Unscientific American: Critiques on Trump’s Trial and More

Woke watch: Not-So-Scientific American

City Journal’s James B. Meigs argues that “American journalism has never been very good at covering science,” but Scientific American has taken a different approach, viewing science as a servant to progressive ideology rather than an objective pursuit of truth. The magazine’s coverage of topics like COVID, trans kids, and climate has been criticized for being more about promoting politically approved opinions than presenting scientific facts. In a historic move, the magazine endorsed a presidential candidate, Joe Biden, for the first time in its 175-year history, further blurring the lines between science and politics.

Public trust in scientists has also been eroding, with only 23% of Americans expressing a “great deal” of trust in scientists, down from 39% in 2020. This decline is attributed to instances where expert opinions have been influenced more by politics than by scientific evidence.

Conservative: Trump’s Insane Trial

The Washington Examiner’s Byron York points out the lack of clarity in former President Donald Trump’s trial in New York. The charges against Trump involve falsifying business records, which is only a misdemeanor with a two-year statute of limitations. Prosecutors have attempted to elevate the charge to a felony by implying an intent to commit another crime, but no specific crime has been identified in the indictment. This ambiguity raises concerns about the constitutionality of the trial, as Trump effectively faces charges without a clear understanding of what he is accused of doing.

If the situation sounds unconstitutional to you, you’re not alone.

Liberal: Dems’ Problem With Health-Care Voters

The Liberal Patriot’s Ruy Teixeira reports that voters with populist/progressive views on health care tend to lean more conservative on immigration issues. Poll findings show that a significant portion of voters support giving Medicare the power to negotiate drug prices while also backing the use of presidential powers to address illegal border crossings. These voters also tend to oppose Democratic policies on police and climate change. Teixeira suggests that Democrats need to understand and address these shifting preferences among voters.

From the right: Jamaal Bowman Loves Hamas

National Review’s Caroline Downey criticizes Rep. Jamaal Bowman for his association with a Hamas-sympathizing Muslim leader. At a fundraiser held by Bowman, the leader celebrated an attack on Israel, prompting the White House to end collaboration with his organization. Bowman’s past remarks on Hamas and his response to police intervention in the Columbia protests have raised questions about his support for violent actions and his stance on law enforcement.

DEI beat: MIT Drops Thought Control

UnHerd’s John Sailer praises the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for ending the use of diversity statements in faculty hiring, calling it a significant development. These mandatory statements were seen as endorsing a divisive diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) agenda, and their removal at MIT is a departure from similar trends seen in public universities. The decision at MIT was driven by university leadership and represents a growing resistance to mandatory DEI statements among faculty members nationwide.

This shift away from compelled speech in academia signals a broader rejection of ideologies that limit free expression and hinder true higher education.

— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board