

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.

Inga Sarda-Sorensen, 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org
A federal court has ruled that a lawsuit charging state and local officials with violating the rights of Indian parents and tribes in state child custody proceedings can go to trial.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit in March 2013 along with the ACLU of South Dakota and Dana Hanna of the Hanna Law Office in Rapid City. The lawsuit claims that Indian children are being removed from their homes in hearings that last no more than a few minutes, in which parents fail to receive a copy of the petition against them or have a chance to present evidence.
"We are thrilled that the court has recognized the importance of these issues to Indian parents and Indian tribes," said Heather Smith, executive director of the ACLU of South Dakota.
The case was brought on behalf of two South Dakota Indian tribes - the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Rosebud Sioux Tribe - and three Indian parents who suffered the loss of their children after very brief hearings in state court. The parents are Rochelle Walking Eagle, Madonna Pappan, and Lisa Young, all residents of Pennington County.
The defendants are State Judge Jeff Davis, Pennington County Prosecutor Mark Vargo, State Director of the Department of Social Services (DSS) Kim Malsam-Rysdon, and Pennington County DSS employee Luann Van Hunnik. In a 43-page ruling issued late yesterday, Chief Judge Jeffrey L. Viken denied motions to dismiss the case. He ruled that if the defendants are engaging in the policies and practices listed in the lawsuit, they are violating the federal rights of Indian children, parents, and tribes.
In a separate ruling, the judge held that the plaintiffs could represent a class of all Indian parents who are members of federally recognized Indian tribes and reside in Pennington County. He also granted a request filed by the plaintiffs to expedite certain aspects of the case due to the important interests at stake.
In 1978, Congress passed the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) which, as Judge Viken points out, was intended "to curb the alarmingly high rate of removal of Indian children from Indian parents." He agreed that if the plaintiffs prove at trial that the defendants are engaging in the practices challenged in the lawsuit, the defendants are violating that law, as well as plaintiffs' constitutional right to due process.
"This is an important step forward for the rights of Indian families and tribes," said Stephen Pevar, senior staff counsel with the ACLU's Racial Justice Program. "We are grateful to Chief Judge Viken for taking the time to examine the complex issues raised in this case and for his sensitivity to the goals of the Indian Child Welfare Act."
Rapid City attorney Dana Hanna, a co-counsel in the federal case, noted, "I have attended many of these cursory custody hearings in Pennington County and have repeatedly raised ICWA issues, to no avail. It's vital that these federal issues will receive adequate attention."
The lawsuit, Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Van Hunnik, was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota in Rapid City.
More information on this case is available at:
aclu.org/racial-justice/oglala-sioux-tribe-v-van-hunnik
This press statement is available online at:
aclu.org/racial-justice/federal-judge-rules-lawsuit-over-treatment-sd-indian-parents-and-tribes-can-move
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) 549-2666The campaign, said one organizer, "was never really about one candidate. It was about what Mainers ultimately wanted and deserved: a Senate seat that answers to them."
As calls mounted on Monday evening for US Senate candidate Graham Platner to drop out of the race in Maine following sexual assault allegations, progressive organizers emphasized that primary voters in the state have made clear their demand for a candidate who prioritizes the needs of working people.
Should Platner be replaced as the Democratic nominee, said the political action organization Our Revolution, the new candidate must be one "who has actually lived the fight Graham Platner ran on: a record with working people, with unions, against corporate money."
"To the Democratic establishment: This is not your opening," said Joseph Geevarghese, the group's executive director. "Mainers did not vote by an overwhelming margin against Janet Mills and the [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee]'s handpicked pick just to be handed another status-quo candidate anyway. They deserve what they voted for... The movement will settle for nothing less, because that is what Mainers deserve."
Platner has not said whether he will end his campaign, during which he has traveled across the state and energized voters from across the political spectrum with his working-class-focused platform—one that calls for Medicare for All, a billionaire's minimum tax, a stop to "billionaires buying elections" through a repeal of Citizens United, and an end to US military aid for Israel.
In a video he posted on social media Monday in response to the allegations, which came from a woman he dated from 2019-21, he denied that he had committed sexual assault but said he was "mindful of the political reality” and that his campaign is "taking the time to reflect on the best path forward" in order to defeat five-term Republican Sen. Susan Collins. The Maine Senate race is crucial as Democrats aim to win back control of the US Senate.
An aide for Platner told The New York Times Monday evening that if he were to step aside, "it would only be with a guarantee of being replaced by a candidate who he believes is true to the values and vision and policy agenda of the campaign that Maine voted for."
Platner won the Democratic primary in June by nearly 53 points. His opponent, Gov. Janet Mills, was on the ballot despite having suspended her campaign in April, citing a lack of funds. Ahead of the primary, Platner had faced other controversies, including one regarding comments he made on Reddit several years ago; a skull-and-crossbones tattoo that resembled a Nazi symbol—a connection he said he was not aware of; and allegations of physical aggression from a GOP-affiliated ex-girlfriend.
Geevarghese said Monday that "everyone deserves a fair and open process, and Graham Platner is entitled to due process like anyone else. But the allegations against him are credible, and at this point they are too serious to treat as a distraction from the campaign or the issues. Sexual violence is a red line. We are withdrawing our endorsement and calling on him to withdraw from this race."
He emphasized that the campaign "engaged thousands of working people in Maine around a simple idea: that Maine's Senate seat should belong to its people, not corporate money."
"That was never really about one candidate," Geevarghese said. "It was about what Mainers ultimately wanted and deserved: a Senate seat that answers to them."
The sentiment was echoed by the Maine Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which had not previously endorsed Platner.
"The power of the Platner campaign was undeniable, but that power does not come from a candidate; it comes from tens of thousands of Mainers who were inspired by his campaign's platform and urgency," said Maine DSA. "Over the last year, everyday people who had long ago written off electoral politics have shown up and worked to build power on a scale Maine has never seen before."
"Maine Democratic Party leadership has a choice: Nominate an establishment candidate who offers excuses, not answers, and ultimately loses to Susan Collins; or offer a candidate who harnesses the still-growing momentum, follows the platform that is so energizing to voters in Maine and across the country, and takes our state back for the many, not the money," said the group.
The state's Democratic candidate for governor, former state legislator Hannah Pingree, also said that Platner had "tapped into something real—voters hungry for change showed up with real passion and energy."
"That energy doesn't have to go away," said Pingree. "It needs a new candidate to carry it forward."
Under state law, Platner could be replaced on the ballot if he withdraws by July 13. The state Democratic Party would have until July 27 to name a replacement.
According to the Times, party officials in the state "have discussed possible plans to replace Mr. Platner on the ballot, with options including a pop-up convention on the weekend of July 25 to choose a nominee, or holding a statewide caucus to effectively redo the party’s primary election."
They have reportedly "ruled out having the state party’s committee, which includes about 100 members, choose the nominee."
Potential replacements who have been named include former Democratic gubernatorial candidates such as Secretary of State Shenna Bellows and former state Senate President Troy Jackson, who campaigned with Platner and was also endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) when he ran for governor.
Jackson told Bangor Daily News reporter Benjamin Kail late Monday that potentially having to replace Platner on the ballot was "something I never considered, but if Graham's stepping away, I am very, very interested and think I'm the best person to replace him."
He said he "received dozens of calls and messages of support" after the news broke Monday.
“The Justice Department that should be fighting to protect clean air and water and avert catastrophic climate change will now work on behalf of polluters to advance the poisoning of people and the planet.”
The executive counsel at the fossil fuel behemoth ExxonMobil is leaving his role to join the Trump Justice Department's newly renamed Energy and Natural Resources Division, a move one watchdog organization said shows that "Big Oil’s capture of the US government is now complete."
Robert Levy, who worked at Exxon for 17 years, announced in a recent LinkedIn post that he is departing the company, whose profits surged amid the Trump administration's illegal war on Iran. Levy will reportedly serve as senior counsel at the DOJ's Energy and Natural Resources Division, which the Trump Justice Department renamed last month from the Environment and Natural Resources Division.
Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday that "the new so-called Energy and Natural Resources Division at the Justice Department explicitly aims to abuse emergency powers to drive oil and gas production, override state environmental enforcement, and generally serve at the beck and call of Big Oil."
"Nothing could make that more clear than the naming of Robert Levy, ExxonMobil’s former executive counsel, a position that had him leading the company’s legal strategy on advocacy and civil justice, to run the division," said Weissman. "The Justice Department that should be fighting to protect clean air and water and avert catastrophic climate change will now work on behalf of polluters to advance the poisoning of people and the planet."
US President Donald Trump campaigned in 2024 on delivering massive, climate-destroying wins for the oil and gas industry, which spent hundreds of millions of dollars to support the president's White House bid and the campaigns of his Republican allies.
Fossil fuel giants have received a significant return on their investment. As Owen Bacskai of the Brennan Center for Justice noted, Trump's "signature legislative package—which one executive deemed 'positive for us across all of our top priorities'—gives oil and gas firms $18 billion in tax incentives while rolling back incentives for clean energy alternatives."
Trump has also "placed fossil fuel allies in charge of the agencies that oversee the industry and fast-tracked drilling projects on public lands," Bacskai wrote. "In just his first 100 days back in office, Trump took at least 145 actions to undo environmental rules—more than he reversed during his entire first term as president. Before Trump even reentered the White House, the industry was reportedly pre-drafting executive orders for him to issue."
Perhaps the biggest gift to Big Oil was the Environmental Protection Agency's decision earlier this year to repeal the "endangerment finding" underpinning climate regulations.
Critics expect more of the same industry-friendly actions from the Trump DOJ's Energy and Natural Resources Division, which last week touted its role in defending "Trump’s executive orders on unleashing American energy, reinvigorating the clean coal industry, and declaring an energy emergency."
“The Justice Department that should be fighting to protect clean air and water and avert catastrophic climate change will now work on behalf of polluters to advance the poisoning of people and the planet," said Weissman of Public Citizen.
Last year, Public Citizen and the Revolving Door Project released an analysis showing that the Trump administration has installed dozens of former fossil fuel industry employees, executives, and lawyers across the federal government, positioning Big Oil allies to advance "the massive expansion of polluting energy, the destruction of public lands, and the sabotage and suppression of renewable energy."
“This is nothing short of a Texas oil industry takeover of the US government at the expense of consumers, the climate, public health, and public lands and waters,” Alan Zibel, a research director at Public Citizen, said at the time of the report's release. "To execute his extreme, reckless, backward-looking fossil fuel agenda, Trump has stocked his administration with fossil fuel staffers and ideologues."
A Maine woman accused the Democratic US Senate candidate of drunkenly assaulting her at her home in 2021, which he denied.
US Senate candidate Graham Platner on Monday denied allegations of sexual assault, but the Maine Democrat also said his campaign is considering the "best path forward" in the wake of Politico's reporting.
Jenny Racicot told The New York Times in an article published last month that Platner's behavior was "reckless" and "unsettling" during their on-and-off relationship in 2019-21, and she cut off contact after he arrived at her Maine home drunk, despite her telling him not to come over. Politico reported Monday that the 41-year-old had told the newspaper off the record that he assaulted her.
Racicot told Politico that Platner came into her home uninvited that night and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said that she was conflicted about publicly accusing him in part because she agrees with the candidate politically, but decided to speak out after much of the reaction to the Times focused on another ex with ties to the Republican Party. The outlet reviewed documents, including emails with her therapist, and spoke with sources Racicot had previously told about her experience.
In a two-minute video shared on social media Monday, Platner called Racicot's allegations "troubling, serious, and false," and said that "any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false." He also said that, "mindful of the political reality" that the reporting will inflict, "we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward."
Platner decisively won his primary last month, after his opponent, Democratic Gov. Janet Mills, suspended her campaign in late April. The oyster farmer and combat veteran is a political newcomer who has championed progressive policies and called out the ultrarich, as well as the politicians who serve them—including longtime Republican Sen. Susan Collins, whom he's running to unseat in November.
While Platner has traveled Maine, speaking and rallying with working-class voters, he's also faced a series of controversies, including concerns over his offensive posts on Reddit, and the skull and crossbones tattoo he got with fellow Marines in Croatia, which he claimed he did not know closely resembled a Nazi symbol and got covered up during the campaign.
There was also the allegation from the GOP-affiliated ex interviewed by the Times, Lyndsey Fifield, that Platner was physically aggressive during their relationship, which he denied, and reporting that Platner's wife, Amy Gertner, told a senior campaign staffer that he had exchanged sexual messages with other women during their marriage, which Gertner responded to with a video.
In a statement to Politico on Monday, Platner's campaign pointed to previous controversies, saying:
These allegations are very serious and Graham vigorously denies them. They are also coached and coordinated by out-of-state establishment operatives. For a year, opponents of this campaign have thrown everything they can at Graham—calling him a Nazi, a war criminal, and a communist. None of it has been true, and this is no different. It is not a coincidence that this story comes a week before the ballot deadline, just as the previous false allegations came a week before the primary. Graham began this campaign to fight for a Maine where everyone is treated with dignity and where Mainers are put first, and no amount of desperate smears will stop this movement from seeing that vision through.
Following Politico's reporting, Platner has lost some key support. At least two members of Congress who backed him—Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.)—withdrew their endorsements, and the Maine Democratic Party's chair, vice chair, and executive director issued a joint statement urging him to withdraw as the party nominee.
The US National Domestic Violence Hotline can be reached at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233), by texting "START" to 88788, or through chat at thehotline.org. It offers 24/7, free, and confidential support. DomesticShelters.org has a list of global and national resources.