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
May, 02 2019, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Email:,info@jewishvoiceforpeace.org
Victory--Judge Rules in Support of Panel Discussion on Palestinian Human Rights at UMass
“To shut down the event would be to violate the First Amendment.”
WASHINGTON
A Massachusetts district court ruled in favor of allowing a panel discussion at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst to go head earlier today. The May 4 panel discussion "Not Backing Down: Israel, Free Speech, and the Battle for Palestinian Human Rights" will be held as planned, despite the legal request for an injunction to halt the panel, premised on a false accusation of antisemitism by the panelists, event sponsors and attendees.
Jewish Voice for Peace member Attorney Rachel Weber explained that, "The judge ruled that to shut down this event would be to violate the First Amendment. But we also challenged the false premise that criticism of Israel is somehow inherently antisemitic. We have every right to criticize Israel's violations of Palestinian human rights. As members of JVP, and as Jews, we stand in solidarity with the event and with the panelists."
This lawsuit is part of a national trend attempting to silence the free speech rights of students and faculty who advocate for justice and human rights in Israel and Palestine. Responding to the attempt to shut down the May 4 event, UMass Amherst Professor of Philosophy Joseph Levine stated, "The attempt to tar everyone associated with the movement for Palestinian rights with the brush of antisemitism is part of a systematic campaign to build a wall of denial behind which Israel can continue to call on the US to aid and abet its brutal oppression of millions of Palestinians living under occupation and in exile."
UMass student Anna Ben-Hur added that, "As a Jewish student member of Students for Justice in Palestine, I'm deeply uncomfortable with the claims that this event is antisemitic. The struggle for Palestinian and Jewish freedom is the same struggle - it's a movement against white nationalism."
Joining Jewish Voice for Peace Western MA in asking the court to reject the injunction were event panelists Linda Sarsour, Marc Lamont Hill, Roger Waters, Dave Zirin, moderator Vijay Prashad, event organizer Sut Jhally and the Media Education Foundation, and co-sponsor Students for Justice in Palestine at UMass-Amherst. The University of Massachusetts Amherst was represented separately and also opposed the lawsuit and request for injunction.
The panel discussion "Not Backing Down: Israel, Free Speech, and the Battle for Palestinian Human Rights" will address recent attacks on Rep. Ilhan Omar and other progressives who have spoken out against Israel's 50-year military occupation of Palestinian land. Admission is free to the event which will begin at 6:30PM on Saturday May 4 at the Fine Arts Center, University of Massachusetts Amherst. Free tickets will be available at the door the night of the event. For more information visit www.notbackingdownumass.org
Jewish Voice for Peace is a national, grassroots organization inspired by Jewish tradition to work for a just and lasting peace according to principles of human rights, equality, and international law for all the people of Israel and Palestine. JVP has over 200,000 online supporters, over 70 chapters, a youth wing, a Rabbinic Council, an Artist Council, an Academic Advisory Council, and an Advisory Board made up of leading U.S. intellectuals and artists.
(510) 465-1777LATEST NEWS
Minnesota Sues Trump Admin Over Killings of Good and Pretti, Shooting of Sosa-Celis
"These shootings are just three examples of the violent actions committed by federal agents in Minnesota during the surge," the complaint notes.
Mar 24, 2026
Minnesota officials on Tuesday sued the Trump administration over its refusal to cooperate with state investigators probing the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents earlier this year, as well as the shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, who was wounded but survived.
Agents with the US Department of Homeland Security and its immigration agencies descended on Minnesota's Twin Cities and surrounding communities in January. Protests and national outrage over President Donald Trump's "Operation Metro Surge" mounted after a series of related shootings in Minneapolis, leading to the current funding fight in Congress that has partially shut down DHS.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer Jonathan Ross fatally shot Good, a 37-year-old US citizen, on January 7; an unidentified agent shot Sosa-Celis, a Venezuelan national, on January 14; and Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Protection officer Raymundo Gutierrez fatally shot Pretti, a 37-year-old US citizen and nurse, on January 24.
"These shootings are just three examples of the violent actions committed by federal agents in Minnesota during the surge," stresses the new lawsuit, filed in a Washington, DC federal court by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, and Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Superintendent Drew Evans.
"Federal agents also carried out illegal stops, sweeps, arrests, and dangerous raids in sensitive public spaces," the complaint notes. "The surge created widespread fear among Minnesota residents, both citizens and noncitizens. It caused hundreds of millions of dollars in economic harm. And it flooded Minnesota's federal courts with lawsuits challenging the unlawful detentions that resulted from the operation."
With the three shootings, "Minnesota authorities responded to the scene of each shooting to investigate" and "expected federal cooperation," the filing explains. "At the scene of the first two incidents—the killing of Renee Good and the shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis—federal agents initially indicated that they would work with Minnesota authorities and share relevant information. State investigators thus began their work in reliance on that understanding."
"But in both cases, federal agents quickly reneged on their pledges to cooperate. Instead of sharing information, federal authorities took exclusive possession of evidence that had been collected, and they denied Minnesota investigators access to key information," the document details. "At the scene of the third shooting—the killing of Alex Pretti—federal immigration officers physically blocked investigators of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) from accessing the scene. That physical obstruction persisted even after state officials obtained a judicial warrant authorizing access to the scene."
The filing points out that when "faced with unprecedented noncooperation," the plaintiffs submitted formal requests to DHS and the US Department of Justice—which are named as defendants, as are their leaders, outgoing Secretary Kristi Noem and Attorney General Pam Bondi. Noem's replacement, Markwayne Mullin, was sworn in Tuesday afternoon.
"Defendants' responses to those requests—indeed, by and large, their refusal to respond at all—confirm that the federal government has adopted a policy and practice of refusing Minnesota authorities access to investigative materials relating to uses of force by federal immigration officers deployed to Minnesota as part of Operation Metro Surge," the complaint says.
Emphasizing Minnesota's "authority and responsibility to protect against and address violence within its borders," as well as the history of cooperation between federal and state authorities in significant criminal investigations, the plaintiffs are asking the court to rule the administration's policy of noncooperation and their resulting refusal to comply with these shooting probes unlawful.
According to The Associated Press, while the two departments haven't responded to requests for comment, Moriarty of Hennepin County told reporters that "we are prepared to fight for transparency and accountability that the federal government is desperate to avoid."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate Probe Launched Into Soaring Childcare Costs Driven by Private Equity Takeover
“Private equity firms have increasingly brought their playbook to essential care industries," warns Sen. Jeff Merkley, by rolling local childcare centers nationwide "into large chains, and prioritizing investor profits over the well-being of the families.”
Mar 24, 2026
US Sen. Jeff Merkley announced the launch of a new investigation into the role of private equity firms in making childcare increasingly unaffordable for American families.
Merkley, the Oregon Democrat who serves as ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, sent letters to KinderCare Learning Companies and Learning Care Group (LCG), the two largest childcare companies controlled by private equity firms, seeking information about the impact of the relentless profit-seeking of their owners on day-to-day business decisions.
Among other things, Merkley wants the companies to provide insight into the influence that their private equity owners exert over facility acquisition, expansion plans, staffing levels, employee wages and benefits; and capital investments.
Merkley is also asking the companies to "describe how tuition increases... are determined and whether financial obligations to lenders or owners are considered in pricing decisions." He also noted that both KinderCare and LCG faced serious accusations of mismanagement in multiple states.
KinderCare, which is owned by Switzerland-based private equity firm Partners Group, has been cited by state regulators in Indiana and Wisconsin for maintaining facilities with "inadequate supervision, staff-to-child ratio violations, unsafe or unsanitary conditions, and failures to report or respond appropriately to alleged abuse," Merkley wrote.
LCG, which is owned by private equity firm American Securities, operates facilities that have been reported for health and safety violations in numerous states, including Georgia, Missouri, and Texas, Merkley noted, "with incidents involving children left unattended on buses, supervision failures, and alleged physical abuse by staff."
Merkley said he was concerned that the failings at these facilities were being driven by the profit considerations at Partners Group and American Securities.
"Private equity firms have increasingly brought their playbook to essential care industries," said Merkley, "buying up independent providers, rolling them into large chains, and prioritizing investor profits over the well-being of the families and communities that depend on these services."
The senator urged both the childcare companies and their private equity owners to "fully cooperate with this investigation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Leaked Video, Maine Voters Challenge Mills on Vetoes, Gun Control, and More
One voter told the Maine governor, who is running for US Senate, that she is wondering "why you would fight on behalf of us on the national level if you couldn't do it on the state level."
Mar 24, 2026
Most of the national news surrounding the Maine Democratic Senate primary has zeroed in on candidate Graham Platner's record—a tattoo he got while serving in the Marines and posts he wrote several years ago on Reddit.
But a video recording obtained by Drop Site News of a local Democratic group's Zoom meeting last week with Platner's main opponent, Gov. Janet Mills, brought to light discussions Maine voters are having not about the first-time candidate's controversies—which have done little to damage his campaign, according to numerous polls—but about the record of the governor who's run the state for the last six years.
For 30 minutes on March 19, members of the Hancock County Democrats grilled Mills about her history of vetoing significant pieces of legislation and opposing measures broadly supported by Mainers.
⚡️Leaked Video: Janet Mills Attack Ad Against Graham Platner Backfires With Maine Democrats
A Zoom recording with Gov. Janet Mills captures unfiltered voter reactions to the governor’s recent attack ad against her U.S. Senate primary opponent, Graham Platner.
Story by… pic.twitter.com/xF6bmqDsAf
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) March 23, 2026
A former Democratic state representative, Mark Worth, asked Mills early in the question-and-answer session about her "record on tribal sovereignty, labor, and gun safety bills, such as your veto of the red flag law"—an apparent reference to Mills' opposition to the red flag law that was passed by referendum in 2025, with 62% supporting the measure to make it easier for law enforcement to take away someone's firearm if they pose a threat to themself or others.
Mills instead supported the state's "yellow flag law," which requires police to take a person into custody and obtain an assessment by a mental health professional before a gun can be taken away.
Nearly two dozen states and the District of Columbia have red flag laws, also known as extreme risk protection orders, and they are supported by 77% of Americans, including a majority of gun owners and Republicans, according to an APM Research Lab/Guns & America/Call To Mind poll from 2019.
Mills responded to the question by defending gun control legislation that has passed in Maine during her tenure—including a ban on ghost guns and expanded background checks—but did not mention the broadly popular red flag law that she opposed.
She said that she had sought to find "common ground" between gun control advocates and gun owners—even though the referendum was supported by nearly two-thirds of voters, including many gun owners—one of whom was Platner, a combat veteran.
The governor has also been criticized for vetoing a bill that would have barred the state from seizing tribal lands, and has angered the state's labor movement several times, including when she vetoed an offshore wind development bill due to her opposition to an amendment requiring collective bargaining agreements, and another measure that would have allowed farmworkers to unionize.
At the meeting this month, a voter named Diana Morenda introduced herself as a "three-time cancer veteran" and asked about two other vetoes by the governor—those of LD 765, which aimed to prohibit "unsupported price increases" of prescription drugs, and LD 1117, which would have prohibited excessive rises in the price of generic prescription drugs.
With the vetoes, Morenda told Mills, she "essentially destroyed any chance that your constituents would have had to combat excessive pricing, kind of siding with Big Pharma."
"You can understand why I... and many others in Hancock County, we might be wondering out loud why you would fight on behalf of us on the national level if you couldn't do it on the state level," said Morenda.
Mills responded similarly as she had to the earlier question, naming other moves she's taken to increase access to prescription drugs and price transparency and telling the voter, "Whoever gave you those two numbers didn't give you the rest of the bills that we did pass."
The controversies surrounding Platner's campaign came up during the meeting, with Worth telling Mills her recent attack ad against Platner was "divisive and odious," and another voter accusing the governor of "using underhanded means" against her opponent.
The ad included several women looking at posts Platner wrote in 2013 disparaging sexual assault survivors. Platner has addressed his old online comments several times, saying his views have evolved since he wrote them.
One voter disclosed that he is a friend of Platner's before asking Mills: "Do you believe in a Maine and a country where a person can be redeemed? Where they can change and become a better version of themself?"
Mills deflected the question, claiming that her concern is not "whether he's reformed or thinks better," but electability.
"The issue is who can beat Susan Collins," said Mills, referring to the state's Republican senator.
The governor has persistently claimed that she has the greatest chance of beating Collins in November, contrary to several polls.
The voter addressed those claims in his question.
"You say electability is what you're looking for here," he said. "And if you truly do believe that and you've read the polls—which I imagine you have—that isn't the case."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular