

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 none of the world's largest venture capitalist (VC) firms have adequate human rights due diligence policies in place, Amnesty International reveals today in a landmark
Almost none of the world's largest venture capitalist (VC) firms have adequate human rights due diligence policies in place, Amnesty International reveals today in a landmark report.
Venture capitalists play a decisive role in shaping the future of technology, and with it the future of our economies, politics, societies and our human rights. And yet there is woefully little effort by VC firms to ensure they are not investing in companies whose products and services may be causing or contributing to human rights abuses.
In the first comprehensive look at the human rights responsibilities of venture capitalists, Amnesty International surveyed all the firms on the Venture Capital Journal's list of the 50 largest VC firms, as well as three leading tech accelerators (Y Combinator, 500 Startups and TechStars). Amnesty International found that none of the ten largest firms - who together have raised more than $82 billion over the last five years - had adequate human rights due diligence policies in place. In fact, of the 50 VC firms and three tech accelerators surveyed by Amnesty International, we found that only a single firm (Atomico) had human rights due diligence processes in place that potentially met the standards set forth by the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
Failure to carry out adequate due diligence is a failure of the corporate responsibility to respect human rights. The vast majority of leading VC firms are failing in their responsibility to respect human rights under international standards on business and human rights, including the globally-endorsed UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
"Our research has revealed that the vast majority of the world's most influential venture capitalist firms operate with little to no consideration of the human rights impact of their decisions," said Michael Kleinman, Silicon Valley Director of Amnesty Tech. "The stakes could not be higher - these investment titans hold the purse strings for the technologies of tomorrow, and with it, the future shape of our societies."
Grading the world's largest VC firms
This report examines 50 of the world's largest VC firms as measured in total funding raised over the last five years - together, a total of $164 billion dollars - as well as three high profile startup accelerators. For this report, Amnesty International reviewed publicly available information on each VC firm's human rights due diligence processes. We also sent numerous letters to each firm, requesting additional information.
As mentioned above, none of the world's top ten largest VC firms have sufficient human rights due diligence policies in place. Eight of these firms (NEA, Tiger Global Management, Sequoia Capital, Lightspeed Venture Partners, Andreessen Horowitz, Accel, Index Venture Partners and General Catalyst) showed no evidence that they checked whether their investments could be linked to human rights abuses. Two of the firms (Insight Partners and Norwest Venture Partners) do conduct some level of human rights due diligence, although not to the standards set out in the UN Guiding Principles.
Amnesty International's research highlights the fact that VC firms fund companies whose products are sold to repressive governments and cause or contribute to human rights abuses. For instance, VC-backed technology companies provide spyware equipment to the Chinese government, which forms part of the dystopian surveillance infrastructure monitoring the Uighur population in Xinjiang.
VC firms also invest in companies whose business models undermine human rights. For instance, Amnesty International in our Surveillance Giants report explained how the surveillance-based business model of social media companies including Facebook and Google undermines our right to privacy. Yet venture capitalists continue to invest in companies like TikTok with similar surveillance-based business models. Companies relying on app-based or "gig workers", such as Lyft and Uber, also receive critical funding from venture capitalists, despite employees often facing exploitative and abusive work conditions.
Further, the lack of human rights due diligence by VC firms dramatically increases the risk that they fund companies developing new and "frontier" technologies that have a significant negative impact on human rights. For instance, the application of increasingly powerful artificial intelligence / machine learning (AI/ML) tools across a wide variety of sectors risks amplifying existing societal biases and discrimination.
"A lack of human rights due diligence means venture capitalists are turning a blind eye to whether their investments are contributing to human rights violations," said Kleinman.
"VC firms cannot act like they are above the law. Like all companies, they have a responsibility to carry out due diligence in order to identify, prevent and mitigate any adverse human rights impacts of their investments."
Lack of diversity
Investment teams that are predominantly white and male are less likely to fund startups led by women and Black, indigenous and other people of color. In turn, this lack of diversity means the new technologies that receive investment are less likely to consider their impact on women as well as minority and marginalized communities.
For instance, a recent survey in the US conducted by the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), Venture Forward and Deloitte, found that women comprise only 23% of venture capital investment professionals - those involved in deciding which startups to fund - while 65% of firms did not have a single female investment partner. This lack of representation has a direct impact on start-up investment - in 2018, all-female founding teams received just 2.2% of all US-based venture funding.
The numbers are even worse for racial diversity. According to the same NVCA, Venture Forward and Deloitte survey, only 3% of VC decision-making investment staff in the US are Black, and 4% Latinx. Black and Latinx founders also received less than 2.3% of VC funding. The problem is even more glaring from an intersectional perspective - Black and Latinx female founders receive less than 0.5% of all US-based venture capital funding in 2019.
The situation in the UK is comparable. According to Diversity VC, as of 2019, men comprised 80% of all investment roles at venture capital firms in the UK.
"This glaring lack of diversity means new frontier technologies are being largely funded and built by white men, without an understanding of the broader impact of their technologies. VC firms urgently need more women and minority groups in decision making roles and should publicly commit to hiring more diverse teams," said Kleinman.
"Venture capitalists ultimately get to decide which startups will grow to become the next Google or Facebook. If we want to ensure that tomorrow's leading tech companies and technologies support our human rights, we need to act today."
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) 807-8400"We will continue this fight in both immigration and federal courts for as long as it takes, not only for Leqaa but for the freedom of all people facing unjust retaliation for speaking out against genocide," said one lawyer.
Leqaa Kordia, along with her family and legal team, celebrated on Monday when the 33-year-old Palestinian was released from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement after over a year in detention—but they also pointed to the battles ahead as President Donald Trump's administration continues to crack down on immigrants and critics.
"We are elated and relieved that Leqaa can finally return home to her family in New Jersey after a long year in ICE detention," said Sarah Sherman-Stokes, supervising attorney with the Boston University School of Law Immigrants Rights Clinic, in a statement.
"This is an important step in restoring Leqaa's rights as she continues to be unlawfully targeted by the government for her advocacy for Palestinian rights," Sherman-Stokes said. "We will continue this fight in both immigration and federal courts for as long as it takes, not only for Leqaa but for the freedom of all people facing unjust retaliation for speaking out against genocide."
Kordia is one of several immigrant advocates of Palestinian rights targeted by the Trump administration. The New Jersey resident was arrested during an ICE check-in last March and swiftly transferred to Prairieland Detention Center in Texas.
An immigration judge ordered Kordia's release a third time last Friday, on the one-year mark of her detention, as various advocacy groups including Amnesty International USA and Defending Rights & Dissent renewed calls for her freedom.
"We are overwhelmed with relief and gratitude at the release of our beloved Leqaa Kordia," her cousin Hamzah Abushaban said Monday. "This past year has taken an unimaginable toll on Leqaa and our entire family. We are grateful to our community that stood beside us every step of the way, and for the countless prayers offered during this past Ramadan—those moments of sincerity and hope carried us through some of our darkest days."
"While today marks a powerful and emotional milestone, we recognize that this is only the beginning," Abushaban continued. "Leqaa's voice, her resilience, and her story will continue to echo as we push for justice in a system that too often relies on unjust tactics, separating families, and inflicting lasting harm, as they have done to ours for over a year. We remain committed to advocating for every person who has been unjustly detained. No family should have to endure what ours has experienced. Today, we celebrate Leqaa's return home. Tomorrow, we continue the fight for justice."
Amal Thabateh, staff attorney with Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility (CLEAR), one of the organizations representing Kordia, stressed that "Leqaa should not have spent a single moment in ICE detention, let alone an entire year."
"Leqaa, like others, was punished for speaking out in defense of Palestinians, including her own family," Thabateh said. "While it took too many months and too many bond hearings for Leqaa to be released, a just result is finally here. We will continue to defend Leqaa's and others' rights to speak out for Palestinian liberation."
According to her Kordia's legal team, she lost nearly 200 relatives in the US-backed Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip, which has continued to kill Palestinians in the territory despite an October ceasefire deal.
"It is an enormous relief that Leqaa is finally liberated from surviving one year of retaliatory and arbitrary immigration confinement for daring to speak her truth and protest against the genocide in Gaza," said Sadaf Hasan, staff attorney at Muslim Advocates. "It's outrageous that it took the government this long to comply with an immigration judge's repeated orders to release her."
While Kordia can now return to her family, the Trump administration may continue to target her. The Associated Press reported Monday that "an attorney for the Department of Homeland Security, Anastasia Norcross, said the government opposed the release of Kordia, regardless of the bond. She did not say at the time whether it would appeal for a third time."
Hasan said that Kordia walking free, at least for now, "is a long-overdue reminder that the government can't silence the movement for Palestinian liberation," but also is "about calling for an end to an immigration system that profits daily by subjecting tens of thousands of people to the abuses and indignities that Leqaa suffered."
As Trump has aimed to round up immigrants across various US cities, often by sending in hordes of masked federal agents, the number of people in ICE detention has climbed to nearly 70,000, as of last month. Despite the administration's claims that it is working to deport "the worst of the worst," data have repeatedly shown that most detainees lack criminal convictions.
Agents roaming streets in cities including Chicago and Minneapolis have also openly violated the rights of protesters and legal observers, even fatally shooting US citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti in the latter city earlier this year.
Travis Fife, staff attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project, said Monday that "Leqaa going home today is the bare minimum. We must continue to assert the fundamental First Amendment principle that the government cannot abuse power to punish people for using their voice."
One physician and public health expert called the ruling "a much-needed victory for a sane approach to federal vaccine policy that relies on science, not misinformation and conspiracy theories."
In what advocates called a major victory for public health, a federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from implementing a series of moves that critics have warned would weaken childhood immunization efforts and increase the likelihood of serious disease outbreaks.
US District Judge Brian E. Murphy of Massachusetts, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, invalidated Kennedy's reorganized Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) panel, which was set to meet later this week.
Kennedy—who was confirmed by the Senate last year over the objections of tens of thousands experts and despite being a purveyor of vaccine misinformation—replaced ACIP members with several people with ties to the anti-vaccine movement.
Murphy also blocked the committee's unprecedented changes to US immunization recommendations, writing that the "arbitrary and capricious" move stands in stark contrast with the long established decision-making process he called "a method scientific in nature and codified into law through procedural requirements."
“Unfortunately, the government has disregarded those methods and thereby undermined the integrity of its actions," the judge said.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under Kennedy revised the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) childhood immunization schedule so that fewer vaccines are now universally recommended for all children. The agency also reclassified vaccines that were previously endorsed for all children into categories in which vaccination depends on designated risk groups and consultations with medical professionals, among other changes.
Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia have announced that they would not follow the new CDC immunization recommendations.
Lookie Here! As of now, 29 states + DC, have announced that they are no longer going to follow CDC's recommendations for some or all childhood vaccines.Kennedy is not restoring public trust in science as he said he would. 🧪 www.kff.org/other-health...
[image or embed]
— Princess Vimentin PhD | Cancer Biologist (@princess-vimentin.bsky.social) March 12, 2026 at 11:47 AM
Plaintiffs' attorney Richard Huges IV said in a statement that "this ruling is a momentous step toward restoring science-based vaccine policymaking."
"The judge recognized that the actions of Secretary Kennedy and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices are not grounded in science and that they are destructive," he added. "We are thrilled that the court has discarded the baseless vaccine schedule changes made by Secretary Kennedy and is blocking the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices from doing further damage to vaccine policy."
Dr. Robert Steinbrook, Health Research Group director at Public Citizen, said in response to the ruling that "Judge Murphy’s decision is a much-needed victory for a sane approach to federal vaccine policy that relies on science, not misinformation and conspiracy theories."
"Kennedy’s hand-picked ACIP has been a national embarrassment, thoroughly lacking in the ability to make careful fact-based decisions," he added. "The judge’s ruling offers a responsible path forward for public health and evidence-based federal vaccine policy.”
RFK Jr. fired all of the legitimate scientific experts on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and replaced them with unqualified political appointees.A judge just ruled that the new members were not appropriately appointed, so ACIP cannot meet this week to spread more misinformation.
— Elizabeth Jacobs, PhD (@elizabethjacobs.bsky.social) March 16, 2026 at 1:38 PM
Anthony Wright, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, said in a statement: "When politics override science, our children pay the price. Today’s decision helps ensure that medical evidence—not ideology—guides how we protect kids from preventable diseases."
Wright continued:
Secretary Kennedy’s attempt to remove universal recommendations for routine vaccinations only increased confusion among medical providers and families. The routine vaccines being questioned by HHS are the product of centuries of rigorous science and medicine and are why children today don’t die from measles or suffer the lifelong consequences of diseases we long ago learned to prevent. For a country as large, diverse, and mobile as ours, universal vaccine recommendations are the safest and most effective way to stop outbreaks before they start.
Amid several recent outbreaks, public health officials warned late last year that the United States is close to following Canada in losing its measles elimination status, a deadly and preventable setback many experts attribute to HHS' vaccine-averse policies and practices under Kennedy.
"We commend the court for this ruling, but families should not have to depend on litigation to ensure their child can receive a routine vaccine," Wright said. "Evidence-based medicine keeps children alive and in school. Preventing disease should be the foundation of any healthcare system serious about confronting the next disease outbreak or finding the next cure."
The group Protect Our Care called the decision "a major step in the right direction for children’s health after many setbacks under this administration."
“Most Americans, most states, and now a federal court have rejected the [President Donald] Trump-RFK Jr. scheme to make preventable disease great again among American children while exploding health costs across the country," Protect Our Care president Brad Woodhouse said. "While this ruling is a reprieve from harmful anti-vaccine policy based on nothing but junk science and discredited conspiracies, it’s clear the Trump administration is determined to resuscitate their agenda in a higher court because they care more about their anti-science agenda than keeping kids healthy.”
Indeed, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said the agency "looks forward to this judge’s decision being overturned just like his other attempts to keep the Trump administration from governing.”
Public health advocates noted the limitations of judicial rulings.
"The courts can only do so much without Congress, which must fulfill its oversight responsibility and rein in an executive branch that is taking an axe to core public health protections," Wright said. "Transparency and scientific integrity are not optional, especially when children’s lives are at stake. Families deserve vaccine policy grounded in evidence and expert guidance—not ideology or personal bias—with the goal of making sure every child in America can grow up healthy.”
"While we're busy destroying the Gulf, our side project is implementing a total siege on the island of Cuba," said one progressive critic. "Unbelievably cruel."
Cuba faced an island-wide blackout on Monday amid an energy crisis resulting from President Donald Trump's decision to ramp up the United States' decadeslong and legally contested blockade of the Caribbean country by cutting off shipments of Venezuelan oil.
"A total disconnection" of the island's electrical system had occurred, but "the causes are being investigated, and protocols for restoration are beginning to be activated," the Cuban Ministry of Energy and Mines said on social media. It later added that "no faults" were reported in the units operating when the grid collapsed, and "the restoration process continues."
While Cuba has endured power outages in recent years that officials and experts have blamed on both the condition of the country's system and US sanctions, there have been multiple major blackouts in recent months, since Trump sent soldiers to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and seized control of Venezuela's nationalized oil industry.
"Officials in the US [government] must be feeling very happy by the harm caused to every Cuban family," Cuban Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossío told CNN of the latest outage. The network noted that it had reached out to the White House for comment.
Blasting the blackout as "a direct consequence of Trump's economic warfare," Manolo De Los Santos of The People's Forum in New York City said on social media Monday that "the US has deliberately cut off fuel, spare parts, and equipment, crippling an already fragile grid. It's a genocidal siege, designed to starve and break the Cuban people into submission."
Similarly highlighting how "decades of US sanctions have made it harder for Cuba to access the fuel, equipment, and financing needed to maintain its energy grid," New York state Sen. Jabari Brisport (D-25), a democratic socialist, declared that "it's time to end the blockade and pursue diplomacy."
The blackout on the island of nearly 11 million people came after Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel publicly confirmed on Friday that his government recently held "sensitive" talks with the Trump administration "to determine the willingness of both parties to take concrete actions for the benefit of the people of both countries."
Specifically, according to The Associated Press, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio—the son of Cuban immigrants and longtime supporter of regime change on the island—and top aides met with Raúl Guillermo Rodriguez Castro on the sidelines of a Caribbean Community leaders meeting in St. Kitts and Nevis last month.
During his Friday remarks to reporters, Díaz-Canel also emphasized the impacts of Cuba not receiving oil shipments for over three months, including disruptions to communications, education, healthcare, and transportation across the island.
While Trump was speaking with reporters on Monday, he called Cuba a "failed nation," and claimed that "Cuba also wants to make a deal, and I think we will pretty soon, either make a deal or do whatever we have to do." He also signaled that any such action would come after the illegal war his administration and Israel are waging on Iran.
Although Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) recently helped Senate Republicans block Sen. Tim Kaine's (D-Va.) war powers resolution intended to halt Trump's assault on Iran, Kaine has now partnered with Sens. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) for a similar measure on Cuba.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) took to social media on Monday to weigh in on the grid collapse: "Cuba has gone dark. Trump's vindictive oil embargo—along with a sanctions regime that has starved Cuba of opportunities to develop its solar and wind—is depriving innocent Cuban citizens of basic necessities and creating a humanitarian crisis. Trump must end the embargo."
Markey and two other Massachusetts Democrats, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Jim McGovern, had previously written to Trump in February to call for an end to the oil embargo, stressing that "Cuba poses no credible national security threat to the United States," and "the overt strategy of choking off oil imports to the island is inflicting severe hardship on the Cuban people, who rely on imported fuel for electricity, transportation, healthcare, and clean water."
"Taking action that sparks a humanitarian crisis as a means of leverage is not a strategy that results in long-term success or reflects who we are as Americans," they argued. "Policies that intensify fuel shortages, cripple essential services, and deepen economic desperation risk destabilizing not only Cuba, but the broader Caribbean region."