Hypocrisy in Blue

For months now, I’ve watched as Democrats and progressive commentators have celebrated the fact that Donald Trump is now a “convicted felon.” The word is being tossed around with smug satisfaction, as if the label alone is a mic drop.

Let me be clear: I’m no fan of Trump. But I’m also someone with a federal felony. And hearing progressives…the very same people who talk about restorative justice, ending mass incarceration, and using person-first language…throwing around “felon” like it’s a slur? That exposes just how shallow the commitment to reform really is.

This is supposed to be the side that sees nuance. It’s supposed to be the side that recognizes that people are more than the worst thing they’ve ever done. It’s supposed to be the one fighting to eliminate the stigma that comes with a criminal record. They say things like “formerly incarcerated person” instead of “inmate” or “ex-con” because words matter.

Until, apparently, they don’t. When it’s politically convenient, some of them are all too happy to weaponize the exact language they claim to reject.

Suddenly, “felon” is fair game. Not just fair game…it’s the punchline.

Let me ask: what message does that send to people like me? Or the millions of others who’ve come home from prison and are trying to rebuild their lives? Is the underlying message that some people deserve compassion and second chances, while others deserve to be publicly shamed and defined solely by their record?

This kind of hypocrisy doesn’t just undermine your message—it drives people away. If the goal is to build a more just and inclusive society, maybe don’t gleefully reinforce the very stigma you claim to fight against.

I have a federal felony. I went to prison. I came home. I earned my Ph.D. I teach. I publish. I vote. I do everything I was told I needed to do to “redeem” myself. But no matter how far I go, there’s always someone ready to remind me that in the eyes of society, in moments like these, I’m still “just a felon.”

This isn’t about defending Trump. It’s about defending basic consistency—and calling out the harm that comes from using a legal label as a political insult. If you only believe in redemption when it's politically convenient, maybe you never believed in it at all.