WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.720 Welcome to the deep dive. This is where we really 00:00:02.720 --> 00:00:04.580 get into some of the biggest stories happening, 00:00:04.940 --> 00:00:08.580 mostly out of Washington, but also beyond. You've 00:00:08.580 --> 00:00:10.900 given us this great stack of sources, articles, 00:00:11.000 --> 00:00:14.119 some research, your own notes too, which lets 00:00:14.119 --> 00:00:17.519 us look behind the headlines in a pretty unique 00:00:17.519 --> 00:00:20.199 way. Our mission, like always, is to pull out 00:00:20.199 --> 00:00:22.839 the key insights for you. Basically a shortcut. 00:00:23.019 --> 00:00:25.940 to getting up to speed, hopefully with a few 00:00:25.940 --> 00:00:29.000 surprising facts and maybe a little bit of humor 00:00:29.000 --> 00:00:31.219 mixed in. Today we have three main things we're 00:00:31.219 --> 00:00:33.320 going to unpack. There's the the budget bill 00:00:33.320 --> 00:00:35.560 saga that's still rolling, then the latest from 00:00:35.560 --> 00:00:38.299 the Supreme Court, and finally this really fascinating 00:00:38.299 --> 00:00:40.719 report from Pride Month, which draws an interesting 00:00:40.719 --> 00:00:42.960 historical parallel. Yeah. And that's really 00:00:42.960 --> 00:00:44.759 the goal for you here, isn't it? To connect these 00:00:44.759 --> 00:00:47.020 dots. It might seem separate, but we want you 00:00:47.020 --> 00:00:48.759 to see how they're shaping the political scene, 00:00:48.799 --> 00:00:50.880 how they're affecting communities. We're aiming 00:00:50.880 --> 00:00:53.119 to help you get that deeper knowledge, you know, 00:00:53.219 --> 00:00:55.859 quickly but properly without just drowning in 00:00:55.859 --> 00:00:58.299 information. OK, let's jump right into it. The 00:00:58.299 --> 00:01:00.899 budget bill, Washington's favorite pastime, it 00:01:00.899 --> 00:01:04.239 seems. Our sources are saying it's been, well, 00:01:04.519 --> 00:01:06.439 quite the scene. The Senate's been doing this 00:01:06.439 --> 00:01:11.219 Voterama thing, which is basically just a marathon 00:01:11.219 --> 00:01:13.920 of votes. Yeah, nonstop amendments. And it's 00:01:13.920 --> 00:01:16.260 full of what they call horse trading and sausage 00:01:16.260 --> 00:01:18.959 making. Right. The usual deal making the compromises 00:01:18.959 --> 00:01:22.140 you need to actually pass something like this 00:01:22.140 --> 00:01:24.540 Donald Trump budget bill. And the key thing is 00:01:24.540 --> 00:01:27.780 it could all still change. Totally fluid. And 00:01:27.780 --> 00:01:30.000 just to give you a flavor of how specific this 00:01:30.000 --> 00:01:33.939 gets. I mean, sometimes weirdly specific. The 00:01:33.939 --> 00:01:36.719 sources mentioned a deal to get Senator Murkowski's 00:01:36.719 --> 00:01:41.010 vote. Yes. The wailing one. Exactly. Raising 00:01:41.010 --> 00:01:43.650 the deduction for wheeling expenses from, like, 00:01:43.829 --> 00:01:46.549 $10 ,000 to $50 ,000 makes you think of Captain 00:01:46.549 --> 00:01:49.069 Ahab, doesn't it? Huh, maybe. But what's really 00:01:49.069 --> 00:01:51.189 insightful from the sources is this. Okay, the 00:01:51.189 --> 00:01:53.930 bill's details might change constantly, but voter 00:01:53.930 --> 00:01:56.689 feelings about it? Much, much stickier. Sticky 00:01:56.689 --> 00:01:58.829 how? Well, think about it. If you're already 00:01:58.829 --> 00:02:01.569 mad about, say, $900 billion in Medicaid cuts, 00:02:01.909 --> 00:02:04.250 you won't suddenly be happy if it becomes only 00:02:04.250 --> 00:02:07.030 $600 billion. Right. The core objection is still 00:02:07.030 --> 00:02:09.770 there. Exactly. Same if you oppose millionaire 00:02:09.770 --> 00:02:12.969 tax cuts, giving a 4 % income boost, making it 00:02:12.969 --> 00:02:16.430 2 .5 % doesn't win you over. The fundamental 00:02:16.430 --> 00:02:19.389 feeling persists. OK. And the polling data backs 00:02:19.389 --> 00:02:21.990 this up. Oh, yeah. We look through a whole bunch 00:02:21.990 --> 00:02:26.150 of polls. Quinnipiac, Wapupso's, KFF, Pew, even 00:02:26.150 --> 00:02:28.830 Fox, all taken since late May. And what's the 00:02:28.830 --> 00:02:30.669 main takeaway from all that polling? What are 00:02:30.669 --> 00:02:33.449 the big trends? Two things really jump out. First, 00:02:34.020 --> 00:02:36.780 Democrats hate this bill. I mean, really intensely 00:02:36.780 --> 00:02:38.900 dislike it. Way more than Republicans actually 00:02:38.900 --> 00:02:42.159 like it. So it's more motivating for opponents. 00:02:42.360 --> 00:02:44.580 It seems that way. If this bill gets people to 00:02:44.580 --> 00:02:46.860 the polls for the midterms, it's likely to be 00:02:46.860 --> 00:02:49.240 disproportionately Democrats showing up angry. 00:02:49.599 --> 00:02:52.439 OK. And the second theme? Independence. They 00:02:52.439 --> 00:02:53.960 really don't like it either. And that's huge, 00:02:54.080 --> 00:02:55.300 right? Because they're the swing voters. They 00:02:55.300 --> 00:02:58.150 could decide, I don't know. Dozens of House seats, 00:02:58.490 --> 00:03:00.849 several Senate races. That's significant. But 00:03:00.849 --> 00:03:03.870 what about the argument that unpopular bills 00:03:03.870 --> 00:03:07.289 sometimes become popular later, like Social Security 00:03:07.289 --> 00:03:10.229 or the ACA? Our sources mentioned that. They 00:03:10.229 --> 00:03:12.150 did. It's a standard counterargument. People 00:03:12.150 --> 00:03:14.629 point to Social Security, the Civil Rights Act, 00:03:14.810 --> 00:03:17.169 the Affordable Care Act, all faced opposition 00:03:17.169 --> 00:03:20.610 initially, but gained support over time. So why 00:03:20.610 --> 00:03:22.789 are the sources skeptical this time? What's different 00:03:22.789 --> 00:03:25.310 about this budget bill? Well, a few things. First, 00:03:25.550 --> 00:03:28.090 those older bills, they actually help a lot of 00:03:28.090 --> 00:03:32.650 people very directly. It's less clear how this 00:03:32.650 --> 00:03:34.770 budget bill really improves things for the people 00:03:34.770 --> 00:03:36.990 who currently oppose it, unless, you know, it 00:03:36.990 --> 00:03:39.030 sparked some massive economic boom, which the 00:03:39.030 --> 00:03:41.210 sources seem pretty doubtful about. OK, that 00:03:41.210 --> 00:03:43.620 makes sense. What else? Second, partisanship 00:03:43.620 --> 00:03:47.479 is just way, way higher now. It's really hard 00:03:47.479 --> 00:03:50.599 to picture Democrats who, let's face it, also 00:03:50.599 --> 00:03:52.780 strongly dislike the former president suddenly 00:03:52.780 --> 00:03:55.340 warming up to a bill linked to him no matter 00:03:55.340 --> 00:03:57.060 what. Right. The political environment is different. 00:03:57.219 --> 00:03:59.699 And third, public opinion just moves slowly. 00:03:59.879 --> 00:04:02.120 It took years, even decades, for those other 00:04:02.120 --> 00:04:05.139 laws to gain broad acceptance. If this bill passes 00:04:05.139 --> 00:04:07.620 now, Republicans have less than 18 months until 00:04:07.620 --> 00:04:11.080 the November 2026 midterms. And you can bet Democrats 00:04:11.080 --> 00:04:13.250 will be as the source put it, screaming to the 00:04:13.250 --> 00:04:16.310 heavens about it the whole time. So if it's unlikely 00:04:16.310 --> 00:04:18.970 to get more popular, is there a chance it gets 00:04:18.970 --> 00:04:21.430 even less popular? You mentioned those polls 00:04:21.430 --> 00:04:23.579 had a lot of I don't know, responses. Exactly. 00:04:23.660 --> 00:04:25.680 That's the potential path by which the numbers 00:04:25.680 --> 00:04:28.420 get worse, as one source described it. All those 00:04:28.420 --> 00:04:31.519 no opinion or I don't know folks. Yeah. The prediction 00:04:31.519 --> 00:04:34.579 is if down the line, maybe a few months from 00:04:34.579 --> 00:04:36.519 now, people start losing their health insurance 00:04:36.519 --> 00:04:39.740 or maybe their kids lose SNAP benefits or if 00:04:39.740 --> 00:04:42.680 the economy tanks. Those I don't knows suddenly 00:04:42.680 --> 00:04:45.220 have a very strong negative opinion. Precisely. 00:04:45.399 --> 00:04:47.899 And there's history here, too. The sources point 00:04:47.899 --> 00:04:50.939 back to the last big Trump budget bill in 2017. 00:04:51.079 --> 00:04:52.990 Right. What happened after that? Well, in the 00:04:52.990 --> 00:04:56.209 2018 midterms, the GOP did gain two Senate seats, 00:04:56.529 --> 00:04:59.949 but they lost big elsewhere, a net loss of 41 00:04:59.949 --> 00:05:03.569 House seats and seven governorships. So there's 00:05:03.569 --> 00:05:06.170 a track record here beyond just the current polling. 00:05:06.310 --> 00:05:09.279 OK, let's shift gears now. from Congress to the 00:05:09.279 --> 00:05:11.279 Supreme Court. Another term just ended. What's 00:05:11.279 --> 00:05:13.360 the big picture assessment from the sources we 00:05:13.360 --> 00:05:16.279 looked at? The overall take is, well, the conservative 00:05:16.279 --> 00:05:18.519 majority kept moving things in the direction 00:05:18.519 --> 00:05:20.579 they have been chipping away at individual rights, 00:05:21.019 --> 00:05:23.639 boosting religious groups, expanding executive 00:05:23.639 --> 00:05:26.740 power a bit. But interestingly, they didn't quite 00:05:26.740 --> 00:05:29.680 take a hatchet to federal agencies the way they 00:05:29.680 --> 00:05:32.620 did last term. So a bit less dramatic on the 00:05:32.620 --> 00:05:35.550 agency front. Generally, yes. But the sources 00:05:35.550 --> 00:05:38.689 flag something else as, quote, the real bad news. 00:05:39.069 --> 00:05:41.649 And that's the court actually expanding its own 00:05:41.649 --> 00:05:44.009 power. How are they doing that? By getting involved 00:05:44.009 --> 00:05:47.129 much earlier in lawsuits, they're using the not 00:05:47.129 --> 00:05:49.189 -so -emergency docket, the shadow docket, more 00:05:49.189 --> 00:05:51.029 often. Right, making decisions without the full 00:05:51.029 --> 00:05:53.790 arguments and briefing. Exactly. And it often 00:05:53.790 --> 00:05:56.170 seems to signal favoritism towards certain groups, 00:05:56.329 --> 00:05:59.009 regardless of the case merits. It also creates 00:05:59.009 --> 00:06:01.269 hurdles for others trying to even get into court. 00:06:01.629 --> 00:06:04.850 Plus, their kneecapping, that's the term used, 00:06:04.930 --> 00:06:07.329 the lower court's ability to use equity powers. 00:06:07.449 --> 00:06:10.129 Their ability to craft flexible solutions. Yeah. 00:06:10.279 --> 00:06:12.740 It limits how district courts can respond, and 00:06:12.740 --> 00:06:15.160 it all feeds this sort of, I'll know it when 00:06:15.160 --> 00:06:18.060 I see it vibe, which can lead to rulings that 00:06:18.060 --> 00:06:20.839 feel arbitrary, inconsistent. That really damages 00:06:20.839 --> 00:06:23.519 public trust, you know? The sources suggest they're 00:06:23.519 --> 00:06:26.079 kind of making law by pretending that they're 00:06:26.079 --> 00:06:28.279 playing it straight. OK, so expanding their own 00:06:28.279 --> 00:06:30.800 power. But you said they mostly held back on 00:06:30.800 --> 00:06:33.459 cutting agency power this term. Any examples? 00:06:33.899 --> 00:06:36.899 Yeah, mostly. There was one notable exception 00:06:36.899 --> 00:06:39.279 with the EPA, but in other cases, like Kennedy 00:06:39.279 --> 00:06:41.959 v. Braidwood, they upheld the structure of that 00:06:41.959 --> 00:06:45.560 Preventive Services Task Force. In FCCV consumers' 00:06:45.639 --> 00:06:47.740 research, they didn't bite on a big challenge 00:06:47.740 --> 00:06:50.500 to agency delegation. They backed the FDA in 00:06:50.500 --> 00:06:52.829 another case. But you mentioned inconsistency. 00:06:52.930 --> 00:06:55.430 Right. Because in NRC v Texas, they said people 00:06:55.430 --> 00:06:57.910 not directly involved in licensing can't challenge 00:06:57.910 --> 00:07:00.589 it in court. But then in Diamond Energy v EPA, 00:07:00.810 --> 00:07:03.050 they said fuel producers do have standing to 00:07:03.050 --> 00:07:06.310 challenge EPA rules. So it's a bit murky how 00:07:06.310 --> 00:07:08.389 standing works, depending on the agency, it seems. 00:07:08.949 --> 00:07:12.430 It shows a, let's say, nuanced, maybe even contradictory 00:07:12.430 --> 00:07:15.449 approach this term. Hmm. OK. Were there anything 00:07:15.449 --> 00:07:19.290 the sources pointed to as maybe a positive development, 00:07:19.430 --> 00:07:22.220 a bright spot? There was one, yeah, under rights 00:07:22.220 --> 00:07:25.360 of individuals, a case called Martin v. U .S. 00:07:25.800 --> 00:07:27.879 The court allowed a family to sue the government 00:07:27.879 --> 00:07:30.579 after federal agents raided the wrong house by 00:07:30.579 --> 00:07:32.740 mistake. Oh, I remember hearing about that. They 00:07:32.740 --> 00:07:35.379 just left. Yeah, realized their error and just 00:07:35.379 --> 00:07:37.579 left. No explanation. The family was traumatized. 00:07:37.660 --> 00:07:39.420 The lower courts threw out the suit. But the 00:07:39.420 --> 00:07:42.379 Supreme Court said no, they can proceed. So that 00:07:42.379 --> 00:07:45.040 was seen as a small victory for individual rights 00:07:45.040 --> 00:07:47.319 against government error. OK, let's move to the 00:07:47.319 --> 00:07:49.579 area of rights of religious and minority groups. 00:07:49.449 --> 00:07:52.629 There was the US v. Scrametti case involving 00:07:52.629 --> 00:07:56.230 Tennessee's law. Right. That case upheld Tennessee's 00:07:56.230 --> 00:07:58.990 ban on hormone therapy and puberty blockers for 00:07:58.990 --> 00:08:01.889 transgender teenagers. The court found the law 00:08:01.889 --> 00:08:04.370 was rationally related to a legitimate government 00:08:04.370 --> 00:08:07.069 interest and basically said the democratic process, 00:08:07.170 --> 00:08:09.589 you know, state legislatures, should handle this. 00:08:09.689 --> 00:08:11.689 And then there was Medina v. Planned Parenthood. 00:08:11.949 --> 00:08:14.129 What happened there? That one was about South 00:08:14.129 --> 00:08:16.790 Carolina cutting Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood. 00:08:17.129 --> 00:08:19.529 The court ruled Planned Parenthood didn't have 00:08:19.529 --> 00:08:22.230 standing to sue the state and federal court over 00:08:22.230 --> 00:08:24.850 this. So they didn't rule on whether the state 00:08:24.850 --> 00:08:27.490 can actually do that? No. Crucially, they didn't 00:08:27.490 --> 00:08:29.930 touch the merits whether a state is allowed to 00:08:29.930 --> 00:08:32.629 defund a specific provider like that. They just 00:08:32.629 --> 00:08:35.070 shut the door to private groups, bringing that 00:08:35.070 --> 00:08:36.909 kind of challenge in federal court, pointing 00:08:36.909 --> 00:08:39.190 them towards state courts or administrative processes 00:08:39.190 --> 00:08:41.990 instead. Got it. But you said earlier there was 00:08:41.990 --> 00:08:44.490 a case the source is considered the biggie. this 00:08:44.490 --> 00:08:49.690 term. Ah, yes. Mahmoud v. Taylor. And the sources 00:08:49.690 --> 00:08:52.090 had some strong words about Justice Alito's opinion 00:08:52.090 --> 00:08:54.970 in this one, described it as full of, let me 00:08:54.970 --> 00:08:58.149 see, gross generalizations, unsupported conclusions, 00:08:58.450 --> 00:09:00.990 assumptions without evidence, saying it twisted 00:09:00.990 --> 00:09:03.789 innocuous things into something insidious. OK, 00:09:03.909 --> 00:09:05.710 strong words. What was the case about? I thought 00:09:05.710 --> 00:09:07.809 the law around religion in schools was fairly 00:09:07.809 --> 00:09:10.090 settled. You know, generally applicable laws 00:09:10.090 --> 00:09:13.090 are OK. Incidental burdens don't usually violate 00:09:13.090 --> 00:09:16.049 rights. kids might encounter ideas parents don't 00:09:16.049 --> 00:09:18.570 like. That was the generally settled landscape. 00:09:18.789 --> 00:09:21.649 But this case changed things. Alito and the majority 00:09:21.649 --> 00:09:24.950 really expanded on an older case, Yoder the Amish 00:09:24.950 --> 00:09:28.169 school attendance case. They found a substantial 00:09:28.169 --> 00:09:30.169 interference with the religious development of 00:09:30.169 --> 00:09:33.740 the children based on Storybooks. Storybooks. 00:09:33.860 --> 00:09:37.159 Yeah. The sources quoted parts Alito cited, like, 00:09:37.500 --> 00:09:39.639 on the two men's wedding day, the prince and 00:09:39.639 --> 00:09:41.919 his shining knight would live happily ever after, 00:09:42.080 --> 00:09:44.419 or Bobby and Jamie love each other, sometimes 00:09:44.419 --> 00:09:47.320 they get married. The source sarcastically called 00:09:47.320 --> 00:09:50.840 it the horror, the horror, highlighting how, 00:09:50.840 --> 00:09:53.419 you know, innocuous these passages seem. So what 00:09:53.419 --> 00:09:56.039 did the court actually rule? They ruled that 00:09:56.039 --> 00:09:59.080 introducing these LGBTQ plus inclusive storybooks 00:09:59.080 --> 00:10:01.500 and not allowing parents to opt their kids out 00:10:01.500 --> 00:10:04.139 placed an unconstitutional burden on the parents' 00:10:04.500 --> 00:10:06.379 religious freedom. They granted an injunction 00:10:06.379 --> 00:10:08.240 forcing the school to give advance notice and 00:10:08.240 --> 00:10:10.000 allow opt -outs for the books in question or 00:10:10.000 --> 00:10:12.120 any other similar book. Any other similar book? 00:10:12.279 --> 00:10:15.419 That sounds vague. Exactly. That's the huge issue 00:10:15.419 --> 00:10:18.480 the sources raise. What does similar mean? Does 00:10:18.480 --> 00:10:21.750 evolution count? Justice Sotomayor's dissent 00:10:21.750 --> 00:10:24.230 brought up women's history books showing women 00:10:24.230 --> 00:10:26.889 achieving things outside traditional roles. Does 00:10:26.889 --> 00:10:30.409 that count? Wow. So uncertainty. Massive uncertainty. 00:10:30.990 --> 00:10:33.250 Sotomayor suggested the court basically created 00:10:33.250 --> 00:10:35.720 a new test where they'll just... know it when 00:10:35.720 --> 00:10:37.759 they see it, leaving everyone else guessing. 00:10:38.220 --> 00:10:40.539 The sources worry about the chilling effect this 00:10:40.539 --> 00:10:43.059 could have everywhere. Schools might just avoid 00:10:43.059 --> 00:10:46.159 any books or discussions with LGBTQ plus characters 00:10:46.159 --> 00:10:48.720 to be safe. Potentially, leading to classrooms 00:10:48.720 --> 00:10:51.720 where only straight characters and stereotypical 00:10:51.720 --> 00:10:55.220 gender roles appear. Plus it raises serious establishment 00:10:55.220 --> 00:10:57.960 clause questions. Can schools function if every 00:10:57.960 --> 00:11:00.419 lesson has to avoid potentially offending someone's 00:11:00.419 --> 00:11:02.559 religious beliefs? That's a lot to unpack. One 00:11:02.559 --> 00:11:04.539 final point on this case. Yeah, just that the 00:11:04.460 --> 00:11:07.000 The injunction itself is narrow. It only applies 00:11:07.000 --> 00:11:09.679 to these specific parents, not broadly, which 00:11:09.679 --> 00:11:11.940 fits the court's recent trend against those big 00:11:11.940 --> 00:11:16.259 universal injunctions. Okay. Wow. Let's pivot 00:11:16.259 --> 00:11:19.279 to our last piece. This is quite different an 00:11:19.279 --> 00:11:21.759 on the ground report from a reader about L .A. 00:11:21.799 --> 00:11:25.360 Pride 2025. Sounds really interesting. It really 00:11:25.360 --> 00:11:27.620 is. Offers a different kind of insight. Our sources 00:11:27.620 --> 00:11:30.179 gave some cool history first. Apparently, the 00:11:30.179 --> 00:11:33.379 very first LA Pride back in 1970 was different 00:11:33.379 --> 00:11:35.759 from other cities. They didn't just march, they 00:11:35.759 --> 00:11:37.820 actually applied for a parade permit. For Christopher 00:11:37.820 --> 00:11:40.240 Street West, yeah. Right. And they had to fight 00:11:40.240 --> 00:11:43.179 for it legally, the ACLU got involved, and the 00:11:43.179 --> 00:11:44.960 city finally issued the permit just two days 00:11:44.960 --> 00:11:48.730 before. But it happened. Floats. Marchers. Thousands 00:11:48.730 --> 00:11:51.289 of spectators and that set up this kind of dual 00:11:51.289 --> 00:11:53.350 nature. LA tried has always had according to 00:11:53.350 --> 00:11:56.009 the sources It's part celebration like Mardi 00:11:56.009 --> 00:11:58.659 Gras, you know, we're here Yeah, IPE. And part 00:11:58.659 --> 00:12:00.740 protest. Yeah, part defiant protest. We're here. 00:12:00.820 --> 00:12:02.879 Take that. And the balance between those two 00:12:02.879 --> 00:12:04.379 shifts each year, depending on the political 00:12:04.379 --> 00:12:07.039 climate. So what was the vibe at LA Pride 2025, 00:12:07.440 --> 00:12:09.679 according to this report? Similar mix of groups 00:12:09.679 --> 00:12:12.080 as usual. Community organizations, businesses, 00:12:12.379 --> 00:12:14.500 corporate groups. Pretty much, yeah. Lots of 00:12:14.500 --> 00:12:17.120 community groups, local businesses, the corporate 00:12:17.120 --> 00:12:19.700 employee affinity groups were very visible. OK. 00:12:20.440 --> 00:12:23.039 But was there a noticeable shift in the mood 00:12:23.039 --> 00:12:26.679 or focus? Yes. A key shift, the reader noted, 00:12:26.799 --> 00:12:29.039 was with the transgender community. While the 00:12:29.039 --> 00:12:31.120 trans pride colors were definitely there, the 00:12:31.120 --> 00:12:33.639 emphasis from that community seemed less focused 00:12:33.639 --> 00:12:36.759 on protests this year, surprisingly muted on 00:12:36.759 --> 00:12:39.059 that front compared to previous years, leaning 00:12:39.059 --> 00:12:42.559 more towards celebration. So if the protest energy 00:12:42.559 --> 00:12:44.419 wasn't coming as strongly from there, where was 00:12:44.419 --> 00:12:46.580 it coming from? Elected officials. The reader 00:12:46.580 --> 00:12:49.019 said they dramatically upped their game. Instead 00:12:49.019 --> 00:12:51.419 of just waving from convertibles, they had big 00:12:51.419 --> 00:12:54.279 floats, blaring music floats, crawling with people 00:12:54.279 --> 00:12:57.360 floats. I'm here. Floats. Using the parade as 00:12:57.360 --> 00:12:59.820 a platform to vent about the national government. 00:13:00.139 --> 00:13:03.200 Loudly expressing real anger about what's happening 00:13:03.200 --> 00:13:05.820 nationally. And was there anything else fueling 00:13:05.820 --> 00:13:08.840 that protest energy? Yes. Another burning issue 00:13:08.840 --> 00:13:12.320 was anger directed at ICE. There was talk of 00:13:12.320 --> 00:13:15.139 the war that the federal government has declared 00:13:15.139 --> 00:13:17.960 against our local immigrant communities. You 00:13:17.960 --> 00:13:20.279 saw groups marching with signs like, I see out 00:13:20.279 --> 00:13:23.440 now, or immigrants are the lifeblood of our communities, 00:13:23.600 --> 00:13:26.019 and lots of Mexican pride flags visible. And 00:13:26.019 --> 00:13:28.600 the sources link this anger directly back to 00:13:28.600 --> 00:13:31.399 the Trump administration's actions. Explicitly, 00:13:31.399 --> 00:13:34.399 citing things like the demonization of our transgender 00:13:34.399 --> 00:13:37.320 countrymen, the war being waged against our immigrant 00:13:37.320 --> 00:13:40.139 communities, the destruction of US -eyed, and 00:13:40.139 --> 00:13:42.399 the attacks on our institutions of higher learning. 00:13:43.019 --> 00:13:45.879 The reader's conclusion was stark. People are 00:13:45.879 --> 00:13:48.700 angry. Really angry. Wow. Okay, now this is where 00:13:48.700 --> 00:13:50.600 the historical parallel comes in, right? The 00:13:50.600 --> 00:13:53.100 marriage equality template. Exactly. It's a really 00:13:53.100 --> 00:13:55.399 fascinating comparison. The fight for marriage 00:13:55.399 --> 00:13:57.320 equality started with some wins, but then hit 00:13:57.320 --> 00:14:00.360 this long losing streak. 32 straight losses on 00:14:00.360 --> 00:14:03.019 ballot initiatives. State after state voted it 00:14:03.019 --> 00:14:05.159 down. And the reaction was usually disappointment, 00:14:05.320 --> 00:14:07.860 regrouping. Yeah, the sources say proponents 00:14:07.860 --> 00:14:09.879 would kind of tuck their tails and pull back 00:14:09.879 --> 00:14:12.860 after each loss. But then came California's Proposition 00:14:12.860 --> 00:14:16.360 8, the 33rd initiative. What made that one different? 00:14:16.840 --> 00:14:19.259 It banned gay marriage after it had already been 00:14:19.259 --> 00:14:21.899 legal in California for about five months. Ah, 00:14:22.200 --> 00:14:24.460 so something was actually taken away. Precisely. 00:14:24.799 --> 00:14:27.600 And that, according to the sources, changed everything. 00:14:28.120 --> 00:14:31.740 Instead of tail tucking, Prop 8 ignited unbridled 00:14:31.740 --> 00:14:34.899 anger. Huge demonstrations erupted everywhere, 00:14:34.980 --> 00:14:38.629 and it created this... momentum, this slingshot 00:14:38.629 --> 00:14:41.110 forward. Including the big legal challenge. Right, 00:14:41.190 --> 00:14:43.070 the Olsen and Boyes lawsuit that eventually went 00:14:43.070 --> 00:14:45.350 to the Supreme Court. And just a few years after 00:14:45.350 --> 00:14:47.870 Prop 8, marriage equality became federal law. 00:14:48.409 --> 00:14:50.549 The crucial difference, the source argues, wasn't 00:14:50.549 --> 00:14:53.009 just losing, it was having something taken away 00:14:53.009 --> 00:14:55.250 after it had been granted. Okay, so the connection 00:14:55.250 --> 00:14:57.669 to today is? The source argues, things are being 00:14:57.669 --> 00:15:00.070 taken away by the Trump administration at a blinding 00:15:00.070 --> 00:15:03.279 rate, and people are angry. Really angry. Prop 00:15:03.279 --> 00:15:05.840 8 level angry. That's a powerful claim. And this 00:15:05.840 --> 00:15:08.700 leads to the Elphaba and Glinda analogy. Yeah, 00:15:08.899 --> 00:15:10.960 it's a great way to frame it. Think of Glinda, 00:15:11.080 --> 00:15:13.480 the good witch. The system basically works for 00:15:13.480 --> 00:15:17.019 her. She knows how to work within it, use subterfuge, 00:15:17.519 --> 00:15:19.960 bend the rules subtly. She believes things can 00:15:19.960 --> 00:15:22.299 always be worked out within the existing structure. 00:15:22.419 --> 00:15:25.059 OK, she's the insider. Right. Then there's Elphaba. 00:15:25.309 --> 00:15:27.889 The system is fundamentally stacked completely 00:15:27.889 --> 00:15:30.250 against her, so she can't rely on working within 00:15:30.250 --> 00:15:33.129 it. She has to find ways around it, circumventing 00:15:33.129 --> 00:15:35.669 it, bending it if she can, breaking it if she 00:15:35.669 --> 00:15:38.889 has to. She's developed instincts to know when 00:15:38.889 --> 00:15:41.070 the system just can't be trusted. So applying 00:15:41.070 --> 00:15:43.990 that now? The idea is for people who've generally 00:15:43.990 --> 00:15:46.029 felt the system worked for them, the Glindas, 00:15:46.230 --> 00:15:48.590 this current environment feels like new, scary 00:15:48.590 --> 00:15:50.929 territory. The usual ways aren't working. But 00:15:50.929 --> 00:15:52.929 for marginalized communities. To the Elphabas, 00:15:53.029 --> 00:15:55.519 it's more like... been there done that here we 00:15:55.519 --> 00:15:58.559 go again the skills needed to navigate a hostile 00:15:58.559 --> 00:16:01.379 or broken system those skills are already honed 00:16:01.379 --> 00:16:03.980 they're ready so the call to action is look to 00:16:03.980 --> 00:16:05.860 the marginalized communities for inspiration 00:16:05.860 --> 00:16:08.039 and the skills needed to prepare for the coming 00:16:08.039 --> 00:16:11.419 slingshot forward there's this underlying belief 00:16:11.419 --> 00:16:16.009 that once the insanity of the current administration 00:16:16.009 --> 00:16:19.169 peaks, like Prop 8 was a peak, the anger over 00:16:19.169 --> 00:16:22.029 everything taken away will fuel another massive 00:16:22.029 --> 00:16:24.590 push forward, getting back what was lost and 00:16:24.590 --> 00:16:26.889 maybe even gaining more. And the final word is 00:16:26.889 --> 00:16:30.289 just prepare. Prepare. Wow. OK, that covered 00:16:30.289 --> 00:16:32.909 a lot of ground today. We went from the messy 00:16:32.909 --> 00:16:35.769 details of budget deals and what polling really 00:16:35.769 --> 00:16:38.309 tells us to the deep shifts happening at the 00:16:38.309 --> 00:16:40.450 Supreme Court affecting rights and the balance 00:16:40.450 --> 00:16:42.759 of power. And then this really vivid picture 00:16:42.759 --> 00:16:45.340 from L .A. Pride connecting current anger to 00:16:45.340 --> 00:16:47.899 historical moments and these powerful archetypes. 00:16:48.360 --> 00:16:50.159 And hopefully for you listening, seeing these 00:16:50.159 --> 00:16:52.299 connections helps make sense of it all. It's 00:16:52.299 --> 00:16:54.360 about getting beyond the headlines to the real 00:16:54.360 --> 00:16:56.700 insights. Especially when things are changing 00:16:56.700 --> 00:16:58.639 so fast, looking at different angles, different 00:16:58.639 --> 00:17:01.940 histories can really light the way. So that final 00:17:01.940 --> 00:17:04.309 thought to leave you with. building on that Elphaba 00:17:04.309 --> 00:17:07.609 analogy. As things keep changing, maybe these 00:17:07.609 --> 00:17:09.630 strategies honed by marginalized communities, 00:17:09.730 --> 00:17:12.829 bending or breaking systems, become necessary 00:17:12.829 --> 00:17:16.069 skills for a much broader group of people trying 00:17:16.069 --> 00:17:18.730 to protect or reclaim things they value. What 00:17:18.730 --> 00:17:20.470 does prepare actually look like for you right 00:17:20.470 --> 00:17:23.390 now? Good question. Something to think about. 00:17:23.450 --> 00:17:24.950 Thanks for sharing your sources and thanks for 00:17:24.950 --> 00:17:25.950 joining us for this deep dive.