

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.

Seth D. Michaels, 202-331-5662, smichaels@ucsusa.org
The Trump administration has announced its intention to withdraw California's current Clean Air Act waiver and assert that federal vehicle rules pre-empt state authority. This would remove the state's long-standing ability to set strong vehicle emissions standards that other states can adopt, as 13 states and the District of Columbia have. This unprecedented move endangers clean air protections and violates the law, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
Below is a statement by Ken Kimmell, president of UCS.
"As the climate crisis escalates, more states are looking to strong vehicle standards to cut emissions. The law is clear--California can set its own emissions standards and other states can adopt those standards. This legal reality has created momentum around the country for clean car standards, with more states considering adopting California's rules. Unfortunately, President Trump is determined to weaken vehicle standards, regardless of the law or the public interest.
"The Trump administration is trying to nullify key parts of the Clean Air Act, violating states' longstanding authority to set and adopt more stringent emissions standards. This move doesn't just defy the plain language of the law; it slams the brakes on technological advancement and throws a wrench into states' ability to deal with air pollution and confront the growing risk of climate change. It's yet another way the administration is defying science, the law, and democratic norms to enable increased pollution.
"If the Trump administration gets its way, it will force drivers to needlessly burn up billions of gallons of gasoline, increasing the danger of climate change and weakening the American auto industry. Taking away state authority on emissions is a purely political move, violating law, science, and the normal regulatory process, and it's going to face a serious challenge."
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
Brazil's president called Israel's continued detention of Brazilian Thiago Ávila and Spanish-Swedish national Saif Abu Keshek "a serious affront to international law."
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva on Tuesday condemned Israel's twice-extended detention of two Global Sumud Flotilla members abducted last week off the coast of Greece while attempting to break the decadeslong Israeli blockade of Gaza and deliver humanitarian aid to its people amid an ongoing genocide.
"Maintaining the imprisonment of Brazilian citizen Thiago Ávila, a member of the Global Sumud Flotilla, is an unjustifiable action by the Israeli government, causes great concern, and must be condemned by all," Lula said on X.
"The detention of the flotilla activists in international waters had already represented a serious affront to international law," he added. "For this reason, our government, together with that of Spain, which also had a citizen detained, demands that they receive full guarantees of safety and be immediately released."
Spain's government has also condemned Israel’s capture of Abu Keshek and demanded his immediate release, and like Lula, called the detention illegal because it occurred in international waters. Abu Keshek is also a citizen of Sweden, which has not condemned his detention—or even mentioned him by name—but has asked that "the rights of any Swedish citizens will be respected."
Adalah Legal Center, the Palestinian group in Israel representing Ávila and Abu Keshek, said Tuesday that the Ashkelon Magistrates’ Court approved Israel's request to extend the pair's detention through May 10. This, after the court on Sunday prolonged their detention by two days.
“The court’s decision to extend the detention of humanitarian activists abducted in international waters amounts to judicial validation of the state’s lawlessness,” Adalah assertedad, vowing to appeal the decision, which the group said was based on "secret evidence."
Adalah noted that “because the activists were abducted over 1,000 kilometers away from Gaza and are not Israeli citizens, Israeli domestic law does not apply to them."
Israel contends that it is enforcing a lawful naval blockade of Gaza Strip, and that under the laws of naval warfare, that blockade can be enforced not only in its territorial waters, but also on the high seas.
Adalah said, "Crucially, the court granted the full six-day extension requested by the state without imposing any limitations or judicial constraints on the interrogation period,” adding that the stated purpose of their continued detention is further interrogation.
"Ávila reported being subjected to repeated interrogations lasting up to eight hours,” the group reported. “Interrogators have explicitly threatened him, stating he would either be ‘killed’ or ‘spend 100 years in jail.'”
“Both activists remain in total isolation, subjected to 24/7 high-intensity lighting in their cells, and kept blindfolded whenever they are moved, including during medical examinations,” Adalah said, accusing interrogators of "trying all the time to connect the humanitarian aid with Hamas to present it as a service to Hamas."
Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs claims that both men were affiliated with the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad, which the US government accuses of "clandestinely acting on behalf of" Hamas, the militant Palestinian resistance group that led the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel.
Still, no charges have been filed against the pair, who Adalah said have been on hunger strike since April 30 in protest of their detention.
Abu Keshek and Ávila were among the more than 170 Global Sumud Flotilla members intercepted and seized last week in international waters 45 nautical miles west of the Greek island Kythira and 600 nautical miles from Gaza in what many critics have called an act of piracy.
All of the other flotilla members have been released. Many said they brutally abused by their Israeli captors, who threatened to kill them. The Washington Post reported 34 people—including citizens of Australia, Colombia, Italy, Ukraine, and the United States—required medical attention for broken ribs, noses, and other injuries. Detained activists also said they were denied food and water, and were forced to sleep on deliberately flooded floors. Both Abu Keshek and Ávila had visible facial injuries during their first court appearances.
In a statement issued on Monday, Global Sumud Flotilla said Abu Keshek and Ávila "are being subjected to systemic psychological torture and explicit threats to the lives of their families."
The statement also noted the growing calls for their release from advocacy organizations and governments.
"We urge the international community and their representatives to immediately take action for the safety and freedom of Saif and Thiago, the freedom of all Palestinian hostages, and the end of Israel's illegal siege of Gaza and its genocide," Global Sumud added.
American journalist Alex Colston, who was aboard the flotilla on assignment for Zeteo, said he was beaten by his captors, and corroborated accounts of broken bones, concussion symptoms, and other signs of abuse inflicted by Israeli forces on flotilla members, as well as death threats, property theft, and other mistreatment.
Hannah Smith, a representative of the flotilla's public affairs team who was also aboard one of the vessels, told Democracy Now! on Monday that, after intercepting the boats, Israeli forces "pointed guns at us. They had lasers pointed at us. We had our hands in the air. They threatened lethal force."
"Many people were subject to aggressive physical force," she said. "We were denied access to adequate water. We were denied access to sanitary supplies."
Smith continued:
The nights were extremely cold. People’s jackets were stolen. When I advocated for one of the participants, who’s a doctor, who was pacing for two hours trying to stay warm—she had a short-sleeve shirt in like 50-degree weather that was cold and damp. When I advocated for blankets, they flooded the sleeping area. And then we had a dozen people pacing, trying to stay warm, trying not to get hypothermia.
When we nonviolently resisted, many people were beat. Many people were dragged. I was held in a stress position for many hours... I heard people screaming. I heard people being dragged around. And it was absolutely horrifying.
The reports of torture and other abuse are consistent with Israeli forces' brutal treatment of members of past Gaza flotillas, including Ávila, who has taken part in at least three such missions. Victims have included Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg, who was allegedly dragged, beaten, and made to kiss an Israeli flag in which she was allegedly wrapped after Israeli forces intercepted last October's Global Sumud mission.
It's not just activists who reported Israeli brutality. Journalist Noa Avishag Schnal—who was covering last October's flotilla—described rape threats and being “hung from the metal shackles on my wrists and ankles and beaten in the stomach, back, face, ear, and skull by a group of men and women guards, one of whom sat on my neck and face, blocking my airways.”
In 2010, Israeli forces raided one of the first Freedom Flotilla Coalition convoys carrying humanitarian aid intended for Gaza, which Israel blockaded three years earlier. The Israeli attackers killed nine volunteers aboard the MV Mavi Marmara, including Turkish-American teenager Furkan Doğan.
In a letter to his daughter dictated to his lawyer from prison, Ávila said, "I’m sorry for not being home with you right now."
"Today over a million children are suffering a genocide, being starved to death, being amputated without anesthesia, and suffering from horrific, hateful ideas, despite not knowing what Zionism and Imperialism is," he continued.
More than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces in Gaza since October 2023. Around 2 million others have been forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza, and Israel is facing an International Court of Justice genocide case filed by South Africa and formally supported by numerous nations, including Brazil and Spain.
"Your world will be safer because many parents decided to give everything to build this better world for you," Ávila added. "I hope someday you understand that because I love you so much there was nothing more dangerous for you and for other children than living in a world that accepts genocide."
A legal expert explores how the administration is "weaponizing the law... to effectuate a widespread harassment and mass deportation campaign that is more akin to ethnic cleansing than routine immigration enforcement."
President Donald Trump's taxpayer-funded mass deportation campaign has tormented communities across the country with militarized federal agents, killed immigrants and US citizens alike, abused demonstrators and detainees of all ages, and sparked fears of an expansive effort to strip citizenship from Americans.
The "Terrorizing Migrants" report released Tuesday by the Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson School of International and Public Affairs details how Trump's xenophobic campaign reflects "specific law and policy options created and strengthened among all three branches of the US government, on a bipartisan basis, since 9/11."
"These law and policy options place heightened unchecked discretionary authority within the administration, and are particularly ripe for abuse against noncitizen persons of color by immigration authorities, law enforcement agents, and other executive branch officials," wrote Widener University Delaware Law School assistant professor Elizabeth Beavers, author of the report.
The publication focuses on five key post-9/11 precedents borrowed from the "War on Terror," though it acknowledges that "the Trump administration is relying on laws and policies far beyond those described in this paper to effectuate its broader anti-immigrant agenda, and justifying much of it in national security language."
The first of the five precedents is "conflation of immigration enforcement and counterterrorism." The report recalls that after the 2001 terrorist attacks, the Federal Bureau of Investigation "orchestrated a mass investigation" that "exclusively targeted Arab, Muslim, and South Asian immigrants in a dragnet roundup, subjecting them to secretive detention at locations inside the US," and holding many of them "for weeks or even months without any charges at all."
Beavers also pointed to the George W. Bush administration's launch of the National Security Entry and Exit Registration System, as well as the creation of the US Department of Homeland Security and the placement of Immigration and Customs Enforcement within DHS. ICE and Customs and Border Protection agents have been key to Trump's campaign.
The Muslim ban from Trump's first term "built upon the structures that came before it, but greatly expanded legal presumptions that people of particular races, religions, and nationalities carry inherent danger," Beavers wrote. His second term policies have "extended this precedent to its logical conclusion by framing migration itself as terrorism. And nearly 25 years after its post-9/11 creation, ICE has been unleashed and empowered to roam American streets, snatching and disappearing people they perceive as unlawfully present, often based solely on race, and often without verifying their immigration status."
The second precedent Beavers explored is "expanded and politicized 'terrorist' designation lists." She noted Trump's invasion of Venezuela and abduction of its president, Nicolás Maduro, as well as his boat-bombing spree allegedly targeting drug traffickers in international waters.
The expert also dove into "deporting people as 'terrorists' without proving actual violent conduct," flagging Trump's "reverse migration" pledge after an Afghan man allegedly shot two National Guard members in Washington, DC, along with the administration's decision to "hold and review" asylum applications for people from "high-risk" countries.
That review, she warned, "could result in mass removal from the country of 'terrorist' noncitizens who involuntarily paid money to cartels at some point in their lives, whose family remittances have crossed hands with cartel-controlled actors, who have family members or other connections to a designated cartel but no involvement themselves, or who have unwillingly been pressed into service of a cartel at some point."
Much gratitude to @costsofwar.bsky.social for publishing my newest paper, highlighting how legal tools that started as post-9/11 counterterrorism abuses are now being weaponized further for Trump's anti-immigrant agenda:
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Beavers (@elizabethrb.bsky.social) May 5, 2026 at 10:49 AM
The fourth precedent examined in the analysis is "indefinite detention, torture, and rendition of noncitizens." Beavers began the section with the detention camp at US Naval Station Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, which she called "perhaps one of the most notorious features of the US government's post-9/11 'War on Terror.'"
"It is both a place where every post-9/11 president has detained Muslim men in connection with the post-9/11 counterterrorism wars, but it is also a place where unauthorized migrants are sometimes held," she wrote. "More than 700 migrants have been sent to and from Guantánamo in President Trump's second term, detained there by ICE with support from the military."
The expert also highlighted Trump's deportation of hundreds of men to El Salvador's infamous Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT)—based on often dubious claims that they belonged to the gang Tren de Aragua, which the president designated as a terrorist organization—as well as the "practice of disappearing people into secretive immigration detention" within the United States, and reports indicating that "abusive treatment in those facilities may amount to unlawful torture."
The final precedent Beavers explored is the "anti-democratic concentration of executive national security powers." She wrote that "the second Trump administration has made prompt use of this latitude" from federal courts since 9/11.
"This has included: manipulating the 'terrorist' designation lists in novel ways to include drug cartels without needing court approval, which has expanded the scope of people who can be deported as 'terrorists'; claiming a maximalist version of its immigration powers, daring courts to intervene; invoking the state secrets privilege to avoid accountability in cases challenging its deportation orders; and indefinitely detaining and torturing migrants," Beavers continued. "They have taken each of these actions without fear they will be meaningfully held accountable in court."
Based on her review, the professor concluded that "indisputably, administration officials are weaponizing the law in new and particularly indefensible ways to effectuate a widespread harassment and mass deportation campaign that is more akin to ethnic cleansing than routine immigration enforcement."
"Neither Congress nor the courts have meaningfully checked presidents or held them accountable for their expansive and spurious claims of war authorities, national security powers, and counterterrorism mechanisms to justify harmful and discriminatory practices against noncitizens and especially against people of color," she stressed. "In these and many other ways, US policymakers on a bipartisan basis built and sharpened the legal weapons that President Trump is now utilizing against immigrants."
"Providers are stretched thin, doing everything they can as resources disappear and the system buckles under the pressure of Republicans cutting more than $1 trillion from healthcare."
An advocacy group tracking the impacts of the unprecedented Medicaid cuts that congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump enacted last year said Monday that at least 900 hospitals, nursing homes, and other healthcare facilities are now shutting down or at risk of closure—a disaster for low-income Americans who lack easy access to care.
Protect Our Care's Hospital Crisis Watch project has identified healthcare centers that have closed or are at risk of closing, cutting services, and shutting down wards as they grapple with the impacts of the GOP's 2025 budget law, which included over $1 trillion in total healthcare cuts over the next decade. More than $900 billion of the cuts will come from Medicaid, which pays hospitals and other providers for services delivered to low-income patients.
"Hospital Crisis Watch has now reached 900 pins, 900 communities where access to care is evaporating as Republicans’ healthcare cuts ripple across the country,” said Brad Woodhouse, president of Protect Our Care. “Providers are stretched thin, doing everything they can as resources disappear and the system buckles under the pressure of Republicans cutting more than $1 trillion from health care to fund tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations."
"Families are driving further for care, parents are scrambling to find services for their kids, and seniors are being left without the support they need," Woodhouse continued. "Care is getting harder to access, in too many places, disappearing entirely, and communities are left to deal with the consequences."
The impacts of the Trump-GOP Medicaid cuts have been felt in both urban and rural areas, despite Republicans' inclusion of a $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Fund that supporters touted as a way to bolster at-risk healthcare facilities. Critics of the fund have warned from the start that it would not be nearly enough to offset the devastation caused by massive Medicaid cuts. (The Trump-GOP law includes an estimated $137 billion in cuts to Medicaid in rural areas.)
"In Nebraska and other states, rural hospitals are facing across-the-board cuts—and the rural health fund Congress created to offset the impact of Medicaid cuts on rural healthcare is falling short," Adam Searing, an associate professor at the Georgetown University McCourt School of Public Policy’s Center for Children and Families, wrote in a blog post last week.
"What is quickly becoming clear, even at this early stage, is that as a result of the cuts enacted by Congress, healthcare is going to become much harder to access for many people," wrote Searing. "Rural areas and small towns across the country will be particularly affected."
The latest assessments of surging healthcare facility cuts and closures across the US came as Nebraska became the first state to implement the punitive work requirements that the 2025 Republican law imposes on some Medicaid recipients. Early estimates indicate that more than 20,000 Nebraskans could lose Medicaid coverage due to the stringent work requirements and the procedural hurdles the new mandates entail.
States must implement the new work requirements by the start of 2027.
"Everyone who is eligible for Medicaid will be at risk of having their health coverage taken away—whether or not the work requirement applies to them, and whether or not they prove their compliance or exemption status if it does—because the administrative burden of implementing the work requirement strains a state’s entire Medicaid system," Farah Erzouki, a senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, warned last week.
"Without sufficient time and guidance," Erzouki added, "states will be unable to implement these requirements without harming many more eligible people and millions will lose coverage."