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
For Immediate Release
May, 26 2021, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Georgia-Based Disability Rights Groups Join Fight Against Georgia's Anti-Voter Law S.B. 202
Three groups joined pending litigation AME Church v. Kemp in an amended complaint that explains how S.B. 202 violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, Rehabilitation Act.
WASHINGTON
Three prominent Georgia-based disability rights groups have joined the broad-based alliance of Georgia voters, civil rights groups, and activists fighting against the implementation of the state's unconstitutional and discriminatory Senate Bill (S.B.) 202.
The groups are: The Arc Georgia (an office of The Arc of the United States), Georgia ADAPT and the Georgia Advocacy Office (GAO).
These organizations, whose core missions are to advocate for disability rights and support voters with disabilities, are the first disability rights-specific groups to join as plaintiffs in any of the pending lawsuits against S.B. 202.
S.B. 202 was passed by both houses of the Georgia General Assembly and signed into law by Gov. Brian Kemp all in one afternoon.
In joining AME Church v. Kemp in the amended complaint filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of Georgia, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), WilmerHale, and Davis Wright Tremaine, these groups are making it clear that -- in addition to targeting Black voters, Latinx voters, other voters of color, new citizens, elderly voters, and student voters -- Georgia legislators and the governor have discriminated against people with disabilities.
Voters with disabilities have received scant attention in Georgia's battles over voting rights but have borne the brunt of historical and continuing discrimination and neglect in all spheres of public life. Rather than celebrating the strong turnout in the 2020 general election and runoffs, S.B. 202 doubles down on making voting even more inaccessible for the disability community.
As detailed in the amended complaint, S.B. 202 unconstitutionally burdens the right to vote of people with disabilities and violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, which celebrates its 31th anniversary on July 26, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 by imposing voting barriers that will discriminate against voters with disabilities and deny people with disabilities full and equal opportunity to participate in the state's voting programs.
The amended complaint in full, which also adds the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) as a client, is available here:
https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/083_ame_et_al_fac.pdf
Other plaintiffs in AME Church v. Kemp include: Sixth District of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., Georgia Muslim Voter Project, Women Watch Afrika, and Latino Community Fund Georgia.
"Georgia's voting process already presented barriers to people with disabilities and S.B. 202 has made the process even more inaccessible in violation of the law," said Stacey Ramirez, acting state director of The Arc Georgia. "This lawsuit is critically important to the future of over 85,000 Georgian citizens with disabilities eligible to vote who have a fundamental right to participate in our democracy. If this law is not struck down, the walls it puts around our voting rights will be even harder for people with disabilities to scale, and that's unacceptable."
To read more about The Arc Georgia's work, please visit the SPLC's profile series Battle for Representation. The Arc's story, released today, is the fourth in the series profiling some of the clients in AME Church v. Kemp.
The Arc Georgia story is available at:
https://www.splcenter.org/news/2021/05/24/arc-georgia-nonprofit-helps-people-disabilities-cast-ballots-joins-splc-suit-against-voter
"I served in the U.S. Army, giving my body and soul to defend our Constitution. Now, as a Cherokee Two-Spirit disabled vet, and as an ADAPT activist, I joined this lawsuit to make sure every citizen -- whether disabled, Black, Native American, Latinx, or Asian -- can participate in the sacred act of voting," said Zan Thornton of Georgia ADAPT.
"Voting is a fundamental right. Access for people who experience disabilities is generally an afterthought if it's thought of at all. The change in the voting law creates new barriers for everyone but those barriers could be insurmountable for people who experience disabilities," said Devon Orland, legal director of the Georgia Advocacy Office.
TRANSLATIONS OF THE ABOVE:
- Plain language available immediately upon request
- ASL video available shortly upon request
RELEVANT LINKS:
- Amended complaint:
https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/083_ame_et_al_fac.pdf - To view all relevant legal documents and track progress in AME Church v. Kemp, please visit:
https://www.splcenter.org/seeking-justice/case-docket/sixth-district-african-methodist-episcopal-church-v-kemp - The press release announcing the filing of the litigation on March 30 is available here:
https://www.splcenter.org/presscenter/civil-rights-groups-sue-georgia-over-new-sweeping-voter-suppression-law - SPLC Battle for Representation series:
https://www.splcenter.org/battle-representation-ongoing-struggle-voting-rights
Contact: Graeme Crews
graeme.crews@splcenter.org / (334) 224-0002
LATEST NEWS
Conservationists Vow Court Fight as DHS Lifts Pause on Big Bend Border Construction
"We won't let them destroy the wildest place in Texas without a fight," the Center for Biological Diversity vowed.
Sep 30, 2026
The Trump administration on Wednesday allowed a temporary pause on border construction in and around Big Bend National Park in Texas to expire, prompting renewed vows from conservationists and other opponents to fight the contentious project in court.
