SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
National Momentum for July 12 Day of Action Grows as Net Neutrality Comments Are Breaking All Records
With more than 5.6 million public comments already in the docket, this FCC proceeding reflects recent polling that shows strong national support for Title II protections
WASHINGTON
In less than 24 hours, a diverse coalition of Net Neutrality supporters will launch a nationwide "Day of Action" to mobilize people to demonstrate their support for the open-internet protections the Trump administration is trying to overturn.
The Federal Communications Commission docket for public comments on the existing Net Neutrality rules has already surpassed all records, with more than 5.6 million comments from individuals, organizations, companies and other interested parties -- and many more to come as a result of Wednesday's day of action.
The previous record for public involvement in an agency proceeding was set during the last Net Neutrality rulemaking, which culminated in the 2015 ruling to reclassify internet-access providers as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. That decision followed a lengthy public-comment period in which 4 million people contacted the FCC, with the vast majority urging the agency to pass strong Net Neutrality rules.
Earlier this year, President Trump's FCC chairman, Ajit Pai, launched a new rulemaking process to undermine the essential open-internet protections his predecessor established. The initial comment period in this proceeding ends on July 17, but people can continue to submit replies and send input to the FCC up until the agency schedules a vote, expected later this year. A large majority of the comments submitted in the current proceeding support preserving the Title II rules.
This is in keeping with recent public polling on the issue, which shows a strong majority of people support Net Neutrality protections. On Monday, Civis Analytics released the results of a nationwide poll that showed Americans of all political parties (73 percent of Republicans, 80 percent of Democrats and 76 percent of independents) overwhelmingly value the principles of Net Neutrality and want to maintain the existing open-internet rules. The results of the poll are available here (PDF).
So far more than 70,000 websites, online services and internet users are participating in the day of action, including companies like Airbnb, Amazon, Etsy, Facebook, Google, Kickstarter, Mozilla, Netflix, OKCupid, reddit, Spotify and Twitter.
The day of action, led by Free Press Action Fund, Fight for the Future and Demand Progress, will focus on mass participation as public-interest groups across the country activate their members and major web platforms provide visitors with tools to mobilize locally, contact Congress and submit more pro-Net Neutrality comments to the FCC.
Free Press Action Fund Campaign Director Candace Clement made the following statement:
"The existing Net Neutrality protections put internet users in the driver's seat and keep big cable and phone companies from controlling what you see and do online. That's why millions of people support Title II: It prevents these companies from charging us pricey tolls to access the online content we want -- and from throttling, blocking or discriminating against the apps, websites and services of our choosing.
"If there's one thing we've learned from this FCC, it's that Chairman Ajit Pai has consistently voted against pro-internet user, pro-competition positions in favor of handing control of the network to a small number of powerful companies. As the polling shows, people of all political stripes understand that corporations like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon should not be allowed to control the internet.
"At its core Net Neutrality is about preserving everyone's free-speech rights online. That's why we're rolling up our sleeves and taking action on July 12 -- to let the world know that you can't have an open and inclusive internet without real Net Neutrality protections."
Day-of-action organizers have created a suite of action tools to ensure that decision-makers hear the voices of real people, and not just those of industry lobbyists.
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490LATEST NEWS
A 'Terrifying Line Is Being Crossed,' Warns Minneapolis Mayor as More ICE Horror Stories Emerge
In an interview with the New York Times, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey described "marauding gangs of guys just walking down the street indiscriminately picking people up."
Jan 31, 2026
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey is warning that the Trump administration has crossed a "terrifying line" with its use of federal immigration enforcement agents to brutalize and abduct people in his city.
In an interview with the New York Times published Saturday, Frey described operations that have taken place in his city as "marauding gangs of guys just walking down the street indiscriminately picking people up," likening it to a military "invasion."
During the interview, Frey was asked what he made of Attorney General Pam Bondi's recent offer to withdraw immigration enforcement forces from his city if Minnesota handed over its voter registration records to the federal government.
"That is wildly unconstitutional," Frey replied. "We should all be standing up and saying that’s not OK. Literally, listen to what they’re saying. Active threats like, Turn over the voter rolls or else, or we will continue to do what we’re doing. That’s something you can do in America now."
Frey was also asked about Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz's comments from earlier in the week where he likened the administration's invasion of Minneapolis to the first battle that took place during the US Civil War in Fort Sumter.
"I don’t think he’s saying that the Civil War is going to happen," said Frey. "I think what he’s saying is that a significant and terrifying line is being crossed. And I would agree with that."
As Frey issued warnings about the federal government's actions in Minneapolis, more horror stories have emerged involving US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Minnesota.
The Associated Press reported on Saturday that staff at the Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis have been raising red flags over ICE agents' claims about Alberto Castañeda Mondragón, a Mexican immigrant whom they treated after he suffered a shattered skull earlier this month.
ICE agents who brought Castañeda Mondragón to the hospital told staffers that he had injured himself after he "purposefully ran headfirst into a brick wall" while trying to escape their custody.
Nurses who treated Castañeda Mondragón, however, said that there is no way that running headfirst into a wall could produce the sheer number of skull fractures he suffered, let alone the internal bleeding found throughout his brain.
“It was laughable, if there was something to laugh about," one nurse at the hospital told the Associated Press. “There was no way this person ran headfirst into a wall."
According to a Saturday report in the New York Times, concern over ICE's brutality has grown to such an extent that many Minnesota residents, including both documented immigrants and US citizens, have started wearing passports around their necks to avoid being potentially targeted.
Joua Tsu Thao, a 75-year-old US citizen who came to the country after aiding the American military during the Vietnam War, said the aggressive actions of immigration officers have left him with little choice but to display his passport whenever he walks outside his house.
"We need to be ready before they point a gun to us," Thao explained to the Times.
CNN on Friday reported that ICE has been rounding up refugees living in Minnesota who were allowed to enter the US after undergoing "a rigorous, years-long vetting process," and sending them to a facility in Texas where they are being prepared for deportation.
Lawyers representing the abducted refugees told CNN that their clients have been "forced to recount painful asylum claims with limited or no contact with family members or attorneys."
Some of the refugees taken to Texas have been released from custody. But instead of being flown back home, they were released in Texas "without money, identification, or phones," CNN reported.
Laurie Ball Cooper, vice president for US legal programs at the International Refugee Assistance Project, told CNN that government agents abducting refugees who had previously been allowed into the US is part of "a campaign of terror" that "is designed to scare people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Scowling Void of Pure Nothingness': Critics Destroy $75 Million Melania Trump Documentary
"It’s one of those rare, unicorn films that doesn’t have a single redeeming quality," said one critic.
Jan 31, 2026
Critics have weighed in on Amazon MGM Studios' documentary about first lady Melania Trump, and their verdicts are overwhelmingly negative.
According to review aggregation website Metacritic, Melania—which Amazon paid $40 million to acquire and $35 million to market—so far has received a collective score of just 6 out of 100 from critics, which indicates "overwhelming dislike."
Similarly, Melania scores a mere 6% on Rotten Tomatoes' "Tomameter," indicating that 94% of reviews for the movie so far have been negative.
One particularly brutal review came from Nick Hilton, film critic for the Independent, who said that the first lady came off in the film as "a preening, scowling void of pure nothingness" who leads a "vulgar, gilded lifestyle."
Hilton added that the film is so terrible that it fails even at being effective propaganda and is likely to be remembered as "a striking artifact... of a time when Americans willingly subordinated themselves to a political and economic oligopoly."
The Guardian's Xan Brooks delivered a similarly scathing assessment, declaring the film "dispiriting, deadly and unrevealing."
"It’s one of those rare, unicorn films that doesn’t have a single redeeming quality," Brooks elaborated. "I’m not even sure it qualifies as a documentary, exactly, so much as an elaborate piece of designer taxidermy, horribly overpriced and ice-cold to the touch and proffered like a medieval tribute to placate the greedy king on his throne."
Donald Clarke of the Irish Times also discussed the film's failure as a piece of propaganda, and he compared it unfavorably to the work of Nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl.
"Melania... appears keener on inducing narcolepsy in its viewers than energizing them into massed marching," he wrote. "Triumph of the Dull, perhaps."
Variety's Owen Gleiberman argued that the Melania documentary is utterly devoid of anything approaching dramatic stakes, which results in the film suffering from "staggering inertia."
"Mostly it’s inert," Gleiberman wrote of the film. "It feels like it’s been stitched together out of the most innocuous outtakes from a reality show. There’s no drama to it. It should have been called 'Day of the Living Tradwife.'"
Frank Scheck of the Hollywood Reporter found that the movie mostly exposes Melania Trump is an empty vessel without a single original thought or insight, instead deploying "an endless number of inspirational phrases seemingly cribbed from self-help books."
Kevin Fallon of the Daily Beast described Melania as "an unbelievable abomination of filmmaking" that reaches "a level of insipid propaganda that almost resists review."
"It's so expected," Fallon added, "and utterly pointless."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked DHS Memo Reveals ICE Claiming Expansive New Warrantless Arrest Powers
"This memo bends over backwards to say that ICE agents have nothing but green lights to make an arrest without even a supervisor’s approval," said one former ICE official.
Jan 31, 2026
An internal legal memo obtained by the New York Times reveals that federal immigration enforcement agents are claiming broad new powers to carry out warrantless arrests.
The Times reported on Friday that the memo, which was signed by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons, "expands the ability of lower-level ICE agents to carry out sweeps rounding up people they encounter and suspect are undocumented immigrants, rather than targeted enforcement operations in which they set out, warrant in hand, to arrest a specific person."
In the past, agents have been granted the power to carry out warrantless arrests only in situations where they believe a suspected undocumented immigrant is a "flight risk" who is unlikely to comply with obligations such as appearing at court hearings.
However, the memo declares this standard to be “unreasoned” and “incorrect,” saying that agents should feel free to carry out arrests so long as the suspect is "unlikely to be located at the scene of the encounter or another clearly identifiable location once an administrative warrant is obtained."
Scott Shuchart, former head of policy at ICE under President Joe Biden, told the Times that the memo appears to open the door to give the agency incredibly broad arrest powers.
"This memo bends over backwards," Shuchart said, "to say that ICE agents have nothing but green lights to make an arrest without even a supervisor’s approval."
Claire Trickler-McNulty, former senior adviser at ICE during the Biden administration, said the memo's language was so broad that "it would cover essentially anyone they want to arrest without a warrant, making the general premise of ever getting a warrant pointless."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, noted in a social media post that the memo appears to be a way for ICE to "get around an increasing number of court orders requiring [US Department of Homeland Security] to follow the plain words of the law which says administrative warrantless arrests are only for people 'likely to escape.'"
The memo broadens the terms, Reichlin-Melnick added, so that "anyone who refuses to wait for a warrant to be issued" is deemed "likely to escape."
Stanford University political scientist Tom Clark questioned the validity of the memo, which appears to directly conflict with the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, which requires search warrants as a protection against "unreasonable searches and seizures."
"So, here’s how the law works," he wrote. "People on whom it imposes constraints don’t get to just write themselves a memo saying they don’t have to follow the law. Maybe I’ll write myself a memo saying that I don’t have to pay my taxes this year."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular