

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.

As the Inflation Reduction Act turns one this week, a chorus of health advocacy groups and over 150,000 individuals are demanding that pharmaceutical executives withdraw their “unconscionable” lawsuits to block drug price negotiation provisions under the popular legislation.
Advocates will be gathering in Washington, D.C, New York City and Austin on August 16, – the one-year anniversary of President Biden signing the Inflation Reduction Act, – to deliver the letter and petitions from over a hundred thousand people demanding the companies drop the suits and instead lower their prices.
In Washington, D.C., groups will hold a press conference outside of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce offices, and in New York City, they will be rallying outside of the offices of Jones Day, the law firm representing Merck and Bristol Myers Squibb in their suits.
Watch the livestream at noon ET here.
Additionally, Public Citizen, Patients for Affordable Drugs Now, Protect Our Care, Families USA and Doctors for America have filed an amicus brief supporting HHS' position that the motion for a preliminary injunction requested by the Chamber and the other plaintiffs in that case should be denied.
Meanwhile, in a new letter targeting the CEOs of Merck & Co., Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Astellas Pharma US, PhRMA, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other chambers of commerce, health advocacy organizations cite how drug corporations routinely charge patients in the United States twice or more of what they charge patients in other large, wealthy countries – even in cases where U.S. taxpayers supported the drug’s development.
“Aging Americans and people with disabilities and chronic health conditions bear the brunt of these excessive prices. No one should have to go into debt, go without life-saving medicines or choose between prescriptions and other basic needs like groceries and rent,” notes the letter, organized by Public Citizen and signed by more than 70 local and national advocacy groups including Social Security Works, Patients for Affordable Drugs Now, Center for Popular Democracy.
"It’s a disgrace that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is fronting for Big Pharma against the interests of the mom-and-pop businesses it purports to represent,” said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen. “Patients, small businesses, large businesses, state and local governments, and the federal government all have a shared interest in curtailing Big Pharma price gouging, as the Inflation Reduction Act’s drug price negotiation provisions will do. It’s time for the U.S. Chamber – and Big Pharma – to drop their lawsuits against the IRA.”
“New Yorkers are fed up with being ripped off by drug corporations, and strongly support Medicare’s new drug price negotiation program created as part of the Inflation Reduction Act,” said Mark Hannay, Director of Metro New York Health Care for All, and coordinator of Health Care for America Now’s New York State Network. “We call on these corporations to recognize political reality that their decades-long profiteering off patients across the US is over, and it’s now time to come to the table and negotiate lower prices. They’ll still make plenty of profits regardless, just as they do in other countries with national health programs.”
“Pharmaceutical corporations have long shown that they care about nothing but profits. So it is not surprising that they are attempting to use the courts to subvert the will of the people and block Medicare from using its bulk purchasing power to get better prices,” said Alex Lawson, executive director of Social Security Works. “The law is incredibly clear, as is the will of the American people: Medicare drug price negotiations are legal and incredibly popular. Everybody wins except the greedy CEOs who see their drug price extortion rackets shut down.”
“The pharmaceutical industry could not win in Congress, so it now resorts to the courts to overturn the will of the people—80 percent of whom support direct Medicare negotiation. It’s Big Pharma and Big Business vs. patients and consumers” said Merith Basey, executive director of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now. “The truth is, implementation of Medicare negotiation is a desperately needed and long-awaited step to ensure millions of Americans obtain the medications they need at prices they can afford.”
“Drug companies’ greed knows no bounds,” said Leslie Dach, chair of Protect Our Care. “While Americans are cutting pills and skipping doses, pharmaceutical companies are putting all of their energy into suing the federal government to protect their ability to charge patients outrageous prices to pad their sky-high profits. Big drug companies spent record amounts on lobbying to kill the Inflation Reduction Act, and now they are doing everything in their power to stop the law from delivering lower costs to patients. The American people will suffer if drug companies get their way.”
"Seniors and people with disabilities on Medicare need lower drug prices now,” said Ady Barkan, Co Executive Director of Be A Hero. “The Inflation Reduction Act passed last year gave Medicare the ability to negotiate pricing for a modest number of prescription drugs. But Big Pharma's insatiable appetite for profit above all else is shameful. Today, we join with other movement allies to demand that they drop their lawsuits and lower their prices now."
“So many of our people are rationing medications and choosing between needed care and other life necessities like housing and food,” said Analilia Mejia and DaMareo Cooper, Co-Executive Directors of the Center for Popular Democracy. “And now these pharmaceutical companies are taking legal action to make it even more difficult for us to survive. Our affiliates Make the Road NY, SPACES In Action, Texas Organizing Project, and Arkansas Community Organizations are rallying Wednesday to put our people over profits. We fought for years to get Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices–which we did through the Inflation Reduction Act–and we’re going to keep fighting until healthcare is a human right in America.”
Meg Jones Monteiro, who directs ICCR’s health equity program said, “If these companies truly put patients and society first, then the companies should align their statements with their actions. The inappropriate use of corporate resources and misuse of the U.S. legal system to file this lawsuit against HHS is not what we would expect from companies espousing a commitment to putting patients first and to increasing access and affordability. If people are unable to afford the drugs these companies develop, there is no market and therefore no profit and no long-term value creation for shareholders. These companies are not acting as responsible stewards in driving long-term value for their companies and the patients they serve.”
“It's clear where big drug companies and the Chamber of Commerce stand: profits over millions of older adults and people with disabilities who can’t afford their prescription drugs,” said Yael Lehman, Senior Direct of Strategic Partnerships for Families USA. “But we know families themselves feel differently - the reforms they are trying to tear away from millions of people who rely on Medicare for their health are extremely popular across all political and ideological spectrums. They need to drop their egregious lawsuit and stop making money from price-gouging families' access to health and health care.”
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) 588-1000"We call on the world to send international teams to recover the bodies of the missing," said the member of one civil society group. "We call on the world to provide the necessary equipment to recover the bodies."
A civil society group in Gaza on Thursday appealed for international assistance to help recover the bodies of more than 10,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces who remain buried beneath the rubble of the flattened strip.
Referring to Gaza as "the world's largest mass grave," Aladdin Al-Aklouk, a spokesperson for the National Committee for Missing Persons in the Genocide Against Gaza, said that "these martyrs were buried under the rubble of their homes, which have turned into mass graves, without their final dignity being preserved or their bodies being retrieved."
"We express our shock and strong condemnation of the absence of an effective role by international organizations and humanitarian bodies, especially those concerned with the issue of missing persons, in light of the ongoing escalating humanitarian disaster," Al-Aklouk continued.
"The remnants are ticking time bombs and pose a danger to the population in the Gaza Strip. We need specialists alongside the teams working in the sector," he added. "We call on the world to send international teams to recover the bodies of the missing. We call on the world to provide the necessary equipment to recover the bodies."
"The remnants are ticking time bombs and pose a danger to the population in the Gaza Strip."
According to the Gaza Health Ministry—whose casualty figures have been deemed accurate by Israeli military officials and a likely undercount by multiple peer-reviewed studies—at least 68,875 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces since October 7, 2023. Although a US-brokered ceasefire technically remains in effect, Gaza officials have documented over 200 Israeli violations in which more than 240 Palestinians have been killed and over 600 others injured.
More than 170,600 other Gazans have been wounded in a war which is the subject of an ongoing International Court of Justice genocide case and for which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder and forced starvation.
Palestinians are struggling to dig through more than 60 million tons of debris after over 80% of all structures in Gaza were destroyed or damaged by two years of Israeli bombardment. That's more than 200,000 buildings and other structures.
United Nations experts estimate it will take seven years for 100 trucks to remove all debris across Gaza, where more than three-quarters of roads are damaged and unexploded ordnance and Israeli booby traps beneath the debris continue to pose deadly threats to recovery workers and survivors in general.
Israel's destruction and denial of the heavy equipment needed for such a monumental recovery operation has left Palestinians reliant upon rudimentary tools such as shovels, pickaxes, wheelbarrows, rakes, hoes, and even their bare hands. They dig amid the stench of death and decomposition that lingers in the air.
The Abu Naser family lost more than 130 members in an October 29, 2024 strike on their five-story home in Beit Lahia, where over 200 people were sheltering when it was bombed. Mohammed Nabil Abu Naser, who survived the bombing, immediately started digging through the rubble, first in search of survivors and later, for bodies.
“It was all bodies and body parts," he explained. More than a year later, many of the victims have yet to be recovered.
"About 50 of them are still under the rubble to this day, a full year later," Abu Naser told The Guardian on Monday.
Often, Gazans survived initial bombings only to die slowly trapped beneath rubble. Two American volunteer surgeons, Drs. Mark Perlmutter and Feroze Sidhwa, last year described how wounded survivors suffered “unimaginably cruel deaths from dehydration and sepsis while trapped alone in a pitch-black tomb that alternates as an oven during the day and a freezer at night."
“One shudders to think how many children have died this way in Gaza," they added.
"The court could not be more clear—the Trump-Vance administration must stop playing politics with people's lives by delaying SNAP payments they are obligated to issue," one lawyer said.
A federal judge on Thursday called out President Donald Trump's recent social media post about the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and ordered the administration to release full funding for 42 million Americans' SNAP benefits by Friday.
Judge John McConnell, appointed to the District of Rhode Island by former President Barack Obama, previously gave the US Department of Agriculture a choice between making a partial payment by emptying a contingency fund or fully covering food stamps with that funding plus money from other sources. The USDA opted for the former, and warned that it could take weeks to get reduced SNAP benefits to recipients, millions of whom would lose the monthly food aid altogether.
Then, on Tuesday, Trump suggested that the administration would not disperse SNAP benefits until congressional Democrats voted to end what has become the longest government shutdown in US history. Although White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later claimed that "the administration is fully complying with the court order" and "the president is referring to future SNAP payments."
That same day, lawyers for the municipalities, nonprofits, and labor groups behind the lawsuit that led to McConnell's initial ruling—one of two SNAP cases currently in the federal court system—filed an emergency request seeking further relief.
On Thursday, McConnell concluded that the USDA's plan ran afoul of his previous directive and issued the new oral ruling. He reportedly said: "Last weekend, SNAP benefits lapsed for the first time in our nation's history. This is a problem that could have and should have been avoided."
"The defendants failed to consider the practical consequences associated with this decision to only partially fund SNAP," the judge declared. "They knew that there would be a long delay in paying partial SNAP payments and failed to consider the harms individuals who rely on those benefits would suffer."
Despite the White House's attempted clarification, McConnell also said that Trump's post "stated his intent to defy the court order."
While the Associated Press reported that the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the order, it was celebrated by Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman, whose group is representing the plaintiffs with the Lawyers' Committee for Rhode Island. She said in a statement that "today is a major victory for 42 million people in America."
"The court could not be more clear—the Trump-Vance administration must stop playing politics with people's lives by delaying SNAP payments they are obligated to issue," Perryman continued. "This immoral and unlawful decision by the administration has shamefully delayed SNAP payments, taking food off the table of hungry families."
"We shouldn't have to force the president to care for his citizens, but we will do whatever is necessary to protect people and communities," she added. "We are honored to represent our brave clients and to have secured this major victory for those who deserve better than what this administration has done to them."
US House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-Minn.) also welcomed the development, while ripping Trump and his secretary of agriculture, Brooke Rollins. The congresswoman stressed: "As we've said from the beginning, the Trump administration has the money and the power to fully fund SNAP in November. They chose to ignore the harm caused by their actions and cut benefits instead."
"President Trump and USDA need to do the right thing and comply with the court ruling rather than further delay food assistance from reaching 42 million Americans in need," she argued. "It is truly shocking and demoralizing just how far President Trump and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins have gone to take food out of the mouths of American children, seniors, working parents, veterans, and people with disabilities."
“This decision will cause immediate, widespread, and irreparable harm to all those who are being denied accurate identity documents,” said a lawyer for the ACLU.
The US Supreme Court issued an emergency order Thursday upholding President Donald Trump's discriminatory policy barring transgender and nonbinary Americans from changing the gender listed on their passports from the gender assigned to them at birth.
Reversing a lower court decision blocking the policy in June, the six conservative justices assessed in an unsigned majority opinion that by requiring passports to reflect a person's sex at birth, the State Department "is merely attesting to a historical fact without subjecting anyone to differential treatment."
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote the dissent, which was joined by the two other liberals, Justices Elena Kagan and Sonya Sotomayor. Lamenting the Trump administration's "routine" reliance on the court to issue emergency rulings, Brown wrote that she would have denied the request, because “the documented real-world harms to these plaintiffs obviously outweigh the government’s unexplained (and inexplicable) interest in immediate implementation of the passport policy.”
Last month, a group of transgender and nonbinary plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU, requested that the court reject the Trump administration's petition for a stay on the lower court's ruling blocking the policy. That ruling had come after transgender and nonbinary plaintiffs testified that they were afraid to submit passport applications to the government as a result of the policy.
"Forcing transgender people to carry passports that out them against their will increases the risk that they will face harassment and violence and adds to the considerable barriers they already face in securing freedom, safety, and acceptance," said Jon Davidson, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project.
The attorneys argued last month before the Supreme Court that the policy "irrationally undermines the very purpose of passports—identifying a US citizen when they travel” and also is “motivated by anti-transgender animus.”
That animus has been on display since Trump's first day in office this term, when he signed an executive order declaring that his administration would only recognize “two sexes, male and female," based on one's “biological classification” at birth.
The passport policy has already led to confusion, which the actress Hunter Schafer—a transgender woman—put on display in February, when she was issued a passport that identified her as male in conflict with both her appearance and other legal documents like her driver's license.
“This decision will cause immediate, widespread, and irreparable harm to all those who are being denied accurate identity documents,” said Jessie Rossman, legal director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, following the Supreme Court's ruling Thursday. “The Trump administration's policy is an unlawful attempt to dehumanize, humiliate, and endanger transgender, nonbinary, and intersex Americans, and we will continue to seek its ultimate reversal in the courts.”