What to know about "Good Trouble Lives On" protests in Indiana
Why it matters: Lewis was one of the most vocal critics of President Trump during his first administration. He skipped Trump's 2017 inauguration — only the second Lewis missed during his three-decade tenure in Congress including former President George Bush's inauguration in 2001.
By the numbers: 56,000 people RSVP'd for more than 1,500 events across the country as of Friday, organizers said.
What they're saying: "Good Trouble Lives On is a national day of action to respond to the attacks on our civil and human rights by the Trump administration," the protest website said.
"Together, we'll remind them that in America, the power lies with the people."
The other side: "Nearly 80 million Americans gave President Trump a historic mandate to Make America Great Again and he is delivering on that promise in record time," White House spokesperson Liz Huston said in a statement.
Context: Lewis, the son of sharecroppers, grew up in rural Alabama. The civil rights leader was arrested more than 40 times and injured repeatedly but remained an advocate for nonviolent protest, per the Library of Congress.
"Rosa Parks inspired us to get in trouble," he said in 2019. "And I've been getting in trouble ever since. She inspired us to find a way, to get in the way, to get in what I call good trouble, necessary trouble."
State of play: Anti-Trump protests since January have retained their momentum, including Tesla Takedown in March, Hands Off! and 50501 in April, May Day, No Kings in June, and Free America on Independence Day.
Indivisible, a leading protest organization group, launched a project ahead of the protest to train a million people in non-cooperation, community organizing and campaign design.
Zoom out: In March 1965, Lewis led more than 600 peaceful protesters across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama. What was meant to be a push for voting rights became known as "Bloody Sunday" after state troopers attacked the marchers.
He was elected to the U.S. House in 1986, representing most of Atlanta, and served until he died in 2020.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's attack on in-state tuition for Dreamers is bad law — and worse policy
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Other surveys — by the Advertisement Among the targets of the administration's hostility, none elicits more sympathy from the public than the so‑called Dreamers — young people brought here unlawfully as children, who have grown up as Americans in everything but paperwork. (According to Gallup, Advertisement In lawsuits filed this spring against Texas, Minnesota, and Kentucky, the Justice Department maintains that offering in‑state tuition to students without legal immigration status — even if they were brought here as small children and essentially grew up American — violates federal law. In reality, it is the administration's assault that distorts federal law. It is also a brazen power grab that tramples states' rights, to say nothing of basic decency. Beginning in 2001, Democratic and Republican legislatures decided that if young people grow up in a state, are educated in its schools, and want to pursue higher education within its borders, it makes no sense to penalize them financially merely because of their immigration status. If there are good reasons to give a break on tuition to local students who want to go to a local college, what difference does it make whether they have a passport, a green card, or neither? Yet on April 28, President Trump Advertisement But that isn't true. Federal law does not say that undocumented immigrants must be excluded from any in-state tuition benefit. It Accordingly, the states that offer reduced tuition to undocumented immigrants condition the offer on criteria other than residency. States that offer in‑state tuition to undocumented students are acting not just humanely but rationally. Such policies reflect the common-sense principle that justifies giving a tuition break to any local student: It is in every state's interest to help its homegrown young people be as successful and well educated as possible. Lower tuition makes higher education more affordable, which in turn boosts the number of local families that can send their kids to college, which in turn expands the state's population of educated adults. A more educated population strengthens the state's economy, since college graduates are more likely to be employed and to earn higher incomes. For states like Massachusetts, which suffers from high outmigration, a particularly strong argument for the in-state tuition break is that graduates of public institutions are more likely to Advertisement None of these arguments has any logical connection to immigration or citizenship. They apply with equal force to those born abroad and to those born locally. And it is irrelevant whether those born abroad were brought to America by parents who had immigration visas or by parents who didn't. Dreamers aren't freeloaders. Like their families, they pay taxes — property taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, and even the payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare benefits, for which they are ineligible. (In 2022, according to the latest estimate from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, undocumented immigrants Aside from the Trumpian hard core, most Americans sympathize with the plight of undocumented immigrants who grew up in this country and have known no other home. That explains why (as Gallup reports) 85 percent of them would like Congress to make it possible for them to acquire citizenship. It also explains why in-state tuition for Dreamers has bipartisan support: The states that have enacted such policies include Oklahoma, Kentucky, California, and New York. Advertisement The Trump administration's lawsuits deserve to be dismissed on their legal merits, but they also deserve to be reviled as one more example of MAGA malevolence, which is grounded in nothing except a desire to hurt immigrants — Few Americans have any desire to punish young people who have done nothing wrong. The cruelty at the heart of Trump's immigration policy may thrill his base, but it repels a far larger America unwilling to abandon its values. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
After a Chaotic Start, a U.S. Attorney's Time May Be Running Out
Lawyers for Eliyahu Weinstein were faced with a difficult situation. After their client's 24-year sentence for investment fraud was commuted by President Trump in his first term, Mr. Weinstein was charged again with a similar crime by federal prosecutors in New Jersey and convicted at trial in late March. But his lawyers had a plan. They reached out to the state's newly installed U.S. attorney, Alina Habba, hoping to persuade her to push for an unusually light penalty, even though their client was a repeat felon. Ms. Habba granted them a rare private meeting to discuss the sentencing, which is scheduled for September, and she did not invite the prosecutors who had handled Mr. Weinstein's case, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. The episode left members of her staff infuriated. A brash media personality and former personal lawyer to Mr. Trump, Ms. Habba is among the most high-profile of the new U.S. attorneys appointed by a president who has taken closer control of the Justice Department than any other in the past half century. She has made frequent media appearances and drawn attention for a series of notable investigations into Democratic political figures. Her tenure has also shattered morale inside the U.S. attorney's office and left many prosecutors looking for a way out, according to 16 close observers of the office who were interviewed for this article and spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution. Ms. Habba boasted, upon taking office, of her direct line to the White House, according to people with knowledge of her remarks, even as she has insisted that she is 'not political.' Prosecutors have chafed at her availability to defense lawyers. She disbanded the office's Civil Rights Division and killed the office's longest-running prosecution just days before it was scheduled to go to trial. Three framed pictures of herself now hang in a conference room named for a legendary New Jersey crime fighter, Frederick B. Lacey. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's cuts threaten to rip research up by the roots
The chain saw approach to medical research funding is not just reckless — it's shortsighted. The families of the richest 2 percent also get cancer and other deadly diseases, and no amount of money can buy a cure that doesn't exist. Advertisement Dennis E. Noonan Wellesley Thank you for Kara Miller's article on the challenges of long-term research in the face of the Trump administration's cuts ( Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up While only a small fraction of original ideas achieve success as envisioned, scientists consistently persevere with passion for their ideas. The research environment overall, however, brings waves of advances. Unlike the business and dealmaking mind-set of the current administration's so-called leaders, scientists are not self-promoters by type. They struggle for funding over years, driven by their passion for making a difference for the world. Advertisement The most telling risk inherent in the Trump cuts is the potential impact on global competition. As Miller points out, for decades some of the world's best minds have come here, with the United States having benefited. But more recently, greater global tools and competition have prompted serious foreign competition for the best minds — and for the opportunities to control future technologies. The administration's cuts would put the United States more than a generation behind in our children's and grandchildren's future world. Larry Kennedy Jacksonville, Fla. I weep when I see what the Trump administration is doing to our country and our world. Kara Miller's article on the savaging of basic science — 'research aimed at understanding rather than commercializing' — is but one example. This type of research may have no application right away. However, over 20 or 30 years, many dozens of applications may emerge, often covering many different fields. The original development rarely occurs in business laboratories because there is no immediate payoff. It is therefore essential that government continue to fund basic science. As Miller points out, a stable flow of funding is essential for the production of a continuing stream of research results. Disruption of the Trumpian kind has several undesirable results: Besides stopping the flow of original ideas, over the long term it will reduce our capacity to learn from and absorb ideas produced in other countries. We have seen mid-career scientists being welcomed by other countries while the paths of early-career scientists have been demolished. American politicians, Republican and Democratic alike, must stand up to the president and say, 'Basic research is the seed corn for 'Making America Great Again.' It must not be destroyed.' They should then act and vote accordingly in Congress. Advertisement Martin G. Evans Cambridge The writer is a professor emeritus at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.
