

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.
Lawyers for four Guantanamo detainees have criticised the Obama administration's "equivocal" response over whether daytime force-feeding will take place during Ramadan, and warned that the prison may become "a veritable force-feeding factory" during the religious period.
Lawyers for four Guantanamo detainees have criticised the Obama administration's "equivocal" response over whether daytime force-feeding will take place during Ramadan, and warned that the prison may become "a veritable force-feeding factory" during the religious period.
In a reply filed today to the Government's response to court proceedings brought by the four men, Guantanamo counsel Cori Crider, of human rights charity Reprieve, and Jon B Eisenberg propose that the US Government should consent to a court-enforceable decree to ensure that detainees' religious rights are not violated.
They argue that this is necessary as Government lawyers have remained "silent...as to how they might implement nighttime-only force-feeding," and as, given the high number currently being force-fed, "nighttime-only force-feeding seems problematic at best and possibly even dangerous to petitioners' health."
US authorities have claimed that they intend to only force-feed during the night, in order to avoid breaking the daytime fast which is the central feature of Ramadan. However, Lt. Col Todd Breasseale, a Pentagon spokesman, told CNN this week that doing so "is an accommodation, not a right."
Crider and Eisenberg add that, based on Guantanamo authorities' own numbers, there will be "just 10 hours and 44 minutes [between sunset and sunrise] for respondents to implement two force-feedings of 45 detainees for up to an hour of feeding time and four hours of total observation time per detainee" which "could require dozens of restraint chairs and hundreds of staff."
They warn that "if this can even be achieved, Guantanamo Bay will become a veritable force-feeding factory" and therefore propose "that respondents agree to a consent decree, enforceable by this Court, which will have the legal effect of securing the detainees' rights to observe the Ramadan fast and to refuse the administration of [anti-nausea drug] Reglan."
The attorneys for the four detainees - Shaker Aamer, Nabil Hadjarab, Ahmed Belbacha and Abu Wa'el Dhiab - also take issue with the Government lawyers' claim that "the public interest lies with maintaining the status quo," pointing to President Obama's recent description of Guantanamo as "a symbol around the world for an America that flouts the rule of law."
"We submit," say Crider and Eisenberg, "that America's public interest lies not in force-feeding the petitioners to prolong their indefinite detention, but in either trial or release as 'ready alternatives' to force-feeding." They note that the US Government "insist[s] that petitioners' force-feeding is necessary to prevent them from 'lay[ing] waste to their bodies,'" and in response state that "Petitioners' indefinite detention, however, is laying waste to their souls."
ENDS
1. For further information, please contact Donald Campbell in Reprieve's press office: +44 (0) 207 553 8166 / 7791 755 415 / donald.campbell@reprieve.org.uk
2. The full document is available on request. The argument on overnight feeding during Ramadan is as follows:
Perhaps tellingly, respondents do not disclaim any prolonged administration of Reglan to other detainees, saying only vaguely that Reglan is "very rarely used."
With regard to force-feeding during Ramadan, respondents offer an equivocal assurance that, "absent any unforeseen emergency or operational issues, Joint Task Force-Guantanamo ('JTF-GTMO') plans" to force-feed detainees only before dawn and after sunset. Resp.'s Opp. at 1-2 (emphasis added). Respondents are silent, however, as to how they might implement nighttime-only force-feeding. See id. at 17-18. Given the number currently being force-fed, which respondents now say is 45 detainees, see id. at 2, nighttime-only force-feeding seems problematic at best and possibly even dangerous to the detainees' health.
According to respondents' regulations, the force-feedings "are usually done two times a day" and are "[t]ypically" completed "over 20 to 30 minutes," and the detainee is then placed in a " 'dry cell' " without access to water "for 45-60 minutes"--unless he vomits or attempts to vomit, in which case he can remain in the restraint chair for up to two hours. Joint Task Force Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Joint Medical Group, Medical Management of Detainees on Hunger Strike at 18 (March 5, 2013.) On July 9, 2013-- the first full day of Ramadan this year--sunrise at Guantanamo Bay is at 6:28 a.m. and sunset is at 7:44 p.m. See Climatology: Sunrise/Sunset for Guantanamo Bay NAS, Cuba, https://in.weather.com/climate/sunRiseSunSet-Guantanamo-Bay-NASCUXX0016. That leaves just 10 hours and 44 minutes for respondents to implement two force-feedings of 45 detainees for up to an hour of feeding time and four hours of total observation time per detainee, which could require dozens of restraint chairs and hundreds of staff.
If this can even be achieved, Guantanamo Bay will become a veritable force-feeding factory. And the fasting detainees, who may not take water during the daylight hours of Ramadan, will be spending up to four more nighttime hours without access to water as well as being under physical restraint, putting them at substantial risk of dehydration and sleep deprivation.
...
We therefore propose that respondents agree to a consent decree, enforceable by this Court, which will have the legal effect of securing the detainees' rights to observe the Ramadan fast and to refuse the administration of Reglan. Absent a consent decree, petitioners' observation of the Ramadan fast will depend on the government's largess and its ability to overcome numerous and repeatedly-acknowledged "operational issues." Resp.'s Opp. at 2, 5, 17, exh. 1 at 6.
We also note that respondents have rebuffed petitioners' assertion of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), see Appl. for Prelim. Inj. at 19-20, merely by citing Rasul v. Myers, 563 F.3d 527, 532 (D.C. Cir. 2009) for the proposition that "non-resident aliens are not protected 'persons' within the meaning of RFRA." Resp.'s Opp. at 18. Respondents do not address petitioners' point that this issue has been revived by Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010). See Appl. for Prelim. Inj. at 19-20.) And it hardly advances international respect for American democracy when the Supreme Court treats corporations as "persons" but the President insists that the Guantanamo Bay detainees are not.
Reprieve is a UK-based human rights organization that uses the law to enforce the human rights of prisoners, from death row to Guantanamo Bay.
"This agency cannot continue to exist," said Rep. Rob Menendez of ICE.
Two US immigration enforcement officers are now under federal investigation after it was revealed that they seem to have lied about the circumstances that led up to the shooting of a Venezuelan immigrant last month.
As reported by Politico on Friday, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons acknowledged that two federal officers appear "to have made untruthful statements" about a confrontation in Minneapolis in January that culminated in one of the officers shooting Venezuelan national Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis in the leg.
The officers claimed that Sosa-Celis and another Venezuelan immigrant, Alfredo Aljorna, assaulted them with a broom and a shovel, which forced one of the officers to open fire in self-defense.
While the two men had been charged with assaulting the officers in the wake of the shooting, charges against them were abruptly dismissed on Thursday when prosecutors revealed that "newly discovered evidence in this matter is materially inconsistent with the allegations" made under oath by the officers.
Lyons said that the US Department of Justice (DOJ) is now investigating the two officers, who have been placed on administrative leave until the probe concludes.
US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem last month defended the officers and parroted their claims about the shooting.
"What we saw last night in Minneapolis was an attempted murder of federal law enforcement," Noem claimed. "Our officer was ambushed and attacked by three individuals who beat him with snow shovels and the handles of brooms. Fearing for his life, the officer fired a defensive shot."
Noem has come under fire in recent weeks for lying about shootings involving federal immigration officials, such as when she falsely claimed that slain Minneapolis intensive care nurse Alex Pretti was aiming "to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement" while filming officers' activities.
In reality, video footage showed Pretti never drew his handgun during his deadly confrontation with federal immigration officers, while also clearly showing that officers disarmed him before they opened fire.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said that the newly uncovered evidence in Sosa-Celis' case showed that the officer not only didn't discharge his weapon in self-defense, but he "fired his gun through a closed door, striking the people inside."
The Minnesota House of Representatives Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) Caucus accused federal immigration agents of systematically lying to cover up unjustified shootings.
"They’re hiding evidence, stifling investigations, and fabricating information," wrote the Minnesota House DFL on social media. "They’re lying to your face. We won’t let them get away with it—Minnesotans deserve justice."
US Rep. Rob Menedez (D-NJ) said that lying appears to be endemic in the entire Trump administration.
"The Trump administration has consistently lied about ICE's violent acts toward Americans and the abuses that this agency perpetuates every day," he wrote. "They aren't afraid to lie about members of Congress, and they certainly aren't afraid to lie about any American they have killed, shot, or assaulted. This agency cannot continue to exist."
"It is of the utmost urgency that we get our economic houses in order and deliver material gains for the working class."
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Friday made a pitch for a "working-class-centered politics" as the key to defeating the kind of authoritarian populism embodied by President Donald Trump.
Speaking at a panel at the Munich Security Conference in Germany, Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said that decades of government failures such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the 2003 Iraq War had opened the door for demagogues such as Trump among working-class voters.
The only way to defeat this, she said, is to reorient progressive politics around social class.
"We have to have a working-class-centered politics if we are going to succeed," she said, "and also if we are going to stave off the scourge of authoritarianism, which provide political siren calls to allure people into finding scapegoats to blame for rising economic inequality, both domestically and globally."
AOC: We have to have a working class centered politics, if we are going to succeed and also if we are going to stave off the scourges of authoritarianism which provide political siren calls to allure people into finding scapegoats to blame for rising economic inequality pic.twitter.com/USqgTk3brd
— Acyn (@Acyn) February 13, 2026
Elsewhere during the panel, Ocasio-Cortez elaborated on the way economic inequality fuels the demand for authoritarian leaders.
"We're seeing, in economy across economy around the world, including in the United States," she said, "that extreme levels of income inequality lead to social instability and drives in a sense in authoritarianism, right-wing populism and very dangerous domestic internal politics. And that is a direct outcome of, not just income inequality, but the failure of democracies over decades to deliver, the failure to deliver higher wages, the failure to rein in corporations."
AOC: We’re seeing economies around the world — including in the United States — where extreme levels of income inequality lead to social instability and, in a sense, drive authoritarianism…
That is a direct outcome not just of income inequality, but of the failure of… pic.twitter.com/0EHsbyqdFK
— Acyn (@Acyn) February 13, 2026
The New York Democrat argued that the situation had grown so dire that many corporate CEOs now had more power and influence than democratically elected leaders.
"When massive corporations begin to consume the public sector and gobble up public spending, they start to call the shots," she said. "And we’re starting to see this with some members of the billionaire class throwing their weight around in domestic and global politics."
Given this situation, Ocasio-Cortez added, "it is of the utmost urgency that we get our economic houses in order and deliver material gains for the working class," or else "we will fall into a more isolated world governed by authoritarians who also do not deliver for working people."
“Every antitrust case in front of the Trump Justice Department now reeks of double-dealing," said Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Thursday raised alarm over what she described as the highly suspicious circumstances surrounding Gail Slater's ouster as the Trump administration's top antitrust official, a move that was cheered by Wall Street investors and lobbyists working to shield corporate monopolists.
"It looks like corruption," Warren (D-Mass.) said in a statement after Slater announced her departure on Thursday following a behind-the-scenes power struggle with pro-corporate Trump officials. "A small army of MAGA-aligned lawyers and lobbyists have been trying to sell off merger approvals that will increase prices and harm innovation to the highest bidder."
“Every antitrust case in front of the Trump Justice Department now reeks of double-dealing," the senator added, noting that Live Nation—the owner of Ticketmaster—saw its stock price surge following news of Slater's removal.
“Americans’ top concern is affordability, but one of Trump’s few bipartisan-supported nominees—the top law enforcement official responsible for stopping illegal monopolies and protecting American consumers—was just ousted," said Warren. "Congress has a responsibility to unearth exactly what happened and hold the Trump administration accountable.”
In recent weeks, Live Nation has been in talks with top Justice Department officials to avoid an antitrust trial that's supposed to begin next month. The negotiations have reportedly bypassed the DOJ antitrust division previously headed by Slater, who was once viewed as the leader of a supposedly burgeoning "MAGA antitrust movement" but was abandoned by her top ally within the Trump administration, Vice President JD Vance, and forced out.
Influence peddlers reportedly on Live Nation's payroll include Mike Davis—who welcomed Slater's departure in a post on social media—and Kellyanne Conway, a former adviser to President Donald Trump. The American Prospect noted that Davis "reportedly earned a $1 million 'success fee' for getting DOJ to drop its challenge to the $14 billion Hewlett Packard Enterprise-Juniper Networks merger," a settlement in which Attorney General Pam Bondi's chief of staff overruled Slater.
"Davis also earned at least $1 million by persuading the Justice Department to allow a merger between Compass and Anywhere Real Estate, the two largest real estate brokerages by volume in 2024, despite objections from antitrust division attorneys," according to the Prospect.
One of Slater's deputies who was fired from the antitrust division last year later alleged that lobbyists are effectively dictating antitrust policy at the DOJ under Bondi's leadership.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), the former chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights, said Thursday that Slater's removal represents "a major loss for bipartisan antitrust enforcement."
"She received significant bipartisan support in the Senate and has continued important cases brought by administrations of both parties, including winning a landmark monopolization case against Google and preparing the vital case to break up Live Nation-Ticketmaster for trial next month,” said Klobuchar. “Her departure raises significant concerns about this administration’s commitment to enforcing the antitrust laws for the betterment of consumers and small businesses, including seeing through its cases against monopolies.”