

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.
Today 91 banks will meet at the annual meeting of the Equator Principles Association (EPA) in Sao Paulo, Brazil. At this time, the indigenous-led divestment campaign, Mazaska Talks, is leading a global 3-day protest known as #DivestTheGlobe. On Monday, there will be actions in at least 44 cities in the United States and Canada. On Tuesday and Wednesday, there will be actions in Africa, Europe and Asia.
The protests are designed to galvanize people to divest their households, institutions, and cities from banks that finance desecration projects, such as tar sands pipelines. The protests are being supported by many national organizations such as 350.org, Rainforest Action Network, Greenpeace and the Sierra Club, some of whom have added their names to a letter promising to boycott the banks until they stop investing in tar sands.
As part of the protests, Mazaska Talks urges banks to follow the example of BNP Paribas, the second largest bank in Europe, which last week promised to cease all funding of companies whose primary business is tar sands, fracking, or Arctic drilling.
In conjunction with BankTrack's campaign, the protests draw attention to the failure of the Equator Principles to align with the Paris Agreement and uphold internationally-recognized indigenous rights to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) in the case of the Dakota Access Pipeline, Line 3, Keystone XL, Trans Mountain, and other fossil fuel projects around the world.
The demonstrations come two months after the Energy Transfer family of companies sued Greenpeace and BankTrack for supporting the #NoDAPL movement and calling on people to divest from banks financing the Dakota Access Pipeline. Energy Transfer received project-level financing for the project by assuring banks they had consulted with the tribe, thus aligning the project with the Equator Principles. Consultation is merely an exchange of information, not consent. Indigenous people have a right to consent, recognized in the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.
Energy Transfer inadvertently admitted the effectiveness of #DefundDAPL divestment campaigns in their SLAPP suit, pointing out, "the damage to Plaintiffs' relationships with the capital markets has been substantial, impairing access to financing and increasing their cost of capital and ability to fund future projects at economical rates."
Since the Standing Rock Tribe passed a resolution ending business with Wells Fargo in October 2016, more than a dozen cities have taken some step towards moving their money out of Wall Street, affecting dozens of billions of dollars in annual cash flow.
Divest the Globe: Quotes and Support
" Big oil, multinational corporations and their financial backers are not persuaded by moral and environmental arguments. Nor do they even care for following the rule of law, as we have witnessed violation after violation of Tribal Nations' treaty rights. They're capitalist and they are persuaded by one thing, money. So Indigenous Nations and their allies are rising up to create a future with clean water and respect for human rights," Matt Remle, co-Founder of Mazaska Talks
"Until these banks start investing in the future of Mother Earth, we will bring attention to the injustice they contribute to and we will continue to use divestment as a tool to help end these atrocities," Rachel Heaton, co-Founder of Mazaska Talks
"Making the transition from fossil fuels to green power is no longer a matter of financial capital, but of political will. These banks have learned nothing from Standing Rock or the Great Recession, so it's up to us to make our own public banks and finance our own communities," Jackie Fielder, Organizer with Mazaska Talks
"In order to create a better future for our next generation, we must encourage the banks who hold the worlds funds to divest from fossil fuels which destroy the environment. We must stand up and empower ourselves to divest, because divestment is empowerment," Ladonna Brave Bull Allard, Founder of Sacred Stone Village
"We have the right to Free Prior and Informed Consent of projects impacting our survival, our cultures and our futures. We want the global financial community to realize that investing in projects that harm us is really investing in death, genocide, racism and does have a direct effect on not only us on the frontlines but every person on this planet. They have a moral obligation to listen to us, to invest in sustainable energy projects which bring lasting growth and jobs not built on dying industries like coal and oil," Joye Braun, Community Organizer with Indigenous Environmental Network
"The social license for fossil fuel companies to poison our lands, communities and water must be removed. Divestment is a means to remove that license, it is a means of exerting our economic power as citizens for the betterment of Mother Earth and future generations," Dallas Goldtooth, Keep it in the Ground Campaign Organizer with Indigenous Environmental Network
"Anyone with a brain, not to mention a conscience, should put their money in a bank that actually thinks the planet has a future, instead of one that scrambles for the shortest of short term gains at any cost," Bill McKibben, Founder of 350.org
" Wells Fargo and other big banks that finance dirty fossil fuel projects should take notice: this movement isn't going anywhere," said Sierra Club Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign director Kelly Martin. "Communities across the country are calling on their local governments and institutions to divest from banks that support fossil fuels, and thousands of people have already committed to moving their own money out of these banks. We will not back down until banks commit to investing in a future that benefits our communities, our economies, and our health."
