radiofree.asia

Author: Jessica Corbett

  • UN Human Rights Chief Condemns Israeli Minister’s​ ‘Unfathomable’ Threat to Huwara



    United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk on Friday called out Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich for saying that Huwara, a Palestinian village in the West Bank, “needs to be wiped out” and “the state of Israel should do it.”

    Smotrich’s comment Wednesday came after Israeli settlers on Sunday rampaged through Huwara, killing a 37-year-old Palestinian man—mass violence that came just hours after a Palestinian gunman murdered a pair of Israeli brothers, who were 19 and 21.

    While presenting a report on Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and “the current intensification of violence” to the U.N. Human Rights Council, Türk blasted Smotrich’s remark as “an unfathomable statement of incitement to violence and hostility.”

    “Over half a century of occupation has led to widening dispossession, deepening deprivation, and recurring and severe violations of their rights, including the right to life.”

    More broadly, Türk lamented that “the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory is a tragedy. A tragedy, above all, for the Palestinian people. Over half a century of occupation has led to widening dispossession, deepening deprivation, and recurring and severe violations of their rights, including the right to life. Nobody could wish to live this way—or imagine that forcing people into conditions of such desperation can lead to an enduring solution.”

    “2022 saw both the highest number of Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces in the past 17 years, and the highest number of Israelis killed since 2016,” he highlighted. “This death toll has further, and sharply, deteriorated in the first weeks of 2023, and in the month that has just ended.”

    Türk’s office found that over the reporting period, Israeli security forces frequently used lethal force, “regardless of the level of threat—and, at times, even as an initial measure, rather than as last resort.” Researchers also documented “several cases of apparent extrajudicial, targeted killings” by such forces.

    As the rights chief told the council, other key findings in the report include:

    • Israeli security forces killed 131 Palestinians—including 65 people who were unarmed and did not engage in violence—and since 2017, fewer than 15% of such killings have been investigated, and fewer than 1% led to an indictment;
    • Palestinians killed 13 Israelis—and nine more, including three children, have been killed in two attacks since then;
    • Israel increasingly imposes collective punishments such as the blockade of Gaza, which are prohibited by international law, on Palestinians;
    • 967 Palestinians are being held in “administrative detention,” the highest number in 15 years; and
    • There are over 270 illegal Israeli settlements across Palestine.

    “The occupation is eating away at the health of both societies, on every level—from childhood to old age, and in every part of life,” Türk stressed. “For this violence to end, the occupation must end. On all sides, there are people who know this.”

    The U.N. leader urged decision-makers in the region and around the world to heed the recommendations of his office’s reports “and to step back from the precipice to which increasing extremism and violence have led.”

    While the settler attack on Huwara drew rare widespread rebuke—including from Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and a pair of conservative Jewish organizations in the United States—the Israeli government’s recent shift to the right has stoked fears that violence in the region will only get worse and more frequent.

    As Beth Miller, political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, said earlier this week, “The Israeli settlers burning down Palestinian homes and attacking Palestinians in the street are supported by the Israeli military and the Israeli government.”

    Heba Morayef, Amnesty International’s director for the Middle East and North Africa, declared Friday that “under Israel’s apartheid system, impunity reigns.”

    “Despite the intensity and scale of Sunday’s attacks, which resulted in the killing of one Palestinian and the wounding of nearly 400 more, and despite a rare show of international condemnation of settler violence, Israeli police yesterday released six suspects who were arrested in connection with the attacks,” she noted. “Meanwhile two others have been issued with administrative detention orders, which violate international law.”

    Like Miller, Morayef emphasized that “Israeli authorities have long enabled and incited settler attacks against Palestinians, and in some cases soldiers have directly participated.”

    “State-backed settler violence is endemic in the occupied West Bank,” she continued. “Towns and villages like Huwara, which was the epicenter of Sunday’s attacks, are frequently targeted as they are surrounded by illegal settlements. For example, in October 2022, settlers broke into a school in Huwara where they smashed windows and beat teachers and pupils; less than two weeks later a café was set on fire, and groups of settlers assaulted Palestinian residents with pipes and rocks.”

    “Amnesty International reiterates its call on Israeli authorities to remove all settlements, which are war crimes under international law, and to dismantle its system of apartheid against Palestinians,” Morayef added. “Apartheid is a crime against humanity and violence against civilians will continue for as long as it is in place.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • ‘We Were Right,’ Says AOC as Amazon Suspends HQ2 Construction in Virginia



    After Amazon on Friday confirmed plans to pause construction on its second headquarters near Washington, D.C., Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez expressed vindication over her 2018 opposition to the tech giant’s initial plan to build part of HQ2 in New York City.

    Following political leaders across the country engaging in what critics called “corporate bribery,” offering Amazon tax breaks and other incentives to build in their communities, the company chose to split the project between Arlington, Virginia, and the Long Island City neighborhood of Queens. However, Amazon halted plans for the NYC campus in response to local backlash.

    Among the opponents was Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who said in a series of tweets Friday, “In the end, we were right.”

    Slate politics writer Alexander Sammon on Friday expressed hope that Ocasio-Cortez, New York State Senate Deputy Leader Michael Gianaris (D-12), “and the small handful of Democratic politicians who had enough courage to stick their necks out and oppose this bullshit in 2018 take a nice, long victory lap today.”

    “This was not at all a safe position when they took it,” Sammon said. “And it was thankless one—as is often the case, the consequences for the marks and corporate bootlickers who embraced [former CEO Jeff] Bezos and Amazon will be nonexistent.”

    In response to reporting by Bloomberg, which broke Friday’s news, Gianaris tweeted that “maybe a multibillion-dollar subsidy for the biggest corporation in the world to build an office was a really bad idea after all.”

    Gianaris added in a statement that “Amazon’s announcement shows once again that paying off a historically wealthy corporation with massive subsidies to make a single office siting decision is bad policy. It also demands we take a different approach to the use of public dollars that does not rely on providing scarce resources to those who actually need them least while continuing to shortchange the services that would actually help people’s lives improve.”

    Amazon has nearly finished phase one of HQ2 construction, a pair of office towers, and plans to move employees into that development, Metropolitan Park, in June. However, phase two—PenPlace, set to be built across the street with three towers, a corporate conference center, and other features such as a garden—is now on hold indefinitely.

    “We’re always evaluating space plans to make sure they fit our business needs and to create a great experience for employees,” John Schoettler, who leads Amazon’s global real estate portfolio, told Bloomberg. “And since Met Park will have space to accommodate more than 14,000 employees, we’ve decided to shift the groundbreaking of PenPlace out a bit.”

    The move comes amid Amazon’s biggest-ever wave of job cuts, impacting 18,000 people globally, and after CEO Andy Jassy last month announced the company would require most employees to return to the office at least three days per week come May.

    “Our second headquarters has always been a multiyear project, and we remain committed to Arlington, Virginia, and the greater capital region—which includes investing in affordable housing, funding computer science education in schools across the region, and supporting dozens of local nonprofits,” Schoettler added. “We appreciate the support of all our partners and neighbors, and look forward to continuing to work together in the years ahead.”

    Congressman Don Beyer (D-Va.) on Friday said that Amazon staff made similar assurances to him directly. He urged the Seattle-based company to “promptly update leaders and stakeholders about any new major changes in this project, which remains very important to the capital region.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Historic Labor Ruling Slams ‘Egregious and Widespread Misconduct’ by Starbucks



    Building on a series of blows to Starbucks on Wednesday, a federal administrative law judge found the coffee giant “committed hundreds of unfair labor practices” at stores in and near Buffalo, New York, the origin of a national unionization wave.

    In a lengthy ruling, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) judge, Michael A. Rosas, called out the Seattle-based company for “egregious and widespread misconduct demonstrating a general disregard for the employees’ fundamental rights.”

    The judge ordered Starbucks to cease a long list of anti-union activities, rehire illegally fired employees, reimburse those impacted by unlawful conduct, rescind disciplinary actions, and reopen closed stores.

    Rebecca Givan, an associate professor of labor studies at Rutgers University, told The Washington Post that “to order a company to reopen stores that it’s closed should be embarrassing for Starbucks.”

    Rosas also ordered “a meeting or meetings scheduled to ensure the widest possible attendance,” during which a notice to the employees and an explanation of rights will be read by CEO Howard Schultz, senior vice president of U.S. operations Denise Nelson, or an NLRB agent. A video of the reading must be distributed to workers electronically or by mail.

    In an emailed statement to Bloomberg, Starbucks said that “we believe the decision and the remedies ordered are inappropriate given the record in this matter and are considering all options to obtain further legal review.”

    The outlet noted that “rulings by NLRB judges can be appealed to labor board members in Washington, and can then be appealed into federal appeals court. The agency can order policies changed and workers reinstated, but lacks authority to hold executives personally liable or make companies pay punitive damages for violations.”

    Meanwhile, Starbucks employees from the area and across the United States celebrated the “historic” ruling. Local organizer and barista Michael Sanabria declared that “after waiting through months of stalling tactics and the slow wheel of justice to turn, this will reinvigorate and re-energize the momentum of this movement.”

    Gary Bonadonna Jr., manager of the Starbucks Workers United Rochester regional joint board, said that “when workers launched their organizing campaign in the summer of 2021, we never could have imagined the lengths Starbucks would go to try to stop employees from exercising their legal right to organize.”

    “This ruling proves what we have been saying all along—Starbucks is the poster child of union-busting in the United States,” Bonadonna added. “We are thrilled that the company is being held accountable for their actions and we will continue to fight until every Starbucks worker wins the right to organize.”

    The ruling came after dozens of white-collar Starbucks workers on Wednesday endorsed a letter calling out the company for requiring them to return to the office and interfering with the unionization efforts at stores nationwide.

    Also on Wednesday, Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Chair Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) announced that next week the panel will vote on whether to subpoena Schultz, who has refused to testify voluntarily.

    “Tough day for Starbucks and its CEO,” More Perfect Union tweeted Wednesday night. “They might want to consider not engaging in constant, illegal union-busting.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • ‘A Decent Society Would Not Let This Happen’: 30 Million Across US Face Food Aid Cuts

    Common Dreams Logo

    This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Feb. 28, 2023. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.

    As of Wednesday, around 30 million people across the United States will have their family’s food assistance slashed, despite high prices and expert warnings about a “hunger cliff.”

    Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits were initially increased at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic. Although Republicans in 18 states had already ended the emergency allotments (EAs), households in the other 32 states along with Washington, D.C., Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have continued to receive them.

    “Poverty is a policy choice in this country”

    Elizabeth Lower-Basch, deputy executive director for the Center for Law and Social Policy

    However, the increased SNAP benefits are set to end Wednesday because of the omnibus spending package from December—federal lawmakers traded the temporary pandemic-era boost for a permanent program to feed children in the summer.

    “We’re really going to struggle,” Deanna Hardy, a mother of two in Marshfield, Wisconsin, told ABC News. “We’re going to have to end up going back to cheaper items like noodles and processed stuff because the meat, the dairy, fruits, and veggies. It’s expensive.”

    “I don’t think the cuts could have happened at a worse time,” added Hardy—whose family relies on a fixed income and will see their benefits drop from $960 to $200 per month. “When the extra payments began, food prices were nowhere near where they are now.”

    As Tracy Roof, an associate professor of political science at the University of Richmond, recently wrote for The Conversation:

    Many advocates for a stronger safety net say that SNAP benefits are too low to meet the needs of low-income people. They are warning of a looming hunger cliff—meaning a sharp increase in the number of people who don’t get enough nutritious food to eat—in March 2023, when the extra help ends.

    At that point, the lowest-income families will lose $95 in benefits a month. But some SNAP participants, such as many elderly and disabled people who live alone and on fixed incomes and who only qualify for the minimum amount of help, will see their benefits plummet from $281 to $23 a month.

    A trio of Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) experts pointed out earlier this month that “a study estimated that EAs kept 4.2 million people above the poverty line in the last quarter of 2021, reducing poverty by 10%―and child poverty by 14%―in states with EAs at the time. The estimated reduction in poverty rates due to EAs was highest for Black and Latino people.”

    CBPP president Sharon Parrott warned Axios Tuesday that the cuts will “allow very high levels of poverty to remain in the country.”

    Noting the outlet’s report, Public Citizen President Robert Weissman declared that “a decent society would not let this happen.”

    The looming cuts are a reminder that “poverty is a policy choice in this country,” Elizabeth Lower-Basch, deputy executive director for the Center for Law and Social Policy, told Axios. “For a while, we decided we were going to make a different policy choice.”

    Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal(D-Wash.) agreed and demanded action by federal lawmakers.

    “Tomorrow, SNAP benefits will drop back to pre-pandemic levels,” she tweeted. “That means $171 less each month for 520,000 Washington families struggling to make ends meet. Ending these increased benefits will cause more food insecurity and poverty.”

    “It’s unacceptable,” Jayapal added. “Poverty and hunger are policy choices. It’s time we step up and do more.”

  • Calling Out ‘Hypocrisy and Censorship,’ Campaign Aims to Prevent US TikTok Ban



    Data privacy and free speech advocates on Tuesday sounded the alarm about “hypocrisy and censorship” as U.S. House Republicans pushed for a bill to effectively ban TikTok, a video-sharing platform created by the Chinese company ByteDance, across the country.

    House Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) held a hearing on “combating the generational challenge of CCP aggression,” referring to the Chinese Communist Party, after introducing the Deterring America’s Technological Adversaries (DATA) Act last week.

    Meanwhile, the U.S.-based group Fight for the Future launched a #DontBanTikTok campaign opposing the bill (H.R. 1153).

    “If policymakers want to protect Americans from surveillance, they should advocate for strong data privacy laws.”

    “If it weren’t so alarming, it would be hilarious that U.S. policymakers are trying to ‘be tough on China’ by acting exactly like the Chinese government,” said Fight for the Future director Evan Greer. “Banning an entire app used by millions of people, especially young people, LGBTQ folks, and people of color, is classic state-backed internet censorship.”

    “TikTok uses the exact same surveillance capitalist business model of services like YouTube and Instagram,” she stressed. “Yes, it’s concerning that the Chinese government could abuse data that TikTok collects. But even if TikTok were banned, they could access much of the same data simply by purchasing it from data brokers, because there are almost no laws in place to prevent that kind of abuse.”

    According to Greer, “If policymakers want to protect Americans from surveillance, they should advocate for strong data privacy laws that prevent all companies (including TikTok!) from collecting so much sensitive data about us in the first place, rather than engaging in what amounts to xenophobic showboating that does exactly nothing to protect anyone.”

    Fight for the Future’s campaign includes a petition that is open for signature and sends the same message to lawmakers: “I want my elected officials to ACTUALLY protect my sensitive data from China and other governments. Stop feeding moral panic and pass a real data privacy law to stop Big Tech companies—including TikTok!—from harvesting and abusing our personal data for profit.”

    In addition to sharing the petition and highlighting the inadequacy of U.S. privacy laws, the campaign site notes that the ACLU is also opposing McCaul’s bill, and on Sunday sent a letter to him and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), the panel’s ranking member.

    “Having only had a few days to review this legislation, we have not included a comprehensive list of all of H.R. 1153’s potential problems in this letter,” wrote ACLU federal policy director Christopher Anders and senior policy counsel Jenna Leventoff. “However, the immediately apparent First Amendment concerns are more than sufficient to justify a ‘no’ vote.”

    “This legislation would not just ban TikTok—an entire platform, used by millions of Americans daily—but would also erode the important free speech protections included within the Berman Amendment,” they continued. “Moreover, its vague and overbroad nature implicates due process and sweeps in otherwise protected speech.”

    The letter explains that 35 years ago, the Berman Amendment “removed the president’s authority to regulate or ban the import or export of ‘informational materials, including but not limited to, publications, films, posters, phonograph records, photographs… artworks, and news wire feeds’ and later electronic media.”

    In a statement, Leventoff declared that “Congress must not censor entire platforms and strip Americans of their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression.”

    “Whether we’re discussing the news of the day, livestreaming protests, or even watching cat videos,” she said, “we have a right to use TikTok and other platforms to exchange our thoughts, ideas, and opinions with people around the country and around the world.”

    Notably, Meeks spoke out against the bill during Tuesday’s hearing. Reuters reports that the ranking member “strongly opposed the legislation, saying it would ‘damage our allegiances across the globe, bring more companies into China’s sphere, destroy jobs here in the United States, and undercut core American values of free speech and free enterprise.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • ‘A Decent Society Would Not Let This Happen’: 30 Million Across US Face Food Aid Cuts



    As of Wednesday, around 30 million people across the United States will have their family’s food assistance slashed, despite high prices and expert warnings about a “hunger cliff.”

    Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits were initially increased at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic. Although Republicans in 18 states had already ended the emergency allotments (EAs), households in the other 32 states along with Washington, D.C., Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have continued to receive them.

    However, the increased SNAP benefits are set to end Wednesday because of the omnibus spending package from December—federal lawmakers traded the temporary pandemic-era boost for a permanent program to feed children in the summer.

    “Poverty is a policy choice in this country.”

    “We’re really going to struggle,” Deanna Hardy, a mother of two in Marshfield, Wisconsin, told ABC News. “We’re going to have to end up going back to cheaper items like noodles and processed stuff because the meat, the dairy, fruits, and veggies. It’s expensive.”

    “I don’t think the cuts could have happened at a worse time,” added Hardy—whose family relies on a fixed income and will see their benefits drop from $960 to $200 per month. “When the extra payments began, food prices were nowhere near where they are now.”

    As Tracy Roof, an associate professor of political science at the University of Richmond, recently wrote for The Conversation:

    Many advocates for a stronger safety net say that SNAP benefits are too low to meet the needs of low-income people. They are warning of a looming hunger cliff—meaning a sharp increase in the number of people who don’t get enough nutritious food to eat—in March 2023, when the extra help ends.

    At that point, the lowest-income families will lose $95 in benefits a month. But some SNAP participants, such as many elderly and disabled people who live alone and on fixed incomes and who only qualify for the minimum amount of help, will see their benefits plummet from $281 to $23 a month.

    A trio of Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) experts pointed out earlier this month that “a study estimated that EAs kept 4.2 million people above the poverty line in the last quarter of 2021, reducing poverty by 10%―and child poverty by 14%―in states with EAs at the time. The estimated reduction in poverty rates due to EAs was highest for Black and Latino people.”

    CBPP president Sharon Parrott warned Axios Tuesday that the cuts will “allow very high levels of poverty to remain in the country.”

    Noting the outlet’s report, Public Citizen President Robert Weissman declared that “a decent society would not let this happen.”

    The looming cuts are a reminder that “poverty is a policy choice in this country,” Elizabeth Lower-Basch, deputy executive director for the Center for Law and Social Policy, told Axios. “For a while, we decided we were going to make a different policy choice.”

    Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) agreed and demanded action by federal lawmakers.

    “Tomorrow, SNAP benefits will drop back to pre-pandemic levels,” she tweeted. “That means $171 less each month for 520,000 Washington families struggling to make ends meet. Ending these increased benefits will cause more food insecurity and poverty.”

    “It’s unacceptable,” Jayapal added. “Poverty and hunger are policy choices. It’s time we step up and do more.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Civil society calls on African Union to foster fossil-free future

    Don’t Gas Africa, in cooperation with the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative, asserts that “Africa has a monumental opportunity to pursue sustainable socioeconomic development without relying on fossil fuels”, reports Jessica Corbett.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Dem Leaders Urged to Mark Bloody Sunday by Acting on Voting Rights, Economic Justice



    “Selma is sacred ground. It is, in a very real sense, the delivery room where the possibility of a true democracy was born. It is no place to play or to be for political pretense. Either you’re serious or not. If you’re coming, come on Sunday, the actual day of remembrance. If you’re coming, come with a commitment to fight for what these people were willing to give their lives for.”

    That’s the message that faith and rights leaders sent in a Monday letter to U.S. President Joe Biden and members of Congress ahead of the anniversary of Bloody Sunday—when white police officers violently assaulted civil rights advocates, including future Congressman John Lewis (D-Ga.), as they marched across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Alabama on March 7, 1965.

    The sign-on letter is led by the co-chairs of the Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival—Bishop William Barber II and Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis—along with former Democratic Alabama state Sen. Hank Sanders, Faya Rose Touré, Rev. Mark Thompson, Rebecca Marion, and Rev. Carolyn Foster. It is open for signature on the Repairers of the Breach website.

    “#SelmaIsSacredGround, not a place for political pretense.”

    “This is a critical year in the life of our country,” the seven initial signatories wrote. “On the one hand, the president and progressive members of Congress have fought to pass policies that have lifted up Americans in many ways. From Covid relief measures to infrastructure investments to child tax credits that lifted millions of children out of poverty (for a brief moment) to the appointment of the first Black woman Supreme Court Justice, we can celebrate some real progress.”

    “But, on the other hand, with a Democratic president and control of the House and Senate for two years, Democratic leadership was unable to raise the federal minimum wage,” they continued, also noting that a few obstructionist Democrats repeatedly helped Senate Republicans block efforts to restore the Voting Rights Act by supporting the filibuster.

    That obstruction, they explained, enabled “regressive legislative bodies across the nation to pass more voter suppression bills than any time since Jim Crow and to go through another round of dangerous redistricting, which nullifies the potential power of progressive voting coalitions by stacking and packing votes in certain districts to predetermine outcomes before any vote is cast.”

    Highlighting research that shows tens of millions of Americans face some form of voter suppression, the letter leaders argue that if Biden and other politicians plan to visit Selma—which was recently devastated by a tornado—for the Bloody Sunday anniversary, they should “declare that the fight for voting rights and the restoration of what they marched across that bridge for is not over.”

    The letter also demands urgent action on living wages and investments in rural areas, stressing that millions of people—particularly in Southern states—live “in poverty and low-wealth conditions” and remain “uninsured or underinsured at a time when we have more people on healthcare than ever before,” three years into the Covid-19 pandemic.

    “Those of us who are planning to be in Selma to honor the struggle for voting rights and economic justice should be willing to protest and engage nonviolently if politicians attempt to do moral harm to the memory and the sacredness of what happened on Bloody Sunday,” declares the letter. “This is no time for foolishness, photo-ops, and flaky commitments.”

    “Let us be clear: To honor the memory of Bloody Sunday is to work for the full restoration of the Voting Rights Act, the passage of the original For the People Act that John Lewis helped to write, not the bill that was watered down by Joe Manchin,” the letter continues, calling out the pro-filibuster West Virginia Democrat infamous for thwarting his own party’s agenda.

    “To commemorate Bloody Sunday,” the letter adds, “is to commit to raising of the minimum wage to a living wage, to ensuring that every American has adequate healthcare, and to enacting economic development that touches poor and low-wealth communities.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Student Loan Borrowers to Rally ‘In Full Force’ as Supreme Court Weighs Biden Relief Plan

    Supporters of President Joe Biden’s stalled student debt relief proposal are
    planning to rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. at the end of the month as justices hear a case challenging the administration’s long-awaited program.

    After Biden in August
    announced his plan to cancel up to $20,000 for Pell Grant recipients and up to $10,000 for borrowers with incomes under $125,000 for individuals or $250,000 for households, right-wing politicians and activists took to the courts. The administration has stopped taking applications while awaiting the high court’s decision but also extended a pause on loan repayments until June.

    Given that the right-wing court’s ruling is expected to “determine the fate of this program and the economic freedom of millions,” organizers of the People’s Rally for Student Debt Cancellation intend to “bring the voices and stories of impacted borrowers directly to the steps of the court” on February 28 from 8:00 am to noon ET.

    “I wanted to make sure that the justices look into the eyes of borrowers while they’re doing the hearing.”

    “More than 26 million borrowers remain in limbo, including 16 million who have been officially approved for relief” through BIden’s “life-changing” program, because of “blatantly partisan lawsuits were filed by the president’s political opponents to block the desperately needed relief,” organizers highlight on a
    webpage for the rally, set to be livestreamed.

    “For too long the student debt crisis has exacerbated racial and economic inequality,” organizers argue on the Campaign to Cancel My Student Debt website, managed by the Student Borrower Protection Center. “Working people are looking to SCOTUS to follow the letter of the law and uphold critical relief for millions of student loan borrowers.”

    Rise, a youth-led nonprofit that aims to make higher education free, plans to bring around 100 college students from the swing states Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to the D.C. rally, co-founder Max Lubin
    told Insider.

    “I think that when people see who is impacted, if they themselves are not, they start to understand that this is about fairness and this is about opportunity, and not ruining someone’s life with decades of unpayable debt just because you’re trying to earn an education,” he said.

    “In these kinds of D.C. fights, oftentimes real impacted Americans, real people are not considered and not present, and they are ignored by either elected, or in this case, appointed decision-makers,” Lubin continued. “So we’re showing up in full force.”

    Melissa Byrne, executive director of We the 45 Million, a campaign that fights for student debt cancellation, told
    Insider that in addition to the rally the day of the oral arguments, there will be an event at 6:00 pm ET the night before the hearing.

    “We’re going to have fun with it in the evening,” Byrne explained. “With a brass band, mariachi, acapella, people telling their stories, pizza, and just to really show and demonstrate that borrowers are just like your neighbors, and that this relief is helping out your communities around the country.”

    “I wanted to make sure that the justices look into the eyes of borrowers while they’re doing the hearing,” she added. “Our actions will show that the people with debt are just regular people from around the country.”

    Supporters of debt cancellation continue to call out those who have stood in the way of the president’s proposal—which was more modest than many borrowers and other Democratic politicians had advocated.

    “Whether purchasing their first home, starting a business, or growing their family, millions of borrowers will benefit from student debt cancellation,” Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) said Sunday, adding that Biden “has the legal authority” and “Republicans must stop obstructing this relief.”

    Former Democratic congressional candidate Nina Turner—now a senior fellow at the New School’s Institute on Race, Power, and Political Economy—similarly
    stressed Sunday that the president “has legal authority to cancel student debt and conservative judges are holding it up.”

    “Over 40 million borrowers would qualify for this administration’s one-time student debt relief,” the White House tweeted Monday. “In every single congressional district, at least half of eligible borrowers either applied or were deemed auto-eligible for relief—in the one month the application was available.”

    “Millions of these borrowers—and more—could be experiencing relief right now,” the White House added, “if it were not for lawsuits brought by opponents of the student debt relief program.”

  • US Meatpacking Plants Illegally Employed Over 100 Children, DOL Finds

    Federal investigators revealed Friday that one of the nation’s largest food sanitation companies illegally employed at least 102 children in dangerous jobs at 13 meatpacking facilities across eight states, leading to $1.5 million in fines. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) said its Wage and Hour Division “found that children were working with hazardous chemicals and cleaning meat processing…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • ‘Egregious’: DOL Finds US Meatpacking Plants Illegally Employed 100+ Children



    Federal investigators revealed Friday that one of the nation’s largest food sanitation companies illegally employed at least 102 children in dangerous jobs at 13 meatpacking facilities across eight states, leading to $1.5 million in fines.

    The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) said its Wage and Hour Division “found that children were working with hazardous chemicals and cleaning meat processing equipment including back saws, brisket saws, and head splitters.”

    The probe determined that children ages 13 to 17 unlawfully worked for Kieler, Wisconsin-based Packers Sanitation Services Inc. at plants in Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Tennessee, and Texas.

    Jessica Looman, principal deputy administrator of the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division, said the child labor violations “were systemic” and “clearly indicate a corporate-wide failure by Packers Sanitation Services at all levels.”

    “These children should never have been employed in meatpacking plants and this can only happen when employers do not take responsibility to prevent child labor violations from occurring in the first place,” Looman charged.

    Michael Lazzeri, the division’s regional administrator in Chicago, said that “our investigation found Packers Sanitation Services’ systems flagged some young workers as minors, but the company ignored the flags.”

    “When the Wage and Hour Division arrived with warrants, the adults—who had recruited, hired, and supervised these children—tried to derail our efforts to investigate their employment practices,” Lazzeri noted.

    The DOL—which found at least three cases where illegally employed children were injured on the job—fined the company $15,138 for each child who was not legally employed, the highest possible penalty under federal law.

    As The New York Times reported:

    Some researchers have criticized the civil monetary penalties, which are set by Congress, as “woefully insufficient” to protect workers and to deter employers from violating labor laws.

    “It’s really shameful that the level of fine is so low,” said Celine McNicholas, director of policy at the Economic Policy Institute, a research group that seeks to improve conditions for workers. “It’s not sufficiently toothy enough to prevent the use of child labor in the meatpacking industry.”

    Despite such criticism, Solicitor of Labor Seema Nanda framed the case as an example of accountability, delcaring Friday, “The Department of Labor has made it absolutely clear that violations of child labor laws will not be tolerated.”

    “No child should ever be subject to the conditions found in this investigation,” Nanda said. “The courts have upheld the department’s rightful authority to execute federal court-approved search warrants and compelled this employer to change their hiring practices to ensure compliance with the law. Let this case be a powerful reminder that all workers in the United States are entitled to the protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act and that an employer who violates wage laws will be held accountable.”

    In a lengthy statement Friday, Packers Sanitation Services said that it was “pleased to have finalized this settlement figure.”

    “We have been crystal clear from the start: Our company has a zero-tolerance policy against employing anyone under the age of 18 and fully shares the DOL’s objective of ensuring full compliance at all locations,” the statement continued, noting internal audits and the hiring of “a third-party law firm to review and help further strengthen our policies.”

    The statement highlighted that none of the illegally employed children still work for Packers Sanitation Services, and “the DOL has also not identified any managers aware of improper conduct that are currently employed” by the company.

    The revelations come amid a renewed national debate about child labor laws sparked by Republican legislators in Iowa pushing rollbacks to allow children as young as 14 to work in jobs including animal slaughtering, logging, and mining.

    The proposal in Iowa is part of a trend of GOP state lawmakers across the country advocating relaxed child labor laws in recent years.

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Civil Society Calls On African Union to Foster Fossil-Free Future for Continent



    As diplomats and political leaders headed to the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa for an African Union summit, civil society groups from the continent argued Friday that “rather than doubling down on the obsolete and dirty energy systems,” the A.U. must “move away from harmful fossil fuels towards a transformed energy system that is clean, renewable, democratic, and actually serves its peoples.”

    African groups are also circulating to heads of state and ministers attending the A.U. summit a report launched by Don’t Gas Africa, in cooperation with the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative, at COP27—the United Nations climate conference hosted by Egypt in November that critics called “another terrible failure” because attendees refused to agree to rapidly phase out fossil fuels.

    The November document asserts that “Africa has a monumental opportunity to pursue sustainable socioeconomic development without relying on fossil fuels,” pushing back against arguments made by some world leaders, industry, and a 2022 International Energy Agency (IEA) publication that African nations should quickly extract and export their natural gas reserves.

    “The Africa we want is one where the energy system is clean and sustainable and brings real access to African people.”

    “The idea that gas will bring prosperity and opportunities to Africans is a tired and overused fallacy, promulgated by those that stand to benefit the most: multinational fossil fuel firms and the elite politicians that aid and abet them,” the report states. “It is a huge gamble to pursue these gas projects throughout Africa in the hope that they will bring development, wealth, and industry. It is highly likely that they will not and, instead, will burden African governments and citizens with vast debts, stranded assets, environmental degradation, and more broken promises.”

    Activists including Dean Bhekumuzi Bhebhe, campaigns lead for Don’t Gas Africa, echoed those messages Friday, declaring that “African land is not a gas station. Millions are losing their homes, don’t have access to food, have their health threatened, and are slipping into higher levels of extreme poverty because of the fossil fuel industry.”

    “Instead of selling away fossil fuel extraction rights to big multinational companies,” he said, “African leaders should invest in clean, renewable energies that will directly benefit people across the continent without damaging their health.”

    African Climate Reality Project Courtney Morgan similarly warned that “gas is a bridge to nowhere and will not address energy access challenges on our continent. Decision-makers and policymakers should be supporting sustainable solutions; for a fossil-free Africa.”

    “The Africa we want is one where the energy system is clean and sustainable and brings real access to African people,” Morgan stressed. “The neocolonial gas project on our continent will not serve our needs and will exacerbate the climate crisis, we need African-led sustainable solutions.”

    Africa Climate Movements Building Spaces coordinator Lorraine Chiponda agreed that “we should not allow further colonial and extractive systems to put Africa on a destructive path,” and called on the continent’s leaders “to co-create a just development path together with African people that is clean, pan-African, and champions people’s regenerative economies away from fossil fuels.”

    Their demands aligned with calls from campaigners who, over the past year, have blasted the IEA report, condemned African leaders’ plan for new dirty energy development, protested during Africa Energy Week, and warned about the impacts of projects by the United States and other rich nations that have largely caused the global climate emergency.

    “We’re in a climate emergency that is causing increasingly devastating climate impacts, particularly in Africa where adaptation capacity is still low,” 350Africa.org regional director Landry Ninteretse said Friday. “African countries cannot bear the world’s challenges on their own. This calls for urgent action to build resilience to climate challenges through the abandonment of fossil fuels and a just energy transition to renewable energy.”

    “There is no place for the expansion of fossil gas in the energy transition in Africa, as it would crowd out resources for renewable energy and dull any hopes for the transition,” Ninteretse added. “We urge African leaders to reject the push for gas production in Africa and instead galvanize resources from developed nations to support renewable, community-centered, and accessible clean energy systems vital to achieving a just energy transition in the region.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Watchdogs Upset EPA Has ‘Once Again Failed’ to Limit Dicamba Herbicide Harm



    “I call bullsh*t.”

    That’s how Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center for Biological Diversity, responded Thursday to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issuing limited restrictions for the use of over-the-top dicamba herbicides in four states.

    Noting that it has been over a year since the Biden administration released a report “detailing just how incredibly devastating the 2020 dicamba approval has been,” Donley said, “And now we’re supposed to believe that four states not being able to use dicamba for two weeks in June accomplishes something?”

    Under the EPA’s rules for the 2023 season, farmers in Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa can’t apply the herbicides Engenia, Tavium, and XtendiMax after June 12 or the V4 growth stage for soybeans and first square for cotton—whichever comes first. The previous end date for those states was June 20, which is the new cutoff for South Dakota, where farmers previously had until June 30.

    Some experts warn that the timing of the EPA’s move is “troubling” given the proximity to soybean planting. University of Illinois weed scientist Aaron Hager told FarmProgress that “it’s going to be a challenge. I’m afraid for soybean farmers who have already made their seed and herbicide purchases for the 2023 growing season.”

    Meanwhile, longtime critics of the herbicide like Donley and George Kimbrell, legal director at the Center for Food Safety, called out the EPA for continuously failing to go far enough to limit harm from dicamba, given concerns about drift damage.

    “This marks the fifth time in seven years EPA has made changes to dicamba’s registration,” Kimbrell said in a statement. “Yet faced with a mountain of data that its past measures have utterly failed to protect farmers, the environment, and endangered species, EPA once again failed to make meaningful changes.”

    “What EPA revised only affects four of 34 states, offers nothing to admitted continued risks to endangered species, and makes a label that already was impossible to follow in real-world farming even more impossible to follow,” Kimbrell added.

    “If allowed to stand, EPA’s capitulation to pesticide companies will condemn many thousands of farmers to another year of devastating dicamba clouds injuring their crops, endangering their livelihoods, and tearing apart their rural communities,” he warned, vowing to continue doing “everything we can to stop this harm.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • UN General Assembly to Vote on Resolution Pushing for ‘Just and Lasting Peace’ in Ukraine



    The United Nations’ 193 member countries are expected to vote on a resolution declaring “the need to reach, as soon as possible, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace” in Ukraine next Thursday, on the eve of the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of its neighbor.

    Two days of speeches are planned leading up to the vote, which could be just the latest U.N. General Assembly (GA) resolution related to the war. While such measures would typically come out of the Security Council, it has been hamstrung because Russia is one of five countries with veto power in that United Nations body.

    A European Union diplomat told The Associated Press that Ukraine asked the E.U. to draft the resolution along with other member states to mark the anniversary of the invasion with a strong statement advocating peace, in line with the U.N. Charter.

    The U.N. Charter uses the term peace dozens of times and specifically states that “all members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”

    As the AP detailed:

    Ukraine initially thought of having the General Assembly enshrine the 10-point peace plan that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced at the November summit of the Group of 20 major economies, U.N. diplomats said. But this idea was shelved in favor of the broader and less detailed resolution circulated Wednesday.

    As one example, while the resolution to be voted on emphasizes the need to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes committed in Ukraine through “fair and independent investigations and prosecutions at the national or international level,” it does not include Zelenskyy’s call for a special tribunal to prosecute Russian war crimes.

    The pending resolution reportedly calls for “a cessation of hostilities” and reiterates the GA’s earlier demand that Russia “immediately, completely, and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces” from internationally recognized Ukrainian territory.

    The draft resolution—which would not be legally binding, if passed—also urges United Nations members and global groups to “redouble support for diplomatic efforts,” including those of U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, according to the AP.

    E.U. Ambassador Olof Skoog, who helped draft the resolution, told Reuters that “we count on very broad support from the membership. What is at stake is not just the fate of Ukraine, it is the respect of the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of every state.”

    Previous GA resolutions calling for the withdrawal of all Russian troops, demanding the protection of civilians and critical infrastructure, and denouncing Russia’s “attempted illegal annexation” of Ukrainian regions received at least 140 votes in favor.

    Two other resolutions in the assembly last year—one suspending Russia from the U.N. Human Rights Council and another advocating Russian reparations to Ukraine over the war—garnered less support, with just 93 and 94 supportive votes, respectively.

    The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights on Monday confirmed the war has killed at least 7,199 Ukrainian civilians and injured another 11,756, while also noting that actual figures are likely “considerably higher, as the receipt of information from some locations where intense hostilities have been going on has been delayed and many reports are still pending corroboration.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • ‘Strikes Work’: REI Agrees to March 3 Union Election After Ohio Walkout



    After REI employees in a suburb of Cleveland, Ohio walked off the job Friday morning, the recreational equipment retailer agreed to schedule a union election vote next month and stopped pushing to exclude certain workers.

    Following successful union drives at two other REI stores, employees in Beachwood last month filed for a union election with National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking representation with the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union (RWDSU).

    John Ginter, a sales associate at the Beachwood REI, told Cleveland-based Ideastream Public Media that he and his co-workers are seeking better working conditions.

    “We are basically making demands that we have a livable wage, that we are able to live our lives outdoors, like REI’s mission statement includes,” he said. “So having a better work-life balance, being able to care for ourselves and to increase benefits for employees across the spectrum, whether or not they are part-time, full-time, whatever that situation would be.”

    According to the report: “Ginter alleged REI has some ‘pretty rigid stipulations’ with regard to which employees are eligible for benefits and accrual of sick time. He also said he believes his REI location is ‘not living up to our diversity, equity, and inclusion statement.’”

    Beachwood workers launched their brief unfair labor practice (ULP) strike Friday as an NLRB hearing got underway at the federal agency’s Cleveland office.

    In a ULP charge that RWDSU filed Thursday with the NLRB, the union claimed REI “engaged in the unlawful surveillance of workers and/or created an impression of surveillance of the workers at the Beachwood store.”

    RWDSU has also accused REI of putting forth “meritless assertions to delay the election” by claiming that sales leads, bike shop workers, and “casual” employees—or those who work part-time with irregular schedules—should not vote.

    “RWDSU vehemently disagrees with REI’s objections,” the union said in a statement. “It is especially galling because, as the company unnecessarily fights RWDSU in Ohio, it is currently bargaining contracts with workers holding these same classifications at the SoHo, New York and Berkeley, California stores. REI’s hypocrisy is union-busting plain and simple and is a meek attempt to exclude more than half of the proposed bargaining unit to be eligible to vote.”

    REI pushed back against RWDSU’s characterization of its intentions in a Thursday statement to Axios, saying that the NLRB hearing was “to ensure that all employees who hold the right to vote are included in the voting process.”

    The agreement reached Friday includes all eligible workers at the location, “a reversal from REI’s position last week,” according to RWDSU. “The union election will take place on March 3, 2023 from 12:00 pm-6:00 pm ET at the Ohio store.”

    New York Times labor reporter Noam Scheiber tweeted Friday evening: “One thing I’ve learned covering labor over the past several years: Your labor rights are typically as robust as the power you and your co-workers can muster at the workplace. This case was a perfect example.”

    More Perfect Union similarly said, “Strikes work.”

    U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown and Congresswoman Shontel Brown, Ohio Democrats who are not related, expressed solidarity with the REI workers in their state this week.

    Others, from the REI union in SoHo to UNI Commerce to the AFL-CIO, have also publicly supported the Beachwood workers this week.

    If the Ohio employees vote to form REI’s third union nationwide, RWDSU would represent approximately 55 workers there—though RWDSU noted that “the store currently operates at a 60% staffing level of its full capacity, potentially increasing that number to over 70.”

    As the Beachwood workers prepare for next month’s election, contract negotiations are underway in Berkeley, and 10 fired employees—including two bargaining team members—are accusing REI of retaliation, which the company denies.

    Meanwhile, in Washington state on Tuesday, REI laid off 167 people, or 8% of headquarters workers. President and CEO Eric Artz said that “in the face of increasing uncertainty, we need to sharpen our focus on the most critical investments and areas of work to best serve our members and grow the co-op over the long term.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Manchin Signals Revival of “Dirty Deal.” Climate Movement Vows to Shut It Down.

    The U.S. climate movement this week vowed to keep fighting against Sen. Joe Manchin’s thrice-defeated “dirty deal” after the West Virginia Democrat indicated he intends to work with House Republicans to force through fossil fuel-friendly permitting reforms. Frontline climate campaigners and progressives in both chambers of Congress worked tirelessly last year to quash Manchin’s proposals—while…

    Source

  • Climate Movement ‘Ready to Kill’ Dirty Deal Again as Manchin Signals Revival

    The U.S. climate movement this week vowed to keep fighting against Sen. Joe Manchin’s
    thrice-defeated “dirty deal” after the West Virginia Democrat indicated he intends to work with House Republicans to force through fossil fuel-friendly permitting reforms.

    Frontline climate campaigners and progressives in both chambers of Congress worked tirelessly last year to quash Manchin’s proposals—while also advocating for updates to permitting policy that would speed up the renewable energy transition.

    The GOP took narrow control of the House earlier this year, and the chamber’s Natural Resources Committee is now led by Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.). Manchin, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, met with him on Wednesday to discuss permitting legislation.

    “Permitting reform as proposed in recent legislation would undermine effective tools used to protect air, water, and climate from the most damaging new infrastructure under consideration.”

    “They’re going to work on something,” Manchin
    said of the House, according to E&E News. “I think it’s a high priority, which both sides know that we need it. Everyone has come to agreement that you got to have permitting. Let’s take the politics out of it, and do what’s doable.”

    After the meeting, Westerman said he saw “common ground between Sen. Manchin and myself.”

    The same day, the Republican Study Committee, the largest House GOP caucus,
    convened to discuss priorities for debt ceiling negotiations. According to a leaked portion of a slideshow, one policy endorsed by the committee for those talks is “enact a package of inflation-busting reforms to increase domestic energy capacity and reduce associated regulatory and permitting barriers.”

    Meanwhile, the Green New Deal Network—a U.S.
    campaign that includes 15 national organizations–pledged Wednesday that “we’ll be here, ready to kill Manchin’s dirty deal all over again.”

    The battle over the dirty deal, as critics call it, began last summer, when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)
    agreed behind closed doors to push through permitting reforms in exchange for Manchin’s support for the Inflation Reduction Act. Despite Manchin and Schumer’s efforts to advance various versions of a permitting bill, it was blocked in September and then twice in December.

    “Defeated for the third time this year, this zombie bill would have fast-tracked dangerous fossil fuel and mining projects that would undercut the positive impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act,” Chelsea Hodgkins, Oxfam America’s climate policy adviser, said in mid-December. “Sen. Manchin’s proposal would do nothing to address the real barriers to renewable energy development, which include fully resourcing underfunded agencies and investing in community-supported renewable systems.”

    Manchin and Westerman’s meeting came after
    Politico reported Tuesday that Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), who supported including the dirty deal in a December military spending package, “is bullish about the prospects of passing a bill to ease permitting rules now that the House is in GOP hands.”

    Capito, who will again serve as ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, told
    Politico that “permitting—it’s a very important aspect of energy development and we have a big role in that at EPW. One of the reasons it failed [last year] is because it didn’t go through the committee process. I would love to see us try to work through a committee process that can be successful in the end.”

    “I’m certainly going to be pressing and we’re going to be having meetings with our House colleagues on this very issue,” Capito
    said during a Thursday press briefing. “We’ll look and see what the House comes up with and see if it’s something I think we can get good compromises on.”

    “Finding reasonable compromise to permit pipelines and power lines and other things is important to both sides,” added Capito—who, like Manchin, wants to see the controversial and long-delayed Mountain Valley Pipeline completed. “If you want more renewable, you can’t do it without transmission. If you want more natural gas, like I do, you can’t do it without pipelines.”

    E&E News reported that House Republicans now plan “to use, as a starting point, legislation introduced in previous sessions of Congress by Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.), known as the ‘Builder Act,’ which would achieve the main goals of speeding up permits for energy projects by making changes to the National Environmental Policy Act,” or NEPA—which is expected to anger Democrats.

    Asked by the outlet whether he would accept changes to NEPA as part of a deal, Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), the ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee—who, as the panel’s chair last year,
    led Democratic opposition to Manchin’s legislation—said, “No.”

    Amid discussion on Capitol Hill this week, the
    Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists asked six experts to weigh in on permitting reform. Associate editor Jessica McKenzie summarized their arguments in a series of tweets:

    “Reform advocates rightly emphasize the need for rapidly constructing wind, solar, geothermal, energy storage, and transmission,”
    wrote Dustin Mulvaney, a professor in the Environmental Studies Department at San José State University and fellow with the Payne Institute for Public Policy at the Colorado School of Mines.

    “The problem is that streamlining environmental rules and regulations could have the opposite effect, unless the ‘streamlining’ is achieved via planning processes that include stakeholder feedback,” he stressed. “More important, permitting reform as proposed in recent legislation would undermine effective tools used to protect air, water, and climate from the most damaging new infrastructure under consideration—namely oil, gas, and tar sands pipelines.”

  • Warren Calls For ‘Landing the Plane Not Crashing It’ After Fed Hikes Rate Despite Cooling Inflation



    Progressive economists and advocates on Wednesday blasted the U.S. Federal Reserve for hiking the federal funds rate an eighth consecutive time despite fears of a recession and impacts on working people.

    “With today’s rate hike, the Fed is pushing us dangerously close to an unnecessary recession that would spell disaster for low-wage workers, workers of color, and vulnerable communities,” the Groundwork Collaborative declared. “Workers and families shouldn’t have to pay the price for inflation.”

    The Federal Open Market Committee rose the benchmark interest rate to a range of 4.5%-4.75%. The 25-basis-point increase was the smallest hike since March and came amid signs that the U.S. economy is cooling off.

    “Chair Powell should pause his interest rate hikes and remember his dual mandate: Fight inflation without throwing millions out of work.”

    Fed Chair Jerome Powell said that “while recent developments are encouraging, we will need substantially more evidence to be confident that inflation is on a sustained downward path,” so “we expect ongoing hikes will be appropriate.”

    U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a major critic of the wave of increases, tweeted that “we want to bring down inflation, but that means landing the plane not crashing it. Chair Powell should pause his interest rate hikes and remember his dual mandate: Fight inflation without throwing millions out of work.”

    University of California, Berkeley professor and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich explained in a recent video that “the Fed is wrongly obsessing about a wage-price spiral—wage gains pushing up prices—when it should be worried about a profit-price spiral—corporate profits driving up prices.”

    Longtime opponents of the Fed’s strategy on Wednesday renewed calls for not only the U.S. central bank to halt its hikes but also federal lawmakers to get to work battling corporate greed.

    Liz Zelnick, director of the Economic Security and Corporate Power program at Accountable.Us, warned that “while the Fed continues to stick to their obsession with job-killing interest rate hikes, the livelihoods of working families are on the line.”

    “Key indicators show inflation is slowing as our economic recovery remains fragile, which means the Fed’s higher rates are only pushing the economy closer to a recession,” she said. “Meanwhile, Fed economists have admitted corporations are the real culprit of high costs yet have still refused to relax rate hikes. It’s time for the Fed to back down and let policymakers rein in corporate greed rather than risk it all on another rate increase.”

    Patriotic Millionaires chair Morris Pearl, former managing director at BlackRock, offered a similar critique of Fed policy.

    “Today’s interest rate hike by the Fed is bad news for the American economy. It’s true that raising rates is meant to solve inflation, but that doesn’t mean it’s the correct course to take right now. Raising rates may cool inflation, but it does so by making everything from mortgages to credit card payments more expensive, which hurts those already suffering the most in today’s cost-of-living crisis,” he said. “In this case, the cure may be worse than the disease.”

    “If the federal government is truly committed to slowing inflation without heaping extra pain on the vulnerable, they should go after greedy, ultraprofitable corporations and their C-suite executives,” he argued. “Many corporations have used the hype over inflation in recent months to raise prices on consumers and line their pockets. Why else would corporate profits be at a 70-year high?”

    “Many corporations have used the hype over inflation in recent months to raise prices on consumers and line their pockets.”

    Pearl pointed out that “everyone’s been complaining lately about how expensive eggs are. The fact that Cal-Maine, the largest egg producer in the U.S., experienced a 10-fold increase in their profits over the last year might just have something to do with it.”

    As Common Dreams reported last month, Farm Action raised concerns about “apparent price gouging, price coordination, and other unfair or deceptive acts or practices by dominant producers of eggs” and urged the Federal Trade Commission to investigate the sector, “prosecute any violations of the antitrust laws it finds within, and ultimately, get the American people their money back.”

    Pearl said Wednesday that “the Fed raising interest rates won’t do anything to stop corporations like Cal-Maine from exploiting American consumers, unless they raise them so much as to cause a massive rise in unemployment.”

    “It is hard to see a scenario where this kind of action does not cause immense pain to the worst off in America,” he added. “The Fed needs to back off, and let Congress step in to tackle corporate greed.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Wife of Chief Justice Causes Latest Ethics Concerns at US Supreme Court



    Fresh calls for federal lawmakers to pass new ethics rules for the U.S. Supreme Court mounted after The New York Times on Tuesday revealed that a former colleague of Chief Justice John Roberts’ wife raised concerns to Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice.

    After her husband joined the nation’s top court, Jane Sullivan Roberts left her job as a law firm partner to work as a legal recruiter. Though Roberts is now the managing partner of the Washington office of Macrae Inc., she and Kendal Price, the author of a letter obtained by the Times, worked as recruiters for the global firm Major, Lindsey & Africa.

    “No wonder public trust in the Supreme Court is at an all-time low.”

    In his letter, Price “argued that the justices should be required to disclose more information about their spouses’ work,” the newspaper reported. “He did not cite specific Supreme Court decisions, but said he was worried that a financial relationship with law firms arguing before the court could affect justices’ impartiality or at least give the appearance of doing so.”

    As the Times detailed:

    According to the letter, Mr. Price was fired in 2013 and sued the firm, as well as Mrs. Roberts and another executive, over his dismissal.

    He lost the case, but the litigation produced documents that he sent to Congress and the Justice Department, including spreadsheets showing commissions attributed to Mrs. Roberts early in her headhunting career, from 2007 to 2014. Mrs. Roberts, according to a 2015 deposition in the case, said that a significant portion of her practice was devoted to helping senior government lawyers land jobs at law firms and that the candidates’ names were almost never disclosed.

    Patricia McCabe, a spokesperson for the Supreme Court, told the paper that all the justices were “attentive to ethical constraints” and complied with financial disclosure laws, and that the chief justice and his wife had consulted the code of conduct for federal judges.

    The reporting comes after Justice Clarence Thomas—one of the Supreme Court’s six right-wing members—ignored calls to resign over efforts by his wife, activist Ginni Thomas, to help former President Donald Trump overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. It also follows a September survey showing that U.S. adults’ confidence in the court hit a record low.

    “No wonder public trust in the Supreme Court is at an all-time low,” Brett Edkins, managing director of policy and political affairs for Stand Up America, said Tuesday. “Jane Roberts is just the latest Supreme Court spouse to raise questions about potential conflicts of interest and influence peddling before the nation’s highest court.”

    Edkins argued that “while she did not join a seditious conspiracy to overthrow the government, as Ginni Thomas did, her actions may nonetheless undermine Chief Justice Roberts’ impartiality when his wife’s clients argue before the court.”

    “It’s clear that the ultraconservative justices in particular cannot be trusted to hold themselves to the same ethical standard as other federal judges,” he added. “It’s time for Congress to step up and pass meaningful reforms to fix the Supreme Court, including a code of ethics that would require justices to recuse themselves from cases where they have an actual or apparent conflict of interest.”

    In a Tuesday tweet, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), lead sponsor of the Judicial Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act, pointed to the reporting as “example #4,394 of why the Supreme Court needs a binding code of ethics.”

    Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) did not say how his panel may respond to Price’s letter but told the Times that it raised “troubling issues that once again demonstrate the need” for ethics reforms to “begin the process of restoring faith in the Supreme Court.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Ilhan Omar Says GOP ‘Not OK With Having a Muslim’ on House Foreign Affairs Panel



    Congresswoman Ilhan Omar on Sunday contended that some of her Republican colleagues—led by U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy—are trying to oust her from the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee because she is a Muslim refugee from Somalia.

    “Let me ask you, Congresswoman Omar, about what Republicans are saying about you, that there is a pattern of antisemitic and other controversial statements that make you unfit to sit on, in your case, the House Foreign Affairs Committee,” CNN‘s Dana Bash said on “State of the Union.”

    Omar (D-Minn.) first addressed a pair of February 2019 tweets in which she tied U.S. politicians’ support for Israel to money from lobbyists. “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” she said at the time, using slang for $100 bills. Asked who she thought was paying American politicians to be pro-Israel, Omar replied, “AIPAC!” referring to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

    “These people are OK with Islamophobia. They’re OK with trafficking in their own ways in antisemitism.”

    The congresswoman said Sunday: “Yeah, I might have used words at the time that I didn’t understand were trafficking in antisemitism. When that was brought to my attention, I apologized. I owned up to it. That’s the kind of person that I am. And I continue to work with my colleagues and my community to fight against antisemitism.”

    After countering some other criticisms from the GOP, Omar argued that the campaign to remove her from the panel “is politically motivated. And, in some cases, it’s motivated by the fact that many of these members don’t believe a Muslim, a refugee, an African should even be in Congress, let alone have the opportunity to serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee.”

    Bash then said that “it sounds like you’re accusing Kevin McCarthy of racism,” to which Omar responded: “I mean, I’m not making any accusations. I’m just laying out the facts.”

    Omar pointed out when then-President Donald Trump went to Minnesota in October 2019 and criticized the state for welcoming “large numbers” of refugees from Somalia. She also highlighted Islamophobic remarks from Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.).

    “These people are OK with Islamophobia. They’re OK with trafficking in their own ways in antisemitism,” Omar charged. “They are not OK with having a Muslim have a voice on that committee.”

    Omar appeared on CNN alongside Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, both California Democrats whom fellow Californian McCarthy barred from the House intelligence panel. Because that is a select committee, the speaker could unilaterally block the pair from being on it; however, kicking Omar off the foreign affairs panel requires a vote by the full chamber.

    Republicans only narrowly control the House, and McCarthy ultimately may not have the votes to oust Omar. Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) have publicly said they oppose the attempt to remove Omar and Congresswoman Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) has openly criticized the effort. Additionally, Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) said Monday that he will be “sidelined in Sarasota for several weeks” to recover from an injury.

    Omar was also appointed to the House Education and the Workforce Committee. She said in a statement Friday that “as a child survivor of war living in a refugee camp, I would never have imagined that I would one day have the opportunity to serve on these important committees.”

    “Our democracy, and our governing bodies, rest on a healthy and vibrant debate,” she stressed. “Our strength lies not in our perfection, but in the diversity of our voices and our openness to a civil discourse.”

    “Whatever our disagreements may be as members of Congress, policy differences alone have not and must not be cause for eliminating someone from serving on a committee,” she added. “I am grateful for the confidence my constituents and my caucus have shown in me to lead this work, and I look forward to continuing to work for a more just and peaceful world.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Investigation Reveals Top George Santos Donors ‘Don’t Seem to Exist’



    A pair of Mother Jones journalists revealed late Friday that more than a dozen people identified as top donors to GOP Congressman George Santos’ campaign who collectively account for over tens of thousands of dollars raised from individual donors in 2020 “don’t seem to exist.”

    That revelation came as The Washington Post reported Friday night that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the Federal Election Commission (FEC) “to hold off on any enforcement action” against the first-term New York Republican “as prosecutors conduct a parallel criminal probe, according to two people familiar with the request.”

    Since his November win—which followed an unsuccessful 2020 run—Santos has faced intense scrutiny and pressure to resign over his mounting “lies and misdeeds,” from dishonesty about his education, employment, family, religion, and residence; to concerns about his net worth soaring; to claims of fraud in Brazil and the United States.

    The Mother Jones reporters attempted to contact “dozens of the most generous donors” to Santos’ 2020 campaign. While several people confirmed their contributions, the investigation also uncovered various “questionable donations, which account for more than $30,000 of the $338,000” raised from individuals that year.

    As the magazine detailed:

    During Santos’ first run for Congress, only about 45 people maxed out to his campaign during the primary and general elections. In nine instances, Mother Jones found no way to contact the donor because no person by that name now lives at the address listed on the reports the Santos campaign filed with the FEC. None had ever contributed to a candidate before sending Santos the maximum amount allowed, according to FEC records. Nor have any of these donors contributed since. The Santos campaign’s filings list the profession of each of these donors as “retired.”

    Two other donors who contributed $1,500 and $2,000, respectively, were listed in Santos’ FEC filings as retirees residing at addresses that do not exist. One was named Rafael Da Silva—which happens to be the name of a Brazilian soccer player.

    Another suspicious donation was attributed to a woman who shares the name of a New York doctor who has made dozens of donations to Democrats. The Manhattan address listed for this donation does not exist. The doctor did not respond to a request for comment.

    The outlet noted that “Santos did not respond to a detailed list of questions Mother Jones sent to his lawyer and his congressional office that included names of donors whose identities could not be verified.”

    Highlighting the report on Twitter Saturday, Brendan R. Quinn of the Campaign Legal Center (CLC) shared a “general reminder (that is apparently needed) that it is illegal to donate money using a false name or the name of someone else.”

    As Common Dreams reported earlier this month, on the same day that the CLC filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission regarding Santos’ 2022 campaign, the group Citizens United filed complaints with the DOJ, FEC, and Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE).

    The Post on Friday framed the DOJ Public Integrity Section’s request that the FEC refrain from taking action against the congressman and turn over any relevant documents as “the clearest sign to date that federal prosecutors are examining Santos’ campaign finances.”

    As the newspaper explained:

    The FEC ordinarily complies with DOJ requests to hold off on enforcement. Those requests arise from a 1977 memorandum of understanding between the agencies that addresses their overlapping law enforcement responsibilities.

    “Basically they don’t want two sets of investigators tripping over each other,” said David M. Mason, a former FEC commissioner. “And they don’t want anything that the FEC, which is a civil agency, does to potentially complicate their criminal case.”

    The request “indicates there’s an active criminal investigation” examining issues that overlap with complaints against Santos before the FEC, said Brett Kappel, a campaign finance lawyer at D.C.-based Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg.

    According to the Post, Santos and his attorney did not respond while an FEC representative said the agency “cannot comment on enforcement” and a DOJ spokesperson declined to weigh in.

    However, critics of the embattled congressman—who is also being investigated by the offices of Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James and the Republican district attorneys in Nassau and Queens counties—had plenty to say.

    “Mr. Santos has one existential reason to remain in office: to gain enough leverage to secure a plea bargain with the U.S. attorney,” said Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), who has urged the Republican to resign and advocated for federal investigations into him.

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Republican Utah Governor Signs Ban on Gender-Affirming Care for Trans Youth

    Defying the guidance of the nation’s leading medical organizations, Republican Utah Gov. Spencer Cox on Saturday signed into law a bill banning gender-affirming care for minors in the state. Passed by the Utah House of Representatives on Thursday and the state Senate on Friday, S.B. 16 prohibits gender-affirming surgeries for trans youth and bars hormonal treatment for new patients who were not…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Memphis Police Shutter SCORPION Unit, Activists Say That’s Not Enough

    The family of Tyre Nichols and others appalled by his death — for which five fired Memphis cops now face murder charges — welcomed the police department’s decision on Saturday to disband a unit created in 2021 to patrol high-crime areas. The move came a day after the Tennessee city put out videos of the former Memphis Police Department (MPD) officers — Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • ‘Just the Next Step’ Toward Justice for Tyre Nichols: Memphis Police Shutter SCORPION Unit

    The family of Tyre Nichols and others appalled by his death—for which five fired Memphis cops now
    face murder charges—welcomed the police department’s decision on Saturday to disband a unit created in 2021 to patrol high-crime areas.

    The move came a day after the Tennessee city
    put out videos of the former Memphis Police Department (MPD) officers—Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills Jr., and Justin Smith—brutally beating Nichols following a traffic stop on January 7. The 29-year-old Black man was hospitalized and died three days later from cardiac arrest and kidney failure.

    The MPD’s Street Crimes Operation to Restore Peace in Our Neighborhoods (SCORPION) Unit hasn’t been active since Nichols’ January 10 death, according to the mayor. The five ex-officers, who are all Black, were part of the unit and on assignment with it when they pulled over Nichols, police spokesperson Maj. Karen Rudolph
    confirmed to multiple news outlets on Saturday.

    In public comments leading up to the footage being
    released Friday night—which sparked nationwide peaceful protests—Nichols’ family along with Memphis residents and people across the United States called for the unit to be shut down.

    The MPD
    said in a statement that members of the unit met with Chief Cerelyn “C.J.” Davis on Saturday “to discuss the path forward for the department and the community in the aftermath of the tragic death of Tyre Nichols.”

    “In the process of listening intently to the family of Tyre Nichols, community leaders, and the uninvolved officers who have done quality work in their assignments, it is in the best interest of all to permanently deactivate the SCORPION Unit,” the statement continued. “The officers currently assigned to the unit agree unreservedly with this next step.”

    In response, attorneys Ben Crump and Antonio Romanucci
    said in a statement that “the Nichols family and their legal team find the decision to permanently disband this unit to be both appropriate and proportional to the tragic death of Tyre Nichols, and also a decent and just decision for all citizens of Memphis.”

    “We hope that other cities take similar action with their saturation police units in the near future to begin to create greater trust in their communities,” the pair added. “We must keep in mind that this is just the next step on this journey for justice and accountability, as clearly this misconduct is not restricted to these specialty units. It extends so much further.”

    Memphis City Council Member J.B. Smiley Jr.
    told the Commercial Appeal that shutting down the unit was “essential for the family” of Nichols, but “my ultimate concern is just, it may just be surface level,” because “the police department has the ability to create other units and just call it something else.”

    Fellow Memphis City Council Member Patrice Robinson
    told CNN‘s Jim Acosta that “the community has a lot more questions and a lot more demands.”

    “We have gotten emails from many citizens in our community, they’re all concerned and they’re expressing exactly what they see and what they want to see in our police department,” she said. “We really need to investigate and find out what’s going on.”

    Rolling Stone reported on institutional changes that some locals want, according to Memphis organizer Amber Sherman:

    They’re calling for widespread reforms in the Memphis police: dissolving similar task forces in the city, ending the use of unmarked cars and plainclothes officers, and banning traffic stops without probable cause. All three help escalate police violence, Sherman tells Rolling Stone. “We can’t just get rid of one of them. We have to do all three.”

    The SCORPION Unit was only 14 months old when it was disbanded. Founded in late 2021 during a rise in the city’s murder rate, it was touted by local officials for its high number of arrests and a decline in violent crime, but locals say the unit quickly developed a reputation for its policing tactics. “Here in Memphis we call them the Jump-out Boys,” Sherman says. “They’re in unmarked cars, and they jump out of them and assault people.”

    Activists in Memphis emphasized that this type of policing is not a new phenomenon. “It’s not just the SCORPION Unit. We’ve had these task forces for years,” Sherman continues. “I’m born and raised here, in my 20s, and this has always been a practice.”

    National leaders also responded to the development on Saturday by warning that much more must still be done at all levels.

    “This is what immediate action looks like in the face of crisis and traumatic events on behalf of a community,” NAACP president and CEO Derrick Johnson declared of the department disbanding the unit, while also wondering why local leaders can “move to address the needs of the people faster than elected officials throughout the halls of Congress.”

    Meanwhile, Black Lives Matter activist DeRay Mckesson
    tweeted: “This is good. And not enough. And we’ve seen this happen before only for these units to pop back up when the world isn’t watching.”

    “I must reiterate that this is not the win they want you to think it is. Cops have and will continue to be brutal despite not being in a cool ‘special taskforce,’”
    coder, organizer, and YouTuber Sean Wiggs warned.

    Legal reform advocate Dyjuan Tatro similarly
    argued that “the problem with this statement is that the SCORPION Unit should have never existed. It’s well documented that police special units are violent, reckless, and racist. Furthermore, the rest of the officers of this violent unit are still on the police force, armed and ready to kill.”

    Strategist and writer Jodi Jacobson
    took issue with another element of the department’s statement, telling the MPD: “It was NOT a ‘tragic death.’ It was murder at the hands of our department. What you say matters, and you clearly are not taking responsibility.”

  • GOP Utah Gov. Signs Ban on ‘Lifesaving Medical Care’ for Trans Youth



    Defying the guidance of the nation’s leading medical organizations, Republican Utah Gov. Spencer Cox on Saturday signed into law a bill banning gender-affirming care for minors in the state.

    Passed by the Utah House of Representatives on Thursday and the state Senate on Friday, S.B. 16 prohibits gender-affirming surgeries for trans youth and bars hormonal treatment for new patients who were not diagnosed with gender dysphoria before the bill’s effective date, May 3.

    “This bill effectively bans access to lifesaving medical care for transgender youth in Utah,” said Brittney Nystrom, executive director of the ACLU of Utah, after the Senate vote Friday. “It undermines the health and well-being of adolescents, limits the options of doctors, patients, and parents, and violates the constitutional rights of these families.”

    Nystrom also sent Cox a letter urging him to veto the bill. She wrote that “the ACLU of Utah is deeply concerned about the damaging and potentially catastrophic effects this law will have on people’s lives and medical care, and the grave violations of people’s constitutional rights it will cause.”

    Cathryn Oakley, Human Rights Campaign’s state legislative director and senior counsel, had also pressured Cox to veto the bill, arguing Friday that “Utah legislators capitulated to extremism and fear-mongering, and by doing so, shamelessly put the lives and well-being of young Utahans at risk—young transgender folks who are simply trying to navigate life as their authentic selves.”

    “Every parent wants and deserves access to the highest quality healthcare for our kids,” Oakley said. “This discriminatory legislation bans care that is age-appropriate and supported by every major medical association, representing more than 1.3 million doctors. Medical decisions are best left to medical experts and parents or guardians, not politicians without an ounce of medical training acting as if they know how to raise and support our children better than we do.”

    Dr. Jack Turban, an assistant professor of child and adolescent psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco who researches the mental health of transgender and gender diverse youth, also pointed out that the new Utah law contradicts the positions of various medical organizations.

    Some LGBTQ+ advocates had hoped Cox would be compelled to block the bill because last March, citing trans youth suicide rates, he vetoed H.B. 11, which banned transgender girls from playing on school sports teams that align with their gender identity. Utah lawmakers swiftly overrode his veto but a state judge in August issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law.

    Republican lawmakers in various states have ramped up efforts to enact anti-trans laws—particularly those targeting youth—over the past few years. As The New York Times reported Wednesday:

    But even by those standards, the start of the 2023 legislative season stands out for the aggressiveness with which lawmakers are pushing into new territory.

    The bills they have proposed—more than 150 in at least 25 states—include bans on transition care into young adulthood; restrictions on drag shows using definitions that could broadly encompass performances by transgender people; measures that would prevent teachers in many cases from using names or pronouns matching students’ gender identities; and requirements that schools out transgender students to their parents.

    Legislative researcher Erin Reed, who is transgender, told the Times that the more aggressive proposals could make others seem like compromises.

    “I really hope that people don’t allow that to happen,” Reed said. “Because these bills still target trans people who will then have to suffer the consequences.”

    In a tweet about Cox’s decision Saturday, Reed said that “my heart breaks for Utah trans kids.”

    After the Utah House passed the measure Thursday, the chamber’s Democrats expressed their disappointment with what they called “a misguided step by our Legislature and a violation of parents’ rights,” and said that “we recognize that gender-affirming healthcare is lifesaving, patient-center healthcare.”

    “With no pathway forward for children in need of care, this legislation will inevitably lead to litigation and a likely injunction,” they added. “This is a tremendous waste of taxpayer money, and worse, a terrible message for our Legislature to send to transgender Utahns, their family, and their friends.”

    After the governor signed the bill, the ACLU of Utah tweeted Saturday that “trans kids are kids—they deserve to grow up without constant political attacks on their lives and healthcare; we will defend that right. We see you. We support you.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Released Footage Shows Five Memphis Cops Brutally Beating Tyre Nichols

    Editor’s note: The videos at the end of this article contain graphic and violent content. The city of Memphis, Tennessee on Friday night released four videos of the January 7 arrest of Tyre Nichols, a 29-year-old Black motorist who died after being beaten by five officers who were subsequently fired and charged with murder. The footage was privately seen by Nichols’ family on Monday.

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Protests Erupt Across US After Memphis Releases Video of Ex-Cops Beating Tyre Nichols



    This is a developing story… Please check back for possible updates…

    People took to the streets across the United States Friday night after the city of Memphis, Tennessee released videos of a January 7 traffic stop that led to five police officers being fired and charged with the murder of 29-year-old Black motorist Tyre Nichols.

    MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE

    The Memphis-based Commercial Appeal reported that protesters advocating for police reform shut down the Interstate 55 bridge that connects Tennessee and Arkansas:

    As of 8:30 pm, more than 100 people remained on the Harahan Bridge with protest leaders saying they wanted to talk with Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland and Memphis Police Department Chief Cerelyn “C.J.” Davis before disbanding. MPD officers closed off roads leading to the bridge―and several others downtown―but had not directly confronted protesters.

    Protesters started moving off of the bridge around 9:00 pm. As they marched eastbound on E.H. Crump Boulevard towards police, they locked arms and chanted “we ready, we ready, we ready for y’all.” Protestors then turned north, toward central downtown. As they passed by residences, some people came out on their balconies to cheer.

    Surrounded by protestors on I-55, NBC News‘ Priscilla Thompson said that “they are chanting, they are calling the name of Tyre Nichols. They are calling for change.”

    Demonstrators and the Nichols family have called for disbanding the MPD Street Crimes Operation to Restore Peace in Our Neighborhoods (SCORPION) team that launched in 2021 and was involved in the traffic stop. The Memphis mayor said Friday afternoon that the unit has been inactive since Nichols’ January 10 death.

    The footage shows that after police brutally beat Nichols—pushing him to the ground; using pepper spray; punching and kicking him; and striking him with a baton—it took 22 minutes from when officers said he was in custody for an ambulance to arrive and take him to the hospital, where he later died from cardiac arrest and kidney failure.

    ATLANTA, GEORGIA

    In Georgia, though Republican Gov. Brian Kemp earlier this week signed an executive order enabling him to deploy 1,000 National Guard troops “as necessary” following protests in Atlanta over law enforcement killing 26-year-old forest defender Manuel “Tortuguita” Teran, those who gathered after the video release Friday night “expressed outrage but did so peacefully.”

    That’s according to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, which detailed that “a small but spirited crowd” of roughly 50 people formed in downtown Atlanta.

    “We want to make one thing very clear, no executive order and no National Guard is going to stop the people for fighting for justice,” Zara Azad said at the corner of Marietta Street and Centennial Olympic Park Drive. “We do not fear them because we are for justice.”

    BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

    Just before the footage was released Friday, a vigil was held at “The Embrace” statue installed on Boston Common to honor Rev. Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and his wife Coretta Scott King.

    The Boston Globe reported that Imari Paris Jeffries, executive director of King Boston, which installed the monument, highlighted that the civil rights icon was assassinated while visiting Memphis in 1968 to advocate for sanitation workers whose slogan was “Am I a man?”

    “Today we are thinking about Memphis and Brother Tyre, and the slogan of today is still, ‘Am I a man?’” Jeffries said. “Seeing the humanity in each of us is the cornerstone of true change. Experiencing another heinous display reminds us that no family should feel this pain, ever. And there’s still work to do.”

    “This is a problem that confronts us all,” he added. “This is a problem that we need to defeat together, as a family, as a community.”

    CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

    “From Memphis to Chicago, these killer cops have got to go,” chanted about a dozen people who gathered near a police precinct in the Illinois city despite freezing temperatures, according to USA TODAY. Their signs read, “Justice for Tyre Nichols” and “End police terror.”

    Kamran Sidiqi, a 27-year-old who helped organize the protest—one of the multiple peaceful gatherings held throughout the city—told the newspaper that “it’s tough to imagine what justice is here because Tyre is never coming back.”

    “That’s someone’s son, someone’s friend lost forever. That’s a human being’s life that is gone,” he said. “But a modicum of justice would be putting these killer cops in jail. A modicum of justice would be building a whole new system so that this can’t happen again.”

    DALLAS, TEXAS

    In Texas, The Dallas Morning News reported that Dominique Alexander, founder of the Next Generation Action Network, called Nichols’ death a “total disregard for life, for humanity.”

    “The culture of policing is what is allowing these officers to feel like they can take our lives,” Alexander said. “We want peace and calm in our communities, and we will do whatever is necessary to demand justice so our children don’t have to deal with the same bullcrap we are dealing with now.”

    Around two dozen people who came together outside the Dallas Police Department headquarters Friday night shouted, “No justice, no peace” and “No good cops in a racist system,” and held signs that said, “Stop the war on Black America” and “Justice for Tyre Nichols,” according to the newspaper.

    Five former MPD cops, Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Justin Smith, Emmitt Martin III, and Desmond Mills Jr.—who are all Black—were charged Thursday with second-degree murder and other crimes.

    After the videos were released Friday, Shelby County Sheriff Floyd Bonner Jr. announced that two deputies “who appeared on the scene following the physical confrontation between police and Tyre Nichols” have been relieved of duty pending the outcome of an internal investigation.

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • ‘Sheer Brutality’: Released Footage Shows Fired Memphis Cops Beating Tyre Nichols



    This is a developing story… Please check back for possible updates…

    Editor’s note: The videos at the end of this article contain graphic and violent content.

    The city of Memphis, Tennessee on Friday night released four videos of the January 7 arrest of Tyre Nichols, a 29-year-old Black motorist who died after being beaten by five officers who were subsequently fired and charged with murder.

    The footage was privately seen by Nichols’ family on Monday. Three of the videos are from body-worn cameras issued by the Memphis Police Department (MPD). Another is from a camera mounted on a pole and contains no audio.

    Before the videos were released, MPD Chief Cerelyn “C.J.” Davis warned that they show “acts that defy humanity.”

    Nichols was pulled over by Memphis officers for alleged reckless driving that Davis has since said her department has been “unable to substantiate.” After three days in the hospital, he died on January 10 from cardiac arrest and kidney failure.

    “I am disturbed and disgusted by the sheer brutality and lack of humanity on display in the footage released today,” said NAACP president and CEO Derrick Johnson in a statement Friday night. “No person should ever be subjected to such violence, to have to call for their mother as they are being brutalized by police.”

    “This video is a stark reminder that in America, on any day of the week, a Black person can be brutally beaten to death less than a hundred feet from his home by those who are supposedly here to ‘serve and protect’ our communities,” he continued. “Let me be clear—a traffic stop should not result in the brutal death of an unarmed man—period.”

    Turning his attention to federal lawmakers, Johnson added: “As you leave the halls of Congress today and return to your comfortable homes, take a moment to think about the pleas for mercy that Tyre cried as he begged for his mother, and ask yourself the question: What if this was your child? Your continued failure to act has left Tyre’s blood, and the blood of the countless Black lives claimed by police violence, on your hands. Get up and do something. We are done dying.”

    As Common Dreams reported Thursday, former MPD cops Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Justin Smith, Emmitt Martin III, and Desmond Mills Jr.—who are all Black—were charged with second-degree murder and various other crimes.

    In a series of tweets responding to the charges, ColorOfChange president Rashard Robinson said Friday, “Let’s be clear, while the mass movement of people demanding some level of accountability has succeeded in this one instance, convictions aren’t the goal.”

    “WE WANT AN END TO POLICE MURDERS OF BLACK PEOPLE. So, this moment isn’t about Black vs. white, it’s about blue vs. Black. Diversity cannot, and does not solve systemic problems,” he continued. “If we don’t change the structure of policing and safety in our country, Black people will continue to be killed, by police of all races. The evidence is clear—investing in communities will keep us safe, not the police.”

    Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said Friday evening that “Tyre’s death is a bitter reminder of the Black lives that we’ve lost due to police brutality. Thirty years ago, we were horrified by the footage of police beating Rodney King. And yet, despite our decades of protest, we’re still fighting the same battle.”

    “The only difference now is more of the horrific incidents are being captured on video, whether it be bodycams or bystanders,” he added. “Tinkering at the margins of a violent police state is not enough. It never was. This death must amount to more than just another viral moment or hashtag. It must spark a serious reconsideration and shifting of priorities, deployment, and resources.”

    Before the footage was released, major cities across the United States were preparing for potential Friday evening protests.

    According to The Associated Press:

    As a precaution, Memphis-area schools canceled all after-class activities and postponed an event scheduled for Saturday morning. Other early closures included the city power company’s community offices and the University of Memphis.

    Nichols’ mother, RowVaughn Wells, warned supporters of the “horrific” nature of the video but pleaded for peace.

    “I don’t want us burning up our city, tearing up the streets, because that’s not what my son stood for,” she said Thursday. “If you guys are here for me and Tyre, then you will protest peacefully.”

    Noting that “there’s been a lot of focus on the perceived threat of violence,” MLK50: Justice Through Journalism, a nonprofit Memphis newsroom, on Friday morning published a collection of stories and columns “to add context to this tragedy” for those who may be unfamiliar with “the antagonistic relationship police have cultivated with the community, dating back decades.”

    The coalition Decarerate Memphis shared on Twitter demands from Nichols’ family and the community, including reforms to reduce the chances of similar future events.

    The Movement for Black Lives tweeted advice on “how to limit viewing sensitive content” on social media platforms, for those who do not want to be traumatized by the footage.

    “We grieve with Tyre’s family, friends, and the entire Memphis community,” the movement said in a statement. “Had those officers not pulled Tyre over, he would be here right now with his four-year-old son, taking photos of sunsets and skateboarding. Yet, even as we try to grieve and stand in solidarity with Tyre’s family, we know the police are ramping up to criminalize our actions—meeting our calls for justice and accountability with more state violence and suppression.”

    Editor’s note: The videos below contain graphic and violent content.

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • Georgia Governor Declares State of Emergency, Prepped to Deploy National Guard

    Republican Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp on Thursday signed an executive order declaring a state of emergency through at least February 9 that will enable him to deploy up to 1,000 National Guard troops “as necessary.” The order follows protests in Atlanta after 26-year-old forest defender Manuel “Tortuguita” Teran was shot dead last week during a multi-agency raid on an encampment to oppose…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Fight Over Trump Facebook Ban Called ‘Huge Distraction’ From Deeper Issues With Big Tech



    Fight for the Future director Evan Greer argued Wednesday that the battle over whether former President Donald Trump should be banned from major social media platforms like Facebook is “a huge distraction” from broader Big Tech conversations that are urgently needed.

    “Discussions about online content moderation and what policies are needed to ensure human rights, free expression, and safety are some of the most important and consequential societal debates in human history,” Greer said in a statement. “When we center these debates about specific moderation decisions, especially ones involving high-profile, wealthy, politically powerful individuals like Donald Trump, we are utterly missing the point.”

    Greer’s comments came as free speech advocates and Trump critics faced off over Meta’s decision to allow the twice-impeached former president back on Facebook and Instagram. Trump, who is now seeking the GOP’s 2024 presidential nomination, was suspended from both platforms—and others—after his supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol attack on January 6, 2021.

    “We need to… instead focus on putting in place transformative policies based in human rights, and regulations that strike at the root of Big Tech giants’ harm.”

    Meta global affairs president explained Wednesday that his accounts will be reinstated in the coming weeks “with new guardrails in place to deter repeat offenses.” The move was blasted by groups including Common Cause, Free Press, Media Matters for America, and the NAACP, while others—including some Trump adversaries—agreed with the ACLU that “this is the right call. Like it or not, President Trump is one of the country’s leading political figures and the public has a strong interest in hearing his speech.”

    Greer, meanwhile, echoed some of the warnings from Big Tech experts two years ago, when tech giants began banning Trump—a serial liar who ultimately launched his own platform called Truth Social, which strongly resembles Twitter.

    The digital rights advocate pointed out that Trump “doesn’t need social media to spread his hateful ideas. He has access to the mainstream press, who religiously cover his every move. And he can afford to hire public relations firms, pay for advertising, and leverage his notoriety and influence to gain attention, something he has shown himself to be uniquely good at.”

    “The Donald Trumps of the world are not the people most impacted by deplatforming, censorship, and overreaching moderation,” Greer stressed. “It is the most marginalized who are the most censored online. Arab and Muslim folks living outside the U.S. routinely have their posts erroneously censored and their accounts unjustly banned by hamfisted ‘anti-terrorism’ filters used by most of the largest platforms.”

    “LGBTQ content creators, sex workers, and sexual health educators face constant deplatforming, debanking, and demonetization,” she continued. “Abortion rights organizations consistently encounter obstacles placing online ads, and have seen an uptick in unjust account suspensions and post removals in the wake of the overturning of Roe v. Wade.”

    According to Greer:

    By allowing the former president to remain the center of attention in world-changing debates about content regulation, free speech, and the harms of Big Tech, we’re helping him accomplish his vile goals of silencing and oppressing the most vulnerable. We need to move past circular discussions over specific moderation decisions impacting high-profile elites, and instead focus on putting in place transformative policies based in human rights, and regulations that strike at the root of Big Tech giants’ harm. Passing a privacy law would do way more to slow the viral spread of hateful content and disinformation than keeping Trump off of any specific platform. Enacting antitrust reforms would do far more to protect our democracy from Trump and his ilk than banning any one account.

    Let’s refuse to let Trump derail the conversations we need to have. Let’s keep fighting for policies that lead not just to the type of internet we want to have, but the type of world we want to live in: a world where everyone has a voice, and decisions that impact our lives are made transparently and democratically, rather than in closed-door corporate meetings.

    However, even modest legislation to rein in Big Tech seems unlikely in the second half of President Joe Biden’s first term, with the U.S. House of Representatives now narrowly held by Republicans and after two years of Democrats controlling Congress but failing to advance relevant bills—which many critics largely blame on Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.