

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 federal judge has signed an order permanently preventing Louisiana from enforcing a 2015 state law that required websites to age-verify every Internet user before providing access to non-obscene material that could be deemed harmful to any minor.
Judge Brian A. Jackson had previously granted a preliminary injunction in the case, Garden District Book Shop v. Stewart. The state then determined that it would not defend the constitutionality of the law and agreed to the entry of a permanent injunction. The judge signed the permanent injunction Friday.
The plaintiffs in the case are two independent booksellers, Garden District Book Shop and Octavia Books; Future Crawfish Paper LLC, publisher of Anti-Gravity magazine; the American Booksellers Association; and the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund. The lawsuit was brought by the Media Coalition and the American Civil Liberties Union.
The law, enacted as H.B. 153, required that "any person or entity in Louisiana that publishes material harmful to minors on the Internet shall, prior to permitting access to the material, require any person attempting to access the material to electronically acknowledge and attest that the person seeking to access the material is eighteen years of age or older." A failure to age-verify, even if no minor ever tried to access the material, would have been a crime subject to a $10,000 fine. Louisiana has a separate law that makes it a crime to lie when asked to acknowledge or attest to anything.
To comply with the law had it not been enjoined, booksellers and publishers would have had either to place an age confirmation button in front of their entire websites, thereby restricting access to materials that may be appropriate for all ages, or to attempt to review all of the books or magazines available at their websites and place an age confirmation button in front of each individual page that might be inappropriate for any minor.
The federal district court found in its preliminary injunction ruling that "[t]he ill-defined terms in [H.B. 153] do not adequately notify individuals and businesses in Louisiana of the conduct it prohibits, which creates a chilling effect on free speech."
"This is an important victory for me as a bookseller and for my customers," said Tom Lowenburg, co-owner of Octavia Books. "This law would have placed an impossible burden on our website by forcing us to 'ID' every person who visited the site before allowing them to browse our books or risk getting a $10,000 fine."
"I'm very relieved by the decision. This law would have had a definite chilling effect on our business, depriving our customers of books that they have a First Amendment right to browse and buy," said Britton Trice, owner of Garden District Book Shop.
"We are thankful for the court's decision to permanently block this law that would have forced booksellers and publishers to restrict access on their online stores to what is acceptable for a 12 year old," said David Horowitz, the executive director of Media Coalition. "The court agreed that parental controls are a more effective and less restrictive way for parents to limit their kids' access to sexual material on the Internet without violating the First Amendment rights of adults and older minors."
"The court's decision is a welcome recognition that the law's online age-verification requirements impose burdens on publishers and Internet users and create a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech rights," said Esha Bhandari, a staff attorney with the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project.
Plaintiffs are represented by Bhandari and Lee Rowland of the national ACLU, Justin P. Harrison and Stephen Dixon of the ACLU of Louisiana, and Michael A. Bamberger and Richard M. Zuckerman of the law firm Dentons US LLP, general counsel to Media Coalition, Inc.
A copy of the order and more information about the case is available here:
https://mediacoalition.org/garden-district-book-shop-v-stewart/
https://www.aclu.org/cases/garden-district-book-shop-v-caldwell-challenge-louisiana-online-censorship-law
www.laaclu.org
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"We’re entering an even more dangerous moment," said foreign policy expert Matt Duss.
President Donald Trump may believe that his unprovoked and unconstitutional war with Iran is "very complete, pretty much," but one foreign policy expert thinks that is highly wishful thinking.
Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), argued in a Tuesday social media post that the negative consequences of Trump's attack on Iran are just starting to be felt, with no option for a quick ending.
"We’re entering an even more dangerous moment," Duss wrote, "as the stupidity of this war becomes undeniable even to its supporters, who realize they’re about to be revealed as morons yet again and are desperate to turn this into something they can spin as a win. Their only option is escalation."
Shortly before Duss offered his analysis of the situation, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth held a news conference in which he dialed up belligerent rhetoric against Iran while declaring the war "a laser-focused, maximum-authority mission, delivered with overwhelming and unrelenting precision."
Hegseth is serving a buzzword salad this morning: "Overwhelming and unrelenting precision. No hesitation. No half measures. As President Trump declared yesterday, we're crushing the enemy is an overwhelming display of technical skill and military force" pic.twitter.com/WQ19jkPpJB
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 10, 2026
"No hesitation, no half measures," Hegseth continued. "As President Trump declared yesterday, we're crushing the enemy in an overwhelming display of technical skill and military force."
Hegseth's bluster did not impress Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who vowed on Tuesday to drag Hegseth before the Senate to answer questions about the war, which the president launched early on a Saturday morning without any authorization from the US Congress.
"I'm joining together with my allies in the United States Senate to use the leverage we have to force a debate and a vote in the Senate on the authorization of war," Murphy said. "I think if the Senate took that vote, it would fail, and that would allow us to stop this illegal, disastrous war in Iran."
Murphy went on to note that "the Constitution is crystal clear" that Trump does not have the power to unilaterally declare war, even though that is precisely what he did less than two weeks ago.
"You should be furious about that," Murphy said, "because this is maybe the most dangerous thing a president can do: Send your sons and daughters to die overseas without your consent."
A group of us in the Senate are demanding public hearings on Trump's disastrous war with Iran with Secretary Hegseth and Rubio. And we've introduced a half dozen war powers resolutions to force the Senate to vote every day on the war if the hearings don't happen. pic.twitter.com/UayrSfoJEb
— Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) March 10, 2026
Murphy's statement earned kudos from Duss, who promoted his message on social media.
"This is the way," wrote Duss. "No business as usual."
Father Pierre al-Rahi stayed in his southern town to help support parishioners who were unable to flee Israeli's attacks.
Pope Leo XIV was among those expressing grief Monday over the killing of Father Pierre al-Rahi, a Maronite Catholic priest, in an Israeli strike in the southern Lebanese town of Qlayaa, days after he had insisted on staying in the region despite evacuation orders, in order to care for residents there.
Agence France-Presse reported that it was unclear why Israel targeted a home where a couple lived in Qlayaa at about 2:00 pm Beirut time on Monday. Up to now, Israeli forces had largely left the community untouched in their attacks on Lebanon in retaliation against Hezbollah, which has launched rockets at Israel in response to the Israeli-US war on Iran in recent days.
After a first strike was launched by a tank, wounding the owners of the house, al-Rahi was among the neighbors who rushed to the scene to help the residents. The priest was injured in a second strike and later died at a hospital from his injuries. Several other civilians were also wounded in the attack.
The pope expressed "profound sorrow for all the victims of the bombings in the Middle East over the last few days—for the many innocent people, including many children, and for those who were providing them with aid, such as Father Pierre El-Rahi, a Maronite priest killed this afternoon in Qlayaa."
Al-Rahi, who was 50, was killed days after speaking publicly in support of Lebanese civilians who are "defending our lands."
"As our forefathers said, we are only defending our land," said al-Rahi of the community members who were staying in the southern town in defiance of Israeli demands that the evacuate. "We are defending ourselves peacefully. None of us carry weapons. We carry nothing but the weapons of peace, goodness, love, prayer, and more prayer."
"That's why we want to preserve the fact that we are here on our land today," said the priest.
Three days ago, Father Pierre Al-Rai, the parish priest in the village of Al-Qlayaa in southern Lebanon, welcomed the Lebanese government’s recent decision declaring that any military or security activity outside the authority of the state is illegal—referring to the government’s… pic.twitter.com/BhxIk1rcGd
— Ihab Hassan (@IhabHassane) March 9, 2026
One Lebanese commentator said al-Rahi was "a priest with prayers. Murdered in broad daylight."
Israel's military has been bombing what it claims are Hezbollah strongholds in southern Lebanon over the past week, and civilians have reported that residential areas are increasingly being targeted.
Qlayaa Mayor Hanna Daherl told Asia News that Israel claimed "there were fighters in the house, but that's not true. These are lies."
"Inside, there were only the residents of the house and people from the village who came to help the wounded," said Daher.
Israel demanded last week that residents of southern Lebanon—where about 200,000 people live—immediately leave and head north of the Litani River, but al-Rahi was among many clergy members who said they would stay to support civilians who couldn't leave their homes.
Aid to the Church in Need International told OSV News that "despite the growing insecurity in southern Lebanon, many priests and religious sisters have chosen to remain with their communities. Many Christian families have also stayed in their villages, unwilling to abandon their homes, land, and livelihoods."
Father Toufic Bou Merhi, a parish priest of two communities in the area, told EWTN News that fleeing the region would mean “living on the street or trying to rent a house, but people can’t afford it.”
He said the killing of al-Rahi has deeply impacted the local Catholic community, whose members are "weeping over the tragedy and, at the same time, are very afraid."
"Until now, people didn’t want to leave their homes in Christian villages, but in this situation, everything has changed,” Bou Merhi told EWTN News.
The French charity L'Oeuvre d'Orient, which supports Christians in the Middle East, condemned "in the strongest possible terms these acts of war, which aim to destabilize all of Lebanon and kill innocent civilians."
"The death of a priest who refused to leave his parish is yet another escalation of senseless violence," said the group. "L'Oeuvre d'Orient also denounces the risk of annexation and the disappearance of villages south of the Litani River, particularly historic Christian villages."
The Lebanese Health Ministry said Sunday that at least 394 people, including 42 women and 83 children, had been killed in Lebanon by Israeli forces since they began retaliating against Hezbollah.
Critics blasted Trump as 'sadistic' for justifying attack on unarmed Iranian ship, which killed over 100 sailors, because it was 'more fun' for US forces than capturing it.
President Donald Trump said the US Navy chose to sink an Iranian frigate, killing more than 100 sailors last week, because it was "more fun" than capturing the vessel, even though the ship posed no threat.
Though death tolls vary, Iran's state media organization, the Islamic Republic News Organization, reported on Sunday that 104 crew members were killed in the attack and that 32 others were injured when a US submarine torpedoed the Iranian warship IRIS Dena in the Indian Ocean on March 4 as it departed from the Milan Peace 2026 naval drills hosted in India.
The Dena was more than 2,000 miles away from the Persian Gulf when it was attacked, far from the hostilities unleashed last weekend when the US and Israel launched a war against Iran. Contradicting US claims, Iranian and Indian officials have said it was not armed.
In what political commentator Adam Schwarz described as "the most blasé admission of a war crime by a US president in history," Trump on Monday casually recounted the US Navy's decision to attack the ship before a gathering of Republicans at a Congressional Institute event, a GOP-aligned nonprofit retreat organizer.
He suggested that the Navy blew the boat up not to neutralize a threat, but purely for its own sake.
After making the exaggerated boast that Iran's navy is "gone" following aggressive US bombing, Trump said at first he "got a little upset" with the military brass who ordered the sinking of the Dena, which he said they described as a "top-of-the-line" vessel.
Trump said he asked: "Why don't we just capture the ship? We could have used it. Why did we sink them?"
He said that an unspecified official told him, "It's more fun to sink them."
As the crowd laughed, Trump went on, chuckling himself: "They like sinking them better. They say it's safer to sink them. I guess it's probably true."
Iran's deputy foreign minister, Saeed Khatibzadeh, described the ship as operating in a purely "ceremonial" role and said it was "unloaded" and "unarmed" at the time of the attack last week.
Rahul Bedi, an independent defense analyst in India, told the Associated Press that while the ship may have used some limited non-offensive ammunition during naval exercises, drill protocol requires “the participating platforms to be unarmed.”
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has claimed the vessel was a "predator ship," while the US Indo-Pacific Command has said claims that the ship was unarmed are "false." However, it has provided no evidence that it posed a threat at the time of the attack.
The attack itself was likely legal under the rules of naval warfare, even if the ship was unarmed, though its ethical and tactical justification has been called into question.
"A military ship might be a lawful target," Phyllis Bennis, the co-director of the Institute for Policy Studies' New Internationalism Project told Common Dreams. "But firing on any ship—any people, anywhere—for 'fun' represents the kind of immoral depravity that this white house is infamous for."
Bennis added that "failing to do everything possible to rescue those aboard is certainly a war crime," as the Second Geneva Convention requires militaries to take all possible measures to search for and collect the shipwrecked, wounded, and sick.
The Dena's 32 survivors, as well as dozens of dead bodies, had to be pulled from the water by a Sri Lankan joint rescue operation following a distress call. The survivors were quickly rushed to a local hospital in Galle City.
Hegseth has previously come under fire for reportedly ordering a second strike on shipwrecked sailors who survived the bombing of an alleged drug trafficking boat in the Caribbean.
Many have described that attack on September 2 as an exceptionally blatant war crime in a broadly illegal campaign that has extrajudicially killed at least 156 people.
In carrying out its war against Iran, Hegseth has emphasized that the US would not abide by what he called "stupid rules of engagement."
Thousands of civilian targets, including schools, hospitals, and residential areas, have reportedly been attacked by US and Israeli strikes, according to the Iranian Red Crescent.
As of Monday, Iranian Deputy Health Minister Ali Jafarian said at least 1,255 people have been killed, including 200 children and 11 healthcare workers.
Though it may have still technically been legal, journalist Mark Ames, the co-host of the geopolitics podcast Radio War Nerd, argued that attacking a ship that posed no threat shows that Trump is "cowardly scum" who "gets his kicks killing those who can’t fight back."
"The ship was unarmed. That’s why Trump and Hegseth chose to murder them," Ames wrote on social media. "Tormenting those who can’t fight back is its own sadistic pleasure."
Bennis added that even if attacking the ship itself was lawful in a vacuum, it took place before a backdrop of brazen "illegality."
"This entire shocking episode represents a clear US violation of what the Nuremberg trials identified as the 'supreme international crime': the crime of aggression," she said. "The US had no legal right to go to war against Iran. The [United Nations] Security Council had not authorized the use of force, and there was no 'armed attack' from Iran against the US that required immediate self-defense.
"Without either of those, the UN Charter is very clear that no country may attack another country," she continued. "To do so, as the Nuremberg judges found, constitutes the crime of aggression—the ultimate crime."
NOTE: This piece has been updated following publication to include additional comments.