Pemikiran

Membaca hanya melengkapi pikiran dengan bahan pengetahuan. Hanya dengan berpikir lah apa yang kita baca menjadi milik kita.—John Locke

Pemikiran

Five Questions for the Secret Service

SPOTLIGHT

2024-08-19

The Most Revealing Moment of a Trump Rally

Aweek before Christmas, an evangelical minister named Paul Terry stood before thousands of Christians, their heads bowed, in Durham, New Hampshire, and pleaded with God for deliverance. The nation was in crisis, he told the Lord—racked with death and addiction, led by wicked men who “rule with imperial disdain.” “With every passing day,” the minister said, “we slip farther and farther into George Orwell’s tyrannical dystopia.”Aweek before Christmas, an evangelical minister named Paul Terry stood before thousands of Christians, their heads bowed, in Durham, New Hampshire, and pleaded with God for deliverance. The nation was in crisis, he told the Lord—racked with death and addiction, led by wicked men who “rule with imperial disdain.” “With every passing day,” the minister said, “we slip farther and farther into George Orwell’s tyrannical dystopia.”Aweek before Christmas, an evangelical minister named Paul Terry stood before thousands of Christians, their heads bowed, in Durham, New Hampshire, and pleaded with God for deliverance. The nation was in crisis, he told the Lord—racked with death and addiction, led by wicked men who “rule with imperial disdain.” “With every passing day,” the minister said, “we slip farther and farther into George Orwell’s tyrannical dystopia.” Aweek before Christmas, an evangelical minister named Paul Terry stood before thousands of Christians, their heads bowed, in Durham, New Hampshire, and pleaded with God for deliverance. The nation was in crisis, he told the Lord—racked with death and addiction, led by wicked men who “rule with imperial disdain.” “With every passing day,” the minister said, “we slip farther and farther into George Orwell’s tyrannical dystopia.”Aweek before Christmas, an evangelical minister named Paul Terry stood before thousands of Christians, their heads bowed, in Durham, New Hampshire, and pleaded with God for deliverance. The nation was in crisis, he told the Lord—racked with death and addiction, led by wicked men who “rule with imperial disdain.” “With every passing day,” the minister said, “we slip farther and farther into George Orwell’s tyrannical dystopia.” Aweek before Christmas, an evangelical minister named Paul Terry stood before thousands of Christians, their heads bowed, in Durham, New Hampshire, and pleaded with God for deliverance. The nation was in crisis, he told the Lord—racked with death and addiction, led by wicked men who “rule with imperial disdain.” “With every passing day,” the minister said, “we slip farther and farther into George Orwell’s tyrannical dystopia.”Aweek before Christmas, an evangelical minister named Paul Terry stood before thousands of Christians, their heads bowed, in Durham, New Hampshire, and pleaded with God for deliverance. The nation was in crisis, he told the Lord—racked with death and addiction, led by wicked men who “rule with imperial disdain.” “With every passing day,” the minister said, “we slip farther and farther into George Orwell’s tyrannical dystopia.”

2024-08-08

The Broligarchs Are Trying to Have Their Way

Eight years ago, the PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel was an outlier in liberal Silicon Valley for publicly supporting Donald Trump. But now a number of prominent male tech plutocrats who previously opposed the former president have done an about-face: These broligarchs are publicly endorsing and donating to the Republican candidate—and revealing a lot about their own priorities. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who according to his biographer once waited in line for six hours to shake Barack Obama’s hand, was planning to donate $45 million a month to a super PAC supporting Trump’s campaign. Musk later denied making the offer, but he reiterated his support for Trump, despite the former president’s effort to overturn the 2020 election and his criticism of electric vehicles. After backing Joe Biden in 2020, Musk has grown sharply critical of Democrats on a range of issues. Eight years ago, the PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel was an outlier in liberal Silicon Valley for publicly supporting Donald Trump. But now a number of prominent male tech plutocrats who previously opposed the former president have done an about-face: These broligarchs are publicly endorsing and donating to the Republican candidate—and revealing a lot about their own priorities. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who according to his biographer once waited in line for six hours to shake Barack Obama’s hand, was planning to donate $45 million a month to a super PAC supporting Trump’s campaign. Musk later denied making the offer, but he reiterated his support for Trump, despite the former president’s effort to overturn the 2020 election and his criticism of electric vehicles. After backing Joe Biden in 2020, Musk has grown sharply critical of Democrats on a range of issues.Eight years ago, the PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel was an outlier in liberal Silicon Valley for publicly supporting Donald Trump. But now a number of prominent male tech plutocrats who previously opposed the former president have done an about-face: These broligarchs are publicly endorsing and donating to the Republican candidate—and revealing a lot about their own priorities. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who according to his biographer once waited in line for six hours to shake Barack Obama’s hand, was planning to donate $45 million a month to a super PAC supporting Trump’s campaign. Musk later denied making the offer, but he reiterated his support for Trump, despite the former president’s effort to overturn the 2020 election and his criticism of electric vehicles. After backing Joe Biden in 2020, Musk has grown sharply critical of Democrats on a range of issues. Eight years ago, the PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel was an outlier in liberal Silicon Valley for publicly supporting Donald Trump. But now a number of prominent male tech plutocrats who previously opposed the former president have done an about-face: These broligarchs are publicly endorsing and donating to the Republican candidate—and revealing a lot about their own priorities. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who according to his biographer once waited in line for six hours to shake Barack Obama’s hand, was planning to donate $45 million a month to a super PAC supporting Trump’s campaign. Musk later denied making the offer, but he reiterated his support for Trump, despite the former president’s effort to overturn the 2020 election and his criticism of electric vehicles. After backing Joe Biden in 2020, Musk has grown sharply critical of Democrats on a range of issues. Eight years ago, the PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel was an outlier in liberal Silicon Valley for publicly supporting Donald Trump. But now a number of prominent male tech plutocrats who previously opposed the former president have done an about-face: These broligarchs are publicly endorsing and donating to the Republican candidate—and revealing a lot about their own priorities. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who according to his biographer once waited in line for six hours to shake Barack Obama’s hand, was planning to donate $45 million a month to a super PAC supporting Trump’s campaign. Musk later denied making the offer, but he reiterated his support for Trump, despite the former president’s effort to overturn the 2020 election and his criticism of electric vehicles. After backing Joe Biden in 2020, Musk has grown sharply critical of Democrats on a range of issues.

2024-08-02

The Post-liberal Catholics Find Their Man

But Trump’s choice of J. D. Vance as his running mate puts a spotlight on a different faction of the religious right: the so-called post-liberal Catholics, who have been Vance’s friends, allies, and interlocutors since his 2019 conversion to Catholicism (he was raised Protestant) and transformation into a MAGA Republican shortly after. This group of Catholic intellectuals—which includes Patrick Deneen of Notre Dame, Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School, and Sohrab Ahmari, a founder and an editor of the eclectically populist magazine Compact—is known for its sweeping attack on classical liberalism. It claims that a long list of contemporary problems (rising rates of economic inequality, drug addiction, suicide, homelessness, childlessness) can be traced back to moral-philosophical errors made centuries ago by the American Founders and their ideological progenitors. In place of our polity’s commitment to individual rights, autonomy, and pluralism, the post-liberals aim to create a society unified around the common good, which is itself fixed on a theological vision of the Highest Good.But Trump’s choice of J. D. Vance as his running mate puts a spotlight on a different faction of the religious right: the so-called post-liberal Catholics, who have been Vance’s friends, allies, and interlocutors since his 2019 conversion to Catholicism (he was raised Protestant) and transformation into a MAGA Republican shortly after. This group of Catholic intellectuals—which includes Patrick Deneen of Notre Dame, Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School, and Sohrab Ahmari, a founder and an editor of the eclectically populist magazine Compact—is known for its sweeping attack on classical liberalism. It claims that a long list of contemporary problems (rising rates of economic inequality, drug addiction, suicide, homelessness, childlessness) can be traced back to moral-philosophical errors made centuries ago by the American Founders and their ideological progenitors. In place of our polity’s commitment to individual rights, autonomy, and pluralism, the post-liberals aim to create a society unified around the common good, which is itself fixed on a theological vision of the Highest Good. But Trump’s choice of J. D. Vance as his running mate puts a spotlight on a different faction of the religious right: the so-called post-liberal Catholics, who have been Vance’s friends, allies, and interlocutors since his 2019 conversion to Catholicism (he was raised Protestant) and transformation into a MAGA Republican shortly after. This group of Catholic intellectuals—which includes Patrick Deneen of Notre Dame, Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School, and Sohrab Ahmari, a founder and an editor of the eclectically populist magazine Compact—is known for its sweeping attack on classical liberalism. It claims that a long list of contemporary problems (rising rates of economic inequality, drug addiction, suicide, homelessness, childlessness) can be traced back to moral-philosophical errors made centuries ago by the American Founders and their ideological progenitors. In place of our polity’s commitment to individual rights, autonomy, and pluralism, the post-liberals aim to create a society unified around the common good, which is itself fixed on a theological vision of the Highest Good. But Trump’s choice of J. D. Vance as his running mate puts a spotlight on a different faction of the religious right: the so-called post-liberal Catholics, who have been Vance’s friends, allies, and interlocutors since his 2019 conversion to Catholicism (he was raised Protestant) and transformation into a MAGA Republican shortly after. This group of Catholic intellectuals—which includes Patrick Deneen of Notre Dame, Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School, and Sohrab Ahmari, a founder and an editor of the eclectically populist magazine Compact—is known for its sweeping attack on classical liberalism. It claims that a long list of contemporary problems (rising rates of economic inequality, drug addiction, suicide, homelessness, childlessness) can be traced back to moral-philosophical errors made centuries ago by the American Founders and their ideological progenitors. In place of our polity’s commitment to individual rights, autonomy, and pluralism, the post-liberals aim to create a society unified around the common good, which is itself fixed on a theological vision of the Highest Good. But Trump’s choice of J. D. Vance as his running mate puts a spotlight on a different faction of the religious right: the so-called post-liberal Catholics, who have been Vance’s friends, allies, and interlocutors since his 2019 conversion to Catholicism (he was raised Protestant) and transformation into a MAGA Republican shortly after. This group of Catholic intellectuals—which includes Patrick Deneen of Notre Dame, Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School, and Sohrab Ahmari, a founder and an editor of the eclectically populist magazine Compact—is known for its sweeping attack on classical liberalism. It claims that a long list of contemporary problems (rising rates of economic inequality, drug addiction, suicide, homelessness, childlessness) can be traced back to moral-philosophical errors made centuries ago by the American Founders and their ideological progenitors. In place of our polity’s commitment to individual rights, autonomy, and pluralism, the post-liberals aim to create a society unified around the common good, which is itself fixed on a theological vision of the Highest Good.But Trump’s choice of J. D. Vance as his running mate puts a spotlight on a different faction of the religious right: the so-called post-liberal Catholics, who have been Vance’s friends, allies, and interlocutors since his 2019 conversion to Catholicism (he was raised Protestant) and transformation into a MAGA Republican shortly after. This group of Catholic intellectuals—which includes Patrick Deneen of Notre Dame, Adrian Vermeule of Harvard Law School, and Sohrab Ahmari, a founder and an editor of the eclectically populist magazine Compact—is known for its sweeping attack on classical liberalism. It claims that a long list of contemporary problems (rising rates of economic inequality, drug addiction, suicide, homelessness, childlessness) can be traced back to moral-philosophical errors made centuries ago by the American Founders and their ideological progenitors. In place of our polity’s commitment to individual rights, autonomy, and pluralism, the post-liberals aim to create a society unified around the common good, which is itself fixed on a theological vision of the Highest Good.

2024-08-12

How to Make #MeToo Offenders Pa

Last year, the journalist Aebra Coe published a bombshell story in Law360, a trade publication for people in the legal profession. The article, titled “‘I Suffered Silently’: Ex-Law Prof Allegedly Preyed on Students,” broke the news that Joshua Wright, then a law professor at George Mason University School of Law and the former commissioner of the Federal Trade Commision, had allegedly pressured female students and workplace subordinates into sexual relationships. Two women lawyers, Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry, participated in Title IX proceedings against Wright in 2021, before speaking to Coe. After the article’s publication, Wright sued Dorsey and Landry for $108 million, claiming that they had defamed him in their statements to Law360. Wright admitted to sleeping with his students and subordinates, but claimed that the sex was consensual and the two women were simply “scorned former lovers.” Wright’s lawsuit was initially thrown out by a Virginia judge who gave Wright the opportunity to file an amended complaint, which he did. This suit stuck, and the defamation claims are now set for trial in March 2025. (A representative for Wright told me that this suit has survived motions to dismiss, and that the essence of his complaint is not that Dorsey and Landry “outed” him, but that they allegedly lied about their consent and episodes of assault.)Last year, the journalist Aebra Coe published a bombshell story in Law360, a trade publication for people in the legal profession. The article, titled “‘I Suffered Silently’: Ex-Law Prof Allegedly Preyed on Students,” broke the news that Joshua Wright, then a law professor at George Mason University School of Law and the former commissioner of the Federal Trade Commision, had allegedly pressured female students and workplace subordinates into sexual relationships. Two women lawyers, Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry, participated in Title IX proceedings against Wright in 2021, before speaking to Coe. After the article’s publication, Wright sued Dorsey and Landry for $108 million, claiming that they had defamed him in their statements to Law360. Wright admitted to sleeping with his students and subordinates, but claimed that the sex was consensual and the two women were simply “scorned former lovers.” Wright’s lawsuit was initially thrown out by a Virginia judge who gave Wright the opportunity to file an amended complaint, which he did. This suit stuck, and the defamation claims are now set for trial in March 2025. (A representative for Wright told me that this suit has survived motions to dismiss, and that the essence of his complaint is not that Dorsey and Landry “outed” him, but that they allegedly lied about their consent and episodes of assault.) Last year, the journalist Aebra Coe published a bombshell story in Law360, a trade publication for people in the legal profession. The article, titled “‘I Suffered Silently’: Ex-Law Prof Allegedly Preyed on Students,” broke the news that Joshua Wright, then a law professor at George Mason University School of Law and the former commissioner of the Federal Trade Commision, had allegedly pressured female students and workplace subordinates into sexual relationships. Two women lawyers, Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry, participated in Title IX proceedings against Wright in 2021, before speaking to Coe. After the article’s publication, Wright sued Dorsey and Landry for $108 million, claiming that they had defamed him in their statements to Law360. Wright admitted to sleeping with his students and subordinates, but claimed that the sex was consensual and the two women were simply “scorned former lovers.” Wright’s lawsuit was initially thrown out by a Virginia judge who gave Wright the opportunity to file an amended complaint, which he did. This suit stuck, and the defamation claims are now set for trial in March 2025. (A representative for Wright told me that this suit has survived motions to dismiss, and that the essence of his complaint is not that Dorsey and Landry “outed” him, but that they allegedly lied about their consent and episodes of assault.) Last year, the journalist Aebra Coe published a bombshell story in Law360, a trade publication for people in the legal profession. The article, titled “‘I Suffered Silently’: Ex-Law Prof Allegedly Preyed on Students,” broke the news that Joshua Wright, then a law professor at George Mason University School of Law and the former commissioner of the Federal Trade Commision, had allegedly pressured female students and workplace subordinates into sexual relationships. Two women lawyers, Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry, participated in Title IX proceedings against Wright in 2021, before speaking to Coe. After the article’s publication, Wright sued Dorsey and Landry for $108 million, claiming that they had defamed him in their statements to Law360. Wright admitted to sleeping with his students and subordinates, but claimed that the sex was consensual and the two women were simply “scorned former lovers.” Wright’s lawsuit was initially thrown out by a Virginia judge who gave Wright the opportunity to file an amended complaint, which he did. This suit stuck, and the defamation claims are now set for trial in March 2025. (A representative for Wright told me that this suit has survived motions to dismiss, and that the essence of his complaint is not that Dorsey and Landry “outed” him, but that they allegedly lied about their consent and episodes of assault.)Last year, the journalist Aebra Coe published a bombshell story in Law360, a trade publication for people in the legal profession. The article, titled “‘I Suffered Silently’: Ex-Law Prof Allegedly Preyed on Students,” broke the news that Joshua Wright, then a law professor at George Mason University School of Law and the former commissioner of the Federal Trade Commision, had allegedly pressured female students and workplace subordinates into sexual relationships. Two women lawyers, Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry, participated in Title IX proceedings against Wright in 2021, before speaking to Coe. After the article’s publication, Wright sued Dorsey and Landry for $108 million, claiming that they had defamed him in their statements to Law360. Wright admitted to sleeping with his students and subordinates, but claimed that the sex was consensual and the two women were simply “scorned former lovers.” Wright’s lawsuit was initially thrown out by a Virginia judge who gave Wright the opportunity to file an amended complaint, which he did. This suit stuck, and the defamation claims are now set for trial in March 2025. (A representative for Wright told me that this suit has survived motions to dismiss, and that the essence of his complaint is not that Dorsey and Landry “outed” him, but that they allegedly lied about their consent and episodes of assault.)

2024-08-03

Why Kamala Harris’s Politics Are So Hard to Pin Down

The Trump campaign says that Kamala Harris is a radical leftist. The far left fears that she’s a neoliberal cop. They can’t both be right. But pinning down exactly where the vice president and Democratic nominee for president sits on the political spectrum is not so easy. She has gone from her first state-level election to the top of the presidential ticket in 14 years, far faster than Joe Biden, and she spent much of that time in positions that don’t provide an extensive record on a wide range of policy issues. During her 2020 presidential bid, she took some positions to the left of her prior record—several of which she’s now walked back in her current bid for president. The Trump campaign says that Kamala Harris is a radical leftist. The far left fears that she’s a neoliberal cop. They can’t both be right.The Trump campaign says that Kamala Harris is a radical leftist. The far left fears that she’s a neoliberal cop. They can’t both be right. But pinning down exactly where the vice president and Democratic nominee for president sits on the political spectrum is not so easy. She has gone from her first state-level election to the top of the presidential ticket in 14 years, far faster than Joe Biden, and she spent much of that time in positions that don’t provide an extensive record on a wide range of policy issues. During her 2020 presidential bid, she took some positions to the left of her prior record—several of which she’s now walked back in her current bid for president. But pinning down exactly where the vice president and Democratic nominee for president sits on the political spectrum is not so easy. She has gone from her first state-level election to the top of the presidential ticket in 14 years, far faster than Joe Biden, and she spent much of that time in positions that don’t provide an extensive record on a wide range of policy issues. During her 2020 presidential bid, she took some positions to the left of her prior record—several of which she’s now walked back in her current bid for president. The Trump campaign says that Kamala Harris is a radical leftist. The far left fears that she’s a neoliberal cop. They can’t both be right. But pinning down exactly where the vice president and Democratic nominee for president sits on the political spectrum is not so easy. She has gone from her first state-level election to the top of the presidential ticket in 14 years, far faster than Joe Biden, and she spent much of that time in positions that don’t provide an extensive record on a wide range of policy issues. During her 2020 presidential bid, she took some positions to the left of her prior record—several of which she’s now walked back in her current bid for president. The Trump campaign says that Kamala Harris is a radical leftist. The far left fears that she’s a neoliberal cop. They can’t both be right. But pinning down exactly where the vice president and Democratic nominee for president sits on the political spectrum is not so easy. She has gone from her first state-level election to the top of the presidential ticket in 14 years, far faster than Joe Biden, and she spent much of that time in positions that don’t provide an extensive record on a wide range of policy issues. During her 2020 presidential bid, she took some positions to the left of her prior record—several of which she’s now walked back in her current bid for president.The Trump campaign says that Kamala Harris is a radical leftist. The far left fears that she’s a neoliberal cop. They can’t both be right. But pinning down exactly where the vice president and Democratic nominee for president sits on the political spectrum is not so easy. She has gone from her first state-level election to the top of the presidential ticket in 14 years, far faster than Joe Biden, and she spent much of that time in positions that don’t provide an extensive record on a wide range of policy issues. During her 2020 presidential bid, she took some positions to the left of her prior record—several of which she’s now walked back in her current bid for president.

My Criminal Record Somehow Vanished

Sixteen years ago, during my last semester of law school, I caused a drunk-driving crash that killed my girlfriend. I pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and faced up to a decade in prison, but thanks to my girlfriend’s family’s forgiveness and whatever unearned sympathy I received as a middle-class white man, my sentence amounted to a few months in jail followed by several years on probation. Considering the sentences faced by many, I’d been very lucky. Ever since, I’ve been among the 80 million Americans living with a criminal record and all its consequences. I’ve fantasized about what my life would be like if my record simply vanished. Not long ago, it sort of did—one more instance of a system that’s not just unjust but also capricious and poorly administered. Sixteen years ago, during my last semester of law school, I caused a drunk-driving crash that killed my girlfriend. I pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and faced up to a decade in prison, but thanks to my girlfriend’s family’s forgiveness and whatever unearned sympathy I received as a middle-class white man, my sentence amounted to a few months in jail followed by several years on probation. Considering the sentences faced by many, I’d been very lucky. Ever since, I’ve been among the 80 million Americans living with a criminal record and all its consequences. I’ve fantasized about what my life would be like if my record simply vanished. Not long ago, it sort of did—one more instance of a system that’s not just unjust but also capricious and poorly administered.Sixteen years ago, during my last semester of law school, I caused a drunk-driving crash that killed my girlfriend. I pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and faced up to a decade in prison, but thanks to my girlfriend’s family’s forgiveness and whatever unearned sympathy I received as a middle-class white man, my sentence amounted to a few months in jail followed by several years on probation. Considering the sentences faced by many, I’d been very lucky. Ever since, I’ve been among the 80 million Americans living with a criminal record and all its consequences. I’ve fantasized about what my life would be like if my record simply vanished. Not long ago, it sort of did—one more instance of a system that’s not just unjust but also capricious and poorly administered. Sixteen years ago, during my last semester of law school, I caused a drunk-driving crash that killed my girlfriend. I pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and faced up to a decade in prison, but thanks to my girlfriend’s family’s forgiveness and whatever unearned sympathy I received as a middle-class white man, my sentence amounted to a few months in jail followed by several years on probation. Considering the sentences faced by many, I’d been very lucky. Ever since, I’ve been among the 80 million Americans living with a criminal record and all its consequences. I’ve fantasized about what my life would be like if my record simply vanished. Not long ago, it sort of did—one more instance of a system that’s not just unjust but also capricious and poorly administered. Sixteen years ago, during my last semester of law school, I caused a drunk-driving crash that killed my girlfriend. I pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and faced up to a decade in prison, but thanks to my girlfriend’s family’s forgiveness and whatever unearned sympathy I received as a middle-class white man, my sentence amounted to a few months in jail followed by several years on probation. Considering the sentences faced by many, I’d been very lucky. Ever since, I’ve been among the 80 million Americans living with a criminal record and all its consequences. I’ve fantasized about what my life would be like if my record simply vanished. Not long ago, it sort of did—one more instance of a system that’s not just unjust but also capricious and poorly administered.Sixteen years ago, during my last semester of law school, I caused a drunk-driving crash that killed my girlfriend. I pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and faced up to a decade in prison, but thanks to my girlfriend’s family’s forgiveness and whatever unearned sympathy I received as a middle-class white man, my sentence amounted to a few months in jail followed by several years on probation. Considering the sentences faced by many, I’d been very lucky. Ever since, I’ve been among the 80 million Americans living with a criminal record and all its consequences. I’ve fantasized about what my life would be like if my record simply vanished. Not long ago, it sort of did—one more instance of a system that’s not just unjust but also capricious and poorly administered. Sixteen years ago, during my last semester of law school, I caused a drunk-driving crash that killed my girlfriend. I pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and faced up to a decade in prison, but thanks to my girlfriend’s family’s forgiveness and whatever unearned sympathy I received as a middle-class white man, my sentence amounted to a few months in jail followed by several years on probation. Considering the sentences faced by many, I’d been very lucky. Ever since, I’ve been among the 80 million Americans living with a criminal record and all its consequences. I’ve fantasized about what my life would be like if my record simply vanished. Not long ago, it sort of did—one more instance of a system that’s not just unjust but also capricious and poorly administered.

Mark O'Brien

2024-08-29