

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.

Almost seven in ten U.S. adults (69%) think governments should ensure vaccine science and know-how is shared with qualified manufacturers, alongside adequately compensating the vaccine developers, rather than remaining the exclusive property of a handful of pharmaceutical giants.
The YouGov poll for the People's Vaccine Alliance, a global coalition of organizations including Amnesty International, Oxfam and Public Citizen, shows that a majority of respondents support the removal of patents for COVID-19 vaccines and other intellectual property barriers, which would allow for mass production of treatments against the disease. 70% of U.S. adults also felt that the continued spread of COVID-19 elsewhere in the world poses a substantial risk to the national economy, while nearly half (47%) felt it was a large or significant threat to them personally.
These poll numbers come as the World Trade Organization (WTO) prepares this week to discuss a proposal which would override the monopolies held by pharmaceutical companies and allow an urgently needed scale up in the production of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines to ensure everyone in the world who needs a vaccine, regardless of how much money they have, can get one. The vast majority of low and middle income countries are supporting this proposal, but the U.S. is amongst richer countries opposing it.
The U.S. government has already ordered more than 20 percent of the world's supplies of vaccines currently in phase 3 clinical trials, enough to immunize the entire U.S. population four times over.
"We cannot bring this pandemic to an end unless pharmaceutical companies share the knowledge, technology and intellectual property to do so. This survey shows that the American public recognizes that COVID-19 will continue to threaten the lives and livelihoods of billions of people across the world, including in the U.S., until action is taken to drastically scale up global vaccine supply," said Joanne Lin, National Director for Advocacy and Government Affairs at Amnesty International USA.
"No one should be blocked from getting life-saving vaccines because of the country they live in or the amount of money in their pocket. Only by working with others to share resources and technology to scale up supply can we bring an end to the COVID-19 pandemic."
"In the battle against COVID-19, we must always remember that COVID anywhere is COVID everywhere. We can't end the pandemic or rebuild the economy without a vaccine that is free, fair, and available to all. Americans recognize this. In order to win against COVID, companies must share vaccine knowledge, technology, intellectual property, data and know-how to boost supply, reduce price and enhance equity," said Niko Lusiani, Senior Advisor with Oxfam America.
"The sharing of information and knowledge is what allowed the U.S. government and vaccine manufacturers to develop COVID-19 vaccines in record time. The legal barriers to sharing medical technology so more manufacturers can help ramp up vaccine production can easily be overcome. All that is needed is political will and cooperation," said Peter Maybarduk, Director of Access to Medicines with Public Citizen.
The People's Vaccine Alliance has previously warned that many poor countries will only be able to vaccinate one in ten people against COVID-19 this year unless urgent action is taken by governments and the pharmaceutical industry to make sure enough doses are produced.
Amnesty International is a global movement of millions of people demanding human rights for all people - no matter who they are or where they are. We are the world's largest grassroots human rights organization.
(212) 807-8400The Monday evening decision "is tantamount to an approval of Louisiana’s rush to pause the ongoing election in order to pass a new map."
Warning that the US Supreme Court's right-wing majority was appearing to give its approval of Louisiana's decision to suspend federal primary elections in the state following the court's ruling on the state's congressional map last week, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson on Monday evening was the lone dissenter as the court agreed to immediately finalize the ruling instead of waiting the customary 32 days.
By expediting the ruling, suggested Jackson, the court was taking an obviously political stance in support of efforts to ensure Louisiana Republicans can quickly redraw the state's congressional map to yield more electoral wins for the GOP.
"The court’s decision to buck our usual practice," wrote Jackson, "is tantamount to an approval of Louisiana’s rush to pause the ongoing election in order to pass a new map."
Ordinarily, the court would wait 32 days to transmit an opinion to the lower courts, giving the losing party time to request that the justices reconsider the case.
In a brief, unsigned opinion Monday evening, the court said that the Black voters who had defended the state's 2024 congressional map at the center of Louisiana v. Callais had "not expressed any intent to ask this court to reconsider its judgment.”
In Louisiana v. Callais last week, the court ruled along ideological lines that the 2024 map—which was drawn to better represent the population of Louisiana, where one-third of residents are Black—was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The ruling effectively struck down the last remaining provision of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which held that voters of color can challenge racially discriminatory electoral maps.
The map that was struck down ensured there were two majority-minority districts in the state. Louisiana's Republican-controlled legislature is expected to try to eliminate at least one of those districts, with a new map yielding five Republicans and one Democrat in the US House.
In transmitting last week's ruling to the lower courts without delay, the court granted a request from the group of white voters who had challenged the state's map.
"Because it is for the District Court to either draw an interim remedial map or approve a legislative remedy, jurisdiction should be returned to the District Court as soon as possible so that it can oversee an orderly process," wrote the plaintiffs.
The Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs' request days after Republican Gov. Jeff Landry took executive action to suspend the state's US House primaries in an effort to ensure they take place after the new map is drawn.
That action, wrote Jackson on Monday, had "a strong political undercurrent" that the court's latest move appeared to openly endorse.
"Louisiana’s hurried response to the Callais decision unfolds in the midst of an ongoing statewide election, against the backdrop of a pitched redistricting battle among state governments that appear to be acting as proxies for their favored political parties," wrote Jackson, noting that the court has only expedited a decision twice in the last 25 years. "As always, the court has a choice... To avoid the appearance of partiality here, we could, as per usual, opt to stay on the sidelines and take no position by applying our default procedures."
"But, today, the court chooses the opposite. Not content to have decided the law, it now takes steps to influence its implementation," she wrote.
John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said that the court was going against its practice of following the "Purcell doctrine," which came out of a 2006 Supreme Court order and holds that "courts should not change voting or election rules too close to an election in order to avoid confusion for voters and election officials alike."
The Supreme Court, said Bisognano, "decided to inject itself into an ongoing election and at this point no one can say otherwise."
"Events in Hormuz make clear that there's no military solution to a political crisis," said Iran's top diplomat.
Iranian officials on Tuesday rejected the Trump administration's account of events in the Strait of Hormuz over the preceding 24 hours, saying that the US military attacked two cargo boats and killed at least five civilians amid President Donald Trump's ploy to force open the critical waterway.
Iran's state-affiliated media carried comments from an unnamed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander who said that American forces "attacked two small boats carrying people on their way from Khasab on the coast of Oman to the coast of Iran on Monday," killing five people on board, and that no IRGC vessels were hit. US forces, said the commander, "must be held accountable for their crime."
The IRGC commander's version of events was reported hours after the head of the US Central Command told the press that two US-flagged commercial vessels successfully transited the Strait of Hormuz with the help of American forces, which purportedly shot down drones and destroyed six Iranian speedboats that were said to be targeting the ships.
Monday's exchanges came amid Trump's newly announced scheme—titled Project Freedom—to "guide" vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has closed in response to the US-Israeli war and the Trump administration's subsequent blockade of Iran.
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, a top Iranian negotiator and speaker of the country's parliament, said in a statement posted online early Tuesday that "the new equation of the Strait of Hormuz is in the process of being solidified."
"The security of shipping and energy transit has been jeopardized by the United States and its allies through the violation of the ceasefire and the imposition of a blockade; of course, their evil will diminish," he wrote. "We know full well that the continuation of the status quo is intolerable for America; while we have not even begun yet."
The US military has not yet responded to Iran's statements on developments in the Strait of Hormuz. Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan Caine are set to hold a press conference on Tuesday morning.
Abbas Araghchi, Iran's foreign minister, said Tuesday that "events in Hormuz make clear that there's no military solution to a political crisis."
"As talks are making progress with Pakistan's gracious effort, the US should be wary of being dragged back into quagmire by ill-wishers," Araghchi added. "So should the UAE. Project Freedom is Project Deadlock."
"This should be a clear-cut case, and all Floridians should see justice for this blatant attempt to reduce their rightful voting power even more than before," said the head of one voting rights group.
As Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Friday did his part to advance President Donald Trump's gerrymandering spree by signing a rigged congressional map into law, state voters swiftly sued over the newly drawn districts.
"Signed, Sealed, Delivered," DeSantis posted on social media Monday, celebrating Florida's new US House of Representatives map that's expected to give the GOP a 24-4 advantage, up from 20-8. It's part of Trump's campaign to redraw districts in various Republican-governed states in hopes of keeping control of both chambers of Congress.
Meanwhile, Floridians supported by the National Redistricting Foundation (NRF) and the Equal Ground Education Fund filed a lawsuit against the state Legislature and Secretary of State Cory Byrd over the map in the Circuit Court of Leon County.
"In 2010, the people of Florida voted overwhelmingly to enact the Fair Districts Amendment to the state's constitution, imposing constraints on the worst abuses of congressional redistricting and entrusting the Florida judiciary to enforce those safeguards," notes the complaint, which goes on to highlight a map tossed out by the Florida Supreme Court in 2015.
The filing also lays out the current battle initiated by Trump last year: He pressured Texas Republicans to redraw their state's US House map. North Carolina and Missouri's GOP leaders followed suit, prompting voters in California and Virginia to support drawing new districts that favor Democrats, who aim to reclaim congressional majorities in the November midterm elections.
The complaint then lays out DeSantis' monthslong push to redraw Florida's districts to appease the increasingly authoritarian president, in violation of the state constitution. It stresses that recent "changes to Florida's congressional plan come on the heels of a 2022 redistricting plan that already substantially advantaged Republicans."
The state's new map "is, by traditional measures of partisan gerrymandering, one of the most extreme gerrymanders in American history," the document declares. It was "made by professionals with sophisticated tools and a clear partisan goal: to pack and crack Democratic voters with surgical precision and deprive Florida voters of a fair map guaranteed to them by the Florida Constitution."
The Democratic and unregistered Florida voters behind the case, who live in various districts, asked the court to block the latest rigged map from being used in this year's election and strike it down completely.
"Florida's mid-decade gerrymander is a blatant violation of the state's constitution," said NAF executive director Marina Jenkins in a statement. "This map is a gerrymander on top of an already egregious gerrymander that cracks apart numerous districts in nonsensical ways with the intent to favor one party over another."
"Given the clear violations of state law, this should be a clear-cut case," Jenkins added, "and all Floridians should see justice for this blatant attempt to reduce their rightful voting power even more than before."
The plaintiffs are represented by the Orlando-based firm King, Blackwell, Zehnder, & Wermuth as well as Elias Law Group, which was founded by Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias.
Nikki Fried, chair of the Florida Democratic Party, and US House Democratic Majority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) also spoke out against the new state map on Monday.
"The lame-duck governor of Florida is auditioning for Donald Trump's undying love after his presidential aspirations were crushed in 2024," Jeffries said in a statement. "Democrats have brutally thwarted the MAGA midterm power grab, and we will continue to push back aggressively. Today, less than a week after corrupt Republican legislators approved an unconstitutional partisan map leaked to a right-wing news outlet, Ron DeSanctimonious signed it into law."
"By his own lawyer's admission, these boundaries were drawn with partisan intent, a shameless disregard for Florida voters who overwhelmingly passed the Fair Districts Amendment to bar political favoritism and incumbent protection in 2010," Jeffries emphasized. "Ron DeSantis knows this gerrymander is a direct violation of Florida law."
As Politico reported Monday
A top aide for the GOP governor acknowledged last week that he relied on political data as part of his map drawing effort—a potential violation of "Fair Districts" standards.
Attorneys for DeSantis contended that these anti-gerrymandering standards no longer needed to be followed because the state Supreme Court last year ruled that the minority voter protections that were also part of the same amendment did not need to be strictly followed. They said the amendment was a "package" that could not be broken apart.
DeSantis and his Republican allies have also cited Florida's growth as a reason to redraw the lines, but the new map relies on the same 2020 US Census data that was used in the current map, which has been approved by both state and federal courts.
The fight playing out in Florida comes after the US Supreme Court last week gutted the remnants of the Voting Rights Act in a battle over Louisiana's congressional map that preceded Trump's gerrymandering campaign. Republican Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry responded by suspending a primary election already underway, sparking lawsuits from civil rights groups and voters.