Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams

Continuing the assault on transgender people that President Donald Trump launched as soon as he returned to power last year, the US Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights rescinded portions of settlements intended to protect trans students at five school districts and one college.

The department framed the move as “freeing schools” from the Biden and Obama administrations’ “illegal and burdensome enforcement of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,” a landmark civil rights law that bars sex-based discrimination in schools that receive federal funding.

According to The Associated Press, “One of the school systems, Delaware Valley School District in rural eastern Pennsylvania, received notice of the change from the Trump administration in February and has since voted to roll back its antidiscrimination protections for transgender students.”

The administration also rescinded provisions of resolution agreements with Cape Henlopen School District in Delaware and Fife School District in Washington, as well as California’s La Mesa-Spring Valley School District, Sacramento City Unified, and Taft College.

“The Trump administration has opened at least 40 civil rights investigations into educational institutions that provide protections for transgender students,” and filed lawsuits in California and Minnesota, The New York Times reported. However, “Education Department officials said there was no precedent for the federal government terminating previously negotiated civil rights settlements with schools. Civil rights lawyers who worked under Democratic and Republican administrations said they were unaware of previous examples of such a move.”

Advocates for trans people sharply condemned the rollback, which came on the heels of last week’s International Transgender Day of Visibility.

“This sends a chilling alarm that trans students really are a target of this administration,” Shelby Chestnut, executive director of the California-based Transgender Law Center, told the Times. “It’s extremely concerning. Students should be safe to go to school and get an education.”

Shiwali Patel, senior director of education justice at the National Women’s Law Center, said in a statement that “there is absolutely no basis for what the Department of Education is doing, and it is unimaginably cruel. Title IX exists to ensure that students are protected from discrimination and treated with dignity so that they can learn and thrive in our schools. It’s always been about that. It’s what students, families, lawmakers, and advocates fought for when Title IX was passed decades ago. But the Trump administration’s Department of Education has spent its limited resources to strip Title IX of that very purpose.”

“Real complaints of discrimination and sexual assault are going unanswered by the Department of Education while conservative lawmakers continue to escalate their attacks on a small minority of students,” Patel noted. “Parents, teachers, and students need the department to focus on addressing real harms on campuses instead of rolling back policies that keep all students safe.”

“We should all be alarmed at the Trump administration’s cruel escalation of their anti-trans agenda,” she added. “When they push laws that explicitly target trans people or attempt to use scientifically inaccurate language to define sex, they are also inevitably targeting all women and girls. They want to control what we do, how we look, and how we act until we are pushed out of public life. But we are not going anywhere.”

The labor union leading the fight for California’s billionaire tax on Wednesday pointed to recent reporting about hospital layoffs to make the case for the ballot measure, which would impose a one-time 5% tax on state billionaires’ wealth to fund healthcare.

The Orange County Register reported last week that “the more than 400 hospitals statewide have already laid off more than 3,400 healthcare workers as of mid-March, with as many as 1,600 coming from Santa Barbara to Orange County and the Inland Empire area, according to a tally of layoffs provided by the state’s Employment Development Department and data collected by Paul Young, senior vice president of public policy and reimbursement with the California Hospital Association of Southern California.”

As the newspaper detailed, hospital executives “are hinting of a second wave of layoffs,” citing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or HR 1, that congressional Republicans passed and President Donald Trump signed last summer. The law will cut about $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next decade, which is expected to significantly impact the state’s Medi-Cal program that covers more than 15 million lower-income residents.

The Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, Berkeley “estimates the Medi-Cal cuts could lead to a loss of 72,000 to 145,000 healthcare jobs throughout California, representing 3% to 5% of the state’s 2.65 million healthcare positions,” the Register noted. “These job losses include positions in hospitals, clinics, and home care.”

The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the lead sponsor of the ballot measure that Californians are set to vote on in November, highlighted the reporting in a Wednesday statement. SEIU-UHW chief of staff Suzanne Jimenez declared that “this is a direct threat to patient care across California.”

“When hospitals lose funding, they lose staff,” Jimenez said. “And when they lose staff, patients face longer wait times, fewer services, and reduced access to lifesaving care. Without urgent action, communities across California will lose access to the care they depend on.”

In the union’s statement, Mayra Castañeda shared concerns about losing her job as an ultrasound technologist at a hospital in Lynwood, California. She said: “Every day I come to work thinking about my patients, making sure they get the care they need, that they feel safe, that they’re not alone. Now, I’m also thinking about whether I’ll still have a job next month.”

“We’re already stretched thin, and the idea that more staff could be cut is terrifying,” Castañeda continued. “It doesn’t just impact us as staff. It impacts every patient who walks through our doors. You can’t keep taking resources out of healthcare and expect people not to suffer.”

Experts estimate that, if passed, the billionaire tax ballot measure would raise about $100 billion from 2027-31 from California’s 200 richest residents. Recent polling suggests the proposal is on its way to success.

It’s drawn support from national progressive figures such as US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who last month partnered with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to introduce the Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act. The bill would impose a 5% annual wealth tax and direct the revenue toward reversing GOP healthcare cuts from HR 1, expanding Medicare, building affordable houses, helping families pay for childcare, boosting teacher salaries, and sending direct payments to members of households making $150,000 or less.

Unlike the California ballot measure, that federal “tax the rich” bill and another introduced last month by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) have no clear path to passage in the Republican-controlled Congress. However, hospital layoffs as a result of HR 1—which featured more tax giveaways for wealthy Americans—aren’t limited to California.

According to a Public Citizen report released Tuesday, 446 hospitals across the United States could close or reduce services due to HR 1’s cuts to Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. The publication notes that these “hospitals collectively have 68,986 beds and served approximately 6.6 million patients in 2024. They employ approximately 275,458 direct patient care workers (this does not include nonmedical workers, such as administrative staff).”

Public Citizen researcher and report author Eileen O’Grady stressed that “Trump’s cuts to Medicaid will hurt millions of low-income and disabled Americans, and will deepen financial strains that are already plaguing rural and safety-net hospitals—compromising their ability to deliver care, potentially leading many to close.”

“Congress should take urgent action to restore all Medicaid funding cuts enacted by Trump and Republicans in Congress,” O’Grady argued, “and should extend the enhanced premium tax credits for coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces.”

One of the more than 200 Venezuelan men whom US President Donald Trump sent to a notorious prison in El Salvador last year, Neiyerver Adrián León Rengel, sued the United States of America in a federal court on Tuesday, seeking $1.3 million in damages.

León Rengel entered the United States at a port of entry in June 2023, during the Biden administration, for a pre-scheduled appointment, at which “he underwent screenings and provided his biometrics,” according to the complaint, filed in Washington, DC. He was released and scheduled to appear before an immigration judge in April 2028.

However, the filing details, after Trump returned to office, León Rengel “was wrongly identified as a member of the gang Tren de Aragua (TDA), repeatedly denied due process, falsely imprisoned, intentionally deceived, and—ultimately—illegally sent to El Salvador in blatant violation of a court order.”

León Rengel was sent to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT), where Human Rights Watch found deportees were subjected to “systematic torture.”

He told CBS News in Spanish that “there came a point when I thought about hanging myself with the sheet they gave us... It was hell. Total hell.”

As CBS—which eventually aired an investigation into the prison despite interference from editor-in-chief Bari Weiss—reported Tuesday:

León Rengel was arrested once in the US after a traffic stop and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for possession of drug paraphernalia in Texas, documents show. León Rengel said the car where the material was found was not his. He said he paid a small fine.

Beyond that misdemeanor, León Rengel’s lawyers said he has no criminal history, and that he was deported despite having an active immigration case and lacking a deportation order. Justice Department records reviewed by CBS News do not list a deportation order for León Rengel and show he had an immigration court hearing scheduled for April 2028.

León Rengel said he was identified as a Tren de Aragua gang member because of a tattoo on his left hand of a lion with a hair clipper on its mouth. He said he has cut hair in the US and Venezuela, and denies having any gang ties. Other former CECOT prisoners have similarly said they were accused of gang membership because of their tattoos.

DHS told the network that “this illegal alien was deemed a public safety threat as a confirmed associate of the Tren de Aragua gang and processed for removal from the US.” The department declined to provide any evidence to support its claim that he is a TDA member, saying that doing so would “undermine” national security.

León Rengel was ultimately freed from CECOT and returned to Venezuela as part of a prisoner swap last summer. He is the first of the deportees to file such a lawsuit under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

“This case reveals an illegal and morally bereft plan of action at the highest levels of our government to defy a federal court, strip a man of his rights, and hand him over to a foreign government for torture to prove a political point,” said retired Amb. Norm Eisen, co-founder and executive chair of Democracy Defenders Fund, in a statement.

“Adrián Rengel spent four months in abhorrent, inhumane conditions because senior officials chose to flout the rule of law,” he continued. “We are filing suit today to get justice for him. The rule of law applies no matter what the political aims of the administration.”

In addition to Eisen’s group, León Rengel is represented by the law firm Mariziani, Stevens & Gonzalez, with support from the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC).

“What happened to Adrián Rengel is government-sanctioned torture and a failure to recognize his humanity because he happened to be an immigrant. He deserves his day in court,” said LULAC CEO Juan Proaño. “His four months of illegal confinement is the devastating outcome of a system designed to treat Latino immigrants as criminals simply because of where they were born or the color of their skin.”

“Rengel and others were stripped of due process, lied to about where they were being sent, and handed over to a foreign dictatorship to be tortured in America’s name,” Proaño added. “The United States government had the power to stop this, and they chose not to. The court should deliver the justice the executive branch intentionally denied him.”

Some Cubans got power back on Sunday after another nationwide blackout on Saturday—the second in less than a week and the third time the grid has collapsed this month after the Trump administration intensified the United States’ decades-long economic blockade, cutting off the island nation from Venezuelan oil.

“The Cuban Electric Union, which reports to the Ministry of Energy and Mines, reported that the total disconnection of the national energy system was caused by an unexpected shutdown of a generation unit at the Nuevitas thermoelectric plant in Camaguey province, without providing details on the specific cause of the failure,” according to The Associated Press.

Critics from around the world have condemned the US siege as “economic warfare,” which is notably occurring as President Donald Trump and his allies in Washington, D.C., repeatedly float a potential takeover of the country located just 90 miles south of Florida.

Saturday’s blackout came a day after The Washington Post reported that “the Cuban government this week refused a request by the US Embassy in Havana to import diesel fuel for its generators, calling the ask ‘shameless,’ given the Trump administration’s fuel blockade on the island, according to diplomatic cables” reviewed by the newspaper.

It also followed the arrival of some members of Nuestra América Convoy, which is bringing humanitarian aid to the island. The effort involves hundreds of people from over 30 countries and 120 organizations.

Highlighting the convoy on social media early Saturday afternoon, US Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) declared that “Trump’s oil blockade in Cuba has caused a worsening humanitarian crisis—cutting Cubans off from power, food, healthcare, and clean water.”

“I am heartened by the solidarity and bravery of the courageous people on the Nuestra América Convoy, arriving in Cuba to bring critical aid directly to the people,” she said. “I stand with the global community demanding that the Department of State and Department of Defense ensure their safety and security.”

Another progressive in Congress, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), similarly said later Saturday that “we must lift the US oil blockade on Cuba. This is economic warfare designed to suffocate an island. Food is spoiling. Water supply is compromised. Healthcare services are disrupted. End the blockade now. Grateful to all those helping deliver humanitarian aid!”

Current Affairs editor-in-chief Nathan Robinson is reporting on the convoy from Havana. On Sunday, he wrote that “when the power went, I was watching a concert held at the Pabellon Cuba, a delightfully strange Brutalist outdoor event space... People can live without music if they have to, I suppose. (The Cubans refuse to, though, and as I walked through the streets tonight I saw plenty of dancing in the dark.) What they cannot live without is healthcare, and the blackout is of course hitting hospitals hard. People aren’t able to get crucial surgeries, or even get to the hospital, which means Trump is simply killing the sickest Cubans. Late last night, a report came in that patients on ventilators at the Hermanos Ameijeiras Hospital have died.”

“It has been tragic and depressing watching the effects of the blockade. This is already a poor country. People didn’t have much to start with. But now they can’t take buses, they can’t afford to run their cars (I have been told gas costs anywhere between 10 dollars a gallon and 40 dollars a gallon, if you can find it—this in a country where a nice meal will cost you about $20),” Robinson explained. “Food in restaurants is starting to run out. Garbage is accumulating in the streets. I had to sprint to get through a city block where the flies were so thick it was a struggle to breathe without ingesting one. The entire supply chain appears to be breaking down. Tourism is drying up—few want to come and experience shortages and sanitation crises. Taxi drivers can’t drive their taxis.”

“With the evaporation of tourists comes greater despair, since so many depend on this influx of foreign money. Everyone in Cuba is warm and friendly, but you can tell they’re desperate. At the large San Jose art market, sellers had booths overflowing with souvenirs, and hardly anyone was there to buy. The merchants were outcompeting each other on pushiness—it was obvious many of them would not make a single sale all day,” the American journalist added. “I cannot believe how cruel what my country is doing is.”

The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog issued a fresh demand for restraint on Saturday after the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran announced that the Shahid Ahmadi-Roshan uranium enrichment complex in Natanz “was subjected to a renewed attack” as the United States and Israel continue to bomb the Middle Eastern country.

The Iranian agency said that “technical assessments indicate that no radioactive material leakage has occurred and there is no danger to residents of the surrounding areas,” but the attack was a “violation of international laws and commitments,” including the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

The International Atomic Energy Agency “has been informed by Iran that the Natanz nuclear site was attacked today,” the UN watchdog confirmed on social media. “No increase in off-site radiation levels reported. IAEA is looking into the report.”

“IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi reiterates call for military restraint to avoid any risk of a nuclear accident,” the agency added.

The Times of Israel reported that “in response to a query... the Israel Defense Forces said that it did not conduct any strikes in the area and that it could not comment on American activities.”

The Israeli newspaper also noted that “Israel’s Kan news reported that the US had indeed struck the facility, using ‘bunker buster’ bombs to target the site. It cited unspecified sources.”

Later Saturday, The Times of Israel reported that at least 20 people were wounded in an Iranian ballistic missile attack on the Israeli city of Dimona, home to Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center.

The United States previously bombed Iran’s Natanz facility last June. The Associated Press highlighted Saturday that satellite images also suggest the site was damaged during the first week of the current war, which President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched on February 28.

Condemning the Saturday strike on Iran’s complex, the Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said that “this is a brazen violation of international law, the charters of the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council and the agency’s General Conference.”

Russia has notably also generated fears of a nuclear accident with its ongoing invasion of Ukraine, launched in February 2022.

Trump has sent mixed messages about the US-Israeli war on Iran, both sending thousands more troops to the region this week while also saying on his Truth Social platform Friday that “we are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran.”

According to the AP: “Iran’s capital saw heavy airstrikes overnight and into the morning, residents said, as thousands of worshippers converged on Tehran’s grand mosque for prayers marking the end of the holy month of Ramadan. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said attacks would ‘increase significantly’ next week.”

US Sen. Bernie Sanders announced Saturday that he is set to headline two major rallies next weekend “as part of a growing national movement challenging oligarchy and economic inequality,” including the flagship “No Kings” rally at the Minnesota State Capitol.

The Vermont Independent plans to join other progressive elected officials, labor leaders, and organizers in Minneapolis on the afternoon of Saturday, March 28, as Americans hold more than 3,000 related No Kings events across the United States.

President Donald Trump’s authoritarian agenda previously sparked more than 2,100 No Kings demonstrations last June, followed by over 2,700 in October. Organizers announced the third round of protests in January, as the administration flooded the Twin Cities with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents who took the lives of two US citizens and violated the rights of many more Minnesotans.

“The next No Kings protest will mark the largest collective exercise of free speech in American history—an undeniable indicator that Americans of all backgrounds support democracy and the Constitution,” GLAAD president and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis, whose LGBTQ+ rights advocacy group is part of the coalition behind the protests, said in a statement earlier this week.

“The administration’s attacks on LGBTQ people, especially transgender Americans, spanning from healthcare to military service to accessing accurate IDs, are a threat to freedom for everyone and out of step with what millions of Americans care about,” she declared. “The power of our voices to oppose authoritarianism and recent gross government overreaches can never be overstated. America is for all of us, not some of us.”

The No Kings coalition also includes the ACLU, American Federation of Teachers, Common Defense, Human Rights Campaign, Indivisible, League of Conservation Voters, National Education Association (NEA), National Nurses United, Public Citizen, Service Employees International Union, United We Dream, 50501, and more.

“Across the country, educators and parents are standing up to the extreme overreach of Donald Trump,” said NEA president Becky Pringle. “His administration has attacked our students, undermined public schools, and used tactics like deploying ICE to intimidate and traumatize our communities.”

“In rural, suburban, and urban communities alike, people of all races and backgrounds are coming together to say, ‘Enough!’” Pringle added. “With more than 3,000 events already planned and new volunteers signing up every day, this growing, nonviolent movement will continue to protect our students, our communities, and our democracy from Trump’s authoritarianism and abuses of power.”

After the Minnesota event, Sanders plans to travel to New York, to headline a “Tax the Rich” rally at Lehman College in the Bronx.

During Trump’s first year back in the White House, Sanders led events throughout the nation, including in New York City, as part of his Fighting Oligarchy Tour. More recently, the two-time Democratic presidential primary candidate has visited California to meet with artificial intelligence leaders and to support a billionaire tax opposed by the ultrarich and Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat expected to run for president in 2028.

In the Bronx next Sunday afternoon, Sanders intends to call on New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, another rising star in the Democratic Party, to impose higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans. The rally is scheduled just before the state’s April 1 budget deadline.

“From Trump’s authoritarianism, to the war in Iran, a corrupt campaign system owned by billionaires, attacks on voting rights, and an AI revolution with no guardrails, we are living in dangerous times,” Sanders said in a Saturday statement. “From Minnesota to New York, working people are standing up to demand a government that represents all of us—not just the 1%.”

With just a month until a key Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act spying power expires, US House Speaker Mike Johnson was planning to try to push through reauthorization legislation next week, but the Louisiana Republican leader is now reportedly delaying the vote while “still dealing with a dozen or so Republican members who want reforms.”

Privacy advocates and lawmakers across the political spectrum have long called for reforms to FISA’s Section 702, which empowers the US government to surveil electronic communications of noncitizens located outside the United States to acquire foreign intelligence information, without a warrant.

Citing three unnamed sources familiar with discussions in the House of Representatives, Politico reported Friday that “with a GOP hard-liner revolt over warrantless surveillance threatening to tank the legislation,” Johnson “will instead work through the remaining issues over the upcoming two-week recess and try to put the extension on the floor the week of April 14.”

Welcoming the development, Demand Progress executive director Sean Vitka said in a statement that “Speaker Johnson is backing away from his plan to ram through a FISA reauthorization vote next week because he knows his members don’t want it and the American people don’t want it.”

“Republicans, Democrats, and independents all overwhelmingly want Congress to take serious action to protect privacy—in particular against AI and data brokers—and oppose any efforts to rubber-stamp the government’s warrantless mass surveillance powers as is,” Vitka continued.

“Before any vote on reauthorizing FISA,” he added, “Congress must first enact real protections for Americans’ privacy, in particular by closing the data broker loophole to prevent the government from circumventing the courts and independent oversight through the purchase of Americans’ private location, web browsing, and other sensitive information.”

Various bills, including the bipartisan Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act introduced last month by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), would close the loophole that agencies use to buy their way around the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which is supposed to protect Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Demand Progress has endorsed that bill, and on Thursday partnered with the Project On Government Oversight and over 130 other artificial intelligence and civil rights groups for a letter urging Republican and Democratic congressional leaders to impose “much-needed privacy protections against government agencies’ warrantless mass surveillance of people in the United States.”

President Donald Trump and his pro-spying deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, have fought for a “clean” reauthorization, but the GOP has slim majorities in both chambers of Congress. In the House, Johnson can only afford to lose two votes, and in the Senate, most bills require at least some Democratic support to get to the president’s desk.

The conduct of Trump’s second administration has fueled calls for reform. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a Thursday statement that “as the Trump administration continues to run roughshod over our Constitution, we cannot continue to give them a further opening to sacrifice our civil liberties in the name of national security. We cannot give Stephen Miller a blank check to conduct domestic surveillance in violation of the Fourth Amendment.”

“I have been working on essential reforms to FISA across administrations, and I have not wavered—whether it is a Democratic or Republican president,” she noted. “This has always been a bipartisan issue for good reason. Americans across political parties care deeply about privacy and not being surveilled. Congress has a duty to protect those fundamental constitutional liberties. Any attempt to push forward a ‘clean’ reauthorization of Section 702 will put our private, sensitive data at risk.”

Jayapal stressed that “this Trump administration has been particularly brazen in its use of domestic surveillance to suppress our constitutional rights and dissent. In just the last six weeks, the administration has blacklisted Anthropic for refusing to stand down on its requirement that its technology not be used for the mass surveillance of Americans, and we learned that the Department of Justice surveilled me—and likely many other members—while reviewing the Epstein files, seeking justice for survivors.”

“In Minnesota, federal immigration agents have surveilled and intimidated US citizens exercising their First Amendment rights to document agents’ unlawful actions,” the congresswoman noted. “It is time to reform FISA, ensure our Fourth Amendment protections are guaranteed, and stop the government surveillance of Americans.”

While US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin on Friday presented a proposed policy change as a demonstration of the Trump administration’s commitment to “ensuring lifesaving medical devices remain available,” public health advocates warned that relaxing rules on emissions of the cancer-causing gas ethylene oxide puts millions of Americans at risk.

As The New York Times explained: “The move revived a long-running debate about the paradoxical effects of ethylene oxide on public health. While it plays a crucial role in sterilizing lifesaving medical devices like pacemakers and syringes, long-term exposure can cause leukemia and other types of cancer among people who work in or live near medical sterilization facilities.”

The EPA proposal would amend the Biden administration’s 2024 National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for facilities that use ethylene oxide, which the agency estimated would have eliminated over 90% of dangerous pollution from the gas. The previous policy was cheered by organizations including Earthjustice, which sounded the alarm on Friday.

“The 2024 standards would have delivered enormous public health benefits. EPA knows that ethylene oxide is carcinogenic and determined that sterilizers can install effective and affordable pollution controls,” said Earthjustice senior attorney Deena Tumeh. “EPA has no basis to repeal this well-supported rule. By rolling back the rule, the Trump EPA is bending the knee to the sterilizer industry at the expense of millions of people’s health.”

Darya Minovi, a senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists’ (UCS) Center for Science and Democracy, similarly stressed that “this dangerous decision puts people across the United States and in Puerto Rico at a higher risk of breathing dangerous fumes known to cause respiratory irritation, nausea, blurred vision, headaches, and various cancers. Children are especially vulnerable to the cancer-causing harms of ethylene oxide exposure.”

As Minovi detailed:

According to UCS analysis, nearly 14 million people in the United States live within five miles of at least one commercial sterilization facility, and more than 10,000 schools and childcare facilities fall within those areas. These communities are disproportionately made up of people of color or those who do not speak English as a first language...

This decision is a reckless and self-serving handout to big industry, which asked for this rule to be rolled back. This process sidestepped community input from the start and is an affront to communities that have unknowingly lived with ethylene oxide exposure for decades. These actions show, yet again, that this administration has little to no regard for the health and welfare of working people or any interest in protecting children from exposure to toxic chemicals.

Minovi declared that “ethylene oxide emissions controls need to be strengthened—not dismantled,” an argument echoed by Jane Williams, executive director of California Communities Against Toxics and chair of the Sierra Club National Clean Air Team.

“Walking back key regulations for ethylene oxide sterilizer facilities is essentially giving a highly polluting industry a get-out-of-jail-free card. Sterilizers are some of the largest, most toxic chemical manufacturing facilities in the country,” said Williams. “Rather than regressing on key protections, these facilities need even more controls in place to ensure the safety of workers and nearby communities.”

People who live near sterilizer facilities also spoke out against the proposed rule, which now faces a 45-day public comment period.

“We understand that industry applied heavy pressure to weaken the previously finalized rule. We also understand that industry remains more concerned with their profits than the lives of those who live near sterilizer facilities, like my community in Laredo,” said Tricia Cortez, executive director of Rio Grande International Study Center in Texas.

“Sterilizer facilities like Midwest must be held accountable for their dangerous, cancer-causing emissions,” she said. “We need an EPA that works to protect us, the people, not financial interests and corporations that continue to cause so much harm to so many.”

Victor Alvarado, founder and coordinator for Comité Diálogo Ambiental, said that “I remember the EPA informing us that Steri-Tech’s ethylene oxide emissions in my hometown of Salinas, Puerto Rico, were so high that we had one of the highest rates of toxic air cancer risk in the United States... Eliminating the new protections against ethylene oxide emissions is unjust.”

The EPA proposal comes after President Donald Trump in July signed a series of proclamations easing pollution rules for over 100 facilities focused on energy, chemical manufacturing, iron ore processing, and sterile medical equipment. His “regulatory relief,” as the Republican called it, applied to dozens of sterilization plants.

The Southern Environmental Law Center and Natural Resources Defense Council responded by filing a federal lawsuit on behalf of CleanAIRE NC, Sustainable Newton, Savannah Riverkeeper, and Virginia Interfaith Power & Light.

“We always knew the presidential exemptions issued last year were part of a broader plan to put the interests of corporate polluters above the health and well-being of American families,” Sustainable Newton president Maurice Carter said Friday. “But we won’t stop fighting to protect our community by demanding commonsense, reasonable measures that even the EPA has said would reduce harmful emissions by 90% and lower cancer risks by 92%.”

Since the United States and Israel launched an unprovoked war on Iran at the end of February, more than 1,100 youth have been killed or injured in related violence across the Middle East, the United Nations Children’s Fund said Wednesday, calling for a swift diplomatic resolution.

“The situation is becoming catastrophic for millions of children across the region,” UNICEF said in a statement, noting that at least 200 children are reportedly dead in Iran, 91 in Lebanon, four in Israel, and one in Kuwait. “These numbers will likely climb as the violence intensifies and spreads.”

Most of the kids killed in Iran died in what mounting evidence suggests was a US attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ school in Minab on February 28. That attack killed an estimated 175 people, mostly students ages 7-12, part of an overall death toll that the Iranian government has said exceeds 1,300.

Responding to the school bombing, Gordon Brown, a former UK prime minister who’s now the UN special envoy for global education, argued in a Guardian opinion piece Thursday that “the world will now need stronger mechanisms to ensure accountability,” such as a body complementing the International Criminal Court but specifically for children, “focusing its attention on the bombing of schools, abductions of pupils, and militias that enslave boys and girls.”

With the widening conflict in the Middle East, UNICEF noted Wednesday, “widespread disruption to education has left millions of children out of school across the region, while hundreds of thousands of children have been displaced by unrelenting bombardment.”

In Lebanon, where Israeli attacks are allegedly targeting the Lebanese political and paramilitary group Hezbollah despite a November 2024 ceasefire deal, nearly 800,000 people, including around 200,000 children, have been forced from their homes, according to Mercy Corps. The Lebanese government has said at least 570 people have been killed and 1,444 injured.

“Civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and water and sanitation systems—upon which children depend to survive—have been attacked, damaged, or destroyed by parties to the conflict,” UNICEF said. “Nothing justifies the killing and maiming of children, or the destruction and disruption of essential services that children depend on.”

“Grave violations against children in armed conflict can constitute violations of international law, including international humanitarian law, and international human rights law,” the UN agency continued.

Across Iran, several United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage sites have also been damaged by the US-Israeli war, which experts worldwide argue violates both the US Constitution and UN Charter.

The UN Security Council, which is currently led by President Donald Trump’s administration, on Wednesday adopted a resolution condemning Iran’s retaliatory attacks on Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan—nations that host US military bases—without even mentioning the US-Israeli bombing campaign.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres last Friday demanded a return to negotiations. Trump, who abandoned a previous Iranian nuclear deal during his first term, ditched recent talks with Iran in favor of bombing the country with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who has used war on Iran to again close crossings into the Gaza Strip, or as critics have put it, reinstate a “starvation policy” in the Palestinian territory devastated by Israel’s 29-month genocidal assault.

In addition to reiterating “the secretary-general’s call on parties to the conflict to end the fighting and engage in diplomatic negotiations,” UNICEF on Wednesday urged everyone involved “to take all necessary precautions in the choice of means and methods of warfare to minimize harm to civilians, including by avoiding the use of explosive weapons that disproportionally affect children.”

“The region’s children—all 200 million of them—are counting on the world to act quickly,” the agency concluded.

A Wednesday letter signed by every member of the US Senate Democratic Caucus but Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.)—who previously helped Republicans block a war powers resolution intended to halt Trump’s assault on Iran—called for a probe of the Minab school attack and sounded the alarm about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s rhetoric that “only serves to endanger civilians.”

Specifically, Hegseth has said that the US assault on Iran, which they’re calling Operation Epic Fury, would have “no stupid rules of engagement,” and there will be “death and destruction from the sky all day long.”

Just a week after Sen. John Fetterman helped Republicans block a war powers resolution intended to halt President Donald Trump and Israel’s assault on Iran, the Pennsylvania Democrat again bucked his own party on Wednesday by not signing on to a letter calling for a probe into an apparent US bombing of a girls’ school in the Iranian city Minab that killed around 175 people, mostly young children.

As with the unsuccessful resolution from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Fetterman was the only member of the Senate Democratic Caucus—which includes Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Angus King (I-Maine)—who didn’t endorse the letter to US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Fetterman has signaled support for Operation Epic Fury and promoted Trump’s narrative that it’s motivated by preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. During a Tuesday appearance on Newsmax, he claimed that “negotiating treaties” and coordinating with regional allies “never worked,” and wondered why Democrats can’t “agree what’s happened is a very, very positive development for world peace.”

Asked for comment about Democrats’ letter, Fetterman told Reuters that he supports the military operation and “the United States never intentionally targets civilians, including its own citizens, unlike Iran. Everyone agrees it was a tragedy. Everyone agrees on performing a full investigation.”

A spokesperson for Fetterman added that “whether the senator is on a letter or not, he fully stands behind a comprehensive investigation into this tragedy.”

Led by Kaine, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the rest of the caucus began the letter by expressing “grave concern” about the bombing—which paramedics and victims’ relatives have said was a so-called “double-tap” airstrike—and stressing that the 12-day assault “is a war of choice without congressional authorization.”

“Nonetheless, as these military actions continue, the United States and Israel must abide by US and international law, including the law of armed conflict,” they wrote. “There must be a swift investigation into the strikes on this school and any other potential US military actions causing civilian harm, and the findings must be released to the public as soon as possible, along with any measures to pursue accountability.”

“Massive civilian casualty incidents like the attack in Minab are not only detrimental to the Iranian people, who have already suffered so much at the hands of its own government, but they also undermine US national security interests,” the Democrats argued.

The letter cites a Tuesday update from the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency that the war has killed more than 1,245 civilians and injured over 12,000. The Iranian government said earlier this week that the death toll is above 1,300.

The Senate Democrats didn’t just focus on the school; they also sounded the alarm about US and Israeli “use of explosive weapons in major Iranian cities and populated areas,” which has damaged “multiple hospitals, cultural heritage sites, and other critical civilian infrastructure.”

“These civilian harm events are not taking place in a vacuum,” the senators wrote, pointing to Hegseth’s recent remarks that Operation Epic Fury would have “no stupid rules of engagement” and there will be “death and destruction from the sky all day long.”

They warned that “this rhetoric only serves to endanger civilians, including American citizens, in the region and around the globe. The United States is a party to the Geneva Conventions and bound by international humanitarian law, including the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution. These are binding and non-negotiable standards designed to protect innocent human life, and it is unacceptable for the secretary of defense to suggest otherwise.”

“Your comments reflect a broader pattern of policies abandoning the Defense Department’s commitment to minimizing civilian harm in US military operations,” the lawmakers noted, referencing budgetary and personnel cuts, including the removal of senior, nonpartisan judge advocate general officers. “These actions, combined with your comments and the horrific reports of civilian casualties stemming from the war against Iran, suggest the administration has abandoned its duty to protect civilians.”

The senators demanded Hegseth’s responses to a list of questions about the February 28 school strike, compliance with rules to prevent war crimes, the military’s efforts to prevent and mitigate civilian harm, and the use of artificial intelligence no later than March 18.

The Wednesday letter came as the The New York Times reported on the preliminary findings of a Pentagon probe that found the strike on the school in Minab “was the result of a targeting mistake by the US military, which was conducting strikes on an adjacent Iranian base of which the school building was formerly a part.”

It also came as a coalition of peace groups launched a national campaign calling on Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) to resign from their leadership roles over their failure to sufficiently fight back “against a war-crazed Trump administration.”

While Hegseth and Trump have so far declined to take responsibility for the school massacre, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)—who supports the US-Israeli war on Iran—has apologized for the bombing at least twice this week, saying: “We made a mistake... I’m just so sorry it happened.”

After a flurry of overnight outrage, President Donald Trump’s administration reversed plans to suspend the Transportation Security Administration’s PreCheck program during a partial shutdown of the US Department of Homeland Security.

“At this time, TSA PreCheck remains operational with no change for the traveling public. As staffing constraints arise, TSA will evaluate on a case-by-case basis and adjust operations accordingly,” the agency said Sunday morning. “Courtesy escorts, such as those for members of Congress, have been suspended to allow officers to focus on the mission of securing America’s skies.”

