

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.
Julia Olson, Our Children’s Trust, 415-786-4825, julia@ourchildrenstrust.org
Christina Leano, GCCM, 786-459-5667, christina@catholicclimatemovement.global
On Friday, the Center for Earth Jurisprudence, on behalf of the Global Catholic Climate Movement (GCCM) and the Leadership Council of Women Religious (LCWR) filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the constitutional climate change lawsuit brought by 21 young plaintiffs from across America.
On Friday, the Center for Earth Jurisprudence, on behalf of the Global Catholic Climate Movement (GCCM) and the Leadership Council of Women Religious (LCWR) filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the constitutional climate change lawsuit brought by 21 young plaintiffs from across America. The Catholic groups filed their brief promptly after Magistrate Judge Thomas Coffin of the federal District Court in Oregon granted defendant status to three trade associations, representing nearly all of the world's fossil fuel companies. The Catholic groups filed the brief to make their views known that the youth's legal claims are rooted in U.S. traditions and parallel Roman Catholic tenets.
The GCCM is an international network of more than 250 Catholic organizations and individuals, including Pope Francis and Catholic bishops. The Catholic group is raising a strong voice in global climate change discussions, relying on the Pope's recent encyclical, Laudato Si': On Care for Our Common Home. The LCWR represents leaders of more than 40,000 women religious across the United States and the world.
"As an organization inspired by the principles of Laudato Si', the Global Catholic Climate Movement welcomes the opportunity to support the young plaintiffs," said Tomas Insua, Global Coordinator with the GCCM. "Laudato Si' reminds us that 'Intergenerational solidarity is not optional, but rather a basic question of justice, since the world we have received also belongs to those who will follow us.' By supporting this initiative, we join our voices with the young plaintiffs who are calling for climate justice and the protection of the atmosphere for generations to come."
The Catholic brief details how youth's constitutional litigation "seeks to establish precisely what Pope Francis has urged in Laudato Si': a 'legal framework which can set clear boundaries' for greenhouse gas reduction--before it is too late." Both groups state that, by including the public trust doctrine as part of their case, the young plaintiffs invoke the same moral imperative that motivates the religious work they do. For GCCM and LCWR, the public trust principle of law mirrors a "sacred trust" based on the Church's deep covenants of obligation towards future generations and to all Creation.
Speaking at the White House last September, Pope Francis urged action, stating, "Climate change is a problem which can no longer be left to a future generation. When it comes to the care of our 'common home,' we are living at a critical moment in history." The Catholic groups' brief reiterates the words used by Pope Francis:
It is no longer enough, then, simply to state that we should be concerned for future generations. We need to see that what is at stake is our own dignity. Leaving an inhabitable planet to future generations is, first and foremost, up to us . . . . The effects of the present imbalance can only be reduced by our decisive action, here and now . . . We know that technology based on the use of highly polluting fossil fuels--especially coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas--needs to be progressively replaced without delay.
In their filing before Judge Coffin, the Catholic groups assert: "With so little time remaining to curb carbon dioxide emissions before the planet crosses irrevocable climate thresholds, [the] Court should enforce government's duty to protect the children's atmospheric trust before it is too late to salvage a habitable planet."
"The Center for Earth Jurisprudence is honored to support the Amici in this case who stand in solidarity with the youth plaintiffs seeking future and intergenerational justice," said Sister Pat Siemen. "The constant threats of climate change and increased GHG emissions assail the rights of nature, in this case, our atmosphere. We hope the Court understands the message of Pope Francis, in his encyclical Laudato Si, where he states: 'the notion of the common good also extends to future generations...Intergenerational solidarity is not optional, but rather a basic question of justice, since the world we have received also belongs to those who will follow us.'"
"Our moral call to protect the common good (and not the profits of a selfish few) is clear in the Pope's call to action," said 14-year-old plaintiff Nick Venner. "The support of the Leadership Council of Women Religious, representing women who have been quietly at the forefront of every major civil rights movement and helping children and the poor, means a lot to me. To have our lawsuit championed by the Global Catholic Climate is so exciting - Catholics around the world uniting in calling for change that will support life, not death and pollution. I thank God for their support in our fight to save our Nation's climate."
Our Children's Trust is a nonprofit organization advocating for urgent emissions reductions on behalf of youth and future generations, who have the most to lose if emissions are not reduced. OCT is spearheading the international human rights and environmental TRUST Campaign to compel governments to safeguard the atmosphere as a "public trust" resource. We use law, film, and media to elevate their compelling voices. Our ultimate goal is for governments to adopt and implement enforceable science-based Climate Recovery Plans with annual emissions reductions to return to an atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration of 350 ppm.
The union leader "is running a campaign focused on raising wages for working people, expanding healthcare, protecting Social Security, and building a strong labor movement," said the progressive senator.
Amid a wave of progressive primary victories and growing support for working-class congressional candidates—from Democrat Graham Platner in Maine to Nebraska Independents Austin Ahlman and Dan Osborn—US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday threw his support behind Trey Martin in Oklahoma.
"Now more than ever, Oklahoma needs leaders willing to fight for working people and take on the powerful corporate interests that are making life harder for families across the state," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement. "Trey understands these struggles firsthand and is running a campaign focused on raising wages for working people, expanding healthcare, protecting Social Security, and building a strong labor movement. That's why I'm proud to endorse Trey Martin for Congress in Oklahoma's 5th District."
An eighth-generation Oklahoman who has served as the president of Ironworkers Local 48 for nearly a decade, Martin is facing off against fellow Democrat Jena Nelson in the June 16 primary. In addition to the policies Sanders highlighted, he is campaigning on a congressional stock trading ban, honoring tribal sovereignty, funding public schools, ending blank-check wars, and more.
Martin welcomed the support of Sanders, who twice sought the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, has traveled the country for his Fighting Oligarchy Tour over the past year, and has been using his national platform throughout this election cycle to promote progressive and working-class candidates running for federal, state, and local offices.
"Sen. Sanders has spent decades fighting for working families in Washington," said Martin. "Sen. Sanders has been one of the loudest, strongest voices in our country's most important fights—from making the most wealthy in this country pay their fair share, to standing up to corporate power, to bringing down healthcare costs. It's a true honor to have his support."
In a social media post, Martin added that "I remember sitting on the couch with my wife in 2016, hearing Bernie for the first time. It inspired me to get more involved in my local, to organize and build power for working people in Oklahoma. He was the first politician who made me truly believe someone in Washington was genuinely committed to standing up for the working class."
Martin and Nelson are competing to challenge Republican Congresswoman Stephanie Bice, who is seeking a fourth term in November—after considering a run for the Senate seat vacated by Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin.
As The Frontier executive editor Dylan Goforth reported last week, "Redistricting has made the path to victory steeper in Oklahoma's 5th Congressional District since the last time a Democrat was elected to the seat in 2018."
However, Oklahoma Democratic Party Chair Erin Brewer told Goforth that "CD-5 is absolutely flippable," and "a win here not only shifts the power dynamic in our state, it would also expand the votes in Congress to hold the president in check."
Polling by CNN on the first year of President Donald Trump's second term showed a majority of Americans were dissatisfied with his mass deportations, aggression toward other countries, and gutting the federal workforce rather than cutting costs. More recent surveys have made clear that the US public is frustrated with the high prices stemming from Trump's tariffs and Iran War.
Last week, when Trump told reporters that he does not think about Americans' financial situation "even a little bit" when it comes to his illegal war on Iran, Martin responded, "That tells you everything you need to know about where his priorities are, and that's exactly why I'm running to focus this conversation on working-class issues and real relief for families, not endless wars."
Earlier this week, another working-class champion and union leader, Bob Brooks, won a Democratic primary for Pennsylvania's 7th Congressional District, setting up the retired firefighter to challenge Republican Congressman Ryan Mackenzie in the midterms.
Congratulating Brooks, Sanders noted that "his win follows the recent progressive victories of ironworker and union leader Brian Poindexter in Ohio, and union organizer Analilia Mejía in New Jersey. We're making progress!"
On the other side of Pennsylvania, in the 3rd District, democratic socialist Chris Rabb also won his primary on Tuesday. After his win, Kendra Brooks and Nicolas O'Rourke, co-chairs of the state's Working Families Party, stressed that "the question in this race was not whether we would elect a Democrat, but what kind of Democrat we would choose."
"The people of Philadelphia made their choice clear: Bold, working-class leadership, and an end to the broken status quo," the pair continued. "They chose a message of real affordability that resonated with working-class voters. They chose a fighter who is not afraid to ruffle feathers and stand up for working people to fight back against Trumpism."
"Tennessee has effectively made the case against the death penalty," said one opponent of capital punishment.
A Tennessee man set to be executed on Thursday got a temporary reprieve—but not due to any intervention by the US Supreme Court.
As reported by The Associated Press, the execution of Tony Carruthers was called off after medical officials struggled to locate a vein during the scheduled lethal injection procedure.
After the failed execution, Republican Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee ordered a one-year stay for Carruthers, who has been on death row for three decades after being convicted of kidnapping and murdering three people in 1996.
Maria DeLiberato, an attorney representing Carruthers, told the AP that she saw her client "wincing and groaning" during the botched procedure, which she described as "horrible" to watch.
DeLiberato, who is also senior counsel at the ACLU’s Capital Punishment Project, later issued a statement describing the execution attempt as "outright barbaric," and reiterated demands for state investigators to examine potentially exculpatory forensic evidence before proceeding with any future attempt.
"We are incredibly relieved Gov. Lee issued a reprieve," DeLiberato said. "We will also continue to push the governor to use this moment to allow the forensic testing that should have happened long ago. Tennessee cannot continue torturing a man while refusing to answer serious questions about his innocence."
The ACLU on Wednesday had called for the US Supreme Court to block Carruthers' execution until all potentially exculpatory evidence had been fully examined.
Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, legal director of the ACLU of Tennessee, said the state had a duty to ensure that it had convicted the right man, and he pointed to troubling aspects of the case that should give courts pause before signing off on his execution.
“Mr. Carruthers was forced to represent himself at trial, and now faces death based on flimsy circumstantial evidence, and unreliable witnesses,” Cameron-Vaughn said. “Forensic evidence the state refuses to test could change everything."
Laura Porter, executive director for US Campaign to End the Death Penalty, argued that the botched execution shouldn't just give Carruthers a one-year reprieve, but should push the US to end capital punishment all together.
"Tennessee has effectively made the case against the death penalty," said Porter. "They forced Tony Carruthers to represent himself at his own capital trial, failed to test DNA and fingerprint evidence and now they have failed to execute him. It is time to end the death penalty."
Stacy Rector, executive director for Tennesseans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, described the failed execution as "horrifying but not surprising," adding that her organization "has sounded the alarm for years about the serious problems with lethal injection and urged our state toward greater transparency so these problems can be addressed."
"Apparently you're not allowed to kill people in international waters now?" said one progressive organizer.
Over the last eight months, at the direction of President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, the US military has bombed at least 57 boats and killed close to 200 people—among them fishermen, a young man known in his town for his indoor soccer playing, and working people who had recently struggled to make ends meet—in what human rights experts have called "murders" and extrajudicial killings.
But the indictment filed this week regarding unlawful killings by government forces in the Caribbean region had nothing to do with Trump's boat bombing spree, which the White House has claimed it aimed at stopping drug trafficking. Instead, the target of the indictment filed by the US Justice Department was 94-year-old former Cuban President Raúl Castro, who was charged with one count of conspiracy for his alleged role in shooting down planes that flew into Cuba's airspace in 1996.
The planes were operated by an anti-Fidel Castro group, Brothers to the Rescue, and four Cuban-Americans were killed in the operation.
In expressing support for the indictment, US Rep. Carlos Giménez (R-Fla.), a Cuban-American immigrant, said that "there will be consequences to pay if you harm American citizens in international waters, in international airspace for no reason at all, and believe me, this was no reason at all."
Michael Galant, a member of the secretariat of the Progressive International, commented with feigned surprise: "Apparently you're not allowed to kill people in international waters now? Someone tell Hegseth."
The organization's co-general coordinator, David Adler, added, "I simply do not understand how we, as a country, tolerate the hypocrisy of indicting Raúl Castro for defending Cuban airspace—while our own government celebrates the extrajudicial assassinations of innocent fishermen sailing across the sea below," while Ryan Grim of Drop Site News noted the indictment also followed the bombing of a school in Iran—an attack that investigators said was likely carried out by the US.
The indictment of Castro, noted the Progressive International, was set to coincide with Cuba's Independence Day and came as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants who has long desired regime change in the communist country, mused that the Cuban government has "plundered billions of dollars, but nothing has been used to help the people"—echoing his criticism of Iran, another target of the US military under Trump.
The timing of and ramp-up to the indictment was "a piece of political theater calibrated to one audience only: the Miami exile lobby that has spent decades pursuing its commercial and ideological vendetta against the Cuban Revolution," said the group's Cabinet.
"US officials themselves acknowledge they do not believe Cuba is an imminent threat, nor actively planning to attack American interests—and yet in the same breath, the administration has laundered a set of alarming claims about Cuban drone acquisitions, presented with all the breathless urgency of a casus belli," the Progressive International added, referring to Axios' reporting last weekend on claims from an administration official that Cuba is preparing to attack the US with drones—a report that ultimately acknowledged the Cubans are not planning any preemptive strikes on the US but are rather thought to be strategizing on self-defense as the US intensifies its anti-Cuba rhetoric and continues the oil blockade it imposed in February.
The Cuban embassy in the United Kingdom on Thursday said it rejected US claims about the downing of the Brothers to the Rescue plane, which it called "an irrefutable act of sovereign self-defense" that took place after "25 deliberate, calculated violations of our national airspace" by the exile group.
"To criminalize our nation, the US manipulated the official [International Civil Aviation Organization] investigation, deliberately erasing the first six minutes of radar and radio recordings to conceal the territorial incursion," the embassy asserted. "The narrative of an attack in international waters is an absolute juridical fraud."
In a column at Common Dreams Thursday, Codepink co-counder Medea Benjamin added that she was in Cuba in 1996 when the planes were shot down. The leader of Brothers to the Rescue, José Baulto, she said, openly stated that he was "trained as a terrorist by the United States," and said after one mission in which the group dropped leaflets over Havana that the group was seeking "confrontation.”
"The Cuban government repeatedly warned Washington, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and international aviation authorities that these flights were illegal and dangerous. US officials knew the risks," wrote Benjamin. "The hypocrisy of indicting Raúl Castro nearly 30 years later is staggering, given the long history of anti-Cuban extremists operating from US soil to wreak havoc against the island with bombings, sabotage, and airline terrorism."
Those US-based extremists include the perpetrators of the 1976 midair bombing of Cubana Flight 455, a commercial airliner carrying 73 crew and passengers, many of them teenage members of Cuba’s junior Olympic fencing team.
The Trump administration's boat bombings, meanwhile, have been called likely "war crimes" by some legal experts and "murders" by others. The White House has insisted the US is in an "armed conflict" with drug cartels in Latin America, but no conflict has been officially declared. In at least one instance, US military members were ordered to bomb the survivors of an initial strike—a clear violation of international law.
The US in the past has treated suspected drug trafficking as a criminal issue—not one to be dealt with militarily. Before the boat bombings began, one top military legal adviser warned Pentagon officials, “There is no world where this is legal," and said carrying out the attacks could expose everyone involved, from top White House officials to rank-and-file service members ordered to carry out the strikes, to legal liability.
"The same US government now pursuing charges against Raúl Castro has itself been carrying out deadly strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean and Pacific, strikes that have killed at least 193 people since September 2025, with no transparency or due process," wrote Benjamin.
Following the Castro indictment, the Progressive International called on "governments, movements, and peoples of conscience everywhere to call out this escalation for what it is—a naked effort to recolonize Cuba and the hemisphere at large—and to stand firmly against it."
"We have seen this playbook before—in Iraq, in Libya, in Venezuela, and in other sites of manufactured consent for illegal war across the world. The Progressive International will not stand silent as it is deployed against Cuba," said the group. "Hands off Cuba."