SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
In a new year that promises to be as wretched, rancorous and bloody as the last one - cue oil lust and delusions of empire - we opt to celebrate the stirring hope and promise of newly elected Democratic Socialist and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who has embraced diversity, collectivism, and the rare chance to shape "lives we (will) fill with freedom" when for too long "freedom has belonged only to those who can afford to buy it." Lesson for now: (Good) change happens.
Yeah, we know the bad kind does too, like America's heedless, illegal attack on and kidnapping from the sovereign Venezuela, "actions of a rogue state" overseen by an addled, clueless, slurring commander-in-chief (sic) making fake claims and struggling to stay upright during his own purportedly exultant news conference on storming "blind into Caracas." Add in preening drunktank bully Hegseth bragging, "America is back!" - to deadly quagmires - and spineless lil' Marco disparaging a country, ostensibly Cuba, "run by incompetent, senile men" - oops - and their brazen disregard of legal mandates to consult with Congress by dismissing that entire, pesky branch of government as "so so weak" - all told, the insane, unschooled act of hubris that is their inevitably catastrophic return to "naked imperialism" is best summed up by James Fallows: "Good God."
Which is why we'd rather bask, at least briefly, in Mamdani's stunning rise, and in the opportunity he represents "to transform and reinvent." "A moment like this comes rarely," he said at his jubilant inauguration, "and rarer still is it the people themselves whose hands are the ones upon the levers of change." Promising to govern "expansively and audaciously," Mamdani, 34, was ceremonially sworn in on New Year's Day by Bernie Sanders, a key political mentor, after taking his official oath the night before from A.G. Letitia James in the City Hall subway station. Both times, he put his hand on two Qurans - one a historic copy from the New York Public Library, and one that belonged to his father. Both times his wife Rama Duwaji, a 28-year-old designer and artist, stood by his side, and he repeatedly underscored themes of unity, equity, diversity and populism.
Mamdani arrived at his inauguration ceremony, not in a limo, but in a motorcade of taxis, a nod to a hunger strike he undertook with cabbies in 2021. In a hat tip to the trains crucial to millions of New Yorkers' daily commutes - in Mamdani's case from Queens - the PA announcer was Bernie Wagenblast, the trans subway system worker whose recorded voice endlessly warns riders, "Please stand away from the platform edge." Mandy Patinkin sang Over the Rainbow with the kids of Staten Island's PS 22 Chorus. Singer-songwriter Lucy Dacus sang the workers'/women's rights anthem Bread and Roses. Along with Bernie, AOC gave a fiery speech - "We have chosen courage over fear" - poet Cornelius Eady performed his poem Proof - "This is our time" - and Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, a son of Grenada immigrants, wept as he repeated with the crowd, "I won't lose hope."
In his soaring speech to the raucous crowd, Mamdani insisted again and again that government should work to improve people’s lives, that its job is to meet the needs of the many not the elite few, that New York, "this gorgeous mosaic," belongs to its people, all of whom deserve an equal share in its governance. "I was elected as a Democratic Socialist, and I will govern as a Democratic Socialist," he said. "Here, where the language of the New Deal was born, we will return the vast resources of this city to everyday people...Construction workers in steel-toed boots and halal cart vendors whose knees ache from working all day," "neighbors who carry a plate of food to the elderly couple down the hall," "those in a rush who still lift strangers’ strollers up subway stairs, and every person who makes the choice day after day, even when it feels impossible, to call our city home."
He also stressed, whatever their vote or politics, "If you are a New Yorker, I am your Mayor. Regardless of whether we agree, I will protect you, celebrate with you, mourn alongside you, and never, not for a second, hide from you." Eloquently, he vowed, "Together, we will tell a new story of our city," summoning neither "a tale of one city, governed by the 1%" nor "a tale of two cities, rich versus poor." "It will be a tale of eight-and-a-half million cities, (each) a universe, (each) woven together...The authors of this story" will speak Mandarin, Yiddish, Creole; will pray in mosques, shuls, churches or not at all; will be Russian Jews, Italians, Irish, black homeowners who triumphed over longtime redlining, young people in apartments whose "walls shake when the subway passes," and, drawing cheers, Palestinians "who will no longer have to contend with a politics that speaks of universalism and then makes them the exception."
On his first work day, he visited a rent-stabilized building to announce three executive orders aimed at improving/creating affordable housing: A Mayor's Office to Protect Tenants facing off against landlords and two task forces - to review city properties flippable into affordable, and to identify/eliminate regulatory roadblocks to building new housing. From the start, Mamdani's campaign boasted a singular accessibility, from his inaugural, hilarious street video - he holds a "Let's Talk Election" sign as many troop past him or report they voted for Trump - to his walking the 13-mile length of Manhattan "because New Yorkers deserve a Mayor they can hear, see and even yell at if they need to. We out here." A couple of weeks ago, already elected, he kept up that tradition with a 12-hourThe Mayor Is Listening event, inviting his wildly diverse constituents to sit down and tell him what's on their minds.
Ultimately, 144 of them did, sitting across from him at the Museum of the Moving Image, often with their kids, to tell him of their hopes and fears - cuts in Medicaid and mental health services, subways that don't feel safe, busses that don't run when they need them after work, students who spend hours on busses, floods and heat, changing migratory patterns of birds, the need to "put fresh food in front of New Yorkers," especially tomatoes, the "stain on the city" that is Riker's Island, the retaliation tenants face for speaking up, the sweeps homeless people endure only to return to the same spot four hours later having lost all their stuff, the terror, nightmares, sense of impotence around ICE, like "an attack on the entire city." One tearful woman, "I dream of being taken away, being sent to a foreign country, not seeing my mother and my baby brother again. Please protect people like me."
Many spoke of affordability, or its lack: People whose families lived for generations in neighborhoods they had to leave, who can't find a place with their new baby, who've spent decades in an apartment but now fear being homeless, who can barely afford groceries: "It's a punchline to buy anything here." A single mother asks how universal child care would work. "It's for everyone," he says gently. "Like public schools." A queer, asylum-seeking Russian, having lost her country, hasn't yet felt part of her new city or its "spaces of power" until now, with him, and starts to cry. Samina, a woman from Pakistan, thanks him carefully, softly, almost whispering, for his empathy: "When I go outside, I see happiness on people's faces, hope, light. You have changed people's hearts, you have created a softening in their hearts. Please continue to be our light and hope in this difficult time." He smiles, thanks her, grasps her hand. She leaves, he weeps.
He listens, nods, scribbles notes on a small pad, laughs at the tomatoes, promises to strengthen sanctuary policies to have no police "collusion" with ICE. He thanks a seven-year-old boy for worrying about homeless people, hugs the Russian woman who says she is excited for the first time about politics, nods he too is troubled by the accelerating climate crisis. At the end of the long, rich day, he is asked how he feels: "That was a lovely, lovely day. I feel like my cup is full with what New Yorkers have shared with me." He notes their breadth of interests, their fluency in the issues, "the reality of the stakes they live with every day." "These are people who give themselves to the city, and they rarely get much back," he says. "This is why we try so hard. It was beautiful. The bravery was incredible."
The top Democrats on a pair of key US Senate panels ended negotiations to reform the federal permitting process for energy projects in response to the Trump administration's Monday attack on five offshore wind projects along the East Coast.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Martin Heinrich (D-NM) began their joint statement by thanking the panels' respective chairs, Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), "for their good-faith efforts to negotiate a permitting reform bill that would have lowered electricity prices for all Americans."
"There was a deal to be had that would have taken politics out of permitting, made the process faster and more efficient, and streamlined grid infrastructure improvements nationwide," the Democrats said. "But any deal would have to be administered by the Trump administration. Its reckless and vindictive assault on wind energy doesn't just undermine one of our cheapest, cleanest power sources, it wrecks the trust needed with the executive branch for bipartisan permitting reform."
Earlier Monday, the US Department of the Interior halted Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind off Virginia, Empire Wind 1 and Sunrise Wind off New York, Revolution Wind off Rhode Island and Connecticut, and Vineyard Wind 1 off Massachusetts, citing radar interference concerns.
Governors and members of Congress from impacted states, including Whitehouse and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), condemned the announcement, with Whitehouse pointing to a recent legal battle over the project that would help power Rhode Island.
"It's hard to see the difference between these new alleged radar-related national security concerns and the radar-related national security allegations the Trump administration lost in court, a position so weak that they declined to appeal their defeat," he said.
This looks more like the kind of vindictive harassment we have come to expect from the Trump administration than anything legitimate.
— Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (@whitehouse.senate.gov) December 22, 2025 at 12:59 PM
Later, he and Heinrich said that "by sabotaging US energy innovation and killing American jobs, the Trump administration has made clear that it is not interested in permitting reform. It will own the higher electricity prices, increasingly decrepit infrastructure, and loss of competitiveness that result from its reckless policies."
"The illegal attacks on fully permitted renewable energy projects must be reversed if there is to be any chance that permitting talks resume," they continued. "There is no path to permitting reform if this administration refuses to follow the law."
Reporting on Whitehouse and Heinrich's decision, the Hill reached out to Capito and Lee's offices, as well as the Interior Department, whose spokesperson, Alyse Sharpe, "declined to comment beyond the administration's press release, which claimed the leases were being suspended for national security reasons."
Lee responded on social media with a gif:
Although the GOP has majorities in both chambers of Congress, Republicans don't have enough senators to get most bills to a final vote without Democratic support.
The Democratic senators' Monday move was expected among observers of the permitting reform debate, such as Heatmap senior reporter Jael Holzman, who wrote before their statement came out that "Democrats in Congress are almost certainly going to take this action into permitting reform talks... after squabbling over offshore wind nearly derailed a House bill revising the National Environmental Policy Act last week."
That bill, the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development (SPEED) Act, was pilloried by green groups after its bipartisan passage. It's one of four related pieces of legislation that the House advanced last week. The others are the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act, Power Plant Reliability Act, and Reliable Power Act.
David Arkush, director of the consumer advocacy group's Climate Program, blasted all four bills as "blatant handouts to the fossil fuel and mining industries" that would do "nothing to help American families facing staggering energy costs and an escalating climate crisis."
"We need real action to lower energy bills for American families and combat the climate crisis," he argued. "The best policy response would be to fast-track a buildout of renewable energy, storage, and transmission—an approach that would not just make energy more affordable and sustainable, but create US jobs and bolster competitiveness with China, which is rapidly outpacing the US on the energy technologies of the future.
Instead, Arkush said, congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump "are shamefully pushing legislation that would only exacerbate the energy affordability crisis and further entrench the dirty, dangerous, and unaffordable energy of the past."
New polling from The Guardian on Monday bolstered recent analyses that have shown low consumer confidence and job creation numbers and higher household costs and unemployment: Americans are struggling under President Donald Trump's economic policies, and they increasingly believe the White House—for all Trump's claims that the economy is strong—is to blame.
The poll, conducted by Harris for the news outlet between December 11 and 13, found that respondents were twice as likely to say their financial security is getting worse as they were to report an improvement.
Nearly half of those surveyed said their financial situation is worsening, and 57% said they perceived that the US is in a recession—although that would be defined by two quarters of negative growth in the US economy, which the country has not experienced at this point.
Despite that, the poll—along with recent focus groups including members of Trump's 2024 base, held by Syracuse University and reported on Monday by NBC News—illustrated how Trump's focus on imposing tariffs on countries around the world and his promotion of policies that have raised household bills for millions of people have left Americans feeling pessimistic about their own financial health and that of the country.
Democratic voters were far more likely than Republicans to tell Harris that their financial security is getting worse, with 52% of the latter saying so compared with 27% of the former.
But 54% of independent voters agreed that they are struggling more financially, despite Trump's recent claim that he would give the economy a grade of "A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus.”
"We have seen a shift among these voters collectively, cracks in their faith, more questioning, oscillating, or outright change of heart about Trump."
Respondents from across the political spectrum were more likely than ever before to blame the White House for their financial struggles, Harris said.
More than three-quarters of Democrats blamed Trump's policies and "government management of the economy," along with 72% of independents and more than half of Republicans—55%.
Analyses this year have shown Trump's tariffs, which he claimed soon after taking office would "liberate" Americans from the national debt, are raising costs for small businesses and making it harder for them to stay afloat, and are passing on higher prices to consumers—resulting in ballooning grocery bills for millions of Americans.
Trump made lowering grocery prices a central promise of his campaign last year, along with repeatedly pledging that he was "going to get your energy prices down by 50%.”
But the president's embrace of artificial intelligence and the expansion of data centers—something he and congressional Republicans have aggressively pushed states to allow despite public disapproval—is unlikely to result in lower utility prices for households. Those costs have risen by 13% since Trump took office, with the president's cancellation of renewable energy projects to blame as well as energy-sucking data centers.
The focus groups held by Syracuse recently found that voters who supported the president last year have rapidly grown discouraged by his economic policies, including his tariffs, which one participant called "a tax on the American people."
"That’s who pays for it, so I don’t support it,” David S. of New Jersey told NBC. “The people who are buying those imports are paying the tax.”
With less than a year until voters are set to decide if Republicans should keep their majorities in the US House and Senate, fewer than half of the people surveyed in four focus groups said they believed Trump has made it a priority to fight inflation and reduce their costs. Robert L. of Virginia told Syracuse researchers that the president's recent comments painting a sunny picture of the economy were "delusional."
Another Virginia voter, Justin K., said the president has been focused on "prosecuting his political enemies" and "pardoning people" and has not "tried at all" to tackle the rising cost of living.
A number of those surveyed said they had decided to back Democratic candidates Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill in this year's gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey just a year after supporting Trump.
"Many of these voters gave President Trump a long runway well into the summer because they believed that he understands how business works better than they do and that his own fortune would eventually translate to enriching the country and their own finances," Margaret Talev, director of Syracuse University’s Institute for Democracy, Journalism, and Citizenship, told NBC on Monday.
"But as the year wore on, we have seen a shift among these voters collectively, cracks in their faith, more questioning, oscillating, or outright change of heart about Trump," Talev said. "What we almost never see is a wish for a do-over vote or a rush toward Democrats for the answer."
Billionaire outrage against a proposed one-time wealth tax on the richest Californians reached a fever pitch in recent days as organizers began the process of gathering the hundreds of thousands of signatures needed to get the initiative on the November ballot.
Without providing specifics, billionaire Bay Area investor Chamath Palihapitiya claimed in a social media post that he knows people "with a collective net worth of $500 billion" who "scrambled and left California for good yesterday" to avoid the potential 5% wealth tax, which would apply to billionaires living in California as of January 1, 2026. (The evidence for significant billionaire tax avoidance via physical relocation is virtually nonexistent.)
Palihapitiya characterized the proposed ballot initiative, which is aimed at raising revenue to avert a healthcare crisis spurred by federal Medicaid cuts, as an "asset seizure tax."
Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge fund manager who lives in New York, similarly described the proposed tax as "an expropriation of private property."
The Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post, meanwhile, published a hostile editorial on Thursday denouncing the proposed tax and mocking its supporters, including Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW).
"Many progressives think of taxation the way teenage boys think about cologne: If some is good, more must be great," the editorial reads. "California, already reeks of overtaxation, but it’s thinking about trying out its most potent scent yet: a wealth tax. Just a whiff has some of the state’s wealthiest residents fleeing."
The Wall Street Journal reported that "the firms of two high-profile California investors issued announcements on New Year’s Eve about establishing new offices out of state, without saying anything about the proposed Golden State tax."
"Tech investor Peter Thiel’s investment firm, Thiel Capital, said it signed a lease in December for office space in Miami," the newspaper added. "The office will 'complement Thiel Capital’s existing operations in Los Angeles,' the company said."
Supporters say the response from billionaires and other opponents of the proposed tax—including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is helping raise money to fight the initiative—badly misses the mark. According to organizers, most billionaires see larger capital gains increases in months than the amount they would pay if California voters approved the tax.
“Asking those who have benefited most from the economy to contribute more—particularly to stabilize healthcare systems under direct threat—is not radical. It is reasonable,” Suzanne Jimenez, the chief of staff of SEIU-UHW, told the Journal.
Earlier this week, as Common Dreams reported, US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) endorsed the proposed wealth tax, which proponents say would raise roughly $100 billion in revenue from around 200 California billionaires. Under the proposal, most of the resulting revenue would be allocated to a Billionaire Tax Health Account, while the rest would go toward an account to fund food assistance and education.
A new expert analysis of the proposal, authored by some of those involved in drafting the initiative, argues that the one-time tax is urgent because "decisions at the federal level have put—and will put—California's healthcare system, education system, and broader economy under severe stress."
"Asking the handful of wealthiest Californians to contribute less than the annual appreciation on their fortunes to mitigate these crises is a small, reasonable, and administrable request," the experts write. "And that is all that this ballot measure does."
The Trump administration is planning a massive propaganda campaign aimed at recruiting thousands of new federal immigration enforcement officers to carry out its mass deportation agenda.
The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that it had obtained internal documents revealing that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is planning to spend $100 million over the next year on what the agency describes as a "wartime recruitment" drive.
The propaganda blitz will be targeted at highly specific demographics, including "people who have attended UFC fights, listened to patriotic podcasts, or shown an interest in guns and tactical gear," according to the Post.
The ICE drive would also use an ad-targeting technique called "geofencing" to send recruitment ads to users' phone browsers if they are in the vicinity of certain locations, such as military bases, NASCAR races, college campuses, and gun shows.
The ads being designed for the recruitment drive will be based around current appeals that depict joining ICE as part of a "sacred duty" to "defend the homeland" from "foreign invaders," the Post reported.
This rhetoric is similar to the language used in a recent ICE job post flagged by University of Wisconsin–Madison sociologist Jess Calarco. The listing asked prospective recruits if they are “ready to defend the homeland” by joining “an elite team dedicated to... securing our nation’s safety.”
Calarco noted that the job post "reads like a video game ad," which she said "is almost certainly by design."
Sarah Saldaña, a director of ICE under the Obama administration, told the Post that it is worrying to see the Trump administration casting such a wide net for people who lack any experience in law enforcement and who may be eager for what the Post described as "all-out combat."
The recruitment blitz comes amid new indications that the Trump administration's mass deportation campaign is falling far short of its goals.
The New Republic's Greg Sargent on Wednesday wrote that immigration arrests this year have fallen far short of the goal of 3,000 people per day set by top Trump aide Stephen Miller, and it seems highly unlikely that Miller will realize his dream of deporting 1 million people per year.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow with the American Immigration Council, told Sargent that "it's clear that they have not achieved the shock-and-awe campaign of mass deportations that they wanted, and they are still running into quite a lot of obstacles."
Reichlin-Melnick also predicted that "there will still be millions of people here who are undocumented" after Trump leaves office in 2028, as the administration "will not be able to deport even the majority of undocumented immigrants in four years."
The Trump administration earlier in the year announced plans to entice new ICE recruits by offering them $50,000 sign-up bonuses and assistance with repaying student loans in a bid to double the agency's head count.
Independent British Member of Parliament Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday accused United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer of "cowardice" for refusing to condemn the US bombing of Venezuela and abduction of its president, acts that experts agree were flagrant violations of international law.
Hours after the US attack—as leaders in the region and worldwide voiced horror and outrage—Starmer issued a statement welcoming Nicolás Maduro's ouster, declaring that "we regarded Maduro as an illegitimate president and we shed no tears about the end of his regime."
Starmer later insisted, as the Trump administration laid out plans to control the Venezuelan government indefinitely, that the situation was "complicated," adding that it was "for the U.S. to justify the action that it has taken."
Corbyn, the former leader of the Labour Party now helmed by Starmer, countered in Tribune magazine that "it’s really not that complicated: Bombing a sovereign nation and abducting its head of state is illegal."
"It is absolutely staggering that a prime minister with a background in law cannot bring himself to say something so obvious," Corbyn wrote. "It’s not that he doesn’t understand. He understands full well. That is the true abomination: He is choosing to desecrate the meaning of international law to avoid upsetting Donald Trump. This is the true meaning of the so-called ‘special relationship’ that government ministers are so desperate to protect: one where the United States tells us to jump, and we ask how high."
"Twenty-three years later, another Labour prime minister is doing his best to cement the UK’s status as a vassal of the United States."
The UK, according to the government's foreign secretary, has been in close contact with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on the role it can play in Venezuela, citing the "work we have done over many years to build up relationships and dialogue with Venezuelan opposition parties and with the current authorities in the regime and of course our relationship with the US."
Corbyn argued that the government's approach is in some ways reminiscent of its conduct in the lead-up to the disastrous and illegal US invasion of Iraq more than two decades ago.
"Twenty-three years later, another Labour prime minister is doing his best to cement the UK’s status as a vassal of the United States," Corbyn wrote. "Unlike Iraq, the UK says it is not involved in the bombing of Venezuela. Like Iraq, however, the UK is proving once again that it has no interest in standing up for international law."
"Rather than an isolated decision, this is part of a clear and dangerous pattern" in which the Trump administration has attacked working families, said one advocate.
The Trump administration is portraying its decision to slash $10 billion in funding to five Democrat-led states as a response to a scandal in Minnesota, where dozens of people have been convicted of stealing public money through the state's social services system—but advocates and Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday condemned what they called an act of "political retribution" that will punish working families who have nothing to do with the recent fraud cases.
"Rather than an isolated decision, this is part of a clear and dangerous pattern," said Kristen Crowell, executive director of the advocacy group Fair Share America.
Crowell pointed to Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that was passed by Republicans last year, and said that along with the cuts announced Monday, "these policies amount to a coordinated attack on working families."
The US Health and Human Services Department (HHS) said the cuts would impact New York, California, Colorado, Minnesota, and Illinois.
About $7 billion in funding for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program will be impacted, reducing cash assistance that is provided to low-income families with children. The five states will also collectively lose nearly $2.4 billion in assistance for working parents through the Child Care and Development Fund and $870 million for social services grants.
The funding freeze follows the administration's suspension of $185 million in annual aid to childcare centers in Minnesota and a pause it announced on childcare funding for all states until officials could prove verification data about how the money was being spent—a response to what Deputy HHS Secretary Jim O'Neill called "blatant fraud that appears to be rampant in Minnesota and across the country."
A spokesperson for HHS, Andrew Nixon, told CNN Tuesday that the new funding cuts for the five states were moving forward because "for too long, Democrat-led states and governors have been complicit in allowing massive amounts of fraud to occur under their watch. Under the Trump administration, we are ensuring that federal taxpayer dollars are being used for legitimate purposes. We will ensure these states are following the law and protecting hard-earned taxpayer money.”
The administration did not point to any evidence that the five states have used taxpayer money fraudulently in their social services programs.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) accused President Donald Trump of "playing politics with our children's lives," while Rep. Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.) posited that Colorado was being targeted once again in retaliation for the state's prosecution of a former county clerk over her involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.
In addition to responding to Minnesota's fraud scandal by cutting funding for millions of families in four other states, Trump has cited the controversy as a reason to further ramp up immigration enforcement as he's placed blame on Minnesota's entire Somali community of about 80,000 people for the fraud. Members of the Somali diaspora have been charged with defrauding the state government.
Trump said Sunday that "every one of them should be forced to leave this country," referring to all Somalis, and is deploying thousands of federal agents to Minnesota to intensify anti-immigration operations there.
In the case of the childcare funding cuts, the administration's decision will mean "higher costs, fewer slots, and more families forced into impossible choices between caring for their children and keeping a job," said Crowell.
"Beyond the immediate human harm, this agenda undermines foundational elements of our economy: the care infrastructure that makes work possible and the purchasing power of the working class," she added. "When parents can’t afford childcare, when families lose health coverage, when hunger rises, our workforce shrinks, productivity falls, families are forced to go without. This is not fiscal responsibility—it’s economic sabotage, paid for by America’s kids.”
On social media, one commentator pointed to the right-wing policy blueprint Project 2025 as evidence that the administration ultimately aims to gut the childcare industry altogether—ending federal funding for large-scale childcare programs and supporting parents "directly" instead so they can stay home with their children.
"It’s not about fraud. It’s about defunding childcare," they wrote. "While not offering a real financial alternative. While cutting programs like Head Start. While rolling back access to birth control and abortion. That’s not support. That’s coercion."
"Today's ruling affirms what we have always known: that abortion is essential healthcare," said one advocate.
The first piece of state legislation in the US explicitly banning the use of abortion pills was struck down on Tuesday as Wyoming's state Supreme Court ruled that it, along with the state's near-total abortion ban, violated the state's constitutional right to bodily autonomy.
Both laws were passed in 2023, following the US Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade. One of them banned abortion in nearly all cases, except when the pregnant patient's life is threatened or in cases of rape or incest—a measure similar to those in several other red states.
But while many states' abortion bans have effectively outlawed the use of abortion drugs like mifepristone and misoprostol, Wyoming's was the first to outlaw the use of these pills in its text.
According to a 2023 study by the Guttmacher Institute, 63% of abortions nationwide are done using medications.
In 2012, Wyoming voters approved a constitutional amendment guaranteeing each competent adult the "right to make his or her own healthcare decisions."
Ironically, the amendment was heavily promoted at the time by conservatives who believed it would protect them from what they viewed as "undue governmental infringement" by former President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act. But reproductive freedom advocates have since used it as a weapon to protect abortion.
In 2023, Wyoming's only remaining abortion clinic, Wellspring Health Access in Casper; the abortion rights group Chelsea’s Fund; and four women, including two obstetricians, sued the state, arguing that the laws violated this constitutional right.
The state's attorneys attempted to argue that the amendment did not apply to abortion, which they claimed is not "healthcare."
In November 2024, a district judge halted both laws, deeming them unconstitutional. Abortion has since remained legal in the state while the lawsuit went ahead.
In a 4-1 ruling, the Wyoming Supreme Court on Tuesday also sided with abortion rights advocates, ruling that both of these laws conflicted with the state’s constitution.
“A woman has a fundamental right to make her own healthcare decisions, including the decision to have an abortion,” the ruling states.
“The state did not meet its burden of demonstrating the abortion laws further the compelling interest of protecting unborn life without unduly infringing upon the woman’s fundamental right to make her own healthcare decisions,” the court added. “As such, the abortion laws do not constitute reasonable and necessary restrictions on a pregnant woman’s right to make her own healthcare decisions.”
Wyoming’s Supreme Court is the state’s highest judicial authority, meaning that the pair of laws is permanently blocked. However, the court said “lawmakers could ask Wyoming voters to consider a constitutional amendment that would more clearly address this issue.”
Janean Forsyth, the executive director of Chelsea's Fund, said the court's decision "is a landmark victory for reproductive freedom in Wyoming, and we are gratified and heartened by the ruling."
"Today's ruling affirms what we have always known: that abortion is essential healthcare, and Wyoming women have the constitutional right and the freedom to make their own healthcare decisions without government interference," she added.
The ruling is a victory for abortion rights at a time when they have come under systemic attack by the Trump administration during his first year back in power, as the Center for Reproductive Rights documented in a report released Monday.
The administration has withdrawn federal guidance that directed emergency rooms to perform abortions in cases where the mother suffers deadly pregnancy complications, which have increased by as much as 50% in states with abortion bans.
A new policy at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), meanwhile, prevented veterans on VA health insurance from receiving abortions, including in cases of rape, incest, or severe risk to personal health.
The massive cuts to Medicaid under last year's Republican budget reconciliation bill have also resulted in the closure of at least 50 Planned Parenthood health centers across the nation, and reduced services at many more.
GOP attempts to restrict mifepristone access are also currently being litigated in Florida, Texas, and Missouri.
Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr said during a Senate hearing in May that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently reviewing its regulations on mifepristone, which was first approved by the FDA 26 years ago. That review has reportedly been delayed until after the 2026 midterm elections in November.
"Too many people wrongly believe that President Trump is done attacking abortion access, and that overturning Roe v. Wade was his endgame,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “But in his first year back in office, the Trump administration is not ‘leaving it to the states’ to decide abortion policy, but wielding federal power to go after abortion access even in states where abortion is legal."
She described "the looming fear that the FDA will soon gut access to abortion pills, which have been a lifeline in post-Roe America," adding that "the threat to further limit access to abortion throughout the nation is real and must be met with vigorous opposition.”
Jessica Plichta told a reporter that it is "the duty of us the people to stand against the Trump regime" just before she was arrested.
A 22-year-old woman who was detained for several hours by police in Grand Rapids, Michigan on Saturday after speaking out against President Donald Trump's invasion of Venezuela had allegedly "obstructed a roadway" and failed to obey officers—but she described an arrest in which the authorities appeared to be suspicious of her for protesting at all.
Jessica Plichta, a preschool teacher and organizer, told Zeteo on Monday that police officers repeatedly asked her why she was at a protest in Grand Rapids' Rosa Parks Circle, where hundreds of demonstrators spoke out against the US military's abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores—a violation of international law that has garnered worldwide condemnation.
Plichta had just finished speaking to a reporter with local ABC News affiliate WZZM about her opposition to the US invasion of Venezuela when two city police officers came up behind her and placed her under arrest.
It is "the duty of us the people to stand against the Trump regime, the Trump administration, that are committing crimes both here in the US and against people in Venezuela," said Plichta just before the officers appeared on camera behind her.
Grand Rapids police arrest an antiwar activist live on air while taking an interview denouncing US military aggression in Venezuela pic.twitter.com/Zm16aFRDxq
— BreakThrough News (@BTnewsroom) January 5, 2026
Plichta told Zeteo, “I don’t think it’s a coincidence that as soon as I finished an interview speaking on Venezuela, I was arrested—the only person arrested out of 200 people."
She told the officers she was "not resisting arrest" as they led her toward a police car. A bystander approached and asked the police what Plichta was being detained for.
The officers replied that she had been "obstructing a roadway" and was accused of "failure to obey a lawful command from a police officer."
BREAKING: IN GRAND RAPIDS MICHIGAN, at approximately 5:30pm today, GRPD arrested local organizer Jessica Plichta on camera during a post-march press interview.
Plichta was sought out and targeted specifically by
GRPD for helping lead a U.S. Out Of Venezuela rally at Rosa Parks… pic.twitter.com/Uj6fLVba80
— Private IcedC81 Politics (@PvtIcedC81Pol) January 3, 2026
Plichta told Zeteo that the police drove her away from WZZM's cameras and then took her out of the car, patted her down, and confiscated her belongings. The officers told her she had been "making a scene" and asked her about her involvement in the protest: whether she was Venezuelan, "what she had to do with Venezuela," and what she was doing at the protest.
She also told Zeteo that the police asked her for the names of other demonstrators.
She was asked again what her connection to Venezuela was after she was taken to Kent County Correctional Facility, where she was held for about three hours and released after outcry from her fellow organizers.
"We are so accustomed to, and used to, repression when we speak out on anti-war topics,” Plichta told the outlet. “When we speak out for Venezuela, when we speak out for Palestine, we expect the police to want to shut that down.”
A spokesperson for the Grand Rapids Police Department told Zeteo that protesters had "refused lawful orders to move this free speech event to the sidewalk and instead began blocking intersections until the march ended," and said Plichta "was positively identified by officers," allowing for her arrest.
Though Plichta remained calm when she was arrested and suggested that she had taken her detention relatively in stride, supporters expressed shock that she had been targeted for speaking out against Trump's attack on Venezuela—which is broadly unpopular across the United States.
"What in the Gestapo is going on in Grand Rapids?" asked Brandon Friedman, a former Obama administration official.
Friedman pointed out that among elected Democrats, there appeared to be little if any outcry over Plichta's arrest for participating in a peaceful protest.
If this happened to a conservative organizer, Republicans would make her a hero, a household name and a congressional candidate.Elected Democrats just pretend it isn't happening.
— Brandon Friedman (@brandonfriedman.bsky.social) January 5, 2026 at 11:29 AM
“Protesting in this country is sacred," Plichta told Zeteo, "and so it is important that our rights are protected and that we are not criminalized for peacefully protesting in a world full of escalating violence."