

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.
Well that was a night. The glad spectacle of a newly sentient America tottering back to its capacious ideals was dubbed Orange Crush, Bluenami, a political earthquake, a wily tweak to Hegseth's coveted public execution and "one of the great acts of defiance in American history." It was both landslide too big to rig or stop and "extinction-level" rout. Above all, it was a thunderous rejection of fear, greed, lies, cruelty, war-mongering, authoritarianism. Tell your kids, urged Abdul El-Sayed, "The bad guys lost."
Who knew, pundits marveled: Turns out if you keep lying, stealing, abusing children, terrorizing, kidnapping, assaulting neighbors, shooting people in the street, making it impossible to get food, gas, health care or education while gloating about it and lining your fat pockets, everyone hates you. So it was that a "Trump Reckoning" and GOP "Armageddon" beyond even their worst doomsday scenarios arrived wherein Democrats swept "nearly every race that matters” as Americans en masse embraced all the shithole, lunatic, transgender, anti-Semitic, dog-eating, Medicare-wanting Muslim Brotherhood communists they'd been so helpfully warned about, alas, in vain.
This, of course, despite MAGA's best/worst efforts to re-draw districts, shutter polling places, strong-arm election officials, browbeat brown and black voters, pre-litigate election results they couldn't buy, and launch 1,000 DOJ "polling monitors" into all 50 states in hopes of targeting vulnerable minority districts. And yet, noted Garrett Graff, nothing untoward happened. Instead, voters "gave America another chance." Millions stood up, showed up, voted early, refused to bend the knee or be silenced. Graff said a friend wrote from deep-red Mississippi, where Democrat Scott Colom still had a stunning, razor-thin lead. "My flabbers are gasted,” she wrote. “Be on the lookout for pigs in the sky."
"So much history was made last night," Graff added, much of it shaped by both the 250 years and then Trump's dark reign of white supremacist politics. The startling result: The most diverse set of newly elected lawmakers the country has ever seen, with one historian writing Dems are winning races "they haven’t won since they were the white supremacist party.” An Atlanta Journal-Constitution story begins, "In 1860, an enslaved man named Sheppard Peek was listed among the possessions of William Peek, a white man in Crawfordville"; Sheppard's value was placed at $1,400. In Georgia on Tuesday, his great-great-granddaughter, Keisha Lance Bottoms, was elected the first Black female governor in the country.
Bottoms is just one of many historic firsts. Xavier Becerra, the son of Mexican immigrants, became California's first elected Latino governor. Deb Haaland became New Mexico’s first Native governor. Wisconsin and Nevada elected their first Black governors. There are three other first women governors. New Hampshire's Chris Pappas will become the first out gay man in the Senate. A trans woman won a House seat in...Alabama. Colorado elected its first Gen Z woman; she will be one of a record 100 women to serve simultaneously in the House. Democrats gained full control of a record six state governments, Southern voters swung 20 points to Dems, Jon Ossoff was easily re-elected on a platform, essentially, of "I don't like Nazis." Virginia ended Jim Crow after 124 years, and enshrined abortion in its constitution. Nancy LaCore, a former Navy admiral fired by Hegseth, flipped Nancy Mace's seat in South Carolina. The GOP lost all four of its gerrymandered districts in Florida. Egyptian-born Adam Hamaway, 57, will be the first Muslim elected to the House from New Jersey. A Rutgers-educated doctor, he served 8 years as a combat surgeon in the US Army before starting private practice in Princeton; he also volunteered in Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Jordan.
Beating back a grotesquely Islamophobic campaign, Michigan's Dr. Abdul El-Sayed will become the first Muslim in the Senate.In his victory speech, he thanked "everyone who sent a dollar, made a call, posted a story and most importantly gave us your stake in democracy. You took a chance on the unlikeliest of candidates." Summoning "all the kids who watched and the parents who struggled to explain why the president openly mocked someone for their name or how they pray, let them (know) the bad guys lost...We deserve an America big enough for all our kids - let's go build it." He also cited the "delicious irony" that JD, whose "view of America is small, like him," is constitutionally obligated to swear him in come January.
In another sweet spot and longtime pipe dream, Talarico took back Texas from the scandal-smeared Paxton in "not just a tsunami, but a bloodbath." Adding to the schadenfreude was the upset win by Gina Hinojosa, the state's first Latina governor-elect, over monstrous Greg Abbott. In a stunning twist, Dems also won every statewide office down to railroad commissioner, along with four Supreme Court seats; the wins prompted an explosion of noisy joy in Austin that "sounded like an Eastern European city that just overthrew a dictator.” The cherry on top: Texas' new Dem Attorney General, who campaigned on investigating Elon Musk after he moved his business there to escape California woke, can now prosecute him for state level crimes without any DOJ interference.
Musk, who spent half a billion dollars nationwide and lost every race he tried to buy, is among MAGA fat cats, tech bros and grifters who'll likely be targeted by California's (easily reelected) Robert Garcia, set to chair the House Oversight Committee. His blunt message: "Lawyer up." Many others also feel "the only way we want Dems to reach across the aisle is with a subpoena." With an "accountability bill" ready, Dean Blundell argues, "A LOT of people need to go to jail" - Hegseth, the Trump family crypto empire, the DOJ hacks who covered up Epstein crimes, the Rapist-In-Chief, the sadists of ICE once it's been "torn down to the studs." Scores of voters also demanded justice for their victims Renee Good, Alex Pretti and Lorenzo Salgado Araujo by putting "I Voted" stickers on their memorials: "They were on the ballot."
Over at the presumably ketchup-encrusted White House, Trump remains in his own daft fantasy world, the "lamest of lame ducks." He burbles he "looks forward to working with" the trans jihadists he says are destroying America, but he'll veto everything. He's awash in his "magnificent" ballroom. He insists if he was on the ballot "we'd have won IN A LANDSLIDE," but of course he was and CNN's John King is happy to name all the places he told voters to pretend he was: "They did. They'd had enough." Even his cultists - and ex-cultists - blame him: "The reason isn't them, it's you. You fucked us. We chose Hitler with Down Syndrome, and we lost." Online, meanwhile, the White House posted a desperate "PSA: Trump Is Still Your President." Like we could forget.
Still, the seismic shift tentatively feels like a new dawn, a path toward redemption, a sliver of hope, the long-ago thing with feathers we can barely remember. Candidates, volunteers, organizers, lawyers stepped up, and vast numbers of Americans showed up to support them. The mood was buoyant. Some said they wished Mitch McConnell was alive to see the Senate results. The Borowitz Report said Mike Johnson begged God to "rapture him up" immediately; tearfully, he said that as a loyal Republican he couldn't bear to be in a "minority" because he hates 'em all. Another report said a bitter Elon Musk put Ken Paxton on eBay; no buyers yet. Also, tragically, two sources say cracks and peeling have again emerged in the Reflecting Pool, but MAGA is on it. Said an Interior spokesperson, "The Reflecting Pool has never looked this beautiful, and it's all thanks to President Donald J. Trump."
Update: Can you say learned nothing, knows nothing, never will, truly astoundingly losing it? On Thursday, our lame-duck loser displayed his stellar grasp on political priorities - what election? - by signing an entirely meaningless order proclaiming nobody can de-Cheesecake Factory his tacky abomination of a golden whorehouse of an Oval Office, 'cause then he'd be some pissed and don't forget we won World War One. Beyond the surreal looking-glass,
- YouTube www.youtube.com
- YouTube www.youtube.com
With the next United Nations Climate Change Conference less than a week away, greenhouse gas levels soaring, and a temporary overshoot of the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C goal now inevitable, Brazil, the host of last year's COP30, on Tuesday published a pair of roadmaps for transitioning away from planet-heating fossil fuels and tackling deforestation.
"We don't need more negotiations. What we need is for governments to start taking action," André Aranha Corrêa do Lago, the Brazilian diplomat who served as the president of COP30, told Reuters. "We need to completely change the way governments deal with climate change. To implement this, we need finance, infrastructure, and transportation ministers at the table."
In his foreword for the transition report, Corrêa do Lago explained that at the closing plenary in Belém last November, "and in the context of the COP being held in the Amazon, I committed to developing... roadmaps for implementing two outcomes of the First Global Stocktake, agreed by consensus at COP28 just two years earlier: (i) transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly, and equitable manner; and (ii) enhancing efforts toward halting and reversing deforestation and forest degradation by 2030. With their publication, that commitment is fulfilled."
"Both transitions depend on finance," he stressed. "The two roadmaps are therefore presented alongside a third document, 'Implementing the Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T,' which sets out how financing to developing countries for climate action can be scaled up from all public and private sources to at least US$1.3 trillion per year by 2035. Read together, the three documents describe what has to change and propose ways forward so that change can be financed and sustained."
After ending with what critics called "an empty deal," COP30 was condemned as a "catastrophic failure to take concrete action to implement a funded and fair fossil fuel phaseout," and there was some criticism of the new roadmaps for also not going far enough.
Greenpeace Brazil executive director Carolina Pasquali said in a statement that "this is a major effort by the COP30 presidency and a crucial step towards ensuring the COP28 decision to transition away from fossil fuels is fully implemented. As our climate races towards a 1.5°C overshoot, the roadmap encourages important measures but stops short of setting clear fossil fuel phaseout targets or calling for an immediate halt to the expansion of fossil fuels."
However, Pasquali praised the forests roadmap—launched in the aftermath of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's reelection victory over far-right candidate Flávio Bolsonaro—which she said "represents a major effort from the COP30 presidency and was launched with the credibility of a Brazilian government that has achieved the lowest deforestation rate in its history. The presidency has helped bring together, through multiple contributions and dialogues, a wide range of existing initiatives and views."
It remains slightly mad that governments have agreed to phase out fossil fuels from energy systems, but can't agree to even the principle that having a plan for doing so would be a good idea. www.businessgreen.com/news-analysi...
[image or embed]
— James Murray (@james-bg.bsky.social) November 3, 2026 at 11:34 AM
Despite some shortcomings, other climate campaigners welcomed the roadmaps—released as activists and world leaders alike prepare for COP31, which is scheduled to kick off Monday in Antalya, Türkiye.
"Brazil has offered a valuable blueprint for the global transition away from fossil fuels," said Oil Change International global policy lead Romain Ioualalen in a statement. "It recognizes there is no one-size-fits-all pathway, that all countries need to plan their transition now, and that equity and finance are critical to achieving fossil-free prosperity in many countries."
Like Corrêa do Lago, he emphasized that "now that we have a global roadmap, we need to see action. If all this process leads to is another series of dialogues, it will be a massive missed opportunity in an already closing window. Countries need to develop their own domestic roadmaps that plan their economic diversification away from fossil fuels using the guidance and tools provided by Brazil’s report."
"We also need to see the global Mutirão for the transition away from fossil fuels deliver key decisions that allow countries with strong economic and energy constraints to unlock their transition. The Second Global Stocktake in 2028 will be a critical opportunity to make that happen," Ioualalen continued.
"Delivering on this global roadmap for countries with deep financial constraints hinges on finance. But it does outline some finance tools that have a track record of failing, like debt swaps and derisking methods," he noted. "Enough public finance can be delivered to fund a fair fossil fuel phaseout as rich countries can unlock trillions every year through taxing polluters and extreme wealth, ending fossil fuel subsidies, and reforming unfair financial rules."
Ioualalen added that "one area of real concern is the suggestion that global action on reducing fossil fuel supply could wait until the 2030s. That would be a grave mistake, and a guarantee to further lock in fossil fuels and for a chaotic transition. Existing fossil fuel extraction projects already commit the world to emissions nearly seven times the remaining 1.5°C carbon budget. There is no time to pass the baton between supply and demand. Both need to be addressed now, through a fair, funded, and fast transition."
“The roadmaps are valuable but fall short of clearly indicating the pace of change needed by including no timeline or key benchmarks” ~Joeri Rogelj, professor of climate science and policy at Imperial College London.
[image or embed]
— Suzanne York (@suzanneyork.bsky.social) November 3, 2026 at 12:06 PM
Fanny Petitbon, a policy analyst at the international movement 350.org, similarly said that "this roadmap is a critical handbook for ending the fossil fuel era, which leaves governments with no excuse not to act. It offers every country a menu of policies to build its own plan to move away from coal, oil, and gas, whether it's a major producer, a big consumer, or an economy that depends on imports."
"Electrification is absolutely central to this transition, but it will only deliver if it is powered by renewable energy, matched by investment in modern grids, and brings clean, affordable energy to everyone," she highlighted. "We cannot swap one energy system for another while leaving the same communities behind."
Petitbon argued that "the roadmap must not end up as just another report gathering dust on a shelf. France, the Netherlands, and Germany have already published national roadmaps, but they fall short of the ambition the climate crisis demands and of their responsibility in it. Pacific Island states plan to deliver a regional strategy to break free from fossil fuels. So the question for all major emitters is simple: When will you submit your roadmap?"
"Rich nations must also mobilize public finance to support developing countries with their transition and ensure that the fossil fuel industry cannot continue to profit from a crisis that is costing people their livelihoods, health, and homes," she asserted. "COP31 must be the moment when governments take this work forward, with clear commitments, timelines, and the resources to deliver a fair and orderly exit from coal, oil, and gas."
"The COP30 presidency has set out clear next steps, and future COPs must keep this issue at the top of the agenda every year so the momentum is never lost," she added. "2028 will be the moment of truth. As the world will take stock of how far it has come in delivering the Paris Agreement, it will become clear who has honored the promise made in Dubai to transition away from fossil fuels, and who has walked away from it."
Less than a week before the US midterm elections in which voters may end Republican control of Congress, the Bureau of Economic Analysis on Thursday released inflation data highlighting the nation's persistent affordability crisis under GOP leaders, including President Donald Trump.
In September, the Personal Consumption Expenditures index rose 3.6% from a year ago, up from 3.4% in August, according to the BEA. Core PCE strips out food and energy prices, the latter of which has soared as Trump has waged an illegal war on Iran. That increased 3.1%, up from 3% the previous month.
The "bottom line," said Navy Federal Credit Union chief economist Heather Long, is that "inflation is back near a three-year high."
"It's largely due to war in Iran, but there's legitimate concern that inflation is spreading beyond energy," the economist explained. Referencing the "core" figure, she noted some "worrying trends."
Long pointed to a "big rise in goods prices" that "is largely driven by Trump's tariffs (big move up since 2025) and now war."
The expert also noted that "service sector inflation is picking up again."
She further observed that "rent prices are no longer improving" and housing inflation is "moving sideways."
The inflation update comes just days after the University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers announced last week that its Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 48 this month, nearing the record low of 44.8 from this past May, and Trump celebrated fossil fuel industry profits from his war during a weekend campaign rally in Georgia.
Trump told the crowd he was advised against highlighting how the industry—which helped him get elected two years ago and in which he is significantly invested—is "making hundreds of billions of dollars," given that "people are paying a little higher" for gasoline and diesel.
"I can just see the fake headlines," he said. "President Trump is talking about all the money they're making while people are suffering at the pump. That will be the headline. But I said, I don't give a damn, I'm going to say it: We're making a freaking fortune."
As of Thursday, the national average for a gallon of gasoline was $4.23 and $6.33 for diesel. The Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University estimates US residents have paid at least $81.1 billion more for gas and $65.9 billion for diesel, or a total of $147 billion. That's over $619 per household, for just gas.
Some estimates are even higher. A Monday report from Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee states 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."
Meanwhile, oil giants Shell and TotalEnergies announced their sizable third-quarter profits on Thursday, and companies such as BP, Chevron, and ExxonMobil are expected to follow suit on Friday.
"Inflation remains high, working families are paying $4.23 at the pump, and meager pay raises aren’t keeping up with rising prices," Alex Jacquez, a former Obama administration official who is now senior vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at Groundwork Collaborative, said in a statement.
"Instead of focusing on delivering lower prices, Trump is touting Big Oil's Iran War windfall," Jacquez stressed. "Skyrocketing prices and economic growth largely driven by AI spending do not add up to an economy that works for working families."
Democrats in Congress have seized on cost-of-living concerns ahead of the midterms, including Sen. Ed Markey, who is up for reelection in Massachusetts. He said Thursday that "inflation is up. Margins are tighter."
"Prices are skyrocketing—and small business owners are on the frontlines of Trump's war on Main Street," Markey added. "Small businesses and workers should not have to bear the costs of Trump's reckless economic policies."
This article has been updated to credit the Climate Solutions Lab at Brown University for its fuel cost tracker.
"Do not stop calling!" was the message that the progressive grassroots organization People for Bernie took from the news Monday that not only had Sen. Chris Van Hollen announced that he was considering a run to replace Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer after calls poured into his office, but cracks were also appearing to form in Schumer's support among his longtime colleagues in the upper chamber.
As Punchbowl News reported that Van Hollen (D-Md.) had not ruled out running for the top leadership post less than a week after Democrats swept the crucial midterm elections, it was reported that Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) declined to endorse Schumer (D-NY) to be Senate majority leader when the new Congress is sworn in in January.
"We need a conversation about leadership going forward because we need new energy and ideas," Blumenthal told reporters, according to News 12 in Connecticut.
People for Bernie called Blumenthal's remarks an "absolutely seismic shift in less than a week," following last week's elections in which the GOP was stunned by its losses to Democrats in states including Texas, South Carolina, and Kansas.
Progressives have emphasized that many winning candidates, even those who did not run as left-wing contenders, campaigned as adversaries to billionaires, corporations, and the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—which counts Schumer as one of its top recipients of campaign cash—and rallied supporters with rhetoric popularized by progressive leader Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), long dismissed by establishment Democrats as an extremist who was out of step with the party's base.
Despite those dynamics, Schumer has expressed confidence that he will remain as the party's leader in the Senate.
On Monday, he told CNN that Democrats' electoral victory was "about to become the largest landslide in the history of the Senate since the '50s, and now we're ready to roll up our sleeves, get to work, and lower costs for the American people.” He did not answer a question from reporter Morgan Rimmer about a possible challenge for the Senate majority leader post.
After Van Hollen said last week that Schumer must earn the support of his colleagues by putting forward a "bold agenda," a source close to the senator told Punchbowl News that he has "received an outpouring of calls" from voters who want him to challenge Schumer.
Van Hollen, said the source, "is now in active listening mode... The door is not shut."
Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett rejected the suggestion by some political observers that a challenger to the senior Democrat, who has been in office since 1999 and previously served in the US House of Representatives for nearly two decades, would never win the race to lead the party's new Senate majority.
"It’s possible the floodgates open if someone has the courage to step up," said Hackett.
Van Hollen won praise from progressive organizers last year when he swiftly traveled to El Salvador to demand the safe return of his constituent, Kilmar Ábrego García, whom the Trump administration had unlawfully deported to the Central American country. Criminal charges against the Maryland resident were thrown out by a federal judge in May, but the White House has continued pushing to deport Ábrego García to another country.
The senator has also been a vocal critic of the administration's blockade on Cuba and Israel's violent US-backed policies in the West Bank and Gaza, and forced a vote this year on ending President Donald Trump's illegal, unpopular war in Iran.
"Voters elected a majority to fight back. It should be led by someone who's been in the fight all along," said organizer Cheyenne Hunt.
With many establishment Democrats still reticent to vote against the interests of Israel, corporations, and Big Tech, Van Hollen would "have a caucus to deal with," said Saikat Chakrabarti, co-founder of Justice Democrats, "but having him in charge makes sure bills to continue sending money to Israel don’t get votes."
Blumenthal, a longtime defender of Israel, was the third sitting Senate Democrat, after Van Hollen and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who took office last year and has frequently called for a "new generation" of party leadership, to decline to endorse Schumer. Slotkin said Saturday she was considering a run.
Sens.-elect Adam Hamilton (D-Kan.), Annie Andrews (D-SC), James Talarico (D-Texas), Juliana Stratton (D-Ill.), and Troy Jackson (D-Maine) are among the incoming lawmakers who have declined to support the Democratic leader.
After the announcement by Blumenthal, who has served alongside Schumer since 2011, Cory Archibald of AIPAC Tracker said she was "starting to think Chuck might actually be done."
"Do it, Chris Van Hollen," said Archibald. "We need you. We need clear and moral leadership in the Senate. We need people who understand this moment and what it demands. Do it. We're with you."
Meanwhile, in the US House, a number of newly elected progressive representatives have refused to throw their support behind House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) for speaker.
As Blumenthal broke with a majority of his colleagues on Schumer's bid, progressive strategist Deep Singh Badesha said, "I'm begging the House Democrats to also have this courage."
Palestine and press freedom advocates on Thursday demanded the immediate release of journalist and activist Abed Abu Shehadeh, a Palestinian citizen of Israel who was arrested during a Tuesday raid on his home, with critics calling his detention part of a "campaign to silence" critical reporting and dissent.
Abu Shehadeh, 38, was arrested by a group of 15 Israeli police officers and agents from the internal intelligence agency Shin Bet, some of them masked, who stormed his family's home in Jaffa and seized him in front of his wife and two children, according to The New Arab.
The arrest of the prominent Arabic-language journalist, podcast host, and political activist was reportedly connected to an interview he conducted with Palestinian intellectual and former Knesset member Azmi Bishara, the exiled leader of the Balad party, which advocates for Israel to become a nation of all its citizens rather than what critics, including the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem, describe as a Jewish supremacist apartheid state.
Bishara fled Israel in 2007 and is accused of helping Hezbollah during Israel's 2006 war on Lebanon. Israeli authorities suspect him of being a foreign agent.
On Wednesday, the Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court prolonged Abu Shehadeh's detention after police sought an eight-day extension on suspicion of "contact with a foreign agent."
According to the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ):
During the court hearing, a police representative initially acknowledged that Abu Shehadeh was a journalist, but after a recess she retracted this statement and instead said he is a political adviser. The defense objected to this new description and asked whether there was evidence that the meeting went beyond recording a podcast interview or contained information not available to the public.
Adalah, also called the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, noted Thursday:
The legal team representing Abu Shehadeh claimed that there was no justification for holding him in detention. The interview, which dealt with the Israeli election campaign, was widely published and available to all... The mere criminal investigation for a media interview is a serious violation of freedom of expression and freedom of the press, and his detention is completely arbitrary.
Abu Shehadeh's arrest sparked accusations that Israeli authorities are using national security allegations to intimidate Palestinian journalists and suppress political expression.
"Arrest for an interview is not a legitimate criminal procedure, but a tool for political silencing," Adalah civil and political rights attorney Hadeel Abu Salih said Thursday in a statement. "The police are asking to send a message to the entire Arab public: Even a public conversation with a political figure can lead you to the detention cell. Abu Shehadeh must be released immediately.”
Abu Salih told The New Arab that police illegally arrested Abu Shehadeh, lacking a court order for the apprehension and prosecutorial permission to interrogate.
"We cannot disconnect this arrest from the attack on the free speech of Palestinians of Israel since 7 October," she said, citing over 1,000 arrests for speech-related "offenses" in the years since the Hamas-led attack on Israel.
"This is not a criminal investigation, it is a campaign to silence Palestinian journalists and political activists," Abu Salih added.
CPJ regional director Sara Qudah said Thursday: "Journalists should not be punished for platforming views critical of the state. We demand the immediate unconditional release of Abu Shehadeh, the dropping of all charges against him, and an explanation of why he was targeted in what some have described as a political campaign.”
Adalah further called Abu Shehadeh's arrest "part of a broad pattern of arrests and investigations [of] Palestinian citizens in Israel due to political statements" that's "worsened" following last week's Israeli elections.
The editors of the progressive US magazine Jewish Currents (JC) wrote Wednesday that "Abu Shehadeh’s imprisonment comes amid a targeted campaign of repression against Palestinian citizens of Israel in the wake of the electoral gains made by Palestinian parties in last week’s elections."
"Spearheaded by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Shin Bet chief David Zini, this campaign follows years of systematic targeting, silencing, and killing of Palestinian journalists," JC continued, referring to Gaza, where at least 200 media professionals are among the more than 74,000 Palestinians, including upward of 21,500 children, killed during Israel's three-year genocide.
"These attacks reflect the Israeli state’s effort to ensure Jewish supremacy and silence the work of those reporting on its human rights abuses," the JC editors added.
Balad leader Sami Abu Shehadeh, who is the journalist's cousin, told The New Arab "Netanyahu and Zini are escalating their efforts to steal the election," calling his relative's detention "part of a broader campaign of arrests, interrogations, and threats against political activists designed to undermine the election results through the weaponization of the police and the Shin Bet."
The JC editors wrote that, as a media outlet, it "generally refrains from encouraging our readers and allies to take specific action."
"But as journalists in community with Abed Abu Shehadeh," they added, "we call on elected officials and others in the US government to demand his immediate release."
Nearly three-quarters of Americans who voted in Tuesday's midterm elections said that President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice on Iran was a significant factor in their vote, a figure that opponents of US militarism said underscored the need for the Democrats to become a true anti-war party.
According to NBC News exit polling, 74% of voters called the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran a "crucial" or "major" factor in their vote, with Democrats winning 63% of people who responded that way. Meanwhile, 63% of voters said the Trump administration made the wrong decision in taking military action against Iran, compared with 37% who said it was the right decision.
"There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is," Vice President JD Vance said Tuesday in a lengthy social media post. "One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true."
"But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone," the vice president continued. "The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night."
Indeed, Trump acknowledged that the war harmed Republicans, telling Fox News, "I think a part of it was Iran," but nevertheless defended the 35-week military campaign, insisting that "people understood the importance of what I've done with Iran."
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Trump was similarly unapologetic, declaring: "I did the right thing. I would have done it again."
Numerous observers contended that Tuesday's results offered an opportunity for Democrats to do more than simply capitalize on Republican mistakes.
"Among other things, this is an absolute rebuke of the war in Iran. Democrats would be wise to heed that lesson and truly become the anti-war party," said commentator Ben Rhodes—who, while serving as a senior national security adviser to then-President Barack Obama, supported US intervention in countries including Iraq, Libya, and Syria, as well as Obama's wider drone war campaign.
Geopolitics scholar Van Jackson opined on social media that "if Democrats remain the party of the national security state, they will lose everything in 2028. If they become the anti-war party, they’ll consolidate this wave with the presidency."
A Wednesday analysis on the libertarian site Reason by Matthew Petti argued that Democrats now have an opportunity to exercise Congress' constitutional power over the war, including by withholding military funding.
Petti noted that Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told Fox News last week, "The House and the Senate should stop the funding for any further actions in the Iran War," just like "we did to stop the Vietnam War."
However, Petti cautioned that Democratic electoral victories usually don't lead to anti-war foreign policy.
"Party leadership that is willing to attack Republicans' execution of the war may not share a principled anti-war commitment," he wrote, recalling how Democrats who swept the 2006 midterms over public anger with the Iraq War but then struggled to use their control of both chambers of Congress to end it.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) wants his party to cut off funding for Trump's war and said Democrats can do so by demanding explicit restrictions on war spending as a condition of supporting the fiscal year 2027 government funding bill that expires next month.
"Right now, the continuing resolution goes through December 11," Van Hollen told The Lever on Tuesday. "And my view is that Democrats should not advance spending to continue to fund this war."
"The Vietnam War ended only when Congress defunded it," he added. "This is an illegal war, and we need to make sure that taxpayer monies are not used to continue an illegal war."
Institute for Middle East Understanding executive director Margaret DeReus pleaded on social media, "For the love of all that is good, Democrats, do not squander this."
"The voters have given you a mandate. Use it. Be the party of working people. Be the anti-war party. Be the anti-corruption party," she added. "We cannot go back to business as usual."
Matt Duss, a former top aide to US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) who serves as executive vice president at the Center for International Policy, noted that "Trump ran and won as an anti-war candidate in 2024 because Democrats left that lane wide open for him."
"Voters have just brutally punished him and the GOP for breaking that promise. Will Democrats finally get it?" Duss added. "Americans are tired of war. They want a new foreign policy."
"Our country is at a critical crossroads and a moment of extraordinary opportunity. This week’s elections sent a clear message: Working people are demanding change," said the IAM Union international president.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's bid to continue leading the Democratic Party when it takes control of the US Senate in January continued to falter Monday night as a key machinists' union asked the New York senator to step aside and allow "a new generation to lead Senate Democrats."
In a letter, Brian Bryant, international president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM Union) thanked Schumer for "many years of leadership, friendship, and unwavering commitment to working people" before telling him that "after thoughtful discussions," the IAM Union Executive Council had opted not to support Schumer's push to remain as the Senate leader.
"With the utmost respect and appreciation for your service, we respectfully urge you not to seek another term as Senate
Democratic leader," Bryant wrote. "We also encourage all returning and newly elected Democratic senators to join together through a fair and open process to select a consensus leader who can unite the party, build on your legacy and carry forward a bold vision for working people."
The letter came hours after Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told reporters that he was considering a challenge to Schumer, after initially saying he was not interested in running for the Senate majority leader post following the party's electoral sweep last week.
Candidates who won Senate seats include several outspoken proponents of Medicare for All, such as Sens.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.), Troy Jackson (D-Maine), and Peggy Flanagan (D-Minn.), and others who centered in their campaigns the need to decisively take on billionaires and worsening economic inequality.
A decision by Schumer to step aside in favor of "new leadership," said Bryant, would allow the party to "turn this moment into lasting progress."
He wrote that the party must push to pass the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, restore collective bargaining rights to all federal workers, reinstate Affordable Care Act and give "every American the healthcare they need, and pass "meaningful rail safety legislation."
"Our country is at a critical crossroads and a moment of extraordinary opportunity. This week’s elections sent a clear message: Working people are demanding change," said Bryant. "The IAM Union’s Workers vs. Billionaires movement reflects a growing desire for an economy and political system that puts working families ahead of wealthy special interests. We have a tremendous opportunity to build on this momentum, but doing so will require fresh ideas, new energy, and a new generation of leadership."
Bryant's message made clear that "it's time" for Schumer to step aside, said author and commentator Don Winslow.
"The Democratic Party will make a catastrophic mistake if they lock out all of these voters for a man who has been in political office for 51 years," said Winslow.
The letter came after Schumer's support among senior Democrats appeared to crack on Monday, with Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) telling reporters, “We need a conversation about leadership going forward because we need new energy and ideas."
But later that evening, the senator said that he expected Schumer to become Senate majority leader and plans to back him.
Van Hollen, who has reportedly received a steady stream of phone calls since last week from voters calling on him to take the helm of the party in the Senate, reiterated Monday evening that he believes there should be "a full caucus discussion" about the path forward.
"I am in listening mode," he said of the possibility that he could challenge Schumer. "There are clearly lots of people around the country and a number of our members, quite a few of our members, who want to have this discussion... I haven't closed the door."
He also told Semafor: “I am listening to the thousands of people who have been calling for change, but especially listening to our members, but in particular to new members who have just come off the campaign trail. So what I've said from the very beginning is, we shouldn't have a coronation.”
Van Hollen also met Monday with Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who has not endorsed Schumer.
On Monday afternoon, Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who is also facing calls from newly elected progressive lawmakers to step aside in his push to become House speaker, released a statement saying that "Democrats are united and ready to lead."
But several representatives-elect, including Melat Kiros (D-Colo.) and Adam Hamawy (D-NJ) suggested that even if Jeffries secures the top post in the House, he will have to contend with many new members of Congress who will be pushing for far-reaching action.
"It's about the agenda, an agenda that actually reflects the priorities of the American people," said Kiros. "We might have different ideas about how to accomplish certain things but we all agree that we have to reduce costs for working families, we all agree that we have to root out corruption in government, we all agree that our foreign policy has to reflect our values. And in order for us to be able to do that we need an agenda that's bold enough to meet that vision. And so what we're demanding is an agenda, it's not about the individual."
"We, as progressives, want to build," she added. "We want to accomplish things, we want to work together with this caucus to actually get work done, and we haven't had that conversation yet."
Carlos Jimenez claims the FBI drove him from the hospital to the scene for an interrogation, "while the bullet and fragments remained lodged in his body," even as he "kept bleeding and vomiting in the agents' van."
Carlos Jimenez, a US citizen and father of three who still has bullet fragments lodged near his lung after being shot by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in California last year, is suing the Trump administration, San Bernardino County, and various agents for over $25 million in damages.
Jimenez, who is from Ontario, east of Los Angeles, filed his complaint against the United States, the county, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations officer Eusebio Ortiz, two US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) special agent, and 20 unnamed defendants on Friday.
While Jimenez was driving to work on the morning of October 30, 2025, he approached agents conducting an immigration operation to let them know they were near a bus stop for schoolchildren. Ortiz ultimately shot him, but it was Jimenez, not the officer, who then faced charges that have since been dropped.
As with some other people ICE or CBP agents have shot—sometimes fatally—the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees both agencies, has claimed Jimenez "attempted to run officers over" federal agents "by reversing directly at them without stopping," but his lawyers have disputed that account.
After the shooting, at a local hospital, FBI agents "interfered with his medical care," according to a complaint. They allegedly prevented Jimenez from talking to healthcare providers, removed him from the hospital bed, and "handcuffed him with a leather waist restraint."
As the FBI drove Jimenez back to the scene for an interrogation, "while the bullet and fragments remained lodged in his body," he "kept bleeding and vomiting in the agents' van," and they told him not to "ruin their vehicle," the filing claims. He was taken to West Valley Detention Center, where he was also denied adequate medical care.
A few weeks later, a grand jury indicted Jimenez, whom federal prosecutors charged with assaulting a federal officer using a deadly or dangerous weapon, but "the criminal case later became the subject of a dispute over evidence," Newsweek reported Monday.
As the outlet detailed:
On May 5, US District Judge Kenly Kiya Kato ordered the government to turn over communications and operational records sought by the defense; this included responsive communications on government-issued and personal phones. The order also required a declaration under penalty of perjury from Ortiz if no responsive messages from him existed.
Jimenez entered into a diversion agreement shortly afterward. After he completed its conditions, Kato dismissed the indictment with prejudice on November 2, meaning the charge cannot be refiled. The dismissal order did not make a finding that federal officers used excessive force or otherwise acted unlawfully.
The Guardian highlighted that in addition to calling the criminal charges against Jimenez "fabricated," the complaint "alleges that the FBI falsely claimed that two neighbors witnessed the incident and told an agent that Jimenez's vehicle had enough room to pull forward without reversing. When Jimenez’s legal team interviewed those witnesses, both denied making those statements and said they were unaware there had been a shooting until they saw news reports."
While the FBI declined to comment and DHS referred questions to the US Department of Justice, Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesperson for the DOJ in Los Angeles, said in an email to the newspaper that Jimenez "could have exercised his right to take the case to trial, but he instead requested that our office agree to resolve the case through a diversion agreement."
Jimenez is among at least 32 people fired upon by federal immigration agents as part of Republican President Donald Trump's mass detention and deportation campaign. Others include Renee Good and Alex Pretti, US citizens killed early this year in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Silverio Villegas González, a Mexican man fatally shot last year near Chicago, Illinois.
At the beginning of October, Good's family filed a pair of lawsuits against the federal government and immigration officials over her death and an alleged conspiracy to interfere with civil rights in Minnesota's Twin Cities. A week later, Villegas González's relatives filed a legal claim against the administration over his "execution-style killing." Pretti's family hasn't yet sued, but his parents demanded justice at a press conference late last month.
"Trump can’t admit his policies fucked the midterms," said one critic. "Nothing is ever his fault. So now the accusation is that red states cheated against themselves."
As Republicans reel from last week's "blue tsunami" midterm wipeout, President Donald Trump—who previously congratulated Democrats on their historic takeback of both houses of Congress—on Monday reverted to the kind of election denial that sparked the 2021 Capitol insurrection, making a baseless claim of voting machine fraud.
“Does anybody really believe that this ‘Election’ was honest,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “How could the Polls be so wrong??? Some early voting ‘dumps’ were so large that it was impossible to win, no matter how many people went to vote. It’s all about the machines, which are far more important than the voter!”
The polls, which widely forecast Democrats reclaiming one or both chambers of Congress, were largely accurate. And despite a handful of localized issues with voting machines, there is no evidence of any widespread problems.
I was just thinking how weird it was that Trump didn’t call the midterms rigged.Well…
[image or embed]
— Matt Novak (@paleofuture.bsky.social) November 9, 2026 at 7:16 AM
On Election Night, Trump said during a phone call to Fox News: "Congratulations to the Democrats. I think the Democrats did a good job. I really do. I think they did a good job. They fought hard. They were, you know, they've been fighting for a long time. They've been fighting me for a long time. This fight's been going on for ages."
However, as unfounded claims of fraud proliferated on social media—and amid posts promoting a January 3 "Million Crusader Cross March" on the Capitol headlined by racist provocateur Jake Lang—the president changed his tune.
"Trump now claims the midterms were rigged," noted the political action group Blue Georgia. "It was just a matter of time."
Conspiracy theory journalist Mike Rothschild said on Bluesky: "After a week of meekly accepting the midterm results, Trump has veered into 'the machines are rigged' denial." But this is a pale shadow of 2020 denialism. He sounds beaten and disinterested."
Former Chicago Tribune metro editor Mark Jacobs also took to Bluesky, touting his prediction that the president would cry fraud and writing, "I knew Trump could never resist the impulse to declare that the election was rigged if he lost."
"The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin said on X, "Lather, rinse, repeat."
Former Obama and Biden administration appointee Andrew Weinstein said: "Losing isn't proof of fraud. It's proof you lost."
Tangle News founder Isaac Saul also took to X, opining that Trump's denial "feels pretty flaccid."
"Nobody *actually* thinks these results are nefarious, and it seems like there's a lot of impatience on the right with anyone suggesting these losses were due to fraud and not policy," he added. "Even Trump seems to be offering this as an afterthought."
That right-wing impatience was evident in just two words from commentator Megyn Kelly, who posted, "Just stop."
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is moving to demarcate scores of Indigenous territories by the end of the year—but many say the government needs to act faster amid deadly attacks.
A tribal leader from Brazil stressed on Monday, the opening day of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Türkiye, that protecting Indigenous lands is a critical part of tackling the climate emergency, remarks that came as Brazil's government advances a plan to demarcate dozens of Indigenous territories amid surging violence against native people.
Joziléia Kaingang, co-founder and executive director of the National Network of Indigenous Women Warriors of Ancestral Wisdom (ANMIGA), told attendees of a session in COP31's Brazil Pavilion in Antalya that there are no real climate solutions without Indigenous participation.
"This means a very simple thing for us Indigenous peoples, something that our grandmothers have been saying for a long time and have known for a long time. Protecting Indigenous territory is indeed a climate policy," said Kaingang, who is a member of the Kaingang people of southern Brazil. "It is not charity, it is not compensation, it is a solution."
Kaingang hailed progress under the government of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who was reelected last month with the support of 608 of the country's 658 Indigenous polling places. Lula's overwhelming support from Indigenous Brazilians is in no small part due to his government's substantial—yet tenuous—progress against illegal mining, logging, and other invasions of tribal lands.
Lula's policies marked a sharp reversal from former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro's deliberate dismantling of Indigenous territorial protections and other actions that lived up to his self-bestowed "Captain Chainsaw" moniker.
"The state withdrew invaders from our lands," Kaingang said. "The forest breathes again from the action of the last government of President Lula, and will continue to do so in this presidency in the next four years."
Kaingang continued:
In the Yanomami territory... 98% of illegal mining fell. This is important for all of us. Indigenous lands and local communities keep about a third of the carbon that humanity cannot lose.
And we want to say that we, Indigenous peoples, are here to celebrate the Brazilian government. We want to advance the roadmap to stop and reverse deforestation and forest degradation by 2030. But it is necessary that the roadmap brings the perspective of Indigenous peoples, of traditional communities, of our knowledge.
"Let's reaffirm that without demarcation, there is no climate solution," Kaingang added. "So let's keep demarcating the Indigenous territories so that we are the solution."
Brazil's government is preparing to approve dozens of additional Indigenous land demarcations before the end of 2026, Indigenous Peoples Minister Eloy Terena, who is a member of the Terena people, told Brasil de Fato on Sunday, as native communities face continuing deadly violence, land invasions, and encroachment by agribusiness interests.
During Lula’s third term, Brazil's government has recognized 20 Indigenous lands, declared 21 others, and established 31 reserves, according to the minister.
However, recent Indigenous land demarcation protests across Brazil have decried the government's failure to move faster in recognizing and protecting Indigenous territories amid ongoing violence.
Terena linked recent attacks against Guarani Kaiowá communities in Mato Grosso do Sul—including reported murders, vehicle attacks, and threats to poison drinking water—to the government's failure to secure their ancestral territories. He said that more than 150 technical working groups are advancing demarcation procedures, but warned that executive action alone cannot overcome entrenched political and judicial resistance, which is sustained by pressure from agribusiness and other destructive interests.
The minister added that the government seeks "to strengthen Indigenous organizations, the Indigenous movement, and communities. Because we understand that if eventually the democratic winds turn, we need to have a very committed society and very well-structured social movements."
"If Texas of all places can go blue, then we can be bold enough to say a better bill is possible."
Environmental groups are making a last-ditch push to persuade Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to block a bipartisan permitting bill that they warn would speed up approvals for polluting projects and data center infrastructure.
Activists gathered outside Schumer’s (D-NY) Midtown Manhattan office Monday morning, hours before the US Senate’s planned evening vote on whether to advance the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA).
In a media advisory, organizers from the New York Public Interest Research Group, Food & Water Watch, and New York Communities for Change, who led Monday’s protest and a previous one at Schumer’s apartment on Friday, called the bill an “aggressive attack on federal environmental protections in order to facilitate rapid, unregulated development of fracked gas power plants, dirty fossil fuel pipelines, and expensive hyperscale data centers.”
The motion needs 60 votes to advance, so some Democrats will have to support holding a final vote. The bill’s leading Democratic sponsor, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), said he believes supporters “have the votes to proceed.”
The bill faces longer odds in the US House of Representatives, especially after Tuesday’s Democratic blowout in the midterms, when voters across the country also backed restrictions on data centers.
Sponsors have revised the bill, but David Watkins, director of government affairs for the Climate and Energy programs at the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued that the amendment “fails to address the fundamental imbalance of the legislation” in favor of polluting energy.
“To get bipartisan support for negligible reductions in emissions,” he said, “this deal would convert compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and Clean Water Act into largely voluntary exercises.”
While some Democratic proponents of the bill have argued that these compromises are necessary to speed up permits for clean energy infrastructure, Watkins said existing law already allows much of that work and saw no need to enact “the most significant legislative reversal in environmental and community protections in decades.”
A coalition of conservation groups, including Earthjustice Action, Defenders of Wildlife, and Friends of the Earth, sent a letter to the Senate on Monday urging members to delay the vote until newly elected members of the US Congress—some of whom made opposition to data centers central to their campaigns—can be sworn in.
“The elections on November 3 sent a clear message from the American public denouncing the administration’s actions over the past two years and, in states across the country, rejecting the accelerated proliferation of data centers,” they wrote. “We strongly encourage you to heed the public’s wishes and advance energy infrastructure needs and an affordability agenda without making false and unnecessary trade-offs that severely undermine tribal sovereignty and our bedrock environmental, public lands, waters, wildlife, ocean, and historic preservation laws.”
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said he would vote against advancing the bill without substantial changes, adding that “robust consideration of the bill should be a priority in the new Congress.”
"Permitting reform for electrical transmission lines is essential," he said. But, he added, "Getting more renewable electrons where they are needed doesn’t tackle climate change if you simultaneously promote the burning of more fossil fuels. Unfortunately, this bill does exactly that."
As questions mount about whether Democratic leaders will use their new mandate to pursue a bold legislative agenda, some see BAAJA as a worrying sign that Schumer and other party leaders may squander the moment by reverting to business as usual.
“If Texas of all places can go blue, then we can be bold enough to say a better bill is possible,” said Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the youth-led climate group Sunrise Movement. “Young people and the working class deserve it. To stop the climate crisis, America needs Senate Democrats to fight harder. Senate Democrats must deliver.”
"The damage done to Big Bend will be felt for future generations of Texans and Americans," one advocate said, "and this administration will bear responsibility for the natural heritage we lose.”
The US Supreme Court on Monday lifted a court order that had halted construction of a barrier wall and roads across Big Bend National Park and the surrounding region, but advocates warned that the "firestorm of outrage" unleashed by the Trump administration waiving of dozens of environmental laws to build the wall would only intensify.
In an 8-1 vote, with Democratic appointee Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting, the high court lifted an injunction that had been issued October 2 by US District Judge Kathleen Cardone, a Republican appointee in the Western District of Texas.
Cardone handed down the injunction after the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Friends of the Ruidosa Church, and a Big Bend-area river guide and landowner filed a lawsuit challenging the administration's decision to waive laws including the Endangered Species Act, the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and the National Park Service Organic Act, arguing that such waivers violate the major questions doctrine, which requires congressional approval for actions with major economic and political consequences.
The majority ruled that construction can continue as the lower court considers its legality, finding that Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin is permitted by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to waive environmental laws and has “broad authority to construct border barriers and roads."
In August, despite a separate coalition's lawsuit, bulldozers appeared at Big Bend and began leveling part of the national park before the October ruling halted construction.
Laiken Jordahl, national public lands advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity, told The New York Times he was "completely devastated" by the ruling.
Customs and Border Protection has indicated the agency plans to build vehicle barriers and patrol roads across the national park, including in the remote Mariscal Mountain region, which would require "extensive dynamite blasting," according to CBD.
“The Trump administration and its contractors are hell-bent on destroying one of America’s greatest national parks, and the Supreme Court just gave them the green light,” Jordahl said in a statement. “This horrific decision clears the way for contractors to bulldoze pristine desert and dynamite canyon walls before the courts have even decided whether this destruction is legal. They’re signing off on the permanent destruction of the wildest place in Texas, and the theft of a great American river from all of us.”
Sierra Club also expressed outrage, and US Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) said the decision would only "destroy the nature and wildlife that we love at Big Bend."
"The corrupt and far-right Supreme Court just gave [President Donald] Trump the OK to rip up Big Bend with a border wall. No one will be safer or freer," said Casar. "Democrats, Republicans, Texans of all backgrounds all agree: Leave Big Bend alone."
Jordahl emphasized that the court had ruled in favor of the Trump administration less than a week after two Texas Democrats, Sen.-elect James Talarico and Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa, stunned the Republican Party with their electoral victories in the longtime GOP stronghold.
Texans “roundly rejected the destruction of this national park and border wall destruction at large," Jordahl told the Times, adding that Mullin's agency “would be wise to listen to Texans and pump the brakes on this project.”
In a statement, he warned that "Americans care deeply about this extraordinary national park and they won’t stand by quietly if its irreplaceable landscapes are butchered and paved over."
"The damage done to Big Bend will be felt for future generations of Texans and Americans," he said, "and this administration will bear responsibility for the natural heritage we lose.”
Hillary Pierce, director of communications for the group No Big Bend Wall, which also sued the administration in September, noted that officials haven't "answered why the government is building a wall in one of the least-crossed stretches of the southern border."
“Once the bulldozers cut through a canyon or a family's ranch gets walled off from the Rio Grande, there's no undoing it," said Pierce. "This isn't the end of our fight. The justices didn't decide whether Big Bend actually qualifies as an area of high illegal entry. That matters because the administration used that designation to justify building the wall and bypassing environmental protections. The government's own numbers show Big Bend has the fewest Border Patrol apprehensions along the southern border. That's exactly what we're challenging in our lawsuit in Washington.”
Progressive advocacy group Our Revolution is calling on leadership candidates to "publicly explain how they would use the new majority to challenge corporate influence, lower costs, and deliver for working people."
With Democrats poised to take over both chambers of the US Congress next year, a majority of progressive organizers are calling for the party to seek new leadership.
A survey of over 4,300 progressive activists released by Our Revolution on Monday shows that there is strong demand among organizers for replacing Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who are seeking the majority leader and speaker roles.
In total, the survey finds that 72% of activists want a different leader than Schumer, compared to just 5% who say they support him and 22% who say they're willing to see what he delivers.
Support for Jeffries was stronger than for Schumer, although 52% of respondents said they wanted a different leader, with 18% offering full support and 29% taking a wait-and-see approach.
Our Revolution has been calling for "open, competitive leadership elections" for the new Democratic Congress, and is urging prospective candidates to "publicly explain how they would use the new majority to challenge corporate influence, lower costs, and deliver for working people."
Schumer and Jeffries have given no indication that they plan to step back from their ambitions to lead Democrats in Congress, and the two put out a joint statement on Monday outlining their priorities.
"The American people have forcefully rejected MAGA extremism and are demanding dramatic change in their lives," Schumer and Jeffries said. "House and Senate Democrats have been given a clear mandate to aggressively address the affordability crisis, stop the reckless war of choice in Iran, meaningfully expand access to affordable healthcare, and hold the crooks accountable who have unleashed unprecedented corruption on the country."
“A new day is coming on January 3rd," they added. "Democrats are united and ready to lead."
So far, no other Democrats have stepped forward to officially challenge either Schumer or Jeffries. According to a Monday report in Punchbowl News, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is opening to challenging Schumer for Senate leadership after receiving "received an outpouring of calls" urging him to do so.
"We need clear and moral leadership in the Senate. We need people who understand this moment and what it demands," one supporter said. "Do it."
"Do not stop calling!" was the message that the progressive grassroots organization People for Bernie took from the news Monday that not only had Sen. Chris Van Hollen announced that he was considering a run to replace Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer after calls poured into his office, but cracks were also appearing to form in Schumer's support among his longtime colleagues in the upper chamber.
As Punchbowl News reported that Van Hollen (D-Md.) had not ruled out running for the top leadership post less than a week after Democrats swept the crucial midterm elections, it was reported that Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) declined to endorse Schumer (D-NY) to be Senate majority leader when the new Congress is sworn in in January.
"We need a conversation about leadership going forward because we need new energy and ideas," Blumenthal told reporters, according to News 12 in Connecticut.
People for Bernie called Blumenthal's remarks an "absolutely seismic shift in less than a week," following last week's elections in which the GOP was stunned by its losses to Democrats in states including Texas, South Carolina, and Kansas.
Progressives have emphasized that many winning candidates, even those who did not run as left-wing contenders, campaigned as adversaries to billionaires, corporations, and the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—which counts Schumer as one of its top recipients of campaign cash—and rallied supporters with rhetoric popularized by progressive leader Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), long dismissed by establishment Democrats as an extremist who was out of step with the party's base.
Despite those dynamics, Schumer has expressed confidence that he will remain as the party's leader in the Senate.
On Monday, he told CNN that Democrats' electoral victory was "about to become the largest landslide in the history of the Senate since the '50s, and now we're ready to roll up our sleeves, get to work, and lower costs for the American people.” He did not answer a question from reporter Morgan Rimmer about a possible challenge for the Senate majority leader post.
After Van Hollen said last week that Schumer must earn the support of his colleagues by putting forward a "bold agenda," a source close to the senator told Punchbowl News that he has "received an outpouring of calls" from voters who want him to challenge Schumer.
Van Hollen, said the source, "is now in active listening mode... The door is not shut."
Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett rejected the suggestion by some political observers that a challenger to the senior Democrat, who has been in office since 1999 and previously served in the US House of Representatives for nearly two decades, would never win the race to lead the party's new Senate majority.
"It’s possible the floodgates open if someone has the courage to step up," said Hackett.
Van Hollen won praise from progressive organizers last year when he swiftly traveled to El Salvador to demand the safe return of his constituent, Kilmar Ábrego García, whom the Trump administration had unlawfully deported to the Central American country. Criminal charges against the Maryland resident were thrown out by a federal judge in May, but the White House has continued pushing to deport Ábrego García to another country.
The senator has also been a vocal critic of the administration's blockade on Cuba and Israel's violent US-backed policies in the West Bank and Gaza, and forced a vote this year on ending President Donald Trump's illegal, unpopular war in Iran.
"Voters elected a majority to fight back. It should be led by someone who's been in the fight all along," said organizer Cheyenne Hunt.
With many establishment Democrats still reticent to vote against the interests of Israel, corporations, and Big Tech, Van Hollen would "have a caucus to deal with," said Saikat Chakrabarti, co-founder of Justice Democrats, "but having him in charge makes sure bills to continue sending money to Israel don’t get votes."
Blumenthal, a longtime defender of Israel, was the third sitting Senate Democrat, after Van Hollen and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who took office last year and has frequently called for a "new generation" of party leadership, to decline to endorse Schumer. Slotkin said Saturday she was considering a run.
Sens.-elect Adam Hamilton (D-Kan.), Annie Andrews (D-SC), James Talarico (D-Texas), Juliana Stratton (D-Ill.), and Troy Jackson (D-Maine) are among the incoming lawmakers who have declined to support the Democratic leader.
After the announcement by Blumenthal, who has served alongside Schumer since 2011, Cory Archibald of AIPAC Tracker said she was "starting to think Chuck might actually be done."
"Do it, Chris Van Hollen," said Archibald. "We need you. We need clear and moral leadership in the Senate. We need people who understand this moment and what it demands. Do it. We're with you."
Meanwhile, in the US House, a number of newly elected progressive representatives have refused to throw their support behind House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) for speaker.
As Blumenthal broke with a majority of his colleagues on Schumer's bid, progressive strategist Deep Singh Badesha said, "I'm begging the House Democrats to also have this courage."
"This is an organization that believes in privacy," Tester said of Palantir, whose software ICE has used to identify targets for deportation and compile dossiers on activists.
Expecting to face a slew of investigations by a Democratic-controlled Congress, the infamous Trump administration-aligned tech firm Palantir is apparently trying to soften its image by bringing in a trusted name: former Democratic US Sen. Jon Tester of Montana.
NPR reported Monday that the three-term senator—who lost his reelection bid in 2024—was joining the surveillance company in an “advisory” role on the government side of the company's work.
Palantir, co-founded by the billionaire right-wing megadonor Peter Thiel, has received tens of millions of dollars in federal contracts supporting President Donald Trump's “mass deportation” campaign during his second term. The company has developed technology that has been used to identify and track immigrants targeted for removal and has reportedly helped federal agencies integrate vast troves of Americans’ personal data—raising concerns among civil rights groups about violations of privacy.
After Trump returned to office in January 2025, Palantir's leadership aggressively courted his administration. The company's CEO, Alex Karp, who had supported Kamala Harris over Trump in the presidential election, gave $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund before pivoting to praise the president's immigration policies and declare his company “completely anti-woke.” Palantir donated an additional $10 million to Trump's White House ballroom project. Meanwhile, company co-founder Joe Lonsdale has been one of the leading backers of the administration's second-term efforts to criminalize homelessness.
This has drawn the ire of Democrats in Congress, who have vowed to put Palantir's practices under the microscope when they take control of investigative committees beginning in January.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who will chair the powerful Senate Finance Committee, has threatened to use compulsory investigative powers if Palantir refuses to answer questions about its role in Trump's immigration enforcement and handling of Americans' personal information. Other Democrats have suggested looking into conflicts of interest between the company and the administration.
Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s mass deportation policy, who was appointed White House chief of staff last week, for instance, has disclosed that he sold up to $250,000 worth of Palantir stock last summer. Several former Palantir employees have been appointed to powerful government positions. Thiel helped to finance the political rise of Vice President JD Vance.

Tester, a vocal critic of the PATRIOT Act and the resulting expansion of government surveillance, told NPR that Palantir's problem was, more than anything, one of "perception."
"Perception is reality in Washington, DC, and in politics in general," said Tester. "But the fact is, I think Palantir has got a good story to tell, and they need to tell it. And hopefully folks will be receptive to it."
Tester said he does not share the fears that many others hold about his new employer: "I've talked to many people within Palantir. They believe the same way I do," he said. "This is an organization that believes in privacy."
He said Palantir was different from other companies because it does not build “big databases.” Though the company maintains that it does not itself collect or own the personal data processed by its software, it specializes in building systems that consolidate, store, cross-reference, and analyze vast amounts of data from different sources.
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), for instance, has used a Palantir-developed application called ELITE that combines address data from federal health records, immigration records, commercial databases, and criminal records to map potential targets for immigration raids. Shortly before the midterms, Democracy Docket revealed that ICE had tried to add voter information from at least six states to the platform.
Last month, a WIRED investigation revealed how federal agents assembled dossiers on activists observing immigration enforcement operations in Maine using Palantir's Investigative Case Management system to store information about them—including license plate data and facial recognition information.
During his time in Congress, Tester also criticized lobbyists’ influence over Congress, even while receiving more donations from lobbyists than any other lawmaker in the 2012 and 2018 election cycles.
David Sirota, founder and editor-in-chief of The Lever, said that for the former senator, the transition from surveillance critic to Palantir adviser was quite “on-brand.”
Pollster Adam Carlson described it as "just about the grossest way he could end his career."
"I can count on one hand companies that are more evil and have caused more direct human suffering than Palantir," Carlson said. "And these kinds of revolving door antics make the public even more jaded and distrustful of their elected officials."
Tester has said he would not be acting as a “lobbyist” for Palantir but would instead merely be helping it to navigate its relations with the incoming Congress, using his nearly two decades of insider experience.
Tester is not the first former Democratic lawmaker to take a role advising an industry that has drawn criticism from within the party.
Recent examples include former Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), a one-time Democrat who joined Coinbase's advisory council and helped launch an artificial intelligence industry advocacy group, and former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), who joined a fossil fuel industry-funded influence campaign to promote natural gas as part of a clean energy transition.
Melanie D'Arrigo, the executive director of the New York Health Campaign, said Tester's journey to the private sector was an example of this “politician to lobbyist pipeline.”
"Secretary Hegseth has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as secretary of defense, and subversive to constitutional government."
Rep. Thomas Massie on Monday took to the floor of the US House of Representatives to introduce articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
In introducing the articles, which he first filed in September, the Kentucky Republican said Hegseth has "knowingly executed and implemented unlawful orders" in carrying out President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran, which was launched without congressional authorization in February.
"In all of this, Secretary Hegseth has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as secretary of defense, and subversive to constitutional government," said Massie. "Hegseth, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with his duties and the rule of law."
Massie: Hegseth knowingly executed and implemented unlawful orders.. Hegseth has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to the constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with his duties and the rule of law. Hegseth thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 9, 2026
Because of this, Massie continued, Hegseth "warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States."
Massie then made a detailed case for removing Hegseth, as outlined across eight impeachment articles alleging a wide variety of misconduct and criminality.
The Kentucky Republican argued that, in carrying out Trump's Iran War, Hegseth violated the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which specified that the president cannot send the US military into combat operations absent “a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization, or a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
Massie also outlined how Hegseth systematically dismantled rules of engagement intended to minimize civilian casualties, which the congressman said led to the deadly US attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in the city of Minab, Iran.
"Reported death tolls from the strikes on the elementary school indicate that at least 156 civilians were killed, with some reports suggesting the civilian death toll surpassed 170," Massie said. "Those killed include at least 120 school children, 26 teachers, seven parents attempting to evacuate their children, a school bus driver, a pharmacy technician from a nearby clinic, and the six month old unborn child of one of the teachers also killed in the attack."
Massie: Reported death tolls from the strikes on the elementary school indicate that at least 156 civilians were killed, with some reports suggesting the civilian death toll surpassed 170. Those killed include at least 120 school children, 26 teachers, seven parents attempting to evacuate their children, a school bus driver, a pharmacy technician from a nearby clinic, and the six month old unborn child of one of the teachers also killed in the attack.
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 9, 2026
Massie also touched upon Hegseth's campaign of military strikes on purported drug trafficking vessels, which he said resulted in the "summary execution of at least 243 persons in international waters" on the defense secretary's orders.
A vote on Massie's impeachment resolution against Hegseth is expected to take place on Wednesday.