Sam Rosenfeld
@samrosenfeld.bsky.social
3.6K followers 630 following 290 posts
Associate Professor of Political Science, Colgate University. Author of "The Polarizers": https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo24660595.html
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Cringy 2017 protest-brunch energy matters a lot right now. Trump has used deployment in four cities as a provocation of violence & further crackdown. With protestors largely staying disciplined, he's been failing. A day of nationally distributed, localized, peaceful protests drives the failure home.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Henry's writing about about institutional actors more than the mass public, but the basic collective-action point relates to mass protests as well--a means of signaling the scope of opposition, unafraid and peaceful. Put me in mind of the No Kings day planned for 10/18, which can't come soon enough.
himself.bsky.social
"It wanted to signal strength. Instead, it’s revealing its weakness. The administration’s need to break the academy is forcing it to make a desperately risky gamble." www.nytimes.com/2025/10/08/o...
Opinion | You Beat Trumpism by Banding Together. It’s as Hard and as Simple as That.
www.nytimes.com
Reposted by Sam Rosenfeld
profsaunders.bsky.social
“This battle holds bigger lessons. The greatest weapon that the forces of regime change possess is the fear of inevitability. If everyone believes that Mr. Trump will succeed in reshaping America, he will.”

A great @himself.bsky.social column in the @nytimes.com.

www.nytimes.com/2025/10/08/o...
Opinion | You Beat Trumpism by Banding Together. It’s as Hard and as Simple as That.
www.nytimes.com
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
He's gish-galloped himself.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Theory: Trump's governance is so hardwired to generate crisis & chaos and multiple media stories at once (typically a problem for Dems struggling to break through the noise) that it's actually making it hard for the GOP to effectively focus attention and jam Dems on the shutdown.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
The Dems can't abide that, but they've been reluctant to actually bring themselves to say any of it out loud. It's bracing to see a House member at least start to do so. /end
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
What the GOP position boils down to is that a few Dems should be made to eat shit and affirmatively vote for a bad-faith bill that's substantively objectionable and guaranteed to be reneged-on thru rescission and impoundment--*even though those votes are not actually necessary.*
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
But what's genuinely crazy-making is that even that leverage is in a true sense illusory. At any moment it's in the Republicans' power to jettison the 60-vote requirement and pass whatever they want.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Dems are in the minority across the board. They're feeling intense pressure to "fight," which means shutting down the entire govt via the one thin piece of leverage they have--the weird supermajority requirement for cloture on appropriations votes. It's a weak position to be in.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Divided government presents a perfectly legible clash of democratic mandates--"the people gave us control of the House to check this president!" "I'm your president and will stand up to extremists in Congress!" But right now Republicans have unified control of the government.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
It hasn't penetrated the discourse sufficiently how unusual it is to be in a shutdown-via-filibuster. All the major past shutdowns have stemmed from divided party control of govt. (Though Trump's weird border-wall shutdown started in the lame duck just prior to divided govt.)
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
But the vibe *I’m* perceiving from “Dems need to fight” types seems surprisingly congenial to this position. It has the benefit of being true and making sense: We can’t make a deal with you because you’re going to reneg, so go ahead and take ownership of your own terrible budget.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
No Senate Dem wants to say that because they want to talk about the popular substantive demands they’re making instead—and presumably because they think that explicitly welcoming the GOP’s filibuster-nuking will be seen as abdication by their base.
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Is this the first Dem MC to say this explicitly? That the reason this is the GOP’s shutdown isn’t because they “refuse to negotiate” or whatever but because they in fact have the power at any moment to nuke the filibuster and pass whatever they want to keep the govt operating?
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
We also feel puny tbc! Our diagnoses of hollowness and the consequences of civic and organizational decline are easier to make than are plausible prescriptions to cure them.
Reposted by Sam Rosenfeld
maxkennerly.bsky.social
To put this into context, the judicial warrant for the search at the Hyundai plant named just four people.

Relying on that warrant, ICE detained nearly 500 people. DHS admitted that included U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and people lawfully here on visas.
chrisgeidner.bsky.social
This is a paragraph Brett Kavanaugh wrote on his little computer and then sent out into the world:

Moreover, as for stops of those individuals who are legally in the country, the questioning in those circumstances is typically brief, and those individuals may promptly go free after making clear to the immigration officers that they are U.S. citizens or otherwise legally in the United States.
Reposted by Sam Rosenfeld
nicholasgrossman.bsky.social
US law created to punish human rights violators—sanctioning officials personally instead of whole countries, since leaders usually don’t feel broad sanctions, passing the pain onto the population—now deployed to punish a Brazilian judge for upholding Brazilian law in the face of a coup attempt.
wendysiegelman.bsky.social
US Treasury sanctions Brazilian judge Alexandre de Moraes under the Global Magnitsky Act- he is overseeing investigation into Trump ally and former President Jair Bolsonaro

The act was created to punish Russian officials responsible for death of Sergei Magnitsky

home.treasury.gov/news/press-r...
Treasury Sanctions Alexandre de Moraes
WASHINGTON — Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is sanctioning Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) justice Alexandre de Moraes (de Moraes), who has used his position to authorize arbitrary pre-trial detentions and suppress freedom of expression.  “Alexandre de Moraes has taken it upon himself to be judge and jury in an unlawful witch hunt against U.S. and Brazilian citizens and companies,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent.  “De Moraes is responsible for an oppressive campaign of censorship, arbitrary detentions that violate human rights, and politicized prosecutions—including against former President Jair Bolsonaro.  Today’s action makes clear that Treasury will continue to hold accountable those who threaten U.S. interests and the freedoms of our citizens.”  Today’s action is being taken pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13818, which builds upon and implements the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act and targets perpetrators of serious human rights abuse around the world.  Today’s action follows the U.S. Department of State’s revocation of de Moraes’s visa and those of his immediate family members on July 18, 2025, for their complicity in aiding and abetting de Moraes’ unlawful censorship campaign against U.S. persons on U.S. soil.DE MORAES’ ABUSIVE JUDICIAL OVERREACHDe Moraes was appointed to the STF in 2017.  Since that time, de Moraes has become one of Brazil’s most powerful individuals, wielding immense authority through his oversight of expansive STF investigations.  De Moraes has investigated, prosecuted, and suppressed those who have engaged in speech that is protected under the U.S. Constitution, repeatedly subjecting victims to long preventive detentions without bringing charges.  Through his actions as an STF justice, de Moraes has undermined Brazilians’ and Americans’ rights to freedom of expression.  In one notable instance, de Moraes arbitrarily detained a journalist for over a year in retaliation for exercising freedom of expression.De Moraes has targeted opposition politicians, including former President Jair Bolsonaro; journalists; newspapers; U.S. social media platforms; and other U.S. and international companies.  U.S.-based journalists and U.S. citizens have not been spared from de Moraes’ extraterritorial overreach.  De Moraes has imposed preventive detention on and issued a series of preventive arrest warrants against journalists and social media users, some of whom are based in the United States.  He has also directly issued orders to U.S. social media companies to block or remove hundreds of accounts, often those of his critics and other critics of the Brazilian government, including U.S. persons.  De Moraes has frozen assets and revoked passports of his critics; banned accounts from social media; and directed Brazil’s federal police to raid his critics’ homes, seize their belongings, and ensure their preventive detention. De Moraes is being sanctioned pursuant to E.O. 13818 for being a foreign person who is responsible for or complicit in, or has directly or indirectly engaged in, serious human rights abuse.GLOBAL MAGNITSKYBuilding upon the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, E.O. 13818 was issued on December 20, 2017, in recognition that the prevalence of human rights abuse and corruption that have their source, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States, had reached such scope and gravity as to threaten the stability of international political and economic systems. Human rights abuse and corruption undermine the values that form an essential foundation of stable, secure, and functioning societies; have devastating impacts on individuals; weaken democratic institutions; degrade the rule of law; perpetuate violent conflicts; facilitate the activities of dangerous persons; and undermine economic markets.  The United States seeks to impose tangible and significant consequences on those who commit serious human rights abuses or engage in corruption, as well as to protect the financial system of the United States from abuse by these same persons.SANCTIONS IMPLICATIONSAs a result of today’s action, all property and interests in property of the designated or blocked person described above that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC.  In addition, any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked. Unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC, or exempt, OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of blocked persons. Violations of U.S. sanctions may result in the imposition of civil or criminal penalties on U.S. and foreign persons.  OFAC may impose civil penalties for sanctions violations on a strict liability basis.  OFAC’s Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines provide more information regarding OFAC’s enforcement of U.S. economic sanctions. In addition, financial institutions and other persons may risk exposure to sanctions for engaging in certain transactions or activities involving designated or otherwise blocked persons.  The prohibitions include the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any designated or blocked person, or the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person. The power and integrity of OFAC sanctions derive not only from OFAC’s ability to designate and add persons to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List), but also from its willingness to remove persons from the SDN List consistent with the law.  The ultimate goal of sanctions is not to punish, but to bring about a positive change in behavior.  For information concerning the process for seeking removal from an OFAC list, including the SDN List, or to submit a request, please refer to OFAC’s guidance on Filing a Petition for Removal from an OFAC List.Click here for more information on the person designated today.###
home.treasury.gov
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Trump's affection for Epstein is so earnest. It's like Kim Jong-Un level.
Trump’s book that he published in 2004 references taking a call from a “mysterious Jeffrey” — less than 2 years after the New York magazine article “Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery.” — White House declined to answer if this was Epstein. www.cnn.com/2025/07/22/p...
samrosenfeld.bsky.social
Seeing Don Bacon mix it up with critics and energetically defend this bill is instructive. He's a moderate who isn't seeking re-election. He's voting for this because, whatever his marginal objections, he believes in the agenda the bill embodies. The same goes for the vast majority of his party.
Reposted by Sam Rosenfeld
clarajeffery.bsky.social
If you have a Republican Senator or Rep and you are opposed to this bill, you should call them.
Senate Republicans said they expected to begin voting on amendments to the domestic policy bill at 9 a.m. Monday, after taking a break likely sometime after midnight, rather than working all night.

The decision not to move from debate straight into the so-called vote-a-rama, an hours-long series of votes on amendments, could indicate that Republican leaders are still struggling to lock in support.