

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.

The Egyptian military should immediately end trials of civilians before military courts and release all those arbitrarily detained or convicted after unfair proceedings, Human Rights Watch said today. In the latest case, 28 civilians arrested in Cairo's Tahrir Square on April 12, 2011, went on trial as a group before a military court on April 28.
The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) has tried more than 5,000 civilians before military tribunals since February, including many arrested following peaceful protests in Tahrir Square. Trials of civilians before the military courts constitute wholesale violations of basic fair trial rights, Human Rights Watch said. At the same time, senior officials in the government of former president Hosni Mubarak are being tried before civilian courts on charges of corruption and using lethal force against protesters.
"Egypt's military leadership has not explained why young protesters are being tried before unfair military courts while former Mubarak officials are being tried for corruption and killing protesters before regular criminal courts," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "The generals' reliance on military trials threatens the rule of law by creating a parallel system that undermines Egypt's judiciary."
Since Egypt's military took over policing the streets from the Ministry of Interior at the end of January, it has arbitrarily arrested peaceful protesters. On February 26, March 6, March 9, April 9, and April 12, military police accompanied by other military personnel violently dispersed protesters and arrested at least 321 persons from Tahrir and Lazoughli squares. At least 76 of them remain in detention after unfair trials before military courts.
Human rights lawyer Adel Ramadan from the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, who has been representing defendants before military courts, told Human Rights Watch that, based on court rolls and case numbers, military courts handed down over 5,000 sentences across the country between February 11 and the middle of April. The military courts typically handle groups of between five and thirty defendants at a single trial, with a trial lasting 20 to 40 minutes.
Egypt's Emergency Law, in place since 1981, and the Code of Military Justice authorize the president to refer civilians for military trials. Under the Mubarak government, such trials were reserved for high-profile political cases, such as the 2008 conviction of the former deputy guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, Khairat al-Shatir, and 24 others; cases in which the defendants had been arrested in a military zone such as the Sinai; or bloggers who criticized the military.
Since February, however, the military has tried thousands of civilians before military courts under the Code of Military Justice. The code, in articles 5- 6, allows for such trials only under specified conditions, such as when the crime takes place in an area controlled by the military or if one of the parties involved is a military officer. In a live television interview on a local station, ON TV, on April 11, Gen. Ismail Etman, the military's head of Morale Affairs, said that "in cases where it affects the security of the armed forces or the security of the country such as thuggery, looting or destruction of property, theft, and especially if one of the parties is a military officer, we transfer it to military trials to be looked into immediately."
The Code of Military Justice should be amended to restrict the jurisdiction of the military courts to trials only of military personnel charged with offenses of an exclusively military nature, Human Rights Watch said.
The Egyptian military amended the country's penal code on March 1, under the legislative powers accorded to it by the Constitutional Declaration of February 13, to add the crime of "thuggery" in articles 375bis and 375bis (a) entitled "causing fear, intimidation and affecting sense of security." It defines "thuggery" as "displaying force or threatening to use force against a victim" with the "intention to intimidate or cause harm to him or his property."
The wholesale use of military courts to try civilians comes at a time when the military is trying to reassure Egyptians that it is taking a strong stance to suppress criminal activity. Since February 26, the military has sent faxes to Egyptian media listing the names and sentences of 647 civilians tried before military courts, lists that newspapers reproduced without providing any further information.
Based on these lists, over the past two months, military courts in Cairo, Alexandria, Ismailiyya, and other cities have sentenced civilians to prison terms ranging from six months to seven years - in at least three cases even 25 years' or life imprisonment. The charges typically were breaking curfew, possession of illegal weapons, destruction of public property, theft, assault, or threat of violence.
"Those who commit genuine crimes should be tried in regular criminal courts, as they have been in the past." Stork said. "Egyptian prisons are now filled with thousands of civilians who were convicted by fundamentally unfair military courts, often on dubious charges."
Defendants in military trials have no access to counsel of their own choosing, except in high-profile cases such as the blogger Maikel Nabil. Dozens of protesters arrested on March 9 were not allowed to speak to their court-appointed lawyers before or during the trial or to communicate with their families to request a lawyer. Military prosecution officials denied human rights lawyers access on at least three occasions when groups of protesters were being interrogated and tried.
Most Egyptian news media have been unwilling to report on arbitrary arrests and allegations of torture of protesters by the military police. The media also largely ignored two March news conferences by human rights lawyers in which a number of torture victims testified. Only a few opinion writers and TV hosts have been willing to raise the issue of torture and arbitrary arrests by the military.
On March 22, General Etman sent a letter to editors of Egyptian newspapers telling them "not to publish any articles/news/press releases/complaints/advertising/pictures concerning the armed forces or the leadership of the armed forces, except after consulting the Morale Affairs directorate and the Military Intelligence since these are the competent parties to examine such issues to protect the safety of the nation."
On April 14, the military said, in its Statement Number 36, that it would review the detentions of "all the youth ... tried in the recent period," an apparent reference to the protesters, but Human Rights Watch is unaware of any movement in their cases. The military had earlier announced that it was reviewing the sentencing of two protesters, Amr Eissa and Mohamed Adel, and also ordered the retrial of Walid Sami Saad.
Two lawyers, Khaled Ali and Taher Abul Nasr, brought a case before Egypt's Court of Administrative Justice on behalf of a former military detainee, Rasha Azab, challenging the military's administrative decision to try civilians before military courts. The court held the first session in the case on April 19 and adjourned the case until May 10.
If the court decides it is competent to rule on this issue, this would be the first step toward the judiciary reasserting control over the administration of criminal justice, Human Rights Watch said. Thus far, civilian judicial bodies have had little say over military abuses, and the Public Prosecutor has referred torture complaints against the military to military prosecutors.
International Law
Human Rights Watch strongly opposes any trials of civilians before military courts, where the proceedings do not protect due process rights and do not satisfy the requirements of independence and impartiality of courts of law. International human rights bodies over the last 15 years have determined that trials of civilians before military tribunals violate the due process guarantees found in article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which affirms that everyone has the right to be tried by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal.
These bodies have consistently rejected the use of military prosecutors and courts in cases involving abuses against civilians, by stating that the jurisdiction of military courts should be limited to offenses that are strictly military in nature. The Set of Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights through Action to Combat Impunity, presented before the former United Nations Human Rights Commission in 2005, state that "the jurisdiction of military tribunals must be restricted solely to specifically military offenses committed by military personnel, to the exclusion of human rights violations, which shall come under the jurisdiction of the ordinary domestic courts or, where appropriate, in the case of serious crimes under international law, of an international or internationalized criminal court."
The Human Rights Committee, the international expert body authorized to monitor compliance with the ICCPR, has stated that civilians should be tried by military courts only under exceptional circumstances and only under conditions that genuinely afford full due process. The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, in interpreting the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, has said that military courts "should not, in any circumstances whatsoever, have jurisdiction over civilians."
Arbitrary Arrest and Military Convictions of Peaceful Protesters
February 26 Protest
One of those detained for participating in peaceful protest is Amr al-Beheiry, whose case alerted human rights lawyers to the fact that protesters were being brought before military courts.
Military officers arrested al-Beheiry, along with at least eight others, in the early hours of February 26 after forcibly evicting protesters from Tahrir Square. Mona Saif, an activist, told Human Rights Watch that she and her mother, Laila Soueif, intervened when they saw military officers first arrest al-Beheiry, and they were able to secure his release. Al-Beheiry had bruises on his face and told Saif that officers had beaten him. After they parted ways, military officers re-arrested him.
Al-Beheiry's family learned of his arrest from the newspaper and contacted Ramadan, the defense lawyer, who unsuccessfully tried to gain access to him at the military base on March 1 and only then learned that al-Beheiry had been tried and sentenced on February 28. Al-Beheiry is serving a five-year sentence in Wadi Gedid prison, 400 miles from his home, rather than in Tora prison outside Cairo.
March 9 Protest
Of the 173 detainees arrested on March 9 from Tahrir Square, at least 76 are believed to remain in prison after military courts sentenced them to prison terms ranging from one to three years on charges of breaking curfew, possession of explosives and knives, and destruction of property.
Human Rights Watch has interviewed 16 men and women who testified to being tortured by beating, electroshocks, and whipping by military officers on March 9 in the grounds of the Egyptian Museum, adjacent to Tahrir Square. Ahmed al-Sharkawy, one of 22 men released on March 12, told Human Rights Watch:
I was one of the protesters in Tahrir. Military officers beat me at the museum on March 9, used electroshocks on my legs and my neck and whipped me on my back with an electric cable. Later they moved us to the military camp S28 where a camera crew filmed us at a table with sticks, knives and Molotov cocktails placed before us, saying we were thugs. My father saw this on state television that evening and that's how he knew I'd been arrested.
The next day they took us to the military prison and brought each of us before the prosecutor. He asked me what I was doing in Tahrir and I said I was just walking past. He told me was charging me with being a thug and I denied all the charges. I was with him for around 15 minutes.
A while later they took me along with 29 others before a military judge. There were three court-appointed lawyers - I tried to ask their names but they told us they couldn't speak to us. He asked us one question "Why were you in Tahrir?" The whole process took around 20 minutes and then they took us to our cells. On Saturday [March 12], an officer came and called me out of the cell. He released me along with 21 other men and the 17 women.
Some of the protesters were able to alert lawyers shortly after they were arrested. Ramadan and Omran went to the military prosecutor's office on March 9 and requested access to the detainees, but officials there denied the detainees were being interrogated and said they would not be brought to trial until March 12. When Ramadan returned on March 12, military officials at the military prosecutor's office told him the group had been tried and sentenced on March 9.
Human Rights Watch interviewed 11 members of the group tried by military courts on March 9. They all said military police and other military officers had arrested them where they were protesting in Tahrir Square, and that military officers beat them in the grounds of the Egyptian Museum. They also said they had no access to lawyers prior to their trials or the chance to speak to court-appointed lawyers at the proceedings. They did not learn about their sentences until, at the earliest, six days later, when their families visited them in prison and saw their sentences on the visiting list.
Human Rights Watch has interviewed six people, received letters from prisoners, reviewed video footage of the events of March 9, and spoken with four prisoners' families to confirm the following cases of protesters who remain inside Tora's high security prison:
Rai'f Kashef, 22, a second-year business student, was arrested at the same time as his brother Ragui in Tahrir Square. Ragui told Human Rights Watch that military officers arrested them and took them to the museum, where the officers beat and subjected the brothers to shocks with electric stun devices. The officers then brought them to a military base, where military prosecutors questioned them separately and brought them before military judges for trial in groups of 25 to 30. Military officers released Ragui Kashef on March 12 along with 21 other men but sentenced his brother to a year in prison.
Amr Eissa, 26, an artist, was arrested along with Ragui Kashef and Khaled Sadek in front of the KFC restaurant in Tahrir Square and sentenced to three years in prison, his brother, Mostafa, told Human Rights Watch.
Eissa's was one of the two cases the military said it would review. In its Statement 30 on March 28, in which it ordered a review of the legal proceedings against him, the military stated that,
"The Egyptian armed forces announced its position at the beginning of the January 25 revolution toward the youth of the revolution that it will not stand against the free youth and that all of the legal measures that have been taken in the past period have been solely directed against acts of thuggery which have terrorized the people."
As of April 18, however, Eissa remained in Tora's high security prison. Mostafa Eissa has been campaigning on his brother's behalf, but said there had been no developments since the military announced it was reviewing the conviction.
Mustafa Abdelmoneim, 25, works in an advertising production company and took part in the Tahrir Square demonstrations from the beginning. On March 9, he was standing next to the tents protesters had set up when army officers, together with men in civilian clothes, started breaking down the tents and arresting demonstrators. In a letter written from his Tora prison cell, he wrote that he had been arrested by two military police officers, who took him to the museum and beat him on his back and his legs and used electric stun guns on him, then took him to the military camp and then before the military prosecutor and court. He told them he was tried in a group of about 30 before a military judge in a hearing that lasted 20 minutes. He said he first learned of his three-year prison sentence from his family when they came to visit him.
Hani Maher Mikhail, 26, from Imbaba, was also one of the demonstrators in Tahrir Square from the beginning. On March 9 men in civilian clothes came into the tent area to take down the tents. Mikhail went to nearby Talaat Harb Street and on his way back to the square, two officers in uniform and two men in civilian clothes arrested him and took him to the museum, where military officers beat him and used electric stun guns on him. A military judge sentenced him to three years in prison, along with a group of about 30 others.
Tamer al-Shishtawy, from Tanta, took part in the Tahrir demonstrations beginning on January 28. Military officers took him to the museum on March 9 and beat him. He said that he was tried together with 30 others by the military judge and was not permitted to speak to a lawyer.
"It is outrageous that those who peacefully protested against Mubarak should now be imprisoned after unfair military trials for peacefully protesting against the new authorities," Stork said. "The military should release all those held arbitrarily and retry any persons suspected of a criminal offence in fair proceedings before civilian courts."
The names of 76 of the protesters now imprisoned in Tora and Wadi Gedid prisons after sentences by military courts are:
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.
"In less than two weeks, Israel has killed 570 people and displaced 750,000—over 10% of the entire country," the senator said of Lebanon. "Residential buildings are being bombed with no warning."
Just a day after tearing into US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for "unraveling international law, the Geneva Conventions, and the legitimacy of the United Nations" with their illegal war on Iran, Sen. Bernie Sanders stressed that "it's not just Iran."
"It's Lebanon," Sanders (I-Vt.) said on social media Wednesday. Since Trump and Netanyahu began bombing Iran a dozen days ago, Israel has also ramped up attacks against its northern neighbor—claiming to target the Lebanese political and paramilitary group Hezbollah—despite a November 2024 ceasefire deal.
That agreement to protect the Lebanese people was struck just over a year into Israel's retaliation for the October 2023 Hamas-led attack, which has also left the Gaza Strip in ruins. Despite the Lebanon truce, and another for Gaza reached this past October, Israeli forces have continued to slaughter civilians in both places.
In Lebanon, Sanders noted Wednesday, "in less than two weeks, Israel has killed 570 people and displaced 750,000—over 10% of the entire country. Residential buildings are being bombed with no warning."
"The US cannot continue to be complicit in Netanyahu's wars," declared the senator. His comments came after the White House tried to walk back Secretary of State Marco Rubio's suggestion last week that Trump followed the Israeli prime minister's lead on Iran.
Sanders has also criticized and even attempted to curb US complicity in Netanyahu's genocidal assault on Palestinians in Gaza—under the Biden and Trump administrations—by forcing unsuccessful votes to cut off some weapons to Israel.
The Israeli government has used the operation against Iran—which experts argue violates the US Constitution and UN Charter—to again cut off necessary humanitarian aid to Gaza, claiming last week that "the existing stock is expected to suffice for an extended period."
Philippe Lazzarini, commissioner-general of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, called the move "a new chokehold on Gaza," adding that "after more than two years of unspeakable suffering and a spreading man-made famine, people still lack the most basic supplies, despite increases in aid since the ceasefire.
As for Lebanon, Axios reported Monday that "the Lebanese government proposed direct negotiations with Israel—through the Trump administration—aimed at ending the war and reaching a peace agreement."
However, the Financial Times reported Tuesday that "Israel has rejected diplomatic overtures by Lebanon," with one unnamed source saying that the Lebanese "are ready to talk to Israel, but under the condition of a cessation of fire. Not a ceasefire, but a cessation... so talks can get going in Cyprus."
"Israel has so far refused and says it will only negotiate 'under fire,'" according to that unnamed source.
Trump's ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Waltz, made US support for Israel's bombing of Lebanon clear in his Wednesday remarks to the UN Security Council.
"The United States condemns the attacks that Hezbollah, a long-time proxy of the Iranian regime, has launched against Israel. Hezbollah has yet again made it clear that it does not represent nor does it defend the people of Lebanon. It defends the interests of the Iranian regime," Waltz said, stressing Israel's "right to defend itself."
Waltz also welcomed the Lebanese Council of Ministers' recent decision "to immediately prohibit Hezbollah’s military and security activities," and declared that "now is the time for the government of Lebanon to take back control of the entirety of its country."
Meanwhile, Tom Fletcher, United Nations under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator, noted to the Security Council that UN Secretary-General António Guterres "has insisted... we need the protection of civilians, de-escalation, an immediate cessation of hostilities, and genuine dialogue and negotiations towards a peaceful settlement, in line with the charter."
Fletcher concluded his comments at the briefing on Lebanon with calls for the protection of "all civilians throughout the region," "generous funding for a principled, scaled-up humanitarian response," and "a revival of strategic, calm, rational, hopeful diplomacy."
"Lebanon is exhausted by other people's wars," he said. "It is not asking for help, but for oxygen. Its people can defy the history, the geography, even the politics. They can be stronger than the forces pulling them apart. But they can only do that if Iran and Israel stop fighting their war in Lebanon."
"This new law is part of a relentless campaign by anti-abortion extremists who continue to push restrictions regardless of settled law, patient safety, or basic compassion," said one critic.
A reproductive rights group coalition that recently got two anti-abortion laws overturned in Wyoming's Supreme Court filed a legal challenge on Tuesday against the insidiously named "fetal heartbeat" legislation signed earlier this week by the state's Republican governor.
The advocacy groups Chelsea's Fund and Just the Pill; Wellspring Health Access, Wyoming's only abortion clinic; and three physicians filed a motion seeking to block HB 0126, the so-called Human Heartbeat Act, which was signed Monday by Gov. Mark Gordon.
The law bans abortion when there is a "detectable fetal heartbeat." Critics note that the term "fetal heartbeat" is medically inaccurate and misleading, as what can be detected with a transvaginal ultrasound at around six weeks of gestation is not an actual heartbeat, but rather electrical activity in fetal tissue that later develops into a heart.
The legislation contains an exception to “preserve the woman from an imminent peril that substantially endangers her life or health, according to appropriate medical judgment," but forces victims of rape and incest to carry their abusers' fetus to term.
The “uNfOrTuNaTe fLaW” he's referring to is that the state's abortion ban has no rape or incest exception. 🤬But this is no accident; these policies are DESIGNED to violate our basic human rights. For the extremists who champion these violent laws, this is a feature, not a bug.
[image or embed]
— Center for Reproductive Rights (@reprorights.org) March 11, 2026 at 7:51 AM
Gordon called the glaring lack of exceptions for rape or incest "an unfortunate flaw."
Wyoming's Republican-dominated Legislature passed the law after the state Supreme Court struck down two other pieces of forced-birth legislation in January.
One of the overturned laws outlawed abortion in nearly all cases, except when the pregnant patient’s life is in danger or for victims of rape or incest. The other banned abortion pills. Both laws were passed after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, reversing half a century of federal abortion rights.
In striking down the laws, the state's high court ruled that they violated residents' ability to make their own healthcare decisions—a right enshrined in the Wyoming Constitution.
The groups challenging the new law echoed the ruling in their motion, arguing the legislation "transgresses the constitutional guarantee of plaintiffs’ and individuals’ to make healthcare decisions without interference from the government."
Chelsea's Fund executive director Janean Forsyth expressed dismay over state lawmakers' relentless attacks on healthcare.
“I'm thinking about everyone from the 15-year-old that we supported, whose grandmother actually reached out, a victim of sexual assault,” Forsyth told Wyoming Public Radio on Wednesday. “I'm thinking about a family with a very wanted pregnancy that we supported in eventually seeking an abortion for a severe fetal anomaly.”
"It's not only affecting access to abortion care, it's affecting reproductive healthcare access generally for parents and children, which is really unfortunate,” she added, referring to medical professionals who are leaving the state for fear of prosecution.
On Wednesday, Brittany Fonteno, president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation (NAF), said in a statement:
A mere two months after two abortion bans were struck down by the state’s Supreme Court, Wyoming’s anti-abortion leaders have enacted yet another ban despite clear judicial rulings and public support for the constitutional right to make personal healthcare decisions. This new law is part of a relentless campaign by anti-abortion extremists who continue to push restrictions regardless of settled law, patient safety, or basic compassion.
“But as they have before, providers are standing firm and fighting back," Fonteno added. "NAF is proud to support Wellspring Health Access and the advocates challenging this ban, and we remain committed to ensuring abortion care is not only legal, but accessible and protected for every person, in every state.”
Abortion access has been tenuous in Wyoming in recent years, with bans and a 2022 arson attack on the Wellspring Health Access clinic in Casper—the state's only full-service abortion facility—causing uncertainty and delays.
Lawmakers in Wyoming considered putting the issue before voters in a referendum but decided against doing so, as such ballot measures have repeatedly resulted in the protection of abortion rights—even in deep "red" and conservative-leaning states including Arizona, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, and Ohio.
Wyoming is the fifth state to ban abortion at around six weeks, joining Florida, Georgia, Iowa, and South Carolina.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, 13 states currently have near-total abortion bans, while 28 other states restrict the procedure. Numerous forced-birth bills are pending across the nation, and—while unlikely to pass—the most severe proposals including punishing the medical procedure with lengthy imprisonment and even the death penalty for healthcare providers and patients.
Wyoming’s governor signed into law a so-called “fetal heartbeat” ban. Abortion is now banned in the state when “cardiac activity” is detected, around 6 wks of pregnancy. WY now shifts from “Restrictive” to “Very Restrictive” on our interactive map. Learn more: https://gu.tt/4985P4S#AbortionAccess
[image or embed]
— Guttmacher (@guttmacher.org) March 11, 2026 at 6:00 AM
On Monday, the Center for Reproductive Rights published a report examining the human and economic toll of abortion bans, which a separate study last year by the Population Reference Bureau has linked to 478 excess infant deaths and 59 excess deaths of pregnant people since Roe was struck down nearly four years ago.
It's not only state-level bans that harm patients. Republicans' so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump last year, contains the biggest cuts to Medicaid in the program's 60-year history. Dramatically decreased Medicaid funding has resulted in the closure of at least 50 Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide, and the reduction of services at many others.
"Massive civilian casualty incidents like the attack in Minab are not only detrimental to the Iranian people," argued the rest of the Senate Democratic Caucus, "but they also undermine US national security interests."
Just a week after Sen. John Fetterman helped Republicans block a war powers resolution intended to halt President Donald Trump and Israel's assault on Iran, the Pennsylvania Democrat again bucked his own party on Wednesday by not signing on to a letter calling for a probe into an apparent US bombing of a girls' school in the Iranian city Minab that killed around 175 people, mostly young children.
As with the unsuccessful resolution from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Fetterman was the only member of the Senate Democratic Caucus—which includes Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Angus King (I-Maine)—who didn't endorse the letter to US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Fetterman has signaled support for Operation Epic Fury and promoted Trump's narrative that it's motivated by preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. During a Tuesday appearance on Newsmax, he claimed that "negotiating treaties" and coordinating with regional allies "never worked," and wondered why Democrats can't "agree what's happened is a very, very positive development for world peace."
Asked for comment about Democrats' letter, Fetterman told Reuters that he supports the military operation and "the United States never intentionally targets civilians, including its own citizens, unlike Iran. Everyone agrees it was a tragedy. Everyone agrees on performing a full investigation."
A spokesperson for Fetterman added that "whether the senator is on a letter or not, he fully stands behind a comprehensive investigation into this tragedy."
Led by Kaine, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the rest of the caucus began the letter by expressing "grave concern" about the bombing—which paramedics and victims' relatives have said was a so-called "double-tap" airstrike—and stressing that the 12-day assault "is a war of choice without congressional authorization."
"Nonetheless, as these military actions continue, the United States and Israel must abide by US and international law, including the law of armed conflict," they wrote. "There must be a swift investigation into the strikes on this school and any other potential US military actions causing civilian harm, and the findings must be released to the public as soon as possible, along with any measures to pursue accountability."
"Massive civilian casualty incidents like the attack in Minab are not only detrimental to the Iranian people, who have already suffered so much at the hands of its own government, but they also undermine US national security interests," the Democrats argued.
The letter cites a Tuesday update from the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency that the war has killed more than 1,245 civilians and injured over 12,000. The Iranian government said earlier this week that the death toll is above 1,300.
The Senate Democrats didn't just focus on the school; they also sounded the alarm about US and Israeli "use of explosive weapons in major Iranian cities and populated areas," which has damaged "multiple hospitals, cultural heritage sites, and other critical civilian infrastructure."
"These civilian harm events are not taking place in a vacuum," the senators wrote, pointing to Hegseth's recent remarks that Operation Epic Fury would have "no stupid rules of engagement" and there will be "death and destruction from the sky all day long."
They warned that "this rhetoric only serves to endanger civilians, including American citizens, in the region and around the globe. The United States is a party to the Geneva Conventions and bound by international humanitarian law, including the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution. These are binding and non-negotiable standards designed to protect innocent human life, and it is unacceptable for the secretary of defense to suggest otherwise."
"Your comments reflect a broader pattern of policies abandoning the Defense Department's commitment to minimizing civilian harm in US military operations," the lawmakers noted, referencing budgetary and personnel cuts, including the removal of senior, nonpartisan judge advocate general officers. "These actions, combined with your comments and the horrific reports of civilian casualties stemming from the war against Iran, suggest the administration has abandoned its duty to protect civilians."
The senators demanded Hegseth's responses to a list of questions about the February 28 school strike, compliance with rules to prevent war crimes, the military's efforts to prevent and mitigate civilian harm, and the use of artificial intelligence no later than March 18.
The Wednesday letter came as the The New York Times reported on the preliminary findings of a Pentagon probe that found the strike on the school in Minab "was the result of a targeting mistake by the US military, which was conducting strikes on an adjacent Iranian base of which the school building was formerly a part."
It also came as a coalition of peace groups launched a national campaign calling on Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) to resign from their leadership roles over their failure to sufficiently fight back "against a war-crazed Trump administration."
While Hegseth and Trump have so far declined to take responsibility for the school massacre, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)—who supports the US-Israeli war on Iran—has apologized for the bombing at least twice this week, saying: "We made a mistake... I'm just so sorry it happened."