Source: The American Conservative
by Luke Nicastro
“When it comes to defense industrial policy, the Trump administration contains multitudes. On the one hand, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has embarked upon a crusade to remake the defense acquisition system (now rechristened the warfighting acquisition system) on more market-friendly lines. … But at the same time, the state’s role in defense production is massively expanding. … One way to interpret the administration’s Janus-faced posture is as simple incoherence, the result of different principals pursuing different policies with different aims. A deeper read, however, suggests an essential compatibility between these two tendencies. Consciously or not, the White House is executing an ambitious double movement, simultaneously blasting open an arena for market competition while anchoring strategically critical production against the vicissitudes of fortune.” (01/05/26)
“The ratifiers of the 14th Amendment could not have contemplated excluding the children of unlawful entrants, because the concept did not yet exist in 1868. There were no visas or standardized passports, or other official travel documents, and thus no defined legal categories of immigrants. The first general entry restriction — a blatantly racist law that applied only to Asians — was not enacted until 1882. There were, however, many temporary residents, the other group subject to Trump’s executive order. Naturally, some of them produced children. As Professor Amanda Frost and her student coauthor, Emily Eason, brilliantly determined, at least a dozen members of Congress in the years 1865 to 1871 may have been the American-born children of temporary residents, whose citizenship would therefore have been ‘suspect under President Trump’s interpretation’ of the 14th Amendment. And yet, there were no challenges to their qualifications to sit in Congress, for which citizenship is a constitutional requirement.” (01/05/26)
“A U.S. judge on Monday rejected Amazon.com‘s bid to dismiss a lawsuit accusing the online retailer of price gouging during the COVID-19 pandemic. … Consumers in the proposed class action claimed to suffer losses because Amazon failed to take steps to prevent sellers from using its platform to charge excessive prices.” (01/05/26)
“Until policymakers accept that financial regulation shifts risk rather than eliminates it, we will keep cycling through crisis, overreaction, unintended consequences, and the next crisis.” (01/05/26)
“New regulations come into force on Monday in Britain banning daytime TV and online adverts for so-called junk foods, in what the government calls a ‘world-leading action’ to tackle childhood obesity. The ban – targeting commercials for products high in fat, salt or sugar – is expected to remove up to 7.2 billion calories from children’s diets each year, according to the health ministry. The restrictions, which cover television advertisements before 9pm and all digital platforms, will cut childhood obesity cases by 20,000 and save the healthcare system £2 billion (US$2.7 billion), the ministry said. The implementation of the measure – first announced in December 2024 – follows other recent steps, including an extended sugar tax on pre-packaged items like milkshakes, ready-to-go coffees and sweetened yogurt drinks.” (01/05/26)
“The stunning U.S. raid on Venezuela that removed President and socialist thug Nicolás Maduro from power to face trial in the U.S. raises questions: What’s next for long-suffering but hopeful Venezuelans, what is the legal basis for snatching a country’s head of state without congressional authorization, and where do Americans stand on the Trump administration’s nation-building project? We’ll have to wait and see on the first point, and the answer to the second is that there is no legal basis for unilateral presidential missions to depose foreign leaders. But while the public will need some time to digest these events, we know Americans — especially young ones — are increasingly dubious about foreign adventures.” (01/05/26)
