

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.

Dozens of university students are behind bars and several hundred
others have been expelled from campus because of their political
activism or religious affiliation, Human Rights Watch said today as Iran
marked National Student Day. Many of those in prison hold leadership
positions in well known student organizations critical of the
government.
Iran's universities have increasingly become targets of government
efforts to consolidate power and stifle dissent. Since 2005, President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's administration has pursued a multi-phased campaign
to neutralize dissent at universities and "Islamicize" higher
education. This campaign, spearheaded by the Ministries of Education,
Science and Technology, and Intelligence, includes imprisoning student
activists; barring other politically active students and members of
Iran's Baha'i community from higher education; using university
disciplinary committees to monitor, suspend, or expel students;
increasing the presence of pro-government student groups affiliated with
the basij (a hard-line Islamist paramilitary group); and restricting the activities of student groups.
"The government accuses student activists of endangering national
security and being manipulated by 'foreign elements' as cover for its
campaign to eliminate the student movement and stifle academic freedom,"
said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch.
"Despite these pressures, students are at the front line of the struggle
for greater freedoms at universities and throughout society."
The latest spate of arrests of student leaders was in November
2010, when security and intelligence forces arrested four members of
Tahkim-e Vahdat (Office to Foster Unity), one of Iran's largest student
organizations, which the government considers illegal.
National Student Day, marked on the 16th of Azar on the Iranian
calendar, commemorates three students killed at Tehran University on
December 7, 1953, by the Shah's security forces. On Student Day 2009,
demonstrations erupted on university campuses throughout Iran as many
students expressed outrage over the disputed June 2009 presidential
election.
Authorities arrested dozens of protesters, including Majid Tavakoli,
an Amir Kabir University student and member of the school's Islamic
Student Association, who gave a speech criticizing the government. A
revolutionary court sentenced Tavakoli to eight-and-a-half years in
prison on various national security charges including "conspiring
against the national security," "propaganda against the regime," and
"insulting the Supreme Leader" and president. He is in Tehran's Evin
prison.
As of November 2010 more than 70 students were in prison throughout
the country as a result of their political activities or affiliation
with banned student groups, according to sources close to Tahkim-e
Vahdat.
In the latest arrests, security agents arrested Ali Qolizadeh on
November 5 at his father's home in the northeastern city of Mashhad
without producing a warrant, as required by law. Two days later,
plainclothes Intelligence Ministry agents arrested Ali-Reza Kiani
outside Mazandaran University. On the same day, authorities arrested
Mohsen Barzegar in the town of Babol, and Mohammad Heidarzadeh in
Shahrekord, in western Iran. Authorities transferred all four to Evin
prison in Tehran, but released Qolizadeh, Kiani, and Heidarzadeh in late
November and early December. They are still holding Barzegar in section
240 of Evin prison and denying him access to his lawyer and family
members.
In a statement issued on November 8, Tahkim-e Vahdat accused the
authorities of targeting these four members because they had just been
elected to the organization's central committee. Several sources close
to Tahkim-e Vahdat told Human Rights Watch that authorities arrested the
students just before the group was to announce the official results of
its annual elections, which took place over the internet this year due
to security concerns.
On October 31, Raja News, a Persian-language website thought to be
close to the Intelligence Ministry, reiterated Tahkim-e Vahdat's illegal
status and ran an article accusing several of its members of having
ties with the Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK) and the Mojahedin-e
Khalq (MEK), both of which the Iranian government considers terrorist
organizations. Tahkim-e Vahdat and several Persian-language websites
affiliated with other student groups have rejected these allegations and
said the arrests were part of the government's latest campaign to
discredit the student movement and stifle dissent.
The Ministry of Science, Technology, and Research declared Tahkim-e
Vahdat illegal in 2009. During the wide-ranging crackdown that followed
the disputed June 2009 presidential election, security forces arrested
more than 200 students, including several high-ranking members of
Tahkim-e Vahdat. Many of these arrests took place in November and early
December 2009, months after security forces attacked Tehran University
and killed several students, and weeks before National Student Day
events were to take place.
Authorities held scores of students incommunicado for weeks before
prosecutors filed charges against them and lawyers gained access to
their clients. Many alleged that security and intelligence agents had
tortured and forced them to confess to crimes they had not committed.
The judiciary prosecuted the students in closed trials in Iran's
revolutionary courts.
Bahareh Hedayat and Milad Asadi are two other central Tahkim-e
Vahdat committee members that were arrested in 2009. They are currently
serving time in Evin prison. Hedayat
is the first secretary of the Women's Commission of Tahkim, and the
first - and so far only - woman elected to the national student
organization's central committee. Authorities arrested her on December
30, 2009, and charged her with various national security crimes,
including "propaganda against the system," "participating in illegal
gatherings," and "insulting the president." In May, a revolutionary
court sentenced her to nine-and-a-half years in prison. Security forces
arrested Asadi on November 30, 2009. Judge Moghiseh from Branch 28 of
the Revolutionary Court sentenced him to seven years in prison for
similar national security-related "crimes."
The administration has also targeted several other student
organizations and their members, including Advar-e Tahkim-e Vahdat
(Tahkim-e Vahdat's alumni group) and the Committee to Defend the Right
to Education (CDRE). Several central committee members of Advar are in Evin prison, including Ahmad Zeidabadi, Abdollah Momeni, Ali Malihi, Ali
Jamali, and Hasan Asadi Zeidabadi. Security forces arrested Zeidabadi
and Momeni, the group's secretary-general and spokesperson respectively,
during the aftermath of the election protests last year. Zeidabadi,
Momeni, and Malihi are each currently serving sentences of 14 years and
11 months on various national security charges such as "participation in
illegal gatherings," "propaganda against the regime," and "insulting
the president."
In September 2009 Momeni sent an open letter to the supreme leader,
Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, detailing abuse and torture he said he
suffered in Evin prison. Momeni was one of the student leaders of the
July 1999 student protests.
Zia Nabavi, a co-founder of CDRE, is serving a 10-year sentence
in Ahvaz's Karun prison. Intelligence Ministry agents arrested Nabavi on
June 15, 2009, and prosecutors charged him with various national
security-related crimes, including "links to and cooperation with the
MEK." Mahdieh Golroo,
a student activist and another member of CDRE, has been in prison since
November 3, 2009. In April, a revolutionary court convicted her of
national security crimes and sentenced her to 28 months in prison.
Another co-founder of CDRE, Majid Dorri, is serving a six-year prison
sentence for his student activities.
Since 2005 the Ahmadinejad government has barred more than 200
students from university education on political and religious grounds,
according to a recent report 01released by the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran.
Nabavi, Golroo, and Dorri formed CDRE in 2008 after authorities
barred them from continuing their university studies. It is one of
several student groups that publicized and resisted the government's
policy of preventing students from continuing their higher education on
political or religious grounds. Another such group is the Population to
Combat Educational Discrimination, which largely addressed the
government's official policy of preventing Bahais admission
to or expelling them from universities "once it becomes known that they
are Bahais." In 2009 authorities also prevented Qolizadeh and Barzegar,
two of the members of Tahkim-e Vahdat who were recently arrested, from
continuing their studies.
"Rather than honoring and celebrating its students, the Iranian
government routinely marks 16 Azar by tightening the screws on academic
freedom," Stork said. "Instead, the authorities should use this occasion
to release the dozens of students who remain in prison on baseless
charges, and allow back into the classroom the hundreds of others who
are being deprived of their education for political and religious
reasons."
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.
"A case like this helps the government kind of see how far they can go in criminalizing constitutionally protected protest," one legal advocate said.
The government has largely won its first case bringing material-support-for-terrorism charges against protesters alleged to belong to "antifa," which President Donald Trump designated as a domestic terror group in 2025 despite the fact that no such organized group exists and the president has no legal authority to designate organizations as domestic terror groups.
A federal jury in Fort Worth, Texas agreed on Friday to convict eight people of domestic terrorism because they wore all black to a protest outside Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Prairieland Detention Facility in Alvarado, Texas on July 4, 2025, at which one of the protesters shot and wounded a police officer. Legal experts say the verdict could bolster attempts by the administration to stifle dissent.
"A case like this helps the government kind of see how far they can go in criminalizing constitutionally protected protests and also helps them kind of intimidate, increase the fear, hoping that folks in other cities then will think twice over protesting,” Suzanne Adely, interim president of the National Lawyers Guild, told The Associated Press.
The administration promised it would be the first such case of many.
"The US lost today with this verdict."
“Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization that has been allowed to flourish in Democrat-led cities—not under President Trump,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement Friday. “Today’s verdict on terrorism charges will not be the last as the Trump administration systematically dismantles Antifa and finally halts their violence on America’s streets.”
The trial revolved around a nighttime protest at which participants planned to set off fireworks in solidarity with the around 1,000 migrants detained inside the Prarieland ICE facility. Some participants brought guns, which is legal in Texas, as The Intercept reported.
Sam Levine explained in The Guardian what happened next:
Shortly after arriving at the facility, two or three of the protesters broke away from the larger group and began spray painting cars in the parking lot, a guard shack, slashed the tires on a government van, and broke a security camera. Two ICE detention guards came out and told the protesters to stop. A police officer arrived on the scene shortly after and drew his weapon at one of the people allegedly doing vandalism. One of the protesters was standing in the woods with an AR-15 and hit him in the shoulder. The officer would survive.
At first, the federal government charged those arrested after the event with "attempted murder of a police officer," according to NOTUS.
However, that changed after Trump's designation of antifa as a terror group in September and the release of National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7), which directs federal law enforcement to target left-leaning groups and activities. The next month, the government's case expanded to include terrorism charges.
“This wouldn’t be a terrorism case if it weren’t for that memo,” one defense lawyer told NOTUS on background.
The prosecution argued that the fact that the protesters wore black clothes to the protest was enough to convict them of material support for terrorism.
“Providing your body as camouflage for others to do the enumerated acts is providing support,” Assistant US Attorney Shawn Smith said during closing arguments, as The Intercept reported on Thursday. “It’s impossible to tell who is doing what. That’s the point.”
The defense, meanwhile, warned the jury about the free speech implications of the charge.
“The government is asking you to put protesters in prison as terrorists. You are the only people who can stop that,” Blake Burns, an attorney for defendant Elizabeth Soto, said, according to The Guardian.
"When the villain is a made-up boogeyman then the target becomes 'anyone who disagrees with Trump'—and this is the result."
Ultimately, the jury decided to convict eight defendants of material support for terrorism as well as riot, conspiracy to use and carry an explosive, and use and carry of an explosive. However, they dismissed attempts by the state to argue that the protest constituted a pre-planned ambush and charge four people who had not shot at the police officer with attempted murder and discharging a firearm during a crime. Only Benjamin Song, the alleged shooter, was charged with one count of attempted murder and three counts of discharging a firearm.
The jury also convicted a ninth defendant, Daniel Rolando Sanchez Estrada, of conspiracy to conceal documents. Sanchez Estrada, who was not at the protest, had simply moved a box of zines out of his wife's home after she was arrested for the protest, according to The Intercept.
"The US lost today with this verdict,” Sanchez Estrada’s attorney, Christopher Weinbel, said, as AP reported.
Support the Prarieland Defendants said in a statement, "Everything about this trial from beginning to end has proven what we have said all along: This is a sham trial, built on political persecution and ideological attacks coming from the top."
However, the group commended the solidarity that had sprung up among the defendants and their allies and vowed to continue to support them.
"We have a long journey ahead of us to continue fighting these charges along with the state level charges," they said. "What happens here sets the tone for what’s to come. We are here and we won’t give up."
Outside observers warned about the implication for the right to protest under Trump.
"Remember all the people who dismissed the alarm over NSPM-7 because 'ANTIFA isn't even a real organization'? We told you that didn't matter. When the villain is a made-up boogeyman then the target becomes 'anyone who disagrees with Trump'—and this is the result," said Cory Archibald, the co-founder of Track AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee].
Content creator Austin MacNamara said: "The Prairieland trial was given almost zero media coverage because of the blatant lies by DHS [Department of Homeland Security] and Police. This verdict now sets a precedent for criminalization of dissent across the board. Noise demos, Black-Bloc, pamphlets/zines/red cards, all of this can be used to imprison you."
Academic Nathan Goodman wrote that convicting people of terrorism based on clothing was a "serious threat to the First Amendment."
The verdict gives new poignancy to what defendant Meagan Morris told NOTUS ahead of the jury's decision: “If we win, I think it shows that Trump’s mandate is not working, that the people understand that you can’t criminalize, you know, First and Second Amendment-protected activities. And I think if we lose, then… a lot of the country is OK with what’s going on. And it will be a much darker time, it’ll just signify a much increased crackdown on political opposition and free speech."
"Brendan Carr is threatening the media to cover the war the way the Trump regime wants. It’s one of the most anti-American messages ever posted by a government official," one news network said.
In a move one administration critic described as "fragrantly unconstitutional," Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr wrote a post on social media on Saturday that appeared to threaten the broadcast license of any media outlet that reported information concerning President Donald Trump's war on Iran that the president did not like.
"Broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions—also known as the fake news—have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up. The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not," Carr's message began.
Carr also shared a screenshot of a Trump post on Truth Social complaining about "Fake News Media" coverage of five US Air Force refueling planes that were reportedly hit and damaged in an Iranian missile strike on Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia.
"The[is] is the federal government telling news stations to provide favorable coverage of the war or their licenses will be pulled," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media in response to the post. "A truly extraordinary moment. We aren't on the verge of a totalitarian takeover. WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT. Act like it."
Several other media professionals, free speech advocates, and Democratic politicians understood Carr's post as a threat.
"The truth is this war has been a failure of historic proportions. They don’t want Americans to know that."
"The FCC is threatening the licenses of news stations that report on the effects of Iranian attacks on the American military," wrote journalist Séamus Malekafzali.
Bulwark economics editor Catherine Rampell wrote, "FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatens broadcast licenses over Iran War coverage."
Journalist Sam Stein posted, "The state doesn't like the war coverage, threatens the license of the broadcasters."
Independent news network MediasTouch wrote: "Brendan Carr is threatening the media to cover the war the way the Trump regime wants. It’s one of the most anti-American messages ever posted by a government official."
"The truth is this war has been a failure of historic proportions. They don’t want Americans to know that," the group continued.
"This is worse than the comedian stuff, and by a lot. The stakes here are much higher. He’s not talking about late night shows, he’s talking about how a war is covered."
Several pointed out that such a threat would be in violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and of the press.
"Constitutional law 101: It’s illegal for the government to censor free speech it just doesn’t like about Trump’s Iran war," Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) posted on social media. "This threat is straight out of the authoritarian playbook."
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who has faced scrutiny from the administration for advising service members to disobey illegal orders, wrote: "When our nation is at war it is critical that the press is free to report without government interference. It is literally in the Constitution. This is overreach by the FCC because this administration doesn’t like the microscope and doesn’t want to be held accountable."
California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote, "If Trump doesn't like your coverage of the war, his FCC will pull your broadcast license. That is flagrantly unconstitutional."
Aaron Terr, the director of public advocacy at the Foundation of Individual Rights and Expression, said: "The president's hand-picked misinformation czar is at it again, singling out 'fake news' that conflicts with his boss' political agenda. The First Amendment doesn't allow the government to censor information about the war it's waging."
Free Press senior director of strategy and communications Timothy Karr responded to Carr with a screenshot of the First Amendment and the words: "Here it is—as it seems you've forgotten what you swore an oath to 'support and defend.'"
This is not the first time that Carr has been accused of putting his loyalty to Trump over his duty to the Constitution. In September, he pressured ABC to take comedian Jimmy Kimmel off the air over remarks Kimmel had made following the murder of Charlie Kirk.
While ABC eventually reinstated Kimmel's show following public backlash, free speech advocates warned at the time that the Trump administration would not stop trying to censor opposing views.
“The Trump regime’s war on free speech is no joke—and it’s not over," Free Press co-CEO Craig Aaron said at the time.
Indeed, Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) wrote of Carr's Saturday statement: "This is worse than the comedian stuff, and by a lot. The stakes here are much higher. He’s not talking about late night shows, he’s talking about how a war is covered."
Carr's note comes at a particularly urgent time for independent media coverage in the US, as Paramount Skydance, which is run by the son of pro-Trump billionaire Larry Ellison, is set to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, which owns CNN. The Trump administration has often criticized CNN's coverage, including of the war.
On Friday, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters, “The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better,” as he complained about a CNN report on how the Pentagon underestimated the risk that Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz in response to US aggression.
Carr has already spoken out in favor of the merger, telling CNBC he thought it was a "good deal, and I think it should get through pretty quickly."
This piece has been updated with quotes from Sens. Chris Murphy, Elizabeth Warren, and Mark Kelly.
“Mandating a restart of these defective oil pipelines won’t curb high gas prices, but it will put coastal wildlife at huge risk of another oil spill," one advocate said.
State leaders and environmental advocates responded with outrage after the Trump administration on Friday ordered the restarting of a California pipeline that caused one of the largest oil spills in the state's history, a move that comes as oil prices have skyrocketed following President Donald Trump's launching of an illegal war against Iran and Iran's subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
After Trump issued an executive order on Friday authorizing the Department of Energy (DOE) to ramp up oil and gas development under the Defense Production Act, Energy Secretary Chris Wright ordered Sable Offshore Corp. to restart operations on the Santa Ynez Unit and Pipeline System, which include an offshore rig and a network of offshore and onshore pipelines along the Santa Barbara coast. Among them is a pipeline that ruptured in 2015, spilling around 450,000 gallons of oil into Refugio State Beach and killing hundreds of marine mammals and sea birds.
“Californians have repeatedly rejected dangerous drilling off our coast for decades," Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement on Saturday. "Now, after dragging the US into a war with Iran and driving up oil prices, the Trump administration is trying to exploit this crisis to further enrich the oil industry at the expense of our communities and our environment."
In his statement, Wright emphasized the defense benefits of resuming drilling, arguing that "today’s order will strengthen America’s oil supply and restore a pipeline system vital to our national security and defense, ensuring that West Coast military installations have the reliable energy critical to military readiness.”
“Directing a private oil company to push its project through without safety checks and adherence to California laws that keep our coast safe is appalling and illegal."
The DOE added that "Sable's facility can produce approximately 50,000 barrels of oil per day, a 15% increase to California’s in-state oil production, that can replace nearly 1.5 million barrels of foreign crude each month."
Yet, far from a novel response to an unexpected emergency, the order is actually an escalation in a preexisting battle between California and the Trump administration over the future of the pipeline system. The state's Attorney General Rob Bonta sued to stop the administration from a federal takeover of two of the pipelines in January.
Sable also faces several lawsuits due to its attempts to restart the system after it purchased it from ExxonMobil in 2024, and has not yet cleared all of the state permitting requirements, according to the Center for Biological Diversity.
"In its latest brazen abuse of power, the Trump administration is attempting to seize exclusive federal control over two of California’s onshore pipelines," Bonta said on social media Friday evening. "We will not stand by as this administration continues their unlawful all-out assault on California and our coastlines, and we are reviewing all of our legal options."
California Gov. Gavin Newsom also spoke out against Wright's announcement.
"Trump knew his war with Iran would raise gas prices," he wrote on social media. "Now he wants to illegally resurrect a pipeline shut down by courts and facing criminal charges. And it won't even cut prices. I refuse to let Trump sacrifice Californians, our environment, or our $51 billion coastal economy."
The Center for Biological Diversity noted that this order would mark the first time that the Defense Production Act was used to force an oil company to restart out-of-use Infrastructure and to disregard the state permitting process.
“This is a revolting power grab by an extremist president. Trump is misusing this Cold War-era law just to help a Texas oil company skirt vital state laws that protect our coastline, and Californians will pay the price,” Talia Nimmer, an attorney for the center, said. “Mandating a restart of these defective oil pipelines won’t curb high gas prices, but it will put coastal wildlife at huge risk of another oil spill. Overriding state law to let an oil company restart pipelines sets a radically dangerous precedent. It’s clear that no state is safe from Trump.”
The center also promised to push back against the order.
“Directing a private oil company to push its project through without safety checks and adherence to California laws that keep our coast safe is appalling and illegal,” Nimmer said. “We’re exploring all legal avenues. This dangerous action should be swiftly blocked by the courts.”