SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Good Trouble Lives On
Taking a break from the awful to celebrate - remember that? - indefatigable civil rights icon, all-round mensch and former chicken preacher John Lewis, who died five years ago today after a lifetime of good trouble. The peerless "moral compass of Congress," now sorely lacking, Lewis never gave up seeking his "beloved community" even as he acknowledged he might never live in it. "Our struggle is not (of) a day, month or year," he said: "It is the struggle of a lifetime."
Over 60 years, Lewis' lifetime of struggle extended from student lunch-counter sit-ins, beatings on Freedom Rides, founding and leading SNCC, speaking fire as the youngest organizer of the March in Washington and Bloody Sunday's seminal Selma march to, eventually, the halls of Congress, where he served 17 terms while persisting in making good trouble in ongoing fights for peace, immigrants, LGBTQ rights and voting rights that, he resolutely declared, “For generations we have marched, fought and even died for." Above all, "John believed in the power of ordinary people to do extraordinary things."
Born the son of sharecroppers outside Troy, Alabama in 1940, he attended segregated public schools. As a boy, he wanted to be a minister, and famously practiced his oratory on the family chickens. Denied a library card for the color of his skin, he became a voracious reader. He was a teenager when he heard, riveted, Martin Luther King Jr. preaching on the radio. They met when Lewis was trying to become the first Black student at Alabama’s segregated Troy State University; he ultimately attended the American Baptist Theological Seminary and Nashville's Fisk University.
Along with Diane Nash and other members of the Nashville Student Movement, he began organizing sit-ins at whites-only lunch counters after four Black college students in Greensboro, N.C. first did it; there, staff refused to serve them but the students wouldn't leave, and then went back with more recruits. Lewis' first arrest came in February 1960 at age 20, when he sat down at a segregated Woolworth's lunch counter in Nashville. Angry white patrons beat and tried to remove him and his fellow protesters; when police finally arrived, they arrested the protesters.
“I didn't necessarily want to go to jail," he recalled in a 1973 interview. “But we knew (it) would rally the student community." And it did: By the end of the day 98 students were in jail, hundreds followed, and that spring Nashville lunch counters began serving Blacks. "Nashville prepared me," he said. "We grew up sitting down or sitting in. And we grew up very fast." Soon, Lewis was also traveling through a belligerent, still-segregated South as a Freedom Rider, enduring more beatings and arrests. Between 1960 and 1966, he was arrested at least 40 times; as a Congressman, he was arrested five more times.
As the 23-year-old head of SNCC, he gave a fiery speech at 1963's MLK Jr.-led March on Washington. Older fellow-organizers - Philip Randolph, 74, and James Farmer, Whitney Young, Roy Wilkins - urged him to tone it down; he scaled back critiques of JFK and dropped a "scorched earth" reference, but it was still potent. "To those who have said, 'Be patient'...We are tired. We are tired of being beaten by policemen, (of) seeing our people locked up in jail... How long can we be patient? We want our freedom and we want it now...We shall splinter the segregated South into a thousand pieces and put them together in an image of God and democracy.”
Two years later, hands tucked in his genteel tan overcoat, he led over 600 voting rights protesters over Selma's Edmund Pettus Bridge, named for a Ku Klux Klan leader, in what became known as Bloody Sunday. State troopers and "deputized" white thugs beat him so badly - still-chilling video here - they fractured his skull. Images of the brutality shocked a complacent nation, and eventually helped led to the Voting Rights Act of 1965. When he joined Pres. Obama at the site 55 years later, Lewis was still urging anyone who'd listen to "get in good trouble, necessary trouble, and help redeem the soul of America."
In 1981, Lewis turned to politics, getting elected to the Atlanta City Council; in 1986, he won what became his longtime seat in Congress. He spent much of his career in the minority, but when Dems won the House in 2006, he became his party’s senior deputy whip. Humble, friendly, eloquent, he was revered as the "moral compass" of the House. Hs last arrest was in 2013, when he was one of 8 Dem lawmakers, including Keith Ellison and Al Green, arrested at a sit-in for immigration reform; police arrested almost 200 people for "disrupting" the street. Lewis blithely posted a photo: "Arrest number 45."
The last survivor of the civil rights icons, he worked for 15 years toward the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History. When Trump ran in 2016, he sensed the urgency, posting, "I’ve marched, protested, been beaten and arrested - all for the right to vote. Friends (gave) their lives. Honor their sacrifice. Vote." He refused to attend the inauguration because Trump wasn't a "legitimate president." He called him "a racist" after the "shithole countries" slur, and voted for impeachment: “When you see something that is not right, not just, not fair, you have a moral obligation to say something, to do something. Our children and their children will ask us, 'What did you do? What did you say?'"
He died of pancreatic cancer on July 17, 2020, at 80. Nancy Pelosi called him "one of the greatest heroes of American history...May his memory be an inspiration that moves us all to, in the face of injustice, make ‘good trouble, necessary trouble.'” This week, Congressional Black Caucus members honored his legacy by vowing to do the same and reading his works. "His words are more necessary today than ever," said Rep. Jennifer McClellan. "John Lewis understood just as Dr. King did he wasn’t going to reach the promised land of that more perfect union. But he fought for it."
Since his death, Dems have continued to reintroduce the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore key, GOP-trashed provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. It has repeatedly stalled in Congress, and for now will likely continue to. But Lewis' colleagues vow to keep pushing for it, said Georgia Rep. Lucy McBath, "to honor his legacy with unshakeable determination to fight for what is right and what is just." "Freedom is not a state; it is an act," said Lewis. "It is not some enchanted garden perched high (where) we can finally sit down and rest. Freedom is the continuous action we all must take." While, he attested at a Stacey Abrams event the year before he died, finding joy. May he rest in peace and power.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Jul 17, 2025
SEE ALL
News
'A Call to Conscience': Damning Report Shows Every Major US LNG Project Fails Climate Test
As U.S. President Donald Trump ramps up fossil fuel production under his "drill, baby, drill" energy policy, a report published Wednesday highlights the climate and financial harms posed by new liquefied natural gas export projects—all of which fail a "climate test" that the Department of Energy issued during the Biden administration.
The report—published by Greenpeace USA, Earthworks, and Oil Change International—examines five major U.S. LNG projects: Venture Global CP2, Cameron LNG Phase II, Sabine Pass Stage V, Cheniere Corpus Christi LNG Midscale 8-9, and Freeport LNG Expansion.
All but one of the projects is awaiting a final investment decision. None passes a "climate test" derived from the Department of Energy's (DOE) December 2024 LNG export public interest studies, as they all would result in a net increase in global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions regardless of sustainability measures including supply basin switching, LNG terminal methane abatement, and powering liquefaction with renewable electricity.
"Increasing LNG exports from the Gulf Coast would still lead to global GHG emissions increases above the level consistent with the DOE's most stringent climate mitigation scenario," the report states. Data suggests "no realistic mitigation can make U.S. LNG exports aligned with limiting warming to 1.5ºC," the more ambitious goal of the Paris climate agreement. Trump has twice withdrawn the United States from the landmark accord.
"What we found was crystal clear—any further investment in LNG is not compatible with a livable climate," Greenpeace USA senior research specialist Andres Chang, the report's lead author, said in a statement.
"The massive growth in infrastructure along the Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coast has already created significant public health and ecosystem impacts, threatening entire coastal communities," Chang added. "But it doesn't stop there. This report shows that if built, these projects would put global climate goals even further out of reach."
"No realistic mitigation can make U.S. LNG exports aligned with limiting warming to 1.5ºC."
The United States is the world's leading natural gas producer and LNG exporter. While the fossil fuel industry often calls LNG a "bridge fuel"—a cleaner alternative to coal that will ease the transition to sustainable energy sources—critics have warned that the fossil gas actually hampers the transition to a green economy. LNG is mostly composed of methane, which has more than 80 times the planetary heating power of carbon dioxide during its first two decades in the atmosphere.
Despite his own DOE's acknowledgment that approving more LNG exports would raise domestic energy prices, increase pollution, and exacerbate the climate crisis, former President Joe Biden oversaw what climate campaigners called a "staggering" LNG expansion, including Venture Global's Calcasieu Pass 2 export terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana and more than a dozen other projects.
Trump—who during his 2024 campaign vowed to "frack, frack, frack; and drill, baby, drill" as fossil fuel interests poured $75 million into his campaign coffers—is planning to increase LNG exports even more, in part by invoking his bogus "energy emergency" to fast-track polluting projects.
A report published in January by Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen examined 14 proposed LNG export terminals that the Trump administration sought to fast-track and found they would create 510 million metric tons of climate pollution—equivalent to the annual emissions of 135 new coal plants.
Oil Change International noted Wednesday that "future administrations could revoke export authorizations that were rubber-stamped under Trump based on their failure to pass the DOE 'climate test,' which introduces a new layer of uncertainty to these already-risky projects."
The report also underscores that while the DOE climate test "is a major improvement upon previous federal analyses," its methodology "still fails to sufficiently account for emissions from large, accidental releases (such as 'super-emitter' events), equipment malfunction, and malpractice."
"High rates of methane emissions during the ocean transport stage of the LNG supply chain are also not represented," the report adds. "Incorporating measurement-based data and more realistic assumptions would make clearer the immense climate impact of building new liquefied gas infrastructure, especially in the near-term."
The report's authors call on the DOE to invoke the "climate test" to reject pending and future LNG export applications and exercise its authority under the Natural Gas Act "to reevaluate the public interest status of LNG projects that received authorizations without consideration of climate impacts or under analyses that predate the 2024 LNG Study."
The publication also calls on Congress to pass legislation "that makes it a statutory requirement under the Natural Gas Act to assess the climate impact of gas exports and reject applications that would increase global GHG emissions under a credible scenario to limit warming to 1.5ºC."
"Additionally, U.S. federal agencies should require all new proposed fossil fuel production and infrastructure projects to meet a similarly high standard under the National Environmental Policy Act," the report asserts.
"Energy purchasers, financial institutions, and foreign governments should refrain from entering into long-term offtake agreements for U.S. LNG and financing of LNG infrastructure," the authors wrote. "Instead, these parties should prioritize measures that accelerate the renewable energy transition and plan for a managed phase-out of fossil fuels. Group of Seven nations, in particular, should abide by their 2022 commitment to stop financing overseas fossil fuel infrastructure with taxpayer money."
James Hiatt, founder and director of the Lake Charles, Louisiana-based advocacy group For a Better Bayou, said Wednesday that "fossil fuel dependency has long externalized its true costs, forcing communities to bear the burden of pollution, sickness, and economic instability."
"For decades the oil and gas industry has known about the devastating health and climate impacts of its operations, yet it continues to expand, backed by billions in private and public financing," Hiatt continued. "These harms are not isolated—they're systemic, and they threaten all of us."
"This report is a call to conscience," he added. "It's time we stop propping up deadly false solutions and start investing in a transition to energy systems that sustain life, not sacrifice it."
Jul 09, 2025
SEE ALL
News
More Price Hikes Coming Soon for US Consumers as Trump Preps ‘Extraordinarily High’ Tariffs
With U.S. President Donald Trump yet again ramping up international trade war tensions, a new analysis conducted by the Tax Policy Center projects that American consumers will soon be paying "extraordinarily high" tariffs on staple goods unless the president again backs down from his threats.
As the Tax Policy Center explains, Trump has set an August 1 deadline for countries to make trade deals with the U.S. or else face the higher tariff rates he first unveiled back in early April that caused the stock market to abruptly crater. Should Trump follow through with his vow to reinstate the tariffs on the countries that have not yet reached agreements, writes the Tax Policy Center, it would mean tariffs "ranging from as high as 48% on women's clothing, 40% on books, and even 22% on baked goods, according to our estimates."
What's worse, the center adds that these are merely the average tariffs that goods imported from all nations will face. Individual products could get hit with even bigger tariffs depending on their country of origin.
"The top tariff on men's and women's clothing will exceed 77%," they write. "Tariffs on purses could be as high as 90%, and tariffs on baked goods could reach 85%. Tariffs on beer will be as high as 79%."
The center's analysis adds that consumers likely won't feel the impact of the tariffs right away since retailers have been stocking up on goods as a way to get ahead of the tariffs. However, this strategy can only work for so long since retailers will eventually have to restock their wares and will then be forced to pass some of costs from the tariff onto their customers.
"As a likely result, consumer prices will rise, employment and incomes in downstream industries will fall and profits will shrink," the Tax Policy Center warns. "The value of retirement plans that hold stocks in these industries will also likely drop... Eventually... it is very likely that these historically high tariffs will damage the economy."
Economist Dean Baker wrote earlier this week that the total impact of the tariffs on American consumers could amount to an average tax of $16,000 per household over the span of a decade, which he said would actually be an estimate on the lower end of the spectrum.
Jul 09, 2025
SEE ALL
News
'Embarrassment of a Human Being': Hawley Unveils Bill to Repeal Medicaid Cuts He Just Voted For
U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley faced ridicule and condemnation on Tuesday after introducing legislation that would repeal a major Medicaid cut included in the recently enacted Trump-GOP budget law—which the Republican senator from Missouri voted for just two weeks ago.
Hawley's new bill specifically targets the section of the Republican law that restricts states' use of healthcare provider taxes to help fund their Medicaid programs. Experts warned that the change will force states to enact devastating cuts to their Medicaid programs and strip benefits from millions.
The Republican senator's bill, which is unlikely to pass, would also boost a rural hospital fund that critics have slammed as a mere Band-Aid that will do little to mitigate the harms of the GOP law's unprecedented Medicaid cuts.
"Now is the time to prevent any future cuts to Medicaid from going into effect," Hawley declared Tuesday. "I want to see Medicaid reductions stopped and rural hospitals fully funded permanently."
Hawley warned against cutting Medicaid in the lead-up to final passage of the GOP budget package, writing in The New York Times in May that "if Congress cuts funding for Medicaid benefits, Missouri workers and their children will lose their healthcare."
But Hawley ultimately joined 49 of his Senate GOP colleagues in voting for the final bill, which—according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office—would cut Medicaid by more than $1 trillion over the next decade and kick around 17 million people off their health insurance.
"If he didn't want to see cuts, he could have voted against cuts. Everything this guy ever does is fake posturing."
If Hawley had voted no on the budget legislation and every other senator kept their vote the same, the measure would not have passed the upper chamber.
"First, Josh Hawley talked about not wanting to cut Medicaid. Then, when the billionaires needed his vote, he voted to cut Medicaid," wrote Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "Now that the Medicaid cuts are passed, he's back to talking about not wanting to cut Medicaid. He's full of shit."
Jonathan Cohn, political director of Progressive Mass, also responded derisively to Hawley's bill, calling the senator "an embarrassment of a human being."
"If he didn't want to see cuts, he could have voted against cuts," Cohn wrote on social media. "Everything this guy ever does is fake posturing."
In addition to the provider tax provision, the Republican law includes draconian work reporting mandates for many Medicaid recipients and would require some low-income program enrollees to pay more for care—an effective cut to benefits.
"We confronted Josh Hawley in person at the Capitol days before Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' and we told him to vote against it. He decided to vote for it anyway," the Debt Collective wrote Tuesday. "Now it looks like he wants a do-over because his constituents will suffer big time. Shameful."
Jul 16, 2025
SEE ALL
News
DOJ Unit That Defends Trump Policies Sees Exodus of Lawyers
Reuters reported Monday that nearly two-thirds of attorneys in the section of the U.S. Department of Justice charged with defending President Donald Trump's policy have voluntarily left the unit or announced plans to resign since his November election.
The list of "69 of the roughly 110 lawyers in the Federal Programs Branch" who have ditched the unit or plan to leave was compiled by former DOJ attorneys. Reuters was able to confirm the departure of all but four names based on court records and LinkedIn accounts. The news agency also spoke with four former members of the unit and three others familiar with the resignations.
The sources—all granted anonymity by the news outlet—described the degree of turnover as highly unusual and said that some members of the unit "had grown demoralized and exhausted defending an onslaught of lawsuits against Trump's administration," Reuters detailed, summarizing their comments. They "cited a punishing workload and the need to defend policies that some felt were not legally justifiable," along with fears that "they would be pressured to misrepresent facts or legal issues in court."
According to the news agency, worries about retaliation grew after DOJ leadership fired Erez Reuveni, a former supervisor in the Office of Immigration Litigation, another Civil Division unit, over the Kilmar Ábrego García case. Reuveni then filed a whistleblower complaint that has generated concern about Emil Bove, now nominated by Trump to serve as a federal appellate judge.
"Many of these people came to work at Federal Programs to defend aspects of our constitutional system," one lawyer who left the unit during Trump's second term told Reuters. "How could they participate in the project of tearing it down?"
Mark Zaid, who has a long record of facing attorneys from the Federal Programs Branch in cases against the U.S. government, said on the social media platform Bluesky that they were "usually top-notch professional, nonpartisan lawyers. Shameful what has happened."
Also sharing the report on Bluesky, Mark Joseph Stern, who covers the courts for Slate, wrote: "Really good piece—but the numbers don't include those who left shortly BEFORE Trump's reelection, when it seemed alarmingly possible, to ensure that they never had to defend lawless, fascist policies in court, even for a day. I understand that group is not small."
"Lawyers who have remained at Federal Programs to continue defending Trump's policies are a disgrace to the legal profession and will carry the immense shame of complicity with authoritarianism for the rest of their lives," he added.
Jonathan Cohn, political director at the group Progressive Mass, similarly said on social media that "the others would resign too if they had any professional or personal ethics."
DOJ lawyers have had to defend Trump's anti-immigrant agenda—from mass deportations that led to hundreds of men, including Ábrego García, being sent to a Salvadoran megaprison to Trump's attack on birthright citizenship, which recently led to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that limits the power of federal judges. They also have had to defend the administration's attempts to slash government jobs and spending, and the president's targeting of major law firms, which, so far, courts have shot down.
The DOJ told Reuters that the department "will continue to defend the president's agenda" and is hiring to maintain staffing levels from the Biden administration, while a White House spokesperson, Harrison Fields, lashed out at critics of Trump. He said that "any sanctimonious career bureaucrat expressing faux outrage over the president's policies while sitting idly by during the rank weaponization by the previous administration has no grounds to stand on."
Since Trump-appointed Pam Bondi became attorney general, she has faced widespread accusations of "serious professional misconduct that threatens the rule of law and the administration of justice," as over 70 legal experts and three groups put it in a June ethics complaint sent to the Florida Bar.
"The gravamen of this complaint is that Ms. Bondi, personally and through her senior management, has sought to compel Department of Justice lawyers to violate their ethical obligations under the guise of 'zealous advocacy' as announced in her memorandum to all department employees, issued on her first day in office, threatening employees with discipline and possible termination for falling short," the filing states.
Bondi has also faced intense scrutiny in recent days over the DOJ's handling of documents related to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) announced Saturday that this week he plans to introduce a measure "to force a vote demanding the FULL Epstein files be released to the public."
Jul 14, 2025
SEE ALL
News
Renowned Genocide Scholar Says 'I Know It When I See It'—And He Sees It in Israel's Assault on Gaza
A leading scholar of the Holocaust and genocide warned Tuesday the continued "silence" of many in his field of study regarding Israel's massacre of Palestinians in Gaza "has made a mockery of the slogan 'never again''" as he outlined in a New York Times opinion piece how he came to conclude that Israel is committing genocide in the besieged enclave.
"I'm a Genocide Scholar," reads the essay's headline. "I Know It When I See It."
Like a number of other experts who were at first reluctant to designate the assault on Gaza a genocide—the term coined by Polish lawyer Raphael Lemkin in 1944—Brown University professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies Omer Bartov gradually came to recognize Israel's campaign of targeted starvation, bombings on civilian infrastructure, forced displacement, and other attacks as genocidal violence as he watched the early months of the war in late 2023 and early 2024.
By May 2024, he wrote at the Times, "it appeared no longer possible to deny that the pattern of [Israel Defense Forces] operations was consistent with the statements denoting genocidal intent made by Israeli leaders in the days after the Hamas attack," including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's threat to turn Gaza into "rubble" and his call for Israeli citizens to remember "what Amalek did to you"—a reference to the biblical passage calling on the Israelites to "kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings" in their fight against an ancient enemy.
At that point, about 1 million Palestinians had been ordered to the so-called "safe zone" of al-Mawasi—which was then targeted in numerous attacks.
Months after one top Israeli official called for the "total annihilation" of Gaza—home to more than 2 million people—Bartov concluded that the government's "actions could be understood only as the implementation of the expressed intent to make the Gaza Strip uninhabitable for its Palestinian population."
He wrote that his interpretation of Israel's actions is now that Netanyahu's government wants "to force the population to leave the strip altogether" and "debilitate the enclave through bombings and severe deprivation of food, clean water, sanitation, and medical aid to such an extent that it is impossible for Palestinians in Gaza to maintain or reconstitute their existence as a group."
"My inescapable conclusion has become that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people," wrote Bartov, noting that his assessment is that of an expert who grew up in a Zionist home, spent the first half of his life in Israel, and served in the IDF as well as researching the Holocaust and other war crimes.
"This was a painful conclusion to reach, and one that I resisted as long as I could," wrote Bartov. "But I have been teaching classes on genocide for a quarter of a century. I can recognize one when I see one."
He added that his conclusion is supported by the destruction of an estimated 174,000 buildings, or 70% of those in Gaza; the killing of more than 58,000 people, nearly a third of whom have been children and nearly 900 of whom were under one year old; and the extermination of more than 2,000 families in their entirety.
CNN anchor Christiane Amanpour noted that Bartov spoke to her last December about his conclusion that Israel is committing genocide.
"If you look at the pattern of what the IDF has been doing, not only has it been moving the population around, every safe zone... tends to get also bombed and shelled," he said at the time. "But also systematically destroying universities, schools, mosques, museums, and hospitals, of course—anything that makes for the health and also the culture of a group, and therefore, by now we have a population that is being completely debilitated."
Bartov published his essay as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said it had recorded the deaths of 875 Palestinians who were killed while seeking aid, with the vast majority killed at or around aid hubs set up by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S.- and Israel-backed privatized aid group that has been rejected by the U.N. due to its lack of neutrality.
"The latest deadly incident happened at around 9:00 am on Monday, July 14, when reports indicated that the Israeli military shelled and fired towards Palestinians seeking food at the GHF site in As Shakoush area, northwestern Rafah," said the OHCHR on Monday of an attack that killed at least two people and injured nine others—days after a hospital in Rafah received more than 130 patients, the majority of whom suffered gunshot wounds they'd sustained while trying to access food distribution sites.
Last May, former Human Rights Watch executive director Aryeh Neier—who was also reluctant to apply the term "genocide" to Israel's attack on Gaza—said Israel's "sustained policy of obstructing the movement of humanitarian assistance into the territory" was what finally convinced him the assault is a genocide.
While backing the militarized GHF aid operation, Israel has continued to block humanitarian assistance from entering Gaza through crossings and has prevented experienced aid groups from distributing food to starving Palestinians.
Israel "has always insisted that any threat to its security must be seen as potentially leading to another Auschwitz" and has portrayed its attack on Gaza—which it and its allies in the U.S. and other Western countries have persistently claimed it is targeting Hamas—as a fight against an enemy comparable to the Nazis.
"The daily scenes of horror in Gaza, from which the Israeli public is shielded by its own media's self-censorship, expose the lies of Israeli propaganda that this is a war of defense against a Nazi-like enemy," wrote Bartov.
Progressive political strategist Waleed Shahid suggested Bartov's conclusions flew in the face of recent comments by U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who in March said the term "genocide" as it related to Gaza should be rejected as antisemitism.
Bartov warned that the refusal of many Holocaust scholars and the political establishment in the U.S.—the largest international funder of the IDF—to confront the reality of Israel's attack on Gaza could ultimately make it impossible "to continue teaching and researching the Holocaust in the same manner we did before."
"Just as worrisome is the prospect that the study of genocide as a whole will not survive the accusations of antisemitism, leaving us without the crucial community of scholars and international jurists to stand in the breach at a time when the rise of intolerance, racial hatred, populism, and authoritarianism is threatening the values that were at the core of these scholarly, cultural, and political endeavors of the 20th century," wrote Bartov.
He expressed hope that "a new generation of Israelis will face their future without sheltering in the shadow of the Holocaust, even as they will have to bear the stain of the genocide in Gaza perpetrated in their name."
"Israel," he added, "will have to learn to live without falling back on the Holocaust as justification for inhumanity."
Jul 15, 2025
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
'Congress Must Reject This Attack': GOP Bill Would Revoke Charter of Largest US Teachers Union
The president of the National Education Association said Republicans are attacking the union because "the billionaires that fund their campaigns don't want educators to have a voice."
Jul 17, 2025
A group of congressional Republicans introduced legislation Wednesday that would revoke the federal charter of the National Education Association, the largest teachers union in the United States and an organization that has mobilized against the Trump administration's far-right agenda—which includes an ongoing effort to dismantle the Department of Education.
The bill, titled the National Education Association Charter Repeal Act, was introduced in the U.S. House by Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.) and in the Senate by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.).
The GOP lawmakers pointed specifically to the union's recent decision to cut ties with the Anti-Defamation League and the NEA representative assembly's adoption earlier this month of a pledge to "defend democracy against [President Donald] Trump's embrace of fascism."
Blackburn, a supporter of privatized charter schools who has endorsed Trump's effort to eliminate the Education Department, accused the NEA of embracing "radical left policies and antisemitism." Harris declared that "it's time to remove Congress' seal of approval from this rogue organization."
Becky Pringle, the union's president, hit back at Blackburn, Harris, and other supporters of the legislation, saying in a statement that "rather than supporting students and educators, some anti-public education politicians are now introducing legislation to repeal the National Education Association charter because the billionaires that fund their campaigns don't want educators to have a voice."
"Let me be clear—public school educators will never stop advocating for our students and communities, and the National Education Association will never stop lifting up the voice of those educators who dedicate their lives to the success of all of our students," said Pringle.
"Some in Congress want to destroy them because they don't like what the NEA says and does."
The NEA, which currently has around 3 million members across the U.S., was chartered by Congress in 1906 to "promote the cause of education in the United States" and "elevate the character and advance the interests of the profession of teaching." The organization was originally founded in 1857.
Republican lawmakers have been working for years to strip the NEA of its federal charter to express disapproval of the organization's support for progressive causes.
Education Week noted that the legislation introduced Wednesday "echoes the Heritage Foundation's conservative Project 2025 plan that has guided much of the Trump administration's education policy, and it could find more traction in the current GOP-controlled Congress."
The outlet observed that the the anti-union Freedom Foundation, which supports the GOP legislation, has called on Congress "to, among other things, bar the NEA from traditional labor union activities such as engaging in electoral politics, lobbying, or collecting dues, and require it to 'actively intervene to prevent any strikes or work stoppages by its affiliates.'"
"Revoking the NEA's charter would not, on its own, do any of those things," Education Week reported. "But Aaron Withe, chief executive officer of the Freedom Foundation, suggested that additional legislation would be introduced next week, 'whether that be removing [the NEA charter] entirely, or stripping it, or changing how it operates.'"
Maya Wiley, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, said in a statement Wednesday that the NEA is "one of the most powerful voices for public education" and warned that "some in Congress want to destroy them because they don't like what the NEA says and does."
"This administration is trying to end the Department of Education and silence opposition, and it is attacking labor unions, law firms, news outlets, colleges and universities, philanthropy, and many of our members. We will not be silent," said Wiley. "Congress must reject this attack on the NEA and defend the constitutional principles that guarantee all Americans the right to organize, advocate, and petition government."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Deadly Shadow Prison': Inmates, ACLU Sue Trump Admin for Denying Due Process at 'Alligator Alcatraz'
"What's happening here is not just a policy failure, it's a moral one," said the executive director for the ACLU of Florida. "This is how rights are erased."
Jul 17, 2025
Detainees at "Alligator Alcatraz" are suing the Trump administration for subjecting them to inhumane conditions at the prison without due process.
The class action suit, brought Wednesday with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other immigrant rights groups, challenges the government's refusal to let detainees speak with lawyers and file legal documents needed to petition for their release.
Inmates in the Everglades detention facility have detailed horrific conditions, including crushing heat, incessant mosquito presence, tainted food, cramped conditions, and a lack of access to water and basic sanitation.
After visiting the detention center over the weekend, some Democratic lawmakers described it as an "internment camp," where as many as 32 inmates apiece were crammed into small cages beneath a single tent.
The majority of the roughly 1,000 people detained there, according to the Miami Herald and Tampa Bay Times, have not been convicted of criminal offenses, while over a third have not even been charged.
"This facility opens another dark chapter in our nation's history. Its very existence is predicated on our country's basest impulses and shows the danger of unchecked governmental authority when combined with unbridled hate. It represents an attack on common decency, and in this case, its treatment of detained people is also unlawful," said Eunice Cho, senior counsel with the ACLU's National Prison Project and the lead attorney in the case.
According to the complaint, multiple attorneys have arrived at the detention center to meet with their clients, only to be turned away by armed police and members of the Florida National Guard. The attorneys were later told no in-person meetings would be allowed. They have additionally been given no information about how to communicate with their clients over the phone or virtually.
"The U.S. Constitution does not allow the government to simply lock people away without any ability to communicate with counsel or to petition the court for release from custody. The government may not trample on these most fundamental protections for people held in its custody," Cho said.
The plaintiffs argue this violates the First and Fifth Amendment rights of those being detained, as well as the First Amendment rights of the attorneys.
"What's happening here is not just a policy failure, it's a moral one," said Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. "The state has hastily erected a costly and deadly shadow prison in the middle of the Everglades during hurricane season to warehouse human beings—stripping them of due process and dignity, cutting them off from their families and legal counsel, intentionally putting their lives in danger, and leaving them to suffer in silence. This is how rights are erased."
The Trump administration is seeking to replicate "Alligator Alcatraz" all around the country. As The New Republic reports, the budget megabill signed by the president earlier this month contains $3.5 billion for "eligible states" to use for the "temporary detention of aliens."
In a Fox News interview earlier this month, Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump's "mass deportation" crusade, called on Republican governors to use this fund to build their own immigrant detention camps.
"We want every governor of a red state, and if you are watching tonight: Pick up the phone, call [the Department of Homeland Security], work with us to build facilities in your state," Miller said.
"No amount of armed guards or government spin can shield this facility from legal scrutiny," Jackson said Wednesday. "We will use every tool at our disposal to end this cruel experiment and defend the rights of every person trapped inside of this unconstitutional abomination."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Doing Trump's Bidding, Senate GOP Votes to Gut Public Media, Foreign Aid in Dead of Night
"At 2 am, Republicans just passed a bill to defund public broadcasting and lifesaving aid because Trump told them to—they wouldn't even protect rural radio or emergency alerts."
Jul 17, 2025
In the early hours of Thursday morning, Senate Republicans passed legislation that would claw back $9 billion in previously approved congressional funding for public broadcasting and foreign aid programs targeted by President Donald Trump's White House.
The final vote count was 51 to 48, with Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) joining Democrats in opposing the package, which now heads back to the GOP-controlled House for final passage. The legislation would cement some of the Trump administration's lawless, unilateral attacks on programs approved by Congress with bipartisan support.
"At 2 am, Republicans just passed a bill to defund public broadcasting and lifesaving aid because Trump told them to—they wouldn't even protect rural radio or emergency alerts," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, warning that the GOP's partisan clawback of funding imperils all future spending negotiations.
"Congress should decide what we spend and what we cut—not Trump and not Russ Vought," Murray added, referring to the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
In a floor speech ahead of the Thursday morning vote, Murray said Vought refused to be specific about which programs would be cut if the rescissions bill passes.
"It's one of the great outrages of this package," said Murray. "At our hearing with him, he refused to go into detail. He stonewalled us. We asked and we asked. The chair, the Republican chair, even asked him about this. But OMB would not tell us. The question is: What will you cut? The answer has been: Pass it, we'll see."
"The thing that's particularly dangerous about it is that this is probably a test case. If they pull it off with these topics, they'll move on to more and more and more topics."
The White House rescissions request was broadly outlined in a May memo authored by Vought, an architect of the far-right Project 2025 agenda.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which helps fund PBS and NPR, is expected to face over $1 billion in cuts, while the rest of the rescissions package targets foreign assistance.
"With this vote, Senate Republicans are telling us everything we need to know about their priorities," said Alex Jacquez, the Groundwork Collaborative's chief of policy and advocacy. "After passing a tax law that gives a massive giveaway to billionaires and raises costs on working families, Senate Republicans are now codifying DOGE's deeply unpopular and reckless cuts to vital programs. Once again, Republicans are failing to deliver on the one thing they promised: lower prices. Instead, they're waging a campaign that will make life more expensive and difficult for working families while lining the pockets of the wealthy."
During the marathon amendment process, Republicans rejected Democratic proposals to shield public safety alerts and prevent cuts to international disaster relief programs.
Vought has signaled that the White House will likely submit more rescissions requests if the $9 billion in cuts make it through Congress.
Kate Riley, the president and CEO of America's Public Television Stations, said in a statement following the Senate vote that the rescissions bill would "eliminate federal funding to the local public television stations throughout this country that provide essential lifesaving public safety services, proven educational services, and community connections to their communities every day for free."
"This elimination of federal funding will decimate public media and put local stations at risk of going dark, cutting off service to communities that rely on them—many of which have no other access to locally controlled media," Riley warned.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) accused Republicans of weaponizing the rescissions process to attack "some of their favorite enemies, like National Public Radio, Elmo, or food for starving people overseas."
"The thing that's particularly dangerous about it is that this is probably a test case," Whitehouse added. "If they pull it off with these topics, they'll move on to more and more and more topics, bringing their Musk-type chainsaw to projects which Congress has approved on a bipartisan basis, put into law, and funded."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
Demand Progress Launches Release the Epstein Files Campaign
Jul 17 2025 · 03:47pm EDT
Democrats Must Continue To Fight Against Trump’s Loyalist Judicial Nominees
Jul 17 2025 · 01:43pm EDT