

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.
In the wake of Tuesday's walloping of the Republican Party in congressional and state-level races across the country by Democratic candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont on Wednesday said it was as clear a repudiation of President Donald Trump and his horrible policies as there could possibly be.
"Trump asked the people to vote as if he were on the ballot," Sanders said in a social media post. "THEY DID."
On election day, Sanders had called on voters nationwide "to hold Donald Trump and his corrupt administration accountable" for his endless grift, greed, and cruelty. And after the so-called "blue tsunami" that saw Democrats claim majorities in the US House and US Senate, as well as many win numerous governor races and state legislatures, Sanders thanked voters for their historic turnout.
"Thank you Americans from coast to coast," he said.
An analysis out this week warns that should the US Senate pass the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026 after the midterm elections, communities across the country can expect to live with the consequences for decades to come, as the permitting bill would allow the Trump administration to swiftly approve data centers, nuclear facilities, and fossil fuel infrastructure—and "then make those approvals nearly impossible to reverse" after President Donald Trump is out of office.
As Common Dreams reported last month, the bipartisan bill could significantly weaken the Endangered Species Act in the interest of speeding up infrastructure projects.
Aaron Weiss, executive director of the Center for Western Priorities, said Wednesday in an analysis at the group's blog, Westwise, that the bill also contains three provisions that would be "disastrous for America’s public lands."
Section 1401 of the legislation would "lock in" development of data centers, nuclear energy facilities, and other projects "the minute" they were greenlit by the federal government.
It states that agencies "shall not take any new action that would revoke, rescind, withdraw, terminate, suspend, amend, or alter” any federal permit in effect on or after September 16, 2026, with few exceptions.
Section 1401 also weakens a court's authority to pause a construction project if it finds an agency did not complete a thorough or accurate environmental review of the project—essentially turning a court-ordered review into "an empty paperwork exercise," according to Justin Pidot, a University of Arizona law professor who served as general counsel of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
"A judge can send the review back for a redo, but construction continues in the meantime, and Section 1401 bars the agency from changing the permit based on what the new review finds," wrote Weiss. "Challengers also get just 150 days to sue."
Finally, Weiss pointed to Section 1402 of the bill, which says that if an agency changes a previously approved permit and a court finds they cannot move forward with the project, "taxpayers would owe the developer 25% to 50% of everything it has spent."
"If a future administration slows a whole category of projects, such as gas plants or nuclear fuel facilities, developers can collect 50% to 100% of a project’s expected construction cost," wrote Weiss.
"This disastrous bill would permanently scar our natural heritage and sacrifice clean water, wildlife, and the health of our communities just to make the wealthiest people on Earth even richer.”
Should the bill pass, any permit in effect on or after September 16, 2026 would be protected under the provisions, and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum would have 27 months, until Trump's term is over, to approve more projects that would also be shielded from actions by future presidents.
But the bill "spares everything the Trump administration has done to mess with clean energy permits,” wrote Matthew Littleton, a former Justice Department lawyer—meaning it does nothing to lift Trump's actions blocking wind and solar energy projects.
Weiss called on the bill's sponsors, including longtime public lands advocate Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), to salvage the bill by engaging "with the tribes, the communities, and the millions of Americans who have made clear they don’t want data centers and nuclear waste forced onto their public lands or into their backyards."
According to a poll released in August by Embold Research, 75% of Americans now oppose building data centers in their area.
Heinrich, said Weiss in a statement, has claimed that the bill "will age very well over time."
"As it’s currently written, it will indeed age, locking in data centers and a new nuclear legacy on our public lands for generations—after all, the half-life of plutonium-239 is about 24,000 years," continued Weiss. “Any permitting deal passed under this administration must strengthen the guardrails that keep Burgum and Trump in check, not hand them a blank check. Sen. Heinrich should pump the brakes on this bill during the lame duck session and work with leaders in the next Congress to get it right.”
The analysis came as more than 100 groups called on Congress to oppose the bipartisan bill, which is also sponsored by Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), and Mike Lee (R-Utah).
“Here in Utah, where 73% of voters oppose fast-tracking oil, gas, and mining projects on public land, we say America’s worst ideas come from the desk of Sen. Mike Lee,” said Olivia Juarez, GreenLatinos public land program director. “This bill exemplifies what we mean. Its only guarantee is blocked public land access, dangerous air quality, and reckless exclusion of public input on how we treat the places we should pass on to future generations in a better condition than we received them. It’s a handout to the fossil fuel and AI industries, and a rubber stamp on wildlife extinction and climate disaster.”
Ashley C. Nunes, a public lands policy specialist at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that "handing our public lands over to corporate polluters and tech billionaires is a staggering betrayal of all Americans."
"It will put irreplaceable public lands at the mercy of industries bent on exploiting them," she said. "This disastrous bill would permanently scar our natural heritage and sacrifice clean water, wildlife, and the health of our communities just to make the wealthiest people on Earth even richer.”
After US President Donald Trump spent the weekend reminding midterm campaign rally attendees that he doesn't "give a damn" about soaring gasoline prices from his illegal Iran War, congressional Democrats on Monday released a report showing that his oil and gas stock holdings could now top $80 million.
During a Saturday rally in Georgia, Trump highlighted that due to his war of choice, the US fossil fuel industry is "making hundreds of billions of dollars," and predicted his comments will be turned into "fake headlines," but he added: "I don't give a damn, I'm going to say it: We're making a freaking fortune."
Just how much extra is the public paying at the pump because of the eight-month conflict? As of Monday, the national average was $4.29 a gallon for gasoline and $6.35 for diesel, according to the American Automobile Association.
An online tracker from the Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University estimates US residents have paid at least $144.6 billion more for fuel—$79.8 billion for gasoline and $64.79 billion for diesel. That's over $609 per household, just for gasoline.
Data from the congressional Joint Economic Committee suggest the impact could be even worse. As JEC Democrats' Monday report notes, the panel found that US households "have now spent an additional $101 billion on gasoline since the start of the Iran War, or an average of $856 in gas costs per family."
A state-by-state breakdown in the report—released just days ahead of the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress for the remainder of Trump's second term—reveals that price increases for gasoline have hit some areas particularly hard. Wyoming, a Republican stronghold, has had the highest hike per household, at $1,454.
Rounding out the top 10 are Utah ($1,240), Alabama ($1,232), Montana ($1,180), Mississippi ($1,141), South Dakota ($1,122), Idaho at ($1,108), North Dakota ($1,087), New Hampshire ($1,029), and Iowa ($1,010). Trump won all of those states but New Hampshire in 2024—when he campaigned on a promise to serve the interests of the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry if its executives dumped $1 billion into his run, while also claiming he would lower costs for working people.
Meanwhile, the report stresses, Trump's oil and gas holdings could have nearly doubled this year, growing by as much as $35.8 million, for a total of up to $81.6 million—and 94% of his 2026 industry stock purchases occurred after he went to war with Iran, which has restricted ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
The document details Trump's holdings—which are reported in ranges—in Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Marathon Petroleum, Occidental Petroleum, Phillips 66, Valero Energy, and Williams Companies. It also warns that "the true value may in fact be higher given that Trump has yet to report stock transactions for September or October, and because he has a history of filing his transactions much later than the law requires."

Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), the JEC's ranking member, declared that "Trump's Iran War has forced Americans to pay much more at the pump while Big Oil rakes in profits and the president's own stock wealth in the oil and gas industry continues to balloon."
Trump has faced scrutiny and criticism for cashing in on the conflict he created, which the White House has tried to dismiss by pointing out that the president's "stock and bond portfolio is independently managed by third-party financial institutions."
Such comments have not appeased critics, including Hassan, who said that "as Trump—the country's highest-ranking public employee—continues to own and trade stocks in companies that stand to benefit from his decisions, his actions raise major concerns about conflicts of interest. Unfortunately, this is nothing new from this administration and only reinforces that the president puts his own financial interests above the American people."
This article has been updated to credit the Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University for its fuel cost tracker.
Lawmakers and political operatives from both sides of the aisle, with varying degrees of subtlety, have spent the 2026 midterms campaign insisting that Michigan US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive Democrat, has endangered or threatened Jewish Americans with his campaign.
But young Arab Americans in Michigan this week said the pervasive anti-Arab and anti-Muslim comments of President Donald Trump along with innuendo by some Democrats have made them feel unsafe in their own communities.
"Seeing us so misunderstood, it's really disheartening," a student named Mina Abdel-Khalek told Sam Robinson of The Michigan Chronicle on Monday. "Because I honestly don't know anyone who's as evil as we're painted out to be."
Aasiya Yaasiin added that "it's like going back in time."
"I'm more in danger of going through a racist event, a dangerous event, than I was like five years back, especially in school and public places," said Yaasiin.
El-Sayed supporters Aasiya Yaasiin, Mina Abdel-Khalek and Faduma Hassan say Islamophobic rhetoric in TV ads is making them feel less safe at school and in public. “It’s like going back in time. I’m more in danger of a racist event now than five years ago,” Yaasiin says. https://t.co/aQzqoU5bNH
— Sam Robinson (@samueljrob) November 2, 2026
The corporate Democrat-aligned think tank Third Way kicked off months of attacks on El-Sayed long before the August primary that focused on his decision to campaign with streamer Hasan Piker, who has said the October 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel was a “direct consequence” of US and Israeli actions. His association with Piker, the group suggested, was an act of antisemitism. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) and a number of Democratic operatives have amplified the claim.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said point-blank recently that El-Sayed would put Americans' lives at risk should be win the Senate seat and serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee, while the candidate has been asked repeatedly about his views on Israel's "right to exist" by journalists who have said nothing about his comments on fighting antisemitism.
Meanwhile, a number of political observers have noticed that the corporate media has said far less about rampant Islamophobia and how the safety of Arab Americans and Muslims in the US has been impacted by the persistent attacks on El-Sayed.
Stevens has accused El-Sayed of being "disrespectful to women," and focused intently this week, as she struggled to explain why she had decided to endorse Republican former Rep. Mike Rogers in the race, on El-Sayed allegedly becoming "angrier and angrier"—suggesting the Muslim former public health official is an "angry antisemite," as Matt Sledge wrote at The Intercept.
The former chair of the Michigan Democratic Party also asserted that El-Sayed, an outspoken critic of US funding for the Israeli military, is an "extremist" and urged Democrats to vote for neither the Democrat nor the Republican.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump and Cruz have openly called El-Sayed a "jihadist," the president has mocked his Arabic name, and Rogers has claimed he has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood—a movement based in Egypt which Rogers himself has previously said he would be open to working with—and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy baselessly mused at an event for the Republican candidate that hundreds of millions of Arabs across the world had contributed nothing to science and literature.
A speaker at a Rogers rally also claimed that the Michigan-born candidate, whose family immigrated from Egypt, is "not an American."
While interview questions, rally speeches, and articles have fixated on whether El-Sayed has endangered or could endanger Jewish communities, whom he has engaged with through a "deep canvassing" campaign in the final weeks of the race, observers have noted that Rogers and Trump have not been asked whether their comments on the candidate may endanger Arab Americans and Muslims.
"Mike Rogers has run a bigoted, openly Islamophobic campaign that endangers millions of our fellow Americans," said Dylan Williams of the Center for International Policy. "That some pro-Israel groups have assisted him by spreading lies about Abdul El-Saued should be a source of shame and cause for reflection among many who should know better."
Christa Pike, whose twice-botched execution in Tennessee last month has renewed calls for abolishing the death penalty in the United States, spoke out about her experience on Friday, a month after she had "walked into the execution chamber at Riverbend men's prison prepared to die."
"I had made my peace," Pike said in a statement dictated by her legal team. "I had told the people who loved me, supported me, and stood by me through the years I was grateful for them. I had also told the people in the room, and who were there to witness my execution, that I was leaving them in loving kindness. Several days later, I woke up alone in a hospital, confused and in pain."
Despite an ongoing legal fight stemming from the pervasive abuse the 50-year-old suffered throughout her youth, the US Supreme Court let Tennessee move forward with its plan to kill her on September 30. Pike, who was sentenced to death over the 1995 murder of 19-year-old Colleen Slemmer, survived two injections of pentobarbital from a doctor involved with an earlier botched execution at the maximum security prison in Nashville. She was taken by ambulance to Vanderbilt University Medical Center.
"There hasn't been a moment since that night when I haven't been in pain," Pike said Friday. "My body hurts. My arms hurt. My hands hurt. My throat hurts. I still struggle to speak. And the pain isn't just physical. There is pain in my mind and in my soul. I had not contemplated life beyond that night, and I'm deeply hurt by the incompetence that has put so many people in this terrible position. I continue to think about my victim's family and the terrible pain and loss they have endured. I am recovering, and I know that I am getting stronger. But healing is not the same as being okay."
"Since that night, I have been largely isolated in the prison's medical ward, away from other people and the human connections that mean so much to me," she continued. "That isolation brings its own kind of pain. I spent 28 years in solitary confinement, and much of what I am experiencing today is a repeat of that condition. I am searching for meaning in what happened to me. One thing that has given me strength is the extraordinary love and support I have received from people around the world. I am overwhelmed by the kindness and prayers of people I have known for years and complete strangers who have never met me."
"To know that so many people care about me, that they see me as a human being whose life matters, is something I cannot fully put into words," Pike said. "It is humbling, and it has touched me more deeply than I can explain. I also want to thank the first responders, doctors, nurses, and everyone at the hospital who cared for me. They treated me with compassion, dignity, and respect. I will never forget their kindness. I also want to thank my attorneys and everyone who has fought for me, stood beside me and refused to give up on me."
She added that "I don't know why I survived that night. I don't know what comes next. Some days, finding hope is harder than others. For now, I am trying to heal, one day at a time. And I am holding on to the love and kindness of so many people who have reminded me that I am not alone."
clicks.wdsu.com/f/a/ZdWHrZpX...End the death penalty.
[image or embed]
— Bill K - NO DEATH PENALTY (@really-mad.bsky.social) October 30, 2026 at 9:57 AM
Gov. Bill Lee—who declined to commute Pike's sentence before the failed injections—has since halted executions in Tennessee through the end of the year, but the Republican suggested Thursday that the state may try to kill Pike again.
"As it relates to a particular individual like Christa Pike and her crime, she is still incarcerated under the laws of the state of Tennessee," Lee said Thursday. "I suspect her sentence will be the same as it was before unless determined otherwise by the courts."
While a review of Pike's execution attempts is underway, and Tennessee Department of Correction Commissioner Frank Strada has already announced he will step down, opponents of capital punishment are demanding more. Amnesty International USA said earlier this month that "Tennessee’s botched attempt to execute Christa Pike, as witnessed by her attorneys, demonstrates why the death penalty truly is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment."
"All execution methods are inhumane and unacceptable," the group declared. "The death penalty must be abolished, everywhere."
As President Donald Trump and Iranian officials traded threats over the weekend, and with the Trump administration reportedly considering renewed attacks against an underground complex it claims is a nuclear site—which Iran denies—critics of the illegal US-Israeli war on the Middle Eastern country called on Democrats to take decisive action to end the conflict after the midterm elections, in which the party could take control of one or both chambers of Congress.
The nonprofit group Just Foreign Policy (JFP) was among those pointing to comments from last week by US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who said members of Congress recently attended a confidential briefing about possible strikes on Iran after the midterms—a plan whose details he called "insane."
As Common Dreams reported Friday, Iranian officials are taking steps to prepare the population for a potential US nuclear attack, which Trump has threatened multiple times since launching the war in February. He went to war with the preemptive aim of defending Israel from Iran's retaliation if the Israeli government waged an attack on its own, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned the US and Israel on Saturday against renewing attacks, saying they would be met with "geographically unrestricted" retaliation. He expressed hope Sunday that "that there is rationality on the other side to prefer diplomacy to other paths."
But with government funding expiring December 11, including money for the US Department of Defense "that is illegally bombing and blockading Iranian civilians," said JFP, "Democrats can block war funding" before the new year.
"Senate Democrats must not send another dollar to [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth's War Department unless the US stops the illegal war that is harming 90 million Iranian civilians and 300 million US drivers," said JFP, referring to the skyrocketing gas prices that have resulted from the conflict. "No excuses. Not another dollar for this illegal war."
JFP referred to Murphy's comments at the Middle East Institute last Wednesday, where he said Democrats in Congress must "use our spending power to end the war."
"I imagine what will happen is that there will be a continuing resolution after the election, and we'll push off the budget until January or February of next year," said Murphy. "And then if Democrats are in charge, we will essentially say we want to fund the Department of Defense, but we are not going to fund the Department of Defense if it's funding this war. And so there will have to be some provision in the bill that denies any funding to be used for the continuation of a war against Iran that's making us less safe and costing billions to American citizens."
JFP emphasized that even if Democrats don't win a majority in Congress in Tuesday's elections, Democratic senators would be able to block the continuing resolution that would keep the war funded into February, because Republicans with their current majority would need seven Democrats to join them in supporting the funding.
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026," said JFP. "Democrats do NOT need to win or wait. Murphy's approach here means Democrats would agree to fund the Iran war for months or years to come."
"If Democrats win a big blue wave rebuke of this patently unconstitutional war, and Trump comes out of the midterms escalating it, Democrats should move to block it and impeach him over it," said another commentator. "Voting to enable it would be a corrupt abdication."
Al Jazeera reported Sunday that Iran was continuing negotiations with the US through Qatari mediators, "but it does not have the slightest optimism about Trump’s intentions even for a moment,” according to a security source.
“We think that there may be different voices in the US, but experience has shown that the US president and his circle are succumbing to the temptations of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and the warmongering extremists who support him,” the source said. “For this reason we are obliged to maintain our focus on being fully prepared for a decisive and punitive defense against any aggression and crime by the United States and Israel.”
"They are going to need to plant new forests for all of the subpoenas we’ll be printing," said Sen. Ed Markey.
After Democrats took back both chambers of the US Congress Tuesday, Rep. Robert Garcia, the incoming Democratic chair of the House Oversight Committee, had two words for President Donald Trump and his family: “Lawyer up.”
With solid majorities in the House and Senate, Democrats will have much greater power to conduct hearings, demand documents, and summon witnesses to testify under oath beginning in January.
“They are going to need to plant new forests for all of the subpoenas we’ll be printing,” said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.).
Democrats are expected to aggressively probe the depths of what Garcia (D-Calif.) called “an unprecedented amount of corruption” by the “Trump crime family.”
Trump has added billions of dollars to his personal wealth during his second term. Garcia said Democrats plan to examine Trump’s cryptocurrency empire and whether foreign governments and businesses have used it to purchase political favors.
He said Democrats intend to investigate Donald Trump Jr.’s personal investments and his involvement with companies that have received government contracts. The business dealings of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who has been accused of using foreign diplomacy to line his own pockets, will also be investigated.
Responding to voter concerns about the cost of living, which fueled Democratic wins across the map on Tuesday, Garcia said “any CEO that has been ripping off the American public” should prepare to face scrutiny, particularly those whose companies have engaged in price gouging, abused government contracts, or financially benefited from their relationships with Trump.
Punchbowl News noted several powerful executives and officials who could be under the gun:
Expect the tech executives closest to [Trump], including SpaceX’s Elon Musk, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, and Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, to be early targets for House Oversight, [the House Energy and Commerce Committee], and [the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee]. Democrats will also want to grill OpenAI’s Sam Altman and Anthropic’s Dario Amodei about their [artificial intelligence] products.
“Anyone who has been in bed with the Trumps” is going to have “no choice but to respond to our questions,” Garcia said of businesses alleged to have gotten favorable treatment due to their relationship with the president’s family.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) will also face scrutiny over its handling of the investigation into the late sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein. A report last month by Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee said the DOJ “appears to be covering up” evidence of Trump’s relationship with the billionaire predator and laid out accounts involving 11 women who connect Trump to Epstein’s alleged sex trafficking operation—five of them have accused the president of sexual assault in Epstein’s presence.
Garcia said Tuesday that in contrast to the closed-door hearings conducted under Republican control, he plans to hold “real public hearings” that “center the survivors” of Epstein’s abuse.
Abuses by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will also be examined.
At least 62 people have died in ICE custody since Trump returned to office, while federal immigration agents have opened fire on people in at least 32 incidents, killing nine and injuring 15, including US citizens and immigrants who appeared to pose no threat. Agents have also been documented committing widespread civil rights violations, using excessive force, and engaging in racial profiling.
“Oversight Democrats have documented hundreds of incidents of abuse and misconduct by DHS immigration enforcement agents, and every single one of them deserves a full investigation,” Garcia said in April in a statement with Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.).

Garcia has stressed that "it can't just be the agents" who face accountability, but anyone “involved in the abuses of ICE."
“The agents are taking direction in some cases from others, and policy is being written to encourage that level of activity and that level of elimination of due process,” he said, adding that he wants “accountability at all levels, and that starts at the top.”
Garcia signaled that top DHS officials, including former Secretary Kristi Noem and her top aide Corey Lewandowski, could face scrutiny over a $220 million taxpayer-funded advertising campaign featuring Noem and allegations that she and Lewandowski used their positions for personal gain. The DOJ was reported in October to have opened a criminal investigation into Lewandowski over whether he personally profited from his government role.
Garcia will likely oversee only a fraction of the inquiries into Trump and his allies’ conduct launched by a Democratic Congress.
Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the incoming chair of the House Armed Services Committee, is expected to dig into Trump’s decision to launch an unauthorized aggressive war against Iran, as well as its financial cost, attacks on civilians, and the administration’s shifting justifications for the now eight-month-old conflict.
He also said he would examine the legality of Trump's unauthorized strikes on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, which have killed at least 243 people and have been described as illegal extrajudicial assassinations by human rights groups. He also called for more transparency surrounding the Trump administration's regime change operation and commandeering of oil in Venezuela, and its crippling blockade and threats to invade Cuba.

Smith, who has served in Congress for nearly three decades, described Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as less transparent than anyone who previously held the position.
"Since I became ranking member, I have had the cellphone number of every single secretary of defense," he told The Washington Post earlier this week. "Hegseth does not speak to me."
He has said, "There are Republicans who would support impeaching Hegseth who might not support doing it to Trump."
But that doesn't mean Trump is safe. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the incoming chair of the House Judiciary Committee, said Tuesday that he would not rule out pursuing a third impeachment of Trump, though he cautioned that Democrats would have to weigh it against their other priorities.
Raskin, who managed Trump’s historic second impeachment, called it "one of the people's major instruments of constitutional self-defense against a president who continues to act like a king or an emperor."
"The more states that follow this innovative approach, the more we can make Citizens United irrelevant."
Voters in Montana on Tuesday delivered a major blow to big moneyed interests by overwhelmingly passing a ballot initiative barring corporate cash from political campaigns in the state.
With 87% of votes counted as of Wednesday morning, Montana Constitutional Initiative 194 has received support from more than 65% of voters, with just 35% registering opposition.
The initiative prohibits what it describes as "artificial persons"—which includes corporations, nonprofits, trusts, partnerships, and trade associations—from giving money to political campaigns.
Supporters of the initiative have billed it as a way to strike a blow against the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which opened the door to unlimited campaign spending in US politics.
“A yes vote on I-194 means that only real people—not corporations, unions, trade associations, nonprofits, or groups with anonymous donors—are allowed to spend money in Montana elections,” the Yes on Initiative 194 campaign explained on its website. "It’s time to kick the oligarchs out of Big Sky country."
The initiative's overwhelming victory drew praise from Tom Moore, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, who congratulated the people of Montana for taking "a historic step toward ending the scourge of corporate and dark money in politics."
Moore noted that the initiative passed by Montana is similar to a law passed in Hawaii earlier this year that classified corporations as "artificial persons" who do not have a constitutional right to make political donations.
Both states, Moore said, are "setting a bold example for other states to follow suit, sending a powerful message that we don’t have to give corporations unlimited power."
"The more states that follow this innovative approach," he added, "the more we can make Citizens United irrelevant."
Stacy Mitchell, co-executive director at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, hailed the initiative's passage as a win for democratic governance.
"We've largely forgotten that states define what corporations can do," Mitchell wrote in a social media post. "Yesterday, Montana voters overwhelmingly stripped corporations of the power to spend money influencing elections. Hawaii did the same in May. Both face court fights. Our nascent citizen muscle is coming to life."
Adam Bojak, a Democrat who on Tuesday won an election in New York State Assembly District 149, said he'd like to see the Empire State follow the trail blazed by Montana and Hawaii.
"Congratulations to the people of Montana!" Bojak wrote. "I can't wait to bring this legislation to New York in next year's session."
"I just want to thank you, everybody who knocked a door, made a call, sent a dollar, posted a story, and, most importantly, gave us your stake in democracy."
Abdul El-Sayed added to the Democratic Party's historic midterm rout of President Donald Trump's GOP on Wednesday by prevailing over former Rep. Mike Rogers in Michigan's US Senate race, overcoming torrents of bigoted abuse from Republicans, a last-minute betrayal by his former primary opponent, and tens of millions of dollars in outside spending–including from an AIPAC-linked super PAC.
"Michigan, we did it," El-Sayed declared in his victory speech, to thunderous applause from supporters gathered in Detroit. "This movement for money out of politics, money in your pocket, and Medicare for All—I just want to thank you, everybody who knocked a door, made a call, sent a dollar, posted a story, and, most importantly, gave us your stake in democracy."
El-Sayed, who will become the nation's first Muslim senator, cast his win as a rebuke of a right-wing opposition that "decided to try to divide us" by attacking his name and religious faith, launching what he described as "one of the ugliest campaigns we've seen in our lifetimes" to distract from the key issues facing American families, including the spiraling cost-of-living crisis.
"We all know that my name and my faith aren't the reason you can't afford your gas," said the senator-elect. "Not the reason you can't afford your groceries. Not the reason you can't see a doctor."
To his Republican opponent, El-Sayed said: "Mike, enjoy your retirement. I know you got a house in Florida and two yachts. See, you chose hate, and Michigan chose hope."
Watch El-Sayed's victory speech in full:
With El-Sayed's win, Democrats have secured 54 US Senate seats starting in January, along with the party's control of the US House of Representatives, where Democrats are on track to have their largest majority since 2008.
As of 5:00 am ET Wednesday morning, two US Senate races had yet to be called and were razor-close: Alaska and Mississippi.
Joining El-Sayed in representing Michigan in the US Congress will be progressive activist and Sunrise Movement cofounder Will Lawrence, who was projected to defeat Republican incumbent Tom Barrett despite being heavily outspent.
“Democrats won tonight because they ran on economic populism, not milquetoast, status quo politics," said Aru Shiney-Ajay, the Sunrise Movement's executive director. "That’s why $30 million in corporate spending against Lawrence, the most expensive House race in US history, wasn’t enough to defeat him. Young people knocked on tens of thousands of doors and made hundreds of thousands of dials to elect him because they want a new Democratic Party."
"We will fight to lower the cost of groceries and gas, expand access to healthcare, make housing and childcare more affordable, stand up for workers, end Republicans' costly war with Iran and their reckless tariffs, put a check on Trump’s corruption, and invest in communities across America."
Some key US Senate races haven't yet been called, but as of late Tuesday, Democrats have flipped enough seats to secure majorities in both chambers of Congress—a clear rejection of President Donald Trump's Republican Party by voters across the country.
The decisive wins in the US Senate, according to various decision desks, were by Josh Turek in Iowa, Roy Cooper in North Carolina, Annie Andrews in South Carolina, Adam Hamilton in Kansas, Troy Jackson in Maine, Sherrod Brown in Ohio, and James Talarico in Texas.
So far, Democrats have not lost any Senate seats they currently hold. As of press time, Democrats are projected to control enough seats to not need support from Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who continues to buck his party on issues including war.
Watching the calls come in one after another, MS NOW anchor Chris Hayes said the results were not just "an eke out" win with an "11,000-vote margin or a 20,000-vote margin" in the races that Democrats are winning. "This is a total shellacking," he said, specifically referring to the Senate and governor races in Texas, but also in the context of the other races called.
Texas, Hayes said, "has been run as a one-party state for a generation—for 30 years," and now "Talarico might win that state by seven, eight, or nine points when all is said and done. It's not close. They're getting their clocks cleaned."
From the Lone Star State, Talarico declared that "we just took back Texas," and "we just sent a message to every billionaire megadonor... In this state, in this country, power belongs to the people."
Earlier in the night, after decision desks determined that Democrats had won enough seats to control the House of Representatives, Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) said that "working people came together to change the course of American history. From coast to coast, Americans are demanding a country that works for all of us, not just corrupt politicians and billionaires."
After his party picked up the necessary number of seats to also control the Senate, Casar said, "Abolish the filibuster."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who's expected to chair the Senate Finance Committee, identified another priority: "Subpoenas."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) similarly said that "they are going to need to plant new forests for all of the subpoenas we'll be printing."
The looming majorities give Democrats critical opportunities not only to thwart Trump's legislative agenda for the latter half of his second term, but also to exercise oversight of him and his administration—and could even lead to a historic third impeachment of the president.
As Trump often does, he took to his Truth Social platform late Tuesday. The president—who faces historically low approval ratings as his policies, including an illegal war on Iran, fuel a nationwide affordability crisis—wrote that "I wasn't on the Ballot and if I was, we would have won IN A LANDSLIDE!"
While there have been serious fears that Trump would not accept a Democratic tsunami, given his refusal to concede after losing in 2020, The New York Times spoke with him by phone shortly before 10:30 pm Eastern Time. Despite his hallmark hostility toward elected Democrats, he said: "We'll, you know, look forward to working with them... We'll probably work something out."
Meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee chair, Ken Martin, pledged the kind of accountability Democrats campaigned on when his party officially reclaims both chambers.
"Thanks to Democrats going on offense throughout the country, we have held Republicans accountable for their harmful policies, elected real champions for working families, and flipped control of the US Senate," Martin said. "Congratulations to our incredible candidates, our hardworking state Democratic parties, and all of the organizers who put in the work to protect our incumbents, flip seats from red to blue, and put Republicans on defense while expanding the map."
"With Democrats back in the Senate majority," he added, "we will fight to lower the cost of groceries and gas, expand access to healthcare, make housing and childcare more affordable, stand up for workers, end Republicans' costly war with Iran and their reckless tariffs, put a check on Trump’s corruption, and invest in communities across America."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who may return to the chamber's top leadership role, said that "against all odds, we Democrats have won the Senate. And we have five words for the American people: Relief is on the way."
While campaigning, he said, "we focused on American families, and their pain, and their needs. They're suffering. They're not having a good life. And they're worried about the future for themselves and their children. And we focused on what they needed and what they wanted and what they asked for. We listened to them. And they talked about costs above all, chaos, and corruption."
"Republicans made a choice and followed Trump over the cliff. And some of the time he talked about extraneous things that were ridiculous, but much of the time he implemented things that raised their costs: on electricity, on healthcare, on goods," he added. "There is now a generational remake of the Senate map that is going to change America now and on into the future. Americans voted for change, and now Democrats must deliver."
This article has been updated with comment from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
"A Democratic senator? From South Carolina? It's not just possible—it's now reality," said one reporter.
In a stunning midterm upset that boosted Democrats' chances of controlling the US Senate, pediatrician Annie Andrews defeated Republican incumbent Darline Graham in South Carolina, flipping a seat long held by her late brother, consummate warmonger Lindsey Graham.
For the first time since 1998, voters elected a Democrat to the Senate in a state that Trump won by 18 points in 2024. It's also the first time that the Palmetto State has elected a woman senator.
"South Carolina, you have shown the nation—in an era of partisan divides, of vitriol and name-calling, in a politics dominated by billionaires, special interests, and insiders in Washington—that we will not bow down," Andrews said Tuesday night. "We will not back down. And we will chart our own course."
Andrews, 45, campaigned on expanding healthcare access, tackling the worsening affordability crisis, and fighting corruption. She defeated Graham, who was appointed to fill the vacancy left by her brother's death in July before winning the Republican nomination for a full six-year upper chamber term.
"A Democratic senator? From South Carolina? It's not just possible—it's now reality," said Slate political reporter Ben Jacobs after major media outlets projected Andrews' victory.
Former National Nurses United communications chief Charles Idelson posted on social media, "Trump's handpicked candidate gets bounced, oh well."
The contest in the deeply red state became unexpectedly competitive as Graham struggled to establish herself as a credible successor to her brother. During her primary campaign, she acknowledged that she was "not that informed on national security," an admission Andrews successfully seized upon.
"South Carolina, if your surgeon said that appendectomies aren't really his thing, would you still hand him a scalpel? No," Andrews said last month. "So why would we hand Darline Graham a full term in the US Senate?"
Some observers argued that Darline Graham's lack of foreign policy acumen was actually less dangerous than her brother's inveterate warmongering. As American Prospect executive editor David Dayen remarked following Lindsey Graham's death, the late senator “never met a war he didn’t want to send your kids to.”
Former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg hailed Andrews' triumph, posting on social media, "There is no such thing as a permanently red state!"
"Dr. Annie Andrews' victory tonight proves that Democrats across the country can win anywhere when we show up and put the hard work in," he added. "Congratulations, Annie!"
"Working people came together to change the course of American history. From coast to coast, Americans are demanding a country that works for all of us, not just corrupt politicians and billionaires."
After nearly two years of President Donald Trump back in the White House and a Republican-controlled Congress, US voters on Tuesday supported enough Democrats to flip the House of Representatives, according to projections by CNN, Decision Desk HQ, NBC News, and more.
While Trump bullied GOP-dominated state legislatures into rigging congressional maps for Republicans in the lead-up to the midterms, Democrats campaigned against the president's corruption and damaging agenda, from his costly tariffs and illegal Iran War to his deadly weaponization of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
"America is alive and well!" House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who is likely to be the next speaker, declared on social media Tuesday night. "We have crushed the Republican gerrymander all across the land."
Just over a month ago, Jeffries laid out some of how Democrats were preparing for possible control of the chamber, and pledged that "if folks have been stealing from the American people, shortchanging the American people, or screwing over the American people... we are going to hold the crooks accountable."
Jeffries signaled at the time that a historic third impeachment of Trump—who has been cashing in on the presidency to the tune of billions of dollars as well as enriching his wealthy allies since he was sworn in earlier last year—is on the table.
Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), who is set to chair the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, had a concise message for the president: "Lawyer up."
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) said Tuesday that "tonight working people came together to change the course of American history. From coast to coast, Americans are demanding a country that works for all of us, not just corrupt politicians and billionaires."
"Tonight we celebrate an incredible victory. Tomorrow the real work starts," he continued. "Now is the time to deliver on the big change people are demanding. End the war. Stop ICE's reign of terror. Root out corruption from politicians and big corporations. Raise wages. Stop price gouging. Get money out of politics. Strengthen unions."
"This is a mandate to deliver big change. No complacency," he stressed. "Tonight is the beginning of the end of the Trump era. Tomorrow we begin building the better world that comes next."
Key seats flipped by Democrats on Tuesday, according to projections, include Jamie Ager in North Carolina's 11th District, Zach Dembo in Kentucky's 6th District, Don Leonard in Ohio's 15th District, and Manny Rutinel in Colorado's 8th District.
In New Jersey, Democrats Zachary Mullock and Rebecca Bennett won the 2nd and 7th districts, respectively. There have also been at least three flips in Pennsylvania: Bob Brooks in the 7th District, Paige Cognetti in the 8th, and Janelle Stelson in the 10th.
Fox News congressional correspondent Bill Melugin said that GOP congressional sources responding to the results told him that "this is f**ked" and a "bloodbath across the board."
Former US Attorney General Eric Holder, who now chairs the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said in a statement that "the Trump plot to steal enough seats to keep control of Congress—the will of the people be damned—was systematically dismantled, and, given the opportunity, voters instead chose to elect a new Democratic majority."
"Once again, American democracy has been defended. Let this be a lesson: never capitulate, never acquiesce to those who would use power for improper purposes; fight," he continued. "The MAGA gerrymandering scheme didn't just fail all on its own—we destroyed it together."
Initiative 194 "is not going to stop Elon Musk from writing a big fat check," explained one backer, but it would prevent "laundering the money through a dark money group."
Montanans are voting Tuesday on a potentially groundbreaking ballot initiative that could become a model for how to overturn Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission—the 2010 US Supreme Court decision that ushered in the era of unlimited money in politics—without the near-impossible necessity of a constitutional amendment.
Citizens United established that the government cannot restrict independent political expenditures by corporations, labor unions, and other outside groups on the basis of their corporate or union identity. Simply put, the decision affirmed corporate personhood and, essentially, that money is speech that cannot be restricted.
Since then, super political action committees have proliferated, and corporate spending has exploded from just $12.8 million during the 2010 election cycle to $737 million during the current one.
Initiative 194, also known as the Montana Plan, would prohibit corporations, nonprofits, trade associations, and other artificial entities from spending money to influence elections and ballot measures in the state. Rather than attempting to restrict corporations' constitutional rights as affirmed by Citizens United, states could simply not give corporations the legal power to spend on politics.
"A yes vote on I-194 means that only real people—not corporations, unions, trade associations, nonprofits, or groups with anonymous donors—are allowed to spend money in Montana elections," the Yes on Initiative 194 campaign said on its website.
"It's time to kick the oligarchs out of Big Sky country," the campaign added.
The proposal's backers argue that legal entities should not have the same rights as natural persons.
"Each state creates and defines its corporations. It need not permit its creations to consume it," Tom Moore, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP), explained in September, arguing that corporations are legal creations, not natural persons, and that states retain broad authority to determine what powers they exercise.
"When the state creates a corporation, it is starting from nothing and deciding what to give the corporation, and no case has ever held that they have to give local spending power to a corporation," Moore told Fortune on Tuesday. "It's not regulation; it's redefinition."
Moore stressed that Initiative 194 "is not going to stop Elon Musk from writing a big fat check to some election in Montana."
"What it will stop them from doing is laundering the money through a dark money group," he added.
Montana's former commissioner of Political Practices, Jeff Mangan—who spearheaded Initiative 194—was equally blunt.
"The Montana Plan simply removes the ability for corporations to spend in our politics," he told Montana PBS. "By removing the corporation's ability to spend in our politics, we end dark money. Simple as that."
Initiative 194 has attracted support from Montanans concerned about the growing influence of wealthy donors and anonymous political spending.
"Most people I talk to when they hear about the prospect of getting dark money out of elections are in favor of it," state resident Nathan Kommers told Montana PBS. "I think that it makes sense to almost everybody."
Shannon Stober, who lives in the Bozeman area, said: "I think what I've observed over the past 15 years is the ways in which money and politics has completely created a decline in civic engagement and participation. A lot of people have just decided that their participation doesn't matter and they don't feel like there's a way out."
Opponents, including the Montana Chamber of Commerce, argue that Initiative 194 violates the First Amendment by restricting organizations' political speech. If passed, the measure will surely face legal challenges.
However, former Republican Montana Gov. Marc Racicot, who supports Initiative 194, said the effort is worthwhile regardless of the ultimate outcome.
"You can't just sit back and curse the darkness," he told Montana PBS. "You have to try and do something about it."
"I'm more in danger of going through a racist event, a dangerous event, than I was like five years back, especially in school and public places," said one young Michigander.
Lawmakers and political operatives from both sides of the aisle, with varying degrees of subtlety, have spent the 2026 midterms campaign insisting that Michigan US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive Democrat, has endangered or threatened Jewish Americans with his campaign.
But young Arab Americans in Michigan this week said the pervasive anti-Arab and anti-Muslim comments of President Donald Trump along with innuendo by some Democrats have made them feel unsafe in their own communities.
"Seeing us so misunderstood, it's really disheartening," a student named Mina Abdel-Khalek told Sam Robinson of The Michigan Chronicle on Monday. "Because I honestly don't know anyone who's as evil as we're painted out to be."
Aasiya Yaasiin added that "it's like going back in time."
"I'm more in danger of going through a racist event, a dangerous event, than I was like five years back, especially in school and public places," said Yaasiin.
El-Sayed supporters Aasiya Yaasiin, Mina Abdel-Khalek and Faduma Hassan say Islamophobic rhetoric in TV ads is making them feel less safe at school and in public. “It’s like going back in time. I’m more in danger of a racist event now than five years ago,” Yaasiin says. https://t.co/aQzqoU5bNH
— Sam Robinson (@samueljrob) November 2, 2026
The corporate Democrat-aligned think tank Third Way kicked off months of attacks on El-Sayed long before the August primary that focused on his decision to campaign with streamer Hasan Piker, who has said the October 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel was a “direct consequence” of US and Israeli actions. His association with Piker, the group suggested, was an act of antisemitism. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) and a number of Democratic operatives have amplified the claim.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said point-blank recently that El-Sayed would put Americans' lives at risk should be win the Senate seat and serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee, while the candidate has been asked repeatedly about his views on Israel's "right to exist" by journalists who have said nothing about his comments on fighting antisemitism.
Meanwhile, a number of political observers have noticed that the corporate media has said far less about rampant Islamophobia and how the safety of Arab Americans and Muslims in the US has been impacted by the persistent attacks on El-Sayed.
Stevens has accused El-Sayed of being "disrespectful to women," and focused intently this week, as she struggled to explain why she had decided to endorse Republican former Rep. Mike Rogers in the race, on El-Sayed allegedly becoming "angrier and angrier"—suggesting the Muslim former public health official is an "angry antisemite," as Matt Sledge wrote at The Intercept.
The former chair of the Michigan Democratic Party also asserted that El-Sayed, an outspoken critic of US funding for the Israeli military, is an "extremist" and urged Democrats to vote for neither the Democrat nor the Republican.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump and Cruz have openly called El-Sayed a "jihadist," the president has mocked his Arabic name, and Rogers has claimed he has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood—a movement based in Egypt which Rogers himself has previously said he would be open to working with—and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy baselessly mused at an event for the Republican candidate that hundreds of millions of Arabs across the world had contributed nothing to science and literature.
A speaker at a Rogers rally also claimed that the Michigan-born candidate, whose family immigrated from Egypt, is "not an American."
While interview questions, rally speeches, and articles have fixated on whether El-Sayed has endangered or could endanger Jewish communities, whom he has engaged with through a "deep canvassing" campaign in the final weeks of the race, observers have noted that Rogers and Trump have not been asked whether their comments on the candidate may endanger Arab Americans and Muslims.
"Mike Rogers has run a bigoted, openly Islamophobic campaign that endangers millions of our fellow Americans," said Dylan Williams of the Center for International Policy. "That some pro-Israel groups have assisted him by spreading lies about Abdul El-Saued should be a source of shame and cause for reflection among many who should know better."
"It’s unconscionable to force workers to choose between the care they need and keeping their job," said one reproductive health advocate, "which is why the Trump administration is waiting until after the election to roll this out."
In addition to renewing its war on abortion rights, the Trump administration is planning to roll back workplace protections for women dealing with a range of reproductive health conditions after Tuesday's midterm elections.
The New York Times reported on Monday, citing several people familiar with the plans, that the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was prepared to rewrite regulations issued under the 2022 Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA).
Signed by then-President Joe Biden, the bipartisan law was meant to fill in gaps in civil rights legislation that left pregnant women and others with reproductive health concerns at risk of being denied basic accommodations like bathroom and water breaks, exemptions from heavy lifting on the job, and time off for prenatal appointments.
The law requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for workers with limitations due to “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions,” language that has existed in antidiscrimination law for nearly half a century.
In 2024, the Biden administration enacted a rule interpreting the law to cover a wide range of conditions and procedures related to women’s reproductive health—including fertility treatments, abortion, and menstruation.
President Donald Trump’s EEOC, led by Andrea Lucas, a conservative employment lawyer, is reportedly leading the effort to narrow the scope of the rule.
In her dissent from the final rule, Lucas argued that it “errs in conflating pregnancy and childbirth accommodation with accommodation of the female sex, that is, female biology and reproduction.”
Republicans have objected to the rule’s requirement to accommodate workers seeking abortions. A federal judge in Louisiana struck down the rule’s requirement to accommodate elective abortions last year, though protections for other reproductive health conditions remained in place.
But Lucas’ argument went far beyond abortion. She said the law should exclude infertility and in vitro fertilization (IVF), menstruation and menopause, hormonal conditions, lactation-related conditions, contraception and its side effects, and other reproductive health issues she considered unrelated to pregnancy or immediate postpartum recovery.
According to the Times, Lucas is expected to shorten the list of “related medical conditions” covered by the rule and expand religious exemptions, which could allow employers to refuse accommodations they deem incompatible with their beliefs.
In May, 15 Democratic senators, including Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Chuck Schumer (D-NY), sent a letter urging Lucas to abandon plans to scrap accommodations for workers undergoing IVF. They noted that Trump had dubbed himself “the fertilization president” and pledged to increase access to fertility treatments.
The senators, including Duckworth, who conceived her two daughters through IVF, described it as an intensive process with “serious impacts on women’s lives.” Treatment can involve daily injections, regular blood draws and ultrasounds, and egg retrieval and embryo transfer procedures that cannot easily be rescheduled. Side effects can include nausea, vomiting, and fatigue.
"The current regulation explicitly protects the right of workers undergoing IVF to request reasonable accommodations like short breaks to take medication, a schedule that accommodates daily monitoring appointments and medical procedures, or even access to a chair," the lawmakers said. "Removing them from this rule does not change the fact that these workers are owed these protections, but it does make it more likely that employers will illegally deny women undergoing IVF their rights under PWFA."
The EEOC is reportedly holding off on the changes until after the election. The US Department of Justice is also waiting until then to step up efforts to restrict access to abortion pills, potentially even in states where abortion is legal, according to reporting last month.
On Tuesday, Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All, said, “It’s unconscionable to force workers to choose between the care they need and keeping their job, which is why the Trump administration is waiting until after the election to roll this out.”
"Today’s elections," she added, "are a crucial opportunity to establish checks on a corrupt administration that continues to leave pregnant workers and working families behind.”
"This highlights the danger of allowing an unregulated monopolist to control an essential service," said former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan.
Tech giant Alphabet, the parent company of Google, is telling US schools that there's a price to be paid for restricting student access to its artificial intelligence tools.
The New York Times reported on Tuesday that, starting early next year, schools that fully disable the company's AI will also lose access to its search engine, which is by far the most used internet search tool in the world.
Chris Phillips, vice president for education at Google, justified the policy by claiming that "Search and AI are deeply integrated," adding that students attending schools where AI is banned "will not have access to Search, and they’ll see a message from their school that indicates it’s not available."
As the Times noted, Google has deeply integrated itself into US classrooms, many of which rely on its Classroom assignment platform and equip students with low-cost Chromebook laptops.
"The company’s new strategy underscores Google’s powerful role in American education," the Times explained. "If school leaders want continued student access to Search within the company’s ecosystem, they will be forced to embrace Google's AI."
Schools around the US have been banning the use of AI for young students over concerns that reliance on the technology will hinder the development of critical thinking skills and also enable mass cheating on assignments.
Morgan Polikoff, an education professor at the University of Southern California, told the Times that he expects Google's new policy linking AI and Search will only add more fuel to the backlash against the tech industry.
"This is a particularly clear example of the tech industry going out of its way to force AI on us all," said Polikoff, "even if we have said we don’t want it."
Lina Khan, former chair of the Federal Trade Commission under President Joe Biden, accused Google of "using its search monopoly to coerce schools into adopting AI," and said it was yet another reason why antitrust action should be taken against the company.
"This highlights the danger of allowing an unregulated monopolist to control an essential service," Khan wrote in a social media post. "Multiple courts have found Google liable for violating antitrust laws, and this latest move shows it remains unchastened. As the public increasingly pushes back against the use of AI in schools, Google is making clear it will punish those who don’t fall in line."
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose city earlier this year banned AI in elementary and middle schools, similarly took Google to task for trying to force its products onto students.
"No corporation should have the power to dictate how we teach our children," Mamdani wrote. "Our public schools exist to serve students, not to grow the profit margins of Big Tech."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) used news of Google's new AI school policy to take a shot at President Donald Trump, who has constantly downplayed the need for any regulation of the industry.
"President Trump claimed that AI oligarchs could regulate themselves because they 'love our country,'" Sanders wrote. "Now, Google is threatening schools: If you stop your students from using AI, we will cut off your access to Google Search. That’s not love. That’s extortion."
Cognitive scientist Gary Marcus, a longtime skeptic of the AI industry, responded to Google's move by writing, "This is evil."
Author Kashana Cauley remarked that Google's motto used to be "don't be evil," whereas today its motto appears to be, "We are now holding your kids and their schools hostage."
Cauley added that schools wouldn't be in this position if they hadn't taken up Google's offer to supply low-cost Chromebooks for students.
"The schools shouldn’t be beholden to district-wide Chromebook deals if Google is holding us hostage," she wrote. "We need to get Chromebooks and Google out of the schools."