SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
ACLU Calls for Voting Rights Protections Amid Reintroduction of John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act
Today, members of the U.S. Senate formally reintroduced the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act (JLVRAA), a critical piece of legislation aimed at restoring and bolstering key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) that have been dismantled over the last 12 years, most notably by the U.S. Supreme Court's 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder.
“We have spent the last decade fighting the unraveling of one of our nation’s most transformative civil rights achievements,” said Molly McGrath, director of the ACLU’s National Director of Democracy Campaigns. “The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act is essential — not just to reverse the damage, but to proactively protect every voter from race-based discrimination and modern-day voter suppression. As we face threats to so many freedoms we hold dear, we must preserve the essential right to vote and therefore the ability to hold our elected officials accountable.”
Named in honor of the late civil rights hero Congressman John Lewis, the bill seeks to re-establish preclearance, the federal government’s authority to review and block discriminatory changes to voting laws in jurisdictions with a record of voting rights violations. It also expands that review to cover nationwide threats to voting access, such as discriminatory voter roll purges, restrictive voter ID laws, and polling place closures that disproportionately impact communities of color and people with disabilities.
Since Shelby, which nullified the VRA’s preclearance provision, states across the country have enacted a vastly growing number of anti-voter laws targeting historically disenfranchised and underserved communities. The reintroduction of the JLVRAA comes at a pivotal time, as American democracy continues to face coordinated assaults on access to the ballot box. The bill outlines a modern preclearance coverage formula based on recent voting rights violations and creates greater transparency for potentially discriminatory voting changes.
It has been 60 years since Bloody Sunday in Selma, Alabama, when John Lewis and hundreds of peaceful protestors were brutally attacked for demanding voting rights, and the enactment of the VRA that followed because of those protests. Those gains are under threat now more than ever. The JLVRAA honors that legacy and recommits us to the promise that all eligible voters — regardless of race, zip code, or background — deserve an equal voice in our democracy.
A copy of this press release can be found here: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-stresses-need-for-federal-voting-rights-protections-amid-senate-reintroduction-of-john-lewis-voting-rights-advancement-act
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) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
'Cowardice': Senate GOP Brushes Whistleblowers Aside to Confirm Trump Loyalist Emil Bove
"Bove, facing a wave of damning allegations that the overwhelming majority of Republican senators refused to take seriously, has been confirmed for one reason only: obedience to Trump."
Jul 30, 2025
Nearly every Senate Republican on Tuesday voted in favor of confirming Trump loyalist Emil Bove to a lifetime federal court seat, brushing aside whistleblowers who alleged that the Justice Department official expressed support for defying court orders and lied during his sworn judiciary committee testimony.
The final Senate vote on Bove's confirmation to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit was 50-49, with every member of the Democratic caucus voting no. Just two Republicans—Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska—opposed Bove's confirmation.
Maggie Jo Buchanan, interim executive director of the advocacy group Demand Justice, said the vote "represents some of the worst aspects of far too many elected to office in Washington—cowardice and political expediency over duty to constituents."
"The American people want and deserve judges who are independent and fair, not ones who have done nothing to hide their political loyalties," she added. "Bove, facing a wave of damning allegations that the overwhelming majority of Republican senators refused to take seriously, has been confirmed for one reason only: obedience to Trump."
Tuesday's vote came hours after The Washington Post reported that a third whistleblower had shared evidence with senators suggesting that Bove "misled lawmakers about his handling of the dismissal of public corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams."
Democratic senators demanded an investigation into the allegations before the final vote to confirm Bove, but Republicans rushed ahead with the vote anyway.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said in a statement following Tuesday's vote that "this sham, hide-the-ball confirmation process is a new low for subservient Senate Republicans."
"Even as the lawless Emil Bove appears to have misled the committee about multiple, credible, backstopped allegations of misconduct, this body has sunk to simply being a partisan rubber stamp for President Trump," said Whitehouse. "Republicans have ignored whistleblower after whistleblower who bravely came forward to corroborate evidence of Bove's misconduct."
"Bove's confirmation sets the stage for the president and his allies to seek out favorable rulings, no matter how unconstitutional their actions may be."
Whistleblower Aid, a group representing one of the Bove whistleblowers, said prior to Tuesday's vote that Trump's Justice Department claimed to have lost a complaint "documenting Emil Bove's contempt for the rule of law" before finding it again on Monday.
The group noted that the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General "received an online copy of the complaint from Whistleblower Aid on May 2 and signed in a couriered copy three days later." The complaint, according to Whistleblower Aid, "provided documentary evidence that Bove and other senior DOJ officials instructed department lawyers to violate a court order relating to the Trump administration's immigration deportation policies."
"They also directed DOJ lawyers to commit perjury in federal court to cover up the violation, the evidence shows," according to the group. "Yet the office now says the documents were lost and refound only after Whistleblower Aid presented proof of submission and receipt. Evidence relevant to the Senate's final vote on the Bove nomination has thus sat unacknowledged for almost three months, foreclosing the possibility of any meaningful investigation into a lifetime judicial appointment."
Last month, The New York Times reported that one whistleblower—a DOJ lawyer who has since been fired—alleged that Bove said earlier this year that the Justice Department "would need to consider telling the courts 'fuck you'" if they ruled against the Trump administration's attempts to deport immigrants without due process.
Caroline Ciccone, president of the watchdog group Accountable.US, said Tuesday that Bove's confirmation "should send a chill down the spine of every American."
"Bove has shown total loyalty to Trump above the American people; refused to commit to recusing himself on cases involving the president; and is the subject of multiple whistleblower complaints," said Ciccone. "His extreme ideological record and ethical lapses have raised grave concerns about his integrity, but that didn't stop Republican senators from ramming his confirmation through, falling in line with Trump's scheme of hand-selecting judges who vow personal loyalty over the rule of law."
"Bove's confirmation sets the stage for the president and his allies to seek out favorable rulings, no matter how unconstitutional their actions may be," she warned. "And that is a threat to fundamental freedoms everywhere."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Enough Is Enough': Sanders to Force Votes on Blocking Trump Arms Sales to Israel
"The time is long overdue for Congress to use the leverage we have—tens of billions in arms and military aid—to demand that Israel end these atrocities," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Jul 30, 2025
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders said he intends to force votes on Wednesday to block the Trump administration's effort to send billions of dollars' worth of additional bombs and assault rifles to Israel as the country's military starves and massacres Gaza's population.
Sanders (I-Vt.) first introduced the resolutions in March after the Trump administration notified Congress of its plans to send Israel more weaponry, including thousands of 1,000-pound bombs and tens of thousands of assault rifles.
The senator's resolutions, S.J.Res.34 and S.J.Res.41, aim to prohibit the sale of 1,000-pound bombs, Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) guidance kits, and assault rifles, as well as related logistical support. The joint resolutions are privileged, meaning they cannot be amended and are not subject to the Senate filibuster, requiring just a simple-majority vote to pass.
"U.S. taxpayers have spent tens of billions of dollars in support of the racist, extremist Netanyahu government. Enough is enough," Sanders said in a statement Tuesday. "We cannot continue to spend taxpayer money on a government which has killed some 60,000 Palestinians and wounded more than 143,000—most of whom are women, children, and the elderly. We cannot continue supporting a government which has blocked humanitarian aid, caused massive famine, and literally starved the people of Gaza."
"The time is long overdue for Congress to use the leverage we have—tens of billions in arms and military aid—to demand that Israel end these atrocities," the senator added.
"Continuing these arms sales would violate U.S. laws that prohibit assistance to governments engaged in gross human rights abuses and obstruction of aid."
Since the start of President Donald Trump's second term, his administration has approved around $12 billion in arms sales to Israel and lifted a Biden-era block on the delivery of 2,000-pound bombs that Israeli forces have used to commit atrocities against Palestinians.
Earlier this year, Sanders led an unsuccessful effort to block the Trump administration's sale of nearly $9 billion in weapons to the Israeli government. Just 14 senators, all Democrats, backed the resolutions.
But there are some indications that support for blocking arms sales could grow as the starvation crisis that Israel has imposed on Gaza intensifies. Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who did not support the resolutions Sanders tried to pass in April, said earlier this week that he would vote for "an end to any United States support whatsoever" for Israel "until there is a demonstrable change in the direction of Israeli policy."
"My litmus test will be simple: No aid of any kind as long as there are starving children in Gaza due to the action or inaction of the Israeli government," said King.
Sanders argued that cutting off offensive U.S. military support for Israel is both a moral and legal necessity. In a press release announcing the impending votes, the senator's office noted that "the arms sales in question clearly violate the criteria laid out in the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act."
"Reliable human rights monitors have documented numerous incidents involving the use of 1,000-pound bombs and JDAMs in illegal strikes leading to unacceptable civilian death tolls," Sanders' office explained. "These include strikes in which hundreds of civilians have been killed and strikes on humanitarian facilities, including U.N. schools. The rifles in question will go to arm a police force overseen by Itamar Ben-Gvir, who advocates for the forcible expulsion of Palestinians from the region, who has been convicted of support for terrorism by an Israeli court, and who has distributed weapons to violent settlers in the West Bank."
Hassan El-Tayyab, legislative director for Middle East policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, applauded Sanders for moving once again to block U.S. arms sales to Israel "in light of its devastating conduct in Gaza."
"The Israeli military has used U.S.-origin weapons in attacks that have killed Palestinian civilians, destroyed civilian infrastructure, and deepened an ongoing humanitarian catastrophe," said El-Tayyab. "Continuing these arms sales would violate U.S. laws that prohibit assistance to governments engaged in gross human rights abuses and obstruction of aid. This resolution rightly affirms that U.S. weapons must not fuel further atrocities, and that only diplomacy, not more bombs, can bring an end to this crisis."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Exceptionally Dangerous': Trump EPA Targets Endangerment Finding That Enables Climate Rules
"Zeldin's assertion that the EPA shouldn't address greenhouse gas emissions is like a fire chief claiming that they shouldn't fight fires," said one critic. "It is as malicious as it is absurd."
Jul 29, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump's administration faced an onslaught of criticism on Tuesday for starting the process of repealing the 2009 legal opinion that greenhouse gases endanger public health and the welfare of the American people—which has enabled federal regulations aimed at the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency over the past 15 years.
Confirming reports from last week, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin unveiled the rule to rescind the 2009 "endangerment finding" at a truck dealership in Indiana. According to The New York Times, he said that "the proposal would, if finalized, amount to the largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States."
If the administration succeeds in repealing the legal finding, the EPA would lack authority under the Clean Air Act to impose standards for greenhouse gas emissions—meaning the move would kill vehicle regulations. As with the reporting last week, the formal announcement was sharply condemned by climate and health advocates and experts.
"Greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and are the root cause of the climate crisis," said Deanna Noël with Public Citizen's Climate Program, ripping the administration's effort as "grossly misguided and exceptionally dangerous."
"This isn't just a denial of science and reality—it's a betrayal of public trust and yet another signal that this administration is working for corporate interests, and no one else."
"Stripping the EPA of its ability to regulate greenhouse gases is like throwing away the fire extinguisher while the house is already burning," she warned. "The administration is shamelessly handing Big Oil a hall pass to pollute unchecked and dodge accountability, leaving working families to bear the costs through worsening health outcomes, rising energy bills, more climate-fueled extreme weather, and an increasingly unstable future. This isn't just a denial of science and reality—it's a betrayal of public trust and yet another signal that this administration is working for corporate interests, and no one else."
Noël was far from alone in accusing the administration's leaders of serving the polluters who helped Trump return to power.
"Zeldin and Trump are concerned only with maximizing short-term profits for polluting corporations and the CEOs funneling millions of dollars to their campaign coffers," said Jim Walsh, policy director at Food & Water Watch. "Zeldin's assertion that the EPA shouldn't address greenhouse gas emissions is like a fire chief claiming that they shouldn't fight fires. It is as malicious as it is absurd."
Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Safe Climate Transport Campaign, similarly said that the proposal is "purely a political bow to the oil industry" and "Trump is putting fealty to Big Oil over sound science and people's health."
Earthworks policy director Lauren Pagel also called the rule "a perverse gift to the fossil fuel industry that rejects yearslong efforts by the agency, scientists, NGOs, frontline communities, and industry to protect public health and our environment."
"Donald Trump and Lee Zeldin are playing with fire—and with floods and droughts and public health risks, too," she stressed, as about 168 million Americans on Tuesday faced advisories for extreme heat made more likely by the climate crisis.
🚨 The Trump administration just took its most extreme step yet in rolling back climate protections.
[image or embed]
— Sierra Club (@sierraclub.org) July 29, 2025 at 4:58 PM
Justin Chen, president of American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, which represents over 8,000 EPA workers nationwide, said that the repeal plan "is reckless and will have far-reaching, disastrous consequences for the USA."
"EPA career professionals have worked for decades on the development of the science and policy of greenhouse gases to protect the American public," he continued, "and this policy decision completely disregards all of their work in service to the public."
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) highlighted that Chris Wright, head of the Department of Energy, joined Zeldin at the Tuesday press conference and "announced a DOE 'climate science study' alongside remarks that were rife with climate denial talking points and disinformation."
UCS president Gretchen Goldman said that "it's abundantly clear what's going on here. The Trump administration refuses to acknowledge robust climate science and is using the kitchen sink approach: making every specious argument it can to avoid complying with the law."
"But getting around the Clean Air Act won't be easy," she added. "The science establishing climate harms to human health was unequivocally clear back in 2009, and more than 15 years later, the evidence has only accumulated."
Today, Zeldin’s EPA plans to release a proposal to revoke the Endangerment Finding, which is the legal & scientific foundation of EPA’s responsibility to limit climate-heating greenhouse gas pollution from major sources.
[image or embed]
— Moms Clean Air Force (@momscleanairforce.org) July 29, 2025 at 12:58 PM
David Bookbinder, director of law and policy at the Environmental Integrity Project, was a lead attorney in the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court case Massachusetts vs. EPA, which affirmed the agency's authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and ultimately led to the endangerment finding two years later.
Bookbinder said Tuesday that "because this approach has already been rejected by the courts—and doubtless will be again—this baseless effort to pretend that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses that cause climate change are not harmful pollutants is nothing more than a transparent attempt to delay and derail our efforts to control greenhouse pollution at the worst possible time, when deadly floods and heat waves are killing more people every day."
In a statement from the Environmental Protection Network, which is made up of ex-EPA staff, Joseph Goffman, former assistant administrator of the agency's Office of Air and Radiation, also cited the 2007 ruling.
"This decision is both legally indefensible and morally bankrupt," Goffman said of the Tuesday proposal. "The Supreme Court made clear that EPA cannot ignore science or evade its responsibilities under the Clean Air Act. By walking away from the endangerment finding, EPA has not only broken with precedent; it has broken with reality."
Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, responded to the EPA proposal with defiance, declaring that "Donald Trump and his Big Oil donors are lighting the world on fire and fueling their private jets with young people's lives. We refuse to be sacrifices for their greed. We're coming for them, and we're not backing down."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular