As Donald Trump is about to be sworn in for a second term, governors across the country are preparing their states to be anti-Trump refuges or MAGA-themed Trumplandias.
Plans to either embolden or resist the incoming president’s agenda have been met with varying levels of enthusiasm from state legislatures, but they do show how state leaders are jockeying for political wins off of Trump’s presidency.
No two governors are trying to ride Trump’s coattails more than California’s Gavin Newsom — who convened a special session to brace against Trump’s agenda despite ongoing wildfires — and Florida’s Ron DeSantis — who also called for a special session to make Trump’s red carpet in the state even redder, despite intraparty pushback.
Trump, for his part, is happy to take center stage. He praised DeSantis for calling back lawmakers to pass legislation cracking down on immigration (even more than the state already has) to pave the way for Trump’s pending executive orders. And he trashed Newsom as the wildfires raged, as he often did during his first term in office.
Trending
Newsom — who called a special session to “safeguard California values and fundamental rights in the face of an incoming Trump administration” — is also part of a larger coalition of Democratic governors calling themselves Governors Safeguarding Democracy, formed in response to Trump’s election.
It’s not a new phenomenon. In 2016, cities across California set aside millions of dollars to defend against deportation efforts and state leaders vowed not to allow “one election to reverse generations of progress.”
The state ultimately filed 122 lawsuits against Trump during his first term, using over $40 million in state funds to do so. Newsom has argued that not only was the money worth spending, but the effort more than paid for itself. In one lawsuit, the Justice Department was forced to reimburse the state $57 million in law enforcement grants.
Even as the Trump resistance movement has taken a different tenor this time around, governors are still keen to make a political statement — whether that results in any substantive policy changes is yet to be seen.
DeSantis held lengthy press conferences Monday, Wednesday and Thursday, each time waxing poetic about how Florida will lead the way for Trump’s agenda. He said he reviewed Trump’s planned executive orders and wrote a set of proposals to accompany them.
Those include punishments for officers who don’t participate in a federal program allowing local police to enforce federal immigration law, expanding detention and deportation programs, changing the legal definition of “gang-related activities” and other changes.
His initial posturing, though, prompted a very public feud afterward over whether a special session was even necessary.
“When we receive specific guidance that may necessitate our state’s legislative action to complement President Trump’s efforts, we stand ready to act at the appropriate time,” the state’s Republican legislative leaders wrote in a letter responding to DeSantis’ call for a special session.
“The people’s elected representatives, the Legislature, not the Governor, will decide when and what legislation we consider.” Shortly after, DeSantis issued a proclamation forcing the legislature back on Jan. 27.
Florida Rep. Greg Steube seemed to be on the side of state lawmakers early last week.
“I don’t see why Florida would need to respond — it’s federal,” he told NOTUS.
Both Florida congressional representatives, Reps. Cory Mills and Kat Cammack, who were vying for the governor’s nomination to Marco Rubio’s Senate seat, publicly supported the governor’s call for a special session despite the pushback.
California had already started the trend of Trump-themed special sessions. Lawmakers reached a tentative $50 million agreement last week: $25 million for California’s Department of Justice and another $25 million to protect immigrants in the state, Politico first reported.
However, that deal was put on hold for the time being to prioritize the passage of around $2.5 billion in fire aid for areas devastated by the blazes across Los Angeles. The session will now focus only on wildfire response and work to “Trump proof” the state will come during a later session.
Before that pivot, Republicans were quick to attack the timing of the session. “How could that be the priority at this moment in time when you have the level of suffering that we’re seeing in LA,” California Rep. Kevin Kiley told NOTUS earlier this month.
“It’s almost like an ‘SNL’ scene,” Rep. Doug LaMalfa, also from California, said. “They had a chance to say, ‘Well, man, we should put this off for a while.’ I mean, how much stuff could Trump do to them in the first week anyway or whatever, instead of attending to the people’s dire need with his fire situation.”
Democrats highlighted that the session was scheduled before the fires in Los Angeles.
“I don’t think it was declared during the fire season,” Rep. Mike Thompson told NOTUS. “Well, we have fire season in California 12 months of the year, but it wasn’t declared during this LA fire.”
Thompson and other California Democrats also blasted discussions between Trump and House Republicans to tie future federal disaster to a debt limit increase.
California’s effort has already yielded a $50 million agreement: $25 million for California’s Department of Justice and another $25 million to protect immigrants in the state, Politico first reported.
Florida’s special session is set to begin Jan. 27.
—
Mark Alfred and Claire Heddles are NOTUS reporters and Allbritton Journalism Institute fellows.
Authors
