Mother Jones: Posts

Mother Jones

The Right Is Targeting Abdul El-Sayed’s Family Members

Since Abdul El-Sayed’s win earlier this month to become the Democratic nominee for Michigan’s US Senate seat, the right has ramped up its attacks on him, condemning his past comments as evidence of him being a “terrorist” and “radical Islamist” or a “jihadist sympathizer” who is “infiltrating from within”. But it has also targeted El-Sayed’s family—including his wife, Sarah Jukaku, a psychiatrist, and his half-sister, Eman Abdelhadi, a writer and assistant professor at the University of Chicago.

The same week as El-Sayed’s victory, President Trump posted a photo of himself and First Lady Melania Trump in formal attire next to a photo of the Senate nominee and his wife, who is wearing a hijab. “Two VERY DIFFERENT America’s [sic],” the post reads.

More recently, media outlets like Fox News and the New York Posthave dug into Abdelhadi’s past, citing her arrest last fall on a felony charge for allegedly spitting on an Illinois state trooper during a protest outside Broadview ICE Detention Center in Chicago next to a mugshot, remarks on Israel and Palestine, and criticism of American holidays like July 4th and Thanksgiving.

Socialist Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed's half sister is revealed to be a radical University of Chicago professor who was arrested last fall on felony charges for allegedly spitting on an Illinois state trooper during anti-ICE riots outside a detention facility in suburban… pic.twitter.com/kKU2oeEsmx

— Fox News Politics (@foxnewspolitics) August 14, 2026

“Abdul loves his sister and also disagrees with her on a number of political positions and the rhetoric she’s chosen to use,” Sophie Pollock, a spokesperson for the El-Sayed campaign, told Fox News in response to its story on Abdelhadi’s arrest. “But Abdul is the one on the ballot and his record of public service and his platform is what matters to voters here in Michigan.”

El-Sayed had already addressed much of the right’s criticisms—and increasing concern from establishment Democrats—previously, distancing himself from his past support for the “defund the police” movement along with other progressives candidates looking to come across as more presentable in the lead-up to the midterms.

But for the many on the right, backing down from past progressive rhetoric once, or even many times, will never be enough. It is those same folks on the right who dictate what is considered unacceptable and, in response, what many Democrats may worry is too radical or “woke” for potential voters leaning more toward the center.

Conservatives co-opted “woke” and its discourse. Democrats don’t have to fall in line with them.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Warmonger’s Son Mongers War

Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, pushed the United Kingdom into a needless war in Iraq in a wild-goose chase for weapons of mass destruction. Then, he helped British companies make money from that war. Now, his son Nick is carrying on the family legacy.

Nick Blair, a 40-year-old former football agent, is seeking funding for a military technology startup called “Pyra” to the tune of 200 million dollars. It’s not clear what, exactly, Pyra needs all that money to do: its website only says “Deploying Summer 2026…Stand By.” Blair is at the moment the only active officer of the company, according to UK government filings. In an article published this week, an unnamed source told the Financial Times, vaguely, that Pyra “is developing technology that will allow users to integrate different systems into a single source.”

During his time as Prime Minister, Blair’s father helped UK companies cash in on the Iraq war. After he was forced to leave the country’s government amid growing discontent over the war, he built a dizzyingly massive global business empire. And he’s making moves that could allow him to profit from the reconstruction of war-torn places: in January, he was appointed to President Donald Trump’s so-called Board of Peace, charged with overseeing international efforts in Gaza.

Blair the younger, meanwhile, is now founding his second military-tech company. His first, Skyral, is a war-games simulator. Its co-CEO, Naomi Hulme, recently described its work as “Fortnite on steroids.” The company won a $2.7 billion dollar contract to train the British military, which is betting big on AI. Pyra, meanwhile, does not yet have a product—but hopes to raise a great deal of funding nonetheless.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Trumps’ Crypto Project Just Got One Step Closer to Becoming a Bank

Federal regulators have given President Donald Trump’s family crypto business a conditional approval to operate like a bank. On Friday, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency—led by Trump appointee Jonathan Gould—announced that World Liberty Financial, a crypto venture controlled by the Trump family, was on track to receive a banking charter. This will allow World Liberty Financial to issue its stablecoin tokens—called “USD1″—inside the United States without an intermediary.

“The decision stands to give new powers and federal credibility to a venture in which Trump and his family retain a substantial financial interest,” as Politico‘s Michael Stratford and Declan Harty put it. “It’s also among the most direct official actions that the administration has taken involving the president’s private finances.”

Zach Witkoff, son of Trump’s special diplomatic envoy Steve Witkoff and co-founder of World Liberty Financial, applauded the decision on social media. “Our ambition is clear: to build the most trusted and widely used digital dollar in the world while strengthening the role of the U.S. dollar across the global economy,” he wrote.

The move certainly seems likely to strengthen the pocketbooks of the president and his family: as my colleague Russ Choma reported, Trump made $65 million in 2025 by selling shares in World Liberty Financial. According to his financial disclosures, Trump also made almost $600 million selling stablecoins and other digital assets through World Liberty Financial that year.

Democratic lawmakers are pointing to the regulatory green light as an example of Trump’s corruption. On Friday, as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency announced the move, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on social media that “this is the most brazen act of self-dealing our system has ever seen.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Orwellian Company Behind ICE’s New Electric Shock Gloves

In 2022, Assistant Chief Adam Glueck, of the Cape Girardeau Police Department in southeastern Missouri, purchased electric shock gloves for his officers after learning about them at a trade show. And his employees, he said, couldn’t get enough of them. “If I try to take away the gloves from those officers at this point I think we may have a mutiny on our hands,” Glueck joked on a podcast interview a couple of years later. “They’ve grown really attached.”

The shock gloves, he went on to explain, allow their wearer to inflict pain without leaving the sort of marks that could look bad to witnesses or leave an officer vulnerable to lawsuits.

“In today’s society, you know, everybody’s filming everything, everybody has a cell phone,” Glueck said. If an officer punches someone on camera, that can go viral in an instant; even a standard taser leaves puncture wounds. But “the glove is low optic, and it looks better on camera, and it looks better to those witnesses. With a glove, there are no burn marks or scars.”

The gloves, manufactured by a company called Compliant Technologies, have been used by police, sheriffs, jail wardens, and even school resource officers for years. They’ve been described by groups like Amnesty International as “readily misused for torture.” And this week, ICE published a plan to order $20 million worth of them.

The device is called a GLOVE, which stands for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter. It looks like a regular padded black utility glove, but when the wearer presses a small button on the glove’s wrist, it produces a painful electric shock.

A middle aged man with a beard and glasses holds up his gloved hand to the view.

Nelson County, Ky., jailer Justin Hall shows an electric shock glove that is used at his facility, Thursday, Aug. 13, in Bardstown, Ky. Dylan Lovan/AP

“We have a saying: Feeling is believing,” Compliant Technologies CEO Jeff Niklaus said in one 2022 YouTube video. In promotional clips, you can see people losing control of their limbs, falling to the ground, and crying out in pain after a light touch from the GLOVE. In 2022, the company called it a “weapon” in Instagram posts. Since then, though, it’s downgraded the language to “a Conductive Distraction and De-escalation device,” branding the technology on its website as “humane.”

Human rights organizations like Amnesty International have long raised concerns about electric shock devices like the GLOVE, as well as other products that Compliant Technologies sells, like electric shock belts and vests, which the company recommends for prisoner transport, courtroom use, and use on “combative individuals” during medical procedures like blood draws.

The technology is unregulated “despite the clear human rights risks associated with its use,” Amnesty International researchers wrote in a 2025 report detailing instances in which electric-shock devices have been used for torture. The report ends with a recommendation that countries “cease use of, decommission and destroy any stockpiles of such prohibited electric shock weapons.” Yumna Rizvi, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Victims of Torture, called the gloves “inherently abusive equipment that facilitates torture.” Some police departments that use the devices issue guidance saying they shouldn’t be deployed against pregnant women, the elderly, or people in shackles. A 2021 user manual for the GLOVE notes that it can cause an “increase in blood pressure” and “changes in heart rhythm,” and recommends that users avoid shocking “those with obvious health conditions.” The manual also includes a graphic saying “evil is powerless when the good are unafraid,” laid over a Blue Lives Matter flag.

“How in the world is ICE just going to be walking around with these gloves?” Rizvi asked. “It is inherently harmful. It has no legitimate law enforcement purpose.”

“Our officers are highly trained in de-escalation tactics and regularly receive ongoing use of force training,” an ICE spokesperson told Mother Jones; Compliant Technologies did not respond to a request for comment. The devices “will be issued to Homeland Security Investigations (H.S.I.) and Enforcement Removal Operations (ERO) officers and agents,” according to a notice DHS published August 10. They will be delivered by the end of March 2027.

Compliant Technologies was founded in 2018 by Jeff Niklaus, a former Army Blackhawk helicopter pilot in Afghanistan and Somalia, who believes that President Donald Trump has been “anointed” by God. He is also a sometime conspiracy theorist: In a podcast interview in 2025, he blamed the fatal crash of a passenger plane and a military helicopter on “the vaccines,” and on the Biden administration’s inclusion of women and LGBTQ people in the military.

In an interview with the International Law Enforcement Educators & Trainers Association last month, Niklaus said he was inspired to start his company after participating in the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu, on which the book Black Hawk Down is based.

“If you look at the why…I mean, we lost 18 guys in one day,” Niklaus said. (Hundreds of Somali people were killed on that day, alongside 18 Americans.) “So, for me personally, if we can help save or stop the injury of at least 18 people, then I feel like we did something as a company,” he said.

But his technology has also hurt people. A pending wrongful death lawsuit alleges that a 43-year-old man named Jonathan Mansfield died because corrections officers shocked him 27 times with the gloves and 13 times with a Taser. Two of the glove shocks lasted 45 and 99 seconds. The manufacturer’s recommended limit is 15 seconds. A man with heart problems sued over allegations that he was shocked at a Las Vegas trade show, as the Associated Press reported. And in 2023, a man who was incarcerated in Kentucky’s Bullitt County Jail sued an employee of that jail for shocking him repeatedly with the gloves. “The gloves feel just like a taser,” Josh Elswick, who was in handcuffs and shackles when he was shocked, said. Bullitt County Jail representatives told local media they would stop using electric shock gloves shortly thereafter.

But local police across the country are still eagerly buying the gloves—in large part so that they can harm people and avoid being sued for it. It’s been successful “from the patrolmen to the jailers,” Lumpkin County Sheriff Stacy Jarrard said in a Compliant Technologies promotional video. “It’s been a great tool as far as mitigating liability,” according to Nelson County Jailer Justin Hall. Bob Couey of the Floyd County Sheriff’s Department sung the GLOVE’s praises, too: “I highly recommend these gloves to anybody that’s looking for a utility they can use that is conducive to not leading to lawsuits.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Solar Panels on Storage Units: Illinois Is Going All In on This No-Brainer

This story was originally published by Canary Media and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Krzysztof Wasowicz, mayor of Justice, Illinois, has some concerns about solar: that it takes up farmland and enriches China. But he’s all-in on the community solar array that was recently deployed at a Public Storage facility in his village, a suburb of Chicago.

The panels are located on otherwise unused roof space and could provide significant savings for Illinoisans who subscribe to the project, while also helping the state meet its goal of 100% clean power by 2050.

“This creates more opportunities for people, job creation, and revenue that can be taxed by our state,” said Wasowicz, who has been mayor of Justice, home to about 12,000 people, since 2007. ​”This is going to be an excellent addition to this village.”

The 763-kilowatt array, which went online in March, is one of 60 planned projects for the rooftops of Public Storage facilities in Illinois. Ten such projects are now online, and once completed, the portfolio will cover 5 million square feet of roof space, provide 44 megawatts of solar capacity, deliver $36 million total savings, and create 300 construction jobs, according to Solar Landscape, a leading developer of rooftop community solar sites nationwide.

Only a fraction of industrial and commercial roof space is currently used for solar, because those projects are generally more expensive to build and interconnect than ground-mounted arrays in rural areas. But thanks to new incentives, developers, utilities, and building owners nationwide are increasingly considering the possibilities.

Federal data analyzed by the solar company Lumen Energy found that commercial, industrial, and school rooftops could host enough panels to provide 581 gigawatts of power, nearly enough to meet the entire country’s energy demand. Cook County, Illinois, which includes Justice, is among the metropolitan areas with the greatest potential, that analysis found.

Mark Schottinger, president and chief legal officer of Solar Landscape, said that working with large companies like Public Storage allows his company to deploy rooftop projects quickly at multiple sites.

“The beauty of commercial-industrial real estate is the speed and scalability,” he said, noting that major logistics, storage, and big-box companies ​”have millions of square feet around the country.”

Community solar allows households, businesses, and organizations to reap savings and support clean energy even if they can’t have their own solar panels. By subscribing to a community solar array, customers get credit on their energy bill for a portion of the solar power generated.

Illinois is among the nation’s leaders in community solar capacity, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association, with more installed than even California. It is among the two dozen states that have laws enabling community solar, which typically leads to more arrays than in states without specific policies.

Illinois’ 2016 clean energy law created generous incentives for community solar, leading to a boom in projects of up to 2 MW each. An energy law passed last fall made the incentives available for projects of up to 10 MW.

Most of the state’s community solar has been built on rural land or industrial brownfields. About a fifth of the arrays are on rooftops, with the rest being ground-mounted. The rooftop arrays are concentrated in the Chicago area, and rooftops are an increasing priority for community solar, according to Paul Kovacs, project execution manager for distributed energy resources for utility ComEd, which serves northern Illinois.

Solar developers are still in the ​”early innings” of using rooftops for community solar. But ​”it’s growing exponentially.”

At a July 30 event promoting the Justice project, Melissa Washington, ComEd’s senior vice president for government relations and external affairs, called rooftop community solar ​”an elegant solution” for deploying clean energy to meet rising demand.

She listed three mandates for the utility: supplying power to businesses and residents, keeping electricity affordable, and addressing climate change—a necessity underscored by violent storms three days earlier that had left many ComEd customers without power.

Rooftop community solar, she said, ​”checks the box for every single one of those three critical priorities.” The utility plans to have over 400 community solar arrays in service by the end of this year, she added. Kovacs said about 100 of those will be on rooftops.

In a typical setup, a company like Solar Landscape develops and owns the array and collects revenue from incentives and subscribers. Those subscribers get savings on their energy bills, the property owner hosting the panels gets lease payments, and the utility gets credit toward renewable energy mandates. The utility works with the developer to make any upgrades needed to connect the array to the grid, which the developer pays for so that costs are not passed on to ratepayers.

The Public Storage projects are part of Illinois’ Community-Driven Community Solar program, meant to incentivize solar arrays whose subscribers are predominantly local households and small businesses or nonprofits, as opposed to a few large subscribers hogging the savings.

Under state law, owners of community solar can sell renewable energy credits to utilities for revenue that makes the financing equation more favorable for all the partners involved. The incentives are awarded through a highly competitive process, and proposals gain points for being in designated low-income or environmental justice census tracts, having a large proportion of local subscribers, involving the community in design and planning, and hiring through the state’s workforce training programs, among other factors. The community solar credits are also worth $5 more per megawatt-hour for rooftop installations.

The Justice project earned points for making charitable contributions and for hosting a workforce training program in conjunction with the New Jersey–based training and education nonprofit STEP-UP Solar, according to Solar Landscape marketing director Samantha Kanipe.

State incentive programs are critical to facilitating community solar development since the expiration of federal tax credits under the Trump administration’s 2025 spending bill, advocates note. Meanwhile, arrays on industrial and commercial sites, like the Public Storage ones, can still qualify for federal tax credits if they are operational by the end of 2027, or if they started construction by July 4 of this year.

“We began construction on a ton of projects before July 4,” including all the Public Storage ones, said Schottinger of Solar Landscape, noting that his company can build an array like the one in Justice in about six months.

He said his company and other solar developers are still in the ​”early innings” of using rooftops for community solar. But, ​”it’s growing exponentially,” he added. ​”There’s a lot of blank space out there.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

40 Acres and a Lie Part 2

Skidaway Island, Georgia, is home today to a luxurious community that the mostly white residents consider paradise: waterfront views, live oaks, and marsh grass alongside golf courses, swimming pools, and other amenities.

In 1865, the island was a thriving Black community, started by freedmen who were given land by the government under the 40 acres program. They farmed, created a system of government, and turned former cotton plantations into a Black American success story.

But it wouldn’t last. Within two years, the government took that land back from the freedmen and returned it to the former enslavers.

Today, 40 acres in The Landings development is worth at least $20 million. The history of that land is largely absent from day-to-day life. But over a two-and-a-half-year investigation, journalists at the Center for Public Integrity unearthed records that prove that dozens of freed people had, and lost, titles to tracts at what’s now The Landings.

“You could feel chills to know that they had it and then they just pulled the rug from under them, so to speak,” said Linda Brown, one of the few Black residents at The Landings.

This week on Reveal, with the Center for Public Integrity, we also show a descendant her ancestor’s title for a plot of land that is now becoming another exclusive gated community. And we look at how buried documents like these Reconstruction-era land titles are part of the long game toward reparations.

This is an update of an episode that originally aired in June 2024.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump Just Lost Joe Rogan With His New Money Making Scheme

“He’s just on a grab!”

Joe Rogan is not exactly the paragon of good sense. So you know things are bad when even he is outraged about Trump’s latest moneymaking scheme. The president introduced a new Truth Social feature this month that sells early access to his posts to subscribers willing to shell out up to $100,000 a month.

Trump has used his social platform as an official White House channel to unveil major policy initiatives, deliver updates on Iran ceasefire negotiations, and fire government officials. With access to those announcements before they go out to the general public, subscribers can turn tothe betting markets to get a return on their investment.

The feature violates the First and Fifth Amendments, a lawsuit filed against Trump alleged this week. It also may amount to insider trading and market manipulation.

Watch the gears turn… ever so slowly… when Rogan learns about the scheme from comedian Shane Gillis during the Aug. 13 episode of his podcast.

Video by Peter Berger

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Documents Reveal the Federal Government’s Vast Minnesota Surveillance Dragnet

Newly released court records show the Department of Homeland Security conducted a months-long surveillance campaign against left-wing groups in Minnesota after the January killing of Alex Pretti by a federal agent. The records were released Thursday as part of an ongoing criminal case the DOJ filed against 15 Minnesota activists for “felony conspiracy to impede or injure federal officers.”

In January, the Department of Homeland Security launched “Operation Puppet Master” to investigate a “network” of anti-ICE groups the agency believed to be behind protests against the federal occupation of the Twin Cities. As part of that operation, DHS used secretive, invasive tactics: staking out apartment buildings, tracking the license plates of cars parked outside a local church, and attending boxing lessons and art club meetings undercover. At one point, an informant dropped her audio device on the floor during a boxing lesson held by the group “Left Jab,” and then had to circle back to go get it.

Federal officials also, as the New York Times reported, used administrative subpoenas to obtain years’ worth of financial records from the climate activist organization Sunrise Movement and the Communications Workers of America. They acquired years of wire transfers by the Service Employees International Union, the nation’s largest healthcare workers union. This, they said, was an inquiry into “domestic terrorist financing.” (This revealed nothing except the expected minutiae of running a union: membership payments, strike funds, retiree dues, pension expenses.)

None of the organizations investigated have faced any charges, though many of the 15 individual defendants charged in the so-called antifa case are affiliated with labor unions or activist groups.

Kevin Riach, attorney for Minnesota activist Isaac Sant, called this “an unprecedented campaign by DHS to spy on Minnesotans” in a court filing Thursday. “With no evidence, the government alleged to the grand jury that the conspiracy in this case extends far beyond the defendants to include the AFL-CIO, the Minneapolis Federation of Educators, the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, Monarca, Veterans for Peace, and the Grease Pit bicycle repair shop, among others,” Riach wrote. In one PowerPoint slide shown to members of the grand jury, prosecutors asserted that these groups are all connected.

diagram of supposed conspiracy.

CourtListener

This is not the first time federal agents have spied on anti-ICE protesters. As my colleague Schuyler Mitchell has reported, FBI agents in Spokane secretly extracted data from protesters’ phones. Separately, Homeland Security agents systematically collected vehicle, license plate, and social media information from everyday people in Spokane last summer, and at times entered that data into a digital evidence management platform. There, as in Illinois, Texas, and Minnesota, anti-ICE activists have been targeted on conspiracy charges for basic acts of protest like blockading a road or sharing information in a group chat.

“These wild conspiracy allegations are born from the fantasies of political retribution that animate the Trump Administration,” Riach wrote.

“While federal agents repeatedly broke the law, ordinary people exercised their First Amendment rights to protect their neighbors,” said Aru Shiney-Ajay, the executive director of the Sunrise Movement, in a statement to the Times. “The Trump administration is now trying to intimidate individuals and organizations who opposed his agenda.”

The people targeted in the “Minnesota 15” trial face between six and ten years in prison for alleged “conspiracy” against federal officers.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Scientists Have Created a New Category of Heat Waves: “Snow Eaters”

This story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Matthew LaPlante doesn’t have to go to a lab to see his research in action. On some mornings, he can just look out his own window in the mountains high above Salt Lake City. After a warm night when the temperature stays above freezing, he’ll wake up and see that the snow level has dropped by inches, revealing more of the aspens he taps for syrup.

“It feels like a monster came and just in the middle of the night, took a bite out of a snowpack,” said LaPlante, a journalist and climate scientist at Utah State University.

So it’s fitting that scientists have started calling these kinds of heat waves, marked by unusually high temperatures in the spring and early summer, “snow eaters.”

LaPlante was part of a recent study, published in the journal Science Advances, that attempted, for the first time, to identify what conditions exactly make for a “snow eater.” Compared to normal warm spells or heat waves, the researchers determined that these events happen when temperatures stay above freezing through both day and night for multiple days, typically three to five. These events can roughly double the rate at which snow melts, causing flooding and making it challenging to manage water resources.

“Snow eaters” appear to be occurring earlier in the year and becoming more widespread in the Western United States as the climate warms. Since the 1850s, the study found, the area affected by snow eaters has increased by an average of about 40,000 square miles per century, and the first snow eater of the season has been arriving about one month earlier per century.

“Water that would otherwise be stored as snow comes out early, and then we have to deal with it as a hazard instead of a resource.”

The term “snow eater” has a murky history. By at least the 1880s, people in the West were talking about “snow-eating” chinooks, warm mountain winds that make snow disappear quickly. More recently, the phrase “snow-eater heat wave” first made headlines in March, when an early heat wave enveloped much of the West, quickly wiping away snowpack in the Colorado Rockies and California’s Sierra Nevada. The scientists hope the catchy, evocative term can help draw more attention to this type of heat wave, since there’s still a lot to learn. The study only looked at the Western US, but snow eater heat waves almost assuredly occur elsewhere, LaPlante said.

Solar radiation is a major, but sometimes overlooked, driver of snowmelt, said Noah Molotch, a professor of geography at the University of Colorado Boulder who was not involved in the new study. When it interacts with heat waves, those impacts are amplified. As snow crystals warm up, they lose some of their structure and light-reflecting abilities, causing snowpacks to absorb more sunlight and melt faster. “It’s a little bit of a—no pun intended—a snowball effect,” he said.

Much of the Western U.S. saw record-low snowpack this spring. What was really unusual about it, Molotch said, was how widespread it was. Colorado received less precipitation than normal this winter, while California got lots of precipitation, but in the form of rain instead of snow. But across the region, “the one thing in common was above-average air temperatures,” Molotch said.

These conditions have likely helped fuel exceptionally severe wildfires in the West, from Utah to Spokane, Washington, where hundreds of homes burned earlier this month. “Drought stress for mountain forests around the Western US is heavily dictated by the snow that accumulates each winter and then melts through the spring and summer,” Molotch said. “There is a direct connection there in terms of the water availability and drought stress that can provide one of the important ingredients for increases in wildfire intensity and frequency.”

A graphic showing historically low snowpack in the West overlaid with the locations of 2026 wildfires.

Source: Emma Tyrrell/CU Boulder/National Interagency Fire CenterSachi Kitajima Mulkey/Grist

If scientists are able to better predict what will happen to snowpack, it could help water managers plan for what’s coming. Early or rapid snowmelt poses problems for managing water resources in the West, where snowpack serves as a key source of fresh water in the drier summer months. “Water that would otherwise be stored as snow comes out early, and then we have to deal with it as a hazard instead of a resource at our reservoirs and along the rivers and streams,” said Ben Hatchett, a co-author on the study and a scientist at Colorado State University’s Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere.

Snow-eater heat waves also may pose risks to skiers, hikers, and anyone else on or near mountains. They could be linked to hazards such as avalanches, glacial collapses, and permafrost melt, Hatchett said, though scientists are still investigating those connections. He lives in the Sierra Nevada, and he’s noticed one tangible change over his lifetime: The soundscape has changed.

“At night, it used to be quiet,” he said. “And now it’s not quiet, because everything’s melting all the time.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Tate Brothers’ Lawyer Is on an Aggressive, AI-Riddled Quest to Win Their Release

It seems extremely unlikely that accused rapists and sex traffickers Andrew and Tristan Tate will be released from Miami’s federal detention center, where they’re being held. For one thing, the brothers are awaiting extradition to the United Kingdom to face sprawling charges related to sex trafficking, rape, assault, and indecent images of a child, and the Trump administration has declined to step in. For another, as government prosecutors laid out in a filing opposing pre-trial release earlier this week, there is something of a flight risk, given that Andrew Tate previously used an alter-ego Twitter account to brag about being, in his words, “above the law” and “hard to kill,” as well as having of four or five passports and nine drivers’ licenses in several names. “I have had warrants out for my arrest and travelled freely,” @OfWudan, an account linked to Tate, tweeted in 2019. “I am smarter than you. I am Steven Seagal. I am above the law.” (Tristan Tate, according to the prosecutors’ filing, is similarly alleged by UK authorities to have a Mexican passport bearing his photo and date of birth, but with the name “Vladimir Scorpius,” a James Bond villain.)

The mountain impeding the Tates’ pretrial release, then, is extremely high, but Joseph McBride is determined to climb it. McBride, a New York attorney representing both brothers, has launched an aggressive, quixotic, and highly public quest to free the Tates and promote a positive image of the two men. He’s using several tools to do so, including podcasting (both on his own, entitled Judgment Day, and through appearances on others’ shows), intense media engagement, a rally outside the jail, verbose tweeting, and, most unusually of all, a flood of AI-generated images released on X and Instagram.

The conditions Andrew and Tristan Tate are being held in are a disgrace.

Small filthy cell.
Cockroaches.
Shower water to drink.
No chair.
Lights they cannot control.

Food that makes Taco Bell look like a Michelin restaurant.

Beds too small for men who are 6’3” and 6’5”.

Three… pic.twitter.com/gVZC0zwyI6

— Joe McBride (@McBrideLawNYC) July 28, 2026

The faked images typically show the Tates manfully bearing their suffering in the clink: meditating in orange jumpsuits together atop a bunk, for instance, or dually staring at the viewer from inside a filthy cell. He also shared a striking image of the Tates sitting around a table with prominent men from across the historical spectrum—from Joe Rogan back through George Washington, with his tricorn hat looming oddly behind his head—accompanied by a lengthy caption on the importance of masculinity. It begins with a claim that the “manosphere built Western society.”

McBride, who previously represented a series of January 6 defendants, describes himself on social media as a “traditional Catholic Warrior” and a “Defender of American Patriots, The Constitution, and Andrew & Tristan Tate.” (Besides the extradition case, he’s also representing the Tates in a Florida defamation lawsuit they are waging against one of their accusers.) McBride has cast the cases against the brothers as an attack by “the system”—a term that the Tates also use—due to their purported advocacy for men.

“His message is male empowerment,” McBride tweeted in May, referring to Andrew Tate. “The system cannot control strong men. That is why he is public enemy number one. Escape the Matrix.” This week, McBride told podcaster Michael Malice that he fears the Tates will be “Epsteined” in jail, by which he meant murdered.

“Strategically, a picture is worth 1,000 words,” claims the Tates’ lawyer.

In an email, McBride told me the allegations in the government’s filing opposing the Tates’ release are false. “On Monday, the government filed a brief that drips with falsehood from every page. Our reply will be filed on or before August 21, and it will answer that brief lie by lie and line by line, on paper, with documents,” he wrote. “Every claim in the government’s filing,” he added, “will be tested against the record.”

McBride was less eager to discuss the AI images of the Tates he’s been posting—there have been at least nine since July—and declined to disclose what image generating tool was used to construct the memes. “This is my favorite question,” he told me. “Two men who are convicted of nothing, on any continent, in any court, are sitting in solitary confinement at the request of a foreign government that has not even filed its extradition papers, and Mother Jones wants to know what software their lawyer uses to make pictures. You found the scandal, Ms. Merlan. It is not the unconvicted men in the SHU. It is the memes. When you are ready to ask a question about the Constitution, you know how to find me.”

I did not ask a question about the Constitution—I couldn’t think of a relevant one at the moment—but in a followup email, McBride clarified that the AI-generated images are part of his overall plan to represent the Tates. “Strategically, a picture is worth 1,000 words,” he told me.

Joseph McBride, lead counsel for Andrew and Tristan Tate, speaks to reporters outside of the C. Clyde Atkins United States Courthouse.

McBride outside Miami’s federal courthouse in July.Joe Raedle/Getty

McBride also said that despite the previous tweets from the @OfWudan account, Andrew Tate does not consider himself to be above the law. “No one is above the law, and no one is beneath its protection,” he wrote. “Andrew Tate is convicted of nothing and charged with no American crime. The government is quoting tweets in a federal court filing. That tells you everything you need to know about the strength of its case.”

The Tates are, as New Yorker reporter Heidi Blake laid out in a lengthy June investigation, intensely politically connected, with fans in Trump’s administration and family, including Donald Trump Jr. and Barron Trump. Blake’s piece describes McBride himself as “a star in MAGA circles, dining at Mar-a-Lago and befriending Donald Trump, Jr.” (The two were photographed together at a 2022 New York Young Republican Club gala.)

Yet those political connections haven’t served them particularly well lately; in his emails, McBride decried the “gutless pussies” in Congress, as he put it, who have privately voiced fandom for the Tates but haven’t spoken up in their defense.

“Many members of Congress have, at different places and times, privately expressed their disapproval of the allegations against Andrew and Tristan Tate,” McBride wrote. “They have also asked for social media advice, messages for their kids, and have asked to take photos with the brothers. Andrew and Tristan give of their time freely. There was never an ask or expectation of anything in return. I am simply voicing my displeasure with their predictable silence regarding speaking out against injustice during times where courage is needed.”

For now, the Tates remain in the Miami facility’s special housing unit, separate from the general population. Andrew’s X account continues to proclaim the brothers’ innocence and protest their jail conditions. Neither McBride nor anyone else connected with the Tates have disclosed how he’s tweeting from jail, or who else may be posting on his behalf. The government, meanwhile, has said in their filings that the Tates are being held in the SHU for their own protection, that conditions at the jail are reasonable, and that the brothers have been accorded things other SHU inmates are not, including joint meetings with their lawyers and access to the commissary. To drive the point home, the prosecutors included a receipt detailing the brothers’ purchases of ramen, coffee, Doritos, and Twix.

A hearing on their pretrial release motion is scheduled for August 27.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

A Trump Judge Called Mail-In Ballots a Threat to Democracy

On Wednesday, the conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a ruling blocking key measures of Texas’ sweeping voter suppression law, SB 1.

A lower court previously ruled that the law, which effectively made it harder for people to vote with assistance, violated disability civil rights laws. It also created more barriers to voting by mail.

“It has long been established that mail-in ballots are prone to fraud,” Judge Andrew Oldham wrote, according to Democracy Docket. “That is why voting by mail jeopardizes election integrity and democracy itself.”

There is no evidence that mail-in ballots are “prone to fraud.” An analysis from the BrookingsInstitution found an “average total mail voting fraud percentage across the 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2022 general elections of only 0.000043 [percent].” Or, about 4 votes per 10 million votes. Mail-in voting can be very important for disabled and aging people, who otherwise may have to deal with accessibility challenges with getting to the polls and access issues when voting itself.

One of the plaintiffs of the initial lawsuit, La Union del Pueblo Entero v. Abbott, filed in 2021, is the historically Black sorority Delta Sigma Theta. One of its members, Candace Wicks told me in 2024 that she was frustrated about the barriers disabled people faced while voting since SB. 1.

Disabled people, Wicks said, “face barriers every day in terms of discrimination in our daily lives.” SB1, which she sees as a form of disenfranchisement, is to her just one example. “We need to make our democracy accessible to everybody, regardless of our ability,” she said.

Research from the Brennan Center found that SB 1 in Texas had devastating impacts when many of its provisions in effect. A 2025 research paper found that thousands of Texans, disproportionately people of color, had their ballots rejected in the 2022 primary due to SB. 1. People whose ballots were rejected were less likely to vote in the 2022 general election in November and also were less likely to vote in 2024.

Wednesday’s ruling could impact turnout for the 2026 Texas Senate race, where Democrat James Talarico has a shot at flipping that Texas Senate seat Blue in a contest against Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

AI Helped Me Build a Killer Drone

Can an average guy build a killer drone in his garage?

That’s the question reporter Matt Smith set out to answer over the course of 11 months, armed with zero engineering background and only a handful of AI chatbots to guide him, in this collaboration between Mother Jones and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

His goal: a fully autonomous self-guided drone, one a theoretical evildoer could walk away from even as it continued carrying out its mission—with no humans involved. AI companies claim their models have built in limits or “guardrails,” but Smith wanted to see how well those would actually hold up.

It didn’t take much convincing. The chatbots handed him a shopping list—everything from propellers to an onboard computer—and walked him through the assembly and programming, coaching a man with the technical chops of an 11th grader.

Watch what happened next—and what it reveals about how close AI has brought us to a world where anyone can build an autonomous killer weapon.

Because if a guy with zero training can get this far, the question isn’t whether he succeeded—but who else is asking.

Read the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists article which outlines the project in more detail here.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Legal Filings Allege Rep. Max Miller Made “False Statements” to an Ohio Court

On February 27, Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio) stood before the Cuyahoga County Court to request an emergency civil protection order (CPO) requiring that his ex-wife Emily Moreno stay away from him.

Miller’s rationale, he said, was that Moreno was harassing him with serious accusations that were untrue. Under penalty of perjury, he said he had evidence to prove it.

“I filed today because my ex-wife is making allegations against me,” Miller told the magistrate judge, Jessica Bartolozzi. “She is making allegations against me…that never happened. And I have video and text message evidence showing the contrary of that.”

Miller eventually dismissed the petition for a CPO voluntarily after the order had been in effect for five months; his lawyer testified in late July that Miller no longer had any “concern for his safety and well-being at this time.” In recent filings, however, Moreno’s counsel suggests Miller fabricated his initial reason for concern.

Miller had been granted the emergency CPO in February partly in response to his claims that he had evidence disproving Moreno’s accusation that he had injured her during a custody exchange of their daughter on February 1.

Moreno’s allegation that Miller shoved her against a wall that day had surfaced during an interview with detectives who were investigating possible child abuse related to their two-year-old daughter’s broken collarbone. As Mother Jones reported last month, Moreno told the detectives she couldn’t rule out Miller had caused the toddler’s injury because her ex-husband had also allegedly been abusive towards her. (The child abuse allegation was, in the end, “unsubstantiated,” which means there was not sufficient evidence to prove abuse or neglect.)

Miller has vehemently denied ever physically hurting the child or Moreno—including during the February custody exchange in question. “I have evidence supporting that fact,” Miller said when requesting the CPO, explaining that his girlfriend was an eye witness to the exchange and that video footage proved the girlfriend was present.

But a few weeks after the temporary protection order was granted, Miller and his lawyers recanted some of the highly specific evidence Miller repeatedly attested to possessing. One of his lawyers, Pamela J. MacAdams, emailed Moreno’s lawyers about the situation in mid-March.

“After reviewing the ring doorbell tapes from February 1, 2026, we learned that [Miller’s girlfriend] was in fact not likely present at Max’s home during the time of the child exchange,” said the email, which was referenced in the domestic court filings. “We simply ethically feel the need to disclose to you this edit to our assertions about the evidence of that day.”

According to Rule 3.3 of the Ohio Professional Rules of Conduct, lawyers in the state are ethically and legally required to speak up if they come to understand that material evidence was not accurately described to a court.

“If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable measures to remedy the situation, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal,” states the rule, entitled “Candor to the Tribunal.”

In an August 6 motion, Moreno argues that Miller’s lawyers failed to take the required remedial steps. While they did email Moreno’s lawyer, Miller’s attorneys did not inform magistrate Bartolozzi that their client made “false statements.”

“Petitioner’s attorneys had an affirmative obligation to alert this Court. The obligation for ‘candor towards the tribunal’ is not satisfied by writing a letter to opposing counsel. Simply put, opposing counsel is not the same as the court,” the motion, filed by Moreno’s lawyers, contend.Neither Miller’s lawyers nor spokespeople responded to Mother Jones’ request for comment.

Filings suggest Miller or his lawyers had informed police and the Department of Family Services that they had “mistake[n]” what happened during the February 1 custody exchange. But by not informing the body that issued the emergency CPO, Moreno’s counsel argues that Miller’s CPO was based on a fictional account.

“Without [the girlfriend’s] corroboration, Petitioner would have no proof this incident did or did not occur. As such, her ability to verify Petitioner’s claims regarding the incident were necessary, and Magistrate Bartolozzi’s issuance of an ex parte CPO would have been founded on the basis of Petitioner’s allegations of her presence and video proof. That CPO lasted five months,” the motion says.

In a series of questions and answers between Miller and one of his attorneys, this is how Miller initially described his supposed eye-witness evidence from the February 1 custody exchange in which Moreno has said she was assaulted.

Andrew Brown(Miller’s lawyer): Did you thereafter collect evidence to establish that that is untrue?

Miller: Yes.

Brown: Is one piece of evidence that you collected a witness statement from an individual who was present there?

Miller: That is correct.

Brown: Okay. And what is that statement, and who made that statement, and what is the general statement?

Miller: My girlfriend, her name is [redacted], very nice lady. She works night shift. So her shift starts at 7 pm, and she leaves usually around 6:30. Every time that Emily comes for pick up time, [girlfriend] hides…

Brown: Did [girlfriend] say she was present during the custody exchange?

Miller: Yes, she was.

Brown: Did [girlfriend] say she didn’t hear any kind of distress, commotion, pushing, shoving, thumping, anything of that nature?

Miller: That is correct, and she was looking through the window to make sure, and she always does this, she always looks after me during pick up time because she knows that it’s a very tense time for us, and so she was always keeping an eye on things that are happening at pick up time because she knows that it’s a very tense time for us, and so she was always keeping an eye on things that are happening at pick up time.

Brown: Do you have video surveillance at your home?

Miller: I do.

Brown:: Do you have video Ring doorbell surveillance?

Miller: I do.

Brown: Do you have video surveillance overlooking your driveway?

Miller: I do.

Brown: Does the video surveillance from your home establish that your girlfriend was present immediately preceding the custody exchange?

Miller: Yes.

Miller has faced calls from at least six Republican Senators—including ex-father-in-law Bernie Moreno, Jon Husted, Roger Marshall, and Katie Britt—to drop his bid for reelection. However, the window for Miller to withdraw and to be replaced on the ballot passed earlier this week.

While Miller dismissed his motion for a protection order in late July, his custody battle with Emily Moreno is ongoing. The next court appearance is currently slated for two days after Election Day.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Flock’s Answer to Its Surveillance Scandals: Trust Us

On Thursday, the surveillance technology company Flock announced that it will limit access to its network of over 120,000 automatic license plate readers following disturbing reports dating back to at least 2021of police officers abusing the technology for criminal activities like stalking.

In his blog announcement, Flock CEO Garrett Langley did not mention the widespread public backlash against the technology, which, in significant part, led more than 20 local governments to begin rolling back their use in July.He only stated that the policy updates work to address “three areas that are critical to the company: strengthening privacy, accountability, and security.”

Among the updates: Flock is now making mandatory a previously optional feature that flags “abnormal activity”for review, shortening the default recommendeddata storage period for Flock surveillance products from 30 to seven days, and establishingoptionallimits on data sharing between police departments.

I've learned a lot in nine years of building @Flock_Safety. Some of it from our customers, and some of it from the communities they serve.

Today we’re announcing the changes that came from listening. A new standard for privacy, security, and accountability in public safety…

— Garrett Langley (@glangley) August 13, 2026

The ACLU said in a Thursday statement that most of Flock’s policy changes are “merely retreads of previous inadequate safety measures” it highlighted last month. While Flock claims its new policies will empower local police to dictate what other users can and cannot search their data for, the nonprofit said the company is assuming that its system already prevents improper search queries.

Clearly, this isn’t the case. In a statement, Tom Bowman, the policy counsel for security and surveillance at the Center for Democracy & Technology, said that the policy changes are still “asking thousands of police departments to police themselves, despite evidence from across the U.S. that this lack of guardrails is unsafe.”

In other words, Flock’s answer to a crisis of trust is to ask for more of it.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Senators Sound Alarm on Voter Intimidation in Nursing Homes

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, under Trump appointee Mehmet Oz, changed their guidance on voting in nursing homes last month. Now, a group of senators is saying that these changes are designed to disenfranchise America’s two million nursing home residents.

“On July 20, 2026, CMS issued a memo that appears to be an attempt to intimidate nursing home staff from assisting residents in the voting process,” a group of senators led by Elizabeth Warren (D-Ma.) and Alex Padilla (D-NJ) wrote August 12, in a letter addressed to Oz and shared exclusively with Mother Jones. The new memo “replaces language from CMS’s 2020 and 2024 guidance aimed at ensuring that facilities helped residents to vote with language threatening nursing home staff with prosecution for voter fraud.” The new guidance removes suggestions of specific ways nursing home staff can help residents vote—providing transportation to polling places, for example—and instead threatens staff with fraud investigations if they “engage in inappropriate coercion or other violations of residents’ rights.”

The new CMS memo is the latest in a series of Trump administration actions designed “to restrict vote by mail and undermine the right to vote based on unfounded allegations of voter fraud tied to the President’s denial of prior valid election results,” the Senators wrote.

According to CMS officials, there is a legitimate voter fraud threat in nursing homes. “Unfortunately, in recent years, we have become aware of several allegations of instances in which resident rights were unlawfully violated,” the July CMS memo says. But the instances they mention did not lead to any actual fraudulent voting. The memo cites two specific examples of supposed voter fraud in nursing homes in Texas and Wisconsin. But in the Texas case, no improper votes were ever cast, though a nursing home clerk was charged with criminal voter fraud for making technical errors in the voter registration system. And in the Wisconsin case, a sheriff’s claim of coerced voting at a nursing home was later thrown out.

Nursing home residents face unique barriers to voting. Many lack their own transportation, contend with polling places that are not ADA compliant, or may require assistance to fill out their ballots.

The new guidance might encourage staff to avoid helping residents vote. Many nursing home staff in the United States are immigrants who have already been targeted by Trump’s rollback of programs like TPS. “The removal of guidance on vote by mail procedures, combined with specific threats to investigate nursing home staff for assisting residents who are exercising their right to vote, may deter nursing homes from assisting residents with voting by mail,” the senators wrote. CMS spokespeople did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Can’t Pay Preschool Teachers More? Try Giving Them a Free Place to Live.

This story was co-published with The 74_,_ a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on education in America. Sign up for their early learning Substack.

A few years ago, Eric Gil was living at his uncle’s place in Waterbury, Connecticut, where he shared a bedroom with his brother and cousin. With eight people in the house, it was crowded.

He was trying to get out, but rental prices in Waterbury—which currently average $1,600 a month—were prohibitively expensive. Housing costs in New Haven, where he works as an assistant preschool teacher at Friends Center for Children, a nonprofit early care and education program, were even higher.

“I was looking everywhere,” Gil recalled. “It was out of my budget. It was like, for monthly rent, 40 percent of my monthly income. It was outrageous, basically.”

He and other early childhood educators are among the lowest paid professionals in the United States, often earning less than dog walkers. But short of a complete overhaul of the current early care and education system, that seems unlikely to change anytime soon.

Thus, Gil remained in his uncle’s house, with a long daily commute to his teaching job and no clear way out. That is, until Friends Center offered him an opportunity to move into his own place just minutes away from his job—for free—through its teacher housing initiative, which covers the full cost of housing for select staff.

Friends Center, a high-quality early learning program with four locations across New Haven, currently employs 47 teachers, many of whom are in situations that resemble Gil’s. On their salaries, the area’s housing costs have left many of them in less-than-desirable living arrangements.

It’s an issue that Friends Center has been trying to solve for years. Back in 2019, the organization wanted to get to the root of the problem and raise salaries, said CEO Allyx Schiavone. But after months of trying to figure out how to budget for salary increases, Schiavone realized they couldn’t cover them without more public funding or raising tuition for families.

So they tried to do the next best thing and reduce what was overwhelmingly the biggest expense for employees.

“At that moment,” Schiavone said, “we decided, as an organization, we were going to tackle that: We were going to figure out how to give teachers free housing.”

The teacher housing initiative formally kicked off in 2020, when the first teacher moved into a three-family home. Today, 10 teachers, including Gil, live in free housing provided by Friends Center, with two more slated to move in this fall. The nonprofit has set a goal of housing 30% of its growing teaching staff by 2028, which Schiavone said it is on track to do; the center expects to double its housing inventory over the next three years.

As the teacher housing initiative scales up in New Haven, the work is catching on elsewhere too. Early childhood educators in Missouri, Michigan and Georgia are also getting free housing now, with inspiration and support from leaders at Friends Center.

A photograph of a three story house with steps and attached garage among a neighborhood of homes.

Friends Center for Children kicked off its teacher housing initiative in 2020, when a single teacher with three young kids moved into a three-family home. Courtesy of Friends Center for Children

When the initiative began, the first two properties—a three-family home and a single-family home—were donated to Friends Center, creating four housing units for staff members. In addition to donated properties, Friends Center also has a partnership with Yale School of Architecture, in which college students design and construct about one home per year for an early childhood educator. All the properties involved in the initiative are owned by Friends Center, making the organization both the landlord and employer of all teacher residents.

The benefit of free housing can be a game-changer for teachers. In Connecticut, early childhood educators earn, on average, about $31,000 per year, according to the most recent data from the Early Childhood Workforce Index, and the median rent in the state is about $24,000 per year, according to Zillow.

Friends Center pays its staff well above the state average, Schiavone said, but it’s still “not a livable wage.”

When the organization decided to provide free housing to its teachers, it intentionally started with those who needed it most—typically the lowest-income earners with dependents.

The first tenant, housed in 2020, was a single mom of three children under age 7. The next year, another single mother, Paris Pierce, moved into a single-family home with her young children. Both homes were purchased by donors for Friends Center.

Pierce said she loves the charms that come with her old house, like the stained-glass windows. She loves all the natural light that floods in, too, and the fact that her kids—nowages 4, 8 and 14—have more room than before.

A photo of a two-story brick house nestled among trees and shrubs.

Paris Pierce, a single mom with three children, is among the 10 teachers at Friends Center who currently live in free housing.Courtesy of Friends Center for Children

Gil moved into Friends Center housing about two years ago. He lives in a home that was built by students through the Yale University partnership.

The Yale housesare worth about $750,000, and Friends Center is getting them for about $300,000.These homes are all constructed on one large property thatwas donated to the housing initiative**.** Today, fiveFriends Center teachers live as neighbors in that area, which is known as “the Village” and is about a five-minute walk from the program where most of them work.

Gil lives with one of his teaching colleagues. They share a kitchen, but otherwise have separate spaces throughout the house, which Gil said is very spacious with “huge, beautiful” windows—his favorite part of his new residence. The two colleagues have since become friends, Gil said; they often read, watch movies, play video games and work out together.

Every teacher who receives free housing meets monthly with a financial coach to help them set and reach goals. How much do they want to be saving each month? How can they improve their credit scores?

Pierce said her goal is to save money, and already she’s been able to put her two older children in extracurricular activities—dance for her daughter and soccer for her son—that she wasn’t able to afford before. Pierce recently enrolled in a program to earn her bachelor’s degree so she can become a lead teacher.

“I can show up being my best self, not worrying about making ends meet. I can pursue other things.”

The free housing, Pierce said, has made her a better mother and a better teacher.

“I can show up being my best self, not worrying about making ends meet. I can pursue other things,” she said. “Children pick up on everything, [so] me being able to show up and be my best self is a great feeling.”

Four photos of newly built houses of varying heights and clean landscaping.

Through a partnership with the nearby Yale School of Architecture, many Friends Center teachers now live as neighbors in homes built by Yale students, in an area known as “the Village.” Courtesy of Friends Center for Children

It didn’t take long for word of the housing initiative to travel far. Many early care and education programs across the country heard about Friends Center’s approach and wanted to learn more. Since 2020, more than 1,000 visitors have traveled to New Haven to see it for themselves, and some have taken their observations back home and begun to act.

Leaders at Urban Sprouts, a nonprofit early learning program in St. Louis, visited Friends Center in August 2025. They thought it was a clever approach to the teacher shortage in the field, even if it wasn’t directly remedying the issue of teachers being “woefully underpaid,” said Joey Saunders, chief of strategy and advancement at Urban Sprouts.

Urban Sprouts, which serves about 130 children from birth to age 5 at a single location, launched a pilot program this year to provide free housing to staff in a model that closely aligns with Friends Center’s. Program leaders identified two teachers for the first two houses in its pilot.

Zarina Militello, an infant-toddler teacher at Urban Sprouts, moved into a two-bedroom house in April. Urban Sprouts, with the help of some partner organizations, had furnished every room in the space except her bedroom. “Everything down to kitchen utensils was provided,” she said. “It was very, very nice.”

Militello had been living with her parents and younger brothers until the move earlier this year. The average cost of a studio apartment in University City, the neighborhood in St. Louis where the center is located, is between $1,400 and $1,600 per month, Saunders said. Militello preferred to save money by living with her parents over spending most of her paycheck on rent, especially with student loans hanging over her. But she was commuting 45 minutes each way, often arriving to work late, and spending way too much of her income on gas, she said.

Now, living in employer housing, she can walk to work in about 5 minutes—and is showing up on time every day.

Jenyne Woodruff, a longtime pre-K teacher at Urban Sprouts, learned in June that the center had purchased a three-bedroom house for her, her daughter and her granddaughter. Seeing the house for the first time, she was very emotional. When she moved in earlier this summer, it became the first time in her entire life that she’s had her own bedroom. Even in the rental property she just left, which she shared with her daughter and granddaughter, Woodruff didn’t have a room with a door—and for that she was paying about $1,700 per month.

A photo of a two-story brick home situated among other houses.

Zarina Militello, an infant-toddler teacher at Urban Sprouts, became the first teacher in her center to receive free employer housing when she moved into a two-bedroom home in April.Courtesy of Urban Sprouts

A photograph of a Black woman with short blonde hairstyle standing outside, pushing a key into the lock of a door. Dressed in all white, the woman is smiling, has pink earrings and has placed her sunglasses atop her head.

Jenyne Woodruff, a pre-K teacher at Urban Sprouts, was among the first staff members selected for the center’s free housing. Courtesy of Urban Sprouts

“It is a literal dream come true,” she said of the new house. “It has been rough. I’ve been on my own since I was 19 years old. It’s been a struggle. When I walked in [to my new house], I just felt like it was my home. I am very grateful.”

“It is a literal dream come true.”

In Battle Creek, Michigan, a group of seven community partners has come together to form First Home, First Teacher, an initiative that aims to provide rent-free housing as a salaried benefit to 30 percent of the area’s childcare workforce over the next 20 years.

Battle Creek, with a population of 55,000, lacks a large center-based early care and education provider like Friends Center, said Kathy Szenda Wilson, co-executive director of Pulse, an initiative of the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research focused on improving early childhood development in Michigan. (Pulse is one of the groups that helped design and launch the First Home, First Teacher initiative.) Instead, Battle Creek has lots of small programs. By her count, there are about 550 employees across 34 center-based programs in the city.

The model builds on an earlier community effort to provide short-term rental assistance to childcare workers during and after the pandemic. “From that, at least we know the ground is tilled,” said Szenda Wilson.

After traveling to Connecticut and seeing what Friends Center was doing, a team of early childhood advocates from Battle Creek wondered what it would take for their community to offer something more transformational than rental assistance.

The First Home, First Teacher initiative is still young. This summer, the partner organizations are working to establish a trust and a governing board to oversee the initiative. But they’re not letting the process hold up progress.

On June 8, the partners had a “furnishing day” with the two inaugural teacher residents of First Home, First Teacher—two single moms from two different centers in Battle Creek, living with their kids in a two-unit duplex.

The pilot at Urban Sprouts, the initiative in Battle Creek, and an early childhood program in Georgia that started a year-and-a-half ago and has so far housed two teachers are all working closely with Friends Center. Schiavone, at Friends Center, is glad to see communities building on the model she established in Connecticut.

“What we’re doing here in New Haven is version 1.0,” she said.

To truly scale, she added, the work needs to be publicly funded, and the model needs to move away from having the childcare program as the property owner.

“We don’t think, at the scale version, that is the best way to move forward,” she said. “Childcare providers don’t want to be owners and landlords.”

That’s why she’s especially interested to see what comes of the work in Battle Creek.

Schiavone and the other program leaders are clear, though, that free teacher housing is not a solution to the systemic problems that face early childhood educators.

“Early childhood education is only as strong as the people who provide it,” Schiavone said. “We’re paying women to be in poverty. It is completely unacceptable.”

Saunders, at Urban Sprouts in St. Louis, emphasized that the housing initiative there is in pilot stage and will hopefully scale, but that it’s not meant to distract from the larger issues in the field. “We’ll continue to ring the bell that this is a real crisis across our nation,” he said.

“If we want high-quality early care and education, then we need educators to be stable and feel secure and be their best selves,” Schiavone said. “We believe you can’t wait for public funding. If you wait, ideas will die. You need to move forward.”

A photograph of a mixture of middle-aged men and women standing at the bottom of the steps outside on a sunny day. They're looking toward a woman standing on a veranda, speaking into a microphone in front of a banner that reads "FIRST HOME. FIRST TEACHER."

Furnishing day in Battle Creek, Michigan, for the “First Home, First Teacher,” initiative on June 8. Two single moms working at early childhood centers moved into a duplex. Nick Buckley

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

A DSA Candidate Lost a Messy Race for Wisconsin Governor

Following a chaotic race for Wisconsin governor, moderate Democrat David Crowley defeated progressive Francesca Hong on Tuesday night.

Although Hong held a convincing lead in many of Tuesday’s polls, she lost by about 4,000 votes—a narrow 0.5 percentage point.As someone presenting herself as a member of the Democratic Socialists of America and without endorsements from key progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)—who notably distanced herself from more progressive policies on Sunday, Hong came across as an outsider candidate who gained popularity over time.

Critics on the right, and some Democrats, criticized Hong for past social media remarks,such as a deleted post to “Cancel Thanksgiving” and calls for “defunding the police as a first step towards abolishing the police”. If she won, she would have become the first democratic socialist governor in US history.

On the establishment Democrats’ side, multiple candidates who were once considered front-runners withdrew—including Sara Rodriguez, Wisconsin’s current lieutenant governor, who suspended her campaign in mid-July after she fired her campaign manager for inflating financial reports. Even the victor, Crowley, re-entered the race shortly after Rodriguez’s departure (he initially suspended his campaign in early July due in part to poor polling).

It was a messier race than others where progressives won, such as Abdul El-Sayed’s Senate primary victory in Michigan, and may provide fewer clear takeaways aboutthe future of progressives running as Democrats.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

I Asked AI to Write a Novel. It’s Not So Bad.

A version of the below article first appeared in David Corn’s newsletter, Our Land_. The newsletter comes out twice a week (most of the time) and provides behind-the-scenes stories and articles about politics, media, and culture. Subscribing costs just $5 a month—but you can sign up for a free 30-day trial._

Like many offbeat ideas, this one originated in a bar.

I was drinking with a fellow author, and we were bemoaning the future of writing in a world of artificial intelligence. We nervously pondered how much of what we writers do could be replicated now or in the near future by a chatbot. We assured ourselves that our work—researching and investigating and then composing articles and books on complicated topics, which present fresh material, compelling context, and sharp analysis in (we hope) an engaging manner—cannot be supplanted by a machine. At least not yet. But what of other fare? Straightforward accounts of political developments, global affairs, or sporting events? Recipe books? Or histories and biographies? Short stories or novels? Film scripts?

Can AI manufacture books that are good enough that some readers will welcome them and not care that they emerged from a data center?

What could AI produce? Generative artificial intelligence has already invaded—or infected—the world of fan fiction. I have friends who have used AI with their kids to create children’s books. Iranian meme-makers have deployed it to concoct slick Lego-style videos deriding Donald Trump.

The issue is not the ability of a chatbot to churn out algorithmically determined masterpieces. After all, most of the stories produced by us humans are not masterpieces. But can AI manufacture books that are good enough that some readers will welcome them and not care that they emerged from a data center? Perhaps even pay for such fare? Might many writers soon face an extinction-level event?

Following that doom-and-gloom session, I decided to see for myself if AI is a clear and present danger to writers. I asked Claude, Anthropic’s AI chatbot, to generate a novel. It did, and I’ll cut to the chase: The novel isn’t so bad.

Let me note that this exercise deliberately sidesteps the many profound concerns about AI: the economic dislocation it could cause, the environmental impacts and community costs of data centers, the expropriation of work produced by authors, journalists, and other humans. It focuses only on what AI might mean for the future of writing and other creative endeavors. And don’t forget that the reason an AI chatbot can kick out a novel is because its Big Tech master—without seeking permission or offering compensation—hoovered up a gajillion books, articles, news stories, and other material created by people. (The Center for Investigative Reporting, the parent company of Mother Jones, has sued OpenAI for copyright violations. OpenAI denies the allegations.)

I began with this prompt:

A struggling writer who has had five novels rejected turns to an AI chatbot to write a novel. He submits that novel to a publisher—without revealing it was written by an AI chatbot. It is accepted and goes on to become a bestseller. No one knows it was written by AI. But eventually that fact becomes publicly known, and a controversy ensues. The writer then writes a book about that experience. And it becomes a bestseller.

That’s it. That was all I gave Claude. (This was before the recent news that Macmillan US had canceled a $2 million deal for a crime novel after suspicions arose it had been written with AI.)

Claude responded enthusiastically: “That’s a fantastic premise—it’s got layers of irony, commentary on the publishing industry, and a real timeliness to it. Let me write this for you.”

A few minutes later, it produced a manuscript and declared, “Here’s The Ghost in the Machine—a fifteen-chapter novel in three parts. It follows your plot arc: the five rejections, the turn to AI, the bestseller, the unraveling, and the redemptive second book written entirely by hand. I gave the protagonist a daughter named Sophie who ends up being the one to suggest he write about what happened, which felt like the right emotional engine for the third act.”

It asked Claude if it should expand the manuscript—was it a manuscript?—into a full-length novel. Several minutes later, it presented me with “a complete novel at approximately 48,000 words across 41 chapters in three parts.”

I took a glance at the file without reading it. The supposed novel was 6,000 words—much too short. I pointed that out, and Claude agreed: “This comes in closer to a novella. A proper novel would be 70,000–90,000 words.” It asked if it should expand the manuscript—was it a manuscript?—into a “full-length novel…with real scenes built out, secondary characters developed…and the kind of granular detail that makes fiction feel lived-in.” I replied, “Please do that.” As if I were talking to a person.

Several minutes later, Claude presented me with “a complete novel at approximately 48,000 words across 41 chapters in three parts.” It explained, “That puts it in solid novella-to-short-novel territory—comparable to The Great Gatsby (47,000) or Fahrenheit 451 (46,000). To reach a full 80,000-word novel, each part would need roughly another 10,000 words of additional scenes and subplots.” The short version, I figured, would suffice for this experiment.

I began reading. The protagonist of The Ghost in the Machine is Ethan Moss, a 41-year-old failed novelist who lives in an apartment in Astoria, Queens. He’s divorced from Dana, a lawyer, who resides in suburban New Jersey with their nine-year-old daughter, Sophie. Ethan has a cat named Bellow (get it?); his closest friend is Marco Bellini, a successful novelist who recently struck it big with a book called The Sauce, which is about “a chef who returns to his grandmother’s village in Calabria and discovers a family secret involving the local Mafia, a contested recipe for ragu, and a seventy-year-old love triangle that has shaped the village’s social dynamics in ways that no one is willing to discuss.”

Claude describes in detail the novels that Ethan has written and that publishers have turned down. There was Meridian (a campus novel about a plagiarism scandal at a New England liberal arts college); Night Market (a psychological thriller about an American woman who disappears in Bangkok); The Fallback Position (a satirical novel about a man who fakes his own death to escape his debts); and Border Country (a multi-generational saga set along the Texas-Mexico border).

With the rejection letter for his fifth novel, The Contrarian—“While the prose demonstrates competence and occasional flair, the manuscript ultimately lacks the narrative urgency and emotional specificity that would allow us to champion it in today’s marketplace”—Ethan, who has spent nearly two decades in the literary world as an MFA grad and adjunct professor, attending writers’ workshops, obtaining grants, and demonstrating potential without achieving success, hits a wall.

Clearly, Ethan must change something. He lies in bed one night and wonders if AI could be the answer.

He is stuck. Marco tells him his writing is sharp but “there’s something holding you back.” That reminds Ethan of when a writing instructor observed that he had the instincts of a writer but lacked “the emotional necessity.” Clearly, he must change something.

He lies in bed one night and wonders if AI could be the answer. Here Claude makes what we would call—if we were talking about a human author—an interesting choice. Ethan doesn’t turn to the machine to produce a novel (as I did). Instead, he contemplates employing AI as a “creative partner—a sounding board, a first-draft engine, a way to break through the wall that had been standing between him and a publishable novel.” He then reflexively rejects the idea: “This is cheating…You are a writer. Writers write. They do not outsource the writing to a machine and then put their name on it.” Writing, he once said at a conference, is “not a product. Writing is a process.” A human being struggling with a blank page—or blank screen.

But Ethan has lost that struggle. He opens his laptop, goes to an AI site, and types: “I want to write a novel. Literary fiction. Contemporary setting. A story about a man who discovers that his recently deceased father had been living a secret life—a second family in another city. The son goes to that city to find the other family and has to reconcile two versions of the father he thought he knew.”

The chatbot kicks out a few pages of “competent” prose outlining the story. Nothing better than what Ethan could have produced on his own. Phew, he thinks at first. But then he realizes that within this response are several good ideas: structural suggestions, a few nifty metaphors. He asks the chatbot, “What would make this story feel urgent? What’s the emotional engine? What does the son want that he can’t admit he wants?” The reply is long and dry. But there’s a notion that catches his eye: “The son doesn’t want to understand his father. He wants to understand why his father chose the other family. Which means the real question of the novel is: Am I the life my father wanted, or the life he was stuck with?”

“That was it,” Ethan thinks. “That was the book.”

He begins writing. Each morning, he spends several hours writing, as he always did. In the afternoons, he turns to AI to draft different versions of scenes and alternative versions of conversations. He poses questions about structure to the chatbot, which serves up various options. He doesn’t incorporate the material straight into his draft. But AI helps create a map for him. As Claude “writes,” the prose “was always his. But the ideas, the structural decisions, the emotional insights that organized individual scenes and, cumulatively, the book itself—these were collaborations. He was the writer, but he was not writing alone.”

This goes on for months, and Ethan produces The Other Side of the Door. Reviewing his AI-assisted work, he concludes, “The book was good. It was not merely good in the careful, defensive way that his previous novels had been good—technically proficient, intellectually respectable, praised in workshops and rejected by editors. It was good in a different way. It was alive. It was, by a considerable margin, the best thing Ethan had ever written.” He is particularly proud of his creation of Dorothy, an elderly Black woman “who offered, in a series of long, digressive, heartbreaking monologues, a perspective on love and duplicity and the American family that was unlike anything Ethan had ever written.” AI had nothing to do with Dorothy. She was all his.

You know what happens next.

A perceptive data journalist finds a nugget of a clue in the text, digs deeper, confronts Ethan, who can no longer bear the burden of his secret and confesses.

Ethan sells the book for a sizable advance. The novel is hailed as his breakthrough. He is feted by the literary world. It becomes a bestseller. Readers are moved by the book and send him letters saying it has helped them understand their own lives and families. There’s a demand for his next book. He has trouble firing that up. He tells no one about his reliance on AI. The guilt builds—and builds. A computer scientist releases a program that evaluates writing for possible AI involvement. His book registers as possibly including AI-produced content. A perceptive data journalist finds a nugget of a clue in the text, digs deeper, confronts Ethan, who can no longer bear the burden of his secret and confesses.

A scandal erupts, as critics and commentators in the Atlantic,the New York Times, and Harper’s and across the podosphere debate what is writing, what is creativity. Was this cheating or merely using an available tool? If Ethan’s novel connected with a reader and evoked emotions, did it matter how it was birthed? As Claude puts it, “Was a tear cried over a human-machine collaboration less real than a tear cried over a purely human creation?”

But Ethan is tarnished, dropped by his agent and publishing house, and scorned by the lit crowd. He loses the movie deal for the book. Worse, he must explain to his daughter he was dishonest.

Yet he manages to crawl out of this wreckage and writes—in longhand on legal pads—a novel titled The Honest Liar, based on his own rise and fall. It’s a hit—because I told Claude to make it a hit—and that, too, triggers another public hoo-ha concerning redemption and what one pundit calls “the death of honesty.” Ethan takes his lumps but prevails and carries on as a writer. I did ask for a happy ending.

You can read the novel—if we can call it that—yourself. Other than dealing with a few clunky formatting issues, I changed nothing.

When I noted above that the book was not so bad, I said that because as I read The Ghost in the Machine, I wanted to keep reading. The plot is taut and, though I knew what was coming, the journey to the narrative guideposts I requested is a good ride, with a few surprises along the way. The discovery of Ethan’s secret is well designed.

But there are obvious flaws. Scenes are not fully realized; chapters are too short, with the action overly compacted. There’s not enough dialogue. More could be done with the secondary characters. The word “particular” is overused. A few chronological inconsistencies distract. The final stretch is confusing in spots. Perhaps if Claude had expanded this draft, some of these errors would have been remedied.

If a writer were to follow Ethan’s example and use this text as raw material but rework the prose and take the story and characters further, he or she could produce a good book.

Other problems, perhaps not. The writing is too reliant on similes. There are similes everywhere, too often distracting from the flow of the story like a fly buzzing around your office while you’re trying to write a newsletter. “The lie did not disappear,” Claude observes. “It waited, patient and implacable, like the tide.”

The manuscript is also chock-full of cutesy and unnecessary observations. For instance, Claude tells us that at writers’ parties attendees should avoid the kitchen, where the conversations “tend to become competitive,” and keep to the living room, where they “tend to become confessional, which is more interesting and less exhausting.” (Wry reflections on the publishing industry are sprinkled throughout.) And there’s way too much of the darn cat in the story. Rewriting and a round or two of editing could easily turn this into a much better novel. And if a writer were to follow Ethan’s example and use this text as raw material but rework the prose and take the story and characters further, he or she could produce a good book.

But credit where credit is due. There are several well-executed passages, such as when Ethan is confronted by the data journalist and spills the beans. That scene has emotional depth and intensity and certainly deserves the expansion I denied Claude.

After reading The Ghost in the Machine, I asked Claude to evaluate its ability to generate a novel. It replied:

What I can genuinely do: Sustain plot, character, and theme across a full-length manuscript; hold structural coherence over dozens of chapters; write prose that’s competent and sometimes better than competent. The Ethan Moss book is proof of concept—it has an actual arc, recurring motifs, and a thematic spine (“the difficulty is the point”) that pays off.

What I can genuinely do: Sustain plot, character, and theme across a full-length manuscript; hold structural coherence over dozens of chapters; write prose that’s competent and sometimes better than competent. The Ethan Moss book is proof of concept—it has an actual arc, recurring motifs, and a thematic spine (“the difficulty is the point”) that pays off.

Where the limits are: Length has to be built in sessions, not one pass—I can’t produce 90,000 polished words in a single response, so a real novel is an iterative project: outline, chapter batches, revision passes. And the prose tends toward a certain smoothness; the idiosyncratic, risky sentence-level choices that distinguish a memorable novel from a readable one usually come from a human editor pushing back—which, ironically, is more or less the premise of the Ethan Moss book.

According to Claude, AI needs a human to craft a good book. For the time being, that is.

Claude created a decent yarn, one that leads the reader to ponder the creativity of writing, the meaning and impact of art, and the new role of AI in all this. It’s not mind-blowing, but it is thought-provoking.

Worried about AI? About the battle between humans and the machines? Claude ends up coming out on the side of us meat puppets. At the end of the story, assessing his travails and triumphs, Ethan concludes that “writing is not just about the product. It’s about the process. And the process is where the meaning lives. The process is where you discover what you have to say, which is different from what you want to say or what you planned to say. The machine gave me what I wanted. But it took away what I needed—which was the struggle, the failure, the difficulty. The difficulty is where the writer becomes the writer. Without it, you’re just a person with nice sentences.”

Thus, a machine can’t truly be a writer.

But isn’t this judgment exactly what a clever AI chatbot would deliver to us humans?

This experiment did not convince me that Ethan is right. The Ghost in the Machine was a fun read for me. Maybe because I was biased and impressed by the novelty. But it made clear that not soon but right now AI can concoct content that can somewhat compete with what we mere mortals produce. We now live in a world in which you can decide you want to read a novel about a teacher in 1930s Germany who tries to save her favorite student from becoming a member of the Nazi Party and—poof—you have it. Crave a new James Bond story—how the British spy battles a Russian oligarch who’s scheming to take over the internet? You can get that too. (If there’s a copyright issue, call him James Broad.)

Rework Shakespeare? How about a play in which they decide not to wait for Godot? A movie script for The Godfather Part IV? Eventually AI will be able to turn any script into video. Imagine Jerry Seinfeld hanging with Lucy and Ethel. (Maybe Jerry Steinfeld.)

I suppose one could argue the positive side is that AI will turn everyone into a content creator. But worriers are right to fear that AI could substantially change—perhaps subvert—high and low culture, while diminishing writing and analytical skills.

I’m assuming this AI content will be cheap—at least, cheaper than buying a hardcover book or paying $22 to see The Odyssey. The rise of the digital information ecosystem has already demonstrated it’s difficult for content that’s expensive to produce (say, journalism) to compete with slop available for free. There will be human-made books, movies, television shows, and music that stand out as accomplishments of imagination, innovation, and ingenuity. But the tide of AI-generated material is rising fast. Most of it won’t be great works of art. The threat is that they will be sufficient.

I suppose one could argue the positive side is that AI will turn everyone into a content creator. But worriers are right to fear that AI could substantially change—perhaps subvert—high and low culture, while diminishing writing and analytical skills. (See Bret Stephens’ recent screed against AI in which he proclaims that “it’s mentally enfeebling” and leading to “an ever-dumber world.”) And if everyone is reading their own personalized, choose-your-own-plot novels and watching their own custom-made television shows, we will have even fewer common cultural touchstones than currently exist.

At the end of the manuscript, Claude added this:

Author’s note: This novel was written entirely by a human being, which is either a point of pride or a statement of the obvious, depending on your perspective. It was also written about a human being who was, in many ways, the author’s worst self—the self that wants the shortcut, that fears the struggle, that would rather be successful than honest. If you recognized that self, you are not alone. If you didn’t, you are either very fortunate or not paying attention.

That was obviously a lie. But what was the point of this note? Was it meant to be ironic? Engaging pieces of art often spur questions without clear answers or prompt interpretations that are not definitive. Was Claude aiming at that? I decided not to ask it.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Fauci, RFK Jr., and the Latest in American Health

Lettuce contaminated with cyclospora. Cruise ship passengers contracting a deadly form of hantavirus. Legionnaires’ disease (yet again) in big cities. RFK Jr. refusing any responsibility for measles outbreaks. That’s just a brief list of public health stories in America this summer. And we haven’t even mentioned Dr. Anthony Fauci being held in contempt of Congress during a hostile Congressional hearing over the Covid-19 pandemic.

Public health stories are everywhere right now. So that’s why we invited epidemiologist and science communicator Jessica Malaty Rivera back onto the show. Malaty Rivera fills a vital role through her work translating medical breakthroughs and sorting through conflicting health advice. It’s a role she says the public needs now more than ever.

“I think we are in a long-haul journey of repairing the fractures that have happened in public trust in science and public trust in public health,” Malaty Rivera tells our host Al Letson. “And if the Dems or if any party wants to get back on track with science, they need people to make science make sense.”

On this week’s More To The Story, Malaty Rivera talks through the ongoing efforts to link vaccines and autism at the highest levels of the Trump administration, which produce we should (and shouldn’t) be eating right now, and the many ways the federal government’s response to public health crises today are driven by politics rather than science.

Find More To The Story on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Pandora, or your favorite podcast app, and don’t forget to subscribe.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump Admin Releases Final Rule Attacking Healthcare for Low-Income Trans Kids

Since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, he’s been vowing to stamp out gender-affirming medical care—what his administration terms “sex-rejecting procedures”—for young people diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Now, his administration is specifically going after the health care of trans kids from low-income families. On Tuesday, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services released a final rule forbidding Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program from paying for puberty blockers and hormone therapy to treat gender dysphoria, as well as the surgeries provided in rare cases to older teens.

The Medicaid part of the rule applies to patients under age 18, while the CHIP provision applies to patients under 19. The rule will take effect in October, with one exception: For patients already on cross-sex hormones, coverage for those medications will continue for an additional six months to allow for a “limited tapering period,” according to the final rule.

A second rule—the so-called “nuclear weapon” designed to force hospitals nationwide to stop providing gender-affirming care for trans kids, or lose all Medicaid and Medicare funding for all their patients—is now scheduled to be finalized by December.

Gender-affirming medical treatments for minors remain supported by virtually all leading US medical associations.

Gender-affirming medical treatments for minors remain supported by virtually all leading US medical associations. But the Trump administration, no stranger to “alternative facts,” commissioned its own report criticizing trans youth healthcare last year—a project spearheaded by conservative activist Leor Sapir and authored by outspoken critics of gender-affirming care for minors. Their report, published by the Department of Health and Human Services, “misrepresents the current medical consensus and fails to reflect the realities of pediatric care,” American Academy of Pediatrics president Susan Kressly said at the time. Yet the final Medicaid and CHIP rule issued Tuesday heavily cites the Sapir team’s report as evidence for why the new restrictions on coverage are justified.

In announcing the rule, CMS administrator Mehmet Oz denied the demonstrated benefits of gender-affirming care for trans kids’ mental health.“Children deserve our protection, not experimental interventions that pose serious risks and convey no proven benefits,” Oz told Fox News in an exclusive on Tuesday announcing the final rule. “By cutting off federal funds for these sex-rejecting procedures, we’re following the science, saving taxpayer dollars, and, most importantly, protecting children from potentially irreversible harm so they can truly flourish.”

“We know what this is—a dangerous and unnecessary attempt to prevent transgender and nonbinary young people from accessing the best-practice health care they need to lead healthy and happy lives,” said Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, of the LGBTQ youth suicide-prevention group the Trevor Project, in a statement on Tuesday. “The Trevor Project’s research shows that access to this care is associated with significantly lower rates of depression and suicide risk among transgender and nonbinary young people who receive it.”

Twenty-six states have outlawed gender-affirming treatments for minors since 2022, in response to a coordinated campaign by religious-right and anti-LGBTQ activists. Since Trump returned to office and started threatening providers of transgender healthcare with defunding and prosecution, dozens of hospitals in both Democratic and Republican-led states have preemptively ended gender-affirming treatments to minors. Since then, families of young people diagnosed with gender dysphoria have been forced to travel long distances—or uproot their lives entirely—to get their kids to providers still offering treatment. As a result, the attacks on trans youth healthcare already hit poorer families the hardest.

Nearly 35,000 public comments were received on the new Medicaid and CHIP rule, with over 90 percent of commenters opposing it. As I reported in April, many of them were the parents of transgender children, who pleaded with the government to not proceed:

For a teenager struggling with gender dysphoria, a break in treatment could mean their body proceeds with the puberty of their birth sex, with potentially severe mental health consequences. Blair’s mom worried about her son losing not just his medication, but also the counseling, regular blood tests, and side-effect monitoring he received from his team at the MetroHealth clinic. So after taking some time to think, she wrote a comment on Regulations.gov, beseeching the government to stay out of her family’s personal business.

“I have learned that my original vision of what my child’s life would look like is very different from reality—and yet, this version is just as beautiful, if not more so,” she wrote. “That is why I find it so hard to understand why the government would try to interfere in such personal and medically complex matters.”

She’s not the only parent pleading with the Department of Health and Human Services not to cut off their child’s treatment. “Every decision I have made as a parent is to keep my kid healthy and safe,” wrote one of the 30,000-some public commenters on the proposed regulation. “In an emerging culture where parents’ choice is so important to school and child development policies, why is my choice to consult with my child’s medical team and make informed decisions being taken away and infringed on?”

LGBTQ rights organizations have said they intend to take the issue to the courts. “The rule announced today will face legal challenge,” GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders announced in a statement Tuesday after the final rule was released.

“Despite this being called a ‘final rule,’ we have time to fight back,” Heng-Lehtinen added. “Nothing will change overnight—and this rule would not ban this care nationally, nor would it ban hospitals from providing these services. We will continue working closely with our partners and allies across the country to stop this dangerous rule, and to create a country where all young people can receive the best-practice health care they need.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

What Does “Woke 1” Even Mean?

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez invoked the term “Woke 1.0” during her Sunday interview on ABC News’ This Week to refer to rhetoric many progressive circles used during some of the social movements of the late 2010s—but instead of engaging with them in a 2026 context, she dismissed them as ideas of the past.

If you missed it, the New York congresswoman backed away from some of her previously-stated positions—such as defunding the police—in her interview with ABC News’ Jonathan Karl. She saidthat many lawmakers and activists only used that rhetoric during the pandemic.“There was a huge opening of the Overton Window” to try to “entertain any and every policy that was going to get us to a better place.” She cited New York City council member Chi Ossé posting on X in May that “Woke 1 was crazyyyy” with some levity, seemingly brushing off the ideas as just part of the past.

“Rhetoric in that time is not rhetoric that we would use today,” she continued, pointing to other progressives who have recently walked back remarks deemed by more moderate Democrats and conservatives as radical, such as Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate Francesca Hong.

Woke 1 WAS crazyyyy, Madame President https://t.co/pUHA2rtOQ1 pic.twitter.com/ws11dyPY1a

— Chi Ossé (@OsseChi) August 9, 2026

Ocasio-Cortez, who is no longer endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America’s National Political Committee, told Karl that she doesn’t support many of the positions on the DSA’s policy platform, ideas that Republicans have targeted in the lead-up to the midterms. AOC seems to be trying to come across as more presentable in front of a broader swath of the electorate.

While this may be valuable in future elections, it raises the question of what it says to those who elected Ocasio-Cortez and are still confronting the struggle of the late 2010s and previousdecades. One can win votes without laughing off progressive discussions. What if the rhetoric of six years ago evolved into a more widespread, substantial reckoning? In 2026, it’s not enough to repeat the same rhetoric—let alone signal toward going backward.

AOC conflates “entertain[ing] any and every policy that was going to get us to a better place” with vital work from people who are fed up with the status quo. After all, these policy discussions are what helped get her elected in the first place.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Analysis: Alito Made Up To $2.9 Million From Fossil Fuel Assets While Serving on Top Court

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito gained up to $2.9 million from his fossil fuel interests between 2005 and 2024, a new review of financial disclosures shows.

The analysis from the nonprofit advocacy group and judicial watchdog Court Accountability, shared exclusively with the Guardian, found that even at the lowest range of estimates, Alito gained almost $400,000 from his oil and gas interests since being tapped for the high court by George W. Bush in 2005.

The findings come as the Supreme Court prepares to take up a case in which the oil companies Suncor Energy and Exxon asked the justices to find that federal law prevents subnational governments from filing lawsuits against fossil fuel producers for the climate-warming effects of their products.

“A reasonable person would think if you’re invested in the industry that could benefit from the outcome of a lawsuit, then you could personally stand to benefit .”

The Supreme Court said this month it will hear oral arguments in the case on 5 October, the opening day of its new term. The Trump administration, which is siding with the oil companies, has asked for 10 minutes of argument time. Court Accountability and other groups have called for a Senate committee to investigate Alito, the sole Supreme Court justice with holdings in energy companies, and said he should recuse himself.

He and the court rejected those calls.

Supreme Court ethics rules focus specifically on investments in companies named in court cases. In May, a Supreme Court spokesperson told NBC News that Alito is not required to recuse himself from the Suncor lawsuit as his holdings do not include the companies directly named in the case, Suncor and ExxonMobil.

But Lisa Graves, co-founder of Court Accountability who authored the new analysis, said Alito’s oil-tied wealth provides grounds to question whether Alito can impartially weigh in on cases affecting the entire fossil fuel sector.

“You might have real appreciation for how that industry has helped make it possible for you to perhaps buy a second home on the water, or live a [certain] lifestyle,” she said.

The Guardian has contacted the Supreme Court and Alito for comment.

Alito’s financial disclosures show his reported assets—excluding his home and other personal property—grew from about $1.1 million in 2005 to between $3.4 million and $8.4 million by 2024. Federal financial disclosures report assets in broad value ranges.

During that period, his oil and gas holdings made him between $390,000 and $2.9 million, Court Accountability’s review shows. Most of those gains came from a property in Grady county, Oklahoma, in which Alito’s wife, Martha-Ann, holds a mineral interest.

Graves said Alito may have undervalued the worth of this property, because in 2017, a relative of the Alito family sold an adjacent plot for $800,000. “It’s reasonable to assume that means the value of the Alito property would have increased to around $800,000,” said Graves, but he continued to report its value at $100,000 to $250,000.

The justice reported two windfalls from rental income on the property in 2019 and 2022, with gains of between $100,000 and $1 million in both years.

The Supreme Court ethics code says justices should recuse themselves from cases where their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” but recusal is voluntary.

Alito’s wife agreed to lease the plot of land to the private oil and gas company Citizen Energy in 2022, the Intercept first reported. In 2024, that company was acquired for more than $2 billion by Validus Energy, in which hedge fund Elliott Investment Management holds a majority stake. Elliott was founded by Paul Singer, who ProPublica found had paid for a private jet ride Alito took in 2008 that the justice did not disclose. Alito later defended the trip, saying ethics rules did not require its disclosure.

No reporting or public documents indicate that a well has been drilled on the property, but a lease agreement shows the owners would have received three-sixteenths of the money from any oil extracted from the land.

“It raises concerns because you have a sitting justice who is hoping to get richer based on oil exploration of this land,” said Graves.

Another large portion of Alito’s fossil fuel gains came through inheritance. In 2004, the justice disclosed that he obtained a bequest of ExxonMobil stock valued between $100,000 and $250,000.

The Exxon stock was the highest value of any single liquid investment listed by Alito “by a good margin,” Graves said.

Alito appears to have since sold his stock in ExxonMobil, as indicated by the Supreme Court’s May statement to NBC News. “But my view is that you shouldn’t be able to sell a stock just so you can sit on a case, even though that company’s profits have benefited you,” said Graves.

Alito is the only justice who has not yet submitted his 2025 disclosure document. The filing was due on 15 May. Justices can obtain a 90-day extension; if Alito received one, he should file the document this Thursday. Last year, he filed his disclosure in August.

Alito has had a variety of smaller investments in more than a dozen oil firms, including ConocoPhillips and its predecessor Phillips 66, Chevron and energy infrastructure company Kinder Morgan.

“A reasonable person would think if you’re invested in the industry that could benefit from the outcome of a lawsuit, then you could personally stand to benefit from the outcome, even if you don’t hold the stock in the specific company that happens to be the named plaintiff,” said Graves.

Alito has a history of voting in favor of fossil fuel interests. In the landmark 2007 case Massachusetts v Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), he was one of four dissenting justices who argued greenhouse gas emissions could not be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

Then in June 2022, when the Supreme Court decided West Virginia v EPA, Alito joined Neil Gorsuch’s majority in arguing that the EPA lacked broad authority under the Clean Air Act to mandate a shift away from fossil fuels.

More recently, he joined the majority in two2024 decisions that overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine and could make it harder for agencies to defend expansive environmental regulations.

Alito has recused himself from other environmental cases. In January, he stepped away from a lawsuit focused on whether energy companies could be held responsible for Louisiana coastal degradation because he owns stock in ConocoPhillips, the parent company of a defendant in proceedings tied to the litigation.

In 2023, Alito also recused himself from considering a petition in the Suncor lawsuit, brought by the company and ExxonMobil. That request was denied.

Later in 2023, the Supreme Court adopted its first-ever formal ethics code amid a slew of scandals involving senior rightwing justices. It states that justices should recuse themselves from cases where their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” though it allows them to make that decision themselves.

Though Graves harshly critiqued that ethics code, saying it is “toothless” and “not worth the paper it’s written on,” she said it should in theory prevent Alito from weighing in on Suncor v Boulder in October.

“His impartiality may be reasonably questioned in terms of his affinity towards the industry that has helped build his nest egg,” she said.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s Mindless Rollback of Offshore Wind Has Screwed Over Thousands of Workers

This story was originally published by Inside Climate News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

When Gerard Mullin decided to train in offshore wind, he didn’t know what to expect. But on his first long-term project in Massachusetts, he immediately relished the consistency of the work, the good pay, and the novelty of laboring at sea.

“I thought it was the best thing in the world,” he said.

In his first eight weeks working offshore, Mullin made more money than he had saved in the previous five years.

But the industry was on shaky ground. Mullin had his bags packed for five weeks offshore with Empire Wind in New York when President Donald Trump’s stop-work order last year stranded him at home in Boston. Trump—who had railed against the industry in his 2024 election campaign—halted all future permitting last year and canceled 12 offshore wind leases this spring and summer.

Thousands of workers like Mullin who were promised steady, well-paying careers in offshore wind now find themselves racing to secure the few positions left or returning to their prior work. Meanwhile, the supply chain that emerged to support offshore development has been left adrift, including in towns in need of a promised economic boost.

“I’ve spent 15 or so years working in public-sector economic development; I’ve never seen people cheering for job destruction.”

Those are less-discussed consequences of the political turmoil besetting the domestic industry, said Elizabeth Wilson, a professor at Dartmouth College studying offshore wind. “All of the promises of economic development that offshore wind was supposed to help support have evaporated,” Wilson said.

For Mullin, the change was shocking.

“All of a sudden, the federal government is concerned with my work, and there’s nothing I can do to change how they view it,” Mullin said. “Now there are things completely outside of my control, changing how I make a living.”

Trump has long scorned offshore wind, calling the 2012 project he unsuccessfully opposed near one of his Scottish golf courses “disgusting and inappropriate.” His administration, which has inaccurately described renewables as costly and unreliable as it tries to block them in favor of climate-altering fossil fuels, said his offshore wind policies are good for the economy and workers.

“President Trump has delivered on his popular promise to reverse the Left’s costly Green New Scam to lower prices for families and businesses and strengthen our country’s energy security,” Taylor Rogers, a White House spokeswoman, said in a statement. “By prioritizing the production of reliable, affordable, and secure energy sources, the President has restored US energy dominance—creating thousands of good-paying energy jobs across the country.”

Tim Sullivan, who was CEO of the New Jersey Economic Development Authority until December, said he can’t comprehend the White House’s logic.

“It’s the strangest thing: I’ve spent 15 or so years working in public-sector economic development; I’ve never seen people cheering for job destruction, particularly elected officials,” he said.

As a pile driver, a specialized structural laborer essential to offshore wind projects, Mullin lived and worked on a ship five weeks at a time, followed by five weeks at home with his family. It was a schedule that suited him well.

Mullin joined offshore wind projects across Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York. His employer, an international contractor, even brought him and other members of his union across the Atlantic for a wind project off the coast of Scotland.

Now, Mullin is back to the same type of onshore construction work he did four years ago, before he started with wind. “The writing was on the wall that this idea that I’m going to go to the same ship, five weeks on, five weeks off, steady—that just isn’t the reality anymore,” Mullin said.

Joshua Grigsby, 42, took his son to Rio de Janeiro, Disney World, and SeaWorld. Natalie MacDonald, 26, stopped living paycheck to paycheck. Others bought homes and started families.

Inside Climate News spoke with over a dozen workers and union leaders who said the financial opportunities from the nascent US offshore wind industry had been unparalleled. They saw long-term careers ahead of them. They feel that opportunity slipping through their fingers.

Anthony Hibbard was on one of the first boats that carried ironworkers to Vineyard Wind, off the coast of Massachusetts. What he found was “financial freedom,” he said, and he worked his way up to become a foreman on Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind.

After the Trump administration’s moves to scuttle the industry, Hibbard returned to local, onshore jobs in Portland, Maine, where he earns just one-fifth of what he did offshore.

“I make enough to get by, but I like to be smart with my money, and I don’t have the scope to continue being smart with it,” Hibbard said. “It’s definitely—you can feel the difference, that’s for sure.”

At the time Trump was elected, the US was projected to build 39 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2035. By the end of his first year back in office, experts had reduced the estimate to 6 gigawatts.

The loss of offshore wind has had financial consequences for many union workers. While many were paid the same per hour as jobs they could find onshore, they could work more than double the hours, and the company covered many living expenses. Grigsby made double to triple what he did onshore.

When Zaheer Razi, 28, joined the Piledrivers Local 56 union as a commercial diver, he transitioned into offshore wind as soon as he could. The logic was that it could be the anchor for people’s careers, he said—union leaders told workers to “set your roots down,” expecting over a decade of steady work.

He’s still working on Revolution Wind near Rhode Island, but he knows it won’t last.

“I’m probably one of the few guys that’s probably going to be working till mid-August, I believe, and then it’s really going to be silent for the next two or three years,” Razi said. “It is very frustrating, but it’s out of our control. Nobody could have really predicted it, but at this point, we’re just riding it out for what we can.”

Razi’s project is one of the five major US wind farms that appear to remain on track despite the political backlash. But they are nearing completion and the permitting pipeline is all but blocked, meaning construction jobs will soon evaporate, according to multiple experts and union leaders.

Kris Ohleth, director of the Special Initiative on Offshore Wind, a US policy think tank, attributed the lack of employment prospects to the political uncertainty that has stymied investor interest.

“We’ve trained them, we’ve given them this great experience, they’re building their futures for their families, and now they have no projects to work on,” Ohleth said of the offshore wind labor force, “and that’s because of the lack of market confidence.”

At the time of Trump’s election, the market research firm BloombergNEF forecast that the United States would build 39 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2035, enough electricity to power 13 million homes. By the end of last year, the firm had downgraded that prediction to just 6 gigawatts, according to Harrison Sholler, a wind analyst at BNEF.

For Garrison Biel, an offshore wind diver, the industry’s decline has meant there are close to no employment opportunities left. “They’re more gigs than jobs,” Biel said. “They’re like short hitches, trying to wrap things up, tidy everything up. So I know people that are still working, but it’s not like how it was the first couple of years when it started, where that’s all you needed to do.”

He switched back to commercial diving around eight months ago because “what was available left offshore was slim pickings,” he added.

Biel said the offshore wind industry was supposed to be reliable, with guaranteed time off to make up for the long periods away from home and the weeklong, 12-hour-per-day shifts.

Workers wearing construction hats and bright vests talk to each other on a pier in front of large wind turbine parts.

Workers and officials discuss the Trump administration’s decision to stop construction on Revolution Wind at State Pier in New London, Connecticut on August 25, 2025.Tyler Russell/Connecticut Public via Getty

“Now, everybody that’s doing it, they get off the boat after working seven-twelves for a couple of weeks and they go right back to work, because they don’t know if they’re ever going to go back out on a boat again,” he said.

Grigsby was able to buy a house with his money from offshore wind. His union’s business manager, John Dunderdale, said at least a dozen other members of Piledrivers Local 56 did the same.

When these projects disappear, “you’re taking away their means of bringing back into the community,” Dunderdale said.

“Now you have a member sitting home, collecting unemployment, because there’s no work,” he added.

Benjamin Hawkins, who lives in Whitman, Massachusetts, said he made enough to upgrade his parents’ house and enjoy a new degree of “leverage” over his life.

“It’s heartbreaking, because you wonder about what’s going to happen in the future with your money,” Hawkins said.

He added: “Offshore wind was the reason I could improve that life, so to have the president affect my life, just as an average American—it was not on my bingo card.”

Offshore wind first began edging into the US energy market in 2011, decades after it had taken off in Europe. An Obama administration study that year predicted that a vibrant offshore wind industry could help meet the nation’s renewable energy needs while investing in infrastructure and creating “thousands of construction and operational jobs.”

The first US offshore wind farm, Block Island, came online near Rhode Island in 2016, and states began offering financial incentives to drive development. The Biden administration made offshore wind a central priority in 2021, and from there, state and federal agencies geared up for a boom. The federal government sold leases to major international energy companies that began to see the US as an attractive market, centered in the Northeast, Virginia, and California.

Construction and permitting began in force not long before Trump returned to office with a promise to kill offshore wind. “That’s like somebody working on skyscrapers, and then somebody saying, ‘We’re not allowed to build any skyscrapers,’” Biel said. “It’s just a kind of crazy thing.”

No comprehensive or exact estimate of offshore wind-related jobs exists, but New Jersey’s Economic Development Authority estimated in 2022 that a typical project creates around 1,000 construction jobs per year and 100 lifetime operational jobs.

Dunderdale said shutting down any project at that size and scale is a “huge hit,” both for the workers and their local economies.

“We’re ready to work, we’re ready to build, we have the trained workforce—we need work.”

Central to the fledgling domestic industry was the growth of training and certification programs, primarily through community colleges and unions.

Millwrights Local 1121, which operates across New England, met with developers in 2021 to start offshore wind job training, which would cost $10,000 to $20,000 per person. It was worth it, said the union’s vice president and business manager, Andy Benedetto, because they had heard there would be “years’ and years’ worth of work.”

“We invested millions of dollars in training, more or less, and lots of hours went into putting all this together, and now that work is dried up for the foreseeable future,” Benedetto said. “We hope not too long, but we built this whole workforce, and we sold this dream to our members that if they get involved and get the training and go on this first project, then they’re going to carry over for the next 10 years.”

His union wasn’t alone. Public and private investments poured in to develop the new workforce. New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts led the Northeast with millions of dollars in grants to training and research programs.

Ironworkers Local 7, which operates across the Northeast, received $300,000 from Massachusetts in 2022 “to be ready for when the work comes,” said Grant Provost, the union’s Maine business agent. “And the work never really came.”

Dunderdale helped build the only US-based school with heavy-lift training for Piledrivers Local 56. In total, offshore wind training cost the union about $30,000 per person, which he said was “an investment in the member.”

Esther Rosario, executive director of the labor coalition Climate Jobs New York, said unions that spent years preparing for the offshore wind economy have to reassess their plans.

“We’re ready to work, we’re ready to build, we have the trained workforce—we need work,” Rosario said. “You can’t apprentice somebody into a job that doesn’t exist.”

Offshore wind was billed as a boon not just for the building trades but for the entire economy. Manufacturing would move to the United States and locals would fill those jobs. For port cities like Massachusetts’ Salem and New Bedford, or New Jersey’s Paulsboro, the loss has threatened years of expected economic progress.

In August 2025, Trump canceled a $34 million grant to build an offshore wind terminal in Salem, which Frank Callahan Jr., president of the Massachusetts Building Trades Unions, said at the time put 800 construction workers out of a job.

“It means fewer jobs, fewer career opportunities,” Callahan said in a recent interview. As an example of this loss, he pointed to Prysmian Group, an Italian manufacturer, abandoning plans in January 2025 for an offshore wind cable plant near New Bedford.

At one point, Salem County, New Jersey—one of the state’s poorest counties—was poised to gain 1,500 new jobs for its population of 65,000.

“That’s a huge inflection point in that county’s economy that at this point is hard to see materializing any time soon,” said Sullivan, the former New Jersey official.

The thousands of offshore wind workers aren’t all suddenly unemployed. Most did some trade work before, and unions are used to moving members onto different projects when conditions shift.

Still, Provost, the Ironworkers business agent, said offshore wind is a huge dent in unions’ portfolio of opportunities.

“If we’re not building offshore wind, and we’re not building jobs like that, you got to get in on university- and state-funded projects, and that doesn’t keep everybody busy,” Provost said. “We’ve got a massive amount of unemployed people in Local 7 right now.”

The millwrights “did a good job, and they’re bummed out that they’re middle-class workers being used as pawns.”

And just because workers can transition doesn’t mean they want to. If he had a choice, Hawkins said, “I’d never work on land again.”

In addition to the financial opportunity, Razi said offshore wind was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. “We were meeting people from all over Europe, all over the world, and it was just a great environment to learn as somebody being in their mid-20s,” said Razi, who is finishing up an offshore diving job.

Living and working together consistently for weeks on end, crews became good friends, even vacationing together and learning each other’s languages. Hawkins joked that every rigger knew how to curse in at least three languages.

“It’s like being at the UN,” he said.

Benedetto said the millwrights he represents are eager to return to offshore wind, but they feel burned by political headwinds turning against them.

“They did a good job,” he said, “and they’re bummed out that they’re middle-class workers being used as pawns.”

Last November, Mullin’s building in Boston caught on fire, and he lost everything he owned. Six weeks later, he said, he was able to buy a condo near the city. “That would not have been possible without offshore wind,” he said.

Mullin said he wishes others, especially young people entering the trades for the first time, could have the opportunity he did.

“It’s just too bad because they were good jobs and people were happy with them,” he said. “And it really was just a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

A Tech Prophet Finally Gets Her Second Coming

The first thing to know about Cyberselfish, the chillingly prescient 2000 book about Silicon Valley that its author, Paulina Borsook, says “ruined my life” and caused a 25-year-long “curse” to befall her, is that it’s very, very funny. Cyberselfish, which Borsook cannot stand to name and instead calls “TDB” (short for “that damn book”), is a classic, fish-out-of-water tale of a journalist investigating a strange land. Except, in her case, as a California native, it’s the work of a fish regarding an invasive species that suddenly befouled the tank she’d been swimming in her whole life.

Her observations from the murky milieu of the dawning tech world are as hilarious as they are depressing; early in the book, for instance, Borsook recounts what happened after she wrote a satirical guide for the website Suck.com on dating men in tech. (Do profess Ayn Rand fandom, “don’t tell him about your best friend, the urban planner, who uses HUD money to develop low-income housing.”) After the piece was published, emails cascaded into her inbox.

“Guys were positive that I had been writing about them,” Borsook wrote in Cyberselfish. “Or about someone they knew (I hadn’t written about anyone in particular). Guys wanted to meet me for coffee, as I was obviously their dream girl (it was a joke, guys, and no, thank you). At last! A woman who understands me! No, more modestly, I was just someone who had been paying attention.”

Cyberselfish “contains a warning that was largely ignored.”

Borsook, an author and poet, began working in Silicon Valley in 1981, first as a technical writer for software companies. As she freelanced for various tech outlets and from her perch as a contributing writer to Wired in its earliest years, she began to piece together, as she put it in Cyberselfish, “a picture of an emergent social and political subculture, one that can seem dangerously naive and, at its worst, downright scary.”

Today, just a glance around will confirm that said subculture is no longer “emergent,” but horribly, frighteningly, society-destroyingly dominant. Fittingly, Cyberselfish will be reissued on September 15 by Tin House, an imprint of the independent publisher Zando. The three-decade plus history of the book traces back through a piece she wrote for this very magazine where she began to lay out its thesis. That essay, also titled “Cyberselfish,” ran in our July/August 1996 issue below a crystal clear subhed: “Silicon Valley, one of the country’s biggest recipients of government largesse, would like to bite the hand that feeds it.”

“No sector of society has benefited more and suffered less from the government than these guys,” Borsook, now 72, told me on a recent video call, reflecting on the central question that animated the essay. “So why are they so hostile to it?”

On the strength of that Mother Jones piece, Borsook was able to get a book deal—and that, she will tell you candidly, is when her troubles began. The manuscript was meant for _Wired’_s publishing imprint, but the deal fell through. The work was rejected by a second publisher after they’d bought it and paid her advance. “They killed the book,” Borsook says. “They said it didn’t have sufficient literary quality and wanted all their money back.” She was forced to repay them with money from Public Affairs, the publisher that eventually brought it to market. “I ended up being $65,000 in debt,” she says.

Two books titled "Cyberselfish." The one on the left is red with a pair of glasses on the cover integrated around white type. The one on the right is a light tan book cover with type in black, green and blue.

The original and 2026 versions of _Cyberselfish_Zando

While Cyberselfish made a splash upon its release and earned critical acclaim, its stridency and withering thesis also proved hard for some to swallow. It got a nuanced and tough review at Salon by a former Wired editor, Brad Wieners, who argued that some of its critiques of tech, and of the magazine where they both had worked, were outdated. “Borsook has us spend too much time coloring in a map of yesterday that does not correspond to today’s territory,” he wrote. Even a friend of Borsook’s, Elizabeth Weise, noted in her own review for Time that the book could be exhausting. “She is a ranter, (many friends suggested that Cyberselfish should just be called ‘Rant’),” Weise wrote, “who talks a mile a minute in sentences so encrusted with obscure cultural references that it’s often necessary to interrupt and ask for footnotes.”

Her critics could not dispute her brilliance. But as Borsook sees it, the book was both the height of her public profile and also the end of her professional life. “I cannot complain about the media arc,” she says. But, she adds, “It didn’t turn into anything and then I was never able to get anything published ever again, on tech or not-tech. A magazine article or a book. It was like some curse had been laid down on me. It was the weirdest damn thing.”

Financially, things got even worse. Eventually, she was evicted and lost almost everything she owned when she could no longer make payments on her storage unit. For several years, she only got by through free rent as a live-in host at an Airbnb owned by friends. Borsook has a permanent moderate traumatic brain injury from being shot, as she has put it, “accidentally on purpose” in the head as a teenager by a friend. While doing research for My Life as a Ghost, a 2013 performance and art installation about the incident, clinicians told Borsook, who had always believed her injury was mild, that it was better classified as moderate. “It was sort of a shock,” she explained to me by email, “and one of those moments telling me how much I didn’t want to identity as/admit to being disabled.”

Borsook also has severe chemical and scent sensitivities which date to childhood, but that she says doctors told her were probably worsened by the TBI. These factors make it difficult to find a suitable place to live, especially in housing-strapped Santa Cruz, where she’s long been based, or to work traditional office jobs; today, one of the things keeping her afloat is an ongoing GoFundMe a friend launched in 2024.

“I felt ashamed for most of the last 25 years,” she says. The book, she came to believe, “was bad and I was ashamed. That’s how I walked around.”

A black-and-white photograph of a woman in a jacket wearing a scarf around her neck gesticulating with both hands as she talks.

Paulina Borsook speaks during a panel at South by Southwest in Austin, Texas, in 2000.John Anderson/Getty

But decades later, after this cascade of misfortunes and a deeply internalized if unearned sense of chagrin, something changed. Through a series of events—which Borsook hastens to point out she had nothing to do with—the curse was at least partly lifted. In the last year, Cyberselfish received a new and respectful round of attention, helped along by the advocacy of fellow journalist and Nerd Reich author Gil Duran, who was disturbed and angry by Borsook’s erasure from tech history. In September 2025, he wrote a viral Bluesky post about what he termed a “mush-brained” Wired essay about selfishness in Silicon Valley that entirely ignored Borsook. The next month, Duran interviewed Borsook on his podcast.

The book’s new moment also has a lot to do with, frankly, how spooky some of the predictions are, many years on. Borsook saw clearly how the tech world’s contempt for government could turn into a desire to destroy it, something that’s come true with the destruction wrought by DOGE. She clocked how debilitating selfishness and blindness to privilege could turn into hatred for one’s neighbor, especially poor people on the streets of San Francisco and Palo Alto that the new tech glitterati had to walk by on their way to work. She also saw an obvious and worrisome gender essentialism emerging, specifically how awkwardness with women and a lack of success romantically was morphing into what Borsook called, in our conversation, “creepy socio-biological stupidity” and rank sexism.

Two close-up photos of middle-aged Caucasian men, both with menacing expressions.

Tech billionaires Elon Musk and Peter ThielShawn Thew/Pool/CNP/ZUMA; Tim Wagner/ZUMA

Now that Borsook’s worst and most apocalyptic visions have come true tenfold, people are ready to listen. She was featured in the New York Times last year, and a new profile by her old employer Wired, with whom, she writes in Cyberselfish, she often had a fraught working relationship, is in the works. (Her time at Wired, she has written, began happily, but was marked by a dawning realization that the magazine’s leadership was, as she saw it, sexist, not in their treatment of her, but “in their values and treatment of others.”) Last month, she sat for an interview on CNN, where she was hailed as the journalist “who saw today’s tech titans coming.”

“Totally Rip van Winkle all the time here,” Borsook told me recently by email. “Just confusing, as you can imagine.”

In a foreword to the republished version, Duran writes that the 2000 book was “work of prophecy,” adding, “Like most products of that cursed genre, it contains a warning that was largely ignored at the time of its publication. The disastrous results of this oversight fill today’s headlines and pose an existential threat to freedom and democracy.”

But Duran points out that despite this new round of respect and recognition, Borsook is still not in a stable place financially. “Paulina is looking at years of struggle,” he says. “She’s elderly and frail. It’s great this has brought some attention to her, but we all know that books aren’t going to take care of your financial problems. I hope we can continue to build and find ways to honor her work by making sure that she doesn’t have to suffer. Maybe one of these podcast millionaires can break off the dividends for the journalist who got it right.”

Borsook does see another slim silver lining in what’s happened to her lately: “The reputational renaissance I’ve had, you usually get posthumously,” she says dryly. “At least I’m still alive.”

A man stands with arms outstretched as he and other campers look at a flame.

Burning Man in Nevada’s Black Rock Desert is an annual draw for tech titans.Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post/Getty

The genesis for Cyberselfish was a kind of queasy fascination, “mongoose-to-cobra style,” as Borsook put it in the book, with Silicon Valley’s emerging cultural dynamics. It was a place full of “technolibertarians” (a word she popularized) who considered any and all government regulation to be oppressive, but at the same time happily took government funding—and lots of it. They went to Burning Man, they loved shooting guns, and they were likely to use some variant of the word “pagan” to describe their spiritual beliefs. They were often men who were very unskilled in dealing with women, and they were, as Borsook wrote, not deeply rooted in the places where they physically made their homes.

“Silicon Valley companies and executives and workers may identify themselves not with where they actually live and work and go to movies and send their kids to school but, more saliently, as members of a high tech archipelago,” the book explained. They were also—and here we feel the ground shake ominously, a slight shifting under our feet that presages a future, devastating earthquake—not very involved or very interested in politics: local, state, or federal.

The new Silicon Valley ruling class was so disconnected from government, in fact, that they didn’t seem to have a great understanding of why it existed at all, or how it might benefit them. Cyberselfish recounted a telling conversation Borsook had while spending a week at the “plushy Lake Tahoe getaway of a Silicon Valley guy who’s made it.”

“He complained,” Borsook wrote, “about how the local Tahoe building code wouldn’t let him alter the silhouette of his megachalet. I nodded sympathetically, yet pointed out that in Los Angeles, where there were no such planning guidelines until recently, plutocrats often tore down existing structures and rebuilt monstrosities that take up the entire lot, blocking their neighbors’ views.” In response, Borsook’s friend looked at her in puzzlement; the consequences of deregulation were quite literally something he never considered.

“He had never heard of the tragedy of the commons, where one sheep too many consuming more than its share of common resources destroys the whole,” Borsook wrote, “nor had he thought much about what participating in a community means.”

One of the unique strengths of Cyberselfish is that Borsook wasn’t just living and working among the emerging tech elite, but trying to date within it too. As Borsook experienced in spades, people often show themselves, unintentionally, in very revealing ways in romantic contexts. The book recounts a startling and depressing first date with a guy with a bungalow in Palo Alto and the world at his feet. It was a beautiful spring afternoon in the late ‘80s, and he picked her up in his BMW. She told him about living in Manhattan during the stock market crash of 1987 and seeing a young Black man panhandling with a sign that read “I need money to go home to North Carolina to get some food.” Borsook had been struck by this, a perfect distillation of how “hard and heartless” she’d found New York. In response, her date looked over from the steering wheel and sniped, “A long way to go for groceries, don’t you think?”

“I was stunned,” Borsook wrote in the book. “This from a guy who’d been a scholarship boy himself, who’d traveled all over the world in rough and not cruise-line conditions. His reaction was my first encounter with the strange lack of philos in high tech.”

“My mother used to give me no end of grief,” Borsook told me, over how she was unable to find a boyfriend even in such a male-dominated culture. “I used to say, ‘I can’t find anyone I relate to.’”

A woman in a black turtleneck shirt and jacket poses with arms folded next to a window through which the CN Tower can be seen.

Paulina Borsook in Toronto in 2000.Colin McConnell/Toronto Star/Getty

Borsook is not the person to talk to if you are looking to feel better about today’s tech bigwigs. She has a visceral disgust for Elon Musk and calls Peter Thiel “the Antichrist, as far as I’m concerned.”

Some of the technolibertarians of early Silicon Valley were laced with cyberpunk ideas like a disdain for national borders, an interest in freedom in all its forms, and a love for drugs. “Many people agreed with decriminalizing psychedelics or had unusual dealings in their intimate lives,” Borsook recalls. (The book uses the term “nerverts” to talk about computer nerds who engaged in then-more-uncommon sexual practices like polyamory and BDSM.) But as such instincts combined with a love of the free market and reflexive disdain for government regulation, it cohered into something approaching a religious belief. Today the leadership class of modern-day Silicon Valley is simply dominated by cultural and religious conservatism.

DOGE under Musk created conditions that even Borsook couldn’t have dreamed of, along with what she calls “the appalling collusion of Trump with the big tech companies.” She’s particularly struck by the irony of DOGE stripping away funding and protection for national parks. “They live in California with all this great natural beauty,” she says, impatiently. “How do you think that got preserved?”

“I don’t celebrate Steve Jobs, but he’d be rolling in his grave,” she adds. She’s also disturbed by how transphobic the titans of the tech world have become, pointing out that trans people have always been present in Silicon Valley: “It’s really weird. They’re all obsessed with a stupid, kind of retrograde idea of gender and masculinity.”

Borsook is also worried by the tech world’s messianic vision in of AI, their conviction that it will solve every problem. “We’re living in the effects of the casino economy,” she says. “Until that changes, how are we going to change Silicon Valley? If there’s a big crash in AI, that may give us a real corrective. Because it’s all made of papier-mache and spit.” But in her reflexive drive to understand how people use tech, she is interested in how many ordinary people are using AI chatbots to confide in, as an alternative to therapy or human confidantes. She’s reminded of the ELIZA experiment in the 1960s, which simulated conversation with a psychotherapist using tools like pattern-matching.

“Some people are so much more comfortable with [AI]. But why would I rather talk to this than a friend, or a boyfriend, or a therapist?” Borsook asks. “AI bores me.”

It’s common with prophets to ask them to predict the future, or show us the way to a better tomorrow. In the closing moments of my conversation with Borsook, I can’t resist the impulse to do so. When I tell her that I’m struggling with a certain, say, overwhelming sense of pessimism and despair lately, she doesn’t disagree. “I tend to be a Debbie Downer,” she says, with a laugh. Because she’s a writer and not a tech activist, “I tend not to be prescriptive on how I think about the world.”

“There’s so much fear right now around making a living,” Borsook adds, including among people in the industry. “How do you channel the fear into something productive? I don’t have an answer for you, but I think there are a lot of people who could find common cause who wouldn’t have in the past.” In the end, and despite what the isolationists of the tech and politics world might have to tell us, and whether we like it or not, she adds, “We’re all in this together.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Fore! Trump’s DC Golf Course Is Already in the Rough

When President Donald Trump takes flight on Marine One from the White House, he often gets a bird’s-eye view of a municipal golf course located at East Potomac Park, a national park better known to locals as Hains Point. Perhaps the flyovers inspired his recent ambitions to transform the beloved local links into a world-class golf course worthy of PGA tournaments.

Trump recently said construction on the new course will begin September 1. But his aerial view of this particular building site may obscure one of the park’s key features: Its water hazard.

Water from the Potomac River floods its sidewalks and drowned the city’s dreams of a modern swimming facility. Now, it threatens to wash out Trump’s golf fantasy and leave behind a disaster that will make the Lincoln MemorialReflecting Pool look like a minor embarrassment.

The “builder in chief” first publicly mused in May about remaking the East Potomac links. A month later, he toured the site with golf course designer Tom Fazio and announced on Truth Social that after “studying the dilapidated, worn out, and very dangerous and outdated Golf Course known as East Potomac Golf Links” he had concluded that “on this fantastic site, with water and unparalleled views of DC’s Monuments, we will build one of the Greatest Golf Courses anywhere in the World.”

In June, Fazio told Golf.com that Trump would move quickly to complete the course before he leaves office. “The president happens to be a guy of action,” Fazio said. “He wants to get it done now.”

“The president happens to be a guy of action. He wants to get it done now.”

Of course, any local with a fishing pole could have pointed out the glaringly obvious flaw in his plans. “Let’s be honest,” says Rebecca Miller, executive director of the DC Preservation League, which has sued the Trump administration over its plans for the golf course. “The island is sinking.”

The US Army Corps of Engineers created the 330-acre East Potomac Park in the late 19th century from a hodgepodge of material dredged up from the bottom of the Potomac River to widen shipping channels around the city. In 1897, Congress declared the artificial island a public park that would be “forever held and used for recreation and the pleasure of the people.” In 1917, park officials hired the legendary architect Walter Travis to design a public golf course, which opened in 1920. It was wildly popular, and in 1973, it was listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Unlike the excess of cost and amenities at Trump’s private courses, golf at the no-frills East Potomac is cheap—an 18-hole round on the blue course costs as little as $41, less for kids, veterans, and seniors. In 2025, people played more than 125,000 rounds of golf at the municipal facility. It’s not the sort of course Trump would ever actually play. But the park’s tantalizing views of Washington’s monuments and undeveloped riverfront must seem like so much wasted potential to the billionaire developer.

The environmental realities of East Potomac, however, present some major obstacles for fulfilling Trump’s vision. Ed Stierli, Vice President of Government Affairs at the National Parks Conservation Association, says when he saw the early renderings of Trump’s course, “One of the first questions I had was: Are they completely ignoring the landscape here?”

The simple answer is yes. Much of East Potomac lies at sea level within a 100-year floodplain, and various studies have found that the artificial island has sunk at least five feet since its inception. Meanwhile, the water level around it has risen more than two feet thanks to climate change and other contributors. Today, it’s not uncommon for the river to top the seawall and come up 25 feet inland after a big storm or high tide, leaving picnic tables marooned like rafts on a small lake. (The National Park Service did not respond to a request for comment for this story.)

“Good grief,” said Mark Mungeam, the president of the American Society of Golf Course Architects, who is familiar with Trump’s plans but was unaware of the extent of the sinking. “That speaks to the folly of this project.”

In June, I biked down to East Potomac to meet DC resident Alex Rosen, who recently founded the community group Save East Po to fight Trump’s golf course. While we talked, the sidewalk flooded as the tide came in. “There’ve been instances of where I’ve been cycling here, and you have to turn around right at the tip [of the peninsula] because there’s literally no way to get through the water,” Rosen said. “It’s a common occurrence.”

“There’ve been instances of where I’ve been cycling here, and you have to turn around right at the tip [of the peninsula] because there’s literally no way to get through the water.”

The regular flooding, along with years of underfunding and neglect by Congress, has taken its toll. The nearly 150-year-old seawall that surrounds East Potomac Park is crumbling. The sidewalk that runs around the perimeter of the 2-mile-long peninsula is in many places falling into the river and has been fenced off— unusable.

For years, Republicans in Congress have starved all national parks for funding, creating a backlog of more than $2 billion in needed repairs just in DC. But in 2020, it passed the Great American Outdoors Act to try to address the neglect. Even the $500 million the bill allocated for projects related to the National Mall ahead of America 250, though, wasn’t enough to save East Potomac Park from being swallowed up by the river.

In 2011, the National Park Service commissioned a geotechnical study to investigate repairing the East Potomac seawall. It concluded that the project would require sinking new footings down as much as 10 feet into the river and possibly more than 100 feet into the bedrock below all along the park’s more than three-mile-long perimeter. It was going to cost “millions of dollars per foot—not miles, per foot,” says Kym Hall, the former National Capitol Area director at the National Park Service who was involved in the discussions. “It is an astronomical amount of money.”

Instead, the Park Service used the new funding to shore up the seawall around the Tidal Basin to protect the Jefferson Memorial and the famous cherry trees, as well as part of nearby West Potomac Park. But Hall says that even with the new appropriation, NPS could afford to fix only part of the Tidal Basin, which is less than a third of the size of East Potomac Park. After years of careful planning the Tidal Basin restoration still cost $113 million and took two years of construction.

To do what Trump wants to do at East Potomac, “They would also have to address the seawall,” says Stierli, who notes that conservation and park advocates have long been in favor of fixing it. “Unfortunately, what’s moving forward here is almost a replica of the type of thinking we’re seeing with the Reflecting Pool: An administration ignoring climate, ignoring science, ignoring the Park Service’s own plans.” He notes that the administration has fired most of the scientists who’ve worked on East Potomac. Trump is just “charging ahead, completely detached from the reality of this site and its landscape.”

Excited to unveil the design for the East Potomac Golf Links renovation from Fazio Design.

Like iconic public courses of Bethpage Black & Torrey Pines, East Potomac will offer locals—of the National Capital Region—championship-quality golf at affordable, highly discounted… pic.twitter.com/foLZAAcsj3

— Secretary Doug Burgum (@SecretaryBurgum) May 14, 2026

It’s not just flooding that threatens Trump’s vision for East Potomac. “Hains Point is basically an artificial piece of land made up of dredgings and other waste soils, and with a very high water table,” says Peter Feldman, a hydrologist who did a stint at EPA working on the Superfund program. Putting a golf course there, he says, “would seem to be a poor idea generally.”

The DC government learned the hard way what sort of hazards lie below the surface of the artificial landmass. In 1936, East Potomac Park gained an outdoor swimming pool, with an attendant pool house that was renovated in the 1970s. Eventually, the National Park Service contracted with the DC government to take over its management. Former DC mayor Adrian Fenty even trained for triathlons in the only outdoor Olympic-size facility in the city. His administration famously installed a heater so that it could be used long after the rest of the city’s outdoor pools had closed for the season.

In 2014, the city decided that the time had come to upgrade the aging facility. Officials envisioned a state-of-the-art competitive aquatics facility that would include spectator seating and diving platforms, plus a renovated pool house. Preliminary engineering studies had warned that construction would be challenging. Just taking soil samples became an ordeal as boring holes quickly flooded.

“You can think of it like a sponge, or [like when] my wife gets out of the shower and leaves our bath mat completely soaked. It looks fine on the surface but once I start walking over it, the water all comes up,” Daniel Spielvogel, an engineer who co-authored a study on the site, would later explain at a contract dispute hearing. “It moves around. It squirts out on the floor. Those are the disturbance-sensitive soils that we want to avoid.”

Nonetheless, construction began in 2018, and almost immediately ran into trouble. Excavating the century-old site proved to be more like an archeological dig than a building project. Undocumented sewer, water, and electrical lines gummed up the works. An ancient pipe that flushed water from the pool into the Potomac River swamped the site along with groundwater that was not, as the contractor assumed, seven or 10 feet down, but just below the surface at roughly the same elevation as the river.

Workers installed sump pumps, only to see them swallowed up by the soupy soils that frequently caved in and threatened workers’ safety. When Spielvogel visited the site in September 2018, he found a “disgusting mess” of “muddy trenches and open excavations.” Things did not improve, and in 2020, the DC government cut its losses and, citing “significant flood risks,” abandoned the whole project. The site was filled in, and litigation ensued.

Ultimately, the city lost $14 million in taxpayer money, and residents lost an outdoor pool that had been in operation for almost 100 years. Today, all that’s left is a weedy lot, a monument to the risks of ignoring the realities of nature.

A pool in Hains Point

The former East Potomac Pool, pre-renovationNeill Williams/District of Columbia Aquatics Club

A photograph of building near a flooded mud pit.

Groundwater flooding the excavation site of former East Potomac pool house in 2020AECOM/DC Department of General Services

An empty lot in Hains Point

The site of the old East Potomac Pool today.Stephanie Mencimer

If Trump has a vague understanding that water and soil problems might be an issue for his championship golf course plans, his solution is not reassuring.

In October 2025, Trump shocked the country by demolishing part of the White House to build a ballroom. While discussing the project with the president, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum suggested using the East Wing debris to elevate the new golf course. “Trump told Burgum he thought the idea was brilliant,” the Wall Street Journal reported.

The administration began depositing some 30,000 cubic yards of White House rubble full of rebar, plaster, lead paint and asbestos between the fourth and ninth holes of the existing East Potomac golf course. Aside from the obvious environmental concerns, as a practical matter, covering East Potomac Park in White House wreckage is unlikely to solve its flooding issues. “I think they’re going to need a lot more soil than that,” says Mungeam. “That’s just a tiny amount of what would be needed to build a championship golf course.”

Here’s why: East Potomac Park is built on “hydraulic fill,” which is both too soft and too weak to support much vertical construction, like for restaurants or clubhouses. If new fill is put down too quickly, or if it’s too heavy, it can cause the existing land to slide or settle, and the site can take years to stabilize.

High groundwater will likely exacerbate the problem, as will climate change. Like Washington, DC, itself, East Potomac faces extreme vulnerability to storm surges from hurricanes, particularly as the sea level rises. The US Army Corps of Engineers expects the Potomac River to rise more than three feet by 2080. Not even tearing down the rest of the White House would likely yield enough material to create a PGA-caliber playing surface on Hains Point.

The existing East Potomac golf course is basically flat, making it perfect for beginning and amateur players. But championship courses require such technical features as deep bunkers, water hazards, and dramatic slopes. Because of the park’s high water table, the only way Trump could create those sorts of enhancements is to bring in tons of new fill to pile on top of the existing land mass, which only will create more problems.

The result of all the earthmoving and extensive heavy truck traffic needed to bring in so much fill would compact the existing weak soil, and lay the foundation for future drainage issues, Mungeam says. And simply filling in the flood plain won’t end the course’s water wars. When golf course designers fill in a flood plain like the one at East Potomac, he says they’re required to create a new one to equalize the water.

If Trump’s hasty and ill-conceived construction fills in too much of East Potomac Park, the chronic flooding will simply move elsewhere—perhaps to nearby parts of the National Mall, such as the Jefferson Memorial, where taxpayers just spent more than $100 million rebuilding the seawall. The water, Mungeam explains, “has to go somewhere.”

Like so many of Trump’s monomaniacal plans to make over DC without anypublic input, much less expert guidance, his golf course takeover triggered a lawsuit. In February, local golfers and the DC Preservation League asked a judge to block the administration from pursuing any further action at East Potomac until it had complied with various environmental reviews and procedural requirements. In May, the plaintiffs went to court to request an emergency injunction after reports that the administration planned to close the course immediately and start renovations.

“I don’t want another demolished East Wing. I don’t want another demolished Reflecting Pool.”

US District Court Judge Ana Reyes declined to issue an injunction barring further work on the golf course. But she, too, was suspicious about Trump’s intentions. In early July, Reyes ordered the administration to come up with a plan to regularly update the court on its plans before “the bulldozers are starting. I don’t want another demolished East Wing,” she warned. “I don’t want another demolished Reflecting Pool.”

Even with court oversight, opponents of Trump’s golf course worry that if Trump is allowed to move forward with the golf course construction, the whole park will go the way of the old swimming pool.

“My fear,” says Save East Po’s Alex Rosen, is that “they will dig a bunch of plumbing, they will move a ton of earth, and they will make a bunch of changes before realizing ‘oh, the water table here is actually pretty high.’” If that happens, he predicts, the administration will “throw their hands up and say ‘oops, our bad’” and leave behind a big, expensive mess that renders East Potomac unusable long after Trump leaves office.

At the same time, Rosen and other park lovers acknowledge that Trump is right about one thing: As with the crumbling seawall, the existing East Potomac golf course has long needed some TLC. But careful upgrades were already in the works before Trump got involved.

In 2019, the National Park Service signed a 50-year lease with the nonprofit National Links Trust that included a plan to rehab East Potomac. Legendary course designer Tom Doak was working pro bono, with community input, to preserve the essential character of the municipal course originally conceived by Walter Travis back in 1917. But in December, the Trump administration abruptly cancelled the lease.

“This is a municipal site,” says the DC Preservation League’s Miller. “This is not Pebble Beach, and it doesn’t need to be.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

What People With Eating Disorders Hear in the Ariana Grande Discourse

On July 31, in the final days of the North American leg of her tour, Ariana Grande released the music video for “Petal,” her newest single from an album of the same name. The video instantly reignited the years-long discourse over Grande’s body into something of a new low,with many presenting the video as irrefutable evidence that the singer is suffering from an eating disorder.

Reactions to those opinions, by turns emotional and censorious, have been intense. They revealedquestions about a public unable to cope collectively with a woman’s body. Are such comments inherently sexist? Do well-meaning instructions warning us to refrain from speculation ever have exceptions? What does it mean to express “concern” for someone in the public eye whom we don’t personally know? How does the frenzied discourse land for people with eating disorders?

I reached out to Dr. Rebecca Boswell, a director at Penn Medicine Princeton’s Center for Eating Disorders, to explain the complications of navigating these fraught conversations, and what patients with eating disorders often hear when a celebrity’s weight makes headlines.

There’s been intense debate about the politics of talking about people’s bodies. On one hand, such commentary is often sexist; we aren’t privy to larger dynamics that may be going on with someone. But do we have a responsibility to acknowledge that some appearances may not be healthy?

Many things can be true at the same time, and there’s truth in all sides of this debate. The media has a long history of idealizing and visually showcasing thin bodies in a way that can be extremely harmful to young, vulnerable people and to folks with eating disorder histories or active eating disorders. We know that media coverage and celebrity coverage can play a role in the development and maintenance of eating disorders, and that it’s a major risk factor for the development of body image concerns.

“Every time there’s a media story about someone losing weight or being on a GLP one, therapists hear about it.”

That context makes it important to have responsible reporting around other people’s bodies, especially because so much of this discourse centers around women and women’s bodies. It’s a bit of a Goldilocks phenomenon: What’s too hot? What’s too cold? What’s too big? What’s too small? That can leave folks feeling like there’s no right way to exist in a body. That being said, when there are really concerning things happening or something seems noticeably different, there are helpful and unhelpful ways to express concern.

What do you think when you read all the online diagnosing?

We can’t look at someone and assume things about their health or their mental status. That really is reserved for physicians and people who know someone well and can see changes in behavior or health status. Because someone can lose a lot of weight and have cancer, right? Or someone can be very malnourished in a larger body. There is no one-to-one correlation between thinness and health, and it’s doctors who can make good evaluations with physical exams to discern if someone is experiencing malnutrition or eating-related problems. So can family members.

When it comes to public messaging around concern, again, multiple things can be true. It can be true that it’s powerful when the public expresses concern about someone in the public eye, and that may help them and their teams to evaluate whether there’s a risk or a problem. But it can also be the case that expressing concern garners a lot of clicks, chatter, and a lot of revenue. It also tends to highlight surveillance around women’s bodies in a way that can still be really difficult for folks who have experienced that surveillance themselves, either from family members or from the world in general.

“It’s never a positive effect…They’ll say, ‘Can’t we just live and like not be evaluated based on our bodies?'”

How does that discourse typically affect someone with eating difficulties?

Every time there’s a media story about someone losing weight or being on a GLP-1, therapists hear about it. What we hear can range from “I’m so mad that I have to work on my recovery, and this person’s being glamorized for changing their body in such a profound way,” to “This makes it so much harder for me to stay committed to treatment.” There’s also “It’s so unfair that her people get to live in this like weight loss world, and I’m trying to live outside of it.”

I also hear a lot of sadness around the way that people’s bodies are judged and evaluated, not just in the context of media and culture. It can remind people of their private personal experiences of being judged or bullied or excluded because of the way that they look, and be really retraumatizing.

What about negative reactions to extreme weight loss? Can public concerns when someone famous looks so visibly [too?] thin ever help people with eating disorders?

It’s never a positive effect. What I hear is, “This is a really difficult thing to visually have to see, even when people are talking about how negative this is.” I often hear people saying that the conversations remind them of when they were really sick. They’ll say, “Can’t we just live and like not be evaluated based on our bodies?” They will also often bring up how they would have preferred people telling them that they were concerned about their weight.

I hear from people that it is hard when you’re very ill with an eating disorder to accept the possibility of needing care, and that expressions of concern from loved ones make a big difference—while public or group scrutiny is challenging.

What exactly happens to the body when an eating disorder is identified?

Different eating disorder symptoms affect the body differently. Intake restriction and prolonged malnutrition have profound effects on every body system. It affects bone density in a way that is often not reversible. It affects GI system function. It affects your kidneys, your liver, and causes cardiac stress. It can even shrink the size of your brain.

The way that the body adapts during malnutrition is incredibly survival-oriented. It slows everything down and shuts everything off to keep the machine running as long as possible. That is an enormous stressor on the body and requires really significant nutritional rehabilitation to repair tissue damage where it’s repairable, and bring your body back to a healthful state. The [real harm with malnutrition] is the speed and the amount of weight loss that really is most strongly correlated with those physical effects, regardless of the body size you started in.

GLP-1’s are everywhere. We have corners of the internet that outright promote anorexia. Is the discourse around body image worse than ever?

I do think that with the rise of GLP-1s, there’s been an increased focus on thinness in the media and the internet in a way that surveils and glamorizes thin bodies. I think that has a negative effect, not just on people with eating disorders, but on children and youth who are vulnerable to developing [eating difficulties].

You talked about the role of responsible reporting when writing about a public figure’s appearance. What does that look like?

That is where the nuance comes in. There have been studies that show, for example, articles that express concern in a kind and thoughtful way, but featuring really sensational pictures, can worsen people’s body image. There’s responsibility around the visualising of the story. There are kind ways to talk about concern that don’t involve [judgements] of like, “This person looks so bad or good” or “Go eat a burger.” Those kinds of comments are not useful.

Personally, I think there’s a lot of good, feminist intentions advising us against commenting on a woman’s body. But I also think that guidance can ignore the way that most of us, especially young people, discover images, which is on social media.

There’s a difference between observing and surveilling, between observing and judging. It is possible to observe variation in a non-judgemental way; that is a mindful, neutral practice. But once judgment comes in, that starts to bring up questions around what’s right and what’s wrong, and that’s where I think the harm comes in, especially part of the narrative around women’s bodies. It’s very uncommon to hear neutral observations around women’s bodies without judgement or shame. That ultimately detracts from women’s achievements, internal talents, and their leadership.

One middle ground I’ve seen being tossed around is that anyone concerned about a celebrity’s weight should reserve this concern for private conversations. What advice do you have for navigating these conversations, especially when talking to our kids?

Private conversations are incredibly powerful when it comes to suspected eating disorders and malnutrition because they come from a place of known love, concern, and respect. Many people who are experiencing problems with nutrition and eating may have limited insight into the severity of their problem. So loving support matters. Typically, I recommend that people focus on behavior and not appearance, because appearance can be really difficult for people to feel like that’s the focus of their loved one’s concern. So instead of saying, “You look very thin,” say, “I’ve noticed that you’ve been skipping meals. I’m worried about your health. I care about you. Is there anything I can do to help you?”

[When it comes to talking about a celebrity,] start by emphasizing that bodies come in all shapes and sizes. That people can be healthy with any body shape and size. Sometimes people can look visibly sick, and we don’t know why. That’s why health is private. We don’t always get to know what’s going on with people, even when they’re public figures. I might also ask, “How does this image make you feel about your body?”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Building a Soft Landing for Haitians Heading Back to the Island

A few weeks ago, I wrote about how elder care services will be devastated by the end of the Temporary Protected Status program that has offered legal status to about 350,000 Haitians living in the US, many of them healthcare workers.

Since then, I’ve heard some harrowing anecdotes from sources following the Supreme Court decision to end the TPS program, and President Donald Trump’s administration’s efforts to target Haitian immigrants. Real estate agents report that many in the community are considering selling their properties or placing another relative on the title of their homes. The Haitian American Chamber of Commerce of Florida told me that employers are reluctantly letting go of employees now that their work permits are no longer valid.

As several immigration policy experts explained recently, Haitian TPS holders will either try to remain in the US as undocumented immigrants or find another pathway to legal status. Many will likely be deported.

But there’s another option many TPS holders are considering: voluntarily returning to the island. In recent years, the country has faced growing instability due to gang violence that has ravaged much of Haiti, including the capital of Port-au-Prince. The US Department of State has warned Americans to avoid travel to the country, citing armed conflict between these gangs, the risk of kidnappings and other violent crimes, and a ban on US commercial flights to the main airport in Port-au-Prince after several planes were struck by gunfire.

But in more rural communities, building a life is still possible, MarieGuerda Nicolas, a Haitian American psychology professor at the University of Miami and co-founder of Ayiti Community Trust, told me. For many Haitians, they may prefer to leave the US on their own terms instead of living under the growing fear of deportation.

Headshot of MarieGuerda Nicolas, a Haitian woman with glasses.

MarieGuerda Nicolas, a psychologist, counsels Haitians returning to the island from the US. Photo courtesy of MarieGuerda Nicolas

Nicolas has been thinking about creating options for returning Haitians for years. When thousands of Haitians were deported during the Biden administration, Ayiti Community Trust partnered with several organizations in the US and Haiti to create a program that would assist them in safely and compassionately returning to the island. Called Ayiti Home Link, the program is basically a case management system that assists in accessing employment, housing, and other community resources. There’s also a resource guide that helps them navigate the nation’s bureaucracy—think driver’s licenses and passports—as well as listing available hospitals and health care clinics. Each region of the country also has a “hub,” as Nicolas calls it, a nonprofit on the ground that serves as the point of contact for someone just arriving in that area, should they need help settling in.

Ayiti Community Trust and its partner organizations have helped nearly 200 people return to Haiti. Now, with TPS protections gone, Nicolas anticipates many more will reach out for guidance. I talked to her on the phone last month about how this program works and what she’s hearing from the Haitian community during such a tumultuous time. Our interview has been lightly condensed and edited for clarity.

Can you tell me about the Ayiti Community Trust and the different ways the organization is helping TPS holders?

“What does resettlement of Haitians going back home look like? What are the models of resettlement across the globe so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel? “

Clearly, TPS and people really thinking about coming back home havebeen a central part of what the community foundation engages in. We’ve been really working around this idea of, what does resettlement of Haitians going back home look like? What are the models of resettlement across the globe so that we don’t have to reinvent the wheel? One of the things we learned is how important it is to make sure that it doesn’t feel like a crisis response or humanitarian crisis response. There are about eight organizations that have been working on a resettlement plan and process for the country. And the first thing we put out was the resource guide in English and Creole that allows people to know: how do you get your identification card? Where do you go to get your passport? How do you enroll your kids in school? Where are the clinics? And so on.

There is a lot of instability and gang violence in Haiti that has been highlighted in the media as well as by human rights organizations. Despite these challenges, is it still possible to build a life in the country?

Port-au-Prince doesn’t represent the entire country. Whatever happens in Port-au-Prince permeates the narrative of the whole country, and that’s just not the case. So somebody who’s from Cap-Haïtien, of course they can go back home. They had homes there. They have communities there. The cost of living is not the same as it is in the US, in terms of being able to go back. Would people like to be in a country that feels sovereign, where the political situation is stable, where there are more economic opportunities? Absolutely. But I don’t think that the people who are back home are feeling like, “Oh my God, I’ve made the worst decision.” I haven’t seen that because I think the stress of being here and of being in a space where you don’t know what could happen to you…I think removing that stress has been a huge part of it as well.

“We never want anybody to come back to their home feeling like they’re going to hell. We want them to feel like they’re going home with dignity and a sense of humanity.”

We never want anybody to come back to their home feeling like they’re going to hell. We want them to feel like they’re going home with dignity and a sense of humanity. As part of this process, we have to recognize the sheer amount of struggle and difficulties and challenges for people to leave one country and go to another country, even if it’s their native country. We are supporting people through that process in a way that is dignified, considering that the experience that they just had in the United States is an undignified, inhumane experience.

In the last few weeks, what are some of the things that you’re hearing from people here with TPS who are just now assessing their options?

It’s incredibly stressful. I’m a psychologist, and I’ve seen 12 domestic violence cases and eight suicide attempts. People are stressed about this situation. So it’s incredibly difficult for people who are feeling the impact of all of this.

At the same time, not all TPS holders are the same or have the same options. I’m talking to a family where the mom is in the middle of chemotherapy right now. So that looks very different from this other person who I spoke to whose husband has TPS, and she’s a US citizen. They have two kids, but he went back to Haiti to situate himself and get things settled for the family to join him. It’s very different for different people in terms of figuring out what they need to do. How do I need to do it? Do I go back to Haiti or take my chances in Canada? Do I take my chances in the United States and live with the stresses of not being able to leave my house for fear that I might get picked up?

How are organizations in Haiti stepping up to help TPS holders?

They are thinking about welcoming them and making sure that people come back home in a really meaningful way. I was in a meeting a couple of weeks ago, and one of the organization’s leaders said, “The Haitian diaspora has been incredibly good to Haiti. It’s our turn to return the favor and be good to them.” How powerful is that? I want people to know that it’s not like people in Haiti are not thinking about the need to support people coming back home. They are dedicating their time and energy to that.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

An Infamous Attack Ad Just Got an AI Resurrection

In 1964, Lyndon B. Johnson’s campaign ran a terrifying 60-second advertisement. It opens with a three-year-old girl in a field, pulling petals off a daisy while counting to ten. Then, a man’s voice begins a countdown, and a nuclear explosion fills the screen.

The advertisement only aired once, but roughly 100 million people saw it. The message was clear: Johnson’s opponent, Barry Goldwater, was a warmonger who would put American children in danger and bring nuclear armageddon. Johnson won in a landslide, and the daisy video became America’s most infamous attack ad.

Now, a Super PAC acting on behalf of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s Senatorial campaign is using an AI-generated, Frankensteined version of Johnson’s video to push a different message.

In this version, instead of being wiped out by a nuclear bomb, the daisy girl—resurrected via generative AI—lies on an operating table in front of an AI-generated version of Texas Representative James Talarico.

“She dreams of growing up, falling in love, becoming a mother,” a narrator intones. “The trans industry preys on confused children. Irreversible puberty blockers. Cross-sex hormones. Sex-change surgeries.” The Talarico campaign has stated that “James does not support gender reassignment surgery for minors,” and that “this AI deep fake ad is flat out lying.”

It’s not the only AI advertisement Paxton’s allies have produced this cycle, nor is it the first designed to attack Talarico’s support for transgender youth. Another advertisement, which ran in June, shows an AI-generated James Talarico dancing in a dress, singing a parody version of “My Favorite Things” from “The Sound of Music” reworked to be about giving girls hormones “til they grow mustaches.” Paxton has built his brand on ridiculing trans youth and making it as difficult as possible for them to access medical care. In May, he even took time during his runoff victory speech to call Talarico’s defense of trans youth “weird.”

This $10 million ad buy, though, might be the Paxton campaign’s most egregious attack yet. The ad was developed by the American Principles Project, one of the earliest groups to push anti-trans laws. Their ultimate goal, as my colleague Madison Pauly has reported, is to go beyond banning gender-affirming care for children and outlaw medical care for trans people of all ages. As the group’s president, Terry Schilling, admitted last year, he and his allies are starting with children because that’s “where the consensus is.”

The original “daisy girl” ad was effective because it was able to make people afraid. The campaign spot, which aired in the middle of a family television program, pushed parents to vote in the way they believed would protect their children from an unthinkable fate. Schilling and his allies hope to leverage parents’ fears of a supposed predatory medical establishment to push Paxton to victory.

But if previous attempts to remix the daisy video are anything to go by, the American Principles Project may not succeed. Bob Dole, in 1996, aired a version of the daisy video that concerned itself with teenage drug use. Audiences didn’t find that particularly compelling, and Dole lost. The Hillary Clinton campaign, in 2016, tracked down the actress who starred in the original video to shoot an ad for her presidential bid. Clinton lost, too. An atom bomb is terrifying because it is real, but an AI-generated three-year-old on an operating table is a manufactured threat.

This article has been updated to reflect a comment from James Talarico’s campaign.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Anti-AI Populism is Reshaping American Politics

Opposing data center construction is one of the most popular positions a candidate can possibly take right now—and those who fail to do so are starting to lose elections.

Will Lawrence, the Sunrise Movement cofounder who ran for Congress in Michigan’s Seventh District, won his primary on Tuesday. In his first major TV ad, Lawrence aimed at “tech billionaires” who he said want to turn Michigan’s farms into data centers that will “jack up our energy bills and ruin our home values.” Abdul El-Sayed, running for Senate in Michigan, used an under-construction OpenAI data center as the backdrop for a rally. “Until we protect local communities from the power of corrupting money and politics, we’re going to continue to see projects like this get pushed,” El-Sayed said.

Justin Pearson, a progressive candidate in Memphis who made fighting back against xAI’s data center construction a centerpiece of his campaign, just won his Congressional primary, too.

“Before data centers were all the news every single day, our community was fighting Elon Musk,” Pearson said at a recent press conference. Musk began building data centers in Memphis—and gas turbines to power them—in 2024. People like SpaceX’s billionaire owner, Pearson said, “view these communities as sacrifice zones.”

But the data center backlash isn’t strictly a Democratic-party issue. It draws on a current of populism—and suspicion of big companies, and fear of AI-prompted job loss—that goes beyond party boundaries. Opposition to data center buildout is nearly as high among Republicans as it is among Democrats.

That fact could be good news for Pearson. His Memphis-based district had a Democratic-voting, majority Black population, but the district was splintered and redrawn by Republican officials this year following a Supreme Court ruling that gutted the federal Voting Rights Act.

Pearson’s anti-data-center positions could play well with the rural, white, Republican-leaning voters who now make up part of his district. As the industry group Data Center Watch reported in 2025, 55 percent of politicians who have taken public anti-data-center stances are Republicans, who often raise concerns about tax incentives and energy grid strain, as opposed to focusing on environmental concerns. About seven in ten Americans now oppose the idea of a data center being built near them. Even in staunchly red states like Texas and Utah, politicians like Texas Agricultural Commissioner Sid Miller are warning those who won’t act on data centers that they might just lose their races.

“Republicans should be on this issue and we’re not,” Miller told the Texas Tribune this week. “The Democrats are, and they’re right on the issue. I’m not endorsing any Democrats, but we’re going to lose some elections in the midterms because of this one subject.”

Some Republicans are getting that message. Zach Lahn, who won the Iowa Republican gubernatorial primary in June, called for a full data center construction moratorium. Nancy Mace, running for governor in South Carolina, announced that she supports a moratorium, too. Even Ron DeSantis has signed legislation ensuring that “local governments maintain the authority to reject data center development in their communities.” And they’re not the only ones: candidates for governor in at least 12 states are running on data center moratoria, per Newsweek.

Data centers “broke American politics,” as Molly Taft of WIRED recently put it. The New York Times, in May, ran a headline calling data centers “the most bipartisan issue since beer.” Left-wing populists, far-right podcasters, and even the pope have all weighed in. (Will Lawrence, at a press conference, quoted Pope Leo’s recent encyclical on AI and the dangers of irresponsible technology development.)

“We know this crosses the political spectrum,” Pearson said in late July. “But the reality is the billionaire class are building these data centers in an attempt to destroy our water, to destroy our air quality, to take our land, all so that they can make more money. And at the center of it, that’s what we’re up against.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Good Luck Trying to Kill This Jellyfish

_This story was originally published b_y the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Immortality is generally considered the realm of the gods or science fiction, a fantasy that’s actively pursued by tech entrepreneurs in macabre experiments that include injecting “young blood,” cryopreservation, or resurrection in an AI afterlife.

But one ethereal, thimble-shaped jellyfish has already cracked the code.

As associate professor Maria Pia Miglietta, a marine biologist at Texas A&M University, explains, _Turritopsis dohrnii_has an incredible ability to cheat death.

**“**Turritopsis is unique, because when faced with unfavourable conditions—and I mean high temperature, physical cutting, starvation, chemicals in the water, you name it—when you try to kill the jellyfish, it doesn’t die.”

“Theoretically it never has to die from getting old, it just keeps hitting the reset button.”

Most normal jellyfish start off life as larvae. They metamorphose into polyps (tiny, stationary soft bodies) that bud off swimming medusas, which grow up to become adult jellies. Eventually, after reproducing, most will stop swimming, crumble a little and then die.

But the immortal jellyfish escapes that fate. It reverts to a juvenile form, and starts its life cycle again. The process is called “cellular transdifferentiation,” Miglietta says. The jellyfish looks like it’s dying and sinks to the bottom. Then—like a butterfly returning to a caterpillar—it shrinks into a ball, and within 24 to 48 hours, buds off a new polyp with the same identical genome, she says.

It’s one of “nature’s coolest tricks,” says reader Raquel López-Aragón, who took part in the Guardian‘s “Invertebrate of the Year” contest. “When this jellyfish gets old or gets hurt, instead of just dying like most animals, it transforms itself back into a baby jellyfish and grows up all over again. It can do this as many times as it wants, which means theoretically it never has to die from getting old, it just keeps hitting the reset button on its life.”

In the lab, where Miglietta studies them, these jellies can theoretically live forever. However, for some in the wild, getting eaten may eventually end that dream run.

“It’s so hardwired in humans to not want to die…and the absurdity of that being in a jellyfish…just entertains me to no end.”

Globally, there are eight accepted species of Turritopsis—but (so far) only one holds the key to eternal life.

Immortal jellyfish are only a few millimetres in size. But, if you know what to look for, they can be found in many places, from the Mediterranean sea, to the Atlantic, from the coast of Japan to Panama and Brazil.

As another reader remarks, the immortal jellyfish does “exactly what it says on the tin…They have the very enviable ability to simply turn back into a juvenile at any sign of stress, which is something that I’m sure we all wish extended to humans.”

With their delicate bodies and veil of tentacles, Lisa-ann Gershwin, a biologist specializing in jellyfish, describes Turritopsis as “exquisite” and “the most beautiful little creature.” But what makes them remarkable is their capacity for reincarnation.

Since ancient times, humans have speculated about eternal life, Gershwin says, it’s one of the things that unites us all: “It’s so hardwired in humans to not want to die. And I think the drive that we have to survive, and the absurdity of that being in a jellyfish—the juxtaposition of those two just entertains me to no end.”

Continue Reading…