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
Amnesty International USA Responds to Andrea Sahouri Being Found Not Guilty
Today, a jury in Polk City Iowa found Des Moines Register journalist Andrea Sahouri, who was arrested at a Black Lives Matter protest in 2020 simply for doing her job as a reporter, not guilty on charges of "failure to disperse" and "interference with official acts." The prosecutor insisted on moving ahead with a trial for two simple misdemeanors, which carried the potential to result in a fine, a 30-day jail sentence, or both.
In a statement, Denise Bell, researcher at Amnesty International USA, said:
WASHINGTON
Today, a jury in Polk City Iowa found Des Moines Register journalist Andrea Sahouri, who was arrested at a Black Lives Matter protest in 2020 simply for doing her job as a reporter, not guilty on charges of "failure to disperse" and "interference with official acts." The prosecutor insisted on moving ahead with a trial for two simple misdemeanors, which carried the potential to result in a fine, a 30-day jail sentence, or both.
In a statement, Denise Bell, researcher at Amnesty International USA, said:
"We are incredibly relieved and heartened to learn that Andrea Sahouri has been found not guilty of the bogus charges levied against her. Reporting at a protest as a working member of the media is not a crime, and treating it as one constitutes a human rights violation. This fits into a larger trend of police forces across the United States committing widespread and egregious human rights violations in response to largely peaceful assemblies protesting systemic racism and police violence, including the killing of Black people.
"Journalists must be able to report on scenes of protest without fear of retribution. The right of the media to do their work is essential to the right of freedom of expression and the right to peaceful assembly.
"Clearly, the jury saw these charges for what they are -- completely ridiculous. This case should never have gone to trial. In much the same way Sahouri's unfounded arrest is a part of a larger pattern of police abuses, the decision of Polk County prosecutors to bring her to trial on these charges fits a larger pattern of practices undermining human rights within the United States justice system."
"The jury did the right thing by upholding freedom of the press and a just democracy. I'm grateful for them, as well as the support I've received from every corner of the world," said Andrea Sahouri.
Background and context:
On the night of May 31, 2020, police in the city of Des Moines, Iowa, pepper-sprayed, arrested, and detained Andrea Sahouri while she was reporting on a Black Lives Matter protest, even after she yelled "I'm press, I'm press."
Amnesty documented Andrea's case in its August 2020 report, The World is Watching: Mass Violations by US Police of Black Lives Matter Protesters' Rights, detailing how law enforcement officials unnecessarily and unjustly targeted journalists, legal observers, and street medics, as well as protesters, with excessive use of force in numerous primarily peaceful protests in 2020. Such excessive use of force violated their rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and expression, causing injuries and endangering all those impacted.
Amnesty International has been campaigning globally for the charges against Andrea Sahouri to be dropped.
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) 807-8400LATEST NEWS
Virginia Democrats Ask US Supreme Court to Restore Voter-Approved Map
"The irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia's decision is profound and immediate," top state Democrats said of the decision that struck down the new districts.
May 11, 2026
Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones and Democratic leaders in the state General Assembly on Monday asked the US Supreme Court to block a ruling against a ballot measure establishing new voter-approved congressional districts that favored Democrats.
The Virginia Supreme Court on Friday delivered a blow to the Democratic battle against President Donald Trump's gerrymandering campaign when it struck down a political map that Virginians had narrowly backed last month. The new districts could help Democrats secure up to four seats in the US House of Representatives in the November midterm elections.
Jones, Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates Don Scott (D-88), state Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D-34), and Senate President Pro Tempore L. Louise Lucas (D-18) are seeking a stay, arguing that based on a "novel and manifestly atextual interpretation" of the Virginia Constitution, the state Supreme Court "overrode the will of the people who ratified the amendment by ordering the commonwealth to conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected."
"A stay is warranted because the decision by the Supreme Court of Virginia is deeply mistaken on two critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the nation. The decision below violates federal law in two separate ways," the emergency application says. "First, it predicated its interpretation of the Virginia Constitution on a grave misreading of federal law, which expressly fixes a single day for the 'election' of representatives and delegates to Congress."
"Second, by rejecting the plain text of the Virginia Constitution's definition of the term 'election' to adopt its own contrary meaning, the Supreme Court of Virginia 'transgressed the ordinary bounds of judicial review such that it arrogated to itself the power vested in the state legislature to regulate federal elections,'" the application continues.
The filing also stresses that "the irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia's decision is profound and immediate. By forcing the commonwealth to conduct its congressional elections using districts different from those adopted by the General Assembly pursuant to a constitutional amendment the people just ratified, the Supreme Court of Virginia has deprived voters, candidates, and the commonwealth of their right to the lawfully enacted congressional districts."
The Associated Press noted that "Democrats are taking a legal long shot in asking the justices to reverse the Virginia ruling. The Supreme Court tries to avoid second-guessing state courts’ interpretations of their own constitutions. In 2023, it turned down a request by North Carolina Republicans to overrule a state Supreme Court decision that blocked the GOP's congressional map."
The high court also has a right-wing supermajority that includes three Trump appointees—and which gutted the remnants of the Voting Rights Act in a ruling related to Louisiana's congressional districts late last month.
Under current conditions, Republicans are expected to pick up seats in Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas due to redistricting demanded by Trump, while Democrats are expected to win more districts in California, where voters also approved new political lines benefiting them.
The Washington Post reported Monday that "some top Democrats express little hope that the appeal will affect this November's congressional midterms and are pivoting to waging campaigns in the state's existing districts."
According to the newspaper:
Surovell (D-Fairfax) said "the practical realities of our election calendar" will prevent candidates from running in new maps even if conservative justices on the US Supreme Court were open to helping Virginia Democrats.
Tuesday is the deadline set by state elections officials for putting the ballot mechanisms in place. Surovell noted that Virginia’s elections software is antiquated and overdue for replacement.
Instead, Democrats are making the case that it’s time to work with the cards they have in hand.
"Since we can't control anything other than mobilizing and organizing, then let's mobilize and organize and turn our anger into fuel for that," Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D-Va.) said.
In a Monday letter to fellow congressional Democrats, US House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY) called out the "vicious Republican assault on the right to vote, free and fair elections, and Black political representation in the South," and pledged that "our effort to forcefully push back against the Republican redistricting scheme will not slow down."
Jeffries also announced a caucus-wide briefing planned for Thursday "to discuss the steps Democrats are taking to advance the largest voter protection effort in modern American history," and declared that "Democrats will take control of the House of Representatives in November."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump War on Iran Sent Gas Prices Soaring—Now He Wants to Rob Highway Funds
"How about we start by suspending the biggest gas tax of them all, Trump’s illegal war in Iran," said US Senate candidate Graham Platner.
May 11, 2026
As President Donald Trump's ongoing war of choice on Iran sends US pump prices skyrocketing by 50%, the president and congressional Republicans are moving this week to suspend the federal gasoline tax—a proposal that critics note would reduce funding for the nation's deteriorating highway infrastructure.
Trump said Monday that he would push to suspend the 18.4-cent-per-gallon federal tax on gasoline and 24.4-cent diesel tax "until it's appropriate," as the average price for a gallon of regular gas has soared from just under $3 before the war to over $4.50 today.
Such a move would require congressional authorization. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) on Monday introduced the Gas Tax Suspension Act, citing "record profits" reaped by "some of the biggest corporations in the world"—but not the root cause of the price spike, the illegal war itself.
Meanwhile in the House, Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ) on Monday introduced similar legislation, while calling on state lawmakers and Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill to also suspend New Jersey's roughly $0.49-per-gallon gas tax. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) also said Monday that she "will be introducing a bill in the House to suspend the federal gas tax in light of Trump’s recent remarks."
This, after Sens. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH) in March introduced the Gas Prices Relief Act, which would suspend the 18.4-cent tax through October 1. Kelly's office noted the pain of "skyrocketing gas prices due to war in Iran" as the reason for the legislation. Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) in April also proposed a similar bill.
"Never before in American history have we seen a 50% increase in the price of gas in such a short time," Boyle said during a Monday interview on MS NOW, adding that the Trump administration's "actions have caused this mess."
Republican support for a gas tax holiday marks a reversal from just four years ago, when they opposed then-President Joe Biden's call to suspend the tax after Russia launched its ongoing full-scale invasion of Ukraine. GOP lawmakers argued at the time that such a suspension would cause the delay or cancellation of critical infrastructure projects, as federal gas taxes provide the vast bulk of Highway Trust Fund money. Such arguments were nowhere to be seen from Republicans after Trump's Monday comments.
Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner of Maine is pushing a multipronged approach to the issue. First, he is backing a permanent end to federal gas and diesel taxes, whose revenue would be replaced by increased taxation of billionaires.
"Relying on fossil fuels to fund basic infrastructure does not make sense if we want to reduce fossil fuels used in transportation," the climate-conscious candidate explained last week.
Platner's plan also calls for 50% per-barrel windfall tax on Big Oil profits, as well as a national freeze on electric rate increases.
Finally, Platner advocates addressing the number one current cause of high gas prices.
"How about we start by suspending the biggest gas tax of them all: Trump’s illegal war in Iran," he said Monday on X.
Most congressional Republicans and a few Democrats have refused to pass war powers resolutions intended to end Trump's assault—which the administration claims has been "terminated," despite continuing its naval blockade and conducting some alleged "self-defense" strikes during the current ceasefire.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Total BS': DHS Gives Trump's Deportations Credit for Decline in Violent Crime That Began Years Ago
"Violent crime has been dropping nationwide for three years. Now Trump comes in and claims that magically that's all his doing."
May 11, 2026
The US Department of Homeland Security is trying to give President Donald Trump's "mass deportation" crusade credit for a decline in violent crime, even though the trend began well before he took office.
Linking to a report from Axios detailing the decline in violent crime across US cities over the past year, the department’s account on X wrote that "under the leadership" of Trump and Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin, "violent crime is PLUNGING in cities across the country.”
"By removing criminal illegal aliens from our nation, we’re making our communities SAFE again," it continued.
The report draws on quarterly data from 67 major US law enforcement agencies, collected by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, which is often cited as a source for previewing crime trends before the annual FBI reports are released in the fall.
The first-quarter data show significant declines in crime rates from the first quarter in March 2025 that "show up across every major region, suggesting a systemic, nationwide trend," according to Axios.
- Homicides dropped 17.7%.
- Robberies fell 20.4%.
- Rapes declined 7.2%.
- Aggravated assaults decreased 4.8%.
However, as the report acknowledges, this drop in crime is not a new phenomenon, but the continuation of "a nationwide decline that began after the pandemic-era crime spike... with drops beginning in the second half of the [Joe] Biden presidency and continuing under Trump."
According to FBI data, homicides fell by 22.7% from January-June 2023 to January-June 2024, while robbery decreased 13.6%, rape decreased 17.7%, and aggravated assault decreased 8.1%.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, called it "total BS" for DHS to give Trump credit for this past year's drops.
"Violent crime has been dropping nationwide for three years," he said. "Now Trump comes in and claims that magically that's all his doing."
Crediting Mullin in particular is especially odd, considering that he had held the role of secretary of homeland security for just over a week when the yearlong data collection period ended on March 31.
But at any rate, there's little reason to believe that immigration enforcement bears much responsibility for the continued crime decline.
A study of incarceration data by the libertarian Cato Institute published in March found that between 2010 and 2024, the incarceration rate for undocumented immigrants was 44% lower than that of native-born US citizens, while that for legal immigrants was 75% lower.
Notably, the data includes undocumented people detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for immigration-related offenses, meaning that the rate of violent crimes committed by undocumented immigrants is likely even lower relative to citizens.
And while the Trump administration has claimed to target "the worst of the worst" immigrants for deportation by ICE, The Guardian found that 77% of those who entered deportation proceedings for the first time in 2025 had no criminal convictions.
Nearly half of those who did had only been convicted of traffic or immigration-related offenses. Just 9% had been convicted of assault, while only 1% were for sexual assault, and just 0.5% were for homicide.
Reichlin-Melnick said: "There is no evidence at all that deportations have reduced crime rates. None. Zero."
In fact, it's possible that the Trump administration's aggressive ramp-up of deportations has made it harder to fight violent crime.
In September, amid Trump's military occupations and surges of immigration agents into cities like Chicago, Cato received records showing that more than 25,000 federal officers—including more than 2,800 with the FBI, 2,100 with the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and 1,700 with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) had been diverted to assist with immigration enforcement. This amounts to more than 1 in 5 FBI agents, nearly half of DEA agents, and over two-thirds of ATF agents.
The Marshall Project wrote about how this shift in priorities was taking shape:
In May, the FBI ordered its agents to scale back investigations of white-collar crime and focus on immigration instead. In Baltimore, FBI agents on the city’s domestic terrorism squad were investigating online child predators when they were ordered to work full-time on immigration enforcement, MSNBC reported. About 10 agents were reportedly reassigned from building cases against what the FBI described as a “nihilistic violent extremist” group in order to help the Department of Homeland Security arrest immigrants.
“It’s a good time to be an American-born criminal,” Jason Houser, formerly ICE’s chief of staff under Biden, told The Marshall Project at the time. “When the FBI, DEA, ATF are all doing checkpoints in [Chicago’s] Little Italy tomorrow, the human trafficking, the sex trafficking, the Jeffrey Epsteins, the fentanyl traffickers—they don’t quit.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular