

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.

In response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed more than a decade ago by the American Civil Liberties Union, the Defense Department has released some 200 photographs related to prisoner abuse at U.S. military facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The photos mostly show close-ups of body parts like arms, legs, and heads, many with injuries. There are also wider shots of prisoners, most of them bound or blindfolded. They are part of a larger collection of some 2,000 photographs, most of which the government refuses to release.
Last March, a federal district court ordered that all of the photos be released. The government appealed, and earlier this month the appeals court returned the case to the district court, where the ACLU is continuing to fight for the full collection's release.
"The disclosure of these photos is long overdue, but more important than the disclosure is the fact that hundreds of photographs are still being withheld," said ACLU Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer. "The still-secret pictures are the best evidence of the serious abuses that took place in military detention centers. The government's selective disclosure risks misleading the public about the true extent of the abuse."
The ACLU filed the FOIA request in 2003 and sued to enforce it in 2004 after media organizations published photographs showing prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. The Bush administration admitted that it possessed other prisoner abuse photographs but refused to release them, contending that doing so would provoke violence. The district court rejected that argument in 2005, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision in 2008.
"In releasing the photos, the Defense Department points to the punishment of a handful of low-level soldiers, but the scandal is that no senior official has been held accountable or even investigated for the systemic abuse of detainees," said Alex Abdo, an ACLU staff attorney. "What the photos that the government has suppressed would show is that abuse was so widespread that it could only have resulted from policy or a climate calculated to foster abuse. That is why the government must release all of the photos and why today's selective disclosure is so troubling."
In 2009, the Obama administration said that it would release the photographs. But as it prepared to do so, Congress carved out an exception to the FOIA, which allowed the government to keep photos secret if the secretary of defense certified that their release would jeopardize national security. Then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates issued a blanket certification for hundreds of photos in 2009, and his successor, Leon Panetta, issued an identical certification in 2012. In the FOIA case, the ACLU challenged these certifications as unsupported and overbroad.
In March 2015, U.S. District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled in favor of the ACLU, ordering the release of all of the photos after finding that such a categorical certification was insufficient to justify the withholding of the images. He wrote that Panetta's certification was "deficient because it was not sufficiently individualized and it did not establish the Secretary's own basis for concluding that disclosure would endanger Americans." The government appealed.
In November 2015, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter certified the photos again, with the exception of the approximately 200 released today. The Defense Department stated that it had given the photographs more individualized consideration, a claim the ACLU says falls short of the district court's order that every photo be evaluated individually.
On January 14, the appeals court granted the government's request to send the case back to the district court rather than hear the pending appeal. The court has set a schedule for briefs to be submitted over the next two months.
The attorneys on the case are Jaffer and Abdo of the ACLU and Lawrence Lustberg and Ana Munoz of Gibbons PC.
The photos are at:
https://www.aclu.org/other/aclu-v-dod-198-photos-previously-certified-under-protected-national-security-documents-act
A summary of what we know about the contents of the photos is at:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/picture-torture-worth-thousand-reports
The district court's March 2015 decision ordering the photos' release is at:
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/abuse_photos_foia_order.pdf
Additional case documents are at:
https://www.aclu.org/cases/aclu-v-department-defense
This press release is at:
https://www.aclu.org/news/pentagon-releases-198-photos-relating-detainee-abuse-long-running-aclu-lawsuit
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666"This is an unprecedented attack on democracy," said US Rep. Shontel Brown.
A voting rights organization in Ohio is accusing the federal government of waging a large-scale intimidation campaign after the group was raided by the FBI on Thursday.
MS NOW reported on late Thursday that FBI agents searched the Cleveland offices of the Ohio Organizing Collaborative, an organization that helps register voters.
In addition to raiding the group's offices, sources tell MS NOW that "agents also fanned out across the state, showing up at the homes of the group’s leaders and staff members, carrying some subpoenas and seeking information and electronic devices."
MS NOW's sources also expressed concern that the raid was not a legitimate law enforcement operation but "part of the Trump administration’s efforts to sow doubt and distrust in voting integrity in key swing states ahead of the midterm elections."
In an interview with MS NOW, Ohio Organizing Collaborative board member Prentiss Haney accused the feds of using "straight-up intimidation tactics."
