Today, Maurice Obstfeld argues that the only byproduct of the Trump administration’s trade agenda is numerous, costly disruptions. The Free Speech Unmuted team explores a bizarre case that asks whether sending a digitally altered, sexually explicit image of a cartoon character to a public officeholder is protected speech or a heinous crime. And David L. Leal explores whether the UK’s local council elections last month can hint at what is to come for future parliamentary elections.
The Commons
Writing in Freedom Frequency, UC Berkeley professor and former chief IMF economist Maurice Obstfeld argues that contrary to Trump administration arguments, the data show that international trade has not unfairly harmed the United States. In fact, the postwar trade system has benefited both America and other nations by evolving a mutually beneficial trade and financial network responsible for unprecedented economic growth and human improvement worldwide. Today, the US administration’s mercurial use of tariffs and its hunt for scapegoats leads not to the proclaimed “rebalancing” of the world economy but to costly disruptions, including driving away America’s trade partners and feeding uncertainty about the dollar’s future role. The “America First” approach amounts to wasted resources and a rejection of time-tested principles of converging prosperity, Obstfeld says. Read more here.
Revitalizing American Institutions
Free Speech Unmuted hosts Eugene Volokh and Jane Bambauer tackle one of the strangest First Amendment controversies imaginable: whether sending a sexually explicit image of Shrek to a politician can constitute criminal harassment. Using an Ohio case involving a blogger and a state senator as their starting point, they explore the constitutional boundaries between protected offensive speech and criminally punishable harassment, the rights of unwilling listeners, the special status of public officials under the First Amendment, and how courts have struggled to adapt decades-old free speech principles to an era of texts, emails, and smartphones. Watch or listen here.
In a Q&A published at Defining Ideas, Visiting Fellow Sean Westwood explores electoral reform, AI’s impact on American politics, and issues such as partisanship and polarization. He spoke to the Hoover Institution’s Chris Herhalt about his recent work exploring the impact and media coverage of politically motivated violence, how AI agents are now capable of turning polling on its head, and the rise of what he and his colleagues call the “conflict entrepreneur” model of conduct in Congress. Read more here.
The Economy
In this week’s Grumpy Economist Weekly Rant, Senior Fellow John H. Cochrane examines one of the hardest challenges facing the Federal Reserve under Kevin Warsh’s leadership: what happens when fighting inflation collides with America’s fiscal reality. Cochrane argues that raising interest rates is never politically easy, but today’s high debt makes the problem much more difficult. With debt near 100 percent of GDP, higher interest rates mean higher interest costs for the federal government. Cochrane warns that unless Congress is willing to raise taxes or cut spending to cover those costs, monetary policy alone may not be enough to bring inflation down. The deeper issue, he argues, is the growing pressure on the Fed to support government borrowing in moments of fiscal stress, crisis, or war—a problem that will require clearer thinking about how monetary and fiscal policy should interact. Watch here.
Europe
In a new essay for Defining Ideas, Senior Fellow David L. Leal examines the aftermath of Britain’s May 2026 local elections, which saw major gains by Reform UK and wins by the Green Party and regional parties, while Labour and the Conservatives suffered setbacks. Although many commentators have portrayed the results as evidence of a dramatic political realignment, Leal argues that the reality is more complex. Looking across England, Scotland, and Wales, he assesses the performance of the country’s major and minor parties, the role of protest voting, and the limitations of local elections as predictors of future parliamentary outcomes. As Britain approaches the June 18 Makerfield special election, Leal urges readers to separate electoral facts from political hype and take a longer view of the country’s evolving political landscape. Read more here.
Related Commentary