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
Sunrise Movement Statement on Senator Manchin's Indecision on Rep. Deb Haaland
In response to Senator Joe Manchin's statement that he is undecided on Rep. Deb Haaland's nomination for Secretary of the Interior, Sunrise Movement's Political Director Evan Weber, released the following statement:
WASHINGTON
In response to Senator Joe Manchin's statement that he is undecided on Rep. Deb Haaland's nomination for Secretary of the Interior, Sunrise Movement's Political Director Evan Weber, released the following statement:
"Despite Senator Machin's statement of indecision on Rep. Deb Haaland's confirmation, we expect a swift turnaround from Machin on her confirmation hearing. We understand it is a sound practice to question pending nominees, but Senator Manchin had no problem voting for Jeff Sessions, Rex Tillerson, Brett Kavanaugh, and others, who have been outwardly racist, sexist, unqualified, and have invoked harmful policies. So why would he be undecided on Rep. Haaland, who is not only uniquely qualified for this role, but would make history as the first Native American Cabinet Secretary?
"There is a clear groundswell of support behind Congresswoman Haaland and her confirmation would help realize sovereignty to native people while invoking the change we need to meet the urgency and scale of the climate crisis. We challenge Senator Manchin to be brave, stand up to the fossil fuel industry and do what's right by moving Rep. Haaland's nomination to the Senate floor for a vote."
Sunrise Movement is a movement to stop climate change and create millions of good jobs in the process.
LATEST NEWS
Video Suggests Trump's ICE Lied About Its First Known Killing of a US Citizen Last March
"He was shot at point-blank range through his side window by an ICE agent who was in no danger," said lawyers for the family of Ruben Ray Martinez.
Mar 09, 2026
Materials released over the weekend by the Texas Department of Public Safety regarding a homeland security officer's killing of 23-year-old Ruben Ray Martinez last March in Texas appeared to provide the latest evidence that federal agents have misled the public about the circumstances surrounding fatal shootings.
American Oversight, a government watchdog group, revealed last month that nearly a year before the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis, Martinez was the first known US citizen to be killed by an agent of the Trump administration who was carrying out official duties.
Since then, a grand jury has declined to indict the accused officer, Homeland Security Investigations agent Jack C. Stevens, and American Oversight as well as Martinez's family and lawyers have demanded that state authorities release the findings of their investigation into the killing, with the watchdog filing a Freedom of Information Act request.
The body camera footage released on Saturday called into question statements that were made by the Department of Homeland Security after Martinez's killing was publicly revealed, when a DHS spokesperson said the young man "intentionally ran over" an agent.
Internal documents also claimed officers commanded Martinez to get out of his car after he approached the scene of a vehicle accident and that he "accelerated forward, striking a HSI special agent who wound up on the hood of the vehicle."
The video that was released came from a body camera worn by a South Padre Island, Texas police officer who was one of a number of local, state, and federal agents securing an area after a car accident.
South Padre Island, TX🚔
⚠️Ruben Ray Martinez - ICE⚠️
•According to the passenger, Ruben was worried about being arrested for DUI & panicked🍺
•Ruben accelerated his vehicle towards an officer.
•The officer fired 3 shots…killing Ruben.
*Was the officer in imminent… pic.twitter.com/YtgS66fAc1
— police.law.news (@policelawnews) March 7, 2026
About 21 minutes into the officer's footage, someone can be heard saying, "Keep going" as Martinez's car approaches the scene. The car briefly stops for some pedestrians, and officers soon appear to become concerned, running toward the vehicle and shouting, "Stop him" and, "Get him out."
Martinez's car appears to be moving slowly, with the brake lights on, as three gunshots are heard and just after.
The video then shows an officer removing Martinez from the car and throwing him on the ground while his friend who was in the car with him, Joshua Orta, is taken into custody.
The internal DHS documents said a second HSI agent Hector Sosa, was struck by the car in his legs, falling over the hood. The footage is taken from behind the car, making it unclear whether Sosa was hit—but it does not show Martinez accelerating.
If an officer was hit, University of South Carolina criminal justice professor Geoffrey P. Albert told the Washington Post, based on the footage of the car it would have been a case of "officer-created jeopardy."
“The contradictory orders are confusing and may have been a strong influence,” Alpert told the Post. “The speed is slow and doesn’t appear threatening. Could the officer have moved away? At worst, all he has to do is step aside."
He added that the body camera video raises "a lot of red flags."
Lawyers for Martinez's family, Charles M. Stam and Alex Stamm, said in a statement that the videos confirm the 23-year-old's car "was barely moving when he was shot."
"He was shot at point-blank range through his side window by an ICE agent who was in no danger," said the attorneys.
Orta, who was killed last month in an unrelated vehicle accident in San Antonio, provided a witness statement after Martinez was killed, saying "I state clearly and without hesitation that Ruben did not hit anyone,” Orta wrote. “The trooper seemed to be trying to get in front of the car, like he wasn’t moving out of the way when we tried to turn around and leave like the police officer told us to do.”
More than a dozen people have been killed by federal immigration officers since President Donald Trump took office for his second term in January 2025.
In the case of Good, an independent autopsy was conducted as part of a civil investigation into her killing and found "strong evidence" against the agent who shot her, calling into question the Trump administration's claim that the officer had killed the 37-year-old in self-defense.
A preliminary government investigation into Pretti's killing did not find that the legal observer had threatened or attacked the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection agents who fatally shot him, as the administration had first claimed.
Both Pretti and Good were immediately denounced as "domestic terrorists" by administration officials.
DHS also claimed that Marimar Martinez, a Chicago resident who was shot several times by a federal agent but survived last October, had "rammed" officers' vehicles. Body camera footage and text messages from officers later undermined those claims. Federal prosecutors abruptly dropped their criminal case against Martinez weeks after she was shot.
The video of Martinez's killing in Texas, said columnist Nicholas Kristof, suggests that the DHS account of that incident "may be a lie" as well.
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Research Details 'Human and Economic Toll' of US Abortion Bans
"Abortion bans don't stay in exam rooms," said the Center for Reproductive Rights president. "They reshape communities, workplaces, and state economies."
Mar 09, 2026
With attention directed at President Donald Trump's war on immigrants across the United States and various international conflicts, including the assault on Iran, there hasn't been much prominent news coverage in recent weeks about a key issue of the 2024 campaign—GOP abortion bans—but people nationwide continue to endure the impacts of such policies, as revealed in a Monday report from the Center for Reproductive Rights.
The Price of Safety: Stories of Abortions Denied, Careers Disrupted, and States Left Behind features various profiles demonstrating "the human and economic toll" of abortion bans, which right-wing policymakers have enacted or intensified since the US Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade with its Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision in 2022.
The anthology uses stories from patients, doctors, business leaders, and others to "show the real-world consequences of laws that criminalize standard medical care," said Nancy Northup, the center's president, in a statement. "Abortion bans don't stay in exam rooms. They reshape communities, workplaces, and state economies. As long as politicians keep restricting care, families will keep moving, clinicians will keep leaving, and states will keep watching their competitive edge slip away."
"Our daughter's spine was severely abnormal, her brain hadn't formed correctly, and she only had one kidney... I did everything by the book medically, but the experience still made me feel like a criminal for seeking evidence-based care for a lethal fetal diagnosis."
Dani Mathisen, "a Fort Worth native from a family of physicians," discovered during a routine anatomy scan with her OB-GYN, who is also her aunt, that she needed an abortion, 18 weeks into a planned pregnancy. As she explained, "Our daughter's spine was severely abnormal, her brain hadn't formed correctly, and she only had one kidney."
Texas had banned abortions after six weeks and allowed private citizens to sue anyone who helped a pregnant person access care. According to Mathisen: "My mom, also a doctor, stepped in anyway. She found a clinic in New Mexico, booked the flights and hotel, called the staff, and handed us an envelope of cash. We paid for the abortion with cash out of fear of leaving a paper trail tying Texas credit cards to out-of-state abortion care. I did everything by the book medically, but the experience still made me feel like a criminal for seeking evidence-based care for a lethal fetal diagnosis."
"I had always imagined building my career in Texas," she added. "After this, I chose an OB-GYN residency in Hawaii because I needed full-spectrum training—including abortion care—and I couldn't get that in Texas."
Mathisen wasn't alone in fleeing that state. Amanda Ducach, CEO and co-founder of an artificial intelligence startup focused on women's health, shared how she "built Ema in Houston, and Texas shaped our earliest users and our mission," but when Roe fell, she "was seven and a half months into a high-risk pregnancy."
"Suddenly, even if I were to face a life-threatening emergency, I wasn't sure I'd receive timely care. My doctors weren't sure either," Ducach detailed. "It also changed how I thought about my company, and our responsibility to the people who rely on us through our partner platforms."
"After months of legal review and deep conversations with my team, I decided to relocate both my family and Ema's headquarters to Massachusetts where abortion access is protected under state law," she continued. "I also gave employees the option to work from any location, which brought immediate relief."
"Suddenly, even if I were to face a life-threatening emergency, I wasn't sure I'd receive timely care. My doctors weren't sure either."
Elizabeth Weller also left Texas. She said that "the decision cost us $25,000+ in income, distanced us from our community, and upended the future we had envisioned. But after the pregnancy complications I faced, it was painfully clear: Texas no longer provided the basic medical care necessary to have a child."
So did Dr. Judy Levison, who spent over two decades practicing and teaching obstetrics and gynecology in the state. After "watching abortion bans turn routine medical care into a legal minefield," she retired, moved to Colorado, and "began volunteering with an abortion support group."
It's not just Texas. Kayla Smith said that she left Idaho—"where I'd lived for 13 years, gone to college, met my husband, built our careers, and wanted to grow our family"—for Washington state. She explained that just 48 hours after Idaho's ban took effect and "19 weeks into my pregnancy with my second child, we discovered that our baby had a severe, inoperable heart defect."
Tracy Young, "a first-generation American, a mother of four, and the co-founder of two technology companies," highlighted how abortion bans also outlaw proper treatment for people experiencing miscarriages. While she is based in San Francisco, California, Young began "losing a pregnancy I had deeply wanted" while traveling for work in Louisiana.
"Back home in California, my doctors told me that my body had not completed the miscarriage naturally. They prescribed misoprostol, and when that wasn't enough, performed a surgical procedure to prevent infection and complications," she said. "Today, abortion bans have made that same care illegal or heavily restricted in many states, including Louisiana where I miscarried."
Another business leader, Chris Webb, CEO and co-founder of ChowNow—an online ordering platform with offices in California and Missouri—publicly supported abortion access in 2019 by signing on to a coalition's "Don't Ban Equality" letter. After Roe's reversal, he sent out a company-wide email disclosing a girlfriend's abortion and offering to personally cover the travel costs of any employee who needed such care.
"Leaders owe employees honesty about where they stand—and action when basic rights are on the line," he said. "Abortion policies aren't just about healthcare. They're good for employers and good for people. When more companies speak up, there is safety in numbers. And in the long run, protecting your team protects your business—and is just the right thing to do."
"Reproductive rights are so crucial that Americans are uprooting their lives to ensure they have access to care."
The report's release coincided with the publication of a paper adapted from one prepared for the center by researchers who estimated "the market value of reproductive rights as capitalized into US housing markets."
The paper, published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, shows that "total abortion bans reduced rents by an average of 2.2% from July 2022 through June 2025, with the effect reaching 4.0% in the most recent year. Over the same horizon, bans increased rental vacancy rates by an average of 1.1 percentage points, with the effect reaching 1.8 percentage points in the most recent year. Estimates for home values and homeowner vacancy rates are similar in magnitude but less precise."
The center's senior director, Julia Taylor Kennedy, said that "the economic data and the firsthand accounts are telling the same story... Reproductive rights are so crucial that Americans are uprooting their lives to ensure they have access to care. That means that, for employers and policymakers, abortion bans carry measurable workforce and competitiveness implications."
Despite such findings, Republican state and federal policymakers continue to restrict reproductive freedom. In recent months, the Trump administration quietly imposed an abortion ban at the US Department of Veterans Affairs and expanded the global gag rule.
Meanwhile, at the state level last month, Tennessee Republicans introduced legislation to make abortion a capital offense, and a sheriff's office in South Carolina launched an investigation into a fetus, estimated to be just 13-15 weeks, found at a water treatment plant, highlighting the rising criminalization of pregnancy loss.
Last week, the Marion County Superior Court granted a permanent injunction preventing enforcement of Indiana's near-total abortion ban, and Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita swiftly appealed.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Anthropic Sues Trump Pentagon Over 'Supply Chain Risk' Designation
“These actions are unprecedented and unlawful,” the lawsuit said after the Pentagon punished the AI company for refusing to lift restrictions on using their products for autonomous killer robots or mass surveillance.
Mar 09, 2026
Anthropic is suing the Trump administration over its unprecedented attempt to coerce the company into allowing the military to use its artificial intelligence technology without ethical restrictions.
After the company refused to bend to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's demands that it drop limits on the use of its product for specific purposes—including to create autonomous weapons and for the mass surveillance of Americans—the Pentagon formally designated Anthropic as a “supply chain risk" on Thursday.
The designation under the Federal Acquisition Supply Chain Security Act (FASCSA) imposes a sweeping prohibition on contractors using the company's technology, including its highly advanced language model Claude.
Hegseth said that effective immediately, "no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic."
The "supply chain risk" designation has typically only been used against foreign companies with ties to adversaries of the United States. According to the Associated Press, Anthropic is the first American firm to be slapped with the label.
On Monday, the San Francisco-based company filed two lawsuits—one in California federal court and another in the federal appeals court in Washington, DC—each challenging different aspects of the designation.
“These actions are unprecedented and unlawful,” Anthropic’s lawsuit says. “The Constitution does not allow the government to wield its enormous power to punish a company for its protected speech. No federal statute authorizes the actions taken here. Anthropic turns to the judiciary as a last resort to vindicate its rights and halt the executive’s unlawful campaign of retaliation.”
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has warned about the dangers of "AI-enabled autocracies" that use their technology to more efficiently invade and dominate less powerful countries and stamp out anti-government sentimet.
"Anthropic’s Usage Policy has always conveyed its view that Claude should not be used for two specific applications: (1) lethal autonomous warfare and (2) surveillance of Americans en masse. Anthropic has never tested Claude for those uses. Anthropic currently does not have confidence, for example, that Claude would function reliably or safely if used to support lethal autonomous warfare," the lawsuit continued.
"These usage restrictions," it said, "are therefore rooted in Anthropic’s unique understanding of Claude’s risks and limitations—including Claude’s capacity to make mistakes and its unprecedented ability to accelerate and automate the analysis of massive amounts of data, including data about American citizens."
The Trump administration issued its ultimatum to Anthropic just days before the US and Israel launched a massive war with Iran, which has involved the targeting of thousands of civilian sites, according to the Iranian Red Crescent Society, including schools, hospitals, oil and water facilities, and residential areas.
The war has resulted in the deaths of at least 1,255 Iranians so far as of Monday, according to the country's deputy health minister, Ali Jafarian. Most of those killed have been civilians, Jafarian said, and have included about 200 children and 11 healthcare workers.
Hegseth, who has said the US would follow "no stupid rules of engagement" and boasted that the military was raining down “death and destruction from the sky all day long" upon Iran, has described adopting artificial intelligence as something necessary to make America's military "more lethal."
Last week, the Washington Post reported that in Iran, the US has “leveraged the most advanced artificial intelligence it’s ever used in warfare, a tool that could be difficult for the Pentagon to give up even as it severs ties with the company that created it.”
During the war's first 24 hours, Palantir’s Maven Smart System, which contains Claude, reportedly helped US commanders select 1,000 Iranian targets, according to the Post, which credited the program with "speeding the pace of the campaign."
This is despite the fact that, as SkyNews tech correspondent Rowland Manthorpe recently demonstrated, when presented with "tricky images," AI programs from Claude to ChatGPT to Google's Gemini still "struggle to recognize what is really going on."
"Now," he said, "this very same system is being used for war."
That first day of the war, February 28 saw a massacre in which a Tomahawk missile likely directed by the US obliterated a girls' school in Minab, resulting in at least 175 people killed—mostly children aged 7 to 12—in what was reportedly a "double-tap" strike. Despite video evidence suggesting otherwise, the Trump administration has claimed that Iran was responsible for the massacre.
It is unclear what, if any, role artificial intelligence systems played in the bombing of the Minab school, which was adjacent to an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps facility. One investigation by Al Jazeera concluded that the bombing of the school was likely "deliberate."
Beyond putting the lives of innocent people at risk through indiscriminate attacks that lack human intervention, media analyst and journalist Adam Johnson has warned that the adoption of AI in warfare will also allow the US, Israel, and other countries to avoid responsibility for atrocities their militaries commit while using the technology.
"One reason these systems are attractive to militaries is that they double as moral laundromats. Offsetting responsibility to AI is a feature, not a bug," Johnson said. "If the decision about what to bomb can be pawned off on some over-eager or sloppy 'AI', then no person, or system even, is responsible. That's a primary selling point of off-setting 'target-choosing' responsibilities to a machine. It's not just speed, it's blanket indemnification."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular