First Time as Tragedy

Re “These Dis-United States” [160th Anniversary Issue, July/August 2025]: Congratulations are in order to The Nation for being a thorn in the side of authoritarianism for 160 years. I was disappointed, however, that there was no mention of The Nation’s reporting on the Alger Hiss case (which, thanks to Carey McWilliams and Victor Navasky, is part of the magazine’s legacy) and the publication this year of evidence establishing his innocence. My new book, Rewriting Hisstory: A Fifty-Year Journey to Uncover the Truth About Alger Hiss, not only exonerates him, but ties what’s going on today to the anti-communist hysteria of the 1940s and ’50s, when the right used Hiss as part of an attempt to destroy liberalism and civil liberties in this country. Sound familiar?

Jeff Kisseloff
tucson, az
 

Worth the Price?

Current Issue

April 2026 Issue

The ad from Negative Population Growth that ran in the July/August 2025 issue demands comment. I understand that it also ran in The Washington Times and the Washington Examiner. Those papers are right-wing; The Nation is a left publication. Yet your acceptance of this ad puts you in league with those who are vociferously advocating for the ethnic cleansing of immigrants. Among its other proposals to “reverse immigration-driven population growth,” the ad states, “NPG further believes that illegal immigration can and must be stopped entirely.” It may as well have been written by Stephen Miller or Kash Patel. I cannot believe that The Nation would accept an advertisement from this group, no matter how much it pays.

On its own, the ad is horrific. But as ICE agents are violently seizing and arresting immigrants off the street, kidnapping them from their homes, chasing them down in agricultural farms and factories, the ad becomes that much more reprehensible. Will The Nation run a retraction? A public self-criticism? Anything less would be unacceptable.

Bruce Hobson
guanajuato, mexico

The writer is co-coordinator of the Mexico Solidarity Project.
 

The Nation Replies

As the child of immigrants—and as someone with family members who have been 
subjected to deportation—I could not disagree more strongly with the xenophobic and Malthusian message of the Negative Population Growth advertisement. The Nation has long stood for immigrant rights, and that commitment is unwavering. That said, we believe readers of The Nation are capable of distinguishing between our editorial stance and paid advertising. Our ad policy has stood since it was written by Victor Navasky in 1979. We publish controversial ads because we trust our audience’s intelligence and judgment, not because we endorse the views expressed. Now, as in 1979, readers of The Nation should expect that we will at times “accept advertising even if the views expressed are repugnant to those of the editors.”

Bhaskar Sunkara
President, The Nation
new york, ny
 

Distrust by Design

Re “Punished for Playing by the Rules: the Deliberate Cruelty of Trump’s Deportation Regime,” by Eileen Markey [TheNation.com, July 24, 2025]: As a former immigration judge, I am alarmed by the increase in arrests at immigration courts. For decades, administrations of both parties agreed that “sensitive locations”—schools, hospitals, churches,and courthouses—should be off-limits to immigration enforcement. These should be sanctuaries of trust, where human needs and fundamental rights are prioritized.

Yet plainclothes agents now stalk immigration courtrooms, waiting to arrest individuals who are complying with the legal process and trying to act on their rights. Many are longtime residents with families and deep community ties. Many have valid asylum claims. Dismissing cases to detain people, denying bond hearings, firing immigration judges, and expanding expedited removal are inhumane tactics and grotesque distortions of what our court system is supposed to be: impartial, accessible, and grounded in the rule of law. The consequences are not only traumatic for those targeted, but they erode public trust in our legal institutions.

This growing imbalance is a policy choice. The federal government must invest in safeguarding due process and the integrity of the court system. We need policies that promote an independent judiciary, protect the safety of all participants in the legal process, and provide access to legal representation—especially for those navigating complex cases without counsel and at highest risk of deportation. These ideas are not radical, but foundational to a fair system of justice. When courts function as neutral forums rather than extensions of enforcement, they can uphold both the law and our values. It’s time to recalibrate and restore that balance.

The Honorable A. Ashley Tabaddor
los angeles, ca

The writer is a former immigration judge and former chief counsel at US Citizenship and Immigration Services.