The Washington Post reported that a DHS official who spoke on the condition of anonymity said the reversal was “based off of conversations the secretary had with the White House and TSA.”

DHS partially shut down last week amid a funding fight in Congress, with Democrats demanding reforms in response to agents with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) openly violating the rights of immigrants and US citizens alike, and even killing Renee Good and Alex Pretti last month in Minnesota.

The department said late Saturday that it would close PreCheck lanes, which allow travelers at US airports to move through security more quickly; halt the CBP Global Entry service, which allows expedited clearance for arriving in the United States; and pause all non-disaster-related Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) response efforts.

“Shutdowns have real-world consequences, not just for the men and women of DHS and their families who go without a paycheck, but it endangers our national security,” said Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, blaming the changes on Democrats in Congress. “The American people depend on this department every day, and we are making tough but necessary workforce and resource decisions to mitigate the damage inflicted by these politicians.”

Critics in journalism, politics, the travel industry, and beyond quickly highlighted how PreCheck and Global Entry reduce the strain on not only air travelers but also federal workers across multiple DHS agencies.

“These nitwits are at it again,” said House Committee on Homeland Security Ranking Member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.). “This is Trump and Kristi Noem purposely punishing the American people and using them as pawns for their sadistic political games. TSA PreCheck and Global Entry REDUCE airport lines and ease the burden on DHS staff who are working without pay because of Trump’s abuse of the Department and killing of American citizens.”

“Trump and Kristi are making your lives harder—and your travel less safe—all on purpose because they know you don’t trust them,” he continued. “They pulled these games with FEMA disaster response last week, now this madness. They would rather force Americans to miss their travel waiting in long lines at the airport than stop Trump’s secret police from shooting our neighbors. The American people—who want ICE reined in—will not fall for this bullshit. The administration must reverse this decision immediately.”

While the Trump administration reversed course on PreCheck, the Global Entry suspension and FEMA restrictions remain in effect as a major snowstorm hit the East Coast.

“Everyone knows Donald Trump and DHS use bullying tactics—this is another one of them,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in a Sunday statement about Global Entry. “The Trump administration is choosing to inflict pain on the public instead of adopting commonsense ICE reforms.”

“In the 43-day historic Trump government shutdown DHS never changed the Global Entry program’s status,” Schumer said, referring to the funding battle that ended in November when a short list of Democratic senators gave in. “Democrats are fighting against this exact kind of abuse.”

Demands for accountability are mounting after internal records revealed this week that an officer with Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations fatally shot Ruben Ray Martinez, a 23-year-old US citizen, almost a year ago in South Padre Island, Texas.

“While Martinez’s death was reported in local media at the time, the reports did not identify HSI involvement or disclose that a federal agent fired the shots through the driver-side window,” Newsweek reported, citing publicly available information and records obtained by American Oversight through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

“It shouldn’t take 11 months and a FOIA lawsuit to learn that the government killed someone,” American Oversight said on social media late Friday. Separately, the watchdog noted that “the details sound similar to the death of Renee Good,” a 37-year-old US citizen and mother of three fatally shot by officer Jonathan Ross last month in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Good’s killing, and two Customs and Border Protection agents’ subsequent fatal shooting of 37-year-old US citizen and nurse Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, have fueled outrage over President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda, resulting in a congressional funding fight that has partially shut down the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees both agencies.

ICE’s internal report on the Texas shooting states that HSI agents were helping redirect traffic at the site of a major accident early on March 15, 2025. Martinez and his passengers aren’t named, but the document claims that the driver of a blue four-door Ford “failed to follow instructions,” including verbal commands to stop and exit the vehicle.

Instead, the driver “accelerated forward, striking a HSI special agent who wound up on the hood of the vehicle. Upon observing this, HSI group supervisory special agent utilized his government-issued service weapon, discharging multiple rounds at the driver through the open driver’s side window,” according to the ICE report—a version of events that a DHS spokesperson echoed in a Friday statement added to the Newsweek article, which was initially published Wednesday.

The DHS spokesperson also said that the incident remains under investigation by the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Ranger Division, whose press secretary, Sheridan Nolen, confirmed that “this is still an active investigation by the Texas Rangers, and no other information is currently available.”

Charles Stam, a lawyer for the Martinez family, told the New York Times that the 23-year-old was the driver in the ICE report. Stam and another attorney, Alex Stamm, also said in a statement that eyewitness accounts of the scene don’t match the document.

“It is critical that there is a full and fair investigation into why HSI was present at the scene of a traffic collision and why a federal officer shot and killed a US citizen as he was trying to comply with instructions from the local law enforcement officers directing traffic,” the lawyers said.

The Times also reached Martinez’s mother, Rachel Reyes, who said her son worked at an Amazon warehouse in San Antonio and was out to celebrate his birthday. According to her: “He was a good kid. He doesn’t have a criminal history... He never got in trouble. He was never violent.”

Reyes also challenged the federal government’s narrative, telling the newspaper: “What they’re saying is different from what they told the family, so that’s adding insult to injury... They are making it sound different. I don’t appreciate their language.”

In a Friday interview with the Texas Tribune, American Oversight executive director Chioma Chukwu also called out the government: “What they’re telling the public is very different than what they’re doing behind closed doors. The only reason why we’re able to make these connections and really call into question the public statements that they’re making to mislead the public is because we’re able to get our hands on these documents... That should deeply concern everyone.”

The revelations this week have generated concern. André Treiber, the Democratic National Committee’s Youth Coordinating Council chair, wrote on social media Friday evening that “ICE murdered a Texan last March and we are only just learning about it now. They are once again offering the excuse that this was done in self-defense, but forgive me if I am extremely skeptical after they’ve been caught lying about that exact same thing multiple times already.”

Federal lawmakers also sounded the alarm on Friday. Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) declared that “Americans deserve immediate answers and an independent investigation of the shooting.” Another Texas Democrat, Congressman Joaquin Castro, similarly called for “a full investigation,” including into the monthslong “cover-up.”

US Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), whose Chicagoland district has also faced a recent ICE invasion, pointed to other deaths tied to the agency, including those of Silverio Villegas Gonzalez, who was shot by ICE in the Chicago suburb of Franklin Park last September; Keith Porter Jr., who was shot by an off-duty agent on New Year’s Eve in Los Angeles, California; and Linda Davis, a special education teacher in Savannah, Georgia, who was killed in a Monday car crash that involved a man fleeing ICE.

“For a whole year, DHS hid that they murdered Ruben, a young man in Texas, after a traffic stop. Just like they did with Silverio, Renee, Keith, Alex, and Linda, they lied and avoided accountability,” said Ramirez, who supports abolishing ICE. “How many more people have to be executed before my colleagues realize that reforms are not enough?”

Rights advocates are sounding the alarm over a new US Department of Homeland Security memorandum that puts legal refugees across the United States at risk of arrest as part of President Donald Trump’s sweeping anti-immigrant agenda.

The US Department of Justice submitted the memo to a federal judge in the lead-up to a Thursday preliminary injunction hearing about DHS arrests of refugees in Minnesota, where Trump recently sent thousands of immigration agents who were subsequently accused of various acts of violence, including fatally shooting citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

The document was first reported on Wednesday by Law Dork‘s Chris Geidner, who has unsuccessfully fought to make such filings available remotely. Right now, for this case, they are only available at the federal courthouse in Minnesota.

While the Trump administration claims it is ending “Operation Metro Surge” and removing most Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents who have terrorized the Twin Cities, the arrest policy detailed in the memo overhauls a long-standing interpretation of federal law for the entire country.

As American Immigration Council senior fellow Aaron Reichlin-Melnick laid out on social media Thursday: “Refugees are people vetted overseas by US Refugee Officers through an often yearslong process. They enter the country legally and on a path to citizenship. Refugees are required to apply for a green card one year after they arrive, but they CANNOT apply earlier than that.”

The Wednesday memo from US Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and ICE acting Director Todd Lyons states that after being in the country for a year, refugees “must return, or be returned,” to DHS custody “for inspection and examination for admission” as a green-card holder, officially called a lawful permanent resident.

“If the refugee does not voluntarily return, DHS will return the individual to custody (i.e., arrest and detain) for this purpose... DHS may maintain custody for the duration of the inspection and examination process,” the memo continues, adding that the detention period “is not indefinite, but also is not limited to merely 48 hours.”

Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge, declared in a Thursday statement that “this unprecedented policy weaponizes a routine administrative milestone as a pretext for detention.”

“These are families the United States government already screened more rigorously than any other category of immigrant,” she stressed. “Only after years of background checks, biometric screenings, and in-person interviews were they invited to rebuild their lives here. To now subject them to arrest and open-ended detention is a stunning betrayal of both our legal commitments and our moral compass.”

DHS is claiming—in the memo and on social media, in response to new reporting—that the Refugee Act of 1980 requires the policy. Reichlin-Melnick emphasized that “reaching this conclusion required overturning decades-old interpretations.”

“In a section of the memo that is truly Orwellian, the Trump [administration] says it’s REFUGEES who have a ‘misguided belief’ about the law—even though its policy is a brand new interpretation of a 45-year-old law—and so it’s THEIR fault they’re traumatized when ICE comes to jail them,” he noted.

“Making matters worse, the Trump [administration] is REFUSING to adjudicate green-card applications for refugees who come from one of the 39 countries Trump banned,” Reichlin-Melnick added. “So under this policy, a refugee who applies for a green card exactly on time, doing nothing wrong, can be jailed by ICE.”

The International Refugee Assistance Project is representing refugees in the Minnesota case. IRAP‘s vice president of US legal programs, Laurie Ball Cooper, told CNN that “this memo is part of a broad and concerted effort to strip refugees of their legal status and render them deportable... This government will clearly stop at nothing to terrorize refugee communities, and really all immigrants, while trampling over our constitutional rights.”

Beth Oppenheim, CEO of HIAS, the world’s oldest refugee agency, agreed that “this policy is a transparent effort to detain and potentially deport thousands of people who are legally present in this country, people the US government itself welcomed after years of extreme vetting.”

“I have never seen anything like this in my 25 years of refugee protection work,” Oppenheim said. “This memo was done in secret, with zero coordination with the organizations that serve refugees. It is a betrayal of our values and our legal commitments, and it will cause extraordinary harm.”

Vignarajah also described the memo as “a broad attempt to redefine refugee status as conditional and revocable at will,” and argued that “you do not welcome families fleeing war and persecution under one set of rules and then move the goalposts after they arrive.”

Calling for “lawful, humane, consistent treatment of refugees and allies,” AfghanEvac similarly said on social media that “you cannot invite people under one set of rules and move the goalposts after they arrive.”

As an adviser to President Donald Trump told Axios that “I think there is 90% chance we see kinetic action” against Iran in the next few weeks following nuclear talks in Switzerland, US military movement on Wednesday fueled fears of an imminent attack on the Middle Eastern country.

Multiple open-source intelligence accounts on social media shared images of what OSINTdefender called “one of the busiest days for the US Air Force in Europe that I have seen in recent history, with close to a dozen KC-135R/T Stratotankers airborne across the Mediterranean and off the coast of Spain, while a steady line of C-17A Globemaster IIIs can be seen heading towards and returning from bases in the Middle East.”

Sharing a similar image showing North America, Europe, and the top of Africa, intelligence analyst Oliver Alexander declared on X that “the tankers just keep coming.”

Greek economist and Progressive International co-founder Yanis Varoufakis responded to that post with a clear message directed at Trump—who notably abandoned the United States’ previous nuclear deal with Iran during his first term.

“Looks like an imminent US strike is in train as US tanker planes are heading eastwards. HANDS OFF IRAN Mr. TRUMP,” he said. “And to the rest of us: Let’s do whatever it takes to oppose another war crime—this time against the Iranian people.”

Also spotlighting the US military movements on Wednesday, progressive US political commentator and talk show host Kyle Kulinski nodded to Trump’s deadly invasion of Venezuela last month to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and hand over the South American country’s nationalized oil industry to his US campaign donors.

A US attack on Iran by “imperialist warmonger Trump” would be “another illegal and offensive war against a country that didn’t attack us,” Kulinski said.

The observed military movements came just hours after Axios not only published the Trump official’s remark about a 90% chance of war, but also reported that “a US military operation in Iran would likely be a massive, weekslong campaign that would look more like full-fledged war than last month’s pinpoint operation in Venezuela,” according to unnamed sources who “noted it would likely be a joint US-Israeli campaign.”

In the Middle East, “Trump’s armada has grown to include two aircraft carriers, a dozen warships, hundreds of fighter jets, and multiple air defense systems. Some of that firepower is still on its way,” the outlet highlighted. “More than 150 US military cargo flights have moved weapons systems and ammunition to the Middle East. Just in the past 24 hours, another 50 fighter jets—F-35s, F-22s, and F-16s—headed to the region.”

The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that leaders in Iran “want to reach a nuclear deal with the US, but they are also rushing to prepare for war in case talks between the countries fail,” including by “deploying its forces, dispersing decision-making authority, fortifying its nuclear sites, and expanding its crackdown on domestic dissent.”

As the newspaper detailed:

A Russian warship arrived at the Strait of Hormuz and docked at the Iranian port town of Bandar Abbas ahead of a military exercise planned for Thursday, according to Iranian and Russian state-run media.

The exercises are taking place not far from the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, which is sailing off the coast of Oman.

“More dangerous than the American warship is the weapon that can send it to the bottom of the sea,” Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, said Tuesday.

While Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said this week’s “constructive” talks with Trump envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner concluded with “a general agreement on some guiding principles,” US Vice President JD Vance contributed to rising concerns on Tuesday as he discussed the ayatollah’s remarks, negotiations, and regional military buildup on Fox News.

“I think the president has a lot of options. We do have a very powerful military. The president’s shown a willingness to use it. He also has a remarkable diplomatic team and he’s shown a willingness to use that too,” Vance said. “The United States has certain red lines. Our primary interest here is we don’t want Iran to get a nuclear weapon.”

Vance, who noted that he spoke directly with Witkoff and Kushner earlier Tuesday, claimed that the administration wants a resolution reached through conversation but also stressed that Trump “has all options on the table.”

Appearing on Democracy Now! Wednesday, Trita Parsi, co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and an expert on US-Iranian relations, warned that “we have a very dangerous situation, because both sides actually believe that a short, intense war may improve their negotiating position. The Trump administration, of course, believes that because of its overwhelming military power that it has now gathered in the vicinity of Iran, it will be able to take out Iran militarily rather quickly and then force it to capitulate.”

“The Iranians have a different calculation,” Parsi continued. “They believe that they have the ability to inflict significant damage on the United States in the short term, including on civilian oil installations in the region, closing down the Strait of Hormuz, that would shoot up oil prices, and the initial cost of this to the United States would be so immense, and the United States would recognize that it would have to go for a longer war, which it cannot afford, and as a result, it would get the United States to back off.”

Parsi previously led the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which said in a Wednesday statement that the anonymous Trump official’s comment about a 90% chance of an armed conflict with Iran “should trigger immediate action from Congress, the branch of government legally and constitutionally charged with deciding when the US goes to war.”

“With extensive military deployments underway and public signals that diplomacy may soon be abandoned, the risk of a large-scale, prolonged, and senseless conflict is immediate and real,” NIAC argued. “A war on Iran would not help Iranians demanding change in the face of government repression but instead kill innocent people, create instability inside Iran, and ignite a regionwide conflict.”

The Republican-controlled Congress has so far shown an unwillingness to stand up to Trump’s violence abroad, with multiple war powers resolutions about Venezuela and his boat bombings on high seas failing. Still, NIAC pressured lawmakers to act now, emphasizing that “a war with Iran would carry enormous regional consequences, endanger American service members and Iranian civilians alike, destabilize global markets, and risk spiraling escalation across the region and diminished civil liberties at home.”

Advocates for animal welfare, environmental protection, public health, and small family farms fiercely condemned various “industry-backed poison pills” in the long-awaited Farm Bill draft unveiled Friday by a key Republican in the US House of Representatives.

“A new Farm Bill is long overdue, and the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 is an important step forward in providing certainty to our farmers, ranchers, and rural communities,” said House Committee on Agriculture Chair Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-Pa.) in a statement.

While Thompson has scheduled a markup of the 802-page proposal for February 23, critics aren’t waiting to pick apart the bill, which aligns with a 2024 GOP proposal that was also sharply rebuked. The panel’s ranking member, Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.), said that from what she has seen so far, the new legislation “fails to meet the moment facing farmers and working people.”

“Farmers need Congress to act swiftly to end inflationary tariffs, stabilize trade relationships, expand domestic market opportunities like year-round E15, and help lower input costs,” Craig stressed. “The Republican majority instead chose to ignore Democratic priorities and focus on pushing a shell of a farm bill with poison pills that complicates if not derails chances of getting anything done. I strongly urge my Republican colleagues to drop the political charade and work with House Democrats on a truly bipartisan bill to address the very real problems farm country is experiencing right now—before it’s too late.”

Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, similarly blasted the GOP legislation on Friday, declaring that “this Republican Farm Bill proposal is a grotesque, record-breaking giveaway to the pesticide industry that will free Big Ag to accelerate the flow of dangerous poisons into our nation’s food supply and waterways.”

“This bill would block people suffering from pesticide-linked cancers from suing pesticide makers, eviscerate the EPA’s ability to protect rivers and streams from direct pesticide pollution, and give the pesticide industry an unprecedented veto over extinction-preventing safeguards for our nation’s most endangered wildlife,” he said, referring to the Environmental Protection Agency.

“If Congress passes this monstrosity, it will speed our march toward the dawn of a very real silent spring, a day without fluttering butterflies, chirping frogs, or the chorus of birds at sunrise,” Hartl warned. “No one voted for Republicans to allow foreign-owned pesticide conglomerates to dominate the policies that impact the safety of the food every American eats. But this bill leaves no doubt that’s exactly who is calling all the shots.”

Food & Water Watch (FWW) managing director of policy and litigation Mitch Jones also sounded the alarm about industry-friendly poison pills, arguing that any draft containing the “Cancer Gag Act” that would shield pesticide companies from liability or the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression Act—which would block state and local policies designed to protect animal welfare, farm workers, and food safety—“must be dead on arrival.”

Sara Amundson, president of Humane World Action Fund—formerly called Humane Society Legislative Fund—also made a case against targeting state restrictions for animals like Proposition 12 in California, which the US Supreme Court let stand in 2023, in response to a challenge by the National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau Federation.

“Once again, the House Agriculture Committee Republican majority is bending to the will of a backwards-facing segment of the pork industry by trying to force through a measure to override the preferences of voters in more than a dozen states, upend the decisions of courts all the way up to the Supreme Court, and trample states’ rights all at the same time,” Amundson said Friday.

The National Family Farm Coalition highlighted that “instead of addressing the widespread concerns of family-scale farmers—ensuring fair prices for farmers, improving credit access, addressing corporate land consolidation, and creating a trade environment that benefits producers—this draft perpetuates the status quo that enriches and empowers corporate agribusiness. The result is an accelerating farm crisis that continues to hollow out rural communities across the US.”

Thompson also faced outrage over other policies left out of the GOP legislation—particularly from those calling for the restoration of $187 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump forced through last year with their so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act (HR 1).

“HR 1 shifts unprecedented costs to already cash-strapped states, expands time limits, and strips food benefits away from caregivers, veterans, older workers, people experiencing homelessness, and humanitarian-based noncitizens,” noted Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center.

“HR 1 is an unforgiving assault on America’s hungry, deliberately dismantling our nation’s first line of defense against hunger,” she continued. “Yet, when given the opportunity to correct this harm in the latest Farm Bill proposal, Chairman Thompson unveiled a package that will only deepen hunger instead of fixing it. Hunger is not something Congress can afford to ignore.”

Jones of FWW said that “families and farmers are hungry for federal policy that supports small- and mid-sized producers and keeps food affordable. Instead, Chairman Thompson appears poised to check off industry’s cruel wish list.”

“America needs a fair Farm Bill,” he emphasized. “It is imperative that this Farm Bill repeal all Trump SNAP cuts and restore full funding to this critical nutrition program; stop the proliferation of factory farms; and support the transition to sustainable, affordable food.”