There’s another way for blue states to respond to Trump

Universities, corporations, hospitals and other institutions across the country face a painful dilemma when President Donald Trump’s administration tries to force them to change long-standing practices and policies to suit the president. Do they submit or embark on an extended court battle? The first option risks going down a road akin to blackmail; the second means months — if not years — of costly hearings with largely uncertain outcomes. I’m watching a fledgling move toward a third way: going cold turkey on Washington.

Corporations that tried submission soon found that that carries its own risk, the potential for ever-escalating demands. When CBS parent company Paramount Global needed Federal Communications Commission approval for a lucrative $8.4 billion merger with Skydance Media, Trump responded with a consumer deception suit most experts predicted they’d win outright in court. Acquiescing in advance, Paramount offered a generous $16 million settlement, yet approval of the merger still languished. It was only after CBS announced the cancellation of frequent Trump critic Stephen Colbert’s popular late night show (after he criticised the settlement) that the FCC OK’d the merger.

Sure, billions in profit can trump millions in settlement for any corporation, but CBS is a media corporation with all the responsibility and integrity that has traditionally carried. So, what’s the greater cost to CBS? In addition to media watcher backlash, Ad Week reports CBS ratings are plummeting, including a 10% drop in total viewers and 20% slip in the all-important adult 25-to-54 demo for “CBS Mornings.”

This begins the tally of the long-term price of capitulation. Target’s bill for acquiescence is already coming due. First, Target shut down its $2 billion REACH initiative to hire more people of color and scrubbed its website of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in January. Then, it pulled gay-themed clothing from Pride week displays in June. The result: Stocks plummeted, investors sued, and consumers launched a devastating, monthslong boycott. So far, Target has lost $12 billion in sales, store foot traffic has dropped precipitously, and its CEO has been forced out.

Somewhat ironically, nine law firms chose to acquiesce instead of fight in court, giving Trump control of a combined $1 billion in pro bono work from the nation’s top firms. Four that chose to fight have, so far, been winning in the courts. This includes Chicago-based Jenner & Block, which is also representing Harvard University, the lead fighter in the higher education sector.

Trump fired all his guns at Harvard, from blocking lucrative international students and investigating alleged antisemitism on campus to pulling $2.6 billion in federal research grants. Now that a federal judge ruled it’s illegal for Trump to freeze those funds, maybe Harvard will walk away from a $500 million settlement deal. Settling could yet be the best route for Harvard, given Trump’s assault on so many fronts. But others are starting to see a third way. Bravo to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which recently announced it is voluntarily refusing nearly $1 million in federal grants because it disagrees with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention policies ranging from vaccine access to the purge of federal information online about contraceptives.

Yes, this is a small amount of money in comparison to the huge numbers at stake in examples above. But the announcement is powerful and has the potential to reverberate through the medical world as Health and Human Services chief Robert F. Kennedy Jr. continues to eschew science and scientists in favor of crackpot theories and their proponents.

Certainly, not all institutions or states can afford this route. But it’s encouraging to see some start to move in this direction. Trump doesn’t hesitate to use any tool he can find to browbeat those he wants to control. It’s time for those who have this tool of independence to start using it. This brings us to the growing conversations around “soft succession,” the “you can’t fire me, I quit” option. The term doesn’t meet the moment, given both its ugly origins in the Civil War and the ongoing fight to protect our Constitution.

Yet, the concept has present-day relevance as a form of resistance available to blue states under increasing assault from the Trump administration. Trump threatens to send National Guard troops into Chicago and other blue cities; he has also cut crucial funding for anti-violence efforts, flood relief and other congressionally approved support for cities and states run by Democrats. Without Congress or the Supreme Court acting as a backstop, Trump controls these important levers. But the nation’s largest Democrat-run states also control some purse strings. Redirecting federal tax money for parallel services can insulate these states from the full impact of Trump’s arbitrary cuts.

Three states have just formed such a parallel with the Western States Health Alliance. Washington, Oregon and California banded together to protect vaccine access in light of the HHS’ anti-vaccine crusade. They will develop their own immunisation guidelines “informed by respected national medical organisations,” according to a news release Wednesday from governors of these states. There’s no mention, so far, of withholding federal tax dollars, but that could be an enticing idea. Data from 2023 shows 19 states paid more to the federal government than they received back, including Trump’s main blue state targets. Illinois taxpayers pay out $28 billion more, Californians $78 billion and New Yorkers $89 billion more than they get back from the feds. Can states withhold these funds to better serve residents affected by an increasingly hostile federal government?

Public policy analyst Chris Armitage suggests that “this economic reality gives blue states leverage they’ve only begun to explore.” He points to the national coalition of more than 20 attorneys general (including Illinois’) filing dozens of joint lawsuits against Trump cuts ranging from education funds and libraries to crime victims and anti-violence funds. Armitage reports: “States are creating pharmaceutical stockpiles, climate agreements, immigration policies,” with ongoing discussions of other ways to collaborate — discussions that put Illinois front and center.

There are many paths to resist Trump’s move toward autocracy and protect our democracy. The smart money goes to those who don’t wait for Washington to drop a hammer but choose to build functional institutions wherever possible, independent of increasingly hostile federal leadership.