

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.

A coalition of consumer rights, community, and environmental organizations filed a motion today with a federal court in Minnesota seeking to intervene in a case recently filed by the American Farm Bureau Federation (FB) and the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The industry groups went to court in July 2013 seeking to prevent EPA from releasing data related to factory farms and their pollution to the American public under the nation's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The case is based on the industry's far-fetched claim that factory farm business information - such as business names and addresses - is private information that should be shielded from public view, unlike in virtually all other business sectors.
"The Farm Bureau, National Pork Producers Council, and other industry lobby groups have managed for years to keep the highly polluting practices of factory farms under wraps," stated Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. "Now, they want a federal court to promote this secrecy by ordering EPA to withhold even basic information - the identities and contact information of owners and operators of these facilities - from the hands of the American people."
Environmental Integrity Project, Food & Water Watch and Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement are asking the court to allow them to intervene in the case so that they can protect the rights of citizens to safeguard their waterways and communities from the many detrimental impacts of the factory farm industry represented by FB and NPPC. The groups are being represented by attorneys from the Government Accountability Project.
Industry sued EPA following the Agency's recent release of factory farm data in response to a pair of FOIA requests filed by environmental organizations. The groups sought information about EPA's July 2012 decision to abandon a proposed information-gathering rule for factory farms, also known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs. EPA withdrew the proposed "308" rule in its entirety due to industry pressure, though the rule would have enabled the Agency to finally begin to catalogue these facilities and their ongoing threats to our waterways. EPA instead opted to collect existing state and federal records, despite recent government reports that confirm state data is "inconsistent and inaccurate and does not provide EPA with the reliable data it needs..." and that "no federal agency collects accurate and consistent data on the number, size, and location of CAFOs." At present, EPA can only guess at the number of CAFOs in the country.
Although it successfully pressured EPA to abandon its rule, industry opposed the Agency's sharing of public records related to its actions. EPA responded to this request in April by recalling all of the FOIA data that it released to the environmental groups and replacing it with a new set of data after redacting the names of CAFO facilities "that include individual names." The industry groups now want to establish an EPA policy of withholding such information.
The environmental groups submitted FOIAs for records related to EPA's withdrawn rule because for years EPA has failed to adequately regulate water pollution from CAFOs, despite the Agency's acknowledgment that "[a]gricultural operations, including CAFOs, now account for a significant share of the remaining water pollution problems in the United States."
Factory farms are industrial facilities that confine thousands of animals in limited land areas for meat, dairy and egg production. EPA estimates there are around 20,000 CAFOs in the U.S., producing three times as much waste as humans. The United States Department of Agriculture puts the number at somewhere around 47,000. While human waste must be treated, EPA does not require factory farms to meet any waste treatment requirements despite the fact that these wastes contain pathogens, heavy metals, antibiotics and hormones.
"While industry describes this case as a fight to protect 'personal information' from the prying eyes of environmentalists, the fact is that these highly polluting animal factories are corporate operations that are destroying waterways and communities wherever they operate," stated Tarah Heinzen, attorney with Environmental Integrity Project. "You can't simply decide to live where you operate an agribusiness, and then claim that you shouldn't be subject to the same level of transparency as every other industry because you happen to sleep there too."
"This is about corporate accountability and transparency," said Iowa CCI Board President Lori Nelson of Bayard Iowa, whose rural homestead is surrounded by 5,000 corporate hogs. Nelson filed a personal declaration of standing in the court intervention. You can read Lori's story here. "Factory farms are one of the most polluting industries in the country and the idea that giant, multinational corporations shouldn't have to tell the public where these facilities are located, how big they are, how many gallons of toxic manure they produce each year, and how many acres of land they have to apply on defies basic, common-sense. What does corporate ag have to hide?"
A series of emails and letters between various EPA and industry officials throughout the spring of 2013 demonstrate even more EPA efforts to appease industry groups opposed to information gathering. For example, EPA itself notified industry of the environmental groups' FOIAs under "a commitment [ ] to be open and transparent" with the industry. EPA produced copies of the documents for each industry group even though they had not requested the documents under FOIA as citizens must; in at least one case EPA hand-delivered a disc of the documents to the Farm Bureau's office in DC. FB and NPPC sued EPA despite the Agency's solicitude.
Media Contacts:
The Environmental Integrity Project: Tarah Heinzen; (202) 263-4441; theinzen@environmentalintegrity.org or Patrick Mitchell; (703) 276-3266; pmitchell@hastingsgroup.com
Food & Water Watch: Rich Bindell, 202-683-2457; rbindell@fwwatch.org
Government Accountability Project: Sarah Damian; 202-457-0034 ext. 130; sarahd@whistleblower.org
Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement: David Goodner, 515-282-0484; david@iowacci.org
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500An unknown number of Palestinians abducted by Israel died or were killed while in custody; living former prisoners have described horrific and sometimes deadly torture.
Israel on Wednesday returned the bodies of dozens of Palestinians abducted during the Gaza genocide showing "signs of torture, mutilation, and execution," as one US-based news site reported—a description consistent with the testimonies of former prisoners held by the Israeli forces over the past two years.
So far, Israel has returned 90 bodies, with more expected to be handed over soon, as part ofo the ceasefire agreement reached with Hamas last week. The Gaza Health Ministry's forensic team said that some of the bodies were blindfolded and bound, and bore signs of torture similar to those seen on many of the living Palestinian prisoners freed by Israel on Monday.
Some of the dead prisoners appeared to be victims of field executions—a war crime Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops have allegedly committed against men, women, and children alike.
Furthermore, Israel's obliteration of Gaza's healthcare and medical infrastructure is making it difficult for Palestinian forensic personnel to identify the bodies returned by Israel, which are in various states of decomposition.
"The horrific scenes visible on the bodies of the martyrs returned by the occupation, bearing marks of torture, abuse, and field executions, clearly reveal the criminal and fascist nature of the occupation army and the moral and human decadence this entity has reached," Hamas said in a statement.
"We call upon international rights groups, foremost among them the [United Nations] and [its] Human Rights Council, to document these atrocious crimes, open an urgent and comprehensive investigation into them, and bring the occupation leaders to trial before relevant international courts, as they are responsible for committing unprecedented crimes against humanity in our modern history," the statement added.
🟢 New Press Statement - Hamas:—The horrific scenes visible on the bodies of the martyrs returned by the occupation, bearing marks of torture, abuse, and field executions, clearly reveal the criminal and fascist nature of the occupation army and the moral and human decadence this entity has...
[image or embed]
— Drop Site (@dropsitenews.com) October 16, 2025 at 10:22 AM
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, including murder and forced starvation. The International Court of Justice is also weighing an ongoing genocide case against Israel filed by South Africa and supported by around two dozen nations.
Although warned by their Israeli captors against speaking out, Palestinians freed from Israeli imprisonment this week described being held in a "slaughterhouse" rife with torture and abuse, including beatings, electrocution, and being shot with rubber-coated steel bullets.
Palestinians imprisoned by Israeli forces—including children—have described being raped and sexually assaulted by male and female soldiers, electrocuted, mauled by dogs, soaked with cold water, denied food and water, deprived of sleep, and blasted with loud music. Dozens of detainees have died in Israeli custody, including one who died after allegedly being sodomized with an electric baton. IDF officers allegedly brought Israeli civilians into detention centers and allowed them to watch and film Palestinian prisoners being tortured
Israeli physicians who served at the notorious Sde Teiman torture prison also described widespread severe injuries caused by 24-hour shackling of hands and feet that sometimes required amputations.
Hamas' treatment of the Israelis it abducted during the October 7, 2023 attack is more complicated, with some freed captives saying they suffered torture and other abuse while others—especially those released early during the war—said they were treated relatively well. An Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldier captured after the rest of his tank crew were killed said that although he was tortured, his captors granted his request for religious materials including a Torah. One woman even pushed back against Israeli media lies claiming she was wounded by her captors, when in fact it was an Israeli airstrike that injured her.
So far, Hamas has returned the bodies of nine Israeli and other hostages. Israel is calling on Hamas to “make all necessary efforts” to find and hand over the bodies of 21 remaining dead hostages still unaccounted for.
"The sweeping language and broad authority in these directives pose serious constitutional, statutory, and civil liberties risks, especially if used to target political dissent, protest, or ideological speech."
Over 30 Democrats in the US House of Representatives wrote to President Donald Trump on Thursday to condemn his designation of antifa as a domestic terrorist organization and a related memorandum targeting the Republican's opponents.
Democratic Reps. Mark Pocan (Wis.), Jared Huffman (Calif.), and Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) led the letter, which builds on criticism that has mounted since late last month, when Trump issued the executive order against antifa—even though the nationwide anti-fascist movement has no central organizational structure or leaders.
Days later, Trump signed National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7), which, as the letter details, "directs federal officials to crack down on organized political violence, which you define to include 'anti-Christianity,' 'anti-capitalism,' and 'hostility toward those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.'"
The lawmakers wrote that "while protecting public safety and countering genuine threats are essential responsibilities of government, the sweeping language and broad authority in these directives pose serious constitutional, statutory, and civil liberties risks, especially if used to target political dissent, protest, or ideological speech."
"Regardless of whether the president agrees with someone's political views, the Constitution guarantees their right to speak and assemble peacefully," they stressed. They also noted that "neither the memo nor the executive order clearly defines 'antifa' as a specific entity. Instead, the executive order conflates nonviolent protest and activism with doxing and violent behavior."
"While the threat of political violence demands vigilance, your administration must not use this moment to undermine the very constitutional and democratic principles we are sworn to uphold," they concluded. "These actions are illegal, and we demand you immediately rescind both the memorandum and the executive order. We stand ready to take legislative action should you fail to do so."
The letter, which its organizers began circulating earlier this month, was sent to Trump ahead of a second round of "No Kings" protests planned for Saturday. Demonstrators intend to take to the streets in over 2,500 US communities to denounce the president's unprecedented and accelerating attacks on democracy. A key ally of Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), on Wednesday called for passing his bill to "prosecute" funders of the rallies.
In addition to dozens of House Democrats—including lawmakers from Illinois and Oregon, where Trump has deployed immigration agents and tried to federalize the National Guard, sparking court battles—the letter is endorsed by American Atheists, American Humanist Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Amnesty International, Council for Global Equality, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, Immigration Equality, MPact Global Action, National Women's Law Center, and Secular Coalition for America.
The order and memo are just part of the Trump administration's broad crackdown on dissent, which has also included trying to deport foreign students who criticize Israel's US-backed genocide in the Gaza Strip, cutting reporters off from the Pentagon for refusing to sign a "flatly unconstitutional" press policy, and bullying Disney-owned ABC into temporarily suspending late-night host Jimmy Kimmel.
Brown University, the University of Southern California, and the University of Pennsylvania—the president's alma mater—all rejected the proposal.
Three more leading US universities have joined the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in rejecting President Donald Trump's compact that critics have condemned as an "extortion agreement" and "loyalty oath" for federal funding.
Brown University's Wednesday decision and Thursday announcements from the University of Southern California and the University of Pennsylvania came ahead of the Trump administration's October 20 deadline for the nine initially invited schools to respond to the "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education."
Although the University of Texas said it was "honored" to receive the offer, it has not officially signed on to the compact to receive priority access to federal funding and other "benefits." Neither has any of the other institutions: the University of Arizona, Dartmouth College, Vanderbilt University, and the University of Virginia.
Bloomberg reported Monday that "a few days after MIT rebuffed the proposal, the administration extended the offering to all higher education institutions," citing an unnamed person familiar with the matter.
Brown's president, Christina Paxson, released her full letter to Education Secretary Linda McMahon and other Trump officials on Wednesday. She pointed out that "on July 30, Brown signed a voluntary resolution agreement with the government that advances a number of the high-level principles articulated in the compact, while maintaining core tenets of academic freedom and self-governance that have sustained the excellence of American higher education across generations."
"While a number of provisions in the compact reflect similar principles as the July agreement—as well as our own commitments to affordability and the free exchange of ideas—I am concerned that the compact by its nature and by various provisions would restrict academic freedom and undermine the autonomy of Brown's governance, critically compromising our ability to fulfill our mission," Paxson wrote. "While we value our long-held and well-regarded partnership with the federal government, Brown is respectfully declining to join the compact."
Penn, also part of the Ivy League, rejected the compact on Thursday. In a statement, its president, Dr. J. Larry Jameson, said that "for 285 years, Penn has been anchored and guided by continuous self-improvement, using education as a ladder for opportunity, and advancing discoveries that serve our community, our nation, and the world."
"I have sought input from faculty, alumni, trustees, students, staff, and others who care deeply about Penn," with the goal of ensuring that "our response reflected our values and the perspectives of our broad community," Jameson detailed. "Penn respectfully declines to sign the proposed compact," and provided the US Department of Education with "focused feedback highlighting areas of existing alignment as well as substantive concerns."
"At Penn, we are committed to merit-based achievement and accountability," he added. "The long-standing partnership between American higher education and the federal government has greatly benefited society and our nation. Shared goals and investment in talent and ideas will turn possibility into progress."
As The Daily Pennsylvanian, the campus newspaper, noted:
At a Wednesday meeting, Penn's Faculty Senate overwhelmingly passed a resolution urging the University to reject the agreement.
"The 'compact’ erodes the foundation on which higher education in the United States is built," the October 15 resolution read. "The University of Pennsylvania Faculty Senate urges President Jameson and the Board of Trustees to reject it and any other proposal that similarly threatens our mission and values."
Penn is the alma mater of Trump and Marc Rowan, a billionaire private equity financier who helped craft the compact.
The Trump White House told the student newspaper that "any higher education institution unwilling to assume accountability and confront these overdue and necessary reforms will find itself without future government and taxpayers' support."
Despite the risk of funding loss, the University of Southern California also rejected the proposal on Thursday. In a statement to the campus paper, the Daily Trojan, interim president Beong-Soo Kim said that "although USC has declined to join the proposed compact, we look forward to contributing our perspectives, insights, and Trojan values to an important national conversation about the future of higher education."
Critics of the compact have called on educational leaders to oppose it. In a joint statement earlier this month, American Association of University Professors president Todd Wolfson and American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten urged "all college and university governing boards, campus administrations, academic disciplinary organizations, and higher education trade groups to reject such collusion with the Trump administration and to stand firmly on the side of free expression and higher education as the anchor of opportunity for all."
Acquiescing, they argued, "would be a profound betrayal of your students, staff, faculty, the public, higher education, and our shared democracy—one that would irretrievably tarnish your personal reputation and compromise your institution's legacy. We urge you not to capitulate and not to negotiate but to unite now in defense of democracy and higher education."