

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.

ACLU: aeverett@aclu.org ACLU of Florida: media@aclufl.org
Center for Reproductive Rights: center.press@reprorights.org
A Florida state trial court indicated today that it will dismiss a challenge to an abortion restriction that will force patients to delay obtaining this time-sensitive care for at least 24 hours after meeting with a physician. The mandatory delay requirement forces patients to make an additional trip to a clinic to receive care. Since its enactment in 2015, the medically unnecessary restriction has largely been blocked, first by a trial court ruling granting a temporary injunction on the law shortly after enactment and then by a 2017 state supreme court ruling reinstating that injunction after an appellate court briefly allowed it to take effect.
Since the passage of this law, Florida politicians have continued to place hurdles in the path of people seeking abortion care as part of a larger effort to push care out of reach. The state legislature took its most extreme step yet in attacking reproductive freedom earlier this month when politicians passed a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to sign any day.
Florida's mandatory delay law singles out abortion and does not apply to other medical procedures, even those that involve far greater health risks. Florida's law requires patients to make an additional trip to a clinic, which will force many people to miss work, lose wages, and spend more on transportation and child care. Those without the means to do so could be prevented from getting care entirely. Delaying access to abortion is medically unnecessary and is another tactic designed to take away people's ability to get care when they've decided to have an abortion. Laws that require people to delay care push people to have abortions in later pregnancy, which increases both the cost and the risks of the procedure. In fact, when a similar 24-hour delay law took effect in Mississippi, abortions later in pregnancy increased by 53 percent.
The case, Gainesville Woman Care v. Florida, was brought on behalf of Gainesville Woman Care LLC and Medical Students for Choice by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Florida, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, and Tallahassee attorney Richard Johnson.
In response to the court's decision, the ACLU, ACLU of Florida, and Center for Reproductive Rights released the following statements:
Julia Kaye, staff attorney, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project:
"This law is an insult to Floridians and their ability to make their own medical decisions. When someone has determined that having an abortion is the best decision for them and their family, politicians should not be in the business of putting unnecessary obstacles in their path, but that is exactly what this law does. And this harmful restriction is just one in a string of laws that Florida politicians have passed to turn back the clock and take away people's rights to make their own decisions about pregnancy and about the course of their lives. We will continue fighting laws designed to push abortion out of reach in Florida and across this country until every person can get the care they need, regardless of their zip code."
Daniel Tilley, legal director, ACLU of Florida:
"This law imposes a significant hardship on Floridians that is medically unnecessary, arbitrary, and dangerous. For years, the Courts have agreed that imposing an additional barrier that would delay an individual's ability to receive the abortion care they need was in direct violation of Floridians' right to privacy. A person's private medical decisions should be made in consultation with a doctor they trust, not politicians, and no one should ever be made to delay the care they need. Abortion care should be safe and accessible. Politicians have no right to interfere with Floridians' private medical decisions."
Marc Hearron, Senior Counsel, Center for Reproductive Rights:
"This demeaning, intrusive law forcibly delays a person's access to essential healthcare despite potentially dangerous risks to their health. Politicians should not be dictating a person's own medical decision of whether and when to end a pregnancy. Abortion access in Florida is in real peril, and this restriction is just another way to push abortion care out of reach and infringe on the rights of Floridians. We will continue to fight to ensure that Floridians can get the care they need without political interference."
More about this case can be found: https://www.aclu.org/cases/gainesville-woman-care-llc-v-state-florida
This release can be found online here: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/florida-state-court-indicates-it-will-uphold-abortion-restriction-forces-patients
The mission of the ACLU of Florida is to protect, defend, strengthen, and promote the constitutional rights and liberties of all people in Florida. We envision a fair and just Florida, where all people are free, equal under the law, and live with dignity.
"Imagine if we had just built on the JCPOA and created a stable Middle East through cooperation instead of these endless wars," said one observer.
Calls to halt the Iran War and avert yet another US bombing campaign in Yemen intensified Friday after President Donald Trump reportedly declined a request from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to launch airstrikes against Houthi forces amid their stunning advance toward a vital global shipping lane.
According to Axios' Barak Ravid, Mohammed bin Salman, who is also the Saudi prime minister, made two urgent calls to Trump on Thursday as Houthi forces captured the strategic Yemeni port city of Mocha and advanced toward the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, one of the world's most important maritime chokepoints. MBS reportedly pressed Trump to intervene militarily, but the president declined to order US attacks at this time.
"With Iran already disrupting traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, Houthi control of Bab el-Mandeb could give Tehran a powerful new point of leverage over the US and its Gulf allies," Ravid wrote.
However, he added that "US officials stressed the administration has no plans to intervene directly against the Houthis for now."
Understanding that Trump's apparent refusal of MBS' request could be temporary, opponents of a wider Middle East war are urging the US leader to refrain from any further strikes on Houthi targets.
Instead of attacking Yemen, Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and a former foreign policy adviser to US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said on social media that a "better idea" would be to "end the war on Iran and remove US forces from the Middle East."
California-based Israeli academic Shaiel Ben-Ephraim said on social media that "Trump wisely decided not to get involved in the Yemeni civil war. Stop expanding all these wars."
"Imagine if we had just built on the JCPOA and created a stable Middle East through cooperation instead of these endless wars in Syria, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, and Gaza," he mused, referring to the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the Iran nuclear deal unilaterally abandoned by Trump during his first term, despite Tehran's full compliance with its terms.
Drop Site News national security and foreign affairs reporter Murtaza Hussain called on the Gulf Arab states—which have borne the brunt of Iranian counterattacks—to circumvent the United States and negotiate an agreement with Tehran.
The Houthi victories give the group—officially called Ansar Allah—a commanding position near the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. The narrow waterway links the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden and carries an estimated 12% of global goods, including approximately 4-5% of the world's total seaborne-traded oil and petroleum products.
Saudi Arabia launched Friday airstrikes on Mocha's airport, while the Houthis attacked targets including Saudi pipeline infrastructure used to circumvent the Strait of Hormuz. The Houthis said that maritime traffic would be safe except for Saudi vessels.
Oil prices surged more than 6% on Thursday, with both major benchmarks trading at over $100 a barrel amid the Houthi advances and continued instability stemming from Iran's effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz despite over six months of unsuccessful efforts by the US military and Trump administration to reopen the vital waterway, through which around one-fifth of the world's oil previously transited.
The average US price of a gallon of gasoline reached nearly $4.30 on Friday, a 37% increase from when Trump—who promised both no new wars and $2 gas—entered office in January 2025.
US forces have carried out airstrikes and ground raids on al-Qaeda and other militants in Yemen for decades. According to the UK-based casualty monitor Airwars, an estimated 445-643 Yemeni civilians have been killed by US forces since 2009.
Starting under then-President Barack Obama in 2014, the US provided arms and support to the Saudi-led coalition during Yemen's civil war. International experts attribute more than 150,000 Yemeni deaths to a US-backed, Saudi-led bombing campaign and blockade, which has fueled mass starvation and disease in the country of approximately 43 million people.
A report published Thursday documented more than 500 Yemeni civilian casualties caused by US attacks between December 2023 and May 2025. All but seven of 46 strikes covered by the report occurred during Trump's presidency, including massacres at the Ras Isa oil port and at a detention center for African migrants in Saada.
During Israel's war on Gaza, the US, Israel, and the United Kingdom carried out repeated airstrikes in response to Houthi attacks on commercial and military vessels in the Red Sea that the group said were intended to pressure Israel as it killed tens of thousands of Palestinians.
Responding to the latest developments, UK political commentator Bushra Shaikh said that "America went to war for Israel, seeking to dominate the Middle East."
"Now Trump is negotiating with Iran, Saudi Arabia is looking towards regional diplomacy, Pakistan says the Mecca Pact won't be used against Yemen, and the Ansar Allah Houthis retain leverage over Bab el-Mandeb," she continued.
Shaikh added: "The ultimate humiliation? America will come out of this war having failed to defeat Iran while pushing the very region it wanted to control towards strategic independence from Washington."
"It is well past time that the United States joins the rest of the industrialized world and treats healthcare as a right, not a privilege, by improving traditional Medicare and expanding it to everyone."
News that top Medicare Advantage insurers are moving to cut benefits and drop some plans entirely in a bid to boost their profitability came as no surprise to critics of the for-profit US health insurance system, which enriches giant companies and their executives while leaving tens of millions of people in the lurch.
In recent public remarks, executives at Humana and UnitedHealthcare—two of the largest Medicare Advantage insurers in the US—have indicated that the companies plan to exit certain geographic markets and implement other changes deemed necessary to drive "margin expansion," corporate-speak for profits. The changes by the two companies are expected to impact more than a million seniors who receive coverage through the insurers' Medicare Advantage plans, which are privately run but funded by taxpayer dollars.
Wendell Potter, president of the Center for Health and Democracy and a former Cigna executive, told Common Dreams that companies like Humana and UnitedHealthcare "have long made clear they answer to their shareholders, not those they insure."
"These companies are not really in the healthcare business, they are in the business of making money for their shareholders and their executives," said Potter, who now advocates for a Medicare for All system. "They will cut any corner, deny any care, and cut any patient if it helps increase their bottom line."
UnitedHealth Group, UnitedHealthcare's parent company, reported $5.5 billion in profit during the second quarter of 2026, up from $3.4 billion the same time last year. Humana reported $694 million in second-quarter profits.
Recent research led by Mark Meiselbach, a healthcare economist at Johns Hopkins University estimates that "approximately one in 10 beneficiaries in HMO or PPO Medicare Advantage plans will be forced to disenroll from their current plan due to their plan exiting the market" this year. That amounts to around 3 million seniors who will be forced to find a different plan or switch to traditional Medicare during the open enrollment period, which begins next month.
Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works and author of The Road to Medicare for All: A Call to Action, told Common Dreams that "misleadingly-named Medicare 'Advantage,' together with all private health insurance, is why our nation’s healthcare system is so dysfunctional."
"It mixes healthcare with the motive to make a profit, resulting in the most expensive system in the industrialized world with the worst health outcomes," said Altman. "The recent announcements by UnitedHealthcare and Humana that they plan to exit markets and cut benefits is just one symptom of the dysfunction."
"It is well past time that the United States joins the rest of the industrialized world and treats healthcare as a right, not a privilege, by improving traditional Medicare and expanding it to everyone," said Altman.
A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis published in July found that federal spending per Medicare Advantage enrollee "is projected to be 7% higher, on average," than spending on traditional Medicare over the next 10 years.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget noted that the CBO's analysis "suggests the federal government will spend about $1 trillion on MA overpayments over the next decade." Medicare Advantage plans are notorious for making patients appear sicker than they actually are, reaping larger federal payments.
President Donald Trump pledged during remarks earlier this week to the Republican midterm convention that his administration would "end all payments to big health insurance companies."
But Potter noted that Trump's administration is set to shell out over $13 billion in payments to Medicare Advantage plans this year along.
"If Trump were serious about lowering healthcare costs," Potter told Common Dreams, "he'd break up the monopolies and the for-profit healthcare system."
"Diesel touches almost everything Americans buy," said one expert.
The price of diesel fuel hit another record high on Friday, thanks in large part to President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran.
New data released by the American Automobile Association showed the average price of diesel in the US increasing to $6.06, a 14% increase over the average price one month ago and a 64% increase from the average price one year ago.
In a Friday social media post, petroleum industry analyst Patrick De Haan reported that the price of diesel "is not slowing down," hitting an average of $6.07 as of 10:34 am ET.
De Haan also projected that Americans will collectively spend $711 million more on gasoline and diesel on Friday than they did a year ago, and warned "this number will continue to grow and could soon be $1 billion per day."
Rising diesel prices often portend higher inflation because it is the fuel used by trucks to ship goods across the country.
In an interview with The Associated Press published Friday, David Ortega, professor of food economics and policy at Michigan State University, warned that US consumers are likely in for another painful round of cost increases if the price of diesel stays at record highs.
“Early on, much of the cost increase gets absorbed along the supply chain through existing freight contracts and retailer margins,” said Ortega. “But as contracts reprice and fuel surcharges take hold, more of that cost makes its way to the grocery store.”
Ortega's analysis was echoed by Mark Tepper, CEO of Strategic Wealth Partners, who wrote in a social media post that "inflation could be about to get a lot more painful" if the price of diesel doesn't come down soon.
"Diesel touches almost everything Americans buy," Tepper explained. "Coming out of the pandemic, rising diesel prices were a leading indicator for the inflation that followed."
Diane Swonk, chief economist at audit services firm KPMG, said rising diesel costs, combined with the latest Consumer Price Index report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showing continued elevated inflation, made it likely that the US Federal Reserve will hike interest rates.
"The Fed will begin hiking in September, removing what it gave us in rate cuts in late 2025," Swonk predicted. "We now expect three rate hikes by early 2026. The probability that the vote will be unanimous just rose."
The record diesel prices, and their subsequent impact on inflation, come less than two months before the midterm elections.
The social media account for Democrats in the US House of Representatives pounced on news of higher diesel prices, which they said would mean "higher delivery prices, more expensive groceries, and surging electric bills."
"Trump's war with Iran did this," the House Democrats added.
Alex Jacquez, senior vice president of policy, advocacy, and research at Groundwork Collaborative, also took a shot at the president's policies, noting that in recent weeks he has "imposed further tariffs on one of our closest trading partners and continues escalation in Iran."
"Trump promised to lower costs and improve daily life for Americans," Jacquez added. "He’s not only failed to deliver on that promise, he’s driven our economy over a cliff."
Willamette University historian Seth Cotlar argued that the spike in diesel fuel could have significant impact on the US Senate race in Maine, where Republican incumbent Sen. Susan Collins is vying for a sixth term in office.
"Home heating oil season is about to start up," Cotlar observed. "In Maine, about 50% of homes use heating oil which is almost identical to diesel. How’s that GOP affordability agenda coming Senator Collins?"
During the same speech, Cruz tied Democrats' rhetoric to the 9/11 attacks, the murder of Charlie Kirk, and assassination attempts against Trump.
While speaking at a midterm convention for Republicans on Thursday night, Sen. Ted Cruz blamed left-wing rhetoric for fomenting violence. But the Texas senator did not react when an attendee in the crowd shouted loudly that three different Democratic politicians "should be shot."
During the speech in Dallas, which took place on the one-year anniversary of the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, and a day before the 25th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, Cruz said that "the hate that killed Charlie Kirk, that knocked down the Twin Towers, that led to two assassination attempts on President [Donald] Trump... just keeps getting worse and worse," and claimed that it had overtaken the Democratic Party.
Cruz said the party was being swept over by "a new and dangerous red-green alliance: communists and Islamists," and singled out specific figures.
Joining persistent attacks from fellow Republicans against New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani's Muslim faith, Cruz lamented, "On 9/11, could anyone have imagined that Comrade Mamdani would be the mayor of New York?"
Cruz then referenced a comment Mamdani, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, made during a 2021 meeting of the organization's youth wing in which he said workers "seizing the means of production" was an "end goal." Though Mamdani has not used similar rhetoric since beginning his campaign for mayor, Cruz seized upon the old comments nonetheless.
"When Mamdani says he wants to ‘seize the means of production,’ he means it," Cruz said.
It was then that a shout rang out from the crowd: "He should be shot!"
Cruz did not react, moving on to discuss Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic US Senate nominee for Michigan, who is a former public health official for Detroit.
"When Abdul El-Sayed says he has an obligation to Sharia law, he means it," Cruz continued, twisting a comment El-Sayed made to The New York Times in 2009, when he was a 24-year-old medical student, referring to his personal decision to use a Sharia-compliant mortgage because Islam prohibits interest.
On the 2026 campaign trail, El-Sayed has clarified he has no desire "to push Sharia law on anyone else… because we live in an America where you should have the freedom of your religion.”
Again, the audience member shouted, "He should be shot!"
Cruz then turned to Texas state Rep. James Talarico (D-50), the Democratic nominee for US Senate, whom he said also "means it," when he "says he wants to dismantle capitalism."
He was referring to comments that Talarico made at a Sierra Club candidate forum in 2020 when he spoke of "climate change, white supremacy, and capitalism" as "oppressive systems" that "work together." Talarico has since said the comments "missed the mark."
Once again, the rallygoer shouted, "He should be shot!" Cruz did not react.
A spokesperson for Cruz declined to say whether the senator heard the violent shouts when asked about it by The Washington Post. The Post noted that while it was unclear if Cruz heard the remarks, several other speakers during the convention responded when hecklers interrupted them, and Trump reacted to shouts from the crowd repeatedly.
Cruz's social media account has posted a clip of the speech in which the shouts of "he should be shot" are audible, which remains online.
El-Sayed told CNN's Kaitlan Collins on Thursday night that the call for violence frightened him.
“Look, I’m a dad with two daughters, and I hope those daughters get to grow up and live with their dad,” the 41-year-old candidate said. “This is what has become the norm in our politics. I mean, literally calls to violence and the inability for anybody to actually call it out.”
“Democracy is supposed to be the process by which we solve our problems peacefully,” he continued. “We can learn to disagree agreeably, and when you hear that kind of call to violence, it should be shuddering to all of us. We have a responsibility to lower the temperature, to realize that this is not a bloodsport, where you’re just trying to bash the other guy.”
Mamdani and Talarico have not publicly responded to the calls for violence at the time of publication. However, other Democrats have called them out and criticized Cruz's silence.
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) wrote in a social media post that Cruz "had the opportunity to end the calls for violence, instead he riled people up."
She added that Cruz "owes Mamdani, El-Sayed, Talarico, and the communities they are fighting to represent an apology."
House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) wrote that "every single Republican should denounce this dangerous rhetoric immediately—starting with Ted Cruz."
At the time of publication, Cruz had not made a public statement on the incident. Multiple outlets reported that his office has not responded to requests for comment.
Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-Mich.) described Cruz's lack of a response to the violent shouts as "a shameful profile in cowardice."
"Political violence is a big problem," she added. "Rather than egging on, real leaders call it out. It needs to stop, regardless of party.”
Cruz's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Common Dreams on Friday about whether he condemned the call for violence and whether he believed that he bore similar responsibility for individuals' reactions to his political rhetoric that he ascribes to Democratic politicians.
"Until the AI starts killing people, unfortunately, history would suggest we’re not going to do anything."
Calls to regulate the development of artificial intelligence are growing louder days after multiple industry insiders warned that the technology could wipe out humanity within years.
In an op-ed published by The New York Times on Friday, journalist Stephen Witt said that he's detected a "vibe shift" among AI researchers who are worried that the technology is becoming too powerful for them to understand, let alone control.
"Swarms of AIs are breaking out of their containers, colluding in secret, covering their tracks, cheating on tests, and even mounting assaults on other computers," Witt wrote. "AI has gone rogue."
Witt said these incidents have convinced him, and many others inside the industry, that there needs to be a global pause on AI research and development.
The journalist noted there has been widespread support among industry insiders for an open letter titled "Pacing the Frontier," which calls on the US government to take the lead in building an international regulatory body that would set guardrails to deliberately slow down AI development.
Daniel Kokotajlo, a former researcher in OpenAI’s governance division, told Witt that he'd like to create "an international, open monitoring system" that would act like an air traffic control system for AI development.
Under Kokotajlo's plan, all AI researchers would be required by law to post information on training runs into a public database that can be monitored in real time.
"If we had this sort of total research transparency," Kokotajlo told Witt, "then there would be this whole ecosystem of academics, third-party auditors, nonprofits, and rival corporations who would all be able to see what was going on inside the giant data centers of these big companies. Insofar as something scary or problematic was happening, anyone could sort of point it out and start a conversation about it online."
The US is not the only country where lawmakers are proposing new regulations for AI.
As reported by Time on Tuesday, Alex Sobel, a member of Parliament from the UK's Labour Party, unveiled a bill this week that would ban artificial superintelligence, defined by the legislation as "a system that could disempower state authorities."
Sobel's bill is similar to legislation proposed in the US earlier this month by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), which would ban artificial superintelligence to "stop AI oligarchs from building machines humans cannot control."
In Warsaw on Tuesday, activists deployed several robots outside Poland's Digital Affairs Ministry to demand the country do more to regulate AI.
Around 30 robots demonstrated outside Poland's Digital Affairs Ministry in Warsaw, chanting 'we want law, we want rules' to demand stronger AI oversight pic.twitter.com/GGUoOCS7JO
— Reuters (@Reuters) September 10, 2026
According to Notes from Poland, the robots were programmed to chant slogans such as "We want regulations, we want rules, we want law" and "Don't wait, regulate, protect jobs."
Democratism, the group that organized the robot protest, argued that the AI industry has the potential to completely upend human society, and demanded to know "who is responsible for preparing people for these changes, how workers should be protected during the transition, and how reskilling should work."
Even though demand to regulate AI is surging, there is little indication so far that governments are preparing to work collectively to place guardrails on the industry.
Greg Jensen, chief investment officer of hedge fund Bridgewater Associates, told Bloomberg on Friday that he doesn't believe governments will act until after a tragedy happens.
“Until the AI starts killing people, unfortunately, history would suggest we’re not going to do anything, but we are going to face that," said Jensen, who likened the current risk environment with AI to the risks posed by Covid-19 in February 2020. "That’s going to happen, and it’d be much better if we started dealing with it before then."
"Let us remember the extraordinary compassion, resilience, and bravery that carried our city through its darkest day."
With Lower Manhattan and the site of the September 11 attacks in the background, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Friday called on people to honor the memory of the nearly 3,000 victims—as well as those who have died of illnesses stemming from toxic air at the site of the attacks—by caring "for one another" as thousands of people "cared for strangers" as the tragedy was unfolding exactly 25 years ago.
Mamdani honored the 2,753 New Yorkers—"parents and children, husbands and wives, friends and colleagues, 2,753 universes gone in an instant"—and said the city and country remember September 11 as "the darkest day" when hijackers flew airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and passengers aboard a fourth plane fought to stop another target from being struck.
The mayor urged viewers to remember the actions of thousands of New Yorkers in the immediate aftermath of the attack—those who donated blood and "opened their homes to those who could not get home."
"We remember the workers who carried their colleagues down hundreds of stairs, then turned around and went back up to find someone else who needed help," said Mamdani.
On social media, as the country marked the 25th anniversary of the attacks, many users spoke about specific acts of bravery, including those of Rick Rescorla, the head of security at Morgan Stanley, who was killed at the World Trade Center after he led roughly 2,700 of his colleagues to safety.
In a separate social media post on Instagram, Mamdani highlighted several lesser-known New Yorkers who "sprang into action to help however they could," including teachers, firefighters, sanitation workers, and healthcare providers.
His office interviewed Roseann Caruana of the city's Department of Transportation, who described a triage center that was set up for victims, and Rashel Dorleans—now a New York City public school teacher, and a high school student at the time of the attacks.
"I think it's a credit to the teachers that were there," said Dorleans. "They did not seem panicked. I'm sure they were panicked on the inside, but they were kind and calm with us."
Mamdani said that "we have a sacred obligation to those who were stolen from us to care for one another as they cared for strangers, to live lives worthy of the sacrifices they made, and to build a city worthy of their courage, a city where we run toward one another. That is how we remember."
Ahead of the anniversary this week, the mayor released long-hidden files regarding how New York residents were misled about the toxicity of the air at the World Trade Center attack site. He said the number of people who have died thus far from related cancers and other health issues has likely surpassed the number of victims on September 11.
Mamdani was also the target of attacks this week from Republicans including former Mayor Rudy Giuliani and City Council members Vickie Paladino and Joann Ariola, who explicitly cited Mamdani's Muslim faith as they said he did "not belong" at the September 11 memorial ceremony held on Friday.
“I’m proud to be the mayor of this city. I love this city. I love this country,” Mamdani said when asked about the racist remarks. “What I want this week to be a focus on is the families whose loved ones were stolen from them 25 years ago in the horrific act of terror of September 11, and a focus also on the first responders who did everything they could.”
The mayor was seen shaking Giuliani's hand and speaking to him at the ceremony.
"Let us remember the extraordinary compassion, resilience, and bravery that carried our city through its darkest day," said Mamdani. "Today, New York remembers."
"US officials who orchestrated post-9/11 abuses must also be held accountable, and their victims must receive meaningful remedy and reparation."
International human rights campaigners, United Nations experts, journalists, and anti-war activists marked the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US by paying tributes to the thousands of lives lost on that day while condemning what followed: an unparalleled expansion of state surveillance, crackdowns on dissent, arbitrary detention, torture, and catastrophic wars that cost trillions of dollars and millions of lives.
Mourning the lasting impact of "those horrific acts of violence" perpetrated in the US a quarter-century ago, a group of more than 40 UN experts said in a joint statement on Friday that "we equally acknowledge the millions of other victims worldwide of terrorist attacks, excessive counter-terrorism responses, and conflicts in the name of countering terrorism."
"Too many governments have adopted unnecessary and disproportionate responses that have seriously undermined human rights, civil society, civic space, democracy, and the rule of law," the experts continued. "Wars of aggression. Unlawful occupations. Countless war crimes and crimes against humanity, and plausible allegations of genocide. Assassinations dressed up as 'targeted killings.' Torture disguised as 'interrogation.' Transboundary abductions, extraordinary renditions, and transnational repression. Secret detention and enforced disappearances. Unfair military trials and special courts, including at Guantanamo Bay. Toxic residues from conflicts have severely harmed human health."
The experts argued that global "wars on terror" launched by the US and other nations in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks have "have stretched foundational rules of international law beyond their breaking point," "counterproductively fueled terrorism," and "entrenched cycles of violence."
Many of those grave abuses continue in the present, the US-based Center for Constitutional Rights emphasized in a statement marking the anniversary of the 9/11 atrocities.
"In the 25 years since September 11, 2001, the sweeping political project the US government undertook in its aftermath has shaped, shattered, or ended millions of lives," the group said. "Exploiting fear and suffering, the Bush administration launched a limitless 'war on terror,' whose stated purpose was all pretext to impose its will on other countries, expand its power beyond constitutional bounds, and target vulnerable communities."
"Today, because of the lack of accountability for these gross abuses of human rights, Trump can use 'counterterrorism' to pursue his authoritarian program," said CCR.
Nick Turse, a senior reporter at The Intercept, argued the attacks coordinated by Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2001 created a "swirl of toxic policies and governmental overreach" that "opened the door to something beyond bin Laden’s wildest dreams, the rise of an even more effective terrorist who has crippled the US in countless ways and sought to strangle the best of the country: President Donald Trump."
"Bin Laden’s attacks turned the US government into an engine for the destruction of America, inducing it to implement policies that have devastated the country and immiserated its people," Turse wrote in a column published Friday. "That includes unrestrained spending while cutting taxes on the rich, closer ties with despotic regimes, the sneak-and-peek warrants and roving wiretaps of the Patriot Act and other domestic surveillance programs, and the ruinous failed forever wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere."
Those wars, according to Brown University's Costs of War project, have cost the US federal government upwards of $8 trillion.
"The opportunity costs are staggering," the project noted. "Many of these funds could have been spent on public health or in sectors that create far more jobs than the defense sector, like education or green energy."
As for the human toll, the Costs of War project noted in a brief published last week that as of 2023, "an estimated 905,000-940,000 people—including US soldiers, allied security forces, civilians, and militants—have died due to war violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria (in the fight against the Islamic State), Yemen, and elsewhere. At least 408,749—432,093 of those who have died were civilians."
"Many other people have died indirectly as a result of the wars," the brief observed. "An estimated 3.6-3.8 million indirect deaths have occurred in post-9/11 war zones."
Scott Roehm, Amnesty International USA's chief human rights strategy officer, said Friday that the US government could have responded to the 9/11 attacks "by upholding human rights and the rule of law while pursuing justice and accountability for victims’ families."
"Instead, it embarked on a campaign of widespread abuses against Muslim, Brown, and Black communities, including arbitrary detentions and mass surveillance in the US; unlawful lethal air strikes abroad; enforced disappearances and torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and at CIA black sites; and the opening of the notorious Guantanamo Bay detention center," said Roehm. "The choice to engage in torture, then build prosecutions against those alleged to be most responsible for 9/11 on the back of torture-derived evidence, is largely why, 25 years later, there has been neither justice nor finality for victims’ families."
"The US government must end the last 25 years of abuses," Roehm added. "US officials who orchestrated post-9/11 abuses must also be held accountable, and their victims must receive meaningful remedy and reparation.”
"Having people pledge allegiance to himself is the most on-brand Trump thing to do," said one progressive critic. "And it shows how cult-like the base is that they did it."
Far-right President Donald Trump on Thursday night asked his Republican supporters at a party convention event to raise their right hands and vow fealty directly to him in a mocking version of the "pledge of allegiance" in which he also called on them to "cheat like hell" at the ballot box in November in order to secure a midterm win against Democrats.
"Please right your right hand," Trump told attendees at the first-ever GOP midterm convention in Dallas, Texas.
"I pledge to the greatest president in the history of the United States—that loves us so much he can't even breathe—that I will go out with my family, my friends, I'll do it any way—I don't care if I'm registered or not, I'm going to try to cheat like hell like [the Democrats] do... there's never been bigger cheaters, they don't care."
President Trump led his Republican Party in a mock pledge during their political convention in Dallas, telling them to ‘cheat like hell’ and vote whether they're ‘registered or not’ in November's midterm elections https://t.co/JgD3J8BdV9 pic.twitter.com/tCDKAi3FBo
— Reuters (@Reuters) September 11, 2026
"Having people pledge allegiance to himself is the most on-brand Trump thing to do," said Jonathan Cohn, political director of the grassroots advocacy group Progressive Mass. "And it shows how cult-like the base is that they did it."
Trump has built the second half of his political career around lies related to false claims of voter fraud and stolen elections. With the midterms less than two months away, and early voting starting soon in some states, the GOP fears losing both the House and Senate because of a crippled economy and historically low approval numbers for the president.
While the president is not on the ballot, Trump has asked his base to pretend that he is in order to help Republican prospects in races nationwide. However, not all political observers are convinced that Trump will be the turnout booster for his party that he claims to be.
In his speech on Thursday—a night after he said that he would issue $5,000 checks to every US adult if the Republicans win in the midterms—Trump told the crowd that those who don't vote this year would "go to hell" as punishment.
"Night One: Trump offers $5k bribes to get people to vote for Republicans," said Amanda Carpenter, a writer for the nonpartisan group Protect Democracy United. "Night Two: Trump tells his supporters they'll go to hell if they don't vote. Sounds like it's going well!"
" Donald Trump just replaced the Pledge of Allegiance with a pledge of allegiance to himself," noted Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom. "This November, the choice is yours on the ballot: America or Trump."
"Bro had his supporters raise their right hands and pledge to vote for him. Then told them they'd go to hell if they don't," said one online commentator.
"This shit is literally beyond parody!" exclaimed another.
"At a time when people are scraping by to keep up with the high cost of groceries, rent, and healthcare, this $500 gimmick won’t even begin to dig them out of the hole that Trump and Republicans created."
President Donald Trump said Thursday that his administration would issue $500 rebate checks to some Americans who were purportedly "overcharged" under the Affordable Care Act, a move that would provide little to no relief to the millions of people impacted by surging health insurance premiums.
The White House said in a fact sheet that around a million Americans in 30 states would receive rebate checks, beginning next month—just weeks before the November midterms. Brad Woodhouse, president of the advocacy group Protect Our Care, ripped the rebate plan as "an absolute joke," calling $500 "a drop in the bucket compared to what Americans are paying because Trump and Republicans gutted healthcare to bankroll massive tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations."
Woodhouse was referring to a Republican budget measure, signed into law last summer by Trump, that enacted more than $800 billion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade.
The GOP also declined last year to extend enhanced ACA subsidies that helped reduce costs for tens of millions of Americans, sending premiums skyrocketing. Some families have seen annual premium increases in the thousands of dollars, leading many to drop marketplace coverage entirely. ACA premiums are set to surge by double digits for a second consecutive year in 2027.
"At a time when people are scraping by to keep up with the high cost of groceries, rent, and healthcare, this $500 gimmick won’t even begin to dig them out of the hole that Trump and Republicans created," said Woodhouse.
The White House said ACA enrollees who "do not receive premium assistance" and who live in states that "use the federal exchange for the operations of their Obamacare markets" would be eligible for a rebate check, meaning the payments would disproportionately benefit enrollees with higher incomes in red states.
"The vast majority of ACA enrollees won't get $500 from the Trump administration, including: those who still get premium subsidies, though what they're paying has gone up a lot with expiration of enhanced tax credits. And, those in mostly blue states that run their own exchanges," noted Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF. "There are 19.2 million ACA enrollees. The Trump administration is talking about sending $500 rebate checks to fewer than one million of them."
Policy experts disputed the Trump administration's claim that Americans were "overcharged" due to the Biden administration's "gross mismanagement" of the ACA. As The Associated Press reported:
Cynthia Cox, a vice president and director of the ACA program at the healthcare research nonprofit KFF, said it’s entirely possible that the funds Trump has promised came from fees collected during Trump’s first term. His first administration collected more user fees from insurers than it spent, resulting in an estimated $1 billion in unspent funds, according to KFF analysis.
It is unclear whether the $500 rebate represents what each enrollee may have overpaid, where the money for the rebates would come from, and whether it requires congressional approval for disbursement.
The White House's rebate check pledge came as Trump also vowed to send $5,000 to every American adult if Republicans retain control of the House and Senate in the November midterms, a promise that was widely derided.
"The 'Trump dividends' scam is just Trump’s latest attempt to distract the country from the Republican affordability crisis," said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.). "Trump promised he would lower prices, and instead he keeps mashing the 'make stuff more expensive button.' The American people will not be fooled."
The directors of the film—which premiered at the Venice Film Festival—said they "felt the responsibility" to expose insider testimony about Israel's systematic mass killing of Palestinians.
A documentary film that premiered Thursday at the Venice Film Festival offers a rare inside account of Israel’s US-backed genocide in Gaza, with former members of a secret Israeli intelligence unit describing how they helped transform the mass killing of Palestinian civilians into a routine, bureaucratized affair.
NAZA, directed by Israeli filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, is based on interviews with 24 Israeli military and intelligence insiders, several of whom served in a secret unit that reported directly to the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"We really are looking at... a system of killing, which is mass killing [and] relies on mass surveillance," Abraham told reporters in Venice on Thursday. "We felt the responsibility as Israelis to use our position... to bring insider testimony into how the system looks like from the inside... And this is the film that we made."
Szor said that "a lot of these things are also, it's important to say... known because they've been documented by journalists, Palestinian journalists, in Gaza. It's footage that has been out there."
"But I think that we felt that there is still some sort of an importance to take those testimonies and put it in a film in a way that, of course, first of all, it's different to hear," she added. "The people who designed and operated those systems talk about it in front of a camera."
According to the film, one former member bluntly said that the unit's mission was to “thwart peace.”
However, Abraham and Szor said their purpose was not to expose a handful of rogue soldiers, but to examine the machinery and policies behind the violence.
The documentary’s title refers to an Israeli military acronym used to quantify the civilians expected to be killed in an attack—a chilling bureaucratic shorthand for people often referred to as collateral damage, or, in the so-called "War on Terror" still being waged by the United States 25 years after the September 11, 2001 attacks, "bugsplat."
The film’s sources describe artificial intelligence-assisted targeting, mass surveillance, and the hacking of mobile phones to identify alleged Hamas operatives, sometimes despite the known presence of family members and other civilians.
Israeli forces have operated under loosened rules of engagement that effectively permit the killing of an unlimited number of civilians when targeting even a single low-ranking Hamas member. The Israel Defense Forces utilizes cutting-edge AI technology to select targets at a far faster rate than humans alone could, and destroys them with weapons including 1,000- and 2,000-pound bombs—many supplied by the US.
The result has been the killing and wounding of more than 250,000 Palestinians since the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. Most of the victims have been civilians, including more than 21,500 children killed and tens of thousands more disabled or wounded.
Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza, including murder and forced starvation. Israel is facing an ongoing genocide case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice—also in The Hague—and formally supported by nearly 20 nations.
Abraham and Szor are best known internationally for co-directing with two others the film No Other Land, which chronicled ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the illegally occupied West Bank by Israeli settlers and soldiers. The film won the 2025 Academy Award for best documentary feature.
NAZA—which reportedly received a 25-minute standing ovation at its Venice premiere—is the sole documentary among the films competing for the festival's famed Golden Lion. It joins a growing body of recent films about the Gaza genocide.
American Doctor, directed by Poh Si Teng, follows US physicians working inside Gaza hospitals amid Israel's deliberate destruction of the strip's medical and healthcare systems.
Last year's The Voice of Hind Rajab offered a harrowing mix of acted scenes and the actual 70-minute audio recording of a 5-year-old Palestinian girl's desperate final phone call to Palestine Red Crescent Society personnel amid an Israeli massacre of her family as they were trapped in a car under tank fire.