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.

Rachel Myers, (212) 549-2689 or 2666; media@aclu.org
The American Civil Liberties Union joined a coalition of civil and human rights groups in sending a letter today to the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, asking the committee to urge the United States government to comply with its obligations under international human rights laws and treaties regarding racial discrimination.
While the committee and other U.N. human rights experts have provided specific and detailed recommendations over the last three years advising the U.S. government of the need to address ongoing issues of racial discrimination through domestic implementation of human rights obligations, including the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), the Obama administration has yet to take concrete measures to fully implement the ICERD and other related human rights obligations. The U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is the principle global body monitoring countries compliance with ICERD, which the U.S. ratified in 1994.
The letter asked the committee to urge the U.S. government to adopt a national plan of action for ICERD implementation, with full and meaningful consultation with civil society and affected communities and in collaboration with local and state governments.
According to the letter, "People of African descent in the United States continue to face intentional, structural, and de facto forms of discrimination which manifest in unequal access to quality education, housing, health services, employment, electoral disfranchisement and discrimination in the criminal justice system, among many other issues."
The full text of the letter follows and is available online at: www.aclu.org/human-rights-racial-justice/coalition-letter-cerd-committee
March 7, 2011
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
78th Session, 14th of February-11th of March, 2011
Geneva
Re: Thematic Discussion in the Context of the International Year for People of African Descent
Dear Members of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination:
The undersigned groups represent major civil and human rights organizations in the United States dedicated to the eradication of racial discrimination against people of African descent and other racial and ethnic minorities. People of African descent in the United States continue to face intentional, structural, and de facto forms of discrimination which manifest in unequal access to quality education, housing, health services, employment, electoral disfranchisement and discrimination in the criminal justice system, among many other issues. In the context of the International Year for People of African Descent,[1] we write to discuss the status of U.S. implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).
As discussed below, in the past few years, the Committee and other U.N. human rights experts have provided specific and detailed recommendations advising the United States government of the need to address ongoing issues of racial discrimination through domestic implementation of human rights obligations, especially ICERD. Unfortunately, the Obama administration has yet to take concrete measures to fully implement the ICERD and other related human rights obligations, notwithstanding the administration's welcomed policy of reengagement on international human rights.
Specifically, we would like to call the Committee's attention to the lack of any progress to develop a specific plan of action based upon the Concluding Observations and Recommendations of the Committee to the United States in March of 2008. We strongly believe that without a comprehensive national plan of action to implement ICERD, we fear that at the time of the next reporting deadline and constructive dialogue (currently scheduled for Spring 2012), the U.S. government will have little progress to show regarding domestic human rights implementation.
Among other things, the Committee recommended that the United States take the following actions:[2]
1) "...establish appropriate mechanisms to ensure a coordinated approach towards the implementation of the Convention at the federal, state and local levels,"[3] and
2) "...take all necessary steps to guarantee the right of everyone to equal treatment before tribunals and all other organs administering justice, including further studies to determine the nature and scope of the problem, and the implementation of national strategies or plans of action aimed at the elimination of structural racial discrimination."[4]
The Committee's detailed recommendations were followed by additional documentation completed by United Nations independent experts as part of official fact finding missions to the United States in 2008 and 2010. In his 2009 report to the Human Rights Council (HRC), the U.N. Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance noted the ongoing challenges that exist in the United States. He recommended that the U.S "reassess existing legislation in view of two main guidelines: addressing the overlapping nature of poverty and race or ethnicity; and linking the fight against racism to the construction of a democratic, egalitarian and interactive multiculturalism, in order to strengthen inter-community relations."[5]
Last year, the U.N. Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent noted in a report submitted to the HRC on their visit to the United States "the ongoing structural discrimination that cannot be effectively addressed with the existing legal mechanisms and legislation[.]" and added that "there is no specific anti-discrimination act that would serve to guide the drafting and implementation of relevant federal, state and local laws."[6]
While this Administration has shown its support for federal civil rights legislation and administrative action and signaled its commitment to domestic human rights issues generally, as mentioned above, the United States has still not yet adopted a national plan of action for implementation of the 2008 ICERD Recommendations; nor has the United States developed the interagency task force that would enable the development and implementation of a plan of action throughout the Executive Branch and in coordination with state and local governments. This lack of progress is disappointing and calls for further action from the Committee.
We commend the Committee for its longstanding work and fight against racial discrimination worldwide and especially its commitment to the promotion and protection of the rights of people of African descent. Moreover, we hope that the thematic discussion will lead to greater commitment and action by all countries, including the U.S. government, to translate their commitment to end racial discrimination into concrete laws and policies through a national plan of action for ICERD implementation with full and meaningful consultation with civil society and affected communities and collaboration with local and state governments.
We welcome the opportunity to assist the Committee in encouraging the U.S. government to fully comply with its obligations under the ICERD and we thank the Committee for all of its consideration in regards to this matter.
Sincerely,
American Civil Liberties Union
Amnesty International USA
Asian American Justice Center
Center for Constitutional Rights
Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute
Human Rights at Home Campaign
Human Rights Watch
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights
National Coalition-Black Women's Roundtable
National Economic and Social Rights Initiative
National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty
Poverty & Race Research Action Council
Rights Working Group
Urban Justice Center
U.S. Human Rights Network
World Organization for Human Rights USA
[1] UN Resolution A/RES/64/169.
[2] In January 2009, the United States responded to the Committee's recommendations contained in its Concluding Observations and submitted additional information to the Committee. On September 28, 2009 the Committee sent a letter to the United States acknowledging receipt of additional information and offering to assist the United States in its efforts to ensure the effective implementation of the Convention
[3] CERD/C/USA/CO/6, para. 13.
[4] CERD/C/USA/CO/6, para. 20.
[5] Report of U.N. Special Rapporteur Doudou Diene, Human Rights Council, 11th Sess., Agenda Item 9, at 27 P 98, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/11/36/Add3 (2009), available at https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/11session/A.HRC.11....
[6] Report of U.N. Work Group of Experts on People of African Descent, Human Rights Council, 15th Sess., Agenda Item 9, at 19 P 81, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/15/18 (2010), available at https://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/racism/groups/african/docs/A-HRC-....
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666"Each day we delay increases the risk of deeper US involvement and more lives lost," said one progressive policy adviser. "Failing to act now means owning what comes next."
Democratic Party leaders are under fire after it was reported that they plan to wait until mid-April to hold a vote to rein in President Donald Trump's powers to wage war with Iran.
Punchbowl News reported on Tuesday that US House lawmakers had abandoned plans to hold a vote this week on a war powers resolution introduced by Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
With a two-week recess beginning next week, postponing the vote means the earliest Democrats could force it again is April 13.
A previous war powers resolution, which came to the floor just days after the US and Israel launched the war at the end of February, failed by a razor-thin margin when four pro-war Democrats—Reps. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), Jared Golden (D-Maine), Greg Landsman (D-Ohio), and Juan Vargas (D-Calif.)—joined the bulk of Republicans to kill it.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said at a press briefing on Tuesday that there are “ongoing conversations” about passing a war powers resolution “sooner rather than later." He said, “When we present something on the floor, it’s our determination to win.”
But Democrats would likely be in a position to "win" the vote if it were held this week. Andrew Solender reported on Tuesday for Axios that following intense criticism from the grassroots base and pressure from party leadership, "most, if not all, of the four defectors are expected to flip and vote for the measure this time."
Solender later reported that Meeks was undecided about the measure. While the New York Democrat confirmed to Axios that the party had gotten defectors on board, he said he "hasn’t decided whether to force a vote on his war powers resolution this week or in mid-April."
Democratic leadership has already been accused of attempting to sabotage a previous resolution introduced by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) in late February by waiting to vote on it until after Trump launched the war.
Independent journalist Aída Chávez, who reported on these stall tactics in February, noted that Meeks "previously tried to delay a vote by warning 40 Democrats could oppose it. In the end, just four did."
"Now Meeks is saying he may not hold the vote because one member could vote no," Chávez wrote on social media. "If Democrats are unified, this Iran war powers resolution could actually pass... That makes Democratic leadership’s refusal to force a vote ASAP even more indefensible."
The decision to punt yet another resolution for nearly three weeks has ignited even more outrage and suspicion among progressives, especially amid reports that Trump is sending thousands more US troops to the Middle East and is mulling a ground invasion of Iran.
"It would be extremely alarming for Reps. Jeffries and Meeks to waver now on forcing a war powers vote," said Cavan Kharrazian, the senior policy adviser for Demand Progress. "Delaying a war powers vote now effectively gives Trump two more weeks to continue and escalate the war in Iran."
Ryan Grim, co-founder of Drop Site News, went further, accusing Meeks of backing off the resolution precisely "because it now may have the votes to pass." He contended that "Democrats secretly want this war to continue because it hurts Trump."
The war is indeed highly unpopular, with 59% of Americans saying it has "gone too far," according to an Associated Press-NORC poll published Wednesday. Its cascading effects throughout the economy—particularly the sharp increases in gas prices across the US—also have the potential to harm Trump, who has shed support for failing to address the high cost of living.
Andrei Vasilescu, the director of communications for Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told Common Dreams that Meeks was "whipping a vote precisely so it passes, and any accusations to the contrary are absurd."
He said many members of the House are not currently in DC and that passing the resolution would require all of the "yes" votes to be present.
"Ranking Member Meeks could not be clearer about his opposition to the war, and is working through this resolution and all other available tools to hold President Trump accountable for his reckless war of choice," he added.
He noted that Meeks also introduced a motion on Wednesday to subpoena Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to testify about the war.
According to the Human Rights Activist News Agency (HRANA), a US-based human rights monitor for Iran, at least 1,443 civilians, including 217 children, have been killed by US and Israeli strikes since the war began on February 28. Lebanon's Ministry of Health reported last week that more than 1,000 civilians have been killed by Israeli attacks as it expanded its military campaign there in early March.
"This war is a disaster, it’s unpopular, and civilians across the region are dying," Kharrazian of Demand Progress said. "This is a moment for anti-war leadership, not hesitation. The House should be on the record now, especially when reporting suggests the votes are there to pass a war powers resolution."
"Each day we delay increases the risk of deeper US involvement and more lives lost," he added. "Failing to act now means owning what comes next."
"Billionaires are on track to break their $1 billion midterm spending record," said Americans for Tax Fairness.
Just 50 billionaire families in the United States have already dumped more than $430 million into the 2026 midterms, with the vast majority of the money flowing to Republican candidates and right-wing organizations such as MAGA Inc.—a super PAC aligned with President Donald Trump.
The progressive advocacy group Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) released an analysis on Wednesday examining the most recent Federal Election Commission data, which underscores increasingly aggressive billionaire efforts to use their immense wealth to secure their favored political outcomes. In the 2024 federal elections, billionaires accounted for nearly 20% of all donations.
Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, tops the list of 2026 campaign spenders so far, donating roughly $71 million—including $10 million in support of a pro-Trump candidate running to succeed Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Behind Musk is businessman Jeff Yass, a relatively low-profile billionaire who has spent millions in recent years promoting school privatization. Yass has so far spent $55 million in the 2026 midterm cycle, $16 million of which went to MAGA Inc.—the largest recipient of the billionaire's donations.
Combined, the 50 top-spending billionaire families—which ATF describes as "modern-day royalty"—have poured $433 million into the 2026 midterms to date.
"Billionaires are on track to break their $1 billion midterm spending record," ATF noted on social media, referring to the 2022 midterms. "The spending is projected to grow exponentially as November approaches."

ATF published its analysis days ahead of the latest round of nationwide "No Kings" protests against the Trump administration this coming Saturday, March 28.
“The American people reject kings, political or financial,” David Kass, executive director of ATF, said in a statement on Wednesday. “Whether it’s an out-of-control chief executive in the White House or a billionaire wielding his huge fortune to influence elections, anti-democratic behavior is anathema to the American public."
"As we approach the 250th anniversary of our independence from the British monarchy," Kass added, "it’s more important than ever that we reform our campaign-finance and tax laws so that no billionaire can purchase a crown.”
ATF found that nearly 80% of top billionaire families' 2026 midterm spending—$344.3 million of the $433 million total—has gone to Republicans and GOP organizations, with the pro-Trump MAGA Inc. super PAC receiving $89 million, far more than any other group.
Four of the top five recipients of midterm cash from the nation's richest billionaire are pro-Republican PACs.
"Republicans and conservatives receive the lion’s share of billionaire financial support because it is the nation’s right-wing that works to ensure the wealthiest families get to keep and expand their fortunes, such as through the GOP tax-and-spending law enacted last year," ATF noted.
"As costs soar from Trump’s illegal war with Iran, any attempt by big corporations to jack up prices is unacceptable," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky.
Democratic lawmakers are warning corporate America to not use President Donald Trump's unconstitutional war with Iran as an excuse to jack up prices on US consumers.
US Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Ed Markey (D-Mass.), along with Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), sent a letter on Tuesday to the Federal Trade Commission demanding that it investigate and prosecute any unlawful price gouging by corporations during Trump's war, which has raised the cost of oil, gasoline, fertilizer, and other essential goods.
While the Democrats acknowledged that Trump's war created "broad supply chain disruptions and widespread uncertainty in the global economy," they warned that "big corporations may capitalize on this uncertainty to hike prices more than is warranted by actual input cost increases, price gouging everyday Americans while enriching executives and padding investors’ pockets."
The lawmakers accused big corporations in recent years of using assorted crises—including the global Covid-19 pandemic, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, and Trump's massive "Liberation Day" tariffs on foreign goods—to justify hiking prices beyond what could be warranted by input increases caused by external shocks.
The lawmakers also touted the Price Gouging Prevention Act that they introduced in July 2025 that would expand the authority of the FTC and state attorneys general to stop sellers from charging a "grossly excessive price, regardless of where the price gouging occurs in a supply chain or distribution network."
The proposed bill would also require public companies to "clearly disclose costs and pricing strategies" used to justify any price increases during periods of economic disruption.
In a social media post, Schakowsky said that "as costs soar from Trump’s illegal war with Iran, any attempt by big corporations to jack up prices is unacceptable," emphasizing that "we must crack down on price gouging and protect consumers."
The call to stop price gouging comes as concerns are mounting about the major economic damage that Trump's Iran war could produce.
Larry Fink, CEO of hedge fund BlackRock, predicted during an interview with BBC on Wednesday that there would be a "stark and steep recession" throughout the world if the war dragged on and the price of oil hit $150 per barrel, which he said would raise costs on products everywhere.
"Rising energy prices are a very regressive tax," Fink said. "It affects the poor more than the wealthy, because it's a larger component of their pocketbook."
CNBC reported on Wednesday that forecasters have been increasing their odds of a recession in the US economy this year, as the Iran war puts a strain on oil prices at a time when job growth in the country has already ground to a halt.
"Moody’s Analytics’ model has raised its recession outlook for the next 12 months to 48.6%," wrote CNBC. "Goldman Sachs boosted its estimate to 30%. Wilmington Trust has the odds at 45%, while EY Parthenon has it at 40%, with the caveat that 'those odds could rapidly rise in the event of a more prolonged or severe Middle East conflict.'"