June, 18 2014, 12:37pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Ophir Bruck, 415-609-2409, ophirbruck@gmail.com, Divestment Organizer with Fossil Free UC and the California Student Sustainability Coalition
Jay Carmona, 510-502-0752, jay@350.org, National Divestment Director
Oakland City Council Votes to Divest from Fossil Fuel Companies
Oakland becomes 5th California city to divest; Council, 350.org urge CalPERS to act
WASHINGTON
The Oakland City Council today unanimously approved a measure divesting city funds from all investments in any company "whose primary business or enterprise is extraction, production, refining, burning and/or distribution of any fossil fuels." The council recommended that city pension funds also divest and urged the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), one of the nation's largest managers of public pensions, with $288 billion in retiree assets under management, to follow suit and eliminate fossil fuel companies from their portfolios.
Oakland becomes the fifth city in California to pass a fossil fuel divestment resolution and the 25th city in the nation, joining the ranks of San Francisco, Seattle and Portland.
"I'm thrilled that Oakland City Council took a strong stand to divest from fossil fuels companies that emit heat-trapping greenhouse gases, and to protect our communities by opposing the transport of hazardous fossil fuels by rail through the heart of Oakland," said Dan Kalb, Oakland City Councilmember, and author of the Council resolutions. "Divesting from a dirty energy economy will add Oakland's voice to a growing movement that makes it clear that the old way of fueling our economy is not sustainable for our cities and our planet."
The move is part of a fast-growing fossil fuel divestment movement, which has spread to over 500 campuses, cities, faith communities, labor unions and pension funds around the nation, calling on institutions to take bold action against climate change by aligning investments with a clean and equitable energy future. So far, 12 colleges and universities, 27 cities, two counties, 30 religious institutions, and 27 foundations in the U.S. and around the world have pledged to divest or have done so already.
Ophir Bruck, an Oakland resident and organizer with Fossil Free UC, the University of California divestment campaign, said Oakland's action could embolden the Board of Regents of the nation's leading public university to act: "This move positions Oakland as a climate leader and should encourage the UC Regents, who are exploring the possibility of divesting UC's $88 billion portfolio from fossil fuels, to stand on the right side of history by divesting for our future."
Efforts on the measure were spearheaded by 350 Bay Area, a regional group aligned with the international climate change organization 350.org, which supports fossil fuel divestment efforts worldwide via its Go Fossil Free campaign.
Added Oakland resident and 350 East Bay divestment activist Janet Cox: "I was really glad to the Council take a strong stand in support of the environment and the fight to halt devastating damage to the climate. Governments and NGOs are going to have to act if we're going to survive climate change, and this resolution puts Oakland in the vanguard. Oakland will be able to lead on this critical issue."
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
Trump's Revived Anti-Worker Rules Condemned as 'Outright Grift'
"Every day, little by little, the Trump administration is rigging the system to benefit giant corporations and shortchange workers," said one senator.
Feb 26, 2026
President Donald Trump's "barrage of attacks on workers" continued on Thursday with announcements about two key labor rules.
The US Department of Labor (DOL) proposed an independent contractor rule that the National Employment Law Project (NELP) called "yet another example of the administration siding with major corporations and stacking the deck against working people" by "effectively allowing employers to strip workers of federal minimum wage and overtime protections."
The DOL's Wage and Hour Division proposal would replace the Biden administration's widely celebrated 2024 policy for when employers can treat workers as independent contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act with business-friendly guidance that resembles a rule adopted just before the end of Trump's first term.
"This rule will have profound real-world consequences for working people," warned NELP. "Misclassification is common in many labor-intensive, poorly paid jobs—jobs like home healthcare, janitorial work, landscaping, personal services, and increasingly, app-dispatched ride-hail and delivery—where people of color and immigrants are overrepresented, and workers lack the bargaining power to negotiate higher wages and better working conditions."
NELP pointed to research showing that low-paid independent contractors "lag behind their employee counterparts," and some "do not even earn the federal minimum wage." The organization stressed that "this rule threatens to enshrine a two-tiered labor system where similarly situated workers receive vastly different rights and protections based on the classification chosen by the business employing them."
The new rule—which now faces a 60-day public comment period—focuses on two "core factors" to determine an employee's classification: the nature and degree of control over the work, and the worker's opportunity for profit or loss based on initiative or investment.
NELP argued that "by elevating two factors above other equally important factors, the Trump administration's test fails to account for the economic realities of many working relationships. Many workers labeled as independent contractors are not really in business for themselves because they are integrated into the operations of a larger business structure that sets most of the terms of the work."
