Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Will Maryland remap itself before Supreme Court acts?

The race is on to see whether a new, more politically competitive congressional map is adopted by the Maryland legislature before the Supreme Court decides if the current map is unconstitutional.

Last week, an independent commission created by GOP Gov. Larry Hogan unanimously embraced a plan to reconfigure two House districts encompassing some Washington suburbs. Even while leaving the rest of the state's sometimes incomprehensibly contorted boundaries intact, a cartographer ( redistricting writer Stephen Wolf of the liberal Daily Kos politics website) figured out a visibly clean way to give Republicans a reasonable shot at electing a second House member from the state.


He refigured the 6th district to cover the entire panhandle and stretch as far southeast as Germantown, with most of the rest of Montgomery County south and east of Gaithersburg falling in a new 8th district far more compact and contiguous than as currently drawn.

After a period of public comment, Hogan is on course to send the map to Annapolis on March 22. The solidly Democratic General Assembly would then have until its annual session concludes April 8 to accept or reject it. But two weeks before that deadline, on March 26, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on a potential landmark case asking whether the existing map is an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander because its contours virtually guarantee that only one of the eight House members from the state is a Republican – even though the GOP reliably wins 40 percent of the vote statewide.

That case is paired with a challenge to the map for North Carolina, where the GOP has held a 12-3 advantage in the congressional delegation all decade even though the total statewide vote for congressional candidates is split almost 50-50 each time. The court is being asked to decide if such maps can ever be drawn with such clear partisan intent as to become unconstitutional.

Read More

Presidents can no longer be trusted with pardons

Rioters breach Capitol security Jan. 6

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Presidents can no longer be trusted with pardons

Ours is a system of “checks and balances.”

The president can do this or that, but the courts and Congress can put a stop to it (depending on the circumstances and relevant rules). When the courts rule that the executive branch can’t do something, Congress can write a new law saying the president can do it. When Congress passes a law the president doesn’t like, the president can veto it. Congress, if it has enough votes, can override the veto. And so on. The whole idea is to deny any one branch or person too much concentrated power.

Keep ReadingShow less
Presidents can no longer be trusted with pardons

Rioters breach Capitol security Jan. 6

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Presidents can no longer be trusted with pardons

Ours is a system of “checks and balances.”

The president can do this or that, but the courts and Congress can put a stop to it (depending on the circumstances and relevant rules). When the courts rule that the executive branch can’t do something, Congress can write a new law saying the president can do it. When Congress passes a law the president doesn’t like, the president can veto it. Congress, if it has enough votes, can override the veto. And so on. The whole idea is to deny any one branch or person too much concentrated power.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump vs. Marjorie Taylor Green?! Here's What MAGA Really Means
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene
Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images

Donald Trump vs. Marjorie Taylor Green?! Here's What MAGA Really Means

In an interview on Fox News, President Trump affirmed his support for H-1B visas. He argued that because the US lacks enough talented people, we “have to bring this talent” from abroad. His words sparked outrage among conservatives.

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of Trump’s staunchest loyalists, pushed back against Trump’s narrative. Greene praised US-Americans as “the most talented people in the world.” She even introduced legislation aimed at ending “the mass replacement of American workers” by the H-1B visa program.

Keep ReadingShow less
Cryptocurrency: Debunking Myths, Understanding Realities, and Exploring Economic and Social Impacts
a pile of gold and silver bitcoins
Photo by Traxer on Unsplash

Cryptocurrency: Debunking Myths, Understanding Realities, and Exploring Economic and Social Impacts

“In 2020 and 2021, there was a big crypto bubble. You couldn’t turn a corner without seeing another celebrity crypto endorsement," said Mark Hays, the Associate Director for Cryptocurrency and Financial Technology with AFR/AFREF and with Demand Progress during the NFRPP’s October 25th, 2025, panel discussion. Hilary J. Allen, a Professor of Law at the American University Washington College of Law, joined Hays. The discussion was moderated by Peter Coy, a freelance journalist covering economics, business, and finance.

Celebrities like Kevin Hart, Gwyneth Paltrow, Madonna, Justin Bieber, Serena Williams, Paris Hilton, and Snoop Dogg jumped to endorse crypto-related companies. The record of these endorsements has been poor (Bloomberg), and some are calling for people who endorse these products without doing due diligence to face legal repercussions (Boston College Law Review). The message from the NFRPP’s panel discussion was one of intense skepticism towards cryptocurrencies in general, with Professor Allen going so far as to call them a “failure as a technology.”

Keep ReadingShow less