

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The AFL-CIO, AFGE, AFSCME, AFT, CWA, SEIU, Economic Policy Institute, and partner organizations are expanding their legal challenge to stop DOGE’s takeover of Americans’ private data
A coalition of the AFL-CIO, unions, an economic think tank and partner organizations filed an amended lawsuit to protect the confidential information of America’s working people housed at the Department of Labor (DOL), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
The lawsuit expands the initial challenge to the “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE)’s attempt to raid the DOL for key information on America’s workers in order to hobble the agency tasked with protecting their rights, health and safety on the job, as Elon Musk expands his slash-and-burn approach to Americans’ private data and their most essential government services.
As the complaint lays out: “DOGE seeks to gain access to sensitive agency systems of data before courts can stop them, dismantle agencies before Congress can assert its Constitutional prerogatives in the federal budget, and intimidate and threaten employees who stand in their way, without regard for the consequences. The results have already been catastrophic. DOGE has seized control of some of the most carefully protected information systems housed at the Treasury Department, taken hold of all sensitive personnel information at the Office of Personnel Management, and dismantled an entire agency within a week.”
“Elon Musk and DOGE continue to jeopardize Americans’ most sensitive, personal data, and threaten our health, safety, rights, paychecks, and the essential services we depend on,” said AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler. “Unions and allies will vigorously fight DOGE’s attempt to put working people at risk through reckless actions that endanger workers and our families. They must be stopped—and today we’re getting back in court to do just that.”
“What Elon Musk is doing is not an audit—it’s an illegal violation of American citizens’ most sensitive personal information by an unelected billionaire who seems to believe he has been delegated the powers of the elected president,” said AFGE National President Everett Kelley. “Unions and our allies will continue to stand up against Elon Musk and anyone else who thinks they can buy the government of the United States.”
“Together with our union partners and allies, we filed a lawsuit to protect working people from billionaires stealing their data. Elon Musk thinks his wealth and political contributions give him the right to disregard the law and masquerade as an elected official—but he is not,” said AFSCME President Lee Saunders. “Working people deserve a government that will protect their privacy and hold corporations that break the law accountable. We call on the courts to address this unlawful corruption and ensure that our government remains for the people."
“Elon Musk, under the guise of making bureaucracy more ‘efficient,’ is effectively eviscerating Americans’ privacy and fundamental freedoms,” said American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten. “This may be one of the biggest data hacks in U.S. history—I doubt anyone who voted for Donald Trump thought he would enable Musk to vacuum up their Social Security numbers, spousal details, and kids’ medical records for his own ends. Americans want a better life for themselves and their families: lower costs and higher wages. Yet Musk’s goal is evidently to weaponize this invasion of privacy to cut support for working families and ram through tax cuts for himself and his billionaire buddies. We are joining this lawsuit to stop the heist, end the chaos and confusion, and prevent Musk from causing irreparable harm to millions of American lives.”
“Elon Musk is a notorious union buster whose retaliation against workers exercising their union rights won praise from Donald Trump as thousands of CWA members went out on strike,” said Communications Workers of America (CWA) President Claude Cummings Jr. “Musk and the other billionaires who supported Trump aren’t looting our confidential records to find ways to help workers organize to join unions and collectively bargain. They aren’t feeding sensitive personal data into AI systems to make sure working families are able to secure the benefits they are entitled to or to stop the big banks from ripping us off. They are looking for ways to enrich themselves and punish anyone who stands in the way of their profits.”
“Every person in our country—regardless of race, occupation or political party affiliation—should have the comfort of knowing that their government is attempting to work in their best interests,” said Service Employees International Union (SEIU) President April Verrett. “No one deserves to have their privacy violated when they visit their doctor and seek care for their sick child. Nurses, doctors and other healthcare professionals should be able to provide their patients with quality care without the threat of having their personal healthcare information being exposed to unelected billionaires. Medical privacy is the cornerstone of quality patient care and necessary for improving health outcomes across our nation. It is an injustice when our leaders willingly leave any person vulnerable to becoming a victim of fraud, scams, and discrimination. Today SEIU members and our allies are saying that working people will not back down to these attacks on our health and safety from the Trump-Musk Administration. We will not stop fighting to build a future where every worker, of every race and from every place, can join together in a union to win the wages, healthcare, and security we all deserve.”
“Elon Musk’s DOGE is illegally seizing Americans’ private data. No responsible policymaker—whatever their political party—should tolerate this, and we all have a moral obligation to stand up against Elon Musk’s takeover,” said Economic Policy Institute (EPI) President Heidi Shierholz.
The lawsuit was brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by the AFL-CIO and a coalition of unions representing workers across the federal government and public sector: the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), AFSCME, AFT, CWA and SEIU, as well as EPI, Economic Action Maryland Fund and Virginia Poverty Law Center.
The full complaint can be found here.
The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) works tirelessly to improve the lives of working people. We are the democratic, voluntary federation of 56 national and international labor unions that represent 12.5 million working men and women.
"Saying so privately to some big donors is very different than publicly calling for transparency from the DNC, which is badly needed," said Norman Solomon of RootsAction, which has led calls for the release.
Even former Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly "has no problem with a public airing" of the Democratic National Committee's internal "autopsy" report on her 2024 loss to Republican President Donald Trump—which the DNC has continued to conceal, despite mounting demands for transparency.
Harris' position was reported Thursday by NBC News, which noted that "while she indicated to donors that she had no issue with releasing it, Harris has not discussed the postmortem with DNC Chairman Ken Martin and did not know about his decision to keep it under wraps until it happened."
NBC cited "a person who has heard the conversations," one of multiple sources journalists Jonathan Allen and Natasha Korecki spoke with for their broader report exploring "turmoil over the Democratic Party’s future" and Harris' consideration of a 2028 run.
For months, Martin has resisted pressure to release the autopsy—which, as Axios revealed in February, found that the Biden administration's support for Israel's genocidal assault on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip contributed to Harris' defeat.
Citing a "person close to Harris," NBC also reported Thursday that the former VP "is signaling privately that she has more to say about the Middle East now that she is freed from the Biden White House policy," and "she is likely to do so after the midterm elections," either "from the perspective of a party elder or from the perspective of a candidate seeking votes."
While touring the country for the book she wrote after her loss, Harris has publicly acknowledged that she is weighing another White House run. Though the 2028 election is two and a half years away, she has led early polling. However, the party's potential primary field is incredibly crowded, featuring dozens of current or former governors and members of Congress.
Potential contenders include governors from the Trump 2.0 era—such as Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois, Andy Beshear of Kentucky, and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan—as well as leading progressive voices in Congress, such as Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
Norman Solomon, national director of RootsAction, which has spearheaded calls for publishing the full postmortem, wrote in a recent opinion piece for Common Dreams that "Martin's concealment of the autopsy report puts a thumb on the scale for one candidate: Kamala Harris."
Solomon highlighted the DNC's reported conclusion about the role of the Gaza genocide in the election result, and suggested that "renewed attention to the Harris 2024 finances would also be unwelcome."
In response to Harris' reported remarks to donors, Solomon said Thursday that "more than four months have passed since Martin announced he was reneging on his promise to release the autopsy.
"But Harris still hasn't made any public statement that she believes it should be released," he added. "Saying so privately to some big donors is very different than publicly calling for transparency from the DNC, which is badly needed."
"Although the FCC has the authority to ensure broadcasters operate in the public interest, it cannot serve as President Trump’s roving censor."
A group of Senate Democrats on Thursday told Federal Communications Chairman Brendan Carr to back off his threats to strip Disney-owned TV network ABC of its broadcast licenses.
In a letter addressed to Carr, the Democrats took Carr to task for ordering Disney to file early license renewals for eight ABC stations shortly after President Donald Trump demanded that the network fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel.
Kimmel earned Trump's ire when he jokingly likened first lady Melania Trump to an "expectant widow" days before a gunman stormed into the White House Correspondents' Dinner in an alleged attempt to assassinate the president.
The senators called Carr's order an "extraordinary abuse of power" and "the latest and most extreme step in your use of the FCC’s licensing authority as a cudgel against broadcasters whose editorial choices displease the president."
The Democrats charged that the order "appears to penalize Disney for refusing to capitulate to Trump’s demands to fire Kimmel and to send a message to other broadcasters: Modify your speech to favor Trump or face the FCC’s wrath," while noting that the order was the first time in over 50 years that the commission had called on a broadcaster to apply for early renewal.
The day before the order to Disney, the FCC sent a similar order to a small station license holder called Bridge News.
Carr's order to Disney was also part of a broad pattern of Trump administration assaults on the free press, including calls to fire Kimmel last year after the comedian said Trump and his political allies were trying “to score political points" after the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
"Although the FCC has the authority to ensure broadcasters operate in the public interest," they wrote, "it cannot serve as President Trump’s roving censor, threatening to revoke licenses against broadcasters whose editorial content—including a comedian’s jokes—displeases the president."
The Democrats concluded their letter by asking Carr to provide information about the timing and process by which the FCC decided to send Disney its early renewal order, including whether any FCC staff had communicated with the White House about the order before it was issued.
The letter was signed by Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Maria Cantwell (D-NM), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Elizabethe Warren (D-Mass.).
"Performative dipshittery, wrapped in fictional jingoism, delivered by an incompetent drunk wearing the clothes of an adolescent boy," said one critic of Hegseth's video.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth drew instant ridicule on Thursday after he released a video touting President Donald Trump's proposed $1.5 trillion military budget as a fiscally responsible plan that is "putting the American taxpayer first."
At the start of the video, Hegseth accuses defense contractors of bilking the Pentagon for expenses such as factory construction, while also constantly charging more for cost overruns.
Hegseth then claims that Trump has brought together a group of private-sector negotiators whom he's labeled "Deal Team Six" to lay down the law on the defense industry and save the US taxpayer money.
Thanks to President Trump’s $1.5 trillion defense budget, this War Department has moved from bureaucracy to business.
This is a FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT in our Arsenal of Freedom—ensuring our military remains the most lethal fighting force in the world. pic.twitter.com/ykIfMw3kuU
— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) May 7, 2026
Hegseth never explains how it is possible that the president and his "Deal Team Six" are saving US taxpayers money while at the same time asking US taxpayers to fund a $1.5 trillion military budget that would be over 50% more than the 2025 US defense budget and more than four times the money spent on defense by China, the world's second biggest defense spender.
Regardless, Hegseth wrote in a social media post that the $1.5 trillion budget would be "a FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT in our Arsenal of Freedom—ensuring our military remains the most lethal fighting force in the world."
Critics of the Trump administration erupted in mockery after seeing the Hegseth video.
"Spread this lame ass video everywhere," wrote Pod Save America co-host Tommy Vietor, a former National Security Council staffer under President Barack Obama. "I want every voter to know that Trump has requested a $1.5 TRILLION Pentagon budget. Shut up if you want better healthcare or for Social Security to remain solvent. All you get is more bombs to drop on Iranian schools."
Indigo Olivier, a reporter for The New Republic, said Democrats could make the proposed Trump budget a winning issue given how many other problems—including the rising costs of gasoline, groceries, and healthcare—that the Trump administration seemingly has no interest in addressing.
"I would love to hear Democrats talk about Pentagon price gouging with even half the energy they devote to Hasan Piker," she wrote. "The administration pushing a $1.5 trillion defense budget somehow becoming the face of anti-waste messaging is political malpractice."
Former Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) described Trump's proposed Pentagon budget as "hundreds of billions more in waste and fraud—at taxpayer expense."
"Remember when this administration pretended it was going to bring down the national debt?" Amash asked.
Former Republican political strategist Jeff Timmer delivered an even harsher assessment of Hegseth's video, which he labeled "performative dipshittery, wrapped in fictional jingoism, delivered by an incompetent drunk wearing the clothes of an adolescent boy."
Journalist Patrick Henningsen ripped Hegseth for delivering a "desperate, dumbed-down message" that he predicted would "go down in history as one of the biggest own-goals yet—and the worst pieces of war propaganda we’ve ever seen."
Steven Kosiak, nonresident fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote an analysis last month of Trump's proposed $1.5 trillion military budget in which he said, "It is difficult to overstate just how massive an increase in defense spending this would represent, or how unhinged it seems to be from reality and sober policymaking."