July, 16 2025, 12:20pm EDT

More than 100 Members of Congress Co-Sponsor Legislation to Protect Workers from Extreme Heat
Bill directs quick action from OSHA to establish a credible set of protections for workers facing heat exposure as summers get warmer
In the middle of another sweltering July afternoon, members of Congress, led by Congresswoman Judy Chu (D-Calif.) and Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), flanked by workers and advocates, today re-introduced the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury and Fatality Prevention Act in both the U.S. House and Senate.
Named for Asunción Valdivia, a worker who died in 2004 after picking grapes for ten hours straight in 105-degree temperatures, the bill directs the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to establish effective heat standards to protect workers. The mandated standard would include requirements triggered based on exposure thresholds, including hydration, paid and scheduled breaks, an acclimatization plan, and more. The standard would have to be at least as good as the most protective state standard, which is currently California’s, and would cover both indoor and outdoor workplaces, as well as employees, contractors and sub-contractors.
In response, Ernesto Archila, policy director with Public Citizen, issued the following statement:
"Workers in America are facing unprecedented dangers from climate-driven heat and extreme weather, and things are only getting worse. It is far past time for a strong national standard to protect workers from illness and death caused by exposure to extreme heat. The provisions mandated in this bill, including temperature triggers, acclimatization, water, shade and paid rest breaks, would save countless lives. They represent a common sense and common decency approach that employers could quickly adopt. American workers deserve no less, and they urgently need it. Today, OSHA is in the final stage of issuing a final rule on this issue. It is imperative that the rule maintain the integrity and high standards called for in the Asuncíon Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury and Fatality Prevention Act. We applaud Senators Padilla and Cortez Masto and Representatives Chu, Grijalva, Adams and Scott, as well as the dozens of Senators and Congresspersons who have joined them in this long effort. It's time to bring a high quality, protective standard to the finish line for American workers."
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
'Hunger Disaster Unrolling Before Our Eyes': Alarm Grows Over Trump Food Aid Evisceration
“SNAP participation is falling because the Trump administration has intentionally kicked people off of the program—leaving Americans hungry and still struggling to afford food,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Oct 23, 2026
An analysis published Thursday showed that millions of Americans have lost critical food assistance since President Donald Trump signed last year's massive Republican tax giveaway for the superrich, with soaring grocery prices and cuts to school meals exacerbating the crisis.
According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), approximately 5.5 million people, including roughly 2 million children, have lost Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) assistance since Trump signed the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) in July 2025.
The legislation approved the deepest cuts to SNAP—also known as food stamps—and Medicaid in those programs' histories while slashing billions of dollars from other essential social programs to fund massive tax breaks for billionaires and corporations.
This, at a time when more than 47 million Americans—including 1 in 5 US children—are living in food-insecure households.
The 5.5 million people who have lost SNAP represent 13% of the program's recipients, according to CBPP. The decline is far below projections made by the Congressional Budget Office.
"The declines are especially pronounced in some states," the report noted. "SNAP participation fell in Arizona by nearly 51%... The caseload declines are 20% or more in Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Nebraska, Nevada, and Oklahoma, and—using more recent state data—in Indiana, Kansas, and Texas."
In absolute numbers, Texas saw the biggest loss of SNAP recipients, with 709,435 fewer enrollees. Florida lost 665,935 SNAP enrollees, while Arizona had 408,204 fewer and California lost 333,062.
The CBPP report follows an analysis released Tuesday by Unrig Our Economy and Americans for Tax Fairness that showed how Latino SNAP recipients have been disproportionately affected by food stamp cuts. The groups estimated that 1.5 million Latinos have been kicked off SNAP since Trump signed the OBBBA, with Texas (396,164) and Arizona (200,124) hardest-hit.
More cuts are highly likely, as "starting in October 2027, most states will have to pay between 5-15% of SNAP benefit costs, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars a year in many states," according to CBPP.
"The magnitude of the cost shift and the urgency surrounding error rates incentivized states to take drastic measures to reduce their payment error rates quickly and cut program costs, even if it meant delaying or improperly denying benefits to eligible people," the analysis warns.
The OBBBA's SNAP cuts, combined with stricter eligibility requirements, have forced schools across the country to scale back universal free meal programs amid declining federal reimbursements.
The Washington Post reported Thursday that school districts are experiencing ballooning unpaid lunch bills and struggling to ensure children are fed. In rural Indiana, one district’s share of students qualifying for free or reduced-price meals plunged from 66% to 44% in a year, while its lunch debt has already reached $10,000. In San Antonio, Texas, the number of schools offering free meals to every student under a federal program fell from 48 to 16. Nationwide, the average number of children receiving free school lunches dropped by 600,000 between fiscal years 2025 and 2026.
Making matters worse, many eligible immigrants are not applying for SNAP benefits out of fear it could affect their citizenship prospects.
Food banks and other charities are having to meet needs the government once addressed.
“It’s been getting out of control since last year,” Paco Vélez, president and chief executive of the Feeding South Florida food bank, told the Post. “It’s all created a situation where families are needing more and more assistance.”
The CBPP and Post reports came on the same day as a "Food Misery Index," published by the office of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), offered a detailed view of how the combined impact of SNAP cuts and skyrocketing grocery prices—exacerbated by Trump policies including tariffs, the deadly immigration crackdown, and the illegal war of choice on Iran—"has stripped more than $22 billion from American families since July 2025."
“SNAP participation is falling because the Trump administration has intentionally kicked people off of the program—leaving Americans hungry and still struggling to afford food,” Warren wrote Wednesday in a letter to US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins.
“Instead of reaching for tools to mitigate these threats to families and working to bring down costs, the administration continues to sit idly by, peddling false narratives about the drop in SNAP participation, while delivering a one-two punch to American families who are struggling to put food on their tables," the senator continued.
"With grocery prices and food insecurity on the rise," Warren added, "I urge the administration to work with Congress to immediately reverse its harmful cuts to SNAP."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Completely Dismisses Rape of 12-Year-Old Child, Calls Amy Acton's Mother a 'Smart Woman'
"There are very serious sexual abuse allegations," said an NBC reporter. "Quiet," snapped the Republican president of the United States.
Oct 23, 2026
US President Donald Trump on Friday shamelessly defended and celebrated Ohio Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy's widely condemned attack ad against his Democratic opponent, Amy Acton, while feigning ignorance about her account of the sexual abuse she experienced at the hands of her stepfather when she was a child.
"It's a mother speaking badly against Amy Acton," Trump told reporters of the Ramaswamy ad, which features Acton's estranged biological mother, Donna Arthur, calling the Democratic candidate a "liar." Acton's account of her childhood is backed by court records, which show that her stepfather, Cledith Arthur, was charged with rape in July 1978 and indicted by a grand jury later that year.
Trump said Friday that he doesn't "know anything about a stepfather," despite being made aware of Acton's past earlier this week. The president called Acton's mother a "smart woman."
"I know that recently, a mother got on television and said that her daughter should not be governor of Ohio," Trump said, after repeatedly snapping at NBC reporter Monica Alba, who tried to get the president to acknowledge Acton's account of sexual abuse.
"Do the sexual abuse allegations mean nothing to you, sir?" Alba asked. "There are very serious sexual abuse allegations."
Watch the exchange:
YIKES 😳 Trump snaps at a reporter asking him about why he's dismissing sexual abuse allegations 👇WOMAN REPORTER: Do the sexual abuse allegations mean nothing to you, sir?TRUMP: Wait. Wait! Wait wait wait. Slow down. Who are you with?REPORTER: NBC, sir. But they are very serious sexual abuse allegationsTRUMP: Quiet! Isn't she a fresh person? You're a horrible little reporter, aren't you?
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 23, 2026
Trump's comments to reporters on Friday marked just the last instance of the president defending and championing Ramaswamy's ad, which the president characterized as "very powerful" in a Thursday Truth Social post.
"The Press is trying to convince everyone that this Ad is bad, because it's so good!" Trump crowed. "Who wouldn't use such an Ad?"
HuffPost White House correspondent SV Dáte wrote Friday that Trump is "doing his damnedest to make this truly vile ad the closing argument of this midterm."
When a reporter in the gaggle once again explained to Trump that the backstory of Acton's estrangement from her mother included that her "stepfather was indicted for rape" and if that changed his position on the ad, Trump immediately cut her off and said, "No, no."
"It's a mother speaking badly of Amy Acton," Trump said, "and to me it's very easy."
Q: Now that you know the backstory about Amy Acton and her stepfather and why she hasn't talked to her mom in so long -- her stepfather was indicted for rape -- do you change your mind about the ad?TRUMP: No. No. It's a mother speaking badly against Amy Acton. You don't know anything.
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 23, 2026
The race between Ramaswamy and Acton is expected to be very close, though some analysts have shifted their assessments of the race in the Democrat's favor amid growing outcry over the ad, including from Ohio's outgoing Republican Gov. Mike DeWine—who endorsed Ramaswamy earlier this year.
Ramaswamy has shown no sign of backing away from the 60-second spot, and his campaign is expected to spend millions airing it in the days leading up to the midterm contest.
During a campaign stop on Friday, Ramaswamy accused his political opponents of "lying" about the ad and insisted that it had "nothing to do" with childhood abuse. The ad does not specifically mention Acton's account of abuse, but Arthur has previously accused Acton of lying about being raped by her stepfather—to whom Arthur remained married until his death.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Consumer Sentiment Data Another Sign Trump 'Affordability Crisis Is Getting Worse, Not Better'
"High prices and borrowing costs are making it harder for people to afford everyday necessities, and inflation expectations are rising again."
Oct 23, 2026
With early voting underway for the midterm elections and Democrats campaigning on how prices have soared under a Republican-controlled Congress and President Donald Trump, data released Friday show US consumer sentiment nearing an all-time low.
The University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers announced that its Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 48 this month, down from 48.1 in September and 53.6 last October. The record low was 44.8, this past May.
Surveys of Consumers director Joanne Hsu noted Friday that "increases in sentiment among Republicans and Democrats were balanced by declines among independents," and also highlighted some of the survey's other findings.
UMich consumer sentiment... 48.0... 2nd-worst in history
[image or embed]
— Mike Zaccardi, CFA, CMT (@mikezaccardi.bsky.social) October 23, 2026 at 10:02 AM
"While year-ahead business conditions improved about 14%, they stand 16% less than last October's read," she continued. "This month's decline in the Current Conditions subindex was driven entirely by buying conditions for durables, which plunged 18% on the basis of higher interest rates and rising concerns about the affordability of such purchases. Purchasing power continues to dominate consumer views of the economy. Sentiment is now 10% below a year ago and 15% less than February, just prior to the Iran conflict."
"Year-ahead inflation expectations ticked up from 4.6% last month to 4.7% this month," said Hsu, who also put out a related report on inflation. "The current reading substantially exceeds the 3.4% seen in February before the Iran conflict began, along with all 2024 readings. Long-run inflation expectations also stepped up from 3.4% in September to 3.5%, notably higher than their 2024 range of 2.8% to 3.2%. Inflation expectations over both time horizons increased for the second straight month to their highest readings since May."
Data released last week by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics show inflation grew faster than expected in September, partly due to Trump's illegal Iran War, and an online tracker published earlier this month by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, highlights how costs have jumped for childcare, electricity, gasoline, groceries, healthcare, and rent.
Tonantzin Carmona, a former Biden administration adviser who now directs economic policy at The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, called the University of Michigan's new consumer sentiment numbers "another sign that the affordability crisis is getting worse, not better."
"High prices and borrowing costs are making it harder for people to afford everyday necessities, and inflation expectations are rising again," she said. "What's more, our research shows that debt payments are eating up more than half of every dollar of real income growth, with debt payments rising more than eight times as fast as take-home income since the end of 2022."
"As inflation outpaces wage gains," she added, "workers are being squeezed from every direction—and October's consumer sentiment numbers, which are the second-lowest on record, reflect just how little families have left after paying their bills."
In 1980, inflation was 14% and unemployment was 8%. Consumer sentiment: 52.In 2026: still 52.Turns out Americans aren't just worried about the economy https://newsletter.platypuseconomics.com/p/its-not-the-economy-its-whos-running
[image or embed]
— Justin Wolfers (@justinwolfers.bsky.social) October 21, 2026 at 10:04 AM
In the lead-up to his colleagues updating consumer sentiment figures, University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers published a Wednesday blog post noting that "every couple of weeks, someone on cable TV sits me down, points a camera at me, and asks the exact same thing. Our economic statistics look pretty good, so why are Americans so gloomy?"
"My prime suspect: An overwhelming majority of Americans rate economic policy under Trump as poor—the worst it has ever been—and they worry what this means for their economic futures," Wolfers wrote. He took "the share of people who say the government is doing a poor job" and subtracted "the share who say it's doing a good job," with a higher figure signaling a "harsher verdict."
"In late 2024, the verdict stood at +14. That means 14 percentage points more Americans thought the government was doing a poor job than a good one," he explained. By last May, when the consumer sentiment was the worst on record, "it had hit +66."
Based on his examination of the survey results over the years, Wolfers decided that "the next time someone points a camera at me and asks why Americans are so gloomy when the numbers look fine, here's my answer. They're not misreading the economy. They're reading the people running it. And their verdict today is the harshest on record."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Let’s Be Clear,’ Expert Says, There Is ‘No Role’ for DOJ or Todd Blanche in Election Certification
Blanche said the DOJ would not "improperly interfere" in elections, but did not rule out blocking certification of a state's election results in a hypothetical "doomsday scenario."
Oct 23, 2026
Election experts pushed back Friday after US Attorney General Todd Blanche refused to rule out the possibility that the Department of Justice could try to stop states from certifying elections in November.
Asked by reporters Thursday whether the DOJ may try to block a state from certifying its results, Blanche responded that "of course there are scenarios that we could all come up with hypothetically—some doomsday scenario, for example" in which the department may need to intervene.
"I don’t think it’s proper to make any kind of conclusory statements about what’s going to happen in the future because I have no idea what’s going to happen in the future," he continued. "It is not DOJ’s intention—and it’s never our intention—to improperly interfere with elections or the state certification process, but to say that there’s no circumstances that we would ever do that—of course I’m not going to say that.”
“But am I planning my days around the election to be somewhere to not certify? Of course not,” added Blanche, who was previously President Donald Trump's personal attorney.
Lauren Miller Karalunas, senior counsel for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice, emphasized on Friday that regardless of what hypothetical "scenario" Blanche may have been alluding to, there is no legitimate way for the DOJ to stop the certification of election results.
"Let's be clear: The state certification process is just that—a state process," Karalunas said. "There is no role for the federal government to play that's not inherently improper."
"Rest assured, state certification processes were created to meet this moment," she continued. "Centuries ago, state legislatures recognized that bad actors could use the process to manipulate election outcomes. They built in safeguards specifically designed to stop that from happening."
Blanche's refusal to categorically rule out federal intervention alarmed many observers, especially in light of Trump's threats to meddle in elections, including by having them "nationalized" against federal law.
Trump used false claims of widespread voter fraud to pressure states to decertify unfavorable election results in 2020 and pushed the DOJ to assist those efforts. In January, FBI agents seized 2020 election ballots and records from a voting hub in Fulton County, Georgia, in an attempt to legitimize the allegations, which had already been extensively investigated.
Under Blanche—who days ago declared "I work for President Trump"—the DOJ has already sued California in an attempt to prevent ballots from more than 20,000 registered voters from being counted, based on largely unsubstantiated claims that they were noncitizens.
On Thursday, the DOJ sued Alaska to potentially block certification of its Senate election if Democrat Mary Peltola defeats Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan and votes for another candidate—also named Dan Sullivan—could have changed the outcome. The DOJ alleges that the challenger entered the race to confuse the senator’s supporters into voting for him.
Armed agents from Homeland Security Investigations, a branch of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, have been going door to door in California and other states, questioning residents about their citizenship and voting histories.
On Wednesday, a federal court ruled that these operations likely violated the Voting Rights Act's prohibition on voter intimidation.
Blanche and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin have also declined to rule out sending immigration or other federal agents to polling places, despite federal laws banning "troops or armed men" from places where elections are being held.

Max Flugrath, communications director for the voting rights group Fair Fight Action, said Blanche's comments on Thursday were unprecedented.
"I don’t know of another US attorney general who has publicly entertained using the DOJ to block states from certifying an election," he said.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) responded that "Senate Democrats have been preparing" for potential election shenanigans by the Trump administration "for months, and will be ready for whatever they try."
"As Trump and his cronies attempt to steal this election, we are fighting them at every turn," he wrote on social media.
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) agreed during an interview with CNN that Democrats remained "vigilant" and were "ready for any scenario."
"We've got litigators ready," he told host Kasie Hunt. "We've got... organizers ready in case things get difficult... and so we're not going to have a failure of imagination in terms of what people are capable of in terms of overturning an election."
"But I also think—it's important to remember that part of the game here is that people are desirous of making voters feel like their vote won't count," Schatz added. "And so, the best way to overcome any kind of people screwing around is to get out there and vote in large enough numbers that these little marginal moves that they could or may or may not make won't work."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Jayapal, Sanders Question Zuckerberg Over Alleged Meta Interference in Brazilian Election
"It is unacceptable for any social media platform to favor one political candidate or party over another, whether deliberately or inadvertently."
Oct 23, 2026
Over a dozen US lawmakers, led by Rep. Pramila Jayapal and Sen. Bernie Sanders, wrote to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Thursday to demand answers about the social media giant's alleged interference in Brazil's presidential runoff election.
Leftist Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is facing far-right Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro, the son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, in Sunday's election. Lula has asked the Superior Electoral Court to probe his challenger over "improper use" of a social network and disqualify him, and Bolsonaro—an ally of US President Donald Trump—has similarly sought Lula's disqualification.
Meanwhile, US-based Meta—which owns Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp—claimed to the Brazilian court that it has adopted measures to ensure equal treatment of the candidates. But the members of Congress remain alarmed, and research released by the corporate accountability group Ekō on Friday, after their letter was sent, bolsters their concerns, showing that "Instagram's algorithm aggressively promoted pro-Bolsonaro and right-leaning content to a brand-new, politically neutral account."
Sanders, Jayapal, and 11 other Democrats in the House of Representatives stressed to Zuckerberg that "in democratic elections, it is incumbent upon social media companies to ensure that candidates receive equitable treatment and access with regards to distribution, moderation, and recommendation of campaign-related content across their platforms."
"We are, therefore, deeply concerned about credible reports of Meta platforms restricting or suppressing content associated with the Lula campaign while amplifying or recommending content associated with the Bolsonaro campaign, thereby creating starkly unequal conditions in the digital environment," they continued. "Given the critical role social media plays in political communication, it is unacceptable for any social media platform to favor one political candidate or party over another, whether deliberately or inadvertently."
"As US lawmakers who support free and fair elections at home and abroad, it is our responsibility to conduct oversight to ensure that US social media platforms are not influencing the outcomes of elections abroad," the lawmakers said. "We urge you to take immediate action to ensure that, going forward, candidates and their campaigns in democratic elections receive equal treatment and access on your platforms."
The lawmakers—including Democratic Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Maxwell Alejandro Frost (Calif.), Jonathan Jackson (Ill.), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Mike Quigley (Ill.), Delia Ramirez (Ill.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), and Nydia Velázquez (NY)—laid out a series of "alarming reports" from late September to mid-October.
They also noted recent events at the Superior Electoral Court, and requested "an immediate briefing on Friday, October 23" from Meta about its measures to comply with a recent order from the tribunal, "including 17 different initiatives and a human review system for presidential campaign ad accounts."
The 13 US lawmakers also requested written responses to a series of detailed questions by November 4, and urged "additional action to ensure that, going forward, candidates in democratic elections at home and abroad benefit from an even playing field on Meta’s platforms."
Separately, on Friday, with the US midterm elections less than two weeks away, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) demanded answers from not only Meta, but also Google, TikTok, and X about their efforts to stop election misinformation from spreading on their platforms to American voters.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Research Shows Meta Algorithm 'Actively Boosting' Bolsonaro Ahead of Brazil Election
"Meta is interfering in Brazil’s elections in plain sight—boosting Bolsonaro and suppressing Lula content."
Oct 23, 2026
Meta has insisted that its social media algorithms treat Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and right-wing challenger Flávio Bolsonaro equally, but research published Friday shows that Instagram is "actively boosting" Bolsonaro and conservative content in the days ahead of the country's high-stakes runoff election.
To test whether Meta was giving either of two presidential candidates favorable treatment, researchers with the nonprofit organization Ekō created a new Instagram account on October 14 and sought to show equal interest in Lula and Bolsonaro, the son of former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro. The researchers followed the accounts of both Lula and the younger Bolsonaro, as well as their respective parties, and viewed a selection of posts without engaging.
The researchers concluded at the end of their experiment that "Instagram’s algorithm aggressively promoted pro-Bolsonaro and right-leaning content" while "actively suppressing Lula’s official campaign account."
The content that Instagram's algorithm pushed toward the newly created account "was overwhelmingly political," the researchers found. "Of all 50 posts, 74%, were pro-Bolsonaro/right/leaning and only 18% were pro-Lula/left-leaning—glaring evidence of a significant right-wing bias in Instagram’s recommender systems."
"Pro-Lula/left-leaning content performed better per post on every engagement measure, yet was recommended far less often, undercutting any claim that Instagram’s algorithm is simply showing users content that is performing best," Ekō said. "Pro-Lula/left-leaning posts averaged 398,000 likes, around 64,000 comments, and 108,000 shares each—more than double the likes and over seven times the comments, and more than nine times the shares of the average pro-Bolsonaro/right-leaning post."
One of the posts that Instagram's algorithm served up to the new account features military police officer Sargento Castro standing alongside a smiling Bolsonaro.
"If you try to fight back," the caption of the post reads, "you’re going straight into a body bag."

Vanessa Lemos, a senior campaigner at Ekō, said the research shows Meta is "interfering in Brazil’s elections in plain sight—boosting Bolsonaro and suppressing Lula content."
"Meta must prove it is complying with the electoral court’s equal-treatment order, verify who pays for political ads, and make its moderation decisions appealable," said Lemos. "Unaccountable Big Tech cannot be allowed to derail democracy."
On Tuesday, Meta told Brazil's Superior Electoral Court that it "has adopted measures to ensure equal treatment," of Lula and Bolsonaro ahead of the October 25 runoff, Reuters reported. Lula has requested Bolsonaro's disqualification from the presidential race over Meta's alleged election interference. Meta employees have acknowledged internally that Lula's accounts have faced restrictions in the lead-up to the election.
Meta's conduct has drawn scrutiny from United Nations experts, who warned on Wednesday that "reports of restrictions on legitimate political expression on Meta platforms during Brazil’s elections raise concerns for freedom of expression, association, political participation and equal treatment of political viewpoints."
"Monitoring reports show thousands of accounts and posts have faced suspensions, reduced visibility, and sharing limits, including journalists, human rights defenders, civil society actors, and content creators,” the UN experts said. “Information, including from Meta employees, suggests that accounts linked to one side of the presidential race were disproportionately curtailed.”
Lawmakers from the US, where Meta is headquartered, wrote a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg earlier this week demanding that the company "take immediate action to ensure that, going forward, candidates and their campaigns in democratic elections receive equal treatment and access on your platform."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Act of Collective Punishment': Netanyahu Condemned Over 'Full Lockdown' of Occupied West Bank
The reaction to a shooting incident in Hebron, said one Palestinian critic, "represents an alarming escalation in Israel’s policies of forced displacement and a flagrant violation of international law and the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people."
Oct 23, 2026
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Friday that he has ordered the Israel Defense Force to "immediately impose a lockdown on Hebron and prepare for a full lockdown of the entire" illegally occupied West Bank following a gun battle that reportedly left two Palestinians dead and at least five Israeli soldiers wounded.
Following an emergency meeting with Israel's security cabinet and his top military advisors, Netanyahu posted a statement to social media in which he blamed Hamas for the incident and accused the group of “planning a major attack aimed at murdering innocent civilians.”
Netanyahu claimed that “large quantities of weapons and ammunition" had been discovered, but did not offer details about the nature of attack or its alleged planning.
Far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who was on the scene of the shooting incident soon after it occurred, warned that “comprehensive military operation” in the occupied West Bank would soon be underway to handle those termed "terrorists."
Smotrich also said that the Palestinian Authority, which governs the illegally occupied territories, should be "dismantled," called for large-scale military operations like those executed in Gaza and Lebanon, and for the increased demolition of Palestinian homes.
"There is no alternative to a comprehensive military operation in Judea and Samaria that will lead to the dismantling of the Palestinian Authority, the confiscation of weapons and the elimination of terrorists," Smotrich said. "Just as in Gaza and Lebanon."
The order to demolish homes near where Friday's incident took place, he added, "will begin to be implemented within the next hour, and the demolitions will continue throughout the afternoon."
Mustafa Barghouti, founder and leader of the Palestinian National Initiative (PNI), was among those warning that what comes next will not be good for the Palestinian people, calling the complete closure of the West Bank "an act of collective punishment."
Netanyahu, Barghouti said, "declared today that he is planning to carry out the ethnic cleansing of entire neighborhoods in Hebron."
Such a declaration, he continued, "represents an alarming escalation in Israel’s policies of forced displacement and a flagrant violation of international law and the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people. It must be unequivocally condemned, and the international community must act immediately to prevent the forcible displacement of Palestinian residents and hold those responsible accountable."
Yariv Oppenheimer, former director of Peace Now and a project director at the Geneva Institute, told Al-Jazeera in a Friday interview that Israeli leaders would now leverage the incident to further tighten their grip on the occupied West Bank, already rife with violence from Israeli settlers and IDF operations in Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
“The Israeli army is getting into the Palestinian cities, the settlers are attacking Palestinians, and the situation is impossible" in the OPT, Oppenheimer explained.
Oppenheimer added that he expected Netanyahu and his cabinet to take advantage of this attack on Israeli soldiers in order to push “more propaganda” to justify the likely violence that is coming from the Israeli government and violent settler factions.
"There will be house demolitions. We will see [a] curfew. We will see more soldiers [...] making arrests, and definitely we might see the settlers trying to target Palestinians in revenge for this attack, and trying to take advantage of this situation in order to escalate the situation even more,” Oppenheimer warned.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Days Before Midterms, US Supreme Court Lets New Hampshire Bar Student IDs for Voting
"The Supreme Court thinks corporations can buy our elections but a college kid can’t use a student ID to vote."
Oct 23, 2026
The US Supreme Court ruled Thursday, less than two weeks before the midterm elections, that New Hampshire officials can bar students from using their school ID cards as a form of identification when voting.
Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the lone dissenter, expressing support for a lower-court decision ordering New Hampshire election officials to consider student IDs as evidence of a prospective voter's identity. Jackson wrote that "when an election is looming," she "would not disturb a clearly justifiable federal-court order issued to ensure that the public receives accurate information about a state’s electoral processes."
Josh Orton, president of the advocacy group Demand Justice, condemned the high court's decision as "absurd," saying that "the Supreme Court thinks corporations can buy our elections but a college kid can’t use a student ID to vote."
“This November we vote in numbers they can’t ignore," said Orton. "Long term, we must expand the Court and end this corrupt majority for good.”
The Supreme Court's brief decision came after New Hampshire officials, with the support of national Republicans, filed an emergency request urging the justices to block the lower-court order allowing election officials to take student IDs into consideration when a voter is trying to prove their identity. The lower-court order limited an April directive from New Hampshire's Republican secretary of state, David Scanlon, who said that "student IDs cannot be used as proof" under a recently enacted state voter ID law.
Retiring Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), whose seat is up for grabs in a competitive race on November 3, wrote in a social media post that she "strongly" disagrees with the Supreme Court's decision and is "troubled by any efforts to limit access at the ballot box."
"With midterm elections days away," Shaheen added, "the Supreme Court just made it harder for our Granite State students to vote."
The counsel for the Coalition for Open Democracy, which sued over the New Hampshire voter ID law, said in a statement that the Supreme Court's decision was "wrong," arguing it injects "confusion into the election" and authorizes "an unconstitutional policy that will deprive young voters of their right to vote."
"We applaud Justice Jackson for her dissent," the statement continued. "We will continue to vigorously litigate this case in the defense of the fundamental right to vote of young voters across New Hampshire."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Grifter Got Grifted': RFK Jr. Adviser Calley Means Quits as Trump 'Hemorrhaging' MAHA Support
One campaigner said that "activists should brace for even more deregulation of cancer-causing pesticides, forever chemicals in water, and flavored vapes aimed at kids."
Oct 22, 2026
In perhaps another signal that the "Make America Healthy Again" movement is feeling betrayed by US President Donald Trump, The Wall Street Journal revealed Thursday that Calley Means is exiting his role as an adviser to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
"I leave with tremendous respect for President Trump and RFK—two historic figures who are committed to confronting a corrupt DC bureaucracy that is doing everything possible to protect the status quo," Means said in a statement. "The past two years have seen historic policy and cultural change to confront the chronic disease crisis and healthcare incentives that profit from us being sick. This movement is in the first inning and just getting started."
White House spokesperson Allison Schuster told the Journal that "we are grateful for Calley Means' time in the Trump administration," and "he has done a fantastic job for the MAHA movement."
While the spokesperson applauded Means, the brother of the president's withdrawn surgeon general nominee, and the departing adviser praised Trump and Kennedy—whose partnership he has been credited with fostering—unnamed sources who spoke to various media outlets cited internal conflicts.
According to the Journal's sources, Means "was greatly frustrated by White House delays of some of Kennedy's most popular policy ideas and blamed others in the administration for allowing food companies and special interests to have too much sway," with one person describing him as "disillusioned."
CNN similarly reported:
Means, who had championed Trump as a candidate willing to overhaul the government's approach to food and health regulation, grew increasingly frustrated over delays in advancing a series of policies at the center of the MAHA agenda, three people familiar with the matter said.
Trump health officials had initially hoped that policies, including an effort to create a definition for ultraprocessed foods, would be finalized well before the midterm elections. Instead, they've faced continued delays in the White House and sharp pushback from major agriculture industry groups.
Means decided to quit primarily because of those delays, the people familiar with his thinking said.
Following those and other reports, Shaughnessy Naughton, president of 314 Action, which works to elect Democrats with a background in science to public office, said in a statement that "Calley Means has called it quits because the grifter got grifted."
"It's clear that top MAHA figures are distancing themselves from the administration because Trump and RFK Jr. have betrayed the promises that built their movement," Naughton continued. "Instead of taking on Big Food and Big Pharma, this administration has repeatedly sided with special interests, using Trump's signature Sharpie to boost the production of pesticides by executive order, loosen restrictions on peptides, and promote fruit-flavored vapes to children."
"The MAHA agenda is a failed experiment—RFK Jr. was the first to fold on the food industry, and we have a president who lives on a steady diet of cheeseburgers and Diet Coke—Trump was never going to be an ambassador for MAHA's food agenda," she added. "Nearly 50% of independents and swing voters say MAHA has failed to deliver on its promises, and Calley Means' departure confirms it. This administration has sold out the very people it claimed it would fight for. More heads will roll, and we expect RFK Jr. will be next in Trump's firing line."
Brad Woodhouse, president of Protect Our Care, declared that "Donald Trump is hemorrhaging MAHA support even from within his administration."
"Again and again, RFK Jr. helped Donald Trump sell out MAHA priorities to protect profits of the GOP's big chemical, food, and tobacco donors," he said. "Patience has already run dry for many MAHA supporters. Now Kennedy's right-hand man can't stomach staying in the administration after all the rug pulls, phony excuses, and corporate surrender."
"Means' exit is a clear sign that Donald Trump has no intention of mending MAHA fences," Woodhouse warned, "and activists should brace for even more deregulation of cancer-causing pesticides, forever chemicals in water, and flavored vapes aimed at kids."
The RFK Jr. adviser's departure followed the Monday publication of an analysis from the watchdog group Public Citizen titled "How Trump Conned MAHA," which lays out how far the administration has "strayed" from its own "warnings about hazardous chemicals in the environment and ignored its own advice about corporate influence and corrupted science."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Pause AI Now!' Sanders Says as US Banks Let Agents Operate in Customer Accounts
“Left unchecked, AI could endanger the entire global financial system—including your bank account.”
Oct 22, 2026
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday renewed calls to pause development of artificial intelligence following reporting that unauthorized AI agents are operating inside the systems of major US banks.
Axios' Madison Mills revealed that Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and other financial institutions are "racing to contain agent risks," including "situations when an agent or AI assistant accesses a human's account with the user's permission and login credentials," which "goes against the guidelines of most banks requiring that humans log in to their own accounts."
In AI, an agent is a system that can take actions to complete an assigned task, rather than simply responding to queries or generating text.
According to Mills' reporting—which cites people familiar with the matter—some agents have contacted bank call centers or appeared to take actions independently of users' instructions.
Banking executives interviewed by Mills described the problem as “horrifying," with one official warning of potentially serious consequences for customers' finances.
The stakes are particularly high, the executives said, when AI agents have permission to make purchases or transfer funds. Banks are also struggling to determine whether activity is actually authorized by customers or whether an agent has gone rogue.
"This is insane," Sanders (I-Vt.) posted on social media in response to Mills' report. "We cannot allow AI agents to go into your bank account and act independently without your authorization."
"But that is what’s happening right now," he continued. "Left unchecked, AI could endanger the entire global financial system—including your bank account."
The senator added, "Pause AI NOW!"
Sanders has repeatedly warned that the race to create increasingly powerful AI systems is outpacing efforts to ensure their safety. Such concerns are mounting as profit- and ego-driven tech oligarchs race toward the "holy grail" of artificial general intelligence (AGI)—an advanced AI that can understand, learn, and apply knowledge of any subject as well as or better than a typical human.
Earlier this month, Sanders renewed his call for a congressional ban on the development of advanced AI, citing Big Tech oligarchs’ secret preparations for a “catastrophic AI event.”
The senator has repeatedly cited pioneers like Geoffrey Hinton who have warned that superintelligent AI—a development that experts believe could come after AGI—might wipe out humanity, as well as less existential but still potentially devastating outcomes like xAI CEO Elon Musk's prediction that AI and robots could “replace all jobs."
Last month, Sanders and Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced legislation to pause advanced AI development and ban the creation or deployment of artificial superintelligence. Sanders also wants a moratorium on the construction of new AI data centers.
The banking story underscores the growing challenge of deploying autonomous AI systems in consequential settings before their behavior can be reliably controlled or monitored.
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon last week announced a ban on outside AI agents from accessing customer accounts.
Sanders wasn't the only elected official who responded with alarm to the new Axios report.
"This is the exact thing we’ve been warning about for years," Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said on social media. "AI agents with unrestrained access to your bank account and protected information. When consumer AI agents are accessing YOUR bank account or using YOUR credit card, they must be subject to fiduciary-like duties of care."
"We need to pass my AI AGENT Act to get some basic guardrails in place," Warner added, referring to legislation that would establish federal rules for artificial intelligence agents that act on people's behalf.
Congressman Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) also weighed in on the report, writing on social media that "the Trump administration and GOP leadership made the deliberate decision to let the AI industry run wild."
"That was a bad political decision," he added. "And now it’s become a potentially catastrophic policy decision."
On the other side of the political aisle, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis—who has opposed the Trump administration's efforts to prevent states from regulating AI—said on X, "Imagine a rogue AI agent liquidating your bank account and investment portfolio."
"If you are the only victim, I suppose you could get made whole by the AI company responsible," he added. "If rogue agents liquidate hundreds of billions across millions of accounts, the AI company would go bankrupt and you wouldn’t get made whole."
The new Axios report comes two days after nationwide “Freeze AI Now” walkout protests by students, workers, academics, and others demanding an immediate halt to further AI development until the public has a meaningful say in how the technology is built and regulated.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular









