Heather Cox Richardson reviews Trump’s flagrant indifference to the law.

She writes:

Yesterday I wrote that President Donald J. Trump’s celebration of his new marble bathroom in the White House was so tone deaf at a time when federal employees are working without pay, furloughed workers are taking out bank loans to pay their bills, healthcare premiums are skyrocketing, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits are at risk, that it seemed likely to make the history books as a symbol of this administration.

But that image got overtaken just hours later by pictures from a Great Gatsby–themed party Trump threw at Mar-a-Lago last night hours before SNAP benefits ended. F. Scott Fitzgerald’s 1925 novel The Great Gatsby skewered the immoral and meaningless lives of the very wealthy during the Jazz Age who spent their time throwing extravagant parties and laying waste to the lives of the people around them.

Although two federal judges yesterday found that the administration’s refusal to use reserves Congress provided to fund SNAP in an emergency was likely illegal and one ordered the government to use that money, the administration did not immediately do as the judge ordered.

Trump posted on social media that “[o]ur Government lawyers do not think we have the legal authority to pay SNAP,” so he has “instructed our lawyers to ask the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible.” Blaming the Democrats for the shutdown, Trump added that “even if we get immediate guidance, it will unfortunately be delayed while States get the money out.” His post provided the phone number for Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer’s office, telling people: “If you use SNAP benefits, call the Senate Democrats, and tell them to reopen the Government, NOW!”

“They were careless people,” Fitzgerald wrote, “they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

This afternoon, Ellen Nakashima and Noah Robertson of the Washington Post reported that the administration is claiming it does not have to consult Congress to continue its attacks on Venezuela. The 1973 War Powers Act says it does.

In 1973, after President Richard M. Nixon ordered secret bombings of Cambodia during the Vietnam War, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution to reassert its power over foreign wars. “It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations,” it read.

On September 4, 2025, Trump notified Congress of a strike against a vessel in the Caribbean that he said “was assessed to be affiliated with a designated terrorist organization and to be engaged in illicit drug trafficking activities.” The letter added: “I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution.”

Monday will mark 60 days from that announcement, but the administration does not appear to be planning to ask for Congress’s approval. It has been reluctant to share information about the strikes, first excluding senior Senate Democrats from a Senate briefing, then offering House members a briefing that did not include lawyers and failed to answer basic questions. The top two leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Jack Reed (D-RI), have both said the administration has not produced documents, attack orders, and a list of targets required by law.

Representative Gregory W. Meeks (D-NY), the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told Nakashima and Robertson: “The administration is, I believe, doing an illegal act and anything that it can to avoid Congress.”

T. Elliot Gaiser, who leads the Office of Legal Counsel under Trump, told a group of lawmakers this week that the administration is taking the position that the strikes on unnamed people in small boats do not meet the definition of hostilities because they are not putting U.S. military personnel in harm’s way. It says the strikes, which have killed more than 60 people, have been conducted primarily by drones launched off naval vessels.

Brian Finucane, who was the War Powers Resolution lawyer at the State Department under President Barack Obama and during Trump’s first term, explained: “What they’re saying is anytime the president uses drones or any standoff weapon against someone who cannot shoot back, it’s not hostilities. It’s a wild claim of executive authority.”

If the administration proceeds without acknowledging the Monday deadline for congressional approval, Finucane said, “it is usurping Congress’s authority over the use of military force.”

Notes:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/31/politics/snap-benefits-november-judge-ruling

https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/news/war-powers-resolution-1973

https://assets.ctfassets.net/6hn51hpulw83/iOdLcVg6XVHorL4Rv5rWr/9a116b4c89cb06efee02dcd6df96bba1/20250904-Trump.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/all-the-u-s-military-strikes-against-alleged-drug-boats

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/11/01/trump-venezuela-war-drugs-law/

Bluesky:

onestpress.onestnetwork.com/post/3m4ldvvz7322u

meidastouch.com/post/3m4jy6x5iks2y

Every so often, I read a story about education that is truly annoying. The most recent one is in The Atlantic. It was written by Idrees Kahloon, a staff writer at the magazine. It is titled “America is Sliding Toward Illiteracy.” The subtitle is “Declining standards and low expectations are destroying American education.”

As a historian of American education, I have read the same story hundreds of times. In the 19th century, these warnings that children were not learning anything in school were commonplace. The cry of “crisis in the schools” appeared frequently in every decade of the 20th century. We are only 25 years into this century, and similar views appear in the popular press regularly.

Long ago, attacks on the schools were intended to produce more funding for them, or higher standards for those entering teaching..

Now they serve the purposes of those pushing privatization of public schools, those who are promoting vouchers, charters, homeschooling, and every other way of destroying public schools.

Test scores have fallen! The culprit? Smart phones! Social media! Low expectations! Low standards! Bad teachers! Bad Schools!

George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind law of 2002 raised standards and expectations but it raised them absurdly high, to a literally unreachable goal. A rebellion formed among those who didn’t think it possible that “all students” would reach “proficiency” by 2014.

NCLB required that all students would be “proficient,” not just at grade level, by 2014. By NAEP standards, “proficient” does not mean grade level. It means “A” performance. In no other nation in the world are all students rated “proficient” on the NAEP scale. Nor has any district or state ever reached that goal.

But the Cassandras of American education have monopolized the podium for many years, wailing that we will be an impoverished third-world country if test scores don’t rise dramatically.

Think about it. The biggest explosion of doom-and-gloom was caused by the Reagan-era report called “A Nation at Risk” in 1983. It flatly predicted that our economy was imperiled by a “rising tide of mediocrity.” But what has happened since 1983? Our economy is booming, we have not been eclipsed by other nations. We continue to be a land of innovation, creativity, scientific and medical pre-eminence.

How is our nation’s success possible, given the cry for more than 40 years that our schools are hobbling our economy and compromising our future?

Instead of complaining about our schools and lambasting them nonstop, the critics should be complaining about poverty and inequality. These are the root causes of poor student outcomes.

If the critics are worried about our future, they should shout out against Trump’s orders to withhold funding for research in science and medicine. If they really wanted great schools, they would stop diverting public funds to nonpublic schools and homeschoolers–where there are low or no standards for teachers– and make sure that every student has certified, experienced teachers, small classes, and the amenities available in every school that are typically available only in wealthy suburban districts.

No, our kids are not sliding into stupidity. If you don’t agree, I dare you to take an eighth grade math test and release your scores. You will be surprised.

The greatest generation sits in our public high schools today, unless our government continues to impose moronic policies of choice and competition that have failed for the past thirty-five years.

Thom Hartmann explains why the shutdown continues. The Republicans in the Senate have the votes to end it.

He writes:

The GOP’s dirty little secret exposed, courtesy of Donald Trump: Republicans in the Senate could have ended the shutdown anytime they wanted. Ever since the shutdown started, I’ve been shouting into the wilderness that Senate Majority Leader Republican John Thune (who now holds the position Mitch McConnell held for so long) could reopen the government with the GOP’s so-called “clean continuing resolution” or “clean CR” any time he wanted. All it takes to suspend or even eliminate the filibuster rule — which is neither in the Constitution nor any law, but merely a Senate rule — is 51 votes. Republicans have 53 senators and the Vice President adds a 54th, so it shouldn’t be a particularly heavy lift. I pointed it out on Ali Velshi’s program, and a few days later Congressman Ro Khanna and I discussed it on my program; he went on to point it out over on Fox “News” (the host thought he was discussing reconciliation; they don’t hire the best and the brightest over there). But virtually none of the mainstream media have bothered to point out this simple reality; instead, they go along with the story that Republicans are essentially helpless victims of evil Democrats who are holding the nation hostage. Finally, though, Trump himself let the bomb drop in a posting on his Nazi-infested social media site, writing: “WE are in power, and if we did what we should be doing, it would IMMEDIATELY end this ridiculous, Country destroying ‘SHUT DOWN’… It is now time for the Republicans to play their ‘TRUMP CARD,’ and go for what is called the Nuclear Option — Get rid of the Filibuster, and get rid of it, NOW!” I’ve argued for years that the filibuster helps the GOP and special interests far more than Democrats, and Schumer, et al, should have nuked it years ago when they had the power to do so. Hell, it was originally put into the Senate rules back in the early 19th century to protect against the passage of legislation outlawing slavery! Thune could suspend the filibuster for a single bill or blow it up altogether; either would be an improvement over the status quo. Yes, it would enable Republicans to pass more of their toxic and destructive legislation over the short term, but it would — importantly — also let Americans see the unvarnished consequences of Republican policies. And when Democrats come back into power, they could get a lot more done without the filibuster, including rolling back Citizens United and establishing an absolute right to vote. Let your Republican senators know (202-224-3121) they should take Trump’s advice and end the filibuster!


Epstein, Rubio, or ego? What’s really behind Trump’s Venezuela madness? What the hell is going on with Trump’s provocations against Venezuela? It sure looks like he’s trying to gin up a war or regime change, neither of which are popular with the American people or consistent with Trump’s outspokenly loud anti-interventionist anti-nation-building campaign rhetoric. And he’s trying to do it the same way he tore down the East Wing of the White House: in secret until it’s such a done deal that nobody can undo it. But why? I’ve posited that — like Reagan and both Bush presidents — he thinks he needs a “little war” to distract us from his crimes, corruption, Epstein, and the weakness of the economy. But it’s also possible that this is being driven by Secretary of State “Lil” Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense “Whiskey Pete” Hegseth. Rubio rose to political power in Florida by lying for years that his parents were Cuban refugees who fled Castro and communism (in fact, they came to the US in May, 1956, more than 2 years before the Cuban revolution), and has long harbored anti-Latin-communist sentiments. It’s entirely possible that he still nurtures presidential aspirations and thinks taking down Maduro might be his ticket to the GOP nomination in 2028 (assuming there’s an election that year). Hegseth is a dry (?) drunk apparently doped up on testosterone who gets giddy every time he can use the words “lethal” or “kill” in a sentence; it’s a safe bet that he’d be orgasmic over the chance to murder more than just a few dozen people in small boats. Yesterday, the Miami Herald reported: “The Trump Administration has made the decision to attack military installations inside Venezuela and the strikes could come at any moment, sources with knowledge of the situation told the Miami Herald…” Adding to the intrigue, the DOD gave a secret briefing to the Senate Intelligence Committee and — get this — only allowed Republicans into the room. The committee’s senior Democrat, Mark Warner, called the unprecedented decision by Republicans “bullshit” and over in the House, where Democrats were allowed in, Democrat Seth Molton said: “What I heard here today was a tactical brief. I heard no strategy, no end game, no assessment of how they are going to end the flow of drugs into the United States…” Every day it seems more and more evident that this has little to nothing to do with drugs, which raises the question: “Why?” Why take such a chance by attacking a country with mutual defense agreements with Russia and China? Why risk war in our hemisphere? Why put our soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen at such risk? Is it Epstein? Rubio‘s ambitions? Inquiring minds — and American patriots who care about our military and our reputation around the world — want to know.


Trump’s new refugee policy: white, wealthy, and welcome. In a major change of a refugee policy that stretches back to the 1920s, the Trump administration has announced that only 7,500 people will be allowed into the US this year, and priority won’t go to Afghans who helped our troops or brown immigrants who’ve served in America’s military. Instead, the entire front of the line will be filled by white South Africans like Elon Musk’s father (who was in Moscow this week for a party with Putin). The white supremacy credentials of the Trump administration — including widespread layoffs of Black employees — are now absolutely impeccable.


— Hispanics not welcome either, unless they worked for one of Trump’s shabby golf motels. Alejandro Juarez illegally crossed the US border 22 years ago, and soon thereafter became one of Trump’s many undocumented workers (like the Poles who built Trump Tower, for example). ICE picked him up a few weeks ago and put him on a deportation flight to Mexico before, apparently, somebody from the Trump organization noticed he was missing. DHS is now frantically trying to find the valued worker and bring him back to the US so he can apply for long-term residency and a work permit. Irony of ironies…


— “Judge Boxwine” Pirro, recently recruited from Fox “News” for a federal judgeship, apparently demanded prosecutors delete the word “mob” to describe a member of the mob that attacked the US Capitol on January 6th. George Orwell famously wrote, “Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.” It now appears that we’re falling deeper and deeper into an Orwellian world where Trump redefines the past so he can rewrite the future, much as the remnants of the Confederacy did with their Lost Cause mythology when Reconstruction collapsed in 1877. Pirro won’t explain why the description was excised, nor why the two prosecutors who wrote it into a sentencing recommendation have been relocated, perhaps in anticipation of being fired. But anybody with half a brain can figure this one out…


Tear gassing trick-or-treaters: Noem’s new definition of American values. Puppy killer Noem refused to pause operations in Chicago so children can trick or treat. What have we become? Brutal is probably a good word, to begin with. In another example of the Trump regime’s frantic efforts to harass, imprison, and deport brown people — and perhaps to gin up an insurrection that could justify suspending elections — Noem denied Illinois Governor Pritzker’s request to hold off on the tear gas and masked terror operations for Halloween. When ICE recently raided a Chicago apartment building, they then trashed multiple apartments, ripping up furniture, smashing windows, breaking and scattering possessions, and removing and carting away phones and laptops. No warrants signed by judges were presented and one ICE thug, when asked about the shivering zip-tied American citizen kids standing in the freezing cold, said, “Fuck the children.” Setting aside the invocation of Epstein (and Trump?) the phrase immediately brings to mind, the brutal sentiment appears to be one embraced by ICE Barbie herself…


From firebrand to outcast: Marjorie Taylor Greene’s midlife MAGA crisis. What’s happening with MTG? The MAGA firebrand appears to be undergoing some sort of a conversion experience, most recently calling out “pathetic Republican men” who she says are essentially telling her to sit down and shut up. Prior to that, she posted on social media: “Democrats did this with Obamacare 15 yrs ago and Johnson says Republicans have a mystery plan that is yet to be revealed to fix it. But no one knows what it is and we’re told to stay home in our districts.” Either Greene is in trouble politically in her district as she looks at an upcoming primary or next year’s midterm election, or she’s finally figured out that she’s been being played for a sucker by Trump and his Republicans all these years (along with so many others) and is no longer willing to play the game. I’ve invited her on my program for a friendly discussion; we’ll see if she shows up…

Heather Cox Richardson draws together the seams of a story that is unfolding piece by piece. Trump’s popularity is plummeting; he is obsessed with his poll numbers. At the same time, he is assembling military forces to control Democratic-run cities where there are no riots, no disorders that can’t be handled by local police. Does he really believe that the nation’s cities are engulfed by a massive crime wave?

The only terrifying development that she did not include in her summary is Trump’s declaration that he intends to resume nuclear testing, a practice abandoned in 1992.

As I read her piece below, I was reminded that Trump said at a rally, “Vote for me now, and you will never have to vote again.” He often says the quiet part out loud.

She writes:

House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) continues to try to pin the upcoming catastrophic lapse in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding on the Democrats. But with the U.S. Department of Agriculture sitting on $6 billion in funds Congress appropriated for just such an event, the Treasury finding $20 billion to prop up Trump ally Javier Milei in Argentina, Johnson refusing to bring the House into regular session to negotiate an end to the government shutdown, and President Donald J. Trump demanding $230 million in damages from the American taxpayer, bulldozing the East Wing of the White House to build a gold-plated ballroom that will dwarf the existing White House, and traveling to Asia, where South Korean leadership courted him by giving him a gold crown and serving him brownies topped with edible gold, blaming any funding shortfall on Democrats is a hard sell.

According to a Washington Post–ABC survey, more Americans blame Trump and congressional Republicans for the shutdown than blame Democrats by a margin of 45 to 33, and Trump’s approval rating continues to move downward, with the presidential approval average reported by Fifty Plus One at 41.3% approval and 55.1% disapproval, a –14 split. G. Elliott Morris of Strength in Numbers noted on October 24 that polls show Americans now trust Democrats more than Republicans to handle the economy well.

Trump ran in 2024 with a promise to bring down inflation, which was then close to the Federal Reserve’s target of 2.0%; now core inflation is at 3%, having gone up every month since April. Halloween candy—on people’s minds today—is at 9.8% inflation and costs 44% more than it did in 2019. Federal Reserve Board chair Jerome Powell sure sounded like he was describing stagflation—a condition when the economy stagnates despite inflation—when he said yesterday: “In the near term, risks to inflation are tilted to the upside, and risks to employment to the downside, a challenging situation.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said today that while the stock market has done well this year, a better economy is going to “start flowing through to working Americans next year.”

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, in a rambling and disjointed speech in Japan, Trump told U.S. military personnel that he is federalizing National Guard troops and sending them into Democratic-led cities “because we’re going to have safe cities.” In the same speech, Trump repeatedly attacked former president Joe Biden and insisted yet again that the 2020 presidential election was rigged. (It was not.)

When asked by a reporter later to clarify his remarks, Trump referred back to the Insurrection Act, saying that if he invoked it, “I’d be allowed to do whatever I want. But we haven’t chosen to do that because we’re…doing very well without it. But I’d be allowed to do that, you understand that. And the courts wouldn’t get involved. Nobody would get involved. And I could send the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines. I can send anybody I wanted.”

In fact, a president can invoke the accurately named Insurrection Act only in times of insurrection or rebellion. Neither of those conditions exists.

But the administration is working hard to create the impression that they do. Drew Harwell and Joyce Sohyun Lee of the Washington Post reported yesterday that the videos the Department of Homeland Security has been publishing to demonstrate the administration’s triumph over crime in U.S. cities as its agents work “day and night to arrest, detain and deport vicious criminals” have been doctored. They do not represent current actions, but rather are a hash of video from different states and different times.

When the reporters asked the White House about the misleading footage, spokesperson Abigail Jackson told them that “the Trump administration will continue to highlight the many successes of the president’s agenda through engaging content and banger memes on social media.”

There are signs the administration is not just trying to give the impression that Americans are rioting, but is trying to push them to do so.

Aaron Glantz of The Guardian reported yesterday that on October 8, Major General Ronald Burkett, who directs the Pentagon’s National Guard bureau, ordered the National Guard in all the states, U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia to form “quick reaction forces” trained in “riot control.” Most states are required to train 500 National Guard personnel, for a total nationwide of 23,500. The forces are supposed to be in place by January 1, 2026.

In his order, Burkett relied on an executive order Trump signed on August 25, calling on the secretary of defense to “immediately begin ensuring that each State’s Army National Guard and Air National Guard are resourced, trained, organized, and available to assist Federal, State, and local law enforcement in quelling civil disturbances and ensuring the public safety and order,” and “ensure the availability of a standing National Guard quick reaction force that shall be resourced, trained, and available for rapid nationwide deployment.”

In August the administration planned for two groups of 300 troops to be stationed in Alabama and Arizona as a “Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force.” Now that number is 23,500, and the troops will be in every state and territory.

The establishment of a domestic quick reaction force to quell civil disturbances at a time when there are no civil disturbances that can’t be handled easily by existing law enforcement suggests the administration is expecting those conditions to change.

That expectation might have something to do with Monday’s story from Anna Giaritelli of the Washington Examiner that the White House is reassigning ICE field officers and replacing them with officers from Customs and Border Patrol (CBP). Greg Wehner and Bill Melugin of Fox News reported that the shift will affect at least eight cities, including Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, Denver, Portland, Philadelphia, El Paso, and New Orleans.

White House officials, presumably led by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who has said the administration intends to carry out “a minimum” of 3,000 arrests a day, are frustrated by the current pace of about 900 a day. So those officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, special government employee and Noem advisor Corey Lewandowski, and Greg Bovino, a Border Patrol sector chief who has been overseeing the agency’s operations in Los Angeles and Chicago, have decided to ramp up those deportations by replacing ICE officials with far more aggressive CBP leaders.

Tripling arrests will likely bring pushback.

Michael Scherer, Missy Ryan, and Ashley Parker of The Atlantic reported today that political appointees Stephen Miller, Kristi Noem, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have moved onto military bases.

The designs of the anti-immigrant leaders in the administration dovetail with Trump’s political designs. Trump has talked a lot about serving a third term in the presidency, most recently talking about it to reporters on Air Force One earlier this week. The Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution prohibits a third term, but Trump ally Stephen Bannon told The Economist last week that “Trump is going to be president in ‘28 and people just ought to get accommodated with that.” Bannon claimed, “There’s many different alternatives” to get around the Twenty-Second Amendment. Trump keeps “Trump 2028” campaign hats on bookshelves outside the Oval Office.

Janessa Goldbeck, the chief executive officer of the nonprofit Vet Voice Foundation, told Guardian reporter Glantz that Burkett’s recent order shows “an attempt by the president to normalize a national, militarized police force.” Such a force has not just military but also electoral power: it could be used in Democratic-led states to suppress voting. In a worst-case scenario, Goldbeck said, “the president could declare a state of emergency and say that elections are rigged and use allegations of voter fraud to seize the ballots of secure voting centers.”

Today, Buckingham Palace announced that King Charles has “initiated a formal process to remove the style, titles and honours of Prince Andrew” over his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and participation in activities surrounding Epstein. Andrew will be stripped even of his title of “prince” and will be forced to leave the home he has shared for more than 20 years with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, at Royal Lodge, a 30-room mansion located in Windsor Great Park. The palace said: “These censures are deemed necessary, notwithstanding the fact that he continues to deny the allegations against him.”

Today Jim Acosta reported that survivors of Epstein’s sex trafficking enterprise have written a letter to Speaker Johnson demanding that Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) be sworn into office. Voters elected Grijalva on September 23, but Johnson has steadfastly refused to swear her in. Grijalva has said she will provide the last signature necessary on a discharge petition to force a vote on the public release of the Epstein files, an outcome that threatens to expose how and why Trump was named in those files.

The survivors write that Johnson’s “continued refusal to seat her is an unacceptable breach of democratic norms and a disservice to the American people. Even more concerning to us as survivors, this delay appears to be a deliberate attempt to block her participation in the discharge petition that would force a vote to unseal the Epstein/Maxwell files. The American public has a right to transparency and accountability, and we, as survivors, deserve justice. Any attempt to obstruct a vote on this matter—by manipulating House procedure or denying elected members their seats—is a direct affront to that right and adds insult to our trauma.”

The News & Observer reported on a shocking case. A father who claimed to be home-schooling his five children—ages 3, 6, 9, 10, and 18–called the police to report that he found the four older children dead. The youngest was alive. The father was arrested.

T. Keung Hui of the News & Observer reported:

The four Johnston County children allegedly killed by their father appear to have fallen through the cracks in the state’s education system, according to homeschool advocates.

Wellington Dickens III is charged with killing four of his five children, ages 6 to 18, over what authorities believe was a four-month period. Dickens appears to have run an unregistered homeschool at his home in Zebulon, which may have kept his children away from prying eyes.

“In a state like North Carolina, parents with ill intent can exploit those loopholes to essentially disappear their kids, which I think is the case that happened here,” Tess Ulrey, executive director of the Massachusetts-based Coalition For Responsible Home Education, said in an interview Thursday with The News & Observer.

Here’s a look at what The N&O found about state education and homeschool laws.

What is North Carolina’s compulsory school attendance law?

North Carolina law requires parents to make sure their children are regularly attending school between the ages of 7 and 16.

Parents are also required to make sure that younger children enrolled in a public school in kindergarten through second-grade are attending regularly.

Violation of the compulsory school attendance law is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Operating an unregistered homeschool

None of the Dickens children attended public school in Johnston County, according to a school system spokesperson.

Johnston County Sheriff Steve Bizzell said the children were apparently home-schooled.

But the state Department of Administration’s Division of Non-Public Education says it does not have a record of a homeschool at Dickens’ address or registered under his name.

Dickens would not have been required to register the 6-year-old and the 18-year-old he’s accused of murdering. But he would have had to register the 9-year-old and 10-year-old he’s charged with killing.

“It appears that people who are not caring for their kids would want to remove them from school settings,” Matthew McDill, president of North Carolinians for Home Education, told ABC11, The N&O’s newsgathering partner. “And so you know, it’s interesting that these aren’t actually, you know, normal homeschool families. There are people who are trying to hide something.”

What are North Carolina’s homeschool requirements?

North Carolina has several requirements for people to begin and maintain a homeschool.

*Homeschool administrators must have at least a high school diploma.

*A notice of intent to start a homeschool must be sent to the Division of Non-Public Education.

*Maintain immunization and annual attendance records for each student.

*Administer a nationally standardized achievement test each school year.

The Division of Non-Public Education is also responsible for overseeing the states’ private schools. The division is so understaffed that it has historically asked home-school families to come to its office in Raleigh to help its staff with paperwork for other families.

Ulrey of the Coalition for Responsible Home Education said North Carolina has better home schooling laws than some states. But Ulrey said there other states, such as Pennsylvania, which do a better job of keeping track of where all their children are being educated.

“We depend on the larger social fabric and network to help us find these kids so they don’t disappear,” said Ulrey, who was a home-schooler. “A lot of those resources come from either a school system or they come from more robust oversight. That’s how we can make sure we’re keeping track of kids and that kids are safe.”

Nearly 200 homeschool deaths since 2000

The Coalition for Responsible Home Education argues that stronger oversight is needed to prevent child abuse and neglect in homeschooling. The group cites its Homeschooling’s Invisible Children national database, which found 423 cases of abuse and 191 child fatalities among home-schoolers since 2000.

“One of the reasons that we advocate for homeschool oversight is to ensure that children are coming into contact with mandated reporters, with a larger community so that they can have more opportunities to hopefully not fall through the cracks,” Ulrey said. “We want all of our children to have access to an open future, and that does mean coming into contact with more safe adults. It sounds like these children were unfortunately victims of that process.”

But the Oregon-based National Home Education Research Institute argues that students who are in public schools or private schools are more at risk of abuse or fatalities than those who are in a homeschool.

“There is no clear evidence of an increase in reported incidents of abuse or other harm in states that move toward laws recognizing and allowing fuller homeschooling freedom,” according to the National Home Education Research Institute.

How popular is homeschooling?

In the 2024-25 school year, there were 101,880 homeschools registered with the state. North Carolina’s estimated enrollment is 165,243 home-schoolers.

The majority of North Carolina homeschools (53%) are religious based.

In a 2017 court filing, Dickens claimed he shouldn’t be subject to federal statute 42 US Code section 666, which governs state child support procedures, because the number 666 violated his religious beliefs, The N&O previously reported.

The number 3.7 million is often cited as the nationwide total for home-schoolers. Enrollment numbers rose during the pandemic even as they shrank in traditional public schools

Read more at: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article312710244.html#storylink=cpy

Trump just announced the lowest immigration target in U.S. history. Only 7,500 immigrants will be admitted, and most will be White South Africans.

Ronald Reagan did not share Trump’s hatred of immigrants. In 1986, he offered amnesty to immigrants who had been in this country for at least four years. Almost 3 million undocumented immigrants gained a path to citizenship.

The last speech that Ronald Reagan gave during his presidency was on January 19, 1989.

He used that farewell speech to praise immigrants and their contribution to the success of America.

Here is the speech in full, as well as President Reagan’s presentation of the Medal of Freedom to two distinguished public servants, one was was a Republican, another to a prominent Democrat. Trump gives that honor only to people known for their allegiance to him.

Here is a video, containing the core of Reagan’s speech.

Please note that President Reagan did not lash out at his critics, of whom there were many; did not belittle the Democrats who preceded him in the Presidency: Jimmy Carter, Lyndon B. Johnson, John F. Kennedy; did not engage in partisan insults; did not ever say that he “hates Democrats.” Even in his dotage, even after the onset of Alzheimer’s, he had more class, more dignity than the current occupant of that office.

The President. When we finish this luncheon, I hope you’ll stick around a little while. We’re having a tag sale upstairs, and everything must go. [Laughter] But, really, thank you all for coming to be with us here today.

Truly, one of the privileges of this office which I’ve found greatest joy in exercising has been the opportunity to present our nation’s highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom. To stand, as I have had the honor of doing, with the recipients of this award has been to stand with the flesh and blood and spirit that is the greatness of America, men and women who have so greatly served our nation and helped keep her free. The contribution of each recipient has been unique and noteworthy, and today is no exception, as we honor two remarkable Americans: Mike Mansfield and George Shultz.

Mike Mansfield has dedicated the entirety of a very long and productive lifetime to public service. He served in both Houses of Congress, spanning seven Presidents, and held the post of Senate majority leader longer than any other person. A former professor of Far Eastern history, he played an important part in shaping America’s Asian policy, serving on both the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and then as our Ambassador to Japan. For a sizable portion of America’s history as a nation, Mike Mansfield has been in service to his country.*

George Shultz — why did my voice crack just as I got to you — [laughter] — George Shultz has been a marine, an academic, and a businessman, and a public servant. He has held four Cabinet-level posts, distinguishing himself as a Secretary of Labor, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Treasury Secretary, and finally as one of America’s great Secretaries of State. Over the last 6\1/2\ years, in managing our foreign policy, he has served wisely and met great challenges and great opportunities. George Shultz has helped to make the world a freer and more peaceful place.

And there’s nothing so precious and irreplaceable as America’s freedom. In a speech I gave 25 years ago, I told a story that I think bears repeating. Two friends of mine were talking to a refugee from Communist Cuba. He had escaped from Castro, and as he told the story of his horrible experiences, one of my friends turned to the other and said, “We don’t know how lucky we are.” And the Cuban stopped and said, “How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.”

Well, no, America’s freedom does not belong to just one nation. We’re custodians of freedom for the world. In Philadelphia, two centuries ago, James Allen wrote in his diary that “If we fail, liberty no longer continues an inhabitant of this globe.” Well, we didn’t fail. And still, we must not fail. For freedom is not the property of one generation; it’s the obligation of this and every generation. It’s our duty to protect it and expand it and pass it undiminished to those still unborn.

Now, tomorrow is a special day for me. I’m going to receive my gold watch. And since this is the last speech that I will give as President, I think it’s fitting to leave one final thought, an observation about a country which I love. It was stated best in a letter I received not long ago. A man wrote me and said: “You can go to live in France, but you cannot become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany or Turkey or Japan, but you cannot become a German, a Turk, or a Japanese. But anyone, from any corner of the Earth, can come to live in America and become an American.” 

Yes, the torch of Lady Liberty symbolizes our freedom and represents our heritage, the compact with our parents, our grandparents, and our ancestors. It is that lady who gives us our great and special place in the world. For it’s the great life force of each generation of new Americans that guarantees that America’s triumph shall continue unsurpassed into the next century and beyond. Other countries may seek to compete with us; but in one vital area, as a beacon of freedom and opportunity that draws the people of the world, no country on Earth comes close. 

This, I believe, is one of the most important sources of America’s greatness. We lead the world because, unique among nations, we draw our people — our strength — from every country and every corner of the world. And by doing so we continuously renew and enrich our nation. While other countries cling to the stale past, here in America we breathe life into dreams. We create the future, and the world follows us into tomorrow. Thanks to each wave of new arrivals to this land of opportunity, we’re a nation forever young, forever bursting with energy and new ideas, and always on the cutting edge, always leading the world to the next frontier. This quality is vital to our future as a nation. If we ever closed the door to new Americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost. 

A number of years ago, an American student traveling in Europe took an East German ship across the Baltic Sea. One of the ship’s crewmembers from East Germany, a man in his sixties, struck up a conversation with the American student. After a while the student asked the man how he had learned such good English. And the man explained that he had once lived in America. He said that for over a year he had worked as a farmer in Oklahoma and California, that he had planted tomatoes and picked ripe melons. It was, the man said, the happiest time of his life. Well, the student, who had seen the awful conditions behind the Iron Curtain, blurted out the question, “Well, why did you ever leave?” “I had to,” he said, “the war ended.” The man had been in America as a German prisoner of war. 

Now, I don’t tell this story to make the case for former POW’s. Instead, I tell this story just to remind you of the magical, intoxicating power of America. We may sometimes forget it, but others do not. Even a man from a country at war with the United States, while held here as a prisoner, could fall in love with us. Those who become American citizens love this country even more. And that’s why the Statue of Liberty lifts her lamp to welcome them to the golden door. 

It is bold men and women, yearning for freedom and opportunity, who leave their homelands and come to a new country to start their lives over. They believe in the American dream. And over and over, they make it come true for themselves, for their children, and for others. They give more than they receive. They labor and succeed. And often they are entrepreneurs. But their greatest contribution is more than economic, because they understand in a special way how glorious it is to be an American. They renew our pride and gratitude in the United States of America, the greatest, freest nation in the world — the last, best hope of man on Earth.

The Medal of Freedom represents the reverence the American people have for liberty, and it honors the men and women who through their lives do greatest honor to that freedom. The lives of the two men we honor here today tell a story about freedom and all its possibilities and responsibilities, and, well, both those that inhere in each free man and woman and those that fall upon a great and free nation. Our honorees have dedicated their lives to preserving and protecting America’s freedom. They have engaged themselves in the larger cause, that of humanity and of the world, to help extend freedom to people of other lands. There is no task more fitting for Americans than that. 

So, I will now read the citations for our two very distinguished award recipients and present to them their medals. Perhaps I should mention that our first recipient today — the one who calls me kid — [laughter] — is the son of immigrants, from a country called Ireland. 

And now, if Michael Mansfield and George Shultz would please come forward. George, you’re due here. 

“During World War I, Mike Mansfield, not yet 15, enlisted in the United States Navy, crossing the Atlantic seven times before he was discharged. His service to country would span seven decades and would help shape America’s destiny as a Pacific power. Through 34 years in Congress — including 16 as Senate majority leader — and with more than a decade as U.S. Ambassador to Japan, Mike Mansfield has set his indelible mark upon American foreign policy and distinguished himself as a dedicated public servant and loyal American.” 

Ambassador Mansfield. Mr. President, First Lady, Mr. Secretary of State and Mrs. Shultz, Ambassador Matsunaga and Mrs. Matsunaga, my former colleagues from both the House and the Senate, our distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, I can’t begin to express in words, Mr. President, my deep appreciation for what you’ve said about me and the encouragement which you’ve given me in my post as your Ambassador, your personal representative, our country’s Ambassador to Japan. 

However, I think that much of the credit should go to Maureen, my wife, who down through the years has been such a wonderful helpmate; whose advice, counsel, and understanding I appreciated; who worked harder at any job I’ve had and received little credit in the process. So, I want to say how much I owe to her, how much I’m indebted to her; how much I appreciate what the President has said — who has laid out a sound policy for our future in the Pacific and East Asia. I appreciate the advice and counsel that George Shultz has given to me from time to time. And I appreciate the fact that, for the first time in memory, that we have both a President of the United States and a Secretary of State who are actively interested in the Pacific, in Japan, and in East Asia. I anticipate that the policies these men have laid down will be continued. 

In conclusion, we may recall that Robert Sandburg [Frost], one of our poets, said on a certain occasion, there are things to do, miles to go, and promises to keep before we sleep. Well, Maureen and I have traveled many miles. We have had and still have things to do. And we still have the promises we made over half a century ago when we were joined together. So, to her I want to give special thanks for all that she has been able to do with me. And to the President and Nancy, my thanks, my appreciation for their thoughtfulness and consideration. Thank you very much. 

The President. “Unyieldingly dedicated to the protection of the American national interest, the advancement of freedom and human rights, the battle against tyranny, and reductions in nuclear arms, George P. Shultz has presided over the Department of State during one of the most critical periods in the history of this nation’s foreign policy. For years of public service and his vital part in inaugurating a new era of hope in foreign policy, his countrymen honor him.” 

Secretary Shultz. Mr. President, you know, Obie [Helena Shultz] has been traveling a million miles around the world with me. So, it’s been a great partnership. But, Mr. President, I feel very special about receiving this award from you, and let me explain why. There’s a phrase that’s catching on — “the Reagan years.” There’s a ring to it. And, Mr. President, it is the ring of freedom. You have advocated it, fought for it. You have known that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. You have known this is a matter of principle on which you don’t compromise. You have known that there are times when it requires action — sometimes, at least initially, not necessarily popular action — but you have to do it. 

You have also known — and I’ve heard you say many times — that the strength comes from “We the People,” that we get our legitimacy and you get your legitimacy as President from the people. And you’ve never been in any doubt, and none of us have, about who we came here to serve: the American people.

And I see you there with your arm around Nancy. I had the privilege of going with Nancy a couple of months ago to the United Nations where she spoke about drugs. And she had the courage to say that one of the root causes of this worldwide problem is use of drugs in the United States. And we have to say no. So Nancy, too, has been a fighter for freedom — freedom from drugs. And we love you for it and revere you for it, Nancy.

So, all of these things make me especially proud to have served with you, to have been your Secretary of State. And to receive a medal from you called the Medal of Freedom has a significance for my life and Obie’s life and my children that we will never forget.

Thank you, Mr. President.

The President. Thank you. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I have been privileged to participate in this recognition of the service of these two gentlemen to this great country of ours. I’m glad that all of you could be here. And now my clock tells me that — like the letter I got the first week I was here from the little 11-year-old girl who told me all the things that I had to do and then said, “Now, get over to the Oval Office and go to work.” I see I’ve still got a few more hours of work ahead of me, and we’re a little behind schedule. And so, we’ll bid you all farewell, and thank you again for all being here and participating.

Note: The President spoke at 1:22 p.m. in the State Dining Room at the White House.

*Mike Mansfield’s life was even more remarkable than President Reagan described.

Michael Joseph (Mike) Mansfield was born on March 16, 1903, in New York City the first of three children of Irish immigrants Patrick and Josephine O’Brien Mansfield. Mike’s mother died in 1910, the same year that his father was seriously injured on a construction job. Because Patrick had no way to care for his motherless children, they were sent to live with Patrick’s Uncle Richard, a Great Falls, Montana, grocer. Mike’s childhood was troubled. Shuttled between public, parochial and reform schools, Mike dropped out by grade seven. In 1917, at age 14, Mike enlisted in the United States Navy. He crossed the sea seven times before officials discovered that he lied about his age. He was summarily discharged.

From 1919 to 1920 he served as a private in the Army, stationed in San Francisco. From 1920 to 1922, Mike enlisted in the United States Marine Corps where as a private first class he served in China, the Philippines and Siberia. At the conclusion of his service, Mansfield returned to Montana and worked in the Butte mines from 1922 to 1930.In 1927 Mike met Maureen Hayes, a teacher, who encouraged him to return to school. In 1932 the two married and were parents of one daughter, Anne. Mansfield first attended the Montana School of Mines in 1927 and 1928. In 1933 he graduated from Montana State University in Missoula (now the University of Montana) and worked as a graduate assistant. In 1934 he earned his Masters and became an instructor. During the summers of 1936 and 1937, Mike attended the University of California in Los Angeles. He was full professor of history and political science until 1942, specializing in Latin America and the Far East.In the early 1940’s Mansfield developed an interest in politics. He was elected to the United States House of Representatives as a Democrat and served with distinction from 1943 to 1953. In 1952 Mansfield was elected to the Senate and served continuously until 1977. He believed, in retrospect, that his most significant achievements were initiating the Watergate Committee leading to Richard Nixon’s resignation; extending voting rights to eighteen year olds; and creating a committee to investigate the abuses of the CIA. He was an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam War.From 1977 to 1988 Mansfield served as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Japan. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.Mike Mansfield died on October 5, 2001, in Washington, D.C. His wife, Maureen, preceded him in death in 2000. Anne Mansfield Marris and one granddaughter survive him.

President Ronald Reagan was a strong proponent of free trade and immigration. Not open borders, but a reasonable way to admit immigrants to the United States.

Trump hates to be reminded of President Reagan’s views, because they don’t agree. Trump wants to deport every immigrant who is not a U.S. citizen, and he has recklessly imposed tariffs on every other nation in the world.

Trump has disrupted the global economic order with his capricious imposition of tariffs, raising them, lowering them, on a whim. And increasing inflation for everything imported by the U.S.

The prince of Ontario in Canada posted an ad that showed President Reagan’s opposition to tariffs. Trump reacted with fury because he didn’t want the public to know that his tariffs were contrary to GOP policies, opposed specifically by Reagan, who was far more popular than Trump.

Trump insisted that the Reagan ad was phony. He raised the tariffs on Canada for daring to try to influence a pending Supreme Court decision about his power to impose tariffs without Congress.

It wasn’t a phony ad. President Reagan opposed tariffs.

Even the Wall Street Journal chastised Trump for lying about Reagan’s opposition to tariffs.

An excerpt:

The Ontario government had the temerity to buy ad time to run clips of Reagan’s 1987 remarks warning about the dangers of protectionism. Mr. Trump pitched a social-media fit in response late Thursday, claiming Ontario “fraudulently used an advertisement, which is FAKE, featuring Ronald Reagan speaking negatively about Tariffs.”

The President said the ad was intended to interfere with the Supreme Court as it considers the legality of his claim that he can levy tariffs on anything he wants, for any amount he wants, whenever he wants. He immediately declared an end to trade talks with Canada….

Mr. Trump is wrong about the Reagan speech, and he was wrong when he said on social media that “Ronald Reagan LOVED tariffs for purposes of National Security and the Economy.” The Gipper was a free trader. In the 1987 speech, Reagan was trying to explain why he was making an exception to his free-trade policies on semiconductor imports from Japan…

It’s a shame to see the Reagan Foundation, of all places, indulging Mr. Trump’s pique with its statement saying the speech was taken out of context. Anyone who reads the whole speech can see the Gipper favored free trade, with rare exceptions for political pragmatism and national security. Reagan also backed, long before Nafta, a North American free-trade area….

Reagan knew that tariffs are taxes, while Mr. Trump pretends they are paid by foreigners. Reagan knew protectionist barriers over time breed complacency and lack of innovation. Mr. Trump thinks he’s making American manufacturing great again, when he is really hurting U.S. manufacturers by burdening them with higher costs. See American companies that use aluminum or steel.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX, which owns a worldwide telecommunications system and builds space rockets, has significant investments by Chinese nationals. ProPublica says there are likely concerns about national security, or should be.

Justin Elliott and Joshua Kaplan of ProPublica reported:

Elon Musk’s SpaceX has taken money directly from Chinese investors, according to previously sealed testimony, raising new questions about foreign ownership interests in one of the United States’ most important military contractors.

The recent testimony, coming from a SpaceX insider during a court case, marks the first time direct Chinese investment in the privately held company has been disclosed. While there is no prohibition on Chinese ownership in U.S. military contractors, such investment is heavily regulated and the issue is treated by the U.S. government as a significant national security concern.

“They obviously have Chinese investors to be honest,” Iqbaljit Kahlon, a major SpaceX investor, said in a deposition last year, adding that some are “directly on the cap table.” “Cap table” refers to the company’s capitalization table, which lists its shareholders.

Kahlon’s testimony does not reveal the scope of Chinese investment in SpaceX or the identities of the investors. Kahlon has long been close with the company’s leadership and runs his own firm that acts as a middleman for wealthy investors looking to buy shares of SpaceX.

SpaceX keeps its full ownership structure secret. It was previously reported that some Chinese investors had bought indirect stakes in SpaceX, investing in middleman funds that in turn owned shares in the rocket company. The new testimony describes direct investments that suggest a closer relationship with SpaceX.

SpaceX has thrived as it snaps up sensitive U.S. government contracts, from building spy satellites for the Pentagon to launching spacecraft for NASA. U.S. embassies and the White House have connected to the company’s Starlink internet service too. Musk’s roughly 42% stake in the company is worth an estimated $168 billion. If he owned nothing else, he’d be one of the 10 richest people in the world.

National security law experts said federal officials would likely be deeply interested in understanding the direct Chinese investment in SpaceX. Whether there was cause for concern would depend on the details, they said, but the U.S. government has asserted that China has a systematic strategy of using investments in sensitive industries to conduct espionage.

If the investors got access to nonpublic information about the company — say, details on its contracts or supply chain — it could be useful to Chinese intelligence, said Sarah Bauerle Danzman, an Indiana University professor who has worked for the State Department scrutinizing foreign investments. That “would create huge risks that, if realized, would have huge consequences for national security,” she said.

SpaceX did not respond to questions for this story. Kahlon declined to comment.

Don’t lose hope! Don’t give up, no matter how bad it looks today.

That’s the advice of Ian Bassin, the co-founder and executive director of Protect Democracy. In this essay, he explains that the enemies of democracy cultivate despair. They flood the zone with cruel policies. They want us to believe that resistance is futile.

It is not. Don’t help them achieve their goals!

He writes:

Let’s not mince words. It’s a dark time.

If you’re reading this, you feel it. You see federal troops on American streets as a political tool. You see a multi-front assault on our elections. You see the machinery of government — from a supercharged ICE to a weaponized Department of Justice — being wielded against those the regime dislikes. You see courts wavering, Congress cowering, and other institutions choosing accommodation over confrontation. The danger is real, and the exhaustion is profound.

But it’s not just the individual threats that weigh on us. It’s the sheer volume. The autocrat’s playbook isn’t just about single acts of repression; it’s about creating a dozen crises at once. This is not incompetence; it is a strategy. As strategists from Sun Tzu onward have counseled, stretch an opponent’s defenses, exhaust them, and strike where they are then unprepared. By flooding the zone with outrages, they keep us perpetually reactive, divided, and off-balance. Our attention is their battleground, and they are winning by forcing us to fight on a thousand fronts at once.

The goal of this chaos is twofold. First, to spread us thinly so our responses are less effective. Second, to exhaust us and make the defense of democracy feel so futile that its defenders simply give up. Despair is a political weapon.

I’m not writing to tell you that you’re wrong to feel this way. I’m writing to tell you that this feeling is a designed part of the assault we’re facing. And I’m writing to tell you that we are not the first to stand in this spot, staring into what looks like an abyss. In the history of those who came before us, we can find a map not for a specific strategy but for a resilient mindset.

The long defeat as enduring hope

The phrase “the long defeat” comes from J.R.R. Tolkien, who has Galadriel speak of “fighting the long defeat” in The Lord of the Rings. That evil may never be fully vanquished and therefore that even victories against it are temporary. For Tolkien, a devout Catholic, it carried a tragic but defiant realism: History is a process of entropy, yet the fight for beauty, justice, and truth is still worth waging.

Over time, the idea that even in a period of decline doing the right thing remains a strategic and moral imperative has migrated from literature into political and theological commentary. Dissidents under Soviet rule, activists resisting authoritarianism, and modern democratic leaders have invoked versions of this concept to capture the paradox of resistance.

Victory may lie invisibly over some horizon, or may never be final. Setbacks are inevitable, and yet the very act of persevering is itself a form of hope.

To “fight the long defeat” is not to surrender to futility but to locate dignity and meaning in the struggle itself — and to recognize that what feels like defeat in one moment may seed the victories of another. Indeed history is replete with examples.

Lessons from a Polish winter

Consider Poland in the winter of 1981. The vibrant Solidarity movement was met with martial law. (If you don’t know the history of Solidarity, we’re planning to write about it later this week — stay tuned.) Its leaders were jailed; its organization shattered.

The pro-democracy cause appeared utterly defeated by the full weight of a Soviet-backed state.

What did they do when open confrontation became impossible? They didn’t stop. They began a patient, underground campaign — sustained organizing, covert communications, and cultural work that kept civic life alive. They understood that when you cannot win on the state’s terms, you must refuse to let the state define the terms of reality. They focused on keeping the idea of a free Poland alive. Through underground publishing and clandestine lectures — continuing traditions like the “Flying University” — they maintained a shared understanding of truth in the face of a regime dedicated to lies.

For roughly eight years they persisted. They were not just an opposition; they were the custodians of a democratic ideal. When a crack in the regime appeared in 1989 — with the Round Table Talks and semi-free elections — they were ready because they had never surrendered the moral and intellectual foundations of a free society.

Their lesson for us is this: When the machinery of the state is captured, the most critical ground to defend is our shared commitment to truth and democratic values. Doing so is necessary to be ready to seize the opening when it inevitably comes.

Clarity in our own history

We can find a similar lesson in our own history. Think of the lawyers and activists of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and ’60s. They faced a legal and political system built to exclude them. The courts, the police, and the law itself were instruments of a brutal racial hierarchy.

Every institution that was supposed to deliver justice was instead architected to deny it.
Their response was not to meet every injustice with a scattered, reactive defense

It was to maintain an unwavering focus on the core principle at stake: the moral and constitutional bankruptcy of segregation. They possessed profound strategic patience, persistence, and powerful moral clarity. Their fight reminds us that in an environment of institutional failure and constant attack, the most potent weapon is a disciplined focus on the fundamental principles being violated.

But history also shows that change can come with surprising speed. Consider the movement for marriage equality in the immediate aftermath of the 2004 election. Voters approved bans in 11 states that year, amending constitutions to prohibit same-sex marriage, and President George W. Bush — who supported a federal marriage amendment — was reelected. The political consensus was so strong that even in 2008, the Democratic nominee for president recanted his previous support for marriage equality. Yet within just a few years, everything shifted: in 2011 the Obama administration stopped defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court; in 2012 the president endorsed marriage equality; and public opinion moved rapidly until marriage equality was recognized in the Constitution. While we know that victory is now facing its own backlash, that moment is a powerful reminder that political winds can shift with breathtaking speed.

A moment of seeming hopelessness can be the prelude to a breakthrough.

A mindset for a hard moment

The history of these movements does not offer us an easy comfort or a simple to-do list. It offers us a way to think, a framework for how to situate ourselves and endure.

  1. Find the signal in the noise — We must resist the autocrat’s strategy of distraction. We cannot respond en masse to every fire. Instead, we must anchor our work in the foundational principles at stake: the rule of law, the integrity of elections, and the ultimate sovereignty of a free people. By focusing on the core pillars of democracy, we refuse to have our attention fragmented and our energy dissipated.
  2. Cultivate strategic readiness — This isn’t just about passively enduring a long winter. It is about actively preparing for a change in the weather and doing what we can to bring it about. We cannot ultimately control when the political winds will shift or when an unexpected event will create an opportunity. But we can control our readiness. The work of a hard moment is to get the sails ready. It is the time to lay the legal groundwork, build the coalitions, refine the strategies, and organize the resources. Our task is to be so prepared that when a crack of daylight appears, we are ready to sail through it with maximum force and not be caught scrambling.
  3. Uphold a common truth — In an era of rampant disinformation, the simple act of insisting on objective reality is a profound form of resistance. The authoritarian project depends on breaking our collective understanding of facts. By committing ourselves to defending the institutions and norms that discern truth — in journalism, in science, in law — we are defending the very possibility of a self-governing society.
  4. Bolster each other — In moments that feel like we’re spiraling backwards, when the forces of unfreedom are on the march, a common tendency is for the forces of freedom to fall into infighting. Rather than gaining strength from each other, our fears and anxieties and anger lead us to turn on each other. But in that reaction are the seeds of ultimate defeat; whereas movements that come together in times of adversity water the seeds of renewal.

There is no question we are being tested — as a country, as a movement, and as individuals.
But we are not the first to have faced such tests and we will not be the last. Many who preceded us faced tests like this and even harder ones, and we have their example to remind us that whatever happens, no matter how dark the night, the world keeps turning and eventually comes the dawn.

Personally, I’m more optimistic than Tolkien. I don’t think human history bends towards decay. I’m partial to Martin Luther King’s vision that it bends towards justice. But what’s powerful about the idea of the long defeat is that it is agnostic about one’s optimism or pessimism — it simply reminds us that the task of being human (or elf) is to do right and to do good and to embrace beauty where we can find it.

And if I can play my small role in lifting you up in this difficult moment, it’s to remind us all to remember that. And to act on it.

After the launch of No Child left Behind in 2002, the curriculum in America’s schools changed. The tested skills–math and reading–were tested. Federal law required a rise in test scores in grades 3-8 every year. The law required that every student would be proficient in these two subjects by 2014–or the schools would face dire consequences, including closure.

There is no nation in the world where 100% of students are “proficient.” That term on our National Assessment of Educational Progress is equivalent to an A. In what world are all children scoring an A in reading and math? La-la land maybe.

The pressure to raise test scores crept into the earlier grades, to second grade, to first grade, even to kindergarten. Children of 5 were learning their letters and numbers instead of playing.

Note that John Dewey recommended that children begin to read at age 7. Note that children in Finland begin reading at age 7.

Some educators complained about the disappearance of play, but members of Congress didn’t listen. There probably is no subject in which legislators are actively engaged than education. Most know nothing about it other than to mosn that test scores are not high enough.

But after nearly a quarter century after NCLB and Race to the Top, the message has begun to get through.

In 2019, Pasi Sahlberg and William Doyle wrote a book titled Let the Children Play, showing the positive benefits of play.

And now a few states have begun to recognize the value of play and to reintroduce it.

Elizabeth Heubeck of Education Week reported:

In recent years, some educators have begun to push back against the “academization” of kindergarten. These voices have gotten the attention of state policymakers; in turn, a few states have begun to push for a return to play in kindergarten, including Connecticut, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Oregon.

New Hampshire in 2018 amended its education legislation specific to kindergarten, noting that this grade level is “structured upon a play-based model.” Language for the state’s official kindergarten tool kits says: “Educators shall create a learning environment that facilitates high quality, child-directed experiences based upon early childhood best teaching practices and play-based learning that comprise movement, creative expression, exploration, socialization, and music.”

Connecticut in 2023 passed legislation requiring play-based learning in public preschool and kindergarten classrooms, and permitting it in 1st through 5th grades. Members of the Connecticut Education Association, led by CEA Vice President Joslyn Delancey, pushed for the return to play-based learning in early elementary classrooms. Delancey taught elementary school for 17 years before being elected to the association. 

“It was a commitment of mine to really understand where other educators were around play,” Delancey said. “It turns out that our members also were particularly excited about pushing play as a legislative agenda.” 

The legislation passed within a year of its introduction. Delancey credits its success to the CEA’s work to educate various stakeholders on the benefits of play-based learning, and its alignment with the state’s focus on creating and maintaining a positive school culture. 

“I think that you can’t talk about improving school climate without talking about bringing play back into our classroom,” Delancey said. 

In Massachusetts, the education department and the state association for school administrations issued a joint statement in 2021 asserting play as an instructional strategy in the early grades.

The state education department’s Early Learning Team then launched a Playful Learning Institute pilot initiative for administrators and educators in pre-K through 3rd grade. During the 2022-23 school year, the pilot involved monthly coaching in classrooms. 

Is all play created equally?

Not all play designed for today’s kindergarten classrooms looks like it did in the 1970s and ‘80s, when kids played together without much direction or input from teachers. Still, free, or unstructured, play retains an important place in the kindergarten classroom, believe some education experts. It allows children to explore, imagine, and socialize independently. But it’s generally not tied to any specific academic goals.

“I love free play, and free play has its own rights. It’s great for social development. It’s great for helping kids build their confidence,” Nesbitt said. “But it’s not going to organically, on its own, teach kids how to read.”

Instead, schools are starting to adopt play-based or playful learning, in which teachers guide students in playful activities designed to grow specific skills. For example, when students are building with blocks, the teacher could ask facilitating questions like, “What do you think will happen if you add this heavier block on top?” 

Play-based learning can boost students’ academic skills, research shows. A 2022 review of 39 studies that compared guided play to direct instruction(when a teacher delivers clearly defined, planned lessons in a prescribed manner) in children up to 8 years old found that guided play has a more significant positive impact than direct instruction on early math skills, shape knowledge, and being able to switch from one task to another.

But kindergarten isn’t just about acquiring academic skills, note education experts. Play-based learning also has the potential to help teach young learners lifelong skills.

“A lot of people are leaning heavily into the importance of play-based learning for the kinds of soft skills they can teach. I call them unconstrained skills,” Nesbitt said. “These are the skills that are not based on content-specific knowledge but rather, things like: How do we teach kids to collaborate with each other? How do we teach kids to be good communicators? How do we help them be critical and creative thinkers? How do we give them the motivation to want to be a learner?”