SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
November, 17 2010, 12:04pm EDT
Contact:
Justin Nunez (202) 331-2389
National Leaders and DREAM Youth Urge Immediate Action on Bipartisan DREAM Act
The Time is Now for Congress to Pass this Common Sense Measure
WASHINGTON
This Thursday at noon, DREAM-eligible youth will join national leaders to call on Congress to pass the DREAM Act before the end of 2010. Archbishop Jose Gomez, Co-Adjutor Archbishop of Los Angeles, Chairman, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop's Committee on Migration, Janet Murguia of National Council of La Raza, Wade Henderson of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and Thomas Saenz of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund will highlight the compelling reasons why the DREAM Act should become law this year. In addition, Raul Hinojosa of UCLA's North American Integration and Development Center will present the findings of his new report, "No DREAMers Left Behind: The Economic Impacts of Dream Act Beneficiaries," and DREAM eligible youth will tell their personal stories about how the DREAM Act will help them contribute to the American economy and realize their dreams.
By passing the DREAM Act, Congress has a chance to rise above the heated rhetoric of the campaign season and show the American people that it can work on a bipartisan basis to pass real immigration reform. The DREAM Act has been around for nearly a decade, and has the support of both Democrats and Republicans. It is a common sense bill that enables high-achieving young people who came to this country as children a chance to legalize their status, if they enroll in an institution of higher learning or the U.S. military. It is a win-win, both for the youth who would qualify and the country that would benefit from allowing these young leaders to realize their full potential.
*Due to speakers' schedules, the event will begin promptly at 12:00pm. Press is urged to arrive early, and refreshments will be provided
WHO: Archbishop Jose Gomez, Co-Adjutor Archbishop of Los Angeles, Chairman, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop's Committee on Migration
Janet Murguia, President and CEO, National Council of La Raza
Wade Henderson, President and CEO, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Dr. Raul Hinojosa, Founding Director, UCLA North American Integration and Development Center
Thomas Saenz, President and General Counsel, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
DREAM Eligible Youth
WHAT: National Leaders and DREAM Youth Urge Immediate Action on DREAM Act
WHEN: Thursday, November 18, Noon eastern time
WHERE: Zenger Room at the National Press Club, 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, DC
America's Voice -- Harnessing the power of American voices and American values to win common sense immigration reform. The mission of America's Voice is to realize the promise of workable and humane comprehensive immigration reform. Our goal is to build the public support and create the political momentum for reforms that will transform a dysfunctional immigration system that does not work into a regulatory system that does.
LATEST NEWS
Trump Threatens to Invoke Insurrection Act, Take 'Unquestioned Power' Following No Kings Protests
Trump claimed that if he invokes the Insurrection Act, "there are no more court cases, there is no more anything."
Oct 20, 2025
While the nation was fixated on President Donald Trump’s deranged social media antics in response to this weekend’s "No Kings" protests, he managed to slip under the radar with some ominous threats to substantially expand his power.
The president generated bewilderment and outrage when, in response to the mass mobilization of more than 7 million Americans against his abuses of power, he posted an artificially-generated video of himself wearing a crown and flying a fighter jet emblazoned with “King Trump” that dumped what appeared to be a pile of excrement upon demonstrators in the middle of Times Square.
The public was understandably preoccupied with the president of the United States posting a video of himself “literally dumping shit on America,” which Ron Filipkowski of MeidasTouch called “metaphorically the most accurate piece of propaganda he’s put out this year.”
But it served as a useful distraction as Trump implied that he may use these protests as a pretext to invoke the Insurrection Act, which he incorrectly suggested gives him “unquestioned power.”
“Don’t forget, I can use the Insurrection Act,” Trump said in a Fox News interview Sunday morning. “Fifty percent of the presidents almost have used that. And that’s unquestioned power. I choose not to.”
“I’d rather do this,” he said, referring to his deployment of the National Guard to American cities, including Chicago, Portland, and now San Francisco, which he announced as his next target last week. “But I’m met constantly by fake politicians, politicians that think that they—you know, it’s not a part of the radical left movement to have safety. These cities have to be safe.”
The Insurrection Act of 1807 allows presidents to direct federal troops to enforce US law in cases of extreme emergency, including rebellions against the federal government, beyond the reach of traditional law enforcement. Contrary to Trump’s claim, it has only been invoked by about a quarter of US presidents.
The last president to invoke the act was George H.W. Bush, in response to the riots in Los Angeles following the acquittal of the police officers who brutalized Rodney King in 1992. Other presidents invoked it during times of extreme upheaval or war, including President Abraham Lincoln, who used it during the Civil War, and Ulysses S. Grant, who used it to suppress terrorism against newly freed Black Americans by the Ku Klux Klan across the South.
It has not historically been used to put down peaceful protests, like this past weekend’s No Kings marches, which frequently emphasize their commitment to nonviolence.
It is unclear what precisely Trump referred to when he said “that’s unquestioned power.” He may have meant that he has unquestioned power to invoke the Insurrection Act, which is also not true.
The law gives the president the power to invoke it in response to “insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy,” which has made it “impracticable to enforce the laws... by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.”
Though the Supreme Court has largely granted the president the authority to determine what forms of unrest may meet these criteria, Joseph Nunn, a lawyer at the Brennan Center for Justice, explained earlier this year that "there are exceptions to the general rule that courts can’t review a president’s decision to deploy" forces:
The Supreme Court has suggested that courts may step in if the president acts in bad faith, exceeds "a permitted range of honest judgment," makes an obvious mistake, or acts in a way manifestly unauthorized by law.
Even in cases where the courts will not second-guess the decision to deploy troops, the Supreme Court clarified in Sterling v. Constantin (1932) that courts may still review the lawfulness of the military’s actions once deployed. In other words, federal troops are not free to violate other laws or trample onconstitutional rights just because the president has invoked the Insurrection Act.
Comments made by Trump aboard Air Force One later on Sunday suggest a different meaning to his claim of “unquestioned power,” that he was not referring to his ability to invoke the act, but rather saying it gives him authority to act unilaterally without any intervention from the courts.
“Everybody agrees you’re allowed to use [the Insurrection Act], and there are no more court cases, there is no more anything. We’re trying to do it in a nicer manner, but we can always use the Insurrection Act,” he continued. “We wanted to go this route, but we get sued every time you look at somebody, you look at somebody the wrong way, and you end up getting sued. We just want no crime.”
Trump has indeed been sued over his deployment of federal troops to American cities, including in Portland, where a judge ruled earlier this month that his claim that the city was “war-ravaged” was “untethered to facts,” as the protests there against US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have been overwhelmingly peaceful.
It was also unclear what Trump meant when he said that if he invokes the Insurrection Act, “there are no more court cases, there is no more anything.” The comment seemed to imply that he believes that the Insurrection Act is tantamount to martial law, where the normal forms of due process do not apply, and the courts have no recourse to intervene against abuses of power.
Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy White House chief of staff, implied a similar unchallenged power earlier this month when he asserted that Trump has “plenary,” meaning practically limitless, “authority” to use the military on US soil, however he sees fit. Miller earlier this year also suggested suspending the writ of habeas corpus, the right to challenge unlawful detention, for immigrants.
Trump previously discussed invoking martial law with his advisers in 2020 in an effort to hold onto power following his election loss and later suggested that the supposed “fraud” in his election loss “allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”
But as Andy Craig, a fellow at the Institute for Humane Studies, explains, even if Trump invoked the Insurrection Act, which he predicted, “is likelier than not,” it doesn’t give him the power to suspend the Constitution, at least not legally.
“None of this is true,” Craig said. “The Insurrection Act is not a declaration of martial law. It doesn’t close the courts. It doesn’t suspend habeas corpus. It means you can use the military to enforce federal laws, but the laws themselves remain the same.”
“There are lots of disasters waiting to happen in how much we have wired up to pure presidential power,” he continued. “But one thing we don’t have is some state-of-exception button the president can push and instantly become an absolute dictator. That’s not a thing in American law. No emergency power encompasses it.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Ripped for 'Holding US Economy Hostage' as Nearly Half of States Face Recession
"At a time when costs are rising and tariffs are wreaking havoc on people's pocketbooks, Republicans are doubling down on their agenda of raising healthcare costs on millions of Americans."
Oct 20, 2025
US states accounting for roughly a third of the nation's gross domestic product are currently in recession or on the verge of one as the federal government shutdown enters its fourth week, with congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump refusing to support an extension of key healthcare subsidies that are set to lapse at the end of the year.
A recent analysis by Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi estimates that 22 states are experiencing an economic downturn or are at serious risk of recession, a nascent crisis fueled by Trump's tariffs, mass deportations, and sweeping attack on the federal workforce—an assault that has intensified since the federal government shut down at the beginning of October.
States currently in or on the brink of recession include Maine, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, and Georgia. Among the states “treading water” are California and New York, according to Zandi, whose analysis was based on figures that predated the government shutdown.
Leor Tal, campaign director at the progressive advocacy coalition Unrig Our Economy, said Monday in response to the analysis that "Republicans in Congress are holding the US economy hostage, and working families are paying the price."
"At a time when costs are rising and tariffs are wreaking havoc on people's pocketbooks, Republicans are doubling down on their agenda of raising healthcare costs on millions of Americans," said Tal. "It's time for congressional Republicans to reopen the government, extend the healthcare tax credits, and start lowering costs for working families."
The shutdown, which Trump has embraced and exploited to advance his far-right agenda, began at a time when the country's economy was already on uneasy footing, with food prices continuing to rise despite the president's campaign promises, GOP Medicaid cuts causing chaos across the nation, and the labor market flashing signs of distress.
With no end to the shutdown in sight, The Associated Press noted Sunday that the "the U.S. Travel Association said the travel economy is expected to lose $1 billion a week as travelers change plans to visit national parks, historic sites, and the nation's capital, where many facilities such as Smithsonian Institution museums and the National Zoo are now closed to visitors."
If the government remains shut down in November, tens of millions of Americans could see cuts to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits—which boost the economy while reducing hunger—and other aid.
Meanwhile, even as the Trump administration withholds federal labor market data amid the shutdown, economists say private and state-level figures signal escalating pain for workers that is sure to intensify the longer the closure persists.
"The fingerprints of Trump policy decisions are most clearly found in the distinct rise in federal [unemployment insurance] claims—claims filed specifically by workers laid off from federal agencies," Elise Gould and Joe Fast of the Economic Policy Institute wrote last week. "However, we are also seeing troubling trends in UI claims in regular state programs, particularly in the Washington, DC metropolitan area."
"The shutdown (and potentially the attempted politicization of key government data-collection agencies) could leave policymakers flying blind just as the economy encounters real turbulence," they cautioned.
John Diamond, director of the Center for Public Finance at Rice University's Baker Institute, warned earlier this month that the shutdown "could be a tipping point to recession."
"If it is resolved quickly, the costs will be small," Diamond argued, "but if it drags on, it could send the US economy into a tailspin."
Keep ReadingShow Less
DOJ Whistleblower Details Being Ordered to Lie in Court About Kilmar Abrego García
"It is the highest, most egregious violation of a lawyer's code of ethics to mislead a court with intent," said Erez Reuveni.
Oct 20, 2025
A former US Department of Justice lawyer on Sunday described how an appointee of President Donald Trump told him to lie about Kilmar Abrego García’s supposed ties to the gang MS-13 after he was wrongfully deported to El Salvador earlier this year.
During an interview with CBS News' "60 Minutes," whistleblower Erez Reuveni said that he was told by a superior at DOJ to argue in court against bringing Abrego García back to the US on the grounds that he was an MS-13 member and a "terrorist."
Reuveni said that he refused to sign onto this strategy because the claims being made about Abrego García were flatly untrue.
"That is not correct," he said of the claims. "That is not factually correct. It is not legally correct. That is, that is a lie. And I cannot sign my name to that brief."
Reuveni went on to say that, even if Abrego García had been a gang member, his right to due process was still being violated by the Trump DOJ.
"What matters here is that they did everything they did to him in violation of his due process rights," he said. "What's to stop them if they decide they don't like you anymore, to say you're a criminal, you're a member of MS-13, you're a terrorist, what's to stop them from sending in some DOJ attorney at the direction of DOJ leadership to delay, to filibuster, and if necessary, to lie?"
Reuveni also discussed how the Trump DOJ had defied court orders by rushing to send a plane full of purportedly undocumented immigrants to be detained in El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT), a facility that for years has drawn criticism for alleged systematic human rights abuses.
Specifically, he said that former Trump DOJ official Emil Bove—who was confirmed to a lifetime seat as a federal judge earlier this year, even after Reuveni first spoke out against him—said during a meeting in February that the department was to not let anything interfere with the planes that were transporting the immigrants to El Salvador, even if it meant defying direct court orders.
The very next day, government lawyer Drew Ensign, who had been at that meeting, told Judge James Boasberg in court that he had no idea whether the government was planning imminently to fly the planes out of the country. Reuveni said this shocked him because it was impossible to believe that Ensign sincerely had no idea that the government was planning to fly the planes out that very day.
"It is the highest, most egregious violation of a lawyer's code of ethics to mislead a court with intent," Reuveni emphasized. "We really did tell the court, screw you. We really did just tell the courts, we don't care about your order. You can't tell us what to do. That was just a real gut punch."
"60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley noted during the interview that while Reuveni previously spoke out about Bove's directive to disregard court orders, the interview on Sunday marked the first time since then that the former DOJ lawyer had broadcast his allegations in a TV appearance.
Reuveni acknowledged that the interview brought up safety concerns for him and his family.
"At the same time, I think about what we're losing in this moment, I think about why I went to the Department of Justice—to do justice. I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution," he said. "I would not be faithfully abiding by my oath if I stayed silent right now.”
This is the first time former DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni has shown his face in such a public way. He says he felt he needed to speak out despite his safety concerns.
“I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution,” Reuveni says. “I would not be faithfully abiding by my… pic.twitter.com/osLCRDIfVm
— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) October 19, 2025
Abrego Garcia was detained in El Salvador for two months, with the Trump administration repeatedly claiming it had no way to return him to the US, before he was finally transferred to the US, where he is facing human smuggling charges. He was transferred to a detention facility in Pennsylvania last month and the Trump administration is still seeking to deport him.
He pleaded not guilty to the charges in June.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular