5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Here We Remain: A World That Abides Slaughter
Atop all the others inflicted on us came last week's sickening spectacle of two vengeful, lying, broken old men - one a longtime killer of children, one a petty useful idiot abetting him - alternately celebrating and threatening genocide before "we the peoples of the United Nations." Born of "the defiance of hope" to enable us to "live together in peace," the forum now hosts the perpetrators of unspeakable atrocities. Omar El Akkad: "One day everyone will have always been against this."
Even before war criminals spoke at the U.N., everyone was already against everything Trump's done, from his insane, drone-packed arch to the other $1.8 billion vanity projects to his latest tantrum over the media. Despite multiple court rulings against it, an ensuing press ban is still partly, messily in place, with CNN, MS NOW and Politico facing dubious access, other major media finally finding their spine and solidarity, and the havoc offering us the droll sight of a needy guy who never met a camera he didn’t like in a farcical silent movie, a “shrinking figure gesticulating wildly into the wind.” Ever the attention whore, he tried to compensate with weird, illegal PR stunts: Claiming an entire hemisphere, boasting, "Only Trump" and an ad pleading "Love Me" on the taxpayer dime in "an astonishing misuse of public resources more fitting for North Korea."
The final own goal of his attack on the press, teased by a frantic promo, was the launch of Trump TV: The Essentials Station, the White House YouTube channel recast as a 24/7 livestream of Trump's "greatest hits." Cue a July rant at Mt. Rushmore about "the communist menace," last year's speech at dinner with King Charles, a 2016 whine in Kentucky about the wet stairs he overcame. YouTube's real-time data let the "king of ratings" see it quickly crash and burn, from a paltry 8,000 viewers to half that to 1,000 to 704 (LOL) as J.D. announced stripping health care from 760,000 people - way below the 2,000-plus then watching birds snack on seeds and nuts. Many relished the flop - "Fascism is awesome!" - or suggested new slots: "Wake Up & Rage Tweet, Ketchup-Throwing, They’re Eating our Pets, The Great MAGA Crypto Scam, Wheel of Pardons" and, from 2:01 to 2:02 a.m., “Covfefe.”
Then came a clumsy, swooning welcome - "the deference was deafening" - for his strongman soulmate Chinese President Xi Jinping, the world's biggest jailer of journalists and never mind the "communist menace," with its empty pomp, cartoonish tour of a hole-in-the-ground ballroom and million-year helipad: "He has a great interest in granite." Accomplished: nada. The next day, with his approval rating "somewhere between Ebola and Ed Sheeran," he waddled into the 81st session of the UN General Assembly and threatened one of its130 participants with war crimes, musing, "Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic quickly and drive them into hell?" Iran's delegation swiftly walked out. Mehdi Hasan: "For shame. The president of the United States goes to the United Nations and threatens genocide against a member state in front of the world. This is where we’re at."
Slurring, stumbling, wandering at unhinged, racist length - details here - Trump boasted about murdering over 200 people “at war with civilization” in illegal boat strikes, celebrated (and inflated) the theft of Venezuela’s oil, charged trans people are a national security risk, inanely declaimed “to the (raping and plundering) victor belong the spoils” - the inept, terrifying vision of a "demagogue who hijacked American democracy devolving into a mad king before our eyes." The speech, a "sad and dangerous national embarrassment" with its "ridiculous braggadocio, narcissistic puffery, absurd demonstrable lies, open criminality and deranged, murderous threats" landed "with silence inside the hall and a pile of fact checks outside it, (the) death rattle of a rapist president and what’s left of America’s reputation on the world stage."
Afterwards, normal world leaders "went back to making plans that don't include the United States." Or, in the case of Denmark, trolling. Trump has created a fictional backstory for a "deal" on Greenland "long in the making - you could go back many, many decades, probably centuries" - that just repackages an existing 1951 deal; ahead of a meeting held later at the U.N., officials played the Sondheim song Send In The Clowns, with a long zoom to Rubio. At this point, writes Paul Krugman, it's "Underwear on the Outside” time, a callback to Woody Allen's 1971 film Bananas about a third-world nation's absurd strongman. Coverage of the U.N., he noted, focused on Trump's rabid rejection of global cooperation or the fact almost everything he said was a lie. The bigger story: "The leader of what used to be the world’s most powerful nation, now collapsing before our eyes, has clearly, undeniably lost his mind."
Other speakers tried to steer the conversation back to reality. Secretary-General António Guterres stressed the primacy of international law, especially in Palestine, calling the birth of the U.N. "an act of defiance (by) people who refuse to surrender the future to fear...who know our futures are bound together." But with accountability: The U.N. deems Gaza "a collective crime," a "live-streamed atrocity...sustained by the complicity of influential third states"; their complicity must be confronted for the rule of law to survive. Holding photos of Iranian children killed in U. S. strikes, Iran's president Masoud Pezeshkian argued it is Trump who has defied international law, while Iran has remained committed to negotiations. “We have only defended ourselves. We are not terrorists." He also called for accountability on all sides, asking "why Israel kills, yet Iran is subject to sanction.”
Israel kills. And Benjamin Netanyahu offered a bellicose "potpourri of lies and incitement" to deny it. In his "furious, ugly and disgraceful" diatribe, he called universal charges of genocide "the biggest lie of the century," summoning the chutzpah to call the carnage in Gaza "the opposite of genocide." Anyone who disagreed, he raved, was "a moral coward." They include about half the Assembly, who walked out as Zionist allies chanted “Am Yisrael Chai," "the Nation of Israel lives"; hundreds of protesters outside, with about 100 arrested, among them Brooklyn Council Member Chi Ossé, who later posted a selfie in handcuffs with “Free Palestine. Netanyahu burn in hell"; and world leaders "spreading lies about my country and our brave soldiers." They are all "tyrants (in) a global anti-Jewish conspiracy (to) erase us from the face of the Earth," Bibi brayed. "Instead of collapsing, we delivered devastating blows to all of them with our great American friends."
There was much more. He brandished a pager in tribute to Israel's 2024 operation targeting Hezbollah in Lebanon that killed 12 and wounded over 3,000. He dismissed settler violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank as the work of "juvenile delinquents." He said bombing Iran was "’one of the easiest decisions I’ve ever had to make." Truly shameless, he claimed Israel still has "the most moral army in the world.” He denied a Haaretz report, confirmed by the New York Times, that Egypt's intel chief warned him in September 2023 that Hamas was planning "a major attack" but he declined to pass the tip on to his intelligence agencies. He assailed as "anti-Semitic" the duly elected mayor of his host city, who deems him a war criminal and wants the ICC's arrest warrant against him enacted. He claimed "many Jews no longer feel safe in New York." He evidently doesn't either; he flew into New Jersey.
He ended his speech with a Bible verse from Samuel that describes the genocide of the Amalek, enemies of Israel, after God orders King Saul, "‘Go and completely destroy those wicked people." Saul mostly does, but spares their king and “the best of the sheep and cattle." Then the prophet Samuel admonishes him: "(God) sent you on a mission, but you have rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord has rejected you as king over Israel." Samuel's murderous gist: “Nezah Israel lo yeshaker,” or "the eternity of Israel will not falter.” The lesson Bibi draws: "We have no choice but genocide." And so they undertook it: Over 73,900 direct deaths, about half women and children. Over 175,000 wounded, often gravely. An estimated, obscene 641,000 ultimately dead, from destruction of the healthcare system, malnutrition, disease. The bodies of perhaps 10,000 more still lie under the rubble.
And the devastation goes on. Under Israel's blockade, there is widespread hunger, 90% of Gazans remain homeless, trauma and illness go untreated. More than 900 wheelchairs donated by two Australian non-profits for over 11,000 disabled children - Gaza has the most child amputees per capita in the world - are held hostage in Jordan warehouses by outlandish Israeli restrictions on anything that could "serve a military purpose." Other targets of insane "dual-use" ban: Portable toilets, sleeping bags, tarps. bandages, diapers, shampoo, tent poles. And evidently kites after Bibi declared "targeted strikes”against the launch of any kites, balloons or drones, with the IDF ordered to "act forcefully" against perps in a besieged hellhole where Palestinian children are deemed “explosives of the future." "What a childhood in Gaza teaches: Want less."
The cruelty, madness, loss continue to spark palpable rage. Actor Mandy Patinkin, a Jew aware of history, on the corrosive effect of "the revenge business": "How could it be done to you and your ancestors, and you turn around and do it to someone else?!” Omar El Akkad - born in Egypt, raised in Qatar and Canada, a US citizen - on "what it means to live under an ordering of the world that abides slaughter, and whether any ordering ever stood for anything at all." He wrote the book One Day Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, though its full title is One day, when it’s safe, when there’s no personal downside to calling a thing what it is, when it’s too late to hold anyone accountable, everyone will always have been against this,” what one critic calls "a cathartic savaging" of empire, Western hypocrisy on Gaza, selective empathy in "the most privileged sliver of global society."
"When the unspeakable happens, the world should stop but it doesn't," he writes of the comforting bubble of a white nationalist world run by broken men and their accomplices. They blithely "shrug at one kind of slaughter," having developed "a terrible immunity...When it mattered, who sided with justice and who sided with power?” The time to choose is now, he adds, and hindsight will not undo or excuse their crimes: "At the time they say, 'Yes, this is tragic, but necessary'...The alternative to the countless killed and maimed and orphaned...screaming from under the rubble (is) barbarism.” "There is no way to finish the sentence, 'It is unfortunate that tens of thousands of children are dead but...'" he movingly writes. "There is no such thing as someone else’s children."
The evening after Netanyahu attacked Zohran Mamdani as anti-Semitic - Mamdani dismissed the "baseless lies meant to sanitize his genocide against Palestinians" - the good mayor was home at Gracie Mansion, busy with one of Carver's "small, good things." The mayor hosted Palestinian families from Gaza who have lost family members or made their way to America as refugees to "honor their contributions (and) acknowledge the losses they have endured." They ate a meal; a smiling Mamdani glided around the table, filling water glasses. They also planted an olive tree - for Palestinians, source of food, wood, fuel and symbol of peace, hope, resilience, a deep connection to their heritage and ancestral land. Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish: ‘"Here we remain, as long as thyme and olives remain." Zohran Mamdani: "May peace be our future."
A young boy in Gaza mourns his murdered mother Getty Image
Sep 28, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Guterres Hailed for Fiery Outgoing Speech Demanding Polluters Pay for Climate Crisis
With United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres set to leave his post at the end of this year, he used his final address to the UN General Assembly on Monday to share a familiar call: "Polluters must pay" for fueling the global climate emergency.
Since the Portuguese politician began his first five-year term leading the world body nearly a decade ago, he has repeatedly called for international action to rapidly phase out the coal, gas, and oil that are heating up the planet. In late 2023, he emphasized that "the science is clear. The 1.5°C limit is only possible if we ultimately stop burning all fossil fuels. Not reduce. Not abate."
The UN chief announced at the end of 2024 that "the top 10 hottest years on record have happened in the last 10 years," and declared: "This is climate breakdown in real time. We must exit this road to ruin." Last year, he argued that fossil fuels represent "the greatest threat to energy security today," and countries clinging to them are "sabotaging" their own economies and futures.
Earlier this month, after a UN report found that at least temporarily surpassing the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting temperature rise this century to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels is now inevitable, Guterres stressed that "this summer’s scorching heat, raging wildfires, and deadly floods are a warning of what lies ahead," and called for making the overshoot "as small and short as possible."
Speaking to the General Assembly on Tuesday, he cited that recent finding: "Now we face a near-certain breach of the 1.5-degree limit, with a supersized El Niño speeding straight for humanity. The dangers are real. But so is the hope."
"The sun belongs to no one. The wind cannot be embargoed. Innovation can come from everywhere," he said. "Renewables are now the cheapest source of new electricity in most of the world. And the most viable path to energy security, independence, and sustainable growth... A future beyond fossil fuels is in sight. The question is how."
"Will it be a just and orderly transition built on international cooperation—or chaotic and costly, leaving people and countries behind?" he asked, urging every government to adopt a Paris Agreement-aligned national plan to transition away from fossil fuels.
"We know that fossil fuel interests won't step aside on their own. For decades, Big Oil has treated the atmosphere as an open sewer—and cashed in on the consequences," he acknowledged. "We have seen this kind of abuse of power before. When the harms of Big Tobacco became undeniable—governments acted. The climate crisis demands the same determination."
According to the UN chief: "Those who polluted the most—and profited the most—must do far more to repair the damage they caused. Polluters must pay. And to the leaders, cities, civil society and citizens working to hold them accountable: I say, you are on the right side of history. Keep going."
"And governments must keep going on all fronts: To end deforestation. Invest in grids and storage. Cut methane emissions," he continued. "But these actions are not enough: We need climate justice with a focus on adaptation and finance. Developed countries must respect their commitments. They must triple adaptation finance.And make the Loss and Damage Fund work at scale."
"We must also ensure that the mining of critical minerals does not dig deeper into the inequities of the past," he added. "Producing countries and affected communities must retain a far greater share of the value created from their resources. No more plundering. No more exploitation."
While Guterres' speech didn't just focus on "the power fueling climate chaos and the war on nature"—it also addressed peace and security, inequality, and artificial intelligence in detail—climate campaigners welcomed the time he devoted to the crisis.
"When the UN secretary-general calls for fossil fuel companies to pay, you know this demand has become impossible to ignore," said Louise Hutchins, co-convenor of the Make Polluters Pay International Coalition, in a statement. "Millions of people around the world are calling for it, and governments are starting to listen."
His address came just a day after campaigners from groups around the world delivered over 2 million petition signatures calling on governments to make polluters pay to Selwin Hart, the UN's assistant secretary-general for climate action, in New York City.
"For years, campaigners and communities on the frontlines have been saying the same thing: The companies that profited from fossil fuels must pay their fair share of the costs of the crisis they helped create. Today, that demand is moving into the mainstream," 350.org executive director Anne Jellema noted after Guterres' remarks. "The voices of more than 2 million people are now being brought to the UN. Governments have the power to make polluters pay, and they must use it."
Enough is enough: over 2 million petition signatures at UNGA to Make Polluters Pay www.greenpeace.org/internationa...
[image or embed]
— Nick Young (@nickofnz.bsky.social) September 21, 2026 at 5:56 PM
Amitabh Behar, executive director of Oxfam International, highlighted that "the people who have contributed least to the climate crisis are paying the highest price. They are losing homes, livelihoods, and access to food and facing an increasingly uncertain future, while fossil fuel corporations and their billionaire backers continue to profit. The call to make rich polluters pay is about justice. It is about ensuring that those who have benefited most from the fossil fuel economy pay for the damage it has caused."
Greenpeace International executive director Mads Christensen pointed out that "Guterres has spent years warning leaders where fossil fuel dependence leads, and this year proved him right. From deadly heat to devastating fires and floods, the very dependence driving these disasters is shaking entire economies and leaving families exposed to volatile energy and food prices, while the companies behind it keep raking in the profits."
"New rules forcing governments to align their taxes and spending with global climate goals would raise hundreds of billions of dollars to support the countries and communities least responsible, while incentivizing money out of fossil fuels and into secure, renewable energy that actually protects people," he argued. "As long as destruction stays profitable, the transition to a safer, fairer future will keep being held back. Guterres has named the solution, governments must now act on it."
Sep 22, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'Is the President Telling the Truth?' Sanders Corners Trump FDA Nominee on His Bogus Drug Price Claims
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday grilled President Donald Trump's nominee to lead the US Food and Drug Administration about the president's false claims about the price of prescription drugs in the US.
During a Senate confirmation hearing, Sanders (I-Vt.) asked Dr. Heidi Overton about Trump's boast at this year's State of the Union address about giving Americans the cheapest medications of any country in the world.
“President Trump has claimed... that he took prescription drugs from the highest price in the entire world to the lowest,” Sanders said in an incredulous tone.
“Wow!" he continued sarcastically. "The American people are so excited to know now that we pay the lowest prices in the world for prescription drugs.”
BERNIE SANDERS: Trump claims we pay the lowest prices in the world for prescription drugs. Wow! Is the president telling the truth?
FDA NOMINEE HEIDI OVERTON: There has been immense progress--
SANDERS: Do we pay the lowest prices like the president said? You just told us you… pic.twitter.com/X7gWNbSmik
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 24, 2026
"What do you think?" Sanders asked Overton. "Are we paying the lowest prices in the world for prescription drugs?"
"Senator... there has been immense progress, especially on individual products," Overton replied. "Right now, 89% of branded drugs have signed agreements to lower their prices and make that available..."
Sanders at this point interjected.
"Do we pay the lowest prices?" he asked. "The president said it. He's your boss... He just said we pay the lowest prices in the world for prescription drugs. It's true or it's not true. Is it true?"
"Senator, we have seen..." Overton began.
"Is it true that we pay the lowest prices in the world for prescription drugs, as President Trump has said?" Sanders persisted.
"So, senator, the results that we have seen for the American people... have dropped prices," she replied. "And right now [the Consumer Price Index] says that, for the first time in 60 years, prescription drug prices have gone down by 3%."
"Which may have something to do with the legislation that we passed several years ago," said Sanders, in reference to provisions in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act that granted Medicare the power to negotiate lower prices for certain prescription drugs.
Even if Trump's policies were solely responsible for a 3% drop in drug prices, that would not make them the lowest in the world by any stretch of the imagination.
A 2024 study from the RAND Corporation found that Americans pay nearly three times as much for prescription drugs compared to the rest of the world.
Sanders' office last year released a report showing that, during the first year of Trump's second term, drug companies raised prices on 688 medications, with a median increase of 5.5%.
Trump has a long history of making false claims about reducing prescription drug costs, and has even said that he has slashed them by as much as 600%, which would mean that pharmaceutical companies are paying consumers to take their medications.
Sep 24, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Impeachment Calls Grow as Dems Say Up to $20 Million in Taxpayer Funds Were Used for 'Illegal' Pro-Trump Ads
As critics condemn President Donald Trump's trio of taxpayer-funded advertisements as illegal propaganda and "an impeachable offense," The Wall Street Journal and leading congressional Democrats revealed Tuesday that the administration appears to have used US Department of Homeland Security funding to pay for the ads.
Citing unnamed sources, the Journal reported that "Trump personally pushed for the ads and has been involved in their creation," and that the money came from US Customs and Border Protection, an agency of DHS. Top Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives said the administration apparently used CBP funding allocated in Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year.
Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Homeland Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday sent a letter to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin about the "outrageous scheme" of using "Americans' hard-earned tax dollars to bankroll the obscene political ads celebrating President Trump."
The pair noted that on September 19, the Office of Management and Budget approved a release of money to CBP, including "$20 million in new funding under the line item 'Commemorative Events,' which we suspect may well be the funding tapped to run this government propaganda."
"We should not have to remind you that using government funding to create or air political ads like the ones that have been running over the last few days is illegal and a shockingly corrupt misuse of taxpayer dollars," they told Mullin, a former senator who voted for the GOP's 2025 budget package.
Specifically, as the watchdog Public Citizen detailed in a Tuesday complaint to the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, and broadcasters, the three campaign ads "appear to violate the federal law against using taxpayer funds to finance propaganda (5 USC §3107) and related provisions of the appropriations laws as well as the Hatch Act (5 USC §7324)."
Margaret Dylus-Yukins, senior legal counsel for ethics at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, highlighted on Monday that the unlawful ads come on top of the war chest that Trump has raised—mostly from rich people and corporations—since the last election for the super political action committee (PAC) MAGA Inc.
"At a minimum, this is an appalling abuse of taxpayer dollars, particularly when hundreds of millions of private dollars are already flowing into US elections—and Trump has personally helped raise enormous sums from wealthy special interests for a super PAC devoted to advancing his political agenda," Dylus-Yukins said.
Axios on Tuesday corroborated the Journal's reporting that "Trump is personally selecting which government-funded ads his administration is airing ahead of the midterms," and one unnamed official claimed that "this is just the beginning."
With the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress just five weeks away, the administration has claimed the ads are "public service announcements." Murray and Murphy called that defense "as absurd as it is offensive," and pointed out that "the White House has failed to answer our most basic questions about where these funds coming from and who is responsible."
"The American people deserve answers about how this president is literally stealing their tax dollars to air campaign ads celebrating himself—while doing nothing to help them afford healthcare or housing. These ads need to immediately come off the air, taxpayers need to be paid back for this theft, and everyone responsible needs to be held accountable for this corrupt and illegal propaganda," the senators argued, demanding answers to a list of questions within 48 hours.
House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) also spoke out Tuesday, saying that "after gutting $1 trillion from Medicaid, stripping healthcare coverage from millions of Americans, giving the very richest Americans and large corporations massive tax breaks, adding more than $4 trillion to the deficit, and more than quadrupling funding for mass deportations, it turns out the Trump administration used Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill to pay for President Trump’s political ads."
"When Democrats reclaim control of Congress next year, the House Appropriations Committee will work to uncover and reverse misuses of taxpayer money like this and hold those who abused their power accountable," that pair pledged.
With Trump's approval rating dropping—largely due to poor economic conditions exacerbated by his illegal Iran War—Republicans are increasingly at risk of losing their current majorities in one or both chambers. In the House, that would likely mean not only DeLauro chairing the Appropriations Committee, but also Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Jim Himes (D-Conn.) Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) respectively leading the Oversight, Intelligence, and Judiciary committees.
"For two years, Trump and his family have run the presidency like a family business, getting richer by the billions while Republicans in Congress held the door open," Congressional Integrity Project senior adviser Jeremy Funk said in a Tuesday statement.
Pointing to "Gulf money" for Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, "Pentagon contracts" for Donald Trump Jr., the first family's lucrative cryptocurrency schemes, and "now taxpayer-funded ads starring Trump himself," Funk charged that "every one of these rackets depended on a Republican Congress that refused to ask a single question."
"That era ends in January," he declared. "Jim Himes, Robert Garcia, and Jamie Raskin, and every other Democratic committee chair, has the receipts, and soon they'll have the gavels and subpoena power. Trump's cronies are already lawyering up. They should be. Accountability is coming for all of them."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who could become speaker if Democrats reclaim the chamber, made clear in an interview with The Associated Press published on Saturday that "we are going to hold the crooks accountable," and "we haven’t ruled anything out," including impeachment.
While some elected Democrats and political commentators have argued that impeaching Trump a historic third time wouldn't be a good use of the party's time—particularly as the Senate acquitted him in both of the previous cases—Jeffries' comments came just days after Congressman Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who is retiring after this term, introduced over two dozen more articles of impeachment against the president.
Meanwhile, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who served as the White House ethics lawyer under former President George W. Bush, told The New York Times on Sunday that the use of federal funds for the ads could be "an impeachable offense."
"This is very dangerous," Painter said. "We do not allow government-sponsored propaganda in the United States."
This article has been updated with reporting from Axios.
Sep 29, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Judge Lets Lawsuit Proceed After Police Target Miami Beach Resident Who Criticized Pro-Israel Mayor
A federal judge has allowed a First Amendment lawsuit to proceed against Miami Beach Mayor Steven Meiner after he allegedly had police sent to a resident's house to question her over a social media post criticizing his support for Israel.
Judge Cecilia Altonaga of the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida on Monday denied defendants' motion to dismiss claims filed on behalf of Miami Beach resident and veteran Raquel Pacheco.
Altonaga said that "ordering a police visit to an individual’s home to discuss the individual’s speech can constitute a restriction on speech that would support a viewpoint discrimination claim."
On January 12, a pair of Miami Beach police officers showed up at Pacheco's door to question her about a post she made on Facebook criticizing Meiner, an outspoken supporter of Israel and its military assault on Gaza, which has killed more than 74,000 Palestinians, including over 21,000 children.
Pacheco referred to Meiner as someone who "consistently calls for the death of all Palestinians" and "tried to shut down a theater for showing a movie that hurt his feelings," referring to his attempt to have an independent theater's lease terminated after it held screenings of No Other Land, an Oscar-winning documentary made by Palestinian and Israeli filmmakers about the displacement of Palestinians and demolition of homes by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank.
Video of the interaction shows police asking Pacheco if the post came from her account and ignoring her as she told them she would not speak to them without a lawyer.
"This is freedom of speech," Pacheco responded. "This is America, right?”
The officers acknowledged that Pacheco was “not going to jail” and did not claim that she had threatened Meiner. One of the officers then explained that "what we’re just trying to prevent is someone else getting agitated or agreeing with the statement."
He added that Pacheco's statements could "probably incite somebody to do something" before telling Pacheco to “refrain from posting things like that." The officers then left and Pacheco was never charged with a crime.
Represented by the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), Pacheco filed a lawsuit in March alleging that Miami Beach officials had used police power to violate her First Amendment rights and deter her from criticizing the mayor and Israel. The lawsuit described it as part of a broader effort by officials to chill pro-Palestinian speech.
Emails released weeks after the incident revealed that Meiner personally flagged Pacheco's post to police, referring to it as a "dangerous escalation. Speaking to reporters on February 4, he defended his decision to alert the cops, saying that Pacheco's post was "absolutely false" and referring to it as "age-old antisemitism."
But Altonaga said Meiner's statements supported Pacheco's allegation that "her viewpoint motivated Meiner’s decision to send police to her home," allowing her viewpoint discrimination claim against him to proceed.
The court also allowed the ADC to proceed with its claim that the City of Miami Beach itself—including the mayor and police chief—had demonstrated a broader pattern of viewpoint discrimination against pro-Palestinian speech. The lawsuit cites Meiner's attempt to shut down the local theater, as well as its law banning government contractors from boycotting Israeli businesses, including those operating in territories illegally occupied by Israel.
It also cites Meiner and other Miami Beach officials' repeated pattern of arguing with and cutting off Pacheco and other pro-Palestinian speakers during city commission meetings while allowing pro-Israel speakers to talk with little obstruction.
During one meeting, Meiner reduced public comments for pro-Palestinian speakers to 60 seconds when they criticized the police response to Pacheco while allowing speakers who defended the police action or criticized Pacheco's pro-Palestine viewpoint to speak for around two minutes uninterrupted.
Jenin Younes, ADC's president and national legal director, said Monday's ruling was "a significant victory for Raquel Pacheco, for the First Amendment, and for all Americans who care about the right to free speech and dissent."
"The city downplayed what happened to Ms. Pacheco as a routine police visit," Younes said. "The court disagreed, recognizing that sending police to someone’s home to question and intimidate them over their protected political speech can itself violate the First Amendment."
"The government does not have to arrest you, prosecute you, or formally censor you to violate the First Amendment," he added. "The chilling effect of these actions is obvious.”
Sep 29, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Battle Over Illegal E1 Settlement in Occupied West Bank Escalates a Month Before Israeli Election
Israel's far-right finance minister and other settlers living in the illegally occupied West Bank fumed on Sunday after their country's attorney general pushed a key deadline for the widely condemned E1 project until after the Israeli Knesset election.
Although the International Court of Justice, plus governments and human rights groups around the world, have concluded that all Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory violate international law, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government has charged ahead with expansion plans, granting final approval for the building of 3,401 housing units in the E1 area last year.
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich had celebrated that decision, declaring that the project "buries the idea of a Palestinian state," as it would split the West Bank in two by connecting Jerusalem and the settlement Ma'ale Adumim. While signing a related agreement a year ago, Netanyahu similarly said that "there will be no Palestinian state."
Despite an ongoing legal challenge to the E1 plan from Bedouin Palestinians who live in the area and Israeli peace groups, Israel's Ministry of Construction and Housing last month issued a tender to build seven residential compounds with 1,234 units, giving contractors until October 19—a week before the October 27 election—to submit bids.
"This is a last-minute maneuver that is part of the scorched-earth policy the government is pursuing at the end of its term to secure long years of conflict and bloodshed for Israel," the Israeli watchdog Peace Now said at the time. "The government is trying to sign contracts with contractors before the elections so that it will be much harder for the next government to cancel the construction."
The office of Israeli Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara this week ordered a monthlong postponement of the deadline for bids, "so that it will fall after Election Day, thereby reducing the concern that the tender could be used for prohibited election propaganda."
Smotrich on Sunday accused her of "trying to stop the construction in E1" and "interfering in the election campaign" to help Gadi Eisenkot, the Yashar party leader who could lead a coalition government that ousts Likud's Netanyahu, depending on the results.
The finance minister called on Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg, who chairs the Central Elections Committee (CEC), to intervene to "ensure that the attorney general and her people do not turn into active players in the election campaign in an attempt to back up the left, prevent the right from forming a government, and to enable the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger the existence of the state of Israel."
Ma'ale Adumim also challenged the attorney general's move on Sunday, with a petition to the High Court of Justice. Mayor Guy Yifrach said that "if the claim is that continuing the tender is political, I say exactly the opposite: Stopping it now is an intervention with political implications."
"The E1 plan is already facing heavy international pressure, and developers and contractors need certainty," Yifrach added. "Is it not enough that outside Israel they are trying to deter them from the project, now we are adding uncertainty from within our home as well?"
Earlier this month, the United Kingdom, France, and Canada jointly announced bans on imports from illegal Israeli settlements, and partnered with nine other nations—Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden—for a statement that describes the situation in the West Bank as "rapidly deteriorating amid unprecedented levels of settler violence and settlement expansion, including the unacceptable decision to publish tenders for the E1 settlement project."
Then, 19 US Senate Democrats on Wednesday introduced a bill to sanction people or companies that facilitate the construction for Israeli settlers in the E1 area, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), one of the lead co-sponsors, condemning the project as "a move towards de facto annexation of the West Bank."
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), another lead sponsor and longtime supporter of Israel, said on social media Friday that "the Netanyahu campaign to extinguish the possibility of a future Palestinian state by building Israeli settlements in the E1 area of the West Bank must end. I'm leading a new effort to sanction those involved in its development and preserve a future pathway for peace."
In addition to pushing for the expansion of settlements in the West Bank, since the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, Netanyahu has overseen a genocidal war against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Despite a ceasefire agreement reached nearly a year ago, Israeli attacks continue, and the official death toll keeps rising, topping 74,000 on Sunday.
The bleak milestone came two days after The New York Times corroborated Haaretz’s recent reporting that in September 2023, United Arab Emirates President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan warned Netanyahu about now-deceased Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar's plans "for a major event" targeting Israel. The Israeli leader has denied those reports, and even threatened to sue Haaretz.
However, in a signal that Netanyahu and his allies are worried about the upcoming election, the CEC this week voted to disqualify all Arab-majority political parties from the election, while declining to take similar action against Smotrich's Religious Zionism, far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir's Otzma Yehudit, and Zehut, founded by Moshe Feiglin, a former Likud member. The Supreme Court is set to review the disqualifications this week.
Meanwhile, Eisenkot suggested this weekend that the barred parties would not be part of any government he leads. As Haaretz summarized, he said that "all coalition partners would have to recognize Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, uphold the values of the Declaration of Independence, support mandatory military service, and recognize Hamas as a terrorist organization that must be destroyed."
Yoav Segalovich from the United Arab List's Knesset slate responded that anyone seeking to lead the country must "show leadership and not fold in the face of the Likud's scare campaign," adding: "Israel needs deep change and genuine partnership, through courageous leadership. Eisenkot will not have a government without the United Arab List."
Sep 27, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
Trump SEC Accused of Letting Wall Street 'Prey On' Everyday Americans With New Proposals
"The Trump SEC is seeking to bail out the struggling private equity and private credit industry with hardworking Americans' retirement savings."
Sep 30, 2026
The US Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday proposed policies that SEC Chair Paul Atkins framed as an effort to promote private market investments by retail investors—or everyday Americans—while also "protecting those investors from bad actors and fraud," but critics accused the Republican-dominated federal agency of serving Wall Street at the expense of the public.
"Chair Atkins talks about the 'responsible retailization' of the private markets, but the rules the SEC proposed today are irresponsible," declared Benjamin Schiffrin, director of securities policy for the nonprofit Better Markets. "The SEC is supposed to protect retail investors from risky private market assets. Instead, it is encouraging investors saving for college and retirement to direct their savings to private market investments that do not offer greater returns but that do offer less disclosure and more limited legal recourse when harmed."
"Although hedge funds may charge fees based on performance to their investors, the SEC has long prohibited investment advisers from charging retail investors performance-based fees," Schiffrin explained. "This protects them from arrangements that might encourage advisers to take undue risks with retail client funds to increase their compensation. Yet the SEC's proposed rules would make such arrangements permissible. This change would eliminate a limitation on the ability of private funds that charge performance-based fees to sell to retail investors and would incentivize advisers to push retail clients into risky private funds that have performance-based fees."
The new rules would also make it easier to sell interval funds, which "hold complex and illiquid assets and charge high fees," Schiffrin noted. "Given that many interval funds have faced heightened redemption requests from existing investors seeking to exit these funds in recent months, now hardly seems like the time to further expose retail investors to these funds."
“Perhaps most troublingly, the SEC expands the categories of individuals who qualify as so-called 'accredited investors' to whom private market assets may be sold," he continued. Specifically, the agency said it is considering letting individuals with some certificates or licenses—such as certified public accountants, research analysts, and financial analysts and planners—qualify.
"Accredited investors are supposed to be institutions and individuals with enough assets to bear the risk of loss inherent in private market assets," Schiffrin stressed. "Now, the SEC would allow individuals to qualify as accredited investors without regard to their ability to lose money in the private markets."
The expert also highlighted the timing of these proposals, pointing to the agency's Monday statement that "reminded the private funds industry of its obligations regarding valuing assets and providing disclosure to investors," which Schiffrin said was "obviously intended to provide cover for the SEC's desired expansion of the private markets."
"Having previously downplayed the turmoil in the private credit markets, continued redemption requests by private credit investors forced the SEC to acknowledge that private market assets are particularly risky and to reassure investors it was not asleep at the switch," he said. "Yet the statement begs the question of why the SEC would seek to expose retail investors to the private markets at the same time it acknowledges the risks that private market assets pose even to institutional investors."
"The answer is that the SEC has lost its way," he concluded. "Its agenda is now the financial industry's agenda, and private funds need access to retail investors and their savings as institutional investors increasingly pull back from private markets. So the proposed rules the SEC issued today have nothing to do with 'democratizing access' to the private markets and everything to do with allowing the financial industry to prey on unsuspecting retail investors."
The SEC chair said Wednesday that the agency's latest moves "complement efforts undertaken pursuant to" President Donald Trump's August 2025 executive order on Democratizing Access to Alternative Assets for 401(k) Investors—which Schiffrin warned last year "exemplifies the administration's determination to prioritize the interests of Wall Street over the interests of Main Street and retail investors."
"Let's be clear: Neither 401(k) plan sponsors or 401(k) plan participants—regular, hardworking Americans—are asking to replace stocks and bonds in their 401(k)s with risky private assets," Schiffrin said at the time. "Instead, the private funds industry needs a way to get its hands on the $12 trillion in Americans' retirement accounts to boost its profits and make up for the fact that institutional investors are fleeing the private markets due to mediocre returns, higher fees, and more risk."
Despite such criticism of Trump's order, the US Department of Labor unveiled its related proposal in March. Jim Baker, executive director of the nonprofit Private Equity Stakeholder Project, pointed to the pending DOL policy in a Wednesday statement responding to the SEC action.
"With the proposed rules, combined with the DOL's 401(k) rule, the Trump SEC is seeking to bail out the struggling private equity and private credit industry with hardworking Americans' retirement savings," he said. "Private equity funds have lagged public markets while charging much higher fees, and institutional investors are pulling back from the asset class. These rules risk shifting more financial risk onto workers who rely on their retirement savings for long-term security."
"Private equity firms are already under pressure from a backlog of unsold assets and declining distributions to investors," Baker emphasized. “At the same time, policymakers are giving private equity access to retirement savers' 401(k) plans, raising serious questions about whether these investment risks are being shifted onto everyday retirement savers."
"Retirement accounts exist to provide security, not to bail out private market investments by shifting liquidity risk onto workers when markets turn," he added. "At a minimum, the SEC should hold private equity to the same disclosure and transparency standards expected of publicly traded stocks, mutual funds, and [exchange-traded funds], including clear reporting on what funds are investing in, the fees and expenses retirement savers are paying, the amount of debt funds are using, and how these investments are actually performing compared with stocks."
Key members of Congress also responded to the SEC's Wednesday proposals. While Republicans on the US Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee welcomed the push to expand the accredited investor definition, which aligns with Chair Tim Scott's (R-SC) Empowering Main Street in America Act, Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was critical.
"Today, the SEC proposed a new rule that would override decades-old protections for Americans' retirements to allow Wall Street to start charging high, private equity-level fees on lower-cost retail funds," Warren said. "Americans already struggling to save in Trump's economy shouldn’t be used as piggy banks to boost the profits of Trump’s Wall Street buddies."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Conservationists Vow Court Fight as DHS Lifts Pause on Big Bend Border Construction
"We won't let them destroy the wildest place in Texas without a fight," the Center for Biological Diversity vowed.
Sep 30, 2026
The Trump administration on Wednesday allowed a temporary pause on border construction in and around Big Bend National Park in Texas to expire, prompting renewed vows from conservationists and other opponents to fight the contentious project in court.
Laiken Jordahl, the national public lands advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), posted a court document stating that US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)k "will lift the pause on ground-disturbing activities" related to the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) plan to build border barriers and other destructive infrastructure across one of the most remote and environmentally sensitive stretches of the US-Mexico border.
The government said Tuesday in a court filing that CBP is “actively considering adjustments” to the project “that would reduce its scope and avoid or minimize potential impacts, based on input received from the National Park Service and other stakeholders."
However, those possible changes did not assuage opponents of the project, who span the political spectrum.
“We are disappointed, and urge the Department of Homeland Security to extend this pause,” Emily Thompson, executive director of the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks, said Wednesday. “Continuing with construction of border barriers, roads, and associated infrastructure inside Big Bend National Park will do unprecedented damage to the park.”
Thompson continued:
Big Bend National Park stands out for its unique desert landscape. With more nesting bird species than any other national park, towering canyon walls, and the largest international dark sky reserve in the entire world, Big Bend is an integral addition to our nation’s natural heritage. The Trump administration's plan to build a border wall through the park threatens all of this, heightening flood risk, inundating the skies with lights, and cutting off migration patterns for wildlife. Building in Big Bend would be mutilating an extraordinary landscape at a massive cost to the taxpayer—with little ultimate benefit.
Bob Krumenaker, chair of Keep Big Bend Wild and a former Big Bend National Park superintendent, asserted that “border security already works" in the park "without the need for intrusive construction."
"The Border Patrol, the National Park Service, and local sheriffs already operate an effective surveillance system with ground and aerial patrols and unobtrusive, wireless sensors," he noted. "The rugged terrain, huge distances, and harsh desert weather in the national park and in Mexico across the Rio Grande make this the least active section of the entire southern border for illegal crossings."
CBD and other plaintiffs are already seeking a preliminary injunction in federal court. US District Judge Kathleen Cardone—an appointee of former President George W. Bush—is scheduled to hear testimony and evidence Friday in El Paso on the request to halt construction while the groups' lawsuit proceeds. The plaintiffs argue that the Trump administration unlawfully waived dozens of federal laws to accelerate construction.
Indigenous peoples and their advocates have criticized DHS for waiving laws, including the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, to enable the project's construction.
In a statement issued Wednesday, CBD described some of the damage already done by construction in service of Trump's deadly immigration crackdown:
Bulldozers started tearing into Big Bend National Park near the iconic Santa Elena Canyon in early August and were documented plowing new routes for vehicle barriers into both the east and west sides of Mariscal Mountain. Contractors have stockpiled heavy equipment across the Big Bend region, where staging yards have been cleared, worker camps built, and water wells drilled.
"We'll be in court... in El Paso demanding a permanent halt to the destruction," CBD said. "We won't let them destroy the wildest place in Texas without a fight.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Ahead of High-Stakes Election, Analysis Details Economic Gains of Brazil Under Lula
"The past almost four years have seen Brazil accomplish a great deal in terms of bringing people out of poverty, creating jobs, curbing hunger, and raising standards of living."
Sep 30, 2026
An analysis released Wednesday documents some of the major economic gains that Brazil has made over the past four years during the third term of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who is currently in a close battle for reelection against rival Flávio Bolsonaro.
The analysis, published by the US-based Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), finds that, between 2022 and 2025, the Brazilian economy grew by a cumulative 8.9%, easily outpacing the average rate of growth in other South American countries.
This growth has been coupled with a drop in the unemployment rate, which has fallen from more than 9% in the second quarter of 2022 to just 5.4% in the second quarter of 2026.
Both poverty and food insecurity fell dramatically in the first two year's of Lula's term, the analysis finds, and in 2025, "Brazil was removed from the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Hunger Map after chronic undernourishment fell below 2.5%."
CEPR's report also gives credit to Lula's policies for improved economic conditions, including a new minimum wage law, an expanded maternity leave program, and increased average payments to low-income families given through the Bolsa Família program.
The economy during Lula's term is far from perfect, however, and the report flags high interest rates set by Brazil's central bank as a key factor in raising consumers' borrowing costs and increasing the rate of household delinquency.
CEPR also noted the negative impact of online betting apps, which Lula has pledged to ban starting next month, on Brazilian workers.
"Brazilian households lost an estimated R$62.5 billion (US$11.2 billion) to online betting in 2025," the report says, "while some 802,000 Bolsa Família households spent more than 2% of their income on betting in January 2025."
Jake Johnston, CEPR's director of international research, said that "the past almost four years have seen Brazil accomplish a great deal in terms of bringing people out of poverty, creating jobs, curbing hunger, and raising standards of living."
"This was done," Johnston added, "despite the lingering impact of the Covid pandemic, external economic shocks that affected the global economy, and excessively high interest rates."
The first round of Brazil's presidential election is set to take place on Sunday, and recent polls show Lula with a narrow lead over Bolsonaro, son of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is still serving a criminal sentence for efforts to instigate a coup after his loss in the 2022 election.
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Put a Real Ban on the Floor If You’re Serious': Senate Democrats Block Loophole-Laden Fake Fix to End Lawmaker Stock Trading
"This measure was a ruse, promoted by House Speaker Mike Johnson, to make it appear that congressional Republicans were tackling an ethical quagmire when, in fact, it would have accomplished very little."
Sep 30, 2026
Democrats in the Senate have blocked what they described as a loophole-laden Republican-led bill to ban members of Congress from purchasing stocks.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) blasted his Democratic colleagues on Wednesday after they declined to give the votes necessary to advance the bill—known as the Stop Insider Trading Act—past the Senate filibuster.
"The Democrats who blocked it went back on their word to protect their own wallets—they should be ashamed of themselves," Cotton said.
But Democrats described the bill, which passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives in July, as a sham. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said the bill "does not adequately ban congressional stock trading," and described it as "meaningless messaging."
While the bill would have prohibited members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children from buying stocks, it would not have required them to divest the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of stock they already own.
It also would have exempted President Donald Trump and other executive branch employees. During his second term in office, Trump has made around 30,000 securities trades since returning to office. Bloomberg estimated, based on public disclosures, that he'd made more than 21,000 trades worth between $600 million and $1.86 billion in 2025 alone.
The bill passed by House Republicans also attached a national photo ID requirement for voting as well as additional identification requirements for vote-by-mail, which voting rights advocates argued could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters who do not possess a valid photo ID.
"This measure was a ruse, promoted by House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), to make it appear that congressional Republicans were tackling an ethical quagmire when, in fact, it would have accomplished very little," said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen.
Democrats have argued that the watered-down Republican proposal was meant to sap momentum from stronger bills, amid broad public demand for a stock trading ban.
Holman noted that "there was serious legislation to stop congressional insider trading, but Johnson would not bring up any of the serious proposals for a floor vote."
A bipartisan bill that has stalled in the House would have required members of Congress to divest stock they currently own. Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled House Rules Committee blocked a Democratic proposal that would have made the president and vice president subject to the ban.
"Let’s be clear: I support a total ban on Congress members trading stock," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Wednesday. "But Republicans are trying to package a fraudulent version of that with a bill to disenfranchise American voters."
"This is politics at its worst," he said. "Put a real ban on the floor if you’re serious."
Keep Reading
Show Less
After 50 Years of Anti-Choice Hyde Amendment, Campaigners and Lawmakers Say 'Enough Is Enough'
"Everyone, no matter who they are, where they live, how much money they make, or how they get their insurance, deserves access to abortion care without barriers."
Sep 30, 2026
On Wednesday, reproductive rights groups marked half a century of abortion care being "baselessly set apart from all other healthcare," with coverage for abortions blocked in government-funded healthcare plans like Medicaid, which about 16 million women of reproductive age rely on.
"Our constituents have suffered the consequences," said the Congressional Reproductive Freedom Caucus, chaired by Reps. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.).
For 50 years, the Hyde Amendment—proposed by the late Rep. Henry Hyde (D-Ill.), who expressed his wish to prevent "anybody having an abortion" and said blocking federal funds within the Medicaid program from being used for care was the best way to do so—has stopped hundreds of thousands of people from obtaining abortion care, and has been called by anti-abortion groups "one of the greatest achievements of the pro-life movement to date."
The Reproductive Freedom Caucus denounced the budget rider that has been reeimplemented in appropriations bills every year since 1976 as "a dangerous, racist, and classist abortion ban. An abortion ban for the working class and people of color, who disproportionately receive health insurance through the federal government."
The caucus noted that more than 200 House Democrats have supported efforts to repeal the amendment, and advocacy groups on Wednesday called on Congress to pass the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH) Act, which would permanently repeal the Hyde Amendment.
"Without solutions like the EACH Act, the Hyde Amendment will continue to force people with low incomes to struggle for the care they need or carry a pregnancy against their will," said the National Women's Law Center (NWLC). "Everyone, no matter who they are, where they live, how much money they make, or how they get their insurance, deserves access to abortion care without barriers."
In addition to low-income people who rely on Medicaid, said the National Network of Abortion Funds (NNAF), the Hyde Amendment blocks abortion care for Indigenous people who use the Indian Health Service, people in federal prisons, disabled people, military service members and their families, and federal employees, among others.
Twenty-nine states follow Hyde Amendment restrictions, which include "exceptions" for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest or cases in which a pregnant person's life is at risk. Twenty-one states use state funds to cover abortion care, but nearly half of US women of reproductive age who use Medicaid live in states that either ban abortion care or bar them from getting abortions using the federally funded healthcare plan.
NNAF highlighted the network's decades of work to counter the Hyde Amendment by ensuring people who need abortions can access funding, which abortion funds across the country obtain through grassroots donations as they also advocate to end the Hyde Amendment.
"By the 1990s—less than two decades after Hyde first passed—28 abortion funds had formed across the country. Twenty-two of those funds started the National Network of Abortion Funds (NNAF) in 1993," said NNAF. "We joined together to build strategic power and end the Hyde Amendment. Today, our network has nearly 100 member abortion funds, and our fight against Hyde continues."
"The fierce abortion funds in our network have raised money, arranged travel, connected folks to clinics, provided practical support, and fought restrictions in their states and communities," the group added. "Despite endless challenges, their tireless work has built power for our collective goal: Make abortion accessible for all."
Abortion funds have helped people obtain care across the country, but the NWLC emphasized that the Hyde Amendment has still left hundreds of thousands of women with no choice but to pay for abortions out of pocket—often pushing them to delay care while they gather funds or to carry a pregnancy to term when they don't want to or can't afford to become a parent.
"While abortion costs vary by location, facility, and stage of pregnancy, the median out-of-pocket costs in 2023 were $563 for medication abortion, $650 for first-trimester procedural abortion, and $1,000 for second-trimester abortion care," said NWLC. "Those costs account for just the procedure itself, not additional expenses. And yet, nearly half of American families cannot afford the true cost of living... So, when the Hyde Amendment denies someone abortion care, the compounding costs can push people further into a struggle to survive and meet basic needs."
Dr. Jamila Perritt, president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health, remembered Rosie Jimenez, a 27-year-old mother and aspiring teacher who died in 1977, almost exactly a year after the Hyde Amendment was passed, after being denied Medicaid coverage for an abortion.
“Hyde has harmed generations of people seeking abortion care," said Perritt. "Women like Rosie Jimenez, the first known person to die because of Hyde Amendment restrictions, should still be here. No one, no matter what insurance they have access to or who they are, should be denied abortion care, full stop."
Stateline reported Tuesday that with weeks to go until the midterm elections and President Donald Trump's approval rating plummeting to record lows, anti-abortion groups are increasingly concerned that a Democratic majority could repeal the amendment, which it came close to doing in 2022.
“If there becomes a pro-abortion majority in Congress, then Hyde is going to be one of the first things to go, probably, especially because it’s been in the spotlight more recently,” Gavin Oxley, spokesperson for Americans United for Life, told Stateline. Particularly since Trump told Republicans to be "a little flexible" on the Hyde Amendment when the party was pushing to end subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, Oxley said "there are some Republicans who may not be as committed to protecting Hyde.”
Perritt expressed hope that Congress could pass the EACH Act, which now "has the highest amount of support... ever seen with over 200 co-sponsors."
"As a DC-based OB-GYN and abortion provider, I see patients burdened with the cost of abortion care, forcing them to choose between basic living needs and lifesaving healthcare," she said. "The Hyde Amendment is a zero-sum constraint that is not about patients’ health and autonomy, but instead about punishing people for making informed decisions about their bodies, families, and futures. Enough is enough."
"We do not need another Hyde Amendment anniversary," said Perritt. "We need to repeal the Hyde Amendment for good.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump’s Horrific, Illegal Iran War Has ‘Costs Us Billions While Making Us Less Safe’
"This is a self-inflicted wound, it's a choice, and it can be undone."
Sep 30, 2026
A group of experts says that President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran, which has been massively expensive and has made Americans less safe, shows the need for a radical overhaul of US foreign policy.
Scholars at the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts on Wednesday are holding a webinar to present ideas for reducing the US military footprint and using the savings to invest in programs that will directly benefit working-class Americans.
In a video posted on social media ahead of the webinar, PERI experts advocated for making major changes to US foreign policy, which they argued has left the country overstretched.
"The Iran War costs us billions while making us less safe," says a message accompanying the video on PERI’s social media account. "By reining in military spending and taxing the wealthy to pay their fair share, we can fund critical services like universal preschool, infrastructure investments, and Medicare for All."
The Iran War costs us billions while making us less safe.
By reining in military spending and taxing the wealthy to pay their fair share, we can fund critical services like universal preschool, infrastructure investments, and medicare for all. pic.twitter.com/daOFLyWHEr
— PERI (@PERIatUMass) September 30, 2026
Lindsay Koshgarian, program director of the National Priorities Project (NPP), made the case that the US can no longer enforce a policy of "maintaining dominance over the entire world."
"We have endless wars in the Middle East, a war of choice with Iran at the moment," said Koshgarian. "Clearly, something is broken about our foreign policy. It's extremely costly and, in fact, it actually makes us less safe."
Koshgarian then outlined her plan for what she described as "a smaller, safer military" that would slash US presence overseas and generate between $200 billion to $500 billion of savings per year.
Heidi Peltier, senior researcher at the Watson School of International and Public Affairs at Brown University, pointed to Trump's request for an "astronomical" $1.5 trillion military budget to argue that America's priorities have become completely warped.
"The money is there," Peltier said. "The question really is, what are our priorities?"
Peltier's research aims to "demilitarize" federal spending by reducing the annual US Department of Defense budget by 10%, which would free up $100 billion more to spend on domestic priorities.
Aaron Medlin, professor of international studies at Boston College, pointed to the ways Trump's illegal war had made the price of energy more expensive and was inflicting economic pain on working-class Americans.
Medlin said that his work focuses on raising taxes on the wealthy by taxing income generated from owning assets at the same rate as income generated from working, while also imposing a minimum tax on fortunes over $100 million, and small levies on stock, bond, and derivatives trades.
In total, Medlin estimates that the proposed tax package would raise more than $2 trillion annually.
"The United States is just becoming unaffordable for a huge share of Americans," he said. "This is a self-inflicted wound, it's a choice, and it can be undone."
The experts' proposals for reducing the US military footprint and taxing extreme wealth came on the same day that petroleum industry analyst Patrick De Haan estimated that Americans have now spent over $75 billion more on gasoline since the start of the Iran War.
When higher gas prices are combined with rising rates for diesel, the Costs of War Project at Brown's Watson Institute estimates that Americans have spent an extra $121.7 billion.
Keep Reading
Show Less
1 in 5 Children in Lebanon Facing Daily Hunger Due to Israeli Assault: UNICEF
After more than six months, 329,000 people in Lebanon remain displaced from their homes by Israel's occupation, one-third of whom are children.
Sep 30, 2026
Israel's latest assault on Lebanon is inflicting widespread hunger, death, and injury on children across the country, according to a report out Wednesday from the United Nations Children's Fund.
Children go to bed hungry in at least one in five households, according to a survey conducted by UNICEF in July, while nearly a third are going without needed healthcare because their families are unable to afford it. Four in five households, the report says, have found it harder to afford basic necessities.
Nearly 17,000 people have been killed or injured since March. Among them are 261 children who've been killed and 1,056 who've been injured—and 12% of those injured now live with a disability.
Around 100,000 children are at risk of losing access to education. At least 436 schools have been damaged across the country, including 37 that were completely destroyed.
“Children and young people in Lebanon are being asked to bear a burden no child should have to carry,” said UNICEF Lebanon Representative Marcoluigi Corsi, who noted the report's finding that 770,000 children have suffered psychological distress over the past six months due to repeated exposure to violence, loss, and displacement.
Lebanon was already in the midst of an economic crisis that left many families poor. But the situation has grown markedly more severe since March, when Israel launched an ongoing occupation of southern Lebanon that has displaced more than 1.1 million people and unleashed punishing airstrikes across the country, including in densely populated civilian areas.
More than 329,000 of those displaced have yet to go home, and around one-third are children. Despite a ceasefire announced in April, Israeli officials have said that those ordered to leave their homes will not be allowed to return until they deem northern Israel "safe" from attacks by the militant group Hezbollah.
Israeli forces have systematically razed dozens of villages and farms in southern Lebanon, destroying tens of thousands of homes. As Al Jazeera reported earlier this week, Israel has predominantly demolished Shia villages while telling Christian villages they'll be spared so long as they stay neutral.
According to a June report by Amnesty International, about 6% of Lebanese territory is effectively under a "don't come back" order from Israel with residents barred indefinitely from returning home. Amnesty said the forced displacement and prevention of return in parts of southern Lebanon constitute unlawful transfer, a war crime.
Some Israeli leaders have discussed annexing the occupied portion of Lebanon and moving in Israeli settlers.
Earlier this week, Bezalel Smotrich—the Israeli finance minister who has overseen a historic surge of violent settlement expansion in the West Bank—said that he would "very much like to annex at least… up to the Litani [River] in Lebanon," extending the country's border into southern Lebanon.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Groups Call Senate Permitting Deal a 'Blatant Giveaway to Big Oil and Big Tech'
"If it comes to pass, this deal would bulldoze America’s most important wildlife law," said one campaigner.
Sep 30, 2026
A bipartisan Senate proposal to overhaul federal permitting rules drew fierce opposition Wednesday from environmental and wildlife advocates, who warn that the legislation could significantly weaken the Endangered Species Act and other key protections in service of boosting President Donald Trump's pro-fossil fuel and artificial intelligence agenda.
Senate negotiators—chiefly Democrats Martin Heinrich (NM) and Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) and Republicans Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.) and Mike Lee (Utah)—reportedly reached an agreement Monday on the text of a sweeping permitting package intended to speed construction of energy and infrastructure projects.
While the full legislative text of the “Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026" had not been publicly released as of Wednesday, reported provisions have prompted alarm among conservation groups, who warn that the proposal would weaken endangered species protections, shift federal authority and responsibility to states, limit scientific review and judicial oversight, and exempt some projects from key environmental consultations.
“If it comes to pass, this deal would bulldoze America's most important wildlife law,” Defenders of Wildlife president and CEO Andrew Bowman said Wednesday. “We can build the infrastructure America needs without sacrificing the wildlife we have a responsibility to protect and that Americans cherish. Development should not come at the expense of science, accountability, or the ability of America’s most imperiled wildlife to survive.”
Oil Change International called the proposal "a blatant giveaway to Big Oil and Big Tech."
“This ‘dirty deal’ threatens to raise electricity prices for working families by accelerating the buildout of energy-guzzling AI data centers and liquefied natural gas export projects," said Oil Change International US campaigns manager Collin Rees. "Our recent research shows that the Trump administration’s support for reckless AI development and greater gas exports drives up energy costs for households."
Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), said that “this is a climate kill shot that condemns our most vulnerable communities to suffer decades more fossil fuel pollution."
"It’s absurd to ensure our planet chokes with greenhouse gases, gut endangered species protections, and eviscerate the Clean Water Act for what seems to be a nearly meaningless victory against Trump’s war on offshore wind,” Hartl continued. "The minor benefits for renewable energy corporations are massively dwarfed by the gifts to the fossil fuel industry."
"If this grotesque legislation becomes law, the paltry increases in renewable energy will be instantly devoured by AI data centers," he added. "The only winners here are Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, tech oligarchs, and the shareholders of fossil fuel companies.”
According to CBD:
Today’s package contains numerous provisions that lock in thousands of fossil fuel projects, including oil and gas pipelines, [liquefied natural gas] export terminals, and expanded fossil fuel drilling onshore and offshore approved by President Trump over the past two years. It also ensures that future fossil fuel pipelines and methane gas-generated electricity can never be challenged in court.
Additional provisions gut parts of the Clean Water Act, including the Section 401 authority of states to protect their rivers and streams from the impacts of building pipelines and the [Environmental Protection Agency's] Section 404(c) permit veto authority, which has been used to stop projects like the Pebble Mine in Alaska.
The legislation weakens the National Historic Preservation Act and Tribal consultations, leaving most Tribal nations with no meaningful way to protect their sovereignty when faced with potential fossil fuel projects on their lands.
Furthermore, CBD noted, "the legislation guts the Endangered Species Act by allowing states to take over the Section 7 consultation process with minimal safeguards, turning one of the law’s strongest provisions into a state-run rubber stamp of dangerous projects."
The Western Environmental Law Center described the proposal as a “five-alarm fire,” warning that it could weaken the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, [National Environmental Policy Act], and other safeguards.
“The permitting deal is a betrayal of public lands, water, and wildlife, and environmental justice values that Westerners depend on,” said Erik Schlenker-Goodrich, the group's executive director, who warned that the measure could ultimately “hobble the ability of future administrations to enact an ambitious climate and conservation agenda.”
Hartl called out Democrats Heinrich and Whitehouse for "giving away our most cherished environmental laws based on fantastical models that project a renewable energy utopia."
"They’re rewarding a ruthless fossil fuel industry that will always put its quarterly profits ahead of a livable planet and future generations,” he said. "Trump promised fossil fuel companies that he’d do everything in his power to assist them in his second term, and Sen. Heinrich and Sen. Whitehouse seem hell-bent on helping Trump fulfill that promise."
Bowman contended that "Congress should be looking for ways to make permitting more efficient rather than a Trojan horse to weaken the Endangered Species Act."
“Efficiency and conservation are not opposing goals," he added. "A durable permitting bill should deliver both. Congress should not lock in permanent damage to the Endangered Species Act simply to get a deal today.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Dems Rebuke Trump's Ultra-Rich Treasury Chief Over $910,000 in Unpaid Medicare Taxes
"Until he pays what he owes, Secretary Bessent is placing himself above the law," said Sen. Ron Wyden.
Sep 30, 2026
A group of Senate Democrats on Wednesday pushed US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to pay back the nearly $1 million in Medicare payroll taxes that he reportedly owes from his years as a hedge fund manager.
In a letter to Bessent, the senators pointed to a recent court ruling clarifying the scope of a self-employment tax loophole that is widely exploited by hedge fund managers and private equity executives. During his confirmation hearing last year, Bessent cited the then-pending litigation to justify his decision not to pay $910,000 in payroll taxes he potentially owes the Internal Revenue Service, and pledged to set up a "reserve fund to address any contingency related to this issue."
"We write to ask whether you will uphold your commitment to pay the Medicare tax you avoided during your time as a hedge fund manager in light of last week’s Second Circuit opinion about the scope of the limited partner exception," the Senate Democrats wrote in their letter. "Your avoidance and delay tactics have already cost the Medicare trust fund hundreds of thousands of dollars. Now that the appellate court has spoken, will you use your reserve fund to pay the avoided tax?"
Bessent, who has an estimated net worth of around $500 million, currently oversees the IRS as head of the Treasury Department, and he previously served as the tax agency's acting commissioner.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee and one of the letter's signatories, said in a statement on Wednesday that Bessent "is the highest ranking tax official in America and he is failing to lead by example by exploiting tax loopholes to avoid payroll taxes that every working American pays out of each paycheck."
"In Trump’s America, you have to pay your fair share of taxes, but the ultra-rich like Scott Bessent get to pay what they want, when they want," said Wyden. "Many Americans are financially struggling in Trump’s economy. Until he pays what he owes, Secretary Bessent is placing himself above the law."
The New York Times reported last year that "like many firms on Wall Street, Mr. Bessent’s hedge fund, Key Square Capital Management, was set up as a limited partnership."
"Through that structure, Mr. Bessent avoided paying roughly $910,000 in Medicare taxes on money he made running his hedge fund in 2021, 2022, and 2023," the Times reported, citing a memo prepared by Democratic Senate staffers ahead of Bessent's confirmation hearing. "Mr. Bessent’s decision to not pay the additional tax has now put him in the unusual spot of personally opposing—and having a personal stake in—how the IRS interprets tax law. And since he took office, the Treasury and IRS have backed away from developing regulations to address it."
Under Bessent's leadership, the Treasury Department has worked to deliver fresh tax breaks to large corporations, championed President Donald Trump's deficit-exploding tax cuts for the wealthy, overseen the gutting of IRS staff, and refused to close loopholes leveraged by the richest people in the US—including one that benefits private jet owners.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Federal Appellate Court Halts Tennessee's Planned Execution of Christa Pike
"So much of Ms. Pike's experience reflects widespread and systemic failures that surface in death penalty cases," said an Amnesty International USA researcher, urging an end to capital punishment "in Tennessee and beyond."
Sep 30, 2026
A federal appellate court on Wednesday morning temporarily blocked Tennessee from executing Christa Pike, as witnesses had already gathered at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville for the state's first execution of a woman in centuries.
A panel from the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled 2-1 to halt the state-sanctioned killing, after Republican Gov. Bill Lee and the US Supreme Court declined to do so. The 50-year-old, found guilty of murdering Colleen Slemmer in 1995, when Pike was 18, could still be executed on Wednesday if the nation's top court allows it.
Republican state Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti's office said: "We will continue to advocate for the lawfully imposed sentence as the courts work through this technical issue. It is common in capital cases for the defense to raise last-minute objections following decades of litigation in numerous courts. We are asking the Supreme Court of the United States to lift the stay."
Judges Jane Stranch and Karen Moore, both appointees of Democratic presidents, concluded early Wednesday that "a short stay of execution" is in order due to arguments related to the sexual abuse Pike suffered as a child—which clinical psychologist Dr. Bethany Brand described as "truly extreme," writing in 2023 that "the level of trauma she was subjected to as a preschooler through her 18th year, when she was arrested, is almost impossible to grasp because it is so severe."
As the 6th Circuit's order details, Pike points out "that the state recently reversed its litigation position that she is a liar who fabricated sexual abuse. Pike contends that the state's concession of her history of child sexual abuse and rape 'erodes the foundation' of her state court proceedings. Pike ties this erosion to defects in the federal court proceedings because... the district court was required to give strong deference to the state court's findings of facts."
"Pike also cites scholarly authority supporting her argument that the state's representations about her history of sexual abuse tainted the state court proceedings and the subsequent federal ones by introducing damaging stereotypes of survivors of sexual assault," the filing says.
Pike was "subjected to drugs and alcohol while she was still in her mother's womb" and "first sexually abused by her grandmother's boyfriend, who would orally rape her before she was in kindergarten," the Nashville Banner's Steven Hale recently reported, citing Brand's findings. "After living through periods of physical and emotional torment by extended family members and one of her mother's husbands, Pike was later raped by a known predatory neighbor."
"She was hospitalized at the age of 12 after overdosing on pills during a suicide attempt," then sexually assaulted by one of her mother's boyfriends, who had "moved into the family's home and brought with him violence and depravity," Hale continued, noting that the perpetrators who abused Pike often faced limited consequences. "When she was 17 in January 1994, Pike was sexually assaulted again, by a man who saw her walking to the store in Carrboro, North Carolina."
Hale was among the journalists at the prison in Nashville on Wednesday morning. He said on social media that "I'm told the state has until midnight to carry out the execution. Still unclear what happens next, but prison officials are bringing those of us witnessing the execution inside now to be ready."
The journalist added just after noon Central Time that "prison officials have brought us back outside now while we continue to wait for news from the Supreme Court."
Following the 6th Circuit's decision, the ACLU—whose Capital Punishment Project works to repeal the death penalty in the United States—took to social media, urging the public to "tell Gov. Lee to respect the court's decision and call off her execution NOW."
"Gov. Lee's 615-741-2001 mailbox is full—contacting him through this form is the quickest way to reach his office," the legal group explained, sharing a link to the relevant page on the state government's website.
Lee had said Monday that "after deliberate consideration of Christa Gail Pike's request for clemency, and after a thorough review of the case, I am upholding the sentence of the state of Tennessee and do not plan to intervene."
Attorneys for Pike—Stephen Ferrell, Kelly Gleason, and Randy Spivey—responded that they were "deeply saddened and heartbroken by Gov. Lee's decision to deny clemency," emphasizing that "throughout her childhood, Christa was failed by people and institutions that should have shown her care and meaningful intervention."
"The 18-year-old girl suffering from severe mental illness and near-debilitating trauma no longer exists," the lawyers said. "Christa is a 50-year-old remorseful woman who understands her actions, receives proper treatment for her mental illness, and provides for and guides fellow incarcerated women."
"With this decision, the state of Tennessee is ignoring what both science and our legal system have decided: An 18-year-old brain is not an adult brain, and 18 is too young to face execution. This decision also leaves unanswered vital questions about Tennessee’s execution protocol," they added. "We will continue to support Christa through every remaining avenue and advocate for a system that is transparent for the people of Tennessee."
Among the organizations that have pressured Lee to block the execution is Amnesty International USA, whose deputy director of research, Justin Mazzola, recently said that "so much of Ms. Pike's experience reflects widespread and systemic failures that surface in death penalty cases."
"She endured profound abuse and trauma as a child and had serious mental disabilities that were never adequately addressed nor treated," he highlighted. "Due to inadequate legal representation, these issues were not fully presented to the jury. Knowing all that, it is unthinkable that Gov. Lee would even consider moving forward with this execution."
Mazzola—whose group opposes capital punishment under all circumstances—also stressed that "this issue is about more than one person. Amnesty International members are speaking out because the use of the death penalty remains a human rights failure. As its use continues to decline globally, the United States remains an outlier. It is well past time to abolish the death penalty once and for all, in Tennessee and beyond."
The US National Domestic Violence Hotline can be reached at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233), by texting "START" to 88788, or through chat at thehotline.org. RAINN's National Sexual Assault Hotline can be reached at 1-800-656-HOPE (4673) or by texting "HOPE" to 64673. Both offer 24/7, free, and confidential support. DomesticShelters.org has a list of global and national resources.
Keep Reading
Show Less
See More
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy