SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
paul manafort
MAGA's Global Roots: Why 'America First' Isn't American
To effectively counter MAGA, it must be accurately framed, not as an embodiment of American exceptionalism, but as part of a global populist strategy.
Jan 25, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump's early actions in his second term under the "Make America Great Again," or MAGA, banner prioritized populist rhetoric over national interests. Withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement and the World Health Organization further isolated the United States and eroded its global leadership. Domestically, policies like federal hiring freezes, attempts to redefine birthright citizenship, and pardons for January 6 participants deepened national divisions and hindered effective governance. Meanwhile, rolling back protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity or removing resources like the reproductiverights.gov website directly targeted "unworthy" groups of Americans. Although these actions energized his base, they sacrificed long-term stability and progress for short-term political gains. Beneath the "America First" rhetoric, these divisive policies weakened the country both at home and abroad.
The MAGA movement, championed by Trump during his 2016 campaign, is often framed as a uniquely American phenomenon. With promises to restore manufacturing jobs, secure borders, and challenge global elites, MAGA tapped into deep-seated grievances within the American electorate. However, while its slogans and imagery evoke American exceptionalism, its ideological and strategic foundations are not exclusive to the United States. Instead, MAGA represents a chapter in the global populist playbook that has been refined and exported across borders in recent decades.
To effectively counter MAGA, it must be accurately framed, not as an embodiment of American exceptionalism, but as part of a global populist strategy. Democrats and other opponents have struggled to expose its true nature, allowing it to masquerade as a grassroots response to American grievances. In reality, MAGA draws heavily from international populist tactics, employing nationalism, scapegoating, and anti-globalist conspiracy theories to consolidate. This is not about a secret "populist cabal" but about recognizing the shared strategies of political programs to counter them effectively. This challenge extends to all activists and policymakers working to counter MAGA's agenda of racism, xenophobia, and authoritarianism.
By recognizing MAGA as part of this global trend, its origins, contradictions, and vulnerabilities become clearer, providing a critical framework for countering its divisive agenda.
Recognizing MAGA's universal nature highlights its contradictions. While claiming to champion "the people," it advances policies that benefit elites, marginalize vulnerable communities, and undermine protections for workers and the environment. Situating MAGA within the broader context of global populism dismantles its American exceptionalist narrative, exposing its rhetoric as hollow and manipulative. This reframing is essential to addressing the systemic issues MAGA exploits and protecting democracy from its corrosive impact.
At its core, MAGA embodies a classic populist framework, dividing society into two opposing groups: the "pure" people and the "corrupt" elites or perceived enemies. While rooted in American political history, its binary "us vs. them" rhetoric mirrors strategies employed by populist leaders worldwide. MAGA's blend of nationalism, anti-immigration policies, economic protectionism, and cultural grievances aligns with populist campaigns in regions as diverse as Europe and Latin America. From Viktor Orbán's nationalist agenda in Hungary to Marine Le Pen's rebranding of far-right politics in France, the tools and messaging of modern populism have become strikingly uniform across borders. Far from an organic response to collective grievances, it is a calculated political strategy tailored to the cultural and domestic contexts of each country.
Much of MAGA's populist DNA can be traced to the political consulting work of Paul Manafort, a pivotal figure in Donald Trump's 2016 campaign. Before working with Trump, Manafort refined his strategies in Ukraine, where he advised pro-Russian leader Viktor Yanukovych, who was later deposed following the Maidan protests and the Revolution of Dignity. Yanukovych's campaigns relied on nationalism, cultural division, and anti-elite rhetoric to consolidate power. These were tactics Manafort later brought to Trump's campaign, including the use of disinformation, targeted messaging, and framing Trump as an outsider fighting entrenched elites.
Manafort first entered Ukrainian politics during the Orange Revolution of 2004, when widespread protests erupted over electoral fraud favoring Yanukovych in a contentious runoff election. Following massive demonstrations, Ukraine's Supreme Court annulled the results and ordered a revote, which resulted in a decisive victory for Yanukovych's opponent, Viktor Yushchenko. While Manafort's initial efforts failed, his subsequent tenure as a campaign consultant for Yanukovych and the Party of Regions proved more successful.
Manafort is widely credited with shaping the Party of Regions' slogans and political rhetoric, emphasizing themes like the "threat of NATO" and the "suppression of the Russian language in Ukraine." These strategies deepened cultural and linguistic divisions within Ukraine, particularly alienating Russian-speaking communities in the country's east. He also crafted slogans appealing to national pride and promises of immediate improvement, such as "Improving Your Life Already Today" (Ukrainian: "Покращення життя вже сьогодні"). This approach sought to resonate with citizens' desire for swift change while portraying Yanukovych as the champion of "Ukraine first" policies in contrast to his rival, then-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.
The Party of Regions portrayed Tymoshenko's pro-European integration agenda as a threat to Ukraine's sovereignty and traditional values. Their rhetoric suggested that closer ties with NATO and the E.U. would usher in liberal policies, including those supporting LGBTQ rights, which they argued would undermine Ukraine's cultural identity. By framing Western institutions as cultural aggressors, the Party of Regions positioned itself as a defender of national values, effectively galvanizing conservative segments of the population against perceived external threats.
Manafort also orchestrated sophisticated disinformation campaigns to undermine Tymoshenko and then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. This included creating a fake think tank to spread negative narratives through media outlets and manipulating online platforms to disseminate false information. Tymoshenko, like Yushchenko before her, was branded as a pro-American radical who prioritized foreign interests over Ukraine's well-being. These tactics, honed in Ukraine's politically fractured environment, were later adapted to resonate with the grievances and cultural divides of the American electorate.
While Manafort's role in shaping Trump's campaign was significant, his strategies are part of a broader international trend. MAGA's populism is not a spontaneous eruption of uniquely American discontent but a chapter in the global populist playbook. From exploiting cultural divisions to leveraging "anti-globalist" conspiracy theories, these methods have been employed, refined, and exported by populist leaders worldwide.
Understanding MAGA within this international context underscores the interconnected nature of modern politics, where ideas and strategies transcend national boundaries to influence movements across diverse cultural and political landscapes. By recognizing MAGA as part of this global trend, its origins, contradictions, and vulnerabilities become clearer, providing a critical framework for countering its divisive agenda.
Thousands of miles away from the U.S., a supporter of Romanian far-right candidate Călin Georgescu, who campaigned under a "Romania First" slogan, starkly declared: "She [Elena Lasconi] will pass a law on marriage between two men, I cannot accept such a thing," while asserting that Romania needed "a capable man to lead us, not a woman." Statements like these exploit cultural anxieties to galvanize conservative support, a hallmark of global populist movements.
The early 2000s marked the rise of a powerful wave of populism across Europe, fueled by economic stagnation, cultural insecurities, and widespread disillusionment with traditional political elites. This period saw far-right movements rebranding themselves as defenders of the "ordinary citizen" against globalist, technocratic, and multicultural agendas. Leaders such as Marine Le Pen in France, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, and Matteo Salvini in Italy capitalized on these dynamics, reshaping the political landscape through nationalist rhetoric and anti-immigrant sentiment.
Marine Le Pen's leadership of the National Front (later renamed National Rally) exemplified the far-right's strategic makeover. While her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, had built the party on overt racism and xenophobia, Marine sought to soften its image without abandoning its core nationalist message. She framed immigration—particularly from Muslim-majority countries—as a threat to French identity and values, tapping into fears of cultural erosion.
Le Pen also embraced Euroscepticism, portraying the European Union as a bureaucratic overreach that undermined France's sovereignty. By combining economic protectionism with cultural grievance, she expanded the party's appeal beyond far-right fringes, positioning it as a populist alternative to the French political establishment.
In the Netherlands, Geert Wilders' Party for Freedom adopted an equally divisive platform. Wilders presented himself as a staunch defender of Dutch culture, depicting immigration and multiculturalism as existential threats. His rhetoric painted Islam as incompatible with Western values, using inflammatory language to link immigration with terrorism.
Wilders also criticized the European Union, framing it as an elitist institution disconnected from ordinary citizens. Like Le Pen, he weaponized nationalist sentiments to challenge liberal democratic norms, portraying his movement as a bulwark against an overly accommodating political elite.
In Southern Europe, populism took on a more authoritarian tone under leaders like Matteo Salvini. As head of the League (formerly the Northern League), Salvini shifted the party's focus from regional separatism to a nationalist agenda. He vilified immigrants, often blaming them for economic hardship and cultural decline.
Salvini's rhetoric resonated deeply with Italian voters grappling with the aftershocks of the 2008 financial crisis. His rise to prominence illustrated how economic grievances and cultural fears could be weaponized to undermine establishment parties. Salvini also positioned himself as a critic of European integration, calling for stronger national sovereignty and rejecting E.U.-imposed policies.
Across the Atlantic, Trump's 2016 campaign borrowed heavily from the European populist playbook. Trump frequently employed anti-Muslim rhetoric, framing Muslim communities as security threats and proposing a "total and complete shutdown" of Muslims entering the United States. This culminated in the so-called Muslim Ban, a series of executive orders restricting travel from several predominantly Muslim countries.
Trump justified these policies as necessary for national security, leveraging fear and xenophobia to energize his base. Simultaneously, he criticized global institutions like the United Nations, portraying it as an encroachment on American sovereignty. This "America First" rhetoric closely mirrored themes seen in Viktor Yanukovych's pro-Russian campaigns in Ukraine, where nationalism and cultural division were used to consolidate power.
Trump's populist appeal also pitted him against establishment Republicans, a trend that had gained momentum during the Tea Party movement. By labeling establishment figures as "Republicans in Name Only" (RINOs), Trump positioned himself as the voice of disenfranchised Americans battling entrenched elites.
The European populist wave demonstrated a remarkable ability to adapt its messaging to local contexts while drawing on common themes of nationalism, anti-globalization, and cultural conservatism. Leaders like Le Pen, Wilders, and Salvini pioneered tactics that not only reshaped their own political landscapes but also provided a blueprint for populist movements worldwide.
The modern American populist movement that evolved into MAGA traces its roots to the Tea Party, a movement that rose to prominence in the late 2000s with significant backing from the Koch network. Many of Trump's staunchest supporters within the Republican Party have roots in the Tea Party, highlighting a continuity of populist sentiment. Studies have shown that individuals who supported the Tea Party in the early 2010s were more likely to align with Trump's agenda in subsequent years, demonstrating the movement's lasting influence on the Republican Party's ideological trajectory.
A key figure in this transition was Steve Bannon, the co-founder of Breitbart News and later the CEO of Trump's 2016 campaign. Breitbart News played a pivotal role in promoting Tea Party ideas and candidates, amplifying the movement's anti-establishment and nationalist messaging. By the mid-2010s, Bannon was leveraging the momentum of the Tea Party to advance a more explicitly nationalist agenda, aligning himself with Trump and broadening the scope of American populism.
Bannon's strategic vision extended beyond the United States. He actively sought to unify and strengthen populist movements in Europe, forging connections with right-wing parties and leaders. His efforts aimed to create a global network of populist movements united by shared principles of nationalism, anti-globalism, and opposition to progressive international institutions. By fostering these alliances, Bannon sought to build a cohesive international populist front that could challenge the global liberal order.
By understanding its connections to international populism, it becomes clear that MAGA is a calculated political construct rather than a genuine grassroots movement.
The transition from the Tea Party to MAGA underscores the evolution of modern American populism. While the Tea Party emphasized economic grievances and a distrust of government, MAGA expanded its appeal through cultural and nationalist rhetoric, effectively reshaping the Republican Party's identity. Bannon's role as a bridge between these movements highlights the deliberate efforts to harness and repurpose the Tea Party's energy for a broader populist agenda.
By situating MAGA within this lineage and connecting it to international populist trends, it becomes clear that modern populism is neither a spontaneous phenomenon nor a uniquely American one. Instead, it reflects a calculated and evolving strategy that draws from shared grievances and ideological frameworks to build power both domestically and globally.
Alexander Dugin, the Russian political philosopher and architect of Eurasianism, has played a significant role in shaping contemporary populist ideology. His Fourth Political Theory rejects the supremacy of liberal democracy, offering an alternative that combines traditionalism with elements of socialism and nationalism. This framework provides ideological backing for populist leaders seeking to distance themselves from Western liberal values, advocating a return to traditional cultural and religious norms.
A similar narrative has emerged in the United States, where "liberal values" are portrayed as an external, malevolent force threatening Western traditions. This narrative creates a shared ideological foundation among global populist movements, highlighting their interconnected strategies while adapting to different cultural contexts.
The convergence of these ideologies highlights a broader trend in modern populism: the collaboration and exchange of ideas among populist leaders worldwide. This interconnectedness has enabled the rapid dissemination of populist rhetoric and strategies, strengthening the global populist movement. Parallel populist victories in Europe and the rise of MAGA in the United States underscore the growing international reach and influence of these movements.
Modern populism also facilitates and normalizes the presence of far-right radical groups. In the United States, MAGA exhibits subtle overlaps with Third Position politics in its emphasis on "America First" nationalism and critiques of globalism. Trump's appeal to the working class, paired with his anti-elite and protectionist economic rhetoric, reflects a syncretic approach. Like the Third Position's rejection of both capitalist elites and socialist internationalism, MAGA positions itself as a champion of the "forgotten" American worker while opposing progressive social movements.
This fusion of cultural conservatism and economic populism resonates with a wide range of disillusioned voters, blurring traditional ideological lines. While MAGA remains distinct from historical Third Position movements, its hybridization of nationalism, economic populism, and anti-elite rhetoric demonstrates how these ideologies evolve within contemporary populist frameworks.
The authoritarian undertones of populist movements are increasingly evident. Trump's actions on the first day of his second term, such as the swift pardoning of January 6 insurrectionists, including Proud Boys and Oath Keepers leaders, signal solidarity with violent actors. This move not only rehabilitates these groups but also reinforces their alignment with MAGA.
Globally, similar ties between populist movements and extremist groups are evident. In Germany, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) has connections with far-right groups like the Identitarian Movement and neo-Nazi networks, using nationalist rhetoric to intimidate opponents. Hungary's Fidesz party, under Viktor Orbán, benefits from the support of groups like the Hungarian Guard, known for targeting Roma communities and promoting anti-immigrant sentiment. Italy's Lega, led by Matteo Salvini, is linked to far-right factions such as CasaPound, which employ neo-fascist rhetoric and violence to advance nationalist themes.
Brazil's Jair Bolsonaro has relied on paramilitary militias to target leftist politicians and activists, while India's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), under Narendra Modi, maintains close ties with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a paramilitary group accused of inciting violence against minorities. These movements use nationalist and anti-globalist rhetoric to consolidate power, suppress dissent, and perpetuate divisions.
The global populist movement is further bolstered by influential figures like Elon Musk, who recently expressed support for the AfD via X. Musk's involvement in Trump's administration underscores the deepening connections between global populist leaders.
Modern populism has created a volatile political landscape, not only undermining liberal democratic norms but also fostering syncretic alliances that blur traditional ideological boundaries. These movements often build connections with extremist groups, activist organizations, and unconventional political networks, drawing strength from shared grievances and interconnected strategies. This convergence amplifies their influence and extends their reach beyond government institutions into civil society. Addressing the global nature of populism, and its ability to co-opt diverse political and activist frameworks, is essential to countering its divisive and authoritarian tendencies while safeguarding democratic principles and inclusive social movements.
MAGA is not a uniquely American movement but part of a global populist strategy that exploits cultural anxieties, nationalism, and anti-globalist rhetoric to consolidate power. By understanding its connections to international populism, it becomes clear that MAGA is a calculated political construct rather than a genuine grassroots movement. Recognizing these global parallels and shared tactics is essential to countering its corrosive impact on democracy and fostering a more inclusive political dialogue. Exposing MAGA as part of a broader authoritarian trend is not just a defense of American values but a necessary step in protecting democracy worldwide.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Our Carceral System Laid Bare': Trump Pardons Cronies Stone and Manafort as DOJ Proceeds With Lame-Duck Execution Spree
"Trump is pardoning his political allies while he's executing people on death row at an unprecedented rate. His deeds are unconscionable."
Dec 23, 2020
Throwing the deeply unequal nature of the U.S. criminal justice system into sharp relief, President Donald Trump late Wednesday issued another wave of pardons for his wealthy political and personal allies as his administration continues its unprecedented lame-duck spree of executions--a punishment almost exclusively reserved for the poor and marginalized.
Just 24 hours after issuing full pardons or commutations for two Republican loyalists, four former Blackwater mercenaries jailed for massacring Iraqi civilians, a Medicare fraudster, and others, Trump rolled out an additional list of pardons that includes longtime adviser Roger Stone, former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, and Charles Kushner, a wealthy New Jersey real estate developer and father of the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
"A flow of pardons for the wealthy and corrupt, yet Brandon Bernard was left to die when his own jurors and prosecutor begged for mercy."
--Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
"A flow of pardons for the wealthy and corrupt, yet Brandon Bernard was left to die when his own jurors and prosecutor begged for mercy," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said late Wednesday, referring to the 40-year-old Black man the Trump Justice Department killed earlier this month for a crime he committed at the age of 18. "Our carceral system laid bare for the world to see."
Rep.-elect Cori Bush (D-Mo.) tweeted that the combination of Trump's wave of pardons for the well-connected and last-minute rush of executions amounts to "mercy for the rich and state-sanctioned murder for the poor."
"Trump is pardoning his political allies while he's executing people on death row at an unprecedented rate," said Bush. "His deeds are unconscionable."
According to the Pew Research Center, the outgoing president "has used his clemency power less often than any president in modern history," and many of his "clemency recipients have had a 'personal or political connection to the president.'"
"The only modern president who granted clemency almost as infrequently as Trump is George H.W. Bush, who granted 77 pardons and commutations in his single term," the research outfit noted. "Trump has granted clemency to less than half of 1% of the more than 10,000 people who petitioned him for it through the end of the 2020 fiscal year (which ended Sept. 30), according to the Justice Department."
\u201cTomorrow marks 28 years since George H.W. Bush pardoned six defendants as part of the Iran-Contra cover up, one of whom, confessed criminal Elliott Abrams, was brought back into government by George W. Bush, and now serves as Trump\u2019s Iran/Venezuela envoy. Corruption is the rule.\u201d— Matt Duss (@Matt Duss) 1608777851
Kyle Herrig, president of watchdog group Accountable.US, said in a statement Wednesday that the president's lame-duck pardons "are just the latest example of Trump's longstanding pattern of promoting cronyism and corruption in his administration at all costs."
"As millions of Americans are suffering and afraid of losing their homes and livelihoods, all Trump has time for is handing out political favors to his friends and allies," said Herrig. "There's little more we can expect from a president who has held ethics in low regard and ignored the struggles of everyday Americans for his entire four-year term."
The Trump administration's execution spree, meanwhile, appears on track to continue as the Justice Department--which resumed federal executions in July after a 17-year hiatus--aims to execute three additional people before President-elect Joe Biden, an opponent of the death penalty, takes office next month.
Attorneys representing the three federal inmates set to be executed--Corey Johnson, Dustin John Higgs, and Lisa Montgomery--have asked Trump to commute their sentences to life without parole. Johnson and Higgs have both tested positive for the coronavirus as it sweeps through the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana.
In a letter (pdf) on Monday, a group of Democratic senators and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) demanded that the Justice Department inspector general investigate the Trump administration's execution spree, which the lawmakers described as "a break with both modern history and decades-old practice."
"The federal government had not executed a federal prisoner since 2003 and had only executed three people in the previous 50 years," the senators wrote. "The executions that have already taken place since November 3, 2020, and those scheduled to occur in January 2021, are 'the first executions under a lame-duck president in over 100 years.'"
Keep ReadingShow Less
!['Manafort Released. But [Insert Name] Still Locked Up': Special Treatment for Trump Crony Denounced](https://www.commondreams.org/media-library/former-trump-campaign-manager-paul-manafort-r-arrives-at-the-albert-v-bryan-u-s-courthouse-for-an-arraignment-hearing-as-a-p.jpg?id=32144882&width=1245&height=700&quality=90&coordinates=67%2C0%2C0%2C0)
'Manafort Released. But [Insert Name] Still Locked Up': Special Treatment for Trump Crony Denounced
"I'm not upset Paul Manafort was released," said one criminal justice reform advocate. "As always, I'm upset that people who aren't rich, white, & connected (nearly everyone of the millions currently caged) aren't treated with the same care, consideration, or humanity."
May 13, 2020
The release of President Donald Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort from prison Wednesday morning spurred immediate denunciations of the unequal treatment of prisoners in the U.S. criminal justice system in which the wealthy and well-connected are spared while millions of others are forced to face the spreading coronavirus pandemic with little or no hope of release.
As the Daily Beast reports:
Manafort has been serving out his seven-and-a-half year sentence at FCI Loretto in central Pennsylvania on charges related to Special Sounsel Robert Mueller's investigation. He was found guilty of tax fraud and conspiracy and was sentenced in March 2019. He wasn't due to be released from prison until November 2024.
At the age of 71, Manafort is considered to be at particular risk from the disease, which hits harder among older people. His lawyer, Kevin Downing, requested Manafort's early release from prison due to coronavirus-related health fears last month, saying that he'd been suffering health problems including high blood pressure, liver disease, and respiratory issues for years.
But whether Manafort was "at particular risk," was an issue of debate for some.
Law professor and MSNBC contributor Joyce Vance was among those asserting that Manafort's premature release "raises real fairness concerns," especially as hundreds of thousands of other prisoners in the U.S--including those with arguably much more dire circumstances--have not been released.
"Manafort doesn't qualify for compassionate release," Vance tweeted. "Did he get special treatment ahead of others who do? People in facilities with outbreaks or closer to the end of their sentence? Did Trump's friend get preferential treatment under the guise of appropriate releases to protect BOP inmates? Releases make sense but there must be a process based on objective criteria. Michael Cohen, much closer to the end of his sentence, was denied release after news he would be was made public."
In addition to the perception that Manafort was the clear recipient of special treatment due to his political connections to Trump, the larger issue for many remained the glaring example of inequality endemic to the U.S. criminal justice system.
\u201cThinking about Tiffany Mofield who died of Covid-19 in a New Jersey prison and many who are in jails and prisons around the country who remain in danger. | Paul Manafort granted home confinement due to coronavirus fears - The Washington Post https://t.co/3Y3hkvYdZj\u201d— Eddie S. Glaude Jr. (@Eddie S. Glaude Jr.) 1589374822
Referenced by Professor Eddie Glaude Jr. of Princeton University, Tiffany Mofield was a 43-year-old woman who died of coronavirus complications in a New Jersey prison on April 29. As reporting by The Intercept's Alice Speri details, "Mofield's death underscores the devastating impact the coronavirus is having as it spreads through prisons and jails, where the health of incarcerated people was often neglected before the current crisis."
In a thread on Twitter posted in response to Wednesday's developments, defense attorney and prison reform advocate Scott Hechinger detailed the cases of many inmates who--unlike Manafort--continued to languish in prison even as the virus threatens.
\u201cManafort released. But Yusef still locked up. He's served 25 years. Been in since he was 16. He's 41 now. Should have been resentenced 5 years ago. Lost 4 friends already to COVID, now running rampant in Michigan prisons. Highest death toll in country. Why is he still in prison?\u201d— Scott Hechinger (@Scott Hechinger) 1589377427
Listing the names of individual inmates--including Anthony Swain, Sue Farrell, Charles Hobbs, Jody Hill, and Andrew Pete--Hechinger wrote: "I'm not upset Paul Manafort was released. As always, I'm upset that people who aren't rich, white, & connected (nearly everyone of the millions currently caged) aren't treated with the same care, consideration, or humanity."
With no nationwide urgency showed by prison officials or lawmakers for the release of most inmates, despire the growing risks to them, Hechinger said the Manafort case only highlights deep and grave injustices that have long existed.
"Right now, imagine how scared you are about contracting this virus. The precautions you take," he wrote. "Then think about how, right now, millions are trapped in close quarters. No ability to distance. To protect themselves. People are terrified and upset. And we should be too."
Since the Covid-19 pandemic touched off earlier this year, criminal justice reform advocates have been raising the alarm over just how vulnerable prison and jail populations are to the spread of the virus.
"This peril is immediate and pressing," wrote veteran civil rights leader Jesse Jackson in an op-ed in March. "There are 2.2 million Americans locked up at any one time, but over 11 million go through prison or jail gates in any one year."
Writing on the subject again last month, Jackson warned that "if the pandemic continues to spread through prisons, the toll in lives will soar."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular