

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.

Tim Bradley, BerlinRosen Public Affairs, (646) 452-5637
Today the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law released
one of the first systematic examinations of voter purging, a
practice-often controversial-of removing voters from registration lists
in order to update state registration rolls-click here for report. After a detailed study of the purge practices of 12 states, Voter Purges
reveals that election officials across the country are routinely
striking millions of voters from the rolls through a process that is
shrouded in secrecy, prone to error, and vulnerable to manipulation.
Upon the release of Voter Purges, today the Brennan Center
and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law began filing
public records requests with election officials in 12 states in order
to expose the purges that happened this year.
"Purges can be an important way to ensure that voter rolls are
dependable, accurate and up-to-date," said Myrna Perez, counsel at the
Brennan Center and the author of the report. "Far too frequently,
however, eligible, registered citizens show up to vote and discover
their names have been removed from the voter lists because election
officials are maintaining their voter rolls with little accountability
and wildly varying standards," Myrna Perez stated.
According to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, between 2004
and 2006, thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia reported
purging more than 13 million voters from registration rolls. While the
secret and inconsistent manner in which purges are conducted make it
difficult to know exactly how many voters have been stricken from
voting lists erroneously, Voter Purges finds four problematic
practices with voter purges that continue to threaten voters in 2008:
purges rely on error-ridden lists; voters are purged secretly and
without notice; bad "matching" criteria mean that thousands of eligible
voters will be caught up in purges; and insufficient oversight leaves
voters vulnerable to erroneous or manipulated purges. The report
reveals that purge practices vary dramatically from jurisdiction to
jurisdiction, that there is a lack of consistent protections for
voters, and that there are often opportunities for mischief and
mistakes in the purge process.
"The voter rolls are the gateway to voting, and a citizen typically
cannot cast a vote that will count unless his or her name appears on
the rolls. Purges remove names from the voter rolls, typically
preventing wrongfully purged voters from having their votes counted.
Given the close margins by which elections are won, the number of
people wrongfully purged can make a difference. We should not tolerate
purges that are conducted behind closed doors, without public scrutiny,
and without adequate recourse for affected voters," said Wendy Weiser,
Deputy Director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center.
Voter Purges reviews the state statutes, regulatory
materials, and news reports in 12 diverse states: Florida, Kentucky,
Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin. In five states-Kentucky,
Missouri, Nevada, Ohio, and Washington-the Brennan Center study also
draws on extensive interviews with state and local election officials
charged with the maintenance of voter registration lists.
The list of states in which the Brennan Center and the Lawyers'
Committee for Civil Rights Under Law began filing public records
requests for purge records today includes 12 states. They were chosen
because they had flawed purges or voter registration practices in the
past, they use problematic purge procedures with insufficient
protections for voters, they recently conducted large-scale purges, or
they have specific practices in place that warrant further examination.
"Every year, the Election Protection hotline receives calls from
across the country from eligible voters whose names have been removed
from the voter rolls. We need to take the lid off the secret process of
voter purges so we can remedy any problems we discover and ensure that
they don't recur in the future," said Jonah Goldman, Director of the
National Campaign for Fair Elections at the Lawyers' Committee for
Civil Rights Under Law, which coordinates the national Election
Protection program.
"Nearly every purge that has come to light has bumped eligible
voters off the rolls. Because purges are done in secret on an ad hoc
basis, the only way to find out what is actually happening and if
eligible voters have been wrongfully purged in droves is through public
records requests," said Wendy Weiser of the Brennan Center.
Several examples of recent purges made public reveal that purge practices are in dire need of improvement:
Flawed purges are sometimes caused by erroneous government lists. For
example, even though Hilde Stafford, a Wappingers Falls, New York,
resident, was still alive and voting in 2006, the Social Security
Administration's Death Master File-a database of 77 million deaths
dating back to 1937-lists her date of death as June 15, 1997. Indeed,
from January 2004 to September 2005, the Social Security Administration
had to "resurrect" the records of 23,366 people wrongly added to its
Death Master File.
Another cause of erroneous purges is flawed procedures for
generating purge lists. In the infamous Florida purge of 2000-for which
conservative estimates place the number of wrongfully purged voters
close to 12,000-Florida registrants were purged from the rolls if 80
percent of the letters of their last names were the same as those of
persons with criminal convictions. Those wrongly purged included
Reverend Willie D. Whiting Jr., who, under the matching criteria, was
considered the same person as Willie J. Whiting.
In 2004, Florida planned to remove 48,000 "suspected felons" from
its voter rolls even though many of those identified were in fact
eligible to vote. When the flawed process generated a list of 22,000
African Americans to be purged-and only 61 voters with Hispanic
surnames, in spite of Florida's sizable Hispanic population-it took
pressure from voting rights groups to stop Florida officials from using
the purge list.
Voter Purges contains several recommendations to improve the
transparency, accountability, and accuracy of purges, including notice
to individual voters and the public, strict and uniform criteria for
the development of purge lists, and "fail-safe" provisions to protect
voters from erroneous purges. An overall fix is the establishment of a
system of universal voter registration, with protections for voters
erroneously left out.
"It is essential that we put in place standards for voter purges to
ensure public accountability and protection for voters," said Myrna
Perez of the Brennan Center.
"There really are no effective national standards to govern voter
purges, and the result is a chaotic, whimsical approach to the
maintenance of voter rolls," said Michael Waldman, Executive Director
of the Brennan Center. "The lack of consistent rules and procedures
means that Americans across the country lack basic protections against
erroneous purges. We encourage election officials, legislators,
advocates and concerned members of the public to use this report to
improve voter purge practices and ensure that the rights of eligible
voters are not jeopardized," Waldman concluded.
A full copy of the Brennan Center's analysis of purge practices and
recommendations is available here: www.brennancenter.org/purges. The
Brennan Center's website is www.brennancenter.org.
The website for the Election Protection program is
www.866ourvote.org, and for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights
Under Law is www.lawyerscommittee.org
The Brennan Center for Justice is a nonpartisan law and policy institute. We strive to uphold the values of democracy. We stand for equal justice and the rule of law. We work to craft and advance reforms that will make American democracy work, for all.
(646) 292-8310Republican Sen. John Kennedy scoffed as David J. Bier of the Cato Institute outlined how the Trump administration has openly demanded "ethnic cleansing" through the deportation of 100 million people.
A Republican senator on Tuesday accused an immigration policy expert of "hyperbole" in his condemnation of President Donald Trump's anti-immigration agenda during a hearing—but the witness, David J. Bier of the libertarian Cato Institute, emphasized that the administration's own words and policies have clearly pointed to a goal of expelling millions of citizens from the United States.
At a hearing on sanctuary cities held by the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) read a post Bier wrote on social media in December 2025 in which he said Trump administration officials "think they can troll their way into us accepting ethnic cleansing," suggesting it was one of many "hyperbolic statements" that discredit Bier.
Bier, the director of immigration studies for the Cato Institute, has spent the past year tracking the Trump administration's mass deportation agenda, in which a majority of people who have been detained have had no criminal convictions, despite the White House's persistent claims it is targeting "the worst of the worst" violent criminals.
He was unfazed by Kennedy's questioning, quickly replying that his comment was in response to a social media post by the Department of Homeland Security's official account in which the agency shared an image of a Cadillac on a beach, featuring the message, "America after 100 million deportations."
"That was in regard to a Department of Homeland Security post about advocating 100 million deportations," said Bier as the senator attempted to talk over him. "One hundred million deportations would be ethnic cleansing. You would be removing one-third of country."
This exchange between David Bier and Sen Foghorn Leghorn (R-LA) is something else. Kennedy thinks he has him in three separate gotcha moments, but not so fast Bier had his number. The clip is a bit long but it’s 3 minutes of Kennedy getting owned. Watch👇pic.twitter.com/HPHicyUcl1
— Brian Cardone 🏴☠️🇺🇦 (@cardon_brian) March 10, 2026
Kennedy didn't respond, instead reading a post Bier wrote on March 2 which said: "If you rule against Trump's population purge agenda... the nativists will name you, threaten you, and come after you. These judges are much braver than the [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] agents who hide behind masks while violating the Constitution."
Bier stood by his defense of judges; his post had been in reference to a "60 Minutes" interview given by US District Judge John Coughenour, who described a hoax in which law enforcement showed up at his house after getting a report that he had murdered his wife. He also received a bomb threat, with both incidents taking place after he ruled against Trump's executive order aimed at ending the 14th Amendment's guarantee of birthright citizenship.
The Cato expert also defended his reference to a "population purge," saying: "I'm talking about the fact that they're trying to deport US citizens, people born here. They are trying to deport them as well. So it's not a 'mass deportation agenda.' It is also an agenda intended to reduce the population of the United States."
"These are not hyperbolic statements," he said as Kennedy hurled insults at Bier, asking "what planet" he was from and telling him he triggered the senator's "gag reflex" before being cut off by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).
Kennedy also accused Bier of making a "hyperbolic statement" on February 11, when he posted on the social media platform Bluesky that in addition to advising US military officers to refuse to carry out illegal orders, Democratic members of Congress should warn them "to refuse unethical orders."
Bier readily defended his remark, asking Kennedy: "Do you disagree with it? You think people should do unethical things?" The senator didn't respond.
It was unclear whether Kennedy was unfamiliar with the president's plan to strip people of their US citizenship—one of the first efforts of his second term, with the executive order signed just after he took office—or if he was simply "looking for fundraising sound bites," as one Cato Institute staffer posited.
Bier said Wednesday that it was the second time in a month that Kennedy has appeared "shocked" to learn about the policies of the president he has supported for nearly a decade.
"Just a month earlier I had explained to him how the Trump administration has already banned HALF of all legal immigrants to the US," said Bier, pointing to his testimony from February in which he explained how the White House has suspended immigrant visas and US Citizenship and Immigration Services benefit applications.
Listen to how shocked Senator Kennedy was. I should've clarified more how it's actually three different overlapping policies (the presidential visa ban, the USCIS benefits suspension, and the State Dept immigrant visa suspension) leading to the theft from applicants. pic.twitter.com/SZh4PMzc6j
— David J. Bier (@David_J_Bier) February 11, 2026
The hearing on sanctuary cities was subtitled "The Cost of Undermining Law and Order," but Bier focused his testimony on the Cato Institute's extensive research that's found immigration has reduced government deficits by at least $14.5 trillion over the last 30 years.
"I was invited to the Budget Committee because of this comprehensive study Cato published, not to discuss random tweets," said Bier. "The Democrats all wanted to talk substance. The other side name-called. Incredible contrast."
"This stupid war isn’t just an indictment of the Trump administration, it’s an indictment of the entire machinery of DC warmongering."
While President Donald Trump is the person primarily responsible for launching an unprovoked US war against Iran, one foreign policy expert argued on Wednesday that the president couldn't have done this without help from a large network of war advocates.
Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), noted in a Wednesday social media post that Trump's decision to attack Iran didn't come out of nowhere.
"This stupid war isn’t just an indictment of the Trump administration," he argued, "it’s an indictment of the entire machinery of DC warmongering, think tanks, journalists, lobbyists, Republicans and Democrats, who have spent decades inflating threats. We need to smash that machinery."
Duss didn't name any specific DC foreign policy power players in his post, although less than an hour later he heaped scorn on Samantha Power, who served as US ambassador to the United Nations under former President Barack Obama and as director of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under former President Joe Biden.
Duss reposted a video of Power recently being asked why she didn't speak out more against the genocidal assault that Israel waged against Gaza given that she had written an entire book calling out the US for past inaction to stop genocides in foreign lands.
Power responded that she did her very best to get aid to Palestinians while running USAID, but said that ultimately she couldn't "just get up and decide today what US foreign policy is."
Duss, however, argued that this was a cop-out and said that someone of Power's stature could have made a difference by speaking out.
"Sometimes it is better to work inside to make a bad policy better," he wrote. "But Power is different. She had enormous credibility she could’ve used to sound the alarm on the Gaza genocide. She chose status, and ends as a cautionary tale."
"There are hundreds of people who could’ve run USAID just as well as Samantha Power," he added. "There are few who could’ve made as much of an impact by speaking out publicly."
Duss' critique of the US foreign policy establishment was echoed by Ben Rhodes, a former national security official in the Obama administration, who argued on Wednesday that the Iran war is partly the result of "a few dozen well-funded, oft-quoted, DC Blob 'experts' who have maniacally advocated for this outcome for 15 years."
In a Tuesday post, Rhodes noted that he and other foreign policy experts had long foreseen the negative consequences of attacking Iran, such as the energy supply crisis created by Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and that these predictable disasters were ignored by DC war advocates.
"Nearly everyone I know who opposes this war has predicted these exact consequences for over a decade. Trump decided to listen to Bibi and the most insular, hawkish, dead-enders imaginable," he wrote, using Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's nickname.
"War fans say that whatever gets destroyed, someone will build a better one later," said one Iranian scholar. "Fine, go ahead and build a new Golestan Palace, a new Chehel Sotun, and a new Taq-e Bostan too."
In addition to killing and injuring thousands of Iranians, the US-Israeli war in Iran is bringing ruin upon some of the oldest and most cherished historical landmarks in the world.
Several centuries-old locations, designated as World Heritage sites by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), have suffered damage from bombings since the US and Israel launched the war on February 28. As UNESCO noted last week, these sites are protected under multiple statutes in international law.
"Iran is home to one of the richest concentrations of historical sites on Earth, representing civilizations that stretch from the Elamites and Achaemenid Persians to Islamic dynasties and modern Iran," wrote Haley Fuller for Military.com on Wednesday.
"Iran contains dozens of sites recognized by the international community as having 'outstanding universal value,'" she said. "The country currently has nearly 30 locations listed as UNESCO World Heritage sites, including ancient cities, monumental architecture, and archaeological landscapes spanning thousands of years."
UNESCO said that it has communicated the coordinates of protected sites to all parties in the conflict, including Israel. Iranian authorities, meanwhile, had already begun marking important historical sites with the internationally recognized Blue Shield symbol, established in the 1954 Hague Convention to designate protected areas. But several have still been attacked.
According to multiple local reports, as well as photos and videos posted to social media, an Israeli airstrike on Monday shattered windows, scattered debris, and broke doors at the Chehel Sotoun Palace and other sites within the 17th-century Naqsh-e-Jahan Square in the city of Isfahan.
The city was the capital of Persia under the Safavid dynasty from 1501-1736, and it boasts some of the country's most significant works of architecture and art. The Israeli military was reportedly targeting the governor’s building, which sits near the square.
"Chehel Sotoun is renowned for its extensive frescoes depicting historical battles, royal receptions, and scenes from Persian mythology, which are among the largest, most unique examples of Persianate painting," wrote Sarvy Geranpayeh in a report for The Art Newspaper.
While most of the site's interior paintings survived the attack, provincial officials said the site's famous mirror-work decorations were damaged, and a 17th-century fresco depicting the Iranian Safavid ruler Shah Tahmasp and the Indian Mughal Humayun sustained a large crack.
Several other buildings in the square also took damage, Geranpayeh reported:
Authorities reported that the 17th-century Ali Qapu Palace had its doors and windows shattered, while the 17th-century Jame Abbasi Mosque, also known as Shah Mosque, sustained damage to sections of its iconic turquoise and calligraphic tiles...
Several other sites within the Safavid-era Dawlatkhaneh complex also reportedly suffered damage. These include the 17th-century Rakeb-Khaneh pavillion (House of the Jockey), originally built to store the equestrian equipment and harnesses of the royal stables, Ashraf Hall, a highly decorative residential structure associated with the Safavid court, and the nearby 15th-century Teymouri Hall, a Timurid-era building later converted into the Natural History Museum.
A previous attack on March 1, the second day of the war, caused damage to the only designated UNESCO World Heritage site in Tehran, the Golestan Palace, which is more than 400 years old.
Geranpayeh reported that the building was left "strewn with debris, its windows blown out and its distinctive mirror and glasswork damaged."
Some of the architecture that has come under attack is even older. On March 8, Israeli strikes on Khorramabad reportedly damaged the structures surrounding the Falak-ol-Aflak Castle, which is more than 1,800 years old, dating back to the Sassanid Empire in the 3rd century.
The US Committee of the Blue Shield, an international organization tasked with protecting heritage sites in times of war and crisis, said it was “disturbed” by the United States' expressions of disregard for the laws of war.
The committee drew attention to comments made by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last week that “America, regardless of what so-called international institutions say, is unleashing the most lethal and precise air power campaign in history... All on our terms with maximum authority. No stupid rules of engagement.”
According to the Iranian Red Crescent Society, more than 19,000 civilian buildings have been damaged since the war began less than two weeks ago, including hospitals, residential buildings, and schools.
One attack, reportedly by the US, on a girls' school in Minab on the first day of the war, resulted in the slaughter of around 175 people, mostly children ages 7-12. According to the World Health Organization more than 1,300 people have been killed and 9,000 injured in total since February 28.
“The failure to observe international humanitarian law, including numerous international conventions to which the US is a state party, as well as customary international law, can lead to the commission of war crimes," the US Blue Shield Committee said. It added that this disregard extends to cultural sites as well.
"The destruction of cultural heritage is irreversible. It erases identity, history, and the shared memory of civilizations," the committee said. "No military or political objective justifies the willful or negligent destruction of humanity’s common inheritance. Such destruction is also one of the actions that can make returning to a state of peace more difficult."
According to a New York Times report on Wednesday, the destruction of culturally important sites has only heightened the anger Iranians feel as their country has fallen under attack.
"War fans say that whatever gets destroyed, someone will build a better one later," Mojtaba Najafi, a prominent Iranian scholar and researcher, said in a post to social media.
"Fine, go ahead and build a new Golestan Palace, a new Chehel Sotun, and a new Taq-e Bostan too," he continued, referring to another site which came under threat from US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025.
“For me, ancient monuments are as important as human lives, because they connect me to my past,” Najafi said. “And their destruction means my memory is being demolished."