You Can't Pay Us to Have More Kids
  April 22, 2025 Greetings, Meteor readers, It’s Earth Day! And also, it’s Taurus season! May we all feel some stabilizing, comforting energy over the next few weeks because boy, do we need it. In today’s newsletter, Nona Willis Aronowitz explains what’s behind the administration’s “make more babies” plan. Plus, we bid farewell to the pope. Bulls up, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONBaby bust: Yesterday, the New York Times reported that the pro-natalist Trump administration, concerned about the U.S.’s falling birth rate, has been brainstorming ways to get American women to have more children. Some of their ideas include five-thousand-dollar baby bonuses, menstrual-cycle education, and a National Medal of Motherhood (a tactic you might recognize from the Nazis). Notably missing: plans to subsidize childcare, parental leave, or any other crucial improvements actual families have been requesting for generations. Lots of incredulous reactions across the internet made that exact point: “How can you expect us to have more babies without a strong social safety net?” As someone who yearns for free daycare and paid maternity leave, I’m tempted to say the same. Yes, it’s darkly ironic that the Trump administration is calling for more babies even as it has made deep cuts to maternal and child health and opposed any repair of the U.S.’s woefully inadequate family policies. But the thing is, offering benefits to families doesn’t actually boost birth rates. In fact, many countries that provide robust support for parents, like Finland, Norway, and Germany, have birth rates below ours. There’s no evidence that Trump’s proposed policies would work, either. “Even the richest, savviest, most committed governments” are stumped, a history professor told Vox in 2023. “If such policies were discoverable, I think someone would have discovered them.” So the question you’re probably wondering is: What’s so bad about the birth rate falling? Most countries in the world are now below the “replacement rate” of 2.1, and the trend is most pronounced in the richest nations; the United States is at about 1.6, a drop of more than 20 percent in the last decade. Seen one way, fewer babies is a success story of women truly having control over their own lives, and—thanks to contraception access, education, and career opportunities—being able to make choices that may or may not involve children. Maybe those decisions “shouldn’t scare us,” writes feminist writer Jill Filipovic, “but should inform us that when women have more options and opportunities, women’s desires become far more varied.” Still, experts across the political spectrum agree that a shrinking population with more old people than young presents huge economic and humanitarian challenges. An aging society means fewer workers to keep society functioning—to grow our food, to build our houses, to care for the elderly. For many, the story of South Korea, which has the lowest birth rate in the world, provides a disconcerting glimpse of what happens when so few babies are born: 1 in 5 people in South Korea are over 65, and nearly 40 percent of those elders live in poverty. But no matter how valid these concerns are, Trump’s “solutions” are both demeaning (ugh, that medal) and historically familiar: The one way governments have temporarily bumped up birth rates throughout history is by oppressing women. Think Nazi Germany and its Lebensborn program, which used women as incubators for 20,000 “Aryan” babies. Or Ceausescu's Romania, which severely restricted abortion and birth control access to devastating effect. Even our own “baby boom” in the repressive 1950s partially relied on pushing women into domesticity. This brand of pro-natalism—promoted by people like J.D. Vance, Tucker Carlson, and Elon Musk—often goes hand-in-hand with racism and anti-immigrant sentiment. While immigration is often touted as a short-term solution to the U.S.’s low birth rate, the Trump administration’s cocktail of natalism and xenophobia makes clear that they don’t want more babies of all kinds, just white, Christian babies in heterosexual nuclear families. So, yes, I agree that we should seriously grapple with how to reshape society in the face of population decline. I just don’t trust this administration—with its blatant disregard for families and basic human decency—to do it. —Nona Willis Aronowitz AND:
