SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Oliver Hall; attorney
617.953.0161
Russell Mokhiber; Single Payer Action
202.468.8868
Margaret Flowers, MD; It’s Our Economy
410.591.0892
Kevin Zeese; It’s Our Economy
301.996.6582
Fifty medical doctors who favor a single payer health insurance system today urged the US Supreme Court to strike down the individual mandate.
In a brief (pdf) filed with the Court, the fifty doctors and two non-profit groups - Single Payer Action and It's Our Economy - said that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's (ACA) individual mandate is unconstitutional.
Fifty medical doctors who favor a single payer health insurance system today urged the US Supreme Court to strike down the individual mandate.
In a brief (pdf) filed with the Court, the fifty doctors and two non-profit groups - Single Payer Action and It's Our Economy - said that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's (ACA) individual mandate is unconstitutional.
The individual mandate is the provision of the ACA that requires Americans to purchase health insurance from private insurance companies if they do not otherwise have coverage.
The doctors are challenging the government's claim that the individual mandate is necessary to reach Congress' goal of universal coverage.
"The court should decide the constitutionality of the individual mandate based on the best available evidence," said attorney Oliver Hall. "That's why it is so important that these medical doctors provide the court with the information in their brief, which demonstrates that Congress can address the United States' healthcare crisis by adopting a single payer system."
"It is not necessary to force Americans to buy private health insurance to achieve universal coverage," said Russell Mokhiber of Single Payer Action. "There is a proven alternative that Congress didn't seriously consider, and that alternative is a single payer national health insurance system."
"Congress could have taken seriously evidence presented by these single payer medical doctors that a single payer system is the only way to both control costs and cover everyone," Mokhiber said. "Instead, Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana), chair of the Senate Finance Committee which drafted the law that became the ACA, had two of those doctors - Dr. Margaret Flowers and Dr. Carol Paris - arrested and thrown in jail. Those doctors are now two of the 50 who have signed onto this brief challenging the Constitutionality of the ACA."
"If the US Congress had considered an evidence-based approach to health reform instead of writing a bill that funnels more wealth to insurance companies that deny and restrict care, it would have been a no brainer to adopt a single payer health system much like our own Medicare," said Dr. Margaret Flowers. "We are already spending enough on health care in this country to provide high quality universal comprehensive lifelong health care. All the data point to a single payer system as the only way to accomplish this and control health care costs."
"People will have the greatest control of their own healthcare if the insurance industry is removed from between doctors and patients," said Kevin Zeese of It's Our Economy. "And, people will no longer be threatened with increased premiums, decreased coverage and financial ruin caused by a health crisis."
Read the full brief here (pdf)
"In just four weeks, thousands have lost their lives, including first responders and humanitarian workers," said the world-renowned aid group. "Hundreds of thousands have been uprooted."
Nearly a full month into US President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice in Iran, the International Committee of the Red Cross issued a statement Thursday expressing horror at the humanitarian catastrophe the deadly conflict has unleashed across the Middle East, with millions of civilians trapped in the crossfire.
"One month of hostilities has upended the lives of millions and sent shockwaves far beyond the region at a scale and speed that threatens to overwhelm the humanitarian response," said the world-renowned organization, a three-time winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. "In just four weeks, thousands have lost their lives, including first responders and humanitarian workers. Hundreds of thousands have been uprooted. Essential infrastructure critical for the supply of energy, water, and health care has been damaged or destroyed. The use of heavy explosive weapons with wide area impact in urban settings has caused suffering and fear."
The war, said the organization, is "eroding the foundations of civilian life in the Middle East."
Without naming any countries in particular, the ICRC condemned "the way hostilities have been waged" with no "respect for the rules of war" that the humanitarian group helped establish and works to uphold.
"At a time of escalating needs and tightening humanitarian budgets, the ICRC and other organizations are being forced to adapt to disrupted supply chains that are undermining their operations," the group said Thursday. "Meanwhile, several countries already burdened by humanitarian crises must now also contend with rising fuel prices and increasing operational costs.
"Respect for the rules of war reduces the consequences for civilians, especially during military operations," the organization added. "All parties, regardless of the side they are on, are bound by international humanitarian law (IHL), and all states have an obligation to respect and ensure respect for IHL, even if their adversary does not."
"Those who survive the bombardment are waking up to a dire humanitarian reality. We are seeing families fleeing with only the clothes on their backs."
The Red Cross statement came as aid groups and human rights organizations assessed the state of the US-Israeli war on Iran—and the Iranian government's retaliatory attacks on Gulf nations—one month after Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the joint military assault, and as fears of an imminent US ground invasion of Iran mount.
Human Rights Watch said in a statement delivered to the United Nations Human Rights Council on Friday that it is "alarmed by attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure across the conflict, including schools and hospitals, and other harms to children including as a result of mass displacement."
Save the Children estimated that one in every five kids in Lebanon has been forced to flee their home since Israel intensified its aerial and ground assault on southern Lebanon in conjunction with the war on Iran.
“No child should have to run for their life in the middle of the night. Yet in Lebanon today, it’s happening to family after family - children fleeing, terrified,” Inger Ashing, the group's chief executive officer, said Friday. "Lebanon’s children are being pushed past their limits. They are exhausted, traumatized, and losing the very foundations of childhood. The world cannot look away—we need action, and we need it now."
Marcoluigi Corsi, the UN Children's Fund representative in Lebanon, said Friday that "the human cost of this escalation is shocking."
"Those who survive the bombardment are waking up to a dire humanitarian reality. We are seeing families fleeing with only the clothes on their backs, forced to move multiple times within days as repeated displacement orders are issued," said Corsi. “Meanwhile, essential civilian infrastructure—including hospitals, schools, bridges, and water and sanitation systems—upon which children depend to carry on with their lives have been consistently attacked, damaged, or destroyed."
In Iran, more than 1,900 people—including women and children—have been killed by US-Israeli attacks, and at least 20,000 have been injured, according to the latest estimate from the Iranian Red Crescent Society.
"The humanitarian situation is rapidly deteriorating," Maria Martinez, head of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, warned on Friday.
"First Trump ordered 2,500 more American ground troops to the Middle East. Then it was doubled to 5,000," wrote one analyst. "Now Trump may literally double down again."
The Trump administration is reportedly considering sending 10,000 additional US troops to the Middle East amid mounting fears of an invasion of Iran, which is mobilizing its forces ahead of a possible ground assault.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the new US troop deployment "would likely include infantry and armored vehicles" and "would be added to the roughly 5,000 Marines and the thousands of paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division who have already been ordered to the region." The US Central Command has said roughly 50,000 American troops are currently stationed in the Middle East.
Lawmakers in the US have not authorized any attack on Iran, but legislative efforts to withdraw American forces from the war have thus far failed to pass either chamber of Congress. House Democratic leaders opted to punt a vote on a new Iran war powers resolution until mid-April despite apparently having enough support for passage, and the Senate isn't planning to hold its first public hearing on the war until after lawmakers return from spring recess.
"Sure am glad the US Congress thoroughly debated the merits of this war and the American public had a chance to weigh in regarding this expenditure of blood and treasure before the legislative branch ultimately decided it was worthwhile and voted to authorize it," Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, wrote sardonically in response to reports of the new troop deployment plans.
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, warned that the rapidly expanding troop deployments are "like a mathematically simplified escalation trap hypothetical come to life."
"First Trump ordered 2,500 more American ground troops to the Middle East. Then it was doubled to 5,000," wrote Williams. "Now Trump may literally double down again by deploying an additional 10,000 ground troops."
The Times of Israel reported Thursday that an unnamed official "from one of the countries mediating between the US and Iran" believes President Donald Trump "appears to be leaning toward ordering a US ground operation against Iran." Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said publicly that a "ground component" is necessary in Iran, and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has reportedly pushed Trump behind the scenes to launch a ground assault.
According to The Times of Israel, "the official intimately familiar with the mediation efforts says the US privately recognizes that Iran is not likely to agree to the concessions presented in Washington’s 15-point plan and has dispatched thousands of troops to the region in order to capture Tehran’s Kharg Island on Trump’s orders."
Kharg Island is Iran’s primary oil export hub. Among those urging Trump to seize the island is former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who wrote Thursday that "on the strategic chessboard of this war, Kharg Island is the next piece."
"Yes, there are risks," wrote Gallant, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. "Any operation to seize Kharg would require thousands of troops, sustained air and naval support, and detailed intelligence, and it would carry a real and expected cost in human life."
"President Trump has set up the US for this option. By signaling willingness to explore a diplomatic agreement with Iran, he has shown both the American people and the international community that he is prepared to compromise if Iran meets core demands," Gallant added. "In giving Iran days, not months, to meet these conditions, he buys time for US forces and their allies to prepare and finalize operational plans."
"The president has actively harmed the well-being of seniors and broken his promises... to stop inflation, not touch Social Security, and leave Medicaid alone."
US Sen. Kirsten Gillbrand on Wednesday unveiled a report detailing how President Donald Trump's attacks on Social Security, Medicaid, nutrition assistance, and other programs are harming the very senior citizens whose strong support was so instrumental in his reelection.
The report—which was authored by the minority staff of the United States Senate Special Committee on Aging at the direction of Gillibrand (D-NY), its ranking member—states that Trump "was tasked with leading a nation that is rapidly aging and facing critical decisions about the policies and resources needed to support a sizable demographic change."
"The United States must decide how to ensure the independence of its seniors, how to support caregivers, and how to assist entire aging communities," the publication continues. "After one year in office, President Trump has failed at his obligations to America’s seniors. In fact, the president has actively harmed the well-being of seniors and broken his promises to them—such as his promises to stop inflation, not touch Social Security, and leave Medicaid alone."
Trump has FAILED at his obligations to America’s #seniors. The president has actively broken his promises to stop inflation, not to touch #SocialSecurity, and to "leave #Medicaid alone." READ the minority report of the Senate Committee on Aging HERE::: www.gillibrand.senate.gov/wp-content/u...
[image or embed]
— NCPSSM (@ncpssm.bsky.social) March 26, 2026 at 9:56 AM
Gillibrand said in a statement introducing the report that it "shows that instead of fighting for seniors, the president has attacked the very programs that help them stay afloat."
Republicans' so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed into law last July, ushered in the biggest cuts to Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in US history.
Gillibrand's report "focuses on eight harms that represent the Trump administration’s failure to support seniors during his first year in office."
According to the publication, Trump:
Other Democratic members of Congress including Sens. Patty Murray (Wash.) and Tammy Duckworth (Ill.) and Reps. Melanie Stansbury (NM) and John Larson (NJ) pointed out how Trump administration policies—including those mentioned in this piece and others like the billion-dollar-per-day war on Iran—are harming seniors by spending money that could have been allocated for their benefit or, in the case of Stansbury, by noting GOP attacks on mail-in voting, upon which many seniors rely.
"Seniors today are having a very hard time getting their benefits.Why?Social Security has pushed out 7,700 workers since Trump took office."
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) March 26, 2026 at 9:03 AM
"'America first' was bullshit," Duckworth said on Bluesky. "With the $200 billion Trump wants for Iran, we could fund a decade of free, universal preschool; provide seniors with Medicare dental, vision, and hearing coverage for three years; build 2 million+ affordable homes. He promised to end wars."