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
ultraviolet
Campaigners Push GoFundMe to Remove Fundraisers for ICE Agent Who Killed Renee Good
"Until each and every campaign supporting Jonathan Ross is taken down, GoFundMe will remain complicit in legitimizing ICE's campaign of terror and violence on our communities."
Jan 13, 2026
The popular crowdfunding platform GoFundMe is facing mounting pressure to remove campaigns supporting Jonathan Ross, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who shot and killed Renee Good last week in Minneapolis, sparking nationwide outrage and protests.
One GoFundMe campaign for Ross, a 10-year ICE veteran who has received full backing from the Trump White House, has raised nearly $600,000 as of this writing. The description of the campaign, started by a user named Clyde Emmons, states, "After seeing all the media bs about a domestic terrorist getting go fund me. I feel that the officer that was 1000 percent justified in the shooting deserves to have a go fund me."
Trump administration officials have characterized Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, as a "domestic terrorist" and openly lied about the circumstances of her killing. President Donald Trump falsely claimed that Good "violently, willfully, and viciously ran over" Ross, despite video footage from multiple angles showing no such thing.
The top contributor to the GoFundMe campaign started by Emmons, who called Good a "stupod [sic] bitch who got what she deserved," is Bill Ackman, who gave $10,000. The billionaire hedge fund manager wrote on social media that he "intended to similarly support the GoFundMe for Renee Good’s family" but it was closed by the time he tried to donate.
The advocacy group UltraViolet on Monday launched a petition urging GoFundMe to remove all fundraisers supporting or claiming to support Ross, noting that the platform's policies bar fundraisers in support of individuals accused of violent crimes.
GoFundMe told The Intercept that the company is investigating Emmons' campaign.
"Renee Good was murdered by ICE in cold blood and in plain sight. There can be no equivocation on the gross abuse of force which caused her death, nor can there be any doubt as to the contemptibility of GoFundMe campaigns to support her killer,” Nicole Regalado, vice president of campaigns at UltraViolet, said in a statement. “GoFundMe claims to be committed to helping people, and yet it continues to profit from our pain."
"Until each and every campaign supporting Jonathan Ross is taken down," Regalado added, "GoFundMe will remain complicit in legitimizing ICE's campaign of terror and violence on our communities."
State and federal investigators are currently examining Good's killing, though the FBI has cut Minnesota officials out of the probe, intensifying concerns of a cover-up.
The New York Times reported Tuesday that federal investigators assigned to Good's killing are "looking into her possible connections to activist groups protesting the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement, in addition to the actions of the federal agent who killed her."
"The decision by the FBI and the Justice Department to scrutinize Ms. Good’s activities and her potential connections to local activists is in line with the White House’s strategy of deflecting blame for the shooting away from federal law enforcement and toward opponents they have described as domestic terrorists, often without providing evidence," the Times added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'An Absolute Joke': Trump DOJ Partially Releases Epstein Files, Many Heavily Redacted
“Trump’s failure to release the Epstein files is an insult to survivors and a further stain on an administration that continuously bends over backwards to protect abusers," said one critic.
Dec 19, 2025
The US Department of Justice on Friday released a massive—but incomplete—trove containing hundreds of thousands of records related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a move that came as Democratic lawmakers vowed to pursue "all legal options" after the Trump administration blew a deadline to disclose all of the files.
The DOJ uploaded the files—which can be viewed here in the section titled "Epstein Files Transparency Act"—to its website on Friday. Earlier in the day, Deputy US Attorney General Todd Blanche said that the agency would not release all the Epstein files on Friday, as required by the transparency law signed last month by President Donald Trump.
Friday's release includes declassified files, many of them heavily redacted and some of which were already publicly available via court filings, records requests, and media reporting. Files include flight logs and masseuse lists. One document contains nothing but 100 fully redacted pages.
Curiously, a search for the words "Trump" and "Epstein" in the posted documents returned no results.
The progressive media site MeidasTouch said, "This Epstein files 'release' is the most disgusting cover up in American history."
Journalist Aaron Parnas accused the DOJ of "engaging in a cover up."
"Most of the files are heavily redacted, with very few fully released," he noted. "There are disturbing images of Epstein with victims. There are images of Michael Jackson, Bill Clinton, and others. Donald Trump is not in any of the ones I've reviewed."
While not accused of any wrongdoing, Trump was a former close friend of Epstein, who faced federal sex trafficking charges at the time of his suspicious 2019 death in a New York City jail cell.
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson released a statement Friday afternoon, which read in part:
The Trump administration is the most transparent in history. By releasing thousands of pages of documents, cooperating with the House Oversight Committee’s subpoena request, and President Trump recently calling for further investigations into Epstein’s Democrat friends, the Trump administration has done more for the victims than Democrats ever have.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) noted in a statement following the DOJ document dump, noting that the Epstein Files Transparency Act passed by Congress and signed by Trump "calls for the complete release of the Epstein files so that there can be full transparency."
"This set of heavily redacted documents released by the Department of Justice today is just a fraction of the whole body of evidence," Schumer continued. “Simply releasing a mountain of blacked out pages violates the spirit of transparency and the letter of the law. For example, all 119 pages of one document were completely blacked out. We need answers as to why."
“Senate Democrats are working to assess the documents that have been released to determine what actions must be taken to hold the Trump administration accountable," he added. "We will pursue every option to make sure the truth comes out.”
Schumer's remarks followed vows by congressional Democrats including Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)—who, along with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) introduced the Epstein Files Transparency Act—to hold Trump administration officials accountable for violating the law.
Responding to the DOJ's document release and delay in fully disclosing the files, Elisa Batista, campaign director at UltraViolet Action, said in a statement that “if the Trump administration had its way, they would undo the sacrifice of survivors who came forward to demand transparency and accountability, as well as all those abused by Epstein who were unable to."
“Trump’s failure to release the Epstein files is an insult to survivors and a further stain on an administration that continuously bends over backwards to protect abusers—and just violated the Epstein Files Transparency Act to do so," Batista added. "We will continue to fight alongside the brave survivors—many of whom were young girls when they were abused by Epstein—who took great risk to reveal Epstein’s globe-spanning sex trafficking network.”
Britt Jacovich, a spokesperson for the progressive political action group MoveOn, said following Friday's release that “President Trump’s Department of Justice is breaking the law by holding all of the Epstein files hostage, and yet again, Trump is doing absolutely nothing."
"Trump doesn’t care about the victims or the millions of Americans calling for justice," Jacovich added. "He only cares about protecting the rich and powerful, even those who abuse young women and children. Every single person named in the Epstein files and involved in the cover-up should face accountability, regardless of their political party. No more delays, no more obstruction.”
Yasmine Meyer, an attorney who represents multiple alleged victims of Epstein, told CBS News that while "we are glad that... we are seeing some documents finally being released," the "heavy redactions" in many of the documents are "troubling."
"Every single time that there has been a promise to deliver some meaningful material, the survivors cannot help but get their hopes up... and every single time, that door slams back shut in their faces and retraumatized them all over again," she added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Appeals Court Upholds Restrictions on Mifepristone—But Abortion Pill Remains Available for Now
"Today's decision is a likely first step toward a massive blow to reproductive rights in the United States—and a stark reminder that our courts have been hijacked by Republican extremists," said one abortion rights advocate.
Aug 16, 2023
A federal appellate court on Wednesday upheld portions of a ruling restricting access to the abortion pill mifepristone, although the drug will remain available pending the outcome of ongoing litigation.
A three-judge panel of the right-wing 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that mifepristone can remain on the market, while finding that the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 2016 move to allow the pill to be taken later in pregnancy, mailed directly to patients, and prescribed by healthcare professionals other than doctors was likely illegal.
The ruling—which the Department of Justice (DOJ) said it will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court—was condemned by abortion rights advocates.
"Ignoring the facts and the expert scientific judgment of the country's top doctors is judicial activism of the highest order."
"This entirely illegitimate decision could cost lives all across the country," Rachel O'Leary Carmona, executive director of Women's March, said in a statement. "The conservative three-judge panel that is the 5th Circuit Court is just another agent in extremist Republicans' plan to enact a full nationwide abortion ban and to cut back access to critical reproductive healthcare."
"To be clear: Mifepristone is an FDA-approved medication that has been proven safe and effective for women in all walks of life for over two decades," she added. "It has a safety record of over 99%—more than that of Tylenol or Viagra."
Following the Supreme Court's cancellation last year of half a century of constitutional abortion rights in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Texas ruled this April in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA that the agency's approval of mifepristone in 2000 was illegal.
The DOJ subsequently appealed Kacsmaryk's decision to the 5th Circuit. Later in April, the Supreme Court granted a request by the Biden administration to continue allowing widespread access to mifepristone pending the outcome of the 5th Circuit case.
"Today's decision by the 5th Circuit to partially reaffirm Judge Kacsmaryk's ruling attempting to yank mifepristone off the shelves is an outrageous attack on the reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy of women and pregnant people in the United States," Catholics for Choice president Jamie Manson said in a statement.
"A mountain of scientific evidence demonstrates that mifepristone—which, when taken in combination with misoprostol, accounts for most of the abortions in the United States—is a safe and highly effective method of terminating an early pregnancy," Manson added. "Ignoring the facts and the expert scientific judgment of the country's top doctors is judicial activism of the highest order."
Nicole Regalado, vice president of campaigns at UltraViolet, warned that "if the Supreme Court refuses to take this case, or affirms the 5th Circuit's decision, it will severely restrict access to mifepristone nationwide."
"Today's decision is a likely first step toward a massive blow to reproductive rights in the United States—and a stark reminder that our courts have been hijacked by Republican extremists who will stop at nothing to advance their sexist agenda," she continued.
"In times like these, every single one of us must make a choice: Will we stand by and let extremist judges impose their sexist agendas on millions of people, or step up to protect the rights of women and pregnant people to make decisions about their bodies?" Regalado added. "History will remember which side we choose."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Jury in Civil Case Finds Trump Sexually Abused, Defamed E. Jean Carroll
One prominent trial attorney called on New York lawmakers to "extend the CRIMINAL statute of limitations for sex crimes so Trump can be criminally prosecuted for the sexual abuse that this civil jury found Trump committed."
May 09, 2023
A civil jury in New York City on Tuesday found former U.S. President Donald Trump civilly liable for sexually abusing and defaming—but not raping—journalist E. Jean Carroll and awarded her $5 million in damages.
After two weeks of testimony and just under three hours of deliberation, the six-man, three-woman jury awarded Carroll $2 million in compensatory damages and $20,000 in punitive damages for sexual battery, and $1 million in compensatory damages, $1.7 million for reputational repair, and $280,000 in punitive damages for defamation.
Carroll alleged that Trump—a 2024 Republican presidential candidate—raped her in a dressing room of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in Midtown Manhattan in 1996 and then defamed her when he denied the accusation.
In denying the assault, Trump claimed to never have met Carroll, whom he called "mentally sick" and a "whack job" who is "not my type" in "any way, shape, or form."
The Associated Press reports:
The trial revisited the lightning-rod topic of Trump's conduct toward women.
Carroll gave multiple days of frank, occasionally emotional testimony, buttressed by two friends who told jurors she reported the alleged attack to them in the moments and day afterward.
Jurors also heard from Jessica Leeds, a former stockbroker who testified that Trump abruptly groped her against her will on an airplane in the 1970s, and from Natasha Stoynoff, a writer who said Trump forcibly kissed her against her will while she was interviewing him for a 2005 article.
Carroll smiled as the verdict was read and as she walked out of the Manhattan Federal Courthouse on Tuesday.
Trump—who did not appear at the trial—wrote on his Truth social media platform: "I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHO THIS WOMAN IS. THIS VERDICT IS A DISGRACE—A CONTINUATION OF THE GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF ALL TIME!"
Joe Tacopina, Trump's attorney, called the verdict "strange" and vowed to appeal.
"Obviously, [Trump is] firm in his belief, as many people are, that he cannot get a fair trial in New York City based on the jury pool, and I think one could argue that's probably an accurate assessment based on what happened today," Tacopina said during a press conference outside the courthouse.
More than two dozen women and a 13-year-old girl have accused Trump of sexual misconduct, including rape and assault.
One month before the 2016 presidential election, a 2005 recording of Trump telling "Access Hollywood" host Billy Bush that "when you're a star," women let you "do anything" to them," including "grab 'em by the pussy" surfaced.
Asked during deposition by Carroll's lawyers if he believes the premise of his "Access Hollywood" comments—that powerful men could sexually assault women with impunity—is true, Trump said: "If you look over the last million years, I guess that's been largely true. Not always, but largely true. Unfortunately or fortunately."
Trial attorney Lisa Bloom called on the New York Legislature to "extend the CRIMINAL statute of limitations for sex crimes so Trump can be criminally prosecuted for the sexual abuse that this civil jury found Trump committed."
Last May, Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the Adult Survivors Act, allowing survivors of sexual assault that occurred when they were older than 18 to sue their abusers—regardless of when the abuse occurred—during a one-year period.
Tuesday's verdict comes just over a month after Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts involving alleged hush money payments during the 2016 election in bids to cover up sex scandals, including $130,000 given to porn star Stormy Daniels and $30,000 payment to a former Trump Tower doorman who claimed to have a story about a child Trump had out of wedlock.
Rights defenders welcomed the jury's verdict.
"We are grateful to E. Jean Carroll for sharing her truth. We are in solidarity with her and survivors of sexual violence," UltraViolet tweeted.
"We know that sexual violence and rape culture is all around us, often perpetuated or carried out by those in positions of power. E. Jean Carroll is one of over 20 women who have come forward with stories of sexual assault by Donald Trump," the group added.
UltraViolet called on CNN to cancel a planned Trump town hall.
"When media outlets like CNN give Trump a platform, they do a disservice to all their viewers," the group wrote. "Contrary to the network's excuses, hosting a town hall with Trump isn't about hearing 'both sides.' It's a brazen ploy to seize ratings."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Texas Ruling Could Have 'Devastating' Impact on Access to Abortion Pills Nationwide
"This isn't about what the overwhelming majority of Americans want," said one advocate. "It's about a small group of people who want control over women's freedom to choose, and will seek any means to achieve it."
Feb 09, 2023
Abortion rights advocates are "watching and hoping that evidence-based care will prevail" in a federal court case in Texas, said one physician this week as a judge appointed by former President Donald Trump is expected to rule as soon as Friday on the Food and Drug Administration's authority to approve one of two drugs commonly used for medication abortions.
In a lawsuit filed by the right-wing Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk will review the final arguments on Friday, and is expected to soon rule on whether the FDA's approval of mifepristone should be revered more than two decades after the drug was first made legal.
Less than a year after the right-wing majority of the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and cleared the way for at least 13 states to impose bans on abortion care, a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would cause fresh "chaos" in the reproductive care landscape, according to abortion provider Dr. Kristyn Brandi. If Kacsmaryk rules in favor of the right-wing group, mifepristone would be banned even in states where abortion remains legal.
"A court case in Texas could easily turn into a nationwide ban on the most commonly prescribed medication abortion in the coming weeks through underhanded judicial tactics."
More than 3.7 million people have used mifepristone, which is taken alongside misoprostol in order to induce an abortion, since it was approved in the United States. Medication abortions now account for 53% of abortions in the U.S., and the FDA in recent years has made them more accessible by allowing patients to obtain the pills at telehealth visits and to get them through the mail and, last month, by allowing certified pharmacies to dispense the medication.
Alliance Defending Freedom and other pro-forced pregnancy groups have claimed the FDA was careless with patients' health when it approved mifepristone, even as clinical trials have shown it to be safer than penicillin, Viagra, and Tylenol.
Advocates say the reversal of the FDA's approval would endanger millions of people who need abortions, as many would be left with only the option of a surgical abortion in clinics, which have become overburdened as people travel from states that have banned or severely restricted access.
"This ruling could be devastating for abortion care," Andrea Miller, president of the National Institute for Reproductive Health, told The Guardian on Thursday. "Cutting off critical access to abortion medication—which is the preferred method for more than half of abortion patients in the country—would cause significant harm, especially at a time when Dobbs has made it difficult or impossible for many to get care at clinics."
Some clinics have begun mobilizing to prepare healthcare workers to provide misoprostol-only medication abortions.
"No matter the case outcome, Planned Parenthood health centers will remain committed to doing whatever possible to ensure patients can choose the method of abortion that is best for their circumstances, including medication abortion," Danika Severino Wynn, vice president of abortion access at Planned Parenthood, told Jezebel on Tuesday.
Taking only misoprostol to induce an abortion has a lower success rate than taking the combination of pills—88% compared to 98%—and misoprostol-only abortions carry a greater risk of side effects. Both factors could complicate matters for people who live in states with abortion bans and decide to travel out-of-state to receive care to avoid potential prosecution. As The 19th reported on Tuesday:
Some patients will have to decide if they want to take the pills in their home state, where it is outlawed, or if they want to take them before traveling home, navigating severe cramps and even vomiting while making an hours-long drive or flight.
And because misoprostol only has a higher failure rate, patients traveling out of state could face other risks. If they return home and learn the abortion has failed, multiple experts said, patients may not know where or how to find safe care in their home states, or may need to make another expensive trip across state lines.
"It's really hard as a provider to know there's a medication that works better than other options and not be able to offer that because of politics," Brandi, who chairs the board of the advocacy group Physicians for Reproductive Health, told The 19th.
Greer Donley, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh Law School, noted that in addition to harming pregnant people, a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would have "serious and broad implications" for all drugs approved by the FDA and for the agency's authority.
Rights advocates this week noted that Kacsmaryk recently ruled against a federal program that allows teenagers in Texas to access birth control without their parents' permission.
Rights groups Women's March and UltraViolet on Thursday announced plans for a rally and march on Saturday in Amarillo, Texas, where the ruling will be handed down.
"A court case in Texas could easily turn into a nationwide ban on the most commonly prescribed medication abortion in the coming weeks through underhanded judicial tactics," said Rachel Carmona, executive director of Women's March. "This isn't about what the overwhelming majority of Americans want; it's about a small group of people who want control over women’s freedom to choose, and will seek any means to achieve it."
"This fight is bigger than Roe," she added. "This is about freedom, democracy, and fundamental human rights.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Chilling': Republican State AG's Office Sought List of Trans Texans
"This is an alarming attack on the privacy, safety, and dignity of transgender Texans," said the ACLU.
Dec 14, 2022
"Despicable." "Disgusting." "Egregious." "Terrifying."
"What a gross abuse of power for no apparent purpose than to harass law-abiding Texans that he's prejudiced against."
Those were some of the responses to reporting by The Washington Post on Wednesday that the office of Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sought to create a list of state residents who had changed their gender on driver's licenses and other Department of Public Safety (DPS) records.
"Need total number of changes from male to female and female to male for the last 24 months, broken down by month," the head of the DPS driver's license division wrote to colleagues on June 30, according to an email obtained via public records request. "We won't need DL/ID numbers at first but may need to have them later if we are required to manually look up documents."
As the newspaper detailed:
After more than 16,000 such instances were identified, DPS officials determined that a manual search would be needed to determine the reason for the changes, DPS spokesman Travis Considine told the Post in response to questions.
"A verbal request was received," he wrote in an email. "Ultimately, our team advised the AG's office the data requested neither exists nor could be accurately produced. Thus, no data of any kind was provided."
Asked who in Paxton's office had requested the records, he replied: "I cannot say."
While Paxton's office did not respond to requests for comment and public records obtained by the paper--entitled "AG Request Sex Change Data" and "AG data request"--did not indicate why his office sought the information, LGBTQ+ individuals and rights advocates are fearful, given the Texas GOP's "unrelenting assault on trans rights."
Last year, Texas lawmakers introduced over 40 anti-trans bills--more than any other state--with a focus on youth. GOP legislators have already signaled they plan to continue pushing such bills.
Meanwhile, Paxton in February released a nonbinding legal opinion claiming that gender-affirming care for minors--considered medically necessary by professional organizations including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association--is child abuse. GOP Gov. Greg Abbott then ordered the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) to investigate child abuse claims filed against parents who may be providing their children with such care.
The Texas Supreme Court in May overturned a statewide injunction on procedural grounds but also concluded that Abbott did not have the authority to order the investigations. In response to another legal challenge filed by the ACLU and Lambda Legal, a Travis County district judge in September issued a second injunction blocking such probes for families that belong to the advocacy group PFLAG and those named in the suit.
The ACLU was among the organizations and individuals alarmed by the Post's new reporting. The group said that "this is an alarming attack on the privacy, safety, and dignity of transgender Texans. Trans people deserve to live free from persecution--in Texas and everywhere."
Human Rights Campaign (HRC) legal director Sarah Warbelow also weighed in with a statement:
For the LGBTQ+ community as a whole, but for transgender Americans in particular, today's story out of Texas is chilling. Weaponizing state agencies and their public records to pinpoint and single out transgender Texans is terrifying, albeit not shocking. Throughout 2022, Attorney General Paxton, along with Gov. Abbot, have stopped at nothing to attack the very existence of transgender youth and adults. This development shows how far they're willing to go in discriminating against transgender people. HRC stands with all members of the trans community in Texas who are living in an even higher state of emergency today, as we will continue to hold extremist officials accountable.
"This is terrifying. Government seeking this kind of information (for no known legal reason) is clearly intended to intimidate people," tweeted Jonathan Schwabish, a podcaster and senior fellow at the Urban Institute's Income and Benefits Policy Center.
James Slattery, a "recovering lawyer and agitator for voting rights" in Austin, similarly said: "This is disgusting: TX AG Ken Paxton tried to use driver's license data to compile a list of people in the state [who] are transgender. What a gross abuse of power for no apparent purpose than to harass law-abiding Texans that he's prejudiced against."
Texas-based digital strategist Sawyer Hackett asked, "What could he possibly need this info for--beyond harassment and persecution?"
"Trans Texans deserve better than to be policed and surveilled," asserted the advocacy group UltraViolet, adding that Paxton "is performing an egregious act of state-sanctioned violence--rounding up records of people who have changed their gender identities."
The Democratic Attorneys General Association declared that "Ken Paxton and Texas Republicans' targeted attacks on trans Texans are despicable. LGBTQIA+ Texans have the right to live without fear of their lives being scrutinized or put in jeopardy."
Some critics even drew comparisons to the Nazis:
"We're horrified to hear TX AG Paxton's office tried to seek detailed data on trans Texans," said the Congressional LGBTQ+ Equality Caucus. "Paxton and the Texas GOP have led effort after effort to attack transgender people. We must protect trans people who are being targeted by their state governments."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FTC Files 'Urgently Needed' Suit Against Data Broker, Citing Threat to Abortion Patients
"This lawsuit highlights the very real threats that data surveillance poses to peoples' safety, security, bodily integrity, and access to healthcare," said the head of Public Citizen.
Aug 29, 2022
Privacy and reproductive rights advocates on Monday welcomed the Biden administration's lawsuit against Kochava Inc., which argues that the Idaho-based data broker's practices endanger abortion patients in the post-Roe v. Wade era.
"It's a critical step to crack down on data brokers selling sensitive location data--including at healthcare clinics."
Since the U.S. Supreme Court's late June Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision reversed Roe, while anti-choice forces have ramped up attacks on reproductive freedom, concerns have mounted about how data from devices like smartphones may be used to target patients and healthcare providers.
In a statement about the new Federal Trade Commission (FTC) suit, Robert Weissman, president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, noted the increased threat posed by those trying to ban and criminalize abortions, and punish those who seek them.
"Especially in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, today's FTC action is urgently needed to protect patients and consumers from data surveillance-superpowered vigilantes, extremists, and overzealous prosecutors," said Weissman.
"This lawsuit highlights the very real threats that data surveillance poses to peoples' safety, security, bodily integrity, and access to healthcare," he continued. "It is why it so important that the FTC is pursuing a broad rule to protect consumer privacy and restrict data surveillance, and why Congress should pass legislation to ensure robust privacy protections for all Americans."
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also celebrated the "major action" by the agency and administration "to protect Americans' privacy," tweeting that "with abortion rights under attack by the Supreme Court and Republican states, it's a critical step to crack down on data brokers selling sensitive location data--including at healthcare clinics and places of worship."
Some, such as Shaunna Thomas of UltraViolet, thanked FTC Chair Lina Khan--an appointee of President Joe Biden--for her leadership.
Only Noah Joshua Phillips, one of the two Republican commissioners, voted against filing the complaint, which accuses Kochava of violating federal law "in connection with acquiring consumers' precise geolocation data and selling the data in a format that allows entities to track the consumers' movements to and from sensitive locations."
That data, collected from mobile devices, can connect individuals with not only their homes but also "locations associated with medical care, reproductive health, religious worship, mental health, temporary shelters, such as shelters for the homeless, domestic violence survivors, or other at-risk populations, and addiction recovery," the complaint explains.
The filing points out that in addition to its paid services, until June, Kochava had a data sample on Amazon Web Services (AWS) that was relatively easy to access for free. One day of that dataset examined by the FTC corresponded to nearly 62 million unique mobile numbers.
In the data sample, "it is possible to identify a mobile device that visited a women's reproductive health clinic and trace that mobile device to a single-family residence," the complaint states. "The data set also reveals that the same mobile device was at a particular location at least three evenings in the same week, suggesting the mobile device user's routine. The data may also be used to identify medical professionals who perform, or assist in the performance, of abortion services."
After detailing other examples, the document declares that "identification of sensitive and private characteristics of consumers from the location data sold and offered by Kochava injures or is likely to injure consumers through exposure to stigma, discrimination, physical violence, emotional distress, and other harms," and "these injuries are exacerbated by the fact that, as described above, Kochava lacks any meaningful controls over who accesses its location data feed," including the data sample.
The filing also asserts that "the collection and use of their location data are opaque to consumers, who typically do not know who has collected their location data and how it is being used," and Kochava "could implement safeguards to remove data associated with sensitive locations... at a reasonable cost and expenditure of resources."
Echoing the complaint, Samuel Levine, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, said that "where consumers seek out healthcare, receive counseling, or celebrate their faith is private information that shouldn't be sold to the highest bidder."
"The FTC is taking Kochava to court," Levine added, "to protect people's privacy and halt the sale of their sensitive geolocation information."
Kochava general manager Brian Cox claimed the suit "shows the unfortunate reality that the FTC has a fundamental misunderstanding of Kochava's data marketplace business and other data businesses," and that the company "operates consistently and proactively in compliance with all rules and laws, including those specific to privacy."
Cox also pointed to Kochava's newly announced ability to block location data from sensitive locations and recent engagement with the FTC prior to the filing. He added that "real progress to improve data privacy for consumers will not be reached through flamboyant press releases and frivolous litigation," and "it's disappointing that the agency continues to circumvent the lawmaking process and perpetuate misinformation surrounding data privacy."
Meanwhile, experts such as Tulane University law professor Ann Lipton highlighted that "the suit is really about general location sharing, which could be used for all sorts of purposes--including stalking and robbery--but the FTC highlights abortion as one sensitive use."
In the words of investigative journalist Jon Keegan, "This is a major shot across the bow to the location data industry."
Keegan also noted that the suit follows a public warning from July that the FTC "is committed to using the full scope of its legal authorities to protect consumers' privacy" and "will vigorously enforce the law if we uncover illegal conduct that exploits Americans' location, health, or other sensitive data."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Nationwide 'Bans Off Our Bodies' Rallies Planned for Saturday
"With the Supreme Court planning to overturn Roe v. Wade, we are at a tipping point in the fight to be able to make decisions about our own bodies, lives, and futures."
May 13, 2022
People across the United States are planning to take to the streets on Saturday, May 14 to protest right-wing attacks on abortion rights, including the looming reversal of Roe v. Wade.
Pro-choice groups--including Planned Parenthood organizations, Liberate Abortion, MoveOn, Service Employees International Union, UltraViolet, and Women's March--are putting together marches, rallies, and other events for the "Bans Off Our Bodies" day of action.
A searchable list of events is available at BansOff.org.
In addition to five anchor demonstrations planned in Austin, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, and Washington, D.C., more than 200 events are scheduled to "demonstrate the massive support for abortion rights nationwide, and make clear to the public just how serious the threat to those rights is in this moment," according to Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Senate Republicans and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on Wednesday blocked a final vote on the Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA), which would affirm abortion rights at the federal level. Calls for passing the bill have built up since a draft U.S. Supreme Court opinion leaked last week.
As the Center for Reproductive Rights explained:
The rallies are in response to the publishing by Politico of a draft Supreme Court opinion in the center's case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, that would overrule Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey and rule there is no constitutional right to abortion. Such a ruling would mark the first time in history that the U.S. Supreme Court has taken away a fundamental right.
Chief Justice John Roberts has confirmed that the draft was authentic, but that it is not the final opinion of the court. The final opinion is expected before the end of the court's term at the end of June.
If the high court does reverse Roe and Casey, abortion could be banned in over half the country due to "trigger" laws and other legislation, according to the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute.
"Either abortion will be outlawed in your state or your state will become a state that needs to start providing abortions to people who are coming from out of state. So this will have an impact on every single person in this country," Kimberly Inez McGuire, executive director of URGE: Unite for Reproductive and Gender Equity, recently told Glamour.
After the WHPA vote this week, Planned Parenthood Action Fund president Alexis McGill Johnson said that "politicians opposed to abortion rights are not stopping here--they have made it clear that their ultimate goal is to ban abortion nationwide."
"With the Supreme Court planning to overturn Roe v. Wade, we are at a tipping point in the fight to be able to make decisions about our own bodies, lives, and futures," she added. "We will not back down, and we will not forget those who put politics over our health and rights."
As part of Planned Parenthood's #BansOffOurBodies campaign, more than 160 young celebrities signed their names to a full-page New York Times advertisement that ran on Friday to promote the weekend protests. Their message on abortion rights was that "we will not go back--and we will not back down."
Rise Up 4 Abortion Rights, which has held actions throughout the week in response to Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion, also has dozens of U.S. events planned for Saturday. Protest leaders from the group said Friday that "the end of Roe v. Wade would be one of the most significant reversals of a fundamental human and civil right in this country's history."
"If you care about women and girls... if you refuse to inherit, or pass on, a world that is hurtling backwards," they continued, "get organized and connect with us. Spread the word to friends, family, and other networks. NOW is the time to rise up, together, as if our lives depend upon it--for, in fact, they do."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Billie Eilish, Ariana Grande, and More Vow Young People 'Will Not Back Down' on Abortion Rights
"Should the Supreme Court take away the constitutional right to safe, legal abortion, young people stand to lose the most," said Planned Parenthood Federation of America's Alexis McGill Johnson.
May 13, 2022
Ahead of nationwide pro-choice rallies planned for the weekend, Grammy-winning pop stars Billie Eilish and Ariana Grande were among more than 160 artists, actors, and other famous figures who declared in a full-page New York Times advertisement on Friday that young people intend to fight for abortion rights.
"Our power to plan our own futures and control our own bodies depends on our ability to access sexual and reproductive healthcare, including abortion."
"The Supreme Court is planning to overturn Roe v. Wade, taking away the constitutional right to abortion," the ad states, referencing a draft opinion leaked last week. "Our power to plan our own futures and control our own bodies depends on our ability to access sexual and reproductive healthcare, including abortion."
"We are artists. Creators. Storytellers. We are the new generation stepping into our power. Now we are being robbed of our power," the ad continues. "We will not go back--and we will not back down."
The ad also promotes the website for "Bans Off Our Bodies" rallies that Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), UltraViolet, Women's March, and other reproductive freedom advocates are organizing for Saturday, May 14.
"Should the Supreme Court take away the constitutional right to safe, legal abortion, young people stand to lose the most," said PPFA president and CEO Alexis McGill Johnson. "So many of us--who grew up with the understanding that Roe was settled law--could have never imagined that our own children would have fewer rights and less freedom over their own bodies and futures."
"What we see in young people from all walks of life is that they aren't backing down--not today, not ever," she added. "Like the artists who signed on to this ad, their resolve to keep bans off their bodies is a source of hope during a dark time, and we are determined to keep fighting alongside them, for them."
Others who signed on to the ad include musical artists Miley and Noah Cyrus, Camila Cabello, Selena Gomez, Demi Lovato, and Megan Thee Stallion; models Hailey Bieber, Kendall Jenner, and Karlie Kloss; and the female stars of the show Riverdale--Camila Mendes, Madelaine Petsch, and Lili Reinhart.
Some of them have previously spoken out in support of reproductive rights--from Halsey's viral speech at the 2018 Women's March in New York City to Eilish blasting Texas' six-week abortion ban that turns anti-choice vigilantes into bounty hunters at the Austin City Limits Festival last year.
After Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's draft opinion signaling the imminent end of Roe was revealed last week, singer Phoebe Bridgers tweeted: "I had an abortion in October of last year while I was on tour. I went to Planned Parenthood, where they gave me the abortion pill. It was easy. Everyone deserves that kind of access."
During her concert last week in Washington, D.C., Olivia Rodrigo said that "I couldn't pass up the opportunity to talk about how heartbroken I am over the Supreme Court's potential decision."
Decisions about women's bodies "should never be in the hands of politicians," the 19-year-old added. "I hope we can raise our voices to protect our right to have a safe abortion, which is a right that so many people before us have worked so hard to get."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Reproductive Rights Coalition Tells Dems to 'Stop Defending the Filibuster in Our Name'
"While the filibuster has prevented passage of anti-abortion legislation in the past, we are under no illusion that clinging to the filibuster will protect us now."
May 12, 2022
On the heels of Senate Republicans and Sen. Joe Manchin blocking federal abortion rights legislation, a reproductive freedom coalition on Thursday demanded that Democrats stop claiming they are defending women by keeping in place the filibuster.
"Again and again, the rotten structures of our democracy deny our federal legislature the ability to enact the will of the people."
The message from 40 reproductive rights, health, and justice groups came just a day after Manchin (D-W.Va.) joined with the GOP--again--to filibuster the Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA) in a vote that Senate Majority Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) teed up after U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's draft majority opinion for Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization leaked last week.
"Most Americans support congressional action to guarantee abortion rights," said the coalition, which includes NARAL Pro-Choice America, Ultraviolet, and Whole Woman's Health. "Yet yesterday, the Senate was unable to pass legislation to protect access to abortion ahead of the Dobbs ruling. This calls us back to January when senators employed the filibuster to block critical voting rights legislation supported by the majority. Again and again, the rotten structures of our democracy deny our federal legislature the ability to enact the will of the people."
Amid a wave of GOP attacks on voting rights at the state level--similar to Republican state legislators' efforts to end reproductive freedom--congressional Democrats tried to pass various bills last year to fend off those attacks and make it easier to vote.
Backed by President Joe Biden, Schumer proposed weakening the filibuster just to pass the House-approved Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act, but Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) in January sided with the GOP to prevent that reform, tanking their own party's popular voting rights package.
"Now is the time to fight like hell and address the structural inequities that hold us back," the reproductive rights coalition asserted Thursday.
"Anti-democratic and anti-abortion actors are reaping the success of their coordinated, well-funded, and dangerous GOP-led strategy to deny people--primarily Black, Brown, Indigenous, and all people of color, as well immigrants, young people, disabled people, the LGBTQI+ community, people with low incomes, and those living in rural and other medically underserved areas--their right to vote and access abortion," the groups said.
"We need to fill the seats of power with senators who will fight for abortion access and ensure they are empowered, procedurally, to pass critical abortion and voting rights legislation," the coalition continued. "That means putting every tool back on the table--including filibuster elimination."
After Alito's draft opinion was made public last week, both Manchin and Sinema--who are up for reelection in 2024 and this year, respectively--doubled down on their support for the filibuster.
Sinema said that she supports the WHPA and framed the filibuster as a safeguard "against the erosion of women's access to healthcare," pointing out that the 60-vote threshold has previously blocked congressional Republicans from advancing anti-choice measures.
The rights groups said Thursday that "while the filibuster has prevented passage of anti-abortion legislation in the past, we are under no illusion that clinging to the filibuster will protect us now."
"As leaders fighting for abortion access," the coalition concluded, "we join together to unequivocally state: Stop defending the filibuster in our name."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
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