

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.

Turkmen authorities should immediately revoke a new travel ban imposed on students bound for foreign private universities, Human Rights Watch said today. Turkmenistan should also end new, burdensome requirements for studying abroad that violate the rights to freedom of movement and to education, Human Rights Watch said.
"These arbitrary travel restrictions are disturbing new proof of how repressive Turkmenistan's government is," said Maria Lisitsyna, Turkmenistan researcher at Human Rights Watch. "Being able to travel abroad is a pretty basic human right."
Since late July 2009, Turkmen authorities have prevented hundreds of students from boarding planes and crossing land borders to depart for study abroad. The students were enrolled or planning to enroll at universities in Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkey, and the United States, among other countries. Authorities told the students that they did not have appropriate documents to leave the country.
The travel regulations have not been made public. According to information from several students, the Turkmen government began to impose the restrictions in late July, and by early August was referring to new regulations on foreign travel that it said had been "announced" on August 1.
The students and other sources said Ministry of Education officials told the students that under the new requirements they must present several documents to seek permission to travel abroad. These include an invitation from the university, a copy of its license, verification of its state-affiliation status, a copy of the contract between the student and the university (if the student is already enrolled), and a passport.
Ferghana.ru, a news website covering Central Asia, reported that when students began being blocked from leaving the country in late July, hundreds went to the National Institute of Education and the Migration Service to try to obtain the required stamps.
After weeks of uncertainty, the Turkmen government started to grant permission to leave the country, but only to those studying in state-run foreign universities, which reportedly had "state accreditation" and therefore met certain standards. While students attending state universities in countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States have been able to travel freely, other students said that they were told by officials that their university was not on an "approved list."
According to the Turkmen Initiative for Human Rights (TIHR), a nongovernmental organization based in Vienna, the deputy minister of education told the parents of students of one private university in Central Asia on August 20 that Turkmenistan "does not need these professions" and that "from now on their children are prohibited from leaving the territory of Turkmenistan for any purpose."
The Vienna-based group and other sources reported that officials threatened to have students' parents jailed or fired from their jobs if the students attended non-approved universities.
Turkmenistan is party to both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees freedom of movement and an individual's right to "leave any country, including his own," and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, which guarantees everyone the right to education, including access to higher education.
"These new travel restrictions and the apparent ban on private higher education abroad are new additions to the extensive list of egregious repressive practices of the Turkmen government," said Lisitsyna. "The foreign travel ban on students should ring alarm bells for Turkmenistan's international partners about this government's disregard for its international obligations."
Turkmenistan remains one of the most repressive and authoritarian countries in the world. Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov came to power in December 2006 after the death of the self-declared president-for-life, Saparmurat Niazov. In the first year of his presidency, Berdymukhamedov took some measures to dismantle some of the most excessive, ruinous social policies of his predecessor, but these did not result in any genuine reforms affecting human rights. Hundreds of people, perhaps more, languish in Turkmen prisons following unfair trials on what appeared to be politically motivated charges. Draconian restrictions on freedom of expression, association, assembly, movement, and religion remain in place.
Because of the country's vast gas reserves, the United States and the European Union have actively engaged the Turkmen government. In July, the European Union formally approved a trade agreement with Turkmenistan that had been stalled by the European Parliament over human rights concerns since 2006. The European Parliament in April green-lighted the agreement as "a potential lever to strengthen the reform process in Turkmenistan."
"Too often, Turkmenistan's partners give the government undeserved credit for announcing reforms without following up to see if they are actually carried out," said Lisitsyna. "They can start the kind of closer scrutiny they should be exercising by pressing Turkmenistan to reverse this harmful travel ban."
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.
"Sami never should have spent a single night in an ICE cell," said one advocate. "His only real ‘offense’ was speaking clearly about Israel’s genocidal war crimes against Palestinians."
A leading Muslim civil rights group in the US applauded Monday as the Trump administration's agreement to release British pro-Palestinian commentator Sami Hamdi acknowledged that he is not "a danger to the community or to national security," after he was held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention for more than two weeks.
Hamdi's family and the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which has been representing the journalist, expressed relief at the news that he had accepted an offer to leave the US voluntarily.
Hamdi was detained at San Francisco International Airport on October 26, mid-way through a US speaking tour during which he spoke about Palestinian rights and Israel's US-backed war in Gaza, which has killed more than 68,000 Palestinians.
The journalist, who is Muslim and of Tunisian and Algerian descent, had just spoken at an event in Sacramento, where he called on US leaders to take an "America First" rather than "Israel First" approach to its policy in the Middle East.
As Prem Thakker reported at Zeteo News, two "unelected, far-right, Islamophobic figures," Laura Loomer and Amy Mekelburg, took credit for "investigating" Hamdi. Mekelburg published a report that called on the US to deport Hamdi and prohibit him from entering the country, claiming he was “training US Muslims in digital agitation, electoral sabotage, and political warfare in alignment with Muslim Brotherhood doctrine.”
Loomer, a far-right conspiracy theorist, has become known during President Donald Trump's second term as someone with a considerable influence over the White House. Two days after Mekelburg's report was published, the US State Department revoked Hamdi's visa, and a day later ICE arrested him.
"His forthcoming release is welcome, but it does not erase the message this sends to every activist and journalist watching—and every authoritarian dictatorship worldwide who can now claim they are following America’s example.”
The Trump administration said at the time that it had "no obligation to host foreigners who support terrorism and actively undermine the safety of Americans," and appeared to reference comments Hamdi made after the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. The Department of Homeland Security shared a video clip released by the pro-Israel group Memri, which showed Hamdi saying Palestinians should “celebrate their victory."
As The Guardian reported, Hamdi later clarified those remarks, saying, "We don’t celebrate blood lust, we don’t celebrate death and we don’t celebrate war... What Muslims are celebrating is not war, they’re celebrating the revival of a cause—a just cause—that everybody thought was dead, this is an important distinction."
Hamdi's wife, Soumaya Hamdi, told The Guardian after his arrest that the Memri video had been “edited in a way to frame Sami in a horrible light and produced by an organization that is very well known to be anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, Islamophobic, and out there to target people who are speaking up against the genocide against Palestinians."
CAIR-CA emphasized Monday that in Hamdi's immigration charging documents, the US government alleged only a visa overstay "and never identified any criminal conduct or security grounds."
“It is this simple: Sami never should have spent a single night in an ICE cell. His only real ‘offense’ was speaking clearly about Israel’s genocidal war crimes against Palestinians," said Hussam Ayloush, CEO of CAIR-CA.
“Sami’s case shows how quickly our government officials are willing to sacrifice our First Amendment and free press when a journalist uses his platform to dare put America first before Israel," said Ayloush. "His forthcoming release is welcome, but it does not erase the message this sends to every activist and journalist watching—and every authoritarian dictatorship worldwide who can now claim they are following America’s example.”
"The Democratic Party at the leadership level has really just become entirely feckless," said the progressive US Senate candidate running to unseat Republican Sen. Susan Collins.
Progressive US Senate candidate Graham Platner said late Monday that the leadership of the national Democratic Party must be replaced as eight Democratic senators—with the tacit approval of Chuck Schumer—voted with Republicans to end the government shutdown without a deal to avert a disastrous surge in health insurance premiums.
"The Democratic Party, at the leadership level, has really just become entirely feckless," Platner, who is running to unseat Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), said on a call hosted by Our Revolution, a progressive advocacy group that is also calling on Schumer (D-NY) to step down as leader of the Senate Democratic caucus.
"It is his job to make sure that his caucus is voting along the lines that are going to be good for the people," Platner said on Monday's call. "He is just completely unable to rise to this moment in American history."
"We gotta get rid of them," Platner said of Democratic leaders. "They have to go."
🚨 Tonight, U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner didn’t hold back:
“The Democratic Party at the leadership level has really just become entirely feckless. There’s an inability to wield power — and people are fed up," he said live on Our Revolution’s 2026 Kickoff Call.
"What… pic.twitter.com/OjiwOMTcaW
— Our Revolution (@OurRevolution) November 11, 2025
On Monday night, eight Democratic caucus members—Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Angus King of Maine, Jacky Rosen and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania—broke ranks and voted with Republicans to send a government funding deal to the House, effectively ending a standoff over Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies that are set to lapse at the end of the year.
In addition to doing nothing to extend the enhanced ACA tax credits, the bill lacks language "saying that Trump has to spend the money," The American Prospect's David Dayen lamented.
"He can keep withholding funds, and even rescind them with a party-line vote," Dayen added. "None of the problems that inspired the shutdown are resolved."
Schumer personally voted against the legislation, which progressives dismissed as a face-saving maneuver.
Durbin, who is not running for reelection next year, told reporters that Schumer was "not happy" when informed of the Illinois senator's decision to vote with Republicans to end the shutdown.
"But he accepted it," Durbin added. "I think our friendship is still intact."
The Democratic capitulation after what became the longest shutdown in US history sparked an eruption of anger within the Democratic Party and from outside advocates who backed Democrats' effort to extend the ACA tax credits as premiums skyrocket, viewing the fight as both good policy and good politics.
The progressive organization MoveOn said late Monday that, in the wake of Democrats' surrender, 80% of its members voiced support for Schumer resigning as leader of the Senate Democratic caucus, a position that was also expressed by progressives in the House of Representatives.
“With Donald Trump and the Republican Party doubling healthcare premiums, weaponizing our military against us, and ripping food away from children, MoveOn members cannot accept weak leadership at the helm of the Democratic Party," said Katie Bethell, executive director of MoveOn Political Action. "Inexplicably, some Senate Democrats, under Leader Schumer’s watch, decided to surrender. It is time for Senator Schumer to step aside as minority leader to make room for those who are willing to fight fire with fire when the basic needs of working people are on the line."
Schumer is not up for reelection until 2028; progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has been floated as a possible primary challenger. Prior to the 2028 contest, it's far from clear that enough Senate Democratic caucus would support removing Schumer from the position he's held since 2017.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) voiced support for Schumer on Monday, indicating that he views the Senate Democratic leader as "effective" even as he folded, yet again, to President Donald Trump and the Republican Party.
"His campaign paired moral conviction with concrete plans to lower costs and expand access to services, making it unmistakable what he stood for and whom he was fighting for."
Amid calls for ousting Democratic congressional leadership because the party caved in the government shutdown fight over healthcare, a YouGov poll released Monday shows the nationwide popularity of New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani's economic agenda.
Mamdani beat former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in both the June Democratic primary and last week's general election by campaigning unapologetically as a democratic socialist dedicated to making the nation's largest city more affordable for working people.
Multiple polls have suggested that Mamdani's progressive platform offers Democrats across the United States a roadmap for candidates in next year's midterms and beyond. As NYC's next mayor began assembling his team and the movement that worked to elect him created a group to keep fighting for his ambitious agenda, YouGov surveyed 1,133 US adults after his victory.
While just 31% of those surveyed said they would have voted for Mamdani—more than any other candidate—and the same share said they would vote for a candidate who identified as a "democratic socialist," the policies he ran on garnered far more support.
YouGov found:
Data for Progress similarly surveyed 1,228 likely voters from across the United States about key pieces of Mamdani's platform before his win. The think tank found that large majorities of Americans support efforts to build more affordable housing, higher taxes for corporations as well as millionaires and billionaires, and free childcare, among other policies.

"There's a common refrain from some pundits to dismiss Mamdani's victory as a quirk of New York City politics rather than a sign of something bigger," Data for Progress executive director Ryan O'Donnell wrote last week. "But his campaign paired moral conviction with concrete plans to lower costs and expand access to services, making it unmistakable what he stood for and whom he was fighting for. The lesson isn't that every candidate should mimic his style—you can't fake authenticity—but that voters everywhere respond when a candidate connects economic populism to clear, actionable goals."
"Candidates closer to the center are running on an affordability message as well," he noted, pointing to Democrat Mikie Sherrill's gubernatorial victory in New Jersey. "When a center-left figure like Sherill is running on taking on corporate power, it underscores how central economic populism has become across the political spectrum. Her message may have been less fiery than Mamdani's, but she drew from a similar well of voter frustration over rising costs and corporate influence. In doing so, Sherrill demonstrated to voters that her administration would play an active role in lowering costs—something that voters nationwide overwhelmingly believe the government should be doing."