A short thread on what refusal to comply can look like, with specifics, examples, and ideas for what the future may hold.
Actually IDK if it's gonna be short, but it's gonna be specific, so read on if you're curious.
When people think of protest, or actions against authoritarian governments, they often think of people in streets yelling stuff and holding signs. And that's important, protest is a powerful way to show where the people stand! But
As a person who operates in systems that are extremely authoritarian (prisons, jails, criminal courts) let me tell you that many of the systems in which we operate simply *do not care* about protest.
As long as it costs them little, they can ignore it.
Which is why I think that now is a great moment to remember that some of the most meaningful acts of resistance are actually actions that can, in practice, look more like workplace procrastination than like outright battle.
Let's take Senate confirmation as an example. Article II of the Constitution sure reads a hell of a lot like the President has the power to simply send Congress out---to adjourn them under specific circumstances.
To be clear, no President has tried to tell Congress to GTFO but we now have an incoming President who is basically the GOAT of trying new batshitty tactics.
So let's say he does that. Let's say the Senate wants to hold their power to advise on agency appointments, but the President has just *declared* that they're in recess, so they're just screaming over on Capitol Hill.
Meanwhile, the various cabinet members the incoming President has declared are literally just showing up at their various agencies, demanding to begin the work of dismantling said agency.
Here, there are endless possibilities for action. The secretary who just doesn't have the keys to unlock the office yet, the staff who slow-roll paperwork, the legal team who sideline orders into review processes, every clerk who can individually hold things back 1%...
...but collectively make a huge impact.
In the criminal court system, we see these small acts of power all the time. The clerk who pulls you aside to tell you that the judge is furious at someone rn and don't call your case until later, or
The deputies who temporarily misplace jail processing paperwork, giving families who need a little extra time those key moments to arrange bail and bring their loved one home.
In my example, does this fix the problem of the balance of power between legislative and executive branch being irreparably upset? No. But it can slow the path of actual harm being enacted, sometimes long enough to allow others to subvert that harm.
So much of these protective acts of quiet workplace disobedience happen at ground level, subverting authoritarian agendas where the rubber meets the road. For example:
Yes, there will be a massive effort to root out and fire people who will use the limited power of their job to delay, derail, or even undermine toxic power.
But there are *a lot of people* who can do these things.
And it doesn't take that many people, actually, to shift the course of history.
Also, so much of this can just be acts of professional scrupulousness and moral rectitude. Declining to follow an illegal order, or delaying a process to seek legal advice on an order that might be illegal.
Choosing to speak publicly about an upcoming policy or rule change rather than quietly processing it.
Choosing to deliver information about the scale of harm of a policy in a public memo rather than behind closed doors.
In my world, I have seen good prosecutors who were being forced to make bad choices by their management make incredible records in court, which subtly telegraphed to everyone in the room that they did not have faith in their case, and let judges do the right thing.
All of this is resistance against the illegal, the immoral, the harmful, or even lethal.
And all of it can look just like another day at work.
Anyway, I hope this helps. All of us have power. Some of it small, but none of it meaningless.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Immigration Reminder: anyone, regardless of citizenship, has the right to remain silent if approached by law enforcement.
And...
If ICE or the police arrive at a home, immigration lawyers consistently note it is safe and legal to keep the door closed and ask who they are and for ID.
Police WITH A VALID ARREST WARRANT are allowed to enter a home, but immigration agents can’t enter unless they have a certain kind of warrant.
Just a reminder that $10 billion has been poured into this election, much of it in ads that line the pockets of media and social media companies. Changing the rules of campaign finance would also eliminate the financial incentive for media companies to drive us nuts every 4 years
Over a billion of this went to Pennsylvania alone. How much do Pennsylvania media companies benefit directly from both-sidesing elections and ensuring their state stays a key swing state?
And on a national scale, how much do all of our media companies quite literally profit from making the election seem like a non-stop horse race with higher and higher stress and drama?
It's the weekly video. For World Mental Health Day, let's talk about something you might not know---how health insurance providers may actually drive up mass incarceration.
Some context: here is the original law, from 2008, where the government tried to get insurers to provide the same level of coverage for mental and physical health. propublica.org/article/biden-…
But they...didn't. Sometimes, they might restrict what medicines they include in their formulary...
1. This is an awful tone to take, as a leader, when talking about government action to forcibly, sometimes violently, remove people from a place where they are seeking stability.
This tone is bad because it treats the circumstance of homelessness as if it were an overt, intentional action by the unhoused person. "No more excuses"? You think people saying "homelessness is not a crime, please don't treat it as such" are giving EXCUSES?
2. It's especially bad when you consider what sweeps do. Sweeps result in arrests, and displacement, but also strip people of all their worldly possessions.
The thing about the Trump immunity case is that yeah, to an extent it creates "King President" but tbh it much more creates "King SCOTUS." This is because what is an "official" act of the prez will of course be litigated and...
...who is waiting at the end of the road on all that litigation? King SCOTUS of course, who will get to decide what's official, what *evidence* is sufficiently tied to official acts to come in or not come in, and basically whether a case lives or dies.
And one more thing.
This whole idea of a job being so important that you get to be above the law? Yeah, that idea comes *straight* from the absolute mess of absolute and qualified immunity in policing and prosecution.