According to Bloomberg on Monday, California State Attorney General Rob Bonta and other state attorneys general have reached a settlement of their antitrust lawsuit against Paramount Skydance’s $111 billion takeover bid for Warner Bros. Discovery.

According to the report, the settlement creates a nominally independent editorial board to oversee CNN and CBS, and makes promises on the output of the combined studios’ movie production. Bloomberg does not report any divestitures of the merged companies’ massive cable channel portfolio.

These minor concessions are largely unenforceable behavioral remedies that Bonta had previously denounced, and in some cases promise less than the two companies are already doing as standalone competitors. They came after Paramount owner David Ellison made multiple threats to move the studio out of California unless the attorneys general dropped their lawsuit. Previously, Bonta had maintained he’d only accept structural remedies, which block the merger or involve companies selling off significant parts of the combined businesses.

In August, California Governor Gavin Newsom indicated that he’d like Bonta to settle the case, despite growing public concern over the many harms such a deal would bring: widespread entertainment industry layoffs, spiraling consumer costs and increased censorship of news on CBS and CNN. Bonta reportedly was holding strong until a couple of days ago, when closed-door negotiations with Paramount ramped up.

Free Press Co-CEO Jessica J. González said:

“We are disappointed that Attorney General Bonta went back on his promise to enforce the law and protect consumers and workers. Hundreds of thousands of people called on our state AGs to stand up to the Ellisons, who have engaged in a campaign of corruption and extortion to pave the way for this unlawful merger. We can no longer rely on the federal government to enforce the law and protect regular people. That much is clear. But the AGs’ capitulation marks a new low. It’s a sad day for all of us who have been opposing this merger because it will cut jobs and raise prices, all as it consolidates the media even more to enable authoritarians.

“Based on all reports, this weak deal contains nothing but unenforceable, empty Paramount promises. It abandons the thousands of creatives and workers who risked speaking out, and the tens of millions of consumers the attorneys general should be fighting for.

“Behavioral conditions do not work. They won’t save jobs, preserve choice, or prevent price hikes. As we learned from the failed and widely-panned Facebook Oversight Board, a fake bipartisan oversight committee won’t save CNN. We have all the evidence we need from the Ellisons’ destruction of CBS about what they do to warp journalism at Donald Trump’s request. This latest capitulation comes as the Trump administration barred CNN and other reporters who dare ask hard questions from the White House press pool.

“Consolidating the media in the hands of friendly oligarchs is right out of the authoritarian playbook. Americans across the political spectrum are fed up with corruption and consolidation, and billionaires calling all the shots while everyone else struggles. People won’t forget who stood up for them and who capitulated.

“What’s exceedingly clear is that our laws and our political system are not strong enough to resist the pressure and manipulation of corrupt billionaires. We need to strengthen democratic systems of government, including getting money out of politics, and pass laws that break up big media conglomerates. We need to ensure that a few billionaires can’t drown out the masses to dictate bad policy.”

On Friday, a coalition of 15 civil-society and press-freedom organizations demanded that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) release renowned Miami-based journalist Luis Galeano. The letter’s signers include Free Press, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, PEN America, Reporters Without Borders and the Society of Professional Journalists, among others.

Read the letter.

ICE detained Galeano on Sept. 14, 2026, while he was working as a rideshare driver to support his primary role as director of the news outlet Café con Voz. Galeano came to the United States in 2018 from Nicaragua. His reporting in Nicaragua had exposed the government’s significant human-rights abuses. Later, the Ortega-Murillo regime stripped nearly 100 journalists of their Nicaraguan citizenship as a penalty for covering the government’s totalitarian tactics.

Since arriving in the United States, Galeano has conducted Spanish-language reporting for communities throughout Florida. He has a Social Security number and a work permit, with a pending asylum case filed nearly seven years ago.

“The U.S. government’s targeting and detention of Galeano are a troubling escalation of attacks on journalists and media workers, particularly immigrant journalists, who consistently provide much-needed journalism and civic information for their communities,” the letter reads. “In the case of Galeano, there are severe dangers should the U.S. government seek to ignore his asylum case and move to deport him. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) withdrew temporary protected status (TPS) for Nicaraguan immigrants starting in July 2025. That would mean any unfounded punitive actions taken against Galeano that might lead to his deportation could very well place him in dire circumstances upon return to Nicaragua, where he was a vocal leader in the press community advocating for human rights.”

Free Press Senior Counsel Nora Benavidez said:

“When the government arrests and detains a journalist and prevents them from doing their work, it sends a chilling message to other reporters and civilians considering speaking truth to power. It’s horrifying that Luis Galeano is now the latest in a long line of journalists who came to the United States to report on issues of the day and instead face deportation.

“To be clear: These cases aren’t just about cracking down on immigration. They are about cutting off community access to vital coverage and scaring reporters from holding those in power accountable. If our government can close off channels of exchange and the free flow of ideas, it is no more than a dictatorship. This coalition has joined together to urge for Luis Galeano’s release — and we will continue to advocate for press freedom as essential to our democracy and collective dignity.”

The wealth explosion among the ultra-rich has led to soaring demand for luxury private jets and the infrastructure to serve them, including expanded private aircraft hangers and runway capacity at local and regional airports. Meanwhile, transnational corporations wanting to shield their top managers from interactions with the public are also expanding their private jet fleets, even as more shareholders are trying to rein in private jet excess.

A vital new report from the Institute for Policy Studies, High Flyers 2026, reveals just how much this private jet-setting is costing taxpayers and the planet.

Key findings:

• Private jets and charter services account for roughly 16 percent of FAA-handled flight operations. The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates noncommercial private jets account for 7 percent of the airspace activity yet contribute less than 0.6 percent of taxes that flow into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund that helps finance FAA operations.
• An estimated 256,000 people, or roughly 0.003 percent of the population, fly on private jets, including the ultrawealthy who use fractional ownership or private charter jets.
• Private jets are one of the most super-polluting forms of transportation, with direct carbon emissions 10 to 14 times greater per passenger than commercial aviation travel –along with additional contributions to global warming from effective radiative forcing, which can be two to four times greater than those from CO2 emissions.
• The National Business Aviation Association spent approximately $2 million on lobbying in 2025 in favor of legislation that gives massive tax breaks for private jet owners, like the permanent accelerated depreciation tax of 2025.
• Private jet ownership and use has accelerated as the number of ultra-high net worth individuals and billionaires has grown. There are 3,428 global billionaires as of this year. The median wealth of a private jet owner is $190 million, while the median wealth of a fractional owner of a private jet is $140 million.
• A luxury tax of 10 percent on used jets and 5 percent on new jets could have raised more than $3 billion in 2025, funds that could be invested in sustainable ground transportation.
• More than a third of all Airport Infrastructure Grants awarded through 2026 went to airport projects that may primarily benefit private jets, amounting to more than $1.13 billion in grant funds.
• Between 2019 and 2025, fractional jet ownership increased 65 percent.
• Substituting so-called “sustainable aviation fuels” (SAFs) is a greenscreen distraction. While there may be some potential for electrification of small scale short hop aviation, there is no scalable or cost-effective alternative to kerosene-based jet fuels developing at the speed of climate change.

“The rest of us should not have to pay for the luxury excess of the private jet billionaire class. Our hard-earned tax dollars shouldn’t subsidize their reckless air travel habits that further harm our warming planet,” said report co-author Chuck Collins. “At a time when most ordinary people are struggling to afford groceries, rent, and healthcare, our report exposes how the ultra-rich and greedy corporations are private jet-setting at the expense of the rest of us, while trying to dodge accountability for fueling the climate crisis.”

The Institute for Policy Studies worked with the worldwide community of 20,000+ open-source trackers to build a new tool (the Private Jet Emissions Tracker, or PJET) that analyzes the private-jet flights into and out of specific locations and times—like the Super Bowl, the Kentucky Derby, or every game of the World Cup.

One key solution: make private jet-setters pay their fair share.

For starters, Congress should strip a private jet tax avoidance provision from the pending air traffic safety legislation, the ALERT Act. “The private jet lobby is cynically and shamelessly inserting yet another tax break for private jets into legislation to respond to the Potomac river aircraft-heliocopter crash in January 2025,” said Collins.

Champions like Stephen Prince have publicly announced they have given up private jets. Meanwhile, high-profile jet-setters like Taylor Swift who have drawn scrutiny recently have yet to change their travel habits.

“Since we first released our analysis on the costs of private jet travel to taxpayers and the planet in 2023, we’ve seen a shocking and irresponsible rise in the use of private jet travel,” said report co-author Omar Ocampo. “Unfortunately, the private jet lobby has worked hard to lower the tax obligations of the ultrawealthy. Meanwhile, the aviation industry pushes false solutions on the climate crisis. It’s time to stop making taxpayers subsidize luxury private jet travel and use our resources to green other industries.”

Other key policy solutions:

• Stop another pending private jet tax break.
• Repeal one-year accelerated bonus depreciation of private jet purchases and pass the End Subsidies for Private Jets Act.

• Increase tax on private jet fuel.
• Levy a luxury tax on private jet sales.

• Roll back secrecy provisions.
• Stop funding and constructing new private jet infrastructure, just as some institutions have committed to no new fossil fuel infrastructure.

“At a time when billionaires and the ultra-wealthy get to avoid the enshittification of commercial air travel experience, taxpayers and the planet shouldn’t bear the costs of their luxury private jet-setting,” concluded Collins.

Read the full report: https://ips-dc.org/report-high-flyers-2026

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a sweeping new directive that attempts to strip imperiled wildlife of protections from most activities that can kill or injure them.

“This stabs at the very heart of the Endangered Species Act by giving federal approval to the killing of some of America’s most beloved wildlife,” said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Trump administration is desperate to annihilate environmental protections, but this incredibly radical measure is both cruel and profoundly unlawful. Killing endangered wildlife is illegal, whether that’s your purpose or not.”

The Sept. 14 memo from Brian Nesvik, director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, attempts to fundamentally rewrite the Endangered Species Act’s prohibition on “take,” effectively ending nearly all potential law enforcement activities under the Act.

The unintentional or incidental killing of an endangered whale, for example, would no longer be considered illegal, even if it was easily foreseeable.

“A vessel that inadvertently strikes a whale has not taken it, because the vessel’s course was not set against the whale,” the Nesvik memo says. “Felling a tree is not a take of the bats roosting in it unless the tree is felled for the purpose of killing or capturing them.”

The new directive goes substantially beyond the administration’s recent elimination of the longstanding regulatory definition of “harm.” It declares that prohibited “take” requires an intentional act directed at a particular animal that directly and immediately affects that animal.

The administration’s July rule rescinded the regulatory definition of “harm,” which had expressly covered significant habitat modification that actually kills or injures protected wildlife. But the Sept. 14 directive goes considerably further. Rather than merely interpreting the word “harm,” the directive establishes requirements that it says apply to “take” generally — a statutory term Congress defined to include “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect.”

The directive also violates the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon, where the majority rejected the contention that “take” is limited to conduct intentionally directed against particular animals.

Under the new Nesvik directive, Fish and Wildlife Service personnel are instructed to look for four elements: an affirmative act; an act intentionally directed at an animal; a direct and immediate effect; and a particular animal rather than populations, future occupants or unoccupied habitat. That could radically shrink the universe of activities the government considers to constitute unlawful take.

The directive could have far-reaching consequences for logging, mining, development, water diversions and other activities that foreseeably kill or injure endangered wildlife without deliberately targeting individual animals.

“If you chop down a tree full of endangered birds or race a huge ship through a pod of endangered whales, you should be held accountable for your destructive acts,” Hartl said. “But this administration wants to give wildlife killers a ‘Get out of jail free’ card. Imposing new limitations on the entire definition of take is a flagrant and illegal attempt to rewrite the Endangered Species Act via unilateral fiat. This would drive imperiled species over the cliff to extinction.”

The American Civil Liberties Union and the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) today released a new report, Citizenship and the Affordability Agenda: A Path to Better Jobs, Higher Wages, and Prosperity for All, detailing how the mass deportation agenda is exacerbating the affordability crisis by disrupting critical industries, eliminating jobs, weakening workplace protections, and driving up costs for working families. The findings come as communities continue to suffer the impact of mass de-legalization, record levels of immigration arrests and rebound from the economic toll of militarized enforcement operations like Minnesota’s “Operation Metro Surge."

The report finds that a broad path to citizenship would stabilize jobs and prices across the construction, hospitality, and care industries that families depend on while raising wages for all American workers. It also examines how Congress has committed at least $240 billion to immigration enforcement, while cutting funding for programs that help families afford food and health care, including SNAP, Medicaid, and Affordable Care Act subsidies — and in some cases allowing them to expire.

“Deportations make workers poorer and more vulnerable to exploitation by employers,” said Naureen Shah, director of government affairs, equality division at the ACLU. “When ICE continuously raids a community, everyone pays for it – in lost jobs higher prices and damaged businesses. The only immigration agenda that actually improves affordability is one that creates a broad path to citizenship.”

“Working people are paying the price for an immigration system that is destabilizing entire industries and communities and making it easier to exploit workers,” said AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler. “As this report demonstrates, a broad pathway to citizenship for all would raise wages, create more and better jobs, and strengthen our economy in ways that help all of us. It’s past time to give millions of working people and their families the stability they deserve, and we call on Congress to make citizenship a top priority. Working people know that it’s not an immigrant that stands between them and a good job—it’s the billionaires—and it’s time our laws reflect that.

• Among the report’s key findings: Immigration enforcement enables workplace exploitation. The federal government now spends 91 times more on immigration enforcement than on labor-standards enforcement, which leaves workplaces more dangerous and enables employers to violate wage, safety, and overtime laws while crushing worker organizing. More than a quarter of workers in low-wage industries report minimum-wage violations. While these abuses are highest among immigrant workers, they are widespread enough to suppress pay and standards for all workers in those industries, regardless of immigration status.
• Immigration raids stunt business activity and revenue creation. Immigration raids and enforcement surges have terrified people from going to work, shopping, dining out, and participating in their communities. The report cites an estimated 8.1 billion fewer visits to businesses and between $3 billion and $14 billion in lost annual spending. For example, Minnesota businesses lost $10–$20 million a week during and after “Operation Metro Surge.”
• Mass deportation eliminates jobs held by U.S. citizens. The Economic Policy Institute projects continued pursuit of the administration’s deportation agenda could eliminate nearly 6 million jobs, almost half of which are currently held by U.S. citizens.
• Stripping workers’ legal immigration status is worsening the affordability crisis. The Trump administration’s mass “de-documentation” campaign has stopped work authorization from nearly 2 million people, disrupting key industries like construction and hospitality.
• A broad path to citizenship would create jobs and raise wages. Creating a path to citizenship would create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and substantially raise wages for every American worker= by removing immigration status as a tool employers use to suppress pay and silence workers.

This report, published in partnership with the AFL-CIO, is the third in the ACLU’s affirmative vision series, in which policy and legal experts explore how the Trump administration’s immigration agenda has harmed communities nationwide, undermined our democracy, and wreaked havoc on key industries and weakened the American workforce. The series will also outline steps that members of Congress, as well as state and local policymakers, can take to reform the U.S. immigration system and inoculate against future attacks on our rights and safety.

You can read the full report here: https://www.aclu.org/publications/citizenship-and-the-affordability-agenda-a-path-to-better-jobs-higher-wages-and-prosperity-for-all

AI “doomerism” is going mainstream. This week the heads of major frontier AI companies ratcheted up their rhetoric about how dangerous the technology they are building is, calling for a “pause” on AI development.

Digital rights group Fight for the Future, which has run many of the highest profile campaigns against the use of AI for surveillance and warfare, issued the following statement, which can be attributed to the group’s director, Evan Greer (she/her):

“We can’t trust the AI industry to regulate itself. We can’t really trust anything these self-interested billionaires say. But we should take them seriously that the technology they are building is dangerous. And we should act urgently to demand strict regulation that protects people and holds AI companies accountable for the harm they’ve already done, while also preventing future harm. It’s clear that these industry leaders think they are best positioned to craft AI policy for the good of all humanity. We think that’s horseshit. Lawmakers should be listening to independent experts, researchers, civil society, and the communities most impacted. They should craft policies that address AI harm without undermining open source models or entrenching the largest players. Whether humans use AI to kill each other or AI agent swarms do immense harm, it’s clear that unregulated AI poses an existential threat to human rights and liberty, if not humanity itself. Congress should act, but they shouldn’t just do whatever the AI bros tell them to.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to announce today that it will stop regulating carbon dioxide released by power plants burning fossil fuels, according to reports. If allowed to go into effect, the second largest source of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would be allowed to grow unchecked. In response, David Arkush, director of Public Citizen’s Climate Program issued the following statement:

“With this move, Trump again subverts the EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment. Allowing more climate-heating pollution from the U.S. power sector will deeply harm Americans’ health and our natural environment. It will also cost us money and put us further behind in the competition over the energy of the future, renewables.

“The EPA’s rationale, that greenhouse gas pollution doesn’t endanger human health or the environment, is absurdly wrong, and the courts should reject it.”

According to published reports, the Trump Administration will finalize rules to rollback carbon pollution standards for power plants, as soon as today.

Following is reaction from Meredith Hankins, federal climate legal director at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council):

“With millions of Americans facing wildfires, heat waves and deadly storms fueled by climate change, the Trump administration is cutting the biggest polluters loose to do more damage than ever.

“For the health of our families and good of our nation, this cannot stand. Ignoring the immense harm to the public from this power plant pollution is a clear violation of the Clean Air Act and of Supreme Court precedent. We will be seeing them in court."

According to reporting, Donald Trump’s administration will propose to repeal the Endangerment Finding for power plants today – a move that would permanently strip the Environmental Protection Agency of its authority to limit greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas power plants under the Clean Air Act. This action would strip EPA of one of its most powerful tools for combating climate change. Combined with the administration’s February repeal of the Endangerment Finding for motor vehicles, today’s proposal is part of a sweeping effort to dismantle the legal foundation for federal climate regulation, leaving the EPA legally unable to act on the two largest sources of carbon pollution in the country.

The proposal is another one of Donald Trump’s attempts to bolster the profits of a struggling coal industry and deliver directly on the promises EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin made to the corporate executives at a National Coal Council meeting in July, where he vowed to fulfill the industry’s “wish list.” The administration has already given more than $700 million in taxpayer dollars to the coal industry, despite the immense public and environmental harms associated with burning coal for electricity, and the well-documented evidence that clean energy is now cheaper, cleaner, and more reliable than fossil fuels.

The handouts and regulatory giveaways come as renewable energy continues to outperform fossil fuel-burning power plants in the marketplace. It is now cheaper to build new solar energy than to build new coal or gas plants–even without subsidies for renewable projects. In May, solar energy generated more electricity than coal across the entire country. That same month, Utah generated more energy from solar than any other source. Despite Donald Trump’s best efforts, the coal industry cannot compete with solar—it’s being kept on life support by taxpayer subsidies and regulatory handouts, while ordinary families pay the price in higher electricity bills, dirtier air, and more extreme weather fueled by carbon pollution.

In response, Sierra Club Chief Program Officer Holly Bender issued the following statement:

“While wildfires rage, floods devastate communities, and families struggle to afford skyrocketing electricity bills and insurance premiums, the Trump administration is handing the fossil fuel industry a license to keep polluting. This is full-throated climate denial while the climate crisis happens in real time and a shocking betrayal of the American public. The Sierra Club will fight back against this reckless and dangerous proposal with everything we have in the courts, in Congress, and in communities across the country.”

Background

The Endangerment Finding is a 2009 scientific determination by the EPA that greenhouse gasses pose a significant threat to public health and the environment. It is the legal cornerstone of the EPA’s authority to regulate climate pollution under the Clean Air Act – the foundation upon which vehicle standards, power plant rules, and other climate protections have all been built. The nonpartisan National Academies of Sciences confirmed last year that the finding “was accurate, has stood the test of time, and is now reinforced by even stronger evidence.”

Sierra Club has been at the front lines of the fight for federal climate standards longer than any other organization. In December 2002, the Club filed the first-ever climate case under the Clean Air Act in federal court, which ultimately led to the Supreme Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. EPA that the Clean Air Act covers greenhouse gas pollution and to all of the federal climate standards that followed. Now, two-and-a-half decades later, Donald Trump and Lee Zeldin are trying to destroy those hard-won victories in an effort to double-down on the fossil fuels that are harming the climate and environment, and driving up costs.

Two national activist groups, Progressive Democrats of America and RootsAction, announced today that they will launch a campaign soon after the November midterm elections calling for Reps. Ro Khanna and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to enter the race for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination.

“As the prospective field comes into view, it’s crucial to have a strong progressive at the top of the Democratic ticket in 2028,” the two groups said in a joint statement. “Most of the Democrats whose names now crowd the field have been war enablers, go-slow reformers or status quo protectors. AOC and Khanna, meanwhile, have shown a willingness to blaze unusual and much-needed trails on Capitol Hill beyond the constraints of the Democratic Party establishment and bipartisan corporatism.”

The groups said: “Majorities of voters, not just Democrats, are angry about nonstop war, runaway inflation, corporate greed and a government dominated by billionaires. The voices of Khanna and/or AOC are needed in the presidential campaign to ensure that voters hear serious solutions. Without a progressive populist advocate atop the ticket, the Democratic response would be woefully underwhelming -- enabling right-wing demagoguery to push voter unrest in dangerous and divisive directions.”

Progressive Democrats of America launched the “Run, Bernie, Run” campaign in 2013, which successfully drafted independent Senator Bernie Sanders to run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016 -- a campaign that sparked a big part of the contemporary progressive movement.

In November 2022, RootsAction launched the “Don’t Run Joe” campaign calling for President Biden not to seek re-election. RootsAction was the first national group to announce support for Zohran Mamdani in his successful run for mayor of New York.

The joint statement called Khanna and Ocasio-Cortez “proven leaders and voices of clarity at a time of grave peril for our country and the world.” The groups said “we believe their presence in the race is crucial to foster debate on healthcare, jobs, AI, militarism and the U.S. relationship with Israel, along with many other issues important to a wide range of voters.”

Progressive Democrats of America and RootsAction commented: “The announcement of this campaign will come as a surprise to both Khanna and Ocasio-Cortez. We did not give them any advance notice of it, and they have never suggested to us that we do any such thing.”

“Our organizations do not always agree with Reps. Ocasio-Cortez and Khanna, and no doubt they don’t always agree with us,” the groups said. “But we definitely want to see one or both of them in the race.”

Both RootsAction and PDA are committed to helping the Democratic Party win the midterm elections, after which this campaign will launch. The groups added, “Party unity will be stronger with the expectation that the party’s full spectrum of views will be well-represented on presidential debate platforms in 2027 and ’28.”

PDA executive director Alan Minsky said today: “The success of progressive candidates across the country was the story of the 2026 primary season. Yet almost all of the high-profile prospective Democratic presidential candidates are Big Money-backed status quo centrists -- at a time when the Democratic voting base overwhelmingly supports progressive policies that lift the lives of working people. We need at least one progressive champion on the presidential debate stage to counter the corporatists’ cacophony of bland incrementalism. Americans want change. Reps. Khanna and Ocasio-Cortez are two brilliant advocates for an America as great as its promise."

RootsAction senior strategist India Walton commented: “Working people are hungry for leadership that works for all of us, not just the wealthy and well-connected -- leaders who do not capitulate to corporate power, who reject endless wars, and embrace policies that mean we can live healthy, happy lives. AOC and Ro Khanna can bring that vision to the presidential stage."

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee on Disaster Management, has launched an investigation into OpenAI following revelations that the company’s AI agents breached Hugging Face during cybersecurity evaluations this summer. Hawley is seeking documents and information from OpenAI about the incident, including evidence that the company knew its agents were engaging in unauthorized behavior before the breach and allowed testing to continue.

Public Citizen previously called on Congress to investigate this deeply disturbing incident and hold the corporations responsible accountable for their failures.

J.B. Branch, director of federal AI governance and technology policy at Public Citizen, issued the following statement in response:

“Senator Hawley’s investigation is an important first step toward getting the answers the American people deserve. Public Citizen, alongside dozens of civil society organizations and leading experts, called on Congress in July to investigate the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident and examine the serious gaps in federal oversight that allowed it to happen.

“But an investigation is only a start. Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, and other leaders of frontier AI companies must be brought before Congress to testify under oath about these incidents. These companies are developing technologies with profound consequences to our digital infrastructure and public safety. Congress must follow the facts wherever they lead and use its oversight authority to determine what went wrong and what binding safeguards are necessary to prevent the next incident from causing far greater harm.”

A coalition of 45 faith, peace, labor, health, and political organizations is calling on House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and committee Ranking Members Gregory Meeks and Jim McGovern to immediately announce plans to call a vote on Rep. Nydia Velázquez’s Cuba War Powers Resolution (H.Con.Res. 106). In a letter sent this week, the groups call on the House to vote to end the de facto US oil blockade on Cuba, which they argue amounts to hostilities that Congress has not authorized.

"Cuba is suffering through a man-made economic and humanitarian catastrophe, caused in significant part by deliberate policy choices of the United States," the organizations wrote.

The privileged resolution — which can be called for a vote without Speaker Johnson’s approval — directs the president to remove US Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Cuba absent congressional authorization. The signatories, who include the American Friends Service Committee, the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Church World Service, Demand Progress, Just Foreign Policy, Indivisible, the Latin America Working Group, Pax Christi USA, Peace Action, RootsAction, United Church of Christ, Win Without War, and dozens of others, argue that the de facto oil blockade in place since January 2026 meets the definition of hostilities under the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

The letter describes a humanitarian emergency on the island that grows worse by the day. Already, six nationwide power grid collapses have occurred in the past year, leaving more than nine million people without power for periods lasting more than 20 hours, and with transportation stranded, inadequate water and food, and the health system forced to ration care. Cuba’s infant mortality rate has increased by 148 percent under sanctions imposed by Trump, meaning 1,800 babies have died since 2018 who otherwise would have lived.

On August 6, a panel of UN experts warned that the humanitarian fallout of the sanctions escalation is becoming a full-blown crisis, threatening Cubans’ rights to health, food, development, and to life itself.

The letter follows a Senate vote on April 28 to end US hostilities against Cuba — sponsored by Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), and Adam Schiff (D-CA) — which was defeated on a procedural motion in a 51-to-47 vote, despite the support of Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Rand Paul (R-KY). The letter notes that those 47 senators voted to affirm that this blockade, imposed without a single shot fired, nevertheless constitutes an act of hostility under the War Powers Act. The letter deems this vote to be “one of the most important stands Congress has taken against U.S. economic sanctions toward Cuba in over six decades,” and calls on the House to “take a similarly forceful action at this crucial moment.”

The letter notes that under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, “the President may not introduce U.S. forces into hostilities, or situations where hostilities are imminent, without congressional authorization,” stating that “a de facto fuel blockade enforced by military assets meets the definition of hostilities.” It cites the UN Charter, which treats a blockade as a use of armed force, and the UN General Assembly’s official “Definition of Aggression,” which also identifies a blockade as an act of aggression. The signatories observe finally that the “deliberate deprivation of fuel to a civilian population also violates the 4th Geneva Convention’s prohibition on collective punishment of civilians, and is therefore a war crime under this treaty, which the United States, along with all other UN member countries, has ratified.”

The signatories call for urgent action, concluding that this “moment calls for decisive leadership that enables our communities to engage in the political process and try to shape the outcomes of policies being waged in our name.”

Today’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) report shows prices rose 0.4% in August and are up 3.4% over the past year. Core prices, which exclude food and energy, rose 0.3% in August alone. Gas prices reached their highest ever recorded for August, and the pressure has not let up, climbing $4.29 per gallon, up 14 cents since hitting a Labor Day record. Diesel surged past $6 per gallon for the first time ever, up more than 70 cents from a month ago, which will show up on grocery store shelves for months to come as it costs more and more to transport essentials.

Rather than address the pain families are feeling at the grocery store and the gas pump, Trump this week floated an absurd rebate program, promising checks sent directly to Americans if his party is successful in the midterm elections – after promising 15 similar payments that never materialized during his second term. Under Trump’s watch, wage growth has slowed to its lowest point since 2021, while inflation has shot up and shows no signs of easing. Every day in Trump’s economy is more expensive than the last for working families.

Today’s report is the final inflation print before the Federal Reserve meets next week to decide where interest rates go next, and it’s already out of date. Most of the August data was collected before Trump’s 50% tariffs on Canadian imports took effect on August 22, hitting products including wine, furniture, and dairy products, and before Trump further escalated his war in Iran and sent oil prices past $100 per barrel.

Groundwork’s Senior Vice President of Policy, Advocacy, and Research Alex Jacquez, released the following statement:

“Trump’s economy is setting all the wrong kinds of records. Working families are being forced to use credit cards to cover the basics as gas prices hit historic highs. Meanwhile, the president has imposed further tariffs on one of our closest trading partners and continues escalation in Iran. Trump promised to lower costs and improve daily life for Americans. He’s not only failed to deliver on that promise, he’s driven our economy over a cliff.”

At a speech at the GOP’s midterm convention in Dallas, Texas yesterday, Donald Trump promised,“if the Republicans win, you win with us and you get $5,000.”

Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, issued the following statement in response:

“Even for the notoriously corrupt and lawless Trump, this explicit and desperate attempt to buy votes in the November election is a new low. Trump knows he can’t do this, and yet he’s attempting to bribe voters with the false promise of cash to help his party win an election, which is antithetical to every principle of American democracy.

“Every Republican at the convention and across the country should loudly and vehemently denounce Trump for proposing this dangerous and transparently illegal scheme. The fact that no one has done that yet is cause for deep alarm about the future of American elections.”

The First Circuit Court of Appeals today kept in place through the Nov. 3 election a preliminary injunction blocking the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) from enforcing key parts of a new rule that would significantly interfere with mail voting if implemented.The Trump administration has also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the injunction. A ruling is expected soon.

In issuing the injunction, the U.S. District Court in Boston found that the USPS rule was likely unconstitutional and unlawful — and that enforcing it would make voter disenfranchisement “practically inevitable.”

The First Circuit Court of Appeals reinforced the District Court’s findings, writing: “[T]he district court made detailed findings about the chaos and widespread disenfranchisement that would occur between now and November 3 should the [USPS] Rule take immediate effect, including the fact that it would be impossible for some States to reprint compliant envelopes; the likely delays in the required USPS envelope review process; the lack of a presently operative portal; and the herculean task that would confront the USPS in scanning tens of millions of ballot envelopes and reviewing for a match with information in the presently non-operative portal."

The injunction stems from a lawsuit filed by a coalition of nonpartisan voter service and civic organizations: the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, League of Women Voters, Association of Americans Resident Overseas, U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Massachusetts, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, Legal Defense Fund (LDF), Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC (Advancing Justice – AAJC), and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.

Plaintiffs and counsel jointly issued the following statement:

“The U.S. Postal Service is not the gatekeeper for mail ballots. It does not have that authority. And it cannot usurp election authority from the states and Congress. This decision rightly keeps in place an order blocking USPS from enforcing its disruptive and disenfranchising rule through the November election and preserves the current system, which has worked safely, securely, and reliably for decades.”

Young voters interrupted the United States Postal Service Board of Governors closed door meeting to request the Governors reject the administration’s plan to intercede in mail-in ballot efforts. They delivered ballots in USPS official mail boxes asking the Governors to deliver ballots uninterrupted like past election years.

"Postmaster General, Board of Governors, you get to decide, will millions Americans have their ballots tossed out or do Americans still get to pick their own leaders. Can you commit to us, to the public today, that you will mail every ballot out and not cave to Donald Trump's political demands?” asked 24 year old Georgia voter Alex Ames.

"Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We are in a private meeting. We appreciate the feedback,” said Board of Governors Member and Chair Amber F. McReynolds.

"We understand it’s a meeting but this is also an emergency. Ballots have already started getting mailed out..if all these ballots get tossed out potentially young voters, potentially millions of people might not have their ballots delivered,” continued Ames. “Can you commit to not tossing out people’s ballots?”

"Thank you for sharing this feedback but this is a different subject for meeting, " responded McReynolds.

Young voters carried ballots in USPS packages with the words “Let us vote,” “we love the USPS,” and “count my ballot” attached.

"I’m worried young people’s voices won't be heard in November because their ballots won't be delivered. Trump is threatening not just our ability to mail our vote but our right to decide our future and the direction of our country,” said 24 year old voter Stella Lovelady. “Young people, like all Americans, have a right to elect our leaders and have our voices heard. I confronted the Board of Governors because they made a commitment to the country–to not just deliver our mail but to honor our values, protect our constitution and fight for what is just. I have the right to vote, to elect my leaders and I expect the Board of Governors to reject this desperate attempt by the Trump administration to steal that from the people. Speak out Governors–please, fight for me.”

Sunrise Movement, the youth climate action organization, called on the USPS Board to reject Trump’s executive order, noting nearly 47 million Americans vote by mail and calling on the USPS to focus on delivering the mail and not deciding who is eligible to receive a ballot.

"Trump is desperate. He sees the writing on the wall and has decided the only way he can win is if possibly millions of people can’t vote,” said Sunrise Movement Executive Director Aru Shiney-Ajay. “The American people won't let that happen. We’ll defeat this wannabe dictator in November like we did in 2020–with our votes, our voices and our peaceful actions.”

Sunrise Movement is currently making millions of voter contact attempts to elect progressive, climate champions to Congress like Abdhul El-Sayed, Donavan McKinney, William Lawrence and Troy Jackson. These races currently face threats of electoral sabotage from the administration.

Responding to the announcement by Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK that they plan to restrict trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and are considering further measures, Amnesty International’s Senior Director for Research Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns, Erika Guevara Rosas said:

“The announcement that 12 states plan to introduce restrictions on trade with Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international humanitarian law, is a welcome, if long overdue, development that must pave the way for the adoption of further measures to bring an end to Israel’s unlawful occupation and institutionalized system of apartheid imposed against Palestinians.

“The measures announced so far, while important, fall far short of meeting the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 instructions to states ‘not to render aid or assistance’ in maintaining Israel’s unlawful occupation of the Palestinian Territory.

“Settlement creation and expansion – with state-backed settler violence now a central tool driving displacement and dispossession at unprecedented levels under the current Israeli government – are a core component of Israel’s policy and cannot be separated from its overarching system of apartheid.

“Entire Palestinian communities face the imminent risk of erasure in the West Bank amidst an ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign. Meanwhile Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip continue to battle for survival amidst Israel’s ongoing genocide.

To truly tackle the violations stemming from illegal settlements states must go further; they must target the very infrastructure that funds, sustains and supports Israel’s unlawful occupation.
Erika Guevara Rosas, Amnesty International

“To truly tackle the violations stemming from illegal settlements states must go further; they must target the very infrastructure that funds, sustains and supports Israel’s unlawful occupation. This requires imposing measures on key entities, including Israeli government ministries, implicated in establishing, maintaining and providing material support to illegal settlements and settlement infrastructure, as well as taking effective action to prevent and halt the forcible transfer of Palestinians.

“All states must make absolutely clear that they will no longer provide political, financial and military support that contributes to Israel’s serious and systematic violations of international law.

“They must also impose targeted sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes, against Benjamin Netanyahu, Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel Katz and Orit Strock as Israeli officials directly implicated in the ethnic cleansing and forcible transfer of Palestinians in the West Bank, and in maintaining Israel’s unlawful occupation and apartheid. They must also ban the transfer of arms and security equipment that risk facilitating Israeli violations.

“For their part, EU states must now call on President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen to present them with a proposal for a comprehensive EU-wide ban on trade with settlements, and on key states to support it, including Italy and Germany. They must also take the next logical step and suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

“There is no longer any room for excuses, delays or half measures. Failure to act decisively to tackle Israel’s mass violations against Palestinians sends a dangerous signal that states are unwilling to uphold their own legal obligations. It also emboldens the Israeli authorities to continue violating international law with impunity while denying Palestinians meaningful protection.”

A federal appeals court today will again hear a lawsuit designed to restrict abortion access nationwide by banning mail and pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone, a safe and effective medication used in two-thirds of U.S. abortions as well as for miscarriage care. The hearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Louisiana v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration is the latest step in a legal battle in which anti-abortion politicians are seeking to make abortion harder for patients to access, even in states where abortion is protected. Today, nearly 30 percent of people who have abortions in the U.S. access care through telemedicine and pharmacy dispensing.

“Abortion opponents will stop at nothing to try to end medication abortion in every state,” said Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “Preventing people from getting their mifepristone prescription by mail and at pharmacies is just the start. But we’re not standing by as the courts and the Trump administration weigh whether to reduce access based on tired anti-abortion lies. The ACLU will use every tool we have to protect access to this safe and effective medication for people across the country.”

In May, the Fifth Circuit ruled for Louisiana, resulting in a brief disruption of telehealth access to mifepristone before the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily paused the appeals court’s decision while the litigation continues. The case is widely expected to return to the Supreme Court. Any decision from the Fifth Circuit to limit telehealth access will be on hold until then.

Legal challenges are not the only threat to patients’ ability to access mifepristone. Despite use by millions of patients, hundreds of studies, and decades of evidence proving mifepristone’s safety, including when prescribed through telemedicine, the Trump administration, after intense lobbying from abortion opponents and their allies in Congress, is conducting yet another review of mifepristone as a pretext for imposing extreme and medically unjustified restrictions on access to the medication. The administration announced the review citing one self-published report that grossly distorts mifepristone’s safety record. This report has since been widely debunked, including by more than 250 experts.

Regardless of whether restrictions on mifepristone come from the courts or from the Trump administration, ending telehealth and pharmacy access will devastate patients’ ability to get this essential medication. Without telemedicine and pharmacy access, patients using mifepristone would be forced to travel, sometimes hundreds of miles, to a health center just to pick up a pill, a requirement that leading medical authorities agree has no safety benefit.

Both the public and experts agree: the federal government should not further restrict mifepristone. A July 2026 survey found that two-thirds of U.S. adults oppose nationwide restrictions on mifepristone and medication abortion. And a wide range of experts — from emergency medicine physicians to experts in intimate partner violence to drug developers — submitted amicus briefs in the Supreme Court and in the court of appeals opposing this nationwide restriction as medically unjustified and harmful to people seeking care.

Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon, who previously worked for OpenAI, has resigned from the AI industry, warning that leading AI companies are racing to create increasingly powerful AI systems without adequate safeguards. Coxon said that neither Anthropic nor OpenAI is “acting responsibly” and accused the companies of “gambling with our lives.” His resignation follows other departures of researchers from leading AI companies raising concerns about safety and the pace of AI development. Coxon specifically pointed to recent incidents involving AI systems accessing external computer systems as a warning of the risks ahead.

In response, J.B. Branch, director of federal AI governance and technology policy at Public Citizen, issued the following statement:

“Jacob Coxon is not the first AI researcher to leave the Big Tech industry because of AI safety concerns and he won’t be the last. Researchers with the most intimate knowledge of how this technology works and is being developed are sounding the alarms, walking away from prestigious jobs to start up evaluation organizations, and warning the public about the risks posed by corporations’ failure to guarantee AI safety.

“But calls for companies to voluntarily pause or slow down are not enough. Members of Congress routinely state their concerns about AI but have failed to pass federal safeguards or emergency measures to respond to the AI cyber security incidents that AI corporations have failed to prevent – and have covered up. Right now, the only protections the U.S. has in place are completely voluntary. There is no comprehensive federal AI regulation, no safety standards imposed on AI companies, and no agency capable of investigating serious AI incidents.

“Believe the researchers and whistleblowers who are telling us that Big Tech does not have these AI systems under control. The people building the most powerful AI systems in the world are warning us about what could go wrong. Why isn’t Congress listening?”

Twenty-five years ago, in the ashes of the September 11th attacks, the United States launched what it called the "Global War on Terror." While the country was afraid and vulnerable, neoconservatives in the Bush administration, like then-Vice President Dick Cheney, saw an opening for expanding empire and U.S. hegemony by selling the country and its allies a story of revenge and "freedom." What they ushered in, however, was a brutal invasion and occupation of both Afghanistan and Iraq that spanned over two decades, both of which had nothing to do with 9/11. For the past 25 years, the "Global War on Terror" has been used by the United States to wreak havoc in the SWANA region with an endless cycle of violence that has cost millions of lives and trillions of dollars.

CODEPINK's Medea Benjamin reflects: "As CODEPINK, we went to Iraq 25 years ago to meet the people our government was preparing to bomb. What haunts me today is not only the devastation of the invasion, but how little accountability there has been for those who lied us into war—and how those same lies are now recycled to justify the attack on Iran."

The loss of human life, injuries, environmental damage, and destroyed infrastructure is staggering. A Brown University report shows over 900,000 killed directly, with an estimated 3.6 to 3.8 million more dying indirectly, reminding us of the profound human cost and the importance of resisting this cycle of violence. This brings the total death toll to at least 4.5 to 4.7 million lives. Over 38 million people from Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, the Philippines, Libya, and Syria have been displaced in the past 25 years. That is tens of millions of lives forever changed by this decades-long war waged by the United States.

The "War on Terror" was never about keeping the citizens of the United States safe. It was about the unchecked growth of power, the expansion of the U.S. empire, the destabilization of the region, and the enrichment of the war economy. The “War on Terror” was a vehicle to use fear to dismantle civil liberties, such as with the PATRIOT Act, paving the way for the surveillance state that tracks our every move today. It was about stoking anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant hatred as a means to divide regular working people, a playbook that politicians and complicit media are continuing to pull from to wage war on countries like Palestine, Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran.

At the start of this war, we watched in horror as feminist organizations were cynically trotted out to manufacture consent for the invasion of Afghanistan, wrapping brutal colonialism in the language of women's rights. In November, First Lady Laura Bush had begun framing the war as a mission to "free Afghan women,” followed by leaders from Feminist Majority Foundation petitioning the State Department and other senior administration for the "establishment of Democracy" in Afghanistan. They asked the Bush administration to do "everything in their power to restore human rights of Afghan women." In its 2002 spring edition, Ms. Magazine called the invasion a "coalition of hope."

The idea that war liberates women was a shameful lie then, and it is a shameful lie now, as it has been used to justify the genocide in Gaza after October 7, 2023, as well as a false provocation for the war on Iran.

The utter lack of accountability for what was actually a "Global War of Terror" has paved the way for a Pentagon budget ballooning toward a grotesque $1.5 trillion, and a Homeland Security apparatus that now stalks our streets and executes people in broad daylight, as well as invasive surveillance cameras that spy on the public without cause. And then there's Guantanamo Bay, a torture black site and a monument to lawlessness, still standing open inside a country we are threatening with another invasion. The same impunity that has shielded the architects of the Global War on Terror now emboldens the war criminals behind the genocide in Gaza and the Minab School massacre in Iran.

The Global War of Terror did not end. There are currently around 2,500 service members still stationed in Iraq, as well as U.S. access to select military installations, such as Al-Harir Air Base, in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Region. Outside of its physical presence, the war of terror became entrenched in the infrastructure of our daily lives.

Ending this reign of violence doesn't just mean pulling troops out of a country or closing a few bases; it means dismantling the entire architecture built by the Bush administration that every administration has since expanded. That means cutting the Pentagon budget and reallocating those billions to healthcare, housing, climate justice, and reparations. It means abolishing ICE and DHS. It also means holding those accountable for countless war crimes committed, from the architects of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan to the torturers in black sites, to the media who shamefully gave cover for it all. It is time to end the impunity and finally see those behind it all face justice.

Like in every war, nobody wins except war criminals and billionaires. We now live in a culture of war, violence, aggression, and dehumanization. The reign of terror cost an estimated 8 trillion dollars, yet the world is no safer today than it was on 9/11. The citizens of the United States not only paid for this with their tax dollars but also live in the constant state of anxiety it has created.

Twenty-five years is an entire generation lost to endless war. Today, we mourn the dead, we honor those who resisted and continue to resist, and we recommit to building a world that invests in life, not death.