The African Activists Who Challenged Colonial-Era Slavery In Lagos And The Gold Coast

Domestic slavery thrived in west Africa even after abolition. Wikimedia Commons/Flickr

BY MICHAEL E. ODIJIE

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF AFRICAN

STUDIES AND AFRICAN HISTORY,

UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

When historians and the public think about the end of domestic slavery in west Africa, they often imagine colonial governors issuing decrees and missionaries working to end local traffic in enslaved people.

Two of my recent publications tell another part of the story. I am a historian of west Africa, and over the past five years, I have been researching anti-slavery ideas and networks in the region as part of a wider research project.

My research reveals that colonial administrations continued to allow domestic slavery in practice and that African activists fought this.

In one study I focused on Francis P. Fearon, a trader based in Accra, the Ghanaian capital. He exposed pro-slavery within the colonial government through numerous letters written in the 1890s (when the colony was known as the Gold Coast).

In another study I examined the Lagos Auxiliary, a coalition of lawyers, journalists and clergy in Nigeria. Their campaigning secured the repeal of Nigeria’s notorious Native House Rule Ordinance in 1914. That ordinance had been enacted by the colonial government to maintain local slavery in the Niger Delta region.

Considered together, the two studies demonstrate how local campaigners used letters, print culture, imperial pressure points and personal networks to oppose practices that had kept thousands of Africans in bondage.

The methods Fearon and the Lagos Auxiliary pioneered still matter because they show how marginalised communities can compel power‑holders to close the gap between laws and lived reality. They remind us that well‑documented local testimony, amplified trans-nationally, can still overturn official narratives, compel policy change, and keep institutions honest.

Colonial ‘abolition’ that wasn’t

West Africa was a major source of enslaved people during the transatlantic slave trade. The transatlantic trade was suppressed in the early 19th century, but this did not bring an end to domestic slavery.

One of the principal rationales for colonisation in west Africa was the eradication of domestic slavery.

Accordingly, when the Gold Coast was formally annexed as a British colony in 1874, the imperial government declared slave dealing illegal. And slave-dealing was criminalised across southern Nigeria in 1901. On paper these measures promised freedom, but in practice loopholes empowered slave-holders, chiefs and colonial officials who continued to demand coerced labour.

On the Gold Coast, the 1874 abolition law was never enforced. The British governor informed slave-owners that they might retain enslaved persons provided those individuals did not complain. By 1890, child slavery had become widespread in towns such as Accra. According to the local campaigners, it was even sanctioned by the colonial governor. This led to some Africans uniting to establish a network to oppose it.

The Niger Delta region of Nigeria had a similar experience. The colonial administration enacted the Native House Rule Ordinance to counteract the effects of the Slave-Dealing Proclamation of 1901 which criminalised slave dealing with a penalty of seven years’ imprisonment for offenders. The Native House Rule Ordinance required every African to belong to a “House” under a designated head. It went on to criminalise any person who attempted to leave their “House”. In the Niger Delta kingdoms such as Bonny, Kalabari and Okrika, the word “House” never referred to a single dwelling. Rather, it denoted a self-perpetuating, named corporation of relatives, dependants and slaves under a chief, which owned property and spoke with one voice. By the 1900s, “Houses” had become the primary units through which slave ownership was organised.

Therefore, the Native House Rule Ordinance compelled enslaved people in Houses to remain with their masters. The masters were empowered to use colonial authority to discipline them. District commissioners executed arrest warrants against runaways. In exchange, the House heads and local chiefs supplied the colonial administration with unpaid labour for public works.

African campaigners in Accra and Lagos organised to challenge what they perceived as the British colonial state’s support for slavery.

Fearon: an undercover abolitionist in Accra

Francis Fearon was an educated African, active in the Accra scene during the second half of the 19th century. He was highly literate and part of elite circles. He was closely associated with the journalist Edmund Bannerman. He regularly wrote to local newspapers, often expressing concerns about racism against Black people and moral decay.

On 24 June 1890, Fearon sent a 63-page letter, with ten appendices, to the Aborigines’ Protection Society in London. That dossier would form the basis of several further communications. He alleged that child trafficking continued.

As evidence, he transcribed the confidential court register of Accra and claimed that Governor W. B. Griffith had instructed convicted slave-owners to recover their “property”.

Fearon’s tactics were audacious. He remained anonymous, relied on court clerks for documents, and supplied the Aborigines’ Protection Society with evidence. He pleaded with the society to investigate the colonial administration in the Gold Coast.

Although the society publicised the scandal, subsequent narratives quietly effaced the African source.

Lagos elites organise – and name the problem

Like Fearon, Nigerian campaigners also wrote to the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines’ Protection Society. They denounced the colonial government in Nigeria for promoting slavery, but they did not remain anonymous.

By this time, the Native House Rule Ordinance had prompted some enslaved people to flee the districts in which it was enforced. They sought refuge in Lagos. Through these arrivals, Lagosian elites learned of the ordinance. They unleashed a vigorous campaign against the colonial state.

The principal figures in this movement included Christopher Sapara Williams, a barrister, and James Bright Davies, editor of The Nigerian Times. Others included politician Herbert Macaulay, Herbert Pearse, a prominent merchant, Bishop James Johnson and the Reverend Mojola Agbebi. Unlike Fearon’s lone-wolf strategy, they mounted a coordinated assault on the colonial administration. They drafted petitions, briefed sympathetic European organisations, and inundated local newspapers with commentary.

Their arguments blended humanitarian indignation with constitutional acumen. They insisted that the ordinance contravened both British liberal ideals and African custom.

After years of pressure the law was amended and then quietly repealed in 1914.

Why these stories matter now

Contemporary scholarship on abolition is gradually shifting from asking “what Britain did for Africa” to examining the role Africans played in ending slavery.

Many African abolitionists who fought and lost their lives in the struggle against slavery have long gone unacknowledged. This is beginning to change.

The two articles discussed here highlight the creativity of Africans who, decades before radio or civil-rights NGOs, used transatlantic information circuits. They exposed colonial governments that continued to rely on forced-labour economies long after slavery was supposed to have ended.

They remind us that grassroots documentation can overturn official narratives. Evidence-based advocacy, coalition-building, and the strategic use of global media remain potent instruments.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Strengthening Collective Labor Rights Can Help Reduce Economic Inequality

The wealthiest 1% of Americans have more than five times as much wealth as the bottom 50%. Olga Yastremska/iStock via Getty Images Plus

BY SKIP MARK AND STEPHEN BAGWELL

Despite the strength of the U.S. economy, the gap between rich and poor Americans is increasing.

The wealthiest 1% of Americans have more than five times as much wealth as the bottom 50%, according to the U.S. Federal Reserve. That’s up from four times as much in the year 2000. In 2024 alone, the wealthiest 19 families got a total of US$1 trillion richer – the largest one-year increase on record.

And yet 59% of Americans don’t have enough money saved up to cover an unexpected $1,000 expense.

We are political scientists who study human rights and political economy.

In a 2023 study, our team looked at 145 countries, including the U.S., to understand the link between labor rights and inequality. We found evidence that strengthening collective labor rights may reduce economic inequality.

Empowering workers

Collective labor rights include the rights to form and join a union, bargain collectively for higher pay and better working conditions, go on strike, and get justice if employers punish workers who exercise these rights.

In the U.S., where less than 10% of workers belong to unions, union members typically earn higher wages than their nonunion counterparts.

Through negotiations on behalf of their members, unions can pressure employers to provide fair wages and benefits. If negotiations break down, the union can call for a strike – sometimes winning better benefits and higher wages as a result.

Some U.S. unions don’t have the right to strike, including air traffic controllers, teachers and those working on national security issues. But most unions have some ability to implement work stoppages and impose costs on employers to negotiate for raises and better benefits and conditions.

Reducing inequality

For our study, we analyzed the human rights in the CIRIGHTS dataset, which uses human rights reports from the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International and other sources to measure government respect for 24 human rights, including the rights to unionize and bargain collectively. The dataset is produced by the University of Rhode Island, Binghamton University and the University of Connecticut. One of us, Skip Mark, serves as a co-director of the project.

Using a scoring guide, a team of researchers reads human rights reports and gives each country a score of zero if they have widespread violations, one point if they have some violations, or two if they have no evidence of violations. The team has assigned scores for all 24 rights from 1994 through 2022.

Using this data, we created a measure of collective labor rights by adding scores for the right to workplace association and the right to collective bargaining. The resulting collective labor rights score ranges from zero to four.

Countries where workers’ rights are routinely violated, such as Afghanistan, China and Saudi Arabia, scored a zero. The United States, Macedonia and Zambia, three countries with little in common, were among those that tended to get two points, placing them in the middle. Countries with no reported violations of the rights to workplace association and collective bargaining, including Canada, Sweden and France, got four points.

According to the CIRIGHTS dataset, the strength of respect for collective labor rights around the world declined by 50%, from 2.06 in 1994 to 1.03 in 2022.

At the same time, according to the World Inequality Dataset, the share of income earned by the 1% with the biggest paychecks increased by 11%.

We used advanced statistical methods to figure out whether better worker protections actually reduce inequality or are just associated with it.

Gaps between individuals and ethnic groups

We also measured what’s been happening to economic inequality, using two common ways to track it.

One of them is vertical inequality, the gap between what people earn within a country – the rich versus the poor. The more unequal a society becomes, the higher its vertical inequality score gets. We measured it using the disposable income measure from the Gini index, a commonly used indicator of economic inequality that captures how much money individuals have to spend after taxes and government transfers.

We found that a one-point increase in collective labor rights on our four-point scale reduces vertical inequality by 10 times the average change in inequality. For the U.S., a one-point increase in collective labor rights would be about enough to undo the increase in inequality that occurred between 2008 and 2010 due to the Great Recession and its aftermath. It would also likely help stem the growing wealth gap between Black and white Americans. That’s because income disparities compound over time to create wealth gaps.

We also assessed the connection between horizontal inequality, which measures income inequality between ethnic or other groups, and collective labor rights.

Negative horizontal inequality measures the amount of a country’s income held by the poorest ethnic group. Higher scores for this metric indicate that the lowest-earning ethnic group has less income relative to the rest of society. Black Americans have the lowest median income of any racial or ethnic group, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Positive horizontal inequality measures the income earned by the richest ethnic group. When positive horizontal inequality rises, that means the richest ethnic group has more income relative to the rest of society. According to the same Census Bureau report, Asian Americans had the highest median earnings.

We found that stronger collective labor rights, both in law and in practice around the world, also reduce both types of horizontal inequality. This means they raise the floor by helping to improve the income of the poorest ethnic groups in society. They also close the gap by limiting the incomes of the richest ethnic group, which can reduce the likelihood of conflicts.

That is, our findings suggest that when workers are free to advocate for higher wages and better benefits for themselves, it also benefits society as a whole.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Roman Empire And The Fall Of Nero Offer Possible Lessons For Trump About The Cost Of Self-Isolation

A marble statue of Nero on loan from the Louvre in Paris is seen at the Landesmuseum in Germany in 2016. Harald Tittel/Picture Alliance via Getty Images

BY KIRK FREUDENBURG

BROOKS AND SUZANNE RAGEN

PROFESSOR OF CLASSICS,

YALE UNIVERSITY

President Donald Trump’s first term saw a record-high rate of turnover among his Cabinet members and chief advisers. Trump’s second term has, to date, seen far fewer Cabinet departures.

But some political commentators have observed that the president this time around has primarily appointed loyal advisers who will not challenge him.

As Thomas Friedman pointed out in The New York Times on June 3, 2025, “In Trump I, the president surrounded himself with some people of weight who could act as buffers. In Trump II, he has surrounded himself only with sycophants who act like amplifiers.”

As a scholar of Greco-Roman antiquity, I have spent many years studying the demise of truth-telling in periods of political upheaval. Spanning the period from 27 B.C.E. to 476 C.E., the Roman Empire still offers insights into what happens to political leaders when they interpret possibly helpful advice as dissent.

Particularly telling is the case of Nero, Rome’s emperor from 54 to 68 C.E., who responded to a disastrous fire in 64 with extreme cruelty and self-worship that did nothing to help desperate citizens.

Suppressing honest advice under Nero

Rome’s first emperor, Augustus, established a handpicked circle of advisers – called the consilium principis in Latin, meaning emperor’s council – to give a republican look to his autocratic regime. Augustus became the emperor of Rome in 27 B.C.E. and ruled over the empire, which stretched from Europe and North Africa to the Middle East at its peak, until his death in 14 C.E.

Augustus wanted to hear what others thought about the empire’s needs and his policies. At least some of Augustus’ advisers were bold enough to assert themselves and risk incurring his displeasure. Some, such as Cornelius Gallus, paid for their boldness with their own lives, while others, such as Cilnius Maecenas, managed to push their political agendas in softer ways that allowed them to maintain their influence.

But the Roman emperors who came after Augustus were either less skilled at maintaining a republican facade, or less interested in doing so.

Nero was the last of the emperors from the noble Julio-Claudian dynasty in ancient Rome at its peak of power. Historians who describe Nero’s rise and fall from power describe the first five years of his reign, or the quinquennium neronis in Latin, as a period of relative calm and prosperity for the empire.

Because Nero was just 16 years old when he acceded to power, he was assigned advisers to guide his policies. Their opinions carried significant weight.

But five years into his reign, chafing at their continued oversight, Nero began to purge these advisers from his life, via execution, forced suicide and exile.

Nero instead collected a small cadre of self-interested enablers who derived power for themselves by encouraging their leader’s delusions, such as his desire to project himself as the incarnation of the sun god, Apollo.

The single most unspeakably corrupt and nefarious of these preferred advisers was Ofonius Tigellinus. Tigellinus had caught Nero’s eye early in 62 by urging the senate to convict a Roman magistrate of treason for having composed poems that he deemed insulting to the emperor. Later that year, Tigellinus was appointed the head of the emperor’s personal army.

As praetorian prefect, Tigellinus was charged not only with protecting Nero from physical harm, but also with crafting and guarding the leader’s public image. Tigellinus urged Nero to stage an ongoing series of public spectacles – like theatrical performances and athletic competitions – that featured him as a divine ruler and a god on Earth.

Up in flames

It was likely at Tigellinus’ urging that, in the aftermath of the great fire of 64 that raged for six days in Rome, Nero staged an exorbitant garden party where Christians were soaked in flammable oils and lit as human torches to illuminate a decadent late-night feast.

But, try as he might, Nero couldn’t outrun the fire and its aftermath by indulging in clever cruelties. Huge swathes of the city had been razed by the fire. Thousands of citizens lacked clothing. They were hungry, displaced and homeless.

For answers, the fire’s countless victims looked to Nero, their earthly Apollo, for help. But they did not encounter a sympathetic leader sweeping in to address their needs. Instead, they found a man desperate to place blame on others – in this case, foreigners from the east.

In order to squelch rumors that Nero had lit the fire, Tigellinus’ army unit rounded up Christians, falsely blamed them for starting the fire and executed them.

But this move just showcased Nero’s failure to focus on the dire needs of the poor, the very people who worshipped him. Instead, he sought to rise above the ashes by doubling down on his divine pretensions.

Once the rubble left by the fire was cleared away, Nero built a magnificent new home for himself. This palace, called the domus aurea in Latin, meaning house of gold, covered more than 120 acres in the heart of Rome. It featured spectacular water fountains, elaborate works of art and, standing tall in the entryway, a 120-foot bronze statue of Nero as the sun god, Apollo.

No truth-teller was there to tell Nero that maybe he shouldn’t rub his people’s noses in their suffering.

Nero’s delusional response to the fire did not put an end to his career, but it did much to hasten its end.

Less than four years later, with armies bearing down on the city, Nero committed suicide. Rome tumbled into civil war.

Self-worship in the Trump era

Trump has long expressed a desire to have his face carved on Mount Rushmore, a national memorial in South Dakota that features the likenesses of legendary American presidents George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt.

This dream became a bit closer to reality when Tennessee Representative Andy Ogles in July 2025 urged the Department of the Interior to explore adding Trump’s image to Mount Rushmore – even though such an addition might not be possible because of geological issues.
Trump’s critics have long noted the president’s propensity to focus on himself and his own greatness and power, rather than the needs of citizens.

As far away as the Roman Empire might seem, Nero’s rise and fall offers a lesson in what can happen when honest criticism of a political leader is sidelined in favor of idolatry.

Instead of honest solutions to real problems, what Romans got was a colossal statue that portrayed their leader as a god on Earth.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

The Oyster Farmers Paving The Way For Women In West Africa

Oysters are sorted and measured for size and quality Credit: Jason Florio

BY JESSAMY CALKIN

Known as ‘the smiling coast of Africa’ the Gambia is a lively little country which wriggles through the middle of Senegal like an intestine. The river after which it was named starts in Guinea, and runs 700 miles directly through the Gambia to Banjul, where it joins the Atlantic Ocean.

It is not somewhere one might immediately associate with oysters, yet oysters are one of the mainstays of the Gambian diet – high in protein and essential nutrients, they grow prolifically on the roots of the mangroves that border the many tributaries of the river.

We are not talking about raw oysters served on an elegant dish with a slice of lemon and Tabasco and a glass of Picpoul; these oysters are shucked, cooked and sold in the market for 60 dalasi (about 60p) for a large cupful; tiny little things that look like mussels and are often served in a stew.

But oyster harvesting is a tough job, and 98 per cent of the people who do it are women. During the designated oyster harvesting season – which is four months of the year, from March to June – the women take canoes out on the water at low tide, and chip the oysters off the roots of the mangroves with small axes.

They then have to be sorted, shucked and cooked, before being sold at the market. It’s an arduous job, especially because many of the women can’t swim – there is no swimming culture in the Gambia, the river is something to be afraid of – so drowning is not uncommon. They have only very basic facilities where the preparation is done, with limited access to fresh water, and they have to rent canoes.

But thanks to an initiative called Fish4ACP, which was launched in 2022 by the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation) and partly funded by the EU and Germany (and, until recently, USAID) support and resources are on hand for the women: swimming lessons, lifejackets, canoes and new cultivating initiatives which will increase productivity and improve standards of living.

An unlikely sounding player in this is the founder and owner of the very successful Whitstable Oyster Company, James Green, who has been employed by the FAO since 2022 in an advisory capacity, to improve oyster productivity. Using coupelles and grow bags means that oysters can be cultivated in parts of the river where the water is at its purest. Cooking the oysters kills the pathogens and algotoxins, but the eventual aim is to be able to sell raw oysters to Gambia’s many tourists. Hopefully, this will come to fruition next year.

Green, who studied marine biology and has a Masters in Aquaculture, has been here several times over the last three years. “It takes 12-18 months for an oyster to grow here in Gambia, because it’s warm. In England it can take up to three years. My part of the project is to source a fresh oyster product: a quality individual oyster that people can have on the half shell, with a bit of lime or lemon juice.”

Another new initiative of the oyster industry, to supplement income, is a handicrafts and jewellery project, using the shells of oysters and other shellfish, which are painted and laminated and crafted into jewellery. The idea behind this is also to attract younger women into the business (known as ‘the young ones’) who might be put off by the hard grafting of hacking and shucking, but are interested in the creative side.

So we begin with a visit to Lamin, a village south east of Banjul in Tanbi wetland. Development is frenzied in Banjul and its surrounding areas and the roads are fringed with multitudes of unfinished buildings.

Traffic has dramatically improved thanks to a new three lane road, which was years in the making. There used to be only one traffic light in the country, our driver tells us, and people would use it as a landmark: ‘Go right at Traffic Light.’ And there was also only one roundabout, which was known as Turntable. “When it was first built, people didn’t know what it was and drove over it.”

At Lamin Lodge there is a lot of activity: women are cleaning oyster shells and painting them. Around the hut – indeed all over every beach we saw – are huge piles of discarded oyster shells like shingle, often with tiny goats climbing all over them. (The shells can be burned and reduced to lime to make paint, but that takes a lot of wood and costs more than it’s worth in labour and fuel.)

Profit from the sale of the jewellery is reinvested in buying materials and infrastructure for the handicrafts project, which is the initiative of TRY Oyster Collective, a community-based organisation with about 600 members (which is one of the beneficiaries of Fish4ACP) working to improve livelihoods and raise standards of living.

A lot of women in West Africa work in the shellfish sector; I am told that men tend to think that harvesting oysters is not worth their time; they stick to fishing, which is responsible for 12 per cent of the country’s GDP. But fishing here, like in many other African countries, has been vastly depleted by Chinese-owned trawlers and fishmeal factories, making it harder and harder for the local fishermen to make a living.

Fatou Jahna Mboob is the director of TRY, which she founded in 2007; a formidable and warm-hearted woman who has devoted herself to empowering the oyster women, and protecting the local ecosystem.

One of her goals is to get the younger generation on board. “One mother told me that harvesting oysters is very hard and they are only doing it in order to get a better education for their children – it is not how they want their children to end up, struggling in the water. But their children can do both – go to school, and work in oysters. Once you’ve been educated, and learned to swim, you can contribute a lot more.”

Thanks to Fatou, TRY now has exclusive harvesting rights in the Tanbi wetland complex, which covers about 6000 hectares, over two thirds of which is mangroves. Previously the women would cut the mangroves to remove the oysters, now they chip them off, which is arduous but more sustainable.

Further east along the river, at Kubeneh, the oyster harvesting is in full swing. Supervised by James Green, the women are removing rubber spat collectors (known as coupelles) from a wooden rack in the river, in the intertidal zone, where they have been languishing since October – to be stripped of their bounty. When oyster larvae attach themselves to a surface, it is known as spat, which will grow into adult oysters.

These oysters will be transferred to Kartong, where the water has been tested, to be put in the river to grow. “We take them off the spat collectors and put them into floating bags,” says Green, “and then you have to maintain the stock to keep the oysters individual – they’ve got a propensity to settle on other oyster shells and you don’t want oysters clumped together like on mangroves because you can’t sell those as a fresh product. The bags are secured to anchored floating lines where they stay for another year to grow into a market sized oyster.”

There is a gentle breeze as the women sit underneath the neem tree, shucking cooked oysters. Their hands are covered in callouses, but they are very lively and cheerful. Any excuse for shouting and singing. Lunchtime – spicy Pempem – soon turns into a song and dance session, with James and Khadija Diallo, project co-ordinator of the FAO, dragged in for good measure.

“We couldn’t find the right guy until James came along,” says Diallo, “but it was clear that he knew what he was doing; he listens to the women, and guides them – he’s been here several times and he’s like family to these communities. He understands the culture which is very important.”

There are 16 separate oyster gathering communities on the west coast of the Gambia. Fatou Sambou is the president of the Kubeneh community, which has grown from 15 members to 44 in the last two years (the youngest being 21 and the oldest 70) and has a backstory which is fairly typical: now aged 54, she never went to school and her parents were farmers.

She started working in oysters after she got married. She works on the oysters during the season, the rest of the time she picks up crabs and cockles; anything to help feed her six children (one of her own and five nephews and nieces who she has adopted.) Her husband lives in Senegal, where he has two other wives. “The oyster community is like my family – we look after each other and respect each other.”

The following day, in Kartong, we are beside the Allahein river on the border with Senegal, one km from the sea, and James and the oyster women are fixing plastic fasteners to the special bags that the oysters which we have brought from Kubeneh will be placed in to grow – about 300 oysters to each bag.

Marie Demba is 44 but looks much younger. She never finished school as both her parents died when she was young, and she has worked in oysters ever since leaving school. How has the oyster business changed since then?

“We had no money and struggled – we used to only be able to charge 10 dalasi (10p) for a cup – now it’s 60 dalasi. We are like a family now, this association.” The season finishes next month, and for the rest of the year she is a fish smoker, which is very bad for the lungs, and she has been hospitalised. “Others do gardening – grow okra, sorrel, onions, and sell them in the market.”

We wait until the tide is out and then climb in a boat. The boat trip is a rowdy affair – the women are wearing life jackets, special footwear and gloves. They take the bags and attach them to specially constructed floating racks; then check the cuprolles that are already in place there.

The following day we go to another site – Old Jeshwang, so I can see what the oyster harvesting in the mangroves is like. While we wait for the tide to be right, I talk to some of the women about their lives, and meet Alice, who is 26, a young man called Lima Manga, who does data collection for TRY, and Andrea, a volunteer and self-confessed ‘oyster nerd’ from Maine, USA who is researching the benefits of oysters for the environment.

Alice was studying to be an accountant but had to give up her studies when her father became sick; now she is involved with the handicrafts and helps her mother with shucking. Her mother wants her to continue her education, and not be an oyster harvester. “My mother says, ‘Look at my hands! Do you want to look like this?’”

Fatou tells me that TRY has helped the women manage their finances; and taught them how to save. Everyone keeps their own profits, but each community contributes a small amount to a central fund which helps out if someone is sick or needs a loan. “Before they didn’t use banks – sometimes they would bury their money under piles of oyster shells.” The involvement of the young will help, she thinks, they all speak English learned at school, for a start, and they know how to use technology.

Our boatman takes us out on the river to follow the women in their canoes who are headed for the mangroves. After about a mile we find a place where the oysters are deemed big and plentiful enough. The women use a small axe to hack the oysters off the mangroves and they all sing as they do it and shout, and tease each other. They have a way of making everything into a party here. When one of the women drops her axe in the water they all stop to help her

It is clear that being able to swim is crucial. “Believe it or not, most of these women never knew how to swim,” says Khadija. “There have been incidents of drowning that are never reported – they’ve seen family members washed away. It’s not our culture here in the Gambia, but we explained the benefits – to keep safe, and how it would boost their productivity.

“However we had to get permission from spouses and community leaders in order to implement the training programme. We have seven female instructors in the navy. Some women did not mind being trained by men. Others were very conservative – so we divided them into groups accordingly. Some of the women are elderly, and the Navy trainers – who are all young – showed them respect and earned their trust before they started to teach them.”

Several members of the Gambian Navy are waiting for us at Lamin the following day, for a swimming lesson, along with a medical team of three, who take people’s blood pressures and listen to their hearts, to make sure it’s safe for them to go into the water. If they find a problem, they will prescribe medicines. All statistics are carefully noted in a ledger by an army sergeant.

In the river, a man and his children are washing the family goat. After the First Aid session about 20 of the the women – aged from 26 to 72 – all get ready for the river in a bizarre assortment of outfits, and the Navy instructors – mostly men but a couple of women – put them through a quick aerobic work out, led by 42 year old Ibrima Colley, who is extremely tall and fit.

They jump in. Firstly they do floating exercises (the water is warm and buoyant and slightly salty as we are only three miles from the sea) looking like a bunch of slightly unruly synchronised swimmers, then there is some general stroke practise followed by a lifesaving demonstration and then a quick race. Funded by Fish4ACP, it’s a six week programme, with four sessions a week. So far, 150 women have been trained – and more sessions are scheduled for October.

Colley has been in the Navy for 19 years. “We’ll work whenever there is funding to employ us because we feel it’s our social responsibility to share life saving skills with the people who are seafarers.” This reduces the demand for one of the Navy’s other jobs – rescue operations.

“When I was a kid if we swam in the river, we would get flogged when we came home. Most of our parents couldn’t swim so they were afraid of water. We would sneak to the river, then find some fresh water in a well and rinse ourselves so when we got home they couldn’t tell that we’d been swimming.”

Oyster season is about to draw to a close and James is preparing to leave. The goal is to be able to serve up the first raw oysters to tourists next year – on newly established National Oyster Day in May. In a country where the fish supplies have deteriorated and the population is growing, the oyster sector is increasingly important to the economy and the livelihood of women, and the Gambian model is paving the way in West Africa.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Sanctioning Ghosts: Why US Plans To Hit Russia With Fresh Economic Penalties Will Have Little Effect

U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on July 16, 2018, in Helsinki. Chris McGrath/Getty Images

BY KEITH A. PREBBLE AND CHAIRMAINE N. WILLIS

One way or other, it looks like Russia could soon be slapped with a fresh round of U.S. sanctions.

On July 23, 2025, a bipartisan push to impose a 500% levy on imports from Russia or any country buying Russian oil was put on hold – but only to allow President Donald Trump’s separate threat of imposing new economic measures to play out first. Trump had previously said he would unilaterally impose new sanctions if President Vladimir Putin failed to agree to a ceasefire with Ukraine by a date the U.S. president originally set at Aug. 30, but later indicated would be shorter.

Adjectives such as “harsh,” “punishing” and even “bone-crushing” have been attached to both proposed measures. But what impact will they really have if the threats turn into action?

As experts on economic sanctions, we argue that such efforts are akin to sanctioning ghosts. The reality is the economic relationship between Russia and the U.S. is a shell of its former self, with trade between the two countries down 90% since 2021, the year before the invasion of Ukraine.

Meanwhile, Russia has developed a network of critical partners to support its war effort, including China, Iran and North Korea. While the Russian economy remains challenged to some degree, it has largely weathered the impact of Western sanctions since 2022. The International Monetary Fund forecasts that Russia’s economy will grow by 1.5% this year, although inflation appears to remain stubborn.

Challenges to US efforts

Economic sanctions imposed to change the behavior of a target country can range from restrictions on exports and imports to asset freezes, banking restrictions and travel and visa bans. They can be comprehensive, encompassing an entire country’s economy; sectoral – that is, targeting specific economic activity; or directed at specific people and entities.

Talk of new sanctions on Russia represents a turn in strategy for the second Trump administration.

After taking office again in January 2025, Trump took what has widely been seen as a softer line on Russia than the previous president, Joe Biden.

On Feb. 24, the anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Trump White House did not, for example, announce any new economic sanctions against Russia – the first time the United States had failed to do so on the date since Russia’s invasion.

And while the broad sanctions landscape has remained largely unchanged under the Trump administration – it hasn’t relaxed any of those imposed on Russia under Biden – the ability to impose additional penalties may be impacted by other actions and changes in approach.

For one thing, the State Department – one of three main departments responsible for sanctions – has shed nearly 3,000 employees as part of Trump’s mass layoffs of federal workers. That loss of expertise could make it difficult for the U.S. to wield its economic power against Russia.

The U.S. has also been less willing to work multilaterally with other countries. Not only has the Trump administration shown a willingness to shut out Ukraine and European allies in peace negotiations, but it has also been less willing to adapt its sanctions to better coordinate with the European Union. The bloc, for example, recently unveiled its 18th package of economic sanctions against Russia on its own, after the U.S. declined to join the bloc in lowering the price cap on Russian oil.

More harm than good?

While EU and U.K. efforts seek to bolster the existing sanctions regime, the proposals currently being looked at in the U.S. could do more harm than good.

The legislation pending before Congress includes what sanctions experts call secondary sanctions. Those are imposed on a sanctioned nation’s trading partners.

While the Senate has, for now, stepped back from its threats to legislate new sanctions against Russia, the Trump administration has threatened both tariffs on Russia and secondary tariffs on nations that continue to trade with Russia.

These measures could be diplomatically challenging as Trump negotiates trade deals with India and China – two of Russia’s key trading partners. Such actions by the Trump administration raise the prospect of retaliatory measures against the U.S.

Also, any additional sanctions and tariffs could be disruptive to a global economy already jittery from Trump’s on-off tariffs.

Less trade = less influence

A problem with lengthy sanctions regimes is that as trade diminishes, they tend to become less effective. As economist Albert Hirschman argued in his seminal work on trade and power, trade is both a means of acquiring power as well as a source of power that can be wielded coercively.

U.S. trade with Russia has fallen significantly – from US$38 billion in 2021 to just under $4 billion in 2024. U.S. exports to Russia and imports from Russia have declined precipitously since 2021, down 73% and 51%, respectively.

As trade links between the two nations decline, the United States’ ability to coerce through trade diminishes significantly.

While the Trump administration has not announced any definitive sanctions against Russia, talk of even a “100% tariff” is unlikely to harm the Russian economy, since it currently exports so little to the U.S. In 2024, this amounted to $3 billion – a nearly 90% decline in trade since 2021.

As such, new tariffs on goods coming into the U.S. economy are unlikely to push Putin to the negotiating table.

The warnings of many economists over the impact of tariffs bears repeating here: Tariffs are taxes. And the costs of those taxes are borne by firms importing foreign goods into the U.S., not the Kremlin, who then pass the costs onto consumers and other businesses purchasing those goods.

Data from the United Nations Comtrade database shows that the top Russian export to the U.S. in 2024 was fertilizer. Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia was the largest exporter of fertilizers globally – with China and Canada second and third, respectively. Further tariffs on Russian fertilizer are not likely to be welcome by U.S. farmers already suffering from the higher costs of imports elsewhere.

Meanwhile, U.S. exports to Russia have fallen sharply since 2021 and are now a mere fraction of the levels four years ago. Since then, Russia has replaced Western trade with that of other countries, mainly developing economies, or has simply avoided sanctions by routing goods through third-party states.

Moscow’s network of friends

Looking at Russia’s network of trading relationships is key to understanding when sanctions work and when they don’t. We argue that sanctions’ limited impact on the Russian economy is largely due to the Kremlin’s ability to find trading partners willing to ignore the United States’ and other countries’ sanctions.

China, Turkey, Germany, India and Italy export significant amounts to Russia. Meanwhile China, India, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Brazil remain critical markets for Russian goods.

And North Korea, along with providing Russia with manpower on the front lines, has also pledged to expand its economic cooperation with Russia.

For its part, China’s trade with Russia appears to be increasing despite the two countries’ complicated history.

A key catalyst for China-Russia economic cooperation has been the Trump administration’s tariffs. Both countries have long aimed to supplant the U.S.-led liberal world order, and the notion of a new world order has only gained support among members and prospective members of the BRICS bloc of low- and middle-income nations, of which China and Russia are a part.

The outlook for US sanctions

The decline in trade between the U.S. and Russia means that tariffs are, in our opinion, a nonstarter if Washington is truly looking for a measure to push Putin toward a ceasefire. And secondary tariffs against Russia’s trading partners have the potential to harm U.S. consumers and businesses.

As such, we believe that sanctions – either through Congress or the White House – will do little to alter the course of the Ukraine-Russia war, or advance Trump’s longed-for peace deal.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Why Government Support For Religion Doesn’t Necessarily Make People More Religious

BY BRENDAN SZENDRO

FACULTY LECTURER IN POLITICAL

SCIENCE, MCGILL UNIVERSITY

The IRS will offer religious congregations more freedom to endorse political candidates without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status, the agency said in a July 2025 court filing. President Donald Trump has previously vowed to abolish the Johnson Amendment, which bars charitable nonprofits from taking part in political campaigns – although the latest move simply reinterprets the rule.

Celebrating the change, House Speaker Mike Johnson highlighted an argument that’s popular among some conservatives: that the Constitution does not actually require the separation of church and state.

Thomas Jefferson, who coined the phrase, did not intend “to keep religion from influencing issues of civil government,” Johnson wrote in a July 12 op-ed published on the social platform X. “The Founders wanted to protect the church from an encroaching state, not the other way around.”

Officials in several red states have challenged long-standing norms surrounding religion and state, ranging from introducing prayer and Bibles in public classrooms to attempts to secure government funding for religious schools.

Conservative thinkers have long pushed for closer ties between religion and the government, arguing that religious institutions can create strong communities. In my own research, I’ve found that mass shootings are less likely in a more religious environment.

For critics, of course, attempts to lower the wall of separation between church and state raise constitutional concerns. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” What’s more, critics fear that recent attempts to lower barriers between church and state favor conservative Christian groups over other faiths.

But as a scholar of religion and politics, I believe another reason for caution is being overlooked. Research indicates that strong relationships between religion and state can be a factor that actually decreases religious participation, rather than encouraging it.

All or nothing

Some scholars suggest that religious institutions operate like businesses in a marketplace, competing for believers. Government policies toward religion can change the balance of power between competing firms the same way that economic policies can affect markets for consumer goods.

At a glance, it might seem like government support would strengthen religious institutions. In reality, it can backfire, whether or not the government promotes one particular faith above others. In some cases, adherents who cannot practice religion on their own terms opt out of practicing it entirely.

In Israel, for example, Orthodox Jewish institutions receive government recognition that more liberal Jewish denominations do not. Orthodox authorities are allowed to manage religious sites, run public religious schools and perform marriages. Many couples who do not want to get married under Orthodox law, or cannot, hold a ceremony abroad or register as a common-law marriage.

In fact, many scholars refer to Israel as an example of a religious “monopoly.” Because the government sponsors a particular branch, Orthodox Judaism, Jewish citizens sometimes face an “all or nothing” choice. The country’s Jewish population is sharply divided between people who are religiously observant and people who identify as secular.

Government involvement can also hurt religious institutions by making them seem less independent, decreasing people’s trust. In a 2023 study of 54 Christian-majority countries, political scientists Jonathan Fox and Jori Breslawski found that some adherents felt that religious institutions become less legitimate when backed by the government. In addition, support from the state decreased people’s confidence in government.

Their findings built on previous research showing that the public is less likely to contribute to faith-based charities and attend religious services when the government offers funding for religious institutions.

In fact, many of the world’s lowest rates of religiosity are found in wealthy countries that have official churches, or had one until relatively recently, such as Sweden. Others have a history of separating people of different faiths into their own schools and other institutions, such as Belgium and the Netherlands.

History lessons

Perhaps the strongest example of how government support for religion can decrease religious participation is found in the former Soviet Union and its allies.

During the Cold War, Soviet officials sought to stamp out religious activity among their citizens. However, policies to repress independent religious institutions worked hand in hand with policies to co-opt religious institutions that would work with the government. Access to religious spaces made it easier for officials to spy on members and punish clergy who protested their rule.

In Hungary, the Communist Party sponsored government-run Catholic churches that were cut off from the Vatican. In Romania, the regime integrated formerly Catholic Churches into a state Orthodox Church. In the former Czechoslovakia, meanwhile, the Communist Party paid clergy’s salaries to keep them subservient.

To this day, many countries in the former Eastern Bloc have low rates of religious participation. In Russia, for example, a majority of citizens call themselves Orthodox Christians, and the church wields influence in politics. Yet only 16% of adults say religion is “very important” in their lives.

While scholars can point to the legacy of overt repression as a source of low religiosity, government support of religious institutions is also a lingering factor. Most post-Soviet states inherited systems that require religious groups to register, and they only provide funding to faiths that the government considers legitimate. Similar policies remain common in southeastern and central Eastern Europe.

In recent years, some countries in the region, including Russia and Hungary, have experienced democratic backsliding at the hands of populist leaders who also politicize religion for their own gain. Because of low rates of religious practice in such countries, religious leaders may welcome government support.

Free market for faith

Most wealthy countries have witnessed steep declines in religiosity in the modern era. The United States is an outlier.

Overall, the percentage of Americans belonging to a religious congregation is declining, as is the share of Americans who regularly attend worship services. However, the percentage of Americans who are intensely religious has remained unchanged over the past several decades. Around 29% of Americans report praying several times a day, for example, and just under 7% say they attend religious services more than once a week.

Some religion scholars argue that the “free-market approach” – where all faiths are free to compete for worshippers, without government interference or preference – is what makes America relatively religious. In other words, they believe that this so-called “American exception” is because of the separation between church and state, not in spite of it.

Time will tell if conservatives’ push for collaboration between religion and the government will continue, or have its intended effects. History suggests, however, that governments’ attempts to strengthen particular religious communities may backfire.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

When Socialists Win Democratic Primaries: Will Zohran Mamdani Be Haunted By The Upton Sinclair Effect?

Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, right, and Attorney General of New York Letitia James walk in the NYC Pride March on June 29, 2025, in New York. AP Photo/Olga Fedorova

BY JAMES N. GREGORY

PROFESSOR OF HISTORY,

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

It has happened before: an upset victory by a Democratic Socialist in an important primary election after an extraordinary grassroots campaign.

In the summer of 1934, Upton Sinclair earned the kind of headlines that greeted Zohran Mamdani’s primary victory on June 24, 2025, in the New York City mayoral election.

Mamdani’s win surprised nearly everyone. Not just because he beat the heavily favored former governor Andrew Cuomo, but because he did so by a large margin. Because he did so with a unique coalition, and because his Muslim identity and membership in the Democratic Socialists of America should have, in conventional political thinking, made victory impossible.

