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
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Michigan/America Is Not For Sale
Wowza, rare glimmer of good news. We take a moment to honor the stunning Michigan victory of Abdul El-Sayed, who was outspent 12-1 by his opponent's millions from establishment Dems, Zionist PACS and corporations and still managed to win even though he is a progressive Muslim who calls genocide genocide and wants Medicare for all in a Trump state that isn't communist New York. Ha. What millions in dark money buys you these days: "Sweet fuck all, as it turns out."
El-Sayed's inspiring win came against a candidate, Haley Stevens, who was bankrolled by over $60 million from party leaders and outside money from a murky nesting doll of super-PACS and shell corporations but whose campaign still had the audacity to bill her as “the grassroots choice of Michigan working families.” Total spending on the race in a key swing state was about $80 million, most from fat cats, making it "the fattest cat in the history of primaries." El-Sayed reportedly got about $4.6 million in outside money; Stevens and Netanyahu got about $60 million, the plurality of it from AIPAC's United Democracy Project (sic) super PAC - the most they've dumped into a single race, making it what observers call AIPAC's biggest defeat. From I Fucking Love Australia: AIPAC shoved 30 million dollars up Michigan's arse, and Michigan shat it straight back out."
Born in Detroit in 1984, Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed was raised by his father Mohamed, an Egyptian immigrant, and his stepmother Jackie, whose Michigan roots go back to the 1800s. After graduating from the University of Michigan Phi Beta Kappa, he earned an MD from Columbia and a doctorate in public health from Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, worked as an epidemiologist and became the youngest health official in a major American city when he was appointed Director of Detroit's Health Department, gutted rwhen it was privatized during the city’s bankruptcy, at age 30. Rebuilding it, he went after corporate polluters, stripped lead out of schools, starting offering free glasses to kids in need, expanded Narcan access, and spearheaded a program cancelling up to $700 million in medical debt for 300,000 state residents.
Faced with that resume, AIPAC spent their millions on an ad blitz that managed not to mention any of his policies, or even Israel, though he won the first-ever political endorsement from Jewish Voice For Peace. Instead, they focused on the issues that really matter: They attacked El-Sayed for criticizing the Obamas, allegedly helping Trump win, and sitting for an interview with a streamer they don’t like, Hasan Piker. If he wins the general election against the GOP's carpetbagging empty suit Mike Rogers, he'd become the first Muslim in the Senate. His longtime message to Dems: Stop compromising, ban ICE, end sending arms to Israel, Medicare for All, no more forever wars, get dark money out of politics. On election night, at a podium reading, "MIchigan Is Not For Sale," he celebrated "the movement we were able to inspire," and "the idea that we could take our government back."
El-Sayed's victory, while slimmer than predicted, was seen as pivotal; noted Bernie Sanders, "This is an election between Abdul and the billionaire class.” And the candidate the establishment called "unelectable" won with the endorsement of the United Auto Workers, "the beating heart of Michigan labor." His win was the biggest but not the only news out of Michigan: Sunrise Movement co-founder and data center opponent William Lawrence also took the primary for Michigan’s 7th Congressional district. They join progressive wins elsewhere: Zohran Mamdani in New York. Katie Wilson in Seattle. Three Mamdani-backed candidates in New York primaries, two against longtime incumbents. Melat Kiros in Colorado. Troy Jackson in Maine. It's still a long tough road ahead. But take heart from spineless ghoul Mike Johnson: “The insurgent left is on the rise."
Aug 06, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Back a Windfall Profits Tax, Say Campaigners, After Trump Admits Oil Giants 'Making Too Much Money'
After President Donald Trump echoed climate campaigners' longtime condemnation of fossil fuel giants' massive profits—uttering "the only thing" the climate-denying president "has said about energy policy since taking office that makes any sense," according to one advocate, organizers on Tuesday urged him to put his money where his mouth is by backing a windfall profits tax for companies like Chevron and Exxon Mobil.
In the Oval Office on Monday, Trump called on those corporations and others to slash prices and give some of their record-breaking profits—specifically those made since the president joined Israel in waging an unprovoked war against Iran on Feb. 28—"back to the public.”
"They're making too much money, based on a shortage," said Trump, while noting that he is a "big free enterprise guy."
"I don't like it... Chevron, too much money. Exxon Mobil, too much money," he said. "When you look at one company, they made 12 times what they made the year before? Give some of that back to the public, and they'd better cut the retail price."
“Too much money.”
“Chevron too much money.”
“Exxon Mobil too much money.”
President Donald Trump attacked oil majors ExxonMobil and Chevron for earning windfall profits from energy shortages created by the U.S.-Iran war, demanding that both companies cut prices and return… pic.twitter.com/I3CfmmQlqv
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) August 3, 2026
With oil and consumer gas prices skyrocketing since Trump and Israel started the war, resulting in Iran's retaliatory measure of effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, which a fifth of the world's oil supply ordinarily travels through, Exxon reported that its second-quarter profits more than doubled compared with last year. The company took in $14.5 billion, while Chevron reported profits of $12 billion compared with $2.5 billion in 2025—nearly a 400% increase.
BP also reported profits that were $2.35 billion higher than last year.
An analysis by the Guardian published Tuesday showed that eight of the world's largest oil companies made nearly $93 billion in profits in the three months following the invasion.
Chevron just announced its highest quarterly earnings ever. Shell clocked its second-highest quarterly profits. ExxonMobil doubled its earnings.Combined, the three companies raked in, on average, some $404 million in profits every day for the last three months.
[image or embed]
— Make Polluters Pay (@polluterspay.bsky.social) August 3, 2026 at 12:16 PM
The climate action group 350.org noted that the record profits of oil and gas giants come as "communities across the world endure record-breaking heatwaves, wildfires, and rising living costs"—and as governments from around the world prepare to resume negotiations on a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, where a "mandatory surtax on highly polluting industries is gaining support as part of that process."
Two Democratic lawmakers in the US, Rep. Ro Khanna of California and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, introduced the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act in March.
“From Bordeaux to Phoenix to Mumbai, families are living through the cost of climate delay, while the companies most responsible bank blockbuster bonanzas," said Anna Jellema, executive director of 350.org. "That is not a coincidence; it is a business model. Governments meeting in New York this month have a genuine opportunity to change it. Calls are growing across the political spectrum for a proper global profits tax, so the industry that helped cause these disasters pays towards the recovery, the solutions and the protection people need. It’s simple fairness: Those who caused the damage and profited from it should pay to fix it.”
Candice Fortin, US campaign manager for 350.org, emphasized that the latest comments from Trump, whose Interior Department just moved to weaken restrictions on Arctic drilling, must be taken with a grain of salt.
In the same Oval Office statement on Monday, said Fortin, "Trump criticized countries championing wind energy and supported more oil extraction in the North Sea."
"We don't just need to tax fossil fuels' windfall profits now, to be then forget about later," said Fortin. "We need to end our dependence on oil, gas, and coal—and we need a permanent mechanism to make the fossil fuel industry pay its fair share and redirect those revenues towards protecting people and communities from the climate and cost-of-living crises."
"If this is a genuine change of heart from a president whose budget bill included $18 billion in taxpayer handouts to Big Oil, we welcome it," added Fortin. "But talk is cheap, here's the real test: Will Trump throw his weight behind the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax bill, which his party has been stonewalling in Congress since March?"
Aug 04, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Majority of Workers Say AI Will Make Jobs Harder and Only Benefit Those at the Top
Regardless of tech executives' promises that artificial intelligence will make people's workdays more efficient, more productive, and even happier, a new survey out Monday found that employees "are bracing for the impacts of AI rather than embracing them."
That was the interpretation of Elizabeth Pancotti, the vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at the progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative, after the group joined research firm Ipsos in releasing the first results of a yearlong study of worker attitudes on AI.
Workers, said Pancotti, "expect the tech to deepen existing inequality in the workplace."
Just one-third of US workers expect the technology, whose expansion President Donald Trump has aggressively pushed, to improve their jobs, according to the poll.
The rest of the respondents rejected the idea that AI would automate tedious tasks at work and provide support, allowing them to complete more challenging responsibilities faster. Instead, two-thirds of workers said they expect their lives at work to get harder as AI eliminates jobs—theirs or their coworkers—and increases pressure at the workplace.
"This sentiment is consistent across race, gender, education, and income lines," reported Ipsos, while people with a college degree were more likely to believe that AI could improve their jobs. Only 1 in 5 people with a high school education or less said they expected their jobs to be improved by the technology.
Black workers (12%) were more likely than white respondents (4%) to feel that AI could eventually replace their jobs.
“Workers know bosses who say AI will make their jobs easier and allow them to be more productive are pulling a fast one."
More than a quarter of employed people said AI is already having a negative impact on their work, while 41% of unemployed people said the same.
As Jessica Grose wrote in The New York Times last month, AI has made it easy for companies to rapidly post job listings and give "the impression a business is thriving," without following up with many applicants, leaving job seekers in "purgatory."
More than half of the workers surveyed by Groundwork and Ipsos said they believe the widespread use of AI in workplaces will "only or mostly benefit business owners and executives."
"The benefits of AI in the workplace are not being split evenly," said Pancotti. "The workers who expect to reap the rewards of adoption are already high earners in white-collar jobs.”
Just 6% of respondents said workers will benefit, and about 14% said the technology will ultimately not benefit anyone.
About 40% of people making $100,000 per year or more expected their jobs to get better and easier due to AI—more than twice the percentage of people who make under $50,000.
“This is really just yet another class divide for the American public,” Alex Jacquez, senior vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at Groundwork Collaborative, told Semafor.
The poll comes as communities across the country have mobilized to stop AI data centers from being built, arguing that the facilities' massive water and electricity consumption, as well as the evidence that they could ultimately lead to job losses while creating little-to-no permanent work, makes them undesirable additions to their cities and towns.
“Workers know bosses who say AI will make their jobs easier and allow them to be more productive are pulling a fast one," said Pancotti. "Across the board, workers report AI putting more pressure on productivity rather than supporting workers as many AI proponents claim."
Aug 03, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Cassidy's Yes on Blanche Again Shows Collins Only Votes Against Trump 'When Her Vote Doesn't Matter'
Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana announced Friday that he would vote yes on Todd Blanche's nomination for US attorney general, rendering vulnerable Sen. Susan Collins' opposition to President Donald Trump's former personal attorney effectively meaningless.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) on Friday morning came out in opposition to Blanche's confirmation—but Cassidy hours later announced that he would vote in vote in favor of the former personal attorney to President Donald Trump.
In a speech announcing the decision, Cassidy acknowledged that Blanche—who as deputy attorney general arranged for convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to be transferred to a minimum-security jail and who orchestrated the widely criticized $1.8 billion slush fund for Trump allies—is "not perfect."
I will support Todd Blanche for U.S. Attorney General. pic.twitter.com/PKWr3atuvA
— U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (@SenBillCassidy) August 7, 2026
"But the choice is not between perfection and Mr. Blanche," Cassidy continued. "It is between Mr. Blanche and another acting attorney general who may not run the department effectively under President Trump, and who indeed may not be as good as Mr. Blanche."
The Louisiana Republican added that he expected to "be criticized for this vote," before adding, "What's new?"
The sequence of Collins (R-Maine) and Murkowski announcing their opposition to Blanche, only for Cassidy to clinch his confirmation shortly after, made MS NOW host Chris Hayes suspicious that the fix was in from the start.
"The moment Collins announced she was a no on Blanche," Hayes wrote, "you KNEW they had the votes."
The social media account of Susan Collins Watch, a website that has tracked the Maine Republican's voting patterns for decades, made a similar observation.
"Of the thousands of GOP nominees Susan Collins has voted on over a 29-year career, NOT ONCE has she cast a tie-breaking vote against the GOP," they wrote. "But she's cast dozens of tie-breaking votes for GOP nominees, bills, etc. Are we supposed to believe this is some quirky statistical anomaly?"
Sam Stein, reporter for The Bulwark, argued Cassidy's yes vote on Blanche "doesn't help Collins" politically, as she "will continue to be tagged with only voting against Trump when her vote doesn't matter."
Collins in 2018 was the decisive vote in favor of confirming US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. During her speech announcing her vote for Kavanaugh, she insisted that he would uphold the precedent set by Roe v. Wade establishing the constitutional right to an abortion.
Four years later, however, Kavanaugh joined the Supreme Court majority in overturning Roe.
Former Maine state Senate President Troy Jackson, who is running against Collins as the Democratic Party's nominee for the US Senate, has highlighted the vote to confirm Kavanaugh as a major reason why she must be unseated.
“When Susan Collins was helping overturn Roe v. Wade,” Jackson said in a recent interview, “here in Maine... I co-sponsored one of the most progressive reproductive rights bills in the country—fought incredibly hard for it."
Aug 07, 2026
SEE ALL
News
‘Like the Gestapo’: Trump-Voting Businessman Horrified After ICE Arrest of His Fiancée
A Trump voter is in shock after the president's ongoing effort to conduct the largest mass deportation campaign in US history impacted him personally.
In an interview with CBS News published Thursday, Texas businessman John Gannon expressed regret for supporting President Donald Trump in the 2024 election after federal immigration officials last month detained his fiancé, a Venezuelan immigrant named Yasmin Suarez Reyes.
Gannon said that he expected that Trump's mass deportation campaign would only go after criminals who are unlawfully in the US, but instead found "they are picking up law-abiding citizens" and "destroying families, jobs."
Texas businessman John Gannon says he feels "totally betrayed" after his Venezuelan fiancée, Yasmin Suarez Reyes, was detained by ICE at Houston's international airport.
A lifelong Republican who says he voted for President Trump, Gannon told CBS News' @camiloreports he now… pic.twitter.com/7dDvGH1TrM
— CBS News (@CBSNews) August 6, 2026
Gannon, the owner of over 1,000 billboards in the US and of a hotel and restaurant in Mexico, explained that Suarez Reyes was detained in July by multiple US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents after passing through security at the George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston.
According to Gannon, the ICE officers "swarmed" Suarez Reyes and "wrestled her off into a car" without providing an explanation.
"This is like the Gestapo," Gannon said.
Anne Kennedy, an attorney representing Suarez Reyes, told CBS that her client entered the US legally and had a pending asylum case and had been able to get a work permit and a Texas driver's license before she was detained. Kennedy also noted that Suarez Reyes had no criminal record.
