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
For Immediate Release
March, 12 2018, 01:45pm EDT
Monday March, 12 2018, 01:45pm EDT
Contact:
Timothy Karr: 201-533-8838,,tkarr@freepress.net
More Mayors Sign Pledge to Protect Net Neutrality, Refusing to Do Business with Internet Providers That Don't
AUSTIN, Texas
AUSTIN, Texas - On Sunday evening, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio unveiled MayorsForNetNeutrality.org, urging mayors and city leaders to sign the Cities Open Internet Pledge.
The pledge requires all internet providers that do business with participating cities to follow strong Net Neutrality principles. It already has 12 signers, including Mayor de Blasio, Mayor Steve Adler of Austin, Mayor Ted Wheeler of Portland, Mayor Mark Farrell of San Francisco and Mayor Jacob Frey of Minneapolis.
In collaboration with the mayors, Free Press created the MayorsForNetNeutrality.org website to allow residents of any U.S. city to contact their local mayors and city leaders and urge them to sign the pledge.
Signers agree that their cities will only do business with "companies that do not block, throttle, or provide paid prioritization of content on sites that cities run to provide critical services and information to their residents," according to the pledge.
The action is the mayors' response to the Federal Communications Commission's unpopular 2017 decision to strip internet users of Net Neutrality protections. The FCC vote has sparked a national movement to restore open internet protections. In addition to this new initiative by the mayors, a congressional resolution of disapproval has gained hundreds of co-sponsors in the House and Senate and dozens of states are weighing legislation to restore Net Neutrality protections.
"Corporate greed is the only reason Net Neutrality is gone," Mayor de Blasio said on Sunday during an appearance at the SXSW conference in Austin. "To help even the playing field, New York City is going to hit companies in the only place they seem to feel it: their bottom line. When the federal government fails to protect consumers, cities must band together to take action. New York City is leading the charge by establishing the Cities Open Internet Pledge."
"Town by town, city by city, local leaders are taking back everyone's right to connect and communicate," said Timothy Karr, senior director of strategy and communications for Free Press. "By signing the Cities Open Internet Pledge, mayors are posing a direct challenge to the FCC's wrong-headed decision to gut Net Neutrality protections. They're saying that access to an open internet is vital to the livelihood of cities and their inhabitants. If bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., won't protect Net Neutrality, local leaders are obligated to step up for the people they represent and defend the open internet safeguards that are essential to a healthy democracy."
Mayors and local leaders who have signed the pledge as of Monday morning:
Mayor Bill de Blasio -- New York, New York
Mayor Steve Adler -- Austin, Texas
Mayor Ted Wheeler -- Portland, Oregon
Mayor Ron Nirenberg -- San Antonio, Texas
Mayor Sly James -- Kansas City, Missouri
Mayor Mark Farrell -- San Francisco, California
Mayor Catherine E. Pugh -- Baltimore, Maryland
Mayor Barney Seney -- Putnam, Connecticut
Mayor Paul Soglin -- Madison, Wisconsin
Mayor Sam Liccardo -- San Jose, California
Mayor Jacob Frey -- Minneapolis, Minnesota
County Board of Supervisors Chair Zach Friend -- Santa Cruz County, California
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
'Deeply Concerning': Alarm as Trump DOJ Ousts Top Antitrust Officials
"The antitrust division has long worked to enforce the law to fight monopoly power, but these attorneys may have been fired for doing just that," said Sen. Amy Klobuchar.
Jul 29, 2025
The Trump Justice Department has removed two of its top antitrust officials amid infighting over the handling of merger enforcement, conflict that came to a head with the DOJ's strange and allegedly corrupt settlement with Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks.
CBS News reported that Roger Alford, principal deputy assistant attorney general, and Bill Rinner, deputy assistant attorney general and head of merger enforcement, were fired for "insubordination" on Monday after being placed on administrative leave last week.
"There has been tension over the handling of investigations into T-Mobile, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, and others," the outlet reported, citing unnamed sources.
The Wall Street Journal subsequently reported that the two officials—both deputies of Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater, the head of the DOJ's antitrust division—were terminated "after internal disagreements over how much discretion their division should have to police mergers and other business conduct that threatens competition."
News of Alford and Rinner's firings came amid growing scrutiny of the Justice Department's merger settlement with Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks, an agreement that reportedly divided the DOJ internally.
The Capitol Forum reported last week that Justice Department leaders including Chad Mizelle, Attorney General Pam Bondi's chief of staff, "overruled" top antitrust officials who raised concerns about the settlement, Slater among them. HPE hired lobbyists with ties to the Trump White House to push for the deal, which allowed the merger to move forward pending a judge's review of the settlement.
MLex reported over the weekend that Mizelle placed Alford and Ginner on leave last week following "disagreements with higher-ups over a recent merger settlement in HPE-Juniper."
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who serves on the Senate Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights, called the firings "deeply concerning" and demanded answers from the Trump administration.
"The antitrust division has long worked to enforce the law to fight monopoly power, but these attorneys may have been fired for doing just that," Klobuchar wrote on social media.
Faiz Shakir, an adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), wrote in response to the firings that "more and more people [are] taking notice that Trump is using his power to coddle the oligarchs."
"Major cases being settled, rather than fought out in trials," he wrote. "Nothing new being filed to fight major monopolies. Things like non-compete bans and click-to-cancel rules being overturned."
The American Prospect's David Dayen described the internal turmoil at the Trump DOJ as an apparent "effort to hijack antitrust powers on behalf of large corporations."
"This mess is about more than just a wireless back-office infrastructure merger," Dayen wrote, referring to the HPE-Juniper deal. "The antitrust division is actively overseeing cases against Google, Apple, Visa, Live Nation, RealPage, and more."
"If Slater is functionally not in control of the division, then cash and favor-trading will determine the outcomes for some of the biggest companies in the economy," Dayen added. "We're already seeing lenient enforcement at DOJ, with a deal between T-Mobile and UScellular approved. The precedent appears to be set: The right consultants paid the right amount of money can get you a sweetheart deal."
DOJ Sued for Withholding Memo on Trump's $400 Million Jet From Qatar
"President Trump's deal to take a $400 million luxury jet from a foreign government deserves full public scrutiny—not a stiff-arm from the Department of Justice," said the head of one watchdog group.
Jul 28, 2025
With preparations to refit a Qatari jet to be used as Air Force One "underway," a press freedom group sued the U.S. Department of Justice in federal court on Monday for failing to release the DOJ memorandum about the legality of President Donald Trump accepting the $400 million "flying palace."
The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), represented by nonpartisan watchdog American Oversight, filed the lawsuit seeking the memo, which was reportedly approved by the Office of Legal Counsel and signed by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who previously lobbied on behalf of the Qatari government.
FPF had submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the memo on May 15, and the DOJ told the group that fulfilling it would take over 600 days.
"How many flights could Trump have taken on his new plane in the same amount of time it would have taken the DOJ to release this one document?"
"It shouldn't take 620 days to release a single, time-sensitive document," said Lauren Harper, FPF's Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy, in a Monday statement. "How many flights could Trump have taken on his new plane in the same amount of time it would have taken the DOJ to release this one document?"
The complaint—filed in the District of Columbia—notes that the airplane is set to be donated to Trump's private presidential library foundation after his second term. Harper said that "the government's inability to administer FOIA makes it too easy for agencies to keep secrets, and nonexistent disclosure rules around donations to presidential libraries provide easy cover for bad actors and potential corruption."
It's not just FPF sounding the alarm about the aircraft. The complaint points out that "a number of stakeholders, including ethics experts and several GOP lawmakers, have questioned the propriety and legality of the move, including whether acceptance of the plane would violate the U.S. Constitution's foreign emoluments clause... which prohibits a president from receiving gifts or benefits from foreign governments without the consent of Congress."
Some opponents of the "comically corrupt" so-called gift stressed that it came after the Trump Organization, the Saudi partner DarGlobal, and a company owned by the Qatari government reached a deal to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar.
Despite some initial GOP criticism of the president taking the aircraft, just hours after the Trump administration formally accepted the jet in May, U.S. Senate Republicans thwarted an attempt by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to pass by unanimous consent legislation intended to prevent a foreign plane from serving as Air Force One.
"Although President Trump characterized the deal as a smart business decision, remarking that it would be 'stupid' not to accept 'a free, very expensive airplane,' experts have noted that it will be costly to retrofit the jet for use as Air Force One, with estimatesranging from less than $400 million to more than $1 billion," the complaint states.
As The New York Times reported Sunday:
Officially, and conveniently, the price tag has been classified. But even by Washington standards, where "black budgets" are often used as an excuse to avoid revealing the cost of outdated spy satellites and lavish end-of-year parties, the techniques being used to hide the cost of Mr. Trump's pet project are inventive.
Which may explain why no one wants to discuss a mysterious, $934 million transfer of funds from one of the Pentagon's most over-budget, out-of-control projects—the modernization of America's aging, ground-based nuclear missiles...
Air Force officials privately concede that they are paying for renovations of the Qatari Air Force One with the transfer from another the massively-over-budget, behind-schedule program, called the Sentinel.
Preparations to refit the plane "are underway, and floor plans or schematics have been seen by senior U.S. officials," according to Monday reporting by CBS News. One unnamed budget official who spoke to the outlet also "believes the money to pay for upgrades will come from the Sentinel program."
Chioma Chukwu, executive director of American Oversight, said Monday that "President Trump's deal to take a $400 million luxury jet from a foreign government deserves full public scrutiny—not a stiff-arm from the Department of Justice."
"This is precisely the kind of corrupt arrangement that public records laws are designed to expose," Chukwu added. "The DOJ cannot sit on its hands and expect the American people to wait years for the truth while serious questions about corruption, self-dealing, and foreign influence go unanswered."
The complaint highlights that "Bondi's decision not to recuse herself from this matter, despite her links to the Qatari government, adds to a growing body of questionable ethical practices that have arisen during her short tenure as attorney general."
It also emphasizes that "the Qatari jet is just one in a list of current and prospective extravagant donations to President Trump's presidential library foundation that has raised significant questions about the use of private foundation donations to improperly influence government policy."
"Notably, ABC News and Paramount each agreed to resolve cases President Trump filed against the media entities by paying multimillion-dollar settlements to the Trump presidential library foundation, with Paramount's $16 million agreed payout coming at the same time it sought government approval for a planned merger with Skydance," the filing details. "On July 24, the Federal Communications Commission announced its approval of the $8 billion merger."
Trump Administration Lets Federal Employees Push Religion in Workplaces
"The Trump regime just handed Christian nationalists a loaded weapon: your federal workplace," said one critic.
Jul 28, 2025
The Trump administration issued a memo Monday allowing federal employees to proselytize in the workplace, a move welcomed by many conservatives but denounced by proponents of the separation of church and state.
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) memo "provides clear guidance to ensure federal employees may express their religious beliefs through prayer, personal items, group gatherings, and conversations without fear of discrimination or retaliation."
"Employees must be allowed to engage in private religious expression in work areas to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious private expression," the memo states.
Federal workers "should be permitted to display and use items used for religious purposes or icons of a religiously significant nature, including but not limited to bibles, artwork, jewelry, posters displaying religious messages, and other indicia of religion (such as crosses, crucifixes, and mezuzahs) on their desks, on their person, and in their assigned workspaces," the document continues.
"Employees may engage in conversations regarding religious topics with fellow employees, including attempting to persuade others of the correctness of their own religious views, provided that such efforts are not harassing in nature," OPM said—without elaborating on what constitutes harassment.
"These shocking changes essentially permit workplace evangelizing."
"Employees may also encourage their coworkers to participate in religious expressions of faith, such as prayer, to the same extent that they would be permitted to encourage coworkers participate in other personal activities," the memo adds.
OPM Director Scott Kupor said in a statement that "federal employees should never have to choose between their faith and their career."
"This guidance ensures the federal workplace is not just compliant with the law but welcoming to Americans of all faiths," Kupor added. "Under President [Donald] Trump's leadership, we are restoring constitutional freedoms and making government a place where people of faith are respected, not sidelined."
The OPM memo was widely applauded by conservative social media users—although some were dismayed that the new rules also apply to Muslims.
Critics, however, blasted what the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) called "a gift to evangelicals and the myth of 'anti-Christian bias.'"
FFRF co-president Laurie Gaylor said that "these shocking changes essentially permit workplace evangelizing, but worse still, allow supervisors to evangelize underlings and federal workers to proselytize the public they serve."
"This is the implementation of Christian nationalism in our federal government," Gaylor added.
The Secular Coalition for America denounced the memo as "another effort to grant privileges to certain religions while ignoring nonreligious people's rights."
Monday's memo follows another issued by Kupor on July 16 that encouraged federal agencies to take a "generous approach" to evaluating government employees who request telework and other flexibilities due to their religious beliefs.
The OPM directives follow the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 Groff v. DeJoy ruling, in which the court's right-wing majority declared that Article VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business."
The new memo also comes on the heels of three religion-based executive orders issued by Trump during his second term. One order established a White House Faith Office tasked with ensuring religious organizations have a voice in the federal government. Another seeks to "eradicate" what Trump claims is the "anti-Christian weaponization of government." Yet another created a Religious Liberty Commission meant to promote and protect religious freedom.
Most Popular
We cover the issues the corporate media never will.
Please support our journalism.