SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
April, 23 2014, 11:38am EDT
Contact:
Emma Cape, 618-841-4363
emma@chelseamanning.org
Judge Approves Chelsea Manning's Legal Name Change Petition
At a hearing this morning at 10am Eastern Time, Leavenworth County District Judge David King granted a petition to allow WikiLeaks whistleblower PVT Manning to legally change her name from "Bradley Edward Manning" to "Chelsea Elizabeth Manning." Manning, who has twice been diagnosed with gender dysphoria by qualified military psychiatrists, issued a public response:
WASHINGTON
At a hearing this morning at 10am Eastern Time, Leavenworth County District Judge David King granted a petition to allow WikiLeaks whistleblower PVT Manning to legally change her name from "Bradley Edward Manning" to "Chelsea Elizabeth Manning." Manning, who has twice been diagnosed with gender dysphoria by qualified military psychiatrists, issued a public response:
"It's worth noting that in both mail and in-person, I've often been asked, 'Why are you changing your name?' The answer couldn't be simpler: because it's a far better, richer, and more honest reflection of who I am and always have been -a woman named Chelsea."
Manning continued:
"Hopefully today's name change, while so meaningful to me personally, can also raise awareness of the fact that we trans* people exist everywhere in America today, and that we must jump through hurdles every day just for being who we are." Manning has explained that she prefers "trans*" (with an asterisk) to denote not only transgender men and women, but also those who identify outside of a gender binary.
You can read Manning's statement in full here: https://www.chelseamanning.org/uncategorized/chelsea-mannings-statement-...
Lauren McNamara, a trans-rights advocate who Manning befriended prior to arrest, and who testified at Manning's trial last summer, issued her congratulations:
"I'm very happy that Chelsea has been able to take this important step. Being recognized by the chosen name that reflects who you are is a matter of basic dignity for all transgender people, and this right must be respected."
McNamara has also been chosen to represent Manning at the San Francisco Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Pride Celebration (SF Pride) this year, and is available this week for interviews.
Manning is also requesting comprehensive treatment for her diagnosed gender dysphoria while at the Ft. Leavenworth disciplinary barracks. She was informed in August of 2013 that the military had created a plan for her treatment. However, she's yet to see the plan, or to be notified of whether it meets with recognized standards of care for trans health.
Currently, the U.S. military does not allow transgender individuals to serve openly. However, Manning will not be discharged from the military until after she has finished serving her sentence at Ft. Leavenworth. According to a March 13, 2014 report released by the San Francisco State University's Department of Political Science, transgender adults are more than twice as likely as non-transgender adults to serve in the U.S. military.1
Earlier this month, the Committee that organizes the San Francisco LGBT Pride Celebration, which attracts 1.8 million people each year, announced that Manning would be representing the 2014 celebration as an Honorary Grand Marshal.
The Chelsea Manning Support Network is currently engaged in supporting Manning's request for medically appropriate treatment for gender dysphoria, in addition to preparing for her legal appeals. Manning's appeals are expected to touch on issues of freedom of information, overclassification, and unlawful pretrial punishment. The Support Network anticipates future challenges in the U.S. Army Court of Appeals, federal court, and potentially even the Supreme Court.
The Chelsea Manning Support Network was a coalition of groups and individuals engaged in supporting the U.S. Army whistleblower.
LATEST NEWS
'Shameful': Trump Threatens to Redirect Student Loan Borrowers to Most Expensive Repayment Plans
More than 7 million borrowers booted from a Biden-era loan forgiveness program will have to quickly switch to a new plan using a system that's been backed up for months.
Mar 27, 2026
After axing a Biden-era student loan repayment program, the Trump administration is threatening to kick its millions of mostly low-income beneficiaries onto the government's most expensive plan unless they switch to a new one quickly.
The Washington Post reported on Friday that the Department of Education was beginning to email the more than 7 million people enrolled in the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) program, telling them they needed to change their plan within the next 90 days.
Around 4.5 million of those borrowers earn incomes between 150% and 225%, allowing them to qualify for zero-dollar monthly payments under SAVE, which the Trump administration effectively killed in December after settling with Republican states who'd brought lawsuits against the program under former President Joe Biden.
Anonymous officials told The Post that those who do not switch plans within three months of receiving the email will automatically be re-enrolled in the Standard Plan. Unlike SAVE, which is income-based, the Standard plan has borrowers pay a fixed rate over 10 years.
Standard typically carries the highest monthly payments, and those transitioning to it from SAVE could pay more than $300 extra per month in some cases, with the poorest borrowers seeing the sharpest increases.
While 90 days may seem like plenty of time to switch to a less expensive repayment plan, it's not nearly that simple.
Due to the large exodus of borrowers, the Department of Education has struggled to process all the forms, processing only about 250,000 per month. Many borrowers who have tried to transition have found themselves waiting months for a reply.
To make matters more confusing, many of these borrowers will have to switch programs again soon, since all but one repayment program will be dissolved on July 1, 2028 as a result of last year's Republican budget law. The remaining plan will also be income-driven, though it is still expected to cost borrowers more each month.
According to a report released last month by the Century Foundation and Protect Borrowers, two groups that support loan forgiveness, nearly 9 million student loan borrowers are in default. During Trump's first year back in office, the student loan delinquency rate jumped from roughly zero to 25%, which it called "precedent-shattering."
"Much of the rise in delinquencies can be linked to the Trump administration’s actions aimed at increasing student loan payments," the report said. “The US Department of Education blocked borrowers from accessing more affordable payments through income-driven plans, having ordered a stoppage in application processing for three months and mass-denying 328,000 applications in August 2025. As of December 31, 2025, a warehouse’s worth of 734,000 applications sat unprocessed.”
Being in default has major ramifications for borrowers' finances. Those with delinquent loans saw their credit scores decrease by an average of 57 points during the first three quarters of 2025, dragging around 2 million of them into "subprime" territory, which forces them to pay thousands of dollars more for auto and personal loans and makes them more likely to have difficulty finding housing and employment.
The report estimated that if those booted from SAVE defaulted at the same rate as other borrowers, the number of student loan borrowers in distress could rise as high as 17 million.
According to Protect Borrowers, the typical family will pay more than $3,000 per year in additional costs as a result of the end of SAVE.
The end of SAVE comes as oil shocks caused by Trump's war in Iran have spiked gas prices and threaten to raise them throughout the economy, adding to the already elevated costs of food, housing, and transportation resulting from the president's aggressive tariff regime.
"In the middle of an affordability crisis driven by Donald Trump," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), "Trump is killing a plan that lowers student loan costs. It's shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
With Everyone Looking for Iran War Off-Ramp, Experts Offer 'Exit Plan'
"The United States and Iran are trapped in a conflict in which each new escalation only deepens a shared, losing predicament... Sooner rather than later, both will confront the urgency of finding an off-ramp."
Mar 27, 2026
Multiple reports published in the last two days have indicated that President Donald Trump is seeking to wrap up his illegal war in Iran, which has significantly hurt his domestic political standing—partially by raising gas prices at a time when polls show US voters are primarily concerned about the cost of living.
While ending the Iran war will not be simple, some foreign policy experts believe that it can be done if both the US and Iran truly understand that deescalation is in both nations' best interests.
George Beebe, director of grand strategy at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and former director of the CIA’s Russia analysis, and Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute, have written an essay published on Thursday by Foreign Policy outlining what an achievable Iran "exit plan" would look like.
The authors acknowledged the immense challenges in getting both sides to meet one another halfway, but said this option is preferable to a drawn-out war that will leave both nations poorer and bloodied.
On Iran's side, argued Beebe and Parsi, a deal would involve renewing "its stated commitment to never pursue nuclear weapons," re-opening the Strait of Hormuz to all shipping vessels, and making a commitment "to denominating at least half of its oil sales in US dollars rather than the Chinese yuan."
The US, meanwhile, would "grant sanctions exemptions to countries prepared to finance Iran’s reconstruction" and "would also permit a specified group of states—such as China, India, South Korea, Japan, Turkey, Iraq, and others in the Gulf—to resume trade with Tehran and the purchase of Iranian oil, thereby easing global energy prices."
Beebe and Parsi emphasized that this deal would only be a first step, and they said the next step would be restarting negotiations to establish a nuclear weapons agreement similar to the one previously negotiated by the Obama administration that Trump tore up during his first term.
"The United States and Iran are trapped in a conflict in which each new escalation only deepens a shared, losing predicament," they wrote. "Neither can compel the other’s surrender. Sooner rather than later, both will confront the urgency of finding an off-ramp—one that does not hinge on the other’s humiliation."
Even if Trump takes this course of action, however, there is no guarantee it will succeed, in part because of how much he has already damaged US alliances across the world.
In an analysis published Thursday, Sarah Yerkes, senior fellow at the Carnegie International Endowment for Peace's Middle East Program, argued that even nations in the Middle East that stand to benefit from a weakened Iran are now thinking twice about their dependence on the US for their security needs, given that Trump's war has resulted in Iran launching retaliatory strikes throughout the region.
Yerkes also highlighted how Trump's handling of European allies is making it less likely that they will play a significant part in helping him end the conflict.
"Europe, which is not eager to enter what it sees as a war of choice, has refrained from proactively joining US and Israeli strikes," Yerkes explained. "One of the clearest examples of the transatlantic rift was over the initial reaction to closures in the Strait of Hormuz, the shipping channel for approximately 20% of the world’s seaborne oil and LNG traffic. Multiple European countries refused to cow to Trump’s demand that they send warships to help keep the strait open, inviting public ire from Trump."
The bottom line, warned Yerkes, is that "each day the war continues, without explicit goals or a clear exit strategy, opposition to the United States—from friends and foes, inside and outside—is also likely to grow, making America less safe and less secure."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Spurns Melania Trump's Vision of Robots 'Replacing Teachers'
"We should attract the best and brightest in our country to become teachers and pay them the decent wages that they deserve."
Mar 27, 2026
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Friday rejected First Lady Melania Trump's vision of a near-future in which artificial intelligence-powered humanoid robots do the work of human school teachers, arguing that society should instead do better by its human educators.
The wife of President Donald Trump entered Wednesday's gathering of the Global First Ladies Alliance accompanied by Figure 03, an AI-powered "general purpose humanoid robot" developed by the Sunnyvale, California-based company Figure.
“The future of AI is personified," Trump told attendees, who included Brigitte Macron of France, Sara Netanyahu of Israel, and Olena Zelenska of Ukraine. “It will be formed in the shape of humans. Very soon artificial intelligence will move from our mobile phones to humanoids that deliver utility.”
“Imagine a humanoid educator named Plato," she said. “Access to the classical studies is now instantaneous: literature, science, art, philosophy, mathematics, and history. Humanity’s entire corpus of information is available in the comfort of your home.”
Responding to Trump's remarks, Sanders (I-Vt.) said Friday on social media: "Call me a radical, but NO."
"We should not be replacing teachers in America with robots," the senator added. "We should attract the best and brightest in our country to become teachers and pay them the decent wages that they deserve."
Trump and Macron also warned about the dangers technology poses to children in remarks that came the same week that a New Mexico jury ordered tech titan Meta to pay a $375 million penalty for endangering youth and jurors in a landmark social media addiction trial found that Meta and YouTube harmed a child user of their platforms.
The office of California Gov. Gavin Newsom—who is believed to be a likely contender for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination—also slapped down the idea of robot teachers, as did ordinary social media users.
"They want to replace human beings. Where will we work? How do we make money?" asked one X account with tens of thousands of followers. "No one wants this. We did not ask for it. Fuck all of this shit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular