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.

Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the
Nigerian Bar Association Human Rights Institute and other Nigerian
human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are deeply concerned
by reports of a decision by the Nigerian government to resume the
execution of prison inmates. The reason given by the authorities for the
resumption is to ease prison congestion.
Instead of executing prisoners, the Nigerian authorities should
address underlying problems in the criminal justice system. The
overcrowding is in part due to delays in trials and failure to provide
enough lawyers. Many death row prisoners may be innocent, as Nigeria's
justice system is riddled with flaws and is unable to guarantee fair
trials.
The decision to execute death row inmates to ease prison congestion
was taken at a meeting of the National Economic Council (NEC) on Tuesday
15 June 2010. The meeting was chaired by the Vice President of Nigeria
and attended by Nigeria's 36 state governors. Following the meeting, the
Governor of Benue state announced that the Council had asked the
Nigerian state governors to review all cases of death row inmates and to
sign execution warrants as a means of decongesting the country's
prisons. This is the second time in two months that Nigeria's state
governors have considered the execution of inmates to ease prison
congestion. In April 2010, a similar decision was taken in a meeting of
the Council of State, a meeting of the 36 state governors, chaired by
the President of Nigeria.
The resumption of executions is the wrong solution to the problem of
overcrowding. According to Nigeria's Minister of Interior, the total
prison population is 46,000, of which some 30,000 are awaiting trial.
Few inmates can afford a lawyer and the government funded Legal Aid
Council only has around 100 lawyers. Prisons will remain overcrowded
until these underlying problems are addressed.
There are approximately 870 death row inmates currently in Nigeria's
prisons, including women and juveniles. However, weaknesses in the
Nigerian criminal justice system means that hundreds of those awaiting
execution on Nigeria's death rows did not have a fair trial and may
therefore be innocent.
Trials can take more than 10 years to conclude. Appeals in some death
row cases have been pending for a decade. Some appeals never happen
because case files have been lost but the person remains on death row.
Two expert groups set up by former president Olusegun Obasanjo - the
National Study Group on Death Penalty (2004) and the Presidential
Commission on Reform of the Administration of Justice (2007) -
recommended a moratorium on executions because the criminal justice
system can not guarantee a fair trial.
The organisations call on the Nigerian government to establish an
official moratorium on the death penalty as a first step towards
abolition. By declaring a formal moratorium on executions, the Federal
Government of Nigeria would be exercising important leadership on the
issue of the death penalty in line with the global trend towards
abolition. A moratorium on executions requires a commitment by all
Nigerian authorities not to carry out executions, regardless of whether
death sentences have been passed. A moratorium would eliminate the risk
of executing the innocent as well as prisoners who have not yet
exhausted their right to appeal.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Nigerian Bar
Association Human Rights Institute and other Nigerian human rights
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) oppose the death penalty in all
cases without exception regardless of the nature of the crime, the
characteristics of the offender, or the method used by the state to kill
the prisoner.
Background
Under international human rights law, the death penalty must not be
imposed for crimes committed by people below 18 years of age and people
charged with capital crimes are entitled to the strictest observance of
all fair trial guarantees.
In November 2008, the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights
at its 44th Ordinary Session in Abuja, Nigeria, adopted a resolution
calling on state parties to the African Charter on Human and Peoples'
Rights to observe a moratorium on the death penalty.
In December 2007 and 2008, the UN General Assembly also adopted two
resolutions on the use of the death penalty calling upon states that
still maintain the death penalty to progressively restrict the use of
the death penalty; reduce the number of offences for which it may be
imposed and establish a moratorium on executions with a view to
abolishing the death penalty.
While Nigeria did not adopt an official moratorium on executions, the
Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs stated in February 2009 at the 4th
Session of the United Nations Universal Periodic Review (UPR) that
Nigeria has a "self imposed moratorium."
In 2006, at least six death row prisoners were executed without ever
having had an opportunity to appeal their death sentence. They had been
tried and convicted by Robbery and Firearms Tribunals under the
jurisdiction of the military.
Any step by the Nigerian government, state or federal, to resume
executing will be contrary to commitments made by Nigeria at
international level.
Signed:
Access to Justice (AJ)
Amnesty International (AI)
Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development (CEHRD)
Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR)
Human Rights Law Service (HURILAWS)
Human Rights Social Development Environmental Foundation (HRSDEF)
Human Rights Watch (HRW)
International Society for Civil Liberties and the Rule of Law
(Intersociety)
Legal Defence and Assistance Project (LEDAP)
Legal Resources Consortium (LRC)
Nigeria Humanist Movement
Nigerian Bar Association Human Rights Institute (NBAHRI)
Ogoni Solidarity Forum (OSF)
Prisoners Rehabilitation and Welfare Action (PRAWA)
Social Action (SA)
Social Justice Advocacy Initiative (SJAI)
Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP)
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.
“This isn’t about advancing the interests of retirement savers, it is about opening a new profit center for crypto and Wall Street," said one critic.
US President Donald Trump's Labor Department on Monday unveiled a proposal that would welcome private equity and cryptocurrency investments into Americans' 401(k) plans, the culmination of an aggressive Wall Street lobbying push that could leave the retirement savings of millions vulnerable to the wild swings of so-called "alternative assets."
The proposed rule, now subject to a public comment period, was issued at the direction of a Trump executive order from last year that was characterized at the time as "the holy grail for private equity."
In addition to giving employers a green light to include private equity and crypto investments in 401(k) plans offered to workers, the new rule would establish a "safe harbor" allowing retirement account administrators to avoid legal action from employees who believe their funds were steered into excessively risky products.
"The legal immunity created by this safe harbor will incentivize financial advisers to pitch these toxic products, which will become ticking time bombs in tens of millions of retirement accounts, which will no doubt result in significant losses," warned Benjamin Schiffrin, director of securities policy at the advocacy group Better Markets. "There are good reasons why 401(k) plans have been considered closed to private markets and cryptocurrencies, and those reasons have not changed. The only thing that has changed is the administration’s support for these industries and regulators’ willingness to do their bidding."
"This is no reason to endanger the retirement savings of millions of Americans," Schiffrin added.
Oscar Valdés Viera, senior policy analyst at Americans for Financial Reform, similarly warned that "opening 401(k)s to these products risks turning workers’ retirement savings into a Ponzi-like scheme that throws a lifeline to an industry scrambling for fresh cash."
"This isn’t about advancing the interests of retirement savers, it is about opening a new profit center for crypto and Wall Street," said Viera. "Retirement savers should not be bailing out these high-risk industries and subsidizing the Wall Street and crypto billionaire class."
"Private equity firms should not get a free pass to loot workers’ 401(k) retirement savings."
Americans currently hold over $10 trillion combined in 401(k) plans, a huge trove of wealth that the private equity industry has been working for years to access. The Labor Department indicated that its proposed rule would apply to over 720,000 retirement plans covering roughly 118 million workers.
The American Prospect reported Tuesday that the managers of private equity firms are "already pressuring companies, third-party administrators, and the consultants who advise them to list their offerings" among workers' retirement plan options.
"One staffer at an institutional investor who is not authorized to speak to the media told the Prospect about their primary worry: that private equity will stick their most overvalued companies into continuation funds exclusively for 401(k) plan holders, or 'retail investors,' as they are known," the outlet continued. "Private credit firms are retailoring their funds for 401(k) plans as well, and some of the biggest have already struck deals with asset managers like Voya and Vanguard. 'I’d be shocked if the industry doesn’t attempt to dump their garbage onto retail,' the staffer said."
One recent analysis by the Private Equity Stakeholder Project (PESP) found that private equity funds for retail investors "dramatically underperformed publicly listed stock indexes" in 2025 while charging much higher fees.
Jim Baker, PESP's executive director, said Monday that "private equity firms should not get a free pass to loot workers’ 401(k) retirement savings."
“The bar for including private equity in 401(k)s should be extremely high,” said Baker. “Private equity funds have lagged public markets while charging much higher fees, and public pension funds are pulling back from the asset class. Instead, this rule risks shifting more financial risk onto workers who rely on their retirement savings for long-term security.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also ripped the Labor Department rule, saying in a statement that "Americans facing an uncertain future in Trump’s economy will now have more reasons to question the security of their retirement savings—all so that Trump’s Wall Street buddies have another pile of cash to play with."
"Anyone who cares about the financial security of working people," said Warren, "should oppose this proposed rule."
Young people are more than twice as likely to attempt suicide if they have been subject to conversion therapy, which LGBTQ+ rights advocates say is "proven to cause lasting psychological harm."
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy,” drawing warnings from LGBTQ+ groups that the ruling could expose children in dozens of states to the harmful practice.
Colorado's law forbade licensed physicians and mental healthcare providers from attempting to "convert" or change a minor's sexuality, a practice that the American Psychological Association has found to be both ineffective and dangerous, raising rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide in LGBTQ+ youth.
The law defined "conversion therapy" as any treatment that “attempts or purports to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”
It allowed exemptions for pastors and religious organizations. It also allowed health professionals to engage in wide-ranging discussions with children about their sexual and gender identities, so long as they did not try to change the child's orientation.
Nevertheless, on Tuesday, the high court sided 8-1 with Kaley Chiles, a Christian counselor who said she wished to offer talk therapy to children who want to reduce same-sex attraction and argued that the ban on this practice was in violation of her First Amendment rights.
Chiles was backed by the Trump administration, as well as the far-right Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian nationalist legal group with a long history of seeking to outlaw same-sex conduct.
Most famously, the group argued in support of state laws criminalizing homosexuality in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas case, and it has since gone on to back many other cases attacking birth control access, same-sex marriage, and transgender equality.
In the majority opinion, the conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that Colorado's law “censors speech based on viewpoint" and therefore must be subject to strict scrutiny—the highest form of judicial review, which the court determined it did not pass.
The lone dissenting justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued that Chiles' treatment was not mere speech, but that it was acting in her capacity "as a licensed healthcare professional," which formed the crux of Colorado's defense of the ban.
She argued that the ruling "opens a dangerous can of worms" and "threatens to impair states’ ability to regulate the provision of medical care in any respect."
"Because the majority plays with fire in this case, I fear that the people of this country will get burned," Jackson said.
Two liberals, Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, joined the conservatives in striking the law down. However, they argued in a concurring opinion that a full ban on therapy aimed at changing minors' sexuality might be more lawful than the one Colorado passed, which included carveouts for specific circumstances.
Kagan also argued that allowing Colorado to outlaw conversion therapy could backfire and give red states the legal framework to also ban counselors from providing affirmative care to LGBTQ+ minors.
LGBTQ+ rights organizations have roundly condemned the court's decision, which is expected to weaken bans on conversion therapy in the 23 states and the District of Columbia that currently have them.
"Today’s reckless decision means more American kids will suffer," said Kelley Robinson, the president of the Human Rights Campaign. "The Court has weaponized free speech in order to prioritize anti-LGBTQ+ bias over the safety, health, and well-being of children."
A 2024 mental health survey by the Trevor Project, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, found that 13% of LGBTQ+ young people have been either threatened with or subject to conversion therapy—including about 1 in 6 transgender or nonbinary youth.
Previously, the group published peer-reviewed research in the American Journal of Public Health, showing that young people subject to conversion therapy were more than twice as likely to attempt suicide as their peers.
"These efforts, no matter what proponents call them, no matter what any court says, are still proven to cause lasting psychological harm," said Trevor Project CEO Jaymes Black. "That’s why protections have been enacted in more than 20 states, and are supported by every major medical and mental health association in the country."
Carl Charles, a senior attorney at Lambda Legal who joined more than a dozen survivors of the practice in a friend of the court brief in support of Colorado's law, said, "I know firsthand the long-lasting harms of conversion therapy, having been subjected to it when I was 15 years old."
"This practice did not change my sexual orientation or gender identity," said Charles, a transgender man. "Instead, it destroyed important relationships and created shame and fear that took time and effort to undo. For many survivors, it is a reverberating life-long harm."
"LGBTQ+ youth do not need to be changed," Charles said. "Rather, like all youth, they need to be supported and celebrated for the unique and important people they are becoming."
Colorado's Democratic Gov. Jared Polis has said he will seek to pass new legislation that complies with the Supreme Court's ruling.
"Conversion therapy doesn’t work, can seriously harm youth, and Coloradans should beware before turning over their hard-earned money to a scam," Polis said. "I am evaluating the US Supreme Court ruling and working to figure out how to better protect LGBTQ youth and free speech in Colorado."
In other states whose bans could be undermined by the ruling, efforts have already begun to ensure that providers who cause harm to children still face accountability.
In California, which has a similar ban on conversion therapy to Colorado’s, state Sen. Scott Weiner (D-11) introduced a bill proposing a longer statute of limitations and making it easier for LGBTQ+ individuals to bring malpractice claims against medical professionals who subject them to conversion therapy.
Weiner noted that the Supreme Court's ruling "explicitly states that malpractice claims for conversion therapy are different than bans," since they require a plaintiff to demonstrate injury caused by their treatment.
"You can’t 'convert' someone who’s LGBTQ—full stop—and people who think you can are peddling quackery," Weiner said. "California will always have the community’s back."
The 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline can be reached by calling or texting 988, or through chat at 988lifeline.org. The Trevor Project, which serves LGBTQ+ youth, can be reached at 1-866-488-7386, by texting "START" to 678-678, or through chat at TheTrevorProject.org. Both offer 24/7, free, and confidential support.
The sentencing of a man for child pornography is but one of dozens of cases—including charges or convictions for child sex crimes, rape, and weapons offenses—involving pardoned January 6 attackers.
President Donald Trump was elected twice on promises of upholding "law and order," but his blanket pardon of January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrectionists—dozens of whom have since run afoul of the law—is drawing renewed criticism in the wake of one particularly heinous crime.
On Monday, a federal judge in Massachusetts sentenced Daniel Tocci to four years in prison followed by five years of supervised release after he was convicted of possessing more than 100,000 child pornography images, as well as photos and videos showing extreme deadly violence against women and animals.
Tocci had been previously charged with crimes connected to the storming of the US Capitol on January 6. Trump—who was impeached for a historic second time for inciting the insurrection—pardoned more than 1,500 Capitol insurrectionists, including those who brutally attacked law enforcement officers, on his first day back in the White House.
The largest US police union warned at the time that the mass pardon sent "a dangerous message" that would "embolden" criminals, a warning that was echoed by numerous civil society groups.
However, Trump was undaunted, railing against a "corrupt" system that wrongfully persecuted "patriots."
Those pardoned "patriots" subsequently went on what the editors of The New York Times on Tuesday described as a "crime spree." At least 33 of them were rearrested, charged, or sentenced for other crimes between the time of their pardon and December 2025, according to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).
"Six of the pardoned January 6th insurrectionists are charged with committing child sex crimes, ranging from sexual assault to possession of child pornography," CREW continued. "At least five were charged with illegal possession of weapons, including at least two who had a previous domestic violence conviction. Five were arrested or charged with driving while impaired or under the influence. In two of these cases, the defendant’s reckless driving resulted in a fatality. Two were charged with rape."
This is Andrew Paul Johnson. Andrew was convicted of insurrection on January 6 for assaulting cops.Trump pardoned Andrew. 9 months later, Andrew was caught molesting children, sharing CSAM, & buying victims' silence by giving them money from a Justice Dept settlement.Trump protects pedophiles.
[image or embed]
— Qasim Rashid, Esq. (@qasimrashid.com) March 6, 2026 at 7:30 AM
The Times editors wrote that Trump's "self-serving pardons are so numerous that public attention cannot keep up with them."
"He has created a veritable pardon industry, in which people with White House connections accept payments from wealthy convicts," they continued. "Among those on whom he has bestowed freedom are dozens of people convicted of fraud."
In May 2024, Trump was convicted of 34 fraud-related felonies after he falsified business records regarding hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 presidential election.
"He has also pardoned Juan Orlando Hernández, a former president of Honduras, who helped traffic hundreds of tons of cocaine into the United States, and Ross Ulbricht, who was serving a life sentence for running Silk Road, a sprawling criminal enterprise that sold drugs," the Times editors added.
Yet Trump ordered the invasion of Venezuela and the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife for alleged narco-terrorism offenses. He also ordered the campaign of nearly 50 airstrikes on boats allegedly smuggling drugs on the high seas and sent troops into Ecuador in the name of fighting drugs.
Emboldened by their pardons and, critics say, Trump's aura of impunity, some pardoned Capitol insurrectionists have parlayed their participation in the attack into runs for elected office. Some are reveling in their embrace by a Republican Party that has enabled Trump's crimes for years and has whitewashed the terror that lawmakers of both parties felt during the Capitol attack.
Steve Bannon: The J6ers are here at CPAC! All of them! The J6 choir is gonna play the Kennedy Center! pic.twitter.com/Lkj3nRPxqD
— Grace Chong, MBI (@gc22gc) February 20, 2025
Others are suing the federal government for tens of millions of dollars, alleging that the law enforcement officers—five of whose deaths are linked to the events of January 6—physically and emotionally harmed them that day. One woman, Ashli Babbitt, was shot and killed while storming the Capitol; the Trump administration agreed to a nearly $5 million settlement with her family and the Air Force offered full military funeral honors.
Responding to Tocci's sentencing for child pornography possession, Scott Kelley Ernest, a former white supremacist who now helps others leave hate groups, quipped on Bluesky, "Another one bites the dust... until Trump hires him to be an ambassador."
That's exactly what the president did for Charles Kushner, the father of Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who in 2005 was convicted of 18 felony counts including illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion, and witness tampering. Trump pardoned the elder Kushner in 2020 and, in 2025, appointed him ambassador to France and Monaco, a known hub of illicit financial activity.