Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Meet the reformer: Gilda Daniels, voting rights advocate and chronicler

Gilda Daniels book launch

Gilda Daniels (right) reads from a passage of her book "Uncounted: The Crisis of Voter Suppression in America" during a launch event Jan. 28.

Tristiaña Hinton/The Fulcrum

Gilda R. Daniels has spent almost three decades at the intersection of law and voting rights. Currently litigation director at the Advancement Project, a liberal nonprofit focused on advancing racial justice, she's also interim director of the group's voting rights efforts. A law professor at the University of Baltimore, she was a senior Civil Rights Division official at the Justice Department in both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. She's become best known to the general public, though, with this year's publication of "Uncounted: The Crisis of Voter Suppression in America" (NYU Press). Her answers have been slightly edited for clarity.

What's democracy's biggest challenge, in 10 words or less?

Voter fatigue and voter suppression.


Describe your very first civic engagement.

My father was the first African-American elected to our parish's police jury, which is a governing body in Louisiana similar to a county commission. He demonstrated public service. His slogan was "A public servant, not a politician."

What was your biggest professional triumph?

Writing "Uncounted: The Crisis of Voter Suppression in America."

And your most disappointing setback?

A miscarriage in 2015.

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

As an African-American female who grew up in the South, I view the world through multiple intersections.

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

Don't pray and worry.

Create a new flavor for Ben & Jerry's.

Democracy's Destiny: chocolate ice cream, nuts, marshmallow cream and dark chocolate chips.

West Wing or Veep?

I have never watched an episode of Veep.

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

Turn it off.

What is your deepest, darkest secret?

I can SANG!


Read More

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less