"For almost two weeks now, she has been in a physical jail cell," said Kennedy, "when she has done nothing more than follow the laws of the United States and do what our immigration laws allow her to do."
When asked by CBS what message he had for Trump, Gannon encouraged the president to "go after the criminals" but "leave the mom and pops and the kids alone."
"Man, he's destroying families," Gannon added.
Some critics expressed little empathy for Gannon's situation, however, given Trump's decades of racist attacks on immigrants.
"You voted for Trump to do this to other people," commented journalist Molly Knight. "You’re mad because he’s not doing this to 'the right people,' as defined by you."
Election forecaster Rachel Bitecofer was similarly unsympathetic, and sarcastically summed up Gannon's position as, "I only wanted other people's relatives deported!"
Gun safety activist Shannon Watts questioned why Gannon needed to be personally impacted by Trump's policies to turn against them.
"The most horrible things shouldn’t have to happen to you in order to oppose them," Watts wrote.
Aug 07, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Trump's $275 Billion Battleship Fleet Set to Be 'Most Expensive US Warships Ever'
The Trump administration's controversial plan to build a new "Golden Fleet" of guided-missile battleships is drawing mounting criticism from budget watchdogs, defense analysts, and Democratic lawmakers, who warn the proposal would put taxpayers on the hook for what could be the costliest naval procurement in US history.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on Wednesday said the cost to build 15 Trump-class nuclear-powered battleships is approximately $275 billion in current dollars through 2056—roughly 50% more than a previous estimate.
"Under the 2027 shipbuilding plan, compared with the 2025 plan, the Navy would purchase substantially more large surface combatants," the CBO said. "The average annual amount of funding needed to buy surface combatants would rise by slightly more than two-thirds, from about $11 billion to $19 billion."
"By 2035, the Navy's 2027 plan would more than double the tonnage of large surface combatants that shipbuilders would need to produce," the office added. "Overall, the tonnage of large surface combatants to be constructed would need to increase by 60%, while the tonnage of small surface combatants would decrease by about 40%. Accommodating such a sizable increase in the production of large surface combatants could be a challenge for the shipbuilding industry."
One journalist noted that the Trump-class battleships' cost would make them "the most expensive US warships ever produced."
President Donald Trump claimed in December that his proposed Golden Fleet would "help maintain American military supremacy, revive the American shipbuilding industry, and inspire fear in America’s enemies all over the world."
The president explicitly linked his desire to revive battleships—which were last built in the US in 1944 and were all decommissioned by the early 1990s—to his affinity for the 1950s television documentary series "Victory at Sea."
Critics say the program will inflate already historically high military budgets while diverting hundreds of billions of dollars that would be better spent on underfunded social programs.
"At a time when families are struggling to afford groceries, gas, healthcare, and childcare, Congress cannot throw hundreds of billions of dollars at Trump’s ‘Golden Fleet,’ including plastering his name across a new battleship," Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said Wednesday in response to the CBO analysis.
"Congress cannot afford to commit to another massive military boondoggle that will only succeed in filling the coffers of the military-industrial complex."
"Just like Trump’s ‘Golden Dome,’ the ‘Golden Fleet’ is expected to cost much more than previously estimated," he continued, referring to the president's proposed missile defense system that Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) derided as a "dangerous $1.2 trillion boondoggle."
“While we continue to see too many Pentagon programs burdened by cost overruns, delays, and unrealistic promises that fail to meet reality, Congress cannot afford to commit to another massive military boondoggle that will only succeed in filling the coffers of the military-industrial complex," Merkley added. "I will work with my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee to reject moving forward with this wasteful project, and instead invest in programs that help families thrive."
In addition to cost, military experts and others noted the obsolescence of battleships—which are now all scrapped or museum pieces—and the fact that they make great big targets.
Among the most outspoken critics of the Golden Fleet is Mark Cancian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), who has argued that the ships represent a throwback to outdated naval warfare doctrine.
Rather than concentrating enormous combat power in a handful of exceptionally expensive vessels, Cancian has said the Navy's own operational concepts increasingly emphasize "distributed maritime operations," the spreading of offensive capabilities across larger numbers of smaller, networked ships that are harder for adversaries to target.
Bernard Loo, a senior fellow at the Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, was even more blunt in a December CBNC interview, calling the proposed Trump-class ships "bomb magnets."
“The size and the prestige value of it all make it an even more tempting target," Loo added.
Aug 05, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
Amazon Says New Texas Data Center Won't Raise Utility Bills—But It Will Supercharge Pollution
"Instead of building a modern, clean energy source to power its increased AI-driven electricity demand, Amazon chose to invest in a massive natural gas power plant to fuel its giant Texas data center."
Aug 10, 2026
Amazon is boasting that the new data center it plans to build in Pecos County, Texas will be self-sustaining in its use of electricity, as the company has acquired permits to build a 7.65 gigawatt gas plant to power the massive facility, ensuring it won't raise electricity prices for households in the area.
But the savings on utility bills will likely come at a cost for the US at large and the planet, as well as locals in West Texas.
According to reporting from Cleanview Newsletter on Friday, the site acquired by Amazon, GW Ranch, has a permit from the state allowing the construction of a gas power plant that could emit 33 million tons of carbon pollution, which would make it by far the largest single source of pollution in the US.
The James H. Miller Jr. Power Plant, which burns coal in Quinton, Alabama, is currently the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide, sending about 16 million tons of pollution into the atmosphere each year.
Power plants generally emit less than the maximum amount of carbon permitted, but the unprecedented limit for the new plant, which is being developed for Amazon by Pacifico Energy and will have 35 natural gas turbines, means it is likely that the company's project will far exceed the pollution caused by the plant in Alabama.
The permits viewed by Cleanview, which tracks data centers and sustainable energy development, show that the power plant would be disconnected from the state's electricity grid, at least at first, and an Amazon spokesperson said the company "believes in paying the full costs of powering our operations" and would not "raise electricity costs for Texas families."
The on-site power generation will be "designed to transition to grid-connected service as interconnection timelines allow," the spokesperson added—suggesting the data center could ultimately raise household electricity costs as well as supercharging carbon pollution in the area.
The company further tried to allay fears of the impact of the new data center and its dedicated power plant by saying it plans to use brackish water that isn't safe for irrigation or consumption at GW Ranch; along with data centers' impact on utility costs, communities have protested against the facilities across the country due to their massive water consumption.
But the advocacy group Climate Action Campaign said Sunday that in its rush to join the nationwide artificial intelligence data center buildout as President Donald Trump has demanded, Amazon "chose dirty power over clean."
"Instead of building a modern, clean energy source to power its increased AI-driven electricity demand, Amazon chose to invest in a massive natural gas power plant to fuel its giant Texas data center," said Margie Alt, the group's director. "During this excessively hot and dry summer, riddled with forest fires and unbearable air pollution, a move like this is truly unacceptable."
With Amazon pledging to eliminate its pollution-causing emissions by 2040, the company's decision to join Meta, Microsoft, and Google in investing in its own power plant to build a data center was an example of "yet another major corporation dodging accountability," said Alt.
"This isn’t innovation," she said. "Despite its massive resources, Amazon is shirking its own responsibility and the industry’s promises of computing progress without the economic or health burdens to local communities. The result of that broken promise is that communities will pay the consequences with their health and their wallets."
According to Cleanview, Pacifico Energy has plans to eventually build up to 750 megawatts of solar generation and 1.8 gigawatts for battery storage capacity at GW Ranch.
As it potentially doubles the amount of planet-heating carbon emissions that are currently sent into the atmosphere by the James H. Miller Jr. Power Plant, the plant at the GW Ranch site could heighten the risk of developing heart disease, asthma, chronic respiratory illnesses, and other health problems for people living and working in the area.
"Progress shouldn’t come at the expense of the rest of us just to power billionaires’ ambitions," said Alt. "Shame on you, Amazon!”
The project, Kathryn Guerra, a campaign director at the watchdog group Public Citizen, told The New York Times, will "absolutely have a huge impact on the environment, and on public health."
The project was made public weeks after Trump insisted that "smart" communities want data centers to be built in their vicinity—but numerous polls have shown the facilities, which offer few long-term jobs as they raise costs for families, are sparking outcry from across the political spectrum.
About 70% of respondents to a Gallup poll in March said they would oppose the construction of a data center in their area. About half of those who expressed opposition said they were mostly concerned with the environmental impact associated with data centers, or the potential for resources to be gobbled up by the facilities.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Shows 'Desperation,' Iran Says Strait of Hormuz Will Not Open 'Until America Corrects Its Behavior'
As it becomes clear that there is "no escalatory military path out of this war," Iran is demanding an even steeper toll for Trump to pull out.
Aug 09, 2026
President Donald Trump is now quietly conceding that he's willing to walk away from his Iran war without meeting all of his demands if they agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. But Iran won't let him back out of the quagmire without a steep price.
Iran is in the process of negotiating a limited reopening of the critical waterway with Oman. But Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said on Saturday that "until America corrects its behavior, the Strait of Hormuz will not open.”
He outlined a list of demands on Saturday, even harsher than those Trump walked away from when he abandoned the "memorandum of understanding" negotiated in June.
Zolghadr said the US must permanently end its war and naval blockade against Iran, and withdraw military forces from the region. He also said the US must fully compensate Iran for damages from the war, lift sanctions, and unfreeze assets abroad.
This demand for an end to US "aggression" applies not just to Iran, but to its allies in the region: Zolghadr also demanded an end to Israel's attacks on Palestinians and a withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon, as well as an end to US and Israeli attacks against the Houthis in Yemen.
The Trump administration, which is not known to be in direct talks with Iran, has not yet responded to the demands. Trump told Axios on Sunday that "We are low-keying it" and "only semi-negotiating with Iran," claiming that it was "in very bad shape" economically.
It's clear, however, that the Iranians believe they have enough of an upper hand to make Trump grovel, especially as news emerges that the US has burned through nearly all its available stocks of long-range precision weapons, making the war increasingly costly, though the administration has denied this.
Domestic concerns are also weighing on Trump. Over the past month, as the war heated up again, average gas prices in the US have shot back up above $4 a gallon, a major liability for Republicans heading into a midterm election cycle in which many voters say the cost of living is a top concern.
Approval of Trump among Americans has fallen to a new all-time low of 34% according to a YouGov poll late last month. And just 28% of Americans say they approve of his handling of the war, according to an Associated Press/NORC poll.
As the Wall Street Journal reported, Trump has privately signaled a willingness to declare victory if Iran opens the strait, even without getting any sort of nuclear agreement, which was purportedly the reason he launched the war in the first place.
Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said Trump was "showing his desperation for a deal before it is completed, so Iran predictably demand[ed] major new concessions," adding that it was a "masterclass in how not to negotiate."
"As time passes, Tehran appears increasingly confident that the pressure is shifting onto Washington," said the Israeli national security analyst Danny Citrinowicz. "Iranian leaders seem to believe that the United States is now more eager than Iran to bring the confrontation in the Strait of Hormuz to an end, and, crucially, that Washington has few attractive military options for changing that equation."
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told CNN, "At this point, it is absolutely clear that there is no escalatory military path out of this war."
"It's been tried in several different variations, and it has not ended up particularly well," Parsi said. "In fact, the US's position has been weakened, in my view, by additional military action. And as a result, I think there needs to be a full dedication to the diplomatic pathway."
He added that for the Iranians, "the promise and the credibility of sanctions relief will carry far more weight than threats of further bombings."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israel Revokes Entry Permits For Jewish Americans Who Protected Palestinians From Settler Violence
"Israeli-occupied territory is not a 'safe place' for all Jews," said one Jewish American activist.
Aug 08, 2026
The Israeli government is closing its doors to some Jewish Americans. Their crime? Volunteering to protect Palestinians in the occupied West Bank from violence by illegal settlers.
The Forward reported on Friday that at least seven young American Jews have had their electronic travel authorization (ETA) revoked over their involvement with activist groups involved with "protective presence." This practice involves unarmed nonviolent activists, often Israelis or other Jewish volunteers from abroad, accompanying Palestinians at risk of being attacked by Israeli settlers.
None of the seven Americans who spoke with The Forward had been arrested or charged with crimes.
One activist from New York, Sam Sherman, said he and some other volunteers received emails informing them that their status had been revoked while they were in the West Bank with a program known as Hineinu, started by the Center for Jewish Nonviolence in 2021.
The program places Jewish volunteers within Palestinian communities for around three months, where they participate in protective presence, accompany Palestinians at risk of attack, and document human rights abuses with the hope of deterring them.
Sherman said that while he was volunteering in Masafer Yatta in the Southern West Bank, he was harassed by a group of soldiers, police, and armed settlers who photographed his passports.
“We were just there hanging out with people, essentially,” he said. “But we were treated as if it was almost criminal for us to be there.”
Other activists explained that once Sherman left, he likely would not be allowed to return unless he immigrated there permanently.
"If I’m the wrong kind of Jew for Israel,” he said, “Sure. Great.”
Increasingly, the Israeli government seems to believe that people like Sherman are the wrong kinds of Jews for Israel.
In April 2024, Israel's far-right national security minister created a police task force aimed at handling foreign and Israeli left-wing activists. He has taken credit for having dozens of activists deported from the country.
As +972 Magazine reported back in October 2024, the task force was set up after the Biden administration began imposing sanctions on violent Israeli settlers and settler organizations.
Activists detained and deported by the task force have described being threatened, intimidated, and falsely accused of crimes like terrorism during interrogations by soldiers.
According to the Center for Jewish Nonviolence, dozens of its foreign volunteers in Hineinu and other protective-presence initiatives have had their entry permits revoked over the past two years.
News of Israel's efforts to keep out Jewish American activists comes amid an extraordinary surge of settler violence in the West Bank that the United Nations recently said had reached an “all-time high."
As of Late July, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported that 18 Palestinians have been killed this year in incidents involving settler attacks, already surpassing the total killed all of last year. About 900 Palestinians have been injured this year in settler attacks, representing more than half of all the Palestinian injuries documented in the West Bank this year.
Cameron Kasky, a Jewish American activist who was recently detained by armed settlers in the West Bank while visiting with US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), said Israel's treatment of Jews who show solidarity with Palestinians calls into question its purported commitment to Jewish safety.
"Israeli-occupied territory is not a 'safe place' for all Jews," Kasky said. "Jewish American, Israeli, and European activists are frequently brutalized by Jewish settlers and soldiers."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Has Trump’s Invasion of Greenland Already Begun?': Experts Fearful as MAGA-Linked Oil Company Prepares Unauthorized Drilling
"Let nobody think Trump has given up on taking Greenland," warned one professor of European politics.
Aug 08, 2026
After appearing to back off earlier this year, President Donald Trump this week renewed his threats to seize Greenland. A Saturday report that a Texas oil company with ties to Trump had begun preparing to drill in the Arctic territory without permission has raised fresh concerns that his push for control of the island may already be moving beyond rhetoric.
As The Guardian reported, Greenland’s government issued a “strong warning” last week after learning that a Texas oil company called Greenland Energy had begun making unauthorized preparations for oil extraction in Jameson Land, a remote area of eastern Greenland, including bringing drilling materials ashore.
The company, founded last year, has claimed that Jameson Land may contain $1 trillion worth of crude oil and announced plans to drill two wells there—a project that requires approval from Greenland’s government.
The company also has ties to several Trump allies and associates. According to The Guardian:
Greenland Energy has retained Phil McGraw, better known as Dr. Phil, a prominent right-wing former chatshow host who served on Trump’s religious freedom commission, to make a documentary series that will “capture the mission of these modern-day wildcatters.”
It has also appointed as a director a US Navy veteran who is working on Golden Dome, the missile defense plan for which Trump says controlling Greenland is “vital.”
Larry Swets, Greenland Energy’s chair and a big shareholder, appears to enjoy access to Trump’s circle. He has said the oil project is “not related to American annexation.”
A Greenland Energy representative falsely claimed in June that the company had permission to place equipment on Jameson Land, before later saying there had been confusion.
But the following month, residents saw a barge arrive with drilling equipment. A Danish outlet confirmed that the delivery was intended for Greenland Energy.
Following the delivery, Greenland’s government said on July 30 that the company "did not have the necessary approvals from the mineral resources authority" and would receive a warning that "all future logistical matters must be advised and approved by the mineral resources authority—before they are carried out."
Two days later, Trump posted an ominious digitally altered image to Truth Social depicting himself as a giant looming over a Greenlandic town, captioned "Hello, Greenland!"
A day earlier, Trump had appeared on the right-wing network Real America’s Voice, where host Steve Gruber reminded him that he had predicted Greenland would be under US control by the time he leaves office in 2029.
“You’ll be right," Trump replied. "Greenland is important. Not from their standpoint, from our standpoint. You should make that bet.”
Before this week’s comments, Trump had spoken far less publicly about Greenland since January, when he threatened to use military force to take over the island if Denmark did not cede it. To pressure NATO allies, Trump threatened steep tariffs on several European countries, but backed off after Europe pledged retaliatory tariffs, causing panic in the financial markets.
"Let nobody think Trump has given up on taking Greenland," said John O’Brennan, professor of European politics at Maynooth University in Ireland. He added that Greenland Energy’s unauthorized activity "is the latest act of lawlessness his acolytes are engaged in."
Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, responded to the story by asking, "Has Trump’s invasion of Greenland already begun?"
Historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat suggested it was possible. "Invasions," she said, "often start with 'technical' projects that justify the presence of operatives and 'technical experts' who are also doing recon and advance prep."
The Greenlandic government ultimately said it “would not be proportionate” to order Greenland Energy to remove the drilling equipment, a decision that The Guardian said underscored the difficult position facing its officials.
"They could grant permission for oil drilling, even though the planned wells appear to fall within a conservation area protected by the Ramsar convention on wetlands," the report explained. "Or they could refuse and, some worry, give Trump a pretext to advance his imperialist agenda."
Although the project has not been approved, a Greenland Energy representative said a vessel carrying additional drilling equipment would depart Canada in September, with drilling set to begin in October.
Jessica Berlin, a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, warned that allowing the equipment to remain would signal weakness that Trump could exploit.
"Don’t even think about allowing this," she wrote in a post directed to the Greenlandic and Danish governments. "If you give them an inch, they’ll take 100 miles. Kick them out now or accept that you just opened the floodgates."
"Like Putin, you can’t negotiate with Trump," she added. "Showing weakness will just guarantee the next outrage."
As part of the Kingdom of Denmark, Greenland is covered by NATO’s Article 5 collective-defense clause, which obligates member nations to defend one another from armed attack. But NATO has no precedent for how Article 5 would apply if one member—the US—attacked another.
O'Brennan warned, "Europe—you are about to be seriously tested."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate Confirms 'Personal Servant to Donald Trump' Blanche as AG in Late-Night Vote
"If he is tasked with leading Trump’s revenge agenda against his political enemies and critics, we have every reason to believe he will execute this mission with eagerness and fealty."
Aug 08, 2026
Early Saturday, outgoing Sen. Bill Cassidy cast the deciding vote to confirm Todd Blanche as US Attorney General shortly after outlining a litany of reservations about the nominee.
Around 4:30 am ET, the US Senate voted 50-49 to confirm Blanche, President Donald Trump's former personal attorney and acting attorney general since April, as the nation's chief law enforcement officer. It did so despite widespread concerns, including among some Republicans, that he would use the office primarily to carry out the president's whims.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), one of two Republicans who voted against Blanche, outlined her concerns in a social media post Friday ahead of the vote, saying Trump had "accelerated" the "politicization—even weaponization" of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and that Blanche had played a part.
"I take issue with the handling of the release of the Epstein files; the sweeping immunity protections granted to the president, his family, and their businesses; the statements that have been made to anti-abortion groups; and the repeated targeting of individuals ranging from former administration staff to sitting US senators," Murkowski said.
Murkowski also expressed doubt about Blanche's promise to eliminate the department's so-called $1.8 billion "weaponization fund" for Trump's supporters and allies—including January 6 Capitol insurrectionists. Referring to it as a "slush fund," she said confirming Blanche would cost the Senate any "leverage" to prevent it from being revived.
In a speech Friday ahead of the vote, Cassidy (R-La.)—who lost his Senate primary in May after being attacked by Trump as "disloyal"—raised similar concerns about Blanche, but ultimately said they did not prevent him from supporting the nominee.
"Mr. Blanche showed poor judgment in approving the anti-weaponization slush fund and exempting the president from [Internal Revenue Service] audits," Cassidy said on the Senate floor. "Mr. Blanche said these were mistakes and has made efforts to kill the slush fund."
To secure his confirmation, Blanche struck a deal with Republican holdouts, including Sens. Thom Tillis (NC) and John Cornyn (Texas), earlier last week and issued an order to eliminate the $1.8 billion fund, but did not agree to end the exemption from tax audits of Trump's past activity.
Cassidy also said he was concerned about "DOJ bringing suits against political enemies," but argued that Trump's "unrelenting" targeting of his foes meant any attorney general he appointed would face the same pressure.
To address the allegation that Blanche would act as a "yes-man" for Trump, Cassidy quoted William Barr, who served as attorney general during Trump's first term: "Because of his previous client-attorney relationship with President Trump, Mr. Blanche would be precisely the person to push back on President Trump."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on CNN Friday night that the Republicans who were voting to confirm Blanche despite their reservations "know better" than to trust him and would ultimately "regret" the decision.
"He advanced... this $1.8 billion slush fund. That's a terrible idea. And frankly, that my colleagues and friends, John Cornyn and Bill Cassidy, accept this paper-thin excuse of a signed deal by Todd Blanche doesn't pass the smell test because, frankly, President Trump is the one who continues to berate and push for that weaponization fund," he said. "I have no confidence that Todd Blanche won't just turn around and give it to him once confirmed."
Asked about Cassidy's reasoning that Blanche, as Trump's former attorney, would be more willing and able to constrain the president, Coons said, "I don't buy that at all."
"What I've seen from Todd Blanche in the role of [acting] attorney general and in his confirmation hearing was that he still thinks of himself as President Trump's personal lawyer, not the person who is trying to protect the Department of Justice and the Constitution from presidential overreach," Coons said.
Ultimately, just two Republicans joined every Democrat to vote against confirming Blanche—Murkowski and Sen. Susan Collins, who faces a difficult reelection battle against Democratic nominee Troy Jackson in Maine. Cassidy, Tillis, and Cornyn all voted yes.
Former Ambassador Norm Eisen, the co-founder and board member of Democracy Defenders Action, said that Blanche's confirmation was "a dark day for the rule of law."
"Senate Republicans sounded the alarm, rightfully so, calling out the ‘fund that would pay people who beat police officers,’ and exposing a nominee who has never stopped serving the personal and political interests of Donald Trump. Yet, at the precipice, they lost their nerve and the majority voted for him anyway."
Praveen Fernandes, vice president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, said that approving the slush fund was "one of the most brazen attempts to circumvent the law and benefit Trump and his cronies."
She added that every senator who voted for Blanche "cast a vote in support of the Blanche-led Department of Justice’s continued failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act and its unconscionable treatment of Epstein survivors, its efforts to wipe clean the records of those who participated in January 6th violence against lawmakers and law enforcement officers, its record of weaponized prosecutions, and its brazen rejection of the notion of prosecutorial independence from White House pressure."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said that "Moving forward, our country has to contend with an attorney general who sees himself as a personal servant to Donald Trump instead of a public servant to the American people."
"If he is tasked with leading Trump’s revenge agenda against his political enemies and critics, as he likely will be," she said, "we have every reason to believe he will execute this mission with eagerness and fealty."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Genocide Deniers Call Gaza Starvation a 'Hoax' by Citing UNICEF—Which Reported Famine
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee—who last year admitted Gazans were starving—was among those noting a new global hunger report by the UN agency that reported the 2025 famine as it unfolded.
Aug 07, 2026
For nearly three years, Israeli officials and their US backers have denounced United Nations agencies reporting the facts of Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza as lies, but now many of them are citing the latest global hunger study by the United Nations Children's Fund as proof that last year's famine that killed at least hundreds of Palestinians in the coastal exclave was a "hoax."
The UNICEF-led State of Palestine Nutrition Cluster Coordination Meeting report, published on July 22, shows decreased hunger rates in areas of Gaza accessible to those conducting the survey. With Israeli forces controlling the majority of Gaza's territory and much of the strip flattened and inaccessible, the report's authors warned that "the survey findings should therefore be interpreted as representative."
This did not stop the Israeli government and media, and Israel's supporters and sympathetic media abroad, from citing UNICEF—which on Thursday said that Israel is killing about one child a day in Gaza despite a so-called ceasefire—and the broader UN, which they formerly accused of "lies," "antisemitism," "blood libels," and "hoaxes" throughout a war that a UN commission of inquiry called a genocide.
"Once again, facts prevail over fiction," Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon said. "UN bodies are acknowledging that the false narrative against Israel is falling apart."
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee may have forgotten his acknowledgement last year—along with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance—that Palestinians were "starving" in Gaza, aspersing the media for reporting on the starvation.
Eylon Levy—the British-Israeli former spokesperson for Israel known for purveying disinformation like the infamous October 7 "beheaded babies" lie—also ran with the narrative, posting on X that "the 'Gaza Famine' was always a hoax."
Except it wasn't.
UN agencies and other humanitarian groups started sounding the alarm on looming starvation in Gaza in the weeks after Israel began annihilating the strip in retaliation for the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. By February 2024, UNICEF warned that "famine is imminent" in Gaza as the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs cited the deaths of six infants from malnutrition and dehydration.
As Gaza's hunger crisis worsened under Israel's "complete siege," UN agencies, including UNICEF, regularly warned about starvation in the strip. In February 2024, UN officials were accusing Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war—one of the alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes for which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, are wanted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Michael Fakhri, the top UN expert on the right to food, accused Israel of genocidal forced starvation of Gazans.
In August 2025, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC)—the UN-aided top global authority on hunger crises—declared a Phase 5, or "catastrophic," famine in Gaza as at least hundreds of Palestinians perished from malnutrition and related causes.
“Famine is now a grim reality for children in Gaza," UNICEF executive director Catherine Russell said at the time. “As we have repeatedly warned, the signs were unmistakable: children with wasted bodies, too weak to cry or eat; babies dying from hunger and preventable disease; parents arriving at clinics with nothing left to feed their children."
The IPC lifted Gaza's famine designation in December 2025, citing improved—but still highly restricted—access of humanitarian aid into Gaza following a nominal ceasefire agreement reached two months earlier. However, last month the IPC published an analysis showing that from mid-April to the end of June, more than 1.2 million people, or 59% of Gaza’s population, were experiencing Phase 3 (crisis) or worse levels of food insecurity. This included about 212,000 people in Phase 4 (emergency).
"The situation remains fragile," IPC warned.
Many of the people who deny that Israeli forces have killed or wounded a quarter million Palestinians in Gaza or that Israel is committing genocide there—a conclusion reached by numerous UN officials, scholars, jurists, rights groups, and the approximately 20 nations that formally joined South Africa's pending genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice—are the same ones who have denied not only the Gaza famine, but that anyone was ever starving there.
They asked to see photos of starving Palestinians, and when shown them, they, and corporate media outlets including The New York Times, attempted to explain or even dismiss the evidence by claiming the emaciated—or often dead—children suffered from preexisting conditions, as if that somehow absolved Israel for their deaths. Others posted images of a Gaza market stocked with food or overweight Palestinians in a bid to debunk the fact of starvation in Gaza.
Still others dismissed images of starving Gazans as Hamas propaganda, with US media personality Megyn Kelly opining that Palestinians are "fine having their own children starve just as long as they can put them on camera."
Keep ReadingShow Less
DuckDuckGo Releases 'Normal Sunglasses' to Troll Meta's AI-Powered 'Pervert Glasses'
"These are the first smart glasses guaranteed to never record nude videos of you and send them to random people. I never thought I’d have to guarantee that, but here we are.”
Aug 07, 2026
As Meta faces heat for selling artificial intelligence-powered sunglasses that record people without their knowledge, the web browser DuckDuckGo responded with what it called "the world's most innovative anti-surveillance sunglasses"... otherwise known as normal sunglasses.
Meta, the Big Tech behemoth that owns Facebook and Instagram, likely did not expect to become the subject of relentless scorn and mockery over its new line of "Meta Glasses," which retail for upwards of $299 and have been plugged by the likes of Kylie Jenner.
But internet users have saddled the shades with the nickname "pervert glasses." For good reason: among other high-tech bells and whistles, the latest version is equipped with photo and video technology that some of the clientele have used to discreetly film strangers.
As the Los Angeles Times chronicles, some women have been approached by bespectacled creeps only to later find a recording of the encounter posted online, entirely without their consent. Although the glasses have a white light to indicate that recording is in progress, some elite-tier perverts have found ways to disable it.
DuckDuckGo, a company that has billed itself as an alternative to its data-mining, privacy-violating competitors, responded to the backlash against Meta by partnering with the eyewear company Knockaround and selling its own pair of glasses whose primary gimmick is that they do absolutely nothing but sit on your face.
"No camera, no microphone, no AI, no battery, no electronics of any kind," reads the website, "Just a beautifully crafted pair of matte black sunglasses with a glossy DuckDuckGo logo, designed to block the sun and never send data to the cloud."
“We’re obsessed with innovation. So when Big Tech started putting cameras in smart glasses, we asked ourselves a radical question: What if we just didn’t do that?” a July 30 social media post from DuckDuckGo said. “These are the first smart glasses guaranteed to never record nude videos of you and send them to random people. I never thought I’d have to guarantee that, but here we are.”
This was not merely a hyperbolic what-if. It's been reported that Meta's AI glasses have recorded videos of users having sex and using the bathroom that were then viewed by Kenyan subcontractors involved in manually training Meta's AI systems.
Internal documents have also revealed plans by Meta to embed facial recognition technology into the glasses, which dozens of rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, warned "would allow anyone wearing them to identify by name any strangers in their vicinity—including at protests, medical clinics, and businesses."
After being secretly implemented for a brief period without being accessible to consumers, the technology was rolled back. But concerns remain that it could be added again, and there have been growing calls from lawmakers and privacy groups in the US and Europe to ban the glasses.
One British activist group called Everyone Hates Elon has begun a viral guerrilla marketing campaign against the Meta glasses.
One satirical ad, placed at a bus stop in London, shows the infamous sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein wearing the frames, with the tagline "glasses for people who don't do consent" next to the Meta logo.
"These glasses feel like they’re making perverts’ and abusers’ lives easier when we should actually be making women’s lives easier. They are pervert glasses," a spokesperson for the group told The Times of London. "We wanted to use Jeffrey Epstein to highlight who these glasses will be used by, and it’s powerful men and abusers.”
In this environment, it's perhaps not a surprise that DuckDuckGo's tech-free alternative has been a hit. The company said that within a week, the shades, which cost $35 a pair, had sold out.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Good Start': Meta Fine Now Nearly $1 Billion for Social Media Giant's Harm to Kids
"We cannot allow Meta to put its short-term profits above the emotional well-being of our kids," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Aug 07, 2026
A New Mexico court on Thursday ruled that Meta must pay an additional $567 million fine on top of the $375 million a jury fined the tech giant in March for harms caused to teens and children who use its Instagram and Facebook social media platforms.
First Judicial District Judge Bryan Biedscheid said in his 68-pager ruling that "significant numbers of people in New Mexico experience harm from Meta’s products due to risks of sexual exploitation, interference with education, and adverse mental health outcomes."
"The harm to the impacted New Mexicans is not doubtful, eventual, or contingent, but an immediate, temporally connected, and highly probable result of Meta’s actions," he continued.
"The youth mental health crisis has inflicted significant and widespread harm in New Mexico in terms of the number of youth suffering mental health harms, the profound suffering they and those in their families suffer, and the resulting interferences with the functioning of the schools, law enforcement, [and] healthcare systems in New Mexico," the judge added.
The case centered on allegations that Meta knowingly designed and operated Facebook and Instagram in ways that exposed children to harmful content, encouraged excessive use, and failed to adequately protect minors from exploitation. New Mexico officials argued that internal company knowledge and outside warnings showed Meta was aware of risks associated with its platforms but did not act sufficiently to address them.
Most of the new fine—$420 million—will go toward funding youth treatment services, while the rest is designated for awareness and prevention, screening services, and other costs.
Biedscheid's order also compels Meta to make changes to its platforms in New Mexico, including removing "like" counts and only showing them to minors with parental consent, and prohibiting overnight push notifications for users under age 18.
"Regardless of whether it is labeled as an 'addiction' or 'problematic use,' the evidence at trial proved that design elements, such as autoplay, infinite scroll, 'like counts,' and push notifications create a product that, particularly for adolescent users, is highly rewarding psychologically and neurochemically," he wrote. "As a result, for many, it is irresistibly compelling to start scrolling and very difficult to stop or abstain from its use."
"In addition," the judge added, "algorithmic content recommendations can create harmful feedback loops and 'rabbit hole' users. Within a similar vein, 'like counts'... can provide a potentially harmful focus for adolescent users."
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the company would appeal the ruling, claiming: “We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and have been transparent about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors and harmful content. We remain confident in our record of protecting teens online and will continue to defend ourselves against claims that misrepresent the facts."
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez hailed the ruling, saying that “Meta built products it knew would fuel addiction, deepen a youth mental health crisis, and expose children to sexual exploitation, then lied to parents and policymakers about the danger. Today, it pays for that choice.”
At Fairplay—a children's advocacy group—executive director Josh Golin hailed the "landmark ruling" as "the clearest indication yet that the tide is turning when it comes to protecting kids from social media."
"For the first time, Meta is being compelled by a court to change its dangerous and harmful design," he continued. "And with so many states lined up to sue Meta and other social media companies, we should expect to see a lot more injunctive relief to make online platforms used by young people safer."
“This ruling also clearly indicates why families need the Kids Online Safety Act," Golin added, referring to a controversial bill advanced this week by the Senate Commerce Committee. "The judge said it was up to Congress to address the addictive features on Instagram and other social media platforms. KOSA’s duty of care against compulsive use is the key to ensuring that Meta and other social media companies stop designing for addiction, as addictive design is the root of all social media harms.”
Justin Mazzola, deputy director of research at Amnesty International USA, said in a statement: "This verdict is an important step towards creating safer social media for children and young people. For years, Amnesty International has warned that major social media platforms have been designed to maximize engagement and profit, while failing to adequately protect children’s rights."
“Crucially, the court went beyond imposing a financial penalty," he continued. "By ordering changes to platform features, including removing 'like' counts for people under 18 and restricting overnight notifications, the ruling recognizes that the harms children experience online are often the result of deliberate design choices."
“Amnesty has been calling for exactly this kind of action," Mazzola added. "Child safety must be built into platforms from the start, not added as an afterthought once harms are identified. This decision sends a clear message that social media companies cannot continue to prioritize engagement at the expense of children’s well-being and rights.”
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said on Bluesky: "This is good news. For far too long, Big Tech corporations have put their bottom lines ahead of the health and safety of kids on their platforms."
"Congress must continue to push for accountability and real guardrails for companies like Meta as tech giants continue to grow," added Jayapal, who was critical of the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act approved by the House of Representatives in June.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also welcomed the ruling, posting on X that billionaire Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's "greed is fueling a youth mental health crisis in America."
"Today, a judge ordered Meta to pay a $567 million fine for the damage it has done to our kids," Sanders added. "Good start. We cannot allow Meta to put its short-term profits above the emotional well-being of our kids."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Must Pass Medicare for All,' Says Troy Jackson as 12th Maine Maternity Unit Closes in 11 Years
"It's past time that we fix our broken, profit-centered healthcare system that leaves many of us struggling to get care, and most of us struggling to pay for it when we do," said the US Senate candidate.
Aug 07, 2026
Democratic US Senate candidate Troy Jackson on Friday was among the Maine leaders expressing anger over the decision by MaineHealth, the state's largest nonprofit healthcare system, to close a labor and delivery unit that's crucial to families in three counties after local residents organized a monthslong grassroots effort to keep the department open.
"I'm angry," said Jackson, the former state Senate president who officially became the Democratic candidate last month. "This marks the 12th labor and delivery ward we've lost in this state since 2015."
With rural hospitals across Maine expected to continue closing—partially due to nearly $3 billion in Medicaid cuts over the next decade, which were included in President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act along with tax cuts for the wealthy—Jackson repeated his call for a government-funded universal healthcare system.
"It's past time that we fix our broken, profit-centered healthcare system that leaves many of us struggling to get care, and most of us struggling to pay for it when we do," said Jackson. "We must pass Medicare for All."
MaineHealth's Board of Trustees voted Thursday in favor of closing the labor and delivery unit at Lincoln Hospital on the health network's Miles Campus in the coastal town of Damariscotta. The decision leaves Lincoln, Waldo, and Sagadahoc counties without any labor and delivery units, and leaves half of the state's 34 hospitals without birthing wards.
The hospital system said it had reached the decision because it cannot "continue providing safe, reliable care for every mother and every baby, every day and every night," according to CEO Andrew Mueller.
Labor and delivery "requires highly specialized teams that are available around the clock and prepared to respond immediately to routine deliveries and unexpected emergencies," said Mueller. "We concluded that we could no longer consistently ensure that level of staffing and clinical coverage at Lincoln Hospital over the long term.”
Cindy Wade, president of Lincoln Hospital, told community members ahead of the vote that the potential closure was "not driven by finance," while acknowledging that staffing is a problem for the facility.
The day before the decision was announced, a woman named Corinna Stum, who had been set to deliver her baby at Miles in January—a month after the unit is set to close—filed a lawsuit in an effort to stop the closure. Stum requested an emergency injunction while the court determines whether MaineHealth violated its obligation to serve the public and be transparent in its review process
A grassroots organization called Miles Delivers Action Coalition, started by three women from the area, has held rallies alongside Jackson, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Hannah Pingree, and other local leaders, as well as working with clinicians to determine how the Miles Campus could deliver sustainable care for parents and babies and finding obstetricians who would be willing to work at the hospital.
The group also examined the finances of the $4 billion healthcare network, finding that the Miles Campus outperformed its parent system in terms of profitability and that deliveries at the hospital are on the rise, despite declining birth rates nationwide.
"A CEO paid $2.2 million should be expected to find solutions, not simply eliminate services," said the coalition as it rallied 10,000 supporters in a matter of months to help convince the hospital to keep the unit open.
When the coalition reached out to MaineHealth with its ideas for continuing to provide maternity services, the company argued that pregnant patients will be able to travel to Mid Coast Hospital for their deliveries—a 26-mile, 43-minute drive from Damariscotta.
When announcing the closure, MaineHealth also suggested families could also transfer their obstetrical care to Pen Bay Hospital, which is roughly the same distance from the town.
Dr. Tim Goltz, a family physician at Miles, told NPR earlier this week: "There's no doubt in my mind that if OB goes away at Miles, that there will be mothers and babies who die because of that decision. The literature is very clear that the further you have to travel to deliver a baby, the higher the risk is of serious complications and death. "
Miles Delivers Action Coalition said the vote on Thursday resulted in "one of the most harmful decisions our community will ever see," and accused MaineHealth of "cowardice."
“They have ignored the voice of our governor, politicians on all sides, the local ambulance service, businesses, far and wide, and they are creating a maternity desert in Lincoln County,” the group said. “This isn’t a hospital, it’s a morgue.”
Former US Senate candidate and organizer Jordan Wood, also an advocate for Medicare for All, said decisions like MaineHealth's would lead Mainers to "lose trust and faith in democracy."
"Millennials, women, moms, young moms, pregnant women organized in our community the minute that news broke that there was a possibility that Miles would close," said Wood. "It can feel like a failure, but it's not... We will fix this problem. This is a setback, it's not a failure."
MaineHealth just voted to close labor and delivery at Miles. The last birthing unit in Lincoln County. You can't make a birth profitable. So this system cuts it. Every time.
This isn’t the end of our fight. pic.twitter.com/fpXLzkAYKi
— Jordan Wood (@JordanWood) August 7, 2026
"There is no way to make labor and delivery profitable," said Wood. "We are living in an absolutely broken healthcare system by profit. By for-profit health insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies that only make money off of us being sick... This is the reminder for so many of us about why this healthcare system is so corrupt and broken and in need of a total overhaul."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Mainers Aren't Stupid': Troy Jackson Says Voters See Through Susan Collins' Charade
"Susan has voted with Trump 96% of the time. The other 4%? She waits until her vote won’t change the outcome."
Aug 07, 2026
Democratic US Senate candidate Troy Jackson on Friday accused rival Sen. Susan Collins of trying to pull the wool over Maine voters' eyes with her decision to vote against confirming Todd Blanche as the next US attorney general.
In a social media post, Jackson pointed to a statement from right-wing radio host John Fredericks praising Collins' (R-Maine) "very savvy team" for having her vote against Blanche while already knowing the former personal attorney for President Donald Trump would have enough support in the US Senate to be confirmed.
"They know that even without her, Blanche has the votes to get confirmed," Fredericks said. "So this was a vote to help her get elected, to help her with Maine voters, but it does nothing to hurt Todd Blanche because he’s already got the votes."
Jackson accused his Republican opponent of participating in a shell game where she arranged to be shielded from what would have been a very damaging vote.
"Weak sauce," wrote Jackson. "Susan has voted with Trump 96% of the time. The other 4%? She waits until her vote won’t change the outcome."
Jackson, the former president of the Maine state Senate, predicted that voters would see right through Collins' ploy.
"Mainers aren’t stupid," wrote Jackson. "We deserve a fighter who will actually stand up to Trump."
Collins earlier this week announced her intention to vote against Blanche, who as assistant attorney general orchestrated Trump's widely criticized $1.8 billion slush fund for political allies.
On Friday morning, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) announced he would be the final vote needed to drag Blanche's confirmation over the finish line, which led some critics to speculate that Collins knew all along that her vote would not be needed.
Collins in 2018 was a decisive vote in favor of confirming US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. During her speech announcing her vote for Kavanaugh, she insisted that he would uphold the precedent set by Roe v. Wade establishing the constitutional right to an abortion.
Four years later, however, Kavanaugh joined the Supreme Court majority in overturning Roe, and Jackson has been hammering Collins' decisive confirmation vote as a major reason why she must be unseated this fall.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
As El Niño and heatwaves dry up fields, governments must act fast
Aug 10 2026 · 08:30am EDT
Blanche Is (Still) Unfit to Be Named Attorney General
Aug 07 2026 · 01:26pm EDT
Food & Water Watch Applauds Failure of Bad Senate Farm Bill
Aug 06 2026 · 03:07pm EDT
New National Policy Agenda Offers Blueprint for Shifting and Keeping People Power
Aug 06 2026 · 01:39pm EDT
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