SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Every day, a stream of volunteers approaches the unofficial Yes Scotland office in Edinburgh. None of these people are political activists; they are members of the public who've stopped at the office to do their part for Yes Scotland, the campaign dedicated to making Scotland an independent country.
Every day, a stream of volunteers approaches the unofficial Yes Scotland office in Edinburgh. None of these people are political activists; they are members of the public who've stopped at the office to do their part for Yes Scotland, the campaign dedicated to making Scotland an independent country.
As a middle-aged trio leave with boxes of pamphlets, a young couple walk in with their two children, offering to deliver leaflets, posters and Yes badges. It is that kind of campaign and proof of how the debate over the country's future really has re-energized the democratic process in this part of the world at least.
When the referendum on Scottish independence was announced in 2011, it was considered a foregone conclusion. The pro-independence camp were seen as delusional Braveheart-loving, Saltire-clad nationalists; Scotland would vote No and the United Kingdom would remain strongly intact. British Prime Minister David Cameron was so sure of this that he refused to allow a third option offering "devo max" - giving more autonomy to the Scottish parliament while keeping Scotland in the union - onto the ballot.
In the last month, though, the Yes Scotland campaign has turned the vote into a cliffhanger. It started in late August, when the polling showed 47 percent for Yes and 53 percent for No, close enough to send a tremor reverberating through the London-based political parties. Within 72 hours their leaders were scrambling towards Scotland to try and rally support.
That turned to outright panic barely a week later when a further poll put Yes in the lead -- 51 percent to 49 percent -- and the prospect of Scotland becoming and independent country and the United Kingdom breaking up quickly became a real possibility.
The question is: How was this remarkable turnaround achieved? The short answer: grassroots enthusiasm.
It has been the staple of the Yes Scotland campaign. Colin Williamson, a volunteer campaigner for Yes Scotland, who has been active in politics for 20 years as veteran of the Scottish National Party, or SNP, says he has never seen most of the volunteers before. "This is huge," he said. "Whatever the outcome, whether it's a Yes or a No, I've had the time of my life."
Back at the office, a new delivery of posters comes in and volunteers hastily start a bucket chain to stack them before sending them out for more canvassing, when Williamson and his fellow volunteers will be checking up on registered Yes voters in the area. "Over the last six months we've delivered roughly 360,000 pieces of literature through the doors in this area," said Dave Sharp, another seasoned Yes volunteer.
It is notoriously exhausting and unglamorous work, but has been the backbone of the Yes movement. Passionate supporters leave their jobs at the end of the day and go straight out to hit the streets and knock on doors.
"This is truly a grassroots campaign," said Williamson. "If I see a little Yes sign in somebody's window, I'm actually going up, chapping on their door and saying 'What can you do? You need to come out, even if it's just to come down to the stall for five minutes.' We've got them all over [the place] now. I say to them 'Come down and talk to the activists, even just to offer some encouragement because there's some of us who are on our last legs.'"
The weather in Scotland is often unkind to canvassers, and today is no exception. It's misty with a cold, spitting rain as the volunteers leave to check that those who pledged to vote Yes haven't changed their minds. Virtually none have.
In a poorer, low-income area of Edinburgh, many people on the doorsteps talk of their disillusionment with the main Westminster parties, particularly Labour, the party that was in government when the recession hit until it was voted out four years ago.
These are rarely new grievances, but they have been building up over a long period. One woman spoke of her shift to voting SNP when she felt it become standard for the Westminster parties to ignore ordinary people: "I'd voted Labour all my life, and then around 10 or 12 years ago me and my husband decided we'd just had enough. Tony Blair was the one that did it," she said.
At about the same time, former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown is due to address an audience in a nearby Miner's Club. Williamson chuckles as he drives past, watching the elaborate security systems being installed outside the event, which requires people to apply for attendance. It seems a fitting metaphor for the restrictiveness of the pro-Union campaign, Better Together.
"The thing about the two campaigns is we knew we had to convert people and win people over," said Sharpe. "We were identifying undecided people very early on and started targeting information at them. The No campaign has always thought the pre-existing no vote was enough to take them over the line, and all they've done is target their campaign essentially to scare their voters into the polling stations; the elderly, the generational Labour voters, people like that."
"Scots don't like being bullied," said Williamson. "This is like an abusive partner saying 'If you leave me I'll wreck your economy.' There's a element within the 'don't knows' who are completely fed up with being told 'You shouldn't do this! You're not getting that!' In the end, they basically said 'Screw it, I'm voting Yes.'"
In this respect, the Yes campaign has been highly critical of the established media for giving a one-sided view of the Scottish referendum, and for toeing the pro-Union line with constant warnings and fear-mongering. "I'll bet you, on Thursday morning [polling day], in the papers you'll see 'Run on Banks if you Vote Yes,'" Williamson said. "Even though it's a whole crock of shit because we're not independent on the 19th. This is out of the Quebec handbook on how to scare people."
Comparisons with the campaign in 1994 for Quebec's independence from Canada and this one are commonplace. Both were neck-and-neck in the lead up to the vote, and both rattled the establish politics of their countries, though in the end Quebec narrowly voted to stay part of Canada.
The consensus in the Yes camp is that these comparisons are outdated. Times have changed with the internet and social media being able to mobilize people and share information at a level which was previously unimaginable. "Twenty years ago, I don't think this would have been possible," said Stuart Mackinlay, a Yes volunteer who had just finished work and is about to start canvassing.
"Before people only really had the mainstream media and word of mouth for information. Now you've got blogs like Wings Over Scotland, the National Collective, Bella Caledonia, which give the other side of the story, and get people involved in the discussion."
That is where the Yes campaign has been making their ground: they have got the nation talking. Left to their own devices, the No campaign wanted to make this a shouting match between political leaders, but the Yes enthusiasts have made sure it is a proper old-fashioned doorstep campaign with modern social media layered on top.
If nothing else comes out of this campaign, the sight of a family wandering in off the street to get involved in a political debate proves the will to get involved is there; the secret is making sure people believe they are making a difference.
Political revenge. Mass deportations. Project 2025. Unfathomable corruption. Attacks on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Pardons for insurrectionists. An all-out assault on democracy. Republicans in Congress are scrambling to give Trump broad new powers to strip the tax-exempt status of any nonprofit he doesn’t like by declaring it a “terrorist-supporting organization.” Trump has already begun filing lawsuits against news outlets that criticize him. At Common Dreams, we won’t back down, but we must get ready for whatever Trump and his thugs throw at us. Our Year-End campaign is our most important fundraiser of the year. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. By donating today, please help us fight the dangers of a second Trump presidency. |
Every day, a stream of volunteers approaches the unofficial Yes Scotland office in Edinburgh. None of these people are political activists; they are members of the public who've stopped at the office to do their part for Yes Scotland, the campaign dedicated to making Scotland an independent country.
As a middle-aged trio leave with boxes of pamphlets, a young couple walk in with their two children, offering to deliver leaflets, posters and Yes badges. It is that kind of campaign and proof of how the debate over the country's future really has re-energized the democratic process in this part of the world at least.
When the referendum on Scottish independence was announced in 2011, it was considered a foregone conclusion. The pro-independence camp were seen as delusional Braveheart-loving, Saltire-clad nationalists; Scotland would vote No and the United Kingdom would remain strongly intact. British Prime Minister David Cameron was so sure of this that he refused to allow a third option offering "devo max" - giving more autonomy to the Scottish parliament while keeping Scotland in the union - onto the ballot.
In the last month, though, the Yes Scotland campaign has turned the vote into a cliffhanger. It started in late August, when the polling showed 47 percent for Yes and 53 percent for No, close enough to send a tremor reverberating through the London-based political parties. Within 72 hours their leaders were scrambling towards Scotland to try and rally support.
That turned to outright panic barely a week later when a further poll put Yes in the lead -- 51 percent to 49 percent -- and the prospect of Scotland becoming and independent country and the United Kingdom breaking up quickly became a real possibility.
The question is: How was this remarkable turnaround achieved? The short answer: grassroots enthusiasm.
It has been the staple of the Yes Scotland campaign. Colin Williamson, a volunteer campaigner for Yes Scotland, who has been active in politics for 20 years as veteran of the Scottish National Party, or SNP, says he has never seen most of the volunteers before. "This is huge," he said. "Whatever the outcome, whether it's a Yes or a No, I've had the time of my life."
Back at the office, a new delivery of posters comes in and volunteers hastily start a bucket chain to stack them before sending them out for more canvassing, when Williamson and his fellow volunteers will be checking up on registered Yes voters in the area. "Over the last six months we've delivered roughly 360,000 pieces of literature through the doors in this area," said Dave Sharp, another seasoned Yes volunteer.
It is notoriously exhausting and unglamorous work, but has been the backbone of the Yes movement. Passionate supporters leave their jobs at the end of the day and go straight out to hit the streets and knock on doors.
"This is truly a grassroots campaign," said Williamson. "If I see a little Yes sign in somebody's window, I'm actually going up, chapping on their door and saying 'What can you do? You need to come out, even if it's just to come down to the stall for five minutes.' We've got them all over [the place] now. I say to them 'Come down and talk to the activists, even just to offer some encouragement because there's some of us who are on our last legs.'"
The weather in Scotland is often unkind to canvassers, and today is no exception. It's misty with a cold, spitting rain as the volunteers leave to check that those who pledged to vote Yes haven't changed their minds. Virtually none have.
In a poorer, low-income area of Edinburgh, many people on the doorsteps talk of their disillusionment with the main Westminster parties, particularly Labour, the party that was in government when the recession hit until it was voted out four years ago.
These are rarely new grievances, but they have been building up over a long period. One woman spoke of her shift to voting SNP when she felt it become standard for the Westminster parties to ignore ordinary people: "I'd voted Labour all my life, and then around 10 or 12 years ago me and my husband decided we'd just had enough. Tony Blair was the one that did it," she said.
At about the same time, former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown is due to address an audience in a nearby Miner's Club. Williamson chuckles as he drives past, watching the elaborate security systems being installed outside the event, which requires people to apply for attendance. It seems a fitting metaphor for the restrictiveness of the pro-Union campaign, Better Together.
"The thing about the two campaigns is we knew we had to convert people and win people over," said Sharpe. "We were identifying undecided people very early on and started targeting information at them. The No campaign has always thought the pre-existing no vote was enough to take them over the line, and all they've done is target their campaign essentially to scare their voters into the polling stations; the elderly, the generational Labour voters, people like that."
"Scots don't like being bullied," said Williamson. "This is like an abusive partner saying 'If you leave me I'll wreck your economy.' There's a element within the 'don't knows' who are completely fed up with being told 'You shouldn't do this! You're not getting that!' In the end, they basically said 'Screw it, I'm voting Yes.'"
In this respect, the Yes campaign has been highly critical of the established media for giving a one-sided view of the Scottish referendum, and for toeing the pro-Union line with constant warnings and fear-mongering. "I'll bet you, on Thursday morning [polling day], in the papers you'll see 'Run on Banks if you Vote Yes,'" Williamson said. "Even though it's a whole crock of shit because we're not independent on the 19th. This is out of the Quebec handbook on how to scare people."
Comparisons with the campaign in 1994 for Quebec's independence from Canada and this one are commonplace. Both were neck-and-neck in the lead up to the vote, and both rattled the establish politics of their countries, though in the end Quebec narrowly voted to stay part of Canada.
The consensus in the Yes camp is that these comparisons are outdated. Times have changed with the internet and social media being able to mobilize people and share information at a level which was previously unimaginable. "Twenty years ago, I don't think this would have been possible," said Stuart Mackinlay, a Yes volunteer who had just finished work and is about to start canvassing.
"Before people only really had the mainstream media and word of mouth for information. Now you've got blogs like Wings Over Scotland, the National Collective, Bella Caledonia, which give the other side of the story, and get people involved in the discussion."
That is where the Yes campaign has been making their ground: they have got the nation talking. Left to their own devices, the No campaign wanted to make this a shouting match between political leaders, but the Yes enthusiasts have made sure it is a proper old-fashioned doorstep campaign with modern social media layered on top.
If nothing else comes out of this campaign, the sight of a family wandering in off the street to get involved in a political debate proves the will to get involved is there; the secret is making sure people believe they are making a difference.
Every day, a stream of volunteers approaches the unofficial Yes Scotland office in Edinburgh. None of these people are political activists; they are members of the public who've stopped at the office to do their part for Yes Scotland, the campaign dedicated to making Scotland an independent country.
As a middle-aged trio leave with boxes of pamphlets, a young couple walk in with their two children, offering to deliver leaflets, posters and Yes badges. It is that kind of campaign and proof of how the debate over the country's future really has re-energized the democratic process in this part of the world at least.
When the referendum on Scottish independence was announced in 2011, it was considered a foregone conclusion. The pro-independence camp were seen as delusional Braveheart-loving, Saltire-clad nationalists; Scotland would vote No and the United Kingdom would remain strongly intact. British Prime Minister David Cameron was so sure of this that he refused to allow a third option offering "devo max" - giving more autonomy to the Scottish parliament while keeping Scotland in the union - onto the ballot.
In the last month, though, the Yes Scotland campaign has turned the vote into a cliffhanger. It started in late August, when the polling showed 47 percent for Yes and 53 percent for No, close enough to send a tremor reverberating through the London-based political parties. Within 72 hours their leaders were scrambling towards Scotland to try and rally support.
That turned to outright panic barely a week later when a further poll put Yes in the lead -- 51 percent to 49 percent -- and the prospect of Scotland becoming and independent country and the United Kingdom breaking up quickly became a real possibility.
The question is: How was this remarkable turnaround achieved? The short answer: grassroots enthusiasm.
It has been the staple of the Yes Scotland campaign. Colin Williamson, a volunteer campaigner for Yes Scotland, who has been active in politics for 20 years as veteran of the Scottish National Party, or SNP, says he has never seen most of the volunteers before. "This is huge," he said. "Whatever the outcome, whether it's a Yes or a No, I've had the time of my life."
Back at the office, a new delivery of posters comes in and volunteers hastily start a bucket chain to stack them before sending them out for more canvassing, when Williamson and his fellow volunteers will be checking up on registered Yes voters in the area. "Over the last six months we've delivered roughly 360,000 pieces of literature through the doors in this area," said Dave Sharp, another seasoned Yes volunteer.
It is notoriously exhausting and unglamorous work, but has been the backbone of the Yes movement. Passionate supporters leave their jobs at the end of the day and go straight out to hit the streets and knock on doors.
"This is truly a grassroots campaign," said Williamson. "If I see a little Yes sign in somebody's window, I'm actually going up, chapping on their door and saying 'What can you do? You need to come out, even if it's just to come down to the stall for five minutes.' We've got them all over [the place] now. I say to them 'Come down and talk to the activists, even just to offer some encouragement because there's some of us who are on our last legs.'"
The weather in Scotland is often unkind to canvassers, and today is no exception. It's misty with a cold, spitting rain as the volunteers leave to check that those who pledged to vote Yes haven't changed their minds. Virtually none have.
In a poorer, low-income area of Edinburgh, many people on the doorsteps talk of their disillusionment with the main Westminster parties, particularly Labour, the party that was in government when the recession hit until it was voted out four years ago.
These are rarely new grievances, but they have been building up over a long period. One woman spoke of her shift to voting SNP when she felt it become standard for the Westminster parties to ignore ordinary people: "I'd voted Labour all my life, and then around 10 or 12 years ago me and my husband decided we'd just had enough. Tony Blair was the one that did it," she said.
At about the same time, former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown is due to address an audience in a nearby Miner's Club. Williamson chuckles as he drives past, watching the elaborate security systems being installed outside the event, which requires people to apply for attendance. It seems a fitting metaphor for the restrictiveness of the pro-Union campaign, Better Together.
"The thing about the two campaigns is we knew we had to convert people and win people over," said Sharpe. "We were identifying undecided people very early on and started targeting information at them. The No campaign has always thought the pre-existing no vote was enough to take them over the line, and all they've done is target their campaign essentially to scare their voters into the polling stations; the elderly, the generational Labour voters, people like that."
"Scots don't like being bullied," said Williamson. "This is like an abusive partner saying 'If you leave me I'll wreck your economy.' There's a element within the 'don't knows' who are completely fed up with being told 'You shouldn't do this! You're not getting that!' In the end, they basically said 'Screw it, I'm voting Yes.'"
In this respect, the Yes campaign has been highly critical of the established media for giving a one-sided view of the Scottish referendum, and for toeing the pro-Union line with constant warnings and fear-mongering. "I'll bet you, on Thursday morning [polling day], in the papers you'll see 'Run on Banks if you Vote Yes,'" Williamson said. "Even though it's a whole crock of shit because we're not independent on the 19th. This is out of the Quebec handbook on how to scare people."
Comparisons with the campaign in 1994 for Quebec's independence from Canada and this one are commonplace. Both were neck-and-neck in the lead up to the vote, and both rattled the establish politics of their countries, though in the end Quebec narrowly voted to stay part of Canada.
The consensus in the Yes camp is that these comparisons are outdated. Times have changed with the internet and social media being able to mobilize people and share information at a level which was previously unimaginable. "Twenty years ago, I don't think this would have been possible," said Stuart Mackinlay, a Yes volunteer who had just finished work and is about to start canvassing.
"Before people only really had the mainstream media and word of mouth for information. Now you've got blogs like Wings Over Scotland, the National Collective, Bella Caledonia, which give the other side of the story, and get people involved in the discussion."
That is where the Yes campaign has been making their ground: they have got the nation talking. Left to their own devices, the No campaign wanted to make this a shouting match between political leaders, but the Yes enthusiasts have made sure it is a proper old-fashioned doorstep campaign with modern social media layered on top.
If nothing else comes out of this campaign, the sight of a family wandering in off the street to get involved in a political debate proves the will to get involved is there; the secret is making sure people believe they are making a difference.
"In the coming months and years, our job is not just to respond to every absurd statement that Donald Trump makes. Our job is to stay focused on the issues that are of importance to the working families of our country."
On the campaign trail, President Donald Trump posed in a garbage truck and performed a staged shift at a McDonald's as he postured as a champion of the working class.
But Trump "ignored virtually every important issue facing the working families of this country" during his inaugural address, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) noted Tuesday in video remarks recorded after he attended the event, which was packed with prominent billionaires and corporate executives—some of whom the president has chosen to serve in his Cabinet.
"How crazy is that? Our healthcare system is dysfunctional and it's wildly expensive," said Sanders. "Not one word from Trump about how he is going to address the healthcare crisis. We pay by far the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs—sometimes 10 times more than the people in other countries, and one out of four Americans are unable to afford the prescriptions that their doctors prescribe. Not one word in his speech on the high cost of prescription drugs."
"We have 800,000 Americans who are homeless and millions and millions of people spending 50 or 60% of their limited income on housing. We have a major housing crisis in America, everybody knows it—and Trump in his inaugural address did not devote one word to it," Sanders continued. "Today in America, we have more income and wealth inequality than we have ever had... but Trump had nothing to say, not one word, about the growing gap between the very rich and everybody else."
Watch Sanders' full remarks:
Upon taking office, Trump immediately launched sweeping attacks on immigrant families, the environment, and the federal workforce, with more expected in the near future.
Trump also rolled back a Biden executive order aimed at lowering prescription drug prices.
In his remarks on Tuesday, Sanders said that "in the coming months and years, our job is not just to respond to every absurd statement that Donald Trump makes."
"Our job is to stay focused on the issues that are of importance to the working families of our country, and are in fact widely supported by the American people," said Sanders, pointing to broad backing for guaranteeing healthcare to all as a right, slashing drug prices, tackling the housing crisis, raising the long-stagnant federal minimum wage, and taking bold action against the climate emergency.
"No matter how many executive orders he signs and no matter how many absurd statements he makes, our goal remains the same," the senator added. "We have got to educate, we have got to organize, we have got to put pressure on Congress to do the right things."
"We cannot quit. We cannot be silent. If we quit, we lose more women," said one mother whose daughter died after being denied care under Georgia's six-week ban.
Congresswoman Nikema Williams joined patients, healthcare providers, and activists—including the mother of a woman who died after being refused abortion care in Georgia—at a Tuesday press conference held a day before what would have been the 52nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, and amid fears of a national abortion ban during U.S. President Donald Trump's second term.
"I refuse to stand by while extremist politicians attack our freedoms, our health, and our future," Williams (D-Ga.) told attendees of the virtual press conference, which was hosted by the abortion rights group Free & Just. "Reproductive freedom is about healthcare, it's about dignity, it's about autonomy. It's about ensuring that everyone, every person, has the ability to make the best decisions for themselves and their families without government interference."
Speakers at Tuesday's event included Shanette Williams, whose 28-year-old daughter Amber Nicole Thurman died in 2022 after being forced to travel out of state to seek care due to a recently passed Georgia law banning almost all abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, a period during which many people don't even know they're pregnant.
"I want to send a clear message to men to get off the sidelines and enter the fight for reproductive justice."
Thurman, who was the single mother of a young son, is one of at least several U.S. women—most of them Black or brown—whose deaths have been attributed to draconian anti-abortion laws.
"She left a son, who every day is confused by why his mother is not here," Williams said of her daughter. "I'm here to be that voice, to fight, to push, to do whatever I need to do to help save another life. Because I never want a mother to feel what I feel today."
"We cannot quit. We cannot be silent. If we quit, we lose more women," Williams added. "In November, following reporting from ProPublica, officials in Georgia dismissed all members of the state's Maternal Mortality Review Committee, which investigates the deaths of pregnant women across the state."
Last September, Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney struck down the state's six-week abortion ban as a violation of "a woman's right to control what happens to and within her body," a decision that made the procedure legal up to approximately 22 weeks of pregnancy. Republican Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr appealed the ruling to the state Supreme Court.
Avery Davis Bell, a Savannah mother who had to travel out of Georgia for care after her fetus was diagnosed with a fatal condition that threatened her own life as well, said during Tuesday's press conference: "I could have been Amber Nicole Thurman. It is important for me to continue sharing my story and advocating for us to be able to build the families we want, protect our lives, and be here for our living children."
Atlanta-area ultrasound technician and abortion care provider Suki O. said during the event that Georgia's ban "has been in place for three years now and it doesn't get any easier."
"To turn women away is the hardest thing for me to do," she added. "How many Black women will die, have died, and will continue to die due to these abortion bans?"
Davan'te Jennings, president of Young Democrats of Georgia and youth organizing director at Men4Choice, told the press conference that abortion "is not just a women's issue, this is a man's issue as well."
"I want to send a clear message to men to get off the sidelines and enter the fight for reproductive justice," Jennings added. "What would it look like for you to have to watch your mother go through this? To watch your sister go through this?"
While Trump has said he would veto any national abortion ban passed by the Republican-controlled Congress, reproductive rights advocates have expressed doubt that the president—a well-documented liar—would actually do so, and warned that his administration could use a 151-year-old law known as the Comstock Act to outlaw the procedure without needing congressional approval.
Critics also note that Trump has repeatedly bragged about appointing three of the U.S. Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the 2022 decision that canceled nearly a half-century of federal abortion rights.
The Trump administration is also widely expected to revive the so-called Global Gag Rule, which bans foreign nongovernmental organizations from performing or promoting abortion care using funds from any source, if they receive funds from the U.S. government for family planning activities.
Conservative groups, including the Heritage Foundation-led coalition behind Project 2025—a blueprint for a far-right overhaul of the federal government—have proposed policies including a national abortion ban, restricting access to birth control, defunding Planned Parenthood, monitoring and tracking pregnancy and abortion data, and eviscerating federal protections for lifesaving emergency abortion care.
While campaigning for president, Trump said he would allow states to monitor women's pregnancies and prosecute anyone who violates an abortion ban. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 12 states currently have near-total abortion bans, and 29 states have enacted prohibitions based on gestational duration.
"Trump isn't king, but if Congress capitulates, he could be," warned the leaders of Popular Democracy.
Since U.S. President Trump's return to office on Monday—at an inauguration ceremony full of American oligarchs—as the Republican has issued a flurry of executive orders and other actions, progressive leaders and organizers have expressed alarm and vowed to fight against his "authoritarian" agenda.
On his first day back at the White House, Trump issued 26 executive orders, 12 memos, and four proclamations, plus withdrew 78 of former President Joe Biden's executive actions, according to a tally from The Hill. Those moves related to the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, the death penalty, federal workers, immigration, LGBTQ+ rights, prescription drug prices, and more.
"In the last 24 hours, Trump has passed dozens of executive orders—many beyond his powers," said Popular Democracy co-director Analilia Mejia and DaMareo Cooper in a Tuesday statement. "Yet, not one of them has lowered prices or made life better for Americans. Instead, he's focused on eroding democracy, attacking constitutional rights, and spreading fear, cruelty, and chaos.
"Trump has taken aim at the 14th Amendment's rights of equal protection and citizenship—the fundamental American right to live and participate in our democracy—with an executive order targeting birthright citizenship," they noted, referencing a policy that is already facing legal challenges from immigrant rights groups and state attorneys general.
Announcing one of the lawsuits, ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said that "this order seeks to repeat one of the gravest errors in American history, by creating a permanent subclass of people born in the U.S. who are denied full rights as Americans. We will not let this attack on newborns and future generations of Americans go unchallenged. The Trump administration's overreach is so egregious that we are confident we will ultimately prevail."
Mejia and Cooper said that "his ineffective and inhumane executive orders targeting immigrants misuse military power and double down on damaging our communities."
The group America's Voice similarly expressed concern over Trump's "authoritarian notions of deploying the military on U.S. streets," with the group's executive director, Vanessa Cárdenas, saying that "this is an attack on American families and our American values. Trump's framing of our nation being 'invaded' coupled with the attacks on birthright citizenship and policies that will throw our immigration system further into chaos show that this is a hateful campaign to justify a nativist agenda that seeks to redefine 'American' and move this nation backwards."
Popular Democracy's leaders also called out various other items from Trump's first day that are expected to face legal hurdles—though the Republican spent his first term working with GOP lawmakers to pack the federal judiciary, including the U.S. Supreme Court, with far-right appointees, so the effectiveness of such suits remains to be seen.
"Trump's rollbacks of critical climate policy sell out future generations to the profit of oil and gas polluters, and further endangers the poor, Black, brown, and Indigenous people who have been at the frontlines of climate disaster," they said. Trump not only repealed various Biden-era policies but also declared a "national energy emergency" to "drill, baby, drill" for fossil fuels.
Climate campaigners slammed Trump for invoking "authoritarian powers on Day 1 to gut environmental protections," in the words of the Center for Biological Diversity. The organization's executive director, Kierán Suckling, vowed that "no matter how extreme he becomes, we'll confront Trump with optimism and a fierce defense of our beloved wildlife and the planet's health."
"The United States has some of the strongest environmental laws in the world, and no matter how petulantly Trump behaves, these laws don't bend before the whims of a wannabe dictator," Suckling stressed. "The use of emergency powers doesn't allow a president to bypass our environmental safeguards just to enrich himself and his cronies."
The president's attacks on health are expansive. As Mejia and Cooper detailed: "Trump's sweeping changes to healthcare will rip away access for millions, line the pockets of Big Pharma, and undo strides in reproductive rights. They also single out trans Americans, denying them lifesaving healthcare and the right to live freely and authentically."
Imara Jones, a Black trans woman, CEO of TransLash Media, and an expert on the anti-trans political movement, said in a Tuesday statement that "Trump's recognition of only 'two genders' means a war on trans people, as well as any cis person with a gender expression outside of the gender binary."
"This is not political theater, this is the beginning of a potential authoritarian takeover of the United States, one that starts with targeting one of the smallest and most vulnerable groups: transgender people," Jones emphasized. "They seek to erase trans people from public life and want to see if they can get away with it, as a prelude to much more. This should worry all of us."
Another development that provoked intense worry—and even
led the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Studies and Prevention to issue a "red flag alert for genocide in the United States"—was Elon Musk, the richest person on Earth and a key Trump ally, twice raising his arm in what was widely seen as a Nazi salute during a post-inauguration celebration.
Trump's Monday night decision to pardon over 1,500 people who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, an insurrection incited by the president himself as he contested his 2020 electoral loss, elicited similar warnings.
"By granting clemency to these individuals, who sought to overturn the peaceful transfer of power, Trump is signaling that political violence and the rejection of democratic norms are acceptable tactics in service to his authoritarian agenda," said Our Revolution executive director Joseph Geevarghese. "This is a direct threat to the foundations of our democracy and the safety of our communities."
The leaders of Popular Democracy highlighted that "undergirding this extreme authoritarian agenda is a claim that Trump has a mandate to act like a despot—no such mandate exists, much less is acceptable to the American people."
"Trump isn't king, but if Congress capitulates, he could be," they warned, just weeks after Republicans took slim control of both chambers. "Popular Democracy is prepared to push back against Trump's assault on our communities. We will stand up against an unconstitutional power grab, and hold our representatives accountable in this fight."