

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.

Jen Nessel, (212) 614-6449, jnessel@ccrjustice.org
Today, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and co-counsel Loevy & Loevy announced the settlement of Professor Steven Salaita's case against the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) for firing him from his tenured position over his personal tweets criticizing the Israeli government's assault on Gaza in 2014. Professor Salaita sued UIUC, the university Board of Trustees and high-level administrators for violating his First Amendment right to free speech and for breach of contract.
Today, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and co-counsel Loevy & Loevy announced the settlement of Professor Steven Salaita's case against the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) for firing him from his tenured position over his personal tweets criticizing the Israeli government's assault on Gaza in 2014. Professor Salaita sued UIUC, the university Board of Trustees and high-level administrators for violating his First Amendment right to free speech and for breach of contract. Salaita's firing became a flashpoint for debates over academic freedom, free speech, and the repression of Palestinian rights advocacy. In exchange for Professor Salaita's agreement to release his claims, the university has agreed to pay $875,000.
"This settlement is a vindication for me, but more importantly, it is a victory for academic freedom and the First Amendment," said Professor Salaita. "The petitions, demonstrations, and investigations, as well as the legal case, have reinvigorated American higher education as a place of critical thinking and rigorous debate, and I am deeply grateful to all who have spoken out."
Professor Salaita's firing prompted student walkouts; the cancellation of more than three dozen scheduled talks and conferences at the school; further pledges to boycott UIUC by more than 5,000 academics; a vote of no confidence in the university administration by 16 UIUC academic departments; and public condemnation by prominent academic organizations, including the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), the Modern Language Association, and the Society of American Law Teachers. In April, the AAUP released a scathing report on Salaita's termination and, in June, voted to censure the UIUC for its actions. In August, a federal judge rejected the university's argument that Professor Salaita had not actually been hired, despite a contract and his impending family move to the university, writing, "If the Court accepts the University's argument, the entire American academic hiring process as it now operates would cease to exist."
Within hours of the court's decision, Chancellor Phyllis Wise, who sent Professor Salaita the letter notifying him of his termination a year prior, resigned from the UIUC. The following day, the university revealed that administrators had been using personal email accounts in an attempt to avoid publicly releasing their correspondence. In one email released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Chancellor Wise admitted that she was not only using her private email because of the litigation, but was deleting her messages after sending. Provost Ilesanmi Adesida resigned a few weeks later. Prior FOIA productions had revealed that wealthy UIUC donors had threatened to withhold funding unless Professor Salaita was terminated.
"Professor Salaita's case galvanized champions of academic freedom and Palestinian rights activists alike, making clear that punishing speech--even speech that dares to criticize Israeli government atrocities--will not be tolerated. It resulted in widespread condemnation of the university's actions and a federal court decision finding he had a contract and his tweets were protected by the First Amendment. Professor Salaita has in fact won--and this settlement permits him to move on and refocus on his work as a premier scholar and an excellent teacher," said Center for Constitutional Rights Deputy Legal Director Maria LaHood.
In July 2014, after his contract with the university had been signed, Professor Salaita tweeted a number of strongly worded messages from his private account expressing his outrage and dismay at the Israeli government's attacks in Gaza, which killed more than 500 children. Professor Salaita's firing is part of a broader crackdown on activism for Palestinian rights that includes event cancellations, baseless legal complaints such as the ongoing case in Washington against Olympia Food Co-op board members for boycotting Israeli goods, administrative disciplinary actions, false and inflammatory accusations of terrorism and antisemitism, and legislation to prohibit boycotts of Israeli goods and institutions. The Center for Constitutional Rights co-authored a report this fall with the organization Palestine Legal on the widespread attempts to silence U.S. activists critical of Israel's policies, called "The Palestine Exception to Free Speech".
"Make no mistake: the size of this settlement is an implicit admission of the strength of Professor Salaita's constitutional and contractual claims," said Anand Swaminathan of Loevy & Loevy. "He has scored a major victory for those who care about free speech and academic freedom. In the future, university administrators will have to think twice before they choose the interests of wealthy donors and alumni over upholding their constitutional obligations. This legal victory could not have been possible without the support of a large and committed movement of activists and academics."
For more information on the case, visit CCR's Salaita v. Kennedy case page.
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“Donald Trump poses a direct threat to our Constitution and to the rule of law," said one of the impeachment campaign's leaders.
The legal advocacy organization Free Speech for People on Thursday published a full-page advertisement in The New York Times highlighting the more than 1 million people who have endorsed the group's petition to impeach and remove President Donald Trump from office.
Free Speech for People's (FSFP) campaign—which also includes billboard trucks and projections in Washington, DC—comes ahead of the third wave of "No Kings" demonstrations, which are set to take place Saturday in thousands of locations across the United States.
“On March 28, 2026, the people will rise up," said FSFP digital organizing strategist Jax Foley. "The No Kings 3 protest is projected to be the largest mass comobilization in US history, with over 3,000 actions planned worldwide. People across this country are organizing, mobilizing, defending their communities, and demanding accountability.”
➡️ Over 1 million signatures.➡️ 27 current grounds.➡️ 1 lawless administration.Join our nationwide movement calling on Members of Congress to honor their oaths of office by impeaching and removing Donald Trump now. #ImpeachTrump
[image or embed]
— Free Speech For People (@fsfp.bsky.social) March 26, 2026 at 6:24 AM
No Kings 3 comes amid Trump's attacks on the rule of law and constitutional rights at home and escalating militarism abroad as the president has bombed seven countries since returning to office—and 10 or possibly even 11 over the course of his two terms—while backing Israel's genocidal war on Gaza.
“Donald Trump poses a direct threat to our Constitution and to the rule of law,” FSFP president and co-founder John Bonifaz said in a statement. “The constitutional remedy of impeachment exists precisely for moments like this when a president abuses power, defies the law, and attacks democracy itself. Congress must act.”
FSFP's petition, which was launched on the day of Trump's second inauguration, urges Congress to "take action to defend our republic and Constitution" by impeaching the president again. As of Thursday afternoon, the petition had over 1,070,000 signatures and is more than halfway to its goal of 2 million signers.
“For more than a year, FSFP’s team of lawyers, election security experts, and grassroots organizers have been tirelessly and fiercely leading the campaign to impeach and remove Trump and key administration officials,” Foley said. “We have heard from people across the United States who are with us in the call for no kings, no tyrants, and the immediate impeachment and removal of Trump and his coconspirators. Put the power back in the hands of We The People."
Trump is the only US president to be impeached twice—once in 2019 for abuse of power and obstruction of justice and again in 2021 for incitement of insurrection. A majority of senators voted to acquit Trump in 2019; a majority—but not the requisite two-thirds—voted to convict in 2021. Both chambers of Congress are now narrowly controlled by Trump's GOP.
"The congressional power of impeachment is designed to address this tyrannical threat to our democracy," FSFP said in the New York Times ad. "Members of Congress must abide by their oath to protect and defend the Constitution and impeach and remove Trump from office."
"Trump has started illegal regime change conflicts in Venezuela and Iran and is now threatening Cuba," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal. "We must pass this legislation to block him from acting on a whim."
Amid calls for Congress to "do something—before it is too late," a pair of US House Democrats on Thursday introduced the Prevent an Unconstitutional War in Cuba Act to block President Donald Trump from using any federal funds to take military action against the island nation without congressional authorization.
The proposal from Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Gregory Meeks (D-NY), ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, comes after Trump ramped up the United States' decades-long economic blockade, cutting off Cuba from Venezuelan oil. The fuel shortage has led to island-wide blackouts, and disrupted everything from healthcare to transportation. As Jayapal put it earlier this month, the "cruel and failing policy... has caused incredible harm to the Cuban people."
Trump has also repeatedly threatened a US takeover of Cuba. His other misadventures abroad—such as joining Israel in waging war on Iran without authorization from Congress, bombing boats allegedly being used to smuggle drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, and abducting President Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela in an operation that killed dozens of Venezuelans and Cubans—have fueled fears that he may act on those threats, as Jayapal signaled in a Thursday statement.
“Trump has started illegal regime change conflicts in Venezuela and Iran and is now threatening Cuba. These military attacks put our troops in danger, endanger innocent civilians, waste billions of taxpayer dollars, and are not what the American people want," she said. "Trump promised to end forever wars—he lied. Congress alone has the power to declare war, something Trump clearly does not respect. He has no plan to improve conditions for the Cuban people or promote democracy, and we must pass this legislation to block him from acting on a whim."
The bill's prohibition on funding military action against Cuba does not apply to any use of force that is consistent with the section of the War Powers Act that empowers the president to respond to a "national emergency" created by an attack on the United States or its armed forces. In January, Trump notably signed an executive order declaring a national emergency with respect to Cuba and authorized new tariffs on imports from countries that supply oil to the island.
As with Iran pre-war, the Trump administration is currently engaged in negotiations with the Cuban government. Those talks are being led by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a son of Cuban immigrants and longtime supporter of regime change in the country, who said earlier this month that "the embargo is tied to political change on the island... They're in a lot of trouble, and the people in charge, they don't know how to fix it, so they have to get new people in charge."
Predictions over whether Trump will actually bomb or invade Cuba, which is located just 90 miles south of Florida, remain mixed.
"I think once Donald Trump gets an economic agreement that opens the island to US business, he will have fulfilled his transactional aims in Cuba. I don't think he cares about political transition. He doesn't seem to care about it in Venezuela," American University professor and Back Channel to Cuba coauthor William LeoGrande told USA Today this week. "And so, I think once there's an economic agreement that's to the advantage of the United States and US businesses, the president will move on to the next thing."
Current Affairs editor-in-chief Nathan Robinson, who's reported on the Nuestra América Convoy from Havana this week, declared on Wednesday that "they WILL run the Venezuela playbook on Cuba."
"They want a Republican donor imperial viceroy who will privatize the Cuban healthcare and school systems, and hand all the waterfront property to developers, with the Cuban people serving as cheap labor building a playground for Miami's rich," said Robinson.
Meeks—who is facing pressure to force a vote on his Iran war powers resolution—said Thursday that "Cuba is not for Donald Trump to take, and today we stand firm against the illegal use of the US military to pursue turning Cuba into another playground for Trump's chaotic adventurism."
"Such a reckless course would risk American lives, cost taxpayers billions, and, in all likelihood, leave the underlying political and economic conditions unchanged," he said. "The United States cannot bomb Cuba out of economic collapse or political repression—lasting change must come through empowering the Cuban people, not doubling down on a failed approach that disproportionately harms them."
The new bill is backed by Democratic Reps. Gabe Amo (RI), Joaquin Castro (Texas), Sara Jacobs (Calif.), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (Calif.), Jim McGovern (Mass.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Melanie Stansbury (NM), Dina Titus (Nev.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), and Nydia Velázquez (NY). However, like legislation aimed at stopping Trump's boat strikes, aggression toward Venezuela, and war on Iran, it is unlikely to be passed by the GOP-controlled Congress.
Still, earlier this week, Velázquez also introduced a war powers resolution to prevent US involvement in military hostilities against the island. She said in a statement that "Donald Trump's belligerent foreign policy is creating new wars and conflicts across the world."
"This administration's foreign policy is totally out of control and is putting countless American and foreign lives at risk," Velázquez warned. "Trump's military blockade, his threats, and his track record this term show that Congress must reassert its constitutional authority and stop another disastrous war before it's too late."
"If there is nothing to hide, then why won’t Donald Trump Jr. explain to this committee why, just months after becoming a partner, his firm’s financial stake grew substantially following the single largest loan ever issued by the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Capital?"
A Democratic member of the US House is calling out her Republican colleagues after they thwarted her attempt to subpoena Donald Trump Jr. to answer questions related to his financial stake in a company that scored a suspiciously timed $620 million loan from the US Department of Defense last year.
Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.) on Wednesday tried to force the House Natural Resources Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee to vote on subpoenaing Trump Jr. to testify about his venture capital firm's investment in Vulcan Elements, a startup that specializes in producing rare-earth magnets used in drones, radars, and other pieces of military equipment.
According to CNBC, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), the subcommittee chairman, moved the committee into an hour-long recess immediately after Dexter motioned to subpoena the president's eldest son. After returning from the recess, Republicans on the subcommittee voted to table the resolution.
Dexter, however, vowed that this wasn't the end of the story.
"If there is nothing to hide," she said, "then why won’t Donald Trump Jr. explain to this committee why, just months after becoming a partner, his firm’s financial stake grew substantially following the single largest loan ever issued by the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Capital? This is the oligarchy on full display, and I’m committed to ending corruption."
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), ranking member on the House Resources Committee, told CNBC that investigations into Trump Jr. potentially using his father's presidency to enrich himself are "not going away."
"You can do these moves, but you cannot hide, you cannot dodge accountability," Huffman emphasized.
The Financial Times reported in December that 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm founded by pro-Trump donors in 2023 that brought Trump Jr. in as a partner in 2024, bought an equity stake in Vulcan Elements, months before it was awarded the $620 million loan by the Pentagon.
Revelations about the Vulcan Elements contract came just weeks after the Florida-based drone startup Unusual Machines, in which Trump Jr. has held a $4 million stake, received a contract from the US Army to manufacture 3,500 drone motors.