

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.

A staggering 1.2 million people are internally displaced in Afghanistan today, a dramatic increase from some 500,000 in 2013. Afghans already form one of the world's largest refugee populations, with an estimated 2.6 million Afghan citizens living beyond the country's border.
Amnesty International's new report, 'My Children Will Die This Winter': Afghanistan's Broken Promise to the Displaced, casts fresh light on the country's forgotten victims of war who have fled their homes but remain displaced within the country's borders.
"While the world's attention seems to have moved on from Afghanistan, we risk forgetting the plight of those left behind by the conflict," said Champa Patel, South Asia Director at Amnesty International.
"Even after fleeing their homes to seek safety, increasing numbers of Afghans are languishing in appalling conditions in their own country, and fighting for their survival with no end in sight."
Amnesty International's research found that despite the promises made by successive Afghan governments, internally displaced people (IDPs) in Afghanistan continue to lack adequate shelter, food, water, health care, and opportunities to pursue education and employment.
"Even an animal would not live in this hut, but we have to," Mastan, a 50-year-old woman living in a camp in Herat, told Amnesty International. "I would prefer to be in prison rather than in this place, at least in prison I would not have to worry about food and shelter."
Their situation has dramatically worsened over the past years, with less aid and essentials like food available. A new National IDP Policy launched in 2014 could be a lifeline to those displaced but has hardly been implemented at all - stymied by alleged corruption, lack of capacity in the Afghan government and fading international interest.
Despite Afghan authorities promising to improve the conditions IDPs are living in, Amnesty International found that forced evictions - from both government and private actors - is a daily threat.
On 18 June 2015, the first day of Ramadan, a group of armed men in military style threatened to bulldoze shelters at the Chaman-e-Babrak camp in Kabul. An elderly man protested the attempted forced eviction, appealing to nearby police officers to halt the bulldozing. He was beaten by the armed men, triggering a demonstration.
In response, residents said that police and the armed men opened fire on the IDPs, killing two people and injuring 10. One of the injured was a 12-year-old boy. No investigation was carried out and no one has been held to account.
Most IDP communities lack access to basic health care facilities. With only mobile clinics, operated by NGOs or the government, occasionally available, IDPs are often forced to seek private health care that they cannot afford.
"If we are ill, then I have to beg and find some money to go to the private clinics," one 50-year-old woman in Herat told Amnesty International. "We have no other choice."
As people without any stable source of income, IDPs can find themselves burdened with large amounts of debt. In one case, a father told Amnesty International that he had to borrow 20,000 Afs (US$292) to pay for an operation for his son. "[This is] an enormous sum of money for us," the father said.
Despite the assertion that IDPs have a right to request and receive food, water and adequate clothing in the 2014 policy and their obligations under international law, the Afghan government has failed to provide reliable accessibility to basic living necessities. People are forced to make long, daily trips to gather water and struggle to find one daily meal.
"Food is a luxury here, no one can afford it," Raz Muhammad, a community leader in Kabul's Chaman-e-Barbak camp said. "We mostly live off bread or spoiled vegetables from the market. The last time we received food assistance was ahead of last winter when we got three sacks of wheat."
Since being forced to leave their homes, IDP children's education has been interrupted and adults have been reduced to chronic unemployment.
"Internally displaced persons should not suffer discrimination of any kind," said Champa Patel. "They should be provided with the same access to education and employment opportunities that other Afghans are."
The IDP policy states that no displaced child should be denied an education even if they can't afford essentials like school books, uniforms and other educational supplies.
In practice, however, the financial burdens borne by IDPs have meant that children often work to support their families, such as by washing cars, polishing shoes for money, and collecting plastic bags to resell.
"The financial burdens on displaced families are compounded," said Champa Patel. "They have lost the traditional sources of their livelihoods, and only have few opportunities for informal work, creating circumstances where women are excluded, and children are being exploited and not educated."
The 2014 IDP Policy spells out the rights of IDPs on paper and a concrete action plan for the Afghan government to implement it. But it has not lived up to its promise and, so far, showed little benefits for those displaced.
There are many reasons for the failure to implement it - for one, there is an enormous lack of capacity and expertise in the Afghan government when it comes to IDPs. The Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation, charged with coordinating the Policy's implementation, is badly under-resourced and has been beset by corruption allegations for years.
At the same time, the international community has not stepped in as much as it could where the Afghan government has been unable to. With other crises grabbing global attention and donor money, aid to Afghanistan is dwindling. The UN has asked for US$ 393 in humanitarian funding for Afghanistan in 2016 -the smallest figure in years despite the dire humanitarian situation. By May, less than a quarter had been funded.
Amnesty International is calling on the Afghan authorities and the international community to immediately ensure that the most urgent needs of those displaced are met. Furthermore, the Afghan government must make the implementation of the IDP Policy a priority, and ensure that enough resources are dedicate across the government to making it a reality.
Key international actors in Afghanistan must also do more to ensure that the human rights of those displaced are met, and lend more weight, expertise and resources to the implementation of the IDP Policy.
"All parties that have been involved in Afghanistan over the past 15 years have a responsibility to come together and make sure that the very people the international community set out to help are not abandoned to an even more precarious fate," said Champa Patel.
"Afghanistan and the world must act now to end the country's displacement crisis, before it is too late."
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
"Billionaire companies are bankrolling Trump’s ballroom and it stinks of bribery," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Amid concerns over President Donald Trump's White House ballroom, a pair of Democratic US lawmakers on Tuesday introduced legislation "to root out apparent bribery and corruption" involving the $300 million project.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) introduced the Stop Ballroom Bribery Act, described by Warren's office as "the first piece of legislation addressing the ballroom that would impose donation restrictions."
“Billionaires and giant corporations with business in front of this administration are lining up to dump millions into Trump’s new ballroom—and Trump is showing them where to sign on the dotted line," Warren said in a statement. "Americans shouldn’t have to wonder whether President Trump is building a ballroom to facilitate a pay-to-play scheme for political favors. My new bill will put an end to what looks like bribery in plain sight."
Billionaire companies are bankrolling Trump’s ballroom and it stinks of bribery.That’s why @robertgarcia.house.gov and I introduced a bill to crack down on this potential corruption.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) November 18, 2025 at 11:16 AM
Garcia said: "Donald Trump is raising hundreds of millions of dollars to build himself a White House ballroom at a time when millions of American families can barely make ends meet. It's outrageous that the White House won’t reveal who’s bankrolling Trump’s pet project, and that the people’s house could be funded by shady figures, corrupt money, and bad actors."
"This bill will ban contributions from anyone with a conflict of interest, prevent bribery, and ensure we can hold any administration accountable for blatant corruption," he added.
Noting that many of the "wealthy individuals, corporations, and organizations" funding the ballroom "need something from the Trump administration," Warren's office flagged "serious concerns of quid-pro-quo arrangements and possible bribery."
"Ethics experts have argued that the apparent pay-to-play relationship between Trump and business leaders oversteps the norms of presidential behavior and could erode Americans’ trust in government," the senator's office added.
As Warren's office noted:
Key ballroom donors currently have business interests in front of the Trump administration. For example, Google, which recently donated $22 million to settle President Trump’s censorship lawsuit against YouTube, will benefit if Trump’s [Department of Justice] decides not to appeal a recent judicial ruling in a relevant antitrust case. Meanwhile, Union Pacific Railroad is seeking federal approval of a lucrative merger and Palantir is working to get more federal contracts.
The White House has refused to be fully transparent, publishing only a noncomprehensive donor list missing multiple key donors and offering donors anonymity. Donations for projects like the ballroom are often channeled through the National Park Service and philanthropic partners; nonprofits with formal ties to property used by the president and [Vice President JD Vance] raise unique conflict-of-interest risks when fundraising from individuals and corporations with interests in front of the federal government.
The Stop Ballroom Bribery Act would:
Virginia Canter, chief counsel and director for ethics and anticorruption at Democracy Defenders Action—another backer of the bill—said that "over the past year, President Trump has raised millions of dollars for vanity projects at the White House—like paving over the Rose Garden and demolishing the beloved East Wing."
"These funds have come from private donors without meaningful transparency or accountability,” Canter added. “The highest office in the land should never be for sale, nor should it ever appear to be."
“The Trump-Abbott maps are clearly illegal, and I’m glad these judges have blocked them,” said Rep. Greg Casar.
In a direct rebuke to President Donald Trump's hopes that mid-decade redistricting in key states could help Republicans retain control of Congress in next year's midterm elections, a federal court Tuesday ordered Texas to halt the use of its new congressional maps, redrawn earlier this year as part of a GOP effort to maximize its advantage in the Lone Star State.
The unprecedented mid-decade power grab was expected to net Republicans an extra five seats in the House, which, in tandem with other redistricting efforts in Missouri and North Carolina, may have proven critical in their efforts to blunt a blue wave by Democrats in next year's midterms.
But those efforts ran into an unexpected obstacle when Tuesday's 2-1 ruling by a panel of three federal judges in Texas determined the maps were "racially gerrymandered," disempowering nonwhite voters in violation of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). With a preliminary injunction, the court ordered the state to instead rely on the boundaries it drew in 2021.
In the majority opinion, District Judge Jeffrey V. Brown, a Trump appointee, wrote that while "politics played a role" in Trump's request for Texas to redraw its maps, the White House explicitly "reframed its request as a demand to redistrict congressional seats based on their racial makeup."
Specifically, Brown's decision cited a claim made in a letter to Texas officials from Harmeet Dhillon, the head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, that the existence of four "coalition districts," where no racial group had a 50% majority, in the 2021 map, was "unconstitutional." The DOJ threatened legal action against Texas if it did not immediately move to redraw these districts, which it promptly did at the direction of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.
This is despite the fact that, as Brown points out, "attorneys employed by the Texas Attorney General—who professes to be a political ally of the Trump Administration—describe the DOJ letter as 'legally unsound,' 'baseless,' 'erroneous,' 'ham-fisted,' and 'a mess.'"
"The governor explicitly directed the legislature to draw a new US House map to resolve DOJ’s concerns," Brown wrote. "In other words, the governor explicitly directed the legislature to redistrict based on race. In press appearances, the governor plainly and expressly disavowed any partisan objective and instead repeatedly stated that his goal was to eliminate coalition districts and create new majority-Hispanic districts."
"The legislature adopted those racial objectives," he continued. "The redistricting bill’s sponsors made numerous statements suggesting that they had intentionally manipulated the districts’ lines to create more majority-Hispanic and majority-Black districts. The bill’s sponsors’ statements suggest they adopted those changes because such a map would be an easier sell than a purely partisan one."
Republicans will almost certainly appeal the ruling to the US Supreme Court. But as the Texas Tribune points out, "time is short," as "candidates only have until December 8 to file for the upcoming election," which means that the district lines must be determined before then.
Chad Dunn, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said: "It seems they’d have a limited chance of success at the Supreme Court because the evidence is so overwhelming. Everyone involved said they were drawing the lines on the basis of race. I don’t see how the Supreme Court sets that aside.”
The Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority has signaled that it intends to strike down Section 2 of the VRA entirely. But that case is currently scheduled for early next year and could not be brought onto the shadow docket in time to override the ruling blocking the Texas map for 2026.
While it could have major implications for future elections, likely allowing the GOP to net over a dozen additional seats, in the near term, Trump's gambit for aggressive racial gerrymandering may blow up in his and his party's face---at least temporarily.
Texas' maps kicked off a retaliatory gerrymandering push by Democrats to redraw maps to their advantage in blue states. That effort culminated in California voters' overwhelming passage earlier this month of Proposition 50, which overrode the state's independent redistricting commission and allowed the state legislature to draw maps that handed Democrats an additional five seats. Similar efforts may soon be underway in New York and Virginia.
With the cushion provided by Texas suddenly yanked away, Democrats now appear to be the clear winners of the gerrymandering war if things stand as they are. Instead of gaining the GOP five extra seats, Trump's gambit could end up costing it five.
"Today’s ruling is a rebuke of Texas Republicans who caved to Donald Trump and trampled the voting rights of their constituents," said Adrian Shelley, the Texas director of Public Citizen. "Gov. Abbott and his allies in the Legislature have forgotten their independent streak as Texans. Perhaps they can find the courage that Republicans in a few other states have to tell the president no.”
Meanwhile, Texas Democrats previously at risk of being gerrymandered out of their seats, rejoiced in the wake of Tuesday's ruling.
This includes Austin Reps. Greg Casar and Lloyd Doggett, who, in anticipation of seeing their districts smushed into one, have spent the past several months engaged in a sort of shadow primary, which resulted in Doggett saying he'd retire if the maps were upheld. If Tuesday's ruling holds, both of their districts would remain intact.
"The Trump Abbott maps are clearly illegal, and I’m glad these judges have blocked them," Casar said after Tuesday's ruling. "If this decision stands, I look forward to running for reelection in my current district."
While he celebrated the ruling, he said, "no matter what, we must fight to pass a federal ban on gerrymandering once and for all."
Trump also contradicted a US intelligence assessment that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had ordered the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
President Donald Trump angrily snapped at ABC News reporter Mary Bruce while taking questions alongside Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the White House on Tuesday.
The testy exchange began when Bruce tried to ask the crown prince about a US intelligence assessment concluding that he was responsible for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
"Who are you with?" Trump demanded to know as Bruce attempted to ask her questions.
"I'm with ABC News, sir," she replied.
"Fake news," Trump said. "ABC, fake news, one of the worst in the business."
Shortly after this, Trump described the slain Khashoggi as "somebody that was extremely controversial."
"A lot of people didn't like that gentleman that you're talking about," Trump said, referring to Khashoggi. "Whether you like him or didn't like him, things happen. But [the crown prince] knew nothing about it. You don't have to embarrass our guest."
In fact, a US intelligence report that was declassified in 2021 concluded that the crown prince personally approved of a plan carried out by Saudi forces to murder Khashoggi after he entered a Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey in 2018.
Shortly after this, Bruce tried to ask the president a question about FBI files related to the late sex offender and longtime Trump friend Jeffrey Epstein, and he again hit her with personal insults.
"It's not the question I mind, it's your attitude," he said. "You're a terrible person and a terrible reporter."
He then threatened to take ABC News completely off the air.
"I think the [broadcast] license should be taken away from ABC because your news is so fake, and it's so wrong," he said. "And we have a great commissioner... who should look at that."
Trump's mention of the "commissioner" was presumably a reference to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr, who earlier this year threatened to pull ABC's broadcast license unless it fired late-night host Jimmy Kimmel, a frequent critic of the president.
Kimmel's show was suspended shortly after Carr made this statement, although he was reinstated days later amid public outcry about government censorship.