

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.

Iraq's process of excluding candidates from the country's national
parliamentary elections on vague, arbitrary, and secret grounds
violates the principles of a free and fair election, Human Rights Watch
said today. The government should immediately suspend the election body
responsible, allow the candidates to participate in the election, and
revise the law that allows for unfair and arbitrary exclusion of
candidates, Human Rights Watch said.
Earlier this month, the Supreme National Commission for
Accountability and Justice disqualified more than 500 candidates for
the planned March parliamentary elections, apparently including several
prominent Sunni politicians, causing a political crisis.
"The commission has undermined faith in the electoral process at a
time when there is already tremendous sectarian tension and a serious
risk of a renewed Sunni election boycott," said Sarah Leah Whitson,
Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "Excluding candidates in a
secretive process based on unclear criteria ensures that the election
will be neither fair nor free."
The Commission revealed that it had disqualified 511 candidates but
did not provide even a minimal level of transparency about its
decision-making process, most significantly the evidence on which it
has disqualified candidates for their alleged Ba'athist connections.
The Commission also did not list all the barred candidates or set out
the exact criteria it has used to bar them.
"We documented atrocities under Ba'ath Party rule, and support
Iraq's efforts to hold those responsible for these crimes accountable
and to bar them from public service," Whitson said, "But we do not
support the use of vague and secret powers to keep the government's
political opponents from participating in an election."
While the Commission has not published an official list of the
barred candidates, it reportedly includes Saleh al-Mutlaq, a Sunni
lawmaker who took part in drafting Iraq's Constitution, and Abdul-Kader
al-Obeidi, the defense minister. It has also reportedly disqualified
large numbers of candidates from secular groups expected to fare well
in the election against Shi'ite-led parties that have governed Iraq
since 2005. The Commission apparently targeted candidates from the two
largest secular coalitions, barring 72 from Iraqiya and 67 from Iraq
Unity. Barred candidates have only three days to appeal the decision.
"The government's next steps will be crucial to salvaging the
credibility of these elections," Whitson said. "It needs to reinstate
the candidates and suspend the Commission immediately and then revamp
the law, establishing clear standards for disqualifying candidates and
requiring the Commission to produce evidence against those it seeks to
ban, so they can challenge its decisions."
The legal authority under which the Commission has the right to
disqualify candidates is opaque; in January 2008, the Iraqi parliament
passed a new law establishing the commission as the successor to the
de-Baathification committee created after the fall of Saddam Hussein's
government in 2003. The 2008 law requires that Parliament approve
commissioners, which it has yet to do.
On January 22, 2010, President Jalal Talabani questioned the
legality of the Commission's disqualifications, asking the Supreme
Court for a ruling. Even if the Supreme Court overturns the
Commission's decision, though, this episode highlights the significant
and fundamental problems with the Commission's enabling legislation,
Human Rights Watch said. Furthermore, the Supreme Court is unlikely to
rule in time for the candidates to campaign in advance of the elections
and for their names to appear on the ballots.
As with previous de-Ba'athification procedures, the 2008 law
effectively maintains the principle of punishment on the basis of group
affiliation, rather than individual actions or qualifications. It fails
to provide those dismissed the right to see and challenge the evidence
against them. Furthermore, the risk of more politically motivated mass
dismissals remains great because the law does not establish the
commission as an independent body made up of individuals chosen on the
basis of competence and integrity.
As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), Iraq is obligated to allow its citizens equal
opportunity to compete as candidates in an election, without being
subject to "unreasonable restrictions." The Covenant requires elections
to guarantee the "free expression of the will of the electors."
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.
"Trump knows Americans are angry that he's made everything more expensive," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Tuesday accused President Donald Trump of trying to sabotage the 2026 midterm elections as his illegal war on Iran jacks up gas prices and threatens higher inflation throughout the economy, angering voters across the political spectrum.
The Massachusetts Democrat's warning came shortly after Trump signed an executive order aimed at restricting mail-in voting, a move that was widely seen as unconstitutional. Warren wrote on social media: "Trump knows his war with Iran is unpopular. Trump knows Americans are angry that he's made everything more expensive. Instead of reversing course, Trump is trying to rig the next election. It's illegal—and we will fight back."
Ben Raderstorf, a policy advocate at the nonprofit group Protect Democracy, said that "just like the war in Iran, the war against the midterms is extremely dangerous and will do so much damage to our elections and our democracy."
A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Tuesday evening found that 66% of US voters—including 40% of Republicans—want a quick end to Trump's war on Iran, even if his administration doesn't achieve its vague and constantly shifting objectives, which have ranged from thwarting an imminent threat that analysts say was not present, to full-scale regime change, to destroying a nuclear weapons program that US intelligence has repeatedly found does not exist.
Reuters reported that two in three respondents to the new survey "said they expected gas prices to worsen over the next year, including 40% of Republicans."
While oil prices fell sharply on Tuesday after Trump declared that US forces would end their assault on Iran in "two weeks or maybe a few days longer," the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimated last week that the gas price surge stemming from the war was on pace to cost American drivers an additional $9.4 billion per month.
"Alabama is the most affected state in the nation, with residents spending an extra $52 per person, per month," ITEP found. "Other heavily impacted states include Mississippi ($51), Wyoming ($49), Kentucky ($47), and New Mexico ($44)."
Trump is expected to address the nation on the Iran war at 9 pm ET on Wednesday, more than a month into a military campaign that was not authorized by lawmakers and that has sparked a regional conflict, killing thousands and displacing millions.
The president told reporters on Tuesday that Iran "doesn't have to make a deal" to end the war, and Trump has privately told aides that he's willing to end the assault without securing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
“We leave because there’s no reason for us to do this,” Trump said.
“The Trump administration knowingly and unlawfully locked up an innocent person for four months in a concentration camp-like prison," said one attorney for the plaintiff.
A Utah law firm said Tuesday that it plans to sue the US government for its allegedly unlawful detention and deportation of a Venezuelan immigrant who was sent to a maximum security prison in El Salvador known for its torture and abuse of inmates.
“Our client is a young Venezuelan man who came into the US legally to escape threats of violence by the Venezuelan government against his family for their opposition to the Maduro regime," said Brent Ward, an attorney at Parker & McConkie, referring to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who was kidnapped by US forces during a January invasion of his country.
Ward said that the client—identified by the pseudonym "Johnny Hernandez"—is seeking $56 million in damages and "has no criminal record either in the US or in Venezuela."
A man entered the U.S. legally, had no criminal record, and was still sent to one of the world's most dangerous prisons for four months. Parker & McConkie is pursuing $56 million in justice on his behalf.www.parkerandmcconkie.com/blog/parker-...#CivilRights #JusticeForJohnny #Immigration #CECOT
[image or embed]
— Parker & McConkie | Personal Injury Law (@parkermcconkie.bsky.social) March 31, 2026 at 2:40 PM
Hernandez was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and subsequently deported to the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) in Tecoluca, central El Salvador, where he allegedly suffered torture and other abuse.
“The Trump administration knowingly and unlawfully locked up an innocent person for four months in a concentration camp-like prison where he suffered torture, shooting, beatings, and solitary confinement," Ward stated. "When the US government knowingly and purposefully violates the law by detaining and deporting innocent individuals on false charges and is not held responsible, the individual rights of not just legal immigrants but all Americans are placed in jeopardy."
"Our client suffered catastrophic injuries in CECOT from which he will never fully recover," the lawyer said. "Failing to demand accountability now places all Americans in jeopardy in the future.”
The impending lawsuit comes as ICE proposes to literally warehouse up to 10,000 arrested immigrants in a "megacenter" in Salt Lake City, Utah. Opponents have compared the 833,000-square foot facility to a concentration camp akin to the Topaz War Relocation Center, a harsh, desolate desert prison where Japanese Americans and Japanese people living in the Western US were forcibly interned during World War II.
The case also follows last week's filing of a lawsuit by Neiyerver Adrián León Rengel, one of the Venezuelans sent to CECOT. Like Hernandez, León Rengel—who is seeking $1.3 million in damages—was in the US legally when he was arrested by federal immigration authorities.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) recently said on the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation of Salvadorans, Venezuelans, and others that, of the 9,000 Salvadorans expelled from the US since the beginning of last year, “only 10.5% had a conviction in the United States for a violent or potentially violent crime.”
The Salvadoran investigative journalism outlet El Faro—which, along with its staff, has been the target of sweeping government persecution—last year published a report on CECOT, citing one former prisoner who said that inmates are “committing suicide out of desperation.”
At least one deported Salvadoran—longtime Maryland resident Kilmar Ábrego García—was wrongfully expelled due to what the Trump administration called an “administrative error.”
The Trump administration deported hundreds of Venezuelans to CECOT under a multimillion-dollar agreement between the Trump administration and the government of Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele.
While Trump claimed—often without evidence—that the Venezuelan deportees were members of the Tren de Aragua gang, only about 3% of them had violent criminal convictions in the United States, and Department of Homeland Security records show that the Trump administration knew it.
In July 2025, El Salvador released 252 Venezuelans imprisoned at CECOT and sent them to Venezuela in a prisoner swap that saw Maduro's government free 10 US citizens and permanent residents whom it jailed. Many of the repatriated Venezuelans said they suffered torture, sexual assault, severe beatings, and other abuse at CECOT.
Last December, Judge James Boasberg of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Trump administration broke the law by deporting the Venezuelans without due process.
"This executive order is a blatant, unconstitutional abuse of power," said Sen. Alex Padilla. "Make no mistake: Trump's attacks on our elections are a clear and present threat to our democracy."
Just days after the GOP-controlled Senate skipped town once they failed to send a voter suppression bill to President Donald Trump's desk, the Republican on Tuesday signed an executive order to create a nationwide list of US voters and crack down on voting by mail—which is how he voted in Florida's most recent election.
The order, Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections, was first reported by the Daily Caller, a right-wing outlet. It requires the secretary of Homeland Security to establish a "citizenship list" of verified eligible voters in each state, using Social Security Administration records and other federal databases.
Trump—who has repeatedly spread lies about election fraud, including his unfounded claim that Democrats stole the 2020 election from him, which led to his supporters storming the Capitol on January 6, 2021—also directed the postmaster general to craft rules for absentee ballots sent through the US Postal Service.
Legal experts expect the order will be swiftly challenged in court as unconstitutional. David Becker, a former US Department of Justice lawyer who now leads the Center for Election Innovation and Research, told Democracy Docket that "it's obvious the president didn't learn anything from his first failed executive order."
"This is unconstitutional on its face. The Constitution clearly gives the president no power over elections," he said. "I expect that this will be blocked by multiple federal courts in a very short period of time and have no legal effect whatsoever."
Becker also noted that "after the Department of Justice has been telling courts they're not creating a national voter list, this appears to confirm exactly what courts were concerned about."
Marc Elias, founder of Democracy Docket and a longtime election lawyer for Democrats, similarly said that "this is a massive and unconstitutional voter suppression effort aimed at giving Trump the power to create a list of who is allowed to vote by mail."
"We know where this will go—the targeting of Democrats for mass disenfranchisement," he added. "We will sue and we will win."
US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) shared a message for the administration on social media: "See you in court. You will lose."
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and California's former secretary of state, said in a statement that "instead of focusing on lowering the cost of energy, groceries, and healthcare, Donald Trump is desperately attempting to take over and rig our elections and avoid accountability in November."
The order was issued just over seven months away from the midterm elections that could hand control of Congress back to the Democrats—which could, in term, lead to a historic third impeachment for Trump.
"This executive order is a blatant, unconstitutional abuse of power," Padilla declared. "The president and the Department of Homeland Security have no authority to commandeer federal elections or direct the independent Postal Service to undermine mail and absentee voting that nearly 50 million Americans relied on in 2024. A decade of lies about election fraud does not change the Constitution."
"Make no mistake: Trump's attacks on our elections are a clear and present threat to our democracy. In the middle of an unauthorized war abroad and an escalating authoritarian crackdown by ICE here at home, Trump is attempting another illegal power grab," he added, referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "I will use every tool I can to stop him, and I expect immediate legal challenges in order to protect our free and fair elections."
After signing the order, Trump signaled that he, too, expects a court battle. While holding up the order, he said that "I don't know how it can be challenged," but critics will "probably challenge it" and "find a rogue judge."
There are "a lot of rogue judges. Very bad, bad people. Very bad judges," he added. "But that's the only way that can be changed, and hopefully we'll win on appeal if it is. But I don't see how anybody can challenge it."
Trump signed the order after unsuccessfully trying to convince the GOP-controlled Senate to pass the SAVE America Act—already approved by Republicans in the House of Representatives—before the current recess.
The bill would require US voters to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote and to show photo identification to participate in federal elections. Trump has been pushing for amendments to restrict mail-in voting as well as more attacks on transgender Americans.
While Trump and other supporters of the bill have claimed it is needed to stop noncitizens from voting, that is already illegal and, according to research, incredibly rare. Critics warn that the SAVE America Act would disenfranchise eligible voters who don't have access to citizenship documents, including people who have lost paperwork, can't afford replacements, or have changed their names.