Stacey Abrams is focused on ensuring fair elections in 2026 : NPR

Stacey Abrams says that its objective is to guarantee free and fair elections in 2026.

Kevin Lowery / Penguin Random House

hide

tilting legend

Kevin Lowery / Penguin Random House

The political strategist Stacey Abrams does not currently present itself to functions – but it does not deviate from a race in the future either.

“Politics is a tool and it is very important to be well done, but it is not the only one,” says Abrams. “I am really focused at the moment on the other tools of my toolbox. … My goal is currently on the sharing of information.”

Former minority of the House of Representatives of Georgia, Abrams led the governor of Georgia as a Democratic candidate in 2018 and again in 2022. Although she lost the two races, she drew national attention to the issues of suppression of voters in the State, especially during the end of the 2018 campaign.

After the 2018 elections, Abrams founded Fair Fight, an organization credited with having stimulated the participation rate in Georgia and contributing to democratic victories during the presidential elections and the 2020 Senate. It warns that the abolition of voters is “all around us” – although this took a new form in the 21st century. She says that excessive restrictions on postal bulletins, students’ vote and early voting can all be examples of suppression of voters.

“Many of us have grown up with the stories of the civil rights movement and the suppression of voters of the 60s, firearms and dogs and pipes,” she said. “The suppression of voters in the 21st century is administrative.”

Abrams discusses the current policy and its concerns concerning the democratic process on its podcast, Required assembly. She is also the author of several novels. His latest thriller, Coded judicial,, is the third episode of a series which focuses on Avery Keene, a former clerk of the Supreme Court who has become a business investigator, who enters the AI world to examine a system designed to revolutionize the health care of the veterans.

Abrams says that she has chosen to focus on AI because it seems to be face -to -face like a neutral technology. “I wanted to write a book where the lines are blurred, because sometimes there is a good intention, just a problematic execution,” she said. “This tool that we intend to use for good can be badly applied. … I wanted to think about what is happening while even the intentional prosecution of the property can lead to challenges and murder.”

Strengths of the interview

By deciding to write on AI Coded judicial

I had been fascinated on this subject because my niece used it. My niece lived with me before going to university. And I was trying to understand how she was able to use AI and this line between that it was a useful tool and that it was cheating. And faith was raised with very strong morality and it knew that it was not going to be allowed to abuse. And one day, we had a conversation: “Tell me about this.” And it has really become a part of the spark to Coded judicial.

By writing books as a child

My first novel was published just after the Faculty of Law. But my parents will tell you, I started writing much earlier. My first attempt as a novel was when I was 12 years old. It’s called The Angoisse Journal. I was a very tortured 12 -year -old child. And I had to explain why this boy didn’t love me and why my friends were cruel. And it was very, very full of anxiety and Gestalt. My mother had actually linked it to the age of 25, because I am thinking of both a gag gift and a Christmas present. But I grew up with parents who loved the narration and loved books, but they both understood in their own way that they could extend our worlds, even if they could not allow us to give us the world. And so we grew up at Mississippi. My mom called us the “poor distinguished”. We had no money, but we looked at PBS and we read books.

On the way her faith guides her

I watched my parents live these values that education counts, that faith counts and that people help people. And for me, it is the values that guide me, my faith first and above all. I cannot call myself a Christian and not to believe that it is my responsibility to help abroad, to help immigrants, to help the dispossessed. I cannot say that my faith justifies the venom which was turned against the LGBTQI community, the way in which we demonized the transgender community. I cannot be a woman of faith who has read the Bible and easily choose the passages that I like. …

Education is part of my faith because I do not expect that I simply behave blindly. The concept of free will exists because faith is when you have the information and you make the decision to do anyway, to do the things you have to do. And finally, what binds me together is the responsibility to serve others.

On his fear that America moves to autocracy under Trump

The two most amazing moments for me were the decision to deploy the Marines in Los Angeles. It is a violation of each precept of democratic domination under a civil leader that we have in this country. We do not use the military against our own people, and yet it was violated with such nonchalance that it was magnificent to me. The second was the arrest of the mayor Ras Baraka. The mayor of [Newark] New Jersey because he stood in front of an immigrant detention center. He did nothing, but they felt very comfortable to stop a mayor for simply questioning the actions of the leadership, and that, once again, should be so scary.

For me, the most important piece, however, was the number of directives, the decrees that released at the very beginning against Dei. And people rejected it as: “Oh, well, it’s just to stop quotas” or “it was an HR thing”. But no, he intentionally implemented a system of belief that the protection of vulnerable, that the corrective measures that this nation has taken for 249 years, that these things were somehow intrinsically erroneous. And it was designed to allow the subsequent attacks that we have seen on all these different communities. Because if you can demonize at first, it becomes much easier to dehumanize when it is important.

On the judge of the Supreme Court Ketanji Brown JacksonDisknight

I think that where Jackson judge stands out is that she would not only lay the basics of what we hope will be the resurgence of democracy and the rule of law, but she also leaves breadcrumbs. She tells us how we will end where we are. But it also reminds us why we are not there now. It comes from a tradition of Thurgood Marshall, of the Warren court. She therefore understands that it is the responsibility of the judiciary, yes, it is to interpret the law, but you cannot interpret a law that you do not believe to have the right to exist. …

The law is difficult. It’s complicated. It is uncomfortable. And we have judges because we want them to struggle with this discomfort. We want them to underline the bright edges and tell us that we may need to ask the Congress organizations to repair them, to approach them. But we have never, we are never accomplices in the erodation of justice. And that’s what she continues to call. This is what continues to grow back. And whenever the others are ready to join her, these are times when we become a better nation, at least on paper. And it becomes a paper path for us to follow when it is time to rebuild what they break.

On the question of whether she will present herself to her functions in 2026

I have really made no decision and it is partly because there is an emergency for 2025 that we cannot ignore. My goal right now is how to make sure that we have free and fair elections in 2026? There is a lot of hope to be pinned in the middle of 26.

Sam Briger and Susan Nyakundi produced and published this interview for Broadcast. Bridget Bentz, Molly Seavy-Nesper and Beth November adapted it for the web.