Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Census bureau sued to stop gathering of citizen population data

A federal lawsuit brought last week by Latino and immigrants' rights groups is seeking to stop the Trump administration from publicizing estimates of the citizen population along with the 2020 census results.

Effectively blocked by the Supreme Court from putting a citizenship question on the census, President Trump has ordered the Commerce Department to come up with numbers using existing government records – in time for delivery to the states along with the detailed population figures.


While congressional districts have to be drawn based on total population, according to a plain-text reading of the Constitution, there's some legal opening for states to draw their own legislative boundaries based on citizenship. That would shrink power in immigrant communities and cities to the benefit of whiter and more rural areas – another route to the sort of partisan gerrymandering that democracy reformers decry.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Maryland, says the collection of citizenship data for this purpose violates the Constitution's Equal Protection clause and federal administrative law. "Defendants' actions should also be enjoined because they are motivated by racial animus, are discriminatory toward Latinos and non-citizens, and are the result of a partisan conspiracy intended to dilute the representation of non-citizens and Latinos," the lawsuit says.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The suit was first reported in Talking Points Memo. The government had not responded as of Monday afternoon.

Read More

The words "Diversity Equity Inclusion"
Dzmitry Dzemidovich/Getty Images

The potential false dichotomy of rethinking DEI

The notion that we can "rethink" DEI reflects a dangerous oversimplification of deeply rooted historical and social issues. This intellectual approach, while well-intentioned, often needs to be revised and is potentially harmful to those who have experienced the real-world consequences of systemic inequities.

Meaningful change requires more than mere philosophical reconsideration or academic debate — it demands concrete action, institutional reform and a genuine willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. Actual progress necessitates critical thinking, practical applications and sustained commitment to transformative action at both individual and societal levels.

Keep ReadingShow less
American flag and money
Javier Ghersi/Getty Images

Thwarting conflict profiteers to save the republic

Over several decades, fringe ideas have grown in popularity to reach the crescendo of noise we have today. Truth and facts are routinely dismissed by half the country (progressive and conservative!) and societal trust is very low. We may be witnessing the decline of the American Empire, or on a more optimistic note it could be the clearing we need for the United States to live into the promise of the founders — a multiracial, pluralistic democratic republic.

At the heart of the matter there lies a disjointed group of savvy marketing people who have created a highly profitable business by dividing society against itself. This “business of breaking” was perfectly timed to take advantage of many societal-changing innovations like the internet, email, social media and most recently artificial intelligence. Ironically It is the democratization of information where discerning truth from lies became more difficult.

Keep ReadingShow less
Man stepping on ripped poster

A man treads on a picture of Syria's ousted president, Bashar al-Assad, as people enter his residence in Damascus on Dec. 8.

Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images

With Assad out, this is what we must do to help save Syria

This was a long day coming, and frankly one I never thought I’d see.

Thirteen years ago, Syria’s Bashar Assad unleashed a reign of unmitigated terror on his own people, in response to protests of his inhumane Ba’athist government.

Keep ReadingShow less
Men and a boy walking through a hallway

Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk, with his son X, depart the Capitol on Dec. 5.

Craig Hudson for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Will DOGE promote efficiency for its own sake?

This is the first entry in a series on the Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board created by President-elect Donald Trump to recommend cuts in government spending and regulations. DOGE, which is spearheaded by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, has generated quite a bit of discussion in recent weeks.

The goal of making government efficient is certainly an enviable one indeed. However, the potential for personal biases or political agendas to interfere with the process must be monitored.

As DOGE suggests cuts to wasteful spending and ways to streamline government operations, potentially saving billions of dollars, The Fulcrum will focus on the pros and cons.

We will not shy away from DOGE’s most controversial proposals and will call attention to dangerous thinking that threatens our democracy when we see it. However, in doing so, we are committing to not employing accusations, innuendos or misinformation. We will advocate for intellectual honesty to inform and persuade effectively.

The new Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory board to be headed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, is designed to cut resources and avoid waste — indeed to save money. Few can argue this isn't a laudable goal as most Americans have experienced the inefficiencies and waste of various government agencies.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less