"Responsible banks don't put their money into projects that bulldoze Indigenous rights, jeopardize clean water, threaten wildlife and destabilize our climate. As the world's biggest banks meet to discuss Indigenous rights in Brazil, we're standing with Mazaska Talks and Indigenous leaders everywhere who are resisting destructive fossil fuel projects. Contested oil pipelines pose too many risks and face too many hurdles to succeed long-term. Already, some of the world's biggest banks such as BNP Paribas, ING, and US Bank are stepping away from these projects. It's time for the rest of the financial sector to follow suit," Alex Speers-Roesch, Finance campaigner, Greenpeace Canada
"Major fossil fuel infrastructure projects like the Teck Resources Frontier Mine, KXL, Kinder Morgan and Line 3 pipelines require outside funding to be completed, giving banks an outsized role in shaping our collective climate future," said Ruth Breech with Rainforest Action Network. "For too long financial institutions have escaped accountability for the real world consequences of their investments, the time for that impunity has come to an end."
"Ever since the City of Seattle broke ties with Wells Fargo, it's been crystal clear that the banks stand to lose billions of dollars because of their funding of projects that both abuse the rights of Indigenous communities and are a disaster for our climate," said 350 Seattle organizer Alec Connon
"Holding big banks accountable by closing accounts is addressing a root cause of outdated and dangerous fossil fuel infrastructure development and egregious human rights violations," said Vanessa Green, Director of DivestInvest Individual. "People, public institutions and private businesses all moving money means real impact on banks and the broader finance industry, as evidenced by updated or new standards, policies, products and services. As finance industry leaders respond, the laggards are exposed and will be the biggest losers."
"Bigotry has been his brand since day 1," said Congresswoman Yvette Clarke.
As President Donald Trump refuses to apologize for a now-deleted social media post in which former President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle Obama are portrayed as apes, the head of the Congressional Black Caucus on Friday blasted what she called the "bigoted and racist regime" in the White House.
“It’s very clear that there was an intent to harm people, to hurt people, with this video,” Congressional Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke (D-NY) said in an interview with the Associated Press. "Every week we are, as the American people, put in a position where we have to respond to something very cruel or something extremely off-putting that this administration does. It’s a part of their M.O. at this point."
After dismissing the widespread revulsion—including by some Republican lawmakers—over Trump's sharing of the racist election conspiracy video on his Truth Social network as "fake outrage," the White House subsequently claimed that an aide "erroneously made the post," which was deleted after nearly 12 hours online.
The president told reporters aboard Air Force one Friday evening, "I didn't make a mistake" and that he is the "least racist president you've had in a long time."
Trump launched his political career by amplifying the conspiracy theory that Barack Obama was not born in the United States and his 2016 presidential campaign by calling Mexicans "rapists." Since then, he has made numerous bigoted statements about racial minorities, immigrants, Muslims, women, and others.
Brushing off the administration's explanation for Trump's post, Clarke said that "they don’t tell the truth."
"If there wasn’t a climate, a toxic and racist climate within the White House, we wouldn’t see this type of behavior regardless of who it’s coming from," she contended.
"Here we are, in the year 2026, celebrating the 250th anniversary of the United States of America, the 100th anniversary of the commemoration of Black history, and this is what comes out of the White House on a Friday morning," the congresswoman added. "It’s beneath all of us."
Asked what it means that Trump—who rarely retracts anything—deleted the post, Clarke said, "I think it’s more of a political expediency than it is any moral compass."
"As my mother would say," she added, "'Too late. Mercy’s gone.'"
Civil rights groups also condemned Trump, with Color of Change posting on Facebook that "this is white supremacy expressed from the Oval Office."
"Trump resents what the Obamas represent: A Black family that is accomplished, respected, and widely admired," the group continued. "Their success contradicts the worldview he has spent years promoting. His attacks follow a clear trajectory—from birther conspiracies questioning Obama's legitimacy, to false accusations of treason, to now circulating imagery rooted in centuries of racial dehumanization used to justify slavery, lynching, and violence."
"Republican leadership has been silent," Color of Change added. "Elected officials who refuse to condemn this behavior are choosing to normalize it."
NAACP president Derrick Johnson said in a statement that "Donald Trump's video is blatantly racist, disgusting, and utterly despicable."
Johnson asserted that Trump is attempting to distract from the cost of living crisis and Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
"You know who isn't in the Epstein files? Barack Obama," he said. "You know who actually improved the economy as president? Barack Obama."
“Our concern remains centered on Liam and all children who deserve stability, safety, and the opportunity to be in school without fear," said an advocate for the family.
The Trump administration's bid to expedite deportation proceedings against 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos and his family faltered Friday as a judge granted them more time to plead their asylum case.
Danielle Molliver, an attorney for Ramos' family, told CNN that a judge issued a continuance in the case, meaning it is postponed to a later date.
The US Department of Homeland Security filed a motion Wednesday seeking to fast-track the Ecuadorian family's deportation. The family responded by asking the court for additional time to reply to the DHS motion.
Zena Stenvik, superintendent of the Columbia Heights Public Schools, where Ramos is a student, told CNN that Friday’s ruling “provides additional time, and with that, continued uncertainty for a child and his family."
“Our concern remains centered on Liam and all children who deserve stability, safety, and the opportunity to be in school without fear," Stenvik added. "We will continue to advocate for outcomes that prioritize children."
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested Ramos and his father, Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias, in the driveway of their Columbia Heights home on January 20 during Operation Metro Surge, the Trump administration's ongoing deadly immigration crackdown in the Twin Cities.
They were taken to the Dilley Immigration Processing Center southwest of San Antonio, Texas. Run by ICE and private prison profiteer CoreCivic, the facility has been plagued by reports of poor health and hygiene conditions and accusations of inadequate medical care for children.
Detainees report prison-like conditions and say they’ve been served moldy food infested with worms and forced to drink putrid water. Some have described the facility as “truly a living hell.”
Ramos, who fell ill during his detention in Dilley, and his father were ordered released earlier this month on a federal judge's order, and is now back in Minnesota.
Molliver accused the Trump administration of retaliating against the family following their release. Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin claimed that “there is nothing retaliatory about enforcing the nation’s immigration laws."
Arias told Minnesota Public Radio Friday that he is uncertain about his family's future.
"The government is moving many pieces, it's doing everything possible to do us harm, so that they’ll probably deport us," he said. "We live with that fear too."
Congressman Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), who helped accompany Ramos and his father back to Minnesota, said at a Friday news conference that DHS "should leave Liam alone."
“His family came in legally through the asylum process,” Castro said. “And when I left the Dilley detention center, one of the ICE officers explained to me that his father was on a one-year parole in place, so they should allow that to continue.”
"This decision will wipe out the availability of release through bond for tens of thousands of people," one critic noted.
A divided federal appellate panel ruled Friday in favor of the Trump administration's policy of locking up most undocumented immigrants without bond, a decision that legal experts called a serious blow to due process.
A three-judge panel of the right-wing 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled 2-1 that President Donald Trump's reversal of three decades of practice by previous administrations is legally sound under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). The ruling reverses two lower court orders.
"The text [of the IIRIRA] says what it says, regardless of the decisions of prior administrations," Judge Edith Jones—an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan—wrote for the majority. "That prior administrations decided to use less than their full enforcement authority... does not mean they lacked the authority to do more."
Writing in dissent, Judge Dana M. Douglas, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, asserted that "the Congress that passed IIRIRA would be surprised to learn it had also required the detention without bond of two million people. For almost 30 years there was no sign anyone thought it had done so, and nothing in the congressional record or the history of the statute’s enforcement suggests that it did."
This is a very, very bad decision from one of the two Reagan judges left on the Fifth Circuit, joined by one of the two most extreme Trump appointees on the court.And, it is about the issue I walked through at Law Dork earlier this week, in the context of Minnesota: www.lawdork.com/i/186796727/...
[image or embed]
— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) February 6, 2026 at 6:50 PM
"Nonetheless, the government today asserts the authority and mandate to detain millions of noncitizens in the interior, some of them present here for decades, on the same terms as if they were apprehended at the border," Douglas added. "No matter that this newly discovered mandate arrives without historical precedent, and in the teeth of one of the core distinctions of immigration law. The overwhelming majority elsewhere have recognized that the government’s position is totally unsupported."
Past administration generally allowed unauthorized immigrants who had lived in the United States for years to attend bond hearings, at which they had a chance to argue before immigration judges that they posed no flight risk and should be permitted to contest their deportation without detention.
Mandatory detention by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was generally reserved for convicted criminals or people who recently entered the country illegally.
However, the Trump administration contends that anyone who entered the United States without authorization at any time can be detained pending deportation, with limited discretionary exceptions for humanitarian or public interest cases. As a result, immigrants who have lived in the US for years or even decades are being detained indefinitely, even if they have no criminal records.
According to a POLITICO analysis, more than 360 judges across the country—including dozens of Trump appointees—have rejected the administration's interpretation of ICE's detention power, while just 26 sided with the administration.
While US Attorney General Pam Bondi hailed Friday's ruling as a "significant blow against activist judges who have been undermining our efforts to make America safe again at every turn," some legal experts said the decision erodes constitutional rights.
"AWFUL news for due process," American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick said on social media in response to Friday's ruling. "This decision will wipe out the availability of release through bond for tens of thousands of people detained in or transported to Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi by ICE."
While Friday's ruling only applies to those three states, which fall under the 5th Circuit Court's jurisdiction, there are numerous legal challenges to the administration's detention policy in courts across the country.