

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.

Noah Greenwald, (503) 484-7495
In response to a scientific petition from the Center for Biological Diversity and other groups, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today found that protection of 374 freshwater species in 12 southeastern states may be warranted under the Endangered Species Act. The decision was made in accordance with a historic settlement agreement reached this summer between the Center and the government to push 757 of the country's least protected, but most imperiled, species toward Endangered Species Act protection.
"With today's finding that 374 southeastern freshwater species will be considered for Endangered Species Act protection, it's clear the Fish and Wildlife Service is finally taking action to help hundreds of American species that desperately need a lifeline," said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director with the Center. "Like so many species in our ever-more crowded world, these 374 species face a multitude of threats to their survival -- habitat destruction, pollution, climate change and pressure from invasive species."
The 374 include 89 species of crayfish and other crustaceans; 81 plants; 78 mollusks; 51 butterflies, moths, caddisflies and other insects; 43 fish; 13 amphibians; 12 reptiles, four mammals and three birds. They are found in 12 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida,Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.
Included among the 374 species are the Florida sandhill crane, streamside salamander, Alabama map turtle, beautiful crayfish, clam-shell orchid, cobblestone tiger beetle, frecklebelly madtom and the Canoe Creek pigtoe.
"The Southeast is home to more freshwater species than anywhere else in the world. Tragically, the region has already lost many of them to extinction," Greenwald said. "Endangered Species Act protection for these remaining species will help stem the tide of extinction and herald the beginning of a new era of species protection in the Southeast."
As documented in the petition, southeastern freshwater species are threatened by many forces that have altered, and continue to alter, the region's waterways, such as dams, pollution, sprawl, poor agricultural practices, invasive species and a warming climate.
"Protecting these species will also protect rivers and streams that are a source of drinking water and recreation for Southeast communities," said Greenwald. "Endangered Species Act protection will not just save these species from extinction but benefit millions of people."
Groups that joined the Center on the petition included Alabama Rivers Alliance, Clinch Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, Gulf Restoration Network, Tennessee Forests Council and West Virginia Highlands Conservancy.
Additional Information
For a copy of today's finding, more information on our campaign to address the Southeast freshwater extinction crisis, a copy of the petition, a list of species by state and a slideshow of a sample of the species, please visit:
For more information on our landmark settlement agreement, please visit:
https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/biodiversity/species_agreement/index.html
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252"Just so you all understand what our vice tyrant is saying here this means ICE is allowed to shoot and kill Americans with ZERO consequences," said one advocate.
When Vice President JD Vance told reporters at a press briefing Thursday that Jonathan Ross, the federal immigration agent who was filmed fatally shooting Renee Good in Minneapolis, has "absolute immunity," he was not referring to any recognized statute in United States law, according to legal experts.
Instead, said Human Rights Campaign press secretary Brandon Wolf, "masked federal agents who can gun people down with 'absolute immunity' is called fascism."
Vance addressed reporters at the White House the day after Good was fatally shot at close range while serving as a legal observer of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) surge of federal agents in Minneapolis, where the Trump administration is targeting members of the Somali community in particular.
Widely available footage taken by onlookers shows ICE agents including Ross approaching the car and, according to at least one witness, giving her conflicting instructions, with one ordering her to leave the area and another telling her to get out of the car. The wheel of Good's car was seen turning as she began to drive away, just before Ross fired his weapon at least three times.
President Donald Trump, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Vance immediately blamed Good for her death, saying she had committed an act of domestic terrorism and had tried to run Ross over with her car.
Vance doubled down on Thursday when a reporter asked him why state officials in Minnesota were being cut off from investigating Good's death—a fact that has left the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, which had been planning to launch a probe, with few tools to bring a case to prosecutors.
The vice president said Minnesota prosecutors should instead investigate people who "are using their vehicles and other means" to interfere with ICE's operations before claiming that Ross is protected from being held accountable for his actions.
"That guy's protected by absolute immunity," said Vance. "He was doing his job. The idea that [Minnesota Gov.] Tim Walz and a bunch of radicals in Minneapolis are going to go after him and make this guy's life miserable because he was doing the job that he was asked to do is preposterous."
Vance: He is protected by absolute immunity. He was doing his job. The idea that Tim Walz and a bunch of radicals are going to go after him and make his life miserable because he was doing the job that he was asked to do is preposterous. pic.twitter.com/AfwpFvhLsC
— Acyn (@Acyn) January 8, 2026
Robert Bennett, a veteran lawyer in Minneapolis, told Mother Jones that he has worked on hundreds of cases regarding federal law enforcement misconduct.
"I’ve deposed thousands of police officers,” he said. “ICE agents do not have absolute immunity.”
He continued:
There’s plenty of case law that allows for the prosecution of federal law enforcement agencies, including ICE. And it’s clear under the law that a federal officer who shoots somebody in Minnesota and kills them is subject to a Minnesota investigation and Minnesota law.
Constitutional law expert Michael J.Z. Mannheimer of Northern Kentucky University told CNN that more than a century of legal precedent has shown that state prosecutors can file charges against federal officials for actions they take while completing their official duties.
“The idea that a federal agent has absolute immunity for crimes they commit on the job is absolutely ridiculous,” Mannheimer said.
Should the state take up the case, Ross could attempt to raise an immunity argument if he were able to move the case to a federal court, where a judge would then conduct a two-part analysis—determining whether Ross was acting in his official capacity and whether his action was "reasonable" considering all the facts on the ground, gathered from video evidence and eyewitness testimony.
While holding Ross accountable may be an uphill battle, former federal prosecutor Timothy Sini told CNN, "officers are not entitled to absolute immunity as a matter of law," contrary to Vance's claim.
Gun control advocate David Hogg called the vice president's comments "insanely dangerous."
"Just so you all understand what our vice tyrant is saying here this means ICE is allowed to shoot and kill Americans with ZERO consequences," said Hogg. "It’s important to note that absolute immunity is something that basically no cop gets. It goes even beyond qualified immunity."
Police officers are typically shielded from liability for civil damages by qualified immunity, provided they can prove their actions did not violate "clearly established" constitutional rights. "Absolute immunity" is typically applied to judges, prosecutors, and legislators who are acting within their official duties.
On Friday, US Reps. Dan Goldman (D-NY) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) announced they would introduce a bill aimed at stripping ICE officers of qualified immunity.
Goldman noted that under current law, it would be difficult to prosecute an ICE agent because the legal standard "allows for the officer’s own view to carry a lot of weight.”
"So what this bill does is only for civil enforcement officers—not criminal enforcement officers who are dealing with real bad guys, not moms driving cars—it would say that it’s an objective test,” he said on a podcast by the New Republic. “And if you are acting completely outside of your duties and responsibilities, you don’t have immunity from a civil lawsuit, and you don’t have a defense from a criminal charge.”
Goldman added that the bill would make clear that ICE agents' "only authority is to investigate and civilly arrest immigrants for immigration violations."
“And so they should have never been in the situation they were in, where they were trying to take a woman out of a car," he said. "That was not part of what they should be doing. They could ask her to move if they needed to. It doesn’t look like from the video that she was doing anything that was obstructing them.”
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, who has expressed outrage over Good's killing and demanded that ICE leave the city immediately, called Vance's claims about absolute immunity "pretty bizarre" and "extremely concerning" in comments to reporters on Friday, and called on the press to "get to a point where we're not trusting everything that [administration officials] are saying."
"That's not true in any law school in America, whether it's Yale or Villanova or anywhere else," said Frey. "That's not true. If you break the law, if you do things that are outside the outside the area of what your job responsibilities require, and this clearly seems to be at the very least, at the very least, this is gray... This is a problem and it should be investigated."
Frey: I think he also asserted that because you work at the federal government that you somehow have absolute immunity from committing crimes. That's not true in any law school in America, whether it's Yale or Villanova or anywhere else. That's not true pic.twitter.com/kqEwYdeVMI
— Acyn (@Acyn) January 9, 2026
Vance's comments, said political scientist Norman Ornstein, made clear that "we are in a police state."
"The notion expressed by Trump, Vance and Noem that there is absolute immunity for a cold blooded murder if it’s carried out by one of their agents is the final straw," he said. "If we do not turn this around, we are done for as a free society and a decent country."
"It is especially pathetic that, once again, his administration's actions are inflicting harm on the most vulnerable among us," said California Attorney General Rob Bonta.
The Democratic attorneys general of California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York on Thursday sued President Donald Trump's administration over its "extraordinary and cruel action to immediately freeze $10 billion in federal funds that plaintiff states use to help provide services and cash assistance that allow families to access food, safe housing, and childcare."
Amid a childcare funding fraud scandal in Minnesota, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on Tuesday announced the halt on a total of around $7.35 billion for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, $2.4 billion for the Child Care and Development Fund, and $870 million for social services grants for those five Democrat-led states.
The states' complaint, filed in the Southern District of New York, says that the department and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., along with the Administration for Children and Families and its leader, Alex Adams, "have no statutory or constitutional authority to do this. Nor do they have any justification for this action beyond a desire to punish plaintiff states for their political leadership. The action is thus clearly unlawful many times over."
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison argued that "withholding all funding for these vital programs will not help fight fraud as purported, and will instead shred the finances of Minnesotans already struggling to get by. Without childcare assistance, poor families will be forced to choose between parents going to work and paying their bills or staying home to provide childcare during their working hours. And it's not just families who benefit from these programs that will suffer."
"Minnesota's entire childcare system will be put under immense strain if childcare centers lose the funding provided by these programs, which could force centers to lay off staff or close their doors entirely," Ellison warned. "This extreme outcome is not just cruel, it's also another example of the Trump administration going off the rails and deciding not to follow the processes and mechanisms Congress put in place to manage federal grants in a responsible way."
"Federal laws and regulations give a roadmap for reasonable, legal ways to audit funding programs and address areas of potential noncompliance, but this 'funding freeze' takes a chainsaw to the entire system without regard to who it hurts," the former congressman stressed. "I will not allow that to happen, so today I am filing a lawsuit to halt these cuts and protect families across Minnesota from Trump's heartless attack on low-income families."
BREAKING--We have filed our 50th lawsuit against the Trump Administration, challenging its illegal and harmful actions. It addresses the withholding of funds for the neediest among us, including access to child care. I will always fight for Colorado. www.axios.com/local/denver...
[image or embed]
— Phil Weiser (@philweiser.bsky.social) January 9, 2026 at 11:18 AM
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Wednesday that at least one other targeted state is being investigated. She said that "the president has directed all agencies across the board to look at federal spending programs in not just Minnesota, but also in the state of California to identify fraud and to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law all those who have committed it."
After the federal suit was filed, HHS General Counsel Mike Stuart said that the department "stands by its decision to take this action to defend American taxpayers" and "it's unfortunate that these attorney generals from these Democrat-led states are less focused on reducing fraud and more focused on partisan political stunts."
Meanwhile, California Attorney General Rob Bonta—who has now taken the Trump administration to court over 50 times—declared that "the American people are sick and tired of President Trump's lawlessness, lies, and misinformation campaigns."
"It is especially pathetic that, once again, his administration's actions are inflicting harm on the most vulnerable among us," he said. "As a society, we are rightly judged by how we treat our neighbors in need, and this is a shameful way to treat them."
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul similarly ripped the funding freeze as not only "unlawful" but "particularly callous," while New York's Letitia James also highlighted that "once again, the most vulnerable families in our communities are bearing the brunt of this administration’s campaign of chaos and retribution."
"After jeopardizing food assistance and healthcare, this administration is now threatening to cut off childcare and other critical programs that parents depend on to provide for their children," James continued. "As New Yorkers struggle with the rising cost of living, I will not allow this administration to play political games with the resources families need to help make ends meet.”
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser emphasized that "the US Constitution does not permit the president to single out states for punishment based on their exercise of core sovereign powers," and vowed that "the administration cannot punish Colorado into submission."
In addition to being blasted by leaders from the five targeted states, the funding freeze has been condemned by a growing number of elected officials across the country. US Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) noted Friday that the move could impact nearly 340,000 children.
"At a time when our childcare system is already struggling, this will be a disaster for working parents and their kids," Sanders said. "This illegal order must be rescinded."
“This is the mind of a fascist,” said a former official of the first Trump administration.
As he uses the military to extort Venezuela and threatens to wage war against half a dozen other nations, President Donald Trump stated plainly this week that there are no restraints on his power to use force to dominate and subjugate any country on the planet besides his own will.
Asked by the New York Times whether there were any limits on his ability to use military force in his ambitions toward "American supremacy," and a return to 19th-century imperial conquest, he told the paper, which published excerpts from the interview Thursday: "Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
Trump’s attack on Venezuela and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro last weekend, his floating of military force to annex Greenland this week, and his repeated threats to bomb Iran in recent days have all been described as blatant affronts to international law and what remains of the “rules-based” global order.
The president told the Times, “I don’t need international law. I’m not looking to hurt people.” He seemed to backpedal momentarily when pressed about whether his administration needed to follow international law, saying, "I do." But the Times reports that the president "made clear he would be the arbiter when such constraints applied to the United States."
“It depends what your definition of international law is,” Trump said.
If statements by other top officials are any guide, the administration's "definition" of international law is more akin to the law of the jungle than anything to do with treaties or UN Security Council resolutions.
In an interview earlier this week, senior adviser Stephen Miller, reportedly one of the architects of Trump's campaign of extrajudicial boat bombings in the Caribbean, laid out a view of the president's power that amounts to little more than "might makes right."
Speaking of Trump's supposed unquestioned right to use military force against Greenland and Venezuela, Miller told CNN anchor Jake Tapper: “The United States is using its military to secure our interests unapologetically in our hemisphere. We’re a superpower, and under President Trump, we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower. It is absurd that we would allow a nation in our backyard to become the supplier of resources to our adversaries but not to us.”
Miller added that “the future of the free world depends on America to be able to assert ourselves and our interests without an apology.”
The United Nations Charter expressly forbids "the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state."
Yet in recent days, Trump has also threatened to carry out strikes against Colombia and Mexico, while his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, suggested a similar operation to the one that deposed Maduro could soon be carried out against Cuba's socialist government, which US presidents have sought to topple for nearly seven decades.
In a Fox News interview on Thursday, Trump stated that the US would "start now hitting land" in Mexico as part of operations against drug cartels. The nation's president, Claudia Sheinbaum—who has overseen a dramatic fall in cartel violence since she took office in 2024—has said that such strikes would violate Mexico's status as an "independent and sovereign country."
To Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, Trump’s assertion of limitless authority sounded like “the dangerous words of a would-be dictator.”
"Trump says he is constrained not by the law but only by his 'own morality,'" Roth said. "Since he values self-aggrandizement above all else, he is describing an unbridled presidency guided only by his ego and whims."
In recent days, the White House has sought to punish those who suggest that members of the US military should not follow illegal orders given by the president.
Earlier this week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that he would seek to strip retirement pay from Sen. Mark Kelly (Ariz.), a retired Navy captain who last year spoke in a video reminding active duty soldiers that their foremost duty is to the law rather than the president. Trump has referred to these comments as "seditious behavior" and called for Kelly and other members of Congress who took part in the video to be executed.
The White House has repeatedly asserted that because Trump is the commander-in-chief of the military, any orders he gives are legal by definition.
For Miles Taylor, who served as chief of staff for the Department of Homeland Security during Trump's first term, the president's latest claim to hold unquestioned authority called to mind a warning from Gen. John Kelly, who also served in the first Trump White House as its chief of staff.
In the lead-up to the 2024 election, Kelly told The Atlantic that Trump fits the definition of "a fascist" and that the president would frequently complain that his generals were not more like “German generals,” who he said were “totally loyal” to Hitler.
"John Kelly was right," Turner said on Thursday. "This is the mind of a fascist."
While Trump's comments left her worried about a return to an "age of imperialism," Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, said that the president's sense of impunity is unsurprising given the recent toothlessness of international law in dealing with the actions of rogue states, specifically Israel's genocide in Gaza.
“International law cannot stop states from doing terrible things if they’re committed to doing them,” Satterthwaite told Al Jazeera. “And I think that the world is aware of all of the atrocities that have happened in Gaza recently, and despite efforts by many states and certainly by the UN to stop those atrocities, they continued. But I think we’re worse off if we don’t insist on the international law that does exist. We’ll simply be going down a much worse kind of slippery slope.”