

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.

Jen Nessel, Center for Constitutional Rights, (212) 614-6449, jnessel@ccrjustice.org
Last night, the Center for Constitutional Rights asked a federal court to vacate the conviction and life-without-parole sentence of Ahmed Abu Ali in light of new evidence stemming from the Saudi government's cover-up of the torture and murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. In 2003, when he was a 22-year-old university student, Mr. Abu Ali was detained by officers of the "Mabahith," a secret domestic police agency in Saudi Arabia--the same agency involved in the murder and cover-up of Khashoggi. During interrogations by the agency, Abu Ali "confessed" under torture to involvement in a Saudi Al Qaeda cell, which later served as the basis for his U.S. prosecution. At Abu Ali's trial, the government's chief witnesses attesting to the voluntariness of his statements were his Mabahith jailors and interrogators, who denied that he was tortured.
The motion filed last night argues that evidence of the agency's role in destroying evidence and obstructing international investigations after Khashoggi's murder, and the demonstrated willingness of the authorities to deny facts even in the face of the most intense outside scrutiny, bears crucially on the credibility of the agency officials who testified at Abu Ali's trial. The motion alleges fraud on the court by the Saudi government, and argues that the U.S. government knew or should have known that it was relying on fraudulent testimony in violation of Mr. Abu Ali's due process rights.
The Center for Constitutional Rights said:
Mr. Abu Ali's life without parole sentence is a travesty of justice. But for a tortured confession in Saudi custody, there would have been no conviction. The court should reexamine this case in light of what has by now been made plain - the Saudi government, and particularly the agency involved in Mr. Abu Ali's torture, has no credibility in denying its crimes.
Those investigating Saudi crimes should look closer to home.
Mr. Abu Ali's parents said:
We hope that this motion will bring attention to the magnitude of injustice our son Ahmed and our family has faced. Ahmed is serving a life sentence based on a coerced confession obtained through torture in Saudi prison as well as the testimony of the Mabahith, whom we know lack credibility. We hope that the court and the American public will see with clarity Ahmed's innocence and demand his immediate release.
After his arrest, Saudi Mabahith officers subjected Abu Ali to beating, whipping, and threats of amputation and beheading, and interrogated him for over 40 straight nights. At the end of this period, Abu Ali was forced to copy and sign a pre-written confession, which was the centerpiece of the government's case against him. At his trial, prosecutors presented testimony from Mabahith officials denying that any prisoner had ever been mistreated by them. "[N]ot once" had an officer or guard used physical force against a prisoner, an official insisted.
According to the motion filed yesterday, revelations that Mabahith officials were deeply involved in the cover-up of the Khashoggi murder have undercut the credibility of that testimony and give rise to a claim that Saudi authorities were engaged in deliberate deception. Based on the findings of international investigations, the filing alleges that Mabahith officials were part of the team that carried out the murder, and in the aftermath destroyed evidence, obstructed investigations, and helped mislead the international community about the truth of what happened.
Abu Ali was held in Saudi Arabia without access to counsel for close to two years without charge - by the Saudis or the U.S. In 2004, his parents filed a habeas corpus petition in federal court on his behalf, alleging that he was being held in Saudi Arabia at the behest of the U.S. and that he was being tortured. Two months after the judge ordered discovery in the case, Abu Ali was indicted and extradited to the U.S. to face charges. A U.S. official told the press at the time that the government wanted to make the civil case "go away" so that it could avoid having to disclose embarrassing and sensitive information.
Mr. Abu Ali was initially sentenced to a 30-year sentence. The sentencing judge emphasized the minimal nature of Abu Ali's alleged role in the conspiracy for which he was convicted, writing:
Mr. Abu Ali never planted any bombs, shot any weapons, or injured any people, and there is no evidence that he took any steps in the United States with others to further the conspiracy; no witness testified that they personally saw or conspired with Mr. Abu Ali to commit any acts of violence and there is no evidence that there were other co-conspirators in the United States; no weapons were ever found in Mr. Abu Ali's possession; and no victim was injured in the United States by Mr. Abu Ali's actions.
However, the government appealed his sentence as unreasonable, resulting in the life without parole sentence he is now serving.
For more information, visit the Center for Constitutional Rights' case page.
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. CCR is committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.
(212) 614-6464US President Donald Trump continued his "war on science" on Friday with his budget request for the 2027 fiscal year, which critics have denounced as "grossly irresponsible" for its proposed $1.5 trillion in military spending and "a moral obscenity" because of its cuts to social and scientific programs.
In the lead-up to Trump's request to the Republican-controlled Congress, as he and Israel waged war on Iran, Sean Manning, a Herbert Scoville Jr. Peace Fellow in the Union of Concerned Scientists' Global Security Program, wrote that "if this Bloody New Deal actually passes, it could give unparalleled increases in financial power to defense contractors and support for the political work they already do to influence Congress."
"Sane voices need to act now, building opposition to this unprecedented plan," Manning argued. "Progressives should be unflinching in defining this proposal as a blank check for the same contractors who cannot deliver ships on time, munitions at scale, or clean audits. Pouring funds into a defense sector that has repeatedly failed basic tests of accountability will not miraculously produce innovation."
In addition to railing against the budget for the Pentagon—the world's largest institutional climate polluter—after it was officially released on Friday, progressive voices directed attention to some particular proposed cuts and their consequences.
To fund the Pentagon's massive war-making budget, "the Trump administration is requesting the cancellation of billions of dollars in funds for renewable energy, environmental justice, carbon removal, space science, and climate change education," Emily Gardner reported Friday for Eos, the American Geophysical Union's news magazine.
As Katherine Tsantiris, Ocean Conservancy's director of government relations, pointed out, among the targeted federal agencies is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The proposed cuts, she said, "fly directly in the face of the clear bipartisan support Congress showed earlier this year by protecting funding for this critical agency."
"Slashing NOAA's budget would weaken weather forecasting, disrupt fisheries management, and stall ocean research—putting American lives, livelihoods, and global scientific leadership at risk," Tsantiris continued. "Congress should once again reject these cuts to ensure NOAA has the resources it needs to support our economy, protect our ocean, and keep Americans safe."
Quentin Scott, federal policy director at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network Action Fund, argued that "this proposed budget is exactly what America does NOT need when facing rising energy bills, more frequent extreme weather, and rising insurance rates."
"By gutting funds for climate science and innovation, the budget jeopardizes our ability to understand and respond to the accelerating climate crisis," Scott said. "Defunding climate research at NOAA doesn't make the problem go away—it makes those hazards more dangerous and more expensive. Families across the country are already paying the price through higher utility bills, flooding, and storm damage. This budget would only make those burdens worse."
Big Oil-backed Trump's budget proposal came on the heels of devastating flooding in Hawaii and as high temperatures hit the Western United States. It also followed an annual World Meteorological Organization report on the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, which last month led UN Secretary-General António Guterres to declare that "every key climate indicator is flashing red."
Devastating.
[image or embed]
— Scott Kardel aka Palomar Skies (@palomarskies.bsky.social) April 3, 2026 at 12:29 PM
Trump also proposed slashing the Environmental Protection Agency's budget—amid calls to oust Administrator Lee Zeldin for "so brazenly" betraying the EPA's core mission to "protect human health and the environment." Trump also proposed cutting the agency's budget. Noting that attack, Climate Action Campaign director Margie Alt described the president's plan as "anything but a serious" one and "a declaration of who this administration is willing to let suffer."
In a nod to some of the rich executives whose campaign cash helped Trump return to power after promising to scrap his predecessor's climate policies and to enact a "drill, baby, drill" agenda, Alt also called it "a reiteration of this president's devotion to fossil fuel interests."
"This budget would slash the EPA budget by 52%, gutting the agency's ability to protect the air our children breathe, the water our families drink, and the communities that already bear the worst of extreme weather and climate change," she said. "It is a deliberately callous choice to remove the protections that keep families safe, healthy, and shielded from the impacts of pollution and climate change."
According to Alt:
This is not just a continuation of last year's rollbacks. It is an escalation of the Trump administration's Polluters First Agenda and their assault on public health safeguards. Since January 2025, among other abuses, this administration has fired 600 National Weather Service staff, proposed eliminating critical climate research institutions, waived mercury pollution standards for 60 dirty power plants, and gutted the Clean Air Act. This budget is the Trump administration's payback for their big oil, coal, and gas friends and contributors. It slashes resources for clean energy, it zeroes out environmental justice, and pushes oil, gas, and coal, at a time when prices for these energy sources are skyrocketing.
Never before have we had an administration that so blatantly treats American lives as expendable, as proven by this budget. Congress must reject this inhumane budget in full. The American people deserve a federal government that protects them, not one that trades their health, their safety, and their futures for big oil, coal, and gas profits.
As Gardner reported, Trump's budget also "proposes consolidating the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act, but did not provide details outside noting the program would be housed at the Department of the Interior," among other changes and cuts.
Chris Westfall, senior government relations legislative counsel at Defenders of Wildlife, said that "the administration is yet again demanding that an overworked and grossly understaffed federal workforce do more with less. The proposed budget recklessly consolidates US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries without the needed resources to preserve scientific expertise, opens our lands and waters to extractive industries, and hollows out the already strained workforce that provides crucial conservation work."
"This proposed budget pushes us further in the wrong direction—potentially triggering even more staff layoffs and providing less resources for wildlife conservation, which are pivotal to recovering America's imperiled species," Westfall warned. "Our nation's lands and the wildlife that depend on them for habitat deserve better than to be ignored by agencies that are shells of their former selves."
The president's proposed attack on endangered species came just days after the administration's so-called "God Squad" voted unanimously for an exemption allowing fossil fuel operations in the Gulf of Mexico to ignore policies intended to protect them. In response, Andrew Bowman, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, said that "I cannot stress enough how unprecedented and unlawful this action is."
"There’s a chilling effect on not just my academic freedom, but that of my colleagues; anyone who dares to speak out against the war and against aggression," said UW professor Aria Fani.
The University of Washington has removed a professor from his role as director of its Middle East Center after he criticized the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran and condemned Zionism, the settler-colonial movement for Jewish hegemony in Palestine.
Aria Fani, who will remain an associate professor at UW’s Jackson School of International Studies, told The Seattle Times on Friday that new interim widirector Daniel Hoffman told him last week he was fired from his leadership role at the Middle East Center.
Fani, who was born and raised in Iran and came to the US when he was 18 years old, said he was hired for his research on Iran. However, he told the Times that he now feels "profoundly hurt and betrayed" by his removal.
"There’s a chilling effect on not just my academic freedom, but that of my colleagues; anyone who dares to speak out against the war and against aggression," he said.
In a separate interview Friday with My Northwest, Fani said he was removed "for improper use" of the center's listserv, an email application.
"I sent out two memos about this atrocious war on Iran in which I offered historical analysis that’s lacking in the media,” Fani said. “I was told that my email made ‘certain constituents feel attacked.’ By certain constituents, I assume the university means Zionists who would like to keep bombing every Middle Eastern country and continue dehumanizing their people.”
Last July Fani told the The Daily UW, a student newspaper, that President Donald Trump's militaristic foreign policy—he's bombed 10 countries, more than any other US leader—is not making the world safer.
“If you tell the dozens of children that were killed in Israeli bombardment... in Iran, or the families of the nuclear scientists who were just wiped out, I hardly imagine they would say that the world is a more peaceful place," he said amid the first round of US and Israeli airstrikes on Iran.
Since then, many more Iranian children have been killed by US and Israeli bombing, including more than 100 students who were among around 175 people massacred in the February 28 US cruise missile strike on a girls' school in Minab.
“The [only] peace this secures is for weapons manufacturers, for oil companies, for drone companies," Fani said in an implicit rebuke of Trump's claim to be the "president of peace."
"It secures peace for them, fills their pockets with money, and makes them fully invincible," he added. "It’s creating a class of people that are living [on] an alternate planet."
Fani was a close friend and defender of Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi, the 26-year-old Turkish-American UW grad and International Solidarity Movement volunteer who was fatally shot in 2024 while peacefully protesting the expansion of Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank. Witnesses said Israeli occupation forces deliberately shot Eygi in the head.
The professor also called Zionism—some of whose founders acknowledged the colonial nature of their endeavor—a "cancerous" ideology.
Fani noted that his removal from his position at the Middle East Center coincided with a recent town hall-style meeting attended by UW President Robert Jones and right-wing media personality Ari Hoffman. According to Fani, Hoffman "specifically asked Jones" about the professor's leadership at the center.
“All we can do is try to remind people of their responsibilities as members of the university community,” Jones said at meeting. “Not trying to tell them that they can’t have a discussion about Palestine or about Israel, but let’s be clear that those discussions need to be had in a way that doesn’t perpetuate an environment where people feel unsafe.”
According to its website, UW's Middle East Center seeks "to strengthen an understanding of the Middle East in all sectors of American society through training and research at the University of Washington, as well as through delivery of outreach programming across the nation."
Fani is one of dozens of US academics who have been fired, had their contracts terminated, lost job offers, or faced other punitive repercussions for advocating Palestinian rights or opposing Israeli policies and practices.
Earlier this week, Shirin Saeidi, who headed the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, was terminated for social media posts deemed supportive of Iran's government, despite the fact that the school's Faculty Committee on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure ruled unanimously in February that she should return to her position.
Late last month, Texas State University philosophy professor Idris Robinson sued school officials after he was fired for what he says was his 2024 off-campus lecture in North Carolina titled “Strategic Lessons from the Palestinian Resistance."
Israel's conduct in Gaza is the subject of an ongoing International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case filed by South Africa and formally supported by nearly 20 nations. The International Criminal Court has also issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza.
The ICJ found in 2024 that Israel's occupation of Palestine is an illegal form of apartheid.
“The American people are tired of a system where the powerful operate under a different set of rules. This is a moment to draw a line."
With Pam Bondi fired from her position as US attorney general, progressive campaigners on Friday said that Democrats in the Senate, although they are in the minority, must use the leverage they have to force a release of all the remaining files concerning convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
"Even in the minority, Senate Democrats have tools to exert pressure—by withholding votes, slowing proceedings, and setting clear conditions," said the grassroots group Our Revolution as it launched a nationwide petition demanding that Senate Democrats block the confirmation of Bondi's replacement unless they commit to the document release. "That leverage must be used."
Our Revolution elevated a call from US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who along with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has led the push for the US Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all of the Epstein files.
The latest release of files, which Bondi oversaw and which didn't occur until more than a month after a December 2025 deadline, failed to protect the identities of some survivors of the abuse perpetrated by Epstein and his vast network of powerful associates, while redacting the identities of many of the alleged abusers. Last month at a congressional hearing, Bondi refused to apologize to the survivors in attendance.
Khanna and Massie as well as Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) have led Democrats in demanding the release of 3 million more files that remain, which Garcia said in February include official FBI interviews regarding allegations that President Donald Trump sexually assaulted a 13-year-old child.
The release of files in late January included thousands of references to Trump, but Khanna said the release amounted to a "cover-up" due to the absence of many official FBI survivor statements.
Khanna said in an interview with NPR on Friday that "the Senate should make it absolutely clear they will not confirm a new attorney general unless that attorney general commits to the release of all these files and commits to starting investigations. And if that new attorney general doesn't live up to that word, they will have the same fate as Pam Bondi."
He added that acting Attorney General Todd Blanche—who stepped into the role vacated by Bondi without needing to go through the confirmation process due to his previous confirmation as Bondi's deputy—has falsely stated that "all the files" the DOJ can release have already been disclosed to the public.
"That's just not factual," said Khanna. "In the past, he said that there are 3 million files that have not been released. Now, he claims that they're not releasing those because they're protecting the identity of survivors. But if you talk to the survivors, if you talk to the survivors' lawyers, they will tell you, in fact, that the DOJ was reckless and did not protect their identity. And the 3 million files that haven't been released have the survivors' statements to the FBI agents, where the survivors name the rich and powerful people who raped them, abused them, showed up to Epstein's island, and that they are protecting a group of people who aren't playing by the same rules. This is about two tiers of justice in America."
Massie offered his congratulations to Blanche on Thursday before telling him, "Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act."
Our Revolution said Senate Democrats must condition any confirmation vote for Bondi's successor on "a clear commitment" to: