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
Latest News
Mexican Officials Fear Stephen Miller Will Push Trump to 'Authorize Direct US Military Action' in Their Country
Miller is reportedly demanding that Mexico drive the number of daily unauthorized border crossings to zero, which they have told him is impossible.
Nov 13, 2026
Officials in Mexico are reportedly worried that new White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller will goad President Donald Trump into launching a military invasion of their country.
Politico reported Thursday that concerns about Miller—a fanatical anti-immigration zealot with a long documented history of promoting white nationalist literature and conspiracy theories—are being expressed by "government officials, business leaders, and other power players" throughout Mexico.
Specifically, these officials fear that Miller will "push Trump to authorize direct US military action on Mexican soil" if it doesn't do even more to crack down on migration at the US southern border.
John Feeley, a former senior US diplomat who has been in contact with several Mexican officials, told Politico that "no one is pleased, to say the least" about Miller's promotion.
A Friday report in The New York Times revealed that Miller has been haranguing Mexican officials for weeks to get unauthorized crossings into the US down to zero per day, which they have told him would be impossible given that the US-Mexico border is roughly 2,000 miles long.
In a Thursday social media post, Trump threatened Mexico over a purported migrant caravan that he claimed was heading toward the US border.
"Many of the people in these Caravans are those that various countries don’t want—'Send them to America,' they say," Trump wrote, without citing any evidence to back up his claims. "But they will not be accepted! MEXICO MUST STOP THEM, NOW, and if they do not do so, the Tariffs on Mexico will be IMMEDIATELY DOUBLED."
A Tuesday op-ed written by columnist Leo Zuckermann published in Mexican media outlet Excelsior declared Miller a "danger" and the polar opposite of predecessor Susie Wiles, whom he described as "a skilled, disciplined, and pragmatic political operative."
Zuckermann also cited reporting from New York Times journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan that Miller in the past has demanded military attacks on Mexican soil against suspected drug cartels.
"Let's be clear," Zuckermann emphasized. "The new chief of staff is a racist who does not look favorably upon our country... At any moment, he could revive plans to attack Mexico and convince Trump of their necessity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israel's Spy Chief Reportedly in DC to Cajole Trump Back Into Iran War
The Mossad director's trip comes amid efforts by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to persuade the US president to abandon diplomacy and resume military strikes on Iran.
Nov 13, 2026
The head of Israel's foreign intelligence agency was in Washington, DC on Friday, reportedly trying to persuade the Trump administration to renew the illegal US-Israeli war of choice against Iran.
Mossad Director Roman Gofman was scheduled to meet with CIA Director John Ratcliffe in the nation's capital before traveling to Miami for talks with White House Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, according to reporting from Axios' Barak Ravid.
Other sources, including The Jerusalem Post, confirmed that Gofman was in Washington to discuss the Iran War.
Gofman's trip comes amid an increasingly public campaign by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to persuade US President Donald Trump to abandon diplomacy and return to military strikes on Iran.
According to Axios, Trump has so far resisted Netanyahu's demands, instead favoring continued economic pressure and a naval blockade while leaving open the possibility of a negotiated agreement.
"I could end it immediately," Trump said Thursday of the 258-day war—a claim he has made dozens of times in one form or another. "At the request of the nations that I'm looking to protect, we are doing it a little bit longer... a little bit more civilly."
The president claimed that leaders of countries including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain said they preferred that the US maintain the current approach rather than resume fighting.
Netanyahu had reportedly been lobbying Trump to resume strikes immediately after the US midterm elections, in which the Iran War played a major role in Republicans' losing control of Congress, according to exit polls.
Israel's domestic political turmoil may also be playing a part in Netanyahu's machinations. His Likud-led far-right bloc lost its parliamentary majority in last month's election, and opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot has a mandate to try to form a new government.
Some Israeli opposition figures fear Netanyahu could initiate another attack on Iran—or provoke an Iranian response—in an effort to sabotage Eisenkot's efforts and cling to power. Eisenkot, who met with Netanyahu for two hours Thursday, said Friday that he had warned the outgoing prime minister against taking advantage of the political transition to pursue military objectives.
Trump's own rhetoric has become increasingly bellicose. On Thursday, he said that he had "no hesitation" about using military force against Iran and that renewed strikes were possible "right now" if he decided to give the order.
In a separate Truth Social post, he declared: "We don't need a deal with Iran. Those days have long since passed."
Thousands of Iranians—including more than 3,500 civilians, at least 380 of them children—have been killed and tens of thousands more wounded by US and Israeli attacks since February 28, according to Iranian and international officials. More than 20 US troops and dozens of people in Gulf Arab states have been killed in Iranian counterattacks.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Working Families Party Joins Call for Schumer to Step Aside in Senate Leader Race
"Voters demanded change, and many of them made clear to us that they meant change in Democratic leadership too."
Nov 13, 2026
Echoing a call from a key machinists' union earlier this week, the Working Families Party on Friday became the latest organization to acknowledge Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's years of leadership—as it urged the New York Democrat to allow the party to begin a new chapter with fresh leadership.
The group's leaders wrote to Schumer on behalf of its hundreds of thousands of members "and the working-class people we organize" to thank him for helping to pass crucial relief packages during the coronavirus pandemic and the Inflation Reduction Act.
But the leaders emphasized that regardless of previous Democratic successes, the voters who turned out in last week's historic elections and handed the party control of the US Senate and House, flipping numerous seats from red to blue, were not giving their "endorsement of business as usual for either major party."
"Our coalition knocked on hundreds of thousands of doors this election year, and heard from voters who are fed up with a political system that has failed to deliver change at the scale they need," reads the letter. "Voters demanded change, and many of them made clear to us that they meant change in Democratic leadership too."
The letter came as some Democrats in the Senate, including Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) and Mark Kelly (Ariz.), credited Schumer with securing the party's new majority in the elections. Sens. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), and Angus King (I-Maine) all reached for a baseball metaphor to explain why they were supporting Schumer, comparing the election to the World Series.
Democrats who won those races have expressed doubt that their supporters were hoping to secure a majority led by Schumer, a staunch supporter of Israel and opponent of the broadly popular Medicare for All proposal who has held public office for over four decades.
Sen.-elect Adam Hamilton (Kansas) has called Schumer a "divisive figure" in his home state, while Sen.-elect Scott Colom (Miss.) on Friday rejected the idea that the Senate minority leader had "recruited" him.
"It’s fair to assume not a single American cast their 2026 vote believing it was an enthusiastic affirmation of Chuck Schumer," said David Sirota of The Lever. "There were lots of Americans who believed they were voting for change—including a change in the Democratic Party. Democrats ignore this at their peril."
"Working-class voters are demanding a government that will fight for them with urgency and conviction," said WFP. "With deep respect for your service, we urge you not to seek another term as Senate Democratic leader. It's time for a new generation of leadership in the Senate to carry forward the agenda the voters demanded last week: taxing the rich to fund the needs of working families, guaranteeing healthcare and childcare, lowering the cost of housing, ending the corrosive influence of money in politics, and making our democracy work for the many, not the few."
The group later said it was endorsing Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who announced late Thursday that he was challenging Schumer for the role, and called on Democrats in the Senate to back him.
WFP noted that Van Hollen is a co-sponsor of the Medicare for All Act "and has said Democrats must stop tinkering around the edges of a broken system," showed leadership in the fight against President Donald Trump's mass deportation agenda when he went to El Salvador to demand the return of his constituent, Kilmar Ábrego Garcia, and has long called for the US to condition aid and block weapons sales to Israel.
“The voters who just elected a new Senate majority are asking for a new generation of leadership that will deliver on housing, healthcare, and childcare. We believe Senator Van Hollen is the right choice for this moment to lead that fight, and we are proud to stand with him," said Jasmine Gripper, state director of the New York Working Families Party.
According to a tally by Drop Site News, 16 senators have expressed support for Schumer and eight have backed Van Hollen or are leaning towards supporting him, based on their previous comments on the minority leader. Twenty-two senators have indicated they are undecided, and nine have not said what their position is on the race.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) has called for new leadership, and said Friday that she will not be supporting Schumer, but did not say specifically that she plans to vote for Van Hollen.
Paul Blest of More Perfect Union posited that support from Slotkin, who has presented herself as a "moderate" Democrat, would be key for Van Hollen.
"If it becomes a progressive vs. moderate thing, Schumer wins that every time because there are more moderates in the Senate," said Blest. "It would need to be about retiring an unpopular leader to signal it’s a different party."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Next Democratic President Must Say ‘No More Foreign Wars—None!’ Declares Ro Khanna at Summit in Denver
Khanna, who has floated a 2028 presidential run, said Democrats' midterm performance showed "being uncompromised" is the way "to reach disaffected independent and MAGA voters who want change."
Nov 13, 2026
US Rep. Ro Khanna, a leading progressive contender for 2028, was met with cheers at a Democratic strategy conference in Denver on Friday as he called on the next Democratic president to categorically reject foreign wars.
"When the foreign policy blob comes, and they say, 'Mr. President, we need an aerial bombing campaign on a rogue regime,' a president must say, 'Not on my watch,'" Khanna said. "And when they come back, and they say, 'It will only be a few days, it will only be a few places, it will only be a few planes,' the next American president must stand firm and say, 'No more foreign wars! None!'"
Khanna (D-Calif.) was one of several Democratic politicians who headlined the "What's Next" conference, put on by the group Majority Democrats in the wake of the party's blowout midterm victory earlier this month.
According to exit polls, opposition to President Donald Trump’s war with Iran and the resulting economic fallout were major factors that fueled unprecedented gains for Democrats in territory that has been represented by the GOP for decades.
That includes the victories of Sens.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) and Troy Jackson (D-Maine), who won competitive elections while aggressively criticizing the US foreign policy establishment and advocating for a progressive domestic agenda.
Khanna told the crowd that the election results showed "being uncompromised" is the way "to reach disaffected independent and MAGA voters who want change."
"This means standing up to private insurance and drug companies and delivering Medicare for All. No half measures!" he shouted. "It means saying no to the defense contractors and cutting a $1 trillion, bloated Pentagon budget. It means a wealth tax on the billionaires who are the economic royalists of our time... It demands rejecting AIPAC [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee], calling out the genocide that Americans saw with their own eyes, and saying zero aid to Israel!"
Khanna told MS NOW on Friday that Democrats' historic wins “made it more likely than not” that he'd launch a presidential bid, joining a field of possible contenders that includes other similarly minded progressives, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
“We elected so many unique candidates: a Muslim senator in Michigan, a young preacher in Texas, an African American district attorney in Mississippi,” he said, referring to El-Sayed and Sens.-elect James Talarico (D-Texas) and Scott Colom (D-Miss.).
“It shows that this country is open to diversity," Khanna added. "It shows that they’re open to people who are not part of the establishment, unique outside voices, and that someone can surprise."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Air Traffic Control Outage Blamed as FAA Orders Nationwide Ground Stop, Citing 'Extraordinary Circumstances'
"All departing traffic should remain ground stopped until further notice," said the Federal Aviation Administration.
Nov 13, 2026
This is a developing story. Please check back for possible updates.
All US flights were ordered not to take off Friday afternoon as the Federal Aviation Administration ordered a "national ground stop."
"Due to extraordinary circumstances and for reasons of safety," said an alert from the FAA, "by order of the Federal Aviation Administration all airports are ground stopped. All departing traffic should remain ground stopped until further notice."
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the ground stop was due to "a communication issue impacting all Air Route Traffic Control Centers.”
A major outage appeared to be affecting the FAA's air traffic control system, The New York Times reported.
“FAA technicians are investigating the issue,” Duffy said. “We will provide immediate updates as we have them."
The FAA issued an unprecedented nationwide ground stop order and closed the nation's airspace after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Van Hollen Cheered, Jeffries Jeered at Denver Event Asking ‘What’s Next’ for Democratic Party
"We have an opportunity to restore faith in our democracy—not by preaching about its virtues, but delivering," said US Sen. Chris Van Hollen.
Nov 13, 2026
Sen. Chris Van Hollen got an enthusiastic reception on Friday at the “What’s Next” summit hosted by the group Majority Democrats in Denver, when the Maryland Democrat brought up his bid to challenge Sen. Chuck Schumer as leader of the caucus.
Van Hollen, who just hours earlier announced his intention to run for Senate majority leader in the next US Congress, was greeted with big applause as he took to the stage at the convention, with some in the audience shouting, "Leader!"
Chris Van Hollen gets thunderous applause and "leader" shouts at What's Next. https://t.co/T7g4DE48tm
— CENTRIFUGE (@ClippingMods) November 13, 2026
During his address, Van Hollen said that his goal as leader would be to restore American voters' faith in democracy, as polls for years have shown steep declines in trust across US institutions.
"For many Americans, our institutions sound like the thing that is standing in the way of getting that better life," Van Hollen said, according to Semafor reporter Dave Weigel. "We have an opportunity to restore faith in our democracy—not by preaching about its virtues, but delivering."
The Maryland Democrat then echoed remarks made over the last week by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), as well as Sens.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) and James Talarico (D-Texas), about passing popular legislation and daring President Donald Trump to block it.
"What if we actually had votes on the Senate floor about things the American people really cared about?" Van Hollen asked. "If Trump wants to veto it and... show that he stands with his billionaire buddies, let him do that."
While Van Hollen was well received at the conference, Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who aims to become the House speaker, was repeatedly heckled and booed during his discussion with Democratic strategist Jessica Tarlov.
One demonstrator, who was escorted out of the auditorium, yelled that Jeffries was a "traitor" for "shaking hands with the Trump family," presumably a reference to the New York Democrat's meeting with Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, earlier this year.
yikes -- Jeffries's talk in Denver is being disrupted by a string of protesters, one of whom screams obscenities at him https://t.co/zyiYkgdSIj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 13, 2026
Progressive organizers over the last week have been calling for Jeffries to step aside as leader, although no other House Democrat has officially announced their candidacy for the speakership.
A Change.org petition posted earlier this week to draft Rep. Ayana Pressley (D-Mass.) for the speakership has gained nearly 99,000 signatures as of this writing.
The New York Times reported on Friday that Jeffries is "pressing to wrap up his nomination to be speaker next week quickly and overwhelmingly, leaving potential detractors little room to maneuver around him even as some of them complain about an undemocratic process."
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Intercept Sues Pentagon Demanding 'True' Casualty Figures From Trump's Iran War
"The Pentagon has been playing games with US casualty stats for months," said investigative journalist Nick Turse. "Someone is dead. Then they're not. 15 people are wounded. Then they disappear."
Nov 13, 2026
The Intercept, an investigative news outlet, is suing the US Department of Defense in an effort to compel it to disclose the “true” number of casualties from the Iran War.
Since President Donald Trump launched the war in February, investigative journalist Nick Turse has reported extensively on what one US defense official quoted in his reports has described as a “casualty cover-up.” He has documented several deaths and hundreds of injuries not included in official tallies and tracked unexplained changes that obscure the full toll of the conflict.
"The Pentagon has been playing games with US casualty stats for months," Turse explained in July. "Someone is dead. Then they're not. 15 people are wounded. Then they disappear."
The lawsuit follows the Pentagon’s failure to substantively respond to five requests by The Intercept under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for records documenting US casualties, briefings provided to Defense Department personnel including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, internal communications, directives governing how casualties were counted, and the war’s financial costs.
The Pentagon acknowledged receiving the requests but missed the legal deadline to fulfill them.
In a complaint filed Friday in federal court in the Southern District of New York, The Intercept accused the Pentagon of violating its duties “to conduct a reasonable search for responsive records” and “to take reasonable steps to release all nonexempt information.”
“For months, The Intercept has been working to determine the true number of US military personnel who have been killed or injured in the Iran War. And for months, the Department of Defense has failed to give a clear answer,” said Ben Muessig, the outlet’s editor-in-chief. “The public deserves clarity and transparency from its government.”
The Intercept's lawsuit comes amid what Turse has described as "the most aggressive assault on press freedom in memory," under Hegseth, who has tried to outlaw journalists from seeking information not officially "authorized" for release—an effort blocked by a federal judge in March—and sought sweeping authority to withhold unclassified records requested under FOIA.
In August, a US Central Command (CENTCOM) public affairs official threatened to put Turse on a “list of people to disregard” after he repeatedly sought answers about Iranian attacks, conflicting casualty figures, and medical evacuations. CENTCOM subsequently denied maintaining a blacklist.
The Intercept is being represented by the nonprofit legal group Democracy Forward, which is also representing the outlet in a similar lawsuit filed in June seeking to compel the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to release documents related to a secretive database of activists who have protested and recorded Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.
“The American people deserve the truth from their government, especially about the true human cost of the military conflict with Iran,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “We are honored to work with The Intercept once again to hold our government accountable, and to fight for a democracy where a free press can report on important issues without interference or being unlawfully prevented from accessing public information.”
As of its latest update on November 9, the Pentagon’s Defense Casualty Analysis System shows that 23 US service members have died and 867 have been wounded in action since the attacks against Iran began on February 28.
But The Intercept says the tallies still contain discrepancies that “have yet to be corrected or explained” and, in October, launched a letter-writing campaign calling for Congress to investigate them.
"More than 200 sailors treated for lacerations or smoke inhalation have never been listed in official statistics. In April, the official number of wounded-in-action troops declined by 15 without explanation. An Army death listed in late May was removed from the record in early June. Ten wounded troops added to the official record in July disappeared a few days later," read the more than 68,000 letters sent to members of Congress.
The Intercept has also asked for answers about why the Pentagon waited more than six months to include Maj. Sorffly Davius, a signals and communications officer with the New York Army National Guard, who died on March 6 while on duty at Camp Buehring, Kuwait, in its official death tally. The Intercept wrote 10 articles about Davius’ death before the Pentagon added it to the count.
"Despite repeated questions for months, the Pentagon has not explained these and other disparities," the letters said. "It’s time for Congress to demand answers about the Pentagon’s long-delayed classification of the death of Maj. Davius and find out the truth about hundreds of other casualties missing from the official record."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New York City Fights 'Predatory Corporate Tactics' With Ban on Surveillance Pricing
“New Yorkers’ personal data should never be used as a weapon against their own pocketbooks,” said Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Nov 13, 2026
The New York City Council on Thursday approved landmark legislation banning businesses from using consumers’ personal data and algorithms to charge different people different prices for the same goods and services, an increasingly common—and controversial—corporate practice known as surveillance pricing.
In a 44-5 vote, city lawmakers passed Introduction 891-A, sponsored by Council Speaker Julie Menin, which prohibits businesses from using personal data—including browsing histories, shopping habits, demographics, location information, and other identifying characteristics—to determine individualized prices for consumers.
The legislation gives the city's Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) authority to investigate complaints and impose civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each violation. Qualifying small businesses would have an opportunity to correct their violations before facing penalties.
“The City Council is putting consumers first by ending the deceptive and insidious practice of surveillance pricing,” said Menin, a Democrat. “When corporations use algorithms and personal data to charge different people different prices for the same products, it’s unethical and worsens our affordability crisis."
"We take consumer protection extremely seriously, and we will continue fighting to lower prices and stop predatory corporate tactics," she added.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamadani, also a Democrat, supports the measure, and called surveillance pricing a way for corporations to "squeeze working people."
“New Yorkers’ personal data should never be used as a weapon against their own pocketbooks,” he said. “Our administration will continue working with the Council to protect workers, tenants, and consumers, and put an end to the scam economy.”
Mamdani has 30 days to sign the bill. If he does not, it automatically becomes law unless he vetoes it, a highly unlikely move that city council members could override with a two-thirds majority.
As the City Council explained:
Surveillance pricing is invisible to consumers, making it difficult to identify, but reports suggest the practice is occurring in a variety of industries. One investigation found that a major grocery delivery platform was engaging in algorithmic pricing experiments that resulted in individualized price differences as high as 23%. Another investigation found that the price of a television at one retailer increased from $499.99 to $599.99 when the consumer pulled into the store’s parking lot. A behavioral economist who worked for a major ride-share company revealed that the application increases prices when a consumer’s phone battery is low because they might not otherwise be able to get home if they do not accept the high offer. The Council aims to end these predatory practices and protect New York consumers with this landmark ban.
"Fair pricing visible for all to see. Today, New York City has upheld this basic principle, passing the country’s strongest municipal protections against surveillance pricing," DCWP Commissioner Samuel A. A. Levine said in a statement.
"At a moment when working families are struggling with the cost of living," he continued, "New Yorkers should not have to contend with an ever more fickle economy, in which the price of groceries, household goods, and everyday essentials depends on how much an algorithm thinks it can squeeze from their wallets."
"Surveillance pricing weaponizes our personal data against us—tracking our behavior, characteristics, location, schedules, and purchasing history to predict the most we are willing to pay, then charging accordingly," Levine said. "It’s wrong, it’s loathed by consumers, and now it’s illegal."
"In New York City, algorithms do not have the final say," he added. "People do."
New York City follows Seattle—which in September became the first US city to ban surveillance pricing—as well the states of Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey in outlawing the practice.
When I sponsored legislation making Seattle the first city in the country to ban surveillance pricing, I knew we wouldn’t be the last. Now, we’re taking on unfair pricing coast to coast. Congrats, New York.Portland City Council, your move.
— AMR - Alexis Mercedes Rinck (@alexis4seattle.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 9:23 PM
Consumer advocates hailed Thursday's vote, with Consumer Reports senior policy analyst Grace Gedye saying that “living in New York is already expensive enough. The last thing New Yorkers need is algorithms quietly hiking prices on everyday essentials."
"Nobody should pay more just because a data broker is tracking what they search for, what they hover over, or where they live,” she added. “The price you see shouldn’t be different based on who you are."
Lindsay Owens, the president and CEO of the economic justice group Groundwork Collaborative, asserted that “New Yorkers didn’t sign up to be spied on and have their own data turned against them just to pad corporations’ pockets."
"Today, the New York City Council has drawn a clear line in the sand that New Yorkers deserve a fair price, not one set by an algorithm designed to extract every last penny they’re willing to pay," she continued.
"But while the Council has moved to protect shoppers in the city, families across the Empire State, from Westchester to Buffalo to Albany, are still waiting on Governor [Kathy] Hochul to do the same," Owens added. "All New Yorkers deserve a fair price, no matter their ZIP code. Gov. Hochul can’t wait another day to sign the One Fair Price Act.”
“Living in New York is already expensive enough. The last thing New Yorkers need is algorithms quietly hiking prices on everyday essentials."
New York state lawmakers passed that bill in June. Championed by Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James, the legislation would prohibit companies from using consumers' personal data—including browsing histories, income, and other identifying information—to set individualized prices for goods and services. It also prohibits collecting, retaining, selling, or sharing personal data to facilitate surveillance pricing.
Not everyone welcomed New York City's surveillance pricing ban. Uber spokesperson Josh Gold argued that "this law will make it harder for small restaurants with limited marketing budgets to reach customers, putting them at a disadvantage against national chains."
The surveillance pricing victory comes amid a broader campaign to restrict corporate snooping on New Yorkers, including the increasingly widespread use of facial recognition and other biometric identification technologies in retail businesses.
A separate City Council measure sponsored by Brooklyn Councilmember Shahana Hanif, a Democrat, would prohibit businesses and other public accommodations from using biometric recognition technology to identify or verify customers. It would also require notification and written consent for biometric data collection and establish protections governing the handling of that information.
The legislation would restrict Madison Square Garden’s controversial use of facial recognition technology. MSG owner James Dolan has notoriously used facial recognition to blacklist people he dislikes, including hundreds of attorneys whose law firms have sued his companies; in one particularly publicized case, a mother was denied entry to Radio City Music Hall while accompanying her daughter’s Girl Scout troop because she worked for a firm litigating against MSG.
Hanif has warned that biometric surveillance poses particular dangers to immigrant communities, whose identifying information could potentially reach federal immigration authorities amid the Trump administration's deadly crackdown.
"This bill protects everybody," Hanif said when introducing her bill, "but we know who experiences disproportionate surveillance, and our immigrant community is among them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Beyond Cruel': Warren Says Congress Must Stop Trump's Latest Assault on Food Aid
Sen. Elizabeth Warren warned that President Donald Trump "wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs."
Nov 13, 2026
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Thursday that Congress must act to stop a new Trump administration assault on federal nutrition assistance that would strip aid from over 6 million people, compounding the hunger disaster created by the Republican budget law enacted last year.
"This is beyond cruel," Warren (D-Mass.) wrote in a social media post, referring to a rule proposed by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that would curtail a policy known as broad-based categorical eligibility. The USDA's own analysis estimates that its proposal, published in the Federal Register earlier this week, would take Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits from roughly 6.3 million people in 2029, the first year the rule would take full effect.
Warren noted that 5.5 million people have already lost federal nutrition aid since enactment of the 2025 Trump-GOP budget law, which instituted the largest SNAP cuts in the program's history.
"Now, he wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs," the senator wrote. "Congress needs to stop this."
After a rule is published in the Federal Register, Congress has 60 legislative days to introduce a Congressional Review Act resolution to overturn it. Democrats will take control of the House and Senate on January 3, 2027.