“They had agents all across the state going to civil rights leaders and community leaders’ doors intimidating them, coming and demanding that they talk about literally anything they would ask,” said Haney, who added that agents asked leaders "if they’re committing voter fraud, just on their doors, in front of their houses with their children, and just following them to work and school.”
In a separate interview with local public radio station WVXU, Haney described the FBI raid as a "full-on assault."
"This is not normal business," Haney said. "I mean there's no reason for over 100 agents to be knocking on the doors of everyday Ohioans, demanding and accusing people of voter fraud as if it was a witch hunt."
Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) said she was "alarmed and outraged" by the FBI raid, which she alleged was part of an effort by President Donald Trump and FBI Director Kash Patel to disrupt the 2026 midterm elections.
"This is an unprecedented attack on democracy: These raids must end immediately," Brown said. “Unfortunately, this appears to be part of a systematic effort by Trump and Kash Patel’s FBI to attack our elections and perpetuate more myths of voter fraud—all to undermine and challenge any election result that Trump does not agree with. It’s an attack on the people."
The Trump administration has waged a multi-faceted attack on voting rights ahead of the midterm elections.
In March, Trump signed an executive order instructing the United States Postal Service (USPS) to not deliver ballots in any states that have not given the federal government access to its voter lists, which critics have warned could lead to the "virtual elimination of mail-in voting."
A Tuesday court filing by the US Department of Justice, meanwhile, argued that states have the power to purge voter rolls at any time ahead of an election and do not have to abide by the 90-day “quiet period” established in the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
If adopted, this policy could result in states deeming voters ineligible without giving them sufficient time to challenge the decision.
Trump has also successfully lobbied Republicans in several states to engage in unprecedented mid-decade gerrymanders with the goal of creating more GOP seats in Congress.
"While Susan Collins’ campaign is backed by billionaire donors, our campaign is built on a movement funded by the people, with an average donation of $26," said Graham Platner's campaign manager.
A new analysis of campaign finance data shows that nearly 100 billionaires and their spouses have contributed to Republican Sen. Susan Collins' reelection bid so far, funneling nearly $10 million to the incumbent's campaign committee and PACs supporting her effort to fend off progressive challenger Graham Platner.
The Maine Monitor on Thursday published a list of billionaires who have donated to Collins and Platner, who has called his Republican opponent a "corrupt" protector and beneficiary of an oligarchic political system. The outlet noted that Collins' billionaire donation total "stands in stark contrast with the fundraising of her opponent... whose campaign has mostly attracted smaller amounts of funds but from many more people."
The $9.8 million that Collins' fundraising network received from billionaires and their spouses between January 2025 and late May 2026 represents "a third of what groups supporting Collins raised from all donors," according to The Maine Monitor's analysis.
Platner's reelection bid has received donations from billionaires George Soros, Pat Stryker, Jon Stryker, Christy Walton, and Jennifer Pritzker. Those contributions represent "a fraction of 1% of his total haul," The Maine Monitor noted. The Democratic candidate's campaign said Thursday that "grassroots donors chipping in $200 or less have given Graham Platner $9.6 million."
“While Susan Collins’ campaign is backed by billionaire donors, our campaign is built on a movement funded by the people, with an average donation of $26,” Ben Chin, Platner's campaign manager, said in a statement. “The establishment can bring it on—they cannot defeat the will of working Mainers, 15,000+ volunteers, and a campaign powered by small-dollar donors from nearly every zip code in Maine.”
Collins' largest billionaire donor to date came from Ken Griffin, a hedge fund manager who pumped $2.5 million into Pine Tree Results, a Super PAC supporting the five-term Republican incumbent. Collins' network has also received at least $1 million from Blackstone CEO Stephen Schwarzman, New Balance chair James Davis, and hedge fund manager Paul Singer.
this is oligarchy — pass it on pic.twitter.com/hU3nsRx9w4
— David Sirota (@davidsirota) June 12, 2026
The Maine Monitor observed that "the majority of the billionaire donations to Collins this cycle are from billionaires who made their money in alternative investments, including hedge funds and private equity."
In 2017, Collins voted for legislation that delivered massive tax breaks to large corporations and American billionaires, whose collective wealth surged to $8.1 trillion last year. ProPublica reported that private equity became Collins' "most reliable source of donations" after she withdrew an amendment to the 2017 legislation that would have targeted one of the industry's beloved tax breaks.
On top of billionaire funding, Collins' campaign has benefited from massive ad spending by dark-money groups such as One Nation. The group, which is aligned with Sen. Mitch McConnell, has spent more than $19 million on advertising for Collins so far.
"The US regime's secretary of state, driven by ambitions of conquest, presidential aspirations, and the vengeful sentiments of the elitist clique that propelled his political career, now further tightens the economic and energy stranglehold against Cuba," said the island's foreign minister.
Amid mounting global calls for President Donald Trump to end his administration's "economic genocide" in Cuba, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced sanctions against the state-owned oil and gas company, a move expected to worsen the island's fuel shortage and related humanitarian crisis.
Trump, in recent months, has repeatedly threatened to "take" Cuba and ramped up the 65-year US embargo against the country, including by imposing an oil blockade—disrupting food supplies, healthcare, education, transportation, and more—and issuing a May executive order that Rubio cited in his statement about the sanctions against Union Cuba-Petroleo (CUPET).
Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants and a longtime advocate of regime change on the island, claimed Thursday "that like every resource on the island, energy has long been weaponized by Cuba's communist government as a tool of both repression and self-serving regime kleptocracy."
"While the Cuban people have suffered fuel shortages and blackouts because of decades of under-investment in critical infrastructure," Rubio continued, "Cuba's communist leaders have diverted energy resources to line their own pockets: reselling countless barrels of scarce energy on the secondary market, hoarding energy supplies for its military, intelligence, and repressive forces, and rationing energy as a tool of social control."
Warning of the new sanctions' likely impact, William LeoGrande, a Cuba expert at American University in the United States, told The Associated Press: "It appears that they're all in on strangling the Cuban economy... Their policy is a contradiction. They claim they don't want to create a humanitarian crisis, although that's exactly what they’re doing."
As some Florida Republicans in Congress celebrated the secretary of state's announcement, Cuban officials fired back, with Bruno Rodríguez, Cuba's foreign affairs minister, taking aim at Rubio in a social media post.
"The US regime's secretary of state, driven by ambitions of conquest, presidential aspirations, and the vengeful sentiments of the elitist clique that propelled his political career, now further tightens the economic and energy stranglehold against Cuba," he wrote in Spanish. "To justify it, he does not resort to excuses prepared by his State Department, but to the usual crude lies, the most aggressive, uncouth, and rabid among Cuba's enemies."
Ernesto Soberón, Cuba's permanent representative to the United Nations, accused Rubio of "peddling crude lies" while the US ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, "mindlessly parrots the claim that the blockade does not exist and is, therefore, not primarily responsible for the suffering of the Cuban people."
"The cynicism of top US officials knows no bounds," Soberón said. "Stop the collective punishment of the Cuban people."
This week alone, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, and thousands of Italian medical professionals have spoken out against the US blockade of Cuba.
“The fuel restrictions imposed since early 2026 and recent tightening of extraterritorial sanctions, taken together, are directly harming Cubans, especially the most vulnerable," said Türk. "Children are dying because doctors lack access to essential medical supplies and medicines. This is unacceptable. These sanctions must be lifted immediately."
The Trump administration's targeting of CUPET came a week after it sanctioned Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel, his wife, and three other individuals.
"We just want them to be a nicely run country," Trump told journalists in the Oval Office last week, when asked whether those sanctions were meant to accelerate Cuba's collapse. "The country is starving, and it's got no energy, it's got no oil, it's got no money, it's got nothing. It's got a beautiful piece of land. You could have beautiful resorts."
Trump said that Cuba had already "sort of collapsed" and "we're going to handle that as soon as we've finished" military operations in Iran. He added, "I like to do one thing at a time."
Earlier this week, Elena Gutiérrez, a Mexican American activist at Global Exchange, wrote for Foreign Policy In Focus about returning from three trips to the island this year "with my heart a little more broken, but also with a stronger conviction that we need to defend Cuba."
"But can US citizens truly stop the madness their own empire imposes on them and on the rest of the world? Let us hope so, because only the people of the United States—and no one else—can carry out the transformations their own country needs," according to Gutiérrez. "Only then will Cuba, the United States, Mexico, and the rest of the world be free."