Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Meet the reformer: Justin Giboney, who wants to put more Gospel into politics

Justin Giboney of the And Campaign

The And Campaign's Justin Giboney, at a Georgetown University forum in October on the intersection of faith, race and politics in the coming campaign.

Georgetown University

In the 13 years since earning his law degree at Vanderbilt, where he played football as an undergraduate, Justin Giboney has been an attorney and political strategist in Atlanta. Two years ago he founded the And Campaign, which uses the logo (&) and describes itself as a coalition of urban Christians seeking to infuse American political culture with the Gospel. His answers have been lightly edited for clarity and length.

What's the tweet-length description of your organization?

A Christian civic organization that helps believers engage politics more faithfully through a framework that emphasizes the compassion and conviction of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Describe your very first civic engagement.

My father took me up to the Colorado state Capitol to watch the legislative process.


What was your biggest professional triumph?

Being invited to give the keynote speech at the Capitol for this year's Council of Christian Colleges and Universities conference.

And your most disappointing setback?

Losing a referendum to fund the Atlanta regions public transportation system in 2012. It not only set back the region, but made me question my interest and place in politics.

How does your identity influence the way you go about your work?

I always try to think about how those who paved the way for me would conduct themselves if they were given the opportunities that I have. What would they say in speeches to certain audiences? What decisions would they make under certain pressures? And how can I make sure I don't squander the legacy of the Civil Rights generation?

What's the best advice you've ever been given?

Identify your core before you enter a new space or venture. Know what you're trying to accomplish and what lines you'll never cross.

Create a new flavor for Ben & Jerry's.

Vintage Vanilla on Vanilla

The West Wing or Veep?

Boardwalk Empire. (I never watched West Wing or Veep)

What's the last thing you do on your phone at night?

Listen to classic sermons.

What is your deepest, darkest secret?

I deal with the pain of having no musical talent by watching every music or musician documentary I can find.


Read More

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding
person in red shirt wearing silver bracelet holding red and black metal tool
Photo by Wassim Chouak on Unsplash

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looking at social media app icons on a phone

Gen Z is quietly leaving social media as algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, and addictive platform design fuel anxiety, isolation, and mental health struggles.

Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Gen Z Begs Legislators: Make Social Media Social Again

Lately, it seems like each time I reach out to an old acquaintance through social media, I’m met with a page that reads, “This account doesn’t exist anymore.”

Many Gen-Z’ers are quietly quitting the platforms we grew up on.

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less