

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 Riestenberg, jriestenberg@commoncause.org or 513-607-9343
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Trump v. New York, a case challenging the Trump administration's attempt to exclude undocumented immigrants from the census count when apportioning congressional representatives.
Statement by Keshia Morris Desir, Census and Mass Incarceration Project Manager:
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Trump v. New York, a case challenging the Trump administration's attempt to exclude undocumented immigrants from the census count when apportioning congressional representatives.
Statement by Keshia Morris Desir, Census and Mass Incarceration Project Manager:
"In our census and the redistricting process, every person and community counts. But the Trump administration has made clear its intention to attempt to erase millions of people from the apportionment process and is once again trying to use the Census as a political weapon to disempower communities of color.
Three-lower district courts have rejected Trump's attempt to not count undocumented immigrants as unlawful on statutory and constitutional grounds. The Constitution, as amended, says every person should be counted in the census, which is the way we've done it for all of modern history. The census is about lifting all of our voices. Our communities are entitled to fair representation. If undocumented people aren't counted, we all lose.
Given the timing of today's decision from the Supreme Court, it is doubtful that Trump administration will be able to enforce its July 2020 apportionment memorandum that was at question in this case. Moving forward, Common Cause urges President-elect Biden to rescind the Trump memorandum."
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200"DOJ policy forbids investigations based solely on First Amendment protected activity," said one legal expert.
The Democratic senator who organized a video warning members of the military against obeying illegal orders given by President Donald Trump said that she is being investigated by federal prosecutors.
In an interview with the New York Times published Tuesday, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) said that the office of Jeanine Pirro, the US attorney for the District of Columbia, had sent an email to the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms requesting to speak with either Slotkin or her private counsel.
Slotkin called the investigation being conducted by Pirro's office an attempt at intimidating her from speaking out against the Trump administration.
"Facts matter little, but the threat matters quite a bit," said Slotkin, a former CIA intelligence analyst and official at the US Department of Defense. "The threat of legal action; the threat to your family; the threat to your staff; the threat to you."
The Times report noted that it's unclear what potential crime Slotkin is being investigated for, and a spokesperson for Pirro's office declined to confirm the existence of the probe.
However, Slotkin has been under fire from Trump and his allies for several weeks after she organized a video with fellow Democratic lawmakers in which they reminded US military service members that they should not obey any illegal orders given by the president.
"We want to speak directly to members of the military and the intelligence community," Slotkin wrote in a November social media post promoting the Democrats' video. "The American people need you to stand up for our laws and our Constitution. Don’t give up the ship."
Trump reacted to the video with rage, accusing Slotkin and other Democrats who appeared in the video of engaging in "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!"
In a social media post Thursday, Michigan Law School professor Barb McQuade argued that any investigation into Slotkin centering on the video about unlawful orders would be flatly unlawful.
"DOJ policy forbids investigations based solely on First Amendment protected activity," McQuade explained.
Slotkin is not the only Trump nemesis facing legal pressure, as it was revealed on Sunday that Pirro's office has also opened a criminal probe into Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, who has been frequently targeted by Trump for his refusal to obey the president's demands to more aggressively cut US interest rates.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that Trump last week berated dozens of US attorneys, including Pirro, and accused them of being "weak" and too slow in launching criminal probes of his political enemies.
"Among his grievances with prosecutors, Trump complained that the Justice Department hadn’t yet brought a case against one of his most prominent Democratic adversaries, Sen. Adam Schiff of California," the Journal reported.
“Greenland does not want to be owned by the United States," said the territory's prime minister. "Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States.”
A survey released Wednesday shows that just 4% of US voters think it would be a "good idea" for President Donald Trump to seize Greenland by military force, data that came ahead of a closely watched White House meeting between Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the foreign ministers of Greenland and Denmark.
More broadly, according to the new Reuters/Ipsos poll, only 17% of Americans approve of Trump's push for the US to acquire Greenland by any means.
The White House has said it is considering a "range of options" to seize Denmark, from buying the mineral-rich island to acquiring it through military force. Just one in 10 Republican voters and virtually no Democrats said they believe it's a good idea for the Trump administration to forcibly take Greenland, which is currently an autonomous territory of Denmark.
Greenland residents have overwhelmingly voiced opposition to US control.
In an early morning Truth Social post ahead of Wednesday's White House meeting, Trump declared that the US "needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security"—a view that military experts have rejected.
"It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building," Trump added, referring to his proposed missile defense boondoggle. "NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON’T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!"
Trump's latest Greenland rant came a day after the territory's prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, said during a press conference that "we are now facing a geopolitical crisis, and if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark."
"One thing must be clear to everyone,” said Nielsen. “Greenland does not want to be owned by the United States. Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States.”
Wednesday's White House meeting was scheduled at the request of Danish and Greenlandic officials, who said they are seeking to head off a potential disaster spurred by Trump's increasingly belligerent rhetoric.
In the face of Trump's threats, Denmark has reportedly begun mobilizing military equipment and advanced troops to Greenland.
"Our reason for seeking the meeting we have now been given was to move this whole discussion into a meeting room where we can look each other in the eye and talk about these things," Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Denmark's foreign minister, said Tuesday.
"We want this terror to stop," said Rep. Ilhan Omar, deputy chair of the CPC.
The leadership of the nearly 100-member Congressional Progressive Caucus said Tuesday that it will "oppose all funding" for US immigration enforcement in any upcoming government appropriations bills without substantial reforms, a position laid out as federal agents unleashed by President Donald Trump continued to terrorize communities across the country.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), deputy chair of the CPC, said during a press conference alongside other caucus members that "demanding accountability is not radical." Omar represents the district where 37-year-old Renee Good was shot and killed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jonathan Ross last week.
"Calling for systematic reforms is not extreme," Omar continued. "This is the bare minimum required to restore safety and justice back to our communities."
Omar, a frequent target of Trump's bigotry, said the CPC's official position is to "oppose all funding for immigration enforcement in any appropriation bills until meaningful reforms are enacted to end militarized policing practices."
"We cannot and we should not continue to fund agencies that operate with impunity, that escalate violence, and that undermine the very freedoms this country claims to uphold," the congresswoman said. "ICE has no place in terrorizing Minneapolis or any American community."
The CPC's press conference marked an intensification of a fight over Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding that erupted in the wake of Good's killing in Minneapolis last week. ICE, which is part of DHS, currently has a larger budget than that of a dozen national militaries, thanks to a massive infusion of funding approved by congressional Republicans and Donald Trump last summer.
NBC News reported Tuesday that "Democratic opposition has already frozen a DHS measure that was slated to be added to an appropriations package getting a Senate vote this week."
"Congress may have to fall back on a stopgap bill to prevent a funding lapse for DHS," the outlet added. "That’s where things get trickier for Democrats. If House Republicans pass a continuing resolution on their own, which would keep DHS running on autopilot, Senate Democrats would again have to choose between accepting it and forcing a partial shutdown."
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democratic appropriator in the House, said Tuesday that she does "not support increasing funding for ICE" and is "looking at policy riders in the homeland security funding bill to rein in ICE."
"ICE is terrorizing our communities, and I have called on masked, armed ICE agents to leave our towns," DeLauro added.
An Economist/YouGov poll released this week found that, for the first time, more Americans support abolishing ICE entirely (46%) than oppose it (43%). Democratic support for abolishing ICE is currently at 77%, according to the survey.
In an appearance on MS NOW, Omar said that "we want this terror to stop."
"People are angry. People are frustrated. They're confused. They don't understand why this chaos is necessary," said Omar. "And they certainly do not want this level of militarized ICE and border agents just roaming the streets, harassing and terrorizing their neighbors."