Academic Freedom for Me, But Not for Thee

In a report on a pair of Republican anti-CRT bills, re-introduced by Congressman Dan Bishop (R., N.C.) and Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) today, I wrote: “With a Democratic Senate majority, to say nothing of an octogenarian president whose administration has a bottomless appetite for anti-American racialism, the odds of the aforementioned Republican bills passing this session are about as good as those of a blizzard slamming Death Valley.”

But that doesn’t mean that so-called “messaging bills” are useless. For one, “they rally a disorganized and internally divided Republican Party around a specific set of priorities” and “forge the outlines of a new Republican agenda.”

About the Author

Nate Hochman

Nate Hochman was a staff writer at National Review.

Featured Tags

In a report on a pair of Republican anti-CRT bills, re-introduced by Congressman Dan Bishop (R., N.C.) and Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) today, I wrote: “With a Democratic Senate majority, to say nothing of an octogenarian president whose administration has a bottomless appetite for anti-American racialism, the odds of the aforementioned Republican bills passing this session are about as good as those of a blizzard slamming Death Valley.”

But that doesn’t mean that so-called “messaging bills” are useless. For one, “they rally a disorganized and internally divided Republican Party around a specific set of priorities” and “forge the outlines of a new Republican agenda.”