 POPE FRANCIS DELIVERED HIS FINAL EASTER SERMON AT THE VATICAN THE DAY BEFORE HE DIED. VIA GETTY IMAGES
 COLUMBIA STUDENTS AND ALUMNI CHAINED THEMSELVES TO THE UNIVERSITY'S MAIN GATE LAST WEEK TO PROTEST THE DETENTION OF STUDENTS. (VIA GETTY IMAGES)
 FOLLOW THE METEOR     Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
The Secret War on Birth Control
  April 15, 2025 Hello, sweet Meteor readers, Happy Tax Day! This year I learned about the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, which sounded heavenly given that my family spent fully $15,000 on daycare last year. Imagine my disappointment when I found out that the maximum credit you can claim is 20% of $3,000…i.e. $600. Womp womp. (And Republicans have contemplated dropping even this piddling credit.) The state of childcare in this country is enraging. Today, we’re tracking the sneaky, scary erosion of birth control rights in America. Plus, Harvey Weinstein is back in court, and the “broligarchy” gets a dressing-down. Nona Willis Aronowitz  WHAT'S GOING ONThe secret war on birth control: From the moment the high court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, one Supreme Court justice signaled that birth control access was in danger. In a concurring opinion back then, Justice Clarence Thomas urged the court to re-examine “demonstrably erroneous decisions” like Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1965 ruling which granted Americans a constitutional right to birth control. So what’s happened to birth control since that fateful ruling? Last week, the National Women’s Law Center released a report addressing that question, and it finds that our right to contraception is indeed eroding. Since 2022, some lawmakers have wasted no time proposing or musing about bans on some forms of birth control; a nominee for Michigan attorney general compared emergency contraception to fentanyl. But there’s one big obstacle in their way: Birth control is incredibly popular. Upward of 90% of Americans believe it should be legal. So policymakers have turned to less obvious tactics to restrict contraception.  BIRTH CONTROL PILLS SHOULD BE AS CONTROVERSIAL AS DANGLY EARRINGS. VIA GETTY IMAGESLawmakers “know that they can’t attack birth control publicly or on paper, so they’re doing it secretly,” said Kimi Chernoby, senior counsel for reproductive rights and health at the National Women’s Law Center and the primary author of the report. Chernoby pointed to an innocuous-sounding bill called the Medical Ethics Defense Act, passed just last week in the Tennessee Senate that has a good chance of passing the House, given that a subcommittee already approved it. Not once does it mention birth control. But the legislator who sponsored the bill later said in an interview that the law would allow pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control. This sneakiness can reach the point of absurdity: Texas senator Bryan Hughes, the guy who crafted the state’s abortion ban, just presented a bill that would test wastewater for abortion medication and hormones found in birth control, because of the supposed health risk it poses “especially for pregnant women and children.” Oh, the irony. And to avoid political blowback, birth control opponents are also going after people on the margins, namely teens (by introducing parental consent laws for birth control) and low-income people (by restricting Title X and Medicaid recipients’ access to contraception). It’s a strategy the report calls “the anti-abortion playbook” because it mirrors anti-abortion activists’ journey from Roe to Dobbs: Start by targeting people who hold less political clout, and inch toward the mainstream from there. They’re also focusing on certain kinds of birth control like emergency contraception, which has been endlessly (and erroneously) attacked by rightwing lawmakers and institutions as a form of abortion, despite the FDA’s explicit clarification in 2022. “Some people are making a conscious decision not to listen to science,” Chernoby said.  CONGRESS TRYING (AND FAILING) TO PROTECT THE RIGHT TO CONTRACEPTION IN 2022. VIA GETTY IMAGESSo what can you do? Since this erosion is mostly on the local and state level for now, Chernoby suggests reaching out to state legislators urging them to codify protections to birth control, which a handful of states have done in the wake of Roe’s fall (and Thomas’ warning). Be sure to call your representatives if you live in Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Wisconsin—all states that have blocked attempts to pass a Right to Contraception Act in the past. And if lawmakers don’t listen, make your outrage known. Chernoby said that when these issues get widespread coverage, restrictions often get reversed. For instance, in 2023, Iowa’s attorney general paused payments to hundreds of sexual assault victims for the emergency contraceptive Plan B. But she backed down after an outcry from Democrats and reproductive rights advocates, who pointed out that paying for pregnancy prevention should be the last thing survivors have to worry about. “When these attacks start happening more in the open,” Chernoby said (and she thinks they eventually will), “I predict there will be a lot of resistance.” Let’s make sure she’s right. AND:
  FOLLOW THE METEOR     Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
Death By 10,000 Layoffs
  April 8, 2025 Greetings, Meteor readers, Congratulations to newly crowned NCAA champions the Florida Gators and UConn Huskies. But more importantly, congratulations to me for winning my first bracket pool ever! It only took three years 🥴. In today’s newsletter, we look at the woman-specific impact of layoffs at the Department of Health and Human Services. Plus, we’re all still thinking about The White Lotus. Shannon Melero 🏆  WHAT'S GOING ONDeath by (ten) thousand layoffs: Last week the Trump administration decimated the Department of Health and Human Services; in the words of one former employee, “shitshow is an understatement.” As a result, the organizations housed under HHS—the Center for Disease Control, National Institutes of Health, Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid— lost 10,000 staff members, effectively shuttering a number of departments. But not just any departments; the cuts will roll back decades of hard-won progress on women’s health research. Just take a look at what we’ve lost: Most of the CDC’s Division of Reproductive Health was laid off, including the team responsible for updating contraception guidelines and groups researching IVF and fertility clinics’ success rates (despite Trump’s promises to make the procedure more accessible). Three of the four branches of the Division of Violence Prevention were also eliminated. The division, established three decades ago, was crucial to framing violence as a public health problem, and yet last week, on the first day of Sexual Assault Awareness Month, all of the staff working on intimate partner violence prevention and sexual assault prevention programs were dismissed. The administration also fired all of the CDC scientists researching drug-resistant STIs. As is usually the case, these cuts will disproportionately impact Black, Latine, and lower-income women. The entire team working on the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, a project started in 1987 to reduce infant morbidity and mortality by offering maternal health guidance through the entire birth process, was laid off last week. “Black women in America are three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women,” one expert told Rolling Stone, and “we know this in large part because of the data collected and analyzed by the CDC.” And the timing of the system’s shutdown couldn’t be worse, a public health professor explained to Mother Jones: It “jeopardizes women and infants’ health at a time when maternal mortality rates in the US have been rising and access to maternity care is increasingly difficult.” So what happens next and how can you help? Lawyers contend that many of the layoffs are on “shaky legal ground”; some state attorneys general have sued to block them. If your state hasn’t joined the lawsuit, file a complaint with your AG’s office online and ask them to fight back against these layoffs. If there is a local domestic violence shelter or rape crisis center in your area, it’s a great time to call them and ask exactly what they need. The government may not care, but we still can. AND:
 MY CHILD'S FAVORITE COUPLE, MS. RACHEL AND HER HUSBAND MR. ARON. (VIA GETTY IMAGES)
 FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
Are Protests Now "Terrorism?"
  March 11, 2025 The weather is absolutely gorgeous in New Jersey, which means it is officially hiking season for me and my mini. We’re packin’ snacks, makin’ tracks, and yelling “dog” every time we see one. And speaking of sunny optimism, thanks to all of you who turned out for our International Women’s Day event at the Brooklyn Museum last Saturday! We loved seeing every one of you almost as much as Aurora James loved seeing Diane von Furstenberg.  ALL LOVE! (PHOTO BY REDENS DESROSIERS) In today’s newsletter, we look at the larger impact of a student arrest, plus a frightening report on who exactly is in our state legislatures. Plus, the second annual Meteor Madness bracket group is now open. From the trail, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONA green card didn’t save him: On Saturday, Mahmoud Khalil, a former graduate student at Columbia University in New York and a vocal member of the pro-Palestinian movement on campus, was arrested by Department of Homeland Security officers in the lobby of his university-owned apartment building. According to Khalil’s attorney, who spoke to NPR, he was told by the arresting officers that he was being apprehended because his student visa had been canceled. When Khalil, who is Palestinian, told officers that he was a legal permanent resident with a green card, they said that his green card had been revoked, too. He was arrested without a warrant, and for several hours, his lawyers and his wife could not find him. He is now in a detention center in Louisiana—although attempts to deport him were temporarily blocked by a federal judge on Monday morning. A little context: Khalil’s arrest comes on the heels of an executive order issued by Donald Trump which promised to detain and deport “Hamas sympathizers on college campuses” and any non-citizen who “endorses or espouses terrorist activity.” (There is no evidence he has committed a “criminal offense,” The Atlantic reported. ) But Trump is still taking a twisted victory lap, posting on Truth Social: “This is the first arrest of many to come,” he wrote, calling protesters “paid agitators” and “terrorist sympathizers.” Khalil has not been charged with a crime, nor is there proof that he’s a “paid agitator.” There’s no evidence that he’s said anything threatening or violent. He was, however, a very visible protester of the genocide in Gaza. He’s a leader of Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), a coalition demanding the school’s divestment from Israel. A quick search of Khalil will turn up photos of him at protests, sit-ins, rallies, and encampments. But those activities—per the Constitution!—are not crimes. So let’s be clear: Mahmoud Khalil is a political prisoner, punished for exercising his First Amendment rights. A lot of us are rightly up in arms about Khalil’s arrest—an arrest that feels ironic because Mahmoud Khalil is what the state would normally consider a “model minority.” He has a master’s degree from a prestigious institution, he’s a husband and soon-to-be father, and he presented a green card at the time of his arrest. But none of that saved him—all because he expressed views the government disagreed with.  PROTESTORS GATHERING ON KHALIL'S BEHALF IN NEW YORK CITY. (VIA GETTY IMAGES) So as social-media users have been asking: If basic human rights are not extended to people like Khalil, who is protected? If you can disappear someone with a green card, who can’t you disappear? These are fair questions. It’s also worth a reminder that other vulnerable people’s rights were taken away recently with far less outcry. In January, the bipartisan Laken Riley Act rendered due process a thing of the past for undocumented immigrants; the bill is apparently a driving force in the increase in targeted ICE raids. Just last month, more than 100 Venezuelans —some of whom had no criminal charges against them—were also “disappeared” after being detained in Guantanamo Bay. What’s being done to Khalil is egregious, but it’s not isolated. Like many immigrants, Khalil sensed he could become a target and reached out for help, only for it to fall on deaf ears. When the president of the United States promised months ago that he was coming for everyone who was against him, we should have believed him—and not waited until he came for someone with a green card. AND:
 FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
A Showdown on Capitol Hill
  March 4, 2025 Dearest Meteor readers, Wishing you a happy Women’s History Month…or at least an informative one. This month-long holiday was established in 1987, in the thick of the Reagan era—another historical moment of backlash against feminism. May we take the missteps and thrilling victories of ‘80s feminists to heart. In today’s newsletter, we lay out what to expect tonight during Trump’s speech to Congress (whether or not you actually tune in). Plus, a rare display of spine by moderate Democrats, and a few ways to make Mikey Madison’s support for sex workers more tangible. Re-reading Susan Faludi, Nona Willis Aronowitz  WHAT'S GOING ON
 AND:
 BILLIONAIRE EX-WRESTLING EXECUTIVE LINDA MCMAHON. (VIA GETTY IMAGES)
 FOLLOW THE METEOR     Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
What Idaho Did When You Weren't Looking
|
  February 12, 2025 Hey there, Meteor readers, The U.S. has now officially changed the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Given everything else going on, this may seem like a small and petty thing. But, for me at least, the stench of colonialism on this move is so strong it’s smothering. Erasure is erasure is erasure, no matter how big or small. In today’s newsletter, we look at what states have been doing on abortion while we’ve all been distracted with the White House. Plus, mark your calendars: There’s a mass boycott coming this month. Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONLook over there: The new administration has been generating record levels of news and destruction on the federal level. But while we’ve all been untangling the mess that the president is making of our lives, some states have been rolling out extreme anti-abortion measures—with less media attention than you might expect in more normal times. Luckily, Abortion Every Day founder Jessica Valenti has been neatly gathering all of these legislative measures in one place. So what are states up to? South Carolina is trying to criminalize everything: Valenti describes the state’s latest anti-abortion bill, The Unborn Child Protection Act (SB 323), as a blueprint for “the future [Republicans] want for American women.” SB 323 is aggressive in its cruelty: It removes exceptions (including for incest) from the state’s existing abortion ban; it makes IUDs and morning-after pills illegal; and it proposes criminal charges against anyone who receives an abortion. Missouri is trying to wish away its abortion-rights vote: Last fall, a majority of voters moved to enshrine abortion rights in Missouri’s constitution. But now, a state House committee is blatantly seeking a do-over by putting the issue back on the ballot, but with much stricter terms: The next ballot initiative would ban abortion after 12 weeks, and limit it severely before that. The people of Missouri haven’t changed their minds: The proposal was met with fierce opposition. Still, the new amendment only has to be approved by lawmakers; it doesn’t need petition signatures to get on the ballot. And Idaho is trying to charge people who have abortions with murder: First, the state introduced a bill that would add mifepristone and misoprostol to the state’s controlled substance list, making it a felony to possess or distribute these common, safe methods. (This move mirrors what’s already happening in Louisiana, Texas, and Indiana.) And then, last week, a state senator introduced a separate bill that would re-classify abortion as homicide—making Idaho the sixth state to consider such a bill. The fact that six states have introduced legislation that would classify one in four American women as a murderer is, it’s safe to say, big news. Let’s keep treating it that way. And stay vigilant: What is your state doing—or not doing—to protect abortion rights? AND:
 (PHOTO BY EMILEE CHINN/GETTY IMAGES)
  FOLLOW THE METEOR  Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
This Newsletter Has Bad Words In It
 February 6, 2025 Salutations, Meteor readers, As we head into Super Bowl weekend, I want to lay out what would be the best, most chaotic but still entirely possible timeline of events. First, Kendrick Lamar does a duet with Taylor Swift during halftime. It would look like this. Then Travis Kelce scores the first touchdown of the second half, looks directly into the camera, and says, “Are you ready for it?” The Swifties go feral. The Eagles comeback in the final minutes to win it all. Jason Kelce rushes the field, rips off his shirt, and written across his stomach is the release date for Reputation (Taylor’s Version).  In today’s newsletter, we return to reality with federal censorship. Plus, your weekend reading list. Ready for whatever, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONBad words: Trump’s war on DEI has taken an absurdist turn that’s ultimately quite serious. The National Science Foundation has been ordered to pull down or halt any research that contains certain forbidden words related to diversity and inclusion. According to reports, the list of banned words given to the NSF and other federal agencies casts an incredibly wide net and includes heinous phrases like “pregnant person,” “BIPOC”, “Black,” “Latinx,” “cultural differences,” “disability,” “diverse group,” “equality,” “gender,” “female,” “historically,” “inclusive,” “LGBT,” “racism,” “trauma,” and “women.” Just to name a few! Notably missing from the list is “male,” “man,” or “white.”  SOME MORE BAD, AWFUL, TERRIBLE WORDS (VIA INSTAGRAM) Now, if the word does appear in a research paper, the corresponding project will not be immediately thrown out the window. Instead, it will have to be manually reviewed to determine whether or not it violates the executive orders on DEI. Nonetheless, let’s be extremely clear: This is censorship throughout multiple federal agencies, and a blatant attack on scientific progress. Darby Saxbe, a professor at USC, also shared a “decision tree” that was included in an email to NSF staffers, laying out how to flag research for further review. “You can't design a study of humans without using at least one of these terms,” she noted, “which means that biomedical, brain, social science research is now on ice in the USA.” Let’s pause for a moment here. Sometimes it’s easy to imagine that fascism or authoritarianism is just the Big Actions, like putting people in prison without due process (already happened) or suppressing the media (in the process of happening). So censorship of this kind may be concerning but still fall short of setting off the big F alarm bell. But please know that I am standing in front of you, clanging a cowbell with all my might because censorship is a cornerstone of fascist government. It is the base Lego piece that holds everything else together and historians argue that we’re watching it happen right now. To demonstrate just how absurd a word ban like this is, the rest of this newsletter will censor all words on the list and mentions of any AND:
 WEEKEND READING 📚On those old tweets: Some people aren’t exactly surprised by On fire: An incarcerated firefighter in California shares what it’s like to do an impossible job. (Teen Vogue) On law and order: Is anything Elon Musk doing legal? A law professor breaks it down. (Vox) On making a comeback: So-called “natural” birth control isn’t new. But femtech apps are pushing a hard rebrand that has drawn in thousands of more  FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
“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. |
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.
"They Deserve Better Than Bobby Kennedy"
  January 28, 2025 Happy Tuesday, Meteor readers, Before we get into the news of the day, one important question: Have you filled out our survey yet? It’s the best way to take our relationship to the next level. Think of it like calling your senator, but more fun! In today’s newsletter, it’s confirmation time again, and we’re at the edge of our seats. Plus, some pardons you may have missed. Serving surveys, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONMaybe say no this time?: Tomorrow the Senate confirmation hearings begin for Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who is in line to become the next Secretary of Health and Human Services. This guy is a sack of contradictions: Before he became a Trump loyalist, RFK, Jr. was an environmentalist warning consumers about the dangers of pesticides and a co-founder of the Waterkeeper Alliance. Cool. But he also led an anti-vaccine advocacy group and has repeatedly spouted theories that go against longstanding science and medical research. His greatest hits include: Wi-Fi causes cancer, chemicals in water cause “sexual dysphoria” in children, and HIV is not the sole cause of AIDS. (Tell that to this French virologist.) So he’s not exactly suited for any job at Health and Human Services, let alone the top one. Of course, he wouldn’t be a Trump nominee if there wasn’t also an allegation of sexual assault dangling over his head. During RFK, Jr.’s bid for president, as we’ve reported before, his family’s former nanny Eliza Cooney alleged that he groped her multiple times in the late 1990s. The Washington Post also reported today that RFK Jr.’s cousin, Caroline Kennedy, spoke out against his nomination, calling him a “predator” who targeted parents of sick children. In a letter to lawmakers denouncing her cousin, Kennedy added that HHS employees “deserve a stable, moral, and ethical person at the helm of this crucial agency. They deserve better than Bobby Kennedy—and so do the rest of us.” In other words, senators will yet again be sitting down with an unqualified and potentially dangerous white man to assess whether or not he is fit to have a job that the average American and 24,000 physicians can plainly see he cannot do. But there is still some hope here. Last week’s confirmation of alleged abuser Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense was a 50/50 vote, with Vice President J.D. Vance casting the tie-breaker. If every Democrat and even a small handful of Republican senators vote no on Kennedy, then the confirmation won’t pass. (Here are all the members of the Senate Finance Committee, if you’re wondering who to call.) A report from the Wall Street Journal has already identified two GOP senators who could go either way on the vote: pro-vaccine senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and James Lankford (R-OK), an anti-abortion senator who’s wary of RFK, Jr.’s previously pro-choice stance. Polio survivor Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has also warned that any nominee should “steer clear” of undermining the polio vaccine and reportedly refused to meet with RFK, Jr. Even Mike Pence is opposed to this appointment, and it’s infuriating that any of us have to agree with Mike Pence on anything. To those senators still on the fence, I also have to ask: Is approving this man worth the message it sends to the millions of women like Eliza Cooney who have to sit and watch their abusers continue to rise? As Cooney put it: “We can do better.” AND:
 FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
