Tiahna Pantovich joins Veterans for Political Innovation to discuss how her desire to serve took her through the Army, to become a therapist, and to become an advocate for election innovation, how she has felt disenfranchised by the partisan primary system, and the challenge of not sitting entirely in one identity, but identifying as a unique individual with multiple identities.
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

Pregnant asylum-seeker Yaoska, 32, comforts her two-year-old son who was not feeling well, inside a motel room where she and her children are living after her husband was deported to Nicaragua.
(AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell)
Amid Trump’s Immigration Crackdown, Immigrant Mothers Carry a Weight
Jun 23, 2026
For Kimberly Alvarez, memories of federal agents whisking her husband away at 26 Federal Plaza last fall come back in jarring flashes.
The couple had just finished their first court appearance as asylum seekers from Venezuela when immigration agents arrested him, then turned to her and simply said, “you can leave.” She remembers the chaos, the confusion, how no one would answer where her husband was being taken.
“All I was doing was crying,” Alvarez said months later in her Brooklyn apartment. “At that moment, all I was doing was praying and saying goodbye, asking him to come back, to bring him back.”
But Alvarez was not just crying for herself; she was six months pregnant.
In the first year of President Trump’s second term, the number of arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has more than quadrupled, according to a report by the Deportation Data Project. Across the country, ICE street arrests have skyrocketed, and in New York City, they increased by roughly 212% over the previous year, according to data analysis by Documented. The crackdown has created a looming fear among many of New York City’s immigrant communities — and created even more concern for the city’s pregnant immigrant population.
As mothers and immigrants, scores of women are bringing children into a country that, in the last year, has placed a record number of people — including 500 babies and toddlers — in ICE detention. On top of that instability, immigrant mothers and families now face the potential dismantling of birthright citizenship — a constitutional protection that, for 158 years, has granted anyone born in the U.S. full citizenship.
Demonstrators rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court as justices hear oral arguments on whether President Donald Trump can deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Wednesday, April 1, 2026. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)In April, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Barbara v. Donald J. Trump, a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union arguing that Trump’s executive order to withhold birthright citizenship from children of non-citizens is unconstitutional. Nearly 10% of all births in the U.S. were to non-citizens in 2023, according to a March analysis by the Pew Research Center.
The Supreme Court is expected to announce its decision in the coming weeks, exacerbating fears of some immigrant mothers already experiencing the intense emotions and anxieties that often come with pregnancy and giving birth.
Historically, immigration crackdowns have had significant adverse health impacts on pregnant women. Specifically, a 2021 study in North Carolina found that the uptick in ICE arrests and deportations during the first Trump administration led to worse health outcomes, including decreased birth weight, for children born to immigrant women.
These impacts go beyond the individual — and can actually impact entire communities, according to Teresa Janevic, an associate professor of epidemiology at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health.
“Even if you yourself are not, say, an undocumented immigrant, it still affects you because it could affect your community,” says Janevic, who studies the social determinants of maternal and child health. “That would impact your life and, in general, the social fabric of your community could be harmed, and certainly, a strong community is healthy for mothers and families.”
M.C., 31 years old
In early April, as the Supreme Court was hearing the first arguments in its birthright citizenship case, M.C. — a Venezuelan asylum seeker who asked that Documented withhold her full name — was already eight months pregnant with her second child.
“Whether [my son] does have nationality or whether he doesn’t have nationality, it’s going to be a problem,” M.C. said in Spanish.
M.C. has lived and worked in the U.S. since November 2023. She came in through the Texas border with her then-2-year-old son. While she began the journey with her child’s father, he abandoned them mid-way through the Darién Gap, taking all of their supplies with him.
“We didn’t have anything,” M.C. said. “We didn’t have the food, we didn’t have the diapers, everything I had bought.”
They made it to New York City, and she has since taken care of her baby on her own, working as a home attendant in Queens. A year and a half ago, M.C. met her now-husband, an immigrant without legal status from Ecuador.
“I don’t know what’s going to happen.”
—M.C.
While she has always wanted more kids, her husband thought he was incapable of having children. When the couple found out she was pregnant, they were both surprised. But her joy and shock quickly turned into confusion and fear.
“I don’t know what’s going to happen,” M.C. said. “If the parents are undocumented and are deported, the baby would end up with them in a country where they were not born and without any document proving where the baby was born.”M.C. has not retained a lawyer but worries about who would care for her baby in the U.S. if she, her husband and her older son are all deported.
On May 13, M.C. underwent a C-section and delivered a healthy baby boy. She named him Kaleb Asher after the biblical character Caleb, known for his loyalty and capability.
Despite her long-term concerns about her child’s citizenship, for now M.C. says she is relieved to have Kaleb’s social security information and birth certificate in hand. While her concerns remain, Kaleb’s birth has also reminded her of the beauty of motherhood.
“Kids always bring joy to your life,” M.C. said smiling. “They won’t let you get depressed.”
Luz Nuñez, 34 years old
Luz Angela Nuñez with her daughter Aisha Quershi Nuñez at their home in College Point, Queens. Photo: Mia Anzalone for Documented.Two weeks before she was due to give birth this winter, Luz Nuñez’s baby bump was rapidly growing in size — and so were her feet. When she arrived to work as a home health aide one Saturday in January, her elderly patient took one look at her ankles and became concerned. The patient promptly sent Nuñez home, suggesting she not work until the baby arrives.
“I feel like I could do it,” Nuñez said a week later. “I feel that I am capable of working to the end.”
The truth was, she needed the money. In 2022, Nuñez said she left Colombia and crossed the U.S.-Mexico border, fleeing an abusive partner with her now-12-year-old son Johan Borja Nuñez. In 2024, Nuñez married a U.S. citizen, Allahrakha Quershi, and is now on a waitlist to attain green cards for her and her son using the I-130 visa, which allows relatives, including those through marriage, to obtain permanent residence. But even that process is under higher scrutiny — in May, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services published a memo reminding officers that adjustment of status be for “extraordinary” cases only.
Still, their current legal fees, she said, are in the thousands.
Despite the love she has for her husband and son in the U.S., Nuñez says she deeply misses her family in Colombia. But until her visa paperwork gets approved, she cannot leave the country. In February, Trump banned Colombians from entering the country, which also means none of her family has been able to visit her. She has not seen her family since she departed, four years ago.
That includes her grandmother, who Nuñez said was like a mother to her. When her grandmother died last year, Nuñez couldn’t return for the funeral — and instead was only able to see her grandmother’s coffin through a phone screen.
“You miss your family, you go through your physical pain alone. There’s no one else supporting you. No one knows how you feel,” Nuñez said. “Sometimes I feel like I’m in a prison.”
“Sometimes I feel like I’m in a prison.”
—Luz Nuñez
Nuñez’s immigration status, along with her homesickness, lack of a job due to her pregnancy and dwindling funds, weighed heavily on her mind when she left for Flushing Hospital Medical Center Feb. 7. She was eight months pregnant and her feet had swelled to a concerning degree. Doctors promptly diagnosed her with preeclampsia, a life-threatening condition marked by persistent high blood pressure during pregnancy or soon thereafter. Stress and anxiety can put pregnant women at higher risk, according to Janevic.
“Mothers who deliver an infant too early, or too small, are also at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and other kinds of chronic diseases throughout their life, so it’s a critical time that can program health for both the infant and the mother,” Janevic said.
Nuñez’s doctors induced her labor, which lasted through the night. The next day, on Feb. 8, Nuñez gave birth to a baby girl, three weeks before her estimated due date.
Shortly after the birth, Nuñez’s blood pressure dramatically dropped, and she suffered from a postpartum complication called retained placenta that can lead to life-threatening blood loss. She underwent a blood transfusion. Quershi was by her side. Her mother was on FaceTime.
She says she doesn’t remember much, but she and her baby spent five days in the hospital with round-the-clock care.
Nuñez named her newborn Aisha, an Arabic name, a moniker that her husband would call Nuñez’s grandmother through video calls. It means “life.”
“I look at my son and think about my daughter and it makes me think that I should continue, I will continue.”
—Luz Nuñez
One month later, on the second floor of her cozy home in College Point, Nuñez continues to adjust to her new life as a mother of two. While she talks lovingly of her husband and smiles graciously at her children, Nuñez’s mind is split between longing for her family in Colombia and the long process of becoming American.“There are a lot of things that sometimes you feel that you cannot do it anymore,” Nuñez said. “But then I look at my son and think about my daughter and it makes me think that I should continue, I will continue.”Kimberly Alvarez, 25 years old
Kimberly Alvarez, 25, with her daughter Evangeline and her husband John Alvarez in Medellin, Colombia. Photo courtesy of Kimberly Alvarez.Alvarez arrived in New York City in February 2024 with her husband John Alvarez as asylum seekers from Venezuela. In April 2025, Alvarez found out she was pregnant with her first child, a baby girl. Her first reaction, she said, was fear.“How am I going to keep her alive?” she said. “That’s what I was thinking. ‘How am I going to be able to take care of her?’”At the beginning of Alvarez’s pregnancy, she said she was aware of the immigration enforcement occurring around the country, but vowed not to let it deter her from showing up to her doctor’s appointments.“When you went out, you were always on alert because you didn’t know if [ICE] might be around. I never saw anything suspicious,” Alvarez said. “But of course, you feel scared.”In October, when Alvarez was six months pregnant, her husband was detained by ICE agents at 26 Federal Plaza. When the immediate shock wore off, she obsessively checked the Online Detainee Locator System to find out where her husband went. A day later, she discovered that he was being kept at Delaney Hall detention center in New Jersey. Alvarez quickly set up an account to pay for phone calls, and every two days, she would pay about $10 for a one-hour call, updating her husband about the baby, her appointments and how she was doing.“Crying was the only way for me to release the tension,” said Alvarez, who worried that her lack of sleep and bad diet were impacting her baby. “Crying was the only way for me to release the tension.”—Kimberly AlvarezThat tension built up day by day, week by week following her husband’s arrest. Alvarez had stopped her work as a cleaner in the neighborhood’s synagogues two weeks before her husband’s detention because of her pregnancy. The plan, she said, was to rely solely on his income as a maintenance worker for “the food, the rent, everything.” Left with few choices, Kimberley had to rely on her mother’s income as a cleaner. The older woman had moved to New York from North Carolina to assist with Alvarez’s pregnancy. “I feel like I’m supposed to help my mom, not the other way around,” Alvarez said. “I felt powerless because I couldn’t do anything.”On Dec. 9, Alvarez gave birth to a daughter, Evangeline. While her baby was healthy, Alvarez’s anxieties did not go away. While she returned to cleaning synagogues a few months after Evangeline’s birth to help make ends meet, Alvarez and her daughter rarely left home. Alvarez said she felt paralyzed, getting frequent alerts from a neighborhood WhatsApp group when ICE was spotted nearby. One day, she said, ICE arrested her friend’s husband in Sunset Park, in an area where she would sometimes take Evangeline for walks.“I’m so afraid that I’ll go out and run into one of them and that they’ll take her away from me,” Alvarez said. “That’s my biggest fear, that someone will take her away from me and I won’t know where my daughter is.”In March, her husband decided to voluntarily remove himself from the United States and move back to Colombia, where he is originally from. It was a family decision, but it was not a happy one — hiring immigration lawyers was too expensive, Alvarez said, adding that staying in the U.S. felt too uncertain. “I’m so afraid that I’ll go out and run into one of them [ICE agents] and that they’ll take her away from me.”
—Kimberly Alvarez
The stress and the loneliness of life without her husband pushed Alvarez and the then-three-month-old Evangeline to leave the country and join him in Colombia. The family has since reunited — but Alvarez misses New York City and the life that could have been.
“I have dreamed many times that I will return,” she said. “At the same time, I am calm because I am with my family.”
Amid Trump’s Immigration Crackdown, Immigrant Mothers Carry a Weight was first published on Documented and was republished with permission.
Mia Anzalone is a journalist based in New York City.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended

Can AI profit-sharing help workers? Examining public wealth funds, AI taxes, economic transition policies, and the future of work.
Jason marz / Getty Images
There’s No Easy Path Through the AI Transition
Jun 22, 2026
“Trending” policy ideas tend to garner attention for all the wrong reasons: they seem like silver bullet solutions that will save us from taking on much harder reforms. Proposals to share profits from leading AI companies with the public are the latest example. It’s the rare policy scheme that seems to have united President Donald Trump, Senator Bernie Sanders, and CEOs at the leading AI labs. While the proposals for AI profit sharing vary in their precise details, a quick review of their likely outcomes should quickly deflate the popular excitement that has formed in response to calls for new taxes, public wealth funds, and the like. It’s important to reveal such limitations so that the AI policy discourse can move on to mechanisms more likely to address the real concerns of the American people.
In our first hypothetical world, the two leading AI labs—Anthropic and OpenAI—give away 3% of their equity. That’s not nothing! Based on current figures, such a contribution could kickstart a public wealth fund of about $55 billion. Let’s then imagine that fund earns 10% a year (a big “if” but let’s run with it). Per The Economist, this AI would reach a staggering $140 billion within ten years. How much would that benefit Americans? If annual payouts were 4% — what the publication reports is a proper amount to keep the fund going and growing — Americans would have an extra $20 in their pocket.
What if we taxed the companies? The Economist also did the math on an annual tax of 0.2% on the market value of AI companies, defined broadly to include AI labs as well as chipmakers. The result? At best, a few hundred dollars a year per American.
Yes, that’s it. Of course, such a fund or tax could be structured in a way that directed a greater share of those annual payouts to individuals from communities with particularly high rates of economic insecurity. But even with some reallocation of the funds, it’s obvious that this is not the AI policy to end all AI policy. In the optimistic case, it’s only ever going to be one of many policy interventions necessary to help Americans transition to the economy of the future.
That’s why it’s essential that these policies not be debated in isolation. Let’s assume that Congress managed to pass some fund or tax, there’s a risk that, given the outsized attention to this single idea, people would feel the temptation to end the economic transition effort there—problem solved, right?
Very unlikely.
The transition ahead will involve tackling a range of more complex, entrenched issues. There’s a clear need for occupational licensing reform so that more people can earn jobs in the care economy without being forced through credentialing programs that often have no tie to public safety. There’s an urgent demand for updating retraining programs that have consistently fallen short of their potential. And, there’s a whole range of barriers that need to be lowered to help more people start and sustain families.
Back-of-the-napkin solutions will not solve any of those issues. There’s no easy way through. Recognition of this challenge will help set expectations and make sure that success is not declared prematurely.
None of this means profit sharing deserves no place in the policy conversation. A modest fund or tax could help at the margins, and a thoughtful design could steer real support toward the communities facing the deepest insecurity. Yet the appeal of these schemes lies in their simplicity, and that simplicity is the tell. The home health aide blocked by needless licensing rules, the factory operator failed by a hollow retraining program, and the young couple priced out of starting a family will not be carried through this transition by a dividend of a few hundred dollars. The upshot is plain: profit sharing can be one tool among many, and the sooner we treat it that way, the sooner we get to the harder work that actually matters.
Kevin Frazier is the Director of the AI Innovation and Law Program at the University of Texas School of Law.
Keep ReadingShow less

Imagine a democracy concert followed by a yearlong democracy call to action roadshow—designed to build a new civic movement
Getty Images, gilaxia
A Hollow Song for a Hollow Patriotism: Reclaiming the Real Patriotic Ballads
Jun 22, 2026
After musician after musician pulled out from Trump’s June 24 “Freedom 250” concert, we’re left with Lee Greenwood and an opera tenor. The anthem that made Greenwood a star, “God Bless the USA,” was written in 1985 during the height of the Cold War. It begins with the specter of loss—“If tomorrow—all the things were gone, I’d worked for all my life / And I had to start all over with my children and my wife.” Then the wounds disappear before they’re felt: “I’d thank my lucky stars to be living here today / Because the flag still stands for freedom and they can’t take that away.”
Ronald Reagan made the song his campaign theme while launching a new age of American inequality by systematically busting unions and cutting taxes for the wealthiest. Greenwood treats layoffs and the resulting toll on ordinary lives as a mere inconvenience. As the refrain shifts from violins and a church organ to a military march, he repeats, “I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free / And I won’t forget the men who died who gave that right to me.”
Honoring those who died resonates powerfully. Those who risk taking bullets to defend our country deserve respect for their service and sacrifice. Yet this gives us no special grace over citizens of other lands. And doesn’t answer the question of whether or not it was necessary to put them in harm's way. Because Greenwood says nothing about what freedom might demand of us, it becomes just an empty phrase, blessing all that our leaders may do, no matter how arrogant or destructive.
We were defending freedom in this view, when supporting dictators from Chile’s Augusto Pinochet to the Iranian Shah, whose brutal rule laid the groundwork for the current theocracy and the war of choice that we hope has now finally ended. We’re supposedly defending freedom now as Trump cozies up to dictators like Vladimir Putin, Turkey’s Recep Erdoğan, and Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Salman, and while ICE agents grab innocent people off America’s streets. When Greenwood sings, “There ain’t no doubt I love this land. God Bless the USA,” he never suggests what qualities of justice would redeem the love he declaims.
Greenwood wrote the song after we invaded the 95,000-person country of Grenada, wanting to reflect “the spirit of America being proud.” Reagan made it his campaign theme, and Greenwood has been singing it at Republican rallies and conventions ever since. Because Greenwood says that just living in America makes us free, his version of patriotism gets reduced to signing a blank check for whatever our leaders choose to do. It’s a perfect match for this or any president who seeks to erase all limits on their power.
But Greenwood’s isn’t the sole patriotic ballad to choose from. The late Waylon Jennings’ “America” reached number six on the charts the year “God Bless the USA” first came out. Written by Sammy Johns, the song affirms connection to native soil, as Jennings repeats, “America, America,” slowly and tenderly as if to a woman he loves; then admits, softly, “You’ve become a habit to me.” But he also makes tough demands—recounting his own history as an Anglo yeoman “from down round Tennessee,” then continuing, “But my brothers / Are all black and white / Yellow too / And the red man is right / To expect a little from you / Promise and then follow through / America.”
In a similar vein, “America the Beautiful” writer Katherine Lee Bates celebrated “purple mountain majesties,” but actively opposed America’s imperial adventures, so added lines like “God mend thine every flaw / Confirm thy soul in self-control / Thy liberty in law!” Bruce Springsteen’s whole career has been about honoring the courage and dignity of ordinary Americans, from “The Promised Land” celebrating those with “dreams that break your heart,” to “The Rising’s” portrait of 9/11 firefighters, to the “Streets of Minneapolis” chorus, “Singing through the bloody mist, we’ll take our stand for this land.”
Hard as it is, we’re stronger for engaging the difficult questions about who we’ve been as a country and who we want to be. Patriotic ballads don’t have to be political manifestos. But the best celebrate our diverse and contradictory land and acknowledge that true greatness does not flow like automatic grace. Rather, it’s fulfilled through honoring common responsibility and connection.
With democracy profoundly threatened, we need true patriotism more than ever. We can choose a patriotism of blind adulation. Or we can embrace the songs that demand the most of us.
Keep ReadingShow less
A Night at Chase Field Revealed a Different America
Jun 22, 2026
I didn’t love seeing the charge for the baseball tickets hit my credit card. Like Americans, I’ve watched expenses and discretionary costs rise. A night at the ballpark felt like a luxury rather than a routine outing. Still, I wanted time with my two grandsons—one a devoted Los Angeles Dodgers fan, the other a loyal Arizona Diamondbacks fan.
That alone promised an interesting evening.
But when we walked into Chase Field in Phoenix, we stepped into something larger than a baseball game. It was Mexican Heritage Night. Families filled the stadium. Music, color, and celebration were everywhere—mariachi bands, dancers, and cultural pride shared openly with the crowd.
Before the first pitch was thrown, something happened that stayed with me. As the Himno Nacional Mexicano—the Mexican national anthem—began, the crowd rose. People stood with quiet dignity, honoring a culture woven into Arizona’s identity. Moments later, everyone remained standing for The Star‑Spangled Banner.
In those opening minutes, the stadium felt less like a battleground of rival teams and more like a shared community.
What struck me most wasn’t the celebration itself. It was the people experiencing it together.
Everywhere I looked, I saw Americans from different backgrounds sharing the same space. Latino, Black, White, Asian. Young and old. Families, friends, and strangers. Arizonans and Californians. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. Fathers with their young children. Multi‑ethnic groups of friends. People who, on paper, are supposed to be at odds.
And somehow, they got along.
The crowd was anything but quiet. Diamondbacks fans shouted, “Beat L.A.!” Dodgers fans responded just as loudly. Thousands of people passionately rooted for opposite outcomes.
Yet no one seemed offended by others' disagreement.
The fans beside us wore Dodgers blue. The fans behind us supported the Diamondbacks. Two couples in front of us came together, laughed together, and left together—while cheering for opposite teams. My grandsons did the same, sitting side by side while rooting for different sides.
The cheers that followed weren’t divided by team or background. There were cheers of pride and unity.
It was a reminder: belonging is not a zero‑sum game.
As I watched, I thought about my years as a school principal. Our staff reflected much of America. We came from different racial and ethnic backgrounds. We were men and women, younger educators and seasoned veterans. Some were Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or held other beliefs. Some were Democrats, some Republicans.
Yet those differences rarely defined our work.
We focused on the children we served. Because we shared a common purpose, differences did not divide us. In fact, they often strengthened our work.
The same lesson was visible at Chase Field.
Arizona is often portrayed as politically combustible—a competitive swing state. But the crowd that night told a different story. People were not scanning one another for political cues. They were not suspicious of who sat beside them. They were not treating strangers as enemies.
They were simply living together.
That reality stands in stark contrast to the rhetoric we often hear from national leaders. In 2025, at a memorial event in this same state, the president told a crowd he “hates” his opponents—a comment reported by PBS, the New York Times, and TIME. The applause that followed showed how normalized political hostility has become in some corners of public life.
But what I saw at Chase Field was the opposite: thousands of people from every background, cheering for different teams, standing for two national anthems, and sharing the same space without hostility. No one was told to hate their neighbor. No one acted as if they should.
What I witnessed was diversity, equity, and inclusion in their most natural form—not as a policy debate, but as a lived experience. Everyone belonged. And when the game ended, everyone left together.
Diversity and inclusion promote cultural understanding and empathy toward different customs and traditions. That is exactly what unfolded during Mexican Heritage Night. When citizens value diversity, they create environments—whether in workplaces, schools, communities, or public life—that are more innovative, empathetic, and resilient. I saw that resilience in the ease with which thousands of strangers shared space without incident.
Inclusion is also essential for breaking new ground in the pursuit of freedom and progress. When people feel valued and safe, they contribute more fully to the life of the community. That is how democracies grow stronger.
This truth is not new. It is woven into the country’s founding ideas.
James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 10 that a free society would always contain many factions—different interests, beliefs, and backgrounds. He believed the strength of the republic depended on our ability to coexist despite those differences.
George Washington warned in his Farewell Address that political factions could turn Americans into enemies. He urged unity, not uniformity, but a commitment to the common good.
And the Declaration of Independence reminds us that all people are created equal and endowed with unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those rights are not theoretical. They become real only when we treat one another with dignity in everyday life.
What they feared—and what they hoped for—was on display in that ballpark.
As the nation approaches its 250th anniversary, we need this spirit more than ever. A diverse, inclusive America is not only truer to our founding ideals—it is the America capable of meeting the challenges ahead. Embracing diversity drives innovative thinking, breaks down barriers, and leads to solutions worthy of a nation entering its next chapter.
It is easy to believe the country is more divided than it is. The daily noise of politics often tells us that Americans cannot coexist without hostility. But that night at Chase Field revealed something different—something quieter and truer. When people are not pushed into categories or told to fear one another, they remember how to live side by side.
In that stadium, people were not abstractions. They were neighbors. They were families enjoying a night out. They were fans sharing a common experience. They were people laughing, talking, and cheering in the same space. The America I saw there was not fractured or fragile. It was functional, familiar, and deeply human.
And it offered a lesson worth carrying forward. If we want a country that looks more like that ballpark and less like the churn of political feeds, we must do our part. We can show up in shared spaces. We can talk to people we don’t already agree with. We can choose curiosity over assumption. And we can support leaders—at every level—who value diversity, demonstrate empathy, and rise above the temptation to divide for personal gain.
A “stadium climate” for America means creating public spaces—literal and civic—where everyone belongs, everyone is respected, and everyone plays by the same rules. It means remembering that disagreement is normal, but dehumanization is not. It means recognizing that diversity is not a threat to the republic—it is one of its greatest strengths.
For a few hours under the roof of Chase Field, that truth was impossible to miss. And by the end of the night, even the charge on my credit card felt a little more worth it—not because of the game, but because of what it revealed about the country we still share.
A night at Chase Field revealed a different America—one that still exists, still works, and is still within our reach if we choose it.
Carolyn Goode is a retired educational leader and former principal who writes about civic responsibility, democratic values, and the everyday experiences that reveal who we are as a nation. She lives in Arizona.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More

















