

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.
Jay Feldman, Beyond Pesticides, 202-543-5450, JFeldman@beyondpesticides.org,, Katherine Paul, Organic Consumers Assoc.: (207) 653-3090, katherine@organicconsumers.org
Beyond Pesticides (BP) and The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) today responded to a federal judge's ruling against Monsanto Co.'s motion to dismiss the groups' lawsuit, filed in April, 2017.
Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, the lead plaintiff in the case, said:
"In the face of EPA's poor regulation of pesticides, misleading pesticide product labeling cannot be left unchecked. The court's decision to allow our case to move forward, in denying Monsanto's motion to dismiss, is critical to showing that the company is deceiving the public with a safety claim on its Roundup (glyphosate) label. Its advertising and labeling claim that Roundup 'targets an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets' is false, given the devastating harm that glyphosate has on beneficial bacteria in the gut biome. The disruption of the gut biome is associated with a host of 21st century diseases, including asthma, autism, bacterial vaginosis, cardiovascular disease, cancer, Crohn's disease, depression, inflammatory bowel disease, leaky gut syndrome, multiple sclerosis, obesity, Type 1 and 2 diabetes, and Parkinson's.
The science on the hazards of Roundup (glyphosate) are clear and Monsanto officials know it. With this case, we seek to ensure that the public is not misled by false advertising and product labeling in the marketplace. It is a critical step toward ensuring that people are fully informed before purchasing toxic products that can poison them, their families, and the communities where they live."
OCA International Director, Ronnie Cummins said:
"Monsanto aggressively markets Roundup as 'safe' for humans and animals, despite newer studies indicating that glyphosate may be carcinogenic and its use may affect human and animal cardiovascular, endocrine, nervous and reproductive systems. No reasonable consumer seeing the claim on this product that glyphosate targets an enzyme not found 'in people or pets' would expect that Roundup actually targets an important bacterial enzyme found in humans and animals, affecting the health of their immune system.
Survey after survey shows that consumers rely on labels to guide their purchases and keep them and their families safe. When corporations mislead on the issue of a product's effect on consumers and their families, they put everyone, but especially young children--in this case, playing in yards and parks--at risk, leaving the public no other recourse than to use the legal system to seek the removal of this misleading information."
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, ruled that OCA and BP presented enough evidence to support that Monsanto's labeling of its flagship weedkiller, Roundup, misleads consumers.
Through their attorneys, Richman Law Group, OCA and BP sued Monsanto on behalf of the general public, in Washington D.C., under the District of Columbia's Consumer Protection Procedures Act, for misleading the public by labeling its popular weedkiller Roundup as "target[ing] an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets." The nonprofits allege that this statement is false, deceptive and misleading, because the enzyme targeted by glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is, in fact, found in people and pets.
Beyond Pesticides is a national grassroots non-profit organization headquartered in the District of Columbia that works with allies in protecting public health and the environment to lead the transition to a world free of toxic pesticides. For more information, visit www.beyondpesticides.org.
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots non-profit 501(c)3 public interest organization campaigning for health, justice, and sustainability. For more information, visit: www.organicconsumers.org.
Richman Law Group (RLG) is a boutique law firm specializing in consumer protection and civil rights. RLG is dedicated to serving the greater good by holding large corporations accountable for actions that harm consumers, the environment, and the general public. For more information, visit: www.richmanlawgroup.com.
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots 501(c)3 nonprofit public interest organization, and the only organization in the U.S. focused exclusively on promoting the views and interests of the nation's estimated 50 million consumers of organically and socially responsibly produced food and other products. OCA educates and advocates on behalf of organic consumers, engages consumers in marketplace pressure campaigns, and works to advance sound food and farming policy through grassroots lobbying. We address crucial issues around food safety, industrial agriculture, genetic engineering, children's health, corporate accountability, Fair Trade, environmental sustainability, including pesticide use, and other food- and agriculture-related topics.
"These losers lost at the ballot box and soon they will also lose in court," vowed a spokesman for California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The US Department of Justice on Thursday filed a lawsuit against California over its new redistricting plan, which was approved overwhelmingly by voters in the state last week.
The DOJ joined a lawsuit filed by the California Republican Party that alleged the state's new redistricting plan is racially discriminatory because it intends, in addition to other "racial considerations," to give preference to Latino voters, who have traditionally voted for Democrats.
"Race cannot be used as a proxy to advance political interests, but that is precisely what the California General Assembly did with Proposition 50—the recent ballot initiative that junked California's pre-existing electoral map in favor of a rush-job rejiggering of California’s congressional district lines," the complaint alleged.
US Attorney General Pam Bondi, in justifying the DOJ's intervention into California's mid-decade redistricting, described the effort as "a brazen power grab that tramples on civil rights and mocks the democratic process" and vowed that "Governor Newsom’s attempt to entrench one-party rule and silence millions of Californians will not stand."
Brandon Richards, a spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, hit back at the DOJ's allegations and vowed that the state would not be backing down.
"These losers lost at the ballot box and soon they will also lose in court," he told CNN.
California decided to commit to a mid-decade redistricting plan in response to President Donald Trump's unprecedented push to get Republicans across the country to redraw their states' maps to help the GOP maintain control of the US House of Representatives in next year's midterm elections.
Trump's gerrymandering push, which began in Texas and subsequently spread to Missouri and North Carolina, has been hit with several setbacks, including California's redistricting plan, as well as a district court in Utah nixing a Republican-drawn map in favor of one in which Democrats are seen as heavy favorites to pick up an additional seat.
Dave Wasserman, a senior elections analyst at Cook Political Report, wrote in a post on X on Tuesday that the Democrats’ victories in Utah and California, as well as reported plans to redraw maps in Virginia, have “pushed the mid-decade redistricting war closer to a draw.”
"Recriminalizing hemp will force American farms and businesses to close and disrupt the well-being of countless Americans who depend on hemp," warned one critic.
Advocates for hemp on Wednesday decried a provision of the Republican government funding law signed by President Donald Trump that tightens restrictions on the versatile plant—a move critics say will devastate a $30 billion industry.
The new restrictions set a stricter limit on the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)—the psychoactive chemical in cannabis—in order to close a loophole that allowed for the sale of unregulated food and beverages containing intoxicating hemp-derived compounds.
Twenty-two Democratic senators—including advocates for legal recreational or medical marijuana—joined almost all Republicans in voting against an amendment introduced by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to strip out the restrictions from the final bill. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas was the only other Republican to back Paul's effort.
"Our industry is being used as a pawn as leaders work to reopen the government," Jonathan Miller, general counsel for the US Hemp Roundtable, an industry group, warned ahead of the vote. "Recriminalizing hemp will force American farms and businesses to close and disrupt the well-being of countless Americans who depend on hemp."
Hemp—which is used in a wide range of products from clothing to construction materials to fuel, food, and biodegradable plastics—was legalized under the 2018 farm bill signed by President Donald Trump during his first term.
But lawmakers including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)—who backed the 2018 legislation—argued that cannabis companies are exploiting a loophole in the farm bill to legally manufacture products with enough THC to get consumers high.
Paul, however, ripped the provision, arguing in a Thursday Courier Journal opinion piece that it "destroys the livelihood of hemp farmers."
"This could not come at a worse time for our farmers," Paul wrote. "Costs have increased while prices for crops have declined. Farm bankruptcies are rising."
"For many farmers, planting hemp offered them a lifeline," he continued. "Hemp can be used for textiles, rope, insulation, composite wood, paper, grain, and in CBD products, and growing hemp helped farmers to mitigate the loses they’ve endured during this season of hardship."
Paul noted that "the provision that was inserted into the government funding bill makes illegal any hemp product that contains more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container."
"That would be nearly 100% of hemp products currently sold," he said. "This is so low that it takes away any of the benefit of the current products intended to manage pain or other conditions."
Charles and Linda Gill have grown hemp on their family farm in Bowdoinham, Maine since the plant was legalized in 2018.
“We are not in the business of these intoxicating hemp products on the market, which are the ones that are screwing it up for everybody,” Charles Gill told Maine Morning Star's Emma Davis on Wednesday. “They’re abusing the system.”
“All our current products would be banned,” Gill said of the new restrictions. “It would pretty much put us out of business.”
Hemp defenders vowed to contest the new law.
"The fight isn't over," Hemp Industry & Farmers of America executive director Brian Swensen said on X after the law's passage.
"In 2018, President Trump and Congress legalized hemp, delivering more jobs and opportunities to American farmers and small businesses," Swensen said, adding that the restrictions "will devastate American farmers, business owners, veterans, and seniors."
"The hemp ban will also open up dangerous black markets for hemp and allow China to take over the entire hemp market," he added, claiming "it kills over 325,000 American jobs and destroys the industry."
“The department I once served is engaging in fascist shows of force,” said Miles Taylor, who served as chief of staff for the Department of Homeland Security during the first Trump administration.
Late at night on September 30, over 300 federal agents stormed an apartment building in one of Chicago's lowest-income neighborhoods. After descending from Black Hawk helicopters, they broke down residents' doors, destroyed furniture and belongings, deployed flash-bang grenades, and dragged sleeping people—some naked—out into the cold evening. Dozens of people, including children and American citizens, were held in zip ties and detained for hours.
As part of the highly publicized raid at the South Shore complex, which was filmed and edited into a miniature action film by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), at least 37 Venezuelan residents of the apartment complex were taken into custody.
On Thursday, an investigation by ProPublica revealed that the raid, heralded by the Trump administration as a counterterrorism victory, has resulted in zero charges against the people who were detained.
In the wake of public backlash to the militarized raid’s extraordinary, indiscriminate brutality, the assistant secretary for public affairs at DHS, Tricia McLaughlin, claimed that the operation "successfully resulted in the arrest of two confirmed Tren de Aragua members,“ describing the cartel as ”a terrorist organization.“ She added that ”One of these members was a positive match on the terror screening watchlist.“
She added that others who were detained had their own rap sheets, including "domestic battery, family violence, battery against a public safety official, aggravated unlawful use of a firearm, retail theft, soliciting prostitution, possession of a controlled substance," while another "had an active warrant and was listed as armed and dangerous [with] weapons offenses."
Stephen Miller, a senior advisor to President Donald Trump and an architect of his "mass deportation" policy, said that the building was "filled with TdA terrorists" and that the raid had “saved God knows how many lives."
But ProPublica's report called many of the government’s claims into question. The government has not released the names of the 37 Venezuelans detained in the raid, but reporters identified the names of 21 of them and interviewed 12.
The report found that contrary to the government's claims of their rampant criminality, federal prosecutors have not filed criminal charges against a single person who was arrested. They have also not provided any evidence that two of the men arrested were part of the Tren de Aragua gang.
The names of the two supposed gang members have not been made public, but ProPublica managed to track down one of them—24-year-old Ludwing Jeanpier Parra Pérez—using another government press release that described him as a “confirmed member” of the terrorist cartel.
While the release also described him as a “criminal illegal alien,” the only criminal charges ever filed against him—for drug possession and driving without a license after a traffic stop last year—were dropped. No other charges against him, related to gang activity or anything else, have been filed.
"I don’t have anything to do with that,” Parra told ProPublica from the Indiana jail where he's detained along with 17 others nabbed in the raid. “I’m very worried. I don’t know why they are saying that. I came here to find a better future for me and my family.”
ProPublica said its reporters have also observed eight immigration court hearings for the detained individuals, many of whom have asked to be deported back to Venezuela. In not a single one of the hearings has a government attorney mentioned any pending criminal charges against them while arguing for their deportation, nor have they alleged that any of them have affiliations with Tren de Aragua.
Judges have instead ordered them deported or granted voluntary departure, which the outlet noted is "a sign that they are not seen as a serious threat and can apply for return to the United States."
Mark Rotert, a former federal prosecutor and defense attorney in Chicago, told ProPublica that if these detainees actually had the long criminal histories the government claimed they do, they would likely pursue charges.
“Do they really believe they have people who are members of a violent organized crime gang?" he said. "If they believe they have people who fit that criteria, I would be very surprised if they were satisfied with only deporting them.”
As far as other crimes, ProPublica found that 18 of the 21 detainees they identified had no criminal charges against them. Meanwhile, the other three, who were charged with offenses “ranging from drug possession to battery,” have all had their charges dropped.
Among those rounded up at the South Shore apartment who spoke to ProPublica were a man with a steady job at a taco restaurant who has a daughter in elementary school, and a construction worker and former Venezuelan army paratrooper who is raising four children.
The investigation's findings are in line with how the Trump administration has attempted to sell its militaristic Operation Midway Blitz and other prongs of its mass deportation crusade to the public.
While the White House has persistently claimed to be targeting “the worst of the worst” criminals, the latest immigration data shows that around 72% of current detainees have no criminal convictions. Previous data from the libertarian Cato Institute has shown that 93% of ICE book-ins were for non-criminals and nonviolent offenders.
Michael D. Baker, an immigration and criminal defense lawyer based in Chicago, described it as laughable that a "300-agent raid" was being "called a terrorist victory" even while it had "zero criminal charges."
"The Trump administration’s showcase anti-gang operation was built on spectacle, not evidence," he said.
In response to the story, Miles Taylor, who served in the DHS from 2017-19, including as its chief of staff, during the first Trump administration, lamented on social media that the department "is no longer recognizable."
"The department I once served is engaging in fascist shows of force," he said, "violating the rights of Americans—only to satiate the creepy desires of an old man who wants to seem macho."