

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, five U.S. Indigenous communities facing forced relocation imposed by the consequences of climate change called on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to honor international human rights obligations by protecting them and other vulnerable communities. Leaders from the Isle de Jean Charles Band of Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw, the Pointe-au-Chien Indian Tribe, the Grand Caillou/Dulac Band of Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw, and Grand Bayou Village in Louisiana, along with Alaska's Kivalina community highlighted the U.S. government's failure to allocate funds, technical assistance, and other resources to support their communities' adaptation efforts to a changing climate, and denounced U.S. efforts to block remedies and reparations for victims of human rights abuses imposed climate change.
The climate crisis is making the planet unlivable, displacing communities worldwide. Rising sea levels, soil erosion, catastrophic storms, and fossil fuel extraction have altered lands occupied for generations by Indigenous peoples. In the U.S. alone, hundreds of Indigenous peoples have been forced to either relocate to new lands or scramble to find solutions that will allow them to stay in their homes. Despite being aware of these risks, the U.S. government has failed to allocate funds, technical assistance, and other resources to support the Tribes' rights to self-determination to implement community-led adaptation efforts. Due to this insufficient action, Tribes now face the loss of sacred ancestral homelands, the destruction of sacred burial sites, and the endangerment of their cultural traditions, heritage, health, lives, and livelihoods.
"The United States government has failed to protect the individual and collective human rights of the Indigenous Tribes in Louisiana and Alaska from the climate crisis," said Maryum Jordan, Climate Justice Attorney for EarthRights International, which supports the Tribes. "Yet the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights specifies that States should take measures to slow the negative consequences of climate change, devoting whatever resources necessary to address it. The Commission is also clear that Indigenous peoples are particularly vulnerable to the consequences of climate change. In not taking effective action on their behalf, the U.S. has violated the rights of these Tribes."
"Prior to the hearing, we learned that this is only the fourth time in the organization's history that the subject of climate change will be publicly presented as a complaint before the commissioners," said Rachel Gore Freed, Vice President of Programs at the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee (UUSC), also supporting the tribal leaders through the complaint process. "This is indicative of the gravity of this issue and just how vital it is that we call attention to it in an international forum. These tribes are making history by calling out the dismal record of both state and federal governments in respecting their right to self-determination and providing equitable solutions to this crisis."
The Tribes call on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to:
Facilitate interactions between them and a government delegation, including representatives from the Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of the Interior, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and representatives from the governments of Alaska and Louisiana.
Recognize that climate-forced displacement is a human rights crisis and conduct an In Loco visit to their communities.
Produce a comprehensive report or resolution on climate-forced displacement and the obligations of States to provide Indigenous and other vulnerable communities protection and mitigation from the effects of climate change.
The Tribes also urge the commission to make the following recommendations to the U.S. federal government:
Immediately provide federal aid directly to the Tribes to rebuild and bolster the protection of their homes, ancestral lands, and traditional sites (including burial sites) from pending storms and the ongoing impacts of the climate crisis.
Recognize the self-determination and inherent sovereignty of all of the Tribes, including those federally recognized and those who have not received federal recognition, in all relevant government policies related to addressing climate change and disaster aid.
Grant federal recognition to the Tribal Nations in Louisiana so that these Tribes can access federal resources that will support their self-governance in light of the various climate impacts that affect them.
Recognize the tribes' collective rights to the land, subsistence, and cultural identities and their collective right to return to and maintain access to their ancestral homelands.
Develop a federal relocation institutional framework that is based on human rights protections to adequately respond to the threats facing Tribal Nations, including the rapid provision of resources for adaptation efforts that protect the right to culture, health, safe drinking water, food, and adequate housing.
Background
The Jean Charles Choctaw Nation of Louisiana are descendants of three historic Tribes who inhabited southern Louisiana and the southeastern part of what is now the United States. The Tribe was originally located on Isle de Jean Charles, Louisiana, an area in southern Terrebonne Parish that has lost most of its land mass. Now only approximately 18 of 700 total tribal citizens live on the island, while others form a diaspora in nearby communities. Before 2021's Hurricane Ida, approximately 80 tribal citizens lived on the Island. The Jean Charles Choctaw Nation is a state-recognized Tribe and has been seeking federal recognition since the 1990s. Since 2002, the Tribe has been actively working to implement Tribal-led resettlement to bring both island residents and the diaspora together in one place to ensure their safety and cultural survival.
The Pointe-au-Chien Indian Tribe (PACIT) has inhabited their traditional territory in the southernmost end of Louisiana along and around Bayou Pointe-au-Chien for generations. Several villages where Pointe-au-Chien members historically lived are no longer inhabitable due to land loss and saltwater intrusion. As a consequence, many tribal citizens have been forced to relocate to family properties further north in the current Pointe-au-Chien village, nearby communities, or beyond. PACIT is a state-recognized tribe and has been seeking federal recognition since the 1990s. Today, Pointe-au-Chien Indians continue to maintain a subsistence and agrarian livelihood - fishing and catching oysters, shrimp, and crabs and growing vegetables. Saltwater intrusion has limited the ability of tribal members to engage in large-scale agricultural practices and has made the land unusable for herding and trapping.
The Grand Caillou/Dulac Band is a Tribe of 1,098 citizens who have historically lived in and around the ancestral village of Grand Caillou/Dulac in southern Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana. The Grand Caillou/Dulac Band, as part of the Biloxi-Chitimacha Confederation of Muskogees, was recognized by the state of Louisiana in 2004 and has been working to gain federal recognition since the 1990s. Like other tribal communities in southern Louisiana, the Grand Caillou/Dulac Band has traditionally sustained itself through trapping, fishing, and farming in lands and waters that were historically fertile. But the diversion of the Mississippi River and other development projects, oil and gas extraction, erosion, salt-water intrusion, and the climate crisis has threatened these practices. Land loss and increasingly severe storms now put the community at frequent risk of disaster and flooding.
Grand Bayou Village, home of the Atakapa-Ishak Chawasha Tribe, is located in the southernmost part of Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, south of New Orleans, and is accessible only by boat. The Atakapa-Ishak Chawasha does not have formal state or federal recognition as an Indian Tribe. In the last century, the Mississippi River levee systems, sea level rise, and destruction of wetlands caused by oil and gas exploration have caused the lands around the village to erode and subside. Saltwater intrusion has killed local forests and medicinal plants and made it impossible to carry out traditional gardening. Major storms, such as Hurricane Katrina in 2005, flooded the community and destroyed homes, causing many families to move elsewhere. Today, only 14 families live full-time in Grand Bayou - in homes built on 16-foot pilings. The community is routinely at risk from coastal land loss, flooding, and storms.
The Native Village of Kivalina in Alaska is a federally recognized Tribe and includes approximately 400 Inupiaq people. The community is located on a barrier reef island between the Chukchi Sea and the mouths of the Wulik and Kivalina Rivers. No roads lead to or from the community, which is only accessible by small planes or boats. Kivalina is approximately 100 miles north of the Arctic Circle and 1,000 miles northwest of Anchorage, Alaska. Inupiaq communities have resided in this region for thousands of years. Historically, the island where Kivalina sits had been used by Inupiaq people for seasonal hunting and fishing, not permanent habitation. But the government forced the Tribe to permanently settle on the Island in the early 1900s. Reports of residents wishing to move because of the risks of erosion date back as early as 1910. To this day, the community has not been able to relocate.
The Tribes are supported by the Lowlander Center, EarthRights, the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, Alaska Institute for Justice, and the Indian Legal Clinic at Arizona State University's Sandra Day O'Conner School of Law.
EarthRights International (ERI) is a nongovernmental, nonprofit organization that combines the power of law and the power of people in defense of human rights and the environment, which we define as "earth rights." We specialize in fact-finding, legal actions against perpetrators of earth rights abuses, training grassroots and community leaders, and advocacy campaigns. Through these strategies, EarthRights International seeks to end earth rights abuses, to provide real solutions for real people, and to promote and protect human rights and the environment in the communities where we work.
Earlier this month, the Trump administration bypassed Congress to sell Israel more than 20,000 bombs, costing over $650 million.
Sen. Bernie Sanders has introduced joint resolutions of disapproval for US arms sales to Israel following its escalation of attacks against Iran, Lebanon, and Palestine in recent days.
The resolutions Sanders presented on Thursday (I-Vt.) are cosponsored by Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and target a total of $658 million worth of weapons sales to Israel.
“Given the horrific destruction that Israel’s extremist government has wrought on Gaza, Iran, and Lebanon, the last thing in the world that American taxpayers need to do right now is to provide 22,000 new bombs to the Netanyahu government,” Sanders said. “No more weapons to support an illegal war.”
The weapons Sanders hopes to block were approved under emergency authority by the Trump administration earlier this month, allowing it to bypass congressional review.
According to Reuters, the package contained more than 12,000 thousand-pound bombs requested by Israel, which human rights groups say Israel has often used in densely populated areas, leading to large numbers of civilian casualties.
"Trump not only disregarded congressional authority to declare this war, he’s now bypassing Congress by invoking an emergency authority to supply additional bombs to this war, a crisis of his own making," Van Hollen said.
More than 3,000 people have been killed in US-Israeli attacks on Iran since February 28, according to a Wednesday report from the US-based Human Rights Activist News Agency, a humanitarian monitor for Iran.
More than 1,300 of those killed have been classified as civilians, including more than 200 children. Meanwhile, more than 3 million Iranians have been displaced from their homes, according to the United Nations Refugee Agency.
In Lebanon, where Israel has launched a ground invasion, the death count is at nearly 1,000 according to the nation's health ministry, following attacks on densely populated areas in recent days. Forced evacuation orders from Israel have led more than a million people to flee from their homes.
Government-backed Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank has also intensified since the outbreak of the war, according to Human Rights Watch. Since the beginning of March, there have been reports of settlers—sometimes in uniform—invading Palestinian communities, firing live ammunition, setting homes and cars on fire, and attacking families in their homes.
Sanders' resolutions of disapproval will be introduced under the Arms Export Control Act, which allows Congress to vote on halting proposed weapons transfers after being notified by the executive branch.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, controlled by Republicans, will have five days to consider the proposal. After that, Sanders and his cosponsors will have the opportunity to force a simple-majority floor vote to discharge it.
To actually block weapons sales, the resolution would need to pass both the House and the Senate, which is highly unlikely. Even if this happened, Trump could still veto it, which could only be overridden by a two-thirds vote in both houses.
While the vote itself is almost sure to fail, it has the opportunity to force members of Congress—particularly other Democrats—to go on the record about their support for Israel's actions in the Middle East, which many have continued to fund even while rhetorically opposing them.
“President Trump’s war of choice in Iran has been a catastrophe—jeopardizing our national security and the lives of our troops, killing and wounding thousands of innocent civilians, and causing havoc in the global economy," Welch said. “I support these joint resolutions to make sure that we do not send another 20,000 bombs to Israel that will result in further destruction in Iran and Lebanon. We must end this war, and we must not send these bombs.”
Hegseth also scolded the US media for reporting negative news about the war and insisted that it wasn't a "quagmire."
President Donald Trump's unprovoked and unconstitutional war against Iran has led to energy prices surging across the globe while unleashing political instability across the Middle East.
However, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday that the world needs to show Trump more gratitude for everything he's done.
Speaking at a press conference, Hegseth lambasted US allies who so far have not joined Trump's Iran war, which he launched early on a Saturday morning without any approval from the US Congress.
"The world, the Middle East, our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press, should be saying one thing to President Trump: 'Thank you,'" Hegseth said. "Thank you for the courage to stop this terror state from holding the world hostage with missiles while building, or attempting to build, a nuclear bomb. Thank you for doing the work of the free world."
Hegseth: "Our ungrateful allies in Europe, even segments of our own press, should be saying one thing to President Trump -- 'Thank you. Thank you for the courage to stop this terror stage from holding the world hostage while building or attempting to build a nuclear bomb.'" pic.twitter.com/EpuPOUDd6I
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 19, 2026
US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified under oath before the Senate Select Intelligence Committee on Wednesday that Iran's nuclear weapons program had been "obliterated" by US-led airstrikes that were launched last year, and that there "has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability" since then.
Former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent also said Iran had posed "no imminent threat" when he announced his resignation this week.
Despite those acknowledgments by high-level officials, elsewhere in the press conference, Hegseth attacked the US media for reporting negative news about the Iran war.
"The media here—not all of it, but much of it—wants you to think, just 19 days into this conflict, that we're somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or a quagmire," claimed the one-time Fox News host. "Nothing could be further from the truth."
Hegseth: The media wants you to think that we're somehow spinning toward an endless abyss or a forever war or a quagmire. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hear it from me.
One of hundreds of thousands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, who watched previous foolish… pic.twitter.com/qI3RpGzmy3
— Acyn (@Acyn) March 19, 2026
Hegseth then informed viewers that as "one of hundreds of thousands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, who watched previous foolish politicians like [Presidents George W.] Bush, [Barack] Obama, and [Joe] Biden squander American credibility," he could credibly claim that "this is not those wars" because "President Trump knows better."
Hegseth also defended the Pentagon's request for $200 billion in funding for the war, telling reporters, "IT takes money to kill bad guys."
The Iran Health Ministry has estimated more than 1,200 Iranians have been killed in Israeli and US strikes since the war began in late February.
A recent analysis of opinion polls conducted by data analyst G. Elliott Morris found that the Iran war is the most unpopular military conflict launched by the US over the span of at least three decades.
“The big takeaway from these numbers is that the new war in Iran is very unpopular,” Morris explained. “Not merely negative-number-so-what unpopular, but worst-ever-support-for-war-when-it-started unpopular. With just 38% of Americans in favor, support for bombing Iran is lower than retrospective support for the war in Iraq was in 2014.”
"The so-called 'balanced budget amendment' is the Republicans’ latest backdoor attempt at gutting Americans’ hard-earned benefits," said one Democratic lawmaker.
Nearly every member of the House Republican caucus voted Wednesday in favor of a proposed constitutional amendment that experts say would result in massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, nutrition assistance, and other key federal programs.
The proposed amendment, led by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), would effectively prohibit the federal government from deficit spending, with an exception for declared wars. The final House vote on the amendment was 211-207, well short of the two-thirds support required for passage of a constitutional amendment.
Every Republican who took part in Wednesday's vote backed the proposed amendment. Just one Democrat—Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas—joined the GOP in voting yes.
The vote came as congressional Republicans, and a handful of Democrats, continued to reject efforts to halt a war that is costing US taxpayers roughly $1 billion a day—a price tag that some in the GOP have openly embraced.
The vote also came less than a year after congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump approved a sprawling reconciliation package that delivered another round of tax cuts primarily to the richest Americans and large corporations, while enacting unprecedented cuts to Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance.
Nonpartisan analysts have estimated that the GOP budget law would add more than $4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.
“American families don’t need a lecture on fiscal responsibility from the same politicians who just added $4 trillion to the debt with their so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill’—one of the most expensive pieces of legislation in American history,” said Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee. “When it comes to cutting taxes for billionaires, they have never had a problem blowing up the deficit. This amendment is nothing more than a show to cover up their hypocrisy on the debt.”
Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) said following Wednesday's vote that "the so-called 'balanced budget amendment' is the Republicans’ latest backdoor attempt at gutting Americans’ hard-earned benefits."
"It would force drastic cuts to Medicare, Social Security, food assistance, veterans’ benefits, and other programs American families depend on," said Larson. "My Republican colleagues can say this amendment is about fiscal responsibility all they want, but the reality is that the budget they passed last year ballooned our deficit by $4 trillion to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy and give ICE a slush fund larger than most nations' militaries."
"Not only would it effectively bar tax increases, but it would allow unlimited tax cuts, thus forcing huge, unacceptable program cuts. It should be roundly rejected."
Ahead of the amendment vote, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) warned that the amendment's passage and ratification by US states would "immediately devastate programs that are appropriated annually, such as housing assistance, education, and scientific and medical research."
"And eventually it would require cutting programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and food assistance," the think tank added. "Claims that these programs would ultimately be protected ring hollow, given their share of the budget. If policymakers decide to shield those programs from cuts, the amendment would require lawmakers to devastate the rest of the federal budget—including Medicaid, food assistance, housing assistance, education, scientific and medical research, farm aid, national parks, transportation, airport security, mine safety—since revenue increases would be so hard to achieve."
Under the proposed amendment, two-thirds support in each chamber of Congress would be required to approve any new tax or increase in the tax rate, hamstringing lawmakers' ability to raise revenue.
"Ultimately, meeting longstanding and broadly popular commitments to seniors’ retirement and healthcare, and managing the future risks associated with higher debt, will require substantially more revenue," said CBPP's Brendan Duke. "This constitutional amendment moves in the opposite direction. Not only would it effectively bar tax increases, but it would allow unlimited tax cuts, thus forcing huge, unacceptable program cuts. It should be roundly rejected."