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
freedom of information act
US News Outlet Sues Trump Admin Over Refusal to Release 'Secret List of Activists'
“The government is not allowed to selectively hide information about its actions that impact protected First Amendment activity,” said a member of the legal team representing The Intercept in its legal challenge.
Jun 24, 2026
The progressive US media outlet The Intercept filed a lawsuit on Wednesday seeking to compel the Trump administration to hand over documents related to claims by federal officials of a secret database used to track protesters and others dubiously deemed "domestic terrorists."
The Intercept is asking the US District Court for the Southern District of New York to force the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to release material sought via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request it filed on February 23.
“It’s not illegal to monitor the activity of immigration agents inside your community,” Intercept editor-in-chief Ben Muessig said on Wednesday. “What is illegal is the US government’s secret list of activists—and its refusal to turn over information about that database to the American public.”
The Intercept's FOIA request came amid mounting evidence that, "by using photos, video, license plates, hotel check-in information, and more to create a database of lawful protestors, the government may be taking concerning action affecting the rights of those exercising their First Amendment rights," as plaintiff's counsel Democracy Forward noted in a statement announcing the lawsuit.
The Intercept's complaint cites a video posted on social media on January 23 that shows a federal immigration agent telling a legal observer in Maine during a protest against the deadly US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) anti-immigrant crackdown that "we have a nice little database, and now you’re considered a domestic terrorist."
According to the lawsuit:
In a court hearing regarding immigration enforcement actions in Minnesota, attorneys for the state of Minnesota reportedly included an exhibit of a recording of a federal agent saying, “Well, this person is gonna have a hard time traveling from now on" after taking a photo of an ICE observer's license plate. The press has reported that “a memo sent earlier this month to agents temporarily assigned to the city asked them to ‘capture all images, license plates, identifications, and general information on hotels, agitators, protestors, etc., so we can capture it all in one consolidated form.'"
Democracy Forward noted that "in a separate court case, a civilian observing ICE submitted a declaration stating that her [Transportation Security Administration] PreCheck and Global Entry were revoked three days after an encounter with immigration enforcement officials."
"Additionally, at least one prominent supporter of transgender rights has reportedly had her Global Entry and US passport canceled in the past few months," the group added.
Not included in the lawsuit are remarks made by White House "border czar" Tom Homan during a January interview with Fox News, during which he said that he aimed to “create a database where those people that are arrested for interference, impeding, and assault" and "make them famous.”
Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said Wednesday, "The government is not allowed to selectively hide information about its actions that impact protected First Amendment activity."
"The surveillance and retaliation being reported would be egregious violations of core constitutional principles," she added, "and we are honored to represent a storied news organization as it fights to demand the public have access to the information we need to protect our democracy.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
DNC Sues Trump Admin Over 'Threats to Free and Fair Elections' in 2026 Midterms
DNC Chairman Ken Martin accused Trump of trying to "bully and cheat his way through a midterm election that he knows Republicans will lose."
Mar 10, 2026
The Democratic National Committee is suing the Trump administration and alleging that it is threatening the integrity of the 2026 midterm elections.
In a lawsuit filed on Tuesday in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, the DNC revealed that the Trump administration hasn't complied with any of the 11 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests the Democratic committee made last year regarding any plans for the "potential deployment of federal agents and troops to polling places, drop boxes, and election offices."
The complaint argued that these FOIA requests were necessary given the "repeat threats to free and fair elections from President Trump and his administration," and accused the administration of violating the law by refusing to fulfill them.
The lawsuit also provided extensive documentation of President Donald Trump and other administration officials making threats and taking actions to potentially disrupt voting in the 2026 elections, including Trump in January saying he regretted not ordering the National Guard to seize voting machines in the wake of the 2020 presidential election; White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt subsequently saying that the administration "can't guarantee" federal law enforcement won't be deployed to polling places; and the FBI seizure of 2020 election ballots in Fulton County, Georgia.
The DNC said the court must now enforce FOIA requirements "to ensure that the American people obtain timely knowledge of potential threats to free and fair elections and to enable the DNC to take appropriate action to ensure voting rights are protected."
DNC Chairman Ken Martin accused Trump of trying to "bully and cheat his way through a midterm election that he knows Republicans will lose," then added that "we won’t let him."
"The DNC will stand on the side of voters," continued Martin, "and use every tool in our arsenal to stop voter suppression and intimidation before it can even begin."
The DNC lawsuit follows reporting from Politico in February revealing that Democratic state attorneys general have been conducting "war games" aimed at combating Trump administration moves to tamper with the 2026 elections.
Among the many possibilities that the AGs are preparing for are that the Trump administration orders the seizure of ballots and voting machines, defunds the post office to block the delivery of mail-in ballots, and sends federal immigration enforcement officials or even the US military to patrol polling places.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'How Many Other Killings Are They Concealing?' ICE Shot Ruben Ray Martinez in Texas Last March
"Americans deserve immediate answers and an independent investigation of the shooting," said Congressman Greg Casar.
Feb 21, 2026
Demands for accountability are mounting after internal records revealed this week that an officer with Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations fatally shot Ruben Ray Martinez, a 23-year-old US citizen, almost a year ago in South Padre Island, Texas.
"While Martinez's death was reported in local media at the time, the reports did not identify HSI involvement or disclose that a federal agent fired the shots through the driver-side window," Newsweek reported, citing publicly available information and records obtained by American Oversight through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
"It shouldn't take 11 months and a FOIA lawsuit to learn that the government killed someone," American Oversight said on social media late Friday. Separately, the watchdog noted that "the details sound similar to the death of Renee Good," a 37-year-old US citizen and mother of three fatally shot by officer Jonathan Ross last month in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Good's killing, and two Customs and Border Protection agents' subsequent fatal shooting of 37-year-old US citizen and nurse Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, have fueled outrage over President Donald Trump's mass deportation agenda, resulting in a congressional funding fight that has partially shut down the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees both agencies.
ICE's internal report on the Texas shooting states that HSI agents were helping redirect traffic at the site of a major accident early on March 15, 2025. Martinez and his passengers aren't named, but the document claims that the driver of a blue four-door Ford "failed to follow instructions," including verbal commands to stop and exit the vehicle.
Instead, the driver "accelerated forward, striking a HSI special agent who wound up on the hood of the vehicle. Upon observing this, HSI group supervisory special agent utilized his government-issued service weapon, discharging multiple rounds at the driver through the open driver's side window," according to the ICE report—a version of events that a DHS spokesperson echoed in a Friday statement added to the Newsweek article, which was initially published Wednesday.
The DHS spokesperson also said that the incident remains under investigation by the Texas Department of Public Safety's Ranger Division, whose press secretary, Sheridan Nolen, confirmed that "this is still an active investigation by the Texas Rangers, and no other information is currently available."
Back in March LAST YEAR, ICE shot and killed a US citizen teenager through his car window, and it never admitted its role. ICE claims it was assisting traffic control (!?!) when the driver didn't follow its instructions. Fake cops. How many other killings are they concealing?
[image or embed]
— David Bier (@davidjbier.bsky.social) February 20, 2026 at 9:35 AM
Charles Stam, a lawyer for the Martinez family, told the New York Times that the 23-year-old was the driver in the ICE report. Stam and another attorney, Alex Stamm, also said in a statement that eyewitness accounts of the scene don't match the document.
"It is critical that there is a full and fair investigation into why HSI was present at the scene of a traffic collision and why a federal officer shot and killed a US citizen as he was trying to comply with instructions from the local law enforcement officers directing traffic," the lawyers said.
The Times also reached Martinez's mother, Rachel Reyes, who said her son worked at an Amazon warehouse in San Antonio and was out to celebrate his birthday. According to her: "He was a good kid. He doesn't have a criminal history... He never got in trouble. He was never violent."
Reyes challenged the federal government's narrative about her son, telling the newspaper: "What they're saying is different from what they told the family, so that's adding insult to injury... They are making it sound different. I don't appreciate their language."
In a Friday interview with the Texas Tribune, American Oversight executive director Chioma Chukwu also called out the government: "What they're telling the public is very different than what they're doing behind closed doors. The only reason why we're able to make these connections and really call into question the public statements that they're making to mislead the public is because we're able to get our hands on these documents... That should deeply concern everyone."
The revelations this week have generated concern. André Treiber, the Democratic National Committee's Youth Coordinating Council chair, wrote on social media Friday evening that "ICE murdered a Texan last March and we are only just learning about it now. They are once again offering the excuse that this was done in self-defense, but forgive me if I am extremely skeptical after they've been caught lying about that exact same thing multiple times already."
Another death. Another truth coming out late. Another failure of accountability.Ruben Martinez should still be alive.ICE has killed multiple people, and we're still uncovering cases after the fact. This is what unchecked power looks like. It must stop.
[image or embed]
— MoveOn (@moveon.org) February 20, 2026 at 12:45 PM
Federal lawmakers also sounded the alarm on Friday. Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) declared that "Americans deserve immediate answers and an independent investigation of the shooting." Another Texas Democrat, Congressman Joaquin Castro, similarly called for "a full investigation," including into the monthslong "cover-up."
US Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), whose Chicagoland district has also faced a recent ICE invasion, pointed to other deaths tied to the agency, including those of Silverio Villegas Gonzalez, who was shot by ICE in the Chicago suburb of Franklin Park last September; Keith Porter Jr., who was shot by an off-duty agent on New Year's Eve in Los Angeles, California; and Linda Davis, a special education teacher in Savannah, Georgia, who was killed in a Monday car crash that involved a man fleeing ICE.
"For a whole year, DHS hid that they murdered Ruben, a young man in Texas, after a traffic stop. Just like they did with Silverio, Renee, Keith, Alex, and Linda, they lied and avoided accountability," said Ramirez, who supports abolishing ICE. "How many more people have to be executed before my colleagues realize that reforms are not enough?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Group Sues to Expose Trump 'Extinction Plan' as Study Shows 2,204 Species May Need Protection
"This study underscores the cruelty and shortsightedness of the Trump administration's slashing of funding and weakening of protections for endangered species," said an expert at the Center for Biological Diversity.
Jan 28, 2026
On the heels of publishing a study that shows 2,204 species across the United States should be considered for protection under the Endangered Species Act, the Center for Biological Diversity on Wednesday sued President Donald Trump's administration for failing to release public records about efforts to dismantle the ESA.
"Americans want to live in a country where animals and plants on the brink of extinction get the protections they need to survive. The Trump administration is hiding information about its efforts to gut these protections," said Ryan Shannon, a senior attorney at the nonprofit, in a statement.
"Widespread public support for the Endangered Species Act makes the administration's secrecy around these rules all the more insidious," Shannon continued. "Trump hands out favors to his billionaire friends while ignoring the irreplaceable value of our nation’s endangered wildlife. This lawsuit seeks to bring that corruption out into the open."
Filed in federal court in Washington, DC, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit could make the departments of Commerce and the Interior, as well as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), turn over documents about potential revisions to the ESA proposed in response to orders from Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.
"Thousands of plants and animals across America are at risk of extinction while they wait for the federal government to do something, anything, to help them."
The complaint warns that if the administration's proposed rules are implemented, they "will dismantle essential protections by, amongst other things, inserting economic considerations into the listing process, curtailing critical habitat designations, prohibiting habitat protections for species threatened by climate change, weakening consultation mandates, and removing nearly all protections for newly designated threatened species."
"On July 3, 2025, the center submitted FOIA requests to each defendant seeking records relating to the development of these proposed rules," the filing details. "The requested records are vital to understanding the basis, rationale, and likely impacts of the agencies' proposed rules. Such information is necessary for meaningful public participation in the rulemaking process."
"Without timely disclosure, the center and its members cannot effectively understand or respond to the agencies' proposed rules, thereby undermining FOIA's core purpose of ensuring government transparency and accountability," the complaint adds, noting that the center sent follow-up requests early last month.
The suit over Trump's "extinction plan" records followed publication of a study in which four experts at the center argued for protecting thousands more species under the landmark 1973 law—which, the analysis notes, "currently protects 1,682 species as endangered or threatened."
"According to the independent scientific organization NatureServe, however, there are more than 10,000 imperiled species in the United States that may need protection," explains the study, published in PeerJ. "One barrier to protecting recognized imperiled species is a lack of threats information."
The center's experts reviewed all species recognized NatureServe as "critically imperiled" or "imperiled" and identified 2,204 species "where there is sufficient threat information to indicate ESA protection may be warranted."
A majority of those species—1,320—are plants, followed by 309 insects, 115 terrestrial snails, 90 freshwater snails, 85 fish, 25 lichen and fungi, 23 reptiles and turtles, 21 amphibians, 14 birds, and various others.
Given that the FWS "has on average listed just 32 species per year since the law was passed," the analysis warns, "at this rate, most species currently recognized as imperiled and facing threats will not receive consideration for protection within any meaningful timeframe."
The Center for Biological Diversity petitioned for protecting the Mount Pinos sooty grouse under the Endangered Species Act in June 2024. The US Fish and Wildlife Service announced in January 2026 that it is considering protections. (Photo by James Bland/Center for Biological Diversity)
Noah Greenwald, a study co-author and co-director of endangered species at the Center for Biological Diversity, stressed in a Tuesday statement that "thousands of plants and animals across America are at risk of extinction while they wait for the federal government to do something, anything, to help them."
"This study underscores the cruelty and shortsightedness of the Trump administration's slashing of funding and weakening of protections for endangered species," Greenwald declared. "That so many species need help highlights just how much we're degrading the natural world at our own peril."
"Humans need clean air and water and a stable climate, just like the many species in decline," he added. "People are destroying the wild places where plants and animals live, and that habitat destruction remains the greatest threat to species' survival both in the United States and around the world.”
Habitat destruction threatens 92% of the 2,204 species, according to the analysis. Other notable threats include invasive species (33%), small population size (26%), climate change (18%), altered disturbance regime (12%), disease and predation (8%), over-utilization (7%), and inadequacy of existing regulations (4%).
Last week, in response to petitions from the center and other groups, the FWS announced that 10 species across the country—including the Olympic marmot, gray cat's eye plant, Alvord chub fish, Mount Pinos sooty grouse, and San Joaquin tiger beetle—warrant consideration for ESA protections.
"I'm relieved to see these 10 precious plants and animals move closer to the protection they so desperately need," said Greenwald. "Unfortunately they're joining a backlog of hundreds of species waiting for safeguards during an administration that didn't protect a single species last year—the first time that's happened since 1981. As the global extinction crisis deepens, imperiled wildlife need the Endangered Species Act's strong protections now more than ever."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Demands to Know If Trump Admin Colluded With Big Oil in Lead-Up to Venezuela Attack
"When government actions tied to foreign resources are preceded and followed by closed-door meetings with the world’s largest oil companies, transparency is not optional—it is essential."
Jan 07, 2026
A legal watchdog group is demanding information about the extent to which the Trump administration planned its attack on Venezuela last weekend with American oil companies, which are expected to profit royally from the takeover of the South American nation's oil reserves.
The group Democracy Forward filed a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests on Monday seeking records and information about the role of US oil companies in the planning of the attack, which killed an estimated 75 people and led to the US military's abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife.
President Donald Trump did not inform Congress of the operation, which is required under the War Powers Act of 1973, but he told reporters on Sunday that he'd tipped off oil company executives both "before and after" the strike.
According to reporting by the Wall Street Journal, he informed executives roughly a month before the strike to "get ready" because big changes were coming to the country, which had long held state control over the largest oil reserves in the world.
Since toppling Maduro, in an operation that international law experts have widely described as illegal, Trump has said his goal is to "get the oil flowing" to American oil companies to start "taking a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground.”
On Tuesday, Trump said Venezuela's interim leaders—who he's threatened with more attacks if they don't do what he says—have agreed to hand over 30-50 million barrels of oil to be sold by the US, which will control how the profits are dispersed.
Trump and several members of his Cabinet, including Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, are expected to meet with oil executives on Friday at the White House to discuss "security guarantees" for their new spoils.
Democracy Forward has requested information about communications between senior officials at the US departments of Energy and the Interior and executives at top oil companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips, prior to the attack. This includes emails, attachments, and calendar invitations exchanged since December 2025.
The group has said it will seek to determine whether these companies were given "privileged access or influence" over the administration's policy toward Venezuela.
“The president couldn’t find time to brief members of Congress before kidnapping a foreign head of state, but appears to have prioritized discussions with Big Oil. When government actions tied to foreign resources are preceded and followed by closed-door meetings with the world’s largest oil companies, transparency is not optional—it is essential,” said Skye Perryman, the president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “The public deserves to know what interests are shaping decisions that have enormous consequences for global energy markets and democratic accountability.”
FOIA, which was passed in 1967, allows members of the public to request records from any federal agency. However, agencies have broad discretion to deny FOIA requests, including in cases involving national security or interagency communications.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Cover-Up of a Cover-Up': Lawsuit Accuses Trump State Dept of Hiding Human Rights Violation Records
"The Trump-Vance administration is refusing to hand over documents that could show their culpability in hiding international human civil rights abuses," says the president of Democracy Forward.
Aug 11, 2025
A coalition of LGBTQ+ and human rights organizations filed a lawsuit Monday against the U.S. Department of State over its refusal to release congressionally mandated reports on international human rights abuses.
The Council for Global Equality (CGE) has accused the administration of a "cover-up of a cover-up" to keep the reports buried.
Each year, the department is required to report on the practices of other countries concerning individual, civil, political, and worker rights protected under international law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Governments and international groups have long cited these surveys as one of the most comprehensive and authoritative sources on the state of human rights, informing policy surrounding foreign aid and asylum.
The Foreign Assistance Act requires that these reports be sent to Congress by February 25 each year, and they are typically released in March or April. But nearly six months later, the Trump administration has sent nothing for the calendar year 2024.
Meanwhile, NPR reported in April on a State Department memo requiring employees to "streamline" the reports by omitting many of the most common human rights violations:
The reports... will no longer call governments out for such things as denying freedom of movement and peaceful assembly. They won't condemn retaining political prisoners without due process or restrictions on "free and fair elections."
Forcibly returning a refugee or asylum-seeker to a home country where they may face torture or persecution will no longer be highlighted, nor will serious harassment of human rights organizations...
...reports of violence and discrimination against LGBTQ+ people will be removed, along with all references to [diversity, equity, and inclusion] (DEI).
Among other topics ordered to be struck from the reports: involuntary or coercive medical or psychological practices, arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy, serious restrictions to internet freedom, extensive gender-based violence, and violence or threats of violence targeting people with disabilities.
Last week, The Washington Post obtained leaked copies of the department's reports on nations favored by the Trump administration—El Salvador, Russia, and Israel. It found that they were "significantly shorter" than the reports released by the Biden administration and that they struck references to widely documented human rights abuses in these countries.
In the case of El Salvador, where the administration earlier this year began shipping immigrants deported from the United States, the department's report stated that were "no credible reports of significant human rights abuses" there, even though such abuses—including torture, physical violence, and deprivation have been widely reported, including by Trump's own deportees.
Human rights violations against LGBTQ+ people were deleted from the State Department's report on Russia, while the report on Israel deleted references to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's corruption trial and to his government's threats to the country's independent judiciary.
"Secretary Rubio's overtly political rewriting of the human rights reports is a dramatic departure from even his own past commitment to protecting the fundamental human rights of LGBTQI+ people," said Keifer Buckingham, the Council for Global Equality's managing director. "Strategic omission of these abuses is also directly in contravention to Congress's requirement of a 'full and complete report' regarding the status of internationally recognized human rights."
In June, the CGE sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the State Department calling for all communications related to these decisions to be made public. The department acknowledged the request but refused to turn over any documents.
Now CGE has turned to the courts. On Monday, the legal nonprofit Democracy Forward filed a complaint on CGE's behalf in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that the department had violated its duties under FOIA to turn over relevant documents in a timely manner.
"The Trump-Vance administration is refusing to hand over documents that could show their culpability in hiding international human civil rights abuses," said Skye Perryman, Democracy Forward's president and CEO.
"The world is watching the United States. We cannot risk a cover-up on top of a cover-up," Perryman continued. "If this administration is omitting or delaying the release of information about human rights abuses to gain favor with other countries, it is a shameful statement of the gross immorality of this administration."
Keep ReadingShow Less
First-of-Its-Kind Lawsuit Seeks to Force Trump Administration to Release Epstein Files
"The only thing transparent about the Trump-Vance administration is how clearly they continue to disregard our nation's laws," said the head of the group behind the suit.
Aug 08, 2025
A pro-democracy legal advocacy group on Friday sued the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation for not releasing documents concerning deceased child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein amid President Donald Trump's stonewalling and attempted deflection of all things related to his former close friend.
In a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Democracy Forward—which has lodged multiple Freedom of Information Act requests with the DOJ and FBI for Epstein-related material—accuses the Trump administration of violating FOIA by failing to produce the files. The suit seeks an order compelling the government "to produce the requested documents in an expedited manner, as required by public records laws."
Tanya Chutkan, the federal judge presiding over the suit, previously oversaw Trump's federal election interference case concerning his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential contest and his incitement of the January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection.
BREAKING: We just filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit demanding records related to the Trump-Vance admin’s handling of the Epstein Files.The only thing transparent about this administration is how clearly they continue to disregard our nation’s laws.
[image or embed]
— Democracy Forward (@democracyforward.org) August 8, 2025 at 6:52 AM
"In January 2024, unsealed court documents disclosed the names of dozens of powerful men with alleged connections to Epstein, including President Donald J. Trump, British Royal Prince Andrew, former President Bill Clinton, lawyer Alan Dershowitz, and others," the lawsuit states.
"This and other information raise persistent questions about what the government uncovered during the years of investigation into Epstein's criminal activity," the filing continues. "Accordingly, there is broad-based public pressure for the government to release that information by disclosing records that are often referred to as the 'Epstein files.'"
"There is widespread public speculation that the Epstein files contain a roster of powerful clients to whom Epstein trafficked underaged girls," the lawsuit adds. "This list has become known as the 'Epstein list' or the 'client list.'"
The suit notes that Trump said during his 2024 presidential campaign that he was inclined to release the Epstein files. The filing also references U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi's claim that the list was "sitting on my desk right now to review," and highlights reported "frantic scrubbing" of Trump's name from relevant documents by DOJ and FBI teams.
Furthermore, the lawsuit recounts Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche's recent meetings with Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's erstwhile procurer who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for child sex trafficking, and the Trump administration's subsequent transfer of Maxwell to a lower-security correctional facility. The suit also notes that Trump has refused to rule out clemency for Maxwell.
"President Trump has repeatedly said he would release the Epstein files, his spokesperson claims his administration is 'the most transparent in history,' and yet, they continue to hide from the American people," Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said in a statement. "The only thing transparent about the Trump-Vance administration is how clearly they continue to disregard our nation's laws."
"Public records laws outline a clear and simple process that requires the government to immediately produce important documents in response to urgent public information requests, and yet again, this administration is ignoring the law," Perryman added. "The court should intervene urgently to ensure the public has access to the information they need about this extraordinary situation."
Trump's efforts to deflect and distract from the Epstein scandal have outraged even many of his hardcore supporters and resulted in calls for transparency from both sides of the political aisle. The president denies any wrongdoing related to Epstein, calling the controversy over the files a "hoax" while denouncing Republicans demanding transparency as "weaklings." Trump also sued The Wall Street Journal over reporting that he wrote a "bawdy" letter for Epstein's 50th birthday in 2003.
On Thursday, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) led 15 Democratic colleagues in a letter urging House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) to hold a hearing with victims of Epstein and Maxwell.
Congress must stand up for Epstein’s victims, not protect his rich and powerful friends.@pressley.house.gov is demanding a public Oversight hearing to give these survivors the opportunity to share their stories with the American people.
[image or embed]
— Oversight Dems (@oversightdemocrats.house.gov) August 7, 2025 at 2:19 PM
"If we are to hold powerful people to account, our investigation must center the voices they tried to silence," the Democratic lawmakers wrote. "To ensure that our investigation is comprehensive and credible, we urge the committee to allow survivors the opportunity to provide their testimony if they wish to do so."
Pressley—a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and rape in college—told The 19th* that if Comer refuses to hold such a hearing, "I will remind people why it didn't happen and that those elected officials are on the side of predators, while the Democrats are on the side of survivors."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FBI Officials Redacted References to Trump From Epstein Files: Report
The names of other high-profile figures were also redacted, according to Bloomberg.
Aug 01, 2025
Bloomberg reported on Friday that FBI officials earlier this year redacted the name of U.S. President Donald Trump from the agency's files on late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Three unnamed sources confirmed to Bloomberg that the FBI had redacted the names of Trump and other prominent public figures even before the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced last month that "no further disclosure" of the Epstein files "would be appropriate or warranted."
Bloomberg's sources explained that "Trump's name, along with other high-profile individuals, was blacked out because he was a private citizen when the federal investigation of Epstein was launched in 2006."
The reviewers applied two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemptions to justify their redactions, according to the report: One that "protects individuals against 'a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy'" and another that protects against disclosures that "could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
Bloomberg noted that there is nothing particularly exceptional about this because these standards have long been employed by the FBI when it comes to redacting FOIA requests, even when it comes to high-profile public figures such as Trump.
The revelations about Trump's name being redacted from the files came on the same day The New York Times reported that Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's longtime accomplice who is serving a 20-year sentence on sex-trafficking charges, was transferred from a federal prison in Florida to a minimum-security women's prison in Texas.
The DOJ's decision to not release the Epstein files ignited a firestorm last month that the president has struggled to contain. At times Trump, who was friends with Epstein for several years, has even chastised his own voters for continuing to ask questions about the files, while at the same time insisting that he had nothing to do with Epstein's sex trafficking ring that involved the sexual abuse of multiple underage girls.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'They Just Made Sh*t Up': Declassified Spy Memo Undercuts Trump Pretext for Deportations to El Salvador
"Sunlight remains the best disinfectant for falsehoods," said one open government advocate.
May 06, 2025
A memo released Monday by the Trump administration in response to a Freedom of Information Act request confirmed that U.S. intelligence agencies never agreed with President Donald Trump's claim in March that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro controls the criminal gang Tren de Aragua—an assertion that was used to justify sending hundreds of migrants to a notorious Salvadoran prison.
The document said that "while Venezuela's permissive environment enables TDA to operate, the Maduro regime probably does not have a policy of cooperating with TDA and is not directing TDA movement to and operations in the United States."
Trump's claim about Maduro's connection to the group had been called into question by The New York Times in March, after Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act for only the fourth time in U.S. history. The law empowers the federal government to summarily expel citizens of a country that is at war with or invading the United States.
The Times reported at the time, based on interviews with officials, that the intelligence community's findings about Tren de Aragua were "starkly at odds" with Trump's claims. The anonymous officials said the gang was not taking orders from Maduro's government.
That reporting prompted the U.S. Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into the "selective leak of inaccurate" information to the Times, with the Trump administration criticizing the Times for its "misleading" report.
Attorney General Pam Bondi also said in an April memo that the department would roll back press freedom protections in leak investigations after The Washington Post reported on the memo that was declassified Monday. The Post reported on the document from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in mid-April when it was still classified.
"The declassification proves that the material should have been public from the start—not used as an excuse to suppress sharing information with the press," Lauren Harper, the Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, told the Times. The group filed the FOIA request for the memo, dated April 7, to be released.
A declassified ODNI memo disclosed in response to a @Freedom.Press FOIA request confirms a @nytimes.com report from March: U.S. intel agencies rejected the claim Trump made to justify deporting Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador. www.nytimes.com/2025/05/05/u...
[image or embed]
— Alexander Howard (@digiphile.bsky.social) May 5, 2025 at 10:27 PM
The memo noted that the FBI partially dissented with the intelligence community's findings about Tren de Aragua.
Analysts at the FBI agreed with the agencies' overall assessment but believed "some Venezuelan government officials facilitate [Tren de Aragua] members' migration from Venezuela to the United States and use members as proxies in Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and the United States to advance what they see as the Maduro regime's goal of destabilizing governments and undermining public safety in these countries."
"Most" of the intelligence community "judges that intelligence indicating that regime leaders are directing or enabling [Tren de Aragua] migration to the United States is not credible," the memo reads.
Intelligence agencies also noted in the memo that detainees accused of being members of the gang could have been motivated "to make false allegations about their ties to the Venezuelan regime in an effort to deflect responsibility for their crimes and to lessen any punishment by providing exculpatory or otherwise 'valuable' information to U.S. prosecutors."
Analysts said they had not collected information about communications or funding exchanges between Venezuelan officials and leaders of Tren de Aragua.
"So you mean kidnapping folks off the streets and sending them to a foreign gulag was not justified by our own intelligence?" said the Arkansas Justice Project. "They just made shit up to dog whistle their base. The AEA argument was never legitimate and they knew it all along."
After the memo was released, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said it was "outrageous that as President Trump and his administration work hard every day to make America safe by deporting these violent criminals, some in the media remain intent on twisting and manipulating intelligence assessments to undermine the president's agenda to keep the American people safe."
Courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have blocked the Trump administration from sending more migrants to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, and the ACLU last month asked a federal judge to facilitate the return of all Venezuelans sent to the country's Terrorism Confinement Center to ensure they have due process via immigration hearings.
But judges hearing cases regarding Trump's mass deportations under the Alien Enemies Act have not yet questioned the administration's debunked claims about Tren de Aragua and the Maduro government.
Writer and open government advocate Alexander B. Howard said the release of the memo proves that "sunlight remains the best disinfectant for falsehoods."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Journalist Sues to Secure Three Months Worth of Hegseth Signal Chat Messages
"And we are bringing this case to make sure that they can't just put national security at risk for their own convenience and then destroy all the evidence afterwards," said the head of the group that filed the lawsuit.
Apr 25, 2025
As the Trump administration faces a metastasizing controversy over reports of U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's use of the commercial messaging app Signal, including to discuss U.S. strikes in Yemen, the legal group National Security Counselors on Friday sued on behalf of a journalist to secure three months worth of conversations that took place on the encrypted platform.
According to The Hill, which was first report the news of the lawsuit, the complaint requests Hegseth's Signal messages and the messages from other top Trump officials.
The plaintiff in the lawsuit is journalist Jeffrey Stein, the founding editor of the outlet SpyTalk. Stein sought the three months worth of chat records via Freedom of Information Act request and is now taking legal action to obtain them, according to the complaint, which was filed in federal court.
News about my Signalgate iceberg lawsuit for @spytalker.bsky.social: it's OUT!
[image or embed]
— National Security Counselors 🕵 (@nationalsecuritylaw.org) April 25, 2025 at 12:35 PM
"The heads of at least five of the most powerful agencies in the national security community were freely texting over an app that was not approved for sensitive communications and setting it to automatically delete everything they said," Kel McClanahan, executive director of National Security Counselors, told The Hill. "Since then we've learned that we were right to be worried, thanks to the news about Hegseth's Signal chat with his wife and personal lawyer about bombing plans."
In what's now become known as "Signalgate," The Atlantic revealed last month that its editor in chief Jeffrey Goldberg had been accidentally included in a Signal group chat with top administration officials where they discussed forthcoming U.S. strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen. The Atlantic later published messages from the chat.
Members of the chat, dubbed "Houthi PC small group," included Hegseth; National Security Adviser Mike Waltz; Vice President JD Vance; CIA Director John Ratcliffe; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
The defendants listed in the lawsuit from the National Security Counselors are the Department of Defense, the State Department, the Treasury Department, the CIA, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The New York Times reported last week that Hegseth had shared information about impending U.S. strikes in Yemen in another Signal group chat included his wife, brother, and personal lawyer on March 15. The outlet cited four unnamed sources with knowledge of the matter.
In response to the Times' reporting, a spokesperson for the Pentagon wrote on April 20: The the newspaper "relied only on the words of people who were fired this week and appear to have a motive to sabotage the secretary and the president's agenda. There was no classified information in any Signal chat, no matter how many ways they try to write the story."
The Times responded a day later saying that it stood by the reporting, that the Pentagon had not denied the existence of the chat, and that the story did not characterize the information in the chat as classified.
In yet another twist, The Associated Press reported Thursday, citing two unnamed sources familiar with the situation, that Hegseth had an internet connection set up in his office at the Pentagon that bypassed government security protocols—also known as a "dirty" line—in order to use Signal on a personal computer.
The AP reported that the advantage of this kind of a line is that a user would be essentially "masked" and not show up as an IP address assigned to the Defense Department, but it would also leave that user vulnerable to hacking.
Speaking of the lawsuit filed by National Security Counselors, McClanahan told The Hill that "this administration has proven again and again that it is allergic to accountability and transparency."
"And we are bringing this case to make sure that they can't just put national security at risk for their own convenience and then destroy all the evidence afterwards," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More Stories
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy