Rob Taber

YouTube video by Farm to Taber How Did Farming Become Conservative?

Some farming 🔥 from sarahtaber.bsky.social. Lots of insightful stuff here.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVnJ...

It's rude to have such terrible commercials during the National Mad Men Renaissance.

What can you do with a history degree?

This halftime brought to you by the arts and humanities.

Adjunct pay/working conditions AY25-26 This form is part of a project to crowd-source pay and working conditions for people who teach and research in colleges and universities during AY2025-2026. This form is for people paid by the course ...

Well, let's give it a shot again and see what we get.

YouTube video by Farm to Taber How Did Farming Become Conservative?

Sarah is kicking off a new series of videos unpacking how agriculture in the US became politically conservative. First one dropped this morning:

Thanks for writing!

Worth reading in full:

Good grief, IOC.

"On December 2, 1783, then-Commander-in-Chief George Washington penned: “America is open to receive not only the Opulent & respected Stranger, but the oppressed & persecuted of all Nations & Religions.”1 More than two centuries later, Congress reaffirmed President Washington’s vision by establishing the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program. See 8 U.S.C. § 1254a (TPS statute). It provides humanitarian relief to foreign nationals in the United States who come from disaster-stricken countries. It also brings in substantial revenue, with TPS holders generating $5.2 billion in taxes annually. See Part VI. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem has a different take. [screenshot of tweet].

So says the official responsible for overseeing the TPS program. And one of those (her word) “damn” countries is Haiti. Relevant here, three days before making the above post, Secretary Noem announced she would terminate Haiti’s TPS designation as of February 3, 2026. See 90 Fed. Reg. 54733 (Nov. 28, 2025) (Termination). Plaintiffs are five Haitian TPS holders. They are not, it emerges, “killers, leeches, or entitlement junkies.” They are instead: Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot, a neuroscientist researching Alzheimer’s disease, Dkt. 90 (Second Am. Compl. (SAC)) ¶ 1; Rudolph Civil, a software engineer at a national bank, id. ¶ 2; Marlene Gail Noble, a laboratory assistant in a toxicology department, id. ¶ 3; Marica Merline Laguerre, a college economics major, id. ¶ 4; and Vilbrun Dorsainvil, a full-time registered nurse, id. ¶ 5. They claim that Secretary Noem’s decision violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 706(2), and the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Government counters that the Court does not have jurisdiction, and, in any case, the Secretary did not violate the law. Plaintiffs seek to stay the Secretary’s decision under 5 U.S.C. § 705 pending the outcome of this litigation. See Dkt. 81 (§ 705 Mot.). To decide their motion, the Court considers first whether it has jurisdiction. It does. See Part II. It then considers: whether Plaintiffs have a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; whether they will be irreparably harmed absent a stay; and whether a merged balance of the equities and public interest analysis favors a stay. See Part III. Each element favors Plaintiffs. See Parts IV, V, and VI. Plaintiffs charge that Secretary Noem preordained her termination decision and did so because of hostility to nonwhite immigrants. This seems substantially likely. Secretary Noem

has terminated every TPS country designation to have reached her desk—twelve countries up, twelve countries down. See Section IV.A.2. Her conclusion that Haiti (a majority nonwhite country) faces merely “concerning” conditions cannot be squared with the “perfect storm of suffering” and “staggering” “humanitarian toll” described in page-after-page of the Certified Administrative Record (CAR). See Section IV.A.3.a. She ignored Congress’s requirement that she “review the conditions” in Haiti only “after” consulting “with appropriate agencies.” 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(b)(3)(A); see Section IV.A.1. Indeed, she did not consult other agencies at all. See id. Her “national interest” analysis focuses on Haitians outside the United States or here illegally, ignoring that Haitian TPS holders already live here, and legally so. See Section IV.A.3.b. And though she states that the analysis must include “economic considerations,” she ignores altogether the billions Haitian TPS holders contribute to the economy. See id. The Government’s primary response is that the TPS statute gives the Secretary unbounded discretion to make whatever determination she wants, any way she wants. And, yes, the statute does grant her some discretion. But not unbounded discretion. To the contrary, Congress passed the TPS statute to standardize the then ad hoc temporary protection system—to replace executive whim with statutory predictability. See Section I.A. As to irreparable harm, the Government contends that, at most, the harms to Haitian TPS holders are speculative. But the Department of State (State) warns [screenshot]

Dkt. 100 (§ 705 Reply) at 20–21.4 “Do not travel to Haiti for any reason” does not exactly scream, as Secretary Noem concluded, suitable for return. And so, the Government studiously does not argue that Plaintiffs will suffer no harm if removed to Haiti. Instead, it argues Plaintiffs will not certainly suffer irreparable harm because DHS might not remove them. But this fails to take Secretary Noem at her word: “WE DON’T WANT THEM. NOT ONE.” See Section IV.B.2.b. Finally, the balance of equities and public interest favor a stay. The Government does not cite any reason termination must occur post haste. Secretary Noem complains of strains unlawful immigrants place on our immigration-enforcement system. Her answer? Turn 352,959 lawful immigrants into unlawful immigrants overnight. She complains of strains to our economy. Her answer? Turn employed lawful immigrants who contribute billions in taxes into the legally unemployable. She complains of strains to our healthcare system. Her answer? Turn the insured into the uninsured. This approach is many things—in the public interest is not one of them. For the reasons below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion for a Stay Under 5 U.S.C. § 705, Dkt. 81.

Even if you don't have time to read all 83 pages of Judge Reyes's opinion barring the Trump administration from rescinding Temporary Protected Status for 350,000+ Haitians, please at least check out the four-page introduction.

It's a tour de force:

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

Thanks for pulling together these resources. Fortunately, in the case of Haitian TPS holders, there's been a court order extending their stay.

VII. CONCLUSION There is an old adage among lawyers. If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither, pound the table. Secretary Noem, the record to-date shows, does not have the facts on her side or at least has ignored them. Does not have the law on her side or at least has ignored it. Having neither and bringing the adage into the 21st century, she pounds X (f/k/a Twitter). Kristi Noem has a First Amendment right to call immigrants killers, leeches, entitlement junkies, and any other inapt name she wants. Secretary Noem, however, is constrained by both our Constitution and the APA to apply faithfully the facts to the law in implementing the TPS program. The record to-date shows she has yet to do that. By accompanying Order, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for a Stay Under 5 U.S.C. § 705. Ara C. Regr

Haiti’s TPS continues for now!!!!! And zowie: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.283214/gov.uscourts.dcd.283214.124.0_1.pdf

It's me. I am surprised. (Only a quarter of an inch so far but coming fast.)

Someday, the forecasted snow will actually arrive in Fayetteville and everyone will be so surprised.

Never mind the jobs you had, tell me five classes you took in college:
1. Geography of Climates
2. Spanish American Revolutions
3. Crime in Classic French Film Noir
4. Advanced Seminar in Current Topics (weekly speakers in DC)
5. Economic Principles & Problems

Having to write an abstract this morning and thinking of the grad school colleague who once helped me get over my writers' block with:

"What's so hard about it? 'Saint-Domingue, blah blah blah. Poor whites, blah blah blah.'"

I can confirm one aspect of Ian's story based on my travels speaking and doing workshops about teaching and AI, the smaller liberal arts colleges have an easier time having more meaningful discussions about what to do. The problem isn't solved, but the work is clearly productive. The other group...

On the off-chance any attorneys in Ohio follow me: DM me and we’ll figure out how to get you trained ahead of this, but I gotta emphasize the mere fact of filing a 2241 petition (you’ll learn what this is!) makes a huge difference in what happens here, you can make difference

It is a low, low bar.

"Welcome to the UNC System, where we still teach Plato!"

UNC System Board Advances Academic Freedom Policy, Despite Pushback Lawyers for a faculty group said the policy would “effectively weaken the definition and historical scope of academic freedom.”

"Still, Hutchens said the UNC System considering protections for academic freedom at all is a notable endeavor compared to the actions of other university systems, like Texas A&M."

Indeed.

Flyer for the annual Lafayette Lecture, titled "Enslaved Afro-Virginian Women in a Revolutionary World," occurring on January 29 from 6 to 7:30 PM in 242 Rudolph Jones Student Center at Fayetteville State University. Presenter is Dr. Adam McNeil.

Happening tomorrow night at Fayetteville State University! Fayetteville / Cumberland friends, come join us as we kick off #America250 and #BlackHistoryMonth! #nc

Amazing - thank you!

Ok, skystorians: are there good surveys of slavery in the ancient/classical Mediterranean? I'm presuming there's something better out there than the opening chapters of Blackburn and D. B. Davis's books.

Congratulations! So excited!

Yeah there's a whole beef industry online course training ~entrepreneurs~ how to sell beef as healthy & sustainable.

It's an MBA! (Master's of Beef Advocacy)

And it's part of an official government program that just exists to sell beef.

Selling tallow is very MAHA, but there's a lot more to it.

Here's the 10 Masters degrees with the highest number of programs expected to fail (using @robertkelchen.com's great spreadsheet here).

Twitter thread in Spanish by José Mario de la Garza, a human rights lawyer in Mexico, translated using Google Translate: 1. Overthrowing a dictator sounds morally right. No one mourns a tyrant. But international law wasn't built to protect the good, but to restrain the powerful. That's why it prohibits force almost without exception: not because it ignores injustice, but because it knows that if each country decides whom to "liberate" by force, the world reverts to the law of the strongest. 2. The problem is not Maduro. The problem is the precedent. When military force is used to change governments without clear rules, sovereignty ceases to be a limit and becomes an obstacle. Today it is “overthrowing a dictator”; tomorrow it will be “correcting an election,” “protecting interests,” “restoring order.” The law does not absolve dictatorships, but neither does it legitimize unilateral crusades.

Cont’d: 3. The uncomfortable question is not whether a tyrant deserves to fall, but who decides when and how. Because history teaches something brutal: removing a dictator is easy; building justice afterward is not. And when legality is broken in the name of good, what almost always follows is not freedom, but chaos, violence, and new victims. The law exists to remind us of this, even when it makes us uncomfortable.

Maduro isn't the problem: he's the face of the problem. Removing him from power would be merely opening the door. Behind him is the machine: Rodríguez, Cabello, the military command, the operators of repression and plunder. If you only change the person at the top and leave the system intact, what follows isn't democracy: it's a reshuffling. And there's something even more difficult: Chavismo didn't just capture institutions, it captured daily life. Economy, media, bureaucracy, employment, fear, favors, blackmail. A country can't be "de-Chavistaized" by decree or by an electoral miracle. The real transition begins when that network is broken without setting the country ablaze. The challenge is enormous, and it's also a moral one: to unite without vengeance, but without impunity. Targeted justice for those most responsible, truth for the victims, guarantees that the rest will dismantle the system, and a plan for people to live again—not just survive. Because freedom doesn't come with a new president: it comes when the state ceases to be a threat.

Best thing I’ve read this morning, from a human rights lawyer in Mexico. Translation is in the ALT-text.

Maduro is gone but the rest of the Venezuelan government is right there, so it's unclear whether this will trigger actual regime change. Also not sure how this will play out re: internal Chavista power struggles (the VP is alive and well but out of the country atm).

No idea what comes next.

Putting this asterisk on the first recommendation in the main thread. The Gibson book Michael recommends is really well done.

El Norte | Grove Atlantic A sweeping saga of the Spanish history and influence in North America over five centuries, from the acclaimed author of Empire’s Crossroads

Thanks, Michael. I had missed the Chomsky/Epstein defense. And yes, Grandin has reflexive takes on current/recent governments across the region that are not great.

Carrie's El Norte is wonderful.