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.

Los Angeles County officials should move urgently to test a backlog of more than 12,000 rape kits - the physical evidence collected after a sexual assault - to ensure justice for rape victims, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
The 68-page report, "Testing Justice: The Rape Kit Backlog in Los Angeles City and County," reveals that the backlog of untested rape kits in Los Angeles County is larger and more widespread than previously reported. Through dozens of interviews with police officers, public officials, criminalists, rape treatment providers, and rape victims, the report documents the devastating effects of the backlog on victims of sexual abuse.
"Women who are raped have a right to expect police to do all they can to thoroughly investigate their case, but in LA they often feel betrayed to learn that their rape kits are never even tested," said Sarah Tofte, researcher with Human Rights Watch's US program and author of the report. "And in some cases, failure to test means that a rapist who could have been arrested will remain free."
Women who report being raped are asked to undergo a lengthy, extensive examination to collect DNA and other physical evidence that might identify their attacker, corroborate testimony about the assault, or connect their case to other rape crime scene evidence. The resulting rape kit is then booked into police evidence. However, although rape victims may believe it is automatically tested, that is often not the case in Los Angeles County. Rape treatment providers told Human Rights Watch that victims assumed silence from the officers investigating their case simply meant no evidence was found, or that there was no DNA match.
But Human Rights Watch analyzed data from the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, and Los Angeles County's 47 independent police departments, and found that as of March 1, 2009, there were at least 12,669 untested rape kits sitting in storage facilities. In those cases, officers never sent the kits on for forensic testing.
Of these 12,669 untested kits, at least 1,218 are from unsolved cases in which the attacker was a stranger to the victim. And 499 kits are attached to cases past the 10-year statute of limitations for rape in California, making it impossible to prosecute the alleged assailants even if they were to be identified. Under California law, if those 499 kits had been opened within two years of the attack, the statute would no longer apply. Thousands more rape kits were destroyed untested.
The backlog grew even as the Police and Sheriff's Departments received millions of federal dollars from the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant, a program the US Congress created to address rape kit backlogs, the effect of which is blunted by the fact that grantees can use the money to test any kind of DNA backlog.
Human Rights Watch's report also contains previously unpublished data on the extent of the rape kit backlog in the 47 cities in Los Angeles County that have independent police departments. For example, records obtained by Human Rights Watch show that the City of Long Beach booked 1,911 rape kits into evidence in the past 15 years. Of those, 51 were sent to the crime lab, an estimated 780 untested kits were destroyed, and 1,072 currently sit untested in their police storage facility. (A chart of data from the 47 cities is available in chapter VI of the report.)
Backlogs of rape kits exist at police stations and crime labs throughout the United States, but nowhere is the problem known to be more acute than Los Angeles. The accumulation of rape kits in Los Angeles County is due to a combination of police discretion regarding which rape kits get tested; a lack of financial commitment to testing; and the length of time it took officials to acknowledge the nature and extent of the problem, Human Rights Watch said.
"Failing to test rape kits denies justice to women who've suffered sexual violence," said Tofte. "If officials had spent federal money to test more kits, they might have prevented future rapes and allowed for prosecution in cases that are now beyond the statute of limitations."
The backlog can have tragic results. In one case documented in the report, in the time it took police to test one woman's rape kit, the alleged perpetrator had attacked at least two other victims, including a child.
Law enforcement officials told Human Rights Watch they sometimes delayed submitting a kit for testing because they did not believe a crime had occurred. Officials also said they tested every kit in which the attacker was a stranger to the victim, but the subsequent backlog count showed this not to be the case. Testing the rape kits can do more than isolate an unknown attacker's DNA: it can connect evidence from different crime scenes and it can exonerate innocent suspects.
"The Police and Sheriff's Departments have agreed to test all rape kits now in the backlog and all those collected in the future," Tofte said. "Now officials need to enforce this policy as part of a wider reform of the way rape is investigated."
The US has specific obligations under international human rights law that require reasonable steps be taken to secure essential forensic evidence from incidents of sexual violence. In order to meet these obligations and eliminate their backlogs, Human Rights Watch called upon the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department to:
Human Rights Watch also called on the Mayor of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles City Council, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to make funding for the testing of rape kits a priority in their 2009-2010 budgets.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
The US president faces pressure to fully retract his "deeply irresponsible threats of acts that would unleash catastrophic harm on millions of civilians."
President Donald Trump on Thursday further delayed any potential US strikes on Iranian power plants to April 6, after nearly a week of critics calling him a "maniacal tyrant" for threatening to commit even more war crimes while attacking Iran with Israel.
"As per Iranian Government request, please let this statement serve to represent that I am pausing the period of Energy Plant destruction by 10 Days to Monday, April 6, 2026, at 8 P.M., Eastern Time. Talks are ongoing and, despite erroneous statements to the contrary by the Fake News Media, and others, they are going very well," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
Trump initially said on the platform last Saturday night that "if Iran doesn't FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!"
Jan Vande Putte, a senior nuclear and radiation protection expert with Greenpeace International, said in a Monday statement that "bombing civilian electricity infrastructure is illegal under international law. The electricity grid is essential for hospitals, clean water, desalination, and the operation of nuclear facilities. Cutting it off puts millions of lives at risk."
"A blackout could force the Bushehr nuclear facility into depending completely on backup diesel generators, causing a heightened risk of overheating, which can lead to a Fukushima-like disaster," Vande Putte warned, pointing to the 2011 accident in Japan. "If Trump carries through with this reckless threat to knock out critical infrastructure, it could lead to cascading failures, from blackouts to nuclear danger far beyond national borders, with the potential to escalate into a wider regional crisis."
Amid mounting outrage on Monday, Trump instructed the Pentagon to "postpone any and all military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a five-day period, subject to the success of the ongoing meetings and discussions."
Critics continued to sound the alarm. In a Tuesday statement, Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International's senior director of research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns, called on Trump to retract his "dangerous" and "deeply irresponsible threats of acts that would unleash catastrophic harm on millions of civilians."
"By threatening such strikes, the USA is effectively indicating its willingness to plunge an entire country into darkness, and to potentially deprive its people of their human rights to life, water, food, healthcare, and adequate standard of living, and to subject them to severe pain and suffering," she warned.
"The decision to not proceed with such attacks must be based on the USA’s obligations under international humanitarian law to avoid civilian harm—not the outcome of political negotiations," the campaigner argued. "Going through with such attacks would cause devastating long-term consequences and severely undermine the international legal framework designed to protect civilians in wartime."
Guevara-Rosas also called on Iran to retract its threats to retaliate by striking power plants used by the US and Israel in Gulf states, as well as end all unlawful attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz and against energy infrastructure and desalination facilities in the region.
"Intentionally attacking civilian infrastructure such as power plants is generally prohibited," she stressed. "Even in the limited cases that they qualify as military targets, a party still cannot attack power plants if this may cause disproportionate harm to civilians. Given that such power plants are essential for meeting the basic needs and livelihoods of tens of millions of civilians, attacking them would be disproportionate and thus unlawful under international humanitarian law, and could amount to a war crime."
As for the Trump administration's negotiations with Iran, the president's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, confirmed Thursday that Pakistani mediators sent the United States' 15-point framework to the Iranian government—which has not fallen over nearly a month of war, despite frequent assassinations.
Citing an Iranian senior political-security official, state-run Press TV reported Wednesday that Iran had rejected Trump's 15-point plan and had a list of five conditions for ending the conflict: a halt to assassinations, concrete mechanisms to ensure that the war is not reimposed, reparations for damages, an end to the war across all fronts and for all resistance groups involved throughout the region, and recognition of Iran sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz.
As The Associated Press reported Thursday:
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in an interview on state TV that his government has not engaged in talks to end the war and does not plan to. He said the US had tried to send messages to Iran through other nations, "but that is not a conversation nor a negotiation."
Egypt is also acting as a go-between, according to Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, who said Thursday that his country sees a desire from both sides "for calm, for the exploration of negotiations."
Throughout the week, fears of Trump pursuing a ground invasion of Iran have also mounted, intenstifying pressure on congressional Democrats to force another vote on a war powers resolution intended to end the president's unauthorized Operation Epic Fury before the upcoming two-week recess.
"This may be the last opportunity for Congress to slam on the brakes before Trump launches a disastrous ground invasion of Iran," Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said on social media Thursday evening. "If Democratic leadership fails to force a vote and leaves town for two weeks, they will be complicit in any catastrophic escalation."
"Professional sports teams should be owned and controlled by the fans who love them, not by the multibillionaire oligarchs," Sanders said.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Greg Casar on Tuesday introduced a bill that would require owners of professional sports franchises who are considering relocating to give the communities in which they are located a chance to buy the teams first.
"The American people are sick and tired of billionaires threatening to move the sports teams they own to different states unless they get hundreds of millions in corporate welfare to build new stadiums,” Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement announcing the Home Team Act.
"In my view, professional sports teams should be owned and controlled by the fans who love them, not by the multibillionaire oligarchs who are getting even richer by charging outrageous prices and getting taxpayers to pick up their extravagant costs," he continued.
"You shouldn’t have to be wealthy to take your family to a football game," Sanders added. "You shouldn’t have to fear that a multibillionaire will move your favorite team to a different city if taxpayers refuse to subsidize it. The Home Team Act is a very modest piece of legislation that begins to address this problem. I am proud to support it.”
The Home Team Act is cosponsored by Democratic Sens. Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut—which lost the National Hockey League's Hartford Whalers to North Carolina in the 1990s—and five House Democrats.
If passed as written, the bill would:
“Sports in America should be about more than just making billionaire owners even richer," Casar said Thursday.
"Far too many Americans know the pain of losing a team, and far too many communities have had to fork over billions in subsidies just to keep an already profitable team home," he added. "Our bill is about creating a level playing field so leagues work for fans and taxpayers, not just owners.”
Sanders' office acknowledged that "team relocation has plagued communities across America for decades," from the Brooklyn Dodgers and New York Giants moving respectively to Los Angeles and San Francisco in 1958 to the Oakland Athletics—who previously called Philadelphia and Kansas City home—relocating to Sacramento and, eventually, Las Vegas.
Oaklanders have arguably felt the heartbreak of losing their beloved pro sports franchises more than any other US city, having lost the As, the NFL's Raiders, and the Warriors of the National Basketball Association in a five-year span.
"Currently, the Chicago Bears are threatening to leave the city after more than 100 years in response to the state of Indiana offering massive subsidies," Sanders' office said of the storied NFL franchise known for its passionately loyal fan base. "The bill would prevent the Bears from being moved across state lines without being offered for sale."
In his youth, Sanders—who grew up during a time when Jewish players dominated racially segregated professional basketball—was known for his killer mid-range jump shot. As a senator, he has championed professional athletes, especially baseball players, during their collective bargaining struggles against oligarch owners.
Sanders still holds a grudge against the former owner of the beloved Brooklyn Dodgers of his youth who relocated the team to Los Angeles in 1958, when he was a teenager. In 2018, he posted an old Brooklyn adage that "the three worst people in modern history were Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Dodgers owner Walter O'Malley—but not necessarily in that order."
Serving in the House of Representatives at the time, Sanders even had a bit part in the 1999 comedy “My X-Girlfriend’s Wedding Reception," in which he played Manny Shevitz, a rabbi who argues that the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn was the "worst thing that ever happened."
"My bill is about basic fairness and making the ultrawealthy pay their fair share," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren. "It's time for the government to stop listening to the richest of the rich and start working for working people."
Backed by dozens of lawmakers, advocacy organizations, and labor unions, a trio of congressional Democrats on Thursday reintroduced the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, which would generate an estimated $6.2 trillion in revenue over the next decade by imposing a wealth tax on US fortunes above $50 million.
As the lead sponsors, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), highlighted in a statement, that estimated revenue is "more than double the score of the bill when it was first introduced five years ago, and enough money to pay for investments like universal childcare, free community college, Medicare expansion, and more—without raising taxes on 99.85% of American households."
The reintroduction comes just months away from the midterm elections. Democrats are working to reclaim control of Congress from President Donald Trump's Republican Party, which last year used its slim majorities in both chambers to push through a budget package that gave more tax cuts to the rich while cutting social programs for working families.
"While multimillionaires and billionaires are getting richer and richer, families are getting squeezed by a rigged economy," said Warren. "My bill is about basic fairness and making the ultrawealthy pay their fair share. It's time for the government to stop listening to the richest of the rich and start working for working people."
Under the bill, the country's wealthiest 260,000 households would pay a 2% annual tax on fortunes valued at over $50 million and an additional 1% on the net worth of households and trusts above $1 billion. The legislation would also impose a 40% "exit tax" on ultrarich individuals who renounce their citizenship for evasion purposes and would give the Internal Revenue Service $100 million in new funding.
"As millions of families are struggling under the weight of inflation, tariffs, and rising gas prices, the richest billionaires continue to see their net worth grow. We live in the richest country in the world, but that wealth is incredibly concentrated in a tiny group of people. It's time to tax the rich and level the playing field to ensure that every American has a chance to succeed," said Jayapal.
"The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act is a major step toward making sure the wealthy finally pay their fair share," she continued. "With this legislation, we can narrow the racial wealth gap and invest trillions of dollars in healthcare, schools, clean energy, housing, and more to improve lives in communities across America."
At the beginning of 2026, an Institute for Policy Studies analysis found that the total wealth of US billionaires surged to $8.1 trillion last year—and the country's top 15 billionaires saw their collective fortune grow from $2.4 trillion to $3.2 trillion, more than double the S&P 500's 16% increase in 2025.
In the months since, even a columnist at the Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal acknowledged that "billionaires' low taxes are becoming a problem for the economy," and Peter Mallouk, the CEO of wealth management firm Creative Planning, suggested that US wealth inequality "is 100% completely unsustainable as a society."
Boyle declared Thursday that "a secretary shouldn't pay a higher tax rate than the CEO. The current tax code is rigged against working people and the middle class. Our proposal finally changes this and makes billionaires pay their fair share."
Today, I'm introducing my wealth tax — and more than 50 members of Congress are joining me. It’s time for the government to start working for American families, not just the ultra-rich.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) March 26, 2026 at 1:54 PM
Unions backing the bill include the American Federation of Government Employees; American Federation of Teachers; American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME); Communications Workers of America; Service Employees International Union; and United Steelworkers.
"Anti-worker extremists in Congress and their billionaire backers are slashing safety net programs and rigging the tax code to make the ultrawealthy richer as working families are pushed closer to the brink," said AFSCME president Lee Saunders. "The working people who keep this country running shouldn't be the ones carrying a heavier tax burden than the richest 0.1%."
"It's past time billionaires paid their fair share, so we can invest in the public services that working people need—from childcare to healthcare to food support," he argued. "Congress must pass Sen. Warren and Rep. Jayapal's Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act now."
Other organizations behind the bill include Americans for Tax Fairness, Climate Hawks Vote, Groundwork Collaborative, Indivisible, MomsRising, Oxfam America, Patriotic Millionaires, People's Action Institute, Public Citizen, the Sunrise Movement, and more.
“The United States is capable of sustaining the rich, stable, and free economy and country the vast majority of Americans—regardless of political party—actually want. The only way to ensure we get there, though, is by building a tax system that puts a check on the extreme inequality that threatens our economy and our democracy," said Patriotic Millionaires chair Morris Pearl.
"Millionaires like me want less inequality because we and our families will be better off in a society with less economic disparity. And it's not because I'm good or altruistic. I am not any more altruistic than the next person, I'm just greedy for a different kind of country than some other rich people in America," he continued. "I'm willing to pay more in taxes if it means helping us become the kind of country I know we can be. The Patriotic Millionaires are proud to support the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, and we urge Congress to act quickly to make this law."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) introduced another bill to tax the rich—the Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act—earlier this month, but neither proposal is likely to advance in the GOP-controlled Congress.
However, as historian Lawrence Wittner highlighted in a Thursday opinion piece for Common Dreams, "campaigns for state tax-the-rich legislation are flourishing in California, Colorado, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, and Virginia, and have already succeeded in getting such legislation adopted in Massachusetts and Washington."
"Most Americans support proposals to raise taxes on the rich," he noted, citing a January poll that found 80% of Americans saw wealth inequality as a problem, 80% said the rich had too much political power, and 78% said taxes on billionaires were too low. Wittner concluded that "it's time to tax the rich."