The new USDA rule takes aim at broad-based categorical eligibility, which lets states automatically deem recipients of other federal benefits eligible for SNAP—reducing administrative burdens for state officials and program enrollees. Under the Trump administration's rule, which is open for public comment until December 10, households with gross incomes above 130% of the federal poverty line would lose SNAP benefits, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Experts have noted that the Trump administration's attack on broad-based categorical eligibility would, if finalized, have far-reaching impacts, including reduced access to free school meals.
In a statement on Friday, the Children's Defense Fund urged the Trump administration to "reverse course" on its proposal, warning it would harm kids across the US.
"Many public schools use SNAP to automatically enroll children in free meal programs, meaning any child who loses SNAP access could also lose automatic eligibility for free school meals, exacerbating food insecurity in school districts across the country," the group said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘A Supermajority Requires a Super Agenda': Talarico Says Democrats Must Dare Trump to Veto Bold Policies
“We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%,” said the senator-elect. “The American people cannot wait two years for change.”
Nov 13, 2026
In the first two years of his second term in the White House, "success" according to President Donald Trump has looked like hundreds of thousands of people being detained by federal immigration agents, and families struggling with soaring costs at the grocery store and gas pump as a result of his "incredible" tariffs and so-called "victory" in the deeply unpopular Iran War.
But at the What's Next summit hosted in Denver by Majority Democrats on Thursday, Sen.-elect James Talarico (D-Texas), whose election win last week stunned Republicans, called on the Democratic Party to ensure the president achieves a new kind of success in his final years in office, as he contends for the first time with a US Senate and House that are both controlled by the Democrats.
The party has an opportunity, said Talarico, to "make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any presidency in American history"—but only if he agrees to sign the kinds of legislation that American voters signaled they're demanding when they went to the polls last week, handing Democrats at least 55 US Senate seats and 255 US House seats and rejecting the president's MAGA agenda.
Talarico called on Democrats to emulate the far-reaching domestic policy agenda of former President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who signed the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, created the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and spearheaded early education and legal services programs for low-income families, among other far-reaching initiatives as part of his Great Society agenda.
"We are in striking distance of a supermajority," said Talarico, "and a supermajority requires a super agenda. We must deliver immediate, bold relief during this affordability crisis. We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%."
Talarico: The American people cannot wait two years for change, so we must work with President Trump. If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits as LBJ, we can help make that a reality. We should make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any American presidency
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 12, 2026
Talarico called on Democrats in Congress to pass legislation to ban gerrymandering, "invest in our teachers and our students and build an American public education system that is the envy of the world," regulate artificial intelligence, end "forever wars that are driving up prices," and "champion a new, values-based foreign policy." Without naming the broadly popular Medicare for All proposal that has been introduced in the House and Senate numerous times, he called for Democrats to "pass universal healthcare so no one in this country goes bankrupt just because they get sick."
"Some of these reforms may not pass until 2029," said the senator-elect, who emphasized during his campaign that Americans across racial, partisan, and gender divides must join together to fight the influence of powerful billionaire megadonors. "But the American people cannot wait two years for change. So we must work with President Trump."
"If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits and busts as LBJ, we can help make that a reality," Talarico continued, alluding to Trump's push to build monuments to himself. "This moment is so much bigger and so much more important than the red team or the blue team."
David Sirota of Lever News applauded Talarico's call, suggesting, as Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) has, that Democrats could pass a Medicare for All bill called "Trumpcare" and trade the president's affection for seeing his own name emblazoned on policy initiatives for a new healthcare system that could save more than 100,000 lives and $1 trillion annually.
Sirota compared a far-reaching Democratic agenda to the legislation passed by Congress during Republican President Richard Nixon's five-and-a-half years in office.
Working with Democrats in both chambers of Congress, Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, key workplace safety and anti-discrimination protections, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, among other major legislation.
Talarico's comments echoed those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who appeared undaunted by Trump's threat to veto legislation passed by Democrats.
“If Donald Trump wants to be Mr. Veto, let’s test that out,” the senator said. “The new Democratic majority in Congress should pass bills to make life more affordable and our government less corrupt.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dodging Question on US-Israel Military Integration, Jeffries ‘Makes It Crystal Clear’ Why He Shouldn’t Be Speaker
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.
Nov 13, 2026
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.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy