LIVE COVERAGE
Our Spring Campaign Is Falling Short
Common Dreams exists to challenge oligarchs and authoritarians. We are people-powered journalism—funded by readers, accountable to readers, and committed to reporting the news that corporate media ignores or distorts.
You Got This: Amidst the Carnage, A Beautiful Moment
Needing a break, we honor the rare sweet sliver of comity during Monday's Boston Marathon when two runners, both on course to achieve their personal best, instead stopped to help Ajay Haridasse, collapsed on the ground and unable to stand back up, over the finish line just ahead - because, they explained, "This is what it's all about...Two is better than one." Hallelujah: For now, still human after all these years.
The "beautiful moment" of compassion and sportsmanship came almost at the end of the grueling, 26.2-mile marathon known as "the runner's Holy Grail" for its tough qualifying standards and steep terrain, including Newton's iconic "Heartbreak Hill." The world's oldest marathon was inspired by the inaugural 1896 Olympics and begun the next year; widely considered one of the most difficult races anywhere, it attracts 500,000 spectators and over 20,000 dogged participants from 96 countries. "It’s a slog. It’s a grind. It’s brilliant," said one aspirant. Another: "Nothing is like it. Runners train and train and train for this race."
So did Ajay Haridasse, a 21-year-old senior at Northeastern running his first Boston Marathon having grown up nearby and faithfully watched it for years. Haridasse had passed the 26-mile mark when, he later said, "the wheels kinda fell off." After running almost three hours and struggling against cramps, his legs abruptly gave out 1,000 feet from the finish line, when he wobbled and fell to the ground. As runners streamed by, he painfully tried to stand up again, fell, tried to stand up, fell. "You got this!" a woman yelled from the sidelines, as others joined in. "You were made for this! You can do it! You got it!"
"After falling down the fourth time, I was getting ready to crawl," Haridasse later recalled. That's when Aaron Beggs, a 40-year-old runner from Northern Ireland, suddenly appeared at his left. Beggs stopped, pulled Haridasse to his feet and tried to hold him upright; Haridasse began collapsing again, only to be caught from behind on his right by Robson De Oliveira, a 36-year-old runner from Brazil who swooped in. Beggs and De Oliveira quickly lifted Haridasse’s arms around their shoulders and put their arms around his waist; then the three men jogged and stumbled toward and over the finish line as the crowd roared.
"No marathon is easy - there's no fooling this distance," says one runner of a two, three, four hour challenge run on grit and blisters, and those who embrace it often cite the importance of "athletes taking care of each other." "It's not always about crossing the finish line first, but lifting others when they fall," said one. "We do it together." When Beggs, a member of North Down Athletic Club, paused to help Haridasse, sacrificing his own time and standing, he "embodied everything our club stands for - integrity, compassion and true sportsmanship," said Club chair Jamie Stevenson, who hailed him as "a superstar (who) couldn't pass an athlete in distress. What a gentleman!"
Beggs later said he saw Haridasse fall a couple of times out of the corner of his eye, and "my instinct was just to go over (and) do the right thing." He doesn't blame those who ran past: "It’s a once-in-a-lifetime achievement. You have to put yourself in front of others. This time, I just happened to put somebody else in front of me...It's one of those things in life - you've got an option at any moment in time. It could be me on my next marathon." As they crossed the finish line, a wheelchair "flew past." He thought it was for Haridasse, but it was for De Oliveira, who'd passed out: "He used everything in him to get Ajay across the line."
"It was a split-second decision," De Oliveira later wrote of stopping when he saw Haridasse collapse. “I knew I wouldn’t have the strength to help him on my own. In that moment, I thought, ‘God, if someone stops, I’ll stop too and help him. And God was so generous...because two are stronger than one." In the end, De Oliveira's time was 2hr 44min 26sec, followed by Haridasse at 2:44:32 and Beggs at 2:44:36. All three qualified for next year's race, and all plan to run again - "God willing," said De Oliveira. Haridasse later thanked his two rescuers; despite his own near-obliteration, he called the race "the greatest experience ever."
In a searing piece about the 2013 Boston Marathon terrorist bombing that killed five and wounded almost 300 - "All My Tears, All My Love" - Dave Zirin contrasted that tragedy with the historic joy of the Marathon. In 1967, Kathrine Switzer became the first woman to run it, registering as K.V. Switzer and dressing in loose sweats. Five miles in, when a rabid official noticed her and tried to force her out, male runners fought him off: "For them, Kathrine Switzer had every right to be there." The moment, Zirin wrote, "gave us all a glimpse of the possible...of the world we'd aspire to live in." This week, Beggs and De Oliveira gave us another.
"If you are losing faith in human nature, go out and watch a marathon." - Kathrine Switzer
Mike Johnson to Unleash 'Catastrophic' Attack on Endangered Species Act
Conservationists warned Monday that "Earth Day could become Extinction Day" if Republican leaders in the US House of Representatives get their way.
Elected Republicans have long set their sights on the historic Endangered Species Act of 1973—and wildfire defenders sounded the alarm in December, when the Republican-led House Natural Resources Committee advanced Chair Bruce Westerman's (R-Ark.) ESA Amendments Act.
"If this bill passes, protections for species like the Florida manatee, monarch butterfly, and California spotted owl would immediately decrease," Earthjustice legislative director for lands, wildlife, and oceans Addie Haughey warned at the time.
Since then, President Donald Trump has continued his war on endangered species with his budget request for the 2027 fiscal year, and his administration's so-called "God Squad" unanimously approved an "unprecedented" exemption allowing fossil fuel operations in the Gulf of Mexico to ignore ESA protections.
Now, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) plans to take up Westerman's bill this week—potentially on Wednesday, Earth Day.
"At a time when wildlife is already under immense pressure from habitat destruction, climate change, pollution, and industrial development, Congress should be strengthening the Endangered Species Act, not tearing it apart," said Jewel Tomasula, policy director of the Endangered Species Coalition, which has hundreds of member organizations.
"If Rep. Bruce Westerman and Speaker Johnson have their way, Earth Day will become Extinction Day," Tomasula warned. "The urgency is real. This bill is catastrophic for threatened and endangered species."
Susan Holmes, the coalition's executive director, emphasized that "the Endangered Species Act works because it is rooted in science and because it recognizes a simple truth: Once a species is gone, it is gone forever."
"We should not allow politicians to dismantle protections that have saved bald eagles, gray whales, peregrine falcons, and so many other species from disappearing forever," she declared.
Holmes also noted that "the American people overwhelmingly support the Endangered Species Act" and "understand that protecting wildlife is not a partisan issue. It is about responsibility, stewardship, and ensuring that future generations inherit a world still rich with wild species and wild places."
Polling commissioned by IFAW and conducted online last year by Beekeeper Group found that over three-quarters of Americans say they are concerned about the environment, the welfare of animals, and conserving nature, and specifically support the goals of the ESA. That aligns with figures from surveys conducted over the past three decades, according to a 2025 analysis.
The U.S. House is scheduled to vote on the so-called "ESA Amendments Act" (H.R. 1897) on Earth Day, April 22. H.R. 1897 would drastically weaken the Endangered Species Act and decrease protections for threatened and endangered species.TAKE ACTION >>> wildernesswatch.substack.com/p/the-extinc...
[image or embed]
— Wilderness Watch (@wildernesswatch.bsky.social) April 20, 2026 at 3:23 PM
"Protecting the nation's wildlife and habitats has never been an issue of right or left—it is a shared value and a commitment to future generations," said Cassie Ferri, legislative analyst at Defenders of Wildlife, in a Monday statement. "Instead of honoring Earth Day, Congress is turning it into 'Destroy Earth Day' by attempting to dismantle one of our nation's most foundational conservation laws. We all depend on healthy ecosystems to thrive, and the vast majority of Americans want to preserve wildlife through a strong Endangered Species Act—yet time and again Congress blatantly disregards their voices."
The advocacy group director of legislative affairs, Mary Beth Beetham, said that "shameless attempts by some members of Congress to dismantle the Endangered Species Act demonstrate a profound disregard for how valuable this law is to wildlife conservation."
"The Endangered Species Act isn't just rhetoric—it's proven effective and has safeguarded imperiled species for more than 50 years," Beetham stressed. "This bill could be the driving force behind future extinctions and would set a dangerous precedent for wildlife legislation moving forward."
The U.S. House is expected to vote on H.R. 1897 next week—the most dangerous bill facing endangered species right now! It prioritizes profits over science-based safeguards and blocks judicial review. ACT NOW and tell your lawmakers #NOHR1897!ACT NOW at TeamWolf.Org!
[image or embed]
— Team Wolf (@team-wolf.bsky.social) April 17, 2026 at 4:01 PM
Defenders of Wildlife is among nearly 300 groups that have signed on to a Monday letter—shared with Common Dreams by another signatory, Humane World for Animals—urging US House members to "vote NO on HR 1897, which is a damaging bill that would dramatically weaken the ESA and make it harder, if not impossible, to achieve the progress we must make to address the alarming rate of extinction our planet now faces."
Westerman's bill, the letter says, "would significantly rewrite key portions of the ESA to prioritize politics over science and inappropriately shift responsibility for key implementation decisions from the federal government to the states, many of which do not have sufficient resources or legal mechanisms in place to take the lead in conserving listed species."
"It would place significant new administrative burdens on already overburdened agencies," the letter continues. "It would turn the current process for listing and recovering threatened and endangered species into a far lengthier process that precludes judicial review of key decisions."
While Republicans can pass legislation along party lines in the House, they usually need at least some Democratic support in the Senate—due to chamber rules, which can be changed—to send a bill to Trump's desk.
Risk of 'Significant and Severe' Food Crisis If Strait of Hormuz Remains Shut, Says Top UN Official
A top United Nations official on Tuesday warned that there is a real risk of a global food crisis if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed to shipments of fertilizer.
Jorge Moreira da Silva, executive director of the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS), said in an interview with UN News that roughly one-third of global fertilizer shipments flow through the Strait of Hormuz, and its closure has caused "a massive disruption in the supply chain of fertilizers," and "clearly we are seeing a crisis emerging" in the agricultural industry.
The UN official also emphasized the need for a fast resolution to the crisis to prevent catastrophic food shortages as tensions continued to escalate in the strait in recent days, with both the US and Iran seizing vessels in the area.
"We can’t wait until everything is fixed to at least get something fixed in time for the planting season," he emphasized. "The planting season has already started, and in most countries in Africa it will end in May. So, if we don’t get some solution immediately, the crisis will be very significant and severe, particularly for the poorest countries and for the poorest citizens."
While poorer nations are most vulnerable to fertilizer supply shocks, wealthy nations like the US are taking a hit as well.
A survey released last week by the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) found that 70% of US farmers say the price of fertilizer has grown so high that they will not be able to afford all they need for the 2026 planting season.
Analysis conducted by AFBF found that, since President Donald Trump illegally launched his war with Iran in late February without any congressional approval, "nitrogen fertilizer prices have risen more than 30%, while combined fuel and fertilizer costs have increased roughly 20% to 40%."
AFBF also found that the cost of widely used urea fertilizers "have increased by 47% since the end of February, marking the largest month-to-month percentage increase" ever.
Zippy Duvall, president of AFBF, warned that "without the necessary fertilizers, we’ll face lower yields and some farmers will reduce acres altogether, which will impact food and feed supplies."
An analysis published by Bloomberg's Tracy Alloway on Wednesday found that "all the signs are already pointing to higher prices" for food in the coming weeks thanks to Trump's Iran War.
"Bank of America’s Commodity Inflation Trendspotter for food and beverage companies shows March input costs up a whopping 373 basis points to 7.9% year-on-year," explained Alloway. "That jump was driven mostly by diesel and heating oil, meaning we haven’t even seen much impact from things like higher plastics prices or fertilizer just yet."
Alloway pointed to the skyrocketing price of urea as particularly worrisome for food prices, as once Midwestern farmers start paying more for the fertilizer, "you start seeing higher prices for everything from actual grains to beef, chicken, eggs, ethanol," and more.
The bottom line, Alloway wrote, is "rising fertilizer prices are now hitting farmers, and eventually those will translate into higher wholesale food prices which will (assuming higher costs are passed onto consumers) eventually land at grocery stores too."
"The inflationary impulse doesn’t arrive all at once," she added, "it builds."
TMZ Confronts Hegseth Over Whether He's on a 'Power Trip' When Ordering 'Extreme Level of Violence'
At the latest press briefing at the Pentagon on Friday, in addition to issuing his latest threat to journalists who publish classified information obtained from sources, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth peppered his comments with the violent rhetoric that's become commonplace in his public remarks.
The US military will "shoot and kill" if Iranian boats are found trying to disrupt passage through the Strait of Hormuz, which remains closed following the extension of a ceasefire this week, said Hegseth.
He added, "We will shoot to destroy, no hesitation, just like the drug boats in the Caribbean"—a reference to strikes that have killed at least 180 people the US has accused of trafficking drugs, in an operation that has been widely condemned as one of extrajudicial killings or murder.
"The War Department stands ready for what comes next, locked and loaded," said the secretary, who has also denigrated what he refers to as "stupid" rules of engagement meant to protect civilians. "We'll use up to and including lethal force if necessary."
Amid Hegseth's escalating efforts to control the media's coverage of his department, including the Pentagon's firing on Thursday of the ombudsman of the military newspaper Stars and Stripes and his demand that journalists agree to a policy prohibiting coverage that the department has not approved, an outlet that's new to Capitol Hill made its way into the press briefing room Friday—and asked the top military official a question that hadn't previously come up about the deadly attacks he's ordered in recent months.
“I’ve heard you talk a lot about bombing people and places," said Jacob Wasserman of the celebrity news outlet TMZ, which has recently expanded its political coverage by opening an office in the nation's capital. "And when you give these orders to carry out this extreme level of violence, what’s going through your mind and your body? Do you have, like, an adrenaline rush? Are you scared? Do you feel like you’re on a power trip?"
WATCH: @TMZ’s first question at a Pentagon briefing...@jacob_wass: “I’ve heard you talk a lot about bombing people in places. And when you give these orders to carry out this extreme level of violence, what’s going through your mind and your body? Do you have, like, an… pic.twitter.com/94IHsMHP1D
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 24, 2026
Hegseth appeared perplexed before smirking and dismissing the query as "a very TMZ question." He quickly denied that a "power trip" plays into his decisions to strike targets in places including Iran, where at least 3,375 people have been killed in US-Israeli strikes, including at least 200 children; the Caribbean Ocean and Pacific Ocean, where the boat bombing campaign is continuing; and Ecuador, where US troops launched a joint campaign with the nation's military last month, targeting suspected drug traffickers on land.
He said his "only thought process is to ensure that our war fighters have everything they need to be successful, defeat and destroy the enemy," before adding some more of the violent rhetoric Wasserman had alluded to about bringing "maximum violence to the enemy."
Some scoffed at Wasserman's question, but others, including Drop Site News journalist Julian Andreone, applauded the reporter for publicly suggesting and confronting Hegseth about the possibility that he enjoys ordering US troops to kill people in foreign countries, including many civilians, in operations that legal experts say violate international law.
"I’ve never seen the corporate media hacks even dream of having the courage to ask something like this, yet they continue to shove the fancy name of their organization in everybody’s faces while looking down their noses at TMZ," said Andreone.
Wasserman's colleague, Charlie Cotton, followed up with a question about whether Hegseth, who has claimed the Department of Defense has been renamed the Department of War—although congressional approval would be needed for such a change—would consider again rechristening the agency as the Department of Peace, "since that's what we're all after."
The question prompted Hegseth, moments after demanding "maximum violence," to remark that "the one institution that should win the Nobel Peace Prize every single year is the United States military, because we are the guarantor of the safety and security, not just of our country, but of a lot of people in this world."
TMZ's first appearance in the briefing room and its arrival in Washington, DC come at a time when the corporate media's coverage of the Iran war and other military operations has been compared to the drumbeating tone in the national press ahead of the George W. Bush administration's invasion of Iraq in 2003, and as some have called for more adversarial coverage of the White House and the political establishment.
The outlet, which is more accustomed to publishing celebrity gossip, spent recent weeks publishing photos of federal lawmakers vacationing during the partial government shutdown, with TMZ founder Harvey Levin interviewing one Transportation Security Administration worker who had been reporting to work for weeks without pay on the company's weekday show, "TMZ Live."
Levin urged viewers to who saw members of Congress on vacation during the shutdown to "take a picture and send it to us at TMZ. We will post that picture on our website, on our social media, and we will put it on our television shows. We want to show what they are doing at your expense.”
Levin told The Hollywood Reporter earlier this month that TMZ's presence in Washington will “sometimes be fun, sometimes intensely serious."
The headline the outlet chose for its brief write-up of Wasserman's question to Hegseth on Friday was, "TMZ DC to Pete Hegseth: Do You Get Off on Dropping Bombs???"
Journalist Krystal Ball of the online news show "Breaking Points" said that if Wasserman's question to Hegseth was a "'TMZ question,' I’m excited to see more of what TMZ will bring to the table."
Groups Issue World Cup Travel Advisory Over ‘Deeply Troubling Human Rights Landscape’ in US
A coalition of more than 120 US-based civil society groups on Thursday issued a travel advisory ahead of the upcoming FIFA Men's World Cup over what the ACLU called the "deteriorating human rights situation" in the United States amid the Trump administration's deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, suppression of free speech, and more.
Citing the "absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA"—world soccer's governing body—"host cities, or the US government," the coalition published a warning urging "fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States" for the tournament to "have an emergency contingency plan."
The US, Canada, and Mexico are jointly hosting the tournament, which is set to kick off with group stage matches in Mexico City and Guadalajara on June 11 and Los Angeles and Toronto the following day.
"World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown," the coalition wrote.
BREAKING: We're joining over 120 organizations issuing a travel advisory to warn anyone visiting the U.S. for the 2026 FIFA World Cup of possible civil and human rights violations.FIFA must pressure the Trump administration to protect the people traveling to and working at the games.
— ACLU (@aclu.org) April 23, 2026 at 7:12 AM
"While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all," the advisory continues, "those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm."
According to the groups, those harms potentially include:
- Arbitrary denial of entry and risk of arrest, detention, and/or deportation of non-US nationals—even those with prior authorization from the US government;
- Expanded restrictions and limitations on travel and entry into the United States, given the Trump administration's ban or severe restriction on entry of people from 19 Global South nations;
- Invasive social media screening and searches of electronic devices as part of admission to the United States;
- Violent and unconstitutional immigration enforcement, including racial profiling and other discrimination by law enforcement;
- Suppression of speech and protest and increased surveillance; and
- Serious risk of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and in some cases, death, while in immigration detention facilities or custody.
Visitors are also advised to download Human Rights First's ReadyNow! mobile app "to notify trusted contacts in case of possible detention."
Journalists covering the tournament are urged to "consult resources from the Committee to Protect Journalists or Reporters Without Borders for information on how to keep themselves safe while entering the US and while reporting inside the country."
Daniel Noroña, Americas advocacy director at Amnesty International USA, said in a statement Thursday that “fans, journalists, and others traveling to the United States for the 2026 FIFA World Cup risk encountering a deeply troubling human rights landscape, shaped by the Trump administration’s racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest."
ACLU human rights program director Jamil Dakwar said that “FIFA has been paying lip service to human rights while cozying up with the Trump administration, putting millions of people at risk of being harmed and their basic rights violated."
“The Trump administration’s abusive actions continue to threaten our communities, tourists, and fans alike—and it’s past time that FIFA use its leverage to push for meaningful policy changes and binding assurances that will make people feel safe to travel and enjoy the games," Dakwar added.
FIFA faced worldwide ridicule for awarding President Donald Trump its first-ever Peace Prize last December amid his administration's illegal high-seas boat-bombing spree, and just ahead of his bombing of Nigeria, kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, launch of the US-Israeli war of choice against Iran, and threats to attack several other countries.
Despite US bombing that's killed thousands of its people—including hundreds of children—and FIFA's refusal to relocate its matches outside the United States, Iran, which easily qualified, is planning to take part in the tournament.
On Thursday, Iran's embassy in Italy decried what it called a "morally bankrupt" effort by US Special Envoy for Global Partnerships Paolo Zampolli to ban it from the tournament and replace its bracket slot with Italy, which is reeling from missing its third consecutive World Cup final.
PEN America Sounds Alarm Over Pentagon's Firing of Stars and Stripes Ombudsman
PEN America, one of the nation's leading free expression groups, voiced alarm Friday at the Pentagon's firing of the ombudsman for the military newspaper Stars and Stripes, warning the move marks yet another blow to US press freedoms amid the Trump administration's war of choice in Iran and other lawless actions across the globe.
"Even as the nation is at war, Pentagon leadership is silencing independent voices that uphold credible reporting, part of a broader pattern of restricting press access to evade scrutiny," Tim Richardson, PEN America's journalism and disinformation program director, said in a statement. "Congress must defend the statutory independence of Stars and Stripes so that service members can continue to rely on it for independent reporting.”
Jacqueline Smith, who was tasked with upholding the Stars and Stripes' editorial independence from the Pentagon—which partially funds the newspaper—publicly announced her firing on Thursday in a defiant editorial, writing: "Apparently the Pentagon... doesn’t want you to hear from me anymore about threats to the editorial independence of Stars and Stripes."
Smith, who has served in the congressionally mandated ombudsman role since December 2023, wrote in Stars and Stripes that while she was not given a reason for her firing, "no one should be surprised" by the decision.
"For nearly a year, Pentagon leadership has placed more and more restrictions on the mainstream media. The New York Times sued and when the Defense/War Department lost in court, instead of following the judge’s ruling Secretary [Pete] Hegseth and company pivoted, finding another way to restrict journalists. The judge rejected that attempt, too," Smith wrote. "The laser beam turned to Stars and Stripes on Jan. 15 when Sean Parnell posted on X four paragraphs announcing a 'refocus' of the newspaper. Parnell is Assistant to the Secretary of Defense/War (Public Affairs); my firing notice came from his office."
"Since his 'refocus' post, I’ve been outspoken in my columns, media interviews, talks with national free press groups and communications with Congress about the Pentagon’s moves to take control of Stripes’ content," Smith added. "This newspaper has a long history of commitment to the military community and to journalistic values. Please don’t let it be controlled by Pentagon brass."
"My responsibility to Stripes and the First Amendment was paramount."
In January, the Pentagon announced plans to overhaul Stars and Stripes with the stated goal of moving its content "away from woke distractions that syphon morale"—without offering any examples of such content.
Weeks later, the Pentagon issued a memo declaring that the newspaper was "prohibited" from using "news stories, features, syndicated columns, comic strips and editorial cartoons from commercial news media." The directive barred the paper from reprinting material from The Associated Press and Reuters.
Smith criticized the Pentagon directive as another blatant and "unacceptable" attempt to infringe on the newspaper's editorial independence.
"What is happening with Stripes is within the broader context of the Pentagon attempting to restrict the mainstream media," she wrote in an April column. "At first it was by closing off areas of the complex where journalists previously had been able to go unescorted, then it followed last fall with the demand for the press to sign an agreement essentially saying it would not use any information not authorized by the department. That’s when more than two dozen journalists from mainstream media turned in their press badges and walked out. They still cover the news."
In a message to Stars and Stripes staff following her firing, Smith said she "knew it was risky to speak out."
"But my responsibility to Stripes and the First Amendment was paramount," she added.
Bernie Sanders Leads Senators in Demand to End Super PACs in Democratic Primaries
“We cannot allow unlimited outside spending to distort our elections or drown out the voices of working people."
Sen. Bernie Sanders is leading a coalition of Democratic senators pushing for the party's leaders to require candidates to swear off billionaire- and corporate-backed super PACs, or political action committees, in this year's primary elections.
Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) joined the independent senator from Vermont to send a letter to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin on Sunday.
Five of the senators are members of a group of Senate Democrats known as the "Fight Club" that has formed to oppose Schumer's preferred candidates in contested Democratic primaries, many of whom are closely aligned with the party's traditional corporate backers.
While the senators applauded the DNC's resolution last month broadly condemning the influence of dark money in party elections, calling it an "important first step," they said Democratic leaders needed to take more "concrete steps to curb the influence of dark money," particularly the artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency industries and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
"Corporate-funded super PACs are shaping the 2026 elections as we speak, and the scale of their resources is unprecedented," the senators said. "Crypto-aligned groups are preparing to spend $200 million, and AIPAC-affiliated groups already control more than $90 million. The AI industry has already spent over $185 million this year alone. These sums are being deployed to influence Democratic primaries and overwhelm candidates who rely on grassroots support."
April's broad anti-dark money resolution was passed by the DNC in lieu of one that directly singled out “the growing influence” of AIPAC, specifically over its more than $100 million spending blitz in 2024 to oust progressive candidates. Despite a dramatic shift toward opposition to Israel among Democratic voters over the past three years, that resolution was voted down by a DNC panel.
AIPAC continues to dump massive amounts of money behind its preferred candidates. The senators' letter notes that "in Illinois alone, outside groups spent over $50 million in recent Democratic primaries." Nearly half of that money was spent by AIPAC, which secretly funneled money to support its candidates using shell groups that appeared to be unaffiliated.
The group has used similar tactics in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Ala Stanford, a candidate for Pennsylvania's 3rd District in Philadelphia, was recently revealed to have received $500,000 worth of backing from AIPAC through a super PAC despite claiming to have received no support from the Israel lobby.
Meanwhile, in Maine, a clique of Republican billionaires who back Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)—including Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman and Palantir CEO Alex Karp—also recently dropped $2 million to fund an ad campaign seeking to hamper the chances of the Democratic Senate primary front-runner Graham Platner.
"We cannot allow unlimited outside spending to distort our elections or drown out the voices of working people," the senators said in Sunday's letter.
The senators noted Schumer's past statement that overturning the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which opened the door for the flood of corporate money into elections by allowing individuals to independently spend unlimited amounts in support of candidates, was "probably more important than any other single thing we could do to preserve this great and grand democracy.”
They said that while reversing the ruling remained a "critical long-term goal," the party "has the authority—and the responsibility—to act now with clear, enforceable rules."
"National and state parties should require all Democratic candidates to sign a pledge opposing billionaire- and corporate-backed super PAC spending on their behalf in Democratic primaries," they said. "The DNC, state parties, and committees working to elect Democrats to the House and Senate have many potential tools at their disposal to enforce that pledge, including withholding endorsements for those who make endorsements in the primary, and they should use whatever tools necessary to do so."
Sanders has said that simply requiring candidates to take a pledge is not enough and that party leaders need to be diligent about holding them to it.
“If the Democrats are going to be honest and consistent in terms of their concerns about money and politics, they’ve got to clean up, in my view, their own house immediately,” he said in an interview on Saturday. “That means getting super PACs out of Democratic primaries, congressional as well as presidential.”
Billionaire-Funded Pro-Collins PAC Drops Nearly $2 Million on Ad Attacking Platner
"They’re getting scared," Platner said. "And they should be."
A super political action committee supporting Sen. Susan Collins, backed by Wall Street and tech billionaires, has dropped nearly $2 million on attack ads targeting Democratic primary frontrunner Graham Platner.
Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings noting the Pine Tree Results PAC’s expenditures on April 22 were first reported on Sunday by Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim, who noted the firm’s support from a who’s who of elite financial benefactors, many of whom have close ties to the Trump administration.
Previous FEC filings reveal that Pine Tree Results has received $2 million from Stephen Schwarzman, CEO of the private equity firm Blackstone. Infamously, those funds came right before Collins cast a decisive vote to advance President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which included major tax breaks for private equity while slashing more than $1 trillion from Medicaid and federal food assistance.
Another major Pine Tree backer is Paul Singer, CEO of the hedge fund Elliott Management and a leading Trump donor, who has been identified as one of the biggest beneficiaries of Trump's overthrow of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Aside from Wall Street, the pro-Collins super PAC has also received $100,000 from Alex Karp, the CEO of the intelligence giant Palantir, which has provided the Trump administration with intelligence and surveillance software used by the US government to target immigrants for deportation and by the US and Israeli militaries.
The company recently published what many called a “manifesto” based on a new book by Karp, which argued for mandatory national military service and the advancement of autonomous killer robot technology while railing against cultural “pluralism.”
These are just some of the donors backing the new round of ads aimed at taking down Platner before the June 9 primary, where polls show him with a commanding lead over Democratic Gov. Janet Mills on the back of a campaign laser-focused on attacking billionaire power, championing progressive policies like a tax on extreme wealth and Medicare for All, and decrying Trump's aggressive foreign wars and attacks on the rights of people across the US.
As independent journalist Nathan Bernard explained, Pine Tree Results' new ad against Platner "is essentially the same attack ad Janet Mills ran [last month], which backfired badly."
It seizes on a comment made by Platner in a 2013 Reddit thread in which he said both victims and perpetrators of sexual assaults while under the influence of alcohol need to "take some responsibility" for their actions. Platner has since disavowed these and other questionable comments he made around the time, saying, "I did not know what the fuck I was talking about.”
The ad also claims that Platner "bragged about having a Nazi tattoo on his chest." Platner said he got the tattoo, a skull and crossbones resembling an insignia worn by the SS, in Croatia in 2007 while serving as a young Marine. He said at the time he was unaware of the symbol's connotations, believing it to be merely a “terrifying-looking skull and crossbones." He has since had the tattoo covered.
While Mills and other liberal opponents of Platner have suggested these controversies may make him less electable in the critical general election—which could prove decisive as Democrats seek to retake the Senate in November—Platner has consistently polled further ahead of Collins in general election polls than Mills, with one from early April showing him ahead by 11 points over the five-term incumbent, and has rallied crowds at standing-room only events across the state.
"I thought Collins was relishing running against Platner," wrote American Prospect editor David Dayen in a sarcastic social media post. "Why wouldn't she save this until after the primary?"
Platner, who has raised three times more than Mills and Collins combined from small donors, decried the fact that the new ads against him were funded “by 12 billionaires” using “all out of state money” and “not a single dollar coming from Maine.”
However, he seemed unfazed by the attack.
"They’re getting scared," he said. "And they should be."
'More Destruction of Science': Trump Fires Every Member of US National Science Board
"This is the latest stupid move made by a president who continues to harm science and American innovation."
US President Donald Trump on Friday quietly fired every member of the independent board that governs the National Science Foundation, a move seen as an escalation of the administration's destructive war on science.
Members of the National Science Board (NSB) were notified in a brief email "on behalf of President Donald J. Trump" that their "position as a member of the National Science Board is terminated, effective immediately." One fired board member, chemist Willie May, told The New York Times that he was "disappointed" but not "entirely surprised," adding, "I have watched the systematic dismantling of the scientific advisory infrastructure of this government with growing alarm, and the National Science Board is simply the latest casualty."
The NSB sets the policies of the US National Science Foundation (NSF), approves major funding decisions for NSF, and advises Congress and the president on "policy matters related to science and engineering."
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, said in a statement Saturday that "this is the latest stupid move made by a president who continues to harm science and American innovation."
“The NSB is apolitical," said Lofgren. "It advises the president on the future of NSF. It unfortunately is no surprise a president who has attacked NSF from day one would seek to destroy the board that helps guide the foundation. Will the president fill the NSB with MAGA loyalists who won't stand up to him as he hands over our leadership in science to our adversaries? A real bozo the clown move."
Alondra Nelson, an academic who resigned from the NSB last May over concerns of political interference, wrote on social media that "history will not look kindly on this administration for many reasons, but the systematic silencing of independent expertise is particularly troubling."
Since the start of his second term, Trump and his deputies have assailed science across the federal government, including by eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency's scientific research arm and firing experts en masse.
In the coming fiscal year, Trump has proposed cutting NSF's budget by nearly 55%. Additionally, the president's budget would "eliminate funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research," Scientific American reported. The White House plan, if approved by Congress, would also slash NASA's budget by nearly 25%.
"This is how the US loses its scientific leadership—with a reckless budget line," Leigh Stearns, a glaciologist at the University of Pennsylvania, told Scientific American.