

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.

Sarah Alexander or Erin Greenfield (202) 683-2500
Today, in honor of "Know Your Milk" Day, Food & Water Watch - a national consumer advocacy organization - kicked off its nationwide School Milk Campaign by announcing a coalition of over 100 organizations that are working to secure healthy milk for schoolchildren participating in the National School Lunch Program. Food & Water Watch is gearing up for this year's re-authorization of the Child Nutrition Act that is designed to help meet the nutritional needs of children through the National School Lunch Program and other feeding programs. The organization is working with parents, consumers, farmers, health professionals and teachers to ensure that schools have the option to purchase organic milk or milk not treated with the recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) - a genetically engineered hormone that has been linked to cancer.
"Our schools should not be a dumping ground for milk that American consumers are increasingly avoiding," stated Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. "We need to make sure our nation's schoolchildren never go hungry and that they have the safest food possible to meet their nutritional needs."
The controversy over the use of the artificial growth hormone rBGH - recombinant bovine growth hormone - stems from the potential threats to human health. Approved in 1994 by the Food and Drug Administration, rBGH is injected into cows to make them produce more milk. Besides the documented increase of infections in dairy cows injected with rBGH, which necessitates increased use of antibiotics, there are ongoing questions about links to cancer in humans. Based on the number of dairies that use rBGH in the United States, it is possible that at least 84 million gallons of milk from rBGH-treated cows were distributed through the school nutrition programs in fiscal year 2005-2006.
"Our children's health should not be put at risk by their being made to consume rBGH milk at school," said Ann Cooper, a chef and school food advocate with Lunch Lessons LLC Food Family Farming Foundation - one of the organizations in the School Milk Campaign's national coalition. "Legislation must be put into effect that eliminates artificial hormones and antibiotics from all milk served in school cafeterias all across the country - our children's health depends upon this."
As part of "Know Your Milk" Day, thousands of people across the country are flooding their Congress members' phone lines, asking them to include language in the Child Nutrition Act stating that schools participating in the National School Lunch Program and other federal feeding programs can purchase milk that is free of artificial hormones. From San Francisco and Chicago, to Philadelphia and New York, activists dressed in cow costumes at local coffee houses are inviting the public to eat cookies and drink artificial hormone-free milk while calling members of Congress.
Some school districts, including the San Francisco Unified School District and the River Valley School District in Wisconsin, have already passed school board resolutions to source only rBGH-free milk in their schools due to parents' demands. Food & Water Watch anticipates other school districts will follow these examples, especially once language is included in the Child Nutrition Act that clarifies schools have the option to request milk from cows not treated with rBGH.
"This is a no-cost administrative change that would help schools make choices that respond to the needs of their students, parents and communities," concluded Hauter. "The most vulnerable members of our society, our children, deserve to have food that does not cause them harm."
Click here to view the School Milk Campaign national coalition letter.
For more information on Food & Water Watch's School Milk Campaign, please visit https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/food/school-milk.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500"It's impossible to overstate how much of what ICE is doing on the ground reflects this completely preposterous conflation of hostile speech and hostile conduct," commented one legal expert.
A court filing released late on Monday alleged that US Border Patrol Commander-at-Large Gregory Bovino said that merely making what he called "hyperbolic comments" about immigration enforcement operations, including President Donald Trump's "Operation Midway Blitz" in Chicago, was enough to justify being arrested.
As reported by the Chicago Sun-Times on Tuesday, attorneys representing several Chicago-based media organizations who are suing to restrict federal immigration agents' use of force in their city claimed that Bovino said during a sworn deposition that "he has instructed his officers to arrest protesters who make hyperbolic comments in the heat of political demonstrations."
The attorneys also said in the court document that Russell Hott, the field director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Chicago, said during his deposition that he did not agree that it would be "unconstitutional to arrest people" simply for expressing opposition to his agency's current mass deportation operation in the Windy City.
This section of the filing caught the attention of Steve Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University, who said it appeared federal immigration officials are straightforwardly violating the First Amendment right to peacefully protest.
"It's impossible to overstate how much of what ICE is doing on the ground reflects this completely preposterous conflation of hostile speech and hostile conduct," he wrote in a post on Bluesky. "The First Amendment protects—or, at least, is supposed to protect—the former up and until it's a 'true threat,' which none of this is."
Elsewhere in the filing, the plaintiffs' attorneys alleged that Bovino said during testimony that he had "interacted with many violent rioters and individuals" at the ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois, which in recent weeks has become the focal point of local protests. Additionally, the attorneys wrote, Bovino would "not admit he has ever seen protesters who were not violent rioters."
The attorneys commented that "by Bovino's logic, anyone who shows up to protest is presumptively violent or assaultive and he can 'go hard' against them."
The case involving the Chicago media organizations and federal immigration enforcement officials is currently being overseen by US District Court Judge Sara Ellis, who last month issued a temporary restraining order that barred federal officers from using riot control weapons “on members of the press, protestors, or religious practitioners who are not posing an immediate threat to the safety of a law enforcement officer or others.”
Federal immigration officials have been employing increasingly aggressive and violent tactics in the Chicago area in recent weeks, including attacking a journalist and a protesting priest with pepper balls outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility; slamming a congressional candidate to the ground; dragging US citizens, including children, out of their homes during a raid in the middle of the night; and fatally shooting a man during a traffic stop.
A hearing on whether to make permanent Ellis’ restraining order which strictly limits the use of riot control munitions has been set for November 5.
“If Trump had any shred of humanity in him, he would do whatever was necessary to prevent hunger and suffering in the country he claims to love," said one critic.
In apparent open defiance of two federal court rulings, President Donald Trump said Tuesday that his administration will not fund a key federal nutritional aid program until after the Republican government shutdown ends, leaving millions of families even more vulnerable to hunger at a time of crisis-level food insecurity.
In a post on his TruthSocial network, Trump took aim at both the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the administration of former President Joe Biden.
"SNAP BENEFITS, which increased by Billions and Billions of Dollars (MANY FOLD!) during Crooked Joe Biden’s disastrous term in office (Due to the fact that they were haphazardly 'handed' to anyone for the asking, as opposed to just those in need, which is the purpose of SNAP!), will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government, which they can easily do, and not before!" the president wrote. "Thank you for your attention to this matter."
"Trump's message to 42 million Americans: Eat dirt."
Responding to the president's post, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on social media, "After a judge ordered Donald Trump to make SNAP payments, the wannabe king declared he will defy a court order and won't help people afford groceries."
"Trump's message to 42 million Americans: Eat dirt," she added.
Trump is now saying he will only pay SNAP benefits once the Republican shutdown is over, despite a federal court order.As a result, 42 million kids, seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities could go hungry. This is illegal, immoral, and absolutely cruel.
[image or embed]
— Rep. Ted Lieu (@reptedlieu.bsky.social) November 4, 2025 at 8:49 AM
Seemingly contradicting Trump's claim, the White House said later Tuesday that the administration is complying with one of the court orders.
Data from the nonpartisan US Government Accountability Office have shown that approximately 70% or more of working-age, non-disabled adults receiving Medicaid and SNAP benefits work full-time—defined as 35 hours or more per week.
On Friday, federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled against the US Department of Agriculture’s refusal to pay at least part of the $8 billion in SNAP benefits—also known as food stamps—to rightful beneficiaries in November via a contingency fund established by Congress.
The administration responded to the rulings by saying it would only fund around 50% of the total monthly benefits, while warning of likely payment delays.
Plaintiffs in the Rhode Island case—represented by Democracy Forward and the Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island—subsequently filed an emergency request seeking a court order compelling Trump and his administration to comply with Friday's order.
“The Trump-Vance administration continues to play politics with people’s lives through failing to ensure SNAP payments are expeditiously available," Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said in a statement Tuesday. "This is immoral and unlawful."
"The political posturing should stop now," Perryman added. "The administration needs to fully fund SNAP benefits so people can eat, today. We should not need to go to court to force the administration to provide food all people are entitled to in this country, but here we are—back in court to demand that the administration acts consistent with the judge’s order."
Alejandra Gomez, executive director of Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), said ahead of a planned Tuesday press conference: “It took two court orders and mounting public pressure for the Trump administration to fund SNAP assistance partially, which is not good enough. Arizona families in need deserve better."
“December SNAP benefits are not guaranteed, and every day that Congress fails to act, children will go hungry, food banks run dry, and working families will pay the price," she added. "It is time to end the shutdown, fund healthcare and SNAP.”
Now in its 35th day, the ongoing federal government shutdown is tied for the longest in US history. Vulnerable people—already reeling from record cuts to social programs to pay for tax breaks for billionaires and corporations under the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed by Trump in July—are feeling even more pain, at a time when more than 47 million Americans, including 1 in 5 children, are living in food insecure households.
"I did not receive any benefits at all... And they said there is no promise of even getting any type of benefits for November," Danielle Rodriguez, a single mother in Pennsylvania who lost $400 in monthly SNAP aid, told MSNBC's Ana Cabrera Monday.
"'Mommy, do you want my piggybank money to help with groceries?'"
"Unfortunately, I've had to reach out to my utility companies and stuff like that to go on payments to use some of my bill money to buy groceries for me and my kids," she continued.
"It's very stressful being a single mom of two kids. I have a 9-year-old, and she is offering her piggybank money," Rodriguez added. "And she's like, 'Mommy, do you want my piggybank money to help with groceries?' And it's sad to hear my child say that to me because I'm mom—I'm supposed to do everything. I'm supposed to be their protector."
Mitch Jones, managing director of policy and litigation at Food & Water Watch, said in a statement: “At a time when rampant corporate consolidation has driven grocery prices sky-high, Trump continues to choose cruelty over the rule of law. He must abide by recent court orders and immediately release SNAP aid to the millions of low-income American families suddenly hanging on the precipice of an unconscionable hunger crisis."
“If Trump had any shred of humanity in him, he would do whatever was necessary to prevent hunger and suffering in the country he claims to love," Jones added.
Update: This piece has been updated with the White House's statement of compliance with one of the court orders.
"Years of grossly insufficient action from richer nations and continued climate deception and obstruction by fossil fuel interests are directly responsible for bringing us here," one expert said.
A United Nations assessment released Tuesday—less than a week before the UN Climate Change Conference summit in Brazil—warns that countries' latest pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions under the Paris Agreement could push global temperatures to 2.3-2.5°C above preindustrial levels, up to a full degree beyond the treaty's primary goal.
A decade after that agreement was finalized, only about a third of state parties submitted new plans, officially called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), for the United Nations Environment Programme's (UNEP) Emissions Gap Report 2025: Off Target.
While the updated NDCs—if fully implemented—would be a slight improvement on the 2.6-2.8°C projection in last year's report, the more ambitious Paris target is to limit global temperature rise this century to 1.5°C. Already, the world is beginning to experience what that looks like: Last year was the hottest on record and the first in which the global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C, relative to preindustrial times.
As with those findings, UNEP's report sparked calls for bold action at COP30 in Belém next week, including from UN Secretary-General António Guterres. He noted that "scientists tell us that a temporary overshoot above 1.5°C is now inevitable—starting, at the latest, in the early 2030s. And the path to a livable future gets steeper by the day."
"1.5°C by the end of the century remains our North Star. And the science is clear: This goal is still within reach."
"But this is no reason to surrender," Guterres argued. "It's a reason to step up and speed up. 1.5°C by the end of the century remains our North Star. And the science is clear: This goal is still within reach. But only if we meaningfully increase our ambition."
UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen also stressed that while inadequate climate policies have created the conditions in which now "we still need unprecedented emissions cuts in an increasingly tight window, with an increasingly challenging geopolitical backdrop," reaching the Paris goal "is still possible—just."
"Proven solutions already exist. From the rapid growth in cheap renewable energy to tackling methane emissions, we know what needs to be done," she said. "Now is the time for countries to go all in and invest in their future with ambitious climate action—action that delivers faster economic growth, better human health, more jobs, energy security, and resilience."
NEW – UNEP: New country climate plans ‘barely move needle’ on expected warming | @ayeshatandon.carbonbrief.org @ceciliakeating.carbonbrief.org @unep.org Read here: buff.ly/U0XaME9
[image or embed]
— Carbon Brief (@carbonbrief.org) November 4, 2025 at 9:03 AM
Climate campaigners responded with similar statements. Savio Carvalho, head of regions at the global advocacy group 350.org, said that "this report confirms what millions already feel in their daily lives: Governments are still failing to deliver on their promises. The window to keep 1.5°C within reach is closing fast, but it is not yet gone."
"All eyes are now on Belém," Carvalho declared. "COP30 must be a turning point, where leaders stop making excuses, phase out fossil fuels, and scale up renewable energy in a way that is fast, fair, and equitable."
Rachel Cleetus, senior policy director for the Climate and Energy Program at the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists, said that "this report's findings, confirming that a crucial science-based benchmark for limiting dangerous climate change is about to be breached, are alarming, enraging, and heartbreaking."
"Years of grossly insufficient action from richer nations and continued climate deception and obstruction by fossil fuel interests are directly responsible for bringing us here," she highlighted. "World leaders still have the power to act decisively to sharply rein in heat-trapping emissions and any other choice would be an unconscionable dereliction of their responsibility to humanity."
Cleetus—a regular attendee of the annual UN climate talks who will be at COP30, unlike President Donald Trump's administration—continued:
Costly and deadly climate impacts are already widespread and will worsen with every fraction of a degree, harming people's health and well-being, as well as the economy. Policymakers must seize the opportunity now to accelerate deployment of renewable energy and energy efficiency—solutions that are plentiful, clean, and affordable—and transition away from polluting fossil fuels. Protecting people, livelihoods, and ecosystems by helping them adapt to climate hazards is also critical as higher temperatures unleash rapidly worsening heat, floods, storms, wildfires, drought, and sea-level rise.
Ambitious climate action can cut energy costs, improve public health, and create a myriad of economic opportunities. Richer, high-emitting countries' continued failure to tackle the challenge head-on is undermining the well-being of their own people and is a monumental injustice toward lower-income countries that have contributed the least to this problem yet bear the most acute harms. It’s past time for wealthy countries to heed the latest science and pay up for their role in fueling the climate crisis. With alarms blaring, the upcoming UN climate talks must be a turning point in global climate action. Powerful politicians and billionaires who willfully ignore urgent realities and continue to delay, distract, or lie about climate change will have to answer to our children and grandchildren.
Jean Su, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Energy Justice Program, also plans to attend COP30.
"This report shows Earth's livable future hanging in the balance while Trump tells climate diplomacy to go to hell," she said. "The US exit from Paris threatens to cancel out any climate gains from other countries. The rise of petro-authoritarianism in the US shouldn't be an excuse for other countries to backpedal on their own commitments. This report sends alarm bells to rich countries with a conscience to exercise real leadership and lead a fossil fuel phaseout to protect us all."
The UNEP report was released on the same day that the German environmental rights group Urgewald published its Global Oil and Gas Exit List, which shows that a green transition is being undercut by fossil fuel extraction and production.
Other publications put out in the lead-up to COP30 include an Oxfam International report showing that the wealthiest people on the planet are disproportionately fueling the climate emergency, as well as a UN Food and Agriculture Organization analysis warning that human-induced land degradation "is undermining agricultural productivity and threatening ecosystem health worldwide."
There have also been mounting demands for specific action, such as Greenpeace and 350.org urging governments to pay for climate action in part by taxing the ultrarich, and an open letter signed by advocacy organizations, activists, policymakers, artists, and experts urging world leaders to prioritize health during discussions in Brazil next week.
As Common Dreams reported earlier Tuesday, COP30 Special Envoy for Health Ethel Maciel said that "this letter sends an unequivocal message that health is an essential component of climate action."