Pandemic to Racial Injustices: Now U.S. Has ‘Anarchist’ Cities, Claims Trump Administration

Share:

By Jose Medina

In the year 2020, the U.S. has had to deal with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, come to terms with racial injustices, experienced record firestorms and hurricanes and is facing a tumultuous election.

Now, we have “anarchist jurisdictions.” At least, according to the US Department of Justice under the direction of the Trump Administration.

The three US cities are New York City, Portland, and Seattle. The designation of these three cities would allow the restriction of federal funding on the grounds that they are “Jurisdictions Permitting Violence and Destruction of Property.”

However, Miriam Krinsky, the Executive Director of Fair and Just Prosecution, a national network of elected prosecutors working towards compassionate justice reforms, challenged the US Department of Justice’s decision.

Krinsky argued the designation announcement is “a chilling move and a dangerous pretext for continued attacks by the President on cities that are Democratic strongholds, coming weeks before the presidential election.”

He suggested the designation seeks to delegitimize the Democratic Party’s ability to lead just before the country is getting ready to vote, and is an attempt to restrict federal funding for Democrat-led cities to strong-arm constituents into voting for the Trump Administration in exchange for these federal funds.

As the US continues to persevere against an ongoing pandemic, cities are going to need all the funding they can get to combat the pandemic and keep their citizens safe and healthy, said Krinsky, noting “any attempt to unilaterally cut off federal funds is unconscionable, illegal.”

Krinsky said the Trump administration would be putting countless citizens in danger over politics.

Federal funding should be given to cities regardless of which party is in power, Krinsky maintains, and the designation “illustrates the extent to which the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice has abandoned all norms and political neutrality.”

Interestingly, despite the administration’s efforts to claim these cities are violent and chaotic, the cities have low violent crime rates.

Krinsky reminds the administration that “prior to the COVID pandemic, cities across the United States were experiencing historic lows in violent crime” and that “violent crime still remains far below the highs of the 1980’s and 1990’s.”

The designation for these three cities seems to also be in retaliation towards the many anti-racist movements across the country, and Krinsky points out that the designation is an “unfounded attack on local leaders and communities challenging racial injustice and calling for a transformation of the criminal legal system.”

The Trump administration has been promoting its strict law and order policies against anti-racist movements and this designation is another one of those policies, according to Krinsky, who said the Trump administration fails to address “the overwhelmingly peaceful protests that have filled our streets in recent months.”

Instead of associating the anti-racist movement protestors with violence, the Trump administration should take into consideration that these protests “are a reflection of the fact that Americans are yearning for justice and change.”

Krinsky reminds the Trump administration that this designation will not change local prosecutors’ minds on the treatment of protestors because “many elected local prosecutors have stated that they will not press charges against peaceful protestors.”

The US Department of Justice’s designation is an effort by the Trump administration to dissuade public support for both the anti-racist movement and Democrat led local governments, said Krinsky, noting that with elections coming up the Trump administration is making every effort to weaken their political opponents.

The effort to restrict federal funding in Democrat-led cities where anti-racist movements have made bold steps towards advocating for justice, said Krinsky, is aimed at showing these cities they have no choice but to implement strict law and order policies towards protestors.

Krinsky asserts that elected prosecutors wish nothing more than to uphold the anti-racist movement’s First Amendment rights to assemble and will not implement militarized law and order policies towards protestors.

She goes on to state that this designation is just “the latest in the Trump Administration’s ongoing unfounded attacks on elected prosecutors seeking to promote a more sensible, data-driven and community-supported vision of justice.”


To sign up for our new newsletter – Everyday Injustice – https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9

Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:

Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

6 thoughts on “Pandemic to Racial Injustices: Now U.S. Has ‘Anarchist’ Cities, Claims Trump Administration”

  1. Eric Gelber

    Note that the term anarchist is not applied only to the relatively few who engage in violent protest. The Trump administration attacks entire American cities and equates the exercise of First Amendment rights to voice dissent and promote racial justice with anarchy. That’s the response of totalitarian regimes to suppress opposing views. It’s the administration that poses the greatest threat to democracy.

    1. Ron Oertel

      The three US cities are New York City, Portland, and Seattle. The designation of these three cities would allow the restriction of federal funding on the grounds that they are “Jurisdictions Permitting Violence and Destruction of Property.”

      Why none in California, do you suppose?

      Wondering if it has something to do with Trump’s relatively good relationship with Newsom.

    2. Ron Oertel

      Newsom said today he has developed a strong personal relationship with Trump and characterized the president’s animosity toward California as more show than substance.

      “There’s not one phone call that I have made to the President, where he hasn’t quickly responded,” Newsom said. “And in almost every instance, he’s responded favorably in terms of addressing the emergency needs of the state,” related to both the pandemic and wildfires.

      https://calmatters.org/politics/2020/08/newsom-trump-relationship-california-fires/

      Kind of amazing, given what we normally hear.

        1. Ron Oertel

          It wasn’t “me” (or you) who said it.  😉

          I’d give credit to both of them, regarding that relationship. It’s a positive thing, not a negative one.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for