Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

How One Public Defender Found Humanity in Jan 6. Rioters

Film poster for The New Yorker documentary Public Defender

Film poster for The New Yorker documentary Public Defender

Spark Media

Olson is the Democracy & Bridgebuilding Program Manager with Interfaith America.

Heather and Jack instantly bonded over their shared blue hair, but besides a similar taste in hair dye, they had little else in common—other than their desire to avoid a jail sentence.


For over 45 years as a DC-based public defender, Heather Shaner has tirelessly protected vulnerable clients from judicial system abuse. “The older I get, the more I think that prisons should be torn down, and very few people should go to jail,” she reflects, underscoring her role to “stand between the overwhelming power of the United States of America and the individual.” Her career took an unexpected turn when she was asked to represent January 6th rioters—fervent Trump supporters like Jack Griffith. Shaner’s decision to defend these individuals, despite facing criticism, was an opportunity to show that empathy and accountability are not only compatible but essential for justice, even for those society might condemn.

When filmmaker Andrea Kalin first read about Shaner’s novel approach toward her January 6th defendants—sending them books to help them reflect on their motivations—she saw a story worth exploring. This encounter led to the creation of Public Defender, a documentary now streaming on The New Yorker, which follows Shaner as she represents two clients: Jack Griffith, a boisterous social media personality from Gallatin, Tennessee, known as “Liberty Dragon,” and Annie Howell, a single mother from Hanover Township, NJ.

Heather Shaner (left) shakes hands with her client and Jan. 6 defendant Jack Griffith (right)Heather Shaner (left) shakes hands with her client and Jan. 6 defendant Jack Griffith (right) Spark Media

The documentary doesn’t offer easy answers, nor does it suggest that every participant in January 6th will experience a dramatic change of heart. From the beginning, Jack and Annie approach their involvement in the Capitol events with starkly different attitudes, though neither of them were physically violent or vandalized property. Jack remains firm in his beliefs in a stolen election, while Annie struggles with personal turmoil and a feeling of betrayal from disinformation. Shaner’s work with them leads to personal journeys that evolve as the film unfolds. The complexity of their responses reflects the broader challenge of addressing the divisions that still shake our country.

Shaner, an unabashed progressive (her home even displays a framed “F*** Trump” poster), has now taken on 42 clients charged for their actions on January 6th—many of whom sit on the far opposite end of the political spectrum than she. By radically listening to their story and acknowledging their hurt, skipping the preaching, and trusting them to grow— Shaner offers an encouraging example of how we can bridge intractable divides. These divides, left unaddressed, continue to threaten our democracy and national security.

At a recent screening at the Dialogue Film Festival in Milwaukee, I saw firsthand how Public Defender ’s fresh perspective resonated with the audience. Based solely on the film's subject matter, it would be easy to expect grim footage of the Capitol riot, fast-paced legal jargon, and disturbing rhetoric from the insurrectionists. Yet Kalin’s film takes a different route—centering relationships with sincerity and even moments of levity. It invites viewers to wrestle with their own capacity for contempt and the limits of their belief in redemption.

As Arthur Brooks wrote in Love Your Enemies, “If we want more unity and less contempt, however, we need to get out of our comfort zones, go where we are not welcome, and spend time talking and interacting with people with whom we disagree—not on lightweight stuff like sports and food, but on hard moral things” Kalin’s documentary challenges us to break the cycle of political hate and division, not by absolving wrongdoers, but by fostering understanding and rejecting the simplistic caricatures we often impose on those we disagree with.

In partnership with Interfaith America, Stone Soup Productions, is showing Public Defender in communities across the country, accompanied by regional book drives for prison libraries. These screenings, and the post-film Q&A, aim to spark dialogue about political radicalization, with new framing that every person who stormed the Capitol has a unique story. “If 2,500 people went in,” Shaner reflects, “that’s 2,500 stories.”

While faith isn’t the central theme of Public Defender, it subtly informs much of Shaner’s approach. In one intimate scene, as Shaner sits in her kitchen, the camera pans to a painted ceramic Hamsa hung on her wall as she quotes a Talmudic verse, almost as if humbly reassuring herself of her mission: "If you save one life, you’ve saved the world.” She continues by saying “You can only change one life at a time, so there's a lot of work to be done”.

Less than a month before election day, when our political climate feels eerily reminiscent of four years ago, Public Defender reminds us that America’s political divide requires more than just election victories and defeats to heal. Healing requires compassion, accountability, and a willingness to seek humanity in those with whom we fundamentally disagree. By focusing on the individual stories behind the political movement that perpetrated the Big Lie, there is hope to be found, even if it’s messy.

You can watch Public Defender on The New Yorker's YouTube channel:

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Public Defender, a 40-minute documentary, is now streaming on The New Yorker. Stone Soup Productions is a Faith in Elections Playbook Grantee, an initiative co-created by Interfaith America and Protect Democracy to help communities bridge divides caused by polarization and protect free and fair elections.



Read More

Vote pins

Vote pins

Photo provided

Sharp Gender Divide Among Latino Voters

A new analysis from the UCLA Latino Policy and Politics Institute (LPPI) and the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) reveals significant political differences between Latinas and Latino men in California — especially among younger voters and those without bachelor’s degrees. The findings, drawn from the May 2026 Berkeley IGS Poll of 1,912 Latino registered voters, challenge the notion that California’s Latino electorate behaves as a single political bloc.

California Latinas are more likely than Latino men to prioritize protecting immigrant communities, opposing the Trump administration’s agenda, and defending democracy and voting rights. According to the report, 69% of Latinas say protecting immigrant communities is “very important,” compared with 52% of Latino men. On “fighting the Trump agenda,” the gap is identical: 68% of Latinas versus 51% of Latino men. Democracy and voting rights receive the strongest support across both groups, with 87% of Latinas and 77% of Latino men rating the issue as very important.

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
Gavel on top of binders

A full rundown of this week's congressional action: 7 bills headed to the President, a stalled data center bill, and the votes lawmakers wanted on record.

May Lim / 500px/Getty Images

House Crams in Votes Before Extended Break

The House wasn’t expected to stay in session past this week and, in fact, they left a day early after Rep. Massie (R-KY4) introduced an impeachment resolution against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Nonetheless, they powered through many more votes than usual. We’ll cover the seven soon-to-be new laws and the bills of interest we highlighted in this week’s preview. As is its usual function, the Senate mostly acted as a break on legislation that had passed the House.

New Laws

These bills have all passed both chambers in identical form, so they next go to the President for signing.

Keep ReadingShow less