

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.

Tom Rosenthal, (212) 549-2582 or 549-2666; media@aclu.org
American Civil Liberties Union affiliates in 23 states today simultaneously filed more than 255 public records requests to determine the extent to which local police departments are using federally subsidized military technology and tactics that are traditionally used overseas.
"Equipping state and local law enforcement with military weapons and vehicles, military tactical training, and actual military assistance to conduct traditional law enforcement erodes civil liberties and encourages increasingly aggressive policing, particularly in poor neighborhoods and communities of color," said Kara Dansky, senior counsel for the ACLU's Center for Justice. "We've seen examples of this in several localities, but we don't know the dimensions of the problem."
The affiliates filed public records requests with local law enforcement agencies seeking information on the use of:
Special Weapons and Tactics teams, including:
- Number and purpose of deployments
- Types of weapons used during deployments
- Injuries sustained by civilians during deployments
- Training materials
- Funding sources.
Cutting edge weapons and technologies, including:
- GPS tracking devices
- Unmanned aerial vehicles, or "drones"
- Augmented detainee restraint, or "shock-cuffs"
- Military weaponry, equipment, and vehicles obtained from or funded by federal agencies such as the Departments of Defense and/or Homeland Security.
Affiliates filed a second request with state National Guards seeking information regarding:
- Cooperative agreements between local police departments and the National Guard counter-drug program
- Incidents of National Guard contact with civilians.
"The American people deserve to know how much our local police are using military weapons and tactics for everyday policing," said Allie Bohm, ACLU advocacy and policy strategist. "The militarization of local police is a threat to Americans' right to live without fear of military-style intervention in their daily lives, and we need to make sure these resources and tactics are deployed only with rigorous oversight and strong legal protections."
The affiliates which filed public records requests are: Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Once the information has been collected and analyzed, if needed, the ACLU will use the results to recommend changes in law and policy governing the use of military tactics and technology in local law enforcement.
More information can be found here:
www.aclu.org/militarization
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) 549-2666Researchers found that informing people of the benefits of taxpayer-funded goods and services significantly boosted public opinion of larger government, spending, and taxation.
A new study challenges the common assumption that Americans are preternaturally averse to higher taxation, showing that public attitudes become more favorable once people are made aware of the "universal benefits of public goods" funded by their tax dollars.
The study, conducted by Japanese researchers and published last month in the Japanese Economic Review, separated the US-based participants into a treatment group and a control group.
People in both groups were asked questions about their views on government size, spending, and taxation, but those in the treatment group were provided passages explaining the universal benefits of tax-funded transportation systems, public roads, trash disposal, and sewage infrastructure.
Researchers intentionally crafted the passages to highlight the benefits of universal goods, not means-tested programs targeted at low-income Americans.
Before and after reading the above passages, participants in the treatment group were asked: "How much of your taxes do you think are used for public goods and services that benefit all of you?"
They were also asked whether they agree with the following statement: "Regardless of income, everyone in the US more or less benefits from public spending."
The researchers found that the treatment passages substantially increased support for public spending, larger government, and higher taxes among study participants.
After consuming the provided information on the benefits of public goods, nearly 64% of those in the treatment group said they would support an across-the-board tax increase of 1%. In the control group, support was significantly lower at 52.5%.
"If people become aware that more public goods are provided than they previously thought, the government might politically achieve more redistribution through expanding its size without reducing policy progressivity," the study authors wrote. "Although we focused on transportation and trash disposal systems, governments provide other public goods. Exploring how our results may or may not generalize to other public goods would be interesting."
The study was published amid a growing national debate over the for-profit US healthcare system, with Democrats pushing for an extension of tax credits that help millions of Americans afford private insurance plans while Republicans float vague and unworkable alternatives.
Congressional progressives, for their part, have used the healthcare fight to elevate their case for Medicare for All, the only plan on offer that would secure universal healthcare—and at a lower overall cost than the status quo.
Opponents of Medicare for All—which would eliminate premiums, copays, and deductibles—have balked at the taxes Americans would have to pay to fund comprehensive health coverage for everyone in the United States.
But the Japanese Economic Review study suggests that US public opinion on taxes is malleable, particularly when people are informed of the benefits of universal programs.
The president dismissed a question about the CIA's finding that Mohammed bin Salman ordered the killing of a journalist, saying the writer was someone "a lot of people didn't like."
A US-based journalist and human rights defender was dismissed as someone "a lot of people didn't like," and the Saudi crown prince who US intelligence experts found had likely ordered the writer's killing was applauded as "one of the most respected people in the world."
That was President Donald Trump's assessment of Washington Post columnist and Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi, who was assassinated in 2018, and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on Tuesday at a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House.
Trump and bin Salman met to discuss a range of topics, from a US sale of F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia to agreements on minerals and artificial intelligence.
Bin Salman also told the president he would increase Saudi investment in the US from $600 billion to $1 trillion.
The BBC reported that Trump "bask[ed]" in the $1 trillion pledge, telling the prince it was an "honor" to be his friend and saying the US "very much appreciate[s]" the investment.
"We're doing numbers no one has ever done," Trump said.
ABC News reporter Mary Bruce asked Trump about his family's business interests in Saudi Arabia and questioned whether the bilateral deals presented a conflict of interest, before pointedly asking bin Salman about the Central Intelligence Agency's finding in 2021 that the prince had likely personally ordered the killing of Khashoggi.
"Your royal highness, the US intelligence concluded that you ordered the brutal murder of a journalist," said Bruce. "Why should Americans trust you?"
Trump was visibly angered by the question and demanded to know what outlet Bruce was with before telling her ABC was "fake news" and calling her comment “horrible, insubordinate, and just a terrible question."
"He knew nothing about it," said the president, contradicting the government's findings.
Khashoggi responded to Bruce, saying, "It's really painful to hear anyone losing his life for no real purpose or not in a legal way."
Trump, said former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, will "overlook the murder of Jamal Khashoggi to pad his pockets and boost the bottom line of the military industrial complex."
Following Trump's comments, Democrats on the US House Intelligence Committee posted a link to the federal report that detailed bin Salman's involvement in the killing of Khashoggi.
US Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) called Trump's warm welcome to bin Salman "outrageous and disgusting."
"Tyrants around the world are celebrating," said McGovern. "After all, why would they hesitate to kill dissidents outside of their borders if the Saudis are allowed to get away with it?"
"Congress and regulators must finally step in and crack down on anticompetitive behavior, opening markets, requiring interoperability, and ensuring smaller tech firms can compete," said one advocate.
Just weeks after major Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure outages, Cloudflare on Tuesday became the latest company to "break the internet," prompting consumer watchdogs to take aim at Big Tech and call out industry consolidation.
"This outage is another brutal reminder that the internet is far too dependent on a tiny handful of tech giants," said Public Citizen's Big Tech accountability advocate, J.B. Branch, in a statement. "For years, industry lobbyists have insisted that deregulation would spark innovation from smaller companies. Instead, we got the opposite: mass consolidation of data, compute, and infrastructure into the hands of a few dominant firms whose failures now cascade across the globe."
"Governments and companies continuing to contract with the same handful of companies are increasing the fragility of both the internet and entire economies," Branch continued. "Congress and regulators must finally step in and crack down on anticompetitive behavior, opening markets, requiring interoperability, and ensuring smaller tech firms can compete so the entire digital economy isn't held hostage by the failures of a few dominant companies."
After Amazon's outage last month, Public Citizen and other groups—including the American Economic Liberties Project, Demand Progress Education Fund, and Tech Oversight Project—called on Federal Trade Commission Chair Andrew Ferguson "to swiftly conduct a market structure review of leading cloud services providers, including but not limited to Amazon, to assess how their market dominance and use of monopoly power to stifle competition is creating systemic fragility across industries."
"Big Tech is clearly creating systemic dangers that warrant proactive oversight and aggressive intervention by the FTC, on behalf of the American people and as soon as possible."
"This probe should also examine dependencies of key sectors (such as financial services, telecommunications, and government services) on any single cloud provider and the extent to which those dependencies pose systemic risks to data security and privacy and consumer protection, as well as to our open markets and the resilience of our national and global infrastructure systems," the coalition argued. "We urge you to then take robust agency action to counter these systemic dangers, particularly to bring diversification to the cloud industry."
"Given the enormous stakes, the FTC should not defer action until the next crisis—the FTC has the mandate, the requisite knowledge, and the legal authorities to tackle this challenge now," the coalition concluded. "Big Tech is clearly creating systemic dangers that warrant proactive oversight and aggressive intervention by the FTC, on behalf of the American people and as soon as possible."
Just a few weeks later, the Cloudflare outage on Tuesday impacted websites including ChatGPT, Coinbase, Dropbox, X, Shopify, Spotify, Zoom, the Moody credit ratings service, and many more. According to Cloudflare, the San Francisco-based company offers over 60 cloud services globally, and it protects "20% of all websites."
In a statement to Forbes, a company spokesperson said that "the root cause of the outage was a configuration file that is automatically generated to manage threat traffic. The file grew beyond an expected size of entries and triggered a crash in the software system that handles traffic for a number of Cloudflare’s services."
Stressing that there is "no evidence that this was the result of an attack or caused by malicious activity," the spokesperson added that "we expect that some Cloudflare services will be briefly degraded as traffic naturally spikes post incident but we expect all services to return to normal in the next few hours."
Cloudflare also said on X—which is now working again—that "we always strive to be as transparent as possible in these types of situations, and we will be publishing an in-depth blog shortly."
Meanwhile, Demand Progress Education Fund highlighted the coalition's recent letter to the FTC, and Emily Peterson-Cassin, the group's policy director, said that "yet again, a failure at one company disrupted the lives of people all around the globe."
"Big Tech's relentless drive to become the only fish in the pond and centralize the internet in their hands threatens our economy and our national security," she added. "The FTC has the knowledge and the power to help prevent this from happening again. For all our sakes, the agency must take action immediately."