

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.

Non-profit civic engagement organization Mi Familia Vota, along with individual voters, filed suit today in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas in San Antonio seeking to block a new voter suppression law enacted by the Texas Legislature.
The lawsuit challenges Texas Senate Bill No. 1 (SB 1), a law designed to suppress votes from Texans of color and other marginalized communities through measures that include prohibiting drive-through voting, limiting voting hours, making it unlawful for counties to automatically mail eligible voters mail-in ballot applications; implementing stricter rules for voting by mail; allowing election officials to reject allegedly defective ballots without notice to the voter prior to the election; implementing monthly purges of voter rolls; limiting physical and language assistance at the polls; and enabling partisan poll watchers, which creates increased risk of voter intimidation.
The law was passed on the heels of the 2020 election, which saw enormous gains in the number of Black and Latino voters in Texas, in part driven by counties like Harris County, which took actions to make voting safe and accessible, including by offering drive-through and 24-hour voting options. "Texas's new voter suppression law, 2021 Texas Senate Bill No. 1, 87th Legislature ("SB 1"), is a calculated effort to disenfranchise voters," the complaint reads. "If allowed to stand, the bill will unconstitutionally burden qualified voters and inevitably prevent many voters from lawfully casting their ballots in future elections."
The plaintiffs argue that these changes to voting law in Texas create an undue burden on voters, especially those who are Black or Latino, in violation of the First, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. They cite a pattern of voter suppression legislation in Texas throughout the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries, and they demonstrate as false Texas officials' claim that the law is targeting "voter fraud."
"Latinos and other voters of color came out to vote in big numbers in 2020," said Angelica Razo, Texas State Director for Mi Familia Vota. "We saw places like Harris County come up with ways of making voting widely available and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our state should empower voters to find safe and accessible voting options. Instead, our legislators chose to suppress voters, make it harder for us to vote, and subject us to voter intimidation. Voting is a constitutional, protected right, and we are proud to continue to advocate for the voting rights of our community, so that all eligible voters are able to exercise their right to vote."
Democratic members of the Texas House of Representatives made national headlines in May when they walked out of the state capitol in response to the bill, denying Republicans the quorum needed for a vote. When the bill was reintroduced in a special session, most Democratic members of the House and a handful in the Texas Senate fled the state under threat of arrest to prevent a quorum once again. They made their way to Washington, D.C., where they met with Members of Congress to press for federal voting rights legislation. The state voter suppression bill eventually passed upon their return, during a second special session.
The defendants in this case are Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Texas Deputy Secretary of State Jose Esparza, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
The plaintiffs are represented by Free Speech For People, a nonpartisan legal advocacy nonprofit dedicated to defending our democracy; the law firm of Stoel Rives; and the law firm of Lyons & Lyons. Free Speech For People filed a federal lawsuit last month in Phoenix, on behalf of Mi Familia Vota, Arizona Coalition for Change, Living United for Change in Arizona, and Chispa Arizona, to block two new Arizona laws restricting voting rights.
"SB 1 creates unconstitutional burdens on the right of Texans to vote, in an effort to block voters--and specifically voters of color--from voting and having their votes counted," said Courtney Hostetler, Senior Counsel for Free Speech For People. "It shuts down reasonable practices that counties have implemented to increase voters' access to the polls. It makes voters and election officials vulnerable to intimidation. And it will force certain voters to jump through costly and time-consuming hoops to remain on the voter rolls. The law violates the First, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the US Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965."
"Access to the ballot and exercise of the right to vote are the bedrock of our democracy," said Stoel Rives Partner Wendy Olson. "Through SB 1, Texas seeks to continue its long history of discriminating against Latino and Black voters, and tries to roll back the historic turnout in the 2020 election. It's imperative that Texas is held accountable and is forced to protect ballot access."
"Mi Familia Vota has been working for over two decades to increase Latino voter participation," said Sean Lyons, Partner at Lyons & Lyons. "SB 1 aims to push back the progress they and others have made for Latinos and other voters of color. We are proud to be a part of the legal team representing Mi Familia Vota and individual voters in this important case to protect the right to vote."
Read the full complaint here.
Free Speech For People is a national non-partisan non-profit organization founded on the day of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC that works to defend our democracy and our Constitution.
Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's genocidal threats against Iran were not a bluff, telling reporters in the wake of a two-week ceasefire deal that US forces were fully prepared to unleash an illegal and devastating assault on Iranian infrastructure.
"Had Iran refused our terms, the next targets would have been their power plants, their bridges, and oil and energy infrastructure—targets they could not defend and could not realistically rebuild," Hegseth told reporters during a characteristically belligerent press briefing. "We were locked and loaded... President Trump had the power to cripple Iran's entire economy in minutes."
Hegseth: If Iran refused our terms, the next targets would have been their power plants, their bridges and oil and energy infrastructure—we were locked and loaded. They couldn't defend against it. President Trump chose mercy because Iran accepted the ceasefire under overwhelming… pic.twitter.com/QMklWNM8PH
— Acyn (@Acyn) April 8, 2026
Hegseth—who, like Trump, is facing articles of impeachment in the US House—went on to say that American forces aren't "going anywhere" and are "prepared to restart" the bombing of Iran "at a moment's notice," echoing the president and underscoring the fragility of the newly announced ceasefire.
"The United States military has the ability to strike [Iran] with impunity," the Pentagon secretary declared, asserting that the president's threats forced Iran to the negotiating table—a narrative that Iranian leaders rejected in their statement on the ceasefire deal.
"The enemy, in its cowardly, illegal, and criminal war against the Iranian nation, has suffered an undeniable, historical, and crushing defeat," Iran's Supreme National Security Council said in a statement. "We congratulate all the people of Iran on this victory and emphasize that until the details of this victory are finalized, there remains a need for the steadfastness and prudence of officials and the maintenance of unity and solidarity among the Iranian people."
The Trump administration's past and continued threats to attack Iran's infrastructure—even if they aren't ultimately carried out—are violations of international law, Yale Law School professor Oona Hathaway said Wednesday, pointing to the Geneva Conventions.
"Threats of use of force also violate the United Nations Charter," said Hathaway, a former special counsel at the Pentagon. "Moreover, the threat to commit mass war crimes raises questions as to whether the US is fighting the war consistent with its legal obligations. It gives insight into intent that may be relevant to war crimes investigations."
In a statement issued shortly before the two-week ceasefire was announced, a broad coalition of more than 200 organizations and experts reminded "those engaged in military operations of their obligation to refuse any patently unlawful orders."
"Anyone who orders, carries out, or is otherwise complicit in, President Trump’s abhorrent threats must be held accountable," the groups said.
“Wisconsin showed the entire nation that we believe that the people should be at the center of government and the priority of our judiciary, not the billionaires," said newly elected Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Chris Taylor.
Liberals on the Wisconsin Supreme Court strengthened their majority on Tuesday when Democratic-backed candidate Chris Taylor romped to victory over her conservative opponent by more than 20 percentage points.
With the win, liberals hold a 5-2 majority on what's been described as "one of the most important courts in America" and are guaranteed control through at least 2030.
As reported by the Associated Press, Taylor centered her campaign on protecting reproductive freedoms, which have come under threat across the country after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.
In her victory speech, Taylor also spoke out against billionaires using their vast wealth to buy influence in politics.
“Once again, Wisconsin showed the entire nation that we believe that the people should be at the center of government and the priority of our judiciary," said Taylor, "not the billionaires, not the most powerful and privileged, but the people."
In addition to protecting access to reproductive care, Taylor's win also gives liberals a bulwark to stand against any efforts by President Donald Trump and his allies to suppress voting in future elections.
As Bolts staffer writer Alex Burness explained in a post-election analysis, the Wisconsin Supreme Court "may soon be asked to weigh in on congressional redistricting... and could see any number of lawsuits during the coming midterms and 2028 presidential election, as it did in 2020."
Burness pointed to an interview Taylor gave to Bolts in February in which she emphasized her determination to protect voting rights, saying that "we cannot be fatigued when it comes to democracy... it's just something we have to keep working on."
Progressive research and communications organization A Better Wisconsin celebrated Taylor's win as "a major victory for democracy, reproductive freedom, and the constitutional rights of all Wisconsinites."
Melinda Brennan, executive director of ACLU Wisconsin, said Taylor's win showed "resounding support for protecting abortion access and defending voting rights in our state."
Ben Wikler, former chairman of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, said Taylor's victory was a tribute to Wisconsin progressives who have not stopped fighting after Trump's 2024 victory.
Wikler added that the result is further evidence that "the overall environment is toxic for anyone aligned with Trump."
"The government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they show up with a bucket," said Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez on Wednesday welcomed news of a two-week ceasefire in Iran as a step back from the brink of catastrophe, but said the war's aggressors—the US and Israel—deserved no praise for the temporary reprieve.
"Ceasefires are always good news. Especially if they lead to a just and lasting peace," Sánchez wrote on social media. "But this momentary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, the destruction, and the lives lost. The government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they show up with a bucket."
"What’s needed now: diplomacy, international legality, and PEACE," the prime minister added.
Drawing US President Donald Trump's ire, Spain's government has opposed the US-Israeli war on Iran from the start, calling it a "cruel, absurd, and illegal" assault and closing off Spain's military bases and airspace to American forces involved in the attack.
"Remaining silent in the face of an unjust war is an act of cowardice and complicity," Sánchez said last month.
Spain's foreign minister, José Manuel Albares, said Wednesday that the government supports "the crucial work of the mediators," including Pakistan, in preventing further escalation of the conflict that the US and Israel launched in late February.
"Diplomacy, negotiation, and international law are the only path to the lasting peace that the citizens of the Middle East deserve," said Albares. "All parties must show responsibility and commitment to ceasing attacks and de-escalating, which Spain will continue to support."
The foreign minister went on to stress that the ceasefire "must extend to Lebanon," which Israel has invaded and bombed relentlessly in recent weeks, displacing 20% of the country's population, devastating its healthcare system, and killing more than 1,500 people. On Wednesday, the Israeli's unleashed a massive bombing blitz of Beirut, the nation's capital and largest city.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said following Trump's announcement of the two-week ceasefire deal with Iran that the agreement "does not include Lebanon."
"Spain will not spare any efforts in supporting the Pakistani mediation efforts in the war in the Middle East and in paving the way for diplomacy," Albares said Wednesday. "Today is a day of hope that we hope will culminate in a definitive peace that must include Lebanon."