++The Court’s GOP-appointed majority is very likely to rule for Trump. But it also matters how they rule for Trump. +
++On Thursday, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Trump v. Anderson, the case asking whether former President Donald Trump’s role in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol disqualifies him from seeking the presidency. +
++The Colorado Supreme Court previously ruled that Trump must be removed from the ballot in that state, under a provision of the Constitution that prohibits former high-ranking officials who engage in “insurrection” from serving again. That decision is now on appeal to the justices. +
++This is just one of four criminal prosecutions of Trump, and Trump is also a defendant in several high-dollar civil suits. But for today, let’s zoom in on this one. +
++Broadly speaking, there are several different ways Anderson could come down. The most likely scenario is that he is definitively allowed to run for president again. +
++Alternatively, there are several ways the Court could punt this case — effectively ruling that Colorado’s courts were wrong for some reason specific to Colorado. They could do this in a way that has broader implications for US election law. Or they could do it in a way that doesn’t, potentially allowing some other state to declare Trump disqualified from the ballot. +
++Finally, there is at least some chance that the Court could rule against Trump and order him disqualified. This outcome would require at least two of the Court’s Republican appointees to vote to remove the leader of the Republican Party from the 2024 ballot, so it is not especially likely. But it could theoretically happen. +
++Let’s dig in. +
++Outcome 1: Total Trump victory +
++Let’s start with the most likely outcome first. This Court is highly partisan, and Republican appointees control a supermajority of its seats. So most of the justices are likely to be sympathetic to Trump. +
++Also, the justices probably won’t want to leave the question of whether Trump is disqualified unresolved, lest they have to hear a very similar case again in just a few weeks. +
++There are some legitimate legal arguments to be made that Colorado has overstepped. But Trump’s lawyers don’t make them. The biggest obstacle to a total Trump victory is that his team makes a very weak case for this outcome in their brief. +
+ ++The Constitution uses the phrase “officer of the United States” to describe former officials who are disqualified from serving again if they engage in insurrection. Trump’s primary argument to the Supreme Court is that the president — the highest-ranking officeholder in the United States — does not count as such an officer. +
++The premise of this argument is that the framers of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, the post-Civil War amendment that functioned as a treaty between the victorious Union and the traitorous Confederate states, intended to ban insurrectionist former senators, representatives, governors, state lawmakers, and potentially even city council members from serving in office again. But if a former president betrays his oath of office, that’s fine. +
++Trump also makes some other arguments in favor of leaving him on the ballot. He argues, for example, that disqualifying him would violate the First Amendment. But his brief spends only about two pages laying out a very thin version of this argument. +
++So, while most of the justices are probably going to want to rule in Trump’s favor, his legal team gave them very little to work with. +
++Outcome 2: A temporary Trump victory, but with bad implications for US election law +
++There are also several ways the Court could reverse the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision while leaving the door open to another court disqualifying Trump again in the near future. +
++Trump’s brief, for example, argues for a legal theory known as the “independent state legislature doctrine” (ISLD), which would give the justices an unprecedented new power to overrule state supreme courts’ interpretations of their own state’s election laws. It then argues that the Colorado Supreme Court misread that state’s election law, and that the justices should correct this alleged error. +
++The ISLD, however, is an extraordinarily radical doctrine. In its strongest form, the ISLD neutralizes all state constitutional provisions that protect the right to vote, and gives state legislatures unprecedented power to determine federal elections even over the objection of state governors and state courts. Even in its weaker forms, the ISLD would trigger a flood of federal litigation challenging virtually any state election decision that Republicans dislike. +
++Indeed, this doctrine is so dangerous that a group of retired admirals and generals recently warned the Court that the ISLD “undermines election integrity and exacerbates both domestic and foreign threats to national security.” Last term, the Court heeded this warning, and rejected a lawsuit seeking to invigorate the ISLD. +
++Still, a line in that ruling indicates there’s at least some risk that the Court could revive this alarming doctrine in extreme circumstances — which could mean in this case. +
++Outcome 3: A one-off, temporary victory for Trump +
++The Court could also reverse the Colorado Supreme Court on narrow grounds that are unlikely to have many implications for future election disputes. The justices could say, for example, that Colorado’s courts failed to provide Trump with adequate due process before removing him from the ballot. +
++The problem with this outcome, however, is that it would not resolve the question of whether another court could remove Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment. Indeed, depending on what the Supreme Court’s opinion says, Colorado could potentially give Trump another trial and then remove him from the ballot all over again. +
++Outcome 4: Trump loses! +
++Finally, it is always possible that the Supreme Court could rule that Trump must be removed from the ballot because he engaged in an insurrection. It is also possible that Trump could be abducted by space aliens. +
++If either of these low-probability events occurs, that would most likely mean that Trump could not seek the presidency in 2024. Given the Court’s partisan breakdown, however, it’s unclear which of these improbable events is more likely to occur. +
++This story appeared originally in Today, Explained, Vox’s flagship daily newsletter. Sign up here for future editions. +
++How to act in service of the planet — and your values. +
++When the subject of climate change is a catastrophe in itself, it becomes incredibly easy to catastrophize the fate of the planet. Alarming news headlines, the increased frequency of natural disasters, and politicians’ failure to promote genuine solutions may lead some to believe in an inevitable future in which extreme temperatures and weather events are constant and currently populated parts of the globe are uninhabitable. It’s important not to turn a blind eye to the effects of climate change, but to view these events realistically rather than project future probabilities as fact. +
++When we catastrophize — or think of the worst-case outcome — our body internalizes our stressful thoughts, whether they’re based in reality or not, says Thomas Doherty, a licensed psychologist who specializes in environmental approaches to mental health. “That creates a positive feedback loop of more stress, more catastrophizing, which then inhibits my performance,” he says, “which, of course, makes me less and less empowered. We have to be careful about that. Realistic thinking about a catastrophe is a different thing. We have to build our capacity to think about catastrophes.” +
++To help you walk this line between staying in touch with reality and not succumbing to despair, climate-aware therapists offer their advice, from accepting nuance to finding strength in community. +
++Accept reality — and the feelings that come with it +
++Climate catastrophizing often begins when thinking about a very real event, be it a flood halfway around the world or threats to wildlife in your town. These are valid concerns that bring about reasonable emotions, Doherty says. +
++Instead of getting caught up in what could happen in the future, face the grief, the anger, or the frustration of what has already occurred, says Maia Kiley, a licensed marriage and family therapist who provides climate-aware therapy. Acknowledge the effects of climate change you’ve already witnessed — maybe it was a drought that impacted your town. Let yourself experience whatever emotions surface. However, don’t let the sadness overcome you or deny your feelings. Use it as motivation to contribute to changing the future. “It’s important for people to face a certain amount of reality,” Kiley says, “and then also to see that the story is still being written and they do have power.” +
++Find an understanding friend, a climate-aware therapist or a local Climate Cafe, where people discuss all things climate, and share exactly what you’re feeling and what concerns you, regardless of how big or small the worry feels, says licensed clinical psychologist Barbara Easterlin, the co-president of the Climate Psychology Alliance of North America. Try to feel the depths of those emotions, she says. +
++Other aspects of reality you must face are those who deny the existence of climate change and the people and institutions — including those at the highest positions of power — who have acknowledged its existence but decided not to do anything about climate change. Turn to your emotions and ask yourself pointed questions, says Kate Schapira, author of the forthcoming book Lessons from the Climate Anxiety Counseling Booth. How do those people and institutions make you feel? What do you usually do when you feel those emotions? What are those feelings inspiring you to do? These solutions should always involve talking with other people, Schapira says. “Action that’s individualist,” says licensed clinical social worker Rebecca Weston, co-president of the Climate Psychology Alliance of North America, “I don’t think it necessarily makes anyone feel better.” (More on how to find a community later.) +
++Get to the root of your emotions +
++After accepting your feelings around climate change, determine what the catastrophic thought is trying to tell you, Easterlin says. What exactly are you afraid of? What is your worst fear? By no means are any of your concerns unfounded, Easterlin stresses. +
++Maybe you panic about the potential for heat stroke and death or that you may be displaced by disaster. Then consider the likelihood of that loss happening tomorrow. “The world is not going to end tomorrow,” Easterlin says. “That is an irrational fear. What is true is that there’s a lot of uncertainty. There’s anxiety that underlies uncertainty.” +
++Perhaps you’re concerned about the safety of your home and loved ones in the event of a hurricane, wildfire, extreme heat, or floods. Consider how you want to prepare before disaster strikes and how you’ll show up if it does, Schapira says. This might include talking to a few neighbors about what you’ll do if you lose power and being ready to act on that plan if the power does go out. “[It’s about] looking into where the thing that you are good at and the thing that you have relationships about, or could have relationships about, crosses paths with what’s needed,” Schapira says. +
++Doherty suggests setting a timer for 20 minutes to map out a specific disaster plan: evacuation routes, knowing where you keep flashlights and nonperishables in your home. It can be helpful to write this down. Of course, you may not have the luxury of time and resources to make these plans. Jobs that pay a livable wage and government programs and funding that support disaster recovery are solutions that individuals simply cannot make plans for. +
++Through this thought exercise, you’ll be able to identify your values. There are three basic values that inspire environmental action, Doherty says: concern about yourself and your loved ones, concern about others, and concern about nature. Which of those are most important to you? (It may be all of them.) “That’s your engine, that’s your core,” Doherty says. “No matter what happens in the world, you’re going to stay with your values.” +
++Working through your emotions, values, and sharing your fears with others ensures you’re acting with intention and not letting fear guide you or prevent you from making constructive choices. +
++Create a plan for action +
++An effective strategy for minimizing climate-related catastrophic thinking is to find a community of like-minded people who are doing positive work. Knowing that you are not alone in your concerns about the future of the planet is empowering, Weston says. Additionally, being a part of a group who believes we collectively have the ability to avert some of the most extreme effects of climate change can blunt catastrophic thinking, says Doherty. +
++Think small at first. Getting involved within your community is both more accessible and ensures your actions will carry greater impact. Organizations and groups of neighbors in the South, for example, have created spaces for residents to find water and shelter during extreme weather events and collectively fought against environmental racism in their community. Try searching for climate-focused groups in your town on Google or Facebook. +
++Let your values guide you when selecting an organization. If you care about clean energy, can you find a local group that’s working to transition businesses and homes in your area to alternative energy? Your love of animals may inspire you to seek out a group focusing on preservation of native species. Consider your skills and the amount of time you’re able to devote, too. Maybe your background as a copywriter makes you best suited to draft emails to city council members on behalf of the organization. +
++Another exercise to help you identify your interests includes imagining the best-case scenario, Kiley says. Ask yourself, “What if all our actions helped ensure the vitality of the earth, helped to make the planet safe and equitable for all?” What steps would you take to make that dream a reality? When people consider their role in changing the course of climate change, they become more motivated to act, Kiley says. +
++Control the information you consume +
++People who are in the habit of catastrophizing may spend a lot of time reading upsetting news, which further feeds their anxiety. While you shouldn’t cut yourself off from staying informed altogether, balance the media that worries you with stories of people, scientists, or organizations who are making positive strides toward climate change, Kiley says. Knowing the government officials and departments who oversee sustainability and disaster preparedness in your town or city can help remind you that there are people actively working on these issues, Doherty says. +
++Keeping up with major climate change stories will help keep you informed and you’ll have a better sense for when this same information is being repackaged as sensationalist or alarming (often on social media and in mass media that don’t regularly report on climate change), Doherty says. “Once in a while, a news story will knock me off my balance, but most of them don’t,” he says. “Most of the stories are not new. Most of the stories are journalists just rediscovering knowledge that I already know. So once you do this work, you can say ‘I know,’ and that’s a very powerful thing to say.” +
++Accept the unknown, including the potential for positive moments +
++A hallmark of catastrophizing is all-or-nothing thinking — that because Earth’s temperature has risen 2 degrees Fahrenheit, the planet will certainly perish, for instance. “When we paint a story of inevitability,” Weston says, “it leaves out all of human agency. It leaves out all of the uncertainties.” It’s important to keep open the possibility of human intervention and innovation, the possibility that your actions could allow your children to have a better life. +
++“We’re still participants in this story,” Kiley says. “It’s not set in stone yet how it’s going to end.” +
++Congressional inaction has created a broken immigration system. But cities can do more for migrants, too. +
++Come nighttime in Boston, some migrant families with no place to stay are put in cabs and sent to Logan International Airport — where, according to some estimates, more than 100 people, some of them children, sleep by baggage claim. During the day, they’re directed to Massachusetts’s family welcome centers, set up by the state to help recent arrivals with housing and other services, only to make their way back to the airport for another night. +
++For some families, this cycle goes on for more than a week at a time, turning part of the airport into a de facto shelter. It’s a symptom of the state’s broader immigration problems and just one example of how cities across the country have been struggling — and, in many cases, failing — to meet the basic needs of a growing migrant population. +
++The Biden administration has presided over a record number of migrant arrests at the southern border. More than 2 million people, the majority of them families, have been released into the country by US Customs and Border Protection over the last three years while they await legal proceedings to determine whether they will be deported. Roughly 6 million people have been taken into custody at some point over the same time period. +
++In city after city — from New York to Chicago to Washington, DC — their arrival has made evidence of the United States’ broken immigration system more visible, as in the case of Boston’s airport. Because despite these cities’ histories of attracting and becoming homes to immigrants, many of them have been caught largely unprepared to handle the sudden increase in the number of migrants reaching their jurisdictions. +
++“As the resources get more scarce, as the infrastructure becomes more overwhelmed, and particularly because of the lack of coordination, what we are seeing are more extreme events happening, including encampments at Logan Airport — something that would’ve been inconceivable a year ago and is now happening in our own backyard,” said Iván Espinoza-Madrigal, the executive director of Lawyers for Civil Rights, a legal advocacy organization that has been providing assistance to migrants in Boston. +
++The federal government shoulders much of the blame for the crisis: For years, Congress has failed to reform immigration laws. It has failed to ease bottlenecks, such as application processing times for people looking to work and stay in the United States. And it has failed to adequately fund services that help migrants navigate the many bureaucratic hurdles that come their way. As a result, far too many migrants are left in legal limbo for far too long. +
++Democratic mayors and governors, who often like to pride themselves on being more pro-immigrant than their Republican counterparts, have been scrambling to adjust to that new reality as local and state governments are met with the high financial costs of hosting the growing migrant populations. That’s led some Democratic leaders, such as New York City Mayor Eric Adams, to declare that “there’s no more room” for asylum seekers in their jurisdictions, increasing pressure on the Biden administration to do more to address the problem. +
++Instead of passing blame and waiting around for Congress to act, there’s more that cities and states, along with the Biden administration, can do to alleviate some of the stresses on the immigration system and better help migrants integrate into communities across the United States. +
++How northern cities became central to the country’s immigration crisis +
++Over the last couple of years, many cities have seen a sharp increase in the number of migrants — most of whom come from Central and South American countries but who are also coming from all over the globe, including China and India. (Regardless of where they come from, they may be fleeing their home countries for similar reasons, including conflict, persecution, and poverty.) +
++New York City, for example, has attracted more than 150,000 migrants since 2022, straining services like the city’s already struggling shelter system and further exposing ongoing issues that have long burdened existing residents — like, say, the dearth of affordable housing. +
++“It’s an unprecedented crisis,” said Muzaffar Chishti, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute. “We have never had this number of people come in such short periods of time.” +
++Most of the released migrants are in active deportation proceedings, which can take years to resolve. During that time, they can stay in the United States but have to navigate a patchwork of laws and safety nets to stay afloat. Some migrants can get work authorization, for example, while others can’t. And though federal benefits are harder to come by than in the past, states provide varying levels of services, from housing to health care to education. +
++“New York has been welcoming migrants from its very inception, and so people expected that, even though there is a significant crisis at the border, that this would not affect New York in any different way than prior chapters have,” Chishti said. “But it all changed, and it changed not necessarily because of the numbers … it changed because it happened in a very dramatic, very visible, and very targeted way.” +
++In 2022, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott started busing thousands of migrants out of his state to Democratic-run cities without notice. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, also a Republican, has pulled similar stunts. These programs are political theater: “There’s no talking around it that Governor Abbott used this as a politically motivated attack on blue states and blue cities in the country,” Chishti said. +
++More than 100,000 people have been shuttled across state lines this way, and there have been allegations that migrants were lured to participate in these programs under false pretenses. The saga has resulted in lawsuits — and tragedy. A 3-year-old girl died of pneumonia while riding a bus from Texas to Illinois; the journey was part of Abbott’s program. +
++What started out as a crass political ploy has been followed by a sustained migration pattern that adds to the backlog for cities’ support services. But it’s also true that the busing programs — which have failed to solve migrants’ struggles but succeeded in getting Democratic mayors and governors to pressure the Biden administration on immigration — were only made possible by the absence of any serious planning effort to connect migrants to jurisdictions that have the infrastructure, capacity, and preparedness to support them. +
++“We are seeing a complete lack of federal coordination and anemic federal support,” said Espinoza-Madrigal, who represents migrants in a lawsuit filed after they were flown from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard. “The unfolding migrant crisis is the result of federal neglect.” +
++What more can cities do? +
++Pointing fingers at federal lawmakers is certainly warranted, but city and state leaders’ hands aren’t tied. “The argument by New York is that immigration is a federal responsibility — like, ‘This is not our responsibility.’ That isn’t really true,” said Yael Schacher, the director for the Americas and Europe at Refugees International. “New York is going to reap enormous benefits. Yes, it’s a federal responsibility to decide who comes in and who has to go … but after people are here, that’s everybody’s responsibility.” +
++That’s not to say that the federal government should take its time in addressing this issue. While it has not necessarily left states and cities to fund migrant assistance programs on their own, it has fallen far short of providing the financial assistance that those jurisdictions actually need. Schacher pointed out that Congress has also drastically restricted migrants’ access to social programs over the years, and that’s put considerably more pressure on local governments. +
++As of now, Congress doesn’t seem interested in passing any new immigration laws. On Wednesday, the Senate failed to pass an an aggressive and fairly right-wing immigration deal, which would have dramatically clamped down on border security, made it harder for people to qualify for asylum, and streamlined the work authorization process. House Republicans had declared it “dead on arrival” before the votes were cast. +
++Without Congress, it’s unlikely that the federal government will be able to sufficiently support local governments and nonprofit organizations providing support services to migrants. But money is not the only thing that’s missing. +
++For the cities receiving a large share of migrants, two things in particular have made this migration wave impose such a high financial cost. First, there has been a notable rise in the number of migrant families with children, who are more vulnerable and rely more heavily on public services than those arriving alone. Second, many of those among the current wave of migrants coming to the United States don’t have relatives or friends who already live here and can help them settle in. +
++“We are seeing a large number of families without immediate contacts or connections in the United States,” Espinoza-Madrigal said. “This generates a host of challenges. It means that people don’t have someone to rely on immediately upon arrival. It means that the state and federal government need to coordinate much more aggressively around housing and other immediate needs.” +
++As experts told Vox, one of the most pressing needs for cities, states, and the migrants they’re accepting is better coordination at all levels: Cities should be working with surrounding counties to share the responsibility of housing migrants and financing the services they need; states should form regional consortiums to strategically plan where migrants can settle; and the federal government should play a more active role in finding appropriate jurisdictions to send migrants to, such as those where migrants have existing family networks or those with a city or organization willing to help them find housing and employment opportunities. +
++That’s hardly an unheard-of concept. In fact, it’s how the federal government handles refugee resettlement, working with existing family networks, nonprofits, and religious organizations to properly match refugees with strong support systems. +
++“We desperately need regional coordination for the migrant crisis to be more effectively addressed and resolved,” Espinoza-Madrigal. He noted that within Massachusetts, there is “minimal coordination,” and nonprofits from other cities in the state are constantly reaching out to his organization to ask for help finding basic services like access to translators. “Why can’t the commonwealth create a clearinghouse where technical assistance, translation support, and other guidance can be coordinated and curated in a much more effective and organized manner?” +
++Some government initiatives have worked well and could serve as a model for more ambitious planning, Espinoza-Madrigal said. For example, when Massachusetts partnered with the federal government and hosted work authorization clinics for two weeks, the number of work permits for migrants in the state surged — from roughly 800 in mid-December to over 2,700 by the end of 2023. +
++State governments should also partner with their neighbors. That way, instead of New York City sending migrants upstate, as its mayor planned to do, it could work with jurisdictions in New Jersey or Connecticut to help people settle in the immediate metro area, so that surrounding counties could help cover some of the financial costs imposed on New York and migrants with work authorization could still access job opportunities in the region. That would ultimately benefit all jurisdictions involved because it would help address regional labor shortages and broaden participating jurisdictions’ tax bases. +
++And the federal government should be more thoughtful in deciding where to direct migrants when they leave federal custody, taking into consideration things like housing affordability and job opportunities. +
++“We know there are some places in this country, like St. Louis, for example, who are dying for workers and actually have housing,” said Schacher, from Refugees International. “For people who have relatives or friends, this isn’t as big of an issue, but for people who actually don’t have a place to go and what they need most is affordable housing and the possibility of a job, then maybe they should be directed towards certain places.” +
++For its part, the Biden administration is aiming to admit more refugees from Latin America, potentially giving some migrants who would otherwise opt to cross the border without prior authorization an alternative entry point into the country. But that level of coordination and planning ought to be applied to all migrants. “We have so much less political will to think of these folks as refugees in this political environment,” Schacher said. +
++In the end, that’s what’s stopping a lot of cities and states from more competently resettling migrants — not just congressional inaction, but that lack of political will, too. +