Thursday, March 6th, 2025 Today, the Supreme Court rules that the Trump administration must unfreeze foreign aid; a US district judge has blocked Trump’s cuts to NIH funding; a US district judge in Maryland has issued a preliminary injunction against Trump withholding funds to hospitals that provide gender affirming care; the Merit Systems Protection Board has ordered Trump to reinstate thousands of USDA probationary employees they determined were wrongfully terminated; hundreds of pages of emails show the turmoil inside the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after Russ Vought issued his stop work order; the VA is set to fire 83,000 people before the end of the year according to an internal document while the IRS is drafting a plan to fire 45,000 people; Trump is threatening to take away transportation funding from the District of Columbia unless the mayor paints over Black Lives Matter Plaza; Andrew and Tristan Tate are under criminal investigation; multiple lawsuits have been updated since Trump said Elon was in charge of DOGE during his the joint session address; House Speaker Mike Johnson’s Chief of Staff has been arrested for DUI; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.
Thursday, March 6th, 2025
Today, the Supreme Court rules that the Trump administration must unfreeze foreign aid; a US district judge has blocked Trump’s cuts to NIH funding; a US district judge in Maryland has issued a preliminary injunction against Trump withholding funds to hospitals that provide gender affirming care; the Merit Systems Protection Board has ordered Trump to reinstate thousands of USDA probationary employees they determined were wrongfully terminated; hundreds of pages of emails show the turmoil inside the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after Russ Vought issued his stop work order; the VA is set to fire 83,000 people before the end of the year according to an internal document while the IRS is drafting a plan to fire 45,000 people; Trump is threatening to take away transportation funding from the District of Columbia unless the mayor paints over Black Lives Matter Plaza; Andrew and Tristan Tate are under criminal investigation; multiple lawsuits have been updated since Trump said Elon was in charge of DOGE during his the joint session address; House Speaker Mike Johnson’s Chief of Staff has been arrested for DUI; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.
Thank You Naked Wines
To get 6 bottles of wine for $39.99, head to nakedwines.com/DAILYBEANS and use code DAILYBEANS for both the code and password.
Stories:
OPM alters memo about probationary employees but does not order mass firings reversed | NPR
Federal judge blocks drastic funding cuts to medical research | AP News
Supreme Court rules Trump administration must unfreeze foreign aid payments | ABC News
129. Untangling the Foreign Aid Ruling - by Steve Vladeck
Good Trouble:
Local group holds 'funeral' as new library policy goes into place | WAAY31 ABC
At The Root Collective | Facebook
Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you’re going to do, or just vent. I’m always here to listen.
Check out muellershewrote.com for my interview with a systems security expert about the massive breach at opm.gov caused by Elon Musk
Check out other MSW Media podcasts
Shows - MSW Media
Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod
Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substack
The Breakdown
Follow AG and Dana on Social Media
Allison Gill
Substack|Muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote, Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewrote
Dana Goldberg
Twitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedy
Have some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?
https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/
From The Good News
https://longislandrollerrebels.org
Local group holds 'funeral' as new library policy goes into place | WAAY31 ABC
At The Root Collective | Facebook
Reminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That’s just one of the perks of subscribing!
Um. MSW Media Media. Hello and welcome to the Daily beans for Thursday, March 6, 2025. Today, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Trump administration must unfro frees foreign aid. A US District judge has blocked Trump's cuts to the NIH funding. A US District judge in Maryland has issued a preliminary injunction against Trump from withholding funds to hospitals that provide gender affirming care. The Merit Systems Protection Board has ordered Donald Trump to reinstate thousands of USDA probationary employees they determined were wrongfully terminated. Hundreds of pages of emails show the turmoil inside the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after Russ Vaught issued his Stop work order. The VA is set to fire 83,000 people before the end of this year, according to an internal document. While the IRS is drafting a plan to fire 45,000 people, Trump is threatening to take away transportation funding from the District of Columbia unless the mayor paints over Black Lives Matter Plaza. Andrew and Tristan Tate are under criminal investigation. Multiple lawsuits have been updated since Trump said Elon was in charge of Doge during his joint session address. And House Speaker Mike Johnson's chief of staff has been arrested for dui. I'm Alison Gill.
And I'm Dana Goldberg.
We have a new record, Dana, for the longest headlines intro in the history of the Daily Beans.
Well done. Well done, my friend.
And I was reading kind of fast, too. I was like, let's get these done. Um, it's a lot of news that has happened since you and I hung up from the virtual studio yesterday, recording the beans. It was just breaking news after breaking news after breaking news. Um, and I, for one, did not watch Trump's address to the joint session of Congress. But apparently he said that Elon Musk is in charge of Doge, so whoopsie. Yeah. And now, like, at least I think three lawsuits, maybe more, have been updated. You know, they've. They've told the court, hey, Trump just told Everybody. We got 10 million witnesses. You know, I don't know how many people watch that shit show, but, yeah, who saw it happen?
They can't remember their stories. That's what happens when you lie and then they give these guys hot mics. And sure, there's a script, but when the fuck has Trump ever stayed on script? Ever stayed on script? Never.
No. Um, and with all these multiple lawsuits, it might behoove him to stay on script, but he won't. He, uh, can't, right? He's just too narcissistic. There was also an awkward moment where Trump patted Chief Justice John Roberts on the back and said, thanks for it or something.
Like, he said, thanks. I. I won't forget.
I won't forget. Yeah, thanks. I won't forget. Um, that was frightening and weird. Yep. Um, and I also got a text that, uh, Al Green was removed from the chamber by the sergeant arms. By Mike Johnson ordering the sergeant Arms to remove him for. For being disruptive. So high five Al Green.
Absolutely. Which is so ridiculous because Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene being like, screaming chimpan disease during Joe Biden's speech. No one removed them. It's just so the decorum is gone on the other side. I'm so proud of Al Green. I'm also proud of the representatives from New Mexico. Um, it's just people. Some people are standing up. I gotta be honest, though, this whole thing, and I didn't watch it either. Just the pictures of Democrats holding up signs that were like, you're lying. Or holding up signs that were like, get rid of musk or whatever. I'm like. I'm like, what. What's with the Twitter photo? Like, let's fucking go walk out of the chamber, make a ruckus. You all. It just.
And Dana, they all. They wore pink.
I know. That's the thing. And I'm like, uh, oh, my God. Like, I love being a Democrat. I love the party. I'm just. I want Jasmine Crockett fucking energy up in this bitch for the rest of the next four years.
Yes, please. I want that. Like, what was it, the viral video of the haka? Uh, yes, that's what we need.
Yes, yes, yes. Like, I'm sorry, I don't need, you know, uh, uh, Raise the paddle in the congressional room. I mean, come on.
Right? Like, what are you. What are you. Are you at an auction?
Like, well, you've already. Some of the Republicans already sold those souls, so I don't know if the Democrats are trying to buy them back. I have no idea.
Well, it was frustrating for me too. I love my party. I, uh, love a lot of the reps there. But I seriously. High five Al Green. They all should have done an Al Green and all had to be forcibly removed one at a time. For being loud. Absolutely. To just disrupt the whole damn thing so people would just shut it off. Um, because, ah, it was. It was. It was just frustrating.
And it wasn't a State of the Union. It was a rally. It was a rally.
Yeah, right.
Congressional quarters. Come on.
Yeah. And, you know, I mean, the thing. Okay, we wore pink. You held up signs. But there was Democratic leadership who decided definitively that they would sit and be quiet and be good and show decorum and that. I think whoever made that decision made a mistake.
Honestly, I do, too. And I know there may be some people that are disagreeing that are listening to this right now. And I'm not saying Democrats should lose all decorum, but this is not a time to be polite. It's not a time to be polite anymore. It's just not.
No. And I do understand, however, that people probably went along with this. Democrats who wanted to be disruptive or do more probably went along with this because they would probably be kept out of leadership positions and committee positions if they, you know.
Yeah, that's true.
Justified Democratic leadership. So I put the blame here squarely on the leadership of the party that whoever it was that decided this, I'm assuming we'll get more information as time goes on, but I'm with you. I would have liked to have seen more pushback. That would have been the only reason that I would watch anything from that night.
Yeah, I don't need to watch him drone on for, what, two and a. Two hours, two and a half hours. Whatever it was, it was way too long.
But, yeah, I was out having a great discussion with a couple of, uh, friends who run non profits to see what we can do for veterans to get their stories out there who've been fired from the federal government. So we were doing real work while he was up there doing whatever he was doing, and people were holding up signs. So, anyway, um. High five. Al Green, appreciate you. We have so much news to get to today. It's gonna probably be a kind of a long show. Uh, but first we have some quick hits. And to make a long story short. Too late. Okay. Hey, remember when Trump fired special counsel Hampton Dellinger, and then he sued to get his job back, and a judge ordered that he be returned to his job, and then he filed a request to block the firing of six probationary federal employees. And then the Merit Systems Protection Board granted it. And then Hampton Dellinger promised he was going to work on ways to reinstate larger swaths of wrongfully terminated probationary employees. And meanwhile, my previous lawyer and friend, Kathy Harris was fired from the Merit Systems Protection Board by Trump. And then she sued, and then a judge reinstated her. And then when she got back, she found a filing on her desk from Hampton Dellinger special counsel, uh, asking to put a stay or block the firing of 5,000 probationary USDA employees and, uh, to reinstate them. Remember that?
Yeah. And then Hampton Dellinger saw Ferris Bueller pass out at 31 flavors. So I guess it's pretty serious.
Yeah, my best friend's brother's cousin's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this girl who saw Hampton Dellinger file a thing with Kathy Harris last week.
I guess it's pretty serious.
I guess it's pretty serious. She doesn't even go here. Well, today. That's two different movies, guys. Sorry. Today, Kathy Harris approved Hampton Dellinger's stay. Uh, and also, this is just breaking now being sent to me. The D.C. circuit Court of Appeals has granted Trump's emergency motion for a stay in the Hampton Dellinger firing case, which effectively removes Hampton Dellinger from his job pending the appeal on the merits. And the D.C. circuit Court has ordered an expedited briefing on the merits. I don't see any dissents here. When we get the full order, I'll go over it. So anyway, this is a temporary stay, pending appeal.
All right, thanks, Allison. And in a related story from NPR, the Trump administration has revised a January 20 memo asking federal agencies to provide a list of all probationary employees to the Office of Personnel Management, adding a disclaimer that OPM is not directing agencies to take any specific action. A new paragraph in the revised memo, updated Tuesday, merely states, and I quote, please note that by this memorandum, OPM is not directing agencies to take any specific performance based actions regarding probationary employees. Agencies have ultimate decision making authority over and responsibility for such personnel actions. So that's interesting. That's a big fucking walk back.
Yeah, but he'll get, you know, he'll just like, he's going to be able to get the heads of his agencies, you know, like Doug Collins at the VA and Pete Hegseth at the dod. You know, his pals, he's just like, he's going to get them to ask for a waiver on, um, the 60 day notification period for reduction in force that's coming. Um, I'm sure that these agency heads who do have the authority to fire anyone in their agency, will just do this on their own, making it more legal. However, all of these initial probationary employees may have something to appeal, so we'll see what happens. The IRS is drafting plans to slash its 90,000 strong workforce by up to half through a mix of layoffs, attrition and buyouts. And that's according to the Associated Press. The Federal Tax Collector has offices across the country. With women accounting for 65% of the IRS workforce, while people of color represent 56% of the workforce. A reduction in force of tens of thousands of employees would render the irs, quote, dysfunctional. That's what John Koskinen, a former IRS commissioner, told the Associated Press. Meanwhile, Dana, Department of Veterans affairs is planning to lay off as many as 83,000 workers by the end of 2025. And that's according to an internal memo obtained by the Government Executive, which is a news outlet covering the executive branch. The leaked memo sent to senior staff on Tuesday said the VA would work with Musk's Doge. So there you are again. It's Musk to slash its workforce to 2019 levels, which is before millions of veterans became newly eligible for care. The cuts will be sweeping and spare no part of the department. That's what the VA Chief of Staff Christopher Siric said in the memo. 83,000 people. That means at least 25,000 veterans.
My God. Uh, masses, Masses message. Thanks, Al. This one is from Associated Press. A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the Trump administration from drastically cutting medical research funding that many scientists say will endanger patients and cost jobs. The new National Institutes of Health policy would strip research groups of hundreds of millions of dollars to cover so called indirect expenses of studying Alzheimer's, cancer, heart disease and a host of other illnesses. Anything from clinical trials of new treatments to basic lab research that is the foundation for discoveries. The US District Judge Angel Kelly in Boston had temporarily blocked the cuts last month. Wednesday, she filed a preliminary injunction that puts the cuts on hold for longer while the suits proceed. And I just want to say something, and I know that this isn't in here. One thing I did see was this moment, apparently during the Trump rally in Congress yesterday, where he gave a Secret Service badge to a young boy, from my understanding, that was dying of cancer. It was sort of like a make a wish and everyone was like, oh my God, what a beautiful moment. No matter what you think about the President, this is such a beautiful moment. It's a beautiful moment. It's a fuck if you separate that. It is a beautiful thing that happened. But how can you do that when you are actively cutting cancer research, the funding for cancer research, it's just such a fuck you. But it's this big spectacle publicly of him doing. And it's not him. The people that actually put on this thing, this gesture. I just. We have to remember what is happening behind closed doors, despite the smoke and mirrors that are happening in front of us. We really do.
Such a good point. Thanks, Dan. I hadn't heard that he did that, but what does that sweet boy, he.
Came in a little uniform and yeah, he was in his police uniform, and they gave him, uh, you know, a Secret Service.
When Trump gave him the badge, did he say, sorry about your cancer research funding?
No. Didn't they. Didn't they just held, you know, the sweet boy up and took a victory lap.
Just checking. All right. A Republican lawmaker and this, like, I hate this, with the burning fire of a thousand suns. But a Republican lawmaker has introduced a bill threatening millions of dollars in transportation funding for Washington, D.C. if Mayor Muriel Bowser does not agree to erase and rename Black Lives Matter Plaza. Bowser drew Trump's ire in 2020 when she ordered the slogan to be painted in large yellow letters on 16th street during a historic racial justice protest outside the White House. Bowser's move became a national symbol of resistance against Trump, who reacted by calling the mayor incompetent. And Republicans have taken aim at the plaza ever since. So he is threatening to rip away transportation funding for D.C. unless the Black woman paints over Black Lives Matter.
He's just a dick.
He is cruel, disgusting.
He's an asshole. This one's from Rolling Stone. Uh, accused rapist and sex trafficker Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan, they're under criminal investigation in Florida. And that's according to the state's Attorney General, James Uthmeyer, from the pair after they arrived in Fort Lauderdale last week.
Do you know how shitty you have to be to have an investigation opened into you in Florida?
I know this was shocking, to be honest with you. And, uh, everyone was like, didn't see that. My bingo card. And this is a quote from the story. These guys have themselves publicly admitted to participating in what very much appears to be soliciting, trafficking, preying upon women around the world. This is what UTH Meyer told a reporter on Tuesday, noting that some of the Tate's accusers have been minors. And I quote, people can spin it however they want. He said, in Florida, this type of behavior is viewed as atrocious.
Is it in Florida?
Is it?
Yeah.
But also, oh, my God, I saw an interview, and this jackass, and I think it might have been with Candace Owens, was like, come after me. Come after me. You think I'm stupid? You think I just sleep with a phone full of evidence? No, I wipe my phone. Everything. Single fucking night. Like, on. On an interview. I was like, there's so much evidence. These two are horrible human beings. And they came to. They went to Florida. Who knows who flew them in? I could. I could, you know, uh, make it. Make a guess.
I bet. I know.
Yeah. But, um, it is Mind blowing in the best way that the attorney Attorney General of Florida is the Republican attorney.
General who previously was a chief of staff to DeSantis.
Yeah.
So I don't know, maybe DeSantis is like, I don't like these guys. I don't like Trump. Get them out of my state. I don't know what it is, but it's. I'll take it.
Yep, me too.
So, uh, that's. That's a good news. Thank you so much. Um, all right, we have a lot more news to get to. We haven't even started the hot notes. We'll do that right after this break. Stick around. We'll be right back after these messages.
We'll be right.
Hey, everybody, it's AG. Have you ever wanted to learn more about wine and where it comes from, but you didn't know where to start? Well, Naked Wines has changed the game for me. They make it easy to explore and enjoy incredible wines without needing to take a class or anything. Naked Wines connects you directly to the finest independent winemakers, cutting out the middleman so you get award winning wines at up to 60% off retail prices. They've been doing this for over 15 years, funding over 90 winemakers around the world. What I love most is the quality and the stories behind each bottle. Every step feels like you are on a journey in the vineyard pl. Plus, there are no commitments or membership fees, and you can pause or cancel anytime. Love that. I recently had the joy of experiencing Mike Peterson's Marlboro Pinot gris. It's a 2023, a bright, refreshing white, uh, that's perfect for any occasion. It bursts with juicy citrus, ripe peach flavors, a lot of stone fruit. It finishes crisp. It's delicious. It leaves you, um, wanting more, to be frank. And it's sourced from low yielding vines in New Zealand's farmed Marlboro region. This Pinot Gris boasts intense fruit flavors. It pairs beautifully with lighter dishes like seared scallops. Or it stands alone as a thirst quenching delight. I love it. Naked Wines has helped me discover so many new favorites, and I love supporting independent winemakers. It's not just about great wine. It's about being part of a community that values quality and craftsmanship. So now is the time to join the Naked Wines community. Head to nakedwines.com/dailybeans Click enter voucher and put in dailybeans, all one word for both the code and the password, and you'll get six bottles of wine for just $39.99 with shipping that is a discount of over $100 off your first six bottles. Again, that's nakedwines.com dailybeans and with the code and password, daily beans, all one word for six bottles of wine for $39.99. You'll be glad you did.
Everybody. Welcome back. It's time for the Hot notes. Hot notes. All right, first up from ABC News, a sharply divided Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the Trump administration must comply with a district court order and pay out nearly $2 billion in foreign assistance funds to nonprofit aid groups for work that's already been completed on the government's behalf. This court ruled 5 to 4. This should have been 9 0. But the court ruled 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett siding with the liberal justices. The court did not elaborate on the decision, but said the district court judge should, quote, clarify what obligations the government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order with due regard to the feas of any compliance timelines, which is a bunch of fucking gobbledygook. And I'm gonna talk more about this when we go over what Steve Vladic wrote about this in a little bit later in the show. But it's, it's reminiscent of like, footnote three in the immunity ruling, which it's just like word salad. It doesn't make any sense. Um, but a lower court judge is currently weighing whether or not to impose a longer term preliminary injunction against the foreign aid freeze. Justice Sam Alito said in his eight page dissent that he was stunned by the majority's decision. Quote, does a single district court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the government of the United States to pay out and probably lose forever 2 billion in taxpayer dollars? Question mark. The answer is yes, Justice Alito. Yes, that a judge does have that power to order people to pay bills. What the fuck do you think, Court? Uh, the answer to that question should be an emphatic no, but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. He wrote. Yeah, because it's the law. Like, he wants to cut his own dick off. Like, I don't understand it.
I'm telling you, I don't. Like Amy. Amy Barrett. What is her full name? Amy.
Amy Coney Barrett.
I want to call her Amy Baron Conant, which I'm, you know, because my brain. Yeah, exactly. But, man, I can see her turning on these guys because they're going to start turning on her. Like, uh, every time she sides with the liberal justices, I see just a little, little Bit more chasm in the Supreme Court. Anyway. Go ahead.
Well, since her name sounds like Sacha Baron Cohen, I think we should call this. When she sides with the liberal justices, I think we should call it a booyukasha.
There you go. Like I said, don't like her, everyone. Don't get me wrong, I think she's part of the Handmaid's Tale, but when this stuff happens, I think it's pretty great.
Yes, me too. Now, the Trump administration didn't immediately respond on the ruling, but the timing of it's interesting. Right? Just 9am Bam, the morning after the address. I feel like they didn't want to release this and then like have to sit there and have him yell at them.
Yeah.
The court's majority did not specify a deadline by which the administration needed to comply. The administration initially tried to freeze the payments via an executive order before U.S. district Judge Amir um Ali ordered these payments to resume in a temporary restraining order issued three weeks ago. Last week, Ali, a Biden appointee, that's why Alito doesn't like him, ruled the administration violated the terms of a temporary restraining order and ordered the Trump administration to dole out delayed payments by 11:59pm Feb. 26. Lawyers with the Department of Justice acknowledged that the Trump administration ignored the temporary restraining order, which prohibited them from freezing foreign aid funds since the order was issued. Instead, they argued that they should not be required to pay back the money because of sovereign immunity, which is fucking frightening. What the fuck is that? That's king language. Now, during an extended exchange with Ali, a DOJ lawyer struggled to answer basic questions about the Trump administration's compliance with the temporary restraining order. Chief Justice Roberts ordered a stay before the deadline as the courts heard the case. Foreign aid groups have been teetering on bankruptcy following Trump's decision to end aid and have been searching for ANSWERS During a Feb. 13 meeting with representatives from those organizations. Pete Morocco, that dickhead Trump administration official tasked with dismantling the U.S. agency for International Development, or USAID, defended what he called a total zero based review and arguing that some of the foreign aid required radical change, according to the audio from that meeting that was obtained by abc. Quote, as far as payment, one of the reasons that there have been problems with some of the payments is because despite the president's executive order, despite the Secretary's guidance, we still had nefarious actors in the agencies that were trying to push out hundreds of illegal payments, Morocco said, which is a total lie, quote, and so we were able to seize control of that and stop them and take control of some of these people and make sure that the money was not. We had rogue deep state liberal Marxists running around paying bills. Morocco suggested the payments for organizations with existing contracts would resume the following week, but they remained frozen.
All right, thanks, Allison. And this one's from Chloe Atkins at NBC. A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday blocking enforcement of the Trump administration's executive order threatening federal funding for institutions that provide gender affirming care for anyone under 19. US District Judge Brendan Herson of Maryland ordered the defendants to file a status report with the court by March 11 detailing their compliance with the court's order. The American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and other groups filed the lawsuit in February on behalf of multiple families and youths who are members of PFLAG's national organization. That's a nonprofit group supporting the friends and families of LGBTQ people. They allege that President Donald Trump's order disrupted their care. It did. The executive order blocked hospitals and clinics that receive federal funding from providing gender affirming care to those under age 19. The judge paused the administration's order last month, prompting many providers who had suspended care to resume under the court's temporary restraining order. And I just want to go back to this fucking bizarre age of 19. You can die for your country at 18. Like, who picked this number?
I know. I bet I know why. I bet it's because they want to raise the voting age. Uh, and so they're starting to creep up other things from 18. That's just my. I just feel like a couple of dickheads were in a room.
Yep.
And be like, well, let's do under 18. Let's make it 19. Since we want to at some point raise the voting age to 21 or whatever. Yeah.
It's just bizarre. But Herson wrote in Tuesday's order that the plaintiffs had demonstrated that the hardships they were suffering were the result of discontinuation of what medical professionals had deemed to be essential care. Let me repeat that. Medical professionals, not the government. The hardships, he added, were potentially catastrophic. Specifically, Hurston wrote, the sudden denial or interruption of plaintiffs medical care had caused or is expected to soon cause unwanted physical changes, depression, increased anxiety, heightened gender dysphoria, severe distress, risk of suicide, uncertainty about how to obtain medical care, impediments to maintaining a social life, and fear of discrimination, including hate crimes. This is awful. In court filings, the Trump administration opposed the plaintiff's request for relief, saying their, quote, arguments concern hypothetical downstream actions that may or may not result from the executive order. Bullshit. They know this is what's going to happen. That's why this is all scientific. It can be proven. The administration added, that the plaintiffs may be incidentally harmed depending on how those institutions react. Hurston's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the court decides on the merits of the case. Joshua Block, senior staff attorney for the ACLU's LGBTQ plus and HIV project, applauded the judge's decision and criticized Trump's executive order. Quote, this order from President Trump is a direct effort to threaten the well being of transgender people while denying them equal protection under the law that's in the Constitution, enacted by coercing doctors to follow Trump's own ideology rather than the best medical judgment. That's what Block said in a statement. So I'm just really glad these cases are unfolding the way they are and that, uh, the Constitution is being upheld in these cases. Equal protection under the law.
Yeah. And as much as I hate John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett, I'm hanging a little bit of hope on what they did with USAID today. Um, that similar things will happen in other cases. That's a really interesting alliance. So we'll see what happens in a lot of these. There's going to be so many, so many cases.
Yep.
And next up From Chaney and O'Donnell at Politico, a new trove of emails unearthed in federal court reveals chaos unleashed, uh, by the Trump administration's abrupt shutdown of the cfpb. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. That's the Obama era agency, which is, is an Elizabeth Warren joint, let's get that clear. And it's meant to shield Americans from unfair banking practices. Hundreds of pages of communications show career officials grasping for clarity in the weeks after the CFPB's acting director Ross Vaught ordered 2-10-A, ah, total stoppage of all work tasks. That order in many ways conflicted with officials legally required responsibilities. The employees laid out a long list of consequences. Enforcement actions had been halted even though some were subject to court ordered deadlines. Mass termination of contracts was jeopardizing enormous caches of CFPB data held by third parties, including some public records required to be stored. Contracts supporting other legally required work had been canceled and would be difficult to restart. Then the emails reveal. As a lawsuit against the shutdown progressed, the agency's Trump appointed leaders scrambled to restart those required programs. And the leaders suggested that Vought's February 10 email, despite its unambiguous language was never intended to halt, called all of the agency's work even Though it says total stoppage of all work tasks. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
It's very confusing, Allison.
Totally try to stop some of the work tasks is what it said. You just read it wrong. That's bizarre and, uh, insane when I. When I think about it. And here's a quote. It has come to my attention that some employees have not been performing statutorily required work. That's what Vought's top legal aid, Mark Paoletta, wrote in a March 2 letter. And he be clear. Employees should be performing work that is required by law and do not need to seek prior approval to do so. Um, okay. Uh, I thought the first email telling them to stop everything was pretty clear. Yeah, but now he wants to be clear again. The communications were filed as part of that rapidly advancing lawsuit brought by treasury workers against the dismantling of the agency. U.S. district Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ordered a Monday hearing with witnesses to testify to fully resolve disputes about the internal chaos that has racked the agency for weeks. Weeks. The lawsuit was filed February 9, but accelerated February 13 after Vought's blanket stop work order. The consumer bureau, long a better noir for Republicans and financial institutions, is at the center of a campaign by the Trump administration. And Elon Musk's doji to dramatically slash the federal bureaucracy is what they call it. The bureau's headquarters, uh, they've been shuttered since Vought's February 10 stop work order, which was clear. Let's be. Let's be honest here. Republicans hate it when we tell, like, cashing places that they can't charge 600% interest or we shouldn't have bank fees this high.
You mean when we protect the consumers?
I don't understand it. Because their rich friends suffer. Still, President Trump nominated a veteran regulator, Jonathan McKernan, on February 11 to lead the agency, signaling he's planning to keep it going. McKernan pledged to continue the agency's work and laid out in the law during his Senate Banking Committee confirmation hearing last week. Now, at the same time, the White House has bragged that Trump ordered the, uh, total halt of CFPB's work, describing it as the brainchild of Senator Elizabeth Warren, who helped develop the structure of the agency after the 2008 financial crisis. The emails show that the top CFPB staffers viewed the takedown of the agency's homepage as an order from Vought himself. And despite the staff's desperate calls to restore it, senior leaders said they had no authorization to do so. So the email exchanges also show the repercussions of attempting to restart paused work after the mass cancellation of contracts, many of which appear to be more challenging to revive than to abruptly cancel. That's always the way. It's way easier to cancel a contract than to get one going. The most recent messages also show an intense exchange between Paoletta and a senior CFPB official. Paoletta accused the official of undermining his authority and questioned the official about a potential leak to the media of his internal instructions. The emails reveal that by February 27, Payoletta had been inundated with requests to restart paused work that employees said was required by law. Ensuring non discriminatory access to credit, processing consumer complaints, processing public records requests, helping advise military lawyers on basic tasks like logging into systems to preserve key data. Those requests were largely approved. Paoletta's March 2 email on the eve of the hearing with Jackson in the lawsuit appeared aimed at putting to rest any confusion over whether staff could proactively restart their legally required work without explicit permission. He noted that, uh, prior to the blanket February 10th order, Vought had issued a more targeted email on February 8th, two days earlier that called for the halt of work unless required by law. But Paoletta's email triggered even more confusion. Quote, Based on every email starting on February 10, the unambiguous guidance was to stop all work tasks. No stipulation of legal requirements was made. And that's irina Mushnick, a Ah Tech official at CFPB, she wrote in a March 3 email. Muchnik said the agency's consumer complaint database had not been updated for weeks and was displaying error messages. As a result of this stoppage, Paoletta authorized Mushnik to shift any resources to fix the database. In another exchange on the morning of March 3, the bureau's chief Financial officer, Jaffnar Gai, uh, I think that's how you pronounce it, described a lot of requests to restart canceled contracts, but said the agency would be taking a very narrow approach. Only contracts absolutely essential to meeting legal requirements of the agency would be considered for reactivation, he emphasized. Others described See, that doesn't sound like you don't like that. Sounds to me like you need permission.
Yeah, I mean, it sounds to me too, like.
Others described apparent tension between the directions issued by Vought and Paoletta and requested clarity. Quote I've received a number of messages from staff who are understandably confused by the information in this email. That's Cassandra Huggins, Principal Deputy Assistant Director of CFPB's Supervision Policy and Operations And Huggins noted that even Vought's February 8th email appeared to demand the stoppage of some legally required tasks. Adam Martinez, the CFPB's chief operating officer, responded that Huggins was correct. Vought's call for work stoppage in the February 8th email was still in effect. As a result of that confusion, Huggins told colleagues to keep all supervisory work on hold, even if it's required by law. That directive from Huggins prompted a reaction from Paoletta. Quote, I'm concerned that you sent out an internal agency communication on such an unfounded basis that is false and directly contradicts my March 2nd message without first getting confirmation directly from me, even though it totally matches the March 10th. 10th directive, but not the March 8th email. My God.
Uh, they're all a mess.
I added that last part. Pay, a letter wrote, your actions severely undermine the agency's leadership ability to supervise the agency staff and to ensure that statutorily required duties are being performed. Paoletta said he learned of Huggins's directive in a Reuters report. Quote, did you provide your internal agency communication to the media, or do you know who provided it? He wrote, please provide your answer to me by 6pm today day. Huggins responded that she did not provide the email to the media or nor did she know who did. Quote, I did not intend to undermine the new administration's ability to supervise agency staff. My only intention was to ensure that our staff did not act against the direction in the February 8th email from Vought. So, like, um. And by the way, I bet I know how that got out. Yeah.
All right, we're going to wrap up this segment, this very long segment with this last story. This one's from Scott Wong and Ryan Reilly at NBC. Hayden Haynes, the chief of staff to House Speaker Mike Johnson. You. As we know, he's the Republican from Louisiana. I know. And one of the most powerful aides on Capitol Hill had a little too much to drink. Yeah. He was arrested after President Donald Trump's joint address to Congress for drunk driving after his car struck a capital vehicle.
Did he have a flask in the. During the State of the Union or.
I mean, listen, I. I wouldn't blame anyone that had a flask during the.
State of the Union. He just sitting there drinking during the whole.
He may have been. By the way, this is from two law enforcement sources. This is what they told NBC News. Johnson's office, of course, also confirmed the incident, which is a little surprising, but how could they not? One of the sources told NBC News that a police Report indicated that Haynes hit a Capitol vehicle around midnight and was arrested and released with a citation to appear in court. Uh, hu. That would not happen to any other human being. They would be in jail. The arrest came after Trump's speech Tuesday night, when Johnson presided over the House floor and sat just behind the President's left shoulder. And this is a, quote, a driver backed into a parked vehicle last night around 11:40pm this is the U.S. capitol Police. That's what they said in a statement to NBC News. We responded and arrested them for DUI.
Yeah, 1140 was right after.
Exactly.
He didn't have time to go to a bar and get shitty and then drink and drive. He left that talk drunk.
Haynes. Haynes, they're saying, is a trusted and longtime aide to Johnson. He has served as chief of staff in the Speaker's office since Johnson won the top job in the House in October of 2023. Now, before that, Haynes served as chief of staff to Johnson in his personal office office from 2017 to 2023. He also had worked in various roles from former Senator David Vitter, another Louisiana Republican from 2009 to 2016. Asked by NBC News Wednesday, I wonder who would drive anybody to. Asked by NBC News Wednesday whether Johnson was standing by Hanes, he said, I am. I am. Of course you are. And I quote, the speaker is aware of the encounter that occurred last night involving his chief of staff and the Capitol Police. The encounter. He was driving drunk. The police were doing their fucking jobs. He had a car. Johnson spokesperson. That was from Johnson spokesperson Taylor Halsey. And that. She added that to the statement. The, uh, speaker has known and worked closely with Hayden for nearly a decade and trusted him to serve as his Chief of staff for his entire tenure in Congress. Because of this and Hayden's esteemed reputation among members of staff alike, the speaker has full faith and confidence in Hayden's ability to lead the Speaker's office office intoxicated. I'm. I added that last part.
How do you not just get a new.
Oh, come on. You kidding me? This guy knows where the bodies are buried. You think he's just going to throw him under the fucking bus?
No. Yeah. No way.
No. He's going to back into it while he's drunk. While most crimes in Washington are Prosecuted by the U.S. attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, DUI offenses are prosecuted by D.C. office of the Attorney General, an office headed by D.C. attorney General Brian Schwab. The distinction, it could be very m. Meaningful in this case because the interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. His name is Ed Martin is a conservative activist with ties to Republicans on Capitol Hill. Martin, whom Trump wants to be the city's chief federal prosecutor on a permanent basis, was granted access to Capitol police footage from January 6, which Martin used to spread conspiracy theories about the Capitol attack. Schwab's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Last month, the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington sent an arrest warrant for Rep. Corey Mills, as we've talked about on the show, but Martin's office didn't sign off. They didn't sign off in the arrest warrant. Mills had been investigated over an alleged assault in an apartment building, and Mills said police had helped, quote, resolve a private matter. So people are protecting some people.
I'm glad Ed Martin isn't in charge of this. I'm glad it's Schwab. Um, that's good news. That's good to hear. I learned something new today. Yay. All right, everybody, everybody, we've got some, uh, listener submitted good news. But first, we're going to go over that Steve Vladek blog about what the Supreme Court did today and what it could mean for future rulings that are similar. But first, we have to take a quick break, so everybody stick around. We'll be right back. Hey, everybody. Welcome back. I wanted to do more of a breakdown on what the Supreme Court ruled today. Uh, as far as putting the money back on to pay the USAID bills. And whenever I need a good breakdown so that I can understand what's going on, what the impact will be, and what it means for future rulings, I always, always, always read one first, by Steve Vladic on his substack. It says, welcome, uh, back to One first, an increasingly frequent newsletter that aims to make the US Supreme Court more accessible to all of us. Given the widespread confusion arising from The Supreme Court's 54 ruling this morning in the foreign aid spending cases, I thought it would be worth an unscheduled issue that took a stab at summarizing what the court did or what they appear to have done, what it didn't do, and what happens next. I'm writing this from an airport gate waiting area, so please forgive me if it's a little less organized than the typical post he posts here. The decision, uh, from the Supreme Court, which says, On February 13th, United States District Court for District of Columbia entered a temporary restraining order enjoining the government from enforcing directives pausing disbursements of foreign development assistance funds. The present application does not challenge the government's obligation to follow that order order. On February 25, the district court ordered the government to issue payments for a portion of the pause disbursements, those owed for work already completed, before the issuance of the district court's temporary restraining order. And they ordered that by 11:59pm on February 26th. Several hours before that deadline, the government filed its application to vacate the district court's February 25th order and requested an immediate administrative stay. The Chief justice entered an administrative stay shortly before the 11:59pm deadline and subsequently referred the application to the court. The application is denied. Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the district court should clarify what obligations the government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order. With due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines, the order hereto, after entered by the Chief justice, is vacated. All right, so first, let's talk about the background. Steve Vladic says, if you're not familiar with the background of these cases, I'd encourage you to read my post from last Thursday, uh, which went into at least some detail on how these cases got to the Supreme Court, the administrative stay that Chief Justice Roberts entered last Wednesday, and the very different ways of understanding the Chief's intervention. I should concede that even that post barely scratched the surface of how intricate and complicated this litigation is. These cases aren't just about the merits of whether the executive branch can unilaterally stop spending these funds. There's a bunch of messy procedural stuff, too, at least some of which has been complicated by the government's shifting litigation positions. I like how he says that very nicely. For present purposes. The key, in my view, is understanding that there are two different sets of rulings here. There's Judge Ali's underlying temporary restraining order, which remains in effect and which the government has neither tried to appeal nor seek emergency relief from from. And then there's Judge Ali's more specific order, which purported to enforce the restraining order by obliging the government to pay somewhere between $1.5 and $2 billion of obligated foreign aid funds by last Wednesday night, February 26th. It was that order that the government tried to appeal and from which it sought, uh, emergency relief, first in the D.C. circuit and then in the Supreme Court. By issuing an administrative stay last Wednesday night, Chief Justice Roberts temporarily absolved the government of its obligation to comply with that order, but not with the underlying tro, which generally requires the government to spend money Congress has appropriated for foreign aid funding. Next Wednesday morning's order against that backdrop, the court's Wednesday morning ruling is more than a little confusing. Let's start with what's clear. A 54 majority, with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett joining the Democratic appointees, denied the government's application to vacate Judge Ali's enforcement order order. There's only one meaningful sentence in the court's ruling, and it's maddeningly opaque. That's the Given this deadline and the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the district court should clarify what obligations the government must fulfill to ensure compliance with a temporary restraining order with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines. That's the same sentence I thought was mushroom, she this sentence, Steve Vladic says, or perhaps a broader earlier draft, provoked a fiery and more than a little hypocritical eight page dissent from Justice Alito, joined in full by Thomas Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. But before getting to the dissent, let me try to read a couple of tea leaves out of this cryptic but important message. First, I think it's meaningful that the majority denied the government's application rather than dismissing it as moving in English. That is the majority signaling that the government likely still must comply with the Pay now order, albeit not on the original timeline. If the majority thought that the Pay now order was no longer live because the deadline had come and gone, then the proper disposition would have been to dismiss the application as moot, not to deny it. Indeed, although there are good reasons to not rely upon dissents to figure out what the majority held held, Justice Alito's dissent seems to reinforce that reading. This may seem like a very thin read, but it is a distinction I can't imagine was lost on the justices. The majority, and apparently the dissent, seem to agree that the government remains under not just the general obligation of the temporary restraining order, but the specific obligation of the Pay now order. Second, the clause about the district court clarifying the obligations the government must fulfill to comply with the temporary restraining order strikes me as an invitation to Judge Ali to do exactly that to issue a more specific order one that identifies the particular spending commitments he believes the government must honor to comply with the TRO, and 2 gives the government at least a little more than 48 hours to do so. Yes, the underlying temporary restraining order has now been in place for 23 days, which should have been enough time already. More on this below as well. But the upshot is even if the Trump administration doesn't have to pay the money immediately, it will have to do so very soon. That's small solace to the organizations and people who've already had their lives upended by the spending freeze. But it's a bigger loss for the Trump administration than the text may suggest. Third, the timing of the ruling is striking. The court handed down the order right at 9am this morning. Morning, less than 12 hours after the end of President Trump's Tuesday night address to Congress. This is exactly what I was talking about. It's just about impossible to imagine the ruling was still being finalized overnight, or that the chief justice was somehow influenced by his awkward moment with Trump. But if not, then there appears to have been at least some choice on the court's part to hand down the ruling after the president's speech and not before. After, for example, at the close of business yesterday, perhaps to avoid the specter of Trump attacking the justices while several of them were in the audience. I've written before about the specter, the court's timings of its rulings. This at least seems like it might be another example. And I have to take a break here from reading Steve Vladek to tell you that the reason that I was thought about the timing of this is because of what I have read by Steve Vladek in the past and its links. You can read what I've read in this particular substack post now. Fourth, here's the 54 lineup again. Back in January, I wrote about this particular 54 alignment with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett joining the three Democratic appointees. It's starting to show up in cases in which the chief justice elusively but not illusory institutional commitments and Justice Barrett's emerging independence are separating them from the other Republican appointees for a host of reasons that I suspect are obvious, we may see more such cases sooner rather than later. On one hand, it's a bit alarming that Justice Kavanaugh joined the dissent, about which more in a moment. On the other hand, for those hoping that the court is going to be a bulwark against the mounting abuses of the Trump administration, it's a cautiously optimistic sign that there may well be at least five votes for that broader but yet to be proven proven proposition. All right, next up, the dissent. Justice Alito's dissent goes on quite a journey. In eight pages, as is unfortunately often the case with respect to his dissents from emergency applications, it combines a remarkable amount of hypocrisy with statements that are either materially incorrect or at the very least misleading. On the page three of the ruling, page two of the dissent. For example, Alito writes that, quote, the government must apparently pay the $2 billion post haste, not because the law requires it, but simply because a district judge so ordered. Of course, this completely misstates both the theory of the plaintiff's lawsuit and the gravelman of Judge Ali's order. The whole point is that the law does require it, that Congress has mandated the spending, and that's the contractual obligations have to be fulfilled. Indeed, Judge Ali's pay now order is about work already completed for which the money is already due. If there's an authority for the proposition that the government is not legally obligated to pay its bills, Alito, uh, doesn't cite it. Yes, there may be separate questions about the court's power to compel the government. More on that shortly. But that's not the same thing as whether the law requires it. The law requires the government to pay its bills. Do the dissenters genuinely believe the answer is no? Alito, ah also makes much of the argument that sovereign immunity somehow bars the claims against the government government. But the Supreme Court has already held that relief under the Administrative Procedure act can run to whether the government is obliged to pay expenditures to which the recipients are legally entitled. Alito asserts that actually ordering the government to pay those expenditures is something else entirely. Suffice to say, I think that's slicing the baloney pretty thin. Again, I think his argument would have more force if Judge Ali's pay now order was about funds for which the administrative processes haven't fully run, but here they have. And so it's just a question of whether the federal courts have the power to force the government to enforce the law in that respect. Contrast Alito's analysis here with his dissenting opinion in USV Texas, in which he would have upheld an injunction by a single judge shop district judge that effectively dictated to the executive branch what its immigration enforcement priorities must be in explaining why the Biden administration should lose. He wrote, nothing in our precedence even remotely supports this grossly inflated conception of executive power, which seriously infringes the legislative powers that the Constitution grants to Congress. At issue here is Congress's authority to control immigration. And this court has repeatedly emphasized that over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete than it is over the admissions of aliens. In the exercise of that power, Congress passed and President Clinton signed a law that commands the detention and removal of aliens who have been convicted of certain particular dangerous crimes. The Secretary of Homeland Security, however, has instructed his agents to disobey this legislative command and instead follow a Different policy. That is more to his liking. In 2023, Alito dismissed the view that the courts could not push back against the President in such cases as a radical theory. Theory. In 2025, apparently it's correct. I wonder what changed. Finally, Alito offers this remarkable discussion of why the harm the plaintiffs are suffering is insufficient to overcome the government's case for a stay. Any harm resulting from the failure to pay amounts that the law requires would have been diminished if not eliminated if the court of Appeals had promptly decided the merits on the government's appeal, which it should not have dismissed. If we sent this case back to the Court of appeals, it could still render a prompted decision. In other words, the plaintiffs are being harmed not by the government's refusal to pay them, but by the D.C. circuit's refusal to exercise appellate jurisdiction over Judge Ali's pay now order. I don't even know what to say about this argument other than that if that's how irreparable harm worked, well, emergency relief and the role of intermediate appellate, uh, court courts would look a heck of a lot different. Alito closes by accusing the majority of imposing a 2 billion dollar penalty on American taxpayers. This comes back to the central analytical flaw in the dissent. The penalty to which Alito is referring is the government's underlying legal obligation to pay its debts. Debts aren't a penalty. They're a literal cost of doing business. And if this is the approach that, uh, these four justices are going to take in all of these spending cases to come come, that's more than a little disheartening. So what's next? If you've made it this far, congratulations. As for what comes next, well, I'm not entirely sure. We know that Judge Ali is scheduled to hold a preliminary injunction hearing tomorrow. Thursday. That's today. As you're listening, it's very possible that before then, or shortly thereafter, he will reimpose some kind of pay now mandate with the hints from the Supreme Court majority, is a bit more specific and has a slightly longer timeline. Of course, the government could seek emergency relief from that order, too. But I take today's ruling as a sign that so long as Judge Ali follows the court's clues, at least five justices will be inclined to deny such relief. That doesn't do anything immediately for the plaintiffs and other foreign aid recipients who are continuing to suffer debilitating consequences. But it does suggest that sometime soon, the government really is going to have to pay out at least some of the money at issue in these cases. And as importantly, perhaps other funding cases, too. The broader takeaway though, though, is the role of the court in the Trump cases. This is now the second ruling, including Dellinger, in which the court has, in the same ruling, moved gingerly, but denied the relief that Trump administration is seeking. Two cases are obviously a small data set, but for those hoping, expecting that even this Supreme Court will stand up, at least in some respects, to the Trump administration, I think there's reason to see today's ruling as a modestly positive sign in that direction. Yes, the court could do even more to push back in these cases, but the fact that Trump is already 0 and 2 on emergency applications is, I think, not an accident and a result that may send a message to the lower courts, whether deliberately or not, to keep doing most of what they're doing. Again, everybody go. Subscribe to one first by Steve Platic It'll make you smarter, I promise. All right, everybody stick around. We'll be right back with the good news. Everybody, welcome back. It's time for the good news everyone. Then good news, everyone. And if you have any good news confessions, corrections, you want to, uh, submit any misheard song lyrics Monda Greens we love those whooby stories. I haven't heard a good wubby story in a while. If you have a woobie or a blanket or a stuffed animal that uh, you've had in your family for a long time, we would love to hear about it. I think the oldest one we have so far is like 110 years old or something like that, I can't remember. But, uh, you can send that in and you can also send in your shout outs to yourself, a loved one, a government program that's helped you or a loved one, whether it's Affordable Care Act, SNAP, WIC, the PACT act, which firing these 83,000 veterans is going to make really difficult to get benefits to those folks, whether it's student debt relief or WIC or SNAP or anything, anything at all. Send it to us. And all you got to do to get your submission in is pay your pod pet tax, which means attach a photo of your pet. If you want us to guess the breeds in your shelter pet, we're happy to try. Uh, we suck. Uh, but we're happy to try. It's just fun to look at pet pictures if you don't have that a pet, we can, we have a good time doing it. We do. We have a good time. We can always use an adoptable pet in your area. We can see if we can try to find him a forever home. If you don't have that. Any animal photo off the Internet will do. And if you don't have that baby photos, please send in your baby photos, whether it's you as a baby or a random baby or your neighbor's baby. Just babies. All babies, all the time. Send those to us. And, uh, if you don't have any of those things, we also accept bird watching for the foreseeable future, which is either photos of actual birds or you and family and friends flipping off Trump properties and Musk properties. A, uh, reminder, you can see all of the pod pics if you become a patron of the show. The good news picks are at the bottom of the show notes in each Patreon episode. Episode. That's just one of the perks of subscribing. You also get these episodes the night before they come out to the public. You get them ad free. You get to come to our Zoom happy hour Q&As. Um, sometimes Harry Dunn drops in, sometimes Andy McCabe drops in, sometimes Dana drops in. It's really, really fun. Um, and all the while you're supporting independent media, high paychecks, healthcare, stuff like that. So please become a patron. Patreon.com first up from Victoria Pronoun. She and her thank you for everything Always beans helped me cope. Sending over a couple of things for full, uh, accuracy from Maine. Number one, Sean Faircloth is a fella. He won his special election. Phew. We keep our slim blue majority in the state house. Yay. Number two, the other Mainer you mentioned. Love her. Heather Cox Richardson writes letters from an American. Right. Thank you. Thank you for caring about the details. Please carry on. I'm listening and taking action. Peace and love from the 44th parallel parallel where we tromp around with snowshoes on mainas in the doyad. Thanks, Victoria.
I love it. This one's from Desi Pronouns she and her. I know. Hi. During the disgraceful capitulation, you mentioned some up Texas was doing regarding gender affirming care. This prompted me to seek out organizations helping trans people in Texas. After donating to the first cause, I received a notification saying to check out whether or not my employer does donation matches matching. I had never thought of this. I checked it out and it turns out they do up to $500. So I went ahead and I donated to another trans org as well as ProPublica. I submitted all my receipts and I can't wait to have my donations doubled. I highly encourage everyone to look into their company's donation matching policies. I'm sharing a picture of my pup Margo, who I adopted in 2020. Cute pie.
I love the teeth. Little pity girl. Adorable. Thank you so much for that. Yeah, everybody check out your company's donation matching policies. I didn't think of that. That's a really good point. Next up, from Anonymous, she and her. I just want to give a huge shout out to the Long Island Roller Rebels. That's the roller derby team from Long Island, New York, that has joined up with the NYCLU to fight trans sports bands in Nassau County. I'm a former player and now officiate for the league, and I'm so proud of everyone on the team for fighting and supporting for our trans and non, uh, binary members. Roller derby is for everyone. I've included a picture of my new rescue baby as pet tax. She loves belly rubs, backyard zoomies, and stealing socks. She's nothing but love for everyone. She has nothing but love for everyone she meets. Look at this sweet puppy.
So sweet.
And anonymous. I'm so glad to hear that the roller derby team, the Roller Rebels, um, and that roller derby in general, uh, is. Is. Feels this way. So thank you for letting us know.
Yeah, me too. All right, this is from we. No pronouns. Given the fact that my dog's insurance is better than mine is a bit odd, but I'm glad that it is as good as it is. He's on his way to recovery from leg injuries.
Oh, that's amazing.
I love that sweet, small submission. Thank you. This one is from Jim N. Pronouns. He and him. Dearest Royal Order of the Badass Beans, Queens. I wanted to give an update on my cancer journey and how it's changed my life. I'm almost halfway through the 12 sessions, and instead of pain and bitterness, I'm literally filled with gratitude and love. This journey has also taught me to radically prioritize what's important in life. Being the best husband, dad and friend I can be. But to also not waste time with stupid shit that has no meaning. If you're not going to worry about it on your deathbed, it's just not that important. Important. Speaking of, thank you for all the good trouble you two are up to daily. We are with you and appreciate you both. For my pod pet tax, I've attached my kiddos, my super strong, independent daughter Piper with her mama, and our best boy, Max, with his favorite joy, an empty water bottle. Much love to you both. Oh. Oh, my God. Piper, baby and mama, thank you for this gift of a picture that is pure love right there.
Thank you, Jim. And high five.
For reals yeah.
Thank you. Next up, Bob O. Upon the suggestion of my sister and avid Beans listener, Gina, while riding my bike in West Palm Beach, I stopped across from Mar a Lago to offer my quote unquote, best wishes. Just him flipping off Mar A Lago, Bob. That is a good brother. You're a good brother. Next up. So fucking pissed in Ohio. Hello, Beans. Queens. I had to share my daily calendar with you. Slightly edited. Consider it a bird watching tangential contribution that I hope will make people laugh. Keep doing your good work. You keep me sane and hopeful, and I know I'm speaking for all your listeners. It's a woman in like a 50s woman with pearls and a green colored dress, driving a car. And it says the daily. The best part of being a bird has got to be on Teslas.
Love it.
Awesome. Thanks.
Oh, my goodness. All right, this one's from Maggie. Pronouns, she and her. Hello, Queen Beans. I wanted to share some good trouble from Alabama. All right, everyone listen, because maybe you can get in on this. This week in our community, at the Root Collective organized the Funeral for the Right to Read. A, uh, protest against book bans and censorship being done here in Alabama that particularly targets LGBTQ literature and apparently even a children's author who had the misfortune of having the last name Gay. I heard about this. Yep. We held a symbolic funeral, complete with a coffin where we placed banned books instead of headstones. Honoring this is amazing. Honoring the titles being erased from schools and libraries. For my own children, this fight is deeply personal. I've got three kids, 15 year old twins who will be 16 next month, and a 14 year old. And both of the twins wanted to be a part of the event. One had even asked to give a speech because they had things they wanted to say. Both had even planned on being pallbearers. Oh, my God, I love this. To carry the coffin at the end of the ceremony. And their father, who's a trans. Wow, hold on. And their father, who is a transphobic. Who is transphobic and controlling. I want to make sure I wasn't misreading that. Forbade them from participating, refusing to let them speak out against censorship and the state's attacks on queer youth. Youth on them. He believes I'm brainwashing them into being LGBTQ simply because I support their right to read and exist safely in the world. Now, despite that, the event was an overwhelming success. The at the Root Collective community came together in the most incredible ways. Securing materials, organizing accessibility measures, helping parents sign online waivers, arranging legal observers and medics, and Making sure every participant was safe and supported. After the event, we even held a check in meeting to process emotions, specifically those who had made themselves publicly vulnerable by speaking. Everyone was cared for, including walking each other to their cars and texting the group chat when they got home to confirm their safety. This is a community first movement that refuses to be silent or, uh, compliant. At the Root Collective occasionally partners with Alabama Trans Rights Action Coalition to amplify our impact and its work. Working the media took notice. We were interviewed by outlets and, uh, news outlets and TV stations multiple times over the last two days. And I personally was interviewed today. And we know we made an impression because counter protesters showed up. That just tells you we're doing something right. They may be banning our books, but that just is united. It's united our forces and amplified our voices. Far from being done, we collectively are being intentional about writing the next chapter and sowing seeds of love. In Love, Light, Constructive chaos and good Trouble. Signed Maggie. And Maggie's name is in here. And um, so I'm going to say it. Maggie Minx. And Maggie's got a lot of letters behind her name. Lpc, lcm, hc, ncc, CI. You are very school it, Maggie. Very schooled. And there's a little PS on here because I know there's a tax. I'm including photos of our three glorious black cats, George, Daphne and Batman, snuggling together to peak void cat perfection. And for extra cuteness, a throwback pick of fat man. When we first got him at, uh, just six weeks old, he's grown into a lively and playful companion. But he started as the tiniest chaos goblin. Enjoy. Oh, and pps, I'm also including a few pictures from the funeral so you can see. Okay. That's fucking brilliant.
I know. This is awesome. Absolutely amazing.
Yeah, this is very cool. Thank you. Thank you for the Good Trouble in Alabama.
Yeah, counter protesters. That's just like you said, that you know, you know you're doing it right when people show up to protest what you're doing.
Yeah.
That's so cool. Thank you everybody. Send your good news. And that, by the way, was our installment of Good Trouble today. I really wanted to focus on that for our Good Trouble piece today. But I'll be back with some regular homework tomorrow. But, uh, send in your good news, your good trouble, anything at all you want to send to us. Really, just literally anything. You could send it to us@dailybeanspot.com and click on contact. Do you have any final thoughts before we get out of here? My friend.
I do not think so today.
All right, we'll be back in yours tomorrow with John Fugelsang for Fugal Sang Fridays. Until then, please take care of yourselves, take care of each other, take care of the planet, take care of your mental health, and take care of your family. I've been AG and I've been DG and them's the Beans. The Daily Beans is written and executive produced by Alison Gill with additional research and reporting by Dana Goldberg. Sound design and editing is by Desiree McFarlane with art and web design by Joelle Reader with Moxie Design Studios. Music for the Daily Beans is written and performed by they Might Be Giants and the show is a proud member of the MSW Media Media Network, a collection of creator owned, popular podcasts dedicated to news, politics and justice. For more information, Please visit msw media.com msw media.