

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.
Reprieve's press office: +44 (0) 207 553 8140 / or alice [dot] gillham [at] reprieve [dot] org.uk
The British government has said it will "urgently" raise with Saudi Arabia the case of a juvenile sentenced to 'crucifixion'- but has given no indication that it will withdraw a controversial bid for a contract with the Saudi justice system, while criticism of the US grows for its silence on the case.
The British government has said it will "urgently" raise with Saudi Arabia the case of a juvenile sentenced to 'crucifixion'- but has given no indication that it will withdraw a controversial bid for a contract with the Saudi justice system, while criticism of the US grows for its silence on the case.
In a statement to Reuters last night on the case of Ali Mohammed al-Nimr - sentenced to death in the wake of pro-democracy protests - the Foreign Office said: "We understand that Ali Mohammed Al Nimr's legal process has finished and his final appeal has been denied. We will raise this case urgently with the Saudi authorities." The spokesperson added: "The abolition of the death penalty is a human rights priority for the UK. The UK opposes the death penalty in all circumstances."
The UK's intervention comes amid controversy over an ongoing Ministry of Justice bid for a contract to provide services to the Saudi prison system. UK Ministers had to correct the Parliamentary record recently after wrongly claiming that they were unable to drop the bid due to the risk of "financial penalties." The only reason now given for continuing with the bid is that "withdrawing at this late stage would be detrimental to [Her Majesty's Government's] wider interests."
The United States has also faced criticism for its silence on the case. When asked about it earlier this week, a US State Department spokesperson refused to comment, but said he 'welcomed' the appointing of a Saudi representative to a senior position on the UN's Human Rights Council.
Ali was 17 when he was arrested in May 2012 in the country's Eastern Province. He was tortured into 'confessing' to a role in protests, and despite later recanting his statement, he was sentenced to be 'crucified' by the country's secretive Specialized Criminal Court. Last week, it emerged that his sentence had been upheld without his knowledge.
Ali has never been permitted to meet with his lawyer, and with legal avenues now exhausted, he could be executed at any moment with no prior notification to his family. The sentence will involve his being beheaded, and his body displayed in public.
The UK's Saudi contract bid follows the government's recent abandonment of both its strategy to end the death penalty around the world, and its use of the term 'countries of concern' when assessing the human rights records of states including Saudi Arabia. Human rights organization Reprieve has called the retreat "disastrous" at a time when Saudi Arabia and others, such as Iran and Pakistan, are presiding over a surge in executions.
Commenting, Maya Foa, director of the death penalty team at human rights organization Reprieve, said: "The Saudi government's plans to 'crucify' Ali al-Nimr are appalling, so it's welcome that the Foreign Office is now joining other countries in raising Ali's case with the Saudi government. But by insisting on pursuing business with the Saudi justice system, the UK continues to indicate to the Saudis that we condone the most extreme abuses, such as Ali's torture and brutal death sentence. Sadly the silence of the US government sends the same terrible message. These two countries - among the strongest allies of the Saudi government - must take real action without delay to stop Ali from being killed."
Reprieve is a UK-based human rights organization that uses the law to enforce the human rights of prisoners, from death row to Guantanamo Bay.
“Reality doesn’t lie: Coal is a rapidly dwindling relic of the past, not a solution for the future," said one climate action advocate.
“The 19th century called, and it wants its fuel source back," said the president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council on Wednesday as President Donald Trump announced his latest attempt to prop up the pollution-causing, expensive coal industry with taxpayer funds—this time by ordering the Pentagon to purchase electricity directly from coal-fired power plants.
"While Americans are demanding clean, affordable energy, the Trump administration is using our tax dollars to prop up the nation’s dirtiest, least efficient power plants," said Manish Bapna of the NRDC.
At an event at the White House, Trump directed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to sign long-term, taxpayer-funded contracts with coal plants that would likely have otherwise been retired in the coming years, to purchase energy to power military installations.
"Hard to think of a dumber 21st Century energy and security policy than Trump's insistence that the Pentagon buy more coal power," said the Military Emissions Gap, a UK-based project that monitors military emissions data.
Trump also announced $175 million from the Energy Department to upgrade six coal plants in Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, and West Virginia, and was presented with a trophy naming him the “Undisputed Champion of Beautiful Clean Coal" by the Washington Coal Club.
The Trump administration's persistent efforts to cancel the planned closures of large coal plants have been challenged not only by more than a dozen state governments, but by the owners of at least one of the facilities and two utilities in Colorado.
The utilities, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association and Platte River Power Authority, accused the administration of violating the Takings Clause of the US Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which states that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
They argued in a regulatory filing last month that “the costs of compliance fall directly on their members and customers, who must now pay."
Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at the Harvard Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program, told the Washington Post that the administration's decision to compel coal plants to continue operating has raised household "energy bills while providing negligible benefits to consumers.”
“Each of the five plants were slated to retire because they are expensive to operate and there are cheaper sources of power available to meet consumers’ needs,” Peskoe told the Post. “Plant owners aren’t just flipping a switch to turn the plants back on—they are spending millions on maintenance, renewing expired coal contracts and rehiring workers.”
“It’s no wonder fossil fuel lobbyists are handing Trump an award today. Trump asked them for campaign cash and promised to return the favor—and now he is."
Bapna said Trump's latest actions on coal were the result of the president's campaign promise to fossil fuel executives, whom he asked for $1 billion in campaign donations and pledged to gut climate regulations in return.
“It’s no wonder fossil fuel lobbyists are handing Trump an award today. Trump asked them for campaign cash and promised to return the favor—and now he is," said Bapna. "The rest of us are left to pay the price: more heart disease and asthma attacks, higher utility bills, and more frequent unnatural disasters. This is a raw deal for our wallets, our health, and our future.”
Julie McNamara, associate policy director of the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, pointed out that Americans will face higher electricity bills and be forced to pay for the new Department of Defense contracts at a time when "people and businesses across the country are struggling with rapidly escalating electricity costs" while other countries around the world expand their use of far cheaper renewable energy sources.
"The country has real solutions at hand—yet instead of pushing ahead with investments in the fastest, cheapest, cleanest resources available, the Trump administration is actively doing everything it can to stop the deployment of new solar and wind projects, to stop investments in energy efficiency, and to stop the buildout of modern grid infrastructure," said McNamara.
“Reality doesn’t lie: Coal is a rapidly dwindling relic of the past, not a solution for the future," she added. "The Trump administration’s flailings come with real consequences. Forcing the use of increasingly unreliable and relentlessly uneconomic coal plants will risk outages and send high electricity costs higher. Recklessly slashing health, safety, and environmental standards will harm people’s health and the environment. And opting for hollow statements and short-term bailouts fails to meaningfully deliver for the coal-dependent communities requiring actual, durable transition solutions."
Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, suggested that Trump's latest handouts to coal firms "ignores basic economics" while also proving that "coal can't compete without a taxpayer-funded bailout."
"Our military is one of the largest consumers of energy in the world," said Alt. "Instead of improving the efficiency of our military and the quality of life for those serving our country, this order saddles taxpayers with inflated energy costs while exposing millions of Americans to more toxic pollution from old, inefficient plants."
"The campaign to rig our elections is well underway," warned one expert.
Doing President Donald Trump's bidding, the Republican-controlled US House on Wednesday approved legislation that would potentially prevent millions of Americans from participating in federal elections by instituting draconian voter ID requirements, mandating documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, and requiring states to share voter information with the Department of Homeland Security.
The White House-backed legislation, an updated version of the so-called SAVE Act that the House approved in 2024, passed with the support of every Republican who took part in the vote and one Democrat, Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas—notably the recipient of a pardon from the president.
Election experts and watchdog groups said the bill represents a massive assault on the right to vote, with many of its provisions directly in line with what Trump has demanded ahead of the 2026 midterms.
“Congressional Republicans are attempting to commandeer the midterm election cycle and increase voting margins in President Trump’s favor by putting a finger on the scale of our elections and pushing nonsensical, anti-democratic laws to stop voters from casting a ballot," said Public Citizen co-president Lisa Gilbert. "This overreaching, un-American bill tacks on unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles to vote, all of which would harm voters across the political spectrum."
The bill is likely dead on arrival in the narrowly divided Senate, with every Democrat and at least one Republican, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, expected to oppose it.
But its passage through the House with unanimous support from the Republican caucus—whose members claim to be driven by a desire to prevent noncitizens from voting, which is already unlawful, and combat voter fraud, which is virtually nonexistent—alarmed rights advocates.
"This obvious attack on our voting rights is based on completely unfounded claims," said Alison Gill, director of nominations and democracy at the National Women’s Law Center. "The lawmakers supporting this measure clearly aim to suppress the votes of women, people of color, and LGBTQ+ people in order to rig elections and remain in power."
“It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, which means that the SAVE Act 2.0 creates a convoluted and dystopian solution to a problem that does not actually exist," Gill added. "Americans strongly opposed legislation when Congress considered this issue last year, and yet the congressional Republicans are trying to double down on this deceptive policy."
"The forces that are driving the Trump administration’s anti-voter agenda are also pressuring Congress to pass legislation that would silence millions of Americans."
Analysts estimate that more than 21 million Americans lack ready access to the documents the Republican legislation would require people to furnish in order to register to vote, such as a passport and a birth certificate. The Brennan Center for Justice notes that the measure "would disenfranchise Americans of all ages and races, but younger voters and voters of color would suffer disproportionately. Likewise, millions of women whose married names aren’t on their birth certificates or passports would face extra steps just to make their voices heard."
In addition to strict documentary requirements for registration and voting, the bill would force states to conduct frequent purges of their voter rolls and share information with the Department of Homeland Security in a purported effort to verify voters' citizenship—changes that could disenfranchise many eligible voters. The legislation would also establish criminal penalties for election workers who register voters without the required documentary proof of citizenship.
Bruce Spiva, senior vice president at Campaign Legal Center, noted that the GOP's renewed voter suppression push "comes as the FBI is seizing ballots from the 2020 election, President Trump is calling for our elections to be ‘nationalized,’ and the US Department of Justice is suing more than 20 states to get access to voters’ private data."
"This is not a coincidence," said Spiva. "The forces that are driving the Trump administration’s anti-voter agenda are also pressuring Congress to pass legislation that would silence millions of Americans by making it harder to participate in our elections."
In an op-ed for the New York Times on Thursday, the Brennan Center's Sean Morales-Doyle warned that "the campaign to rig our elections is well underway."
"It will be incumbent on all of us—election officials, advocates, state law enforcement, and voters—to see the administration’s efforts for what they are and to fight back," wrote Morales-Doyle.
"I will not be bullied," said Carrie Prejean Boller. "I have the religious freedom to refuse support for a government that is bombing civilians and starving families in Gaza, and that does not make me an antisemite."
A conservative Catholic was expelled from President Donald Trump's so-called Religious Liberty Commission this week over remarks at a hearing on antisemitism in which she pushed back against those who conflate criticism of Israel and its genocidal war on Gaza with hatred of Jewish people.
Religious Liberty Commission Chair Dan Patrick, who is also Texas' Republican lieutenant governor, announced Wednesday that Carrie Prejean Boller had been ousted from the panel, writing on X that "no member... has the right to hijack a hearing for their own personal and political agenda on any issue."
"This is clearly, without question, what happened Monday in our hearing on antisemitism in America," he claimed. "This was my decision."
Patrick added that Trump "respects all faiths"—even though at least 13 of the commission's remaining 15 members are Christian, only one is Jewish, and none are Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, or other religions to which millions of Americans adhere. A coalition of faith groups this week filed a federal lawsuit over what one critic described as the commission's rejection of "our nation’s religious diversity and prioritizing one narrow set of conservative ‘Judeo-Christian’ beliefs."
Noting that Israeli forces have killed "tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza," Prejean Boller asked panel participant and University of California Los Angeles law student Yitzchok Frankel, who is Jewish, "In a country built on religious liberty and the First Amendment, do you believe someone can stand firmly against antisemitism... and at the same time, condemn the mass killing of Palestinians in Gaza, or reject political Zionism, or not support the political state of Israel?"
"Or do you believe that speaking out about what many Americans view as genocide in Gaza should be treated as antisemitic?" added Prejean Boller, who also took aim at the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism, which has been widely condemned for conflating criticism of Israel with anti-Jewish bigotry.
Frankel replied "yes" to the assertion that anti-Zionism is antisemitic.
Prejean Boller also came under fire for wearing pins of US and Palestinian flags during Monday's hearing.
"I wore an American flag pin next to a Palestinian flag as a moral statement of solidarity with civilians who are being bombed, displaced, and deliberately starved in Gaza," Prejean Boller said Tuesday on X in response to calls for her resignation from the commission.
"I did this after watching many participants ignore, minimize, or outright deny what is plainly visible: a campaign of mass killing and starvation of a trapped population," she continued. "Silence in the face of that is not religious liberty, it is moral complicity. My Christian faith calls on me to stand for those who are suffering [and] in need."
"Forcing people to affirm Zionism as a condition of participation is not only wrong, it is directly contrary to religious freedom, especially on a body created to protect conscience," Prejean Boller stressed. "As a Catholic, I have both a constitutional right and a God-given freedom of religion and conscience not to endorse a political ideology or a government that is carrying out mass civilian killing and starvation."
Zionism is the movement for a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine—their ancestral birthplace—under the belief that God gave them the land. It has also been criticized as a settler-colonial and racist ideology, as in order to secure a Jewish homeland, Zionists have engaged in ethnic cleansing, occupation, invasions, and genocide against Palestinian Arabs.
Prejean Boller was Miss California in 2009 and Miss USA runner-up that same year. She launched her career as a Christian activist during the latter pageant after she answered a question about same-sex marriage by saying she opposed it. Then-businessman Trump owned most of Miss USA at the time and publicly supported Prejean Boller, saying "it wasn't a bad answer."
Since then, Prejean Boller has been known for her anti-LGBTQ+ statements and for paying parents and children for going without masks during the Covid-19 pandemic.
The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) commended Prejean Boller Wednesday "for using her position to oppose conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism and encourage solidarity between Muslims, Christians, and Jews," calling her "one of a growing number of Americans, including political conservatives, who recognize that corrupted politicians have been trying to silence and smear Americans critical of the Israeli government under the guise of countering antisemitism."
"We also condemn Texas Lt. Gov. Patrick’s baseless and predictable decision to remove her from the commission for refusing to conflate antisemitism with criticism of the Israel apartheid government," CAIR added.
In her statement Tuesday, Prejean Boller said, "I will not be bullied."
"I have the religious freedom to refuse support for a government that is bombing civilians and starving families in Gaza, and that does not make me an antisemite," she insisted. "It makes me a pro-life Catholic and a free American who will not surrender religious liberty to political pressure."
"Zionist supremacy has no place on an American religious liberty commission," Prejean Boller added.