This sounds familiar, at least to historians like me. Upton Sinclair, the famous author and a socialist for most of his life, ran for governor in California in 1934 and won the Democratic primary election with a radical plan that he called End Poverty in California, or EPIC.

The news traveled the globe and set off intense speculation about the future of California, where Sinclair was then expected to win the general election. His primary victory also generated theories about the future of the Democratic Party, where this turn toward radicalism might complicate the policies of the Democratic administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

What happened next may concern Mamdani supporters. Business and media elites mounted a campaign of fear that put Sinclair on the defensive. Meanwhile, conservative Democrats defected, and a third candidate split progressive votes.

In the November election, Sinclair lost decisively to incumbent Gov. Frank Merriam, who would have stood less chance against a conventional Democrat.

As a historian of American radicalism, I have written extensively about Sinclair’s EPIC movement, and I direct an online project that includes detailed accounts of the campaign and copies of campaign materials.

Upton’s 1934 campaign initiated the on-again, off-again influence of radicals in the Democratic Party and illustrates some of the potential dynamics of that relationship, which, almost 100 years later, may be relevant to Mamdani in the coming months.

California, 1934

Sinclair launched his gubernatorial campaign in late 1933, hoping to make a difference but not expecting to win. California remained mired in the Great Depression. The unemployment rate had been estimated at 29% when Roosevelt took office in March and had improved only slightly since then.

Sinclair’s Socialist Party had failed badly in the 1932 presidential election as Democrat Roosevelt swept to victory. Those poor results included California, where the Democratic Party had been an afterthought for more than three decades.

Sinclair decided that it was time to see what could be accomplished by radicals working within that party.

Reregistering as a Democrat, he dashed off a 64-page pamphlet with the futuristic title I, Governor of California and How I Ended Poverty. It detailed his plan to solve California’s massive unemployment crisis by having the state take over idle farms and factories and turn them into cooperatives dedicated to “production for use” instead of “production for profit.”

Sinclair soon found himself presiding over an explosively popular campaign, as thousands of volunteers across the state set up EPIC clubs – numbering more than 800 by election time – and sold the weekly EPIC News to raise campaign funds.

Mainstream Democrats waited too long to worry about Sinclair and then failed to unite behind an alternative candidate. But it would not have mattered. Sinclair celebrated a massive primary victory, gaining more votes than all of his opponents combined.

Newspapers around the world told the story.

“What is the matter with California?” The Boston Globe asked, according to author Greg Mitchell. “That is the farthest shift to the left ever made by voters of a major party in this country.”

Building fear

Primaries are one thing. But in 1934, the November general election turned in a different direction.

Terrified by Sinclair’s plan, business leaders mobilized to defeat EPIC, forming the kind of cross-party coalition that is rare in America except when radicals pose an electoral threat. Sinclair described the effort in a book he wrote shortly after the November election: “I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked.”

Nearly every major newspaper in the state, including the five Democratic-leaning Hearst papers, joined the effort to stop Sinclair. Meanwhile, a high-priced advertising agency set up bipartisan groups with names like California League Against Sinclairism and Democrats for Merriam, trumpeting the names of prominent Democrats who refused to support Sinclair.

Few people of any party were enthusiastic about Merriam, who had recently angered many Californians by sending the National Guard to break a Longshore strike in San Francisco, only to trigger a general strike that shut down the city.

The campaign against Sinclair attacked him with billboards, radio and newsreel programming, and relentless newspaper stories about his radical past and supposedly dangerous plans for California.

EPIC faced another challenge, candidate Raymond Haight, running on the Progressive Party label. Haight threatened to divide left-leaning voters.

Sinclair tried to defend himself, energetically denouncing what he called the “Lie Factory” and offering revised, more moderate versions of some elements of the EPIC plan. But the Red Scare campaign worked. Merriam easily outdistanced Sinclair, winning by a plurality in the three-way race.

New York, 2025

Will a Democratic Socialist running for mayor in New York face anything similar in the months ahead?

A movement to stop Mamdani is coming together, and some of what they are saying resonates with the 1934 campaign to stop Sinclair.

The Guardian newspaper has quoted “loquacious billionaire hedge funder Bill Ackman, who said he and others in the finance industry are ready to commit ‘hundreds of millions of dollars’ into an opposing campaign.”

In 1934, newspapers publicized threats by major companies, most famously Hollywood studios, to leave California in the event of a Sinclair victory. The Wall Street Journal, Fortune magazine and other media outlets have recently warned of similar threats.

And there may be something similar about the political dynamics.

Sinclair’s opponents could offer only a weak alternative candidate. Merriam had few friends and many critics.

In 2025, New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who abandoned the primary when he was running as a Democrat and is now running as an independent, is arguably weaker still, having been rescued by President Donald Trump from a corruption indictment that might have sent him to prison. If he is the best hope to stop Mamdani, the campaign strategy will likely parallel 1934. All attack ads – little effort to promote Adams.

But there is an important difference in the way the New York contest is setting up. Andrew Cuomo remains on the ballot as an independent, and his name could draw votes that might otherwise go to Adams.

Curtis Sliwa, the Republican candidate, will also be on the ballot. Whereas in 1934 two candidates divided progressive votes, in 2025 three candidates are going to divide the stop-Mamdani votes.

Religion also looms large in the campaign ahead. The New York City metro area’s U.S. Muslim population is said to be at least 600,000, compared to an estimated 1.6 million Jewish residents. Adams has announced that the threat of antisemitism will be the major theme of his campaign.

The stop-Sinclair campaign also relied on religion, focusing on his professed atheism and pulling quotations from books he had written denouncing organized religion. However, a statistical analysis of voting demographics suggests that this effort proved unimportant.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

'Victory ‘45’ Chronicles The Long, Winding Road To Ending WWII

BY DOUGLASS K. DANIEL

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Most wars begin with a unilateral act. Americans fired “the shot heard round the world” in Lexington in 1775, the Germans invaded Poland in 1939, and the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941. To call off a war, however, the belligerents must agree to terms and conditions, a collaborative and convoluted process.

In the popular imagination, World War II concluded in 1945 with the deaths of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini in Europe, and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. As historians James Holland and Al Murray chronicle in their finely detailed book “Victory ’45: The End of the War in Eight Surrenders,” those events alone were not capable of halting the colossal military might unleashed over the previous six years,

Consider how the ultimate aim of the Allies — unconditional surrender as set in a joint declaration — contrasted with the Nazi blood oath calling for a “1,000-year Reich or Armageddon.” President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill, meeting in Casablanca in January 1943, outlined the strategic, political, and moral clarity necessary to fight a global conflict. By spring 1945 Hitler and his supporters were rotting in his Berlin bunker.

Holland and Murray use the bunker setting — depicted in the 2004 German film “Downfall“ featuring a meme-able Hitler tirade — as the predicate for the multiple European surrenders to come. If rehashing Hitler’s suicide, in April 1945, early in the book seems anti-climactic, “Victory ’45” justifies itself by moving on to the unsung but equally dramatic tales of those who navigated the confusion of a war that was won but hardly finished.

The first significant capitulation began weeks earlier when two backstabbing rivals in the Nazi SS high command in Northern Italy separately schemed to save their own postwar skins. Their intrigues delayed the first of Europe’s unconditional surrenders, limited to their sector, signed just a day before Hitler’s demise. A recurring motif was the futile attempts by the Germans to only yield to the West in hopes of splintering the Allies and escaping Soviet vengeance.

While Holland and Murray include brief profiles of famous politicians and commanders as further European surrender ceremonies were staged and announced, “Victory ’45” finds its relevance and poignancy when it directs its focus downward. There, ordinary individuals journeyed to the intersections of triumph and despair, relief and revulsion.

Examples include the Jewish-American college student haunted by the atrocities at a slave compound in Austria seized by his Army unit. Those rescued included a Jewish-Czech teen who lied about his age to avoid extermination at Auschwitz and joined his father in surviving stints at multiple camps. Liberation was punctuated by grief just days later in a makeshift hospital when his father died in his arms.

On the Eastern Front, a young female translator in Soviet military intelligence was integral to a search in Germany’s devastated capital. Were the reports of the Fuhrer’s death Nazi disinformation? She interrogated captured witnesses, attended the autopsy of the burned corpse, and was even given custody of the teeth that were eventually confirmed as Hitler’s. Not much further west, a bedraggled teenage German conscript who did escape Berlin’s aftermath lived on the run until captured by a Russian soldier who simply told him, “War is over! All go home!”

Turning to the Pacific Theater, “Victory ‘45” examines the grim prospect the Western Allies faced in “unconditionally” conquering a warrior ethos in Japan, epitomized by their civilians’ suicidal resistance to the Allied invasion of Okinawa. The necessity of the atomic bombings was proven by the attempted military coup staged by high-ranking Japanese holdouts who wanted to defy Emperor Hirohito’s orders and continue fighting despite the threat of nuclear annihilation.

Not simply targeted to WWII enthusiasts, “Victory ’45” illustrates for those with a broader historical interest the myriad challenges in bringing to heel the dogs of war. Brits Holland and Murray cannot be expected to quote Yankee baseball legend Yogi Berra, but their book deftly explains 80 years later why in war as well as sports, “It ain’t over ’til it’s over.”

Due Process: What It Means In US Law And Its Implications For Migrant Rights

BY RAY BRESCIA

ASSOCIATE DEAN FOR RESEARCH

AND INTELLECTUAL LIFE,

ALBANY LAW SCHOOL

As the United States edges up to the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence in 2026, one of the core principles the founders sought to advance – that the government must act with accountability and in accordance with the rule of law – is being strongly tested.

In their deliberations leading up to the declaration, the founders would not just raise deep concerns that the government of King George III was violating the Colonists’ rights, which they described in the declaration. They would also enshrine these principles in the U.S. Constitution over a decade later through the concept of “due process.”

What did the framers likely mean when they did so? That’s no longer simply an academic question for legal scholars like me. The meaning and application of due process has become a crucial issue in the U.S., most often with respect to the Trump administration’s migrant deportation efforts.

Over the past several months, the U.S. Supreme Court has made several rulings in deportation-related cases with respect to what’s called the due process clause of the Constitution.

In April 2025, in the case Trump v. J.G.G., the court seemed to state quite clearly that deportations could not take place without due process. More recently, however, in D.H.S. v. D.V.D., the Supreme Court prevented a lower court from providing due process protections to a group of men the administration wanted to deport to South Sudan, where they are at risk of facing torture and even death.

These seemingly contradictory rulings not only make it unclear when due process applies but probably leave many asking what the term “due process of law” even means and how it works.

The origins of due process

The American concept of due process can be traced from medieval England to its modern formulation by the U.S. Supreme Court. Doing so allows the meaning of due process to come into focus. It also calls into question the court’s most recent ruling on this issue.

The concepts of due process and the rule of law largely emerged in the 13th century in the Magna Carta, a formal, written agreement between King John of England and the rebel aristocracy that effectively established legal constraints on government.

One key passage from the Magna Carta provided that “No Freeman shall be taken, or any otherwise imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or destroyed; nor we will not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful Judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land.”

This accord established formal constraints on a previously unrestrained regent, setting English law on the course that would prioritize rule of law over the whims of the monarch.

Over a century later, Parliament would pass the English statute of 1354 that said “That no Man of what Estate or Condition that he be, shall he put out of Land or Tenement, nor taken nor imprisoned, nor disinherited, nor put to death, without being brought in Answer by due Process of the Law.”

These principlesd evolve over time in British law and then informed the emerging revolutionary spirit in the American Colonies.

Released in January 1776, Thomas Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense would help galvanize and steel many Colonists for the revolutionary conflict to come. The work shifted the focus of Colonists’ anger from trying to force the king to treat them better to more radical change: independence and a country governed by the rule of law.

What the Colonists wanted, Paine wrote, was not a monarch: “So far as we approve of monarchy, that in America THE LAW IS KING. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.”

Defining due process

After independence, many of the original 13 states adopted their own constitutions that would enshrine principles akin to due process to protect their constituents from government overreach, such as that government was to be bound, as it was in Virginia’s Declaration of Rights in 1776, by “the law of the land.”

But it was not until the nation adopted the Bill of Rights – the first 10 amendments to the Constitution – in 1791 that the federal government could not act in a way that deprived the populace of life, liberty or property without due process of law. After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment would apply these same protections to all government action, state and federal.

The contemporary and most comprehensive formulation of what due process requires can be found in the Supreme Court’s ruling in the 1970 case Goldberg v. Kelly, brought by welfare recipients challenging their loss of such benefits without a hearing.

In that case, the court determined that when governments attempt to deprive someone of their life, liberty or property, the target of those attempts must receive fair notice of the charges or claims against them that would justify that loss; be given an opportunity to defend against those claims; and possess the right to have such defenses considered by an impartial adjudicator.

The Supreme Court in 1976 would accept that due process protections in different settings will vary based on a number of variables. Those include what is at stake in the case, the likelihood that government might make a mistake in a particular setting, and the benefits and burdens of providing certain forms of process in a given situation.

When someone’s life is literally on the line, for example, more exacting procedures are required. At the same time, regardless of how important the interest that is subject to due process – whether it is one’s life, one’s home, one’s liberty, or something else – the components of fair notice, an opportunity to be heard, and to have one’s case decided by an impartial adjudicator must be meaningful.

As the court said in Mullane vs. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. in 1950: “Process which is a mere gesture is not due process.”

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE