

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.

ACLU Media, (212) 549-2666 or media@aclu.org
The American Civil Liberties Union will be in court Wednesday for oral arguments in its landmark challenge to the unconstitutional FISA Amendments Act (FAA), which gives the government virtually unchecked power to intercept Americans' international e-mails and telephone calls. The ACLU filed a lawsuit to stop the government from spying under the FAA less than an hour after the Act was signed into law by President Bush on July 10, 2008. Recent news reports have indicated that the National Security Agency has exceeded the already overbroad limits granted to it under the FAA.
The case was filed on behalf of a broad coalition of attorneys and human rights, labor, legal and media organizations whose ability to perform their work - which relies on confidential communications - is greatly compromised by the law.
Plaintiffs in the case are The Nation and contributing journalists Naomi Klein and Chris Hedges; defense attorneys Dan Arshack, David Nevin, Scott McKay and Sylvia Royce; and Amnesty International USA, Global Rights, Global Fund for Women, Human Rights Watch, PEN American Center, Service Employees International Union, Washington Office on Latin America and the International Criminal Defense Attorneys Association.
WHAT: Oral arguments in the ACLU's challenge to the unconstitutional FISA Amendments Act
WHEN: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 10:00 a.m. EDT
WHERE: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Daniel Patrick Moynihan Courthouse, Courtroom 12B 500 Pearl St. New York, NY 10007
WHO: Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project, will argue on behalf of the plaintiffs before Judge John G. Koeltl.
More information about the case, including the ACLU's complaint, a video discussing the legal challenge and plaintiff statements in support of the lawsuit, is available online at: www.aclu.org/faa
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666Their boss, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, has said that videotaping officers on the job is a form of "doxing" and "violence."
The US Department of Homeland Security has claimed for months that filming immigration agents on the job constitutes a criminal offense. But under oath during a Senate Homeland Security Committee oversight hearing on Thursday, the leaders of immigration agencies under the department’s umbrella admitted this is not true.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the chair of the committee, interrogated Todd Lyons, the acting head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Rodney Scott, the commissioner of Customs and Border Protection (CBP); and Joseph Edlow, the director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) about the recent surge of agents in Minnesota, which has resulted in the killing of two US citizens since January.
He zeroed in on the case of Alex Pretti, the 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse who was shot by a pair of immigration agents on January 24, showing footage of the incident leading up to Pretti's killing, which DHS claimed was justified prior to any investigation taking place.
"So what we see is the beginning of the encounter with Alexander Pretti. He's filming in the middle of the street," Paul explained after rolling the tape.
The senator then asked Scott and Lyons, "Is filming of ICE or Border Patrol either an assault or a crime in any way?"
They both responded flatly, "No."
Courts have generally affirmed that filming law enforcement agents is protected by the First Amendment. But this admission by Lyons and Scott is a major deviation from what their parent agency has claimed.
Their boss, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, stated during a July press briefing that “violence” against DHS agents includes “doxing them” and “videotaping them where they’re at when they’re out on operations.”
Even in the wake of last month's shootings, DHS has held to this line, with spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin claiming that “videoing our officers in an effort to dox them and reveal their identities is a federal crime and a felony.”
Agents have been directed to treat those who film ICE as criminals—a DHS bulletin from June described filming at protests as "unlawful civil unrest" tactics and "threats."
Several videos out of Minnesota, Maine, and other places flooded by ICE have documented federal agents telling bystanders to stop recording and issuing threats against them or detaining them.
In one case, a bystander was told that because she was filming, she was going to be put in a "nice little database" and was now "considered a domestic terrorist."
Last month, a federal judge sided with a group of journalists in California who cited the June bulletin to argue that Noem had "established, sanctioned, and ratified an agency policy of treating video recording of DHS agents in public as a threat that may be responded to with force and addressed as a crime," in violation of the First Amendment.
"Congress needs to pass legislation in 2029 that will automatically undo all major mergers occurring under this corrupt regime," said one antitrust advocate.
Gail Slater, once heralded as the leader of the "surging MAGA antitrust movement," announced Thursday that she is leaving her role as the top antitrust official at the US Justice Department after repeatedly clashing with Trump administration leadership over corporate merger enforcement.
Slater said in a statement that "it is with great sadness and abiding hope that I leave my role as [assistant attorney general] for antitrust today," but reporting indicates she was forced out. According to The Guardian, Slater was "given the option to resign or be let go." CBS News reported that "top Trump administration officials had decided to oust" Slater and "had discussions with her shortly before she announced on social media that she was leaving the department."
Matt Stoller, research director at the American Economic Liberties Project, said in a statement that Congress must "aggressively investigate" the circumstances surrounding Slater's departure, noting that it came shortly before the closely watched Live Nation-Ticketmaster antitrust trial is set to begin next month.
Live Nation's stock price jumped following Slater's announcement, and at least one lobbyist openly celebrated the news.
Days before Slater's apparent removal, Semafor reported that Live Nation executives and lobbyists "have been negotiating with senior DOJ officials outside the antitrust division to avert a trial over whether the company is operating an illegal monopoly that has driven up concert prices."
" Wall Street expects there will be a settlement to block this trial at the behest of the lobbyists who engineered this ouster," said Stoller. "Congress needs to pass legislation in 2029 that will automatically undo all major mergers occurring under this corrupt regime, as well as breaking up companies who have their monopolization cases settled. In addition, the next Justice Department needs to organize an aggressive white-collar criminal law section to jail the lawyers, bankers, and lobbyists enabling this seeming crime spree."
Huge L for the populists on the right as lobbyists successfully got Trump's head of antitrust fired. I have not been a fan of Gail Slater, and this firing has been a long time coming. Things were bad under Gail, they could get worse now. https://t.co/zzyhXA3iWo
— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) February 12, 2026
Slater's tenure at the head of the DOJ's antitrust division was marked by a power struggle with pro-corporate officials within—and at the top of—the department, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, a former corporate lobbyist.
Last summer, top Justice Department officials reportedly bypassed Slater and cut a sweetheart merger settlement deal with Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks. Weeks later, DOJ leadership removed two of Slater's deputies for "insubordination."
Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, said Thursday that Slater's departure "is very bad news for small businesses who had hoped for some faithful enforcement of the antitrust laws against monopolies like Ticketmaster."
"Instead, it looks like pure corruption reigns at the DOJ—pay the right people and you can freely crush your small rivals," Mitchell added.
"Is there anything worse than a child dying of cancer when it was preventable?" asked one observer.
Infant mortality is on the rise in Cuba as the Trump administration tightens a decadeslong economic embargo on the island nation in hopes of toppling a socialist government that's outlasted a dozen US presidents.
According to the United Nations Inter-Agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation, infant mortality in Cuba—which plummeted dramatically in the decades after the 1959 triumph of the Cuban Revolution—has increased from 4 to 7.4 per 1,000 live births since 2018, an 85% increase.
The rise in infant mortality comes amid a deadly surge in mosquito-borne illness, including dengue and chikungunya, that has inundated already struggling hospitals suffering shortages of staff and even basic supplies. Hospitals in Cuba—which in 2015 became the first country in the world to eliminate mother-to-child transmission of HIV and congenital syphilis—are now reliant upon donations and the black market for their needs.
The crisis is particularly dire among children with cancer. Cuba's free healthcare system—which prioritizes the health of the people instead of industry profits, as in the United States—once boasted a pediatric cancer survival rate of 80%, on par with the world's wealthy nations. Now that's down to around 65% as the blockade has forced healthcare providers to modify treatment protocols and medications.
“The situation is very serious at the moment. It was already in terms of acquiring supplies and medicines. But now it is intensifying and complicated with other aspects," Dr. Forteza Saéz, an oncologist at Havana's University of Medical Sciences, told La Jornada in an interview on Wednesday.
Dr. Luis Curbelo Alonso, former longtime director of the National Institute of Oncology and Radiology in Havana, told La Jornada: "You have the knowledge, the expertise, the team to face something that can be curable or can be controllable and yet not have the drug. It's a very lacerating thing as a professional, very cruel."
The situation is also driving Cubans to extreme measures to find treatment. Two-year-old Mía Rey Jiménez and her family left their home in Cardenas, Matanzas last May weeks after the child was diagnosed with metastatic stage 4 neuroblastoma, an extremely aggressive childhood cancer requiring complex treatment.
The family left Cuba to seek treatment in Nicaragua and then Costa Rica, where Jiménez underwent chemotherapy and high-risk surgery. Still left with a tumor in her lung and cancer in her bone marrow, Jiménez's family sought help from Nicklaus Children's Hospital in Miami, one of the world's leading specialized facilities.
The hospital agreed to evaluate Jiménez and estimated her chances of survival with proper care at up to 80%—more than double her prognosis in Costa Rica. However, the humanitarian visa for which Jiménez's family applied was denied by US authorities due to what they claimed was "lack of evidence," even though the girl's father resides legally in the United States.
The family successfully appealed their denial and Jiménez and her mother Liudmila Jiménez Matos arrived in Miami in January.
“I can’t be happier," Jiménez Matos told Cuba Noticias 360 last month. "My daughter will be treated by doctors who have been waiting for her for a long time. That’s a love for the profession and for saving another life."
As President Donald Trump tightens the blockade on Cuba following a similar strangulation of Venezuela that ended with last month's US invasion and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to face dubious "narco-terrorism" charges in the United States, critics are renewing calls to end Washington's embargo.
Imposed in the early 1960s after a successful revolution that overthrew a brutal US-backed dictatorship and replaced it with a socialist government, the blockade—which accompanied a decadeslong campaign of terrorism by US-based Cuban exiles—has claimed thousands of Cuban lives and cost the country's economy more than $1 trillion, according to official estimates.
The United Nations General Assembly has overwhelmingly condemned the blockade 33 times.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned Wednesday of a potential "collapse" of Cuba's economy if the US keeps blocking oil from entering the country.
On Thursday, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who visited Cuba in 2024 as part of a delegation of progressive US lawmakers, called the ramped-up embargo, which is now targeting fuel imports, as "cruel and despotic."
Back in Havana, Cuban doctors vowed to do the best they can for their patients under the harrowing circumstances.
“We will continue to resist," Dr. Carlos Alberto Martínez, head of the Ministry of Health's cancer control section, told La Jornada. "We will continue to look for alternatives that allow the sustainability of what has been achieved."