Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Governor Cox’s Prayer Wasn’t Just Misguided—It Was Dangerous

Opinion

utah governor spencer cox speaks

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox speaks at a press conference flanked by FBI director Kash Patel following the fatal shooting of political activist Charlie Kirk during an event at Utah Valley University on September 12, 2025 in Orem, Utah.

(Photo by Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images)

In the hours following the shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University, Governor Spencer Cox stood before the press and offered a prayer. But it wasn’t for the victim’s family, or for a nation reeling from yet another act of political violence. It was a prayer that the perpetrator would be someone from “another state” or “another country.” In his own words: “For 33 hours, I was praying that if this had to happen here, that it wouldn't be one of us — that somebody drove from another state, somebody came from another country… Sadly, that prayer was not answered the way I hoped for.”

Governor Cox was hoping the killer would be an outsider. Preferably a foreigner. That’s not just a rhetorical misstep—it’s a dangerous invocation of the kind of scapegoating that has long fueled xenophobic policy and public distrust.


This kind of deflection is not new. It echoes the rhetoric of President Donald Trump, who just last year claimed Vice President Kamala Harris had “imported an army of illegal alien gang members and migrant criminals from the dungeons of the third world … from prisons and jails and insane asylums and mental institutions.” These words weren’t just inflammatory—they were designed to shift blame away from domestic failures and toward imagined foreign threats.

Donald Trump and the Rise of Political Violence

donald trump walking toward reports U.S. President Donald walks toward reporters while departing the White House on September 11, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)


Governor Cox’s remarks, whether intentional or not, reinforce a narrative that violence is imported, not homegrown. That’s a lie. And it’s a lie that has consequences.

The suspect, Tyler Robinson, is a resident of Utah. His arrest should have prompted a sober reflection on the conditions that allow radicalization to flourish within our own communities. Instead, Cox’s remarks implied that violence is somehow more palatable—less shameful—if committed by someone who doesn’t “belong.”

This framing is not only morally hollow, it’s statistically baseless. Immigrants, both documented and undocumented, commit crimes at significantly lower rates than native-born citizens. A 2024 study from the National Institute of Justice found that undocumented immigrants in Texas were arrested at less than half the rate of U.S.-born citizens for violent and drug crimes, and at a quarter the rate for property crimes. The Migration Policy Institute reports that immigrants are 60% less likely to be incarcerated than native-born Americans. The facts are not ambiguous: immigrants are not the threat.

What is a threat, however, is the persistent political impulse to deflect blame outward—to cast suspicion on the “other” rather than confront the rot within.

Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Jon Meacham framed the moment with chilling clarity: "Political violence erupts in America when there is an existential question—who is an American? Who deserves to be included in ‘We the people,’ or ‘All men being created equal’?” he said. “When that is in tension, when we don’t have common agreement about that, then, if you look at it historically, violence erupts." These are not rhetorical flourishes. They are the fault lines of a democracy under siege.

Political violence in America is not a foreign contagion. It is domestic, it is rising, and it is often fueled by rhetoric that dehumanizes, divides, and deflects. The bullets that killed Charlie Kirk were fired by someone born and raised in Utah. That fact should not be a source of shame—it should be a call to accountability.

Governor Cox later said, “We can return violence with fire and violence. We can return hate with hate… but at some point we have to find an off-ramp.” He’s right. But that off-ramp begins with truth. And the truth is: it was one of us. It often is.

Until our leaders stop praying for convenient villains and start confronting uncomfortable realities, the road ahead will only grow darker.

Meacham: Political Violence in America Linked to Deep Questions of Identity and Inclusion

who is an american graphic showing silhouettes "Who is an American? Who deserves to be included in ‘We the people" - Jon Meacham AI generated illustration

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network. Balta is the only person to serve twice as president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ).


Read More

 U.S. President Donald Trump speaks from the Cross Hall of the White House on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks from the Cross Hall of the White House on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Pool/Getty Images

How Presidential Primetime Addresses Shape Public Trust in Democratic Institutions

A question still being studied is the effects on public trust when the head of the Executive casts doubt on the institutions that run elections, enforce laws, and decide legal disputes. The President of the United States is arguably the most powerful man in the world. He is the commander in chief of a nation #1 in nominal gross domestic product as well as #1 in military power, budget, and spending as of 2026. The actions he takes spew ripple effects across the world and follow many generations. A way you can measure the executive's power can also be measured in how much influence his speeches have on the markets, opinions of the masses, news outlets, lawmakers, social media reactions, etc. His framing of an issue can shape the next day’s political conversation.

These conversations become extremely dangerous/consequential when discussing a principle as embedded in our country as Democracy. In his July primetime speech, Trump continued to pedal the claims about election security and argued for stricter voting rules. He continued to portray the country as facing a moment of corruption and uncertainty, followed by presenting himself as the one prepared to restore order. The address continued with repeated claims about his loss in the 2020 election that have not been supported by the evidence compiled over years of investigation by many parties. Professional reviews, audits, and courts have yet to find significant evidence of foul play substantial enough to influence the outcome of that election.

Keep ReadingShow less
unrecognizable businessman giving speech to professional audience

Brain science explains why voters reward charisma over results — and why the leaders who "fix" the most get credit for the least. A behavioral look at elections.

alvaro gonzalez/Getty Images

The Résumé Should Outvote the Smile

There's an old joke about a couple who finally solved years of arguing over decisions. "Since you're the man of the house," the wife said, "you handle the big things -- our stance on foreign wars, who we send to the Senate. I'll take care of the small stuff: groceries, the mortgage, where we live, what we eat." The husband agreed happily, certain he had won the better half of the deal. A few years later he realized the trade had gone entirely the other way. He held forth on geopolitics at dinner parties while his wife quietly ran every detail that actually touched his life: what he ate, where he lived, how his money was spent. What looked like ultimate authority was, in practice, near-total abdication over the things that shaped his days.

Voters make the same trade, and pay for it the same way. We keep hiring leaders for the qualities we would want in a spouse -- warmth, charm, a commanding voice, the sense that they see us -- instead of the qualities we would want in a mechanic: someone who can find what is broken and fix it before the whole system fails. We evaluate candidates the way we choose intimate partners, not the way we hire people to run complex, high-stakes systems.

Keep ReadingShow less
US soldier with American flag patch on his arm.
a group of soldiers in uniform
Photo by Oleg Ivanov on Unsplash

Moral Leadership Can Protect Service Members' Psychological Well-Being

It has recently been reported that President Trump and Secretary of War Hegseth disparaged the mental health concerns, including suicide attempts, expressed by the sailors serving aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln during the carrier’s record deployment. Their comments brought back the disquiet I felt several months ago while attending a performance of the US Naval Academy Glee Club at the Church of St. Ignatius Loyola in Manhattan. Usually, when I attend choral concerts in the church’s imposing Baroque sanctuary, my mind quiets, and I find myself immersed in the music. But not on that occasion. Instead, as I enjoyed the exuberant singing, my mind filled with resentment. The Glee Club, handsome midshipmen in formal dress, is a multiethnic group of men and women. The harmonious singing of a chorus composed of individuals of widely varied backgrounds seemed a metaphor for how our country and its military should work.

My upset originated with the realization that during their time at the Naval Academy, these midshipmen had witnessed the firing of the Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General C. Q. Brown, Jr., as part of an apparent purge of those supporting diversity in the military. Even uglier was the implication that Brown, a highly decorated officer, had been elevated to his position as a ‘DEI’ hire. They also had seen the firing of trailblazing women leaders in the military, including Admiral Linda Fagan, the first woman Coast Guard Commandant, and Admiral Yvette Davids, the first woman Superintendent of the Naval Academy at Annapolis, the very institution they were attending. I was offended and angered by the message these firings conveyed to the men and women of the Academy’s Glee Club, especially the women and minority midshipmen, who had volunteered to serve their nation and, ultimately, to place themselves in harm’s way for it.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a“ Steel Across America” event ahead of the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11th attacks on the Ellipse near the White House on Sept. 8, 2026 in Washington, D.C. President Trump welcomed 9/ 11 first responders to the Tunnel to Towers Foundation’ s“ Steel Across America” event featuring a 16,900- pound, 21- foot steel beam recovered.

(Getty Images)

For Trump, even 9/11 is an opportunity

There was a reason organizers of the 9/11 ceremony in Manhattan told President Trump he could not speak at this year’s memorial service.

A good one, it turns out.

Keep ReadingShow less