

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.

Erin Powers, Powers MediaWorks LLC, for Burke O'Neil LLC, (281) 703-6000;
and Jen Nessel, Center for Constitutional Rights, (212) 614-6449.
A Virginia federal court ruled Wednesday that four
former Abu Ghraib detainees who were tortured and later released without charge
can sue U.S. military contractor CACI International Inc. (NYSE: CAI), according
to their U.S. legal team.
U.S.
District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee, of Alexandria, Va., denied CACI's motion to dismiss the
detainees' claims which allege multiple violations of U.S.
law, including torture, war crimes and civil conspiracy.
CACI sought immunity
against the lawsuits and claimed that the actions of its contract interrogators
at Abu Ghraib were beyond judicial review. Court martial and other testimony
from the soldiers convicted of abuse link the company personnel to the abuse.
In a ruling important to
accountability for government contractors in Iraq, the Court ruled Tuesday that
"[t]he fact that CACI's business involves conducting interrogations on
the government's behalf is incidental; courts can and do entertain civil suits
against government contractors for the manner in which they carry out
government business. CACI conveniently ignores the long line of cases where
private plaintiffs were allowed to bring tort actions for wartime injuries."
The Court also rejected
CACI's effort to shield itself from accountability by invoking the
political question doctrine. The Court found "the policy is clear: what
happened at Abu Ghraib was wrong." The Court reasoned "While it is
true that the events at Abu Ghraib pose an embarrassment to this country, it is
the misconduct alleged and not the litigation surrounding that misconduct that
creates the embarrassment. This Court finds that the only potential for
embarrassment would be if the Court declined to hear these claims on political
questions grounds. Consequently, the Court holds that Plaintiffs' claims
pose no political question and are therefore justiciable."
The plaintiffs are Suhail
Najim Abdullah Al Shimari, Taha Yaseen Arraq Rashid, Sa'ad Hamza Hantoosh AI-Zuba'e
and Salah Hasan Usaif Jasim Al-Ejaili - all of whom are Iraqi citizens
who were released from Abu Ghraib between 2004 and 2008 without being charged
with any crime.
The
former detainees are represented by attorneys Susan L. Burke, William T.
O'Neil and William F. Gould of Burke
O'Neil LLC, of Washington, D.C.; Katherine
Gallagher of the Center
for Constitutional Rights; and Shereef Akeel, of Akeel & Valentine, PLC,
of Troy, Mich.
The
lawsuit alleges that the CACI defendants not only participated in physical and
mental abuse of the detainees, but also destroyed documents, videos and
photographs; prevented the reporting of the torture and abuse to the
International Committee of the Red Cross; hid detainees and other prisoners
from the International Committee of the Red Cross; and misled non-conspiring
military and government officials about the state of affairs at the Iraq
prisons.
Susan L.
Burke, of Burke O'Neil LLC, stated, "The court's ruling is
another step toward ensuring that this litigation will contribute to the true
history of Abu Ghraib. These innocent men were senselessly tortured by a U.S.
company that profited from their misery. Their stories remain untold largely
because CACI never interviewed them - or any victims - before
reaching and promoting hollow conclusions about what happened at Abu Ghraib.
These men came to U.S.
courts because our laws, as they have for generations, allow their claims to be
heard here."
Center for
Constitutional Rights attorney Katherine Gallagher
stated, "Private military contractors like CACI cannot act with impunity.
They must act within the bounds of law and must be held accountable for their participation
in the atrocities at Abu Ghraib and the other facilities in Iraq. We believe their actions and
the acts of torture of their employees clearly violated the Geneva Conventions,
the Army Field Manual, and the laws of the United States."
Shereef Akeel, of Akeel
& Valentine, stated, "This is a positive development for the torture
victims to hold CACI accountable for the atrocities committed in the Abu Ghraib
prison."
The case is "Suhail
Najim Abdullah Al Shimari, et al., v. CACI Premier Technology, Inc. and CACI
International, Inc.," in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Virginia, Alexandria Division (Case No. 1:08cv827 GBL).
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. CCR is committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
(212) 614-6464The resolution was "'out of step with the policies of the Democratic Party' while being entirely in step with the vast majority of Democratic voters," said one advocate.
Poll after poll shows that support for Israel and political candidates' associations with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group that poured more than $100 million into the 2024 elections, are toxic for the Democratic Party.
One of the most closely watched Democratic primary elections last month was significantly swayed toward US Senate candidate James Talarico in Texas when he spoke out against the US arming Israel.
And the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) own suppressed autopsy of the 2024 election found that the Biden administration's support for Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza harmed then-Vice President Kamala Harris' efforts to win over some voters.
But the mounting evidence that voters want candidates to shift away from the party's decadeslong alliance with Israel wasn't enough on Thursday to convince a DNC panel to approve a resolution condemning the "growing influence" of dark money and corporate spending in Democratic races, particularly by AIPAC.
The committee's resolutions panel killed the motion, which called for "robust" campaign finance transparency, at its spring meeting in New Orleans.
“The use of massive outside spending to support or oppose candidates based on their positions regarding international conflicts or foreign governments raises concerns about undue influence over democratic debate and policymaking, potentially constraining elected officials’ ability to represent the views of their constituents,” reads the resolution, which was submitted by Allison Minnerly, a DNC member from Florida.
The resolution was voted down weeks after organizations linked to AIPAC accounted for $22 million in super political action committee spending in Illinois' US House primaries.
Margaret DeReus, executive director of the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project, said the vote shows that "Democratic leadership is asleep at the wheel when it comes to one of the biggest existential threats to the party."
"AIPAC’s extreme agenda for unconditional weapons funding to Israel is deeply out of step not just with most Democrats, but with the majority of the American people," said DeReus. "We know DNC officials conducting their unreleased post-2024 autopsy found President [Joe] Biden’s support for Israel cost Democrats votes in the last presidential election and paved the way for [President] Donald Trump to ascend to the White House. Party leadership needs to wake up.”
In a memo to the DNC resolutions committee ahead of the vote, the IMEU Policy Project stressed that "the vast majority of Democratic voters agree Israel is committing genocide and support ending weapons to Israel."
"Democratic elected officials face intense pressure from AIPAC to not align with their voters and most voters across the country," wrote the group.
Resolutions like the one Minnerly put forward, said DeReus on Thursday, are "entirely in step with the vast majority of Democratic voters."
Progressive advocate Brian Tashman wrote that "as Israeli settlers carry out violent pogroms, Israeli soldiers shoot children in Gaza in the head, Israeli warplanes bomb apartment buildings in Beirut, and Israeli leaders try to sabotage the Iran ceasefire, the pro-Israel lobby still demands total support for Israeli war crimes."
"Our tax dollars are doing more to bomb children in Iran and other countries than to feed and educate children here."
A new analysis released Thursday estimates that the average American taxpayer shelled out over $4,000 to the federal government last year "for militarism and its support systems" such as the Pentagon, whose already-massive annual budget is poised to surge to $1.5 trillion if President Donald Trump gets his way.
The National Priorities Project (NPP) at the Institute for Policy Studies found in its latest annual Tax Receipt report that, through their federal taxes, the average US taxpayer contributed $4,049.35 to Pentagon contractors, military personnel, nuclear weapons, aid to foreign militaries, and last year's bombing of Iran's nuclear energy facilities. That's significantly more than the average US taxpayer contributed to healthcare for low-income Americans through Medicaid—$2,492.
NPP's estimated militarism sum for last year does not include costs related to the current, massively unpopular US-Israeli war on Iran, which began on February 28, 2026 and has already cost Americans billions at the pump.
"But if we place the 2026 Iran war costs in the context of our 2025 tax receipt and put the cost at $35 billion—a line the US is likely on the verge of crossing—the average taxpayer will have paid $130 for the war on Iran, eight times more than the $16 the average taxpayer paid for a full year of home heating and energy assistance in 2025," NPP said.
The $1,870 that the average US taxpayer paid toward Pentagon contractors in 2025 was "fifteen times as much as the $124 the average taxpayer paid for school lunches and other nutrition programs," the analysis found.
“It’s shameful that our tax dollars are doing more to bomb children in Iran and other countries than to feed and educate children here," said Lindsay Koshgarian, NPP's program director. "Instead of spending even more of our hard-earned dollars on war and mass deportation, we deserve a massive reinvestment in making this country a place where we can all survive and thrive."
"We’re facing chronic underinvestment in this country, from healthcare to education and more. That money has instead been funding a $1 trillion war machine and a class of Pentagon contractors getting rich off our tax dollars."
NPP noted that Trump's recent request for a $1.5 trillion US military budget for the coming fiscal year would, if approved by Congress, further drive up costs for American taxpayers.
"Our tax receipt shows why so many people in this country are struggling," said Koshgarian. "We’re facing chronic underinvestment in this country, from healthcare to education and more. That money has instead been funding a $1 trillion war machine and a class of Pentagon contractors getting rich off our tax dollars. The good news is that if we reverse our backwards priorities, we can start to make Americans’ lives better."
MarketWatch reported earlier this week that Americans are "increasingly saying they won't pay their taxes this year as a political protest," citing the illegal war on Iran and Trump's unleashing of federal immigration agents and National Guard troops on US cities.
Activist and attorney Rachel Cohen wrote in Current Affairs magazine last month that she is not paying her federal income taxes this year, noting that "our enormous military budget is going to illegal wars of aggression in multiple hemispheres."
"When I learned about pacifists who participated in draft refusal during the Vietnam War," Cohen wrote, "I was confident they were doing the right thing, and that if I were similarly situated, I would have joined them."
"Dangerous climate breakdown is already here, and killing people—now, today."
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration confirmed Thursday that last month—which featured a heatwave that cooked the US West and caused a snow drought—was the hottest March in the 132-year record for the contiguous United States.
The average temperature "was 50.85°F, 9.35°F above the 20th-century average, marking the first time any month's average has exceeded 9°F above that baseline," according to NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information. NCEI also said April 2025-March 2026 was the warmest 12-month span observed for the Lower 48 since recordkeeping began in 1895, and over half of the area had its hottest single March day on record, dating back to 1950.
"Maximum daytime temperatures were especially high, averaging 11.4°F above the March average and 0.9°F above the April long-term average," NCEI noted. "Ten states recorded their warmest March on record: Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. Across all of these states, average temperatures exceeded their respective April averages, with California also eclipsing its average May temperature by 0.7°F."

In a social media thread about the findings, Shel Winkley, the senior engagement specialist and meteorologist at Climate Central, stressed that "our overheating planet played a major role."
"Out of 192 cities analyzed by Climate Central, 111 experienced at least one week of heat made [more than two times] more likely by human-caused warming," he noted. "The Southwest averaged 25 out of 31 days with heat made at least two times more likely."
The "most staggering" statistic, he said, is that "on March 20, 29% of the Lower 48 saw heat made [more than five times] more likely by our warming atmosphere. Put simply: Heat that would be virtually impossible without that fingerprint."
⚠️ Most staggering stat:
On March 20, 29% of the lower 48 saw heat made 5x+ more likely by our warming atmosphere.
Put simply: heat that would be virtually impossible without that fingerprint.
Largest climate-influenced area on record since at least 1970 pic.twitter.com/1Nsjvpj5jX
— Shel Winkley (@shelwinkleywx) April 9, 2026
Winkley told The Associated Press that "what we experienced in March across the United States was unprecedented," while Yale Climate Connections meteorologist Jeff Masters said that the new batch of broken records "tells us that climate change is kicking our butts."
The "January through March period was the driest on record for the contiguous US. So not only was it hot, it was record dry as well," Masters said. "And that's a bad combination for water availability, for agriculture, for river levels, for navigation."
Looking ahead, NOAA warned that "drought is expected to persist and expand across much of the interior West, Southwest, Rockies, and High Plains, as well as parts of the South, Southeast, and Mid-Atlantic... Significant wildland fire potential is above normal across portions of the Southwest, southern Plains, and central High Plains, and much of the Deep South and Southeast."
The AP also pointed out that both the US agency and Europe's Copernicus are "forecasting a 'super' strong El Niño to form in a few months and intensify into the winter. Meteorologists expect that to increase already warm temperatures across the globe, likely pushing past the hottest year mark set by 2024."
Already, as governments across the globe, including the Big Oil-backed Trump administration, refuse to take the actions that the scientific community argues are necessary to address the climate emergency—most notably, swiftly shift away from planet-warming fossil fuels—humanity is contending with deadly conditions during heatwaves.
For a study published last month in the journal Nature Communications, researchers examined heatwaves in Mecca, Saudi Arabia (2024); Bangkok, Thailand (2024); Phoenix, Arizona, the United States (2023); Mount Isa, Australia (2019); Larkana, Pakistan (2015); and Seville, Spain (2003). During each, they found spans of "nonsurvivable" conditions for people ages 65 and older in direct sun.
"My first thought was, 'Oh shit'—I really didn't expect to see that, especially when you zoom in to individual cities," Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, the study's lead author and a professor at the Australian National University, told The Guardian in reporting published Wednesday. "If it's already happening now, then what does a future that is two or three degrees warmer hold?"
Sharing the report on social media, Bill McGuire, a volcanologist and emeritus professor at University College London, said, "As some of us have been saying for quite a while, dangerous climate breakdown is already here, and killing people—now, today."