"In app-dispatched ride-hail and delivery jobs, for example, corporations like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and Amazon use apps and algorithms to offer shifts or assignments to so-called independent contractors doing the core work of the business, set the wages these workers receive, surveil and assess their performance, and determine if they are offered future assignments or get 'deactivated,'" the group noted. "App-based ride-hail and delivery workers perform difficult and dangerous work without basic employment protections like the right to minimum wage and overtime, workers' compensation, and unemployment insurance."
As NELP and other critics sounded the alarm over the DOL proposal on Thursday, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) also revived an effort from Trump's first term, reinstating that administration's 2020 rule on joint employers.
During Trump's initial administration, the NLRB required joint employers to "possess and exercise substantial direct and immediate control" over at least one aspect of the workers' employment. In 2023, under former President Joe Biden, the board decided that two or more entities could be considered joint employers if they had an employment relationship with the workers and helped to determine their terms and conditions of employment. However, the latter was blocked by a Trump-appointed judge the next year.
Unlike the DOL proposal, the board's rule is final. The NLRB—which has two Trump appointees, one Biden appointee, and two vacancies—said in the Federal Register that "the 2023 rule was vacated by the district court, and the action the board takes today merely implements the court's decision. Our action is ministerial and therefore will have no separate economic effect."
US Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a senior member and former chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, declared in a Thursday statement that "every day, little by little, the Trump administration is rigging the system to benefit giant corporations and shortchange workers—it's an outright grift and working people should be furious."
"The joint employer rule is nothing more than a return to Trump's anti-worker policies that let giant corporations skirt their basic obligations to employees—Trump is giving the biggest corporations cover to deny workers their ability to band together for better wages and working conditions and leaving millions of workers in the lurch, vulnerable to egregious violations of their rights," she said.
"At the same time, today, the Trump administration announced they're working to rescind the independent contractor rule," Murray continued. "Trump wants to let giant corporations classify workers as contractors so that they don't have to pay them minimum wage and overtime—these workers deserve fair pay."
The senator then took aim at the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act that congressional Republicans passed and the president signed last summer, saying that "under the Trump administration, giant corporations get giant tax breaks paid for by cutting Medicaid—the healthcare that the poorest workers are forced to rely on."
"Now, Trump wants those same corporations off the hook for every benefit, protection, and dollar they'd otherwise owe to millions of workers—it's a shakedown," she asserted. "Republicans are proving time and again, they don't care about workers—they don't want to even let workers have crumbs, but billionaires can get trillions in tax breaks that will blow up our national debt."
Murray isn't up for reelection in November's closely watched midterms, but could lead the Senate Appropriations Committee if Democrats reclaim the chamber. On Thursday, she vowed that "I am going to keep fighting for laws on the books that protect workers and build an economy that grows the middle-class, not just profit margins for the largest corporations on Earth."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israel Responsible for Two-Thirds of Journalist Deaths in 2025: Press Freedom Group
The number of journalists killed by Israel is remarkably high even when compared to the number of journalists killed in other conflict zones.
Feb 26, 2026
A new report from a major press freedom group has found that a record 129 journalists were killed in 2025, and that Israel was responsible for two-thirds of the worldwide total.
The Tuesday report from the Committee to Protect Journalists says that the Israeli military has cumulatively killed more journalists than any other government since CPJ started tracking reporter deaths in 1992, with the vast majority being Palestinian media workers in Gaza.
The report also finds an increase in the use of drones to attack journalists, with Israel accounting for more than 70% of the 39 documented instances of reporters killed by drone strikes.
The number of journalists killed by Israel is remarkably high even when compared to the number of journalists killed in other conflict zones.
Only nine journalists were killed in Sudan, for example, while just four journalists were killed in Ukraine, despite both countries being in the midst of brutal conflicts that have collectively killed hundreds of thousands of people.
A report issued in December by Reporters Without Borders similarly found that Israel was responsible for the most journalists deaths in 2025, the third consecutive year that the country had held that distinction.
The CPJ report also points the finger at governments for not taking their responsibilities to protect journalists seriously.
"The rising number of journalist deaths globally is fueled by a persistent culture of impunity," the report states. "Very few transparent investigations have been conducted into the 47 cases of targeted killings (classified as 'murder' in CPJ’s longstanding methodology) documented by CPJ in 2025—the highest number of journalists deliberately killed for their work in the past decade—and no one has been held accountable in any of the cases."
CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg said that attacks on the media are "a leading indicator of attacks on other freedoms, and much more needs to be done to prevent these killings and punish the perpetrators," adding that "we are all at risk when journalists are killed for reporting the news.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Detained Columbia Student Released by ICE After Mamdani-Trump Talk
In an Instagram post, student Ellie Aghayeva confirmed she was “safe and OK,” but “in complete shock.”
Feb 26, 2026
Update (4:25 pm ET):
Columbia University student Ellie Aghayeva was released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody Thursday afternoon after New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani expressed concerns about her detention in a meeting with President Donald Trump earlier in the day.
Mamdani shared the news on social media at 3:13 pm Eastern time.
“Just got off the phone with President Trump,” he wrote. “In our meeting earlier, I shared my concerns about Columbia student Elaina Aghayeva, who was detained by ICE this morning. He has just informed me that she will be released imminently.”
Aghayaeva then confirmed her release on her Instagram account, according to journalist Prem Thakker.
“I just got out a little while ago. I am safe and OK,” she wrote from an Uber on her way home.
“I am in complete shock over what happened and my phone is blowing up with calls from reporters,” she continued. “I need a little bit of time to process everything.”
Earlier:
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
Federal agents with the Department of Homeland Security abducted an international student with a visa from her apartment in a Columbia University-owned building in New York on Thursday, after lying to gain access to her home.
Acting university president Claire Shipman released a statement saying that around 6:30 am Eastern, the federal agents had "made misrepresentations to gain entry to the building to search for a 'missing person.'"
They then detained Ellie Aghayeva, a senior studying neuroscience and political science, according to a statement from her friends that was given to the American Association of University Professors.
Manhattan Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Democrat, said in a statement that agents with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had "used a phony missing persons bulletin for a 5-year-old girl."
"It is unconfirmed at this time whether they impersonated an officer to do so," Hoylman-Sigal told Prem Thakker of Zeteo News.
State Assemblymember Micah Lasher (D-69) told the New York Times that the ICE agents had presented themselves as police officers. A building superintendent let them in upon learning about the supposed missing child and led them to Aghayeva's apartment.
According to the ACLU: "ICE agents should not be falsely impersonating another government official or claiming they have a different governmental purpose to gain your permission to come into your home. A person’s 'consent' under these circumstances is not valid. ICE’s resulting entry in the home and any arrests they conduct violate the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution."
After being arrested, Aghayeva managed to post a one-second Instagram video to her 105,000 followers with the message, "DHS illegally arrested me. Please help."
Protests erupted on Columbia's campus as news of Aghayeva's abduction spread.
Protest outside Columbia going on right now after ICE abducted a student on campus early this morning.@JumaaneWilliams and @bradhoylman are here. pic.twitter.com/0fARmHEBvJ
— Timmy Facciola (@TimmyFacciola_) February 26, 2026
Court records showed that a lawyer for Aghayeva had filed an emergency petition requesting her release.
Shipman noted in her statement that all law enforcement officers "must have a judicial warrant or judicial subpoena to access nonpublic areas of the university, including housing, classrooms, and areas requiring [Columbia University ID] swipe access. An administrative warrant is not sufficient."
Last month, a leaked internal ICE memo revealed that acting Director Todd Lyons had given agents broader authority to carry out warrantless arrests. Last May, Lyons issued guidance saying agents needed only an administrative warrant, not a judicial one, to enter a home.
A coalition of advocacy groups sued the Trump administration this week over warrantless immigration arrests in North Carolina.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, said Thursdauy that ICE agents clearly "didn't have the proper warrant, so they lied to gain access to a student’s private residence."
US Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-NY) said the latest "exhibit of the Trump administration’s lawless actions—which are rarely supported by legitimate warrants or subpoenas—is yet another reminder that Columbia University and other institutions must enhance the protections and policies they utilize to create a safe environment for those they serve and employ."
"Students and faculty should not fear for their safety in their dorm rooms, the classroom, or anywhere else on campus," said Espaillat.
Columbia students including Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi were been detained last year by immigration agents under the Trump administration; Mahdawi had asked Columbia officials to move him to a safe location prior to his arrest, but his lawyer told The Intercept that university had told him it was unable to move him to housing where he would be protected.
As Common Dreams reported earlier this month, federal immigration agents have increasingly used deceptive tactics to carry out arrests and raids in places like Minneapolis, where thousands of agents were surged in recent months
"Yet again, ICE is using blatantly illegal trickery to circumvent judicial warrant requirements and abduct a student," said former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, now a candidate for the US House in the state's 10th District. "These are the tactics of brownshirts. That’s why I’ve long been calling to abolish ICE. And why Congress should not grant them one more penny."
"This lawlessness has to end. Ellie Aghayeva must be safely released. And Dylan Contreras," said Lander, referring to a Bronx high school student who was detained last year. "And too many other students whose names we don’t even know."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular