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
Judge Throws Out Trump DOJ's Push to Block Certification of Alaska Senate Election
The administration quickly appealed the ruling, making it clear that it "still wants to interfere in Alaska's election and pursue an investigation that would violate the right to a secret ballot."
Nov 01, 2026
With numerous recent court rulings dismissing the Trump administration's attempts to intimidate election officials and its push to discount tens of thousands of ballots due to the dubious claim they were cast by noncitizens, a key midterm strategy of President Donald Trump—questioning the results of the election before it happens—is falling apart.
The US Department of Justice has focused in recent days on the Alaska US Senate election, with Trump personally calling on the DOJ to file a lawsuit arguing that a federal court must block the certification of the results if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan narrowly loses his reelection bid—but Chief Judge Sharon Gleason of the US District Court in Alaska threw that effort out on Sunday, as well.
The administration has focused on the election because, along with Sullivan and former Rep. Mary Peltola, the Democratic candidate, another Dan Sullivan appears on the ballots Alaskans have begun casting: Daniel J. Sullivan, a retired teacher.
The DOJ argued in its lawsuit that if Sullivan loses his reelection race but would have won if the votes for Daniel J. Sullivan had gone to him instead, the election results should not be certified.
The Republican senator is clearly marked with his party affiliation and the word "incumbent" on the ballots, and observers have noted that the state's ranked-choice voting system would likely stop Daniel J. Sullivan from acting as a "spoiler."
"Voters are familiar with the system," wrote Anna Griffin at The New York Times Sunday. "Any voter confused by the existence of two Dan Sullivans could simply rank both candidates."
Voters interviewed at the polls in recent days have said the ballot did not cause confusion.
Alaska Voter: I saw that it showed incumbent and Republican for the current incumbent, I wasn't worried about it at all. People are smart enough to see it's labeled clearly. It's already been determined by our Supreme Court in Alaska. I wasn't worried about it https://t.co/003wocOV7N
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 1, 2026
Still, the DOJ in its lawsuit called for an investigation should Sullivan lose narrowly, without explaining how officials would conduct a probe into the secret, anonymous ballots that American voters have a right to.
The administration, said Gleason as she rejected the lawsuit, "offers no rebuttal to the concerns regarding preservation of the secrecy of voting and provides no explanation of how its request for ballot segregation and a court-ordered investigation by law enforcement officers into certain voters’ intent could be implemented while preserving the secrecy of the ballot.”
As the DOJ filed an appeal to the ruling Sunday, a spokesperson for the department complained to the Times that Gleason had not addressed “the argument of the United States that Daniel J. Sullivan (a/k/a Decoy Dan) entered the race as a frivolous candidate to confuse voters.”
Entering an electoral race to act as a "spoiler," while potentially inconvenient and aggravating for another candidate and sometimes denounced as a "dirty trick," is generally not against the law in the US, according to legal experts. Neither is recruiting or encouraging someone to run as a spoiler, as Peltola's campaign has been accused of doing in the Alaska case.
"Regardless of who encouraged him to run, the second Dan Sullivan validly qualified for the ballot. And this is a matter of state law," Joshua Douglas, a law professor at the University of Kentucky, told Reuters this week.
Gleason rejected the DOJ's claim that the administration is not attempting to interfere in "the time, place, and manner of Alaskan elections," which the Constitution stipulates are to be determined by state officials.
"A court order preventing the state from certifying the election if certain circumstances occur; a court order requiring the state to segregate and preserve certain ballots; and a court order permitting the United States to conduct an investigation into the intent of those voters who cast ballots for Daniel J. Sullivan... certainly involve the time, place, and manner of Alaska’s election,” the judge wrote.
Sullivan said Sunday that he would accept the election results regardless of who wins, while also claiming the election could be "stolen."
The DOJ's decision to immediately appeal Gleason's ruling, said journalist Adam Klasfeld, made clear that the administration "still wants to interfere in Alaska's election and pursue an investigation that would violate the right to a secret ballot."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AIPAC-Backed Stevens Denounced as 'Traitor' After Endorsing Pro-Trump Rogers in Michigan Senate Race
"Politicians like Haley Stevens always had more in common with Republicans like Mike Rogers and Donald Trump than with the Democratic base," said House candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier. "And now she admits it."
Nov 01, 2026
Rep. Haley Stevens, the pro-Israel Democratic congresswoman who was backed by top party leaders, establishment figures, and tens of millions of dollars from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and other outside groups in the primary race earlier this year, suggested Sunday that being disinvited from campaigning with Michigan's Democratic US Senate candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, was all it took to convince her to endorse his Trump-allied Republican opponent, former Rep. Mike Rogers.
But one former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes said this weekend that Stevens' alignment with the Republican was the "logical endpoint" of her politics after months of attacking El-Sayed for his critical views on US military aid for Israel—views that are now shared by a majority of US voters after more than three years of Israel's relentless assault on Gaza.
Stevens announced her endorsement in a video posted online after she appeared with Rogers at Perfecting Church in Detroit, where she asserted that the Republican would support investments in Black-owned businesses—a ploy, said Melat Kiros, a Democratic congressional candidate in Colorado, to use Black voters "as a prop to embrace a racist who will do nothing but rubber stamp this fascist administration."
"Abdul was very clear. He said, 'Don't come,'" said Stevens, standing next to Rogers at the press conference where she was called "traitor" by one bystander. "When it really comes down to it, this is how I'm casting my ballot."
Haley Stevens gets heckled. She is called a traitor and the press conference ends as she is ushered away. https://t.co/O6q2LaYt23
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 1, 2026
She added that "nothing's perfect" when asked why she was supporting a candidate who "stands so firmly for some of the policies that you've stood so firmly against."
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) made clear Saturday that she, not El-Sayed, had directly asked Stevens to stay away from the candidate's events in the last days of the campaign after Stevens put out a statement criticizing El-Sayed's position on Israel. She told CNN: "I'm the one. I am the one that talked to Haley. And I am the one that said this isn't working."
On Sunday, Dingell issued a brief statement saying that she, El-Sayed, and Michigan Democrats are "focused on electing Democrats up and down the ballot" instead of Stevens' "continued efforts to get attention."
The political action committee American Priorities, which was established to counter AIPAC's funding of Republicans and Democrats who support Israel, said that with Stevens' choice, "what’s been clear to us all along is now plain to see: AIPAC and its candidates, including this failed primary one, are committed to electing Republicans."
"Every Democrat should be crystal clear on what AIPAC is and is not: It is an outside interference in Democratic politics, not a legitimate stakeholder in the party's future," said the group.
Stevens' endorsement came a day after reproductive rights advocates highlighted a recent interview Rogers did with WMUZ radio host Bob Dutko, in which he affirmed he would support a nationwide abortion ban.
"You don't even have to think about it twice," said Rogers on Thursday. "I mean, I feel I’ve been very open about all of those issues, including for the time I was in Congress having a 100% pro-life rating... This is the only way that I know how to be when I go back to the United States Senate."
Stevens' appearance with and endorsement of Rogers capped the congresswoman's months of political attacks on El-Sayed, a progressive who has also made Medicare for All a key part of his platform.
El-Sayed's positions on the Middle East and the human rights of Palestinians, Stevens and other pro-Israel politicians and groups have claimed, threaten the safety of Jewish communities in Michigan—despite the fact that 61% of Jewish Americans last year expressed agreement with leading human rights groups and Holocaust experts, saying in a Washington Post poll that they believed Israel's US-backed military had committed war crimes in Gaza.
El-Sayed has repeatedly spoken about protecting Jewish communities from acts of antisemitism, and his campaign is engaging directly with Jewish voters on the issue in the final days of the race. Meanwhile, Rogers has joined President Donald Trump in waging anti-Arab and Islamophobic attacks against El-Sayed, accusing him of being aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood and standing alongside Trump at rallies where the president has openly called the Michigan-born candidate, whose family immigrated to the US from Egypt, a "jihadist."
During the primary, Stevens spent weeks condemning El-Sayed for campaigning with another Arab American, popular streamer and Israel critic Hasan Piker. Last week, nearly three months after losing the primary, she demanded the candidate apologize for statements made in a digital ad by an outside group, which criticized the use of taxpayer dollars to fund Israel's military.
On Sunday, her appearance with Rogers reportedly led to the collapse of her own political operation, with her chief of staff and other aides abruptly resigning.
El-Sayed was asked about Stevens' actions, but reiterated his focus on securing a federal government that serves the needs of Michiganders and other families across the country, saying: "At the end of the day, I actually don't think about Haley Stevens. Because you know what? I'm just less interested in the politics of it all than I am in the policy of it all."
El-Sayed: At the end of the day, I actually don't think about Haley Stevens. Because you know what? I'm just less interested in the politics of it all than I am in the policy of it all… If you are somebody who believes that we should stand up to hate, and you have watched this last campaign, I think we probably would not want to support Mike Rogers and Donald Trump and JD Vance. If you're somebody who believes that we need more health care, not less than you probably don't want to vote for the guy who voted to raise prescription drug prices or keep them high 19 times and takes money from big pharma and big insurance. If you're somebody who believes in public education, you probably do not want to support the guy who architected the initial legislation in 1999 that ended up stripping local control from Detroit public schools and the local community. If you're somebody who believes that you should have a right to a union, you probably don't want to support the guy who busts unions. So I'm just saying that the principles that we believe in as Democrats are really quite clear. I stand for all of them.
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 1, 2026
Jesse Brenneman, an editor for the podcast "Know Your Enemy," expressed hope that "this debacle drops the blinders from many eyes and allows people to see things clearly."
"The Democratic establishment is not primarily concerned with winning elections. It is concerned with preserving its power and pushing certain outcomes," said Brenneman. "They are usually more subtle than this, but when push comes to shove they will explicitly blow things up to serve this end. They don’t want majorities full of popular politicians, unless those politicians serve the interests that they care about."
Stevens' decision, said congressional candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier, who is running in New York's 13th District, showed "that politicians like Haley Stevens always had more in common with Republicans like Mike Rogers and Donald Trump than with the Democratic base. And now she admits it. That’s why it’s so important to run democratic primaries. It’s not enough to send Democrats to Washington, we have to send Democrats who are fighting for the things working-class voters want!"
Stevens' alignment with Rogers and Trump would leave Democrats across the state "feeling even better today about nominating Abdul El-Sayed to fight for our working-class families," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian American in the US Congress. "Three days to go, let’s tune out this nonsense and turn out the vote. Let's make sure Haley loses to Abdul twice."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Renews Iran Threats, Dems Reminded They Can 'Block War Funding' Regardless of Election Outcome
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026."
Nov 01, 2026
As President Donald Trump and Iranian officials traded threats over the weekend, and with the Trump administration reportedly considering renewed attacks against an underground complex it claims is a nuclear site—which Iran denies—critics of the illegal US-Israeli war on the Middle Eastern country called on Democrats to take decisive action to end the conflict after the midterm elections, in which the party could take control of one or both chambers of Congress.
The nonprofit group Just Foreign Policy (JFP) was among those pointing to comments from last week by US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who said members of Congress recently attended a confidential briefing about possible strikes on Iran after the midterms—a plan whose details he called "insane."
As Common Dreams reported Friday, Iranian officials are taking steps to prepare the population for a potential US nuclear attack, which Trump has threatened multiple times since launching the war in February. He went to war with the preemptive aim of defending Israel from Iran's retaliation if the Israeli government waged an attack on its own, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned the US and Israel on Saturday against renewing attacks, saying they would be met with "geographically unrestricted" retaliation. He expressed hope Sunday that "that there is rationality on the other side to prefer diplomacy to other paths."
But with government funding expiring December 11, including money for the US Department of Defense "that is illegally bombing and blockading Iranian civilians," said JFP, "Democrats can block war funding" before the new year.
"Senate Democrats must not send another dollar to [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth's War Department unless the US stops the illegal war that is harming 90 million Iranian civilians and 300 million US drivers," said JFP, referring to the skyrocketing gas prices that have resulted from the conflict. "No excuses. Not another dollar for this illegal war."
JFP referred to Murphy's comments at the Middle East Institute last Wednesday, where he said Democrats in Congress must "use our spending power to end the war."
"I imagine what will happen is that there will be a continuing resolution after the election, and we'll push off the budget until January or February of next year," said Murphy. "And then if Democrats are in charge, we will essentially say we want to fund the Department of Defense, but we are not going to fund the Department of Defense if it's funding this war. And so there will have to be some provision in the bill that denies any funding to be used for the continuation of a war against Iran that's making us less safe and costing billions to American citizens."
JFP emphasized that even if Democrats don't win a majority in Congress in Tuesday's elections, Democratic senators would be able to block the continuing resolution that would keep the war funded into February, because Republicans with their current majority would need seven Democrats to join them in supporting the funding.
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026," said JFP. "Democrats do NOT need to win or wait. Murphy's approach here means Democrats would agree to fund the Iran war for months or years to come."
"If Democrats win a big blue wave rebuke of this patently unconstitutional war, and Trump comes out of the midterms escalating it, Democrats should move to block it and impeach him over it," said another commentator. "Voting to enable it would be a corrupt abdication."
Al Jazeera reported Sunday that Iran was continuing negotiations with the US through Qatari mediators, "but it does not have the slightest optimism about Trump’s intentions even for a moment,” according to a security source.
“We think that there may be different voices in the US, but experience has shown that the US president and his circle are succumbing to the temptations of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and the warmongering extremists who support him,” the source said. “For this reason we are obliged to maintain our focus on being fully prepared for a decisive and punitive defense against any aggression and crime by the United States and Israel.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Stevens' Latest Attack, El-Sayed Reiterates Focus on 'Beating Mike Rogers' in Final Weekend of Campaign
"Our campaign is and has always been focused on addressing the most critical challenges Michiganders are facing: skyrocketing gas prices, unaffordable groceries, and the inability to see a doctor."
Oct 31, 2026
After issuing a brief statement in response to Rep. Haley Stevens' demand that he apologize for the views he's expressed—in line with a growing majority of Democrats—that are critical of US funding for Israel, Michigan's Democratic US Senate candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, headed into the final weekend before the midterm elections with the same focus he has maintained throughout his campaign.
"While Congresswoman Stevens seems intent on relitigating a primary that ended three months ago," said El-Sayed, "let's all focus on the task at hand: That's beating Mike Rogers, holding [President Donald] Trump accountable, and getting money out of politics, putting money in pockets, and passing Medicare for All."
The statement followed Stevens' latest attempt to suggest that El-Sayed's candidacy has threatened Jewish communities, by tying him to an anti-Rogers ad by an outside group, Rebellion PAC, that addressed how the billions of dollars and political support the US provides to Israel each year costs Americans. The Trump administration has publicly said the US launched its illegal war on Iran after being pushed to do so by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—a decision that has markedly worsened the affordability crisis for Americans.
El-Sayed's campaign has said the digital ad does not "speak for" the progressive candidate, while others have pushed back on the claim by the vehemently pro-Israel Stevens and pro-Israel groups that the video is antisemitic, noting that it says nothing about Jewish people.
In his statement Friday evening, El-Sayed appeared to have little interest in engaging with Stevens further regarding persistent accusations by corporate Democrats who have claimed he hasn't done enough to reach out to Jewish communities, whom his campaign has been speaking with extensively about fighting antisemitism and their views on Israel at "deep canvassing" events.
"Our campaign is and has always been focused on addressing the most critical challenges Michiganders are facing: skyrocketing gas prices, unaffordable groceries, and the inability to see a doctor," said El-Sayed, noting that his message had allowed him to win the primary in August despite "a historic $70 million in outside spending by big corporations" and the pro-Israel lobby on behalf of Stevens.
Two sources told Politico that El-Sayed's campaign was asking Stevens not to campaign with him in the final weekend, which the congresswoman had begrudgingly said she planned to do in her statement demanding an apology from the candidate.
But El-Sayed himself was applauded by progressives for "holding firm and ignoring the whines and threats of extremists," as art director Lindsay Ballant said.
"For those folks demanding that El-Sayed condemn that ad, he isn’t playing your stupid game," said another observer. "He understands that whatever he does, it won’t be enough. There will always be another demand. So take your cudgel somewhere else."
Even if El-Sayed took time away from the statewide door-knocking tour he had planned for the weekend to address Stevens' demand, podcaster and former Obama administration staffer Tommy Vietor asserted that "people would then say he didn't condemn it firmly enough."
"The guilt by association shit is endless," said Vietor. "Meanwhile, Abdul is literally being called a jihadist by the president of the United States!"
Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) are set to join El-Sayed at the "Knock Out the Vote" canvassing event from Saturday through Monday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Federal Judge Shuts Down Trump DOJ Threats to Prosecute Election Officials
A labor leader called the ruling "a resounding win for the election workers who make our democracy happen and for all Americans’ freedom to vote."
Oct 31, 2026
Days after the US Department of Justice threatened election officials in all 50 states with possible prosecution unless they preserve election records—the latest push by the Trump administration to cast doubt on the validity of the upcoming midterm elections—a federal judge on Friday ordered the DOJ to reach out to the officials again, this time to rescind the threat.
The DOJ must contact the state and local officials who received warnings this week and inform them that the "threats of prosecution to election officials and workers... have been enjoined," said District Judge Trina Thompson in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.
Thompson ordered officials with the Trump administration to stop demanding that election workers remove voters from rolls, sequester ballots cast by people the White House has claimed are ineligible to vote due to being noncitizens, and refuse to issue ballots to people who have been included on the administration's error-riddled lists of residents whom it says have voted illegally.
"Because the public has a paramount interest in ensuring that election officials and workers are able to carry out their work in accordance with federal law and election procedure, and the official day of the elections is only a couple of days away, the balance of the equities and public interest weigh in plaintiffs’ favor," said Thompson.
The ruling was handed down in connection with a lawsuit filed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), and other groups.
Protect Democracy, part of the coalition that sued, called the threat "yet another attempt designed to shake Americans’ confidence in the election results and undermine our electoral process."
Patrick Moran, president of AFSCME, said Thompson's ruling and the temporary restraining order she issued were "a resounding win for the election workers who make our democracy happen and for all Americans’ freedom to vote."
"We applaud the court for granting a temporary restraining order protecting election workers from unlawful prosecution simply for following the law and forbidding the administration from interfering with the lawful administration of elections," said Moran. "Now, our nation’s nonpartisan election workers, many of them AFSCME members, can continue to do their jobs, and our elections can continue to proceed freely and fairly.”
With President Donald Trump's approval rating at an historic low and Republicans facing widespread disapproval of the illegal war on Iran they've supported, healthcare cuts they voted for, and violent mass deportation operations they've funded, the White House has approached the midterms with a laser focus on sowing doubt about the results before the elections are completed.
The DOJ demanded confidential voter roll data from states across the country last year, pushing the baseless claim that the lists were rife with the names of noncitizens who would be illegally permitted to vote. The administration has been rebuffed by dozens of officials.
In response, the Department of Homeland Security and DOJ have used commercially available data and federal records to cobble together their own lists of voters they say have cast ballots illegally. The results of the effort have included a list of 185 people in Nevada, all of whom were proven to be citizens, and a list of 28 immigrants in California whom federal officials said were suspected of voting before they became naturalized citizens—representing about .0001% of all registered voters in the state.
The administration has also pushed for the certification of Alaska's election results to be blocked, citing the presence of two Dan Sullivans on the ballot—one clearly labeled as the incumbent Republican senator, the other not—and on Thursday, sent the threatening letters to election officials across the country.
Earlier this week, Judge David Carter in the US District Court for the Central District of California said that the administration's threats "must stop," throwing out the DOJ's attempt to force the state to sequester ballots cast by 20,000 people officials claimed were not citizens.
"DOJ tried to bully election workers with threats and intimidation," Norm Eisen, co-founder of Democracy Defenders Action, said Saturday. "Last night, a federal court shut it down. We and our partners are fighting to protect elections in the court of law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Global Summit Ends Without Securing Finance Commitments Needed to Protect Biodiversity
“This meeting should have been a turning point, not just a stocktake. Success required governments to commit the political will and financing needed to reverse biodiversity loss," said one advocate.
Oct 31, 2026
The 17th United Nations summit on biodiversity ended in Yerevan, Armenia on Friday with more than 200 countries adopting a "forward-looking" agreement aimed at speeding up and scaling up action to protect nature, reforming "harmful subsidies fueling nature’s demise," and closing the biodiversity finance gap—with the global economy spending $1 on nature protection for every $30 it spends on destruction, according to a recent UN report.
But conservation advocates warned that with four years to go until 2030, when 30% of land and water is meant to be protected under the 30x30 goal set by the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework in 2022, biodiversity conservation is behind schedule, and the goal of accelerating beneficial finance is still falling short in the Yerevan Pathway that came out of the meeting.
The conference produced about $1.8 billion in nature-finance agreements, including a commitment of $500 million from the Netherlands to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility, which rewards countries for protecting their tropical forests. Six contributors also pledged $60.13 million to the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund, which supports the Global South in implementing the 2022 framework.
However, "overall spending on biodiversity remains far short of the $200 billion per year target in the Kunming-Montreal framework," wrote John Cannon at Mongabay, while the framework's demand to reform "damaging subsidies remains largely unmet."
Experts say $700 billion in additional annual spending is needed to protect and restore ecosystems damaged by mining, drilling, and other industries, pollution, and other human activities.
Governments committed to reducing subsidies by at least $500 billion per year by 2030, but about $2.4 trillion "is still estimated to flow annually toward subsidies that can harm nature," said Sustainable Business Services.
Daudi Sumba, chief conservation officer at World Wildlife Fund International (WWF), said that the Global Review that came out of the summit was “a strong signal to countries that they must do better when it comes to action for nature."
"But without clear scaling of the funds to be able to deliver, I fear finance will remain the key issue that continues to haunt the UN biodiversity summits," said Sumba. "Negotiators returning home must now turn the Global Review into clear dedicated action, scaling nature’s recovery by transforming the most damaging sectors and activities across our food and finance systems.”
The Cali Fund, a mechanism that came out of COP16 in Colombia and is designed to share digital sequence information on genetic resources, is also falling short of the goals set for it by last year's conference. The fund aims to raise at least $1 billion annually from companies that access DSI from genetic resources for pharmaceuticals and other products, but "with only $10,000 pledged at the close of [COP17]," said WWF, "follow-up work at intersessional meetings will be important."
“Back when the UN Convention on Biological Diversity was first adopted in 1992, one of the main pillars was ensuring the fair and equitable benefit-sharing from biodiversity, especially from provider countries and local communities,” said Vishaish Uppal, director of governance, law, and policy at WWF-India. “Almost 35 years later, we’re still not seeing the companies that profit off nature sharing their benefits with the Indigenous peoples and local communities that act as the custodians of much of the biodiversity that their businesses rely upon. It really is about time that countries iron out these differences, so that funding can reach the people and places that need it the most.”
An Lambrechts, a biodiversity politics expert at Greenpeace International, said that "giant corporations did everything they could to keep the Cali Fund voluntary two years ago, and then did everything they could to stop the fund from working in Yerevan."
"It is unacceptable that big multinational corporations are turning massive profits from what they take from nature while contributing very little to its protection and leaving people across the world to face the impacts of the biodiversity crisis," said Lambrechts.
"It is unacceptable that big multinational corporations are turning massive profits from what they take from nature while contributing very little to its protection and leaving people across the world to face the impacts of the biodiversity crisis."
Negotiators also established a permanent body for Indigenous peoples and local communities under Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity, but Sustainable Business Services warned that "questions remain over institutional status, representation, and the extent of their participation in decision-making."
COP17, said the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), "put forth a clearer picture of the global biodiversity crisis and the gaps that must be closed to meet the world’s 2030 targets."
But Susan Lieberman, vice president for international policy at WCS, said that "the negotiations themselves ended up weak on ambition."
“This meeting should have been a turning point, not just a stocktake. Success required governments to commit the political will and financing needed to reverse biodiversity loss," said Lieberman. "That means protecting and restoring ecological integrity, respecting the rights and leadership of Indigenous peoples and local communities, and reducing the drivers of decline. With just four years until 2030, we cannot afford another conference that diagnoses the crisis without accelerating the cure."
Twenty-two of the 23 targets set by the Kunming-Montreal framework are behind schedule, and Lieberman said that COP17 "has clarified the challenge" of ensuring they are met.
"Now governments must summon the political will, resources and resolve to meet it," she said. "We applaud the Armenian government, the [Convention on Biological Diversity] secretariat, and many governments and partners for keeping the momentum moving toward achieving the 2030 goals and targets. But ‘good enough’ should never be acceptable.”
Friends of the Earth International (FOE) also said the two weeks of negotiations had "ended with weak decisions and many unanswered questions," pointing to "the capture of this space by transnational corporations" and the "greenwashing and false solutions like biodiversity offsets and credits" that it said would continue.
Along with calling out harmful subsidies, FOE helped launch a campaign during COP17 highlighting how "business sectors contribute to biodiversity destruction and related human rights impacts," such as in the pulp and paper and biomass industries.
"In Indonesia, the expansion of industrial plantations and biomass production continues to drive forest loss and biodiversity decline," said the Environmental Paper Network, which joined the initiative.
With the Yerevan Pathway, said Nele Marien, coordinator of the forest and biodiversity program at FOE, "the structural drivers of biodiversity loss remain an elephant in the room: the financial and legal systems that undermine biodiversity need to be addressed."
Wilmer Lucitante, member of the Kofan nation and spokesperson for the Union of People Affected by Texaco and FOE Ecuador, said that COP17 is "a turning point, as the ways of operating of the Indigenous body of the convention were established."
"Yet the measures are voluntary, and do not alter the power transnational corporations wield in our territories," said Lucitante. "In the Kofan territory, from the time of Texaco and until now, fossil fuel companies have contaminated our lands and violated our rights. Voluntary measures are clearly not enough."
WCS said the overall outcome of the summit, just before countries meet in Türkiye for the 31st UN Climate Change Conference, where climate finance is expected to be a major topic, was "too timid."
"The COP17 decision merely encourages countries to begin applying a set of voluntary guidelines, which will be negotiated further before COP18," said the group. "This 'kicking the can down the road' falls far short of what is needed at a time when climate change poses a significant threat to biodiversity ecosystems, and the loss and degradation of ecosystems is driving emissions and reducing the capacity of people and nature to adapt."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's 'Election Denial Must Stop': Progressive Lawmakers Demand US Recognize Lula's Brazil Victory
"In the two largest democracies in the hemisphere, we cannot tolerate authoritarian efforts to deny election results, overturn the will of hundreds of millions of voters, or violently interrupt the peaceful transfer of power."
Oct 30, 2026
Progressive leaders in the US House of Representatives on Friday demanded that President Donald Trump recognize Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's reelection victory, accusing the Republican of joining defeated far-right candidate Flávio Bolsonaro's bid to undermine democracy in Latin America's largest country.
“Trump continues to ramp up his election denialism," Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas), CPC Deputy Chair Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and CPC Whip Jesús G. "Chuy" García (D-Ill.) said in a statement, adding that Lula won by "more than 4 million votes. Yet Trump called it 'rigged’ and ‘corrupt’ and refused to recognize the outcome."
Turning to loser Bolsonaro's flight from Brazil to the United States, where senior Trump officials said he and his family would be granted visas, the progressives continued, "As soon as Flávio Bolsonaro touched down in Florida, he thanked Donald Trump for his support and claimed that Brazil’s election was stolen, outrageously declaring himself the rightful ‘president-elect.’"
"Trump’s and Bolsonaro’s partnership in election denial must stop immediately," they stressed. "We demand that the United States join the rest of the world in accepting the results of Brazil’s election. In the two largest democracies in the hemisphere, we cannot tolerate authoritarian efforts to deny election results, overturn the will of hundreds of millions of voters, or violently interrupt the peaceful transfer of power."
“As November approaches, we are committed to using every congressional tool at our disposal to defend election integrity at home and stop Trump’s election interference and denialism abroad," the lawmakers added, alluding to next week's US midterm elections.
The Trump administration's response to the results of the Brazilian runoff has angered many in Brazil, especially those on the left.
According to Folha de São Paulo, the US State Department had prepared a customary statement congratulating Brazil on its election but was ordered to withhold its release after Bolsonaro challenged the results. The US Embassy in Brasília subsequently offered no indication of when the statement would be issued.
Lula's leftist Workers' Party addressed Trump's behavior in a resolution saying that "Brazil will not accept foreign interests interfering in its democracy, nor will it accept political disputes serving as a pretext to disrespect the sovereign will of the Brazilian people, in elections that were widely monitored and recognized for their integrity."
"The position of US President Donald Trump regarding the election results and [Bolsonaro's] presence on US territory also requires attention," the resolution added.
Dan Beeton, communications director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, told Common Dreams on Friday that "the CPC leaders are right."
"Trump should join the rest of the world and recognize Lula’s historic electoral victory and, hopefully, turn a new page in US-Brazil relations, which have deteriorated significantly during Trump’s second term, with Trump’s unprovoked and unnecessary tariffs, sanctions against officials responsible for holding former President Jair Bolsonaro accountable for his 2023 coup attempt, and other hostile actions," Beeton added. "Trump will risk further isolating the US on the world stage as long as he doesn’t.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Plan to Deport Afghan Immigrants, Refugees Condemned as 'Sickening'
"The consequences could be prison, torture, or worse," said one human rights defender.
Oct 30, 2026
The Trump administration is preparing to deport more than 150 Afghan immigrants and refugees to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan via Pakistan, a move that drew fierce condemnation Friday from a range of critics—including human rights defenders and Democratic US lawmakers—who warned that such expulsions would place many of the deportees' lives in grave danger.
The New York Times reported that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has transferred Afghan detainees from facilities around the country to Louisiana in preparation for a chartered deportation flight expected to leave as soon as Monday.
The administration reportedly intends to send the Afghans to Pakistan, whose government would then expel them across the border into Afghanistan, where the Taliban has ruled since the US withdrew from the country in defeat over five years ago.
According to the Times, those slated for deportation include relatives of people who aided the US military invasion and occupation and at least one gay man. Both categories of people would face possible execution or severe persecution by the Taliban.
"Five years ago, Americans watched Afghans cling to planes to escape the Taliban. On Monday, our government plans to charter one back to their persecutors' hands," Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of refugee resettlement organization Global Refuge, said in a statement Friday.
"For the people on that manifest, the consequences could be prison, torture, or worse," she added. "For their families here, some of whom served alongside US servicemembers, it means losing a loved one without knowing whether they'll ever hear from them again."
Vignarajah implored the Trump administration to halt or reverse the plan before the flight departs.
"Pakistan is patently unsafe for Afghans," she said. "Its own government has made that clear by hounding them out of the country by the millions. Deporting Afghans into that crackdown is a deliberate decision to put them in harm's way."
Since 2023, Pakistan's government has expelled more than 2.7 million Afghans, according to Global Refuge, and has vowed to remove approximately 1.5 million who remain in the country regardless of their immigration status. The United Nations has documented killings, arbitrary detention, and torture of people associated with Afghanistan's former US-backed government and security forces.
The Taliban has also systematically stripped Afghan women and girls of the rights they gained during the US invasion, banning them from secondary schools, universities, and most employment, while imposing sweeping and draconian restrictions on their lives.
"Individuals returned to Afghanistan face grave, systematic dangers, including arbitrary detentions, executions, public flogging, and retaliatory violence," the group Human Rights First said Thursday. "Women and girls face severe restrictions on basic freedoms, including systematic denials of education, employment, and public speech."
Several Democratic US lawmakers, including Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, decried the planned deportations.
"We made a promise to our Afghan allies—that after aiding and protecting our troops during the conflict in Afghanistan, America would not abandon them," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). "This administration is betraying that promise, deporting them to potential torture and death."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) posted: "While he hopes nobody is watching, Trump greenlit the expulsion of more than 150 Afghans back to Taliban rule, where they will face almost certain persecution, torture, or worse. Accountability for Trump’s cruel immigration agenda cannot come soon enough."
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) also weighed in, writing on social media, "Our Afghan allies risked everything to help the United States."
"Now Trump plans to send their relatives back to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan," he added. "Repaying their sacrifice with betrayal is shameful and will make it much harder for America to secure assistance in future conflicts."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Haley Stevens Slammed for Statement Suggesting She's Willing to Sabotage Midterms to Halt Progressive Surge
"If a progressive candidate was actively trying to pin an establishment nominee days before the election the way Stevens is with Abdul right now, they’d be exiled from political life."
Oct 30, 2026
In the final days of the US Senate campaign in Michigan, Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed is leading in polls, winning praise for taking President Donald Trump and his Republican opponent to task with incisive humor, and providing a clear closing message in evocative ads.
But his former Democratic primary opponent, Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), said Friday that while she reiterated this week her decision to support El-Sayed in next Tuesday's election—a plan not shared by her fiancé, who publicly announced he would vote for Republican former Rep. Mike Rogers—she was demanding concessions from the Democratic candidate, in a statement that sought to tie him to a recent online ad by an outside group.
Stevens said she would campaign with El-Sayed this weekend alongside Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), but demanded that he apologize for comments he has made about Israel on the campaign trail. El-Sayed, like a growing majority of Americans, is deeply critical of US support for Israel's military, to which it sends billions of dollars in aid annually. Since Israel began attacking Gaza in October 2023, the Biden and Trump administrations have sent $21 billion in military aid to Israel.
The congresswoman demanded that El-Sayed apologize for suggesting "that Israel is the reason Michigan cannot afford schools, healthcare, and childcare."
"Abdul promises to get money out of politics," she said. "He can begin by getting Israel out of his explanation for everything Michigan cannot afford."
Journalist Ryan Grim of Drop Site News said Stevens was essentially asking El-Sayed to lie to voters.
"The US government itself, in its official explanation, says that we launched the war on Iran in significant part to defend Israel," said Grim. "Marco Rubio said it out loud too. It's obvious. So it would be a lie not to include Israel in any explanation for why life in Michigan is less affordable now."
The war on Iran has sent gas prices soaring, with Americans paying an additional
$101 billion on gasoline since the war started, or an average of $856 per household.
Stevens also said she expected El-Sayed to "formally" condemn a recent ad by Rebellion PAC, led by Cenk Uygur of the left-wing network The Young Turks, and suggested that she was only agreeing to campaign with the candidate because she had received assurances of the condemnation.
El-Sayed's campaign has already emphasized that "no one speaks for Abdul but himself," and that he had nothing to do with the ad, for which the PAC spent just $4,000 for social media and digital placement. The ad shows a couple talking about having to cut grocery spending because of the billions of dollars the US provides to Israel in military aid.
The video makes no mention of Jewish people, but was quickly denounced as "antisemitic" by groups including the Anti-Defamation League—which has frequently attacked progressive politicians who are critical of US support for Israel and defend Palestinian rights—and a group of rabbis and Jewish voters called Nonnegotiable Michigan.
Throughout El-Sayed's primary and general election campaign, pro-Israel lawmakers and groups that back corporate Democrats have claimed his candidacy threatens Jewish people in Michigan; attacked him for campaigning with popular streamer Hasan Piker, a vehement critic of Israel; and accused him of not sufficiently denouncing terrorism.
On Friday, critics said Stevens was renewing attacks that she had waged during the primary, when El-Sayed denounced the pro-Israel congresswomen for taking millions of dollars from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The powerful lobby group and other outside groups poured at least $50 million into the Michigan primary race in an effort to boost Stevens. The congresswoman spent months attacking El-Sayed for campaigning with Piker.
Julian Andreone of Drop Site News suggested that judging from Stevens' statement just days before the crucial election in a swing state, "she wants him to lose because she is more subservient to her pro-Israel donors than she is loyal to her constituents and country."
"If a progressive candidate was actively trying to pin an establishment nominee days before the election the way Stevens is with Abdul right now, they’d be exiled from political life," he said.
The Michigan race could determine which party holds control of the Senate—and whether Democrats are able to rein in Trump in the last two years of his presidency.
At The Nation, Jeet Heer wrote that with Trump's approval rating at an historic low and Republicans tasked with convincing voters that the party is looking out for their interests—despite supporting an illegal, price-hiking war and healthcare cuts—Stevens had offered the GOP "one glimmer of hope" that corporate Democrats seem "addicted to self-sabotage."
"In Michigan, Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed has been dogged by the sore-loser behavior of centrist Democrats who can’t abide the fact he won the primary," wrote Heer. "In particular, his defeated rival Haley Stevens keeps trying to extract political concessions from El-Sayed rather than letting him unite the party against Republican Mike Rogers."
Mehdi Hasan of Zeteo News emphasized that while the congresswoman was happy to condemn a fellow Democrat who "has nothing to do with an ad that isn’t racist," she has ignored "the endless actual racist abuse the candidate has had to endure."
"I have never seen so many Democrats attempt to ratfuck their own candidate in the final stretch of a campaign," said history professor Keith Orejel of Wilmington College. "Absolutely insanity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
With Trump in Office, 'Corruption' Becomes Key Issue for Midterm Voters
Voters across party lines "rank government corruption among their top concerns, believe Trump puts his own interests ahead of the country, and connect his self-dealing directly to the costs hitting their budgets."
Oct 30, 2026
As US voters contend with an affordability crisis under President Donald Trump and a Congress controlled by his Republican Party, polling released Friday shows that with next week's midterm election looming and tens of millions casting their ballots early, many people are worried about not only the cost of living, but also government corruption.
Since Trump's first term, which concluded with his supporters storming the US Capitol after he failed to cling to power in the 2020 election, he has been condemned as the "most corrupt president in our lifetimes" and "most dangerous criminal in US history."
Trump won the 2024 election after not only campaigning on a slew of right-wing policies but also making clear that he would serve the interests of the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry and Big Tech. For his latest inauguration, the president surrounded himself with some of the richest people on the planet—the event was dubbed "a coronation of our country's descent into oligarchy."
The president has spent the past two years enriching himself—annual disclosures from July show he pocketed at least $2.2 billion during his first year back in the White House—as well as relatives and rich allies, including by waging an illegal war on Iran that has boosted the profits of fossil fuel companies, in which he's invested, while everyday Americans feel the pain at the pump.
According to the new Harris poll, conducted for The Guardian October 22-24, "The rising cost of living is still expected to drive the election, with 36% of voters saying it is the single most important issue to how they plan to vote in the midterms."
However, it is followed by government corruption, at 12%. After that are immigration (9%), healthcare (7%), and taxes (5%).
Democrats running for office this cycle have focused heavily on affordability as they try to win majorities in Congress, but they've also pledged that if they succeed, they'll "hold the crooks accountable," and even teased possible impeachments.
However, the new polling shows that it's not just Democratic voters who are concerned about corruption. The newspaper reported:
Nearly nine out of 10 Americans said that government corruption... defined as elected officials putting their own or their donors' financial interests ahead of the public's, is a problem, according to the survey.
Three-quarters (76%) of voters said that elected officials care more about enriching themselves than improving the economy for ordinary people. Voters were more likely to say that government corruption (65%) is more concerning than corporate power (29%). Just under 10% said that neither concerns them.
The Harris poll is not an outlier. The Not Above the Law coalition—made up of more than 150 organizations focused on protecting democracy and fighting for the rule of law—noted Friday that "voters rank government corruption among their top concerns, believe Trump puts his own interests ahead of the country, and connect his self-dealing directly to the costs hitting their budgets. That alarm crosses party lines, with Republicans, independents, and even Trump's own voters rejecting this administration’s corruption."
The coalition highlighted various recent surveys in a statement:
- Corruption tops the list, alongside grocery prices. In the CNBC All-America Economic Survey (October 14-18), 36% of registered voters named government corruption as their top issue, narrowly ahead of food costs at 34%, with protecting democracy and gas prices each at 23%.
- Six in 10 voters are extremely concerned. The Fox News Poll (October 9-12) found government corruption led all voter concerns, with 60% extremely concerned, ahead of inflation (58%) and gas prices (50%).
- Perceived corruption is at a record high. According to Gallup (May 1-June 10), a record 89% of Americans say government corruption is widespread, the highest level in 20 years and a 10-point jump from last year.
There was also a Financial Times/Focaldata poll from October 16-18, which found that 69% of US voters are concerned about corruption, self-dealing, or conflicts of interest in the current administration.
"When a family reads a story about presidential crypto profits at the same time as they are deciding whether they should put off their expensive doctor's appointment, they see that the system is working for someone—just not for them," Columbia Business School professor Jeremy Ney told the Financial Times.
"Voters can tolerate some economic pain, as long as they believe it is shared," added the professor. "But when that pain only flows in one direction, discontent boils to the surface."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Stephen Miller, Who Wants Immigrants Deported Over Paperwork, Has 'Glaring Inconsistencies' in His Disclosures
"This administration has demonstrated an objective to scrutinize alleged errors in other people’s paperwork, with very serious consequences. If that is the standard set by the White House, then the rules should apply equally to everyone."
Oct 30, 2026
Stephen Miller, a chief architect of President Donald Trump's lawless and cruel mass deportation campaign, is facing scrutiny from a leading watchdog organization over apparent discrepancies in his financial disclosures—the kinds of paperwork errors that the White House has used to target immigrants and political opponents.
An analysis published Friday by Public Citizen identifies a number of "glaring inconsistencies" in Miller's disclosures related to his reported stock sales, his children's custodial investment accounts, and his wife's tax-advantaged retirement account.
“Stephen Miller is neither above the law nor the rules, and conflict of interest standards are not optional," said Public Citizen co-president Lisa Gilbert. "This administration has demonstrated an objective to scrutinize alleged errors in other people’s paperwork, with very serious consequences. If that is the standard set by the White House, then the rules should apply equally to everyone. Stephen Miller included. The American people deserve an answer on why these inconsistencies are present, as well as corrections and consequences.”
Public Citizen opens its new report by noting that the Trump administration recently raided the home of US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) as part of an investigation into decades-old immigration paperwork filed by her father. In March, Vice President JD Vance said publicly that he and Miller discussed how to "go after" Omar, claiming without evidence that she committed immigration fraud.
"Miller—who wrote in 2023 that the 'denaturalization project' begun under Trump, which can strip Americans of citizenship over misstatements on their immigration paperwork, would be 'turbocharged' in 2025—ironically appears to have filed inaccurate disclosures of his own," Public Citizen wrote after comparing certificates of divestiture that the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) issued to Miller's family with the White House official's disclosure filings.
The group's investigation, which it provided to OGE, found that in at least 10 of the 27 stock sales listed on Miller’s August 29, 2025 transaction report, "the reported proceeds are too low to match the shares listed on the certificates of divestiture at any price those stocks traded on August 14, the day of the sales."
"The largest gap is MP Materials: 3,000 shares were worth at least $223,000 that day but were reported as just the $50,000 to $100,000 range," the watchdog said, noting that the Pentagon "became the company’s largest shareholder five weeks before the sale."
As for the custodial accounts of Miller's three children, Public Citizen found that the accounts were worth roughly $1.4 million total on August 14, 2025.
"By the end of 2025, according to Miller’s annual report, each account held just $1,000 to $15,000 in cash, plus, in one account, Spotify shares it already owned," the group said. "None of the other investments appear, and the report does not explain where the money went."
Public Citizen also identified "holdings that disappeared with no reported sale," pointing to the Individual Retirement Account (IRA) of Miller's wife, Katie.
The group wrote:
On Miller’s March 2025 disclosure, Katie Miller’s IRA held shares of Arm Holdings, Spotify, Alphabet, Viking Therapeutics, MP Materials, Apple and Amazon, reported at a combined $21,000 to $140,000, as well as $1,000 to $15,000 in cash. On Miller’s annual report for 2025, the IRA is still listed, but it holds just $2,000 to $30,000 in Spotify shares and $1,000 to $15,000 in cash.
Miller’s only transaction report for the year lists no sales of Alphabet, Viking Therapeutics or Apple at all, and its sales of Arm, Amazon and MP Materials match the shares on the certificates of divestiture, which do not include the IRA. Public Citizen found no transaction report showing any additional sales.
"It is unclear whether the discrepancies in Miller’s paperwork are due to sloppiness, bureaucratic error or another explanation," said Public Citizen. "What is clear is that the Trump administration has used alleged errors or inconsistencies in official paperwork to justify criminal investigations and prosecutions against perceived political enemies, immigrants, and others."
"Nobody is asking for federal agents to search Miller’s home," the group added. "But Public Citizen is asking OGE to review Miller’s filings, require him to explain the discrepancies, and make sure his financial holdings are dutifully reported."
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