

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.

Today, a broad coalition of Texas abortion providers--led by Whole Woman's Health--along with abortion funds, doctors and other organizations, once again asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in a case challenging Texas' ban on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy (S.B. 8). In an attempt to expedite the case, plaintiffs are asking the Supreme Court to hear the defendants' motions to dismiss the case, which were denied by the district court and then appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, where they are currently pending. The plaintiffs have asked that the Supreme Court hear the appeal on an expedited basis, without waiting for a further ruling from the Fifth Circuit.
S.B. 8 has now been in effect for 23 days and has eliminated the vast majority of abortion access in the state. Plaintiffs previously asked the Supreme Court to block the law before it took effect on September 1, which the Court refused to do. Clinics in neighboring states have reported huge upticks in patients traveling from Texas since the law took effect. For instance, an Oklahoma clinic reported that two-thirds of the phone calls they receive are now from Texas patients.
Intervention by the Supreme Court is urgently needed because, despite the great harm the ban is causing, the Fifth Circuit has set a schedule that will not allow the appeal to be heard before December. In a separate lawsuit challenging S.B. 8 in state court--brought by Planned Parenthood providers--the Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel indefinitely stayed all proceedings in the trial court today.
In a separate federal lawsuit, the Department of Justice is suing Texas and requesting that the law be blocked. A preliminary injunction hearing in the DOJ's case has been set for October 1 in district court. In a press conference, Attorney General Merrick Garland said of the law: "This kind of scheme to nullify the Constitution of the United States is one that all Americans, whatever their politics or party, should fear."
Yesterday, a copycat bill was introduced in the Florida legislature, and lawmakers in many other states have voiced their intent to introduce similar bills. Tomorrow, the U.S. House of Representatives will vote on a federal bill that would protect against abortion bans like the one in Texas, as well as the Mississippi ban that the Supreme Court will hear later this year. That bill--the Women's Health Protection Act--is a response to the hundreds of state laws passed in recent years designed to block access to abortion care.
S.B. 8 bans abortion after six weeks into a pregnancy--before many people even know they're pregnant--and creates a bounty-hunting scheme that encourages the general public to bring costly and harassing lawsuits against anyone who they believe has violated the ban. Anyone who successfully sues a health center worker, an abortion provider, or any person who helps someone access an abortion after six weeks in Texas will be rewarded with at least $10,000, to be paid by the person sued. Lawsuits may be filed against a broad range of people, including: a physician who provides an abortion; a person who drives their friend to obtain an abortion; abortion funds providing financial assistance to patients; health center staff; and even a member of the clergy who assists an abortion patient.
Plaintiffs in this case are represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Lawyering Project, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Texas, and Morrison & Foerster LLP. The defendants include every state court trial judge and county clerk in Texas, the Texas Medical Board, the Texas Board of Nursing, the Texas Board of Pharmacy, the attorney general, and the Director of Right to Life East Texas, who has already openly called for people to sue their local abortion providers under S.B. 8.
Timeline of the case:
* May 19: TX Gov. Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 8 into law.
* July 13: Plaintiffs filed the case in federal district court.
* August 4-5: The defendants filed four motions to dismiss, asking the district court to end the case.
* August 12: The federal district court judge scheduled a preliminary injunction hearing for August 30 to determine whether to block the law before it would take effect on September 1.
* August 25: The federal district court judge denied the defendants' motions to dismiss the case. Defendants immediately filed a notice of appeal with the Fifth Circuit, as well as a motion to stop all proceedings in the district court, including canceling the district court's preliminary injunction hearing.
* August 27: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order stopping all proceedings in the district court, including canceling the district court's preliminary injunction hearing. The court also denied the plaintiffs' request to expedite the appeal of defendants' motions to dismiss.
* August 29: The plaintiffs filed for emergency relief with the Fifth Circuit, which was quickly denied.
* August 30: The plaintiffs filed an emergency request with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to block the law before it could take effect on September 1 or allow district court proceedings to resume.
* September 1: S.B. 8 took effect after the Supreme Court did not respond to plaintiffs' request before the law's effective date.
* September 2: The U.S. Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs' emergency request to block the law and allowed Texas's six-week abortion ban to remain in effect. The case returned to the Fifth Circuit for briefing on defendants' appeal of the district court's denial of their motions to dismiss.
* September 10: The Fifth Circuit issued an order explaining its refusal to block the law, and expedited the defendants' appeals to "the next available oral argument panel."
* September 22: the Fifth Circuit issued a briefing schedule that will not allow the case to be heard until at least December.
* September 23 (Today): Plaintiffs filed a petition for writ of certiorari before judgment with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to hear defendants' appeal on an expedited basis. If granted, the case will bypass further proceedings in the Fifth Circuit.
You can read the full petition for writ of certiorari before judgment here.
Quotes from plaintiffs and litigators:
Amy Hagstrom Miller, president and CEO of Whole Woman's Health and Whole Woman's Health Alliance:
"For 23 days, we've been forced to deny essential abortion care for the vast majority of patients who come to us. Most of those we've turned away told us they would not be able to make it out of Texas for care. I don't know what happened to these patients after they left our clinics, but I can't stop thinking about them. Forcing our staff to tell patients 'no' day after day is cruel. This chaos must come to an end, and that is why we are going back to the Supreme Court today."
Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:
"We're asking the Supreme Court for this expedited appeal because the Fifth Circuit has done nothing to change the dire circumstances on the ground in Texas. We need this case to move as quickly as possible. Right now, patients are being forced to travel hundreds of miles in the middle of a pandemic to find abortion care. But many people can't afford to do that. We're doing everything we can to block this ban and restore abortion access in Texas."
Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO, Planned Parenthood Federation of America:
"Planned Parenthood call centers have become crisis hotlines and health center staff have become crisis counselors. For three weeks, Texans have been without access to basic health care that is their constitutional right -- forced to travel out of state to get care or carry pregnancies against their will. With this request today, Planned Parenthood, along with our partners, is urging the Supreme Court to move our legal challenge along. Our patients in Texas can't wait. We'll never stop fighting for our patients and will leave no stone unturned in our effort to restore abortion access in Texas."
Julia Kaye, staff attorney, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project:
"For half a century, the Supreme Court has upheld the fundamental right to end a pregnancy. But for the past three weeks, five justices have shrugged their shoulders while Texas politicians do an end-run around the Constitution and impose devastating harm on countless Texans, especially people of color. Already, politicians in other states are lining up to propose copycat bills that insult the Constitution, turn neighbor against neighbor, and force people to suffer the serious risks and pains of pregnancy against their will. It is past time for the Supreme Court to step in and right this grave injustice."
The Center for Reproductive Rights is a global human rights organization of lawyers and advocates who ensure reproductive rights are protected in law as fundamental human rights for the dignity, equality, health, and well-being of every person.
(917) 637-3600"Restarting his reckless war with Iran won't make America stronger," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "It will cost more lives and waste more taxpayer dollars."
Key progressives in Congress took aim at President Donald Trump on Wednesday amid his second straight night of attacks on Iran.
US Central Command (CENTCOM) first said Tuesday that its forces had "begun launching a series of powerful strikes against Iran," in response to attacks on commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Then, Trump said Wednesday that the ceasefire established under the memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed last month was "over" and "I don't want to deal with" the Iranians.
As oil prices soared, CENTCOM announced later Wednesday that "at the direction of the commander in chief, US Central Command forces have started conducting additional strikes against Iran to further degrade their ability to threaten freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. The United States is holding Iran accountable for recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping and civilian crews freely navigating a vital international waterway."
Minutes later, progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) declared: "After getting the United States into a war based on lies, Trump has now declared the ceasefire with Iran 'over' after less than a month. Restarting his reckless war with Iran won't make America stronger. It will cost more lives and waste more taxpayer dollars. END THIS WAR."
Meanwhile, Trump shared a series of videos of the bombings across Iran on his Truth Social platform Wednesday evening.
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) said in a statement that "the Trump administration is steering the United States back toward an illegal and disastrous war with Iran. Rather than implementing the agreement it negotiated, it has chosen escalation over diplomacy."
"A return to war is illegal," NIAC emphasized. "Congress passed a war powers resolution directing the president to terminate hostilities, and a majority of Americans oppose another war with Iran. If President Trump wants to return to war, he must seek congressional authorization. If he refuses, Congress must enforce the law."
The US House of Representatives voted 215-208 in favor of a war powers resolution aimed at ending Trump's illegal war of choice on Iran early last month. After a few weeks, the Senate also passed it, with a 50-48 vote—but just a day later, under pressure from the president, Republican Sens. Bill Cassidy (La.) and Rand Paul (Ky.) helped the GOP block a subsequent measure.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), sponsor of the blocked resolution, said at the time that "after both Republican-majority Houses took the historic step of voting that additional war against Iran is illegal without congressional authorization, President Trump came to the Capitol and tried to browbeat Republican senators for upholding their oaths of office."
"To appease his temper tantrum, Republicans agreed to defeat a superfluous motion to proceed to a separate War Powers Resolution currently pending before the Senate," he continued. "The vote is of no consequence and does not undo the expressed position of Congress that further war against Iran is illegal unless Congress votes for it."
Kaine also spoke out Wednesday morning, saying: "Congress voted against more war with Iran. The U.S. should not be launching new strikes without congressional authorization and restarting a war that has raised gas prices, killed Americans, and hurt the economy. The U.S. and Iran must return to a ceasefire."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) weighed in Wednesday afternoon: "Donald Trump's war with Iran has cost American lives, and jacked up prices on gas and groceries for millions across the globe. Congress voted against this war. Congress shouldn't allow Donald Trump to continue it."
Key House members have also spoken out since the strikes resumed Tuesday. Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) said that "Trump is extending his disastrous, illegal war with Iran. Congress and the American people have demanded the war end. Instead, Trump is choosing higher gas prices, more lives lost, and more instability. Outrageous."
Noting the new attacks and Trump's ceasefire comment, CPC Chair Emerita Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) similarly stressed that "this is another escalation in a war that the American people do not want. The House and Senate passed bipartisan war powers resolutions for this exact reason. This war must end NOW."
Oil price jumps should "start being passed along tomorrow and in the days ahead" in the form of higher gasoline prices, said one industry analyst.
President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran is sending oil prices surging—again.
While attending the 36th NATO Summit of Heads of State and Government in Türikye on Wednesday, Trump said that the ceasefire agreement he struck last month with Iran is "over," while adding, "I don’t want to deal with them," in reference to the Iranians.
Shortly after the president's remarks, Brent and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil prices each jumped by more than 4% during Wednesday trading, marking the end of a steady decline in prices that occurred in the weeks since the ceasefire deal was first announced.
Later in the day, Trump went on a lengthy rant about Democrats criticizing his failed campaign promise to bring down the price of groceries starting on his very first day in office, and he falsely claimed that the price of oil "is coming down very big."
At this point, a reporter interjected and said that oil prices on Wednesday were surging upward.
"If we hit Iran, oil goes up a little bit," Trump replied. "That's all right."
Trump on Inflation: And now inflation is way down. Everything is great. The prices are coming down. They made up a phony word: affordability. Oil is coming down very big.
Reporter: Brent crude is up today.
Trump: Every time we hit Iran, oil goes up a little bit. That's all… pic.twitter.com/ZvG0a5RYZh
— Acyn (@Acyn) July 8, 2026
Although the price of gasoline has been following the price of oil downward, any increase in petroleum prices will almost certainly send it back upward.
In a social media post, petroleum industry analyst Patrick De Haan said the renewed fighting between the US and Iran, combined with Russia banning exports of diesel fuel, would likely cause more pain at the gas pump in the near future.
"With news of Russia suspending diesel exports, markets have accelerated their climb," De Haan explained. "In addition, the current national average for diesel of $4.75 per gallon could head back to $5 per gallon in the next week or two, while the national average gas price heads to $4 per gallon."
De Haan added that spot gasoline prices on Wednesday were up by between $0.14 and $0.20, projecting that "today's jumps could start being passed along tomorrow and in the days ahead."
"Is this the future you want to see? Where AI executives pretend like they have the answers, that they are doing good, and you're giving them a stage?"
A protester was violently removed from the United Nations AI for Good Global Summit in Geneva on Wednesday after Palestine defenders disrupted a presentation by a senior Amazon executive to denounce Big Tech's complicity in Israel's genocidal war on Gaza.
Pro-Palestine activists linked to the global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement are protesting the UN International Telecommunications Union (ITU) conference over its partnerships with tech titans, especially Amazon and Google. In 2021, the pair signed a $1.2 billion contract for Project Nimbus, which provides cloud services to the Israeli government and military.
Under the deal, Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud provide the Israel Defense Forces and Israeli government agencies with cloud infrastructure, artificial intelligence tools, and data storage. The contract prohibits Google or Amazon from refusing service to Israeli government, military, or intelligence agencies.
Project Nimbus sparked the #NoTechForApartheid campaign, in which disaffected tech workers and dozens of advocacy groups rose up against Big Tech’s complicity in Israeli human rights crimes in Palestine, including the Gaza genocide; apartheid; and illegal occupation, settler colonization, and ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.
On Wednesday, activists interrupted a summit speech by Amazon vice president and chief technology officer (CTO) Werner Vogels, with protesters taking the stage—two of them holding a large sign reading "No Tech for Apartheid"—as others in the audience chanted "Drop Project Nimbus!"
"You are making Project Nimbus, a project of billions of dollars that Amazon is investing so that Israel has free access to your servers," the man who upstaged Vogels said as the Amazon CTO stood by with his hands on his hips. "You are investing billions in that. Your technology, Project Nimbus, develops Lavender, develops the software Where's Daddy, that actively tracks, using AI, people in Palestine, and when they come back, they kill them together with their families."
"And you know this... and you're making millions out of this," the protester continued. "You're sitting here as if you're trying to do good, as if you're trying to be for the good of AI. What do you have to say for yourself? How do you sleep at night?"
"Maybe that's why you're looking so panicked. Maybe that's why you cannot even stand on this stage anymore and look at these people, because you know exactly what your technology is being used for," the activist said after Vogels stepped off the stage.
"They know exactly where their profits are coming from, and they continue anyway," the protester added, drawing loud cheers.
As the activists holding the sign were removed from the stage, the man speaking gestured to Vogels and others and said: "You should be stopping them! You should be stopping those criminals right here! Why are you facilitating genocide? Why are you continuing to be complicit in the deaths of innocent people three years on?"
Security personnel then removed the man from the stage as he said: "No violence. No violence."
"Why are you putting me in a chokehold?" he asked as he was violently ejected. "Is this the future you want to see?... Where AI executives pretend like they have the answers, like they are doing good, and you're giving them a stage? Shame on you, Amazon! Drop Project Nimbus!"
Activists with the BDS movement and other groups also protested at last year's AI for Good summit, which came on the heels of a report by UN independent Palestine expert Francesca Albanese detailing corporate complicity and direct participation in Israeli crimes against Palestinians and specifically naming dozens of companies, including Amazon and Google parent company Alphabet.
More than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded, including thousands of people who are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath the rubble of the flattened Gaza Strip, since Israel launched its US-backed war on October 7, 2023, when Hamas led the deadliest attack on Israel in the country's 78-year history. Around 2 million Palestinians have been forcibly displaced, while Israel's "complete siege" of Gaza fueled famine and disease.
Israel is facing a genocide case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice in The Hague. The International Criminal Court, also located in the Dutch city, has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza.
The Geneva summit follows the creation earlier this month of the ITU's AI for Good Global Commission, which is co-chaired by Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff and Rwandan President Paul Kagame, whose repressive 32-year rule has been criticized for persistent human rights abuses. Both Amazon and Google are represented on the commission.
The summit also comes amid growing worldwide opposition to the unchecked development of AI technology, which experts warn will lead to job losses on an unprecedented scale, widening economic inequality, environmental and climate harms, social isolation, increased government surveillance, "killer robots," and, in the long term, possibly even human extinction.