success and campus improvements, are facing disbursement delays. Research grants for university programs across the state are also on hold, which could impact innovation and job opportunities for students and faculty. If the freeze continues, universities may be forced to raise tuition or cut academic programs to compensate for lost funding, placing additional burdens on students and families.

The effects of the funding freeze on education are far-reaching, impacting early learning, public schools, and higher education. Without federal support, students and educators across the state may face significant challenges in the months ahead.

Economic Consequences for Small Businesses and Rural Communities

The funding freeze also harms North Carolina’s economy, particularly in rural areas that rely on federal assistance.

Paused USDA and Small Business Grants

Rural communities depend on USDA funding for agriculture and economic development. Farmers cannot access essential grants and loan programs needed for crop production and farm expansion with the freeze in place. Small business loans, which help entrepreneurs and local businesses grow, are also at risk, creating economic uncertainty. Programs that support broadband expansion and farm assistance are now on hold, limiting growth opportunities in rural areas and threatening local economies.

Food Assistance Programs and Economic Strain

The freeze raises concerns about food security as funding for SNAP and WIC faces potential delays. These programs help low-income families afford groceries; any disruption could lead to increased hunger. Food banks and local charities, which often supplement these programs, are bracing for a surge in demand. Meanwhile, grocery prices continue to rise, making it even harder for families to afford basic necessities.

North Carolina’s Job Market and Federal Workforce

Federal agencies and contractors operating in North Carolina feel the effects of the funding pause. Job losses in research, infrastructure, and public service sectors are becoming a growing concern. Additionally, reduced consumer spending due to economic uncertainty could slow the state’s recovery. Many businesses that rely on federal contracts now face uncertainty, raising fears about long-term job stability and economic growth.

The Path Forward for Us

The funding freeze has left us in a horrible position. Legal challenges that argue that the freeze is unconstitutional and a gross abuse of presidential power are already underway. The U.S. Constitution makes it clear: Congress controls federal spending, not the president. Trump’s decision to unilaterally halt funding violates this principle and puts millions of Americans at risk.

Senator Thom Tillis’s recent comments dismissing fears about housing assistance (“I can't imagine that the president would knowingly cut off housing assistance for people displaced from their homes) echo his earlier defense of Trump’s pardons for violent offenders (“I find it hard to believe that the President of the United States… would look at facts that were used to convict the violent people on January the 6th and say it was just an intemperate moment”). His refusal to push back against this overreach is troubling.

Senator Ted Budd and every other North Carolina Representative have remained silent, failing to stand up for the state’s families and communities.

There are several possible outcomes to these legal and political challenges. Courts may overturn or modify the freeze, ensuring critical programs can resume. Congress also has the power to intervene, but such action would require bipartisan support—a tall order in the current political climate. In the meantime, state and local governments may need to find temporary solutions to fill the gaps, though these measures would likely fall short of meeting the full scope of the need. The 2026 elections could also be pivotal in shaping future funding policies, as voters hold leaders accountable for their actions—or inactions—during this crisis. But that is a long way off…

We have a role to play as well. First, contact Tillis, Budd, and your Representative to demand action and advocate for restoring essential funding. Supporting local relief organizations and food banks can also alleviate some immediate impacts on vulnerable families. Staying informed about changes to federal funding and ongoing legal developments is crucial. Finally, grassroots efforts and community advocacy can push for stronger protections against such overreaches in the future.

Trump’s funding freeze has created chaos, as he so loves to do. But silence and inaction from the state’s representatives cannot go unnoticed. It is essential to hold them accountable and demand leadership that prioritizes the well-being of all North Carolinians.

On January 6, 2021, a mob stormed the Capitol to stop the peaceful transfer of power after Trump lost the election. They broke windows, pushed through barriers, and attacked police officers with bats, flagpoles, and other weapons. Law enforcement officers died1. Many were injured. Law enforcement officers fought to protect the Capitol and everyone inside. It was a dark day for America.

Donald Trump’s decision yesterday to pardon over 1,500 people involved in the January 6 Capitol attack is a big deal. Among those pardoned were more than 200 violent offenders who attacked police officers2.

Senator Tom Tillis of North Carolina was there that day. He said he walked past injured officers and saw the damage. Tillis said, “I saw Capitol police officers bleeding, bruised, and I saw damage to a certain extent as we were exiting to call those people patriots is not in my lexicon.”3

Tillis has been clear about what happened. He said people who call the rioters “patriots” are wrong. He also said calling them “hostages” or “political prisoners” is like calling drug dealers “unlicensed pharmacists.” Tillis said, “At the end of the day, they are January 6 convicts to me.”4

During the confirmation hearing of Pam Bondi for Attorney General, Tillis addressed the possibility of pardons for violent offenders. He said, “...January 6, a lot of people are going to say you're going to have a rubber stamp for letting people have pardons or recommending a pardon for people who did violence to law enforcement… I have to believe, as a member in the last... I was the last member out of the Senate on January the sixth. I walked past a lot of law enforcement officers who were injured. I find it hard to believe that the President of the United States… would look at facts that were used to convict the violent people on January the 6th and say it was just an intemperate moment.”5

But here’s the problem: Even though Tillis talks tough, it is all BS. Tillis hasn’t pushed back. Instead, he has stayed quiet. That silence matters. Words without action don’t mean much.

Recently, Tillis broke his silence and criticized Trump’s sweeping pardons. In a public statement, he said, “There’s no way to justify pardoning people who brutally attacked law enforcement officers, vandalized the Capitol, and threatened our democracy. These pardons undermine the sacrifices made by police that day and send the wrong message about accountability.” His words reflect the growing concern among some Republicans about Trump’s actions, but they also highlight the GOP’s struggle to hold its leader accountable.

Trump’s pardons erase years of work by law enforcement and the Department of Justice. These were the largest criminal investigations in U.S. history6. They showed us the truth about January 6: It wasn’t a peaceful protest. It was an attack on democracy. By pardoning these people, Trump is rewriting history. He’s saying that if you commit violence for him, it’s not a crime.

This isn’t just about politics. It’s about right and wrong. The Republican Party likes to call itself the “law and order” party7. But how can they claim that when their leader lets criminals walk free? What does it say to police officers who risked their lives that day? What does it say to regular Americans who believe in fairness and justice?

Some Republicans, like Tillis, know this is wrong. They’ve said so. But their actions don’t match their words. They haven’t taken a stand against Trump. They haven’t defended the officers or the rule of law. Instead, they’ve let Trump take over their party. They support election deniers like Pat Bondi8 for Attorney General or Kash Patel9 (the nominee to be the Director of the FBI who also has an enemies list10). Heck, Tillis is even hanging out with Patel11!

In so doing, they have cozied up themselves to the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers12.

Trump’s pardons send a dangerous message. They tell his supporters that violence is okay if it’s for him. They tell law enforcement that their sacrifices don’t matter. And they tell the rest of us that the rules aren’t the same for everyone. This isn’t just unfair—it’s un-American.

Tillis said, “Police officers could potentially be assaulted and there’s no consequence… I think that it raises, I think, a legitimate safety question here on Capitol Hill.”13

If Republicans want to be the party of law and order, they need to prove it. They need to speak out against Trump’s pardons. They did before the pardons14, now? <Crickets> They need to stand up for the truth. Most importantly, they need to stand up for the police officers who put their lives on the line that day. Anything less is a betrayal of our democracy and our values.

But we too, citizens of North Carolina and citizens of the United States. We need to make our voices heard that this was wrong. We must promise Senator Tillis that we won’t forget.

Write him: https://www.tillis.senate.gov/

Primary or no primary in 202615, we won’t forget these pardons and his capitulation in November 202616…

UPDATE: Text in italics has been updated to include that Tillis recently spoke out and opposed the pardons17.

Today, as we celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. Day, we are reminded of his lifelong fight for justice and fairness. This holiday honors a man who believed in accountability, compassion, and equality for everyone.

Yet, on this same day, Donald Trump is beginning his second term as president. It’s a stark contrast that raises difficult questions about who we are as a nation and what we truly value.

Martin Luther King Jr. taught us that justice isn’t just about punishing wrongdoing; it’s about making things right. It’s about creating a society where everyone is treated fairly, no matter who they are.

But today, we see examples of the opposite. Donald Trump has faced accusations of serious wrongdoing throughout his career—allegations of sexual misconduct from 26 women1, 34 felony convictions for civil financial fraud2, and even leading an insurrection against the Capitol on January 6, 20213. Yet, he has faced little real accountability. He won’t serve time for his crimes4.

Instead, he takes the highest office in the land once again, promising to pardon those who joined the Capitol riot. What does this say about fairness in America when some people seem to live by a different set of rules?

Justice also means standing against greed and putting people before profits. Yet Donald Trump has used his power to enrich himself and his inner circle.

On Saturday, 2 days before his inauguration, he launched a cryptocurrency called a “meme coin.” Trump owns 80% of the coin now valued at $10B. Yah. Trump made $8,000,000,000.00 selling something that is worthless5.

On Sunday, he launched the $Melania coin and made $800,000,000 ($800M at the time of this writing). There is no value for it. Combined, the coins took $11B from supporters for nothing.

Does he pay taxes on it? Nope6. He hasn't realized any of the funds, but he can borrow against them tax-free.

While he profits, his administration plans to make laws about cryptocurrency. That’s like being both the referee and a player in the same game.

And where did this money come from? Some from his fans, but probably a lot from foreign governments, giving them a way to gain influence over him. Bribery? Yes, probably, but we will never know...

Martin Luther King Jr. believed in helping the poor and vulnerable, not creating systems that benefit the rich while putting everyone else at risk.

Trump’s injustices aren't just about money; they’ve also hurt real people in deeply personal ways.

During his first term, his administration separated families at the border. Parents and children were taken from each other, sometimes permanently7. The emotional pain and trauma caused by these policies cannot be undone. Families are the foundation of any community, and breaking them apart weakens the bonds that hold us together.

This next term promises to be worse, deporting US citizens who are children right alongside their parents, but first holding these children in detention facilities for who knows how long. That is what they have told us the plan is8...

Martin Luther King Jr. worked to unite people and strengthen communities, showing us the power of love and connection. Trump? No, not so much.

Something different is going on today. Something very powerful. Something very dark. Today we see power concentrated in the hands of a few. Trump’s close ties to tech billionaires like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg reveal a new kind of oligarchy in America. These unelected billionaires have incredible influence over our economy, our media, and even our government.

The Founding Fathers warned us about this kind of power. James Madison once wrote that putting too much power in the hands of one person—or a small group—was the very definition of tyranny9. Yet here we are, with a government that seems to serve the interests of the wealthy rather than the needs of everyday people.

And maybe it will all work out ok? But why would it? When they can take and take and take.

On Martin Luther King Jr. Day, we have the chance to reflect on what kind of country we want to be. Do we want to live in a place where a few rich and powerful people control everything? Or do we want a fairer society, where everyone gets a chance to succeed? King’s legacy reminds us that change is possible, but it requires courage and action. It means speaking out against injustice and standing up for what’s right, even when it’s hard.

Today, we face a choice. Will we accept a world where greed and power rule, or will we fight for justice and fairness? Martin Luther King Jr. showed us the way forward, but it’s up to us to continue his work. The future of our democracy depends on what we choose to do next.

North Carolina’s job market is like two sides of a coin. One side shows a lot of good things happening, but the other side shows real problems that need fixing. President Biden’s team talks about low unemployment and new jobs, which is true. But for many families, life is still hard. We need to look at what’s really going on and make it better.

Here’s the good news: North Carolina’s unemployment rate is only 3.9%. Places like Raleigh are doing great, with lots of jobs in technology, education, and healthcare. The average household in Raleigh makes $75,424 a year. This is helping the state recover from the pandemic and grow stronger.

But not everyone feels this success. Many families can’t keep up with rising costs. Prices for homes and energy have gone up, but wages haven’t grown as fast. Housing costs are up 25% in just five years, and energy bills have gone up 15%. Families making $50,000 to $149,999 are feeling the squeeze. Wages are not keeping up because many companies prioritize profits over raising pay, and there is increased competition for jobs that don’t require advanced skills. This has made it hard for some people to trust the government to solve their problems.

There’s another big problem: we don’t have enough workers. Jobs in healthcare and manufacturing need more people. Youth unemployment is really high at 11.7%. That means a lot of young people are looking for work but can’t find jobs. This hurts businesses and slows down the economy. If these issues aren’t fixed, North Carolina’s economy could face long-term problems. Businesses might stop expanding, and fewer new companies might move here. Families could struggle even more, and the state’s growth could slow down.

Unfortunately, the road ahead looks even tougher. The President, House, and Senate are now Republican-led, and their policies threaten to make life harder for working families. They’re pushing for tariffs that will raise prices, stricter immigration rules that hurt industries needing skilled workers, and cuts to the Affordable Care Act. At the same time, they’re adding trillions more to the national deficit. These actions could bring back inflation and make it even harder for families to make ends meet.

So, what can we do? Here are some ideas:

• Train More Workers: Let’s teach people the skills they need. We can have programs in community colleges and offer apprenticeships to help workers get ready for jobs.

• Support Parents: Many parents can’t work because childcare is too expensive or hard to find. We need more childcare centers and help paying for them.

• Fix Immigration Rules: Some industries need workers from other countries. We should make it easier for skilled workers to stay here and help our economy grow.

• Build Affordable Homes: Rising housing costs are pushing families out of cities like Raleigh and Charlotte. We need more affordable homes so people can live near their jobs.

• Use Technology: New machines and tools can help businesses work better. At the same time, we should teach workers how to use these new tools so no one is left behind.

North Carolina is at a crossroads. The policies coming out of Washington could hurt working families and push our state backward. But we can fight back by investing in people and making smart choices. If we take these steps, we can protect our future and build a stronger North Carolina for everyone.

The battle for the North Carolina Supreme Court is a microcosm of the broader fight for democracy in this country, and Justice Allison Riggs is at the center of it. After securing her seat in the 2024 election by more than 700 votes, her victory has been subjected to an unprecedented challenge by her Republican opponent, Judge Jefferson Griffin. Despite the results being reaffirmed by multiple recounts, Griffin is now questioning the validity of over 60,000 ballots based on technical voter registration details. Though lacking evidence of fraud or misconduct, these claims have brought the certification of her re-election to a halt, leaving democracy itself hanging in the balance.

The ongoing legal battle isn’t just about a single judicial seat; it’s a deliberate attempt to reshape North Carolina’s judiciary and tip the scales of democracy. The Republican-controlled North Carolina Supreme Court’s stay on Riggs’ certification demonstrates how partisanship has infiltrated institutions meant to serve the public impartially. If Griffin’s challenge succeeds, the court’s composition will shift to a 7-1 Republican majority, granting the GOP unchecked influence over redistricting and voting rights rulings. This could set the stage for deeper voter suppression and a future where fair elections become an afterthought.

The stakes are colossal. The 60,000 ballots in question belong to North Carolinians who cast their votes following the procedures established by the state. These voters are now at risk of being disenfranchised. This is a thinly veiled attempt to silence opposition and undermine public confidence in elections. If successful, this would create a dangerous precedent, paving the way for similar efforts to disenfranchise voters nationwide.

Justice Riggs has recused herself from the court’s review of her election, demonstrating her commitment to judicial ethics. However, her opponent’s baseless challenges aim to cast doubt on her legitimacy, threatening to erode the authority of a court already under partisan strain. Riggs continues to serve diligently, signing orders and fulfilling her duties, while her opponent’s claims seek to destabilize the very foundation of democracy in the state. North Carolina’s voters, who chose Riggs to lead, deserve better than this relentless political maneuvering.

This fight is deeply tied to the broader challenges facing democracy in North Carolina. The state has been a battleground for partisan gerrymandering and voter suppression for years. A Democratic-controlled Supreme Court previously struck down unconstitutional gerrymandering that gave Republicans a 10-3 advantage in congressional seats. Now, with control of the court at stake, the GOP is determined to maintain its hold on power through any means necessary, including challenges to legitimate election outcomes.

The implications of this fight extend far beyond North Carolina’s borders. Population shifts expected after the 2030 Census will likely cost Democratic-leaning states up to 12 Electoral College votes, increasing the importance of flipping swing states like North Carolina. With its 16 Electoral College votes, North Carolina could offset these losses, but only if fair representation is restored and maintained. Reclaiming control of the state Supreme Court is critical to achieving this goal.

The Democratic playbook for the years ahead is clear and urgent. First and foremost, they must protect Justice Riggs’ seat and ensure that her rightful election is upheld. In 2026, the focus will shift to re-electing Anita Earls, a justice whose leadership has been instrumental in advancing fair representation and protecting voting rights. Beyond that, the 2028 elections will be pivotal, with three Republican-held Supreme Court seats up for grabs. Flipping these seats would establish a Democratic majority on the court, enabling rulings against partisan gerrymandering and restoring balance to the judicial system.

Achieving these goals is not just about winning elections. It’s about securing the future of democracy in North Carolina and across the country. A Democratic-controlled Supreme Court could revisit unfair district maps, ensuring equitable representation in Congress and the state legislature. The court’s rulings could also set national precedents, pushing back against the tide of voter suppression that has plagued elections in recent years.

The stakes in North Carolina couldn’t be higher. This state has become a microcosm of the national battle for democracy. What happens here will reverberate across the nation, influencing not only the composition of the state’s judicial and legislative bodies but also the broader fight for voting rights and fair representation. For Democrats, progressives, and anyone committed to the ideals of democracy, the mission is clear: defend Justice Riggs, protect Anita Earls, and fight to reclaim the court in 2028. North Carolina’s future—and the nation’s—depends on it.

US House Republicans are advancing proposals to gut Medicaid funding, threatening to destabilize healthcare in North Carolina and beyond. These cuts are not just about budget numbers; they’re about real lives, real families, and the economic health of communities. At the heart of this effort is an attempt to extend the 2017 tax cuts, a policy projected to add $4.6 trillion to the deficit, paid for by stripping away vital health coverage for millions.

Medicaid has been a lifeline for North Carolinians, with more than 2.7 million people depending on it for access to doctors, medication, and preventive care. The Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid brought coverage to an additional 499,000 adults in the state, driving down uninsured rates and improving health outcomes. Now, that progress is under threat. The proposed cuts include slashing federal funding, reducing matching rates for states, and imposing red tape in the form of work requirements. These measures would disproportionately impact low-income families, children, pregnant women, and people with disabilities—those who can least afford to lose coverage.

The fallout from such cuts would be immediate and severe. For families in North and Central Raleigh, the consequences are stark. Losing Medicaid coverage means losing access to routine checkups, cancer screenings, and treatments for chronic illnesses. It means making impossible choices between paying for groceries or a life-saving prescription. Without Medicaid’s safety net, the financial burden of healthcare would shift to individuals and families, driving many into debt and medical bankruptcy. Hospitals, particularly those in underserved areas, would struggle to manage the influx of uninsured patients needing emergency care, further straining an already overburdened system.

These proposed cuts are also a direct attack on North Carolina's progress under the ACA. Since its passage, the uninsured rate in the state has dropped by nearly 50%, offering families a level of stability and security they hadn’t seen before. Medicaid expansion didn’t just provide insurance; it gave people peace of mind, allowing them to focus on their jobs, children, and futures without the constant fear of what might happen if they got sick. Rolling back this progress would not only unravel these gains. Still, it would also jeopardize the state’s innovative programs like the Healthy Opportunities Pilots, which address social determinants of health and reduce healthcare costs.

The argument that these cuts are necessary to reduce federal spending is a smokescreen. The real motivation is to fund tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. These tax cuts prioritize the interests of billionaires and corporations over working families who rely on Medicaid to stay healthy and productive. It’s a tradeoff that leaves North Carolinians to pay the price in terms of dollars and lives.

What’s especially disheartening is that these cuts come with a false narrative about employment. Most Medicaid enrollees already work, attend school, or care for family members. Imposing work requirements is not a solution; it’s a barrier designed to kick people off the rolls. These policies don’t create jobs or lift people out of poverty. Instead, they create more hoops to jump through, making it harder for people to access the care they need.

The ripple effects would be profound for small businesses in North Carolina. Many rely on Medicaid to ensure their employees and families can afford healthcare. Without ACA subsidies and Medicaid’s support, these businesses would face rising insurance costs, making it even harder to compete and grow. For the state’s economy, this means fewer jobs and less opportunity, particularly in sectors still struggling to recover from the pandemic or recovering from Hurricane Helene.

The risks aren’t abstract. These cuts threaten to undo years of progress, jeopardizing families' health and economic stability. When preventive care becomes a luxury and emergency rooms become the only option, costs don’t disappear—they skyrocket. And the people who will feel it most are those who can least afford it.

This isn’t just about healthcare policy; it’s about the kind of community we want to be. North Carolina’s families deserve better than being used as pawns in a political game. They deserve leaders who prioritize their health and future, not policies that cater to the wealthy at their expense. The proposed Medicaid cuts are more than a budgetary decision—they are moral

.