

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Senate minority leader addressed reporters amid a push for progressives in the House to nominate Rep. Ayanna Pressley as an alternative to Jeffries at next week’s Democratic caucus meeting.
Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped a reporter’s questions about a controversial proposal to more closely integrate the US and Israeli militaries on Thursday, underscoring some critics’ argument that he’s unfit to serve as House speaker when Democrats retake the chamber in January.
Democrats in the US Congress are facing growing calls to strip out provisions in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would significantly expand cooperation between the US and Israeli defense industries, making it easier for the two countries to jointly develop weapons, share military technology, and incorporate Israeli tech into US military systems.
One poll from August by Data for Progress showed that 61% of likely voters opposed the measure, known as the "United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative," including 78% of Democrats—a reflection of the public's growing desire for the US to cut ties with Israel following over three years of genocidal attacks on Gaza, expansionist conquest in the West Bank and Lebanon, and military aggression against Iran.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who is challenging Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to lead the Democrats’ Senate majority, said earlier this week that Democrats should oppose the military integration provisions. He and his colleagues warned that these provisions would give Israel even greater leverage over US policy and threaten national security by granting Israel access to sensitive information about US military technology beyond what is shared even with NATO allies.
The NDAA is expected to come up for a vote next month. But it will need Democratic support to pass the Senate, where 60 votes are required to break the filibuster. It may also face obstacles in the House, where Republicans hold a narrow 218-214 majority. Some in the GOP, like Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), and Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.), have already signaled opposition to the measure, meaning that a united Democratic caucus could kill it.
Asked by The Hill's Laura Kelly at a news conference on Thursday whether he agreed with Van Hollen's call to remove the provisions from the NDAA, Jeffries never answered her question directly:
I haven't had a conversation with Sen. Van Hollen, but what I have said is that things have to dramatically change over in the Middle East.
We need dramatic change in the West Bank, which is why I strongly support the West Bank Violence Protection Act. We need dramatic change in Gaza, and we need dramatic change with respect to the memorandum of understanding as it winds down, all of which I've previously said publicly.
And we'll work as a caucus to make sure that we can bring about the just and lasting peace that Israelis and Palestinians deserve over in the Middle East.
The status quo is unacceptable, and we need dramatic change. And that looks like, as far as I'm concerned, making sure you have a safe and secure Israel, living side by side as a Jewish and democratic state with an independent Palestinian state that provides dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people.
Jeffries, who has received more than $1 million in campaign donations facilitated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) since 2022, is already facing criticism over his refusal earlier this week to commit to using next month's government funding bill to force President Donald Trump to end his war in Iran and for failing to ensure the whole Democratic caucus was present for a key vote to advance the impeachment of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that with his noncommittal answer on US-Israeli military integration, Jeffries had “in less than 90 seconds” made it “crystal clear why he should not become the next speaker of the House.”
"Asked whether he supports removing provisions that deepen US defense cooperation and intelligence sharing with Israel from the National Defense Authorization Act—an obvious yes!—he refuses to address the question and instead gives a 1990s answer about a mythological two-state solution," Parsi wrote on social media.
In the Senate, momentum is building behind Van Hollen’s effort to oust Schumer as leader. On Wednesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said that Schumer, another staunch ally of Israel, was “way out of touch with where the American people are at.”
Several incoming Democratic senators, including Abdul El-Sayed (Mich.), Peggy Flanagan (Minn.), Troy Jackson (Maine), Adam Hamilton (Kan.), and Juliana Stratton (Ill.), have said they support Van Hollen or won't back Schumer, while others, including Democratic Sens.-elect Annie Andrews (SC) and Chris Pappas (NH), as well as the centrist Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), have suggested they wanted new leadership.
However, despite growing calls from the Democratic base for new leadership in the House as well, no Democrat has formally stepped up yet to challenge Jeffries’ claim to the speaker’s gavel.
Some newly elected Democrats—like Reps.-elect Melat Kiros (Colo.), Don Leonard (Ohio), and Claire Valdez (NY)—have suggested they would prefer a different leader, but House progressive leaders have so far put the kibosh on an insurgency, with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), and Greg Casar (Texas) standing by Jeffries, at least as long as he's the only choice.
Time is running out for progressives to rally behind an alternative to Jeffries. The Democratic caucus will begin its internal leadership elections on November 18 and choose its nominee for speaker. The entire House will vote to elect a speaker when the new Congress convenes on January 3, 2027.
Some grassroots organizers have pushed for progressive Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) to challenge Jeffries, with one petition to draft her garnering over 90,000 signatures.
She has circulated her own petition pushing for a bolder agenda for Democrats to pursue in the next Congress, including passage of Medicare for All, national abortion protections, restrictions on data centers, and the abolition of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In a speech on the House floor Thursday, she declared that “incrementalism is a recipe for failure” and that Democrats “cannot let money and the special interests dictate our fight.”
No one in the House Democratic caucus has publicly declared support for Pressley. But there is reportedly some movement behind the scenes ahead of Wednesday’s caucus meeting, where a nominee for party leader will be chosen.
One lawmaker, granted anonymity by Drop Site News congressional reporter Julian Andreone, said, "I am hearing that many progressives will be writing Ayanna’s name in.”
“You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists. And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan.”
A coalition of environmental organizations is warning that the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Türkiye is in danger of being co-opted by big polluters.
An analysis released on Friday by the Kick Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition finds that more than 100 polluting corporations and trade associations—including from fossil fuel, Big Tech, and industrial agriculture—have sent delegations to COP31.
Among the largest delegations, the report says, are International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), which sent 29 delegates; BNP Paribas, which sent 22; HSBC, which sent 19; and Amazon, which sent 12.
The analysis also shows that banks "collectively representing more than $2.2 trillion in fossil fuel financing from 2021-2025" have a presence at COP31.
The KBPO report notes that these industries and associations "have demonstrated track records of being notably misaligned with or obstructing climate policy... indicating they can be a threat to the strong climate action COP31 must urgently deliver."
These polluters' delegations are so big that they vastly outnumber delegations sent by many nations that are most endangered by the climate emergency, including Niger, the Philippines, and Nepal.
Maikel Peuki, director of the Papua chapter of the Indonesian Forum for Living Environment (WALHI) and a KBPO partner, said allowing big polluters to have a seat at the COP31 table would have dire consequences for his country's environment.
“In Papua our forests and coastal areas are being targeted for fossil fuel and food estate projects and carbon-offsetting schemes by major corporate emitters,” said Maikel Peuki. “This is not a genuine solution to the climate crisis. Those who cause pollution should be the ones to pay for the damage they have created.”
Peuki's remarks were echoed by Lien Vandamme, senior campaigner for the Center for International Environmental Law's Climate and energy program.
"You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists," said Vandamme. "And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan. It’s therefore no surprise that the UN climate talks continue to fail in delivering the climate action that is needed. It’s time to show Big Polluters the door and fundamentally change the rules that keep rolling out the red carpet for them."
Prakash Dalal, director of Friends of the Earth Nepal, accused big polluters of causing "loss of livelihood, emotional damage, trauma, and survival challenges" for people in his country, adding that "we cannot tolerate the disproportionate space given to them compared to civil society and our country delegations."
"We need to kick these big polluters out!" Dalal emphasizes. "This should be a moral and legal obligation for the COP."
The presence of polluters also drew the ire of climate activist Greta Thunberg, according to a Thursday report in Latin Times.
While protesting outside COP31, Thunberg decried the negotiations for being "filled with lobbyists" who are "paid by the very destructive industries" profiting from continued fossil fuel dependence.
Thunberg also accused governments attending COP31 of using the event to "whitewash themselves" without taking real action.
"Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
A broad coalition of advocacy organizations on Friday urged Democratic lawmakers to aggressively wield their investigative powers in the new Congress to scrutinize US President Donald Trump and his administration's relationship with Jensen Huang, the scandal-engulfed former chief executive of the AI chip giant Nvidia.
"While CEO Jensen Huang has resigned, that should not mean that he escapes scrutiny of Nvidia's actions," Guardrails Action, Indivisible, the American Federation of Teachers, and seven other groups wrote in a letter to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). "Beyond the obvious and pressing concerns regarding legislation on chip exports is a question at the very core of our democracy: Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
The letter came a day after Huang stepped down as head of Nvidia following revelations of two extramarital affairs—one with a subordinate and another with a woman flagged by US intelligence agencies for potential ties to the Chinese government.
Over the past two years, Huang has developed a close relationship with Trump, and the CEO's professional demise has heightened scrutiny of White House policy decisions that have benefited the company—including licenses to export AI chips to China.
"Nvidia, the second-largest corporation in the world, gave $25 million to Trump’s ballroom," the advocacy coalition noted on Friday. "Its former CEO, Jensen Huang, traveled with Trump on Air Force One to China, and attended Trump’s state dinner with Chinese President Xi Jinping. At the same time, according to recent bombshell reporting, Huang was having an affair with a suspected Chinese spy, who led Megaspeed, a company under investigation for allegedly smuggling restricted Nvidia chips into China."
"Rather than take action, President Trump ignored the warnings; a Commerce Department investigation was even halted after direct intervention by Nvidia’s general counsel," the groups observed.
The coalition specifically called on Democrats in both the House and Senate to commit to three actions:
"The concentration of power and wealth from AI, and the risks that come with it, are historic," the groups wrote. "Countering that power is the most important fight of our lifetime. The American people put their trust in Democrats to put them first; now let’s prove they were right."
As Common Dreams reported on Thursday, a pair of high-ranking congressional Democrats have already launched an investigation into what they characterized as a "scheme" by the Trump administration to "mask an unconstitutional export tax as a national security tariff action—benefiting both Nvidia and the Chinese government."
The Democrats, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), announced their investigation in a letter to Lutnick, a billionaire businessman whose department is under fire for lax oversight of Nvidia chip exports. Wyden and Neal noted in their letter that Lutnick's Commerce Department "has approved sales to Chinese companies with government and military ties—including Chinese 'cutout' companies with no physical presence at their listed addresses."
CNN reported Friday that some of Trump's advisers "have begun discussing" whether Lutnick should be fired. In an interview on Friday morning, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent blamed Lutnick for what he described as "leakage" of Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China.
According to Axios, Lutnick "has repeatedly stood in the way" of efforts to crack down on companies "suspected of diverting Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China."
"Howard Lutnick should resign or be fired," US Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) wrote on Thursday.
"Senator Van Hollen understands this is a fight of workers vs. billionaires and has the courage to deliver the change voters demanded," said the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
A machinists union with around 600,000 members issued a statement on Thursday endorsing US Sen. Chris Van Hollen's bid for Senate majority leader in the new Congress, calling the Maryland Democrat "a proven champion of working people who will fight to unrig an economy stacked against working families."
"The IAM Union proudly supports Senator Chris Van Hollen for Senate Majority Leader," said Brian Bryant, president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "Senator Van Hollen understands this is a fight of workers vs. billionaires and has the courage to deliver the change voters demanded. Workers did their part on election night. Now it’s Senate Democrats’ turn. Senator Van Hollen is the right choice.”
IAM's statement came shortly after Van Hollen, an outspoken supporter of labor unions, announced that he would challenge Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for the majority leader post.
"In this election, Americans called on us to unrig an economy rigged against working people and fueled by political corruption," Van Hollen wrote on social media late Thursday. "To deliver, we need new leadership. This isn't about any one person—it’s about answering that call. That's why I’m running for Senate majority leader."
The Maryland senator acknowledged he would be the "underdog" in the contest but disputed Schumer's claim to have already locked down enough support to win. Senate Democrats are expected to vote for majority leader by secret ballot in early December.
Van Hollen told MS NOW on Thursday that he has the support of "more than 10" of 55 Democratic senators and senators-elect so far, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.).
"Now people will have to make a decision, one way or the other," said Van Hollen, "and they have to decide whether they want to vote for change or whether they want to vote for the status quo."
The progressive advocacy group RootsAction, which says it has more than a million supporters online, announced Friday that it plans to "build on the campaign that we launched early this week, when activists responded to our mass emails by telling their Democratic senators to urge Van Hollen to run for the top Senate post."
"Now that he has done so, the imperative task is for Democrats nationwide to make sure that their voices are heard and heeded within the Capitol bubble," the group said in a statement. "At this historic moment, that bubble must be burst so that grassroots Democrats finally have the bold leadership in the Senate that they deserve. Political business as usual is absolutely unacceptable, and that means Schumer is unacceptable as the Senate Democratic leader."
"The ‘blue tsunami’ could easily become the blue mirage in the wrong hands," warned Sunrise Movement. "And Schumer’s hands are too full of billionaire money to hold young people’s future."
Thursday's announcement that Sen. Chris Van Hollen will challenge Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to lead the upper house of Congress when Democrats retake control in January was met with cautious optimism from progressives, who underscored the mandate for change delivered by voters in last week's Democratic midterm blowout.
"Yes, I am planning to run for the Senate majority leader," Van Hollen (D-Md.) told Jen Psaki on MS NOW Thursday night. "This is not about any one individual but it is about answering the call of the American people."
"We saw a huge outburst of democracy on Election Day; red states, blue states, purple states," the senator continued. "And it wasn't only a rejection of [President] Donald Trump and his corruption, and his wars, and his cruelty. It was also about a call... to take on a broken economic system that's rigged in favor of the very wealthy against working people, and it's fueled by a corrupt political system."
"The call was to reject the status quo, and to reject business as usual," Van Hollen added. "And to do that, I think we need new leadership."
Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) was among the first to hail Van Hollen's announcement, writing on social media that he called on the senator "to lead our caucus as a candidate back in April because he leads with courage and experience."
"We need both right now," El-Sayed added. "Which is why I’m proud to stand with him in his bid to lead our Senate majority."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) soon followed, noting that "the American people voted for change. They want a Democratic Party that will stand up to powerful special interests, take on the billionaire class, and fight for working families."
"That is why I am supporting Senator Chris Van Hollen to lead Senate Democrats," he added.
The secret-ballot vote to choose the next majority leader is expected to take place in early December and would mark the first contested Democratic leadership contest in decades.
Author Courtney Millan said on Bluesky that she is calling her "centrist-ass senators and asking them to back Chris Van Hollen."
Journalist Matt Novak said, "Hell yes, let's go."
BREAKING: Chris Van Hollen officially announces run for senate majority leader against Chuck Schumer! Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at:(202) 224-3121to tell your senators: Vote Chris, NOT CHUCK.
[image or embed]
— 50501: The People’s Movement ❌👑 (@50501movement.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 6:07 PM
The activist group RootsAction said it "will build on the campaign that we launched early this week, when activists responded to our mass emails by telling their Democratic senators to urge Van Hollen to run for the top Senate post."
"Now that he has done so, the imperative task is for Democrats nationwide to make sure that their voices are heard and heeded within the Capitol bubble," the group continued. "At this historic moment, that bubble must be burst so that grassroots Democrats finally have the bold leadership in the Senate that they deserve."
"Political business as usual is absolutely unacceptable, and that means Schumer is unacceptable as the Senate Democratic leader," it added.
The youth-led Sunrise Movement for climate action said on Bluesky that "Young people voted for change on election night. Chuck Schumer can’t give us that, but Chris Van Hollen might."
"The truth is, the ‘blue tsunami’ could easily become the blue mirage in the wrong hands," Sunrise continued. "And Schumer’s hands are too full of billionaire money to hold young people’s future."
"Young people are looking for a fair shot at life, and they haven’t yet been given one," the group added. "While the climate crisis barrels toward us at full speed, politicians like Schumer, who has been in office since 1974, have received plenty of chances."
"Chris Van Hollen has spent the last two years fighting to release his constituents out of [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] custody, spoken out against [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's] corrupting influence, and tried to build the future young people deserve," Sunrise noted.
"But Senate Democrats won't elect him just because young people want change," the group cautioned. "We’ll have to show up at their offices like young people did today at Schumer’s Senate office."
More than 50 Sunrise activists were arrested during Thursday's sit-in at Schumer's Washington, DC office.
Schumer, meanwhile, responded to the news by posting on X:
I welcome any discussion about the future of our caucus and the important work ahead. I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished together—55 seats and counting is an amazing result—and I have the votes to continue serving as Democratic Leader. I look forward to leading our new Democratic majority and delivering for the American people.
Van Hollen drew plaudits from human rights defenders, who noted his opposition to US wars and support for Israel and for authoritarian regimes around the world. The senator has criticized Israel for what a UN commission of inquiry and many other experts have called its genocide in Gaza and what the International Court of Justice has found to be an illegal occupation and apartheid in the West Bank.
Americans, Van Hollen wrote earlier this year in one of his many calls to end US armed aid to Israel, “do not want to be complicit in ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, or what human rights organizations and scholars have determined to be genocide in Gaza.”
“A historic number of voters sent a clear message to Congress this election that they want mass economic relief and financial breathing room,” said one campaigner.
More than 200,000 student borrowers and their allies, as well as a coalition of advocacy groups, demanded Thursday that Democratic congressional leaders seize the moment of their soon-to-be majorities in both houses of Congress to win a student loan repayment pause.
A petition circulated by the Student Debt Crisis Center (SDCC) demanding President Donald Trump act to pause all federal student loan repayments and interest had collected 209,359 signatures as of Thursday afternoon.
The petition accuses the Department of Education under Education Secretary Linda McMahon—who has said she shares Trump's goal of abolishing the DOE—of having "failed Americans" by moving the student loan portfolio to the US Treasury Department, creating lengthy delays in and "egregious account errors" in application processing, not granting loan forgiveness to qualified borrowers, making repayment less affordable, announcing the end of the Saving on a Valuable Education plan, and restarting interest accrual on SAVE plans. Dozens of Democratic lawmakers last week pressed McMahon to answer for these failures.
"Amid an affordability crisis and the current state of affairs, student loan payments should be the last thing on anyone’s mind," the petition states. "Student loan payments are an unacceptable source of additional stress for Americans who are already stretched thin."
Our payment pause petition surpassed 200,000 signatures, but we aren't stopping there. Read the full press release here: www.studentdebtcrisis.org/post/student...Add your name to the petition: actionnetwork.org/petitions/pa...
[image or embed]
— Student Debt Crisis Center (@debtcrisisorg.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 8:10 AM
"We called for a payment pause in 2025, which the Department of Education chose to ignore, but we are resuming our call for a pause right now," the document adds. "Given the growing economic anxiety and hardship facing Americans, an immediate payment pause is not just necessary; it is imperative."
SDCC said in a statement announcing the petition:
Following the midterms, affordability is top of mind for millions of Americans. With a new Congress opening the door for real change, beginning with a payment pause would give student loan borrowers necessary relief while the 120th Congress legislates and conducts oversight. Lawmakers are already demanding answers from the Department of Education on their extensive failures managing the federal student loan system. Now, borrowers are holding those in charge accountable.
“The results of the midterm election are undeniable—Americans need relief from the burden of unaffordable living, and they need it now," said SDCC founder and president Natalia Abrams.
"Implementing an immediate pause on student loan payments and interest wouldn’t just be an effective way of providing relief, it would also free up room in the paychecks of over 43 million borrowers to pay bills, care for their families, and revitalize their local economies," Abrams added. "It’s a no-brainer."
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reported Tuesday that outstanding student loan debt reached approximately $1.66 trillion in the third quarter of 2026, making it the second-largest category of household debt after mortgages.
Meanwhile, Federal Student Aid, a DOE agency, highlighted earlier this year that more than 42 million people hold federal student loans, with the federally managed portfolio alone exceeding $1.64 trillion.
On Wednesday, around 20 advocacy groups wrote to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, both New York Democrats, urging them to pressure Trump to sign legislation pausing student loan repayments after Democrats take back control of Congress in January.
We joined nearly 20 orgs in a letter to Senator Schumer and Rep. Jeffries urging them to win a pause on student loan payments in this next Congress.From widespread administrative errors to high monthly payments, Dems must step up for student debtors.www.forbes.com/sites/adammi...
[image or embed]
— Debt Collective 🟥 (@debtcollective.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 9:30 AM
"The student debt system is on the brink of breakdown, and today it functions worse than it did before the COVID-era payment pause," the groups contended in their letter, referring to the suspension of repayments during the first Trump administration that continued during former President Joe Biden's tenure before ending in 2023.
"We do not make this request lightly," the letter continues. "It is grounded in a documented and worsening pattern of administrative failure that is causing real, immediate, and irreparable harm to millions of borrowers."
"The chaos and disarray in the current system are not the fault of borrowers, and borrowers should not bear the consequences," the signers asserted. "A pause is the only responsible course until the department can guarantee that the system works as the law requires."
Groups signing the letter include the American Association of University Professors, Debt Collective, Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise Movement, SDCC, and the University of California Student Association.
“A historic number of voters sent a clear message to Congress this election that they want mass economic relief and financial breathing room,” Debt Collective co-founder Astra Taylor said on Bluesky. “Trump paused student loans once. Democrats should push him to get it done again.”
Corporate Democrats could also prove to be an obstacle to debt relief. Both Schumer and Jeffries backed legislation that effectively prohibited the Biden administration from extending the pandemic-era payment pause.
Schumer had previously been among the most prominent congressional advocates for student debt relief, repeatedly urging Biden to extend the payment moratorium and cancel as much as $50,000 in debt per borrower.
During Trump's second term, his administration has moved aggressively to resume collections. In April 2025, the DOE announced that it would restart collections on defaulted federal student loans the following month, and that it would seize federal tax refunds and other payments through the Treasury Offset Program.
The department also announced plans to garnish borrowers' wages. In July 2025, it notified borrowers that interest would resume accruing on loans enrolled in Biden's SAVE repayment plan, which had been blocked by a federal court injunction. The administration subsequently announced plans to eliminate SAVE. However, the Trump administration has also twice delayed involuntary collections, including the planned wage garnishments, amid public outcry.
As of September, more than 9.3 million student loan borrowers were in default, owing approximately $234 billion.
"Americans across the political spectrum have good reason to distrust unchecked executive branch surveillance power."
As a few leading congressional Democrats urged their Republican colleagues to reauthorize a widely reviled spying power before Democratic majorities take over in January, a diverse coalition of advocacy groups on Thursday demanded lawmakers refrain from including a provision on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in any critical bills before the year ends.
Rampant abuse of that portion of FISA—which lets the federal government spy on electronic communications of noncitizens located outside the country without a warrant—has fueled calls for reform across the ideological spectrum in Congress and among civil society organizations. Although Section 702 expired in June, surveillance operations will be able to continue through next March.
Noting that various lawmakers have long "sought meaningful reforms," including a warrant requirement for "accessing the private communications of US persons in Section 702 databases and closing the data broker loophole," the new letter calls on top Democrats and Republicans in both chambers of Congress to keep a reauthorization of Section 702 "out of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) or any other must-pass legislation in the waning days of the 119th Congress."
"The principle at stake is fundamental: Foreign intelligence authorities and purchased data should not be used to circumvent Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights," argued more than two dozen groups. "The need for reform is particularly acute as artificial intelligence tools are making it cheaper and easier than ever for the government to compile and analyze Americans' data at scale to reveal our habits, associations, and beliefs."
"Americans across the political spectrum have good reason to distrust unchecked executive branch surveillance power. Conservatives have seen abuses of surveillance authorities targeted at political campaigns and other Americans engaged in lawful, First Amendment-protected activity. And progressives have warned against granting expansive surveillance powers to the current administration," the letter notes. President Donald Trump has both fought for and sabotaged reauthorization efforts.
The letter emphasizes that "in recent years, Section 702 has been abused to spy on protesters on the left and the right; 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign; members of Congress and their staff; and multiple government officials, political commentators, and journalists. No member of Congress knows who will occupy the White House in the years ahead, and constitutional protections should not depend on who is president."
Signatories include the ACLU, Center for Democracy & Technology, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Fight for the Future, Free Press Action, Win Without War, and the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University's School of Law—whose Liberty and National Security Program counsel, Hannah James, stressed that "for too long, Section 702's warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance authority has been abused to spy on Americans. Slipping an extension into must-pass year-end legislation, instead of openly debating and voting on bipartisan reforms, would betray the democratic process and Americans' Fourth Amendment rights."
Hajar Hammado, senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, which helped organize the letter, similarly said in a statement that "following the widespread outcry over Flock cameras, it's clear that the American people don't want mass surveillance. Slipping a renewal of federal mass surveillance powers into a must-pass defense bill during a lame-duck session would be a wholesale rejection of what the American people want."
"Congressional leaders need to reject the failed agenda of out-of-touch Intelligence elites who want unchecked surveillance of Americans by refusing to add FISA to the NDAA or any other must-pass bill," the campaigner continued.
Jason Pye, vice president at the Due Process Institute, another signatory, pointed to Democrats' sweeping victories in the midterms: "Voters just spoke with a resounding voice that they are sick of politics as usual in Congress. They're sick of backroom deals. They're sick of being sold out."
"Putting the reauthorization of Section 702 in the NDAA is a terrible message to send back to voters who are desperately seeking a change in how Congress operates," Pye declared. "Worse, it's coming at a time when there are increasing worries about the executive branch having too much power. The notion that Congress would reauthorize Section 702 without a warrant requirement and without prohibiting the government from buying information on Americans from third-party data brokers is incomprehensible."
The letter came a day after House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Jim Himes (D-Conn.), who will likely chair the panel next year, urged the GOP to act on reauthorization immediately: "My preference would be, let’s just take the win that’s on the table, get it done in the lame-duck,” he told Politico on Wednesday. "If that fails, we'll do something in the first quarter."
Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) also backed a lame-duck reauthorization, acknowledging that "it becomes much more difficult in a new Congress," while Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) told the outlet: "We need to get it reauthorized... As soon as possible."
In response to that reporting, Hammado charged that "Jim Himes has betrayed his own party and the American people," highlighting that a reauthorization is desired by not only Trump but also his controversial new chief of staff, Stephen Miller.
"After seeing a blowout election where Americans overwhelmingly rejected Trump and sided with the Democrats, Himes' first instinct was to urge Republicans to use the little time they have left to hand Donald Trump and Stephen Miller the mass surveillance powers that they're asking for," said the Demand Progress adviser.
"It's incredibly telling that Himes fears the idea of his own party having the leverage to stop Trump from bypassing the courts to spy on everyday Americans, and it is shameful he is advising the administration on how to undermine Americans’ privacy," added Hammado. "Democrats and Republicans alike must reject Himes' agenda and oppose any effort to force a FISA renewal through Congress."
The Michigan Democrat has tried multiple times in the last week to appeal to Trump's ego in the hopes of securing his support for Medicare for All.
Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed on Thursday ratcheted up his campaign to convince President Donald Trump to sign Medicare for All legislation.
In a social media post, El-Sayed (D-Mich.) offered up a mockup of a gold "TrumpCare" card that every American would use to access medical treatment.
"This is a message for Donald Trump," El-Sayed wrote. "Donald, this is on the table. Guarantee healthcare for every American, from cradle to grave."
This is a message for @realDonaldTrump. Donald, this is on the table. Guarantee healthcare for every American, from cradle to grave. https://t.co/f32IYs3FXG
— Dr. Abdul El-Sayed (@AbdulElSayed) November 12, 2026
The Michigan Democrat has been trying for the last week to appeal to Trump's vanity to get the president on board with Medicare for All.
In a Friday interview with Zeteo editor-in-chief Mehdi Hasan, El-Sayed directly addressed the president and said he'd be happy to label America's universal healthcare program as "Trumpcare for All," given that "he seems to like to put his name on things."
"Donald, if you’re watching, we’ll put your name on it," he said. "You get to be the American president who finally guaranteed healthcare for every single American—met the unmet promise of America. You get to be that guy, so let’s talk about it."
During a Thursday interview with NPR, El-Sayed repeated his offer to put Trump's name on the healthcare bill, adding that the US Senate would still be wise to pass it even if the president ultimately vetoes it.
“I dare Donald Trump to veto,” he said. “I dare him, because if you want to make the argument that Democrats want to deliver for you, do that. Make him veto it.”
Zeteo senior correspondent Asawin Suebsaeng poured some cold water on El-Sayed's hopes of a Trumpcare deal in a Thursday social media post.
"I understand the game he’s playing here and I’ll admit defeat if I’m proven wrong," Suebsaeng wrote, "but how many times do we have to go thru this: No, Trump is not going to sign universal healthcare even if you put his name on it."
Suebsaeng then speculated on El-Sayed's political strategy in trying to push the president to back Medicare for All.
"AES is doing this in part because it’s a form of 'fighting' for Medicare for All, even when there isn’t a Dem president," the journalist explained. "And it’s a lot better than saying 'I campaigned on something that won’t be happening soon, but I hope it does eventually.'"
“Autonomous weapons systems are no longer a hypothetical future threat," said a program director at Amnesty International. “Meaningful constraints need to be put in place now."
A coalition of human rights groups called on United Nations member states to begin negotiating a treaty restricting the use of autonomous "killer robots" in battle at an international weapons conference taking place next week.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the international coalition Stop Killer Robots said Thursday that governments should use the Review Conference of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) to launch negotiations on a new protocol imposing legally binding limits on weapons guided by artificial intelligence. The conference begins in Geneva, Switzerland, on November 16.
The CCW, a treaty adopted by the UN in 1980, prohibits the use of weapons that cause unnecessary harm to combatants or affect civilians indiscriminately. However, the treaty does not include specific restrictions on the use of self-guided weapons systems.
“Autonomous weapons systems are no longer a hypothetical future threat, with reports growing that they are already being tested, integrated, and deployed,” said Carolyn Horn, program director for law and policy at Amnesty International. “Meaningful constraints need to be put in place now. Countries should seize this moment to open negotiations on new international law before these systems become entrenched in military practice, with potential to lead to devastating consequences for humanity.”
The CCW Review Conference is held only once every five years. Since the last one, self-guided systems capable of finding, selecting, and striking targets have been deployed on battlefields around the world.
Earlier this year, The New York Times reported that Russia was testing and deploying AI-powered drones in Ukraine that can identify and strike targets without a human operator making the final decision. In July, one of these drones struck a gas station in Zaporizhzhia, killing three civilians.
China is also aggressively developing increasingly autonomous weapons systems, including packs of rifle-equipped robotic dogs, AI-powered drone swarms, and unmanned combat vehicles—some of which have already been demonstrated in military exercises.
The Financial Times reported Wednesday that Foundation Future Industries, a US-based robotics startup backed by President Donald Trump's son, Eric, was in talks to supply the Israel Defense Forces with up to 1,000 Phantom MK-1 humanoid robots for operations in Gaza's tunnel network, potentially including combat.
The company's co-founder and president, Mike LeBlanc, told the outlet he had “no question of the morality of building a ‘Terminator’,” adding that “combat is the noblest” purpose they could perform.
“If you can keep somebody from having to kick in a door not knowing if there’s an enemy on the other side with a gun pointed at it, that’s kind of the highest purpose of what these robots could do,” he added.
Related concerns surround the more widespread use of AI to select targets. Israel has used AI-powered systems to identify thousands of Palestinians for potential assassination, generate bombing targets, and track people to their homes, raising serious concerns about faulty targeting, inadequate human oversight, and the killing of civilians, including entire families.
During its war on Iran, the United States has used AI-powered software to identify and prioritize targets for airstrikes. Pentagon investigators identified flawed intelligence, outdated imagery, and excessive reliance on Palantir's Maven AI system as factors contributing to the US bombing of an elementary school in Minab, which killed more than 150 people, including at least 123 children, on February 28, the first day of the war.
In September, a UN group of governmental experts agreed on a proposed definition of lethal autonomous weapons and a framework for regulating them. The proposal included basic principles requiring human control and adherence to the laws of war.
But the United States and Russia pushed to weaken some of the requirements for human review of AI-generated targets and for autonomous weapons to operate predictably and reliably. They also removed explicit language requiring "that ethical considerations are taken into account" when autonomous weapons are used.
Human Rights Watch has criticized the narrowing of these parameters, but said the agreement still provided a workable basis for treaty negotiations within the next year.
“After years of stalemate largely due to some states weaponizing the consensus-based decision-making under the CCW against meaningful progress, state parties finally have an opportunity to move from discussion to action,” said Verity Coyle, the group's deputy crisis, conflict, and arms director. “A time‑bound treaty negotiation process is the only credible way to ensure UN member states effectively respond to the existential dangers posed by autonomous weapons systems.”
As of August, more than 120 nations have indicated support for a binding treaty to regulate autonomous weapons systems, according to Stop Killer Robots. Nicole van Rooijen, the group's executive director, said next week's conference is the best opportunity in years to establish one.
“The Convention on Conventional Weapons was created to address emerging threats, and this Review Conference should show that it still can,” she said. “States parties to the convention have a responsibility to act before autonomous weapons systems reshape warfare in ways that undermine human dignity and civilian protection.”
Deadlier flood disasters "are the foreseeable consequences of a fossil-fueled economy in which those who pollute most are also the best protected from its consequences," said one campaigner.
An analysis released Thursday by anti-poverty group Oxfam juxtaposed the soaring number of flood-related deaths worldwide with the ultrawealthy's ability to insulate themselves from the climate disasters that are growing more common and devastating as oil and gas emissions continue.
The group found that as monthly temperature records were shattered in more than 100 countries this year, flood deaths reached a 13-year high—driven largely by catastrophic flooding in Nepal and Tibet in August, when a glacier collapse sent a "wall of water more than 100 meters high, traveling at 180 kilometers per hour," which swept through a valley and killed more than 1,500 people, with 5,600 still missing.
The flooding disaster, which the chief of the United Nations Office for Project Services said last month should be a "defining moment" for an international community grappling with how to mitigate the impacts of the climate emergency, accounted for about three-quarters of the 8,000 people who died in floods this year.
"Deaths from flooding are seven times higher in more unequal countries," noted Oxfam, while people in the Global South are far less likely to have contributed meaningfully to the carbon pollution that scientists say is heating the planet, putting the 1.5°C limit set by the Paris Agreement in 2015 out of reach, and causing the loss of glaciers and more extreme weather disasters.
"The carbon pollution of a person in the richest 1% has contributed 34 times more to today's extreme heatwaves than the average person, and 100 times more than someone in the poorest 50%," said Oxfam.
In September, the UN found that with countries contributing far too little to efforts to reduce carbon emissions, the planet is now expected to overshoot the 1.5°C threshold, and said policymakers must now focus on ensuring the overshoot is temporary.
But on Thursday, as world leaders gathered in Antalya, Türkiye for the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31), a report warned that the Earth could in fact be heading for an "irrevocable" breach of the 1.5°C limit.
"The carbon pollution of a person in the richest 1% has contributed 34 time more to today's extreme heatwaves than the average person, and 100 times more than someone in the poorest 50%."
The record number of flooding deaths this year, said Amitabh Behar, executive director of Oxfam International, "are not accidents of weather. They are the foreseeable consequences of a fossil-fueled economy in which those who pollute most are also the best protected from its consequences."
Oxfam also emphasized that while flooding deaths are soaring, one trend at COP31 demonstrated how the ultrarich are making devastating disasters in communities around the world more likely.
The group analyzed data from Polluterjet, finding that 87 private jets landed at Antalya Airport since November 7, just before COP31 began, emitting an estimated 777 tons of carbon dioxide.
"Nigerian billionaire Aliko Dangote’s private jet flew approximately 4,370 kilometers from Lagos to Antalya, emitting an estimated 30 tons of carbon, roughly as much as the average person emits in six years," said Oxfam. "During COP30 last year, 66 private jet journeys were recorded."
According to the Global Solidarity Levies Task Force, taxing private jets owned by about 250,000 people around the world could raise $45 billion per year, "nearly 12 times the amount rich countries gave to UN climate funds in 2025."
“While families mourn loved ones killed by floods and endure blistering heat, the ultrawealthy carry on flying in private jets, high above the devastating consequences,” said Behar. “Governments must stop treating the extraordinarily polluting luxuries of the superrich as an untouchable privilege. Taxing private jets is an obvious first step.”
"He should be standing up to Trump and Big Oil, not cutting deals that hand them even more power," said one campaigner.
US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse has worked hard to establish a reputation as a climate champion and a foe of fossil fuel giants, but the Rhode Island Democrat is under fire this week for pushing a "dirty deal" on permitting reform in Congress, even as he's promoting action to slash planet-heating emissions on the world stage.
Although there is no formal US delegation at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31) hosted by Türkiye, Whitehouse has posted a series of videos from Antalya, arguing that "we're going to fail on climate as long as it's free for the fossil fuel industry to pollute," "economic collapse related to financial risk is on its way," and the "real villains" are not only the oil and gas companies but also their "climate denial fraud operation."
Whitehouse is the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works' ranking member and could chair the panel when Democrats claim their majority in January. He headed for the summit after joining 21 other Democrats who voted with Republicans on Monday to advance the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA)—which GOP President Donald Trump has supported, while still opposing wind energy.
BAAJA is intended to speed up the permitting process for energy infrastructure—not only renewable projects and transmission lines, but also oil and gas pipelines. Critics have blasted the bipartisan bill as "a blatant giveaway to Big Oil and Big Tech," highlighting that it would undermine its clean energy provisions by propping up the dirty fossil fuel industry and further accelerating the expansion of deeply unpopular artificial intelligence data centers.
"Sen. Whitehouse is a reliably strong voice for climate action and a frequent presence at the climate talks," Collin Rees, United States campaign manager at the advocacy group Oil Change International, said in a Thursday statement. "This makes it even more disappointing that he's choosing to introduce and champion a Trump-backed bill that would accelerate massive build-out of fossil fuel projects and AI data centers by weakening environmental protections."
As one of the lead sponsors, Whitehouse's "involvement acts as a smokescreen for the Big Tech, Big Oil, and industry-funded front groups who have spent millions of dollars lobbying for the bill," Rees asserted. "BAAJA could fast-track construction of hundreds of proposed gas power plants and pipelines, polluting communities’ air and water, desecrating tribal nations' sacred sites, and raising households' energy bills. It would gut bedrock environmental laws in exchange for some weak promises Trump has already committed to breaking."
While Whitehouse has tried to frame the legislation as "a BIG step to fight climate change," Rees pointed out that "proponents’ own modeling shows that the bill's transmission provisions would have no discernible benefit to our climate, while unlocking unprecedented fossil fuel development. At best, this bill leaves US emissions over 2.1 billion tons short in 2040 of even a modest climate goal."
"Sen. Whitehouse knows better than most the damage the fossil fuel industry has done to our climate and democracy," the campaigner continued. "That's precisely why he should be standing up to Trump and Big Oil, not cutting deals that hand them even more power. Climate leadership at COP31 must be matched by climate leadership at home, and that means rejecting BAAJA."
A final Senate vote on BAAJA looms. Reuters reported Wednesday that Whitehouse "told reporters by phone that he would return by Monday for the next permitting reform vote," and "the 75-23 Senate vote to advance the legislation earlier this week had improved its prospects in the House of Representatives."
"He said members of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus had assured senators that the House will hold a vote on the measure and were optimistic about its chances of passing," according to the news agency. While the midterm election results mean Democrats will control both chambers next year, for now, they still have Republican majorities.
Backed by those GOP majorities in Congress, Trump has delivered on his 2024 campaign promise to serve fossil fuel industry interests since returning to office early last year. That has included abandoning the Paris Agreement, again, and refusing to participate in annual UN climate summits—even though the United States is the world's worst historical polluter.
With the world barreling toward "an irrecoverable overshoot of 1.5°C," the Paris Agreement's global temperature rise limit for this century, unless governments "rapidly reduce emissions to limit both the magnitude and duration of this overshoot," as Climate Action Tracker warned Thursday, other US leaders are participating in COP31.
Whitehouse is there with the Massachusetts-based Woodwell Climate Research Center, while The New York Times reported that Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom—a likely 2028 presidential candidate—and outgoing Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who ran for vice president last cycle, were both heading there Thursday and former VP Al Gore is scheduled to speak at events on the sidelines of the summit.
America Is All In, Climate Mayors, and the US Climate Alliance have organized a delegation of over 100, according to ABC News.
"America Is All In is showing up in force at COP31 to let the world know that millions of Americans are still in," said the group's chair, Gina McCarthy, a former Environmental Protection Agency administrator and White House National Climate adviser. "Mayors, governors, and cross-sector leaders from all across our country will be in Türkiye to demonstrate the strength of US subnational climate leadership and build partnerships and solutions that advance people's lives everywhere."