Discussion about this post

User's avatar
W. A. Lawrence's avatar

Commenting Guidelines

Please keep conversations civil, substantive, and relevant to the published work.

* Do not promote other Substacks. The comment section provides space for substantive engagement with the published work, rather than redirecting readers elsewhere.

* Avoid profanity.

* Address opposing viewpoints through reasoned, good-faith argument.

* Do not insult, disparage, or personally attack fellow commenters.

Rigorous debate and differing perspectives are welcome. Comments that violate these guidelines will be removed

Dino Alonso's avatar

Wendy’s piece is doing serious work and the Texas comparison she surfaces is the most important observation in it, I believe. Let’s hang out there.

Greg Abbott seized Eagle Pass parkland in January 2024, blocked Border Patrol access, and kept installing razor wire after losing at the Supreme Court. The Biden administration sued, preserved federal payments, issued no criminal subpoenas, and deployed no troops. Abbott faced lawyers. That’s it. Lawyers.

Now run the same comparison from the other direction. Janet Mills resists a transgender sports order and Maine loses university funding, faces Operation Catch of the Day with a hundred agents, and buries a 26-year-old father shot by a federal officer who lacked a body camera five months after Congress appropriated money for them. Gavin Newsom challenges a military deployment and gets Marines, a judicial finding of Posse Comitatus violations, and a presidential suggestion that his arrest might be appropriate. Tim Walz, Jacob Frey, and Keith Ellison get federal subpoenas that a judge later quashes for harassment and insufficient evidence.

Same constitutional resistance, categorically different consequences. If that pattern showed up in a foreign government’s conduct we’d have a name for it before the second cup of coffee. Good grief, we have a name for it here too, yanno. Selective enforcement operating at a national scale. Anyone who’s spent time inside big institutions knows what it looks like when it’s deliberate and sustained. The law isn’t the point. The target is.

Selective enforcement is one of the oldest tools of political repression, and it works precisely because it doesn’t require a written directive. You don’t need a memo ordering agents to treat Democratic governors differently. You need a culture where the people making operational decisions understand which direction the pressure should flow, and leadership that protects personnel when they get it right. The plausible deniability comes built in.

What the Texas comparison makes undeniable is that the pressure flows one direction consistently, across multiple states, multiple agencies, multiple legal rationales, and multiple months. Maine, Minnesota, California. Funding, agents, troops, subpoenas, and in three cases, bullets. Individual incidents can be explained away. Patterns can’t.

Joan Sebastian Guerrero’s daughter was wearing a pink backpack when her father died. I don’t have anything analytical to add to that. I just think we should say his name before we move on, because the argument matters more when we remember who it’s actually about.

The law applies equally or it isn’t law. That’s the gist of it, and right now in Maine and Minnesota and California it isn’t applying equally.

November puts one question to voters. Does that change, or does the pattern get a mandate.

15 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?