How the ‘Seven Mountains Mandate’ Is Linked to Political Extremism in the US

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It was originally published at The Conversation.

Vance Boelter, who allegedly shot Melissa Hortman, a Democratic Minnesota state representative, and her husband, Mark Hortman, on June 14, 2025, studied at Christ for the Nations Institute in Dallas. The group is a Bible school linked to the New Apostolic Reformation, or NAR.

The NAR is a loosely organized but influential charismatic Christian movement that shares similarities with Pentecostalism, especially in its belief that God actively communicates with believers through the Holy Spirit. Unlike traditional Pentecostalism, however, the organization emphasizes modern-day apostles and prophets as authoritative leaders tasked with transforming society and ushering in God’s kingdom on Earth. Prayer, prophecy and worship are defined not only as acts of devotion but as strategic tools for advancing believers’ vision of government and society.

After the shooting, the Christ for the Nations Institute issued a statement “unequivocally” denouncing “any and all forms of violence and extremism.” It stated: “Our organization’s mission is to educate and equip students to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ through compassion, love, prayer, service, worship, and value for human life.”

But the shooting has drawn attention to the school and the larger Christian movement it belongs to. One of the most important aspects of NAR teachings today is what is called “the Seven Mountain Mandate.”

The Seven Mountain Mandate calls on Christians to gain influence, or “take dominion,” over seven key areas of culture: religion, family, education, government, media, business and the arts.

With over three decades of experience studying extremism, I offer a brief overview of the history and core beliefs of the Seven Mountains Mandate.

‘Dominion of Christians’

The Seven Mountains concept was originally proposed in 1975 by evangelical leader Bill Bright, the founder of Campus Crusade for Christ. Now known as “Cru,” the Campus Crusade for Christ was founded as a global ministry in 1951 to promote Christian evangelism, especially on college campuses.

United by a shared vision to influence society through Christian values, Bright partnered with Loren Cunningham, the founder of Youth With A Mission, a major international missionary training and outreach organization, in the 1970s.

The Seven Mountains Mandate was popularized by theologian Francis Schaeffer, who linked it to a larger critique of secularism and liberal culture. Over time, it evolved.

C. Peter Wagner, a former seminary professor who helped organize and name the New Apostolic Reformation, is often regarded as the theological architect of the group. He developed it into a call for dominion. In his 2008 book “Dominion! How Kingdom Action Can Change the World,” he urged Christians to take authoritative control of cultural institutions.

For Wagner, “dominion theology” – the idea that Christians should have control over all aspects of society – was a call to spiritual warfare, so that God’s kingdom would be “manifested here on earth as it is in heaven.”

Since 1996, Bill Johnson, a senior leader of Bethel Church, and Johnny Enlow, a self-described prophet and Seven Mountains advocate, among others, have taken the original idea of the Seven Mountains Mandate and reshaped it into a more aggressive, political and spiritually militant approach. Spiritual militancy reflects an aggressive, us-vs.-them mindset that blurs the line between faith and authoritarianism, promoting dominion over society in the name of spiritual warfare.

Their version doesn’t just aim to influence culture; it frames the effort as a spiritual battle to reclaim and reshape the nation according to their vision of God’s will.

Lance Wallnau, another Christian evangelical preacher, televangelist, speaker and author, has promoted dominion theology since the early 2000s. During the 2020 U.S. presidential election, Wallnau, along with several prominent NAR figures, described Donald Trump as anointed by God to reclaim the “mountain” of government from demonic control.

In their book “Invading Babylon: The 7 Mountains Mandate,” Wallnau and Johnson explicitly call for Christian leadership as the only antidote to perceived moral decay and spiritual darkness.

The beliefs

Sometimes referred to as Seven Mountains of Influence or Seven Mountains of Culture, the seven mountains are not neutral domains but seen as battlegrounds between divine truth and demonic deception.

Adherents believe that Christians are called to reclaim these areas through influence, leadership and even, if necessary, the use of force and to confront demonic political forces, as religion scholar Matthew Taylor demonstrates in his book “The Violent Take It By Force.”

Diverse perspectives and interpretations surround the rhetoric and actions associated with the New Apostolic Reformation. Some analysts have pointed out how the NAR is training its followers for an active confrontation. Other commentators have said that the rhetoric calling for physical violence is anti-biblical and should be denounced.

NAR-aligned leaders have framed electoral contests as struggles between “godly” candidates and those under the sway of “satanic” influence.

Similarly, NAR prophet Cindy Jacobs has repeatedly emphasized the need for “spiritual warfare” in schools to combat what she characterizes as “demonic ideologies” such as sex education, LGBTQ+ inclusion or discussions of systemic racism.

In the NAR worldview, cultural change is not merely political or social but considered a supernatural mission; opponents are not simply wrong but possibly under the sway of demonic influence. Elections become spiritual battles.

This belief system views pluralism as weakness, compromise as betrayal, and coexistence as capitulation. Frederick Clarkson, a senior research analyst at Political Research Associates, a progressive think tank based in Somerville, Massachusetts, defines the Seven Mountains Mandate as “the theocratic idea that Christians are called by God to exercise dominion over every aspect of society by taking control of political and cultural institutions.”

The call to “take back” the culture is not metaphorical but literal, and believers are encouraged to see themselves as soldiers in a holy war to dominate society. Some critics argue that NAR’s call to “take back” culture is about literal domination, but this interpretation is contested.

Many within the movement see the language of warfare as spiritually focused on prayer, evangelism and influencing hearts and minds. Still, the line between metaphor and mandate can blur, especially when rhetoric about “dominion” intersects with political and cultural action. That tension is part of an ongoing debate both within and outside the movement.

Networks that spread the beliefs

This belief system is no longer confined to the margins. It is spread widely through evangelical churches, podcasts, YouTube videos and political networks.

It’s hard to know exactly how many churches are part of the New Apostolic Reformation, but estimates suggest that about 3 million people in the U.S. attend churches that openly follow NAR leaders.

At the same time, the Seven Mountains Mandate doesn’t depend on centralized leadership or formal institutions. It spreads organically through social networks, social media – notably podcasts and livestreams – and revivalist meetings and workshops.

André Gagné, a theologian and author of “American Evangelicals for Trump: Dominion, Spiritual Warfare, and the End Times,” writes about the ways in which the mandate spreads by empowering local leaders and believers. Individuals are authorized – often through teachings on spiritual warfare, prophetic gifting, and apostolic leadership – to see themselves as agents of divine transformation in society, called to reclaim the “mountains,” such as government, media and education, for God’s kingdom.

This approach, Gagné explains, allows different communities to adapt the action mandate to their unique cultural, political and social contexts. It encourages individuals to see themselves as spiritual warriors and leaders in their domains – whether in business, education, government, media or the arts.

Small groups or even individuals can start movements or initiatives without waiting for top-down directives. The only recognized authorities are the apostles and prophets running the church or church network the believers attend.

The framing of the Seven Mountains Mandate as a divinely inspired mission, combined with the movement’s emphasis on direct spiritual experiences and a specific interpretation of scripture, can create an environment where questioning the mandate is perceived as challenging God’s authority.

Slippery slope

These beliefs have increasingly fused with nationalist rhetoric and conspiracy theories.

A white flag bearing the words 'An Appeal to Heaven,' featuring a green pine tree, with the American flag displayed beneath it.
The ‘Appeal to Heaven’ flags symbolize the belief that people have the right to appeal directly to God’s authority when they think the government has failed. Paul Becker/Becker1999 via Flickr, CC BY

A powerful example of NAR political rhetoric in action is the rise and influence of the “Appeal to Heaven” flags. For those in the New Apostolic Reformation, these flags symbolize the belief that when all earthly authority fails, people have the right to appeal directly to God’s authority to justify resistance.

This was evident during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection, when these flags were prominently displayed.

To be clear, its leaders are not calling for violence but rather for direct political engagement and protest. For some believers, however, the calls for “spiritual warfare” may become a slippery slope into justification for violence, as in the case of the alleged Minnesota shooter.

Understanding the Seven Mountains Mandate is essential for grasping the dynamics of contemporary efforts to align government and culture with a particular vision of Christian authority and influence.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Conversation

A Modest Jeff Epstein Proposal

As you have probably seen, Attorney General Pam Bondi has announced that there’s no there there with the whole Jeff Epstein saga: no list, no hidden group of the world’s most powerful men having sex with minors, no prostitution ring, etc. etc. etc. Of course MAGA has gone into paroxysms with claims that Bondi, Kash Patel and Dan Bongino may be part of the Deep State themselves. I confess to as much schadenfreude as the next red blooded American seeing MAGA eat itself alive over this latest turn of the conspiracy theory. But is it possible that none of this stuff was ever true in the first place or that it’s perhaps been wildly exaggerated?

Continue reading “A Modest Jeff Epstein Proposal”

Trump Official Suggests Replacing Deported Farm Workers with Medicaid Enrollees

There are several layers to my conclusion that today’s remarks from President Trump’s agriculture secretary are among the most creatively maniacal I’ve heard yet from the administration.

Continue reading “Trump Official Suggests Replacing Deported Farm Workers with Medicaid Enrollees”

Media Companies Like Paramount Should Think Twice Before Settling With Trump

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis.

Paramount Global, which owns CBS News, recently made a perilous decision to settle the lawsuit that Donald Trump brought against them last year. Trump’s suit asserted that CBS’ 60 Minutes illegally edited a Kamala Harris interview in order to hurt his chances in the 2024 presidential race. Before settling, Paramount validly argued Trump’s legal theories were meritless and violated the company’s First Amendment rights. Yet the media conglomerate settled the suit for $16 million, which it reportedly will pay toward Trump’s presidential library plus other costs, although Trump asserted that the settlement is worth double that sum. The settlement decision by Paramount’s board of directors carries huge legal and reputational risks — including potential bribery charges — while degrading the independent investigative journalism Americans rely on.

Many legal experts agreed from the beginning that Paramount had a strong defense, citing constitutional protections to make editorial decisions. But the company’s choice to settle reportedly appears to have hinged on an unrelated $8 billion merger with Skydance Media. If the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), led by Trump ally Brendan Carr, doesn’t approve this merger by October, the deal could fall apart and board chair Shari Redstone could lose a reported $2 billion payout.

While Trump’s lawyers and Carr deny the lawsuit is related to these FCC proceedings, Paramount staff appeared to see a link, as did Trump himself. And as Paramount’s board struggled with the prospect of facing bribery charges if it settled the suit, internal pressures for CBS News to provide more favorable coverage of Trump sparked major internal discord, resulting in two high-profile news division resignations.

Paramount found itself in a tough situation, no doubt. But the grave risks of settling with Trump are bad for the business, its shareholders, and its employees — and it represents a dangerous sign for democracy. These stakes are clear in the potential legal risks Paramount is still facing post-settlement.

First, three U.S. senators — Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) — warned Redstone in a May 19 letter that under federal law, paying Trump to help finalize merger approval could potentially be bribery of a public official. Such a charge has a five-year statute of limitations. The senators suggested that any “scheme to curry favor with the Trump administration” compromises journalistic independence and raises corruption concerns. Immediately after the settlement, Wyden reupped these issues and asked state prosecutors to pursue criminal charges, while Warren called for an investigation.

State-level problems have surfaced, too. In California, two powerful senators who chair relevant committees already launched an inquiry, inviting two former CBS News executives to testify. The lawmakers suggested a settlement could violate California’s laws against, for example, unfair competition and misuse of corporate funds, while penalizing competitors who resist political interference, distorting the media marketplace, and chilling the investigative journalism Californians depend on.

On top of that, Paramount’s shareholders have already threatened legal action. The nonprofit Freedom of the Press, which owns Paramount stock, promised to sue the company if it settled with Trump and recently hired two powerhouse lawyers in preparation. On June 5, the nonprofit told Paramount’s board a settlement could cause “catastrophic” harm to the company and destroy shareholder value. They also said a settlement could illegally breach the board’s duties of care and loyalty to shareholders, constitute bribery, and violate anti-competition laws in several states — which could multiply legal fees and liability.

Other long-term hazards abound. For example, a future president could take a very different look at the matter than Trump. A future Congress could hold high-profile hearings and refer the matter for Department of Justice investigation. A future DOJ could investigate potential lawbreaking, including the bribery angle. An FCC under the stewardship of a new chair could also launch investigatory proceedings. And attorneys involved in the settlement could face state disciplinary proceedings or disbarment if there is a finding that they acted illegally or unethically.

Aside from the legal risks, the trusted brand of CBS News and its credibility with the American people will likely crater. More broadly, the settlement represents yet another example of independent media companies kowtowing to an administration that appears intent on weakening perceived enemies. As the editorial board of the conservative Wall Street Journal wrote: “The President is using government to intimidate news outlets that publish stories he doesn’t like. It’s a low move in a free country with a free press.”

JD Vance: Some Americans Are More American Than Others

The day after President Trump signed a bill that throws unprecedented amounts of money at ICE, extends tax cuts for the wealthy, and slashes health-care and social services to do so, Vice President JD Vance was in San Diego. And while he might have been far away from Washington, the administration’s immigration crackdown was front of mind: he was there to give a keynote address at a dinner hosted by the Claremont Institute, the southern California nonprofit that’s earned a reputation as a “nerve center” for MAGA thought.

Continue reading “JD Vance: Some Americans Are More American Than Others”

Rep. Lawler Fielded Sock Puppet Provocateur at Raucous Town Hall

This is my official new favorite story ever. It’s from the Journal News, which covers three suburban counties just north of New York City, and it’s about local congressman Mike Lawler (R) and a raucous town hall which I actually covered back in May. It turns out that at that town hall, his deputy district director, Erin Crowley, was simultaneously patrolling the boisterous constituents who had showed up to express their opposition while also apparently egging the anti-Lawler crowd on to disrupt the town hall using a fake identity known as “Jake Thomas.”

The Journal News is careful to note that it is impossible to prove definitively that “Jake Thomas” is Erin Crowley — who is also a county legislator in addition to being Lawler’s staffer. But they’ve got hard proof that “Jake Thomas” used Crowley’s cell phone when “he” joined an anti-Lawler Facebook group and the Signal group it uses and used during the May town hall.

Continue reading “Rep. Lawler Fielded Sock Puppet Provocateur at Raucous Town Hall”

Trump Stages Another Boffo Reality TV Episode In LA Park

A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo. Sign up for the email version.

Once a Reality TV Star, Always a Reality TV Star

The Apprentice isn’t the only, or even the best, prism with which to view Donald Trump’s approach to politics, but it is an essential one. 

Trump is always putting on a show in which he will always be, if not the hero, then at least the strong protagonist, and he needs villains. Lots and lots of villains to vanquish. But not just any villains. He needs villains whose defeat touches the deepest, darkest parts of the American psyche. And so the villains he picks often wind up being people of color, women and foreigners, and what they may lack in actual villainy he makes up for by casting them as derangedly violent or sexually deviant or otherwise sinister in comic book ways. 

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass — a Black woman — fits the bill for Trump, and it appears that she will have a recurring role in Trump’s rogue gallery. 

Yesterday, in a made-for-Fox-News stunt, heavily armed federal immigration agents swept through Los Angeles’ MacArthur Park in a dramatic but mostly ineffectual set-piece that seemed designed more to antagonize locals than to serve any legitimate law enforcement purpose. On cue, Bass rushed to the park and later denounced the maneuver at a press conference. “What I saw in the park today looked like a city under siege, under armed occupation,” Bass lamented. 

This is footage from today in MacArthur Park. Minutes before, there were more than 20 kids playing — then, the MILITARY comes through.The SECOND I heard about this, I went to the park to speak to the person in charge to tell them it needed to end NOW. Absolutely outrageous.

Mayor Karen Bass (@mayor.lacity.gov) 2025-07-07T21:10:34.326Z

Calling it a stunt doesn’t make it any less threatening or alarming, but it does suggest a need to be self-aware about getting caught up in the Trump-created drama and playing to the type he has cast. That’s easier for the rest of us than for local elected Democrats or others unwillingly caught in one of Trump’s reality TV episodes, especially those who are powerless and vulnerable. 

The president of the Los Angeles City Council, Marqueece Harris-Dawson, understood the game, noting wryly: “If you want to film in L.A., you should apply for a film permit like everybody else.”

In preserving your self-awareness, it helps to remember your audience. Trump is playing to his own with a well-worn script that has the rough contours of a pro-wrestling bit. Leading the “raid” of the park was Gregory Bovino, a Customs and Border Protection official who played the boastful tough guy with a puffed-out chest.

Gregory K. Bovino, US Border Patrol El Centro Sector Chief, walks on the scene as a large group of federal law enforcement officers arrive at MacArthur Park in Los Angeles, California, on July 7, 2025. (Photo by PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images)

“Better get used to us now, cause this is going to be normal very soon,” Bovino told a Fox News reporter. “We will go anywhere, anytime we want in Los Angeles.”

And then there is the right-wing propaganda machine. It gobbles up the Trump-generated content and eggs it on, as here where a host questions Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin about why Bass hasn’t been arrested:

DHS's Tricia McLaughlin on possibility of arresting Karen Bass: "We are certainly keeping everything on the table."

Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-07-08T01:26:25.138Z

Of course, the Trump administration already arrested Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) when she attempted to conduct oversight at a detention facility in New Jersey. Like Bass, McIver is a Black woman.

It’s Only Going to Get Worse From Here

Garrett Graff, on the One, Big Beautiful Bill and its insane funding level for immigration enforcement: “As someone who has covered federal law enforcement for the last two decades and has spent recent years writing both about the state of democracy today and authoring history books about the fall of fascism in Europe in the 1930s, it’s hard not to look at the new legislation and fear, most of all, how we’re turbo-charging an increasingly lawless regime of immigration enforcement and adding superpowers to America’s newly masked secret police.”

Abrego Garcia Case Slogs On

My report from court yesterday on the U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis efforts to pin down the Trump administration on what it intends to do next to Kilmar Abrego Garcia. She ordered the Trump administration to produce a witness of its choice for a hearing Thursday.

An Important Development

El Salvador told a United Nations body that the detainees shipped to CECOT by the Trump administration remain the “jurisdiction and legal responsibility” of the United States. Lawyers for the detainees filed a UN document, which reported El Salvador’s position, in the original Alien Enemies Act case in DC.

Trump-Targeted Judge Loses First Round on Immunity

Wisconsin state judge Hannah Dugan lost her motion to dismiss the criminal charges against her for allegedly interfering with an immigration enforcement operation in her courthouse. She can appeal the magistrate’s ruling to a district judge.

Good Read

Jason Zengerle: The Ruthless Ambition of Stephen Miller

ICYMI

Michael Feinberg, the senior FBI agent targeted by the Trump administration for his personal friendship with Peter Strzok, recounts his decision to resign after learning from his supervisor that his career would be intentionally stalled.

Do you like Morning Memo? Let us know!

Thanks to the GOP Megabill, You’ll Pay Higher Utility Bills

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis.

Natural gas price spikes, grid transmission bottlenecks, and a data center construction boom are already straining America’s power grid. The Republican Party just passed a budget bill that might break it. 

Donald Trump and the GOP’s irrational energy agenda deliberately sidelines wind and solar energy — the lowest cost, fastest-to-deploy sources of energy generation available — to prop up a dying fossil fuel industry that won’t be able to meet rising demand. 

The consequences will be severe: hundreds of billions in clean energy investment will evaporate, hundreds of gigawatts of power won’t get built, and hundreds of millions of metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions will be produced. By 2035, according to Princeton’s ZERO Lab for energy research, the U.S. will have added 45% less clean electricity to the grid than it would have if Trump had not been reelected. 

All of this comes as America’s electricity demand is accelerating for the first time in decades. A report last year from the Clean Grid Initiative projected up to a five-fold increase in demand on the grid. Meanwhile, the U.S. added 64 TWh of solar generation to the grid in 2024 — enough to meet fully half of the record-breaking growth in electricity demand last year, according to independent energy think tank Ember Energy.      

The only way America can meet rising energy demand and keep costs down is by building more wind and solar. Clean energy means lower utility bills, more good jobs, and cleaner air. 

The Republicans don’t care. It’s a tale as old as the party. The GOP campaigns on one thing — lowering the cost of energy for Americans — and does the opposite

The GOP Plot to Raise Your Energy Bill

The final version of the GOP’s bill, which Trump signed into law on July 4, phases out clean energy tax credits by the end of 2027, a year earlier than the timeline in the original House version.

Rather than “unleash” American energy, the Republican Party just kneecapped it. The loss of renewable subsidies threatens to disrupt or cancel a combined capacity of 547 GW of wind and solar by 2027 or later, according to Cleanview’s tracker. That’s not “leveling the playing field” with the massively-subsidized fossil fuel industry — it’s rigging the game. 

While the bill does give some juicy handouts to the fossil fuel industry, it’s hard to see who else benefits. U.S. automakers will definitively lose the global electric vehicle race. Big Tech will have to pay a premium to power their AI data centers. Advanced manufacturers now face insurmountable regulatory hurdles. An estimated 2.3 million jobs in clean energy and associated industries will vanish over the next 10 years. The nascent battery manufacturing boom is over. And American households will soon face steep price hikes on their utility bills, with double-digit increases in states like Arizona and North Carolina. 

If that wasn’t bad enough, in June, Trump stated plainly what he had already put into practice: a total ban on wind energy. “We’re not going to let windmills get built because we’re not going to destroy our country any further than it’s already been destroyed.” Adding cheap, abundant energy to the grid that would lower costs for working Americans simply isn’t worth the eyesore to Trump. Instead, Americans will foot the bill for Trump’s aesthetic preferences.

While China added 329 GW of solar last year alone, the U.S. added about 50. Once the tax credits expire, we’ll add even less. As energy expert, Doug Lewin, puts it: this isn’t energy dominance, it’s “energy submission.” 

No Other Way Out

The Trump administration champions fossil fuels as the energy solution for the modern world — but the industry can’t come close to replacing the renewable capacity that would be lost under the GOP’s rollback of clean energy incentives. 

Demand may be high, but the natural gas industry can’t meet it. The cost of building new natural gas plants has already tripled since 2022, with orders for new gas turbines backlogged past 2029. And as Heatmap reports, manufacturers like GE Vernova have little incentive to ramp up production capacity and risk future profit margins due to overcapacity. By 2027, GE will be able to produce only 20 gigawatts’ worth of gas turbines per year — worldwide.

These supply constraints won’t be fixed anytime soon. CEO John Ketchum of NextEra Energy calculates that natural gas will only be able to make up 16% of the 460 GW of additional capacity needed by the U.S. by 2030. The energy consulting firm, The Brattle Group, found that the combined capacity of new natural gas plants and nuclear plant restarts will only supply about a third of projected peak demand growth by 2030. 

And once gas plants are built, unlike wind or solar, their electricity prices are tied to a global market prone to volatility — as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine made painfully clear. On top of that, the Trump administration’s push to boost LNG exports will only intensify global demand for natural gas and raise prices at home.

The administration’s gung-ho nuclear stance also faces headwinds from its own self-defeating policies — like arbitrary staff cuts at the Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission — that make building nuclear power more difficult. Not to mention that tariffs on key components, like steel and aluminum, drive up already staggering construction costs — jeopardizing projects like the reopening of the Palisades Nuclear Plant. 

The final bill extended the window to claim tax credits for clean, firm power sources like nuclear, hydro, and geothermal for a decade — but this will still be too little, too late to stabilize energy prices. Industry analysts say no new nuclear plant will come online before 2032, at the earliest. And even if it did, the enormous upfront capital costs mean that any cost savings from nuclear appear on the timescale of decades, not years. While states like New York have moved forward with plans for new nuclear in an effort to improve “reliability and affordability,” the experience of some nuclear customers has been the opposite. Integrating nuclear’s constant baseload power may bolster the grid’s long-term reliability — but it won’t provide any short-term rate relief.

Republicans can idolize fossil fuels all they want, but the industry lacks the physical capacity to expand fast enough to meet demand. 

Republicans Are Lying to You

Trump calls windmills “costly and unsightly.” His Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright, derides net-zero goals as “sinister.” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum warns that the U.S. has “tipped” too far towards renewables. In one of the administration’s first executive orders, Trump bizarrely claimed that clean energy “makes worse the high energy prices that devastate Americans.”

These lies are designed to obscure the reality: it’s fossil fuels, not renewable energy, inflating energy prices. Sensitive to global markets, the price of natural gas fluctuates wildly in response to supply shocks and geopolitical instability, as the Russia-Ukraine war made painfully clear in 2022. Coal is even worse. In places like West Virginia, Republican regulators have long forced ratepayers to subsidize uneconomic, aging coal plants despite cheaper alternatives. Now, Trump is mandating the rest of the country follow suit.

Republicans are forcing Americans to accept higher utility bills just to prop up a dying fossil fuel industry — one that has already saddled the public with trillions in climate damages while raking in historic profits

The clean energy transition is unstoppable. Stripping away renewable energy subsidies will only increase costs and slow the pace of adoption. But it won’t kill the momentum. 

Many ‘Big Beautiful’ Losses Won’t Be Felt Til After Midterms, And That’s Intentional

House Democrats have shifted to a new messaging strategy now that their Republican colleagues have given in to President Trump’s wishes and passed the devastating “big, beautiful” bill despite many Republicans’ supposed concerns about the legislation.

Continue reading “Many ‘Big Beautiful’ Losses Won’t Be Felt Til After Midterms, And That’s Intentional”

Frustrated Judge Struggles In The Quicksand Of The Abrego Garcia Case

GREENBELT, MARYLAND—I suppose it was inevitable that in a case over whether the Trump administration can defy federal court orders without consequence, a trial judge would emerge as a main character.

Continue reading “Frustrated Judge Struggles In The Quicksand Of The Abrego Garcia Case”