Laiken Jordahl, the national public lands advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), posted a court document stating that US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)k "will lift the pause on ground-disturbing activities" related to the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) plan to build border barriers and other destructive infrastructure across one of the most remote and environmentally sensitive stretches of the US-Mexico border.
The government said Tuesday in a court filing that CBP is “actively considering adjustments” to the project “that would reduce its scope and avoid or minimize potential impacts, based on input received from the National Park Service and other stakeholders."
However, those possible changes did not assuage opponents of the project, who span the political spectrum.
“We are disappointed, and urge the Department of Homeland Security to extend this pause,” Emily Thompson, executive director of the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks, said Wednesday. “Continuing with construction of border barriers, roads, and associated infrastructure inside Big Bend National Park will do unprecedented damage to the park.”
Thompson continued:
Big Bend National Park stands out for its unique desert landscape. With more nesting bird species than any other national park, towering canyon walls, and the largest international dark sky reserve in the entire world, Big Bend is an integral addition to our nation’s natural heritage. The Trump administration's plan to build a border wall through the park threatens all of this, heightening flood risk, inundating the skies with lights, and cutting off migration patterns for wildlife. Building in Big Bend would be mutilating an extraordinary landscape at a massive cost to the taxpayer—with little ultimate benefit.
Bob Krumenaker, chair of Keep Big Bend Wild and a former Big Bend National Park superintendent, asserted that “border security already works" in the park "without the need for intrusive construction."
"The Border Patrol, the National Park Service, and local sheriffs already operate an effective surveillance system with ground and aerial patrols and unobtrusive, wireless sensors," he noted. "The rugged terrain, huge distances, and harsh desert weather in the national park and in Mexico across the Rio Grande make this the least active section of the entire southern border for illegal crossings."
CBD and other plaintiffs are already seeking a preliminary injunction in federal court. US District Judge Kathleen Cardone—an appointee of former President George W. Bush—is scheduled to hear testimony and evidence Friday in El Paso on the request to halt construction while the groups' lawsuit proceeds. The plaintiffs argue that the Trump administration unlawfully waived dozens of federal laws to accelerate construction.
Indigenous peoples and their advocates have criticized DHS for waiving laws, including the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, to enable the project's construction.
In a statement issued Wednesday, CBD described some of the damage already done by construction in service of Trump's deadly immigration crackdown:
Bulldozers started tearing into Big Bend National Park near the iconic Santa Elena Canyon in early August and were documented plowing new routes for vehicle barriers into both the east and west sides of Mariscal Mountain. Contractors have stockpiled heavy equipment across the Big Bend region, where staging yards have been cleared, worker camps built, and water wells drilled.
"We'll be in court... in El Paso demanding a permanent halt to the destruction," CBD said. "We won't let them destroy the wildest place in Texas without a fight.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Federal Judge Rejects Trump's Rationale for Hiding Memo on 'Cold-Blooded Murder' at Sea
“No president can arbitrarily assassinate people from the sky based on their sole say-so,” said one legal expert.
Sep 30, 2026
A key memo from the Office of Legal Counsel at President Donald Trump's Department of Justice has underpinned the administration's yearlong campaign of bombing boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, and the White House has been adamant that the document should be kept secret.
But on Wednesday, Judge Paul Engelmayer in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected the administration's rationale for keeping the memo hidden, saying that the Department of Defense and US Southern Command have adopted its contents as its "working law" while conducting 70 strikes on boats and killing at least 234 people who officials claimed, without evidence, were "narco-terrorists."
After the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed a Freedom of Information Act request calling for the release of the 40-page memo, the administration argued it needed to remain secret to protect confidential deliberations and attorney-client communications.
Engelmayer noted that administration officials have repeatedly cited the memo in public statements to explain why it was bombing dozens of boats that it claimed were operated by drug cartels—which experts and family members of some of the victims have called into question.
“The agency defendants cannot claim surprise from this consequence of the executive branch’s repeated public statements embracing the OLC memo—and it only—as setting out the legal parameters for the boat strikes,” Engelmayer wrote.
Jeffrey Stein, staff attorney with the ACLU's National Security Project, called the order "a huge step in the right direction of ensuring that the government does not get to summarily execute people based on secret law."
“The public deserves to know how our government is justifying the cold-blooded murder of hundreds of civilians," said Stein.
The judge ordered the administration to turn the memo over to him so he can determine whether it should be released to the public. He also ordered officials to provide information about who has seen the memo and how they have used it, and called on the administration to provide details on whether the memo could be protected from public view as a "closely held presidential advice document."
Engelmayer gave the administration until October 14 to comply with the order.
The boat strikes have been carried out as part of Trump's stated push to defeat drug cartels in Latin America. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) has pointed out that there is little evidence the administration is ensuring it is targeting drug boats, as the presence of drugs on a boat has not been identified as "targeting criteria" for the operation in congressional briefings. Some victims have been identified as fishermen and other people who had little, if any, involvement with drug trafficking.
Beyond that, legal experts say that even if the 234 victims were drug traffickers, the boat bombings constitute extrajudicial killings and violations of international law—something Trump himself appeared to brag about last week when he said at the United Nations General Assembly that "we don’t waste our time" addressing alleged drug crimes in the court system.
“No president can arbitrarily assassinate people from the sky based on their sole say-so,” said Baher Azmy, legal director for CCR. “If the OLC opinion seeks to dress up the obvious illegality of these serial murders in legalese to provide Trump cover, the public needs to see that analysis and ultimately hold accountable all those who facilitate murder in the United States’ name.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ahead of High-Stakes Election, Analysis Details Economic Gains of Brazil Under Lula
"The past almost four years have seen Brazil accomplish a great deal in terms of bringing people out of poverty, creating jobs, curbing hunger, and raising standards of living."
Sep 30, 2026
An analysis released Wednesday documents some of the major economic gains that Brazil has made over the past four years during the third term of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who is currently in a close battle for reelection against rival Flávio Bolsonaro.
The analysis, published by the US-based Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), finds that, between 2022 and 2025, the Brazilian economy grew by a cumulative 8.9%, easily outpacing the average rate of growth in other South American countries.
This growth has been coupled with a drop in the unemployment rate, which has fallen from more than 9% in the second quarter of 2022 to just 5.4% in the second quarter of 2026.
Both poverty and food insecurity fell dramatically in the first two year's of Lula's term, the analysis finds, and in 2025, "Brazil was removed from the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Hunger Map after chronic undernourishment fell below 2.5%."
CEPR's report also gives credit to Lula's policies for improved economic conditions, including a new minimum wage law, an expanded maternity leave program, and increased average payments to low-income families given through the Bolsa Família program.
The economy during Lula's term is far from perfect, however, and the report flags high interest rates set by Brazil's central bank as a key factor in raising consumers' borrowing costs and increasing the rate of household delinquency.
CEPR also noted the negative impact of online betting apps, which Lula has pledged to ban starting next month, on Brazilian workers.
"Brazilian households lost an estimated R$62.5 billion (US$11.2 billion) to online betting in 2025," the report says, "while some 802,000 Bolsa Família households spent more than 2% of their income on betting in January 2025."
Jake Johnston, CEPR's director of international research, said that "the past almost four years have seen Brazil accomplish a great deal in terms of bringing people out of poverty, creating jobs, curbing hunger, and raising standards of living."
"This was done," Johnston added, "despite the lingering impact of the Covid pandemic, external economic shocks that affected the global economy, and excessively high interest rates."
The first round of Brazil's presidential election is set to take place on Sunday, and recent polls show Lula with a narrow lead over Bolsonaro, son of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is still serving a criminal sentence for efforts to instigate a coup after his loss in the 2022 election.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Put a Real Ban on the Floor If You’re Serious': Senate Democrats Block Loophole-Laden Fake Fix to End Lawmaker Stock Trading
"This measure was a ruse, promoted by House Speaker Mike Johnson, to make it appear that congressional Republicans were tackling an ethical quagmire when, in fact, it would have accomplished very little."
Sep 30, 2026
Democrats in the Senate have blocked what they described as a loophole-laden Republican-led bill to ban members of Congress from purchasing stocks.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) blasted his Democratic colleagues on Wednesday after they declined to give the votes necessary to advance the bill—known as the Stop Insider Trading Act—past the Senate filibuster.
"The Democrats who blocked it went back on their word to protect their own wallets—they should be ashamed of themselves," Cotton said.
But Democrats described the bill, which passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives in July, as a sham. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said the bill "does not adequately ban congressional stock trading," and described it as "meaningless messaging."
While the bill would have prohibited members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children from buying stocks, it would not have required them to divest the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of stock they already own.
It also would have exempted President Donald Trump and other executive branch employees. During his second term in office, Trump has made around 30,000 securities trades since returning to office. Bloomberg estimated, based on public disclosures, that he'd made more than 21,000 trades worth between $600 million and $1.86 billion in 2025 alone.
The bill passed by House Republicans also attached a national photo ID requirement for voting as well as additional identification requirements for vote-by-mail, which voting rights advocates argued could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters who do not possess a valid photo ID.
"This measure was a ruse, promoted by House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), to make it appear that congressional Republicans were tackling an ethical quagmire when, in fact, it would have accomplished very little," said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen.
Democrats have argued that the watered-down Republican proposal was meant to sap momentum from stronger bills, amid broad public demand for a stock trading ban.
Holman noted that "there was serious legislation to stop congressional insider trading, but Johnson would not bring up any of the serious proposals for a floor vote."
A bipartisan bill that has stalled in the House would have required members of Congress to divest stock they currently own. Meanwhile, the GOP-controlled House Rules Committee blocked a Democratic proposal that would have made the president and vice president subject to the ban.
"Let’s be clear: I support a total ban on Congress members trading stock," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Wednesday. "But Republicans are trying to package a fraudulent version of that with a bill to disenfranchise American voters."
"This is politics at its worst," he said. "Put a real ban on the floor if you’re serious."
Keep ReadingShow Less
After 50 Years of Anti-Choice Hyde Amendment, Campaigners and Lawmakers Say 'Enough Is Enough'
"Everyone, no matter who they are, where they live, how much money they make, or how they get their insurance, deserves access to abortion care without barriers."
Sep 30, 2026
On Wednesday, reproductive rights groups marked half a century of abortion care being "baselessly set apart from all other healthcare," with coverage for abortions blocked in government-funded healthcare plans like Medicaid, which about 16 million women of reproductive age rely on.
"Our constituents have suffered the consequences," said the Congressional Reproductive Freedom Caucus, chaired by Reps. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.).
For 50 years, the Hyde Amendment—proposed by the late Rep. Henry Hyde (D-Ill.), who expressed his wish to prevent "anybody having an abortion" and said blocking federal funds within the Medicaid program from being used for care was the best way to do so—has stopped hundreds of thousands of people from obtaining abortion care, and has been called by anti-abortion groups "one of the greatest achievements of the pro-life movement to date."
The Reproductive Freedom Caucus denounced the budget rider that has been reeimplemented in appropriations bills every year since 1976 as "a dangerous, racist, and classist abortion ban. An abortion ban for the working class and people of color, who disproportionately receive health insurance through the federal government."
The caucus noted that more than 200 House Democrats have supported efforts to repeal the amendment, and advocacy groups on Wednesday called on Congress to pass the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH) Act, which would permanently repeal the Hyde Amendment.
"Without solutions like the EACH Act, the Hyde Amendment will continue to force people with low incomes to struggle for the care they need or carry a pregnancy against their will," said the National Women's Law Center (NWLC). "Everyone, no matter who they are, where they live, how much money they make, or how they get their insurance, deserves access to abortion care without barriers."
In addition to low-income people who rely on Medicaid, said the National Network of Abortion Funds (NNAF), the Hyde Amendment blocks abortion care for Indigenous people who use the Indian Health Service, people in federal prisons, disabled people, military service members and their families, and federal employees, among others.
Twenty-nine states follow Hyde Amendment restrictions, which include "exceptions" for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest or cases in which a pregnant person's life is at risk. Twenty-one states use state funds to cover abortion care, but nearly half of US women of reproductive age who use Medicaid live in states that either ban abortion care or bar them from getting abortions using the federally funded healthcare plan.
NNAF highlighted the network's decades of work to counter the Hyde Amendment by ensuring people who need abortions can access funding, which abortion funds across the country obtain through grassroots donations as they also advocate to end the Hyde Amendment.
"By the 1990s—less than two decades after Hyde first passed—28 abortion funds had formed across the country. Twenty-two of those funds started the National Network of Abortion Funds (NNAF) in 1993," said NNAF. "We joined together to build strategic power and end the Hyde Amendment. Today, our network has nearly 100 member abortion funds, and our fight against Hyde continues."
"The fierce abortion funds in our network have raised money, arranged travel, connected folks to clinics, provided practical support, and fought restrictions in their states and communities," the group added. "Despite endless challenges, their tireless work has built power for our collective goal: Make abortion accessible for all."
Abortion funds have helped people obtain care across the country, but the NWLC emphasized that the Hyde Amendment has still left hundreds of thousands of women with no choice but to pay for abortions out of pocket—often pushing them to delay care while they gather funds or to carry a pregnancy to term when they don't want to or can't afford to become a parent.
"While abortion costs vary by location, facility, and stage of pregnancy, the median out-of-pocket costs in 2023 were $563 for medication abortion, $650 for first-trimester procedural abortion, and $1,000 for second-trimester abortion care," said NWLC. "Those costs account for just the procedure itself, not additional expenses. And yet, nearly half of American families cannot afford the true cost of living... So, when the Hyde Amendment denies someone abortion care, the compounding costs can push people further into a struggle to survive and meet basic needs."
Dr. Jamila Perritt, president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health, remembered Rosie Jimenez, a 27-year-old mother and aspiring teacher who died in 1977, almost exactly a year after the Hyde Amendment was passed, after being denied Medicaid coverage for an abortion.
“Hyde has harmed generations of people seeking abortion care," said Perritt. "Women like Rosie Jimenez, the first known person to die because of Hyde Amendment restrictions, should still be here. No one, no matter what insurance they have access to or who they are, should be denied abortion care, full stop."
Stateline reported Tuesday that with weeks to go until the midterm elections and President Donald Trump's approval rating plummeting to record lows, anti-abortion groups are increasingly concerned that a Democratic majority could repeal the amendment, which it came close to doing in 2022.
“If there becomes a pro-abortion majority in Congress, then Hyde is going to be one of the first things to go, probably, especially because it’s been in the spotlight more recently,” Gavin Oxley, spokesperson for Americans United for Life, told Stateline. Particularly since Trump told Republicans to be "a little flexible" on the Hyde Amendment when the party was pushing to end subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, Oxley said "there are some Republicans who may not be as committed to protecting Hyde.”
Perritt expressed hope that Congress could pass the EACH Act, which now "has the highest amount of support... ever seen with over 200 co-sponsors."
"As a DC-based OB-GYN and abortion provider, I see patients burdened with the cost of abortion care, forcing them to choose between basic living needs and lifesaving healthcare," she said. "The Hyde Amendment is a zero-sum constraint that is not about patients’ health and autonomy, but instead about punishing people for making informed decisions about their bodies, families, and futures. Enough is enough."
"We do not need another Hyde Amendment anniversary," said Perritt. "We need to repeal the Hyde Amendment for good.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump’s Horrific, Illegal Iran War Has ‘Costs Us Billions While Making Us Less Safe’
"This is a self-inflicted wound, it's a choice, and it can be undone."
Sep 30, 2026
A group of experts says that President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran, which has been massively expensive and has made Americans less safe, shows the need for a radical overhaul of US foreign policy.
Scholars at the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts on Wednesday are holding a webinar to present ideas for reducing the US military footprint and using the savings to invest in programs that will directly benefit working-class Americans.
In a video posted on social media ahead of the webinar, PERI experts advocated for making major changes to US foreign policy, which they argued has left the country overstretched.
"The Iran War costs us billions while making us less safe," says a message accompanying the video on PERI’s social media account. "By reining in military spending and taxing the wealthy to pay their fair share, we can fund critical services like universal preschool, infrastructure investments, and Medicare for All."
The Iran War costs us billions while making us less safe.
By reining in military spending and taxing the wealthy to pay their fair share, we can fund critical services like universal preschool, infrastructure investments, and medicare for all. pic.twitter.com/daOFLyWHEr
— PERI (@PERIatUMass) September 30, 2026
Lindsay Koshgarian, program director of the National Priorities Project (NPP), made the case that the US can no longer enforce a policy of "maintaining dominance over the entire world."
"We have endless wars in the Middle East, a war of choice with Iran at the moment," said Koshgarian. "Clearly, something is broken about our foreign policy. It's extremely costly and, in fact, it actually makes us less safe."
Koshgarian then outlined her plan for what she described as "a smaller, safer military" that would slash US presence overseas and generate between $200 billion to $500 billion of savings per year.
Heidi Peltier, senior researcher at the Watson School of International and Public Affairs at Brown University, pointed to Trump's request for an "astronomical" $1.5 trillion military budget to argue that America's priorities have become completely warped.
"The money is there," Peltier said. "The question really is, what are our priorities?"
Peltier's research aims to "demilitarize" federal spending by reducing the annual US Department of Defense budget by 10%, which would free up $100 billion more to spend on domestic priorities.
Aaron Medlin, professor of international studies at Boston College, pointed to the ways Trump's illegal war had made the price of energy more expensive and was inflicting economic pain on working-class Americans.
Medlin said that his work focuses on raising taxes on the wealthy by taxing income generated from owning assets at the same rate as income generated from working, while also imposing a minimum tax on fortunes over $100 million, and small levies on stock, bond, and derivatives trades.
In total, Medlin estimates that the proposed tax package would raise more than $2 trillion annually.
"The United States is just becoming unaffordable for a huge share of Americans," he said. "This is a self-inflicted wound, it's a choice, and it can be undone."
The experts' proposals for reducing the US military footprint and taxing extreme wealth came on the same day that petroleum industry analyst Patrick De Haan estimated that Americans have now spent over $75 billion more on gasoline since the start of the Iran War.
When higher gas prices are combined with rising rates for diesel, the Costs of War Project at Brown's Watson Institute estimates that Americans have spent an extra $121.7 billion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
1 in 5 Children in Lebanon Facing Daily Hunger Due to Israeli Assault: UNICEF
After more than six months, 329,000 people in Lebanon remain displaced from their homes by Israel's occupation, one-third of whom are children.
Sep 30, 2026
Israel's latest assault on Lebanon is inflicting widespread hunger, death, and injury on children across the country, according to a report out Wednesday from the United Nations Children's Fund.
Children go to bed hungry in at least one in five households, according to a survey conducted by UNICEF in July, while nearly a third are going without needed healthcare because their families are unable to afford it. Four in five households, the report says, have found it harder to afford basic necessities.
Nearly 17,000 people have been killed or injured since March. Among them are 261 children who've been killed and 1,056 who've been injured—and 12% of those injured now live with a disability.
Around 100,000 children are at risk of losing access to education. At least 436 schools have been damaged across the country, including 37 that were completely destroyed.
“Children and young people in Lebanon are being asked to bear a burden no child should have to carry,” said UNICEF Lebanon Representative Marcoluigi Corsi, who noted the report's finding that 770,000 children have suffered psychological distress over the past six months due to repeated exposure to violence, loss, and displacement.
Lebanon was already in the midst of an economic crisis that left many families poor. But the situation has grown markedly more severe since March, when Israel launched an ongoing occupation of southern Lebanon that has displaced more than 1.1 million people and unleashed punishing airstrikes across the country, including in densely populated civilian areas.
More than 329,000 of those displaced have yet to go home, and around one-third are children. Despite a ceasefire announced in April, Israeli officials have said that those ordered to leave their homes will not be allowed to return until they deem northern Israel "safe" from attacks by the militant group Hezbollah.
Israeli forces have systematically razed dozens of villages and farms in southern Lebanon, destroying tens of thousands of homes. As Al Jazeera reported earlier this week, Israel has predominantly demolished Shia villages while telling Christian villages they'll be spared so long as they stay neutral.
According to a June report by Amnesty International, about 6% of Lebanese territory is effectively under a "don't come back" order from Israel with residents barred indefinitely from returning home. Amnesty said the forced displacement and prevention of return in parts of southern Lebanon constitute unlawful transfer, a war crime.
Some Israeli leaders have discussed annexing the occupied portion of Lebanon and moving in Israeli settlers.
Earlier this week, Bezalel Smotrich—the Israeli finance minister who has overseen a historic surge of violent settlement expansion in the West Bank—said that he would "very much like to annex at least… up to the Litani [River] in Lebanon," extending the country's border into southern Lebanon.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Groups Call Senate Permitting Deal a 'Blatant Giveaway to Big Oil and Big Tech'
"If it comes to pass, this deal would bulldoze America’s most important wildlife law," said one campaigner.
Sep 30, 2026
A bipartisan Senate proposal to overhaul federal permitting rules drew fierce opposition Wednesday from environmental and wildlife advocates, who warn that the legislation could significantly weaken the Endangered Species Act and other key protections in service of boosting President Donald Trump's pro-fossil fuel and artificial intelligence agenda.
Senate negotiators—chiefly Democrats Martin Heinrich (NM) and Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) and Republicans Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.) and Mike Lee (Utah)—reportedly reached an agreement Monday on the text of a sweeping permitting package intended to speed construction of energy and infrastructure projects.
While the full legislative text of the “Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026" had not been publicly released as of Wednesday, reported provisions have prompted alarm among conservation groups, who warn that the proposal would weaken endangered species protections, shift federal authority and responsibility to states, limit scientific review and judicial oversight, and exempt some projects from key environmental consultations.
“If it comes to pass, this deal would bulldoze America's most important wildlife law,” Defenders of Wildlife president and CEO Andrew Bowman said Wednesday. “We can build the infrastructure America needs without sacrificing the wildlife we have a responsibility to protect and that Americans cherish. Development should not come at the expense of science, accountability, or the ability of America’s most imperiled wildlife to survive.”
Oil Change International called the proposal "a blatant giveaway to Big Oil and Big Tech."
“This ‘dirty deal’ threatens to raise electricity prices for working families by accelerating the buildout of energy-guzzling AI data centers and liquefied natural gas export projects," said Oil Change International US campaigns manager Collin Rees. "Our recent research shows that the Trump administration’s support for reckless AI development and greater gas exports drives up energy costs for households."
Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), said that “this is a climate kill shot that condemns our most vulnerable communities to suffer decades more fossil fuel pollution."
"It’s absurd to ensure our planet chokes with greenhouse gases, gut endangered species protections, and eviscerate the Clean Water Act for what seems to be a nearly meaningless victory against Trump’s war on offshore wind,” Hartl continued. "The minor benefits for renewable energy corporations are massively dwarfed by the gifts to the fossil fuel industry."
"If this grotesque legislation becomes law, the paltry increases in renewable energy will be instantly devoured by AI data centers," he added. "The only winners here are Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, tech oligarchs, and the shareholders of fossil fuel companies.”
According to CBD:
Today’s package contains numerous provisions that lock in thousands of fossil fuel projects, including oil and gas pipelines, [liquefied natural gas] export terminals, and expanded fossil fuel drilling onshore and offshore approved by President Trump over the past two years. It also ensures that future fossil fuel pipelines and methane gas-generated electricity can never be challenged in court.
Additional provisions gut parts of the Clean Water Act, including the Section 401 authority of states to protect their rivers and streams from the impacts of building pipelines and the [Environmental Protection Agency's] Section 404(c) permit veto authority, which has been used to stop projects like the Pebble Mine in Alaska.
The legislation weakens the National Historic Preservation Act and Tribal consultations, leaving most Tribal nations with no meaningful way to protect their sovereignty when faced with potential fossil fuel projects on their lands.
Furthermore, CBD noted, "the legislation guts the Endangered Species Act by allowing states to take over the Section 7 consultation process with minimal safeguards, turning one of the law’s strongest provisions into a state-run rubber stamp of dangerous projects."
The Western Environmental Law Center described the proposal as a “five-alarm fire,” warning that it could weaken the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, [National Environmental Policy Act], and other safeguards.
“The permitting deal is a betrayal of public lands, water, and wildlife, and environmental justice values that Westerners depend on,” said Erik Schlenker-Goodrich, the group's executive director, who warned that the measure could ultimately “hobble the ability of future administrations to enact an ambitious climate and conservation agenda.”
Hartl called out Democrats Heinrich and Whitehouse for "giving away our most cherished environmental laws based on fantastical models that project a renewable energy utopia."
"They’re rewarding a ruthless fossil fuel industry that will always put its quarterly profits ahead of a livable planet and future generations,” he said. "Trump promised fossil fuel companies that he’d do everything in his power to assist them in his second term, and Sen. Heinrich and Sen. Whitehouse seem hell-bent on helping Trump fulfill that promise."
Bowman contended that "Congress should be looking for ways to make permitting more efficient rather than a Trojan horse to weaken the Endangered Species Act."
“Efficiency and conservation are not opposing goals," he added. "A durable permitting bill should deliver both. Congress should not lock in permanent damage to the Endangered Species Act simply to get a deal today.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Rebuke Trump's Ultra-Rich Treasury Chief Over $910,000 in Unpaid Medicare Taxes
"Until he pays what he owes, Secretary Bessent is placing himself above the law," said Sen. Ron Wyden.
Sep 30, 2026
A group of Senate Democrats on Wednesday pushed US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to pay back the nearly $1 million in Medicare payroll taxes that he reportedly owes from his years as a hedge fund manager.
In a letter to Bessent, the senators pointed to a recent court ruling clarifying the scope of a self-employment tax loophole that is widely exploited by hedge fund managers and private equity executives. During his confirmation hearing last year, Bessent cited the then-pending litigation to justify his decision not to pay $910,000 in payroll taxes he potentially owes the Internal Revenue Service, and pledged to set up a "reserve fund to address any contingency related to this issue."
"We write to ask whether you will uphold your commitment to pay the Medicare tax you avoided during your time as a hedge fund manager in light of last week’s Second Circuit opinion about the scope of the limited partner exception," the Senate Democrats wrote in their letter. "Your avoidance and delay tactics have already cost the Medicare trust fund hundreds of thousands of dollars. Now that the appellate court has spoken, will you use your reserve fund to pay the avoided tax?"
Bessent, who has an estimated net worth of around $500 million, currently oversees the IRS as head of the Treasury Department, and he previously served as the tax agency's acting commissioner.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee and one of the letter's signatories, said in a statement on Wednesday that Bessent "is the highest ranking tax official in America and he is failing to lead by example by exploiting tax loopholes to avoid payroll taxes that every working American pays out of each paycheck."
"In Trump’s America, you have to pay your fair share of taxes, but the ultra-rich like Scott Bessent get to pay what they want, when they want," said Wyden. "Many Americans are financially struggling in Trump’s economy. Until he pays what he owes, Secretary Bessent is placing himself above the law."
The New York Times reported last year that "like many firms on Wall Street, Mr. Bessent’s hedge fund, Key Square Capital Management, was set up as a limited partnership."
"Through that structure, Mr. Bessent avoided paying roughly $910,000 in Medicare taxes on money he made running his hedge fund in 2021, 2022, and 2023," the Times reported, citing a memo prepared by Democratic Senate staffers ahead of Bessent's confirmation hearing. "Mr. Bessent’s decision to not pay the additional tax has now put him in the unusual spot of personally opposing—and having a personal stake in—how the IRS interprets tax law. And since he took office, the Treasury and IRS have backed away from developing regulations to address it."
Under Bessent's leadership, the Treasury Department has worked to deliver fresh tax breaks to large corporations, championed President Donald Trump's deficit-exploding tax cuts for the wealthy, overseen the gutting of IRS staff, and refused to close loopholes leveraged by the richest people in the US—including one that benefits private jet owners.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Federal Appellate Court Halts Tennessee's Planned Execution of Christa Pike
"So much of Ms. Pike's experience reflects widespread and systemic failures that surface in death penalty cases," said an Amnesty International USA researcher, urging an end to capital punishment "in Tennessee and beyond."
Sep 30, 2026
A federal appellate court on Wednesday morning temporarily blocked Tennessee from executing Christa Pike, as witnesses had already gathered at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville for the state's first execution of a woman in centuries.
A panel from the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled 2-1 to halt the state-sanctioned killing, after Republican Gov. Bill Lee and the US Supreme Court declined to do so. The 50-year-old, found guilty of murdering Colleen Slemmer in 1995, when Pike was 18, could still be executed on Wednesday if the nation's top court allows it.
Republican state Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti's office said: "We will continue to advocate for the lawfully imposed sentence as the courts work through this technical issue. It is common in capital cases for the defense to raise last-minute objections following decades of litigation in numerous courts. We are asking the Supreme Court of the United States to lift the stay."
Judges Jane Stranch and Karen Moore, both appointees of Democratic presidents, concluded early Wednesday that "a short stay of execution" is in order due to arguments related to the sexual abuse Pike suffered as a child—which clinical psychologist Dr. Bethany Brand described as "truly extreme," writing in 2023 that "the level of trauma she was subjected to as a preschooler through her 18th year, when she was arrested, is almost impossible to grasp because it is so severe."
As the 6th Circuit's order details, Pike points out "that the state recently reversed its litigation position that she is a liar who fabricated sexual abuse. Pike contends that the state's concession of her history of child sexual abuse and rape 'erodes the foundation' of her state court proceedings. Pike ties this erosion to defects in the federal court proceedings because... the district court was required to give strong deference to the state court's findings of facts."
"Pike also cites scholarly authority supporting her argument that the state's representations about her history of sexual abuse tainted the state court proceedings and the subsequent federal ones by introducing damaging stereotypes of survivors of sexual assault," the filing says.
Pike was "subjected to drugs and alcohol while she was still in her mother's womb" and "first sexually abused by her grandmother's boyfriend, who would orally rape her before she was in kindergarten," the Nashville Banner's Steven Hale recently reported, citing Brand's findings. "After living through periods of physical and emotional torment by extended family members and one of her mother's husbands, Pike was later raped by a known predatory neighbor."
"She was hospitalized at the age of 12 after overdosing on pills during a suicide attempt," then sexually assaulted by one of her mother's boyfriends, who had "moved into the family's home and brought with him violence and depravity," Hale continued, noting that the perpetrators who abused Pike often faced limited consequences. "When she was 17 in January 1994, Pike was sexually assaulted again, by a man who saw her walking to the store in Carrboro, North Carolina."
Hale was among the journalists at the prison in Nashville on Wednesday morning. He said on social media that "I'm told the state has until midnight to carry out the execution. Still unclear what happens next, but prison officials are bringing those of us witnessing the execution inside now to be ready."
The journalist added just after noon Central Time that "prison officials have brought us back outside now while we continue to wait for news from the Supreme Court."
Following the 6th Circuit's decision, the ACLU—whose Capital Punishment Project works to repeal the death penalty in the United States—took to social media, urging the public to "tell Gov. Lee to respect the court's decision and call off her execution NOW."
"Gov. Lee's 615-741-2001 mailbox is full—contacting him through this form is the quickest way to reach his office," the legal group explained, sharing a link to the relevant page on the state government's website.
Lee had said Monday that "after deliberate consideration of Christa Gail Pike's request for clemency, and after a thorough review of the case, I am upholding the sentence of the state of Tennessee and do not plan to intervene."
Attorneys for Pike—Stephen Ferrell, Kelly Gleason, and Randy Spivey—responded that they were "deeply saddened and heartbroken by Gov. Lee's decision to deny clemency," emphasizing that "throughout her childhood, Christa was failed by people and institutions that should have shown her care and meaningful intervention."
"The 18-year-old girl suffering from severe mental illness and near-debilitating trauma no longer exists," the lawyers said. "Christa is a 50-year-old remorseful woman who understands her actions, receives proper treatment for her mental illness, and provides for and guides fellow incarcerated women."
"With this decision, the state of Tennessee is ignoring what both science and our legal system have decided: An 18-year-old brain is not an adult brain, and 18 is too young to face execution. This decision also leaves unanswered vital questions about Tennessee’s execution protocol," they added. "We will continue to support Christa through every remaining avenue and advocate for a system that is transparent for the people of Tennessee."
Among the organizations that have pressured Lee to block the execution is Amnesty International USA, whose deputy director of research, Justin Mazzola, recently said that "so much of Ms. Pike's experience reflects widespread and systemic failures that surface in death penalty cases."
"She endured profound abuse and trauma as a child and had serious mental disabilities that were never adequately addressed nor treated," he highlighted. "Due to inadequate legal representation, these issues were not fully presented to the jury. Knowing all that, it is unthinkable that Gov. Lee would even consider moving forward with this execution."
Mazzola—whose group opposes capital punishment under all circumstances—also stressed that "this issue is about more than one person. Amnesty International members are speaking out because the use of the death penalty remains a human rights failure. As its use continues to decline globally, the United States remains an outlier. It is well past time to abolish the death penalty once and for all, in Tennessee and beyond."
The US National Domestic Violence Hotline can be reached at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233), by texting "START" to 88788, or through chat at thehotline.org. RAINN's National Sexual Assault Hotline can be reached at 1-800-656-HOPE (4673) or by texting "HOPE" to 64673. Both offer 24/7, free, and confidential support. DomesticShelters.org has a list of global and national resources.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular