Legislators in 19 states are considering changes to state courts that would diminish the role or independence of the judiciary by giving political players more control over judicial selection, judicial decision-making or judicial administration. The roster of such bills was compiled by the progressive Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, which opposes all such efforts.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Join a growing community committed to civic renewal.
Subscribe to The Fulcrum and be part of the conversation.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More

Visitors watch Old Faithful Geyser as an eruption winds down on May 21, 2026 in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming.
Mario Tama/Getty Images
In Praise of Bison, Free Peoples, and American-Flag Fashion
Sep 23, 2026
They come by the hundreds, gathering from every corner of their land. Their ancestors were once hunted, but they roam free. They stretch across the forests and scrubland and mountains. They vary in size and color, but they bear the marking of shared identity.
They are the American people sporting their country’s flag at Yellowstone National Park.
Visitors wear American flag-themed: socks, t-shirts with sequins for the stars, cowboy hats, sweaters, t-shirt with lightning bolts as stripes, t-shirt with an elk coming out of the stars, vests, t-shirt with fish as the stripes, visors, Under Armour t-shirts and sweatshirts, Columbia Sportswear t-shirt with trees instead of stripes, baseball caps, bandanas, construction services shirts, Tampa Bay Buccaneers Veterans Day camo shirt, and a dozen varieties of America’s 250th birthday t-shirts.
These patriotic sartorial choices adorn Americans of every race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, geography, and religion, because Yellowstone brings together a highly representative cross section of America:
·Half men, half women
·Evenly distributed across ages 0-18, 19-35, 36-51, and 52+ (with a slight skew older)
·Equal representation of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents
·All income levels but especially middle class: 56% of visitors earn between $50,000 - $150,000 annually
·More white and Asian Americans than the general population, though people of every ethnic and racial group are present everywhere.
·Hundreds of crosses as necklaces and pins and also people in yarmulkes, hijabs, and dastars.
The vast majority of license plates are from out of state. A sampling of two hundred license plates by my children and me revealed: Montana 20%, Wyoming 10%, California 5%, Texas 5%, Idaho 5%, Colorado 5%, Washington 5%, Massachusetts, Oregon, Illinois, Indiana, Florida, Utah, Arizona, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, Missouri, Virginia, Minnesota, New Jersey, Michigan.
Yellowstone is the ingathering of Americans. And Americans are proud of their country.
Photo Courtesy of Raphael Rosen
It’s worth celebrating. Thousands of people choose to advertise their appreciation for their country, exhibit kindness to each other, and make time to respect the natural bounty that their government and their ancestors protected from destruction.
American flag-themed clothing is an old phenomenon experiencing a resurgence with entire businesses dedicated to American flag t-shirts alone. Distressed and vintage tees have become top sellers. Lucky Brand and Nine Line Apparel move a lot of American flag product, and Old Navy is perhaps the leader, selling one million American flag t-shirts every summer. Discussions over who should wear the flag and how have become less partisan and more inclusive.
There is much pessimism in America today, outrage over policies pushed by left and right, political polarization, a petulant partisanship bogging down the country—but the greater reality of the American people is easier to see in the open meadows of American-flag-clad Yellowstone visitors than in the claustrophobic digitally divided universe hunched over phones and tablets.
The situation recalls Edmund Burke’s analogy from 235 years ago:
“Because half a dozen grasshoppers under a fern make the field ring with their importunate chink, whilst thousands of great cattle, reposed beneath the shadow of the British oak, chew the cud and are silent, pray do not imagine that those who make the noise are the only inhabitants of the field, that…. they are many in number, or that… they are other than the little, shrivelled, meager, hopping, though loud and troublesome, insects of the hour.”
Grasshoppers are indeed loud and interesting so it’s easy to chime in and like the irate statements of the hour.
But they are trivial beside the bison who rules the meadow. Massive, muscular, unyielding, independent and communal, brave and peaceful, defender of its territory but not aggressive—the bison symbolizes the best of America.
Those thousands of Americans who feel sufficient ownership over their country to wear its symbol will exert great efforts to protect it and its democratic ways. The love of one’s democracy is the greatest bulwark against its collapse.
Such is America’s fortuitous, felicitous fate.
“My country right or wrong,” the German-American Senator and Major General Carl Schurz proclaimed, “If right, to be kept right. If wrong, to be set right.” And he remarked: “If you want to be free, there is but one way; it is to guarantee an equally full measure of liberty to all your neighbors. There is no other.” Americans of all political and demographic backgrounds who, through their daily actions, invest in their freedom and their neighbors’ freedom—these are people who can set America right. They are democracy’s inexhaustible font of national renewal. We are lucky to have them.
Photo Courtesy of Raphael Rosen
Raphael Chayim Rosen is the award-winning author of the book Pedestal: What Makes American Democracy Stable and the Substack newsletter Lady Liberty’s Pedestal, where he researches the culture, customs, and norms of democratic society. An accomplished social entrepreneur and inventor, he is the CEO and co-founder of Centinel, which he scaled from a bootstrapped startup into a national platform. Rosen has published academic papers in physics and history, holds degrees from Cambridge and Harvard, and resides in New York City, though a part of him always dwells in America’s National Parks.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee speaks as Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter, U.S. Vice President JD Vance, U.S
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Trump's Sale of Arms to Israel Violates U.S. Law
Sep 23, 2026
President Trump recently announced a $2.8 billion deal to sell arms to Israel, including 60,000 powerful one-ton bombs, which Israel had widely used to devastate densely populated areas of Gaza.
U.S. law prohibits arms sales in various situations. The Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) establish eligibility prerequisites for the sale of defense articles to foreign governments. The acts also require that such sales be for specific authorized military purposes.
Israel is technically in a cease-fire with Hamas, although during this period it has continued to use missiles, bombs, and artillery to attack Palestinians in Gaza. When the war was at its peak, most neutral parties in the world agreed that what began as a legitimate defensive action by Israel after the October 7 Hamas attack had turned into an offensive war.
What difference does that make in terms of the legality of Trump's deal? First, under the AECA, defense articles may be sold for specific purposes only, including "internal security and legitimate self-defense." Second, the FAA specifically prohibits security assistance to any country whose government engages in a "consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights."
Without question, the use of arms against Gaza has gone far beyond "legitimate self-defense," and the 60,000-ton bombs in this context are exclusively offensive. As to violating human rights, many observers argue that Israel has engaged in a "consistent pattern" of such violations. This arms deal is thus definitely against U.S. policy and law.
Congress could pass a resolution calling on the President to not go through with the sale because it violates laws passed by Congress. But this Republican-controlled Congress will obviously not pass such a resolution. Nor will the Democrats seek to force a vote on such a resolution because the country in question is Israel, and despite all the controversy about Israel's actions during and after the Gaza War, only a minority of Democrats in Congress would likely support such a resolution.
This is not a new situation. President Biden was guilty of the same action when he approved a $20 billion sale of arms to Israel in 2024.
Nor is the violation of this law limited to arms sales to Israel. Questions have also been raised regarding past arms sales to Saudi Arabia and to Egypt. Politics and short-term goals often, not surprisingly, override humanitarian concerns.
These sales raise several basic questions. First, is the goal of the government's foreign policy to support our "friends," regardless of the laws in place or human rights concerns, or is the goal to support ethical standards by our and all governments, especially those that flow from the Declaration of Independence?
The reader may well ask what the Declaration has to do with issues of foreign policy. In my book, We Still Hold These Truths:An American Manifesto, I used the Declaration as a touchstone to look at all areas of government policy, including foreign policy and defense. While foreign policy must be pragmatic, it should be consistent with the principles America stands for: democracy, human rights, and the legitimate aspirations of all people as recognized in the Declaration.
Instead, as stated in the book, foreign policy has often been based more on military, industrial, or political interests—a narrow reading of our national interest. As a result, "the government has often resorted to gross stereotypes and a good-versus-evil analysis of who is friend or foe, an analysis that ultimately was often against the country’s best interests."
The second question is, how can the President and Congress itself be allowed to ignore what is very clearly the law of the land? What of their oath of office to support the Constitution?.
The President does have the power to overrule these concerns as provided for in both the AECA and FAA, but when he does so, by their requiring a waiver or certification, there must be an acknowledgment that he is doing that and why.
In Trump's or Biden's action, there is no acknowledgment of the fact that Israel's use of these weapons is mostly for offensive rather than defensive action, nor of Israel's consistent violation of Palestinian human rights, but that "extraordinary circumstances" warrant moving forward with the sale and that they were thus overruling the law. They instead chose to move forward with the sale, acting as though there is no violation that the President is overruling. They took the easy way out.
By not acknowledging the problem and stating they were granting a waiver or overruling the restrictions of the law, both Trump and Biden were in violation of U.S. law. And the President should be held to account for that.
Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com
Keep ReadingShow less

Trump's firing of the Librarian of Congress exposed a flaw in how Congress's own watchdogs are appointed. Now GAO needs the same fix
Bill Clark/Getty Images
Congress Should Take the Appointment Power for Its Own Agencies
Sep 23, 2026
Early last year President Trump fired the Librarian of Congress allegedly for her promotion of diversity, equity, and inclusion at the agency, amid a string of firings of top government officials appointed by prior presidents. But unlike with other firings, the Librarian of Congress runs an agency that primarily serves Congress, not the President. That’s a problem, and Republicans in the House quietly agreed. But another even more significant agency needs the same fix. That’s why this week we signed onto a letter to Congressional leaders about fixing the same issue at the Government Accountability Office.
Firing the Librarian of Congress
The power of the President to fire Congress’s top librarian poses a “threat that the Trump administration, or any future administration, could appoint a Librarian who would undermine Congress’s ability to receive trusted confidential advice on policymaking and have access to information resources necessary for policymaking,” our colleagues Daniel Schuman and Chris Nehls of the American Governance Institute wrote. “The Library of Congress is a vast legislative branch agency that provides confidential advice and research support to members of Congress,” they explained. (We wrote about this last year and again in June.)
What if a president fires Congress’s top auditor?
The problem is even worse for the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which audits federal spending on behalf of Congress. Its head, the Comptroller General, can sue Executive Branch agencies for withholding federal funds, a power rendered meaningless by the threat of being fired by the President, who that power is meant to hold accountable. Former Republican Rep. Dan Burton recognized this in 1998, saying “It is particularly incongruous for the President to appoint the head of an agency whose exclusive mission is supporting Congressional oversight of the branch of government that the President heads.”
Lately Republicans have proposed cutting GAO’s powers and funds. Instead, GAO’s power to audit should be strengthened. This week signed onto a letter urging Congress to give themselves the power to directly appoint GAO’s head. (More on GAO at the First Branch Forecast.)
By historical quirk, the heads of the Library of Congress, the Government Publishing Office, and the Government Accountability Office are appointed through nomination by the President and confirmation by the Senate, like most federal agencies, which is how President Trump has the authority to fire them. But these three agencies today primarily support Congress, not the President.
House Republicans pass bill to fix two agencies
Republicans in the House recognized that this is a problem for two of the agencies. In June and then again this month the House passed a Republican-sponsored bill to change the appointment process for the Librarian of Congress and the head of the Government Publishing Office to remove the President from the equation. In committee, the bill passed unanimously. The bill would have those positions appointed directly by the House and Senate. “House passage of my Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act is a positive step for Congress and the U.S. Constitution. This bill helps reassert Congress’s Article I responsibilities as well as deliver clarity on the powers exercised by the Legislative and Executive Branches,” sponsor Rep. Morgan Griffith wrote. The bill goes to the Senate next. We urge senators to pass that bill.
The appointment process for the Architect of the Capitol, whose job is to manage Congress’s buildings including the Capitol itself, was already changed like this in 2023 with bipartisan support.
But no bill has been proposed yet to make the same fix for the Government Accountability Office.
Congress Should Take the Appointment Power for Its Own Agencies was originally published by GovTrack and is republished with permission.
Keep ReadingShow less
What Protest Taught Me About American Democracy
Sep 23, 2026
The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists.
We asked Pechuqui Laurata, a Fall Fulcrum Fellow, to share what democracy means to her and her view of its current health.
Ask any pupil in Cameroon what democracy means, and they will likely repeat the definition many of us knew at their age: “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” The Anglophone crisis taught me what those words are worth when a government refuses to listen.
In 2016, lawyers and teachers in Cameroon’s English-speaking regions protested the growing use of French in Anglophone courts and schools. Civilians later joined them. Security forces responded with arrests and violence. Some protesters were killed; some civilians retaliated with stones. The unrest hardened into an armed conflict that has displaced families, disrupted education, and taken thousands of lives.
I come from the Northwest Region, one of the conflict’s epicenters where I first experienced political unrest, displacement, and mass killing of innocent people, including women and children. Although democracy is preached, on paper it is practically nonexistent, and citizens do not have a voice or right to protest. This challenges democratic beliefs that citizens must be free to hold powerholders publicly accountable and that the government must answer to them.
After that political crisis, I began to see how democracy is being practiced differently in different countries while I was still in Cameroon in 2020. When a Minneapolis police officer killed George Floyd, I watched Americans on TV march through the streets demanding justice and accountability from the police. From thousands of miles away, I was struck by how their democratic rights allow them to protest and challenge the governing power, confront powerful institutions, hold them accountable, and force a national conversation. That history shaped how I see a democratic system in practice in America.
The police response, however, was chaotic. Police arrested more than 10,000 people during the first 10 days of demonstrations. Police used tear gas, rubber bullets, and other force against protesters and journalists. Many arrests involved curfew violations or failure to disperse rather than violence.
What happened afterward mattered. Prosecutors dismissed many charges against peaceful demonstrators. In Cincinnati, prosecutors dismissed charges against 479 nonviolent protesters arrested for violating curfews. Five years later, the city approved an $8.1 million settlement resolving their claims of wrongful arrest, police brutality, inhumane detention conditions and unlawful property seizures.
The Black Lives Matters movement produced many forms of accountability including the conviction of Derek Chauvin of murdering Floyd. Some states and local governments changed policing rules, and President Joe Biden restricted certain federal practices through a 2022 executive order. But Congress failed to pass the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, and several reform efforts later stalled or were reversed.
The lesson was not that American democracy worked perfectly. It was that citizens could expose its failures and use courts, elections and public pressure to demand a response. That distinction is why I judge democracy not by absence of conflict, but by whether institutions respond to it.
After I arrived at UC Berkeley, protest in America was no longer something I watched through a screen. In fact, I have witnessed many of them happening around Berkeley and in Oakland. For instance, in November 2025, I saw protestors opposing a Turning Point USA event at Zellerbach Hall. Police surrounded the area to ensure the safety of the protestors and people participating to avoid any physical confrontation among the opposing parties. Although some confrontations occurred and a few people were arrested, the program continued inside while protesters voiced their opposition outside. This shows how competing political voices can coexist when authorities are there to protect violence.
The No Kings demonstrations in March 2026 carried that tradition across the country. Thousands of protests took place in all 50 states, with organizers estimating that millions participated. In Berkeley, I watched how the police stood there and watched protesters go along. For what I remember watching from a close distance, it remained peaceful in Berkeley, although some cities reported arrests and confrontations.
To Americans who see protest mainly as noise or inconvenience, that public disagreement may look like democratic disorder. But that disorder and public disruption is democracy in practice.. The First Amendment gives citizens room to challenge the government, but arrests, police force and unfinished reforms show that the right to speak does not guarantee that power will listen.
American democracy is therefore active but uneven. Its strength lies in citizens who continue to assemble and institutions that can correct abuses. Its weakness appears when officials suppress dissent or wait for public outrage before accepting responsibility.
Cameroon showed me the cost of unanswered grievances. America has stronger protections, but those protections endure only when people use them in a great way. Protest gives citizens a voice. Accountability tells us whether democracy is listening and whether their response is healthy.
Pechuqui Laurata is a fall fellow with The Fulcrum and a student at UC Berkeley School of Journalism (Master of Journalism). Guided by early experiences in Cameroon and strengthened at Berkeley, Laurata aims to produce rigorous, compassionate journalism that highlights how communities respond to hardship and where meaningful change is taking root.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More
















