

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.

Earlier this year Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pledged a thorough review of the Patriot Act, and a week-long debate on its pending extension. Now he appears poised to cave to overzealous law enforcement officials and pass a multi-year extension without reforms or even serious debate.
More than 80,000 Demand Progress members have signed petitions demanding reform of the Patriot Act, which have been delivered to the House and Senate, at https://act.demandprogress.org/sign/obl_patriot/
The Patriot Act was enacted as a supposedly temporary measure in the wake of 9-11, but portions of it have been made permanent, and the remaining provisions have been extended four times and are set to sunset on May 27th. With the death of bin Laden, Demand Progress urges Congress to reject the Sensenbrenner amendments and re-institute pre-9-11 legal norm, when reverence for civil liberties was a priority for both Americans and their government. Demand Progress Executive Director Aaron Swartz said, "We need to erase bin Laden's ugly legacy, not extend it. By ending the Patriot Act's erosion of our civil liberties, we can protect the freedoms that make America worth fighting for."
"With bin Laden's demise, the era of the Patriot Act, of spying on Americans who aren't suspected of crimes, of heavy-handed abuse of our dearly held civil liberties, must come to an end," said Campaign Director David Segal. "If not now, when will lawmakers ever restore our civil liberties?" Progressives and Tea Party Republicans initially blocked a long-term Patriot Act extension in January, but a three month-extension was passed in February. During the interim, the House and Senate have held hearings on potential reforms to the expiring provisions.
The authorities in question are:
1) Section 215 powers which make it easier for the government to seize records from people not accused or suspected of crimes.
2) Roving wiretaps which need not specify the devices or the individuals being targeted.
3) The "lone wolf" provision which reduces legal protections for certain individuals by applying the standards used when somebody is an agent of a foreign power.
Demand Progress is a political action committee and online activism group with more than 400,000 members. In April nearly 3,000 of them called the White House to urge President Obama to veto any bill that lacks sufficient reforms. Demand Progress aired an anti-Patriot Act ad on MSNBC, CNN, and FOX News earlier this year.
Demand Progress amplifies the voice of the people -- and wields it to make government accountable and contest concentrated corporate power. Our mission is to protect the democratic character of the internet -- and wield it to contest concentrated corporate power and hold government accountable.
Federal law enforcement officials "have ignored basic human rights in their enforcement activity against Minnesotans, especially targeting Somali and Latino communities," said the ACLU.
The ACLU revealed on Wednesday that it has asked a United Nations committee to initiate "urgent action" protocols over the Trump administration's human rights abuses in Minnesota.
The national ACLU, alongside the ACLU of Minnesota, said that it reached out to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) on Tuesday and asked it to "use its early warning and urgent action procedure in response to the human rights crisis following the Trump administration's deployment of federal forces in Minneapolis and the St. Paul metropolitan area."
In its submission, the ACLU alleged that federal immigration officials "have ignored basic human rights in their enforcement activity against Minnesotans, especially targeting Somali and Latino communities," and it called on CERD to "issue a decision under its early warning and urgent actions procedures to intervene and investigate the US' grave violations of its human rights obligations."
Jamil Dakwar, director of the ACLU's Human Rights Program, said that the US government is in violation of international human rights treaty obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), which prohibits "the use of racial and ethnic profiling, extrajudicial killings, and unlawful use of force against protesters and observers."
Teresa Nelson, legal director of the ACLU of Minnesota, explained the urgency in getting the international community to intervene in the US government's operations in her state.
"The Trump administration’s ongoing immigration enforcement operations in Minnesota are being carried out by thousands of masked federal agents in military gear who are ignoring basic constitutional and human rights of Minnesotans,” Nelson said. “Their targeting of our Somali and Latino communities threatens Minnesotans’ most fundamental rights, and it has spread fear among immigrant communities and neighborhoods.”
Others in the Trump administration have walked back the lie that Pretti was a "would-be-assassin." Vance isn't sorry.
Vice President JD Vance is refusing to apologize to the family of Alex Pretti after defaming the Minnesotan in order to justify his killing by Customs and Border Protection agents late last month on the streets of Minneapolis.
Video shows Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse, was shot at least ten times by a pair of agents after being disarmed of a handgun, which he was carrying legally according to local police.
Within hours of the incident, the Trump administration had already begun to run with false claims that Pretti had "brandished" his weapon at agents, which were immediately disproven by video. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who first made the claim, has since backed off that characterization following criticism.
On social media, Vance shared a post in which senior White House adviser Stephen Miller described Pretti as a "would-be-assassin" who sought to "murder federal agents," a claim for which they have still not provided any evidence weeks later.
President Donald Trump himself told reporters last week that he did not believe Pretti was an assassin, even acknowledging that the shooting was a "mistake."
Even Miller, who rarely backs down from even the most extreme and outrageous statements, has since acknowledged that agents may not have been following protocol when they shot Pretti.
But Vance is not sorry. During an interview with the Daily Mail on Tuesday, when interviewer Philip Nieto asked if the vice president would apologize to Pretti's family, he retorted, "For what?" with a smirk.
"For, you know, labeling him an assassin with ill intent," Nieto answered.
“I just described to you what I said about Alex Pretti, which is that he’s a guy who showed up with ill intent to an ICE protest,” Vance responded, referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Nieto then asked if Vance would apologize if an FBI probe opened last week found that the officers involved in the shooting had violated Pretti's civil rights.
Vance, appearing exasperated, sighed, “So if this hypothetical leads to that hypothetical leads to another hypothetical—”
Nieto then interjected, "It's a real case that's open."
"Like I said, we're gonna let the investigation determine," Vance said.
Then, in the ultimate dose of irony, he continued: "I don’t think it’s smart to prejudge the investigation, I don’t think it’s fair to those ICE officers,” he said, misidentifying the agency responsible for the shooting as ICE rather than CBP.
He notably did not give his thoughts on whether it was similarly unfair to "prejudge" Pretti as an attempted murderer within hours of his killing.
A clip of the interaction garnered immediate disgust online.
Ken Martin, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, said that "JD Vance had the opportunity to be a normal human being and show some empathy for the family of a man who was murdered. To nobody's surprise, he’s doubling down on being an asshole."
Pedro Gonzalez, a right-wing activist who has since become fiercely critical of the Trump administration, said that with his "little smile after 'for what,'" Vance appeared to be "relishing the opportunity to seem cold-blooded."
He added, "What Vance really is at heart is a hollow shell of a man who defends the murderers of American citizens more vigorously than he has ever defended his own family from the bigots he's trying to court for 2028."
John Ganz, the author of the newsletter Unpopular Front, simply said Vance is the "most repulsive person in politics, and there is stiff competition."
"Trump said he was 'entitled' to five more congressional seats in Texas," said California Gov. Gavin Newsom. "He started this redistricting war. He lost, and he’ll lose again in November."
The US Supreme Court on Wednesday dealt a major blow to President Donald Trump's mid-decade redistricting scheme when it refused to take up an emergency request by the California Republican Party to override an appeals court ruling that greenlit a newly redrawn congressional map in their state.
The court's decision came two months after it cleared the way for Texas to adopt a new map drawn up by state Republicans, which analysts have projected could net the GOP as many as five additional seats in the US House of Representatives.
California's initiative to redraw its map came as a direct rebuke to the Texas GOP, which pushed through its mid-decade partisan gerrymander at Trump's insistence. As drawn, the new California map is expected to balance out the redrawn Texas map by netting Democrats in the House five additional seats of their own.
California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, who led the charge to redraw his state's map, took a victory lap after the Supreme Court decision.
"Donald Trump said he was 'entitled' to five more congressional seats in Texas," Newsom wrote in a social media post. "He started this redistricting war. He lost, and he’ll lose again in November."
Attorney Norm Eisen, executive chairman of Democracy Defenders Fund, hailed the court's decision as a "huge, gigantic, enormous win" that will counter "Trump's attempt to steal congressional seats."
Trump’s unprecedented mid-decade redistricting crusade, which began in Texas and subsequently spread to Missouri and North Carolina, has been hit with major pushback from Democrat-controlled states.
In addition to California, Democrats in Virginia and Maryland are also working on redrawing their congressional maps to counter Trump's efforts ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
However, Trump and his allies have signaled that aggressive gerrymandering won't be the only trick they'll play to hold onto power in the 2026 midterms.
Right-wing podcaster and political strategist Steve Bannon claimed on Tuesday that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers will "surround" polling places in November, and Trump on Monday called on Republicans to "nationalize the voting" and take away states' power to conduct their own elections.