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.
Fatima Khan, (617) 216-7089, media@muslimadvocates.org
Jen Nessel, CCR, (212) 614-6449, jnessel@ccrjustice.org
Philadelphia, PA - Today, attorneys from Muslim Advocates and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to reverse a federal district court's dismissal of Hassan v. City of New York, a case that challenges the New York City Police Department's (NYPD) blanket surveillance of Muslims in New Jersey. The plaintiffs - among them a decorated Iraq war veteran, Rutgers University students, a coalition of New Jersey mosques, and the former principal of a grade-school for Muslim girls, targeted and surveilled by the NYPD solely on account of their religious affiliation and without any criminal suspicion - had their day in court when lawyers presented oral argument inside a courthouse filled with concerned community members. This is the first time a federal appellate court will review the legality of the NYPD's religious surveillance program.
"Today marks a critical day on the path to justice for all the victims who have been treated like criminals simply because of their faith," said Glenn Katon, legal director of Muslim Advocates. "The NYPD has abused its powers for too long and has brazenly violated our core constitutional values of freedom and equality under the law, and we hope that today's argument will pave the way to a ruling to protect Americans of all faiths against discrimination by law enforcement."
Since 2002, the NYPD has spied on at least 20 mosques, 14 restaurants, 11 retail stores, two grade schools, and two Muslim Student Associations in New Jersey alone. The monitoring has included video surveillance, photographing, community mapping, and infiltration of places of worship, student associations, and businesses. Internal NYPD documents, including a list of 28 "ancestries of interest," reveal that the NYPD used racial and ethnic backgrounds as proxies to identify and target adherents to the Muslim faith. Although the NYPD recently disbanded one of the main units through which it conducted the surveillance, there is no evidence that it has abandoned the underlying unlawful targeting and profiling of Muslims.
"By creating a Muslim exception to the bedrock principles of equality and religious freedom, the lower court opinion signals that Muslims are to be second-class citizens," said Center for Constitutional Rights Legal Director Baher Azmy, who argued the case today. "The Constitution prohibits singling out an entire faith for discriminatory policing, simply because a handful of totally unrelated adherents committed criminal acts. Painful historical lessons remind us that courts should not sanction such overt discrimination by law enforcement, even in times of fear."
The argument is part of the plaintiffs' appeal of a New Jersey trial court's dismissal of the case in February 2014, when it ruled in a 10-page summary opinion, that the surveillance did not harm any of the eleven plaintiffs and that if anyone did suffer harm, it was caused not by the unlawful surveillance program, but by the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting of the Associated Press that exposed it. The court also accepted the City's argument that its targeting of Muslims for their faith alone was justified in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. According to the NYPD itself, in more than ten years of operation, the City's Muslim spying reports failed to produce a single lead.
"100 Blacks supports the plaintiffs in their case against the City of New York for the NYPD's discriminatory Muslim surveillance program," said Noel Leader, co-founder of 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care. "Such police tactics are not only wrong morally and constitutionally, but they also are ineffective police strategies that do not keep us safe."
"Today is an important day in the history of civil rights," said Farhaj Hassan, U.S. Army reservist and lead plaintiff in Hassan. "This lawsuit stands up for Americans of all faiths and upholds our Constitutional rights. There's no reason that the people of my community, my mosque, or any other individual should be treated like a second-class citizen by law enforcement just because of their faith. Our police force is supposed to protect us, not spy on us because of how we pray."
For more information about the case, please visit www.muslimadvocates.org/endspying and https://www.ccrjustice.org/hassan.
Hassan was initially filed by Muslim Advocates; the Center for Constitutional Rights and Gibbons, P.C. have joined as co-counsel. It is the first case to challenge the NYPD's Muslim spying program.
Muslim Advocates is a national legal advocacy and educational organization working on the frontlines of civil rights to guarantee freedom and justice for Americans of all faiths. Through high impact lawsuits, policy advocacy, and community education, Muslim Advocates serves as a resource to empower communities and ensures that the American Muslim community is heard by the courts and leaders at the highest level of government. Visit Muslim Advocates at www.muslimadvocates.org and follow @muslimadvocates.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. CCR is committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
(212) 614-6464"Trump was handed a stable economy," said one economist. "I expected them to screw up either the labor market, prices, or growth. I didn't expect them to fumble all three."
Belying U.S. President Donald Trump's promise to "end inflation"—and his subsequent claim that he's "solved" it—new federal economic data released Tuesday showed increased inflation in July resulted from businesses in some sectors are passing the costs of Trump's tariffs on to consumers.
The consumer price index (CPI) figures, released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), measure the cost of staple goods across the economy and offer a detailed look at inflationary impacts in a variety of areas. The overall CPI rose 2.7% in July from year-ago levels, a similar increase from June. So-called "core" inflation, which excludes volatile energy and food, rose 3.1% in July, the highest level in five months.
While White House Council of Economic Advisers Stephen Miran claimed that July's CPI shows that there is "no evidence whatsoever" that Trump's trade war has spurred price increases, economic experts have repeatedly predicted the cost of tariffs would ultimately be passed to consumers.
Natalie Baker, director of economic analysis at the Center for American Progress, a public policy research and advocacy group, said in a statement that "the consistent upward trend in inflation is the latest sign that President Trump's reckless trade war and the resulting economic uncertainty are wreaking havoc on family budgets and the American economy."
"Combined with the lackluster jobs report and recent [gross domestic product] numbers, this is a clear warning sign that the president's policies are raising prices and squeezing consumers," Baker adeed. "It's a chilling reminder that the risk of stagflation is growing by the day."
The Democratic National Committee weighed in on the numbers, with communications director Rosemary Boeglin saying that "Donald Trump is steering the economy off a cliff, as core inflation rises to over 3%."
"Working families are already cutting back on basic necessities as Trump's billionaire-first agenda makes life more expensive," Boeglin continued. "While his budget explodes the deficit and enables the largest wealth transfer in history from the working and middle classes to the ultrawealthy, Trump's erratic trade war continues to accelerate inflation and jack up prices."
"While Trump profits off the presidency, hardworking Americans are struggling to get by with no end in sight," she added.
House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) said in a statement: "Donald Trump was elected to bring down costs. Instead, he's made the problem worse."
"Trump's Big Ugly Law gives away trillions to billionaires, paid for by cutting healthcare for millions of Americans," Boyle added. "The American people simply can't afford the policies of Donald Trump and the GOP."
Mike Konczal—an economic adviser to former President Joe Biden who is now the senior director of policy and research at the progressive nonprofit Economic Security Project—called July's CPI "overall worse than I expected, with the background of government disinvestment and deportations weakening potential growth."
"Trump was handed a stable economy," Konzcal added. "I expected them to screw up either the labor market, prices, or growth. I didn't expect them to fumble all three."
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and the advocacy group he helped found applauded a new resolution from Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin, revealed Tuesday, that aims to limit corporate and dark money spending in the party's next presidential primary.
CNN obtained a draft of the resolution that Martin plans to introduce at the DNC's August 25-27 meeting in Minneapolis. The outlet reported that it calls for creating a panel that would identify and study "real, enforceable steps the DNC can take to eliminate unlimited corporate and dark money in its 2028 presidential primary process."
The draft "does not explicitly mention" super political action committees, "and it's not clear whether it will ultimately restrict super PAC spending in party primaries," according to CNN. It also says that the "only way to solve for this problem in the long term is through congressional action, including a constitutional amendment" to overturn Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision that opened the floodgates to corporate spending on elections.
Still, Sanders (I-Vt.)—who ran for president as a Democrat in 2016 and 2020—welcomed the proposal as progress, writing on social media Tuesday, "Congrats to the DNC for starting the process to ban Big Money from presidential primaries."
"Billionaire-funded super PACs like AIPAC and Crypto shouldn't be able to undermine democracy and determine Democratic candidates," he added, calling out the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. "This principle should apply to congressional primaries too."
Sanders and seven of his Democratic colleagues—Sens. Ed Markey (Mass.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Chris Murphy (Conn.), Tina Smith (Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (Md.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), and Peter Welch (Vt.)—wrote to Martin and Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) in June, urging them to curb the influence of rich donors and super PACs in party primaries.
Last year's federal elections were devastating for Democrats, who lost not only the White House but also both chambers of Congress. In the wake of that, Sanders said that "it should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working-class people would find that the working class has abandoned them."
"Will the big money interests and well-paid consultants who control the Democratic Party learn any real lessons from this disastrous campaign?" he wondered at the time. "Probably not."
While then-DNC Chair Jaime Harrison swiftly lashed out at Sanders in November, calling his critique "straight up BS," the forthcoming resolution is a sign that Martin may be listening to key progressives—as well as registered Democrats and Independent voters, who are frustrated with the party and want to see elected officials fight harder for working people.
Just before the February DNC election in which Martin was victorious, Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, the group that grew out of Sanders' first presidential campaign, declared that "this moment demands a Democratic Party that provides more than just reactive opposition to an administration bent on rigging our economic and political systems in favor of the wealthiest and most powerful individuals on Earth."
Geevarghese also stressed the need for "leaders who put the party's grassroots base ahead of the donor class" and reject corporate rule, and accused Democratic leadership of "failing disastrously to meet this urgent mandate."
On Tuesday, Geevarghese welcomed the reporting on Martin's proposal, saying that "for the last 15 years, the disgraceful Citizens United ruling has unleashed a flood of spending from dark money groups and corporate super PACs that has drowned out working people's voices and sidelined the progressive candidates our party needs to challenge the corrupt billionaire class."
"This resolution is a crucial step to ensure the Democratic presidential nominee is chosen by everyday people—not deep-pocketed donors and the special interests they serve," he added. "We urge every DNC member to rise to the moment, back this fight, and put power back where it belongs—in the hands of voters, not the billionaires."
"We saw evidence of food and medical aid denied entry, and heard witness accounts of the killing of Palestinian civilians, including children," said former Irish Prime Minister Mary Robinson and former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark.
The group of global leaders known as The Elders on Tuesday demanded "decisive measures" to end the famine and "unfolding genocide" in Gaza that has led to international outcry month after month with no end in sight.
In a statement, the organization founded by the late South African President Nelson Mandela revealed that two of its members, former Irish Prime Minister Mary Robinson and former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark, recently visited the Rafah border crossing in Egypt that is formerly a key entry point for humanitarian aid to be delivered into Gaza that has now become only a trickle.
Robinson and Clark said that the situation in Gaza was dire and they accused the Israeli government of overseeing "human-caused famine in Gaza" as well as "an unfolding genocide." They then outlined evidence that Israel was responsible for the catastrophe going on inside the territory.
"We saw evidence of food and medical aid denied entry, and heard witness accounts of the killing of Palestinian civilians, including children, while trying to access aid inside Gaza," they said. "The deliberate destruction of health facilities in Gaza means children facing acute malnutrition cannot be treated effectively. At least 36 children starved to death just in the month of July."
Robinson and Clark also noted that no shelter materials have been allowed into Gaza since this past March, and they added that "we saw huge numbers of tents ready for delivery but blocked by the Israeli authorities."
The two leaders called for cease-fire talks to begin immediately between Israel and Hamas, while also specifically calling for Hamas to release any remaining hostages it kidnapped during its October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. They also recommended that arms sales to Israel be "suspended immediately" and that "targeted sanctions should be imposed on Prime Minister Netanyahu and all members of his security cabinet."
They also chided other nations for maintaining economic relations with Israel even as starvation unfolds in Gaza.
"The uncomfortable truth is that many states are prioritizing their own economic and security interests, even as the world is reeling from the images of Gazan children starving to death," they said.
The Elders' call for action comes on the same week that the Gaza Health Ministry announced that the number of children in Gaza who have died from severe hunger has passed 100, with the vast majority of such deaths occurring over the last three weeks.
Additionally, international charity Save the Children last week said that 43% of pregnant and breastfeeding women who showed up to its clinics in Gaza last month were malnourished, which represented a threefold increase since March, when the Israeli military imposed a total siege on the area.