Welcome to this week’s community open thread. After a busy week, this is your time and space to gather among friends and talk. Join the conversation in the comments and share what’s on your mind.

This community is for paid subscribers, and we’d love to have you join us! The goal is to create a safe and welcoming environment for everyone, which means speaking to and treating each other with respect in the comments.

Thanks for being part of our community!

— The Preamble Editorial Team

But did you really have to toss them?

Americans throw away billions of dollars’ worth of good food each year, often because they misunderstand labels such as “best by,” “sell by,” and “use by.” What people don’t realize is that the dates are just suggestions and aren’t based on when food expires.

These voluntary dates are there to tell consumers and retailers when the product is expected to have the best flavor or quality, not when it’s safe to eat.

Two federal agencies — the USDA and the FDA — are responsible for keeping American food safe. Both agencies inspect food, chase down contamination, and oversee recalls. But with one exception, neither agency regulates “best by” or “use by” dates at all. (The exception is infant formula, where the “use by” date marks the period through which the product is guaranteed to contain the nutrients listed on the label.) Many perishables are good well past the date on the label if they’ve been stored properly and show no signs of spoilage. The USDA even says that the dates you commonly see on food products are not “safety dates.”

If a company voluntarily chooses to include a “best by” or “use by” date, however, the USDA does have something to say about it — namely, that the label cannot be misleading, and that the company should explain what it means.

Many manufacturers and producers use labels like:

• “Best if used by/before,” or when the product is expected to have its best flavor or quality.

• “Use by,” which has essentially the same meaning.

• “Sell by,” which is guidance for retailers on how long to display the product.

• “Freeze by,” or when a product should ideally be frozen to preserve its quality.

The terminology bloomed gradually. Before the 1970s, the food industry used what it called closed dating: codes stamped on packages for stores so they knew when to rotate stock.

But reading closed dates required a special scanner, and shoppers wanted dates they could read. By 1975, a national survey found that 95% of consumers considered date labels the most useful service a store could offer. Sellers were eager to oblige.

Before long the issue captured the attention of legislators. Efforts in Congress to require date labels began in the 1970s and continued for decades, but nothing passed since there was resistance from the food industry. For example, in 1974, the National Association of Food Chains told Congress the industry was already spending millions on labeling on its own, and that federal rules would only add cost and discourage further voluntary programs. Also, lawmakers could not settle on what type of dates to require, how to explain them to consumers, and what foods to cover.

Without federal legislation, some states decided to take on food dating themselves. Ten had mandated some sort of dating by 1973, and by 1978, 21 states and DC had rules.

But the confusion never really went away. In 2013, a Harvard study found the labeling mess had led to 90% of Americans throwing out food early because they misread a date as a safety warning.

So in 2016 the USDA again tried to do something about it. Its Food Safety and Inspection Service issued guidance recommending that manufacturers explain what their dates and terms meant. And in 2017, big grocery and manufacturing groups responded by launching an initiative to settle on just two phrases — “best if used by” for quality and “use by” for the cases involving food safety.

Simplifying the terminology would have benefits for the manufacturers, too. A company selling in all 50 states currently has to navigate dozens of conflicting state rules on a single product. FMI and the Consumer Brands Association, the successor to the grocery manufacturers’ group, now back the Food Date Labeling Act, a bipartisan bill that would set a single national standard and end the patchwork. In February this year, more than 30 companies and trade groups — Walmart, Amazon, and Unilever among them — signed an open letter urging Congress to pass it.

How do manufacturers settle on the various dates?

It’s part lab test, part taste test.

Manufacturers, or the labs they hire, store a product under realistic conditions. Trained tasting panels rate a sample’s look, smell, texture, and flavor on a scale, watching as quality deteriorates. Instruments — like a texture analyzer or a moisture-level reader — do the work a tongue and nose cannot.

The results depend on the food’s ingredients, how cold it stays as it rides through trucks and warehouses, and its packaging. Vacuum-packed meats and cheeses last longer because pulling the oxygen out starves the organisms that cause spoilage in foods. Airtight packaging also holds moisture in and keeps contaminants out.

To avoid waiting a full year to date a product with a long shelf life, the labs do accelerated testing. That means they store the food in hotter or more humid environments to measure how fast it breaks down and use the resulting information to estimate a real-world date.

What this means for you

Here’s a good example: A tub of ice cream that’s been sitting in the freezer for a year will probably be full of ice crystals. It may not taste very good, but it wouldn’t be unsafe to eat. The same is true of many other foods if they’ve been stored properly.

So treat most date labels as a guide to quality, not a hard deadline, unless you’re dealing with infant formula. If something looks moldy, smells sour, or has an unusual texture, it’s time to toss it.

One important caveat: some of the microbes that cause foodborne illness don’t change a food’s smell, taste, or appearance. That’s why proper refrigeration and safe handling matter just as much as the date on the package. And for higher-risk foods such as deli meats, egg salad, and chicken salad, it’s best to err on the side of caution. When in doubt, throw it out.

But her Instagram account, @catsonacouch, has been trolling Vice President JD Vance since its launch in August 2024. Its name comes from a comment Vance made on Fox News back in 2021. As a Senate hopeful in Ohio, he said, “We are effectively run in this country via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too.”

After Vance joined Trump’s ticket, the cat-lady quote resurfaced, and McGonigle introduced her account. “This petty cat account exists purr-ly to troll the current administration & have more followers than JD Vance,” it announced, complete with an image of Vance’s head affixed to a couch with cartoon arms and legs. As of this writing, @catsonacouch boasts 1.9 million followers to Vance’s 2.9 million. It features comments such as “Vance cured my impostor syndrome” and “Vance is a sentient jar of mayonnaise.”

Now, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine, McGonigle is suing parts of the federal government. She alleges that she was barred from attending a May 14 event in Bangor, ME, at which Vance was present to discuss his task force against fraud in government agencies. The event was taxpayer-funded, and McGonigle says that her exclusion violated her First Amendment rights.

The 24-page suit, filed July 7, alleges that after McGonigle registered for the event and received a confirmation that she could attend — as shown via screen shots in the complaint — Secret Service agents stopped her in line, called her “Amanda” by name, told her it was a private event she could not attend, and added, “We know where you stand.”

“It’s absurd that the Secret Service is wasting their time tracking a satirical cat account on social media,” McGonigle said through the ACLU upon filing the suit. “But the First Amendment protects our right to criticize the government, and it’s well within my rights to say that I think JD Vance is an unlikeable idiot.”

The ACLU is taking the case very seriously. Lead ACLU attorney Anahita Sotoohi told The Preamble that the ACLU is concerned about escalation against McGonigle. “We’re trying to demonstrate a real fear that if Amanda continues to try to engage in speech protected by the First Amendment, keeps running the account, and wants to continue to attend vice presidential events and act as any audience member would, some kind of criminal penalty will evolve or a criminal charge will be made against her.” As the suit puts it, being “excluded from such events, and remaining in a restricted area of a building or grounds where a Secret Service protectee (the Vice President) is or will be temporarily visiting, could subject Ms. McGonigle to criminal penalties.”

The suit goes on to claim the events of May 14 were already an escalation. McGonigle registered to attend a Vance event on May 5 in Des Moines, IA, but did not receive any confirmation, which she and her attorney see as an earlier move to bar her from a public event in response to her speech.

Sotoohi thinks McGonigle’s case reflects a broader effort to chill criticism of the Trump administration. “She is one example, one person in a pattern in this administration. They are very thin-skinned, and retaliate in ways that violate the First Amendment or are very close to violating the First Amendment. It’s very much in the vein of politicizing the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to go after Jimmy Kimmel.”

The administration has yet to comment on the lawsuit.

The suit names as defendants Sean M. Curran, director of the Secret Service, and John Hiller, director of Presidential Advance (which plans events with the president or vice president). It cites several precedents related to public forums or viewpoint discrimination:

• Matal v. Tam (2017), in which the Supreme Court unanimously found that a trademark could not be banned because of its message. Justice Alito wrote, “Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate.’”

• Rosenberger v. Rector (1995), a 1995 case in which the justices found, by a 5–4 vote, that a public university violated the First Amendment by denying funds to a religious publication when secular publications received funds.

• A Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals holding in 2019 that an elected official’s Facebook page could not exclude dissenting comments or participation.

Vance walks it back in new book

In his latest memoir, Communion: Finding My Way Back to Faith, published June 16, Vance laments the childless cat lady quote.

“One of the dumbest things I ever said came when I argued that ‘childless cat ladies’ across the Democratic Party were running our country into the ground… The comment caused two firestorms: the first when I made it, the second years later during a political campaign… It was a boneheaded comment, intentionally (and successfully) provocative rather than illuminating.”

He goes on to write that the comment, while “enraging… had the added benefit of distracting from the actual point I wanted to make, which was that our society is becoming pathologically hostile to having kids.” Vance said that he “could have made that point much more effectively, and with the benefit of showing a little charity to the many Americans who — some for reasons beyond their control — don’t have children.”

There has been little charity on @catsonacouch since the lawsuit was filed. McGonigle — a mother of two children whose day job is VP of marketing and growth at a software firm, according to her LinkedIn page — has been basking in the media attention, showing numerous article screenshots against a backdrop of her riding in a car or lying on a couch, or of images of cats on parade. A recent post offers journalists an array of new Vance insults, some of them unprintable.

What does McGonigle want? According to the lawsuit, for the court to “declare that excluding [her] from official vice presidential events in retaliation for her protected speech and expression is unconstitutional; declare that Defendants’ viewpoint-based exclusion of [her] from official vice presidential events is unconstitutional; enter an injunction prohibiting Defendants from excluding [her] from official vice presidential events in retaliation for her protected speech and expression or based on her viewpoint; [and] award Plaintiffs their costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.”

And, to recall her first post on Instagram, more followers than JD Vance.

Aid to Israel

Yesterday almost half the Democrats in the US House voted to end military aid to Israel. The amendment, attached to a funding bill for the State Department, would have eliminated $3.3 billion in annual aid and barred any spending in the bill from going to the country.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries

The amendment failed 104–314, with 103 Democrats in favor of cutting off the aid, 98 against, and 10 voting “present.” Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who sponsored the amendment, was the only Republican to support it.

The result marked a dramatic departure from 2016, when the House approved military aid to Israel by a 405–4 margin.

Democratic leadership split publicly on the amendment. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries voted no, saying it was too broad. Democratic Whip Katherine Clark voted yes, saying, “I believe we must change course.”

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, long known as one of Israel’s strongest defenders in Congress, also voted to end the aid. She called the amendment an “unfortunate choice” but said she supported it “for the message that it sends.”

The vote highlights the growing divide between Democrats over military aid to Israel. Read more in Elise Labott’s Preamble article from earlier this week.

Trump Primetime Address

President Trump is set to give a primetime address tonight in which he’s likely to repeat claims about fraud in the 2020 election.

The White House hasn’t released a draft of the speech, but sources suggest Trump will claim there’s new information on foreign interference, including from China, in the 2020 election. He will also reportedly talk about voting machine security.

“It doesn’t get bigger, because without free and fair elections, you don’t have a country… We’ll be discussing other things too, but it’s going to be a very big announcement,” Trump said earlier this week.

Former DOJ Attorney Says Blanche Endangered Judges

Former DOJ pardon attorney Liz Oyer testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche fueled threats of political violence against judges by attacking those who rule against the Trump administration. She said it amounts to “declaring a war against the courts.”

The committee was holding its second day of confirmation hearings for Blanche, whom Trump has nominated to be attorney general. As evidence of the threat of political violence, Oyer pointed to the testimony of two Supreme Court justices — Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett — before the House and Senate Appropriations committees earlier this week in which they requested additional security funding for Supreme Court justices.

Separately, one of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, Dani Bensky, asked senators on the committee to “put politics aside” and not confirm Blanche. She criticized the Justice Department for failing to redact personally identifying information about survivors, including information about her, when it released the Epstein files. She also criticized Blanche’s decision not to meet face-to-face with them.

The Senate panel has 11 Republicans and 10 Democrats after the sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) last week, meaning that a single GOP defection could sink Blanche’s nomination. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a Republican on the committee, said he will not vote to confirm Blanche unless he meets with the survivors.

News Break

On Nov. 6, 1860, Abraham Lincoln became the fluky victor in a tight race for president. The country was bitterly at odds; Southern extremists were moving ever closer to destroying the Union, with one state after another seceding and Lincoln powerless to stop them. Slavery fueled the conflict, and somehow the passions of North and South came to focus on a lonely federal fortress in Charleston Harbor: Fort Sumter. In The Demon of Unrest, Erik Larson draws on diaries, secret communiqués, slave ledgers, and plantation records to offer a gripping account of the chaotic months between Lincoln’s election and the Confederacy’s shelling of Sumter.

Vance on Epstein Files

Vice President JD Vance said the Trump administration “absolutely” mishandled communications about the Jeffrey Epstein files.

During a podcast interview with Joe Rogan released yesterday, Vance pointed to former Attorney General Pam Bondi, who once said an alleged Epstein “client list” was “sitting on my desk right now.” Vance said Bondi made a mistake by overstating “what we had and what we didn’t have.”

Vance has previously pushed internally for releasing the full record, including materials mentioning Trump, while others in the administration, like White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, have favored releasing less.

Testosterone Tests for Troops

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced a new annual screening program for “testosterone deficiency” among American troops, saying it’s necessary to keep them at their “absolute best.”

The screenings will be added to the medical checkups already required of service members 30 and older. Those under 30 can volunteer to be tested. Testosterone replacement therapy will be available for anyone found deficient who wants it.

The Pentagon hasn’t explained what prompted the new policy, and it declined to say whether female troops would be screened for hormones.

Iran War Intensifies

The US and Iran traded military strikes, with the US launching attacks in northern Iran today. The US military said it carried out the strikes for the sixth consecutive night “to further degrade Iranian military capabilities.”

American forces also hit an Iranian ship that it said was trying to break the US naval blockade of Iranian ships and ports. Iran retaliated by firing missiles and drones into Bahrain and Kuwait.

Cyclosporiasis Diarrhea

Nearly 7,000 people are now suspected to have been infected with cyclosporiasis, a parasitic foodborne illness that can cause weeks of diarrhea.

The CDC says that 1,645 cases are lab-confirmed and more than 5,100 additional cases are under investigation. The final number could be much higher because not everyone who has the parasite visits the doctor. This time last year, there were fewer than 250 cases.

Cyclosporiasis is caused by a microscopic parasite that spreads through food or water contaminated with feces. It doesn’t spread person-to-person.

The agency recommends seeing a doctor for prolonged or watery diarrhea and cooking vegetables before eating them. Foods linked to past outbreaks include basil, bagged salads and salad mixes, cilantro, parsley, and snow peas.

It’s difficult to pin down the exact source of contamination because symptoms can show up anywhere from two days to two weeks after it is eaten.

If the daily sorting was prayer, recycling night was church: the weekly pilgrimage of taking divided and rinsed materials to the edge of the driveway was a dutiful exercise in hope that my gesture, however small, might make a difference for our planet. My obsession with recycling continued into college, where for a not insignificant amount of time I sincerely pondered whether I could major in “teaching people to recycle” (I could not).

And it’s continued through today: I cannot think of so much as a piece of paper that I haven’t hung on to until I’ve gotten to a place to recycle it (including, incredibly, while on international long-haul flights — I know). As I write this, I have a box in my kitchen filled with thoroughly rinsed toothpaste tubes and sunscreen containers to carry down — in person — to a specialty recycling program for cosmetics containers, because they apparently require different treatment from other types of containers.

Yet so many people around me don’t recycle. When I was pondering inventing my own major about the subject, I had a boss who always said she “didn’t have time to recycle” (I still don’t understand it). My mother-in-law’s entire neighborhood in the Midwest couldn’t agree on a recycling service, so they just don’t have one. And they are not alone: by one estimate, only 43% of American households recycle at all. Not only does this vary by state, with some coming in at fewer than 10% of households recycling, but even among households that do recycle only about half of recyclable materials are, on average, recycled.

So, who is right? Am I noble, selfless, and saving the world, one diligently washed can of crushed tomatoes at a time? Or is recycling an exercise in delusion, and it’s the 57% of Americans who aren’t bothering with this frivolous activity who see the light? Luckily, we can find out by applying a social science lens to this question.

1. What do we mean by “work”?

There are a lot of things we might hope to accomplish with recycling, such as curbing climate change, reducing physical waste in landfills, helping ourselves feel like we’re at least doing something for the environment, and even creating jobs. From an environmental perspective, researchers mostly evaluate the extent to which recycling reduces greenhouse gases (GHG), which are the primary driver of climate change.

There are several ways recycling can contribute to reducing GHGs. First, it can mean less raw material extraction, which can require all kinds of GHG-exacerbating activities, including drilling, cutting down trees, and transporting raw materials to be manufactured. Second, the manufacturing process itself in some cases can be less energy-intensive if we’re reusing materials rather than working from new ones. Third, recycling reduces the amount of waste that ends up as regular garbage, which means fewer GHGs emitted if your trash is incinerated, as well as fewer GHGs from decomposition in a landfill.

2. Okay, so does recycling reduce GHGs?

The short answer is mostly yes, with some caveats. The more complete answer is that it varies considerably by what material is being recycled and where the recycling is done. And, overall, recycling has a relatively small impact on GHGs compared with high-impact behaviors, including flying, driving, eating meat, and (brace yourselves, natalists and tradwives) having big families.

The chart below shows the average climate impact of various activities measured in terms of the metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO₂) equivalent (tCO₂e) saved per year. I’ve left off the biggest intervention according to the researchers who collected this data, which is having one fewer child, because the climate impact is so high (58 tCO₂es) that it makes the rest of the chart unreadable. (But just know that not having children makes me a climate hero, okay?)

On average, recycling does help mitigate climate change, but there are other individual actions that have a bigger impact

Estimated metric tons of CO₂ equivalent (tCO₂e) saved per year from each behavior below

Three questions might arise from looking at this chart. First, does it matter what we are recycling? Surely recycling a soda can has a different mix of costs and benefits from recycling a mattress or a car battery.

Second, while recycling on balance may not have much of an impact compared with, say, ditching your car or saying no to a trip to Paris, isn’t it a lot easier to recycle? How can we think about not just the absolute value but also the relative value of recycling?

Finally — and this is probably screaming at you right now — why are we zooming in on individual behaviors when, if we really want to move the needle on GHG emissions, we need to address large corporations, governments, and other structural drivers of climate change? Also, even if we do look at individual behavior, shouldn’t we focus on the wealthiest people, who are, on balance, responsible for far more emissions than regular folks? These are all excellent questions. We’ll address each in turn.

3. How much does it matter what you’re recycling and where you’re recycling it?

In general, quite a bit. When it comes to materials, recycling aluminum and steel is the most effective. Recycling paper and cardboard can be effective, but its effectiveness varies considerably with the type of fibers in the material and how often it’s been recycled previously (unlike aluminum, paper can be recycled only a fixed number of times, and each one costs more). This information then needs to be compared with the counterfactual of how much “virgin” paper would have been produced instead, as new paper production can also create nonfossil biofuels from its pulp byproducts. Glass can be effectively recycled, though its weight can make the costs outweigh the benefits if it needs to be transported long distances to a recycling facility. It also can contaminate an entire collection of recyclables when the recycled materials are placed into one container rather than separated by type.

Finally, plastics are extremely complicated. Different plastics contain different materials and mixes of materials, separating them can be difficult if not impossible, and the costs of mechanically or chemically processing these different mixes can be very high. Recent research on plastics recycling has highlighted the need for technologies to more effectively produce as well as recycle plastic.

We also need to consider where the recycling is taking place. Recycling in urban areas with denser collection routes, higher volumes of recycled materials, and shorter distances to facilities can contribute more than recycling in areas that are populated less densely. But even in those areas, infrastructure can make a difference. Some evidence suggests that “hub and spoke” systems, which streamline the process of getting materials to central processing centers, can increase the efficiency of recycling in non-urban areas.

A full accounting of the efficacy of recycling in any given area also needs to consider the counterfactual — where the material would end up if not recycled. If the materials would otherwise end up in a landfill, recycling tends to be a winner in reducing GHGs. Some recent research, however, suggests that if recycling is expensive to implement in a location — whether, for example, because of the costs of building a new recycling facility, developing the infrastructure for collection, or even persuading citizens to recycle in quantities large enough to make the investment worth it — it might not be that much more efficient than sending trash to an incinerator (which is better than putting it in a landfill). Moreover, all of this is going to vary depending on local economic conditions and policies as well as global demand for recycled materials.

Thus, even within the broad category of “recycling,” the value of my recycling an aluminum can in New York City compared with the value of a Nebraska farmer’s recycling a glass jar is going to be wildly different. Any broad measure of the efficacy of recycling will likely make simplifying assumptions that obscure variation across locations and materials.

4. How much does it matter that recycling is an easier activity to adopt than other pro-climate behaviors?

There are a few ways we might think about the “ease of adoption” of various climate behaviors. One is a concept called “behavioral plasticity,” which refers to the likelihood of persuading people to adopt a particular change. This is not trivial to measure, but in general researchers estimate it by assessing the proportions of people in various studies who have meaningfully changed their behavior. Other estimates focus on costs — how expensive is it to change a lightbulb compared with, say, buying a more efficient car.

A recent study approached this question by simply asking survey respondents how difficult or easy it would be for them to adopt certain behaviors. It then mapped those behaviors against data from a meta-analysis of the overall effectiveness of pro-climate activities. The results showed that while recycling indeed is not a high-impact activity, it is generally considered relatively easy to adopt.

Recycling is a relatively low-impact but also relatively low-effort behavioral change

Estimated behavioral plasticity (y-axis) compared with average climate effectiveness (x-axis) for common individual behaviors to combat climate change

The big headline from the above chart, of course, is that I am a huge climate criminal because I regularly take long-haul flights and have adopted two dogs (though I’m also vegan, which I am contractually obligated to mention in every article I write).

My dogs, who are sleeping next to me as I write, would like to add that we should consider the infinite joy they bring to our lives even if they are a net climate negative (I suppose I am starting to see why people might not like the whole “don’t have children” argument about climate change).

But the other headline here is: okay, but what about the ultra-wealthy with their private jets and other ways of generating massive emissions? What about corporations or investors in fossil-fuel-emitting industries?

5. Aren’t we just blaming individuals for structural problems and inequities beyond their control?

Our final question is possibly the most difficult. Yes, we know that most GHGs come from industries like energy, agriculture, manufacturing, and transportation. Researchers have suggested that a focus on lifestyle changes is a distraction from these larger-scale problems — one that can even make individuals less supportive of climate change policies.

So it could be tempting to blame industries, absolve individuals, and call it a day.

But we also know that carbon-emitting industries produce things like food and cars, which individual humans use. This makes the accounting tricky (it’s difficult to avoid double or even triple counting if we try to isolate the climate impact of, say, the resources used to grow cotton, process it into a shirt, transport the shirt to a store, power the store, power your car to get to the store, and so on). A 2020 report from the United Nations nonetheless estimated that two-thirds of global emissions are linked to private households.

Of course, not all households contribute the same level of emissions. One recent study estimates that the wealthiest 10% of individuals are responsible for 50% of global emissions, while the poorest 50% of all people on earth are responsible for just 8% of emissions. Emissions also vary by country, and particularly by the wealth of that country. Emissions per capita in the United States, for example, are higher than those in India or China (though China’s overall emissions are higher than those of the US).

Thus, in many ways, yes, the idea of the “carbon footprint” as an individual responsibility is a distraction from broader issues around climate interventions. But that’s not the same thing as saying that individuals are entirely powerless. We have two levers at our disposal: personal and structural.

6. What we can do

The stark disparities between the emissions of industries and those of the very wealthy can make it easy to feel helpless and hopeless. While I sip from my soggy straw (and that’s only if I didn’t manage ahead of time to say, “No straw, please!”), feel guilty that I’m not sure how to recycle the plastic my berries came in, and stress out over the fact that they’re in a plastic container at all, super-wealthy people zip around in private jets, fossil fuel companies continue to pump out billions of tons of CO₂ equivalents, coal consumption is somehow re-climbing, and AI usage is skyrocketing. What’s the point of dropping this single crushed tomato can into one bin rather than another?

I don’t have easy answers for you (if I did, I’d have a Nobel Peace Prize, and maybe even a FIFA Peace Prize, plus we wouldn’t need this article). But one lens I’ve found helpful is this: it doesn’t have to be either/or. While the scale of emissions from many industries and wealthy people is enormous compared with the average person’s, that doesn’t mean individual actions don’t matter. In fact, there are two big things we can do: keep recycling (and doing any other climate-forward behavior available to us), as well as push for broader societal and government interventions.

I’m going to keep recycling because I live in a city that makes it relatively easy to do (plus I think I get fined if I don’t!). I’m going to think more carefully about whether I really need to fly somewhere or can take a train or join a meeting virtually. I’m going to keep being the heroic, noble, and eternally humble and modest vegan that I am. I’m going to turn down my air conditioning right now. (It’s worth noting that in the scheme of “reduce, reuse, recycle,” doing more of the first two can spare us a lot of the difficulties associated with the third.)

But I can also advocate the adoption of recycling programs in other parts of the country. I can push for legislation that, say, imposes taxes on private jet usage. I can use my skills with data and science communication to help others understand the importance of addressing this crisis. I can donate to my brother’s excellent nonprofit (I’m only slightly biased!) that rewilds urban areas while partnering with local schools to educate the next generation on local ecosystems.

I know I’m not doing enough. I know there are far worse emitters out there. And I know that hopelessness is not a way forward. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go cut up and rinse out some toothpaste tubes.

Blanche Confirmation Hearing

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told senators at his confirmation hearing today that he and his team are “restoring trust” in the Justice Department.

Blanche was asked about the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files, its cases against Trump’s perceived opponents, and the roughly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” he established as part of the settlement of President Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS. The fund was blocked by a federal court.

Blanche told senators that the Justice Department made redaction errors, including the publication of names, photos, and email addresses of victims, in about 1% of the Epstein files it released but moved quickly to fix them.

On the “anti-weaponization” fund, Blanche said it was dead. Sen. John Cornyn asked whether the Trump-IRS settlement — which includes both the “weaponization” fund and a separate provision shielding Trump and his sons from IRS audit — could be enforced as a contract. Blanche said “it’s an enforceable document,” and said that Trump’s lawyers could try to argue in court that the Justice Department breached the agreement by not creating the fund, even though he insisted that the department will not move forward with it.

In one of the hearing’s tenser exchanges, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse asked Blanche about FBI Director Kash Patel’s travel and alleged on-the-job drinking. Blanche retorted that the question was “extraordinarily obnoxious” and said he had full faith in Patel.

Blanche needs support from every Republican on the Judiciary Committee for his nomination to advance, and two of them — Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis — haven’t committed to backing him, though Tillis said today that he was pleased with Blanche’s performance during the hearing. The committee is down one Republican with the death of Sen. Lindsey Graham. His sister, Darline Graham Nordone, who has been sworn in to replace him, does not have her committee assignments yet.

DNI Pick Can’t Say Biden Won

Separately, Jay Clayton — Trump’s pick for director of national intelligence — testified today before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Clayton, who is the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, was asked repeatedly who won the 2020 election and refused to answer the question directly. He said he’s “not an election denier” but would not say that Joe Biden won the election.

He was also asked about the New York Times reporters who had received subpoenas after publishing a story on the new Air Force One. He defended the subpoenas saying the reporters weren’t targeted, “those leaking classified information are.”

Trump Coins

The US Mint will begin producing commemorative $1 coins with a gold-like finish featuring President Trump to mark America’s 250th anniversary.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the coins on social media, calling them a celebration of “the strength of American values.”

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, a frequent Trump critic, mocked the announcement, noting that the government recently ended production of the penny while introducing gold coins few Americans could afford. “I feel sorry for the folks who will be sold worthless knockoffs of this by the usual grifters,” he wrote.

Federal law generally bars living people from appearing on US currency. When Congress created the Presidential $1 Coin Program in 2007 — to honor US presidents in chronological order — it said that no living presidents or those who died in the past two years would be included.

News Break

Many of us know that the Moon pulls on our oceans, driving the tides, but did you know that it smells like gunpowder? Or that it was essential to the development of science and religion? Acclaimed journalist Rebecca Boyle takes readers on a dazzling tour to reveal the intimate role that Earth’s 4.51 billion–year–old companion has played in our biological and cultural evolution. In Our Moon, Boyle introduces us to ancient astronomers and major figures of the scientific revolution, including Johannes Kepler and his influential lunar science fiction. Our relationship to the Moon changed when Apollo astronauts landed on it in 1969, and it’s about to change again. As governments and billionaires aim to turn a profit from its resources, Rebecca Boyle shows us that the Moon belongs to everybody, and nobody at all.

Hegseth Blocks Promotions

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has blocked the promotions of seven senior Navy officers, five of whom are women or people of color, to the rank of two-star admiral.

The original promotion list included 22 officers selected by a board of senior admirals, which found the nominees to be among the Navy’s highest performers over careers spanning more than 25 years. Among those removed was Rear Adm. Amy Bauernschmidt, the first woman to command one of the Navy’s 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.

Hegseth has not explained why he pulled Bauernschmidt or the other six officers. He has argued for years, including in his 2024 book The War on Warriors, that the military has focused too much on promoting women and people of color at the expense of white men.

Since taking office, Hegseth has fired or sidelined more than two dozen generals and admirals.He has also removed about 40 senior officers from promotion lists despite their selection by promotion boards. More than half of those removed or dismissed have been women or Black officers.

Musk May Have Broken Law

The Wisconsin Elections Commission says Elon Musk likely violated Wisconsin’s election bribery law.

The bipartisan commission, made up of three Democrats and three Republicans, found probable cause that Musk violated state law by offering $1 million to some voters “in order to induce [people] to vote.”

In March last year, Musk posted on X that he would give a talk in Wisconsin, with entrance to the event limited to people who had already voted in the Supreme Court election, and said that he’d “personally hand over two checks for a million dollars each in appreciation for you taking the time to vote.”

After election officials and Democrats raised bribery concerns, he replaced that post with another saying entrance would instead be limited to people who signed his America PAC’s petition opposing “activist judges.” Two people were chosen to receive the money and presented as spokespeople for his political group, America PAC.

The commission voted 5–1 in a closed session last week to forward election bribery complaints against Musk to the district attorney. Under state law, Brown County DA David Lasee, a Republican, has 40 days to decide whether to file criminal charges. The complaints, filed by voters in Milwaukee and Green Bay, remain sealed under state law.

Separately, a government watchdog group, the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, has a pending lawsuit in Brown County circuit court that accuses Musk of running an “unauthorized lottery.”

Voter ID Bill

House Republicans combined the SAVE America Act with the 2027 funding bill for national security and the State Department before sending the package to the Senate.

The SAVE America Act would require Americans to show proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and a photo ID to cast a ballot. The House approved the bill earlier this year. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has not brought it up for a vote in the Senate because the opposition to it, which includes a handful of Republican senators, would prevent it from overcoming a filibuster.

For weeks, a group of House Republicans had refused to let any legislation come to the floor until Republican leaders found a way of pressuring the Senate to adopt the SAVE America Act. House Speaker Mike Johnson ended that impasse by agreeing to attach the act to the funding bill, which the House Republicans believe their Senate counterparts will have a harder time refusing to pass.

Few issues symbolized that bipartisan consensus more than Israel. Through Democratic and Republican administrations alike, support for Israel became one of the last places where Washington still spoke a common foreign policy language.

That consensus is breaking down, and Israel is where you can see it most clearly. The change isn’t simply that Israel has become more controversial. It has become a test of political identity in a way that Ukraine, NATO, or almost any other foreign policy issue has not.

Read more

ICE has told its officers to stop attempting arrests during most traffic stops, according to multiple media reports, after its agents fatally shot two immigrants in the span of a week. The Trump administration has not confirmed the directive.

The man killed Monday morning in Biddeford, ME, has been identified as 26-year-old Joan Sebastián Guerrero, a Colombian national with authorization to work in the US, according to immigrant-rights groups. He lived with his partner and three-year-old daughter and was driving to his job when he was stopped.

The DHS initially said he “weaponized” his vehicle against agents but then changed its account, saying the agents were watching a home tied to someone they believed was living in the US illegally with a final deportation order. When a vehicle left the home, agents tried to stop it. DHS said the vehicle attempted to flee and that the officer, “fearing for public safety,” opened fire and killed Guerrero. DHS hasn’t explained why the officer believed the vehicle posed a threat.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills and the state’s two senators, King and Susan Collins, a Republican, have demanded a full and impartial investigation.

Utah Monuments Reduced in Size

President Trump signed proclamations shrinking two Utah national monuments by roughly 90% each, saying the move was intended to restore local control over the land.

Grand Staircase-Escalante was designated by President Clinton in 1996; Bears Ears was designated by President Obama in 2016.

The proclamations say the smaller boundaries will “better align” with US economic and national security interests, citing deposits of uranium and other ores in the area. Both Obama and Biden designated the monuments under the Antiquities Act, a 1906 law that lets presidents protect federal land containing historic or scientific sites. The same law gives presidents authority to redraw those boundaries later.

Native American tribes and conservation groups condemned the cuts. The Wilderness Society, a nonprofit promoting conservation, said it would challenge the reduction in court, and tribal leaders said they weren’t consulted before the decision.

Paramount–WBD Merger

A coalition of 12 states sued to block Paramount Skydance’s $110 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery.

In the lawsuit, filed in federal court in California yesterday, the states argued the merger would “extinguish competition” in Hollywood. They say this would lead to higher prices, fewer movies and TV shows, and lower-quality content.

Paramount criticized the lawsuit, saying it will protect the interests of big streaming companies like Netflix instead of promoting competition. The merger, Paramount said, actually creates a “stronger competitor against dominant streaming and technology platforms.” (Antitrust law is generally meant to ensure that competition is possible.)

Paramount Skydance is controlled by the Ellison family, including billionaire Larry Ellison, a longtime Trump ally. The Justice Department approved the merger last month. If completed, the combined company would own Paramount Pictures, Paramount+, CBS News, Warner Bros. Studios, CNN, and HBO.

International Criminal Court

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has launched a campaign to dismantle the International Criminal Court, arguing the panel threatens US sovereignty by interfering with American military and law enforcement operations.

The ICC, based in The Hague, Netherlands, began operating in 2002. More than 120 countries have joined the treaty establishing it, but not the US. The court was created to prosecute the world’s gravest crimes — including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes — when national courts are unwilling or unable to do so.

The State Department said it would work to “systematically disable the ICC’s ability to operate, target American servicemen or officials, or otherwise threaten American sovereignty.”

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Rubio argued that the ICC had grown from a “narrow” court meant to prosecute the world’s gravest crimes into a “world tribunal with near-unlimited reach” to “override the courts and constitutions of the U.S. and other sovereign states” that never agreed to its authority. Rubio cited a 2020 ICC investigation of alleged war crimes by US troops in Afghanistan as an example when the ICC overstepped.

The State Department also said it would pressure other countries to reject the court’s authority over US personnel and that officials from countries supporting the ICC could face possible visa revocations, travel bans, and sanctions.

The European Union criticized the US move and affirmed its own commitment to international criminal justice.

Eliminate clutter and free cabinet space with this bamboo desk organizer for small spaces. The top shelf is perfect for storing larger items like binders, textbooks, or folders while the drawers are perfect for storing smaller items like pens and pencils, calculators, and index cards. It’s made of 100% natural bamboo, and can also be used to hold craft supplies, cosmetics, or anything else that needs organizing.

News Break

War Notification to Congress

President Trump has formally notified Congress that the United States has resumed military action against Iran. In a letter dated last Friday, he said the new US strikes began on July 7. The notification starts a 60-day clock under the War Powers Resolution, after which the president must seek authorization from Congress for continued military action.

The US and Iran have continued exchanging strikes in recent days, effectively ending the interim peace agreement the two sides signed on June 17. The US military said it would reinstate its naval blockade of Iranian ports this week.

Trump also reversed his plan, announced yesterday, to impose a 20% toll on commercial ships using the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for US protection. Today he said the fee was no longer necessary because Gulf states had agreed to make “trade and investment deals” in the United States.

SCOTUS Budget

Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett testified in front of Congress today to defend the new Supreme Court budget, which is seeking an increase for security spending.

This is the first time sitting justices have testified before lawmakers since 2019.

The Court is asking for an increase of $20 million over this year’s budget. It would be used to hire additional Supreme Court police officers and expand protection at justices’ homes.

Barrett told a House panel that “the threat level is really high,” citing a wave of threats against judges nationwide, including a swatting call at her home in May. She recalled a time when her 12-year-old son saw her bulletproof vest and asked what it was and why she needed it. “I didn’t know how to respond because maybe I lack imagination, but I didn’t expect that performing this service was going to put me in the position of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was and why I had to wear one,” Barrett said.

Inflation

Inflation dropped to an annual rate of 3.5% last month, down from 4.2% in May. Prices fell 0.4% for the month — the largest one-month drop since April 2020 — after rising 0.5% in May.

The drop was due to lower energy prices, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The relief may be short-lived, though. Oil prices have begun to rise again as the US and Iran have resumed fighting.

Daylight Saving Time

The House passed a bill that aims to end twice-yearly clock changes and make daylight saving time permanent. The bill, pushed by President Trump, now heads to the Senate, where it faces an unknown future.

The legislation, called the Sunshine Protection Act, would keep the country on daylight saving time year-round while letting states opt to stay on year-round standard time instead. But any states doing that would not be able to switch clocks as they do now.

Supporters of permanent daylight saving time say it would mean more evening light and less energy use.

From each of those vantage points, I have watched a profession I love evolve into something almost unrecognizable. I am concerned about the current attacks on the US Department of Education and legal protections for diverse learners. But I am also cautiously optimistic about the opportunity we have to reimagine learning environments for modern students.

When Congress passed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2001, the goals were well intentioned. Lawmakers wanted every child, regardless of zip code or family income, to read and do math at grade level, and they wanted the achievement gap between rich and poor, white and non-white, closed for good.

But by choosing to measure these achievement gaps with annual standardized testing tied to funding and sanctions, Congress reshaped classrooms in ways the bill’s architects did not fully anticipate. Schools began “teaching to the test,” narrowing instruction toward reading and math while trimming time for science, social studies, art, and recess.

Critics on the left and right eventually agreed that the law intruded on state and local control because it imposed unfunded mandates on already-strained districts and treated teachers less as trained professionals and more as scripted technicians.

I felt that shift from the front of my own classroom. Twenty-five years later, the good intentions of our legislators have produced cookie-cutter classrooms and a generation of teachers who entered the field to nurture curiosity and instead were measured by a number on a benchmark test. No Child Left Behind’s promise, in practice, left behind the very professionals it needed most.

A harder moment, not an easier one

If the last two decades were defined by standardization, this one is defined by disruption, and it is arriving from every direction at once. Artificial intelligence tools are moving into classrooms faster than schools can write policies around them. Children are growing up with screens competing for their attention nearly from birth. Parenting culture has trended toward closer supervision and less unstructured independence, even as employers say they need young workers who can solve problems without being told exactly how. Entire industries are being reshaped by automation, and the pipeline from school to career no longer runs reliably through a four-year degree.

Layered on top of all this is a federal rebuke of public education itself. Since 2025, the executive branch has moved to shrink and, where possible, dismantle the US Department of Education, transferring more than a hundred federal programs to other agencies and cutting hundreds of millions of dollars in the research contracts that once told us what schools and families actually need. Dr. Casey Burgat recently wrote about these dangers here at The Preamble.

We can stand and point fingers of blame, but this is the environment in which we now have to raise, and educate, the next generation. We cannot return to the standardized, one-size-fits-all model NCLB offered, but we also cannot waste another day paralyzed by indecision.

I will quickly outline four of the most critical gaps that need to be closed in public education. Our future leaders are growing up quickly, and we need today’s leaders to bring real solutions to the table.

1. Start earlier, and start closer to work

Nearly a third of the American workforce is raising young children, and the lack of affordable, quality child care costs the economy an estimated $172 billion a year in forgone earnings, lower productivity, and job turnover. Employers already have a financial incentive to help solve this, and an expanded federal tax credit for employer-sponsored child care now allows companies to claim up to 40% of what they spend on it. States and school districts should partner aggressively with major employers to build early childhood centers on site or nearby, giving parents safe, developmentally appropriate care within reach of their workday, and giving children a genuine runway to kindergarten readiness.

The cost of living almost necessitates dual-income homes to cover a family’s living costs. When health care costs as much as a mortgage, and daycare costs the same as a single income, many parents face an impossible choice between barely scraping by through honest work and utilizing government programs to house and feed their children. Investing tax dollars in early-childhood-development centers is an economic and an education policy at once.

2. Allow public schools to differ

Uniformity was the whole premise of the NCLB era, and it is a premise we should retire. More than 500 public schools nationwide now operate Montessori programs, in which students have a degree of freedom to follow their own interests. Districts from Milwaukee, MN, to Longview, TX, have shown that families will choose Montessori instruction, nature-based programs (which emphasize outdoor learning), or STEAM education (which includes the arts along with science, technology, engineering, and math) when public schools actually offer them. Expanding choice within public districts lets teachers practice the pedagogy they were trained for and helps families find a model that fits their child.

Combined with attention to equitable access rather than just proximity to affluent neighborhoods, this kind of choice can strengthen public education instead of hollowing it out (as vouchers do, by diverting funds from public schools to private ones). All children are unique and learn in unique ways. Parents in both rural and urban areas want to trust that their children are in the best possible learning environment.

3. Follow the brain science

The beauty of alternative classroom settings is supported by developments in modern brain science.

We know a remarkable amount now about how children actually acquire language, learn to read, and build cognitive skills. Phonemic awareness, the ability to hear and manipulate the sounds in words, is one of the strongest known predictors of reading success. Unfortunately, speech, occupational, and physical therapies that strongly support building phonemic skills are chronically underfunded in public schools.

Early childhood (ages 0–3) is also when the brain is most efficient at acquiring new languages, which argues for introducing foreign language instruction far earlier than the middle or high school years, as most districts currently do. Research on screen time consistently shows that passive, solitary screen use is linked to worse cognitive and behavioral outcomes, while unstructured, exploratory play builds the reasoning and problem-solving skills children need most. Providing more after-school enrichment opportunities, establishing ”bike buses” (in which children ride bikes to school together), and increasing the availability of brain-based interventions for our youngest learners struggling to read: none of this requires new discoveries. It requires funding for schools and supports for teachers that we have chosen, so far, not to provide.

4. Build real bridges to work

The old assumption that every student should be pointed toward a four-year degree has never matched the economy we actually have, and it matches it even less today than it did in 2001. Youth apprenticeships, which combine paid work-based learning with classroom instruction, served over 415,000 young people last year, and states from California to Tennessee are now investing tens of millions of dollars to expand them beyond their traditional home in construction trades and into health care, technology, and other growing fields. High schools should expand access to these programs and to entry-level licensing pathways for careers that pay handsome salaries and help many students avoid crushing debt from education loans.

Just as important, we owe students hard assignments they might fail. Resilience and belief in one’s capacity to achieve goals are so much more than soft skills. They are character traits that are some of the most important qualities employers seek in young job applicants. The future of education will continue to change rapidly with the growth of large language (AI) models and an information age that threatens the relevance of the classroom. When graduates enter the workforce, they are a liability unless their interpersonal skills offline are as strong as their technical skills online.

A positive angle in an uncertain time

As a fierce defender of public education, I find hope in believing that states can pivot their school models and curriculum standards more quickly than the machine of federal government can. Our nation has always protected a market for innovation, and that principle should apply in public education as well.

Employer-linked early learning, real choice inside public schools, brain-science-informed instruction, and genuine career pathways are all achievable with the will to fund and implement them. They collectively reject the premise that a single test score, a single curriculum, or a single path to adulthood can serve every child equally well. No Child Left Behind was right that we owe every student the same shot at success. It was simply wrong about how to deliver it.

Now, with the federal government stepping back and our most vulnerable students still at risk, it falls to all of us (state leaders, local boards, and parents willing to show up) to build something better.

Dr. Lauren Pinkston is an independent candidate for governor of Tennessee. A seventh-generation Tennessean, former business ethics professor, wife to a family physician, and mother of four, she holds a Ph.D. in international family and community studies from Clemson University and writes at The Mindful Middle. Learn more at pinkstonfortn.com

Trump–IRS Suit

A federal judge has ruled that President Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS was an improper attempt to give “judicial legitimacy for a ‘settlement’ that had no viable basis in law or fact.”

US District Judge Kathleen Williams said since the president has power over the IRS and the DOJ, “there was never a case or controversy; and there was never a question as to who would prevail.” She also referred the attorney who filed the case — Alejandro Brito — to the Florida bar for possible disciplinary action.

The initial settlement that the judge was weighing in on also gave Trump and his family immunity from future tax audits, and created a $1.776 billion fund for people who claimed to be victims of the Biden administration.

Following bipartisan criticism, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Justice Department had abandoned the proposed compensation fund but intended to preserve the tax-related protections for Trump, his sons, and their business.

Williams’s order came in response to a petition from 35 former federal judges who filed a lawsuit asking her to reopen the case after the DOJ announced Trump-IRS “settlement,” arguing the settlement amounted to fraud.

Election Officials Fired

President Trump removed the three remaining members of the independent Election Assistance Commission (EAC) last week, effectively dismantling the bipartisan panel just months before the midterm elections.

Democratic commissioners Benjamin Hovland and Thomas Hicks were dismissed by email, while Republican commissioner Christy McCormick was allowed to resign. The commission’s fourth member, Republican Don Palmer, resigned in April to join the conservative Heritage Foundation.

In defending the move, the White House cited the Supreme Court’s June 29 decision in Trump v. Slaughter, which expanded the president’s authority to remove members of independent federal agencies.

The EAC was created in response to the chaotic recount in the 2000 election. It helps certify voting equipment used by states, distributes federal election grants, develops voluntary voting-system guidelines, and provides technical assistance and training. Without any sitting commissioners, the agency cannot take formal votes on new policy, though career staff can continue to do routine things like disbursing already-approved grants and certifying equipment.

Sen. Lindsey Graham

Sen. Lindsey Graham, who died over the weekend, will be replaced in the Senate by his sister.

Graham passed away on Saturday night after “a brief and sudden illness,” according to his staff. The chief medical examiner later ruled his death was due to aortic dissection, a tear in the body’s largest artery.

Graham, who had represented South Carolina in the Senate since 2003, was seeking a fifth term in November.

Earlier today, Gov. Henry McMaster appointed Graham’s sister, Darline Graham Nordone, to fill the rest of her brother’s term, following President Trump’s public recommendation. Senate Majority Leader John Thune also backed that idea. Graham and his sister were very close, and he became her legal guardian after both of their parents died at a young age.

Since Graham had already won the Republican primary, South Carolina law requires a special primary to pick a new nominee for the seat, which is scheduled for August 11.

Several other Republicans — including Reps. Nancy Mace and Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette — are considering the special-primary race.

Graham became one of President Trump’s closest allies and was a leading GOP voice on US foreign policy matters. He chaired the Senate Budget Committee and sat on the Judiciary and Appropriations committees. His death leaves Republicans down a member on the Judiciary Committee, which is scheduled to hold Acting Attorney General Blanche’s confirmation hearing on Wednesday.

News Break

Inspired by true events, Women of the Post is a historical novel that brings to life the heroines who proudly served in the all-Black 6888th Battalion during World War II, finding purpose in their mission and lifelong friendship. The story, written by Joshunda Saunders, follows three women — from different cities and circumstances — who join the Women’s Army Corps and ship out to England. There, they receive orders to sort over one million pieces of mail, becoming the only unit of Black women to serve overseas during WWII. As they undertake the task, knowing that they’re reuniting soldiers with their loved ones through their letters, the work soon becomes personal when one receives a backlogged letter that will change the course of her life.

Another ICE Shooting

A person was killed Monday morning in a shooting involving ICE in Biddeford, ME, according to the speaker of the state House, Ryan Fecteau. It marks at least the 10th death tied to an ICE encounter since the start of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, and the second in less than a week.

Sen. Angus King said Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told him that an ICE agent opened fire after the man “weaponized” his vehicle against ICE agents who were pursuing him for deportation. The man was a 26-year-old from Colombia who was authorized to work in the US, according to immigrant-rights groups.

The shooting comes just days after ICE officers fatally shot Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a Mexican immigrant, in Houston. ICE has said Araujo attempted to run over an officer with his vehicle, prompting an agent to fire in self-defense.

Araujo’s family has disputed ICE’s version of events and called for an independent investigation. An attorney for the three men who were riding with him said officers were positioned alongside the vehicle, not in its path, when the shooting occurred.

US Naval Blockade

President Trump has announced that the US will reinstate a blockade targeting Iranian ships in the Strait of Hormuz while allowing vessels from other countries to continue using the shipping lane.

Trump said the US would seek a 20% fee on other cargo shipped through the strait in exchange for providing security.

Separately, the US and Iran have exchanged strikes for several consecutive days. The US has hit Iranian military sites — including air defense systems, radar installations, and small boats used by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard — after Iran attacked commercial ships transiting the strait.

The June 17 memorandum of understanding that paused the war is effectively dead for now. Trump declared the ceasefire “over” last week after Iran’s attacks on commercial shipping. While Trump has claimed Iran has asked to keep talking, Iranian officials dispute that and say negotiations will not resume until the US stops what Tehran calls ceasefire violations.

SCOTUS Budget

The Supreme Court is asking Congress for about $20 million in additional funding to cover security for its justices.

Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett are scheduled to testify tomorrow before the House and Senate to defend the judiciary’s budget request.

The additional money will be used for expanded personal security for the justices and to hire additional Supreme Court Police officers.

DOJ Subpoenas NYT Reporters

The Justice Department has subpoenaed at least four New York Times reporters over their coverage of security concerns involving President Trump’s new Air Force One.

The subpoenas require reporters Julian Barnes, Eric Lipton, Tyler Pager, and Eric Schmitt to testify before a federal grand jury in Manhattan later this week.

Their reporting examined security concerns about the new Air Force One — the Boeing jet gifted by Qatar and retrofitted at a cost of roughly $400 million — after the Secret Service reportedly recommended Trump use an older presidential jet to leave a NATO summit in Turkey amid renewed tension with Iran.

The Times condemned the move as an attack on press freedom and said it would challenge the subpoenas in court.

The Justice Department issued similar subpoenas to reporters at The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal earlier this year in separate leak investigations, then withdrew both.

Mitch McConnell

Sen. Mitch McConnell has finally released a statement about his hospitalization on June 14, saying a fall left him briefly unconscious, and that he also developed a mild case of pneumonia while recovering.

He said doctors determined he did not suffer any broken bones, a concussion, a heart attack, or a stroke. He has since moved from the hospital to a rehabilitation center to continue physical therapy.

McConnell explained why he waited so long to speak out, saying, “Folks of my generation often hesitate to share the vulnerability that comes with growing older.” He also said that having polio as a child has led to mobility issues that have gotten worse as he has aged.

Gebbia, the Airbnb co-founder serving as the nation’s first chief design officer, typed a drug name into TrumpRx.gov. The search bar filled it in. A clean page displayed the medication and the available discount. “It’s that simple,” he said during the rollout.

This was the promise behind the National Design Studio, the temporary White House office President Trump created last August to make federal services more “usable and beautiful.” Anyone who has spent 25 minutes searching a federal website for a form that turns out to be a scanned PDF from 2007 can appreciate the assignment.

Led by Gebbia and staffed largely by veterans of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, the studio was supposed to bring private sector talent, speed, and design sense to a federal government that could use more of all of them.

Then came the fine print that users never saw.

A Guardian investigation published this week found that four websites operated by the studio had run commercial tracking software capable of following visitors’ behavior in extraordinary detail. The tool, called PostHog, offers a “session replay” feature that can reproduce clicks, scrolling, and keystrokes; in effect, it creates a record of everything you do online. Its code was installed on all four sites and enabled on two, while activating it on the others required only changing a dashboard setting.

Many people rely on ad blockers to keep them from being tracked. But the sites also reportedly routed tracking requests through their own government addresses, a technique that makes the requests look like ordinary website traffic so that they’re less likely to be stopped by ad blockers. One studio site ran a separate, custom-built monitor that assigned visitors identifiers and sent information to an address hidden from the public internet.

The tracking software disappeared after the Guardian sent questions to the White House. A spokesperson said studio personnel comply with all legal requirements. There is no public evidence that the information was used to identify, investigate, contact, or otherwise surveil any specific visitor, and we do not know exactly what was collected, whether it was retained, or who may still have it.

Read more

Then I watched her expression slowly change to what I can only describe as disgust mixed with sadness. I immediately felt the heat rise in my face. I had expected gratitude. Instead she saw what I couldn’t: a person with no boundaries, who couldn’t stop.

She was right. Being available to everyone, all the time, was something I did for almost everyone in my life. I answered texts the second they came in. I inserted myself into family conflicts that had nothing to do with me. I took criticism from strangers online as seriously as criticism from people I loved. From the outside it looked like care. But if I’m being really honest, a deeper reason drove my behavior. Caring about everyone made me feel like a good person. But in reality, I was just stretching myself so much that there was very little left for the people in my life who mattered most. My guess is that you have some version of this too.

Now, I want to be crystal clear about something — I am not saying you should look away from the world, or that the suffering of people far away doesn’t matter. Caring about strangers is one of the better things humans do. But caring about someone and being responsible for them are not the same. And lately I fear we’ve started to treat them as if they were. We’ve decided that to care about someone is to take them on — to hold their problems as ours, to feel accountable for how they turn out.

There’s a hard limit on this. The anthropologist Robert Dunbar found that humans can maintain only about 150 stable relationships at a time. The number tracks with the size of the groups humans lived in for most of our history, and roughly with brain size across other primates. For almost all of human existence, 150 was close to everyone you would ever know. (Remember when that was about how many Facebook friends we had?) Smartphones changed this. With a screen in your pocket, now you can see everyone, all the time. But your capacity hasn’t changed.

There’s only so much attention and care in any of us. When we put our care toward the few people actually in our lives, we can do something real for them. When we try to stretch it over everyone, we’re left with almost nothing for anyone.

So, let me share an exercise I do with clients. You draw four circles inside of each other, sort of like a bull’s-eye, and sort the people in your life into them. The center is the smallest. This holds the few people you cannot imagine your life without. The next ring is wider. It’s for friends, extended family, and the people you actually talk to. Then the third circle is filled with coworkers, neighbors, acquaintances. These people you’d recognize but wouldn’t call.

Finally you add a fourth ring. This vast circle is for people you can see but will never meet: strangers, influencers, the lives unfolding on your phone at midnight. These are real people who matter (unless they’re bots — it’s hard to tell these days), but you can’t be responsible for them.

The exercise encourages you to get honest about what each ring can hold and what your capacity actually looks like (not what you wish it could be). The people at the center obviously get the most from you. And, critically, their well-being is so important to you that it is partly yours to steward. The outer ring can get your attention, sometimes your money, sometimes your voice, but their well-being is not your individual responsibility.

It’s easy for me to fall back into old patterns. But I don’t obsessively refresh Slack or dig deep into my comment sections anymore. I would rather save my time and energy for the people in my life who matter most.

The weekend’s here, and it’s time for our open thread. Jump into the comments below to connect with other Preamble community members, get to know each other, and talk through all the news of the week.

This community is for paid subscribers, and we’d love to have you join us! The goal is to create a safe and welcoming environment for everyone, which means speaking to and treating each other with respect in the comments.

Thanks for being part of our community!

— The Preamble Editorial Team

Welcome to Tristan da Cunha, a tiny island in the South Atlantic, roughly midway between South Africa and South America. It’s often described as the world’s most remote inhabited island.

Tristan is essentially all volcano — a steep green cone, Queen Mary’s Peak, rises nearly 6,700 feet straight out of the sea and is usually wrapped in clouds. The island is barely 38 square miles, almost all of it mountain, which leaves only a thin parcel of flat land at the water’s edge. There, a couple of hundred people are gathered into one village: Edinburgh of the Seven Seas, or just “the Settlement” — a set of low, houses built to withstand strong winds that constitute the whole of inhabited Tristan. The weather is cool, around 60°F year-round, gray and wet and windy.

To the outside world, it sounds less like a place to live than like the setting of a reality TV survival show. And yet the roughly 220 people who call Tristan home don’t merely tolerate life there. By all accounts, they love it.

Spend a few minutes watching TikTok videos posted by island resident Kelly Green, and you’ll begin to understand why. Green, a mother of two who also runs Tristan’s tourism and heritage department, documents daily life on the island for more than 144,000 followers. Her videos show a life that can look impossibly difficult by modern standards: long waits for necessities, few shops, limited travel, and a population so small that everyone knows everyone else’s business.

But they also reveal something many of us yearn for: a deep sense of community, belonging, and contentment.

Take the “potato patches,” the communal farming plots that have helped sustain Tristan’s families for generations. In one video, Green films islanders digging up potatoes while someone gives a brief history about how the “humble hero” (potato) has been an integral part of the island’s life. The scene looks less like farm chores and more like a family gathering.

That sense of belonging may help explain one of the most extraordinary decisions in modern history. In 1961, when a volcanic eruption forced the evacuation of all 264 residents to Britain, the islanders suddenly found themselves with access to modern amenities, shopping, jobs, and conveniences they had never known.

Yet within two years, most chose to return to one of the most isolated places on earth. Most families were home by late 1963, led by island council head Willie Repetto. Repetto explained their desire to return this way: “In England it’s money, money, money, worry, worry, worry, all the time,” he said. “If you have no job and no money it is difficult to live. In Tristan every man has his job and he grows his own food.”

More than six decades later, that choice still puzzles outsiders. Scroll through the comments on Green’s social media, and you’ll find commenters who declare that life has to be “absolutely miserable” out there. Many of them ask: Why would anyone live there? Isn’t it unfair to raise children in such isolation?

But the better question might be: How did this community come to exist in the first place?

A 16th century discovery

The island was discovered in 1506 by the Portuguese explorer Tristão da Cunha, who was leading a fleet around the Cape of Good Hope en route to India. Rough seas kept him from landing, but he gave the island his name — which means the man who lent his name to the world’s most remote inhabited island never actually set foot on it.

For centuries, Tristan stayed empty. But Britain became interested in the island because of Napoleon.

In 1816, with Napoleon Bonaparte exiled to St. Helena (which is about 1,500 miles away from Tristan), Britain worried the French might use Tristan as a staging point for a rescue. So it annexed the island and stationed a garrison of soldiers there. When the garrison withdrew the next year, most soldiers left. A few stayed on — among them William Glass, a Scottish corporal, who remained with his wife, their two children, and two English stonemasons. They drew up a founding agreement called the “the firm” which laid the foundation of a shared labor system: “equal shares of stock and stores; equally divided profit; equal shares in paying for purchases; no one superior over another.”

Some of Glass’s ideas have survived to the present. Land is held communally, and rules limit how much livestock each family can keep — partly to protect scarce grazing, partly to keep large inequalities from taking root.

But who actually lives on the island today — and governs?

Most people living on Tristan were born there, though they do have British citizenship since Tristan is a British overseas territory. Immigration is effectively closed unless you already have family ties to the island, as some do in South Africa and Britain. The few outsiders are contract workers hired by the local government — including a doctor, teachers, an agricultural adviser, and conservation specialists — who rotate through on fixed-term assignments that typically last about two years.

The island is governed by the 11-member Island Council — eight elected and three appointed, led by a UK-appointed administrator who lives on the island as the British government’s resident representative and oversees the territory’s day-to-day administration. One of the elected members serves as Chief Islander, chosen in a separate vote.

Daily life

One of the biggest misconceptions about Tristan is that life there is slow. In fact, NPR recently called it “the busiest place you’ve never seen.” With so few residents, nearly everyone ends up wearing several hats.

The island’s economy revolves around one thing: lobster. Tristan’s prized rock lobster is caught in the rough waters offshore and exported worldwide, and it’s the community’s main source of income. Lobstering season typically runs from July through April. On a good day during the season, the boats can land five metric tons.

But while lobster is the backbone of the economy, islanders have other professions too. Many residents work for the island’s small government as teachers, nurses, administrators, conservation officers, or mechanics. Others farm, fish, knit, repair machinery, or manage tourism — often several of these at once. For food — besides potatoes — families grow pumpkins and raise sheep, cattle, chickens, and ducks. A three-mile stretch of road runs from the settlement to the potato patches, served by what may be the world’s most remote scheduled bus route.

And when the work is done, life on Tristan turns social. Birthdays, christenings, and holidays are community-wide affairs. One child celebrating a first birthday recently had 25 godparents at their celebration. People meet at the Café da Cunha or Albatross Bar, go on hikes, and gather for community events like outdoor picnics. Sometimes, islanders even make videos responding to outsiders’ questions — whether they are genuinely curious or negative. One such video shows children and adults simply having fun outdoors together. Neighbors drop by without invitations. Evenings are often spent “visiting” — turning up at someone’s house for food, drink, and conversation. The front door, quite literally, stays open.

Despite the isolation, the island does have some modern conveniences, including the internet. For years it was so limited that residents joked about scheduling their online lives around the hours the connection was on. Then, in September 2024, the satellite internet broadband service Starlink arrived, giving islanders more reliable and speedier access.

Leave a comment

But there’s still no airport, and never will be, because of the island’s geography. To visit, you’ll spend close to a week crossing the South Atlantic by ship from Cape Town, South Africa, which is about 1,750 miles away. And because there’s no deep-water harbor, passengers and cargo can’t simply walk ashore — they transfer to smaller boats to reach land. Fresh fruit vanishes from the shop almost as soon as a ship arrives. New cars and furniture come off by crane.

And if someone gets seriously ill? Tristan’s small Camogli Healthcare Centre handles routine care, minor surgeries, and some emergencies, but isn’t equipped to treat complex medical cases. Major health issues mean waiting for the next ship and a roughly six-day sail to Cape Town — there is nothing within helicopter range and the nearest airport is more than 1,500 miles away. This May, with a patient in critical condition and oxygen running low, Britain didn’t extract the patient — it parachuted a doctor, an intensive care nurse, and supplies onto the island, and later sent a Royal Navy ship to collect the team.

The island also doesn’t offer opportunities for higher education, so many young islanders leave for South Africa or the United Kingdom to attend college and pursue careers they might not be able to find at home.

It’s tempting to romanticize life on the world’s most remote inhabited island, but Tristan has real hardships: isolation, rough weather, limited opportunities, and the knowledge that leaving — or getting help in a crisis — means a long ocean voyage.

But read enough about the place — or watch islanders collect eggs, harvest potatoes, and get ready for another community celebration — and the real mystery may not be why anyone chose to go back.

It may be why the rest of us cannot have the same sense of contentment and belonging in our own communities.

Privilege is not just about what doesn’t happen to you; it is also about what you don’t have to carry or think about. It is the conversations that you don’t have to have with your children. It is the grief and anger you do not have to feel, names you do not have to call, fear that justice won’t be served, circumstances you don’t have to survive.

When 18-year-old Nolan Wells went to Horn Island on Independence Day, no one knew it would be his last time being seen alive. His mother called him “NoNo” and described him as kind, sweet. In most pictures that I see of him he smiles, his teeth as radiant as his eyes and demeanor. He was young, Black, and now dead — left behind on a remote island by what some people have called his “friends.”

He was a freshman wide receiver at Southwest Mississippi Community College, around two or three hours away from the island. A highlight reel the family’s attorney posted shows Nolan as he gestures in a first-down motion; he smiles; he jumps up with his teammates, and then, he signs a letter of intent to attend college and play for the team. By all accounts, as we’ve learned of him through family and friends, Nolan was that guy: charming, ambitious, kind, determined.

He would have turned 19 next month.

Here is what we know: According to reports, Nolan and a group of teenagers — all white — had gone out to the Island. Nolan was last seen at 3 p.m. The group he’d come with had left the island, and none of them reported him missing. His mother, God bless her soul, had to report him missing. Those boys came with him, left, and said not a word.

Here is what we know: From the time Nolan was last seen to the time his body was discovered was 48 hours. In those 48 hours, none of those “friends” thought to stay on the island. In those 48 hours, his mother begged and pleaded on social media. In those 48 hours, his name came across our feeds, and our stomachs churned with rage. The news came, our hearts sank.

Here is what we don’t know: Why would “friends” leave their friend behind on a deserted island in the dead heat of a Mississippi summer? Why would none of them report him missing? How could they sleep at night? How could they or their parents wake up the next morning and go on about their day? How could they be so cold and unmoved and unconcerned?

This is the sad and apathetic reality of this kind of whiteness: there is no sense of urgency or care for another human being; no care for his survival; no care for his family’s tears.

If Nolan had died while with his family, that would have been a tragedy enough to make the toughest of us weep. But he didn’t. He died alone. His final minutes were not spent with his mother or father or actual friends, but with a group of white boys who left him on a deserted land with gator-infested waters. That is what crushes so much.

And that it happened on the 250th anniversary of this country’s independence — its declaration of freedom from one kind of oppression — is the brutal reminder that we have not reached complete freedom just yet.

I’ve been in Mississippi for the last few weeks, just five miles from where Nolan was found. A few days ago, I was writing in Ocean Springs, the town where he grew up, staring out onto the roads as the cars passed by. The air was thick and unforgiving, almost like the coastal waters here in the Gulf after a storm.

It is said that the waters here in this stretch of Route 90 are murky because the Mississippi Sound is shallow and sediment gets trapped. During certain weather conditions, the waters become contaminated and filled with bacteria. The night before Nolan disappeared, I watched a raging storm pass over Horn Island. It is not lost on me that here — part of the same place the president wants to rename the Gulf of America — is its own kind of brutal and ironic metaphor.

I can’t help but think of those early moments when we heard of the death of Ahmaud Arbery — and so many Black people who died under “mysterious circumstances.” How in the beginning, we had heard so little of what actually happened, only to find out that what we were being told wasn’t how the tragedy of that day unfolded. I can’t help but feel those same feelings right now.

Both Ahmaud and Nolan were young and Black and loved the game of football; both were said to have an infectious smile and personality; both were doing what they felt to be pleasurable and their right to do; both of their last moments were spent surrounded by a sea of white and uncaring faces; both, we would say, are dead before their time. And though we know Ahmaud was murdered and so much is still left to be answered in the death of Nolan, the same uneasy feelings arise when that old and familiar shock to the collective Black nervous system happens again and again.

To think, had Ahmaud’s killers not recorded the murder, none of us would have ever known. The whole system was set against him, corrupt at every step. And we can’t help but be bothered by what is left unsaid and what is left unknown and what remains to be discovered.

This is what we as Black people mean when we say there is a kind of collective grief: Nolan wasn’t our child, but we are heartbroken. But whatever we are feeling, those who knew and loved him best are experiencing it in far deeper and painful ways. And yet the collective, vicarious grief is real because Nolan could be any of us: he could be our friend, our teammate, our cousin, our son.

Then there is a particular kind of heartbreak in being a Black parent in this country. You know what this country has done to us and our loved ones, and what it made us endure. You know how many conversations you’ve had with your child, both to arm and affirm them even as the country tries to convince them of its own progress — that everyone in America is safe, and the ghosts of history have been buried.

Share

You know how terrifying it is to be only one degree away from being a victim of American apathy, that chilling disregard for anything Black and alive and moving freely. You know that at some point you must tell your child the truth of this place: for good or for ill. You know you want to protect what you see in them while also preparing them for what others will refuse to see.

And every time, you do it — you do it because so much depends on your ability to keep moving through the heartbreak and not to be destroyed by it. You do it because you know that when you look into those precious eyes of your child — as I have my own when they asked me who Nolan Wells was — you know you must give them hope and protect that part of them that remains open to the world.

If anybody knows, Black people know.

We know that Nolan deserved better than what he got. We know that though his so-called “friends” couldn’t see him, we do and we would have never left him behind. We know that this is an all too familiar American story. We know that right now it’s a waiting game and we pray that justice will be done.

But that waiting game is hard. Having to contend against whiteness is hard. Having to be strong is hard. It is terrifying, and we can only hold his family in the dearest of prayers. We can only say his name and say it again and again, as loud and as tender as we can muster: “You deserve to be here, you deserve to grow up, you deserve to live.”

And I can already hear people saying, “Let’s wait for the facts.” I understand that sentiment, but we are Black and many of us are Southern and have seen the face of white supremacy many times. We know what we see and feel; we know deep in the crevices of our minds and in the churning of our guts and in the pleading with our children and in the grieving and in the hoping.

This morning, I have done the same thing I do most times these tragedies happen: I save the images of the dead to honor their memory and living. In every image Nolan smiles. I see him happy at Signing Day, his playing days in high school completed, his playing days in college on the horizon. I see his high school graduation photo, his father and mother hugging him at his waist, the tassel declaring to everyone, “I made it!” I think of so many Black kids like him who are loved, and cherished, and then gone.

When I look at him, I think of myself and I think of my son and so many Black boys who are lovely in spite of the world’s unloving gaze. I see in his eyes what I see in so many of us: courage, wonder, freedom, desire, pleasure, ambition, commitment, kindness.

I don’t know what these next moments will hold, and I truly do not anticipate what is to come, but we are here and can fight for him, and that counts for something. We must grieve and when the time is right, we must demand more of this country. We must demand its care.

He was more than a dead Black boy: he was Nolan Xavier Wells — loved, beautiful, alive — and he deserves to be here and safe.

Trump Must Pay $5M

Yesterday, a federal judge ordered that $5.8 million be released to E. Jean Carroll — the amount awarded to her in 2023 by a jury that found Donald Trump liable for sexually assaulting her in the 1990s. The money has been sitting in a court-controlled account while Trump appealed.

Carroll sued Trump for the assault and defamation after Trump called her account of the assault a “hoax” when she went public in 2019. The original $5 million award grew because of accrued interest over three years.

Trump appealed the verdict to the US Supreme Court after it was repeatedly upheld by lower courts, and last month the Court declined to hear his case.

Trump’s lawyers asked the Supreme Court to reconsider yesterday, and wanted the lower court judge to continue to keep the $5.8 million frozen. But Judge Lewis Kaplan rejected the delay, and a court of appeals agreed.

Platner Ends Senate Campaign

Democrat Graham Platner ended his Senate campaign yesterday after a former girlfriend publicly accused him of raping her in 2021. In an 11-minute video, Platner denied the allegation as “false” and blamed “corporate media” and the “political establishment,” saying pressure from Democratic leaders had made it impossible to keep raising money or running a functioning campaign. He said he wasn’t dropping out because of the allegations themselves.

The rape accusation followed earlier allegations from former girlfriends of Platner who said he was intimidating and erratic.

The Maine Democratic Party has until July 27 to pick a new nominee. Yesterday, state party leaders approved plans for a 600-person nominating convention.

Former Judge Avoids Prison

A federal judge spared a former Milwaukee County judge prison time yesterday, fining her $5,000 instead, for helping a defendant evade ICE agents outside her courtroom last year.

County judge Hannah Dugan was convicted in December of felony charges for obstructing immigration removal proceedings in her court.

She was accused of directing federal agents to the chief judge’s office, then leading defendant Eduardo Flores-Ruiz out a private hallway in April 2025. Flores-Ruiz was arrested by ICE shortly thereafter.

At her sentencing hearing yesterday, where she could have received up to five years in prison, Dugan told the court her actions were meant to preserve the “decorum and safety of the courtroom,” not to help the defendant escape arrest.

Federal judge Lynn Adelman ordered Dugan to pay $5,000 in fines, citing Dugan’s long record of public service and lack of a prior criminal record. Dugan resigned her judgeship in January.

Newsbreak

Save your place in your next great read with an oil-painting-inspired bookmark from this set of four, based on the works of Van Gogh and Monet. With images of water lilies and sunflowers, these metal bookmarks are both decorative and functional, and they include a clip to mark your desired page.

Family Demands Independent Probe

The son of a Houston construction-business owner killed by an ICE agent this week is calling for an independent investigation, disputing the agency’s account of the killing. Ronaldo Salgado said his father, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, 52, was on his way to pick up his work crew earlier this week when an ICE agent shot him during a traffic stop. He died at the hospital.

ICE says Araujo rammed an agency vehicle and tried to run over an officer, who fired in self-defense. Salgado said his father had lived in the US for nearly 35 years, had no criminal record, and was in the process of applying for a work permit.

He said his father was likely scared because the vehicles following him were unmarked, and may have been worried the people were trying to steal the tools he needed for his work. Had his father “seen an emblem of ICE, or an emblem that says anything about a law enforcement agency,” Salgado said, he would have complied and stopped his car.

The shooting is under investigation by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general.

Erika Kirk Wants Evidence to Be Public

Tyler Robinson, the man accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk, reportedly expressed regret after the attack to his partner, according to a recorded police interview that was presented in court today. The partner, Lance Twiggs, told the police during the interview that Robinson told him he wished “he hadn’t done it.”

Twiggs was granted immunity in exchange for his statement.

Meanwhile, Erika Kirk, the widow of Charlie Kirk, asked the judge to make all evidence in the case public. In her motion to the judge, she said a public display of evidence was necessary to prevent conspiracy theories about her husband’s death.

Judge Tony Graf is conducting a weeklong preliminary hearing in Provo, UT, to determine whether prosecutors have enough evidence against Robinson for him to stand trial. He’s been charged with aggravated murder, and prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

Kennedy Center

A federal appeals court rejected President Trump’s bid yesterday to restore his name to the Kennedy Center while he appeals a lower court’s order requiring its removal. This is the second time the court has turned down that request.

The judges said Trump and the Kennedy Center’s board, whom he appointed, failed to show he would suffer “irreparable harm” without his name on the building, since it was already removed from the façade last month.

The board had voted in December to add Trump’s name, but Rep. Joyce Beatty, a Democrat and ex officio board member, sued. A judge ordered the name’s removal in May, ruling that only Congress can rename the center.

US, Iran Trade New Strikes

The US struck Iran again early today, hours after Iran attacked commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz. US Central Command said it struck 90 targets in Iran, including what appeared to be an airport runway and missile launchers. The US military said the strikes aimed to stop Iran from threatening shipping in the strait, where it has tried to control which vessels pass.

Iran’s health ministry said the two days of American strikes had killed at least 14 people and wounded 78, mostly members of the country’s armed forces.

Trump asserted that the ceasefire agreement is over, saying, “I don’t want to deal with them…They’re liars, they’re cheats, they’re sick people.”

Trump Swaps Planes

President Trump left this week’s NATO summit on an older Air Force One plane rather than the new Qatari-donated Boeing 747-8 at the Secret Service’s recommendation.

According to The New York Times, officials said that the newer plane lacks some of the older jet’s defense capabilities and the switch was a precaution against a potential threat from Iran rather than a response to a specific threat.

His office announced that the 84-year-old Kentucky senator had been hospitalized and was receiving excellent care. That was basically it.

Then came the dispatch audio. Recordings reportedly tied to McConnell’s address described an unconscious person, a possible cardiac arrest, and CPR already underway. McConnell’s office declined to confirm the account or explain what had happened. Nearly three weeks after he entered the hospital, his staff finally confirmed that he was still there, “continues to improve,” and was working with aides on Kentucky and Senate business.

Then came the drip, drip, drip of updates. Several Republicans said they had spoken with McConnell directly. Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s office described a “lengthy and substantive” phone call. Sen. John Barrasso’s office said he had spoken with McConnell for 20 minutes. And Scott Jennings, a longtime McConnell ally, said he spoke with him about Iran, Ukraine, Senate races, and a little Senate history.

Those assurances may all be true. But the enormous space between what the public can see, what reporters can piece together, and what a small circle of family members, doctors, staff, and allies decide to say is where American politicians’ health disclosure currently lives.

The same tension surrounds President Donald Trump, who turned 80 in June, and famously President Biden before him. Trump has undergone four publicly announced medical exams during his second administration. After each of them, his physician pronounced him in excellent health and fully fit for duty, while questions remained about repeated advanced imaging, bruising, leg swelling, and moments when he has appeared sleepy during public events.

Maybe every White House claim is accurate. The current arrangement gives voters no independent way to know. Presidents choose what gets released, their doctors answer to them, and the public receives a memo written in the reassuring language of a luxury car inspection. Everything checked out. Runs beautifully. One owner.

That would be easier to accept if these were isolated episodes. They aren’t.

America is being governed by one of the oldest political classes in its history, with the age question most visible in the Oval Office. The last two presidents have been the oldest ever elected to the job, and the Senate remains a chamber where many of the most powerful members are well past traditional retirement age. And Congress has no substitute system when a lawmaker is in office but unable to show up.

Age alone does not prove incapacity. Younger politicians can get sick, disappear from work, or leave constituents without representation, too. But the older our government becomes, the more often voters will face the same question: Who is actually doing the job?

Read more

Iran War Resumes

President Trump says the ceasefire with Iran is over. Yesterday, Iran attacked three commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz, and the US responded by hitting more than 80 Iranian targets, including air-defense systems and radar sites. Iran retaliated with missiles and drones aimed at Kuwait and Bahrain. No injuries were reported in these attacks by Iran.

The US and Iran signed an interim 60-day agreement last month to pause their war, which began in February. Under the deal, the Strait of Hormuz reopened to commercial shipping and the US lifted its naval blockade of Iranian ports, while both sides began negotiating over a final agreement on the future of Iran’s nuclear program.

Trump said the US will likely strike Iran again tonight, and could reimpose the blockade on Iranian oil exports. He also renewed his previous threat to strike Iran’s power and water plants and seize Kharg Island, Iran’s key oil-export hub.

NATO Summit Ends

NATO’s annual summit concluded today, with the alliance’s 32 members, including the US, pledging continued support for Ukraine and reaffirming Article 5, the NATO provision that requires members to treat an attack on one as an attack on all.

The recommitment to mutual defense is notable given that some European allies had doubts about whether the US would defend them against Russia.

On Ukraine, there was a broad commitment to military aid for 2026 and 2027, according to a draft declaration. Trump said the US would let Ukraine build Patriot air defense systems in Europe. These defense systems are proprietary US technology and the manufacturing rights are held by US companies, so no country can make them without a US license. Zelensky has long sought the defense system to thwart Russia’s missile attacks on his country.

Denmark Rebuffs Trump

Denmark’s prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, said again today that Greenland is “not for sale,” after President Trump renewed his push for the US to control the Danish territory at the NATO summit. Frederiksen said Denmark is “ready to defend every inch of NATO, including our own territory.”

Greenland is the world’s largest island and an autonomous Danish territory in the Arctic. Trump has pursued US control of the island since his first term.

DOJ Warns States on Voting

The Justice Department sent letters to election officials in all 50 states and Washington, DC, yesterday, warning they could face criminal prosecution if they knowingly allow noncitizens to vote or remain on voter rolls. The letters, sent by the department’s civil rights division, gave officials five days to explain how they intended to comply with federal voter eligibility rules.

Noncitizen voting in US elections is extremely rare. A 2016 Brennan Center study of 42 jurisdictions that counted 23.5 million votes found just 30 instances of suspected noncitizen voting. The libertarian Cato Institute, after separately reviewing state investigations into voter fraud allegations, found the practice virtually nonexistent.

After receiving the letter, Utah’s top election official, Republican lieutenant governor Deidre Henderson, wrote in a social media post that she and other election officials are being targeted “for following state and federal laws by resisting DOJ’s demands for private voter data that have thus far been ruled illegal by at least a dozen courts.”

Newsbreak

From bestselling author Eric Jay Dolin comes the story of the American whaleship Mentor, wrecked in 1832 on a remote reef in the western Pacific. With supplies dwindling, the eleven surviving crewmen faced not only the miseries of shipwreck in unfamiliar territory but also the profound uncertainty of contact with the Indigenous people of the Micronesian archipelago of Palau, who within days approach them brandishing axes, clubs, and spears. Illustrated with more than 100 images and maps, The Wreck of the Mentor is at once a powerful story of survival and a revealing window into the great Age of Sail.

Judge Blocks DOJ in Georgia

A federal judge blocked the Justice Department yesterday from seeking the names and contact information of election workers who served in Georgia’s Fulton County during the 2020 election.

The department had issued a grand jury subpoena in April seeking the information as part of an investigation tied to President Trump’s false claims that fraud in the county — a Democratic stronghold Biden won in 2020 — cost him the state.

Fulton County argued that the subpoena was meant to “target, harass and punish the President’s perceived political opponents.” Federal district judge William Ray agreed, writing that the subpoena’s scope was “staggering” and that turning over personal details on thousands of election workers was “unreasonable.”

A DOJ spokesperson said the department is “considering all options” to challenge the ruling.

More Platner Accusations

A former girlfriend of Graham Platner, Maine’s Democratic nominee for US Senate, said in a CNN interview yesterday that he removed condoms during sex without her consent. Lyndsey Fifield, who accused Platner of physically abusive behavior in a New York Times article last month, made the new allegation a day after another former partner, Jenny Racicot, accused Platner of rape.

Platner’s campaign called Fifield’s claim “categorically false and politically motivated.”

Platner is deciding whether or not to drop out of the race. Under state law, Platner must withdraw by July 13 for the party to name a new nominee, and Democrats would then have until July 27 to do so.

The Trump administration’s new counterterrorism strategy, released in May, names Antifa — the loosely organized, leaderless, “anti-fascist” protest movement with no formal membership or command structure — as a threat. Federal attention is in general directed toward leftist anti-government activists and protest movements, and to what officials describe simply as “ideological” threats inside the United States. Meanwhile, the government’s long-standing category for racially and ethnically motivated violent extremism, or REMVE, has been dropped.

It would be easy to read this as one more partisan reshuffling of priorities. Presidents always reorder threat lists according to their priorities, and emphasizing domestic threats isn’t unprecedented. Bush-era counterterrorism was built around dismantling al-Qaeda’s hierarchy and hardening the homeland against another mass-casualty attack. Obama’s DHS kept that foreign-threat focus but added a prevention layer — the 2011 strategy on countering violent extremism, built around community partnerships, aimed at stopping radicalization before it turned violent. Biden’s domestic terrorism strategy — the first ever, released in 2021 — named white-supremacist and anti-government violence as the top domestic threats.

What’s different now is how domestic terrorism is being defined, and how loose the definition is.

It is true, and worth saying plainly, that the strategy overwhelmingly targets people, movements, and causes associated with the left. That’s a consistent theme of Trump’s rhetoric, and the strategy reflects it. But the bigger story is what makes that targeting possible in the first place: the administration is taking a legal and institutional framework built to stop political violence and using it instead to attack political, cultural, and ideological movements it opposes. Today those movements are mostly on the left. There’s no reason a future president couldn’t use the same tools against the right.

Same architecture, new mission

After 9/11, the United States built an enormous, durable national security apparatus. The Patriot Act, passed six weeks after the attacks, expanded the government’s surveillance, wiretapping, and financial-monitoring powers to investigate and preempt terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security consolidated dozens of agencies under one roof. The National Counterterrorism Center fused intelligence across agencies, and FBI joint terrorism task forces formed the domestic investigative backbone. Around all of it grew a web of international intelligence-sharing agreements.

None of that disappeared when bin Laden was killed, or when ISIS lost its territory, or when one administration gave way to the next. It’s all still there, fully staffed, fully funded, fully legal.

What can change from administration to administration is what it’s used for. Over most of the past two decades, that answer was relatively stable, even across party lines: organized violence, operational plots, foreign terrorist organizations, and — after January 6 — domestic violent extremism, with a particular emphasis on the far right. Since 2019, the FBI and the DHS have repeatedly told Congress that white-supremacist violence is the most persistent and lethal domestic terrorism threat. This was the same period when the term “REMVE” was formalized, with agencies moving to track a wave of white-supremacist mass-casualty attacks from Pittsburgh to El Paso.

The new strategy breaks with that, by essentially writing REMVE out of the federal threat picture even as it devotes sustained attention to Antifa and to what it calls “radically pro-transgender ideology” — a term the document uses but never defines.

Terrorism becomes a cultural category

Traditional counterterrorism policy has generally drawn a line between people who hold radical beliefs and people who organize or commit violence. The tools of the field were built with that distinction in mind: statutes criminalizing material support for terrorism, designation of foreign terrorist organizations, and surveillance keyed to intent and operational capability, not to ideology alone.

The new strategy blurs that line by weaponizing the culture war: it names “violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist” as a priority threat category, placed in close proximity to — sometimes in the same sentences as — al-Qaeda and ISIS. Increasingly, domestic political fights are narrated with a vocabulary once reserved for terrorism and foreign threats — security, radicalization, extremism, threats from within — but without the documented violence that has historically justified that vocabulary.

That language doesn’t stay confined to political speeches: it helps decide which networks intelligence analysts are told to map, whose members get flagged for surveillance, and which groups eventually face FBI investigation or material-support charges — the same legal tools used to prosecute support for foreign terrorist organizations.

The old framework asked who was planning acts of political violence. The emerging one asks which movements are undermining the country — a much broader and more political standard, anchored to ideology rather than to documented conduct.

The omissions are the argument

Strategies reveal themselves as much through omission as through inclusion, and this one omits a great deal. By dropping the REMVE category, it greatly reduces discussion of white-supremacist violence, even though far-right extremists have been found responsible for 75% to 80% of domestic terrorism deaths since September 2001.

These groups have not suddenly disappeared. On the morning of July 4, as Washington prepared for the country’s 250th anniversary celebrations, several hundred masked marchers associated with Patriot Front — a white-nationalist group that grew out of the deadly 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville — walked through neighborhoods near the Capitol chanting slogans about reclaiming the country. It followed a familiar script: Patriot Front has staged similar uniformed, flag-waving demonstrations in cities including Nashville in 2024. This is precisely the kind of organized extremist network the REMVE category was built to track. Its continued activity is a reminder that dropping the category doesn’t mean the threat it once named has gone away — only that the government’s strategy no longer names it.

And there’s little emphasis on prevention. Under both the Bush and Obama administrations, federal counter-radicalization strategy centered on grassroots intervention — engaging Muslim-American leaders, funding mentorships, and using targeted grants to insulate youths from extremist recruitment. These community-level approaches to tackling the root causes of extremism were ultimately rolled back during Trump’s first term.

There’s essentially no human rights language, and no meaningful acknowledgment of the international institutions the US helped build after 2001 — including the Global Counterterrorism Forum, the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund, and the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law, all of which the administration withdrew from in a January 2026 presidential memorandum. These specialized institutions provided a framework for the United States and its allies to share intelligence, train foreign judiciaries, and fund community-led programs to counter violent radicalization.

Nor is the counterterrorism strategy an isolated example of the shift in emphasis — the administration has also reorganized the FBI’s priorities and restructured how the intelligence community assesses domestic threats. FBI Director Kash Patel created a new mission center focused on domestic terrorism and “politically motivated violence,” while President Trump has repeatedly called the left “the enemy from within.”

It’s true that Biden’s strategy also treated a domestic ideological current, the far right, as a security threat. The difference is that Biden’s framework was anchored to a specific, documented pattern of lethal violence that FBI and DHS analysts had tracked for years. Trump’s strategy applies similar language and tools to movements without a comparable evidentiary basis, which makes this a story about the malleability of the category itself, not just about who currently occupies it.

What allies notice

The international consequences are easy to overlook from inside a domestic political argument, but they’re real. Washington spent two decades after 9/11 building — and largely leading — a multilateral counterterrorism framework organized around human rights, the rule of law, prevention of attacks, and a shared, if imperfect, definition of the threat. That framework included the UN’s 2006 Global Counterterrorism Strategy, a UN special rapporteur dedicated to human rights in counterterrorism, and the Global Counterterrorism Forum, which the US co-founded in 2011 to promote rule-of-law-based responses to terrorism. That framework was imperfect — the Global War on Terror had its own well-documented abuses — but it operated inside a shared international vocabulary.

The new strategy doesn’t just deprioritize that vocabulary; it largely abandons it, alongside the formal US withdrawal from these bodies. If Washington no longer defines terrorism the way its European allies, the UN, and NATO partners do, cooperation doesn’t just get harder at the margins — it starts from a different premise entirely. The consequences are already visible in regions like the Sahel, where US engagement is receding just as jihadist groups are gaining ground.

What the government believes it’s protecting

Every counterterrorism strategy tells you two things: whom the government fears and what kind of country it believes it’s protecting. Read that way, this document isn’t really about Antifa, or transgender activists, or campus protests. It’s about where the administration believes danger comes from — and how far the machinery built to fight political violence can be redirected toward fighting political disagreement, whoever happens to be on the other side of it.

Twenty-five years ago, the war on terror was organized around preventing another September 11. Today, the same institutions and vocabulary are being enlisted in a different project: defining, and confronting, what the administration sees as an enemy ideology.

That may prove to be one of the more consequential — and least noticed — legacies of this national security strategy. It changes how the government treats perceived threats at home, in a way that future administrations, of either party, will find easier to repeat.