Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Michigan’s new curb on partisan mapmakers survives in federal court

Michigan congressional map

Republicans held a majority of Michigan's congressional district through the 2010s, until Democrats achieved a split in 2018. (Rep. Justin Amash's 3rd District is shaded purple, since he left the Republican Party.)

mapchart.net

Michigan may continue planning for its new voter-mandated independent redistricting commission, a federal judge has ruled, because Republicans are not likely to win their lawsuit alleging the panel's membership requirements are unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Janet Neff on Monday rejected the GOP's bid to stop implementation of a state constitutional amendment approved last fall.

In one of the biggest victories ever for opponents of partisan gerrymandering, 61 percent of voters decided to take the drawing of the next decade's legislative and congressional lines away from the Legislature and give it to a new panel — where a plurality must be without political connections or activities on their resume.


The Michigan GOP and several individual Republicans say those restrictions on membership limit their rights to free speech and free association. No party officials, lobbyists, consultants or any of their relatives may sit in five of the 13 seats; the others are split between Republicans and Democrats.

Neff, who was picked for the court in Grand Rapids by President George W. Bush, sent a clear signal where her formal ruling would come down. "The eligibility provisions at issue do not impose severe burdens on plaintiffs' First Amendment rights," she wrote. "There is no right to state office or appointment."

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Republican officials signaled they would keep pursuing their arguments, either in this case or another federal lawsuit alleging the membership limits violate federal antidiscrimination laws.

Republicans drew the current boundaries ahead of the 2012 elections and they worked mostly as designed, with comfortable GOP control of the state House and Senate through the decade and a GOP majority in the congressional delegation until last fall, when the Democratic midterm wave produced at 7-7 split.

Thousands have already asked for a seat on the new commission, where the pay will be $40,000.The deadline for applying is June 1.

Read More

Are President Trump’s Economic Promises Falling Short?

U.S. President Donald Trump takes a question from a reporter in the Oval Office at the White House on May 05, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Anna Moneymaker

Are President Trump’s Economic Promises Falling Short?

President Donald Trump was elected for a second term after a campaign in which voters were persuaded that he could skillfully manage the economy better than his Democratic opponent. On the campaign trail and since being elected for the second time, President Trump has promised that his policies would bolster economic growth, boost domestic manufacturing with more products “made in the USA,” reduce the price of groceries “on Day 1,” and make America “very rich” again.

These were bold promises, so how is President Trump doing, three and a half months into his term? The evidence so far is as mixed and uncertain as his roller coaster tariff policy.

Keep ReadingShow less
Closeup of Software engineering team engaged in problem-solving and code analysis

Closeup of Software engineering team engaged in problem-solving and code analysis.

Getty Images, MTStock Studio

AI Is Here. Our Laws Are Stuck in the Past.

Artificial intelligence (AI) promises a future once confined to science fiction: personalized medicine accounting for your specific condition, accelerated scientific discovery addressing the most difficult challenges, and reimagined public education designed around AI tutors suited to each student's learning style. We see glimpses of this potential on a daily basis. Yet, as AI capabilities surge forward at exponential speed, the laws and regulations meant to guide them remain anchored in the twentieth century (if not the nineteenth or eighteenth!). This isn't just inefficient; it's dangerously reckless.

For too long, our approach to governing new technologies, including AI, has been one of cautious incrementalism—trying to fit revolutionary tools into outdated frameworks. We debate how century-old privacy torts apply to vast AI training datasets, how liability rules designed for factory machines might cover autonomous systems, or how copyright law conceived for human authors handles AI-generated creations. We tinker around the edges, applying digital patches to analog laws.

Keep ReadingShow less
Global Lessons, Local Tools: Democracy at Home and Abroad

Global Lessons, Local Tools: Democracy at Home and Abroad

Welcome to the latest edition of The Expand Democracy 5 from Rob Richie and Eveline Dowling. This week they delve into: (1) Deep Dive - Inviting 21st century political association; (2) Australian elections show how fairer voting matter; (3) International election assistance on the chopping block; (4) Checks and balances and the US presidency; and (5) The week’s timely links.

In keeping with The Fulcrum’s mission to share ideas that help to repair our democracy and make it live and work in our everyday lives, we intend to publish The Expand Democracy 5 in The Fulcrum each Friday.

Keep ReadingShow less