“You can’t rewrite a statute with a Sharpie”
![]() January 30, 2025 Greetings, Meteor readers, Too much is happening at once. ![]() In today’s newsletter, we take a close look at the many anti-DEI actions Trump has put in motion, and what they mean in real life. Plus, what to expect at this year’s Grammys. Resting my eyes, Shannon Melero ![]() WHAT'S GOING ONThe ripple effects of the DEI crackdown: The morning after the aircraft collision over the Potomac River on Wednesday night, Trump was busy blaming the DEI policies of Biden and Obama for the crash. “Their policy was horrible,” he said, “and their politics was [sic] even worse.” His evidence-free rant is just the latest move of his administration’s obsessive, all-out assault on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. So what do Trump’s slew of executive orders, freezes, and attacks on programs that help people of color, women, and LGBTQ+ people thrive actually mean? Before we parse out what we should expect, let’s first review what’s happened. On his very first day, Trump overturned Biden’s executive order on DEI, which, among other things, ordered all federal agencies to come up with equity action plans, which address discrimination in the workplace. The second Trump executive order, handed down the same day, went further, ending any DEI activities in the federal government and reversing core policies that have been around for decades, including a Lyndon B. Johnson-era order that required any workplace taking federal dollars to implement equal opportunity measures. The Trump administration made clear just how much they mean it: Tens of thousands of federal employees got an email directing them to report any colleagues trying to “disguise” DEI “by using coded or imprecise language” and promising that they’d face “adverse consequences” if they didn’t. This effort extends throughout the government. The Department of Justice was ordered to halt ongoing cases in its civil rights division, including police reform agreements negotiated in the final days of the Biden administration. The Department of Education removed more than 200 web pages with guidance for schools on how to implement DEI policies and create welcoming campus environments. And just last night, Trump issued an order that threatened to remove federal funding from schools teaching about things like transgender identity, white privilege, and unconscious bias (though it’s unclear how much of this will actually happen, given how difficult it is for the federal government to dictate curricula.) So, are you ready for the hopeful part? “These executive orders cannot change civil rights law,” says Amalea Smirniotopoulos, senior policy counsel at the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund. “You can’t rewrite a statute with a Sharpie.” That means that hiring, say, only white people is still illegal. Denying a woman a promotion just because of her gender is still illegal. Firing someone for being gay is still illegal, even according to the rightwing Supreme Court. Which also means that if any federal employee experiences discrimination or workplace harassment, they still have rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and can file a lawsuit against the federal government. And despite the administration’s attempt to frame DEI programs as “illegal and immoral,” the programs it’s ending “are lawful and have been upheld by courts in many cases,” says Smirniotopoulos, pointing to the NAACP’s success in winning an injunction to stop an anti-DEI executive order issued by Trump during his first term. She predicts these newer orders will face challenges, too. But that doesn’t mean this crackdown won’t have far-reaching effects. There’s the law, and then there’s enforcement. “The reason DEI programs exist in the first place is to help with compliance of civil rights laws,” Smirniotopoulos says. “If we see the federal government roll them back, there is a risk that they’ll allow discrimination to fester among their own workforce.” In other words, you’re still free to file a lawsuit alleging discrimination—but the guardrails and systems that might discourage discrimination to begin with may be deteriorating. This deterioration could be widespread, given how the current administration is “encouraging” the private sector to roll back DEI. Since the election, many private companies—from Walmart to McDonald’s to Amazon—already have. Anti-DEI efforts will also rob federal employees of things like volunteer affinity groups. “Employees are feeling that the loss of these programs [will deprive] them of community and the social network that’s essential in any workplace,” Smirniotopoulos says. “Your ability to succeed in your workplace isn’t just about your raw intelligence, it’s also about knowing how to navigate workplace dynamics, knowing the culture and norms. Those social factors can play just as much of a role in whether someone can thrive or get promoted.” For the federal government, the ultimate effect may be a working environment where swaths of the population feel unwelcome—which will hurt hiring and retention for government positions. (Many suspect this is part of the point; the president of the American Federation of Government Employees called the anti-DEI orders “a smokescreen for firing civil servants.”) A diminished federal workforce affects everything from getting through airport security quickly to making sure we have clean water. “When the federal government works well, it’s invisible,” Smirniotopoulos says. “When the federal workforce is attacked, that ultimately hurts all of us.” If you’re experiencing workplace discrimination or harassment: The Equal Opportunity Employment Commission technically still exists, but to be safe, we recommend contacting independent organizations like the ACLU, NAACP, or National Women’s Law Center to get advice on how to proceed. —Nona Willis Aronowitz AND:
![]() Two Pop Stars, Both Alike in DignityBeyoncé and Taylor Swift face off at the GrammysBY SCARLETT HARRIS ![]() IN FAIR LOS ANGELES WHERE WE LAY OUR SCENE, FROM ANCIENT GRUDGE BREAK TO NEW MUTINY. (VIA GETTY IMAGES) It’s been an incredible year for women in pop, and this weekend at the 67th Grammy Awards the race for the highly coveted Album of the Year award is stacked with the gals who ruled the summer. Billie Eilish, Sabrina Carpenter, Chappell Roan, and Charlie XCX are among the nominees. And while each of these women has a strong chance of taking home the gold, the real competition is between two titans of the industry—Taylor Swift and Beyoncé, who have 157 nominations and 46 wins between them. This weekend promises to be a kind of referendum on the notoriously racist and old-fashioned music establishment. All eyes will be on whether Bey, with “Cowboy Carter,” can finally clinch the Album of the Year award that has eluded her her entire career—or whether Grammy darling, Swift, will add to her already record-breaking tally of four AOTY golden gramophones with “The Tortured Poets Department.” The last time they were pitted against each other in this category was at the 2010 Grammys, for “I Am… Sasha Fierce” and “Fearless,” respectively, which Swift went on to win. This followed Kanye West’s infamous “I’mma let you finish” screed at the MTV Video Music Awards the year prior, in which he interrupted Swift’s acceptance speech for Best Female Video for “You Belong With Me,” asserting that Beyoncé had one of the best videos of all time and should have won for “Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It).” (He wasn’t wrong.) Ever the consummate professional, Bey had invited a deer-in-the-headlights, 19-year-old Swift back on stage during her own acceptance for Video of the Year so she could give the speech truncated by West. ![]() WEEKEND READING 📚On stoking division: Anti-immigration policies are creating a wider divide in already fragile Latine communities. One Mexican/Puerto Rican writer shares what that looks like for her family. (New York Times) On letting the dead rest: A new documentary about Selena Quintanilla called Selena y Los Dinos has some wondering where to draw the line between honoring late artists and profiting off their tragic stories. (Refinery 29) On sex and other cities: A new character has emerged from the manosphere: the “passport bro.” While that may sound like a cool name for travel buddies, it’s just the latest depraved rebrand of sex tourism. (The Baffler) ![]() FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays.
|
Two Pop Stars, Both Alike in Dignity
Beyoncé and Taylor Swift face off at the Grammys
BY SCARLETT HARRIS
It’s been an incredible year for women in pop, and this weekend at the 67th Grammy Awards the race for the highly coveted Album of the Year award is stacked with the gals who ruled the summer. Billie Eilish, Sabrina Carpenter, Chappell Roan, and Charlie XCX are among the nominees. And while each of these women has a strong chance of taking home the gold, the real competition is between two titans of the industry—Taylor Swift and Beyoncé, who have 157 nominations and 46 wins between them.
This weekend promises to be a kind of referendum on the notoriously racist and old-fashioned music establishment. All eyes will be on whether Bey, with “Cowboy Carter,” can finally clinch the Album of the Year award that has eluded her her entire career—or whether Grammy darling, Swift, will add to her already record-breaking tally of four AOTY golden gramophones with “The Tortured Poets Department.”
The last time they were pitted against each other in this category was at the 2010 Grammys, for “I Am… Sasha Fierce” and “Fearless,” respectively, which Swift went on to win. This followed Kanye West’s infamous “I’mma let you finish” screed at the MTV Video Music Awards the year prior, in which he interrupted Swift’s acceptance speech for Best Female Video for “You Belong With Me,” asserting that Beyoncé had one of the best videos of all time and should have won for “Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It).” (He wasn’t wrong.) Ever the consummate professional, Bey had invited a deer-in-the-headlights, 19-year-old Swift back on stage during her own acceptance for Video of the Year so she could give the speech truncated by West.
The two have been eerily linked ever since: fans noticed Beyoncé dropped her groundbreaking self-titled visual album at midnight on Swift’s birthday in 2013. The streaming debut of Swift’s The Eras Tour concert film was released on the 10th anniversary of that self-titled album. (Queen Bey showed up to the film’s red carpet premiere, quashing any lingering rumors of beef between the two.) They are the only two women to debut a single at number one on the country charts. And both dominated the cultural conversation in 2024, a year full of women taking back and transforming pop music.
Despite pretty much every other awards body and cultural arbiter giving Bey her dues, and despite a trio of standout albums in BEYONCÉ, Lemonade, and Renaissance, the Grammys routinely withholds AOTY from her (this is her fifth nomination). As writer Kathleen Newman-Bremang explained last year—after Jay-Z accepted the Dr. Dre Global Impact Awards at the Grammys and slammed the Academy in his acceptance speech— Black music is often relegated to the genre categories like R&B, rap, and dance, which Renaissance won in in 2023. Albums by Black women seldom win the general categories like Album of the Year—which was last won by a Black woman in 1999 with The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill.
“[Calling] Black artists the greatest of all time… would require admitting the power of Black art, it would require acknowledging the history of cultural pillaging and musical theft of Black work that the industry was built on,” Newman-Bremang wrote at the time.
Cowboy Carter is a direct response to that kind of racism in the industry, featuring Linda Martell, a Black country pioneer, and her modern-day contemporaries Shaboozey, Tanner Adell, Brittney Spencer, Tiera Kennedy and Reyna Roberts. Despite being her most critically polarizing album in over a decade, Bey will probably win for what is, in my opinion, her weakest body of work since 4. That is if Swift doesn’t best her for the similarly conflictingly reviewed and unwieldy The Tortured Poets Department.
Of course, Grammy voters might surprise us and hand the award over to one of the freshly crowned pop princesses, like Sabrina Carpenter or Chappell Roan. But the fact that Beyoncé will actually be attending the award ceremony this year tells me she expects to be leaving with some hardware. Or perhaps everyone’s just there to have a good time and we’ll still be waiting for an AOTY award in another 15 years (you know, if society holds up in the meantime).
Donald Trump Signs Laken Riley Act Into Law
Originally published on January 24.
Updated January 30.
Donald Trump has signed the Laken Riley Act into law, making it the first of his second term. During the signing, Trump also announced his intentions to authorize ICE to detain migrants at Guantanamo Bay, where he claimed there are "30,000 beds to detain the worst criminal aliens threatening the American people." Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth praised the decision on Fox News, referring to it as a humane option to manage deportations. But according to Vince Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, "The facility is decrepit. It's been falling apart. It's in disrepair...And, as a practical matter, the conditions that would be created if people went there would be so substandard that it would give people opportunities to file lawsuits around the conditions of their confinement while they're being deported."
Congress passed the Laken Riley Act just last week. Named for a young woman in Georgia who was killed by a Venezuelan undocumented immigrant, it was slated to be among the first laws passed by Trump's administration (although his hand must be tired from the other stuff he’s been signing) and it is ominously fitting that the first piece of legislation he executes is an anti-immigration bill.
So what’s in it? The top line item is that any undocumented immigrant accused of non-violent crimes like theft, either in the U.S. or their home country, will now be subject to mandatory indefinite detention by ICE. They will not be allowed bond hearings in their criminal case and, once in ICE custody, can be held until deportation, which will be the most likely outcome if they’re unable to leave the detention center for preliminary trial hearings. The bill also allows for state attorneys general to sue the federal government on behalf of residents who believe they’ve been harmed by immigration policies.
To be clear, there are already policies in place for detaining and deporting convicted violent offenders. But this bill expands those policies to include anyone arrested or charged with “theft, larceny, burglary, shoplifting” or assault against a law enforcement officer, regardless of any conviction or lack thereof. “What's dangerous about this bill is that it takes away some of the basic fundamental due process tenets of our legal system," one legal expert told NPR.
This bill is a direct response to the particulars of Laken Riley’s case: The man who murdered her had previously been charged with shoplifting, and supporters of the bill argue that had he been deported after that minor crime, Laken Riley would still be alive. That is possible—but overriding the Fifth Amendment for a vast number of people is not a sensible way to protect women from being murdered. (Riley was one of the roughly 2000 women killed by men in this country every year. Fortunately, in response to these crimes, two years ago, the White House formed the first-ever government plan to end gender-based violence… Oh, wait.)
The Laken Riley Act isn’t just a GOP favorite; 12 Democrats voted for it, too—see which here—which shows just how many people believe that immigrants to the U.S. commit more crimes than its citizens. (Which, of course, is demonstrably false.) Immigrants have long been used by the GOP as boogeyman responsible for America’s troubles, and now they’ve got the tools they need to disappear as many as possible.