Hello again, loyal reader. I thank you for taking the time to read again after a brief absence. For this newsletter I am making a short reflective detour. This is probably my tenth version of this introduction. I have written and re-written and thought and re-thought the words, the message, the information I want to share with you.
As we enter the 250th year since the establishment of this nation-state, I have been overcome by a loss for words. I’ve questioned what I could possibly offer you when the President thinks he spoke to Teddy Roosevelt IRL, Mercury is in the microwave, and the SCOTUS is acting a fool again. When the only voice of reason in the chambers of our nation’s highest judicial power, the only consistent voice of dissent, comes from a wise Latina.
Maybe that is what I can offer: voices of dissent amid despair that hopefully resonate with your rage and incite, if not joy, then the endurance that clears space for bridges of connection and community. In composing this newsletter for you, I ask the same question Audre Lorde did in relation to her own writing:
“Am I altering your aura, your ideas, your dreams or am I merely moving you to temporary reactive action?”
I would add that I question if even the latter is true. It is easy to fold to defeat when consistent pressure just to stay afloat compounds the constant drumbeat of devastating news. If you do anything this weekend—well, besides read this newsletter—I hope it is to challenge yourself to remain ungovernable.
—Roxana Rojas
If this newsletter speaks to you, be sure to share it with your friends, family, and community. Is there a story not being covered that you’d like to see? Join as a paying supporter and engage in the comments below. Let me know what you want to see in the next newsletter!
Consent of the Governed
˝All men recognize the right to revolution; that is the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable.”
—Henry David Thoreau
In the last week of June alone, the Supreme Court issued a number of devastating rulings pertaining to the legal status of immigrants (and US citizens) and their treatment by the US government. On June 25, it both upheld the practice of “metering” to prevent refugees from filing asylum claims (a policy known as “Remain in Mexico”) and also made it easier for the government to revoke Temporary Protected Status beyond Haitians and Syrians (bad enough) by limiting the ability of the courts to hear any legal challenges to TPS determinations. In both rulings, Justice Sotomayor was joined only by women in her dissent, along with Justice Jackson and Kagan. In the former, Sotomayor herself delivered the dissent, after which Alito, in an unheard of manner, grumbled before the bench.
The one bright spot in June’s rulings (if you can call it that) was the Court’s narrow 5-4 reaffirmation of birthright citizenship, a right clearly and plainly stated in the Constitution’s 14th amendment, which the Trump administration nonetheless attempted to overturn in an executive order from January 2025. The audacity of the administration to unilaterally make changes to the Constitution, an act that by definition of our government system requires Congressional approval, does not surprise me—given that our president doesn’t know (or care) how the government works.
In light of these rulings, I have spent much of the last month in deep reflection on the sustainability of long-term resistance. It seems that no level of vile attack on our lives, our freedoms, and our very existence is beyond this administration, nor does it seem to spark significant collective action on a national level to mobilize and effectuate change.
What straw are we waiting for if the camel’s back is already broken? Did the sleeping giant take too much valerian or melatonin? Maybe the Ambien was laced with diazepam? What about everyone else?
