Mother Jones: Posts

Mother Jones

Texas Democrat Forced to Sleep in Capitol After Refusing 24-Hour Police Escort

After weeks spent out-of-state in an effort to deny Texas Republicans a quorum for an extreme redistricting plan—designed at Donald Trump’s behest to give the GOP a five-seat advantage in the House of Representatives—the state’s Democrats are still refusing to back down.

After the Democrats’ departure,Gov. Greg Abbott went as far as signing arrest warrants for the absent lawmakers—and when several of the Democratic legislators returned on Monday to Austin, the state capital, they were immediately met with GOP retaliation. On Monday, Republican House Speaker Dustin Burrows ordered that the returning lawmakers could only leave the House floor with written permission and a 24-hour police escort until the House reconvened on Wednesday.

While many of her colleagues agreed to these terms, Democratic state Rep. Nicole Collier stood her ground. State Reps. Gene Wu and Vince Perez, who reportedly signed the agreement, joined Collier in her protest. She’s now suing the state legislature for unlawful imprisonment.

“If you leave the Capitol,” House Administration Committee Chair Charlie Geren told Collier, according to the lawsuit, “you are subject to arrest.”

On Monday night, state Reps. Collier, Wu, and Perez, who were among the returning Democrats, slept propped up on leather swivel chairs on the state House floor.

This was my night, bonnet and all, in the #txlege. #thisisme pic.twitter.com/46YgqbMUk8

— Nicole Collier (@NicoleCollier95) August 19, 2025

If the GOP redistricting plan succeeds, it would not only help the party maintain its narrow control of the House in the 2026 midterm elections, but would also guarantee the disenfranchisement of Black voters, of whom Texas has more than any other state.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Mother Jones (@motherjonesmag)

“My constituents sent me to Austin to protect their voices and rights,” Collier said according to ABC. “I refuse to sign away my dignity as a duly elected representative just so Republicans can control my movements and monitor me with police escorts.”

She added, “My community is majority-minority, and they expect me to stand up for their representation. When I press that button to vote, I know these maps will harm my constituents—I won’t just go along quietly with their intimidation or their discrimination.”

It was very cold spending on the #txlege Floor! Rep. @VinceMPerez & I joined @NicoleCollier95 in support of making #GoodTrouble! We know this is a #riggedredistricting process. Democrats are not giving up! Thanks for the support, standing with @TexasHDC, & we have coffee! pic.twitter.com/wlQTpYINTY

— Gene Wu (@GeneforTexas) August 19, 2025

Several of Collier’s fellow representatives supported her refusal to sign the agreement, including Rep. Sheryl Cole, who was threatened with arrest by her police escort after he lost track of her on her morning walk. It appears that Collier is still trapped inside Texas’s State Capitol, as an ongoing livestream records her movements on the state House floor.

Rep. Collier in House Chamber Live https://t.co/NOIIzgRYMK

— Nicole Collier (@NicoleCollier95) August 19, 2025

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Control of the Senate Could Be Decided in Maine. This Oyster Farmer Is Vying to Unseat Susan Collins

Graham Platner, a 40-year-old oyster farmer from Sullivan, Maine (pop. 1,219), announced a bid for the seat of incumbent GOP Senator Susan Collins on Tuesday.

A Marine and Army veteran who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Platner says he’s running his Democratic campaign on a message of economic populism. His goal, he says, is to “claw back wealth that was created by the labor and the consumption of working class Americans who have not shared in the riches they helped build.”

“The working class abandoned the Democratic Party, primarily because the Democratic Party abandoned the working class.”

To accomplish his mission, he will first have to win the party’s primary against at least two candidates: Democrats who have already announced their campaigns include Jordan Wood, the former chief of staff to then-Rep. Katie Porter, and David Costello, a former USAID worker who ran against Maine Independent Sen. Angus King in 2024. Maine Governor Janet Mills, who is term-limited in her current role, has also been floated as a strong possible Democratic contender should she decide to run.

If he wins the Democratic primary, Platner would likely face an even greater challenge: Collins, the only GOP Senator up for reelection from a state won by Kamala Harris in 2024. In a markedly polarized Congress, Collins is one of just a handful of Senators on either side who have dared to (on occasion) buck her party. She’s one of just three Republican Senators, for example, who rejected Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill.

But her nay vote didn’t the stop the legislation, which 58 percent of Maine residents opposed; it merely required Vice President JD Vance make a quick trip to the Capitol to break the tie. In a state Trump lost by nearly 7 points in 2024, Democrats see an opportunity in Collins’ declining approval rating to oust a GOP Senator making only the faintest show of resistance against Trump’s controversial agenda. By contrast, ousting Collins could tip the Senate majority towards Democrats, which would help the party neutralize Trump moving forward.

In announcing his upstart bid, Platner is betting his broad embrace of the working class—and how he defines that group—could be the key to replacing her.

“When I talk about the American working class, I talk about the people who work, who labor and struggle, and have and build families, and cannot access the wealth that this country has,” Platner says in an interview. “Someone who’s making a couple hundred thousand dollars a year is far, far, closer to someone who makes below the poverty line than they are to the rich.”

In other words, reader, he most likely means you. He also means himself.

Platner has never run for office and seldom wears a suit. His closest connection to Congress before his campaign was serving glasses of Jameson to the late-Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) while working a brief stint at the beloved DC dive bar, Tune Inn. More recently, he spends the vast majority of his days on—or in—the Atlantic Ocean, running Waukeag Neck Oyster Company from the town he grew up in.

By his telling, his oyster farm is not making bank: “I don’t make a lot of money,” he says. But he still counts himself lucky. After his military career ended, he said he found it difficult to make ends meet. It wasn’t until several years later that disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs afforded him the financial breathing room to seek out a living he’d actually enjoy. “I didn’t have to go get a job just to get health insurance. I could find something that I might really love, and I could take a risk of starting a business,” he tells me.

Many Americans don’t have that luxury. Instead, they are often stuck working multiple jobs, or at least unfulfilling ones, that still don’t earn them enough to buy a house or comfortably afford basics like health care and groceries. Republicans, he says, obliterated Democrats in 2024 because they acknowledged these common adversities.

“Everybody down here knows that the system is screwing them,” he says. “The one thing the Republicans and, more importantly, I would say, Donald Trump, did, is they told people that they were right. They told people that they were getting screwed, that the system wasn’t helping them.”

Where Trump and other Republicans erred, Platner says, is by not pinning the blame on the billionaires and massive corporations with immense political pull that reap the largest rewards from the government.

Instead, Republicans “blamed minorities, immigrants, groups of people who live lives that are frankly, just as, if not more, full of suffering and pain than the rest of the American working class,” Platner says. “But at least they blamed somebody.”

He argues that addressing the woes of average Americans doesn’t mean abandoning the most marginalized groups; it just means listening to the concerns of all the other working-class Americans who are suffering too.

“The working class abandoned the Democratic Party, primarily because the Democratic Party abandoned the working class,” says Platner. “And if we are going to move things forward, we need to fix that.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

National Park Visitors Are Not Keen on Donald Trump’s Effort to Sanitize History

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

As part of his administration’s war on “woke,” Donald Trump has asked the American public to report anything “negative” about Americans in US national parks. But the public has largely refused to support a worldview without inconvenient historical facts, comments submitted from national parks and seen by the Guardian show.

Notices have been erected at every National Park Service (NPS) site, including 433 national parks, monuments and battlefields, following an order from May entitled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” issued by Trump’s Department of the Interior. The president had demanded a crackdown on any material that “inappropriately disparages Americans.”

The signs ask visitors to report any damage to parks as well as, via QR code, to identify “any signs or other information that are negative about either past or living Americans or that fail to emphasize the beauty, grandeur, and abundance of landscapes and other natural features.”

“What we’ve seen from these comments is that the public has said this is an insulting and misguided effort.”

But a trove of nearly 500 comments relating to the signs submitted across the US by the public in June and July, seen by the Guardian, show that visitors have mostly been reluctant to demand the removal of park materials about the darker chapters of America’s past, such as slavery or the mistreatment of Native tribes.

“Are we such weak, fragile people that we can’t view the full length and breadth of our history?” one visitor to Muir Woods in California wrote in July after a sign called “history under construction” was taken down. “Are we so afraid that we have to hide factual history from the telling of our past? Oh, please!!”

Another visitor to Cumberland Gap national historical park in Kentucky wrote in June that “the staff that work at this park are among the kindest, most knowledgeable people you will find anywhere.” They added: “I hate that this administration feels that history that may depict the United States in a bad light should be covered up.”

Many of the comments praise park rangers or call for more information on issues such as the Indigenous American experience or the climate crisis. Some complain about the decision to remove the ‘T’ from LGBT at New York’s Stonewall national monument, to exclude transgender people, while some visitors demanded the unvarnished truth be told at Manzanar, a California facility where Japanese-Americans were interned during the second world war.

“Sanitizing or downplaying this history does a disservice to those who lived through it,” one Manzanar tourist wrote. “Whoever authorized this sign should be fired,” added another visitor about the new signage. “History belongs to all people, and any attempt to rewrite or gloss over even our darkest days should not be tolerated.”

The QR code comments, a snapshot of public opinions that are filtered before being stored by the NPS, come at a tumultuous time for the park service. Nearly a quarter of NPS staff have departed the agency since Trump became president, leading to overstretched and potentially dangerous conditions at storied sites often referred to as “America’s best idea,” such as Yellowstone, the Everglades, and the Statue of Liberty.

“Americans have demonstrated they have a deep love affair with national parks and what we’ve seen from these comments is that the public has said this is an insulting and misguided effort,” said John Garder, a senior director at the National Parks Conservation Association.

“Rangers shouldn’t be intimidated to not talk about slavery and other things that have happened in America’s past. It’s outrageous and the American public have been deeply disturbed by it.”

However, not all of the submitted comments from what some park staff call “snitch signs” will be used to direct the revamp of park signage. Of the comments seen by the Guardian, fewer than 40 were “flagged for review” by the park service and of those, fewer than 10 were indicated to be definitely used as part of the response to the Interior Department order.

This small selection of comments mostly aligns with the administration’s perspective. One complains about “revisionist history based in woke religion” at Muir Woods, another criticizes “fashionable leftist jargon” and a third, from a visitor to Washington’s Rock Creek park, is upset that materials on Francis Newlands, a US senator around the time of the first world war, “disparage him as a white supremacist for holding what were common views at the time.”

“They want this virtue-washed version of history and they are trying to drive a wedge between us and the public,” said one senior NPS employee, who did not want to be named for fear for retribution.

“Every time there is a comment asking for more information on Indigenous people, it won’t be acknowledged. If there’s someone who says they are terribly offended by a sign, it will be flagged and sent for review.”

The NPS staffer, part of the “resistance rangers” movement within the Park Service comprising more than 1,000 off-duty rangers that has its own podcast to which they contribute anonymously, said that the composition of comments has become more pro-Trump since the Park Service noticed the public was mostly supportive of signs.

“I don’t think they expected so many of the comments to be positive, it backfired a bit on them.”

“It seems like an orchestrated effort was made; a lot of the comments appear the same or AI-generated,” said the employee. (The Guardian has seen no evidence that the public responses have been distorted by the administration in this way.)

“Overwhelmingly, we have a positive response from the public every day. People don’t want this. Every day I have people whisper to me, ‘we love the parks, we want to help.’”

The administration is expected to act soon to take down signs it deems inappropriate. On Monday, it began a separate monthlong process to review and remove other materials at national park sites, such as books and posters found in gift shops. “We have to review every single pamphlet, pin, and magnet,” said one NPS employee. “There are going to be hundreds of items that are going to be removed.”

A superintendent of a history-based park said there has been very little guidance on how to judge materials as problematic. “It’s on the park staff, who are already underresourced, to figure out what to censor, which is really troubling,” they said.

“I’ve tried to not delegate any of this because I don’t want to make staff do things that go against their values,” the superintendent said of the signs.

“This is a way to stop us talking about difficult topics and tie our hands behind our backs. Overwhelmingly, the public aren’t buying it. They don’t want this. When the department set this up I don’t think they expected so many of the comments to be positive, it backfired a bit on them.”

The purge is part of a wider push by the Trump administration to bend American historical, cultural, and scientific life to fit its ideological imperatives.

Military bases and statues will again bear the name of Confederate generals, climate science reports will be re-edited to potentially include discredited, fringe views while current and planned exhibitions at the Smithsonian Institution, the world’s largest museum and research complex, will be reviewed to “assess tone, historical framing, and alignment with American ideals.”

An NPS spokesperson said by September 18 signs found to be “inconsistent” with the Department of Interior order would be removed, covered up, or reinstated at a later date. “The National Park Service has received several substantive comments to date from across the country complimenting park programs or services, noting maintenance issues, or flagging potential inaccuracies or distortions of information out of context,” the spokesperson said.

“In implementing the order, the goal is to foster honest, respectful storytelling that educates visitors while honoring the complexity of our nation’s shared journey and park staff are only sent actionable comments related to that goal.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s Promise to End Vote-By-Mail Is Yet Another Attack on Disabled Voters

On Monday morning, President Trump returned to a longtime fixation, posting on Truth Social that he was “going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS” by “signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections.”

The post came just after Trump’s Friday summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin—not known for his love of free and fair elections—who allegedly counseled Trump that “your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting,” a message Trump promptly relayed to Fox News’ Sean Hannity.

Trump already led a movement to get rid of mail-in ballots, helping to push for a spate of anti-voter state laws both in the run-up to the 2020 election and after his loss. But each successive crackdown strips voting rights from disabled and aging voters, who disproportionately rely on absentee ballots and voter assistance laws to participate in democracy.

Some experts question whether the White House even has the power to take further steps to ban voting by mail; a plethora of lawsuits would likely follow any executive order against it.

“Eliminating this option through an executive order would not only be unconstitutional, it would add to the barriers many disabled voters already face, from inaccessible polling places to health risks,” said Casey Doherty, a policy analyst for the Center for American Progress’ Disability Justice Initiative. “Elected leaders should be expanding accessible voting options, not dismantling them.”

“Making sure that people have access to be able to vote by mail is really critical,” said Lisa Hassenstab, who leads Disability Rights Wisconsin’s voting rights program, “and to see it portrayed as a cause of fraud or anything like that—there’s no truth behind that.”

Not that Hassenstab was surprised. “The rhetoric around this from the President has been pretty consistent,” she said. “It’s still disappointing.”

Barrett Nuzum, a power wheelchair user in Oklahoma, started voting by mail in 2019—the state already requires him to have two witnesses present when he votes. Trump’s plan to double down with an executive order, Nuzum says, “drives me up a wall.”

Jen England, who lives in Pennsylvania, sits on the board of the myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) group #MEAction: England’s wife lives with severe ME and votes by mail. England is concerned that people with conditions like ME, frequently associated with Long Covid, won’t be be able to qualify for exemptions when they need them.

“People in the community who are bed-bound know that if they can’t mail in a ballot, they’re not voting,” England. “You’re basically depriving people of their citizenship rights.”

An attack on mail ballots, of course, doesn’t just impact disabled people. Many people benefit from mail-in voting: people who are unable to get time off work to vote, those who live in areas with long lines and waits at the polls, and full-time caregivers who may not be able to find or afford someone else to take care of their loved one. If a lawsuit doesn’t stop the impending executive order, then any such voters, and disabled voters across the board, would likely vote in lower numbers.

“Absentee voting provides people with an option of how to have their voice heard, and we should make that as readily available as possible,” said Eric Welsby, advocacy director of Detroit Disability Power. “Not everyone can take an hour, half an hour or several hours off to go vote in person on Election Day.”

Hassenstab expects any exemptions to be limited—for example by requiring proof of disability, such as medical paperwork, which would also disproportionately lock out voters with less time, money, and job flexibility.

“There are so many complicating factors for people in terms of things like transportation or maybe a chronic condition, which would mean that sometimes they are able to get to the polls and sometimes they aren’t,” said Hassenstab.

Disabled people have the same range of political viewpoints as any other group of voters, Hassenstab said, and an executive order on against mail-in ballots “is really disenfranchising in terms of people’s ability to participate on both sides of the aisle.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

States Sue Over DOJ Demand to Hand Crime Victims to ICE

More than 20 state attorneys general have filed suit against the Department of Justice (DOJ), alleging the Trump administration is unlawfully seeking to withhold critical funds for crime victims from states and nonprofits deemed noncompliant with its draconian immigration enforcement efforts.

The lawsuit, filed in federal district court in Rhode Island on Monday, centers on three notices that DOJ posted last month for funding allocated by a decades-old law called the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA). As I previously reported for Mother Jones, those funds have long been a critical source of support for organizations including domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centers, and child advocacy centers, which use the money to run emergency shelters and hotlines and provide therapy services, legal advocacy, and court accompaniment to abused people, particularly women and children. Another bucket of VOCA funding also goes directly to crime victims, who can use the funds for pay for services including mental health counseling, funeral expenses, and clean-ups of crime scenes.

“Playing politics with the lives of people who have suffered so greatly is reckless, it is cruel, and in this case—it is illegal.”

But under the Trump administration, this year’s round of $1.9 billion in funding comes with strings attached: It stipulates that grantees may not use the funds for any program or activity that, in DOJ’s opinion, “violates (or promotes or facilitates the violation of) federal immigration law…or impedes or hinders” enforcement.

While the funding announcements do not clarify what, exactly, would constitute such violations, the intent seems clear: Trump’s DOJ wants to essentially force states and the programs they fund to grant the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), unfettered access to the victims they serve—conditions that the lawsuit calls “unprecedented.”

“Playing politics with the lives of people who have suffered so greatly is reckless, it is cruel, and in this case—it is illegal,” said New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, the lead plaintiff, in a statement.

Advocates for crime victims say that, if enacted, these conditions could have a chilling effect on immigrant survivors of violence, who may avoid seeking help for fear of being deported. “One huge barrier for victims to leave an abusive situation is fear of their abusers reporting them to immigration, which is a real threat, even when the survivor has a path to lawful status,” Carmen McDonald, executive director of Survivor Justice Center, a Los Angeles organization that supports immigrant survivors of domestic violence, told me. “This will continue to cause victims to be unsafe at home and have devastating impacts for survivors.”

As I reported in June, McDonald and other domestic violence service providers in LA saw these impacts firsthand when ICE increased its presence in the city earlier this summer. Several providers told me that survivors were afraid to show up to court appointments and seek in-person help at shelters because they worried that it could put them at risk of deportation or detention from ICE.

These fears were worsened by the fact that Trump administration also rescinded Biden administration guidance characterizing domestic violence shelters and victim services centers, among others, as “protected spaces” where immigration enforcement should not take place due to the harm it could inflict on a community. It seems unsurprising, then, that a survey of more than 170 advocates and attorneys, conducted earlier this year by the Alliance for Immigrant Survivors, found that nearly 80 percent of advocates reported an increase in immigration-related questions from immigrant survivors since Trump’s election last year.

Now, the administration is trying to use another yet tool in its arsenal—billions in federal funding—to strong-arm nonprofits reliant on VOCA funds into cooperating with Trump’s mass deportation agenda. As I reported last year, VOCA funds come mostly from financial penalties levied in corporate criminal cases; the DOJ distributes a portion of the funds to states, while another portion of the funds are earmarked for direct compensation to eligible victims.

In the last fiscal year, the funds served more than 7 million victims, most of whom were women and victims of domestic violence, assault, and child sex abuse, according to DOJ data. That data does not specify how much of the funding went to immigration-related programs, but shows that it served millions through individual advocacy, legal advice, and referrals to other programs—all services that could theoretically include support for immigrants.

But the available VOCA funds have been declining as federal prosecutors have pursued more deferred and non-prosecution agreements, which allow defendantsmore time to pay up or avoid charges entirely if they cooperate with the government. That has alreadyleft organizations relying on VOCA funds stretched thin, with programs serving LGBTQ and immigrant survivors particularly difficult to fundraise for due to the hot-button politics around the clients they serve, sources previously told me.

If Trump’s DOJ prevails in court, that landscape is poised to get even worse. Krista Colon, executive director of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, said service providers “should not have to interrupt these services because of fears of running afoul of new, unrelated grant terms and conditions, just as they should not have to fear catastrophic cuts.”

The lawsuit alleges that the conditions seeking to mandate immigration enforcement are unlawful under various provisions of both the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs how agencies operate; the complaint states, for example, that the DOJ does not have the authority to mandate compliance with federal enforcement due to the Constitution’s separation of powers, and that the requirements are “arbitrary and capricious,” in violation of the APA. It names as defendants Attorney General Pam Bondi and two of her subordinates, as well as the offices all three represent. A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment on the lawsuit.

This is one of many times the Trump administration has threatened harm to survivors of crimes: The DOJ previously cancelled more than $800 million in grants for crime victim services, before restoring some following public outcry and reporting from Mother Jones. The latest lawsuit also follows another, similar suit, filed in June by 17 state domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions, which targeted anti-DEI conditions that Trump’s DOJ imposed on funding allocated by the Violence Against Women Act; earlier this month, a federal judge [issued][16] a preliminary stay, temporarily blocking the administration’s requirements on those grants.

Advocates are hoping plaintiffs in the latest lawsuit will find similar success. As Colon, executive director of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, put it: “Domestic violence does not discriminate.”

[16]: http://Court Blocks Trump-Vance Administration’s Unlawful Restrictions on Violence Against Women Act Grants

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Federal Budget Cuts Are Forcing Volunteers to Clean National Forest Toilets

This story was originally published by High Country News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

On a private ranch in southeastern Wyoming in mid-June, mud squelched under our sterilized muck boots as we searched for one of North America’s most endangered amphibians. Adult Wyoming toads, raised in captivity by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, have been released here for years, and I had volunteered to help count how many had survived and reproduced. Along with several other volunteers, three Wyoming Game and Fish Department employees and a Fish and Wildlife Service seasonal technician, I slowly scanned the marshy banks.

About an hour into the search, I caught a little brown toad with a very grumpy face as it hopped from land to water. Wearing disposable blue gloves, I held the toad as the technician scanned for a pit tag; she found none, suggesting that the animal had been born or grew up outside captivity.

Since the 1970s, the Fish and Wildlife Service has worked with state biologists, the University of Wyoming, and legions of volunteers to help the Wyoming toad survive habitat destruction, drought, and the deadly chytrid fungus. As federal agencies struggle with budget cuts, hiring freezes, and draconian layoffs, the beleaguered toad needs even more help.

“I knew (Fish and Wildlife biologists) were short-handed, and I knew there were people who, if I asked in advance, could get out and help,” said Wendy Estes-Zumpf, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department’s herpetologist and current Wyoming toad recovery team leader.

As the federal land and wildlife agencies struggle to meet their responsibilities, volunteers and others are stepping up, not only to help endangered toads but also to maintain trail systems, host campgrounds, and even clean outhouses. Their assistance is crucial, but it’s not a permanent solution—and there are some jobs they just can’t do.

West of Albany Country, where the Wyoming toad clings to life, lies the Bridger-Teton National Forest. The third-largest national forest in the Lower 48, it’s known for its sheer granite rock faces, clear mountain streams, and grizzly bears, wolves, and elk.

Friends of the Bridger-Teton, which formed in 2019, organizes volunteers to clear trails and work as campground hosts and the “floating ambassadors” who educate visitors at trailheads and dispersed campsites. Scott Kosiba, the group’s executive director, said that even if the Forest Service hired more people, volunteers would still be needed.

So far this year, the Forest Service has lost about a quarter of its permanent staff on the Bridger-Teton, largely through deferred resignations and early retirements. The Pinedale Ranger District, one of the units within the Bridger-Teton, lost seven of its eight front-country rangers, leaving a single staffer to maintain trails, clear downed logs, and clean bathrooms.

In response, Friends of the Bridger-Teton boosted its volunteer programs and started a new program called Forest Corps, which hires experienced trail crews to work on the Bridger-Teton. Their first crew, which is all female, is made up of former Forest Service employees.

“Volunteers are valuable, but they’re no substitute for agency personnel.”

Some federal needs are even more urgent: In Utah County, Utah, county leaders voted to redirect $15,000 from a tourism tax fund toward pumping Forest Service outhouses ahead of the Fourth of July weekend. Nearly half of the outhouses in the popular Pleasant Grove Ranger District were full and closed because of budget cuts and red tape, Utah County Commissioner Amelia Powers Gardner told local TV station KSL-TV. County communications manager Richard Piatt called the move an “emergency measure” and said the Forest Service is working to resolve the issue.

When the Flathead National Forest in Montana lost most of its seasonal maintenance crew to budget cuts, three local rafting outfitters created a rotating calendar to clean 10 pit toilets and pick up garbage at boat launches along the Flathead River, said Nathan Hafferman, general manager of Glacier Guides and Montana Raft. The companies pay their guides to clean the toilets—a job that can require a four-hour round-trip drive on rough dirt roads—and even buy toilet paper.

Hafferman doesn’t know if the arrangement is a permanent solution, but points out that some of the toilets and launches are used by hundreds of visitors every day. “The sentiment so far is that everyone knows it needs to happen,” he said. “If there’s no funding in the future, I believe everyone would like to figure out how to get it done. Having them not cleaned is not an option.”

When I signed up to survey for Wyoming toads, I also volunteered to spend a weekend feeding tadpoles, which are cheaper to produce in captivity and ensure a variety of ages in the free-roaming population, said Rachel Arrick, a Fish and Wildlife Service biologist. To protect the tadpoles from predators, agency biologists place them in pens set up in wetlands near a pond—a soft release of sorts—and feed them daily until they metamorphose into toads. In previous years, the Fish and Wildlife Service hired Student Conservation Association interns to care for the tadpoles; this year, they turned to volunteers.

A toad in gloved hands.

A young Wyoming toad.Courtesy of USFWS

Once I’d committed to a weekend in mid-July, I received an email with directions to the site and instructions on what to do if any tadpoles appeared to have died. The day before I was set to go, however, the project’s technician informed me that fluctuations in the wetland’s water levels and other issues had made the task of feeding more complicated, and that it would be carried out by staff instead of volunteers.

That’s the hitch with volunteers: There’s only so much we can do. Volunteers can’t issue permits, analyze projects, create plans for tackling invasive species or act as law enforcement.

“Volunteers are valuable, but they’re no substitute for agency personnel,” said Josh Hicks, director of conservation campaigns for The Wilderness Society. And all volunteer efforts still need oversight from knowledgeable staffers—people who know which trails need clearing or can explain how to safely remove graffiti from a rock face.

“They don’t have the staff in many areas to do the monitoring to get volunteers plugged in,” Hicks said. “It’s an absolute mess out there.”

This story is part of High Country News’ Conservation Beyond Boundaries project, which is supported by the BAND Foundation.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Is Trump’s America Ready for Hurricanes?

This story was originally published by Vox.com and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The peak of the hurricane season is upon us and forecasters are still anticipating higher than normal levels of activity, despite a relatively calm season so far.

As of Wednesday afternoon, Tropical Storm Erin is churning in the Atlantic Ocean and moving toward the Caribbean, likely to become the season’s first hurricane, a storm with sustained winds above 74 miles per hour.

The National Hurricane Center says it’s too early to predict the storm’s impacts but advises people on the East Coast of the US “to ensure your preparedness plans are in place.”

The hurricane season officially runs from June 1 until November 30 and typically has 14 storms strong enough to be named, meaning with wind speeds above 39 mph. This year is anticipated to be busier than usual, with forecasters expecting up to 18 named storms, and up to five that will turn into major hurricanes. That’s due in part to the El Niño cycle, which is currently in its neutral phase, creating atmospheric conditions more favorable to tropical storms. The surface of the Atlantic Ocean remains at above-average temperatures, and since hurricanes are powered by hot water, Erin may become the first major hurricane of the year.

“As we enter the second half of the season, this updated hurricane outlook serves as a call to action to prepare now, in advance, rather than delay until a warning is issued,” acting NOAA Administrator Laura Grimm said in a news release.

But a tropical storm doesn’t have to reach hurricane strength to cause death and destruction. The remnants of Tropical Storm Barry last month stalled over Texas, where they converged with another weather system and caused a massive downpour that led to deadly flooding in the state’s hill country.

A key step to saving lives from tropical storms and hurricanes is to anticipate where they might go and get people out of the way. On this front, scientists have made tremendous strides in building longer lead times ahead of a storm’s landfall, and new tools are continuing to extend that lead. But the Trump administration’s recent cuts to departments that study and forecast weather are undermining this progress, while cuts to emergency agencies are slowing disaster responses.

Erin could be a major test of the results of these actions.

Meteorologists often describe hurricanes as heat engines, meaning that they use a temperature difference to generate wind and rain. But to start up, a hurricane needs sea surface temperatures to be around 80 degrees Fahrenheit or hotter. This is why the apex of hurricane activity tends to be in September, after the Atlantic Ocean has had all summer to heat up.

Generally, the hotter the water, the more powerful the resulting storm. “For every degree centigrade that you raise the ocean temperature, the wind speed in the hurricane goes up between 5 and 7 percent,” Kerry Emanuel, an emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told Vox last year. With global average temperatures rising due to climate change, the potential for more powerful hurricanes is increasing.

A warmer planet also means rising sea levels as ice caps melt, adding more liquid to the seas. The ocean itself also expands as it gets hotter. So when a hurricane occurs, its winds create a larger storm surge as it pushes water inland. Warmer air can also hold onto more moisture, increasing the rainfall during a hurricane. The combined effects of storm surge and more intense rainfall can lead to more flooding, often the deadliest and most destructive aspect of a hurricane. And as the floods in Texas this year showed, even areas that are far inland can suffer severely from hurricane storm systems.

Since hurricanes spin counter-clockwise, these effects tend to be stronger on the right side of the storm—sometimes called the “dirty side”—where the wind is blowing in the same direction as the storm is moving.

On the other side of the equation, more people are living in the path of hurricanes. In the US, about 40 percent of the population lives in a coastal county, and the numbers are growing. So when a hurricane makes landfall, it threatens more lives and takes a bigger bite out of the economy.

The good news is that scientists have made huge strides in anticipating hurricanes and can now predict where they are going days in advance. A modern hurricane track forecast looking 72 hours ahead is better than a 24-hour forecast in the early 90s. Last year, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration deployed a new prediction model called the Hurricane Analysis and Forecast System. It proved to be better than previous models at predicting a storm’s path and intensity.

In recent years, a number of hurricanes have undergone rapid intensification, where they gain more than 35 miles per hour in wind speed in less than 24 hours. It makes storms harder to predict, and makes evacuating people in their path more hasty and chaotic, as hurricanes surge in strength. Scientists are still trying to tease out the mechanisms behind rapid intensification, but the new model was able to see the rapid intensification coming in Hurricanes Helene and Milton from their earliest advisories, days before landfall.

But while NOAA has made improvements in its forecasts, the agency itself has faced big cuts from the Trump administration, including staff who work on hurricane modeling. The White House has proposed cutting its budget by a quarter, eliminating research divisions like the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, which studies hurricanes. Several field offices for the National Weather Service under NOAA currently lack lead meteorologists, and key forecasting tools like weather balloon launches have seen a decline. The National Weather Service is now scrambling to hire back hundreds of employees. All of this adds an unnecessary layer of chaos to an already dangerous situation.

The true scope of these vulnerabilities won’t be revealed until after a major hurricane. Already, emergency responders in some parts of the country are getting the message that help from higher up in the government isn’t coming, while homeowners are getting the sense that they’re on their own when facing extreme weather. And even if the US dodges the worst of Erin, there are still more than two months left in the hurricane season, which has yet to reach its peak.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Laura Loomer’s Latest Victim: Visas For Critically Injured Palestinian Kids

Laura Loomer, the far-right provocateur and conspiracy theorist who has described herself as a “proud Islamophobe,” has proven to have particular sway with President Donald Trump.

The latest example came on Saturday, when the State Department halted all visitor visas to people from Gaza, including humanitarian medical visas for injured children. The announcement followed Loomer’s days-long posting spree, in which she baselessly alleged that Palestinian kids and their families arriving in the US for medical care were “a national security risk,” and that nonprofit organizations that facilitate their treatment in the US support Hamas. “They are not that sick if they can sit on a plane for 22 hours,” Loomer wrote.

Loomer posted videos of Palestinians arriving in the US this month via a group called Heal Palestine, a nonprofit organization founded last year that has brought injured children to the US for treatment. One of the videos, which Loomer claimed showed Palestinians arriving in Texas, shows a family arriving at the airport to cheers, with a teen boy on crutches who has one leg amputated below the knee. In another post, she claimed, without evidence, that Palestinian children who arrived in Texas—many of whom had lost limbs—and their families were “doing jihadi chants.” She posted that whoever approved the Palestinians’ visas at the State Department “should be fired,” and that Heal Palestine should be investigated.

The latest move comes as Israel’s aid blockade has caused widespread starvation in Gaza, with at least 100 children recently dying of hunger and malnutrition, according to Save the Children. Doctors have attested to evidence that the Israeli military may be deliberately targeting children in Gaza, with more than 40,000 reportedly killed or injured in the war, according to UNICEF. Earlier this year, UNICEF said the Gaza Strip had the highest number of child amputees per capita anywhere in the world.

Sara al-Borsh clutches a pen between her toes, carefully sketching a butterfly on the back of a recycled notebook page in June. She lost her arms, and her father, in an Israeli airstrike last year.Rizek Abdeljawad/Xinhua/ZUMA

A Reuters analysis of State Department data found that the US issued 3,800 visitor visas permitting medical treatment to people with travel documents from the Palestinian Authority so far this year. Heal Palestine told the New York Times that it has evacuated 63 injured kids for treatment to the US, including 11 who were flown to hospitals in nine American cities this month.

In a statement Sunday, Heal Palestine said it was “distressed” by the State Department’s decision, and that it is “a medical treatment program, not a refugee resettlement program.” The organization’s founder, Steve Sosebee, shared a photo with two child amputees, one of whom also lost his parents in a bombing, who Heal Palestine relocated to the US for medical treatment. “Where is our humanity in denying children like this access to medical care?” Sosebee wrote.

These are the kids that we bring for medical care they cannot get back in Gaza. Four year-old Adam lost his leg and parents in a bombing, and two year-old Seedra came for orthopedic surgery and will be fitted with artificial legs. She was born with a birth defect and has to have… pic.twitter.com/ueSPOeYUmY

— Steve Sosebee (@Stevesosebee) August 17, 2025

The Palestine Children’s Relief Fund, another American nonprofit founded by Sosebee, called the State Department’s decision “dangerous and inhumane,” adding, “Blocking visa access for the wounded and sick children of Gaza is not merely a bureaucratic measure, it is a denial of their most basic right to access medical care.” Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations Nihad Awad said the decision “is the latest sign that the intentional cruelty of President Trump’s ‘Israel First’ administration knows no bounds.”

Loomer, on the other hand, called the news “fantastic” in a post on X, adding, “Hopefully all GAZANS will be added to President Trump’s travel ban. There are doctors in other countries. The US is not the world’s hospital!”

On CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told host Margaret Brennan that the decision to halt the visas followed “outreach from multiple congressional offices,” adding that the State Department is “going to reevaluate how those visas are being granted, not just to the children, but how those visas are being granted to the people who are accompanying them.” In an X post on Friday, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) responded to Loomer’s posts, saying he was “deeply concerned about the incoming flights—including to Texas—allegedly filled with folks from Gaza,” adding that he was “inquiring.” Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) also chimed in after Roy did, posting on X, “Oh, hell no!”

Rubio did not mention Loomer or those members of Congress by name, but claimed that “numerous congressional offices” have presented “evidence” that some of the organizations involved in bringing Palestinians to the US “have strong links to terrorist groups like Hamas.” But Loomer told the New York Times that she had spoken with Rubio on Friday night to flag the flights.

Spokespeople for the State Department did not immediately respond to questions from Mother Jones on Sunday, including about which congressional offices made these claims, what so-called evidence they provided, and what role Loomer played in the decision.

Loomer has consistently wielded a wild level of influence in the West Wing: In April, the president fired six members of his National Security Council after an Oval Office meeting in which she reportedly alleged they were disloyal to him; in May, Trump fired National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, with Loomer claiming credit in the aftermath.

To Loomer, though, the Trump administration could still go further in its latest move. “The GAZA visas don’t need to be temporarily halted,” she wrote in a post on X Sunday morning. “They need to be TERMINATED FOREVER.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Melania Trump’s Weird, Vague Letter to Putin

First Lady Melania Trump tends to be seen more often than she is heard. But when she does speak, it’s often hard to forget.

Take, for example, her infamous profanity-laden tirade against having to decorate the White House for Christmas, per tradition, and criticism for being “complicit” in the policy of separating immigrant families during her husband’s first term. Or her bizarre and baseless video from last yearin which, while trying to hawk her memoir, she implied that conspiratorial forces were at work in the first attempted assassination of President Donald Trump, in Butler, Pennsylvania.

Now, she has granted us another puzzling message—this time in epistolary form. Ina letter first published by Fox News on Saturday, the First Lady wrote to Russian President Vladimir Putin begging him to protect unnamed “children”—without specifying which children or what, exactly, she wants Putin to do to support them. The letter seems to be concerned with Ukrainian children—but never acknowledges the litany of indignities that they have suffered since Putin’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

More than 600 Ukrainian children have been killed and more than 1,800 have been injured from the start of the war through last December, according to a report released earlier this year by the UN Human Rights Office. In addition, in 2023, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Russian Commissioner for Children’s Rights, alleging that they committed war crimes by kidnapping Ukrainian children and deporting them to Russia. The UN report says officials verified that, in the first year after Russia’s invasion, “at least 200 children, including many living in institutions, were transferred within occupied territory or to the Russian Federation.” Other entities have said the numbers are far higher: The Humanitarian Research Lab at Yale University estimated that more than 35,000 Ukrainian kids were taken, and Ukraine’s human rights commissioner has said Russia took more than 19,500 Ukrainian kids of whom only about 1,000 have been returned.

A doctor carries a child who was injured in a 2024 rocket attack out of the Okhmatdyt Children’s Clinic Hospital in Kyiv, Ukraine.Aleksandr Gusev/SOPA/ZUMA

This context, though, was absent from the First Lady’s letter. That’s especially bizarre given that the president has told the press that Melania Trump has been disturbed by the war. “I go home, tell the First Lady, ‘I spoke to Vladimir today, we had a wonderful conversation.’ She says, ‘Oh really? Another city was just hit,'” President Trump told reporters in the Oval Office last month.

“Dear President Putin,” the First Lady’s letter begins, “Every child shares the same quiet dreams in their heart, whether born randomly into a nation’s rustic countryside or a magnificent city-center. They dream of love, possibility, and safety from danger.” The president reportedly hand-delivered the letter to Putin prior to their Friday summit in Anchorage, Alaska, according to Fox.

The letter, which Melania Trump also posted on her social media accounts Saturday night, proceeds to state that parents have a “duty to nurture the next generation’s hope” and that leaders have a “responsibility to sustain our children.”

“A simple yet profound concept, Mr. Putin, as I am sure you agree, is that each generation’s descendants begin their lives with a purity—an innocence which stands above geography, government, and ideology,” the letter continues. “Yet in today’s world, some children are forced to carry a quiet laughter, untouched by the darkness around them—a silent defiance against the forces that can potentially claim their future. Mr. Putin, you can singlehandedly restore their melodic laughter.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by First Lady Melania Trump (@flotus)

“In protecting the innocence of these children, you will do more than serve Russia alone—you serve humanity itself,” the letter says.

“Such a bold idea transcends all human division, and you, Mr. Putin, are fit to implement this vision with a stroke of the pen today. It is time,” it concludes.

If you are not sure what, exactly, any of this is supposed to mean, you are not alone. On social media, some reactions to the letter included claims that it was “vapid,” “word salad,” and potentially written by artificial intelligence. Spokespeople for the White House did not immediately respond to questions from Mother Jones on Sunday about the letter’s lack of specifics and whether AI was used in its writing.

In response to an inquiry from Mother Jones, the Children of Ukraine Foundation, a U.S. nonprofit that provides support to Ukrainian kids and families, said that it welcomed “every call for peace and the protection of children” but went on to add that “it is vital to be precise.”

“Ukrainian children need more than general words of peace—they need concrete action to stop attacks on schools, hospitals, and civilian areas, to ensure safe humanitarian corridors, and to support their healing and future.”

Even if Melania Trump had asked Putin for a ceasefire in the letter, or outlined what most disturbs her about the war’s impacts on Ukrainian children, it’s highly unlikely that would have moved the needle. As my colleague Ruth Murai outlined yesterday, the Friday summit was ultimately a win for Russia: The president called it “great and very successful” while backtracking on the idea of pursuing an immediate ceasefire. Russian state media, meanwhile, reportedly gleefully replayed clips of the two men meeting, contrasting it with the president’s dressing-down of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office earlier this year.

If anything, the letter proves that both Donald and Melania Trump share an arrogant certainty that they can stop Russia’s more than three-year-long war on Ukraine: He, through the summit in Alaska (after his campaign trail pledge to end the war within 24 hours failed); she, through a letter that would make ChatGPT proud.

Update, Aug. 17: This post was updated with a statement from the Children of Ukraine Foundation.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

After Maui’s Fires, Native Hawaiian Families Face a New Threat: Foreclosure

This story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

As a Native Hawaiian teenager growing up in West Maui, Mikey Burke couldn’t wait to leave. “All my life, I thought I was bigger than this town, bigger than the village, and I was going to go somewhere and make something of myself,” she said.

Then she went to college in Los Angeles, where she was just one person among millions navigating the city’s crowded freeways and squinting through its smog. She would go entire days without anyone looking her in the eye, even if she held a door open for them or perused fruit next to them at the grocery store. Burke began to dream of returning home to Maui, where relationships felt authentic and she didn’t feel pressure to impress anyone. “Everything that I thought that I wanted, I had already had at home,” Burke realized.

The summer after she graduated from college, in 2006, Burke flew home to visit before starting a new job in public accounting in L.A. On the flight, she noticed the man sitting next to her with salt-and-pepper hair was preoccupied with a video game device. She had just finished her free mai tai and was feeling chatty and emboldened. **“**Are you going to put that thing away and talk to me?” she asked brazenly. He met her gaze with piercing blue eyes and set the device down.

His name was Rob, and he was a commercial painter. They fell in love, and when he proposed a year and a half later, Burke had just one condition: She wanted to raise their future kids at home, to give her children the same upbringing and connection to family and the ʻāina, or land, that she now couldn’t imagine growing up without.

A brown and green sign surrounded by flowers says "Lahaina Royal Capital of the Hawaiian Kingdom"

A sign welcomes drivers into the coastal town of Lāhainā, once the royal capital of the Hawaiian Kingdom.Anita Hofschneider / Grist

When their son was a year old, Burke took a huge pay cut from her LA job to work as an accountant at Maui’s local power utility. She thought she’d get back to her old salary in a couple of years, and that her husband would find work quickly. Instead, her pay stagnated, and Rob spent months struggling to find a job in construction before accepting a role as a host at Bubba Gump, a bustling tourist restaurant.

Everything on Maui was more expensive: Their first water and electric bill was twice as much as their old bill in LA, and Burke’s commute cost at least $100 in gas per week. “I could get maybe two or three meals for the price of a whole week’s groceries in LA,” Burke said.

Even after her husband finally got hired in commercial painting and her parents helped the family buy a condo, their living expenses ballooned. After their first son, the couple had twins, who were just 10 months old when Burke unexpectedly became pregnant again. Then a hostile malihini haole, Hawaiian for “white foreigner,” on their condo board commented on their growing family size, and Burke realized with panic that their soon-to-be six-person family exceeded the occupancy limits for their two-bedroom unit.

The four-bedroom house they found in Lāhainā felt like the answer to their prayers. It was a brand-new, two-story home in a new development with two-and-a-half bathrooms and a two-car garage. It was closer to the center of town than Burke preferred, but she wasn’t in a position to be picky. They had spent a year getting outbid by cash offers and had come close to bidding on a termite-infested home that would’ve required the whole family to bunk in the same room for months while they spent thousands on renovations. “The housing market for local people here was nonexistent,” Burke said. “When we did find a house to look at, we were outbid by somebody every time.”

But this house in Lāhainā was $761,645 with a $3,300 monthly mortgage payment — affordable by Maui standards — and only available to them because they qualified through a workforce housing program that aimed to help local families like theirs.

The first time they walked through the house, Burke was incredulous. “We were looking out at Lāhainā town and just in awe and disbelief that this was our life, and this was actually possible for us,” she said. It wasn’t until the day they got the keys and her two-year-old twins wobbled through the rooms in their tank tops and diapers that it felt real: Burke and her family were in Maui to stay. “We did this for them,” she thought. “Their future is secure.” Her boys would know what it was like to grow up Hawaiian in Hawaiʻi.

That certainty crumbled the afternoon of August 8, 2023, when their home, and the town of Lāhainā, burned.

The wildfire incinerated more than 2,000 acres, killed more than 100 people, and instantly made headlines as the worst wildfire in the US in more than a century. In Hawaiʻi, the community was in shock: No natural disaster had been so deadly since before statehood, and the fire had ripped through the town so quickly that thousands of buildings and structures became ash, altering the landscape irrevocably. Burke was among more than 800 homeowners who were suddenly rendered homeless and are now grappling with whether, or how, to rebuild. For her, it’s about more than just her house—it’s her ability to raise her family in their ancestral homelands, and avoid joining a growing number of Indigenous people forced to leave and priced out of returning.

A local nonprofit, Hawaiʻi Community Lending, surveyed 257 Lāhainā homeowners with mortgages affected by the fire and found their average balance was $696,983, more than twice the national average. That disparity reflects the sky-high real estate prices on Maui, where the median home price was $1.3 million in July. After the fire, the homeowners were able to delay paying their mortgage payments for months or years. But Jeff Gilbreath, the nonprofit’s executive director, said those forbearance periods are now ending, and for many, tens of thousands of dollars in back payments and interest are now coming due. As of early August, 78 of those 257 homeowners had missed mortgage payments and were at risk of foreclosure, largely because they are trying to pay rent while waiting to reconstruct their homes.

“Ninety-eight percent of the homeowners who are enrolled in our program have lost income in the fire,” said Gilbreath. “Now their existing mortgage is greater than 31 percent of their income. They can’t afford the existing mortgage. They need help with the rebuild and the gaps they’re facing.”

Two years after the Maui wildfires, Burke and other homeowners are experiencing an uptick in texts from investors wanting to buy their properties. A third of residents who were homeowners before the fire no longer own their homes, and more people are listing their properties for sale. “Whether you’re a visionary investor, a legacy builder, or someone who simply wants to be part of rebuilding one of Hawaiʻi’s most beloved communities, this lot is more than dirt and square footage,” says the description of an 8,000-square-foot burned-out lot listed on Redfin for $1.8 million.

But the post-disaster property ownership shift isn’t limited to Maui. It happened in New York and New Jersey after Superstorm Sandy hit in 2012. It’s happening in Altadena in the wake of the LA wildfire. A May analysis by the research firm First Street found that bank losses from mortgage foreclosures related to disasters—mainly flooding—are expected to nearly quadruple over the next decade, with climate change driving nearly 30 percent of all foreclosure losses by 2035. Foreclosures often don’t spike in the immediate aftermath of wildfires because homeowners have fire insurance, but that silver lining could disappear as insurance premiums spike to cover the growing cost of losses from natural disasters—just $4.6 billion in 2000 and now approaching $100 billion annually—as climate change drives stronger hurricanes, heavier flooding, and more frequent wildfires.

“If you can’t afford to rebuild, if you can’t afford your mortgage because of all the other financial bills that you have, where are you going to go?”

In Lāhainā, homeowners are still short nearly $140 million in insurance payouts. There, as in many other places, climate change is colliding with a housing affordability crisis, said Carlos Martín, vice president for research and policy engagement at the think tank Resources for the Future. “If you can’t afford to rebuild, if you can’t afford your mortgage because of all the other financial bills that you have, where are you going to go?” he said. “We don’t have the spare housing that’s affordable to absorb all the people that are going to be affected by these twin crises.”

The day that Lāhainā burned, a storm passed south of the island and heavy winds knocked over more than two dozen power poles, prompting widespread electric outages and school cancellations. “I was working the storm, but I could do it from home,” said Burke, who was still employed with Hawaiian Electric but working with commercial customers by then.

She had a walkie-talkie in one hand, her phone in another, and was talking to her clients—hotels and local businesses—to triage the outage while juggling four children and her nephew, who were all home from school.

In the mid-afternoon, she glanced outside and noticed black smoke, which she knew meant homes were burning. She ordered her kids to pack four changes of clothes as a precaution. Then her husband ran into the house. “There’s a fire and it’s moving really fast,” he yelled up the stairs. “We’ve got to go.” The smell of smoke filled the house through the open front door.

Burke loaded her 6-year-old, her twin 8-year-olds, and her 13-year-old in the car, along with her 9-year-old nephew and their dog Nalu. She grabbed an envelope of cash and then hesitated, her hand on her beloved Tahitian pearls. “This is going to be OK,” she thought. “We’re not losing the house,” and released them. Her husband got into his work truck, carrying their pet tortoise Flash and three other dogs, Blue, Murphy, and Toby.

But when Burke turned the ignition, she realized she couldn’t pull out of the driveway. “Our street was already full of cars trying to evacuate,” she said.

For a few, painstaking minutes, Burke’s family sat in the driveway as the fire approached, unable to leave. Then, a woman she didn’t recognize waved her and her husband into the line. “Typical Hawaiʻi,” Burke said. “We’re all running for our lives, and she’s like, ʻNo, come in,’ and she lets my husband and me get in line.” Similarly, every car sat in the right lane. The left lane was empty. “It’s crazy that none of us thought to just take that and cram the whole thing,” she said. “We were so orderly.”

With traffic at a standstill, Burke watched embers fly into her yard through her rearview mirror and flames engulf the home of her next-door neighbor. If they didn’t move soon, she knew the fire would be all around them. She suggested as calmly as she could to the children, “Why don’t you guys unbuckle?”

“Why?” the kids asked, alarmed. “Why are you telling us to unbuckle?”

“No, nothing’s wrong,” she lied. “I just want you guys to be ready in case we have to leave the car.”

Burke told the boys that if they needed to run, they should climb over a nearby fence and head straight into the ocean. “You’re not going to stop, you’re not going to look back,” she said, trying to speak as calmly as possible. “We’re all going to get to the ocean. That’s not going to happen, but if we have to, that’s what we’re going to do.”

“You’re not going to stop, you’re not going to look back. We’re all going to get to the ocean.”

Unprompted, her sons turned to one another and began to say, “I love you.”

Then a bicyclist with a T-shirt wrapped around his face rode up and knocked on the passenger window, motioning her to get into the opposite lane and drive ahead. She did, and others followed. When she got to the next major intersection, she saw a police officer directing traffic and had finally started to allow the line of cars she’d been waiting in to go ahead.

An aerial view of Maui after the wildfires. Buildings and trees are blackened.

Thousands of buildings were devastated, and more than 100 people died in the 2023 Maui wildfires that leveled much of the town of Lāhainā, pictured here from above in the immediate aftermath.Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images/Grist

Their family survived thanks to the kindness of others: the unknown neighbor who waved her in, the masked bicyclist, even the random dirt bike riders who broke through a locked gate on an old sugar cane road to allow drivers to escape. An hour and a half later, the Burkes found their way into a gated community on a hill overlooking Lāhainā.

“It was a little bit surreal, because nothing was happening there,” Burke said. “They were literally standing on their lānai or in their driveways looking towards Lāhainā, untouched, and here we are in our cars that are just full of silt.” Wealthy homeowners stared at their ash-covered caravan as they slowly drove through. Even though Burke was born and raised in West Maui, she had never seen the luxury estates with their ocean views, golf courses, and private clubhouse.

Hawaiʻi has a low homeownership rate—61 percent, 47th of all states and Washington, DC—in part because land is so pricey. The rate for Native Hawaiians is even lower, 57 percent, as families like the Burkes are forced to compete with insatiable global demand for their land. After the US-backed overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, the US took 1.8 million acres of land—more than a third of the main archipelago—formerly owned by the Hawaiian Kingdom, and the Hawaiian people were never compensated. Lāhainā was once the royal capital, but the colonial transformation of the community into an American tourism destination meant that Lāhainā’s Indigenous population shrank considerably.

“Across Hawaiʻi, it’s getting increasingly difficult to remain there, especially towns like this where the local population and the Hawaiian population have been marginalized and pushed to the side so that the tourists can be center stage,” Burke said. “So to have infiltrated that system and been able to purchase something is like winning at the monopoly of life.”

Before the fire, just 8.5 percent of Lāhainā residents identified as Native Hawaiian or another Pacific Islander identity. That figure could keep dropping if families like Burke’s are forced to leave in the wake of the fire. “Often the people who have been on the land the longest are the first to get displaced,” said Jeff Gilbreath from Hawaiʻi Community Lending.

Most Pacific island nations have restrictions on who can own land, in part to protect Indigenous peoples from displacement. Some U.S. Pacific territories do, too. That’s not the case in Hawaiʻi, where most land is at the mercy of American capitalism.

Some Native Hawaiians are eligible for property on land designated as “Hawaiian home lands,” a federal program set up by the U.S. Congress at the urging of Prince Kūhiō, a member of the Royal Family, in the aftermath of the overthrow. The prince wanted every Hawaiian to be eligible to own land, but was forced to accept a compromise to get the bill passed by limiting who could qualify by blood quantum. The program has fallen far short of his vision: More than 23,000 Hawaiians are still waiting for homes, and at least 2,000 have died while waiting for a homestead. The current process of building infrastructure, constructing homes, and finding homeowners who are qualified to obtain a mortgage is estimated to take 182 years for everyone currently on the waiting list to receive a home.

“Like almost any Indigenous community, we still get the crumbs, and if you happen to not be 50 percent Hawaiian, it’s like you get the crumbs of the crumbs.”

Burke’s mom has been on the list for more than 25 years. When Burke was a teenager, her mom was offered a plot of land in East Maui with no electrical or sewer hookups, and so she decided to wait for an actual house where she could raise her family. She’s now in her 70s and still waiting. Burke isn’t hopeful; even if her mom gets off the waitlist, she is retired and would have a hard time qualifying for a mortgage. Burke, meanwhile, doesn’t have enough Hawaiian blood by federal standards to qualify to get on the list herself. “Like almost any Indigenous community, we still get the crumbs, and if you happen to not be 50 percent Hawaiian, it’s like you get the crumbs of the crumbs,” Burke said. “We’re just left to figure it out ourselves.”

The weeks and months immediately after the fire were a blur of moving and grief. For days, there was no cell service, and Burke’s name was among more than a thousand people feared missing. No one knew exactly how many had died, and the US Department of Health and Human Services flew in cadaver dogs to identify human remains. Burke had to figure out how to explain the destruction to her children while processing her own grief and continuing to work full-time. Work was exhausting, but she still had her job when thousands of her neighbors had lost theirs. For a while, her family of six crowded in with her mom and sister in their two-bedroom condo, then they moved in with a friend, then moved into a Red Cross shelter at the Hyatt, then a rental home, and then another.

“The entire system is set up so that, after disaster, we see an increase in distress-driven land sales and foreclosures, and that leads to gentrification and mass displacement of the community.”

Burke began to make a list: Call her mortgage company. Cancel her internet and cable. Call her insurance company. Cancel her water and electric services. Apply for disaster assistance. In two weeks, their mortgage bill would be due, but they also needed to find new housing and pay rent there, too.

“You qualify to be on forbearance for up to 12 months,” Burke recalls a customer service representative for her mortgage servicer told her in an initial call.

“What happens after that?” she asked. She couldn’t get a straight answer.

“That scared the crap out of me because I didn’t know if after 12 months I was going to have to pay that 12 months back in full, or if they were going to put me on a payment plan, or if they were going to just tack it on to the back of my loan,” she said. Two years later, she still doesn’t know what the answer is—and has been trying to save money in case she’s required to pay everything upfront. As of July of this year, she owes $71,000.

In the US, keeping up with your mortgage payments in the wake of a disaster is largely up to individual homeowners. Mortgage companies might allow you to suspend your monthly payments for a few months or years, during forbearance, but interest still accrues, and eventually every bill comes due. Mortgage lenders and banks have different rules about how lenient to be with homeowners and when to force them to repay their bills. Some will let homeowners add the bill to the end of their mortgage, delaying the payments until the end of their loan or until they sell the property. But other banks require homeowners to pay upfront, which can saddle them with a sudden bill of tens of thousands of dollars.

Autumn Ness, executive director of the Lāhainā Community Land Trust, a nonprofit established after the fires, is already seeing a handful of attempted foreclosures as banks resume collecting mortgage payments that they temporarily suspended after the fire. The community land trust has already spent more than $1.1 million to purchase homes from homeowners whose houses would otherwise have been auctioned off by banks.

With the average mortgage for fire-affected Lāhainā homeowners approaching $700,000, Ness knows that it’s unlikely her nonprofit will be able to help everyone who wants to save their home from investors. “We don’t have enough money for it,” she said.

It’s also challenging to communicate with big mortgage lenders and servicers. According to data that Gilbreath from Hawaiʻi Community Lending has collected, the bulk of Lāhainā’s mortgage debt, more than $46 million, is held by Rocket Mortgage, a multibillion-dollar company based in Michigan. However, even this is an undercount, as Gilbreath surveyed just 257 Lāhainā homeowners with mortgages who lost their homes, out of more than 800. The second-largest mortgage servicer, Mr. Cooper, is based in Texas. Both Gilbreath and Ness have struggled to get in touch with real people at out-of-state mortgage companies to advocate on behalf of homeowners. Ness has had trouble even getting statements estimating how much homeowners owe so that the land trust can help them pay it off. “It’s just been extremely tough,” Gilbreath said.

A local analysis predicted that more than 20 percent of Lāhainā properties will have new owners within three years after the fire, or by next summer. That’s due to financial stressors and other factors like inconsistent employment, uncertain home rebuilding timelines, and emotional and mental health stress.

“The entire system is set up so that, after disaster, we see an increase in distress-driven land sales and foreclosures, and that leads to gentrification and mass displacement of the community,” Ness said. “And then we wonder why people like us are left scraping in our worst moments to try to swim against this current.”

One proposal in Congress would guarantee that disaster-affected homeowners with mortgages backed by federal agencies like Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac could delay their payments for up to a year. But not everyone has a federally backed mortgage, and that doesn’t solve the problem of what happens after the forbearance period runs out.

“Forbearance is good as far as it goes, but it’s a temporary band-aid and it does kick the can down the road,” said Lisa Sitkin, a senior staff attorney at the National Housing Law Project. “It has to be coupled with long-term solutions.”

The most straightforward solution, Sitkin said, is government funding to help homeowners catch up with their payments. California started such a program in June to give disaster-affected homeowners $20,000. Just this week, Maui County launched a federal program to help Lāhainā homeowners rebuild their homes. Demand for such programs is expected to increase as climate change fuels more extreme weather events.

A woman wearing a dress looks down at black gravel.

Mikey Burke looks down on the gravel covering her land where her home used to stand before a fire consumed it two years ago. Anita Hofschneider / Grist

But every program has limited funding and specific criteria that may limit who can access it. And for disaster survivors struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder and other disaster-induced health problems while frequently moving between temporary rental homes, staying on top of the patchwork of assistance programs is yet another burden.

Even Burke—who keeps a notebook filled with dozens of pages and multicolored tabs documenting nearly every effort she has made to advocate for her family over the past two years—overlooked an email from a housing assistance program that gave her five days to respond and missed the chance to receive $30,000. “That is a huge amount that could be lifted off our shoulders,” she said. “I was really bummed about missing that.”

Before the fire, like a lot of working moms, Burke was the CEO of her family, juggling her kids’ school performances and extracurricular activities and sports games, and medical appointments. Now she’s doing all of that while remembering to call her mortgage servicer every few months to have the same conversation over and over.

“I’m calling to extend my forbearance,” Burke will say.

“Disaster forbearance is only up to 12 months,” the person at the other end of the line will usually respond. “We have other options available to you.”

“Actually, my mortgage is owned by Fannie Mae, and that’s not what Fannie Mae told me,” Burke will tell them, reminding them of the government-owned entity that owns her loan. “Fannie Mae said that I can be on disaster forbearance for as long as I’m not in my home and we haven’t rebuilt; we’re still in temporary housing.”

“OK, let me do some research,” they’ll say. They’ll put her on hold, and then: “We’re not seeing anywhere that Fannie Mae has extended the disaster forbearance.”

That’s when Burke will request to speak with a supervisor, who will agree to do more research and often tell Burke she’ll get a call back. Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn’t. In July, Burke found out her forbearance was extended because she just happened to check the website—nobody called her with the news.

Even then, she’s still on high alert. Last summer, she found out she was briefly in foreclosure from a random conversation with a Mr. Cooper representative who looked up her file—again, she said, the company hadn’t notified her. Michala Oestereich, a company spokeswoman, declined to comment on Burke’s case, but said that the servicer is required to comply with loan requirements that are set by investors. Some allow forbearance periods to last as long as 24 months, but others don’t.

It will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to rebuild the Burkes’ house, and insurance money will only cover a portion of that. But she is just as determined as she was 20 years ago when she decided to move home to Maui. For Burke, she’s fighting for more than just a house.

“It doesn’t just anchor me,” she said. “It anchors my children and grandchildren. Because at the end of the day, whatever they choose in life, they will always have that piece of ʻāina.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

As Feds Flaunt Trump’s Takeover, DC Pushes Back

In a small park in northwest Washington on Friday, a group of what appeared to be eight federal agents posed for a picture in front of an anti-ICE banner. Then they tore down the sign and departed with it. In its place they appeared to have left a dildo.

As if this week were not bizarre enough: Mount Pleasant residents tell me a group of federal agents gathered for a photo-op near a pro-immigrant banner, pictured below, then tore it down.

In its place, they left a dildo. A neighbor's Ring camera captured the whole thing… pic.twitter.com/YbXmFMwL6S

— Alex Koma (@AlexKomaDC) August 15, 2025

We can’t be sure how much thought the feds gave to their actions.But by removing a banner because they didn’t like what it said, then depositing a rubber dick in a park frequented by children, they crisply conveyed what Donald Trump’s occupation of DC is really about.

The agents were not there to stop crime. Instead, they communicated to the mixed leafy neighborhood of Salvadoran immigrants and mostly progressive-leaning townhouse residents that Donald Trump has the power to override their rights and democracy in the left-leaning district. Or, basically, suck our dildo.

National Guard troops parked by monuments and museums in downtown DC are far from the spots where the worst DC crime occurs, but well placed to alert tourists that the president has the power to occupy DC with troops. The dismantling of homeless encampments in the district, without planning for where the residents will go, does nothing to address homelessness or the fentanyl crisis in the district, but it does remove signs of poverty from the route the president takes on his way to play golf.

Less than a week into the occupation, Trump’s display of authoritarianism, famously greeted by a Subway sandwich-chucking now-former DOJ employee, is still ramping up. But it is facing mounting pushback from DC residents.

On Friday, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, after waffling slightly between defiance and efforts to maintain cordial relations with the White House, moved toward opposition. The district sued to block Trump’s effort to seize control of its Metropolitan Police, arguing that Attorney General Pam Bondi’s attempt to install Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator Terry Cole as head of the force was illegal. DC got a quick, if partial, victory on Friday, when Judge Ana Reyes persuaded the DOJ to walk back Bondi’s order and remove Cole as de facto head of the department.

Reyes said the White House can ask DC police for help, but cannot simply dictate their policies. “The statute would have no meaning at all if the president could just say, ‘we’re taking over your police department,'” Reyes said. Reyes did not rule on whether Trump can compel DC police to enforce federal immigration laws, but said she believed the president does have some power to enlist local officers for immigration actions.

Bowser’s pushback clearly reflects pressure from DC residents. Red “Free DC” signs distributed by a local nonprofit are rapidly multiplying in yards around the city.

On Wednesday night,a federal checkpoint at 14th and V Streets NW near a popular nightlife area drew a crowd of protesters, including residents who made hand-held signs warning drivers to avoid the agents, and heckled the federal agents, chanting “shame” and “go home.” Onlookers cheered as local police, who had accompanied the feds, departed.

Tensions continued Friday night. Steven Rangel, 21, said he was walking along 14th St, NW, around 9:45 p.m. with a poster and megaphone announcing the presence of ICE agents nearby when a man tore up his poster. Rangel said the man had repeatedly indicated he had a gun on his hip and threatened: “If you come closer I’m going to shoot you.”

More than half a dozen bystanders yelled for the nearby Homeland Security agents to intervene, but according to Rangel, “They just stood there.” The agents, supposedly on the streets to prevent crime, told Rangel to call 911, he said.

Later a Mother Jones reporter saw the man who attacked Rangel smashing what appeared to be a camera or cell phone he had taken from a photographer, while yelling that the photographer as well as protesters were the reason law enforcement officers get killed on the job. After a 911 call, DC police officers arrived and spoke to the man. Federal agents did not.

At a McDonalds at 14th and U Street, an area ripe with bars and clubs, David, a lifelong DC resident in his 50s, said the federal agents patrolling that area, “are in the wrong place. They should be in dangerous neighborhoods.”

On Saturday, independent journalist Marisa Kabas posted a video that shows a half dozen masked federal agents tasing and punching a unarmed man while subduing him. The video does not show what prompted the confrontation. Asked by onlookers for identification and what agency they work for, one agent responds: “Do I have to answer to you?” And: “I don’t care my guy.”

In Mount Pleasant Saturday, the park where agents ripped down the anti-ICE sign was full of new slogans opposing the occupation, written in chalk on the sidewalk. One, where the dildo was left hours earlier, read, with a slight misspelling, “Gustapo Go Home!”

Isaias Guerrero, co-director of local group Poder del Pueblo, which organized a protest concert in the park on Thursday night, said the group planned to hold additional events using music to oppose what he called “the actions of a dictator.”

“We’re saying, ‘We’re not gonna take that,” Guerrero said. “This is a show of fighting for democracy.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Trump-Putin Summit Was a Win for Russia

During his campaign, Donald Trump repeatedly promised that he would end the Russia-Ukraine war in the first 24 hours of his presidency. Eight months in, he has left a summit with President Vladimir Putin without a deal.

Trump went into Friday’s meeting in Anchorage with the goal of securing a ceasefire, telling reporters on Air Force One, “I want to see a ceasefire rapidly. I don’t know if it’s going to be today, but I’m not going to be happy if it’s not today.” Putin has resisted calls for a ceasefire, while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, along with other European leaders, have stressed the importance of a commitment to stop fighting in order to begin negotiations for a lasting peace deal. On Wednesday, Trump promised “very severe consequences” if Putin did not agree to a ceasefire.

After the meeting with Putin, Trump backtracked on the idea of a ceasefire entirely on Truth Social. “It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,” he wrote.

Without a demand for a ceasefire, Russia can continue to fight in Ukraine without concern for US sanctions. Leaders in Moscow have celebrated the meeting as a victory for Russia.

In an interview with Sean Hannity following the summit, Trump praised Putin, saying, “I always had a great relationship with President Putin, and we would have done great things together.” He went on to complain about the “Russia Russia Russia hoax” getting in the way of their potential partnership.

Trump has insisted that he wants to see the killings in Ukraine end, but it’s also clear he stands to gain from the end of the war, as my colleague David Corn wrote in May:

It seemed rather obvious that Trump wanted the war to end not because he was outraged by Putin’s vicious and vile assault on democracy and decency but so he would be free to work with the Russian autocrat for whom he has expressed admiration for over a decade.

Trump has for years been yearning for an out-in-the-open bromance with Putin—perhaps like the profitable relationships he has forged with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other nations. But this desire has been impeded by the Ukraine war and also complicated by an inconvenient fact: Trump would not likely have reached the White House without Putin’s assistance.

For nine years, Trump has done a masterful job of suppressing what was perhaps the most important story of the 2016 race: Moscow attacked the US election to assist Trump, and Trump and his crew aided and abetted that assault by denying it was happening. With his relentless ranting about “Russia, Russia, Russia,” the “Russia hoax,” and the “witch hunt”—propaganda enthusiastically embraced and loudly amplified by right-wing media and GOP leaders—Trump has essentially erased from public discourse Putin’s successful subversion of an US election and Trump’s own traitorous complicity.

Zelenskyy will travel to Washington for a meeting with Trump on Monday. In a statement on Telegram, the Ukrainian president wrote that “the killings must stop as soon as possible, and the fire must cease both on the battlefield and in the air.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

What Police Weren’t Told About Tasers

Kansas City police Officer Matt Masters first used a Taser in the early 2000s. He said it worked well for taking people down; it was safe and effective.

“At the end of the day, if you have to put your hands on somebody, you got to scuffle with somebody, why risk that?” he said. “You can just shoot them with a Taser.”

Masters believed in that until his son Bryce was pulled over by an officer and shocked for more than 20 seconds. The 17-year-old went into cardiac arrest, which doctors later attributed to the Taser. Masters’ training had led him to believe something like that could never happen.

This week on Reveal, we partner with Lava for Good’s podcast Absolute: Taser Incorporated and its host, Nick Berardini, to learn what the company that makes the Taser knew about the dangers of its weapon and didn’t say.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Fossil Fuel Producers Derail Global Agreement to Combat Plastic Waste

This story was originally published by Inside Climate News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Global talks on curbing dangerous plastics pollution ended early Friday without agreement on a comprehensive treaty. Divisions over whether to mandate enforceable limits on plastic production were too deep to bridge.

“I believe that everybody is very disappointed. However, multilateralism is not easy,” said Inger Andersen, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme. “To the people who are disappointed, I am in that group.”

She said discussions about moving ahead will continue, including at the UN Environment Assembly in Kenya in December, where a report on the plastic talks is due.

Failure of the talks means that island-sized rafts of rotting plastic in the world’s oceans will keep growing for the foreseeable future, and that dangerous human health impacts from the production and processing of plastic will increase.

“A bad process doesn’t lead to good outcomes.”

A 2022 resolution passed by UNEA, which includes all U.N. member states, obligated the countries to create a legally binding treaty to address these growing environmental and health threats. Four meetings over the past two years preceded this month’s Geneva talks, which were intended to deliver a full-fledged deal.

Andersen noted that no previous major U.N. treaties had been finalized on such an ambitious timeline.

“And it is important that everyone takes time to reflect on what they have heard,” she said. “Because in the closed groups…in the corridors of these halls, red lines have been mentioned for the first time in a true way which will enable deeper pathway seeking as we move ahead.”

The red lines highlight the deep division between the two blocs. One group of about 80 to 100 countries, including the European Union and numerous developing countries and island nations in the Global South, is calling for global action to address all aspects of plastics pollution.

A smaller group, including fossil-fuel producers, said they would not accept a treaty with limits on production. Gas and oil are the primary raw materials for plastics. The United States doesn’t consider itself aligned with either group, but its positions at the latest round of talks place it closest to the one blocking action.

The deadlock mirrors the situation at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiations aimed at limiting the global temperature increase caused by humans, where a similar coalition of oil- and gas-producing countries has long blocked any ambitious measures to reduce fossil fuel use, including for the production of plastics.

To a growing number of people involved in international environmental talks, that’s a sign that the consensus-based system is not working. At Geneva, hallway conversations increasingly explored options for voting on key provisions in the treaty, including whether production and consumption should be addressed.

“A bad process doesn’t lead to good outcomes,” said South African marine biologist Merrisa Naidoo, attending the Geneva talks for GAIA Africa, part of the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives.

“We only care about the achievement of consensus,” she said, speaking during a press conference on Thursday. “But consensus is not democracy. It ignores the will of the vast majority of member states, and has unfortunately started to cater to the wish list of the petrostates and fossil fuel industry.”

For the global majority favoring swift measures to curb plastics, the frustration built up throughout the Geneva talks. Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, head of Panama’s delegation at the talks, at one point said, “We are not here for diplomatic tourism. We are here to negotiate. We’re here to engage. We’re here to get a deal that includes the entire life cycle of plastic, and that means addressing production.”

About half of all plastics produced are used once and then discarded, and that, he said, “is not innovation. This is human arrogance that poisons rivers and robs our children of a safe future.”

Microplastics especially are a dangerous scourge that must be dealt with soon, he added.

“They are in our blood, in our lungs and in the first cry of a newborn child,” he said. “Our bodies are living proof of a system that profits from poisoning us. Behind every microplastic also lies a macro lie, and that lie is that recycling alone will save us.”

But provisions calling for less production would cross red lines for several countries, including the United States, a major plastics maker. The country opposes “restrictions on producers that would harm US companies and the nearly one million American workers employed in plastics and related industries,” according to a statement from the US Department of State.

“There is no one-size-fits-all approach to reducing plastic pollution; the agreement shouldn’t create prescriptive lists of products or chemicals to restrict,” a State Department spokesperson wrote in an email.

Since the start of the second Trump administration, the US has backed away from international engagement and collaboration on environmental topics, but has remained fully engaged in the plastics talks. Its delegation is headed by the same career diplomats who represented the US under the previous administration of President Joe Biden.

And while the Trump administration and Congress are trying to reverse many of Biden’s environmental policies, that’s not the case at the UNEP plastic talks. Under both Biden and Trump, the US has been opposed to legally binding measures requiring a reduction of plastic production and consumption.

The differences between the two administrations are nuanced, said Rachel Radvany, an environmental health campaigner who has been tracking the plastic talks since the beginning for the Center for International Environmental Law.

Under Biden, the US seemed ready to support language that would at least include some aspirational language about capping production, but that is no longer the case, she said.

“What they were supporting was not really a production cap and phase down,” she said. “It was like an aspirational target that would leave us in the same place for plastics as we are for climate, when it’s like, when everyone’s responsible, no one’s responsible.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Anti-Vaxxers Are Making Excuses for the CDC Shooter

When Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared on Scripps News this week to address the tragic CDC shooting, he began by condemning the violence that had occurred four days earlier, when shooter Patrick Joseph White fired over 180 rounds into CDC buildings in Atlanta, Georgia. White broke approximately 150 windows and killed Officer David Rose, a Marine veteran, father of one, and expectant father of another. White then fatally shot himself at a nearby CVS. Investigators later discovered writings in which White blamed the COVID-19 vaccine for his depression and suicidal ideation—beliefs that reflect themes common in anti-vaccine spaces. Public health workers, Kennedy said in the interview, “should not be the targets of this kind of violence from anybody.”

But then Kennedy pivoted, claiming, somewhat cryptically, that it was unclear what drove the shooter. “We don’t know enough about the motivations of this individual, but people can ask questions without being penalized,” Kennedy said, seemingly referring to people who question the safety of vaccines. He then shifted his remarks back to critiquing federal public health policy. “What I’m trying to do at the agency,” he said, “is return it to gold standard science.”

That carefully ambiguousresponse contained echoes of the reactions from some of the most influential anti-vaccine influencers on social media. The day after the shooting, Erin Elizabeth, creator of Health Nut News and a well-known anti-vaccine figure with 219,000 followers, posted on X that the tragedy stemmed from public frustration with CDC vaccine guidance, not from misinformation. “R U shocked that mainstream admitted the vaxxed CDC shooter [gun emoji] people and took his own life because of the Covid vaccines, which made him suicid@l?” she wrote. “It’s proven to alter brain chemistry. And several of my regulars w accts posted today that the shot has made them like this.”

Larry Cook launched the Stop Mandatory Vaccination movement in 2015. He grew a Facebook community of around 360,000 members before platforms dismantled much of his reach, using fundraising and promotion to spread anti-vaccine and health conspiracy content. On August 13, Cook reposted an Instagram post that accused news outlets of incorrectly referring to the shooter as an anti-vaxxer rather than an ex-vaxxer. “Fake news can’t distinguish between an ex-vaxxer and an anti-vaxxer,” Cook told his 131,000 followers on X, implying that White soured on the Covid shot only after concluding that he had been injured by it.

Another amplifier, Jessica Rojas—who describes herself as a “conspiracy realist,” “mother,” and “libertarian skeptic”—also weighed in, posting to her 211,000 followers, “Media spin: ‘CDC shooter was an anti-vaxxer.’ Truth: He got the shot, was injured, and abandoned. Also, he didn’t kill any kids. The CDC can’t say the same.”

Into this mix entered Dr. Robert Malone, a physician and biochemist who in recent years became one of the most prominent critics of Covid vaccines, promoting false claims about their safety and efficacy. Kennedy recently appointed Malone to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), whose previous members Kennedy had fired this spring.

In the wake of the shooting, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) demanded that Kennedy remove Malone from the ACIP. Blumenthal pointed to Malone’s posts rounding up memes—one from a day before the shooting featured an image of a revolver with the phrase, “Five out of six scientists have proven that Russian roulette is harmless,” and another from two days after the shooting that included the phrase, “if you need a disarmed society to govern, you suck at governing.” Blumenthal said they were unacceptable, especially in the context of a tragedy that killed a law enforcement officer and terrified public health workers. Malone, however, has contested these allegations, insisting they were misinterpreted and denying that they justify his removal. Thus far, Kennedy has not weighed in regarding Malone’s future at ACIP.

HHS Communications Director Andrew Nixon said Monday in a statement that Kennedy “has unequivocally condemned the horrific attack and remains fully committed to ensuring the safety and well-being of CDC employees.” The CDC’s employee union, however, seemed unconvinced. In a statement, they described a climate of escalating hostility toward public health staff, fueled by misinformation, and urged federal leaders to explicitly denounce disinformation and improve staff safety. The tragedy, the union wrote, “compounds months of mistreatment, neglect, and vilification that CDC staff have endured.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Democratic Socialists of America Want to Win

Last month, energized by growing membership and recent electoral victories—including Zohran Mamdani’s New York City mayoral primary win—the Democratic Socialists of America convened in Chicago. The disagreements were the usual for the group: the needs of electoralism pitted against the goals of radicalism. But, overall, the goal was the same. DSA wants to win.

Building support outside its base was a recurring theme throughout the convention. This year, for the first time, DSA hosted 40 outside guests. They represented labor unions, community organizations, and international political parties. “We need relationships with regular people who believe a better world is possible,” said Laura Waldin, from Portland, Oregon, who organized the political exchange.

The guests included keynote speaker Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, who gave a rallying speech. But she also pushed DSA. The congresswoman took them to task for not having a diverse enough leadership body and urged delegates to organize on the street and in face-to-face conversations. It is DSA’s duty “to cultivate this power—people power—into a force that can fight fascism,” she said.

Man in red jacket holds up a red card.

Delegates cast their votes at the DSA National Convention in Chicago. Resolutions passed include fielding a socialist candidate to compete in the next presidential election and affirming DSA’s anti-zionist position.

Group of young people singing.

Delegates including two from Austin, TX, sing “Solidarity Forever” at the closing festivities at the DSA National Convention.

That fight may soon take on a new dimension. The more than 1200 assembled delegates voted to field a presidential candidate in 2028 so that working class struggles can take center stage.

Jeremy Cohan, former co-chair of NYC DSA and newly elected member of the National Political Committee, joined DSA after campaigning for Sen. Bernie Sanders, and voted for the measure to bring forward a 2028 candidate. He said it was a mistake to have sat out of the 2024 election and not confronted Biden. “The primary is a site of struggle,” Cohan told me.

Internal member disputes and financial woes had stymied the DSA national governing body in the past few years. But local chapters have grown rapidly. Around 250 DSA members hold elected office nationwide. Portland’s city council has four DSA members in a 12-person council. And, earlier this month, DSA member Denzel McCampbell squeaked out a primary victory for Detroit City Council. (Campbell volunteers powered by DSA knocked on 15,000 doors.)

Man walking past cluster of tables in convention center room.

Around 1000 delegates packed into the McCormick Convention Center for the DSA National Convention in Chicago.

Silhouette of a woman speaking on a stage, seen on a large screen.

There is a no clapping rule (frequently violated) at the DSA National Convention.

In July, Minnesota state senator and DSA member Omar Fateh won his primary for mayor of Minneapolis against an incumbent candidate. And, of course, there is Zohran Mamdani, whose historic campaign helped double the NYC DSA chapter to over 11,000 members, by far the largest in the country. A recent Siena poll has Mamdani 20 points ahead of former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in the November mayoral race.

While electoral wins may be the most visible manifestation of DSA strength, its other areas of militant organizing attract many members, too. Jessica Czarnecki, a restaurant hostess from Brunswick, Maine, joined DSA in June 2023 after she and co-workers at her local coffee shop went on strike and were shut out by their boss. She recalled how DSA showed up on the picket line and financially contributed to a strike fund.

“I need to be in an organization that made a material difference in my life,” she said. While she and her co-workers lost the strike and the coffee house shut down, she doesn’t see it as a loss. “The connections we made from that experience is the win,” she said. She has personally recruited around 20 new members to her DSA chapter, and they organized a tenants’ rights meeting last year.

Dominic Bruno, an electrician from Pittsburgh, said he joined up after DSA members defended him against police officer at a 2017 protest to honor Heather Heyer, who was killed at the white power Unite the Right rally in Charlottsville.

Since then he’s worked to build the chapter of around 700 members by bringing “social back into socialism.” The group hosts cocktails for comrades and coffee for comrades, hiking meet ups, free shops and swaps, mutual aid, twice monthly hot food distros, and a DSA community garden.

Person talking to Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib.

Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib greets international guests at the DSA National Convention.

Group of people waving a large red DSA flag.

The Portand, OR contingent hoist a flag at the closing ceremonies of the DSA National Convention in Chicago. Four DSA membesrs serve on the Portland City Council or 1/3 out of the total council.

Silhouettes of people against a window.

Delegates and guests in conversation at the DSA National Convention.

Man holding phone with a group of people behind him.

Twitch star and online streamer Hasan Piker greets delegates at the DSA National Convention in Chicago.

Group of people singing around a man playing a piano.

Sing in Solidarity choir from the NYC DSA entertain delegates at the DSA National Convention in Chicago.

Portrait of woman wearing a mask.

Jessica Czarnecki from Brunswick Maine at the DSA National Convention in Chicago.

Portrait of man in yellow shirt.

Dominic Bruno a delegate from Pittsburgh, at the DSA National Convention in Chicago.

Portrait of back of man wearing shirt that reads, "MAGA: Mexicans Ain't Going Anywhere."

An organizer from Mexico wearing a MAGA teach shirt – Mexicans Aren’t Going Anywhere at the DSA National Convention in Chicago.

Portrait of woman with raised arm, holding a red card.

Laura Wadlin, from Portland, OR, and a member of the DSA National Political committee and convention co-chair casts a vote at the DSA National Convention.

Group photo.

The newly elected and expanded National Political Committee celebrate their election victories with a group photo at the DSA National Convention.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Tribal Nations Scramble to Save Clean Energy Projects

This story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Cody Two Bear, who is Standing Rock Sioux, served on his tribal council during the Dakota Access pipeline protests in 2017. Growing up in a community powered by coal, the experience was transformative. “I’ve seen the energy extraction that has placed a toll significantly on tribal nations when it comes to land, animals, water, and sacred sites,” said Two Bear. “Understanding more about that energy, I started to look into my own tribe as a whole.”

In 2018, Two Bear founded Indigenize Energy, a nonprofit organization that works with tribes to pursue energy sovereignty and economic development by kickstarting clean energy projects. Last year, with nearly $136 million in federal funding through Solar for All, a program administered by the Environmental Protection Agency, the nonprofit launched the Tribal Renewable Energy Coalition, which aims to build solar projects with 14 tribal nations in the Northern Plains.

But when President Donald Trump took office in January, those projects hit a wall: The Trump administration froze Solar for All’s funding. That temporarily left the coalition and its members earlier this year without access to their entitled grant (it was later released in March). However, the EPA is considering ending the program entirely.

The coalition is back on track with its solar plans, but now tribes and organizations, like the ones Two Bear works with, are bracing for new changes.

When President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, or OBBB, became law last month, incentives for clean energy projects like wind and solar tax credits and clean energy grants were cut—a blow to the renewable energy sector and a major setback to tribal nations. Moves from federal agencies to end programs have shifted the project landscape as well. The current number of impacted projects run by tribes is unknown. According to the Alliance for Tribal Clean Energy, at least 100 tribes they have worked with have received funds from federal agencies and the Inflation Reduction Act; however, those figures could be higher. “Without that support, most of, if not all of those projects are now at risk for being killed by the new unclear federal approval process,” said John Lewis, the Native American Energy managing director for Avant Energy, a consulting company.

“Some of these projects, at a minimum, have stalled, or they’re having to be reworked in some way to fit within the current parameters that have been laid down by the administration.”

The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, for instance, has planned solar projects reliant on federal tax cuts. The projects were designed to power a community health clinic, schools, and a radio station that broadcasts emergency notices during winter storms. However, with the passage of the OBBB, the tribe must now begin construction by July of next year or lose credits, a feat that doesn’t account for the time it takes to secure capital in various stages, seek a complete environmental review, and navigate long permitting timelines through the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

“Some of these projects, at a minimum, have stalled, or they’re having to be reworked in some way to fit within the current parameters that have been laid down by the administration,” said Verrin Kewenvoyouma, who is Hopi and Navajo, and a managing partner at Kewenvoyouma Law, a firm that assists tribes with environmental permitting, cultural resources, and energy development. “We have clients that are looking at creative solutions, trying to keep them alive.”

In June, the Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan, a joint organization representing 12 federally recognized tribes in the state, joined a class action lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency, alongside a tribe in Alaska, arguing that the agency illegally froze access to promised project funds from the Environmental and Climate Justice block grant program. The now-defunct program promised $3 billion to 350 recipients to fund projects addressing pollution and high energy costs. Plaintiffs hope the program will be reinstated so that pending projects can be restarted.

Tribes are now seeking philanthropy, short-term funding, and conventional financing to cover delays and gaps in project costs. After the Guidiville Band of Pomo Indians in California lost access to a $3.55 million BIA award to the tribe for solar microgrid development in March, the BQuest Foundation, which specializes in covering expenses needed to continue housing or climate-related projects, gave the tribe $1 million to resume the project’s timeline.

Currently, the self-funded Alliance is covering tribal projects that have experienced a sudden loss in tax credits, rescission of federal funds, and uncertainty of direct pay. “We’re helping try to navigate this challenging period and continue on their self-determined paths, whatever it looks like for them—to energy sovereignty,” said Shéri Smith, CEO of the organization. At the moment, the Alliance is offering a mix of grants from $50 to $500,000 and loans up to $1 million, which will be converted to grants should a tribe default.

“Tribes need to build up internal capacity to carry that out and to have control of their energy situation, for their at-risk members, and members in general,” said John Lewis from Avant Energy. “At such a critical stage, access to affordable, reliable electricity is paramount. The country is getting hotter. The world is getting hotter. It’s warming.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

EXCLUSIVE: These Three Texas Democrats Are “Standing Strong” Amid GOP Redistricting Push

We’re well into the second week of the Texas redistricting showdown. Far from home, these Texas Democrats are resolute. In an undisclosed location, I sat down with them to talk about their decision to leave their home state to stand up for democracy.

WATCH:

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Mother Jones (@motherjonesmag)

More than 50 Texas House Democrats fled the state en masse earlier this month, with many holing up with their blue state brethren in Illinois and New York, to block a GOP-led attempt to redraw congressional maps that could yield Republicans up to five additional U.S. House seats—part of a radical Trump-inspired scheme to help Republicans keep control of the US House of Representatives after the 2026 midterm elections.

The current special session of the Texas chamber may adjourn if a quorum isn’t met, but Texas Governor Greg Abbott has vowed to call successive special sessions until the redistricting plan is passed. He’s also signed civil arrest warrants for absent Democrats and invoked a nonbinding opinion from the scandal-plagued Attorney General Ken Paxton regarding their possible removal from office; any such action would ultimately require court rulings. My colleague Tim Murphy found one prominent Democrat holed up somewhere outside Chicago last Thursday, just hours after Sen. John Cornyn announced that the Trump administration would assign FBI agents to help “hold these supposed lawmakers accountable.” I explained the basics of the big stand off in a video posted last week:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Mother Jones (@motherjonesmag)

In the Texas Senate, Democrats also staged a symbolic walkout but failed to break quorum, allowing GOP legislators to advance the redistricting proposal in the chamber. Still, for the map to become law, both the House and Senate must pass it, and the governor must sign it, meaning the standoff continues.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Tulsi Gabbard Once Blasted Trump for Being a Warmonger and Protecting Al Qaeda

These days, Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, is a faithful servant for President Donald Trump, going so far as to cook up a phony intelligence report so Trump’s Justice Department can pursue investigations of his perceived enemies. But not so long ago, Gabbard slammed Trump for being a warmonger supporting a “genocidal war” in order to score billions of dollars in arms sales and for pushing an “insane” policy “to protect Al Qaeda.”

These blistering criticisms of Trump came during the first Trump presidency, when Gabbard was a Democratic House member from Hawaii and a founding fellow of the Bernie Sanders Institute, a nonprofit the socialist senator from Vermont set up after his 2016 presidential campaign to promote progresssive policies. In the fall of 2018, Gabbard, who had supported Sanders’ presidential bid, recorded a video with Jane Sanders, the senator’s wife and a co-founder of the institute, in which she accused Trump of profound perfidy.

Gabbard not only blasted the Trump administration’s policy as misguided; she asserted that Trump was backing Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen to protect $2 billion in US arm sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Gabbard excoriated the “disastrous decisions” of the US government that had led to “regime-change wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan. Referring to the “genocidal war that Saudi Arabia” was then waging in Yemen, she noted that it had created the “worst humanitarian disaster in the world,” and she decried the Trump administration for “standing shoulder to shoulder with Saudi Arabia in this war, as they commit these atrocities against Yemeni civilians.”

Gabbard referred to this conflict as “an illegal war that the United States is waging” with Saudi Arabia. She added that Trump was using US taxpayer dollars to “refuel Saudi planes, to provide precision missiles” that were attacking weddings and school buses. She called for stopping all US military support for Saudi Arabia—a government with which Trump was striving to forge a closer bond.

Gabbard not only blasted the Trump administration’s policy as misguided; she asserted that Trump was backing Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen to protect $2 billion in US arm sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. She leveled a serious charge at the Trump White House: “These leaders are making decisions for profits on the backs of the lives of these innocent civilians in Yemen. It’s heartbreaking to see how these millions of people’s lives have just been devastated by the continuance of this war.”

Sanders turned the conversation to the ongoing civil war in Syria. Trump had recently threatened to use military force against Russia-backed President Bashir al-Assad if Assad attacked Idlib province, a stronghold of the jihadist opposition, and Gabbard assailed the president for his “beating of the war drums.”

She contended that Al Qaeda controlled Idlib and Trump’s action was a “complete betrayal of the American people, of those who lost their lives on 9/11, of the troops who have been fighting against terrorism and their families.” She said, “It’s insane, frankly, that we would hear these threats coming from the United States president and the commander in chief that they will force ‘dire consequences’ and the use of military force against these other countries to protect Al Qaeda.” (At that point, the largest rebel force in Idlib was a group with historic ties to Al Qaeda.)

Explaining to Sanders why Trump was supposedly protecting Al Qaeda, Gabbard described what was close to a conspiracy theory:

Since 2011, when the United States, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and these other countries started this kind of slow, drawn-out regime-change war in Syria, it is terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham—these different groups—that have morphed and taken on different names but are essentially all linked with Al Qaeda or [are] Al Qaeda themselves that have proven to be the most effective ground force against the government in trying to overthrow the Syrian government. So President Trump and his war cabinet recognize now that if Al Qaeda is destroyed in Syria, in Idlib, which is kind of their last stand, then that ground force will be gone, and this regime-change war, in effect, will be over.

Gabbard was saying that Trump was purposefully backing what she called Al Qaeda in order to keep the war going in Syria.

Regarding Idlib, Trump’s national security team at that time was concerned that an Assad assault on the province—with the likely support of Russia and Iran—would produce much bloodshed and chaos and cause a massive flow of refugees into Turkey. This flood could include thousands of jihadist fighters who might move to other parts of Europe. Trump’s advisers also feared that Assad in attacking Idlib might once again use chemical weapons.

Gabbard did not address these matters and focused only on her belief that the Trump administration was aligning itself with Al Qaeda to keep alive the war against Assad. She seemed supportive of allowing Bashar to proceed with an assault on Idlib—or not taking steps to prevent him from doing so.

By this point, Gabbard had already positioned herself as an outlier on Syria policy and had been branded an apologist for Assad. She had questioned international findings that Assad had used chemical weapons on civilian targets. And in 2017, she held a secret meeting with him.

This conversation with Sanders was not a one-off. In an interview with the Nation weeks earlier, Gabbard had castigated Trump for protecting “al-Qaeda and other jihadist forces in Syria,” all the while “threatening Russia, Syria, and Iran, with military force if they dare attack these terrorists.” She slapped Trump for acting “as the protective big brother of al-Qaeda and other jihadists.” She painted a dark picture of him:

The president loves being adored and praised, and despite his rants against them, he especially craves the favor of the media. Trump remembers very well that the only times he has been praised almost universally by the mainstream media, Republicans, and Democrats, was when he has engaged in aggressive military actions… Right now, President Trump’s approval ratings are dropping, and he craves positive reinforcement. He and his team are making a political calculation and looking for any excuse or opportunity to launch another military attack, so that Trump can again be glorified for dropping bombs… President Trump and his cabinet of war hawks are concerned that if Al Qaeda is defeated in Idlib, then our regime-change war to overthrow the Syrian government will be over.

During her chat with Jane Sanders, Gabbard, who was a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, affirmed Sanders’ calls for Medicare for All and a Green New Deal. She bemoaned the nation’s “addiction to fossil fuels.” And when Sanders referred to the “autocratic nature” of Trump, Gabbard nodded along. She also praised the “great work” of the Bernie Sanders Institute.

Mother Jones sent Gabbard a long list of questions about her harsh criticism of Trump’s actions related to Yemen and Syria, her work with the Bernie Sanders Institute, and her support of Medicare for All and the Green New Deal. She did not answer any query, but her press secretary at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Olivia Coleman, emailed, “For a publication that brands itself as ‘investigative’ and pro-peace, your inquiry conveniently ignores everything President Trump and DNI Gabbard, under his leadership, have done to keep Americans safe and advance peace since day one. Shame on you for using cherry picked remarks from seven years ago in a clear attempt to smear them.”

In December 2018, Gabbard was a featured speaker at a conference organized by the Bernie Sanders Institute, and appeared on a panel with actor Susan Sarandon, civil rights activist Ben Jealous, and progressive economist Radhika Balakrishnan. Addressing the topic of environmental justice, she said that “the most basic and fundamental human right is clean air and clean water.” She asked the audience to hold its breath. “You can’t exist for very long without air, ” she remarked.

At this gathering of leftist Democrats and progressives, Gabbard was quite at home. She noted that “so many of the decisions that are being made in regards to policy” were “being driven by greed.” She recounted her participation in the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline in Standing Rock, South Dakota. She assailed the fossil fuel industry. She noted that economic conditions in Central America were driving people in that region to flee their countries and called for US policies to address that. She urged “economic empowerment” in the United States “based on human rights and needs, not consumerism and greed.”

Two months later, in February 2019, Gabbard announced her bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. After a year of campaigning, having collected merely two delegates, she withdrew from the race and endorsed Joe Biden, the eventual nominee. Two years later, Gabbard, who had once been a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, left the party—calling it too woke and too hawkish—and endorsed several Trump-backed GOP congressional candidates in the 2022 midterm elections.

In August 2024, Gabbard, the onetime progressive House Democrat and Bernie Sanders Institute fellow, endorsed Trump, now claiming he had the “courage” to pursue peace and see “war as a last resort.” His support of Saudi war crimes in Yemen (due to a greedy desire for revenue from arms sales) and his supposed scheming to support Al Qaeda in Syria were memory-holed—as were her previous leftish views on economics, health care, and the environment.

Trump’s current stable of top appointees includes several who were once fierce critics and who dumped their harsh views of Trump in order to serve him. On this roster are Secretary of State Marco Rubio (“a con artist”); Vice President JD Vance (either “a cynical a–hole like Nixon” or “America’s Hitler”) and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (“a threat to democracy”). But only one of his senior aides previously accused Trump of making common cause with Al Qaeda, betraying the nation, and supporting war crimes for the sake of profits—and that person now comfortably works for Trump and oversees the entire US intelligence community.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump Plans Raids on DC’s Homeless Tonight, Sources Say

The Trump administration is planning citywide sweeps of dozens of homeless encampments in DC starting tonight, according to city workers and advocacy groups briefed on the plan. In anticipation of the raids, organizations that assist the homeless are hurriedly working to get homeless individuals out of tent encampments before they can be detained or arrested.

“Arrests will occur at night, in an effort to avoid news cameras,” Jesse Rabinowitz, communications director at National Homelessness Law Center, said via email.

“We are working to get our clients out of harm’s way as much as we can, and to monitor whether the actions follow the law.”

The impending crackdown, which local government staff and local and national advocacy groups confirmed to Mother Jones, come less than a week after President Donald Trump wrote on social media this week that the homeless have to “move out, IMMEDIATELY.”

A DC government worker briefed on the plan says law enforcement will target up to 62 different sites across the city, and that land not controlled by the federal government may not be immune from sweeps. (People sleeping in front of churches and businesses may also be targeted, the source says.)

It is unclear whether DC Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) or federal law enforcement will lead the efforts, or if the National Guard members Trump deployed to the district earlier this week will assist. Neither MPD nor the White House immediately responded to requests for comment.

Crucially, advocates point out, there are not enough shelter beds in the nation’s capital to accommodate all of the people who regularly sleep outside. According to a joint press release from the National Homelessness Law Center, the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, and Miriam’s Kitchen, there are currently just 40 shelter beds available and nearly 900 people who may need them.

“We are working to get our clients out of harm’s way as much as we can, and to monitor whether the actions follow the law,” Amber Harding, executive director at the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, tells Mother Jones.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Ken Paxton Is Beating John Cornyn…In a Race to the Bottom

Ken Paxton’s path to becoming one of the conservative movement’s most powerful lawyers is littered with the sort of obstacles that might have brought a more reputable politician down.

The third-term Texas attorney general is a law enforcement official whose own staff reported him to law enforcement; a former state representative who was later impeached by the state house; a securities broker who admitted to breaking securities law; and a promoter of Biblical values whose wife recently announced she was leaving him over “Biblical” transgressions. His petition to the US Supreme Court to effectively overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election was such a mess that lawyers in the Florida attorney general’s office mocked him in private and the State Bar of Texas tried to impose sanctions. But in a political moment in which Republican officeholders are engaged in endless displays of debasement, Paxton’s shamelessness is his superpower. He is the guy you get when you need someone to go above and beyond what a respectable lawyer would do—the smirking face of lawfare.

Paxton did what he’s always done when power or attention are in the offing: wield the legal system against his opponents.

And this year, he’s seeking a promotion. Polls give the AG a healthy lead in his primary challenge to Sen. John Cornyn, but the outcome could hinge on which of the two candidates earn the endorsement of President Donald Trump. So when Democrats in the Texas house of representatives fled the state earlier this month to block passage of a Trump-ordered mid-decade redistricting bill that would likely net the party five seats in Congress, the 62-year-old Paxton did what he’s always done when power or attention are in the offing: wield the legal system against his opponents.

Republicans have attempted to use financial penalties, litigation, removal from office, and imprisonment to get their maps passed. And Paxton, eager to distinguish himself to the president and his most loyal voters, has led the way. Since Democrats left the state, Paxton has gone to court to try to remove 13 Democratic representatives from their seats—including minority leader Gene Wu and James Talarico, a possible Senate candidate. He asked a judge in western Illinois to enforce arrest warrants issued by the Republican speaker of the house for the Democrats (the representatives are staying much further away, outside of Chicago). He is suing Beto O’Rourke—the 2018 Democratic Senate nominee who is reportedly considering another run for Senate next year—and alleging that the former congressman broke the law by using funds from his political organization to support quorum breakers. And on Tuesday, Paxton took his most serious step, asking a judge in Fort Worth to have O’Rourke jailed for allegedly violating a temporary restraining order that barred him from “raising and utilizing political contributions from Texas consumers to pay for the personal expenses” of legislators.

You don’t need a strong imagination to conjure a scenario in which this situation might have played out much more tamely. When Texas Democrats broke quorum in 2003 in an attempt to block a similar mid-decade redistricting effort, Greg Abbott was the Republican attorney general. He didn’t attempt to have the Democrats removed from office. In 2021, when Democrats flew to Washington to break quorum, Republicans waited out their Democratic colleagues to eventually pass a voter-suppression law.

But the incentives are different this time around. Paxton is trying to stay one step ahead of scandal, and Cornyn is trying to stay one step ahead of Paxton—or if you trust the polling, catch up, before anti-Paxton Republicans in Washington give up hope and hitch their wagon to someone else. (Reps. Wesley Hunt and Ronny Jackson, are both reportedly considering entering the race.) Cornyn has gamely played his hand, writing to FBI director Kash Patel last week to request the FBI’s assistance in locating the absconding Democrats. Nevermind that their absenteeism was not a federal issue, that the Democrats’ whereabouts were so widely known that their hotel has been evacuated for a bomb threat, and that many of the legislators were holding public events.

“I think Senator Cornyn is trying to stay relevant in his primary battle with Ken Paxton,” Talarico told me last week.

But Paxton has a lot more tools at his disposal, and he’s adept at using them. In addition to seeking O’Rourke’s detention, and his ongoing efforts to have quorum-breaking lawmakers removed from office, Paxton has deployed one of his favorite tactics as attorney general. Under Texas law, the attorney general can “request to examine” the books of any Texas non-profit. As I reported last year, Paxton has frequently used RTEs to harass and intimidate organizations that work with migrants and promote voting rights. And he’s used such fishing expeditions to promote conspiracy theories that those organizations were involved in human trafficking and voter fraud—which, in turn, could be used to justify further crackdowns.

Last week, he issued an RTE for O’Rourke’s political action committee, Powered by People, accusing it of “potentially operating an illegal financial influence scheme to bribe runaway Democrats who fled Texas to break quorum.” A candidate for higher office demanding to see the communications and other internal records of a critic and political rival is a potentially enormous abuse of power—surpassed only by the threat to jail the same rival. For Paxton, it was just another Wednesday. By Friday, he was suing O’Rourke on behalf of the state, accusing him of “scamming” Texans by using political donations to commit “bribery.” (O’Rourke has denied that there is anything illegal about his group’s operations and is fighting Paxton’s claims in court.)

The redistricting episode is a microcosm of the late-Trump-era GOP: A ruling party prioritizing a partisan power-grab over flood relief; entirely-serious threats to prosecute and jail political opponents; the casual misuse of the FBI; and a messy primary battle pumping gasoline onto the fire. Some of Paxton’s legal argument might be losers—Texas legislators have been breaking quorum for 150 years, and no legislators have been expelled for breaking quorum anywhere in the United States since colonial New Jersey. But the chief flunky of the Big Lie has long played by a different set of rules: bad cases are how he wins.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

DC’s Homeless Have Nowhere to Go. Trump Might Send Them to Jail.

On the 26-mile motorcade ride from the White House to his private golf club in Northern Virginia (one of 18 in his collection), President Donald Trump observed a few tents on public land and some garbage under an overpass. Perturbed by the imagery, he issued a sweeping demand via his social media site, Truth Social: “The Homeless have to move out, IMMEDIATELY.”

“We will give you places to stay, but FAR from the Capital,” Trump continued in his Sunday post. “Be prepared!”

The command came as he made plans to deploy 800 National Guard members to DC and temporarily federalize the city’s police department, which he announced in a rambling 79-minute press conference the next day.

Advocates for homeless people immediately pointed to a fundamental problem (one of many) with Trump’s order: There aren’t enough shelter beds in the nation’s capital. Accordingly, how can homeless people prepare if they have nowhere to go?

“We really don’t know what that looks like,” Andy Wassenich, the policy director of the local nonprofit Miriam’s Kitchen, which provides free food and social services in DC, tells me.

And if Trump’s plan for removing homeless people from the District is hazy, so is his rationale. In his zig-zagging speech from the briefing-room podium, Trump described an anarchistic hellscape home to “violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals, roving mobs of wild youth, [and] drugged out maniacs and homeless people.” The description perhaps conjured visuals of sprawling tent encampments where rape and assault problems run rampant, but the depiction doesn’t match the reality: US Park Police have already removed 70 DC tent encampments in response to an an executive order Trump signed in March, and violent crime in the city is actually at a 30-year low. To the extent that unhoused people still live outside in DC, most sleep alone or in small clusters. This subgroup of the unhoused surely isn’t welcoming crime, of which they are disproportionately victims. They too want law enforcement to arrest dangerous criminals in DC—homeless or not.

“In DC, there are, right now, 30 open shelter beds for men and 30 open shelter beds for women… So for all intents and purposes, there’s nowhere else for people to go.”

Wassenich’s concern is that unhoused people minding their own business will be targeted along with the alleged criminals Trump has vowed to crack down on. On Tuesday afternoon, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested that was indeed a possibility.

“Homeless individuals will be given the option to leave their encampment, to be taken to a homeless shelter, to be offered addiction or mental health services,” said Leavitt. “And if they refuse, they will be susceptible to fines or to jail time.”

Among those at risk is 66-year-old Larry, who did not provide his last name. Sitting on a park bench in Dupont Circle, where he has spent most of his days since losing his housing in June, Larry explains that keeping a roof over his head had never been an issue until his wife passed away from kidney failure in 2022. Her death meant the loss of the earned income she contributed to their household, but more importantly, it deprived Larry of his will to get out of bed in the morning.

“I didn’t feel like I could go on,” he tells me. “When I finally came back to reality, I ended up outside.”

Alongside the DC National Guard, which was mobilized Tuesday, the newly federalized DC police could theoretically arrest Larry for sleeping in Dupont Circle, which—like much of DC—is considered federal property.

“I sleep sitting up,” says 66-year-old Larry, who is concerned about the possibility of arrest in DC.

The Supreme Court legitimized this practice in a 2024 decision in which the conservative justices ruled that the city of Grants Pass, Oregon could fine and arrest unhoused people for sleeping outside, even though there weren’t sufficient homeless shelter beds to accommodate them.

Larry is concerned about the possibility of arrest in DC and takes extra measures to prevent it. He doesn’t have a tent—just a pushcart and a backpack. He says he is most comfortable sleeping during the daytime and doesn’t lie down to avoid trouble. “I sleep sitting up,” he says. (At night, he says, he posts up at a better-lit bus stop, but doesn’t fall asleep).

Like Grants Pass, DC also lacks enough shelter beds. “In DC, there are, right now, 30 open shelter beds for men and 30 open shelter beds for women in places that are very hard to get to and places that people don’t generally want to go,” explains Jesse Rabinowitz, communications director at the National Homelessness Law Center. “So for all intents and purposes, there’s nowhere else for people to go.”

Among those on the street, several unhoused people I spoke to say they were generally supportive of an increased presence of law enforcement dedicated to arresting violent crimes offenders—they just don’t want to be lumped in with them.

“Keep the violent people away,” Henry Johnson, an unhoused man selling Street Sense newspapers in Georgetown, tells me in 90-degree heat.

Experts point out that it’s more likely for an unhoused person to be the victim of violence—between 14 and 2021 percent of the unhoused population is affected, versus less than 2 percent of the general population. “Does that mean there are no violent offenders in the homeless community?” Wassenich says. “Of course not.”

“But don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater,” he continued. “Deal with the ones who are dangerous. Let everybody else be.”

Thus far, DC police haven’t announced any arrests based solely on someone’s status of being unhoused. (Nor did the department respond to Mother Jones’ request for comment.) But in the meantime, Wassenich says, we can expect unhoused people to scatter to further corners of the city—where it isn’t as easy for places like Miriam’s Kitchen to help them find food and shelter, or keep track of their wellbeing.

“You can sweep away an encampment, but you’re not sweeping away homelessness,” Wassenich says. “The person is still homeless, they’re just in a different spot.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Report: Teen with Disabilities Detained by ICE Outside School in Los Angeles

On Monday, a 15-year-old boy with disabilities was detained by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement outside a Los Angeles Unified School District high school at 9:30 am when he was registering for classes.

KTLA 5 reported that the boy was placed in handcuffs; he was only released after both school staff and the Los Angeles Police Department intervened. Latino students, who are more likely to be profiled by ICE, make up close to 75 percent of the student body at LAUSD.

“The release will not release him from what he experienced,” LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho said during a press conference. “The trauma will linger. It will not cease. It is unacceptable, not only in our community, but anywhere in America.”

California State Superintendent Tony Thurmond also said in a press release, referring to the actions of ICE agents, “these military-style actions against innocent children and their families on and near school campuses must stop now. Our children deserve to be protected and cared for at school, not terrified and traumatized.”

The school year officially starts on Thursday, and the LAUSD school district has taken steps to try and protect students against ICE, according to reporting from the Los Angeles Times. This includes the following:

School police and officers from several municipal forces will patrol near some 100 schools, setting up “safe zones” in heavily Latino neighborhoods, with a special concentration at high schools where older Latino students are walking to campus. Bus routes are being changed to better serve areas with immigrant families so children can get to school with less exposure to immigration agents.

Community volunteers will join district staff and contractors to serve as scouts — alerting campuses of nearby enforcement actions so schools can be locked down as warranted and parents and others in the school community can be quickly notified via email and text.

California Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, ahead of Donald Trump assuming office last December, also introduced a bill that would prevent public school officials from allowing ICE agents on campus. The bill has been referred to committee. ICE agents, however, can still enter schools when they have a judicial warrant.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s Homelessness Crackdown Has Been Tried Before. It Didn’t Work.

This week, President Donald Trump announced that his administration will remove homeless encampments from Washington, DC. It came at a press conference in which he declared a public safety emergency in the nation’s capital, despite violent crime numbers hitting a 30-year low. But the announcement also illustrated something else: The way the country approaches homelessness is rapidly changing.

In July, Trump issued an executive order that not only makes it easier for cities and states to eliminate homeless encampments, but also directs authorities to involuntarily commit unhoused people struggling with mental health issues or substance abuse. The policies represent a dramatic shift away from an approach the federal government has used for years called Housing First, an evidence-based program that prioritizes housing over treatment. Sam Tsemberis first developed the Housing First approach in the 1990s. Tsemberis was working as a clinical psychologist in New York City, where he brought people who lived on the streets into hospitals for treatment, often against their will. He soon realized that many of those people ended up back on the streets, seemingly no better off.

Housing First proved more successful than treatment-first models. It soon became the way cities, states, and the federal government approached homelessness, including the Department of Veterans Affairs, which used Housing First to cut veterans’ homelessness in half over the last 15 years.

But the Trump administration is now abandoning the approach, and Tsemberis says that decision could lead to disastrous consequences for the hundreds of thousands of people who are homeless in America. “People will get discharged from the hospital. They will get released from the jail. And they’ll be back out on the street and the thing will be going in a circle again,” Tsemberis says. “The only way to end homelessness is to provide housing.”

On this week’s More To The Story, Tsemberis sits down with host Al Letson to examine the potential effects of Trump’s executive order, how he developed the Housing First approach decades ago, and whether the US has the necessary values to truly tackle poverty and homelessness.

This following interview was edited for length and clarity. More To The Story transcripts are produced by a third-party transcription service and may contain errors.

Al Letson: Let’s talk a little bit about how you came up with the idea for the Housing First Program. Exactly what is that and when did it originate?

Sam Tsemberis: The Housing First Program is a program that helps people who are homeless and have mental health, and addiction problems, and often health problems as well. The program originated in response to this era of homelessness. We’ve had homelessness in America at an increasing level for the last 40 years, so this has been around, for some of the people that are listening, I imagine, their entire lives. A whole generation has grown up thinking homelessness is part of the landscape, but homelessness really started in the early ’80s, right after the Reagan administration took office and introduced policies that were supply side economics, they were called. They had this idea about trickle-down theory, give tax breaks to the wealthy and to corporations and they will create jobs for the rest of the population and let’s cut government spending because there isn’t a lot of tax revenue because corporations and very wealthy people aren’t paying taxes so you have to reduce the size of government.

One of the things that they did was they were cut out, essentially cut out the public housing program which was housing for people who needed a rent subsidy. That, very soon, right after that, we began to see people on the streets of every major city in America. That was homelessness, that was disaster. Many of the people looked like they had disabilities, mental health issues, the shelters were filled, and there was a struggle in getting people into housing at that time, because in order to get housed, if you had a mental health or addiction problem, you needed to take care of the mental health issue and the addiction issue before you would get housing. Some people were successful in that, but many tried and couldn’t. Mental illness and addiction are relapsing conditions. You can do okay for a while and then you relapse and it’s back to the start, so there was a growing group that wasn’t managing in the existing system of care in the treatment then housing system. That’s a lot of background to say that we needed a different approach, we needed to do something else, and that’s where Housing First came in.

The Trump administration signed an executive order that will make it easier to remove homeless people from the streets and called for ending support for Housing First policies that don’t promote treatment, recovery, and self-sufficiency. What’s the clash between what they’re doing and what you do?

What they’re doing is they are insisting that people go to treatment or else they get arrested and go to jail. It sounds like they’re doing something. Actually, other than the immediate removal of someone from the street to go to a hospital or to a jail, this is a very expensive and completely ineffective approach to homelessness, because people will get discharged from the hospital, they will get released from the jail, and they’ll be back out on the street and the thing will be in a circle again. This is what it was like in the ’80s when Reagan started all of this, and we had that same cycling. The only way to end homelessness is to provide housing. Unless you provide housing, you’re going to have people going in and out of jail, hospital, shelter, jail, hospital, shelter. They’re saying that they believe in treatment, recovery, and self-sufficiency. It absolutely flies in the face of what then they are proposing for their policy. There is no recovery in jail. There is no recovery in a hospital. You’ll take care of an immediate illness, but recovery is a long-term process that requires support in the community.

It feels like their idea of recovery and homelessness is not based on reality, is based on the things that they would like to see. All of us would like to see people who are unhoused and who are having mental challenges get the help that they need and become self-sufficient, but that’s not an easy path. The reality of it is that it takes a while for these things to happen and sometimes you may never get the outcome that you want, but if that’s the case, do you just throw people away because they can’t get to that goal that you have set? That is an unrealistic goal.

What I find amazing about the language in the executive order is that they have taken the very language of Housing First and twisted it into making it sound like this is what they want. Housing First is about treatment, and recovery, and self-sufficiency. That’s what living in an apartment by yourself with supports is all about. They have done the same thing with DEI. They’ve taken diversity and inclusion and made it into discrimination. I mean, there’s a sinister quality to this, like the language choice and calling up-down and left-right, and just confusing people with it. There’s a sort of a sinister quality to it. The thing that is to be determined, I would say, is the extent to which this executive order will actually translate into actual policy. This is an executive order. It’s not the budget for Housing and Urban Development, or Health and Human Services, or the Veterans Administration.

I think where the rubber hits the road on these policies will be determined about where the money is allocated. I mean, are they really going to stop funding housing and rent subsidies? What about the thousands, probably hundreds of thousands of people now, that are housed and the government is paying rent for them? Are they going to pull those rents? I doubt that that is going to be welcomed even by this party. Taking such a strong stance specifically against Housing First Program reverses the policy that’s been in place for at least the last 10 or 15 years. The question is, will the funding follow the policy? If it does, it would be quite disastrous.

As someone who was around when Ronald Reagan put these policies in place that helped create the homelessness problem we’re seeing today, the ideas of trickle-down economics, are you now feeling a sense of déjà vu watching what the Trump administration is doing on this issue?

Absolutely, a parallel in policy, although I would say that the first version, there was still a veneer of politeness about the things somehow. This is the gloves off and we got to get these people off our street, they’re a hazard to us. Any trace of compassion about people suffering is really gone from this administration’s policy. There’s a punitive tone to getting people out of the citizens’ ways, get people out of parks, get people off the streets, reclaim the cities, which is understandable from the point of view of we’ve had homelessness for a long time and why haven’t we solved it, because I think there is a solution. I have that same frustration. But from that frustration, this administration is going to punitive measures like arresting people or demanding involuntary treatment for people, basically to move them from the streets into jail or hospital as opposed to something more compassionate like help them get housed. It’s cruel.

Do you think that through the eyes of the administration just going off of their policy stances, that they look at poor people, unhoused people, people with mental disabilities as like it’s a moral failing? I.e. like you did something wrong and so now you have to pay the consequences and it’s not on us to fix it.

Yes, that was the policy. I don’t know if you recall, Reagan used to talk about welfare queens and people taking advantage of the system, and then about homelessness, he’s quoted saying that, “Well, some people are just out there by choice,” and always pointing to individual failings, because if you don’t point to individual failings, you have to acknowledge that we have an out-of-control real estate system, that the rents have been increased, and minimum wage has barely increased at all. You have people falling into homelessness all the time not because they’re not working hard. You have people in shelters that are working one or two jobs and can’t get that first month’s rent and first month’s security together.

Everyone is doing the best they can, but the system is stacked up against you if you are not making enough money, if you are a member of a minority group. In every single state that we count homeless people, in every single state, minorities, Blacks, Latinos, or indigenous people are always overrepresented, so these are structural issues that preclude people getting the good jobs, getting into housing, and then you see the representation on the street and you’re blaming the individual for a game that’s stacked against them.

Yeah. Can you give me a sense of how many people are homeless in the U.S. at any given night?

On the last count for 2025, we had about 775,000 people that were homeless on that one night, but it’s a very narrow window. They count in January so all of the northern states are quite cold. I mean, that’s the minimum number, and these are people who are both in shelters and on the streets.

With this new executive order from President Trump, what do you expect to happen to that number?

I think if you remove the funding from housing and put money into going into hospitals or jails, it’s going to be much more expensive and there are going to be many more people homeless.

Let’s talk about that a little bit as in the expense of it, because on the surface, it would seem that they are creating this new path as a way to save on the budget. It’s in the spirit of DOGE and trimming the government down, but you think it’s going to actually cost the government more in the long run.

Well, it costs, on the low side, about 1,500 to $2,000 a day for a hospital bed. If you put someone in a hospital for a month, you have basically spent… Let’s say a $2,000 day, you’ve spent $60,000 for a month of hospitalization, and then at the end of that month, the person is discharged back out into homelessness. For $60,000, you could pay someone’s rent for three or four years depending on where they’re living. This is not saving anyone any money. It’s costing a fortune for these very expensive acute care services and doing nothing about ending the homelessness. Whereas that investment just skip hospitalizing people, skip arresting people, put them right into housing, you would save a lot more money and you would house and end homelessness for a lot more people.

Talk to me about how you got into this work.

Well, I got into this work out of complete frustration and failure in trying to bring people to the hospital, ironically enough, because I thought that was the right thing to do. I was trained as a psychologist, I saw people on the street that had mental illness, and I would try and persuade them that it’s for their own good to go to Bellevue and get some treatment and things will be better, I naively thought. Some people did go, and other people, we actually had to bring involuntarily to the hospital. I was one of those people that worked in one of these involuntary treatment programs that are being proposed now. What I saw both as an experience, but we were also keeping data on it, is that the majority of people ended up returning to the street and actually being more wary of engaging in treatment because it didn’t go well for them that first time. That’s ultimately what got me to thinking, “Hey, we got to do something else, because what we’re doing is not only not effective but it’s actually alienating people.”

We went to the people themselves that were on the street, was very much a ground up kind of a program developed, and we said, “How can we help you?” They said, “Isn’t it obvious? Isn’t it obvious? We need a place to live?” We began to bring people literally from the streets into apartments, and then we had a team of case managers, social workers, psychiatrists, people with lived experience that would make house calls after the person was housed. We thought, “Okay, we had now at least another alternative for those who couldn’t get clean and sober to get into housing.” People got into housing and then they got well, they got better. 80% of the people assigned to Housing First would be housed and stay housed, and about 40% of the people that needed treatment first and then housed would get housed, so we were onto something, I thought, very, very effective.
We published it and then people began to say, “Maybe there’s something to this. We think it’ll work over here, why don’t we try it over here? Would you be willing to come and show us how to do it?” I think the gradual implementation of the programs with the success that it delivered, it began to be more widely accepted.

Here’s what I’m trying to wrap my head around. A decade ago, this approach was widely celebrated and received bipartisan support. The George W. Bush administration was even the first to make it a centerpiece of their federal approach. When did things start to change? What happened?

It was during the first Trump administration. They appointed somebody in what used to be the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness that the Doge people have actually now eliminated as an agency, but that was sort of the federal agency in charge of setting federal policy. The first Trump administration appointed someone that was anti-Housing first. They were saying, “Housing fourth. First is treatment, sobriety, and then employment, and then housing maybe,” but they weren’t in power long enough to actually do anything about it. Project 2025 did a lot of work in between those two terms, and when they hit the ground running this time, it wasn’t housing fourth, it was housing last, and now we have the executive order that says, “Actually, don’t do Housing First at all.”

Housing First definitely has its critics. Homelessness in the U.S. has been rising, some say that Housing First doesn’t adequately address the underlying mental health and addiction issues that often contribute to homelessness. What do you tell people who say this approach doesn’t work?

Homelessness is rising because of the structural factors that contribute to homelessness. The rents are too high and the salaries and the benefits are too low and there’s a racial discrimination. That’s what contributes to homelessness. We have more people falling into homelessness. Every year that we’ve been counting homelessness with a few rare exceptions, the numbers keep going up. Housing First is a program that works for people who are homeless and have mental health and addiction problems. Everywhere where the program is implemented properly, it solves homelessness for 80 or 90% of the people it’s working with. These programs serve a couple of hundred people.

We don’t have a National Housing First Program, but we have a national homeless count, so because the national homeless count is going up does not mean that the hundreds of Housing First Program serving people are not working. They are absolutely working, but we’ve never taken Housing First to a national scale. We’ve never tried to house 770,000 people. Not all of them would need Housing First anyway. Most of the people who are homeless just need a housing voucher, but we’ve never taken Housing First to scale, so to say that it hasn’t solved homelessness is accurate, but…

But it’s also disingenuous.

Totally disingenuous, because it’s never been scaled up to try and solve homelessness. It only solves pockets of homelessness in the cities where it’s tried.

Yeah. You’ve been working on this for a really long time. How does it feel seeing something you’ve developed get dismantled this way?

I haven’t given up that it’s being dismantled actually. But the attack, the attack, I have to say, is completely new, and it’s just such a disservice to homelessness. The irony of it is that Housing First is probably the most successful program that has been used by the two federal agencies that have actually embraced it. HUD and the Veterans Administration have used Housing First over the last 10 years to house veterans that are homeless, and they have reduced veterans’ homelessness by 56%.

Do you think this executive order is going to threaten those programs?

It appears as a threat to all Housing First Programs, and I don’t know exactly how it’s going to be implemented.

Yeah. What are you doing to try and keep your policies, Housing First, in place? Is there anything you can do?

Well, the thing that I think we can do is sort of the same thing we’ve learned from people that were running DEI programs and other programs that have been pushed out by this administration. We are basically providing people with housing and supports. I think that maybe we get less pushback if we say we’re housing people and we’re providing support services for them. You don’t have to call it Housing First, you don’t have to call it anything. You can call it helping people who are homeless.

Yeah. It’s like figuring out ways around the roadblock by not calling attention to it.

Exactly, exactly.

If the Democrats get back in power, what are the moves that you think that they should be taken? I guess the question is that Ronald Reagan was in office for a set amount of time, and when he got out, we never went back to fixing the policies that clearly weren’t working, so what is the work for the next administration that wants to get this right?

I’m not sure that, as a country, we inhabit or embrace the kinds of values it would actually take to fix poverty in this country. If you recall after Reagan, Clinton came in and did away with welfare so that people who are poor have been beaten up on by both parties, because both parties are somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum between left and right. I mean, we’re way over on the right now. But even if the usual Democrats get back in, I don’t know that they are willing or able to go back to building public housing, guaranteeing healthcare for all, which are the kinds of things we would need to have to begin to deal with the damage that has been done since Reagan and what this administration will also contribute to significantly. We have to move way over to a much more… A society where we believe that every member of our society needs to be taken care of.

Find More To The Story on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Pandora, or your favorite podcast app, and don’t forget to subscribe.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

What Is a Far-Right Ideologue Going to Do With the U.S. Institute of Peace?

In February, President Trump included the U.S. Institute of Peace in an executive order targeting federal entities he deemed “unnecessary” and which he planned to cut as much as he legally could. In March, the USIP’s Washington D.C. offices were invaded by armed private security as part of a brute force takeover by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency. Amid the subsequent running court battle, the USIP, which once employed over 200 people, has been reduced to a ghost organization, with around four total workers. In court, DOGE and the Trump administration continue to insist they can seize both USIP’s famous headquarters, situated near the National Mall, as well as its finances.

“How can this person be one to lead any peace-building? It just seems absurd.”

In late July, the State Department also announced a new, eyebrow-raising acting president for what’s left of USIP: former academic Darren Beattie, who was fired from the first Trump administration for speaking at a conference heavily attended by white nationalists.

Beattie is also an undersecretary for public diplomacy and public affairs at the State Department, despite the act that created the USIP seemingly barring him from accepting a salary for both roles. When asked for comment, a State Department spokesperson did not address the issue, but sent an anonymous statement suggesting Beattie’s appointment was in response to USIP having “slipped in its mission over recent decades” and saying he would “advance President Trump’s America First agenda in this new role.”

Beattie’s background and history of racist and extremist remarks has generated concern. He tweeted in 2024 that “competent white men must be in charge if you want anything to work;” another time that year, he floated an inflammatory rhetorical question: “What if America moved on to some national religion other than coddling and excusing inner city black dysfunction, violence, and misbehavior?” He has also advocated for stripping what he called “undesirables” of US citizenship, adding, “ship them out, put them to work extracting rare earth minerals. Peace through strength!”

The USIP was founded in 1984 under President Ronald Reagan as an independent, nonprofit, and nonpartisan organization to train people here and abroad in mediation, diplomacy, conflict management, and other peace-building skills. Staffers who were forced out of USIP, as well as an attorney who represents them, say it’s unclear what, precisely, Beattie could even do with today’s skeleton organization.

“Nobody knows if the intention is for this man to come in and reinstate the institute with this America First lens, or he’s there just to dismantle it,” a former USIP staffer who requested anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation said. “How can this person be one to lead any peace-building? It just seems absurd.”

“At the very least, it’s an incredibly peculiar appointment,” dryly observed another former USIP staffer, who also requested anonymity. “I don’t know the motivation. I’m not sure what it positions what’s left of the institute to do.”

Beattie, a former visiting professor at Duke University, has very little experience in anything that could be called “peace-building,” either at home or abroad. After being forced out of his White House job in 2018 in disgrace, he worked for then-Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz before founding Revolver News, a pro-Trump site that has repeatedly advanced conspiracy theories about the January 6 attack; just this April, a Revolver writer described the Capitol attack as a “totally manipulated event, crawling with fed involvement, unanswered questions, and a phony threat to democracy used to justify a slew of political crackdowns and North Korea-style arrests.” In November 2020, the week after Trump faced voters, he appointed Beattie to the U.S. Commission for the Preservation of America’s Heritage Abroad. The Biden administration forced Beattie to resign from the federal board in January 2022 over Revolver’s false claims about January 6.

Revolver, a website founded by Beattie, called January 6 a “totally manipulated event.”

In his time away from government, Beattie became obsessed with attacking research on disinformation, writing in 2022 that the term “disinformation” is “principally a pretext for domestic political censorship,” and tweeting derogatory remarks about Renee DiResta and Joan Donovan, two female disinformation scholars.

In his multiplying roles in the Trump administration, Beattie has largely seemed concerned with attacking disinformation research, and limiting the government’s participation in it. In April, Rubio shuttered the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference Hub, a small office that studied, tracked, and countered government-backed disinformation from foreign states like China, Russia, and Iran. According to reporting from MIT Technology Review and the New York Times, Beattie carried out the firings himself.

In April, between two rounds of USIP firings, Beattie tweeted from his official Department of State account that the disinformation industry is “a scam to monitor, demonetize, and censor Americans.” The exact same statement was immediately shared by Twitter accounts for the U.S. Embassy in London, the U.S. Mission to the EU, and the U.S. Embassy in Sofia, Bulgaria. The State Department did not respond a to a request for comment at the time about why the diplomatic accounts shared the statement.

The only indication about how Beattie views the organization he now heads is a tweet that he retweeted on July 25—the day his appointment was announced— from Mike Benz, a far-right activist who’s made his name as a crusader against “online censorship.” In 2023, NBC’s Brandy Zadrozny reported Benz had worked as a pseudonymous alt-right content creator and described himself as a “white identitarian” and railed against “Jewish influence.” (Beattie is Jewish.)

The post Beattie retweeted claimed that the organization he was about to take charge of was responsible for “dirty deeds in everything from drugs to riots to color revolutions”—essentially accusing it of undertaking espionage and regime change abroad.

The claim, says attorney George Foote, who until recently represented USIP for thirty years, and who is acting as outside counsel for former USIP employees, is “absurd” and “total fiction.” Friends of USIP, an organization supporting former staffers, has also denied claims in far-right media that the agency’s officials “funded the Taliban,” bought drugs, or carried guns. This week, Revolver News, the outlet that Beattie founded, described USIP as “a DC institution that has been accused of shady backroom operations, regime-change meddling, and more than a few quiet coups,” adding, “Thankfully, with Darren at the helm, that era may finally be coming to an end.”

This is not the first time that a right-wing ideologue has been appointed to the USIP. In 2003, uproar ensued when a Middle East scholar named Daniel Pipes, described by his critics as an anti-Muslim extremist, was nominated to the organization’s board by George W. Bush. While Democratic Senators launched a filibuster against his nomination, Bush used a recess appointment to install him anyway; he served until 2005.

“The peacemakers are fighting the fight. And we’ll keep doing it.”

But the Pipes appointment, however controversial, was not designed to undo or remake USIP as an organization. Under Trump, Foote says, the stakes are far higher, as the administration has insisted it can “transfer USIP’s assets, including USIP’s real property” elsewhere in the government.

“The principle that we’re fighting for here is one that matters from everything from the Fed down to Meals on Wheels,” he says. “If the government wins this case and can crush USIP—take a private corporation, privately owned building, private donor money, all in the guise of the president being the chief executive—we’ve got a different country.

USIP will put up the toughest possible fight. We’re going to fight this thing ot the end. There are people fighting in a similar way, all to defend this executive whose desire for power we don’t know the limits of. We don’t know where they’ll stop in the reach to control economic and political activity in the country. Not to over blow it, but here the peacemakers are fighting the fight. And we’ll keep doing it.”

Whatever Beattie’s plans for USIP, the reputational damage of his appointment, according to those familiar with the organization, will be hard to recover from.

“The name USIP means something… They’re known around the world for training tens of thousands of UN peacekeepers and others—really good, substantive work,” says Foote. “It would be a travesty of justice and criminal if that name is used as cover as any of the sort of things that Mr. Beattie is known for.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Desperate Towns, Empty Promises: The EV Startup That Left Three Communities Hanging

This story was reported by Floodlight, a nonprofit newsroom that investigates the powerful interests stalling climate action.

They came with promises of transformation: thousands of jobs, surging salaries, and a foothold in the booming electric vehicle market.

Imola Automotive USA, a Boca Raton, Florida-based startup, pitched officials in small, struggling towns in Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arkansas on a bold vision. The company planned to build six EV plants, create 45,000 jobs—and help these impoverished communities secure a place in America’s green future.

But more than 18 months later, the company hasn’t broken ground on a single site. And its top executive—whose background is in television and athletic shoes, not automotive manufacturing—has gone silent.

A Floodlight investigation did not uncover lost taxpayer money in Fort Valley, Georgia; Langston, Oklahoma; or Pine Bluff, Arkansas, where Imola has sought free land, municipal financing, and other incentives for its shifting proposals.

But an economic development watchdog said the episode illustrates how the frenzy to land electric vehicle jobs can leave economically distressed towns vulnerable to empty promises.

Imola CEO Rodney Henry declined requests for an interview. He responded to Floodlight’s inquiries with a short statement, insisting the company had not given up on its plans, which have included a partnership with an Italian manufacturer of two-seat electric vehicles.

“Our timetable has been modified due to matters outside of our control,” Henry said in a statement. “We are highly focused on bringing our goals into alignment. Due to proprietary considerations as well as NDA (nondisclosure) agreements, we are not at liberty to discuss specifics at this juncture.”

That’s a stark shift from the company’s earlier promises. In a press release issued in January 2024, Henry claimed the company had already secured land in multiple states to build half a dozen plants and create tens of thousands of jobs.

Two black men wearing suits sit next to each other at a wooden table. One signs a paper while the other looks at him.

Imola Automotive USA CEO Rodney Henry, left, looked on as Dr. Isaac Crumbly, of Fort Valley State University in Georgia, signed an agreement in 2024 to collaborate on science education and workforce development. It was part of Imola’s plan to develop an electric vehicle plant in Fort Valley. Since then, however, there has been no sign of construction.

Could someone with no experience in car manufacturing really deliver that?

“It’s ludicrous,” said Greg LeRoy, CEO of Good Jobs First, a nonprofit that tracks and analyzes economic development projects.

Building large auto plants, he said, requires “a great deal of capital, a great deal of management skill, a great deal of engineering and marketing chops. And obviously, Tesla developed those, but they didn’t do it overnight, right?”

Langston, Fort Valley, and Pine Bluff weren’t the only towns swept up in the competition to attract electric vehicle plants. Spurred by federal policies like the Inflation Reduction Act, which unlocked billions in private investment and expanded government incentives, local officials across the country scrambled to land high-paying manufacturing jobs and a slice of the booming clean energy economy.

Since the IRA passed in 2022, more than 150 EV plants have been announced in the United States, according to E2, a nonpartisan group of business leaders who advocate for economic development good for the environment.

But that rush may be grinding to a halt. The recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which rolls back many federal tax credits and incentives for electric vehicles, is already throwing the EV sector into turmoil—threatening to stall or shrink the kinds of ambitious projects towns like Langston, Fort Valley, and Pine Bluff were counting on. E2 reports that plans for 14 EV-related plants have been canceled this year.

In three towns where Imola pledged massive investment, there’s no sign of construction and little more than confusion.

Langston—a town of 1,600 where more than 35 percent of residents live in poverty—never saw Imola’s plans take shape.

A 2023 letter to the city council from former Imola chief operating officer Eric Pettus stated that the company had run into “multiple obstacles,” including trouble acquiring enough land.

“In order for us to continue moving forward on the project, we are requesting that the City of Langston convey to us any and all vacant properties owned by the city,” Pettus wrote.

Langston City Council member Magnus Scott said the company also asked the town to issue municipal bonds to help them build their plant.

But before any land changed hands or bonds were issued, a company representative delivered unexpected news: The deal had been canceled. “I guess maybe they ran into financial problems,” Scott said.

Reached by phone, Pettus, of South Florida, said he’s no longer employed by Imola but instead works as a consultant for the company. Citing a nondisclosure agreement, he declined to discuss Imola’s plans.

Fort Valleygave its backing in early 2024 to Imola’s ambitious plan to build an EV plant that would employ 7,500 workers.

A year later, with no sign of progress on the plant, the company came back to the Georgia town with an entirely different proposal. This time, instead of building an EV plant, they pitched a high-tech lighting system for the town.

One city council member balked.

“You want us to sign an agreement for 99 years before you bring us the car company? It feels like a bait and switch.”

“You want us to sign an agreement for 99 years before you bring us the car company,” said council member Laronda Eason, according to minutes of the March 2025 meeting. “It feels like a bait and switch.”

Eason did not respond to emails and text messages seeking comment on the Imola proposal.

In Pine Bluff, where per capita income last year was just over $21,000, city officials were initially all in. Writing to Henry in August 2024, then-Mayor Shirley Washington said the city of 39,000 stood ready to buy land, build infrastructure, and issue industrial revenue bonds to support Imola’s vision.

“With an anticipated employment base of more than 8,000 jobs,” Washington wrote, “we firmly believe this investment will marshal a pivotal turning point in our community.”

But a year later, the project hasn’t moved. “We never did get off the ground with that,” Washington said in a brief phone interview.

LeRoy said Imola’s pitch fits a troubling pattern.

“It grabs me as an example of how the craze among governors and mayors to get the next big thing has caused some sloppy vetting,” he said of the struggling communities courted by Imola.

Such towns, he said, are “easy prey…They’re desperate.”

Henry, who lives in Florida, touts a background as a longtime TV executive producer and the founder of Protégé, an athletic footwear brand. He claims on his IMDB profile that Protégé donated a million pairs of shoes to African nations.

But despite announcements of partnerships and promises of good-paying jobs, his EV company has yet to show any tangible progress.

Floodlight found the website for Imola—named after the Italian city where Tazzari EVs are made—is no longer accessible without a password. A search of the Tazzari website found no mention of plants in the United States. But a 2024 version of the Imola site mentions the tiny vehicles “coming soon to America.”

In early 2024, Imola Automotive USA and the Tazzari Group—an Italian firm best known for its electric two-seater micro cars—jointly announced plans for a partnership.

The EVs that Tazzari makes in Italy aren’t designed for highway driving. Top speed on the company’s Opensky Sport model is about 56 miles per hour, while maximum speed on the Opensky Limited is about 37 mph, according to the company’s webpage.

Tazzari didn’t respond to email messages from a Floodlight reporter.

A screenshot of a website page that says "Meet the Family Tazzari EV"
There are photos of several mini cars labelled "Zeromax Cube," and "Zeromax," and "Opensky."

These are some of the electric two-seater micro cars made by the Tazzari Group. The Italian firm and Imola Automotive USA jointly announced plans for a partnership in early 2024 as Imola promised to build electric vehicle plants in economically struggling U.S. towns. There’s no sign of progress so far.Tazzari Group’s website

Henry said at that time that the company chose Langston and Fort Valley because of their universities.

“Both of these locations are ideal,” he said in the January 2024 news release, “as their proximity to communities with institutions of higher learning will allow residents and students career opportunities in the fast-growing EV Technology and Innovation Industry.”

Many local officials in Fort Valley, Langston, and Pine Bluff did not respond to interview requests. Few documents were provided in response to Floodlight’s public records requests.

But it’s clear from available records that Imola’s promises stirred hope.

Langston Mayor Michael Boyles called the proposal “transformative” in a January 2024 news release.

But some local leaders soon began to question the details.

Erica Johnson, a real estate agent and former member of Langston’s economic development commission, said parts of the plan didn’t add up. How, for instance, would the company house more than 1,000 workers in such a small town? And how were they going to build such a large plant on land without utilities or water?

Her doubts deepened when she learned that Imola wanted to lock down land agreements without putting up any earnest money.

“My early feeling was, ‘Something is not quite okay with this,’” she said. “But I think the hope for our community kind of outweighed the ability to just take things slow and look at them for where they are and what they are—versus where you hope them to be.”

Eventually, the promise fizzled.

“It was disappointing,” Johnson said. “We could have had our energy and time focused on something that seemed more valid and more substantial.”

Some residents in Fort Valley are still holding out hope.

Mayor Jeffery Lundy said early last year that it was a “priority for my administration to land a company like Imola Automotive USA.” Local officials, he said, were looking forward to the economic boost the plant would bring.

An intersection with several signs. The largest points to the left and says "Fort Valley State University." Right below it, another sign reads, "Massee Lane Gardens."

In early 2024, Imola Automotive USA promised that it would build an electric vehicle plant in Fort Valley, Ga., that would employ 7,500 people and pay average wages of $45 an hour. The promises have raised hopes in the economically struggling town, but there’s little indication they will be fulfilled.Michael Rivera/Wikimedia

At the time, Imola claimed it would break ground on a 195-acre site by the third quarter of 2024 and open the plant within 20 months, according to a report in the Macon Telegraph.

During a February 2024 town hall meeting, Imola officials told residents that the plant would pay employees an average of $45 an hour, according to a Facebook post. Commenters buzzed with excitement, with one writing: “Application me !!!!”

Pettus told a local TV station that most jobs would require only a high school diploma.

In early 2024, Fort Valley rezoned land to accommodate the plant, and the city council signed off on the deal. But more than 15 months later, there’s still no sign of construction.

Council members were told that Georgia Power couldn’t provide sufficient power for the EV company, according to minutes of their March 2025 meeting. A spokesman for Georgia Power said that while the utility doesn’t discuss economic development projects, “We’re prepared and ready to meet the energy needs of any new customer.”

Makita Driver, one of the Facebook commenters who’d voiced excitement about the proposed EV plant, said there’s no doubt she would have applied for one of the jobs there, had the facility ever been built.

“The pay rate was really what got my attention,” she said.

As a medical assistant, Driver said she earns far less than what Imola had promised. But she eventually concluded the promises were too good to be true.

“Who really makes that kind of money starting out?” she asked.

In a brief interview with Floodlight on July 11, Mayor Lundy said he’s still in contact with Henry.

“We are patiently waiting for that groundbreaking,” Lundy said.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump Taps Project 2025 Architect Who Wants to Do Away With the Jobs Report to Run BLS

On Monday night, President Donald Trump announced his new pick to run the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) after firing the previous commissioner and baselessly alleging that recently released poor jobs numbers were “rigged.”

Trump’s pick for the post is EJ Antoni, a conservative economist at the Heritage Foundation and a longtime critic of the BLS who has suggested doing away with the report that so triggered Trump. “Our Economy is booming, and EJ will ensure that the Numbers released are HONEST and ACCURATE,” Trump claimed in his Truth Social post announcing he would nominate Antoni for the role.

Economists have called him “completely unqualified,” “an extreme partisan,” and “disastrously terrible.” Stan Veuger, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, told Axios that Antoni’s work at the Heritage Foundation “frequently included elementary errors or nonsensical choices that all bias his findings in the same partisan direction.”

A look at Antoni’s public statements, writings, and politics suggest that, if confirmed, he will likely help remake the BLS—a wonky, heretofore nonpartisan agency housed within the Department of Labor (DOL)—in Trump’s image.

Last week, Antoni, who is also a senior fellow for the right-wing Committee to Unleash Prosperity, said on Steve Bannon’s podcast that the next BLS commissioner should “be willing to essentially overhaul the entire thing.”

“We need a redo at at BLS, essentially,” Antoni said. He also told Bannon he thinks a MAGA Republican should be running the agency, alleging that the lack of a Trump supporter in a leadership role is “part of the reason why we continue to have all of these different data problems.”

BANNON: Have we put our own person, a MAGA Republican, into the Bureau of Labor Statistics?

E.J. ANTONI: No, and I think that's part of the reason why we continue to have all of these different data problems. @RealEJAntoni pic.twitter.com/kmvv95z9fD

— Bannon’s WarRoom (@Bannons_WarRoom) August 1, 2025

Also last week, in an interview with Fox News, Antoni suggested instead publishingquarterly data. But the monthly data, focused on estimates of employment and earnings nationwide, offers important information on the state of the economy for economists, policymakers, government officials, and employers. In a post on X the same day, Antoni seemingly contradicted himself, calling for the next BLS commissioner to ensure “consistent delivery of accurate data in a timely manner.”

According to his LinkedIn profile, Antoni received a doctorate in economics from Northern Illinois University in 2020. Since then, he has worked as an economist for a handful of right-wing organizations, including the now-defunct FreedomWorks and the Texas Public Policy Foundation. The Heritage Foundation, where he currently works, has become best known for compiling Project 2025, the more than 900-page guidebook to a second Trump term. Antoni is listed in the document as one of several hundred contributors who the document says “volunteered their time and effort to assist the authors in the development and writing.”

Project 2025 has some questionable ideas for BLS, including collecting and disseminating monthly “family statistics,” including marriage and fertility rates, and having a congressionally-appointed assistant commissioner for family statistics to oversee this data collection and dissemination. (This would, of course, track with the administration’s pronatalist priorities.) The document also suggests the administration should consider merging BLS with other statistical agencies, including the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis, which collect and share distinct data. Antoni did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Mother Jones on Tuesday afternoon, including a question on whether he supports Project 2025’s proposals for the agency or would implement them if confirmed.

Like Trump, Antoni has argued that the BLS revision of May and June jobs numbers to show weaker growth was politically motivated to make Trump look bad, even though such revisions are commonplace as BLS gains more precise data over time as employers complete voluntary surveys. Former government officials, including former BLS Commissioner William Beach, who was appointed by Trump in 2019, also said there was no way that Trump’s allegations of “rigged” data were possible.

Trump and Antoni share many other baseless takes. In his other writings for the Heritage Foundation website, Antoni has alleged Biden’s DOL shared unreliable jobs data, even though there is no evidence to support that. He called criticisms of Trump’s tariffs “overblown and unfounded,” even though major banks have said they create a higher likelihood of recession and economists have estimated they will cost the average US household thousands of dollars per year. He praised the work of DOGE, despite the havoc the DOGE bros wreaked across government. And Antoni has claimed immigrants are stealing jobs from American-born workers and that Trump’s mass deportation policies would raise wages and create more jobs, even though experts say they will tank the GDP and decimate industries including agriculture, health care, and construction, as my colleague Isabela Dias previously reported.

The Senate will need to confirm Antoni’s nomination in order for him to formally assume the post. And if he does, he will have his work cut out for him: Several of the agency’s top roles are vacant, and the White House budget seeks to cut its funding by $56 million.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Report: Half of Trump’s Judicial Nominees Have Anti-Abortion Records

During his campaign for a second term in office, President Donald Trump claimed that he would leave abortion “to the states” if reelected.

Trump has, in fact, managed to quietly shape the national abortion politics in his second term. According to a new analysis from the Associated Press, roughly half of Trump’s nominees to the federal judiciary thus far have records of being openly anti-abortion or associating with anti-abortion groups.

This is not entirely surprising for anyone who has been paying attention. As my colleague Madison Pauly outlined back in January, packing the federal courts with anti-abortion judges is one of the many insidious measures that reproductive rights advocates warned Trump could take to restrict access to abortion nationwide. But the new analysis from AP reveals the greatest detail to date about the extent of these nominees’ opposition to abortion.

In a statement provided to Mother Jones, Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, called on senators “to defend their constituents’ rights and health care by voting no on the remaining and future anti-abortion nominees.” (Five of Trump’s nominees, including two who the AP found have openly anti-abortion hsitories, have already been confirmed by the Senate.)

At least eight of the 17 nominees Trump has named so far have argued in favor of abortion restrictions or against expanding access, the AP reports.

These nominees include Whitney Hermandorfer, who defended Tennessee’s abortion ban as an attorney representing the state attorney general’s office last year; Jordan Pratt, who argued in support of Florida’s 15-week abortion ban back in 2023, when he was an attorney for the First Liberty Institute, a right-wing Christian legal group; John Guard, who defended the same Florida law as the state’s chief deputy attorney general; and Bill Mercer, a GOP state lawmaker in Montana, who has voted for a variety of anti-abortion bills.

Several of the nominees have also explicitly sought to restrict access to abortion pills, even though more than 100 scientific studies have proven they are safe and effective. Maria Lanahan, who is awaiting confirmation, and Joshua Divine, who has already been sworn in, both, while working in the Missouri Attorney General’s office, co-authored state’s complaint when it intervened in joining a then-pending lawsuit before the Supreme Court asking the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to rescind its approval of abortion pills.

It may be tempting to dismiss these nominees as a small handful of anti-abortion zealots who appear to share the anti-abortion politics of many others in the Trump administration. But as I previously wrote, nominees who secure one of these lifetime appointments wield immense power:

The significance of these lifetime appointments for the future of reproductive rights becomes apparent when you consider Matthew Kacsmaryk. He’s a Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas who issued an anti-science ruling [in 2023] that paved the way for anti-abortion activists to bring a case to the Supreme Court challenging the FDA’s approval of mifepristone, one of the two drugs used in a medication abortion.

[In 2024], the Supreme Court sent the case on emergency abortion care back to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals—a federal court in California with 10 Trump-appointed judges and jurisdiction over more than a dozen district courts in nine states.

As David Cohen, a law professor at Drexel University whose scholarly work focuses on abortion access, told me when I wrote that piece last year: “The power of lower court federal judges is immense, because the Supreme Court only deals with such a limited number of cases.”

Reproductive rights advocates said that the nominees’ anti-abortion politics are both unsurprising and deserving of urgent opposition.

“It’s no surprise that Trump is not only continuing to nominate more anti-abortion, anti-democracy extremists, as he did in his first term, but is also ignoring his promise to ‘leave it to the states,’ while lying about a half-baked plan to pay for IVF procedures, a major campaign promise, which has been proven to be nothing more than a hoax to curry favor with single-issue voters,” Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All, said in a statement provided to Mother Jones.

“These nominees have, and will always be, about who will remain loyal to Trump while advancing his agenda to ban abortion nationwide,” Timmaraju added.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Israel Has Killed Nearly 200 Palestinian Journalists in Gaza

Since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza in October 2023, the Israeli military has killed nearly 200 Palestinian journalists, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

The latest deaths include six journalists—five for Al Jazeera and one freelancer—who the Israeli military killed on Sunday in Gaza City, according to CPJ. Those killed include correspondents Anas al-Sharif and Mohammed Qreiqeh; camera operators Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal, and Moamen Aliwa; and freelance journalist Mohammad al-Khaldi, CPJ says.The journalists were stationed in a tent across from Al-Shifa Medical Complex when they were struck, according to a statement from the news outlet; al-Khaldi, a local freelancer, was struck in a nearby tent, an eyewitness told CPJ.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed in a post on X that it targeted Al-Sharif, 28, alleging that he was a “Hamas terrorist” who “posed as an Al Jazeera journalist”—a claim that Al-Sharif denied when he was alive. The IDF has made similar unsubstantiated claims against other Al Jazeera journalists who the military killed, CPJ notes. Last month, the IDF accused Al-Sharif of being part of Hamas’s military wing since 2013, which Al Jazeera called a “campaign of incitement” and “a dangerous attempt to justify the targeting of its journalists in the field.” Al-Sharif told CPJ at the time, “I live with the feeling that I could be bombed and martyred at any moment,” adding that his family was also in danger.

A man in a press vest stands inside a tent ridden with bullet holes.

Palestinians inspect the scene at the journalists’ tent Israel struck on Sunday.Omar Ashtawy/APA/ZUMA

In its statement on Monday, Al Jazeera called Al-Sharif “one of Gaza’s bravest journalists” and said the order to kill him and his colleagues “is a desperate attempt to silence the voices exposing the impending seizure and occupation of Gaza.” A compilation of his reports published by Al Jazeera on Monday shows him reporting from the front lines of the war. In one clip, he accompanied a rescue crew trying to free a man trapped under rubble; in another, he broke down crying, as a passerby told him, “Keep going, you are our voice.” His final report filed with the network was focused on the rise in starvation deaths in Gaza. On Sunday, Al-Sharif reported “intense, concentrated Israeli bombardment” in Gaza City on his X account.

The killings mark a uniquely gruesome period for members of the press covering the war. More than 190 journalists have been killed since the October 2023 start of the war, at least 184 of whom were Palestinians killed by Israel, CPJ says. Dozens were killed within the first month of the war alone. Eleven Al Jazeera journalists and eight freelancers who worked with the news outlet have been among those killed, according to CPJ data.

The journalists killed since the start of the war is more than the number of journalists killed worldwide from 2020 through 2022 combined, according to CPJ. (Gaza’s [government media office][11], [Reporters Without Borders][12], and [Al Jazeera][13] put the amount of journalists killed in Gaza since October 2023 higher, at more than 200.) An April report [published][14] by Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs says that, based on the estimates of more than 200 journalists killed, Israel’s war in Gaza has killed more journalists than the U.S. Civil War; the first and second World Wars; the Korean and Vietnam wars; both Yugoslav wars; and the post-9/11 US war in Afghanistan wars combined.

Press freedom groups condemned the latest round of killings and dismissed Israel’s terrorism allegations against Al-Sharif. In a statement, CPJ Regional Director Sara Qudah called the Sunday killings “murder,” adding, “Israel is murdering the messengers.”

“The world needs to see these deadly attacks on journalists inside Gaza, as well as its censorship of journalists in Israel and the West Bank, for what they are: a deliberate and systematic attempt to cover up Israel’s actions,” Qudah added.

Reporters Without Borders [called][12] for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council in response to the killings, pointing to a 2015 [resolution][15] that called on member states to enact protections for journalists reporting in conflicts. “This massacre and Israel’s media blackout strategy, designed to conceal the crimes committed by its army for more than 21 months in the besieged and starving Palestinian enclave, must be stopped immediately,” Thibaut Bruttin, the organization’s director general, said in a statement.

“The world needs to see these deadly attacks on journalists inside Gaza, as well as its censorship of journalists in Israel and the West Bank, for what they are: a deliberate and systematic attempt to cover up Israel’s actions,” Qudah added.

Despite all this, though, American officials have yet to condemn the Sunday killings. Spokespeople for the State Department and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Mother Jones on Monday afternoon.

In a final statement [posted to his X account][16] on Sunday, which Al-Sharif appeared to draft in April and requested be shared if he was killed, the journalist wrote that he “never once hesitated to convey the truth as it is, without distortion or falsification.” He urged support for his family, including his two children and his wife.

“If I die,” he added, “I die steadfast upon my principles.”

[11]: http://Al Jazeera staff journalists killed by Israel in Gaza during the war to 11, in addition to eight journalists who freelanced with the media organization, according to CPJ data. [12]: https://rsf.org/en/gaza-rsf-calls-emergency-un-security-council-meeting-after-targeted-israeli-strike-kills-six-media [13]: https://www.aljazeera.com/features/longform/2024/12/31/know-their-names-the-palestinian-journalists-killed-by-israel-in-gaza [14]: https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2025/Turse%5FCosts%20of%20War%5FThe%20Reporting%20Graveyard%204-2-25.pdf [15]: https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s%5Fres%5F2222.pdf [16]: https://x.com/AnasAlSharif0/status/1954670507128914219

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Texas Bill Would Allow Lawsuits Over Shipping Abortion Pills

This story was produced in partnership with CBS News.

Republican lawmakers in Texas have opened a new front in their efforts to crack down on abortion, this time with a bill that would enable lawsuits targeting the use of medication to terminate pregnancies. Their proposal would also take aim at shield laws in other states that protect manufacturers and the doctors who prescribe abortion pills.

In Texas, it is already illegal to knowingly mail, carry, or deliver abortion-inducing drugs. It is also illegal for a doctor not licensed in the state of Texas to prescribe abortion medication.

Now, in the midst of an already controversial special legislative session, lawmakers have reintroduced a bill that would allow lawsuits to target anyone who manufactures, mails, delivers, prescribes, or distributes abortion pills. The bill would also permit people to file a wrongful death lawsuit if the medication results in harm or death of a fetus or the mother, within a statute of limitations up to six years.

“These are the pills that are being mailed into Texas directly to women, often without instructions, certainly without doctors as before, and without follow-up care after,” the bill’s sponsor, Texas state Sen. Bryan Hughes, a Republican, told the Texas Tribune earlier this year. “This is illegal in Texas, but is taking place, and we’ve thus far not been able to protect women.”

The World Health Organization says the pills—a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol—can be safely prescribed for women to self-administer at home, without the direct supervision of a health care provider, in the first trimester.

Hughes previously sponsored a state law, passed in 2021, banning abortions at six weeks, or when a “fetal heartbeat” is detected.

The new proposal, known as the Women and Child Protection Act, is expected to be heard in committee in the Texas State Senate during Monday’s special session. An earlier version stalled in the House during the most recent legislative session.

The bill also seeks to route any challenges into federal court, and includes language aimed at neutralizing the force of so-called shield laws in other states, designed to protect doctors who prescribe abortion medication from states without bans.

“Texas continues to try to meddle in the provision of safe, legal, and affordable reproductive health care nationwide,” says Julie Kay, the former executive director for the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine. “Telemedicine abortion is a modern and effective way to provide care.”

At the same time, former Texas Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell, who led the push for the state’s current abortion restrictions, has announced a lawsuit filed on behalf of a Texas woman who alleges the father of the child she was expecting slipped abortion medication into her hot chocolate, leading her to lose her pregnancy.

Similar to the proposed legislation, this lawsuit targets shield laws in other states meant to protect physicians who provided the abortion pills in the plaintiff’s case. The lawsuit is filed in federal court and names a nonprofit group that the plaintiff claims helped the father obtain medication, Aid Access, which is based in the Netherlands.

According to the civil lawsuit, the father “obtained these drugs from Aid Access, a criminal organization that illegally ships abortion pills into Texas and other jurisdictions where abortion has been outlawed.”

Aid Access and the father have not been criminally charged.

On its website, Aid Access says it has facilitated over 200,000 online abortions to women in the US since 2018. In some cases, the group relies on telemedicine shield laws, such as ones enacted in California, Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, and Washington, to fulfill orders and mail them to recipients in states with bans.

Aid Access founder Dr. Rebecca Gomperts previously told CBS News the service is legal in all the jurisdictions in which it operates.

“Where I work from, it’s legal to prescribe the medications. And so I’ll do that. And the pharmacy that I refer to is allowed to mail the medicines, on a prescription of a doctor, to the women. So (the Texas law) has no impact on what we do,” Gomperts said.

Aid Access and the father have not responded to the filing as of Monday morning.

Jonathan Mitchell declined to comment for this story.

Haley Ott contributed reporting.

Continue Reading…