❌

Reading view

Filmographie

La maison est noire (1963), de Forough Farrokhzad. Court-métrage documentaire poétique sur une léproserie, méditation sur la souffrance et la dignité humaine.

La Brique et le Miroir (1965), d'Ebrahim Golestan. Un chauffeur de taxi découvre un bébé abandonné, portrait de l'Iran urbain des années 1960.

Qeysar (1969), de Massoud Kimiai. Drame de la vengeance devenu un classique fondateur du cinéma populaire iranien moderne.

La Vache (1969), de Dariush Mehrjui. Après la mort de sa vache, un paysan sombre dans la folie en s'identifiant à l'animal.

Un simple événement (1973), de Sohrab Shahid Saless. Chronique minimaliste de la vie quotidienne d'un jeune garçon dans une ville côtière.

Le Coureur (1985), d'Amir Naderi. Un enfant des rues rêve d'une vie meilleure grâce à sa détermination.

Bashu, le petit étranger (1986), de Bahram Beyzai. Un enfant déplacé par la guerre trouve refuge dans une famille du nord de l'Iran.

Où est la maison de mon ami ? (1987), d'Abbas Kiarostami. Un écolier traverse des villages pour rendre le cahier de son camarade.

Nassereddin Shah, acteur de cinéma (1992), de Mohsen Makhmalbaf. Fantaisie historique sur l'arrivée du cinéma à la cour du chah.

Le Foulard bleu (1995), de Rakhshan Bani-Etemad. L'histoire d'amour entre une ouvrière et un riche exploitant agricole.

Papier sans lignes (2001), de Nasser Taghvai. Une femme tente de devenir écrivaine, révélant les tensions de son couple.

Respiration profonde (2003), de Parviz Shahbazi. Deux jeunes amis errent dans Téhéran en quête de sens et de liberté.

Persepolis (2007), de Marjane Satrapi et Vincent Paronnaud. Film d'animation autobiographique sur l'enfance et l'exil de l'artiste Marjane Satrapi (1969-2026).

Le Chant des moineaux (2008), de Majid Majidi. Un père de famille affronte les difficultés économiques avec humanité.

Une séparation (2011), d'Asghar Farhadi. Conflit familial et judiciaire explorant les dilemmes moraux de la société iranienne.

La Loi de Téhéran (2019), de Saeed Roustaee. Thriller sur la lutte contre le trafic de drogue en Iran.

Voir en ligne : /mav/209/A/69916
  •  

‘Major win’ for democracy as Supreme Court rejects Trump attack on mail-in voting

An election worker processes mail-in ballots at the Los Angeles County Ballot Processing Center during California's state primary election in the City of Industry, California, on June 2, 2026. Photo by Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images
Common Dreams Logo

This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Sep. 14, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.

The US Supreme Court on Monday night rejected a bid by the Trump administration to keep onerous US Postal Service rules for mail-in ballots in place, which voting-rights defenders said risked depriving millions of people of the franchise in this year’s midterm elections.

After a back-and-forth legal battle over the USPS rules that dragged on for months, the nation’s highest court issued the 7-2 ruling without elaborating on its legal reasoning, though right-wing Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas issued dissents in favor of President Donald Trump’s side.

The ruling in USPS v. California was in response to a legal challenge brought by the League of Women’s Voters, the attorneys general of numerous states, and others who argued that newly-announced rules by the Postal Service regarding mail-in ballots, changes prompted by an executive order issued by Trump, would prevent people from having their ballots counted and cause chaos for those trying to administer this year’s elections.

A victory for democracy, a defeat for election deniers. https://t.co/MKjfKmgyTv

— David Crowley (@DavidCCrowley) September 15, 2026

In response to the ruling, the plaintiffs’ legal team said the decision was “a critical step to ensuring free and fair elections this November by maintaining access to mail voting for millions of eligible voters across the United States and lifting the dire threat that the Postal Service would disenfranchise them.”

“Mail voting is safe, secure, and reliable—and the Trump administration has presented no evidence to the contrary, as the courts have repeatedly recognized,” the statement continued. “We will remain vigilant in countering threats to free and fair elections and ensuring that every eligible voter is able to cast a ballot and have it count.”

“Today’s decision is a victory for our democracy and a powerful affirmation of the rule of law,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta in a statement. “The stakes in this litigation could not have been higher.”

Virginia Kase Solomón, president and CEO of Common Cause, was among the other pro-democracy advocates who welcomed the decision.

“Today’s decision is a major win for the millions of everyday Americans who count on vote-by-mail—our seniors, service members, busy parents, rural voters, and voters with disabilities,” said Solomón in a statement. “Vote-by-mail is safe, proven, and vital; even the president uses it. This executive order was a blatant power grab designed to silence voters and undermine our elections, but it failed because the people and the law were on our side. Our Constitution is clear: states run our elections, and voters choose their leaders—not the other way around. No administration can strip the people of their power.”

Michael McNulty, senior policy director for Issue One, a nonpartisan group that works to defend free and fair elections, also welcomed the ruling, but said vigilance would still be necessary going forward.

“The fight to preserve states’ authority to administer elections is far from over,” warned McNulty.

“President Trump continuously and falsely claims fraud in mail-in voting without evidence,” he added. “Despite voting multiple times with this method, he remains obsessed with centralizing control over elections to tilt the playing field. However, for now, one piece of that centralization effort is blocked, and it ensures that mail-in voting for the midterms won’t be disrupted.”

  •  
❌