

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.

The Supreme Court ruled today in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, siding with a public-school football coach who demanded the right to pray with his players after games at the 50-yard-line. The decision significantly erodes the separation of church and state in public schools.
The case was brought by Joseph Kennedy, a former football coach in Bremerton, Washington, who sued a public school district for placing him on administrative leave after he repeatedly ignored directives to stop leading his team in mid-field prayers immediately after games. The school determined that Kennedy's practice violated students' religious-freedom rights and also created a safety risk at games because Kennedy had orchesterated a public spectacle by inviting media and local politicans to attend. Kennedy claimed that the school's actions violated his free-speech and free-exercise rights.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Washington filed a Supreme Court amicus brief in the case, arguing that Kennedy's prayers, which he admits he delivered while on duty, are not protected by the Free Speech Clause and that the school district had a constitutional duty to stop his practice because it violated the separation of church and state. As the dissent explained, "[t]oday's decision is particularly misguided because it elevates the religious rights of a school official . . . over those of his students, who are required to attend school and who this Court has long recognized are particularly vulnerable and deserving of protection."
Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, said:
"This decision is deeply disappointing and undermines the religious liberty of public school students. As the Supreme Court recognized over 60 years ago, it's inherently coercive for school officials to pray with students while on duty. Today's ruling ignores that basic principle and tramples the religious freedom of students who may not share the preferred faith of their coaches and teachers."
Taryn Darling, senior staff attorney, ACLU of Washington, said:
"The freedom to hold beliefs that differ from those with authority has been a founding principle of our country. It is disappointing that today's decision erodes protections for public school students to learn and grow free of coercion. Kitsap County is a religiously diverse community and students reported they felt coerced to pray. One player explained he participated against his own beliefs for the fear of losing playing time if he declined. This decision strains the separation of church and state -- a bedrock principle of our democracy - and potentially harms our youth."
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666"I never imagined that my government would so blatantly lie like this," said one author and attorney.
As Americans have continued to document federal agents violently pushing a bystander to the ground during an arrest, handcuffing a screaming mother, and demanding to see citizenship papers of people of color, observers said the US Department of Homeland Security's latest video about a federal officer's killing of Renee Good in Minneapolis last week showed it has resorted to "blatant propaganda" to shape public opinion on the Trump administration's violent crackdown on immigrants and dissenters.
"This agency, and the way it now speaks, is the most repulsive and un-American things I have ever seen," said one writer of a video featuring Lauren Bis, the deputy assistant secretary of homeland security, that was released four days after Good was fatally shot by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer.
The video was posted to social media Sunday, accompanied by the text: "Defend the Homeland. Protect the American way of life." Bis presented footage of Good's vehicle before and after she was shot while sitting in the driver's seat of her car by an ICE agent who had approached the driver's side of the front of the vehicle.
Bis repeated claims that have been pushed by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Vice President JD Vance, and President Donald Trump: that Good was a "rioter" who "weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over our law enforcement officers in an attempt to kill them."
She said that "the American people can watch this video with their own eyes and ears and judge for themselves," but legal experts, news outlets, and members of the public have already spent the past several days doing just that.
Experts and media organizations have extensively analyzed footage of the killing and said that despite the administration's repeated claims, there is no evidence that Good was part of any riot. As the Guardian reported last week, "The officer who fired the fatal shots walked up to the front of Good’s car, which was turning away from him as it began to move forward, and he remained on his feet as the vehicle passed him."
Author and University of Missouri law professor Thom Lambert said that the government "may argue that the ICE agent feared for his life, perhaps even reasonably, but the video CLEARLY shows that Good had turned away from the officer."
"I never imagined that my government would so blatantly lie like this," added Lambert, who also took issue with Bis' insistence that the administration "pray[s]" for Good and her family—even as another White House official, press secretary Karoline Leavitt, called the victim a "lunatic" in comments to reporters on Monday.
Despite DHS' display of footage that many observers have said proves Good's wheels were turned away from the ICE agent when she began driving, David J. Bier of the libertarian Cato Institute said: "They are still using verbatim the utterly inaccurate statement from the first day. This is pathological."
Another critic noted that the video was edited by DHS to make it appear that Good "weaponized her vehicle" by "speeding across the road"—"obviously failing to mention that footage is of when she had just been shot in the fucking face and her dead foot hit the pedal."
Jessica Simor, an expert in human rights law in the UK, said that Joseph Goebbels, the architect of Adolf Hitler's propaganda machine in Nazi Germany, "could not have improved" on Bis' video.
As the video circulated online Monday, ICE and Border Patrol agents were seen in numerous new footage treating people in Minneapolis and elsewhere violently and appearing the warn them against even acting as bystanders to their enforcement actions.
Federal agents were seen chasing and tackling a man to the ground, apparently for filming with his cellphone as they carried out an arrest at a gas station in St. Paul, Minnesota.
In another video, a federal officer approached a woman who was filming him and said, "Listen, have you all not learned from the past couple of days?" before snatching her phone.
It is legal under the First Amendment for bystanders to film ICE and other federal agents as long at they are not obstructing their operations.
Organizer and attorney Aaron Regunberg said in response to that video that the US will ultimately "need some serious Truth and Reconciliation/Nuremberg shit for every fascist scumbag member of this administration."
"We must not allow our great country, the United States of America, to become an authoritarian society."
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday warned that the Trump administration's targeting of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell for criminal investigation was part of a broader pattern of intimidation aimed at quelling dissent.
In a prepared statement, Sanders (I-Vt.) acknowledged that he had his own disagreements with Powell, a conservative Republican who was first appointed by President Donald Trump to be chairman of the Federal Reserve in 2017.
However, Sanders said political disagreements had nothing to do with the Department of Justice launching a criminal probe of Powell.
"In a democracy, debate and disagreement are normal," Sanders said. "But Donald Trump does not 'disagree' with his opponents. In his pursuit of absolute power, he attempts to destroy anyone who stands in his way. He's actively prosecuting Powell not because the Fed chair broke the law, but because he won't bend the knee to Donald Trump."
Sanders noted that Powell was only the latest target of the Trump administration's vindictive retribution.
"When Sen. Mark Kelly (R-Ariz.) spoke out against Donald Trump's authoritarian rhetoric and threats toward political opponents, Trump didn't agree," Sanders explained. "He had his Defense Department investigate Kelly for misconduct and threatened to have him executed."
Sanders also pointed to the prosecutions of New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey, as well as his threats against assorted other critics, as evidence that Trump seeks to "intimidate and destroy... as part of his march to authoritarianism."
"We must not allow our great country, the United States of America, to become an authoritarian society," Sanders concluded. "Trump's persecution of his political opponents must end."
The co-chairs of the Not Above the Law coalition–Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen; Praveen Fernandes, vice president of the Constitutional Accountability Center; Kelsey Herbert, campaign director at MoveOn; and Brett Edkins, managing director for policy and political affairs at Stand Up America—also denounced the investigation into Powell as politically motivated on Monday, while arguing it was part of an effort to stifle dissent in the US.
"Whether targeting federal judges, members of Congress, civil society organizations, or now the chair of the Federal Reserve, Trump weaponizes the full force of government against anyone who won't submit to his will," they said. "Undermining the Federal Reserve threatens Americans’ jobs and savings, and our nation’s economy."
The Pentagon chief's "unconstitutional crusade against me sends a chilling message to every retired member of the military," said the former Navy captain.
US Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain, announced Monday that he "filed a lawsuit against the secretary of defense because there are few things as important as standing up for the rights of the very Americans who fought to defend our freedoms."
The Arizona Democrat is suing not only Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth but also the US Department of Defense, the Department of the Navy, and Navy Secretary John Phelan over the DOD leader's effort to cut Kelly's retirement pay over a November video in which he and other veterans of the military and intelligence community reminded troops that they "must refuse illegal orders."
Kelly, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), and Reps. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH), and Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) released the short video as Hegseth and President Donald Trump were in the midst of their deadly boat-bombing spree and ramping up threats against Venezuela, whose leader they have since abducted to put him on trial in the United States.
Of the six Democrats in the video, Kelly is the only one still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Given that, Hegseth initially launched a probe into the senator and threatened to call him back to active duty to face a court-martial, but ultimately revealed last week that the DOD was working to reduce his retirement pay and had issued a formal letter of censure.
"Pete Hegseth is coming after what I earned through my 25 years of military service, in violation of my rights as an American, as a retired veteran, and as a United States senator whose job is to hold him—and this or any administration—accountable," Kelly said Monday. "His unconstitutional crusade against me sends a chilling message to every retired member of the military: If you speak out and say something that the president or secretary of defense doesn't like, you will be censured, threatened with demotion, or even prosecuted."
"In 1986, at just 22 years old, I took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. I have fulfilled that oath every day since, but I never expected that I would have to defend it against a secretary of defense or president," said Kelly, also a former US astronaut. "But I've never shied away from a fight for our country, and I won't shy away from this one. Because our freedom of speech, the separation of powers, and due process are not just words on a page, they are bedrock principles of our democracy that has lasted 250 years and will last 250 more as long as patriotic Americans are willing to stand up for our rights."
Kelly's 46-page complaint, filed in federal court in Washington, DC, states that "defendants' actions violate numerous constitutional guarantees and have no basis in statute," citing "the First Amendment, the speech or debate clause, the separation of powers, due process, 10 USC § 1370, and the Administrative Procedure Act."
The senator is asking the court "to declare the censure letter, reopening determination, retirement grade determination proceedings, and related actions unlawful and unconstitutional; to vacate those actions; to enjoin their enforcement; and to preserve the status of a coequal Congress and an apolitical military."