Trump, Kristen Welker, and the Boundaries of FCC Authority

President Trump and NBC’s Kristen Welker have managed to turn two ordinary words—“mixed results”—into a national argument about political influence, media bias, federal authority, and the First Amendment. Apparently, Washington had a quiet moment and needed something to do. The dispute began when Welker, appearing in a live promotional segment on NBC-owned WRC-TV before Meet…

Texas Classrooms, the Ten Commandments, and the Supreme Court

The Ten Commandments are headed toward another possible encounter with the Supreme Court, this time by way of Texas, two groups of public-school families, and a sharply divided federal appeals court. On August 17, more than two dozen Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Baha’i, Unitarian Universalist, and nonreligious families asked the Supreme Court to review Texas Senate…

Visa Revocations and the Limits of American Entry

The Trump administration announced that the State Department has revoked more than 175,000 visas since President Trump returned to office, marking a significant expansion of immigration enforcement. According to the department, the affected foreign nationals violated visa conditions, committed crimes, defrauded Americans, abused the immigration system, called for violence against Americans, or threatened national security.…

The Air Force One Leak Investigation and the Boundaries of Press Freedom

The Justice Department’s attempt to identify confidential sources behind The New York Times’ reporting on the Qatari-gifted Air Force One jet has created a serious clash between two legitimate public interests: protecting national-security information and preserving a free press capable of investigating the government. The Hill reported that the DOJ sought communications records connected to…

Truth, Libel, and the Media’s Very Expensive Hall Pass

Few Supreme Court precedents have shaped American political speech more than New York Times v. Sullivan, the 1964 decision that made it much harder for public officials, and later public figures, to win defamation lawsuits. Supporters say that high bar protects free debate, especially criticism of powerful people. Critics say it’s become a legal bunker…

Jim Crow 2.0 or Hardball Politics?

Black Democrats are accusing Republicans of using redistricting to create “Jim Crow 2.0,” especially as GOP-led states move to redraw congressional maps in ways that could weaken or eliminate districts currently represented by Black Democrats. The immediate flashpoint is South Carolina, where Republicans are discussing a map that could threaten Rep. Jim Clyburn’s seat, the…

When “Protecting Voters” Becomes “Sorting by Race”

Yesterday’s decision by the Supreme Court to strike down certain majority-minority congressional districts as unconstitutional racial gerrymandering has landed like a political thunderclap, though not exactly a surprising one. If you’ve been watching the Court’s trajectory on race-conscious policymaking, this feels less like a sudden detour and more like the next logical mile marker. Still,…

Conversion Therapy Bans: Protection or Overreach?

The phrase “conversion therapy” tends to end conversations before they even begin. It’s one of those terms that carries so much emotional and cultural weight that people often feel they already know where they’re supposed to land. Harmful. Discredited. Case closed. But once you slow down and actually examine what’s being debated—laws that prohibit certain…