#TalkRadio – August 12: #FreeDC! The Perils of Presidential Overreach: The Trump Takeover of Texas and Washington, D.C.

SPEAKERS:

Rep. Jolanda Jones: 12:00 PM – 12:57 PM Eastern Time
Jolanda Felicia Jones is a Democratic member of the Texas House of Representatives, representing District 147 since May 18, 2022. She serves on the following committees: Criminal Jurisprudence; Subcommittee on Juvenile Justice as Vice Chair; and, Public Health. She is an attorney, former Houston City Council member, school board trustee, and nationally recognized heptathlete. Jones won multiple NCAA championships and was a U.S. track and field champion before earning her law degree from the University of Houston. She has built a career as a criminal defense attorney, civil rights advocate, and television personality, appearing on shows like Sisters in Law and Survivor: Palau. Jones is openly LGBTQ and became the first Black LGBTQ member elected to the Texas Legislature. Her work has focused on justice reform, healthcare access, and protecting marginalized communities.

Rep. Ron Reynolds: 12:00 PM – 12:57 PM ET
Texas State Representative of House District 27 who serves as Chair of the Black Caucus for the state of Texas. Rep. Ron Reynolds serves on the following committees: Environmental Regulation as Ranking Member; and, Land & Resource Management. He also holds leadership roles as Chair of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus; Vice Chair of the Texas Energy & Climate Caucus; and, Chair of the Texas HBCU Legislative Caucus; the first African American elected as state representative in Fort Bend County since Reconstruction. He is the Leader of the Black Legislative Caucus in Texas, Former Associate Municipal Judge for the City of Houston, Past President of the Houston Lawyers Association, and Past President of the Missouri City & Vicinity NAACP.

Dianne Wilkerson: 12:15 PM – 12:57 PM ET
First African American Female to serve in the Massachusetts Senate and TJC Board Treasurer

Dr. Elsie Scott: 12:15 PM – 12:57 PM ET
Dr. Elsie L. Scott is a political scientist, educator, and public policy leader. Elsie L. Scott, Ph.D. has served as the New York City Police Department Deputy Commissioner of Training, as an executive in the Metropolitan Police Department of Washington,DC and law enforcement specialist who consulted with a number of police departments across the country. She formerly served as President and CEO of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation. Beyond academia, Dr. Scott has held influential roles in law enforcement and nonprofit leadership. She has worked with the Detroit Police Department and the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE). Dr. Elsie L. Scott is also a writer. She has served as a special section editor for the Journal of Leadership published by the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, contributing to thought leadership on public policy and civic engagement. Her writing often focuses on leadership development, law enforcement reform, and political participation within the Black community.

INTRODUCTION:

Hi Igniters For Change! The Igniting Change Radio Show on Tuesday, August 12th, 2025, from 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM Eastern Time, Entitled “#FreeDC! The Perils of Presidential Overreach: The Trump Takeover of Texas and Washington, D.C.”, will be live with Radio Show Co-Hosts and Transformative Justice Coalition (TJC) Co-Leaders Attorneys Barbara Arnwine, Esq. and Daryl Jones, Esq. and will feature special guests Rep. Jolanda Jones; Rep. Rep. Ron Reynolds; Dr. Elsie Scott; and, Dianne Wilkerson.

Texas Redistricting Drama
Here’s a detailed summary of the latest developments in the Texas redistricting standoff, as of August 8–11, 2025:

Texas Republicans are attempting to pass a mid-decade redistricting plan that would add five GOP-leaning congressional districts, potentially shifting control of the U.S. House in 2026. On August 11th, Texas Republicans attempted again to convene the House for a vote on redrawing congressional maps that would favor their party, but failed to reach quorum due to the ongoing Democratic walkout. Only 94 members were present—just short of the 100 needed. House Speaker Dustin Burrows issued civil arrest warrants for absent Democrats and set a Friday, August 15 deadline for their return. Governor Greg Abbott has vowed to continue calling special sessions until the vote can proceed. The Texas Constitution (Article III, Section 10) requires two-thirds of each chamber to be present to conduct official business. It also allows either chamber to compel attendance through civil arrest—but only within state lines. Lawmakers who flee Texas cannot be forcibly returned.

Democratic lawmakers remain out of state, appearing at press events in Illinois and California alongside governors Gavin Newsom and JB Pritzker. Abbott has stated that if they re-enter Texas, they will be arrested and brought to the Capitol.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit with the Texas Supreme Court on August 8th seeking to vacate the seats of 13 Democratic state representatives who fled the state to block a vote on a mid-decade redistricting plan. The proposed map would add five Republican-leaning congressional districts, potentially shifting control of the U.S. House in the 2026 midterms.

Paxton’s lawsuit argues that the lawmakers’ absence constitutes “abandonment of office,” citing public statements they made affirming their refusal to return. Among those named are Reps. Gene Wu, Ron Reynolds, Jessica González, Chris Turner, Ana-Maria Ramos, and others from North Texas, Houston, and Austin. Paxton claims their actions “sabotaged the constitutional process and violated the oath they swore to uphold.”

Governor Greg Abbott had previously filed a similar petition targeting Rep. Gene Wu, which Paxton publicly disputed, asserting that only the attorney general has standing to bring such a case under Texas law. Paxton also stated that if Democrats do not return by August 15th, he will pursue additional filings.

Legal experts widely question the legitimacy of Paxton’s argument. The Texas Constitution permits quorum-breaking as a legislative tactic, and courts have historically upheld it. Constitutional law scholar Charles “Rocky” Rhodes stated that breaking quorum does not equate to abandoning office, and that Paxton’s theory stretches legal precedent. Chad Dunn, a former attorney for the Texas Democratic Party, emphasized that lawmakers retain discretion over attendance and that intent to relinquish office must be proven—something not evident in this case.

Paxton himself acknowledged the legal complexity, noting in interviews that the process would require filing individual suits in each member’s district, many of which are Democratic strongholds. If successful, the seats would be filled via special elections, but the timeline and legal hurdles make that outcome uncertain.

In parallel, Paxton’s office filed a separate suit in Tarrant County against Beto O’Rourke’s organization, Powered by People, for allegedly fundraising to support the absent Democrats. A temporary restraining order was granted to halt further donations, though legal analysts say the bribery allegations are unlikely to hold up without direct evidence of quid pro quo.

The Texas Supreme Court, composed entirely of Republican justices, has not yet ruled on Paxton’s petition. In 2021, the court affirmed that the legislature can compel attendance but did not endorse expulsion for quorum-breaking.

Quorum-breaking has a long history in Texas politics, dating back to 1870. Notable examples include the 1979 “Killer Bees” incident, the 2003 redistricting walkout, and the 2021 voting rights protest. While these efforts rarely block legislation permanently, they serve as high-profile messaging tactics. Political scientists describe the current walkout as symbolic but constitutionally valid, with Democrats using it as a last resort to stall redistricting and other controversial bills.

Notably, Republicans themselves have used the tactic. In 2003, Democrats fled the state to block a mid-decade redistricting plan, and in 2021, they left again to protest voting restrictions. At the time, many Republicans—including then-Governor Rick Perry—acknowledged the legality of quorum-breaking, even if they criticized its use. The Texas Tribune notes that while Republicans condemned the 2021 walkout, they did not pursue legal removal of seats, and some GOP lawmakers privately admitted it was a valid procedural tool.

Texas Republicans, led by Governor Greg Abbott and Senator John Cornyn, have escalated efforts to locate and potentially arrest the over 50 Democratic state lawmakers by appealing to the FBI. On August 6th, Cornyn sent a letter to FBI Director Kash Patel requesting federal assistance to track down the absent legislators. According to Cornyn, the FBI agreed to assist, though it remains unclear what resources or legal authority the agency is using.

President Donald Trump publicly supported the move, stating the FBI “may have to” get involved to locate the Democrats, whom he accused of abandoning their constitutional duties. Abbott echoed this sentiment, claiming the FBI would help identify and return the lawmakers to Texas, where civil arrest warrants have already been issued.

Democrats and legal experts have strongly pushed back. According to Northeastern University law professor Dan Urman, the FBI lacks jurisdiction in this case because quorum-breaking is not a criminal offense. Federal law allows FBI involvement only in cases involving fugitives from felony prosecution, which does not apply here. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, where many Democrats are staying, has stated he will not cooperate with any effort to forcibly return them.

Democratic leaders in Congress, including Reps. Jamie Raskin and Robert Garcia, sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Patel expressing concern over the politicization of federal law enforcement. They cited past precedent, including a 2003 Texas court ruling that the Department of Public Safety could not apprehend lawmakers for breaking quorum. They also referenced the 2003 incident when then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was reprimanded for involving federal agencies in tracking Democratic lawmakers.

The FBI has declined to comment publicly on its role, and legal analysts note that any federal involvement in a state-level political dispute could raise serious constitutional questions. Democrats argue the move is an abuse of power and part of a broader effort to criminalize political protest.

Meanwhile, Democratic-led states are threatening retaliatory redistricting. California is preparing a special election in November to authorize new maps that could offset Texas’s proposed gains only if Texas goes through with its plan. Governor Newsom sent a formal letter to Trump on Monday, August 11, demanding that he call off the nationwide redistricting push led by Republican-controlled states. Newsom warned that the GOP’s effort to redraw congressional maps mid-decade—especially in Texas—was “playing with fire” and undermining democratic norms ahead of the 2026 elections. He pledged that California would stand down from its own retaliatory redistricting effort if red states did the same.

Newsom’s letter came after Trump publicly endorsed the Texas redistricting plan and called for a new census to justify further map changes. In response, Newsom announced that California would pursue a statewide ballot measure to temporarily bypass its independent redistricting commission and allow voters to approve a new map that could add five Democratic-leaning seats. He gave Trump until Tuesday, August 12th, to respond, stating in a video: “We’re not going to sit back and watch you light democracy on fire. We will fight fire with fire.”

This move signals escalating redistricting warfare between blue and red states. Trump has not publicly responded to Newsom’s ultimatum, though he is expected to address it during his upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15th.

The standoff is intensifying, with national implications for the 2026 midterms. Legal experts note that Democrats would need to remain out of state until November to block the vote entirely, which is historically difficult to sustain. If the maps aren’t finalized soon, Texas may face delays in its primary schedule.

The current special session is scheduled to end August 19th, but Abbott has indicated he may call additional sessions. Without quorum, the House cannot pass any legislation, including the redistricting bill or other measures such as SB 7, which would restrict bathroom access for transgender individuals in public buildings.

“The Federal Takeover of the District of Columbia Police Department” – Article by Dr. Elsie Scott

On August 11, 2025, President Trump announced that the Federal government is “restoring law and order in the District of Columbia” by “mobilizing the District of Columbia National Guard”. The takeover of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) is reportedly justified based on the murders of two embassy staffers and a Congressional intern, the beating of a former DOGE employee, and the need to ensure the functioning of the government.

As a long-time resident of Washington, DC, a former employee of the MPD, a former training director for the New York Police Department, and a consultant to other police department, the actions by the President are very disturbing. The crime statistics as documented by the FBI show that the crime rate in DC is declining, not increasing. There is a need to keep reducing crime in the District and throughout the country, but that is no justification exaggerating statistics. 

He announced that the Attorney General will be in charge. What expertise does this political appointee have that qualifies her to run the MPD? What will be the role of Chief Pamela Smith? 

The executive order states that “special conditions of an emergency nature exist that require the use of the Metropolitan Police Department…for Federal purposes.” If the MPD is being taken over for Federal purposes, who will be responsible for protecting the citizens of the District? The National Guard officers have not been trained in local laws, and they have no relationships with the communities in which they will be serving. They do not know the local statutes. They do not know our neighborhoods and our citizens. One of the best examples of the misuse of the National Guard was the deployment of soldiers to the campus of Kent State University in 1970. The untrained soldiers fired on unarmed students, killing four and wounding another nine.

We, the taxpaying citizens of the District, have not asked for this deployment. The Executive Order states that “violence and crime hamper the recruitment and retention of essential Federal employees”. We, the residents, are more worried about crime increasing due to the loss of federal jobs than we are about the effects of crime on “recruitment and retention” of federal workers. Where are these jobs coming from?

The President has not focused on local victims of crime. Would there be this kind of attention if all the victims were poor DC residents? Some residents have praised the decision to deploy federal troops, but will their praise continue if their friends and family become victims of abuse? There is also the question of whether citizens will be harassed and arrested for petty crimes such as drinking out of open containers on Federal property. If citizens who are praising the action by Trump do not see a decline in crime and violence in their communities, will they continue to support the takeover? Another major factor is the length of the takeover and the action by Congress in the fall related to the Home Rule act.

QUESTIONS:

• Welcome, guests, this week’s show is highlighting two of President Trump’s most egregious and impactful executive overreaches: 1) his move to stack the 2026 election by gerrymandering Texas and to institute mid-decade gerrymandering despite the normal process requiring a 2030 Census; and, 2) his takeover of Washington, D.C. law enforcement and his criminalization of the homeless. 
• Let’s start with the Texas Gerrymandering and the ongoing war. Rep. Reynolds, welcome back! You are now in your second week of “refugee” status from the state of Texas. Please recap for our audience what has led to 50 Democratic members of the Texas legislature fleeing the state.
• Rep. Jones, welcome to your inaugural Igniting Change appearance!! Can you tell our audience what this experience has been like for you?
• Dr. Scott, besides your tremendous police experience, you are also quite a political science expert- you’ve earned a Ph.D. in Political Science from Atlanta University, now known as Clark Atlanta University. How do you interpret this war that President Trump has started with the Texas gerrymandering? How do you see the long-range implications of this 2025 gerrymandering war?
• Dianne, you have served as a state senator and have seen many redistricting battles in the state of Massachusetts. What, in your opinion, is unique about this 2025 battle?
• Rep. Jones, how are your constituents back home reacting to all of this?
• Everyone, how do you think President Trump is going to react to Governor Gavin Newsom’s letter demanding a “ceasefire”? [Governor Newsom sent a formal letter to Trump on Monday, August 11, demanding that he call off the nationwide redistricting push led by Republican-controlled states. Newsom warned that the GOP’s effort to redraw congressional maps mid-decade—especially in Texas—was “playing with fire” and undermining democratic norms ahead of the 2026 elections. He pledged that California would stand down from its own retaliatory redistricting effort if red states did the same.] 
• Representatives Jones and Reynolds, are you worried about the threats from Paxton and Abbott to seek the removal of you and others from office?
• Rep. Reynolds, how are you and everybody else reacting to Senator John Cornyn’s solicitation of the engagement of the FBI in facilitating the arrest of you and your compatriots?
• Dr. Scott, as we are holding our show today, the streets of DC are being invaded. 
• President Donald Trump has recently threatened and begun deploying a range of federal law enforcement agencies in Washington, D.C., under the claim of combating violent crime—even though crime rates have been falling. Here’s a breakdown of the agencies and forces involved:
• 📆 Trump’s Federal Law Enforcement Actions in Washington, D.C. (2025)

• March 14, 2025

  • EO 14288: “Restoring Safety and Order in the Nation’s Capital”

  • Created the “D.C. Safe and Beautiful” task force to address crime and homelessness

• August 8, 2025

  • EO 14325: “Federal Surge Deployment for Urban Crime Prevention”

  • Deployed 450 federal officers from FBI, DEA, Secret Service, Park Police, ATF, and others

• August 10, 2025
  EO 14326: “Emergency Mobilization of the D.C. National Guard”

  • Announced activation of up to 800 troops and intent to federalize MPD

• August 11, 2025

  • EO 14327: “Temporary Federal Oversight of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department”

  • Declared a public safety emergency and placed MPD under federal control

  • Appointed the U.S. Attorney General to oversee MPD operations

• August 11, 2025

  • EO 14328: “Federal Protection of Government Continuity in the District of Columbia”

  • Cited embassy staff murders and threats to federal operations as justification

  • FBI agents began street patrols and license plate scans

  • Federal officers initiated removal of homeless encampments from federal areas

  • DEA and Park Police began leading enforcement in designated zones

• Dr. Scott, you have recently written an article on this. Can you summarize your top concerns about Trump’s recent three executive orders?
• To all our guests, what are the implications of Trump’s D.C. Takeover for the nation?
• Dr. Scott, how do we get out of this hole? A number of Congresspeople have railed against his actions. What do you see as the next steps to stop him from turning D.C. into a police state?
• Dr. Scott and Dianne, what can our listeners do to help in D.C.?
• Representatives Reynolds and Jones, what can our audience do to help in Texas and what are your final one-minute thoughts to our audience?
• Everyone, thank you for being on the show. How can our listeners get in contact with you?

[ Arnwine will remind listeners: when you make those daily calls to the Congress at 202-224-3121 to vote NO and protest the SAVE Act to stay in those streets! TJC will continue to vigorously defend the rights of all Americans and will fight the implementation of Project 2025 and our future shows will continue to cover any hate crimes and how we effectively protect ourselves while advancing our agenda for justice.]

[Daryl, Barbara, and guests may share their favorite books and encourage people to donate towards TJC’s giveaways of banned and affirming books.]