5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
March, 23 2010, 12:03pm EDT
Contact:
Melissa Garriga: melissa@codepink.org
CODEPINK to Build Settlements in Congress Today
Activists call for end to siege on Gaza and illegal settlements
WASHINGTON
Shortly after announcing Israel's commitment to defense in his
address to the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)
Gala, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was disrupted by a
demonstrator. Rae Abileah, 27, from Half Moon Bay, CA, jumped onto
AIPAC Executive Director Howard Kohr's private table alongside the stage
and unfurled a pink banner that said "Netanyahu: Build Peace Not
Settlements!" Abileah shouted, "Lift the siege of Gaza! No illegal
settlements!" as she was forcefully removed from the building. A second
disruption came moments later from Joan Stallard, from Washington, DC,
who shouted, "Stop the settlements!"
Today, Tuesday,
March 23, at noon CODEPINK is planning to build a
settlement (including homes and beds) inside Senator Schumer's and
Senator Lieberman's offices (Hart Senate Building, offices 313 and 706).
CODEPINK's protests of the policies of AIPAC during their
national
conference this week have included daily morning protests, staging of a
checkpoint for attendees, an afternoon press conference announcing the
launch of a city-wide boycott of products illegally made in the
settlements, and the release this morning of a spoof press release from AIPAC announcing that the
organization was calling for a settlement freeze.
American Jewish peace activists are outraged at the influence that AIPAC
has on U.S. policy. "AIPAC supports policies of aggression that damage
Israel's reputation, harm innocent Palestinians, and contribute to
making America less safe in the world," said Jewish-American activist
Medea Benjamin of CODEPINK."
CODEPINK is a women-led grassroots organization working to end U.S. wars and militarism, support peace and human rights initiatives, and redirect our tax dollars into healthcare, education, green jobs and other life-affirming programs.
(818) 275-7232LATEST NEWS
Voting Rights Advocates Sue Over Florida GOP 'Show Your Papers' Law
"The Legislature's failure to look out for constituents instead of legislators' own political interests will harm married women, naturalized citizens, young people, and many other eligible voters."
Apr 01, 2026
As President Donald Trump bullies Congress to pass a voter suppression bill while also trying to take matters into his own hands with an executive order, voting rights advocates on Wednesday sued to block similar legislation passed by Florida Republicans.
Common Cause, Florida Immigrant Coalition, Florida Rising, Hispanic Federation, League of Women Voters of Florida, and UnidosUS filed the lawsuit over House Bill 991 on the same day that the state's Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, signed it. The law requires documentary "evidence of citizenship," such as a birth certificate or passport, to register to vote or remain on the rolls.
"New barriers to voting too often fall hardest on the communities that have long fought to be heard in our democracy," noted Caren Short, director of legal and research at the League of Women Voters of the United States. "Sadly, but unsurprisingly, Florida's new documentary proof of citizenship law requirement is based on xenophobic lies and disinformation."
It's already illegal for noncitizens to vote, and research has shown voter fraud is incredibly rare. Short said that "the Legislature's failure to look out for constituents instead of legislators' own political interests will harm married women, naturalized citizens, young people, and many other eligible voters who do not have ready access to documents like passports or birth certificates."
Common Cause Florida executive director Amy Keith warned that "if this law stands, thousands of US citizens will be removed from Florida's voter rolls, blocking them from voting in the next presidential election if they can't afford specific documents."
"Life is getting increasingly harder and more expensive in Florida," Keith continued, "but with this bill, legislators are purging the very voters who are suffering most from Florida's affordability crisis. I don't think that's a coincidence."
UnidosUS Florida state director Jared Nordlund similarly said that the state's Republican policymakers "know their agenda is unpopular, and when they cannot win by persuading voters, they try to win by making it harder for people to vote."
"HB 991 is another solution in search of a problem, and Florida is once again the testing ground for a voter suppression playbook that could spread nationwide," Nordlund declared. "These laws target the voices they fear most, especially women, communities of color, and working-class voters."
The groups behind the suit—filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida—are represented by the state and national ACLU as well as the Advancement Project and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.
BREAKING: Gov. Ron DeSantis just signed Florida’s new anti-voter law, HB 991. This “show your papers” law adds unnecessary barriers to voting, so @aclu.org and @aclufl.bsky.social are suing. In America, voters choose our leaders — politicians don’t get to choose who votes.We’ll see you in court.
— Abdelilah Skhir (@abskhir.bsky.social) April 1, 2026 at 12:18 PM
"Florida's new 'show your papers' law is a blatant attempt to add unnecessary barriers to the ballot box," said Jonathan Topaz, staff attorney with the ACLU's Voting Rights Project. "We bring this lawsuit to ensure that Florida cannot block its eligible voters from exercising their fundamental right to vote because of missing or mismatched paperwork."
DeSantis' signing of HB 991 and the subsequent suit came a day after Trump signed a voter suppression executive order that critics called a "blatant, unconstitutional abuse of power." The measure requires the secretary of homeland security to establish a "citizenship list" of verified eligible voters in each state and directs the postmaster general to make new rules for voting by mail.
Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, said in a Tuesday statement that "once again, President Trump is attempting to seize power he does not have. The president's order is not about protecting elections—it's about trying to control them and using that control to make it harder to vote for his perceived enemies. The Constitution is very clear: Only Congress and the states can make laws regarding our elections."
"The ability to vote by mail is crucial to our democracy," she explained. "It ensures that voters with disabilities, those without transportation access, working families, those who are deployed or otherwise abroad, and many others who rely on its flexibility can exercise their right to vote. President Trump's attempts to undermine a safe, proven, and reliable method of voting is just another part of his strategy to sow distrust in our elections. As always, we are prepared to protect our democracy and our right to vote in court against these continued unconstitutional attacks."
Trump signed the order while pressuring the US Senate to pass anti-voter legislation that's already been approved by Republicans in the House of Representatives. Advancement Project power and democracy program director Hani Mirza said that the president's directive "cannot be separated from the broader legislative push for the SAVE America Act, which would impose burdensome proof-of-citizenship and photo ID requirements that would create new barriers to the ballot for millions of Americans."
"The authoritarian plan to shrink the number of people who can participate in the 2026 midterms is clear," Mirza added, just over seven months before Election Day. "In our ongoing pursuit of a truly multiracial democracy, we refuse to remain silent and will continue to defend the right to vote until every community is heard and every eligible voter is able to cast a ballot that counts."
Keep Reading
Show Less
AOC Commits to Opposing ‘Any Spending on Arms for Israel,’ Including Iron Dome
The progressive congresswoman has been named as a potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender.
Apr 01, 2026
A private meeting between Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and an increasingly influential progressive New York City organization on Tuesday evening revealed new evidence of Israel's "weakening position," as one journalist observed, as the potential 2028 presidential contender committed to voting against any military funding for the Middle Eastern superpower, including for "defensive" weapons.
To the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), whose New York City chapter Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) met with on Tuesday, the congresswoman's failure to vote against a 2021 funding package for Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system—instead voting "present"—represented a significant betrayal of the fight for Palestinian rights and against Israel's violent anti-Palestinian policies.
The congresswodefeman further angered solidarity organizers in 2024 when she voted in favor of a resolution to adopt a definition of antisemitism that conflates the term with criticism of Israel, and last year she voted against an amendment to strip Iron Dome funding from a must-pass defense spending bill. She then voted against the Defense Appropriations Act itself, which included spending for offensive weapons for Israel.
On Tuesday, Ocasio-Cortez was clear when asked by a DSA organizer whether she would support an arms embargo on Israel, which has killed more than 72,000 Palestinians in Gaza since beginning its US-backed assault there in 2023; is currently joining the US in attacking Iran; and has killed over 1,000 people in the region in the last month as it's pledged to use Gaza as a "model" for its attacks on Lebanon.
“I have not once ever voted to authorize funding to Israel, and I will never,” Ocasio-Cortez said in response to the question. “The Israeli government should be able to finance their own weapons if they seek to arm themselves."
A member asked to clarify in a follow-up question, asking specifically, “If the moment presents itself in Congress, will you commit to voting ‘no’ for any spending on arms for Israel, including so-called ‘defensive capabilities?’”
“Yes,” Ocasio-Cortez replied, according to a partial recording of the meeting.
DSA members who attended the forum also reported that Ocasio-Cortez committed to opposing the International Holocaust Remembrance Association's definition of antisemitism, which claims that "denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavor," and “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis," are examples of anti-Jewish bias.
The positions expressed by Ocasio-Cortez at the DSA forum have already been embraced by other progressive lawmakers like Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), but some observers noted that Ocasio-Cortez committed to voting against all military funding for Israel as she's been named a potential contender for the 2028 presidential race.
Political strategist Chris Sosa said Ocasio-Cortez's clear position against all weapons for Israel "will echo across the Democratic Party" and is a sign of a new "common litmus test" for candidates.
"Whatever Israel’s level of popularity is right now is its ceiling, because Israel is going to take a huge part of the blame for the financial crisis and likely recession about to hit us," said Ryan Grim of Drop Site News, referring to the growing economic turmoil that's resulted from the US-Israeli war on Iran. "And while the global economy is on its knees, Israel will *still* be pushing for the war on Iran to continue. And people will have had more than enough."
"Alexandria Ocasio-Corronez breaking against Israel here is a major sign of their weakening position," added Grim.
A poll released last month by Hart Research Associates and Public Opinion Strategies found that more US voters now view Israel negatively than positively. In 2023, 47% of Americans viewed Israel in a positive light, versus 24% who had negative views of the country's government.
At Groundwork DSA, a faction within the organization that aims for the DSA to "become a genuine, mass political party," one organizer noted that Ocasio-Cortez's position sets her apart from other Democrats who are thought to be likely presidential contenders, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Vice President Kamala Harris, who refused to back an arms embargo during her 2024 campaign.
Neither Newsom nor Harris "will be ideologically willing to even consider an arms embargo against Israel," wrote organizer J. Kraush ahead of Tuesday's forum. "More importantly, they can not be swayed on the topic, precisely because there is no political or financial benefit for them to move. We can expect them to receive millions in funding from Zionist organizations such as AIPAC, especially if AOC remains a front-runner."
While establishment Democrats continue to back military funding for Israel, Ocasio-Cortez's commitment "is the right thing to do and the leadership Democratic voters want to see," said progressive organizer Daniel Denvir.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump Accused of ‘Intimidation Tactic’ for Attending Supreme Court Birthright Citizenship Hearing in Person
In an unprecedented move, Trump arrived at the court after accusing conservative justices of being "disloyal" for ruling against him in previous cases.
Apr 01, 2026
President Donald Trump is being accused of trying to "intimidate" the US Supreme Court as it hears oral arguments on his attempt to kill birthright citizenship.
Trump broke nearly 250 years of precedent as he arrived at the high court on Wednesday morning to personally observe the proceedings, which no sitting president has done.
As Kathryn Watson, a reporter for CBS News, explained, historically, "presidents have avoided attendance in part to honor the separation of powers."
Trump was in attendance as the justices—three of whom he appointed—mulled what could be their most consequential decision in decades: whether to uphold an executive order that would strip away a fundamental guarantee of citizenship enshrined in the US Constitution.
Making it all the more unnerving were the president's comments about the high court on Tuesday night in the Oval Office after letting reporters know he was "going" to keep tabs on Wednesday's proceedings.
He specifically zeroed in on the Republican-leaning justices, describing those he appointed as “disloyal” for ruling against him in previous cases. While describing the liberal justices as rank partisans, who’ll vote against him no matter what, he said the conservatives were “very different.”
"They want to show how honorable they are, so a man can appoint them, and they can rule against him and be so proud of it," Trump said.
"Some people would call it stupidity," Trump went on. "Some people would call it disloyal."
The court is expected to rule this summer on the legality of Trump’s executive order declaring that the children born to undocumented immigrants or those on temporary visas would no longer automatically become US citizens.
A lower court has already ruled against Trump's order, declaring it in violation of the 14th Amendment, which was passed following the Civil War and plainly states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."
The Supreme Court will now hear arguments from the Trump administration seeking to undo that fundamental understanding, including ones advanced over a century ago by a former Confederate officer who also helped to establish the “separate but equal” doctrine that legalized racial segregation for over half a century.
If the court votes to uphold Trump's executive order, hundreds of thousands of American citizens could become effectively stateless.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said it could also throw the citizenship of tens of millions more into doubt, as it would effectively require people with legal birth certificates to "prove" their parents' legal status.
Trump's effort to strip millions of people of their citizenship comes as his Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has pushed to ultimately deport "100 million people" from the country—a number that far exceeds the population of undocumented immigrants in the US.
DaMareo Cooper explained on Tuesday for Common Dreams that the Supreme Court's decision will determine "whether a president can rewrite one of the clearest promises embedded in American law":
If the court strikes down birthright citizenship, it would let the government decide who counts as American based on the circumstances of their birth.
The 14th Amendment’s authors understood the danger of that approach.
Once citizenship becomes conditional, every other right soon follows. Ending birthright citizenship would affect everyone—not just children of immigrants—in a system that has long questioned the belonging of people of color, including Black Americans.
Allowing the Trump administration to determine who counts as a citizen takes on even more weight in light of another likely unconstitutional executive order signed by the president on Tuesday, requiring DHS to create a "citizenship list" to determine who is allowed to vote in the 2026 election.
Given these extraordinary stakes, many observers fear that Trump’s appearance before the Supreme Court's deliberations on Wednesday is designed to send a message to the justices he's accused of being "disloyal."
Historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat called Trump's arrival at the high court an “intimidation tactic to remind judges of the costs of defying him.”
Josh Sorbe, a spokesperson for the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee, said, "The separation of powers is pure fiction at this point."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular