

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 April, Pakistani authorities used draconian laws and excessive force to prevent tenant farmers in Punjab province from protesting for land rights, Human Rights Watch said today. Farmers in Okara district had planned to convene on April 17, 2016, the International Day of Peasants' and Farmers' Struggles.
The authorities should drop all charges brought against those exercising their rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly, and appropriately punish security force members responsible for abuses against protesters.
"Blocking a peaceful meeting, arresting organizers, and then using excessive force against demonstrators shows a complete disregard for basic rights in a democratic society," said Brad Adams, Asia director. "The government's use of vague and overbroad counter-terrorism laws against protesting farmers brings new tensions to this volatile situation."
On the morning of April 16, police arrested Mehr Abdul Sattar at his home. Sattar is the secretary general of Anjuman-i-Mazareen Punjab, the farmers' group which was organizing the meeting the next day. The district administration imposed section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a colonial era law to restrict gatherings.
Hundreds of villagers gathered soon after to protest against the arrest of Sattar and four other tenant farmer leaders. The police and army personnel deployed in armored personnel carriers. After several protesters threw stones, the security forces carried out baton charges and fired tear gas canisters to disperse the protesters. Dozens were arrested under various anti-terrorism and public order provisions and many remain detained at undisclosed locations. Numerous witnesses told Human Rights Watch that security forces beat and arrested protesters, arresting some at their homes in the middle of the night.
The district coordinating officer of Okara told media that the local administration decided to forbid the Peasant's day meet because of security concerns after a recent terrorist attack in Lahore, saying there were "strict directions from the top authorities to keep an eye on the law and order situation and such assemblies that can cause security concern." He said that the farmer organizers refused to comply.
The Okara district police have registered more than 4000 cases under the penal code and the anti-terrorism law, which provides the authorities broad powers to arrest and to prosecute vaguely defined offenses such as section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. The government's National Action Plan against terrorism, created in 2015, expands the role of the military in counter-terrorism operations and permits the use of military courts for terrorism-related prosecutions.
In some cases, including that of Mehr Abdul Sattar, the police are refusing to provide information on the whereabouts of those arrested, which amounts to an enforced disappearance in violation of international law. Individuals forcibly disappeared are at a grave risk of being tortured or otherwise ill-treated.
Aisha Bibi, 55, villager, said that her son has disappeared since the crackdown by government forces. "When I asked the police about my son, the officers abused me and said that my son is being taught a lesson for being part of the farmers' struggle."
Since April 16, at least 24 farmers have been brought before the anti-terrorism courts and returned to judicial custody. Excessive use of tear gas might have resulted in the death of a 26-year-old farmer, according to his family members. Villagers told Human Rights Watch that security forces have since cordoned off villages in the area of dispute, preventing people, food and public services from entering or leaving.
Pakistan should ensure that security forces follow the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. They provide that all security forces use nonviolent means as far as possible before resorting to the use of force. Whenever the lawful use of force is unavoidable, officials should use restraint and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offense. Lethal force may only be used when strictly unavoidable to protect life.
"The government should promptly release those wrongfully held, provide information on those 'disappeared,' and hold accountable soldiers and police who use excessive force," Adams said. "Efforts to reach an agreement over the longstanding land dispute in Okara will be improved by showing greater respect for human rights."
Background and eyewitness accounts (names changed):
The dispute between tenant farmers in Okara and the military started 16 years ago. Traditionally, farmers were sharecroppers, handing over part of their produce as rent to the military, which acts as landlord through military-run farms. In 2000, the military unilaterally tried to change the rules, demanding that the farmers sign new rental contracts requiring them to pay rent in cash. The farmers refused, fearing that cash rents would, when times were lean, place them at risk of being evicted from land that their families have lived on for generations.
Human Rights Watch has previously documented a campaign of arbitrary detentions, torture, killings, and summary dismissals from employment by Pakistani security forces against the farmers.
The dispute peaked between May 5, 2003 and June 12, 2003, when the 150,000 people who live in the 18 villages that comprise Okara Military Farms were placed under curfew, with severe restrictions on movement within and into the district. Water, electricity and telephones were disconnected until the farmers agreed to sign the new contracts guaranteeing fixed income to the military owners of agricultural land.
During the election campaign of 2013, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif held a rally in Okara district and promised farmers their right to the lands farmed over generations. However, Sharif's promise remains unfulfilled and local authorities' oppression of the Okara farmers continues unabated, which has led to further protests. In July 2014, security forces killed two tenant farmers during a siege and assault in village 15/4 L.
The following accounts are from Human Rights Watch's visit to Okara district, Punjab from April 21 to 23, 2016.
Arbitrary arrests, detention, enforced disappearances
Human Rights Watch interviewed 14 people who said that their friends or family members were arrested by the authorities on April 16 or on ensuing days. Many remain in custody. Some have not been accounted for and may have been forcibly disappeared. The interviews were conducted in villages 4/4-L and 15/4-L. The local farmers' movement started in village 4/4-L in 2000, and it is considered by both the government and the farmers as the movement's headquarters.
Sakina Bibi, a 70 -year-old farmer from village 15/4L, said that her sons were arrested and detained, and she is concerned for their safety:
At about 2 to 2:30 a.m. on April 18, the police broke down the door of my house. There was a lot of noise. They were shouting. There were many of them. First they dragged my elder son Abbas, who is a school teacher from his bed and started beating him with rifle butts. Abbas suffers from hepatitis. Then they grabbed my younger son Javaid, and started hitting him on the head with batons. When I tried to restrain them, one police officer hit me on the head. They kicked and slapped my two daughters-in-law. They also arrested two village chowkidars [caretakers] and an 80-year-old neighbor who came to our house hearing our screams.
I don't know, where they have taken my sons and why they were arrested. I am more than 70-years-old and cannot pursue the disappearance of my sons. Nobody from the village can go to the police station to check because whoever goes to the police station is arrested.
Why is the National Action Plan being used against farmers? It is clearly because they want to throw us in jails and take our lands.
Muhammad Irfan, a resident of village 15/4L, said that his 60-year-old mother was in custody:
My mother Kaneez Bibi went to get medicine from the city for her diabetes on the morning of April 16. She was in an auto-rickshaw [motorbike taxi] and fell out after she was caught in the firing of teargas shells. She was arrested for attempted murder and under various sections of the Anti-Terrorism Act. We do not know where she is. I can't even go to the police station to check since I fear that I will be arrested as well. My mother can hardly walk. It is absurd to accuse her of attempting to commit murder.
Aisha Bibi, 55, a resident of village 4/4L, said that her son has disappeared since the crackdown by government forces:
My son Nadeem was arrested on April 17 when he was on his way to Okara city. My son is an auto-rickshaw driver and he was not in the protest of April 16. We have no land and are not even farmers. My husband is dead and my son is the only person in the house that earns a living. The police say that they have sent him to the Okara jail. However, the jail people refuse to talk to me and say that they will give out no information. When I asked the police about my son, the officers abused me and said that my son is being taught a lesson for being part of the farmers' struggle.
Mehr Abdul Sattar is the secretary general of Anjuman-i-Mazareen Punjab, the group that had organized the April 17 meeting. His arrest, a day earlier, led to the protests. His brother Mehr Abdul Jabbar told Human Rights Watch:
On April 16, I heard footsteps and loud noises coming from the front gate of our house. I ran towards the gate. Around 40 to 50 police officers had broken into our house. I couldn't recognize any of them, apart from the local Station House Officer. They started dragging and beating my brother. When I tried to restrain them, they started hitting us with rifle butts. They dragged us both out to the front gate. There were at least 12 police vehicles outside in the street. Then they took him away.
The police refused to tell me why Sattar was arrested. The district government officials claim that they have arrested him under the Maintenance of Public Order law. Earlier, on April 13, the district government had asked him to cancel the planned convention celebrating the International Day of Peasants. The district government also imposed section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code to stop the convention. Sattar refused to comply and said it is the constitutional right of the farmers to hold a peaceful, public meeting.
To this day we do not know where the police have taken Sattar. The police and district government refuse to meet us or tell us where he is. I am sure that they are torturing him. I was arrested in 2003 and was kept in "torture cells" for weeks.
Anyone who tries to question the detention of Sattar and the other farmers is implicated in false cases and arrested. Our fault is that we are sons of a poor farmer who have become aware of our rights to our land.
Izhar is a lawyer and a resident of village 4/4L. He said:
They are detaining people without registering arrests. I am a lawyer who has been working for the rights of other villagers. However, now even I can't go out of the village. For the past one year, I have stopped practicing law because I am afraid of being arrested. There are check posts outside the village and they arrest anyone going in and out. Sometimes they ask for National Identification Card and if the address on the N.I.C. is of our village, the police detain the individuals without any legal cause. The government has used the National Action Plan, which is meant to counter terrorists, to use military force on us. Anti-terrorism cases have been registered against women and children.
Excessive use of force
On April 16, army soldiers and the police responded to several protesters hurling stones and carrying wooden sticks by firing teargas canisters, carrying out baton charges and using steel rods, and shooting in the air. According to accounts, several protesters were badly beaten.
A resident of village 4/4L said that her 26-year-old son died during the protest:
In the morning, on April 16, he left the house to go to the protest against cancellation of the Peasants' day event. In the evening, he was brought home by fellow villagers. He was very ill, and told me that the excessive exposure to the teargas shells was suffocating him. We called the emergency ambulance service. However, the ambulance was stopped on the way to the hospital by the police at the checkpoint outside the village. My son died in the ambulance. Had the security forces allowed the ambulance to pass through quickly, my son might have been saved.
Muhammad Aslam, 50, a farmer from the village of 4/4L, described the security forces' use of force at the protest on April 16:
We had gathered that morning to protest the arrest of our leader, Mehr Abdul Sattar. There was a heavy presence of police and army troops. At about 10 a.m., the police attacked to disperse us without any warning. They started beating us, men, women, and children, mercilessly. I have marks on my body, which you can see. They used rods and batons to beat us. I cannot even go for a medical examination since I am afraid that I will be arrested on my way to the hospital. The entire village is hostage now. Nobody goes out.
The police have registered cases against us under the anti-terrorism law. The only terror acts that were committed are by the police and army. We were unarmed and peaceful.
How is it a crime to commemorate the International Day of Peasants? Is it a crime to be a farmer? The government treats us farmers as criminals and traitors. For the past one year, even if four or five farmers are seen together, they are arrested. They detain us for a few days without registering our arrest. They torture us and give us dirty water to drink while in custody. They want to break our resistance.
Rasheedan Bibi, a farmer from the village 4/4L, said:
I am over 50-years-old, a woman suffering from multiple illnesses. On April 16, I went to the protest against the cancellation of the peasant convention and arrest of our leaders. We had not blocked any road. We were unarmed and simply chanting slogans demanding release of our leaders and for granting us rights to our lands. The police and the army troops charged at us without any warning. They beat us with batons, kicked us, and dragged women on the road. My finger was fractured as a result of the beating and my knees are injured. My only crime is that I am a poor, farmer woman.
Muhammad Shabbir said he and his mother were beaten by the army and police officers for being part of the protest:
I work as a laborer in the fruit market in Okara city. I don't own even an inch of land, so I'm not a farmer. However, I went to the protest on April 16 in solidarity with the rest of the villagers. The army and the police attacked for us no reason. We posed no threat to them. When they were beating my mother with batons, I pleaded with them to stop, as she is old. For this, a police constable hit me on the head repeatedly, even as I bled. I needed stitches on my head. My mother has a broken hand and bruises all over her body.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
The directors of the film—which premiered at the Venice Film Festival—said they "felt the responsibility" to expose insider testimony about Israel's systematic mass killing of Palestinians.
A documentary film that premiered Thursday at the Venice Film Festival offers a rare inside account of Israel’s US-backed genocide in Gaza, with former members of a secret Israeli intelligence unit describing how they helped transform the mass killing of Palestinian civilians into a routine, bureaucratized affair.
NAZA, directed by Israeli filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, is based on interviews with 24 Israeli military and intelligence insiders, several of whom served in a secret unit that reported directly to the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"We really are looking at... a system of killing, which is mass killing [and] relies on mass surveillance," Abraham told reporters in Venice on Thursday. "We felt the responsibility as Israelis to use our position... to bring insider testimony into how the system looks like from the inside... And this is the film that we made."
Szor said that "a lot of these things are also, it's important to say... known because they've been documented by journalists, Palestinian journalists, in Gaza. It's footage that has been out there."
"But I think that we felt that there is still some sort of an importance to take those testimonies and put it in a film in a way that, of course, first of all, it's different to hear," she added. "The people who designed and operated those systems talk about it in front of a camera."
According to the film, one former member bluntly said that the unit's mission was to “thwart peace.”
However, Abraham and Szor said their purpose was not to expose a handful of rogue soldiers, but to examine the machinery and policies behind the violence.
The documentary’s title refers to an Israeli military acronym used to quantify the civilians expected to be killed in an attack—a chilling bureaucratic shorthand for people often referred to as collateral damage, or, in the so-called "War on Terror" still being waged by the United States 25 years after the September 11, 2001 attacks, "bugsplat."
The film’s sources describe artificial intelligence-assisted targeting, mass surveillance, and the hacking of mobile phones to identify alleged Hamas operatives, sometimes despite the known presence of family members and other civilians.
Israeli forces have operated under loosened rules of engagement that effectively permit the killing of an unlimited number of civilians when targeting even a single low-ranking Hamas member. The Israel Defense Forces utilizes cutting-edge AI technology to select targets at a far faster rate than humans alone could, and destroys them with weapons including 1,000- and 2,000-pound bombs—many supplied by the US.
The result has been the killing and wounding of more than 250,000 Palestinians since the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. Most of the victims have been civilians, including more than 21,500 children killed and tens of thousands more disabled or wounded.
Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza, including murder and forced starvation. Israel is facing an ongoing genocide case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice—also in The Hague—and formally supported by nearly 20 nations.
Abraham and Szor are best known internationally for co-directing with two others the film No Other Land, which chronicled ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the illegally occupied West Bank by Israeli settlers and soldiers. The film won the 2025 Academy Award for best documentary feature.
NAZA—which reportedly received a 25-minute standing ovation at its Venice premiere—is the sole documentary among the films competing for the festival's famed Golden Lion. It joins a growing body of recent films about the Gaza genocide.
American Doctor, directed by Poh Si Teng, follows US physicians working inside Gaza hospitals amid Israel's deliberate destruction of the strip's medical and healthcare systems.
Last year's The Voice of Hind Rajab offered a harrowing mix of acted scenes and the actual 70-minute audio recording of a 5-year-old Palestinian girl's desperate final phone call to Palestine Red Crescent Society personnel amid an Israeli massacre of her family as they were trapped in a car under tank fire.
The Environmental Protection Network listed actions "that could increase pollution-related health risks, weaken protections that would otherwise reduce those risks, or shift more costs onto families and communities."
As President Donald Trump claims that US communities fighting against artificial intelligence data centers are promoting "poverty, crime, and squalor," a Thursday report details how his administration "is weakening or proposing to weaken pollution and permitting safeguards" for such facilities, to the detriment of public health.
The Environmental Protection Agency's "mission is to protect human health and the environment," notes the new report. "Yet Administrator Lee Zeldin has made turning the United States into the 'AI capital of the world' a pillar of EPA's work."
"The Hidden Health Costs of AI Data Centers"—from the Environmental Protection Network (EPN), which is made up of hundreds of former EPA staffers—documents "at least 30 federal actions since January 2025 that could increase pollution-related health risks, weaken protections that would otherwise reduce those risks, or shift more costs onto families and communities."
As the document details: "17 of the 30 explicitly cite or target AI or data centers in the action itself or in an agency statement specifically describing or justifying that action. The remaining 13 affect how data centers are powered, what pollution safeguards apply, how projects are approved, or how federal requirements are enforced."
The report points to the EPA policy that "made it easier for some long-idled facilities to restart without triggering the major air-permitting requirements," as well as its proposed elimination of federal carbon pollution standards for fossil-fueled power plants and some outstanding state clean-air requirements for areas that failed to meet ozone standards.
The publication also notes the EPA's extended deadlines for several coal-plant wastewater requirements, newly regulated coal-ash units, the 2024 oil and gas standards, and for states to submit plans to reduce visibility-impairing pollution. The agency further interpreted a policy on nonemergency backup generator use that it framed as a move supporting AI and data centers.
It's not just the EPA. The US Department of Energy "authorized grid use of backup generation at data centers and other major facilities during emergencies," the report explains, while the Army Corps of Engineers "expressly named data centers as examples of commercial development covered by" a streamlined water permit.
The race for AI data center growth shouldn’t mean weaker safeguards on pollution. Former EPA official Walter Mugdan explains why strong enforcement matters when families’ health is at risk.What’s being weakened? Read the full report at the link in the comments.
[image or embed]
— Environmental Protection Network (@enviroprotnet.bsky.social) September 10, 2026 at 4:39 PM
"No study has yet calculated the combined health effects of these actions, but the direction is clear," the report says. It cites a study from this year that estimates air pollution related to data centers "could impose roughly $11.7 billion to $20.9 billion in annual public health costs by 2028," and "contribute to roughly 600,000 asthma symptom cases and 1,300 premature deaths."
Dan Costa, who spent about 35 years at EPA studying the impact of air pollution on human health and led its national research program on air quality, climate, and energy, said that "the existing health study gives us a picture of the potential health burden under particular data-center growth and emissions scenarios."
"But it does not estimate the additional health effects of the 30 federal policy actions EPN documents," he stressed. "That is the analysis EPA should be doing now: Measuring what these sources actually emit, modeling both local and regional air-quality effects, and translating those changes into health impacts."
In addition to laying out the Trump policies and their risks, the publication highlights how his agenda on AI data centers conflicts with voters' wishes. An April poll conducted by YouGov for EPN found that:
"You would think a build-out of this magnitude would mean more vigilance from EPA: stronger safeguards to make sure companies control their pollution, more science to understand what this scale will bring, and more monitoring," said Dr. Lynn Goldman, a pediatrician and former EPA assistant administrator. "Instead, EPA and other federal agencies are doing the opposite."
The EPN report was published amid mounting calls for Congress to rein in artificial intelligence development in the wake of Jacob Coxon, a researcher at Anthropic who previously worked at OpenAI, quitting, and spotlighting fears within the industry that the rapidly advancing technology "could kill us all by the end of the decade."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) have introduced legislation that would permanently ban the development of "superintelligent" AI until a federal body is created to regulate it—and, according to polling results published on Wednesday by Data for Progress, 68% of likely voters in the United States support that proposal.
Sanders has also partnered with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (D-NY) for the Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act, which would pause construction on the facilities "until strong national safeguards are in place to protect workers, consumers, and communities, defend privacy and civil rights, and ensure these technologies do not harm our environment."
"Even for the notoriously corrupt and lawless Trump, this explicit and desperate attempt to buy votes in the November election is a new low," said one watchdog leader.
Many Democrats in Congress are on the growing list of critics calling out President Donald Trump for his Wednesday night vow to give US voters $5,000 each if they help Republicans win control of the Senate and House of Representatives—where they already have majorities—in the November midterm elections.
"Nothing says confidence like trying to bribe people for votes," Congressman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) quipped Thursday.
When Fox News' Laura Ingraham later asked, "Why not just give the money now?" Trump attempted to blame Democrats.
Noting the president's jumbled response to that question, Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said: "I don't know what this even means, but I do know the reason Trump won't give a straight answer is that he doesn't really mean to send these checks to anyone. He has lied about this over and over again, and he's lying now. Just like he lied when he said he would lower costs."
Some critics highlighted other cases of Trump pledging to give Americans money, including alleged savings from the actions of his so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an effort spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk.
Congressman Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said: "So now it's $5,000 bribes that Trump will never deliver to attempt to make voters forget what they are paying for gas and food. What ever happened to those promised DOGE checks? Americans are not fools, we know he lies daily."
Blasting the president as "our pathological liar-in-chief," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also pointed to previous instances of Trump promising money, from a 10% cap on credit card interest rates to $2 for a gallon of gasoline.
"The Trump administration is not about helping working families," the former presidential candidate stressed. "It's about giving a trillion dollars in tax breaks to the 1% and throwing 15 million Americans off the healthcare they have."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who has also sought the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, shared on social media Groundwork Collaborative's roundup of 15 times Trump has promised a check, dividend, or rebate—and not delivered.
Some Democratic governors also took aim at Trump. California's Gavin Newsom, who is expected to run for president in 2028, said: "After making you sicker and poorer with his war, Donald Trump now wants to buy your vote with $5,000 in taxpayer-funded blood money. The most corrupt man ever to occupy the Oval Office."
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul emphasized that "Trump owes New Yorkers $13.5 billion for his illegal tariffs and hasn't paid up."
"Now he's dangling $5,000 checks if Republicans win Congress. A trillion-dollar campaign bribe from a guy who doesn't pay his bills," she added. "Fool me once…"
It's not just elected Democrats ripping Trump's new pledge. Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a Thursday statement that "even for the notoriously corrupt and lawless Trump, this explicit and desperate attempt to buy votes in the November election is a new low."
"Trump knows he can't do this, and yet he's attempting to bribe voters with the false promise of cash to help his party win an election, which is antithetical to every principle of American democracy," she continued. "Every Republican at the convention and across the country should loudly and vehemently denounce Trump for proposing this dangerous and transparently illegal scheme. The fact that no one has done that yet is cause for deep alarm about the future of American elections."
The First Circuit Court of Appeals found implementing Trump's order would cause "chaos and widespread disenfranchisement... between now and November 3."
A federal court on Thursday rejected the Trump administration's request to reinstate an executive order that placed restrictions on mail-in voting ahead of the midterm elections, arguing that the order is "likely unlawful."
The US First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that President Donald Trump's mail-in voting executive order likely violates the US Constitution's elections clause, which grants states the rights to oversee their own elections, subject to oversight from the US Congress.
The court also found that the regulations proposed by the order "could prevent millions of Americans from obtaining and returning their ballots" in the coming election.
The ruling noted that the Trump executive order places a number of onerous restrictions on mail-in voting, such as requiring states to print "a voter-specific Intelligent Mail barcode ('IMb')" on all outgoing ballots as a precondition for their delivery by the United States Postal Service (USPS).
Additionally, the court wrote, the order would compel states "to obtain USPS approval for new ballot-envelope designs; to purchase new envelopes to replace those already ordered; to assure that there are technological systems in place adequate to generate IMbs; and to upload voter-specific information to a USPS online portal that is still not operational."
The court said these restrictions are so severe that they validate an earlier ruling from a federal district court, which found that implementing Trump's executive order would lead to "chaos and widespread disenfranchisement... between now and November 3."
Among other things, the court found these Trump-ordered rules would make it "impossible for some states to reprint compliant envelopes," while also creating a "herculean task" of "scanning tens of millions of ballot envelopes and reviewing for a match with information in the presently non-operative portal."
The court also took a shot at Trump administration lawyers, whom it alleged "have not even seriously challenged" the district court's finding about the chaos the president's executive order would cause.
The injunction against Trump's mail-in voting order came as a result of a complaint filed by a number of civil society groups, including the League of Women Voters and the Association of Americans Resident Overseas.
In a joint statement released after the ruling, the plaintiffs and their counsel said that the court affirmed that "the US Postal Service is not the gatekeeper for mail ballots."
"This decision rightly keeps in place an order blocking USPS from enforcing its disruptive and disenfranchising rule through the November election," they added, "and preserves the current system, which has worked safely, securely, and reliably for decades."
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom took the opportunity to taunt the Trump administration for suffering yet another loss in its crusade to clamp down on mail-in voting.
"The rule of law continues to slap down Donald Trump's dangerous and un-American attacks on our free and fair elections," Newsom wrote. "California will never stop fighting for our democracy and the people's ability to exercise their constitutional right to vote."
The Trump administration has asked to the US Supreme Court to reinstate the president's voting order. With mail-in ballots for the upcoming midterms already being sent out in some states, a ruling from the nation's highest court is expected in the coming days.
"Right now, we're counting on AI corporations to voluntarily block weapons of mass destruction," said Rep. Greg Casar, who is pushing for a ban on "superintelligent" AI.
As industry insiders issue louder warnings about the catastrophic danger of unchecked artificial intelligence, Anthropic has revealed in a report out Thursday that it had to "disrupt" several attempts by scientists to use its AI models for research that could contribute to the creation of biological weapons.
In the report, titled “Detecting and Countering Misuse of AI,” Anthropic said that over the past eight months, it banned several accounts that had used its chatbot Claude for research into highly contagious diseases.
As NBC News reported:
In each of the five cases Anthropic cited, the company suspected that the researchers behind them were affiliated in some way with a government or military in a country it had banned or took deliberate steps to hide their location and identity, or both. The company declined to say where any of the researchers were based, but its terms of service allow all use from all but a few regions, including China, Iran, and Russia.
In one example, Anthropic said researchers used a third-party platform that attempted to use Claude to complete a grant application for work that would look into how to repeatedly mutate chikungunya, a mosquito-borne virus that causes severe pain and fever in humans. Anthropic said it blocked all attempts by the researchers. The research, which would be conducted at a military institute, would seek to repeatedly mutate the virus in live animals to become increasingly more infectious, Anthropic said.
Another had used Anthropic’s Claude to assist in research into how to make bird flu, which historically has a global fatality rate of around 50% in confirmed human cases, more virulent and damaging to mammals. Anthropic said the researcher only received assistance from Claude’s weakest class of models, which provided clerical help.
Anthropic clarified that it did not find any concrete instance of a scientist attempting to use its technology for nefarious purposes, and that these use cases may well have been part of beneficial scientific inquiry, like research into vaccines or other cures for disease. Nevertheless, it said it erred on the side of caution and shut down the accounts.
"Biological misuse is one of the most serious risks of frontier AI models," the report explains. "It has long been a concern that AI models might one day reach the level of capability where they can help to make existing pathogens more dangerous—or create entirely new ones. Without the correct safeguards, such capabilities could have catastrophic consequences."
The report acknowledges that even as safeguards are implemented, those with the intent to do harm are getting more savvy about how to evade them and using the appearance of legitimate science to do it.
"Sophisticated threat actors are aware that we (and other AI providers) are attempting to detect dangerous uses of our models, and they use the dual-use nature of biology to maintain a kind of 'plausible deniability' about their research," the report says. "More sophisticated actors can hide their intent, extracting assistance from an AI model in interactions that look plausibly beneficial, but when put in context and analyzed holistically, can provide clear warning signs of misuse."
The report details other ways in which actors have used its technology for malicious purposes. It found that governments like China, Iran, and Mali had used Claude to collect information about journalists and dissidents. Others used it to conduct hacking campaigns, automate identity theft operations, and create malware.
Anthropic said it hoped that by publishing the report, it would "help other developers recognize similar patterns on their own platforms, give governments and civil society a clearer view of how emerging threats take shape, and strengthen collective defenses."
The report comes amid a torrent of scrutiny directed at Anthropic and its competitor OpenAI following reports in recent months of severe security breaches involving their technology, which has been documented acting autonomously to hack into other websites and evade human detection.
Earlier this week, Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon, who previously worked at OpenAI, resigned from his post and sounded the alarm about fears within the industry that the technology “could kill us all by the end of the decade" and that the companies are prioritizing the race toward superintelligence without regard for the potential risks.
In the wake of Coxon's resignation, several other researchers from Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google have shared similar warnings that the technology could result in an extinction-level disaster or otherwise cause severe harm to human society.
A poll published on Wednesday by Data for Progress showed that 68% of likely voters in the US support a proposal announced last week by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) for legislation that would permanently ban the development of "superintelligent" AI that can surpass human cognition and would put a pause on "advanced" AI development until a federal body is put in place to regulate the industry.
Casar said the fact that Anthropic was being relied upon to stop its own users from using its tech to potentially create bioweapons illustrated the urgent need for regulation.
"Right now, we're counting on AI corporations to voluntarily block weapons of mass destruction. Voluntarily," Casar emphasized in a post to social media on Thursday. "Congress must do the obvious thing: BAN catastrophic AI uses like creating biological or nuclear weapons."
"The so-called 'War on Terror' never ended in Yemen," said Costs of War Project director Stephanie Savell. "This report will allow people to hold the US government accountable for the deaths and destruction it has caused."
A report released Thursday examines the more than 500 Yemeni civilians its authors said were killed or wounded by US airstrikes in the Middle East nation during a recent 17-month period amid the open-ended so-called "War on Terror" that has left nearly one million people dead in around half a dozen nations over the past 25 years.
The report—authored by the Yemen-based group Mwatana for Human Rights and published by the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs—documents 46 US airstrikes that took place between December 2023 and May 2025 that caused at least 576 civilian casualties, including 213 deaths and 363 injuries. Among the casualties were at least 50 children and 25 women.
"The so-called 'War on Terror' never ended in Yemen," Costs of War Project director Stephanie Savell contended.
"It's important that we continue to account for the civilian lives lost, harmed, and disrupted in Yemen and other US war zones," she added. "This report will allow people to hold the US government accountable for the deaths and destruction it has caused in Yemen in support of the Israeli government's wars since 2023."
The overwhelming majority of the casualties covered by the publication occurred during President Donald Trump’s 2025 "Operation Rough Rider" campaign. Mwatana estimates that the operation killed 208 civilians and wounded 341, while the Pentagon has acknowledged a smaller toll of 153 killed and 243 wounded.
Seven of the 46 strikes took place between December of 2023 and January of 2025 during former President Joe Biden's "Operation Prosperity Guardian," a military campaign that came amid Houthi rebel attacks on shipping lanes in the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandab Strait during Israel's genocidal war on Gaza.
Among the deadliest attacks covered by the report was the April 2025 bombardment of Ras Isa oil port ordered by Trump, in which US strikes killed scores of people and wounded more than 150 others. Human Rights Watch called the bombing an “apparent war crime,” saying the destruction of the civilian oil facility also threatened vital fuel supplies in a country already devastated by years of war and humanitarian crisis.
The campaign also included the April 28 bombing of a detention center in Saada while jailed African migrants were sleeping. Amnesty International has called for a war crimes investigation into that attack, in which scores of migrants were killed.
Mwatana researchers conducted site visits and 59 interviews with survivors, relatives, eyewitnesses, first responders, and other sources for the new report.
"The first strike hit while we were in deep sleep. I could not believe what I saw—30 of my fellow detainees died; their bodies were charred, and the smell of burned flesh filled the air," one 25-year-old Ethiopian survivor of the Saada attack recounted. "The place was crowded with bodies, while others were screaming and calling for help and rescue... we could do nothing for them."
In addition to physical harm, survivors described the deep psychological trauma suffered by victims. One mother said her 8-year-old son Taha "saw his father after he was hit by shrapnel—how he was bleeding, and how his intestines were coming out."
"His father was screaming: ‘Run… leave me and run before the American aircraft strikes again and finishes me off,'" she continued. "Taha still cannot sleep; when he does, he wakes up terrified. Whenever he hears thunder or any loud noise, he runs in fear, his whole body trembling."
Overall, US strikes covered by the report "hit civilian structures such as homes, shops, farms, residential neighborhoods, and infrastructure," the publication notes, adding that airstrikes "also caused severe damage to infrastructure and critical facilities, compounding the humanitarian suffering of local populations by striking essential service facilities, particularly in rural areas that already face acute shortages of clean water, electricity, and health services."
"Given Yemen’s economic deterioration and the catastrophic humanitarian situation produced by the armed conflict that has been ongoing since September 2014, it is likely that the US strikes expanded the cycle of poverty in Yemen by increasing unemployment and multiplying the number of households that lost breadwinners and sources of income," the report adds.
Hundreds of thousands of Yemenis have died during the civil war that began in 2014, with international experts attributing more than 150,000 Yemeni deaths to a US-backed, Saudi-led bombing campaign and blockade. According to the UK-based casualty monitor Airwars, an estimated 445-643 Yemeni civilians have been killed by US forces during the George W. Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations.
The Costs of War Project says that in the first two decades following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, "between 363,939 and 387,072 civilians were killed by multiple warring parties in post-9/11 war zones, including 12,690 civilians in Yemen."
Mwatana for Human Rights chair Radhya Al-Mutawakel said Thursday that "the losses caused by US airstrikes against civilians cannot be regarded as temporary harm that ends when military operations cease. Civilians who have lost loved ones, homes, or sources of income continue to bear the consequences of these attacks, amid economic and humanitarian conditions that do not provide them with even the minimum capacity to recover.”
"Protecting civilians is not limited to avoiding killing or injuring them; it also includes respecting civilian objects and livelihoods," Al-Mutawakel added. "The United States must assume its legal and moral responsibility to recognize the civilian victims of its military operations in Yemen, provide them with redress and reparation, and hold accountable those responsible for the violations inflicted upon them.”
The new survey results come as whistleblowers from leading AI firms speak out about the potential catastrophic dangers if their technology is allowed to develop unchecked.
As whistleblowers in the artificial intelligence industry speak out about the extraordinary risk posed by their technology if it remains unchecked, a new poll out Wednesday reveals that more than two-thirds of US voters agree with a new proposal in Congress to pause artificial intelligence development until guardrails are set up and ban AI superintelligence completely.
The proposed legislation, announced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) last week, and soon to be introduced in Congress, would ban developers from creating “superintelligent” AI programs capable of surpassing human cognition and resisting human attempts to shut them down. It would also halt "advanced" AI development until a new federal regulatory body was established to set clear rules and processes for AI safety.
The polling firm Data for Progress asked more than 1,300 likely voters about the bill. According to survey results released on Wednesday, 68% of them said they would support the proposal to temporarily pause advanced AI development and permanently prohibit the development of superintelligent programs, while just 25% said they'd oppose it.
Though the bill was proposed by a pair of progressive lawmakers, its appeal spans the political spectrum: 72% of Democrats and 70% of independent and third-party voters said they supported it. But so did 63% of Republican voters.
The poll results come just one day after AI researcher Jacob Coxon resigned from Anthropic, saying that the company and one of its top competitors, OpenAI, where he previously worked, were more concerned with winning the AI race than with protecting the public against out-of-control “superhuman systems” that many of his industry colleagues privately fear could “kill us all by the end of the decade.”
"Neither company is acting responsibly," Coxon said. "They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives.”
With reports piling up of AI agents escaping human control, hacking into external computer systems, and deceiving users, several other researchers at leading AI firms have cosigned Coxon's warning, saying that AI could have catastrophic results if it surpasses human capabilities.
Evan Hubinger, an alignment science lead at Anthropic, said that while "the risk from present models is low," he and other researchers "earnestly believe AI could kill all humans" if it continues to develop and put the likelihood of it happening within the next decade at above 10%.
Alex Turner, who left his job as a research scientist at Google's DeepMind in June, concurred that Coxon was "right" and that "many researchers believe they are building something that could kill everyone on the planet. It was literally my day job to think about how to stop that."
Even if AI doesn't lead to the extinction of humanity, other researchers have said they are gravely worried about its impacts on society.
"I think there are a number of ways AI could go poorly for humanity, and at the current, frankly terrifying pace, humanity will be quite lucky if we manage to find and stay on the narrow path between all the bad outcomes," wrote Jason Wolfe, a researcher at OpenAI. "Regardless of what you think of OpenAI, this is not a problem that can be solved by any one company (or country) in isolation."
Jonathan Richard Schwarz, former Senior Research Scientist at Google DeepMind, noted that he left the company after seven years and rejected offers from other AI companies "due to severe concerns about the concentration of power these labs represent."
"What is currently happening in this field is deeply unhealthy for society," Schwarz said.
In a Wednesday social media post, Sanders pointed to these and other warnings from industry experts as evidence that federal intervention is urgently needed.
"The very people building this technology admit that it could threaten the future of humanity," the senator wrote.
He added on Thursday that "Unless we reverse course, there is a very real possibility that once advanced AI surpasses human intelligence, it could escape our control with catastrophic consequences."
Wednesday's poll results are consistent with other recent surveys showing that solid majorities of voters across all parties object to the construction of AI data centers near them, an issue that has come to dominate the 2026 election season.
William Lawrence, a cofounder of the Sunrise Movement, became the Democratic nominee for the US House in Michigan's 7th Congressional District last month, in part by tapping into constituents' fears about data centers. He said recent whistleblower warnings were evidence that AI companies were "gambling with our lives" and needed to be reined in.
"I can't see the future," Lawrence said in a video posted online Thursday. "But if there is even a 5% chance of a bioweapon being set loose, authoritarians using AI to entrench their own power, or a rogue AI hacker taking down the economy, that risk is too great."
"We need a pause on the development of AI models and data center construction," he said. "I do believe that AI is very powerful and could potentially be of tremendous benefit to humanity. But if we stay trapped in this arms race, if OpenAI and Anthropic have to keep competing for market share, we know that they will not slow down."
"The only entity that has the power to intervene here," Lawrence said, "is the federal government."
"Tax flight is nothing more than a myth, and should be given as much credence as flat-earthers.”
The threats came in a steady stream last year from Fox News, hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, and Gristedes grocery chain CEO John Catsimatidis, who insisted that wealthy New York City residents were "panicking" at the possibility that then-state Rep. Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, could become the mayor and ensure rich locals pay more in taxes to help fund crucial services.
"It only takes a handful of successful people to leave to decimate the city’s tax base," cautioned Ackman, while Catsimatidis suggested many rich New Yorkers would likely join him in fleeing to "the promised land": Florida, which has no state income tax.
But the progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative said Thursday that new Internal Revenue Service (IRS) data should be "the final nail in the coffin" of the evidence-free, perennial claim that higher taxes cause wealthy residents to leave their cities and states.
The agency released its 2023 Statistics of Income (SOI) data, covering the period before Mamdani became mayor and introduced a tax on second homes, ranging from 0.8% to 1.3% for properties valued at $5 million or more, which he estimated will raise $500 million annually.
The data shows how the tax base was impacted after the state imposed a separate tax policy in 2022, raising its top tax rate on the highest earners.
Poking a giant hole in the persistent theory that wealthy people won't want to live in states that require more from them in taxes, the number of New Yorkers reporting more than $1 million in income grew by about 3% after the tax rate was raised, the SOI data shows.
"If there was any merit to the myth that tax increases on New York’s wealthy drive them away, the new IRS data should show it. It doesn’t."
The number of millionaires nationwide went down in 2023, but New York counted 2,000 more than it had the previous year. The number of tax filers earning between $500,000 and $1 million also grew by over 8,500—more than 7%.
The average adjusted gross income of New Yorkers who left the state from 2022-23 fell 15%, from over $125,000 to $106,900.
"If the past is prologue, the SOI data suggest few, if any, of the city’s wealthiest residents will leave as a result of a modest tax. Instead they are likely to remain rooted in the social, business, and economic networks that make New York uniquely valuable to them," said Groundwork Collaborative. "The New Yorkers actually at risk of leaving the city are the lower-income workers who power the economy."
Lindsay Owens, president and CEO of Groundwork Collaborative, said the new data makes clear that "tax flight is nothing more than a myth, and should be given as much credence as flat-earthers.”
"If there was any merit to the myth that tax increases on New York’s wealthy drive them away, the new IRS data should show it," said Owens. "It doesn’t—New York’s millionaire population kept climbing years after the state raised taxes on top earners."
Wealthy New Yorkers, said Groundwork, are shown by the data to be "a settled population that may squawk about a tax increase, but not pack up and leave."
"This research makes clear that the Earth and climate system doesn't stand still while we debate policy," said a co-author of the new paper.
On the heels of the United States setting new summer heat records and United Nations scientists warning that at least a temporary overshoot of the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target can no longer be avoided, researchers on Thursday published an alarming new study on climate feedback loops.
For years, experts have feared that humanity's continued reliance on fossil fuels that heat the Earth could lead to several "positive" feedback loops—or changes to natural systems that amplify global warming. The scientists behind the new paper in the journal Environmental Research focused on carbon dioxide and methane emissions from inland freshwaters, permafrost thaw, wetlands, and wildfires.
"Continued warming from greenhouse gases emitted from human activities threatens to feed further warming as permafrost, wetlands, and wildfires destabilize and respond by releasing carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide," said co-author Ben Poulter, warming-induced emissions program director at Spark Climate Solutions, in a statement.
"This study provides a critical look at the magnitude of the temperature response," he explained, "and a call to action to accelerate the accounting and monitoring of warming-induced emissions to support pathways that phase out fossil emissions to stabilize the planet's climate."
Lead author and Spark research scientist Sam Abernethy noted that "what surprised us was the size of the feedback."
"We found that natural systems could amplify global warming by 20-30%," he said. In other words, these natural systems could add an estimated 0.2-0.4ºC of warming this century to any temperature rise tied to human activity.
"This hidden multiplier is missing from the models guiding climate policy, so those models are likely underestimating how much warming is coming—and overestimating how much carbon we can still afford to emit," Abernethy added.
Permafrost is ground that remains fully frozen for at least two consecutive years, and the scientists who study it "have long warned that thawing soils would become a significant emissions source as the planet warms," said co-author Christina Schädel, senior research scientist at the Woodwell Climate Research Center.
"This paper shows that permafrost thaw accounts for half of the anticipated warming-induced emissions," she pointed out. "Warming-induced emissions are already in motion, and they scale with every fraction of a degree. Every little bit of warming we can avert today matters for what the climate looks like in the long term."
Co-author Robert Jackson, a Stanford University professor and chair of the Global Carbon Project, similarly stressed that "the results are a wake-up call, and it's imperative that they be included in the next generation of climate policies. Failure to do so will make meeting the world's climate goals less and less likely."
The paper's publication came just two months away from the next United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31) in Türkiye, where firefighters are currently battling deadly blazes that have fueled calls for the country's government to fight for rapidly phasing out coal, gas, and oil on a global scale.
"This research makes clear that the Earth and climate system doesn't stand still while we debate policy," said Brian Buma, a co-author of the new study and senior climate scientist at Environmental Defense Fund.
"Emissions from permafrost, wetlands, and wildfire could meaningfully erode our remaining time to warming thresholds—and they are unaccounted for in most scenarios," Buma reiterated. "This means rapid fossil fuel emissions reductions are even more urgent than current projections suggest."
"The good news," he added, "is that it's in our hands—lower emissions now limit how severe these feedbacks become."
The increased fighting is putting even more pressure on global energy markets, with the price of Brent crude topping $107 per barrel during Thursday trading.
Houthi fighters on Thursday took control of a key port city on the west coast of Yemen, putting them in a stronger position to disrupt commercial shipping—and to potentially send oil prices rocketing even higher.
According to Reuters, the Houthis seized the city of Mocha from Saudi-backed forces before moving toward the Hanish Islands, located to the northeast.
Reuters further reported that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps provided the Houthi fighters with weapons and guidance ahead of their successful assault.
The Houthis' seizure of more territory along the Red Sea gives the militant group a greater ability to launch attacks on vessels trying to transport oil through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
Petroleum exporters in the region have had to rely more heavily on the Bab el-Mandeb Strait ever since Iran shut down shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice, which he launched in February without authorization from Congress.
Restricting shipments through both straits would put even greater pressure on global oil markets, which have already been under strain since the start of the Iran War.
A Thursday report from Bloomberg noted that Saudi Arabia, whose ships have been targets of Houthi attacks, revealed that its oil output has dropped to 6.24 million barrels per a day, its lowest level of oil production since 1990.
The price of Brent crude topped $107 during Thursday trading, a 6% increase from the day before. Data released Thursday by the American Automobile Association showed that the average price of gas in the US has reached $4.28 per gallon while the average price of diesel has reached a record high of $5.98 per gallon.
Fawaz Gerges, professor at the London School of Economics, said in an interview with The New York Times that the Houthis, despite receiving assistance from Iran, have their own distinct goals and see Trump's illegal war as a "golden opportunity" to make advances against Yemen's Saudi-backed government.
Additionally, said Gerges, "Iran directly and indirectly benefits from what the Houthis have been doing," since "all-out war could have major implications for the global energy supply."
Brett Erickson, managing partner at Obsidian Risk Advisors, wrote in a social media post that Iran and the Houthis have all the incentive in the world to keep the pressure on global petroleum shipping.
"Brent Crude just spiked over $107 per barrel," Erickson wrote. "Just a mere month ago, it was trading at $85. That’s a 25.9% increase in a month. And with no off-ramp for Trump until at least the midterms are over, we’re looking at a long period of elevated oil prices now."