Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Webinar Rewind: Diversity in the democracy reform movement

Diversity in the Democracy Reform Movement

As protests sweep the country in response to continued police violence against Black people, many democracy reform leaders say that achieving racial justice and fixing our broken political system are two sides of the same coin. Amendments to the Constitution have been rooted in protecting the rights of citizens and making the system more accessible to those who had been excluded, including Black and Native Americans and women. Democracy reform has, from its inception, been about bringing about allowing all Americans to have a viable voice in our government.

The Fulcrum convened reform leaders to talk about the importance of leaning into the diversity of the movement and how the foundations of democracy reform are built on social justice and civil rights.

The Fulcrum's audience development editor, Tristiaña Hinton, moderated a discussion with:
Gilda Daniels, litigation director at the Advancement Project
Jacqueline De Léon, staff attorney for the Native American Rights Fund
Khalid Pitts, executive vice president of policy and programs, FairVote

Read More

Entrance Sign at the University of Florida

Universities are embracing “institutional neutrality,” but at places like the University of Florida it’s becoming a tool to silence faculty and erode academic freedom.

Getty Images, Bryan Pollard

When Insisting on “Neutrality” Becomes a Gag Order

Universities across the country are adopting policies under the banner of “institutional neutrality,” which, at face value, sounds entirely reasonable. A university’s official voice should remain measured, cautious, and focused on its core mission regardless of which elected officials are in office. But two very different interpretations of institutional neutrality are emerging.

At places like the University of Wisconsin – Madison and Harvard, neutrality is applied narrowly and traditionally: the institution itself refrains from partisan political statements, while faculty leaders and scholars remain free to speak in their professional and civic capacities. Elsewhere, the same term is being applied far more aggressively — not to restrain institutions, but to silence individuals.

Keep ReadingShow less