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
josh hawley
'Fear Is the Point': Alarm as Republicans Launch Probe of 200+ Immigrant Charity Groups
"An attack on civil society is an attack on us all," said Democratic Rep. Delia Ramirez. "We must dissent."
Jun 13, 2025
Congressional Republicans this week launched an investigation into more than 200 immigrant charity organizations, a move that Democratic lawmakers and the targeted groups condemned as an egregious effort to intimidate opponents of the Trump administration's mass deportation agenda.
"Terror is the point. Cruelty is the point. Fear is the point," Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) said Friday in response to the probe, which was announced earlier this week by top Republicans on the House Committee on Homeland Security (CHS).
"The actions of Republicans on CHS unlawfully target organizations standing against their authoritarian power grab," said Ramirez. "An attack on civil society is an attack on us all. We must dissent."
On Tuesday, Reps. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) and Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.) sent letters to at least 215 organizations in a purported effort to "determine whether these NGOs used taxpayer dollars to facilitate illegal activity."
The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), Make the Road New York, Catholic Charities USA, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Haitian Bridge Alliance, and Global Refuge were among the organizations that received investigatory letters from the House Republicans.
"Republicans mistakenly believe they have a mandate to inflict cruelty on migrants with their anti-immigrant agenda, but Americans want migrants treated fairly. This sham investigation is the opposite of that."
The letters give the targeted groups two weeks to respond to a survey that, according to the House Republicans, includes questions on "government grants, contracts, and disbursements they have received" and "any legal service, translation service, transportation, housing, sheltering, or any other form of assistance" they have provided to undocumented immigrants since January 2021.
A link to the survey is redacted in the GOP's letter to CHIRLA, an organization that was also targeted this week by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who accused the group of providing "logistical support and financial resources to individuals engaged" in Los Angeles protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids.
In a statement Wednesday, CHIRLA said that "we categorically reject any allegation that our work as an organization now and during the past 39 years providing services to immigrants and their families violates the law."
"Our mission is rooted in non-violent advocacy, community safety, and democratic values," the group continued. "We will not be intimidated for standing with immigrant communities and documenting the inhumane manner that our community is being targeted with the assault by the raids, the unconstitutional and illegal arrests, detentions, and the assault on our First Amendment rights."
A CHIRLA representative told the New York Post, a right-wing tabloid that first reported the House GOP investigation into the 215 charity groups, that the organization has "not participated, coordinated, or been part of the protests being registered in Los Angeles," apart from holding a rally last Thursday before the protests exploded.
Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the top Democrat on the House Committee on Homeland Security, issued a joint statement with Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) on Thursday condemning their Republican colleagues' investigation as "little more than a campaign to intimidate these groups so they'll stop the good work that our communities rely on."
"The fact that they sent demand letters to groups that have never received federal funding, and others that received money specifically provided by Congress to assist immigrants, shows how unserious their investigation is," Thompson and Thanedar said, adding that "most of the information they have requested is publicly available."
"More detailed records on the funding—including receipts—are owned by DHS, which their party controls. It raises the question—are they too lazy to pull this information themselves, or is the intent simply to bully groups they hate?" the Democrats continued. "Republicans mistakenly believe they have a mandate to inflict cruelty on migrants with their anti-immigrant agenda, but Americans want migrants treated fairly. This sham investigation is the opposite of that."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Abortion Rights Defenders 'Sound the Alarms' Over RFK Jr. Attack on Mifepristone
"Hawley is pointing to new junk science to motivate RFK Jr. and FDA to review the science on mifepristone," said one public health scientist. "The science is clear: Mifepristone is safe."
May 15, 2025
Abortion rights defenders and scientists expressed deep concern after U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s remarks about mifepristone, a key medication used to end pregnancies, at a Wednesday congressional hearing.
During the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) inquired about the secretary's previous pledge to conduct "top-to-bottom review" of mifepristone, asking, "Do you continue to stand by that and don't you think that this new data shows that the need to do a review is, in fact, very pressing?"
Kennedy, one of President Donald Trump's most controversial Cabinet picks, responded by describing the data cited by Hawley as "alarming," suggesting that "the label should be changed," and confirming that he has asked Marty Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), "to do a complete review and to report back."
Ushma Upadhyay, a public health scientist and professor at the University of California, San Francisco, posted the exchange on social media. She said that "Hawley is pointing to new junk science," and research has made clear "mifepristone is safe."
Hawley is pointing to new junk science to motivate RFK Jr. and FDA to review the science on mifepristone. I've been studying #abortion safety for a decade. The science is clear: mifepristone is safe. Let me tell you about a couple of **peer-reviewed and published** studies I've done... 🧪
[image or embed]
— Ushma Upadhyay, PhD, MPH ( @ushma.bsky.social) May 14, 2025 at 9:20 PM
In one study of Upadhyay's studies, "among 11,000 medication abortions, less than a third of one percent (0.3%) had a serious adverse event," the expert noted. In another from last year, she continued, "we found that telehealth abortion was just as safe and effective as published estimates of in-person care. Serious adverse events were 0.25%."
However, anti-abortion groups have seized on the paper cited by Hawley—published in April by the think tank Ethics & Public Policy Center—to pressure the Trump administration to restrict mifepristone further, or even remove it from the market.
The April paper conflicts with a mountain of research. A 2023 New York Times review found that "more than 100 scientific studies, spanning continents and decades, have examined the effectiveness and safety of mifepristone and misoprostol, the abortion pills that are commonly used in the United States. All conclude that the pills are a safe method for terminating a pregnancy."
Upadhyay said Wednesday that "one crappy report cannot silence decades of peer-reviewed high-quaility published research."
Other critics of RFK Jr.'s comments similarly stressed medical conclusions about mifepristone's safety.
"Mifepristone has a 25-year record of safety and efficacy under the FDA's watch, but now anti-abortion extremists are peddling junk science in an effort to deny people access to it," the group Power to Decide said on social media Thursday. "The reality is that medication abortion is safe, widely used basic healthcare."
The Center for Reproductive Rights also responded on social media, declaring, "SOUND THE ALARMS!"
"Let us be clear: President Trump, who once suggested injecting bleach, should not be making decisions about our healthcare, and RFK Jr. should not be interfering with our ability to access medication that's been PROVEN SAFE AND EFFECTIVE," the center said. "In putting this target on mifepristone—and therefore on abortion access at large—Trump's administration is making it clear that they do not care about science, or our health and safety. They only care about taking away our rights. But we refuse to let that happen."
"We'll be in court on Monday, fighting to protect mifepristone and make sure this VITAL, LIFESAVING medication is accessible and available to anyone who needs it," the center added, referring to oral arguments for Whole Woman's Health Alliance v. FDA, a case aimed at eliminating restrictions that impede access to mifepristone.
The ACLU pointed out in a Wednesday statement that the "pseudo-science paper" at the center of Hawley and Kennedy's exchange echoes calls made in Project 2025—a Heritage Foundation-led guide for a far-right overhaul of the federal goverment, from which Trump unsuccessfully tried to distance himself on the campaign trail—to severely restrict access to medication abortion.
"Secretary Kennedy just revealed that he has ordered the FDA to consider making it harder for people to get medication abortions based on propaganda pushed out by a Project 2025 sponsor," said Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project. "Even leading anti-abortion advocates admit this junk science is 'not a study in the traditional sense,' and is 'not conclusive proof of anything,' but that clearly won't stop extremist politicians from waving it around as a basis to restrict abortion."
"We should all be scared if our access to safe, FDA-approved medications turns on President Trump's gut instinct rather than credible scientific evidence," she warned. "This new FDA review has nothing to do with science and everything to do with teeing up nationwide restrictions on abortion."
Kaye added that "if the FDA moves forward with this politically motivated review, that is a dangerous sign that the president is going back on his promises to voters not to restrict abortion access even further."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Does Trump Really Want to Cap Credit Card Rates at 10%? Bernie Sanders Aims to Find Out
"When large financial institutions charge over 25% interest on credit cards, they are not engaged in the business of making credit available," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "They are engaged in extortion and loan sharking."
Feb 04, 2025
In an effort to hold U.S. President Donald Trump to a promise he made on the campaign trail, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday introduced legislation alongside Republican Sen. Josh Hawley that would cap credit card interest rates at 10% for five years, targeting a major cash cow for Visa, Mastercard, and other corporate giants.
"During the campaign, President Trump pledged to cap credit card interest rates at 10%," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement Tuesday. "I am proud to be introducing bipartisan legislation with Senator Hawley to do just that. When large financial institutions charge over 25% interest on credit cards, they are not engaged in the business of making credit available. They are engaged in extortion and loan sharking."
"We cannot continue to allow big banks to make huge profits ripping off the American people," the Vermont senator added. "This legislation will provide working families struggling to pay their bills with desperately needed financial relief."
During his 2024 White House bid, Trump said he would support a "temporary cap" on credit card interest rates "at around 10%," declaring, "We can't let them make 25% and 30%."
One recent estimate put the average credit card interest rate in the U.S. at close to 27%, and an analysis released last year by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) found that credit card interest rates have surged over the past decade—a boon for card issuers and a disaster for Americans falling deeper into debt.
"Working Americans are drowning in record credit card debt while the biggest credit card issuers get richer and richer by hiking their interest rates to the moon. It's not just wrong, it's exploitative. And it needs to end," Hawley (R-Mo.) said Tuesday. "Capping credit card interest rates at 10%, just like President Trump campaigned on, is a simple way to provide meaningful relief to working people. Let's do it."
It's not clear whether Sanders and Hawley's bill stands a chance in a Congress fully controlled by Republicans, many of whom have shown a willingness to play defense for the predatory banks and credit card firms that help fund their campaigns.
The Trump White House did not respond to media requests for comment on whether the administration would throw its support behind the Sanders-Hawley proposal, which is sure to face Wall Street opposition.
During a Senate confirmation hearing last month, Sanders asked billionaire U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent whether he supports Trump's call for a 10% cap on credit card interest rates.
Bessent replied that he would "follow what President Trump wants to do" on the issue.
During Trump's first term in the White House, Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) introduced legislation that would have capped credit card interest rates at 15%.
Just nine Democrats in the House and one in the Senate co-sponsored the bill, which received zero Republican support.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular