Mother Jones: Posts

Mother Jones

DOJ Is Trying to Convince a Judge That RFK Jr.’s Decisions Are Untouchable

A lawyer for the Justice Department argued on Wednesday that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s vaccine decisions are protected from legal scrutiny, in a case brought by medical groups challenging HHS’s vaccine policy changes. So much so that the Trump administration appears to believe that Kennedy’s actions are “totally unreviewable.”

Reuters reports that Trump administration lawyer Isaac Belfer was asking District Judge Brian Murphy to rule that Kennedy and other health officials are protected from legal challenges by, for example, medical groups who accuse the department of imperiling the public’s health.

Murphy asked: “If the secretary said instead of getting a shot to prevent measles, I think you should get a shot that gives you measles, is that unreviewable?”

“Yes,” Belfer replied.

As of February 27, 1,136 confirmed measles cases were reported in the United States in 2026, primarily from the large outbreak in South Carolina, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—though that number is likely higher.

Should Murphy, a Biden appointee, rule in the DOJ’s favor, Kennedy and his team could have further leeway to upend long-held vaccine schedules and inject confusion into the health decisions of everyday Americans.

Related

Photo illustration featuring profile shot of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and a needle being injected into a syringe.The Plot Against Vaccines

James Oh, a lawyer for the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical groups included in the case, urged Murphy to block a series of actions by HHS, including a May directive to the CDC to remove its vaccination schedule recommendation for COVID-19 shots for pregnant women and children, as well as another move from January to reshape and diminish childhood vaccination schedules.

He also requested that the judge block a meeting from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices scheduled for later this month that will cover “COVID-19 vaccine injuries and Long-COVID.” Oh told the judge that the meeting is a “recipe for spreading distrust and dare I say misinformation or disinformation about vaccines.”

This is the same advisory committee that voted to abandon the universal hepatitis B birth dose recommendation for newborns in December, ending a decades-old advisement. Oh argued that the committee violates balance rules in the Federal Advisory Committee Act after Kennedy, last Summer, fired all 17 members of ACIP and installed allies.

Murphy said he plans to rule on the arguments before the next ACIP meeting, calling it his “hard deadline.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

These Far-Right Conspiracists Are Pushing Trump to Take Control of Voting

On Monday afternoon, as war raged with Iran, President Trump was seemingly preoccupied with more trivial matters. “FREE TINA PETERS!” he wrote on Truth Social, referring to the former Colorado election clerk who’s serving a nine-year sentence for giving election conspiracists access to sensitive voting equipment.

While it might seem odd for Trump to be posting about Peters as bombs fell on Tehran, there’s a connection between her and Trump’s orbit—her lawyer, Peter Ticktin, is a former classmate of Trump’s at the New York Military Academy who has represented the president in litigation against his political opponents. And Ticktin is now pushing Trump to declare a national emergency, based on the false claim that China interfered in the 2020 election, so that the president can assume vast new powers over the voting process. After the US invaded Iran, Trump reposted an article from a far right news site claiming that Iran also attempted to interfere in the 2020 and 2024 elections, seemingly tying the military effort to his voting crusade.

The 17-page executive order Ticktin is lobbying Trump to sign would completely upend how Americans vote and have their ballots counted in an unprecedented attempt to usurp powers that the Constitution gives to states and Congress. The order claims that an emergency declaration would allow Trump to unilaterally outlaw mail-in voting for most Americans and seize voting machines in favor of a hand count of all ballots, which would take much longer and be far more error-prone than a regular machine count.

An elderly man with glasses dressed in a suit and tie sits next to a middle-aged woman with gray hair in business attire. They are seated at a table with pads of notes in front of them.

Attorney Peter Ticktin listens during oral arguments for People vs Tina Peters in the Court of Appeals at the Ralph L. Carr Colorado Judicial Center in Denver on Jan. 14, 2026.AAron Ontiveroz/The Denver Post/Pool/AP

That’s not all. The order would require all Americans to re-register to vote in person before the 2026 midterms, effectively voiding all state voter rolls, and force voters to re-verify their status before every election, a wildly impractical measure. It would mandate that all absentee ballots be notarized and restrict mail-in voting to those who have a medical condition or are out-of-town during the election. It would require strict forms of voter ID and proof of citizenship to cast a ballot, which could disenfranchise tens of millions of Americans who lack such documents. “Taken together, the proposal amounts to a radical attempt to reshape the rules of elections ahead of the 2026 midterms,” notes the voting rights group Fair Fight.

“Under the Constitution, it’s the legislatures and states that really control how a state conducts its elections, and the president doesn’t have any power to do that,” Ticktin told the Washington Post. “But here we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes. That causes a national emergency where the president has to be able to deal with it.”

Of course, there is no evidence that China interfered in the 2020 election. And the two statutes that Ticktin claims allow Trump to declare a national emergency—the National Emergencies Act (NEA) and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)—in fact give the president no control over the voting process. (The Supreme Court just ruled that the president could not invoke the IEEPA to justify his tariffs.)

“None of the cited authorities delegates the president any power to change voting laws, let alone the wholesale takeover of federal and local elections that the draft EO attempts to enact, even in the face of national emergency—including attempted foreign interference,” says an analysis from the Center for American Progress.

For these reasons, any such executive order would likely be immediately blocked in the courts, much like the last executive order on elections Trump issued last March.

Trump said last week he’s “never heard about” Ticktin’s proposal, but he’s already vowed to issue a new executive order on elections. And given his obsession with the 2020 election and calls for Republicans to “take over the voting in at least 15 places,” the allure of attempting to gain dictatorial control over the electoral process, no matter how illegal it is, is sure to appeal to the president.

Some of the sketchiest figures in the far right’s election denial movement are behind this push.

Ticktin, whose friendship with Trump dates back to their time at the military academy in the 1960s, has had a rocky career as a lawyer. He’s been suspended twice from the Florida bar. After the 2020 election, he represented Trump in a sprawling racketeering lawsuit accusing Hillary Clinton and Democrats of manufacturing allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit and ordered sanctions against Trump’s lawyers, including Ticktin.

“The rule of law is undermined by the toxic combination of political fundraising with legal fees paid by political action committees, reckless and factually untrue statements by lawyers at rallies and in the media, and efforts to advance a political narrative through lawsuits without factual basis or any cognizable legal theory,” wrote US District Judge Donald Middlebrooks.

“Taken together, the proposal amounts to a radical attempt to reshape the rules of elections ahead of the 2026 midterms.”

Ticktin subsequently went on to seek pardons for election deniers including Peters, Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, members of the Proud Boys, and other January 6 insurrectionists. He told Steve Bannon the 101st Airborne should be sent in to free Peters, who was convicted of giving access of 2020 election records to an associate of My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell.

Ticktin has been promoting the proposed executive order since last April, including on QAnon-affiliated talk shows. “If President Trump can’t call a national election emergency, then we will lose our country,” he told QNewsPatriot in January. Ticktin said the right-wing conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi has also “been very involved” in the effort. Corsi has been circulating a new draft since the summer alleging that Trump could invoke emergency powers because of alleged foreign intervention in the 2020 election.

Corsi was the driving force behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth smear campaign against John Kerry’s military record in 2004 and the birtherism conspiracy against Barack Obama, which Trump amplified. Corsi was investigated by special counsel Robert Mueller for allegedly acting as a conduit between Trump adviser Roger Stone and WikiLeaks as part of the effort to leak emails from Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Corsi falsely claimed the emails were leaked by murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich.

The work of these fringe characters has been amplified by outside advisers closer to the president. Cleta Mitchell, the former Trump lawyer who helped the president attempt to overturn the 2020 election, said on a podcast in September that she believed “the president is thinking that he will exercise some emergency powers to protect the federal elections going forward.” Bannon has repeatedly promoted the national emergency scenario on his radio show in recent days.

In December 2020, the likes of Sidney Powell, Michael Flynn, and Patrick Byrne went to the White House to urge Trump to order the military to seize state voting machines. Trump was talked off the ledge by his advisers, but now says he regrets not doing so.

Whereas the craziest schemes hatched by election deniers were rejected by Trump’s aides in 2020, today those very election deniers hold prominent positions in the administration and are plotting from the inside. Recently, six administration aides took part in a gathering hosted by Flynn where attendees called on Trump to declare a national emergency. “At some point,” Byrne, the ex-CEO of Overstock.com, said, “he’s got to do something, the muscular thing: declare a national emergency.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s Actions Threaten the Integrity of Our National Parks, Critics Say

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

Just over a year ago, the Trump administration gutted staff across the National Park Service, triggering a series of protests around the country, a signal of the public’s deep passion for America’s “crown jewels.”

Since then, the service has been in flux. Though a federal judge required the administration to rehire much of the staff laid off in that February 2025 purge, gaping holes still exist across the agency following firings, loss of seasonal workers, buyouts, and forced retirements. The National Park Service lost 2,750 employees in the first 11 months of the second Trump administration, a 15 percent drop, according to an analysis of federal workforce data from the Office of Personnel Management by my colleague Peter Aldhous.

“One of our most beloved national parks and our state’s largest park will be scarred beyond repair.”

On top of this, a recent series of changes—from the pending appointment of a new director to the mandated elimination of certain park exhibits that discuss racism and climate change—could fundamentally reshape the future of the National Park Service, experts say.

After more than a year without an official director of the National Park Service, President Donald Trump in February nominated hospitality executive Scott Socha to head the agency, which oversees more than 85 million acres of land and water. Socha is the president of parks and resorts at Delaware North, a food, venue, and hotel management company that operates across the US and in Australia. The company provides services for several national parks, according to its website.

Many conservation groups, elected leaders, and outdoor enthusiasts have pushed back. These shifts, they say, threaten the long-term future of the parks—and rewrite the American legacy they represent.

However, Delaware North’s relationship with the service hit a major bump in 2015, when it lost a contract to operate concessions inside Yellowstone National Park, the Guardian reports. The company sued the National Park Service over costs related to the trademark rights of names and logos, and the agency eventually settled for $12 million after a yearslong court battle.

Trump’s choice of Socha falls in line with the administration’s push to privatize US public lands, and it doesn’t sit well with some advocates.

“The private park concessionaire executive, Socha, has zero experience in public service or conservation,” Jayson O’Neill, spokesperson for the Save Our Parks campaign, told SFGate. “Instead, he’s made a career out of extracting maximum profit from our national parks, not protecting them, making it abundantly clear he’ll be doing the bidding of special interests and corporate interests.”

The National Parks Conservation Association, which said the new director “must reverse course on the damage that’s been done to parks and park staff over the last year,” put out a statement that reserved judgment.

“We don’t want people to feel like when they go to parks, that history is going to be edited.”

“Our national parks need strong, sensible leadership now more than ever before,” the group’s president and CEO, Theresa Pierno, said in the statement. “Given Mr. Socha’s years of experience working with the Park Service, we hope he will be that leader.”

An August investigation by the New York Times found that at least a fifth of the country’s 433 national parks had been significantly strained due to Trump-related cuts. I spoke with former National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis in May about the cascading impacts the job cuts could have on the country’s public lands. Another former director, Charles F. Sams III, echoed these concerns, along with other former park staff and recreation experts, as Blaine Harden reported for ICN in January.

Meanwhile, US Customs and Border Protection intends to build border barriers throughout the Big Bend region of southwest Texas, which plans show will cut through part of the popular Big Bend National Park, as my colleague Martha Pskowski reported. Scientists and conservationists have condemned the project.

“One of our most beloved national parks and our state’s largest park will be scarred beyond repair,” David Keller, a noted archaeologist of the region, told ICN.

Last March, Trump issued an executive order titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” which directed the Department of the Interior to ensure that exhibits, installations and signs across the national parks system do not “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living.” Interior is the park service’s parent agency.

A May order from Interior Secretary Doug Burgum doubled down on this effort, requiring staff to report signage that catalogues negative parts of history and the environment for potential removal.

A new analysis of an internal government database reviewed by the Washington Post found that staffers have filed a number of inquiries from across the country that indicated confusion over what would fall into the category of disparaging American history, but nonetheless flagged signage discussing everything from climate impacts at Arches National Park to segregation in the South.

The Trump administration in January took down an exhibit at the President’s House historical site on Philadelphia’s Independence Mall that detailed the lives of nine people enslaved by President George Washington. Intense public outcry followed. The city of Philadelphia sued. In February, a federal judge ordered the exhibit to be reinstalled as the court battle continues, PBS reports.

In her opinion brief, Senior US District Judge Cynthia Rufe wrote that the federal government does not have the power “to dissemble and disassemble historical truths.”

I reached out to the Department of the Interior to get the agency’s response to all of this. I asked about the criticism of its signage removal efforts and advocates’ concerns about Trump’s choice to lead the National Park Service. A spokesperson sent this reply right before publication: “Your story is full inaccuracies but that should come as no surprise seeing this is a far-left blog, funded by well known liberals, with an agenda to push the Green New Scam and DEI initiatives meant to divide Americans.”

Adding to the administration’s legal fights, the National Parks Conservation Association and a coalition of scientists, historians and advocates filed a federal lawsuit two weeks ago to “cease all unlawful efforts to remove up-to-date and accurate historical or scientific information from the national parks.”

“We want Americans to know that their parks actually hold this powerful history, and that parks are a place that they can…go learn that history,” David Lamfrom, the vice president of regional programs at the National Parks Conservation Association, told me. “We don’t want people to feel like when they go to parks, that history is going to be edited, and it’s going to be edited by the government because the government doesn’t believe that Americans can handle or manage that truth.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Chevron’s Hometown Paper Is Quiet on Climate. Guess Who Owns It?

Children were starting to stream out of Peres Elementary School in Richmond, California, as activist Katt Ramos pointed towards a plume of smoke in the distance. Ramos is an activist who, at the time, helped to lead the Richmond chapter of Communities for a Better Environment. She was standing outside of the school in the Iron Triangle, the local name for a part of town defined by three railway tracks. The smoke was emanating from the vast Chevron refinery that borders the elementary school.

Chevron is Richmond’s largest employer—and its largest polluter. When it flares hazardous gases, or when mysterious, sulfurous smells suffuse the city, there is no daily newspaper to report on health concerns or keep residents in the know. The primary local news site, the Richmond Standard, largely avoids covering local health issues or the impact of Chevron’s facilities on people’s well-being. Perhaps because the site is owned by Chevron itself.

Given Richmond’s status as a news desert, most people here have come to accept the lack of deeply investigated stories, the kind that help keep corporations accountable. But plenty of locals are deeply aware of the implications of living in proximity to the refinery, and, like Ramos, have turned to their own activism and organizing. I spent time in Richmond interviewing and photographing local people, including former Chevron employees, activists, reporters, and politicians.

This work was done in conjunction with a project about news deserts and misinformation supported by Amplifier Art.

View of Richmond, California with refinery in background.

Chevron is not the only polluter in town—it’s located next to major interstates, railways, and industrial activity. Richmond deals with air pollution not seen in other parts of the Bay Area.Sara Hylton

Landscape with steam rising from a refinery.

A view of the Chevron refinery in Richmond. Chevron is the city’s largest employer, employing thousands of people, and its largest polluter. It also owns one of Richmond’s primary news sources, the Richmond Standard, which often runs stories similar to those on Chevron’s website. It rarely reports on health hazards or flares.Sara Hylton

Woman in a wheelchair with her hand on her head, on a front porch.

Nancy Mardonado, 52, lives next to the Chevron refinery. Mardonado believes her health issues, including a heart operation, are the result of living in proximity to the refinery for over 40 years. Richmond has a large immigrant population; English isn’t the first language of many residents, who often rely on word of mouth for timely information about local health hazards.Sara Hylton

Woman and her daughter standing outside their home.

Karen Duran and her daughter, Luna, outside of their home in Richmond, California. Duran lived out of her car next to the Chevron refinery while she was pregnant with her daughter, who she feared would be born with abnormalities and birth defects because of the toxins Duran was exposed to. “Living there, I was so stressed out about that. Seeing the flares, that was scary as hell. Seeing the smoke coming out, that’s like another stressing thing, because they don’t tell you, they didn’t tell us anything.”Sara Hylton

Street scene of a man sitting in a chair, looking at a phone.

Downtown Richmond, a largely working-class community.Sara Hylton

Portrait of a man standing near an intersection by a hotel.

Tom Butt served as Richmond’s mayor from 2015 to 2023, beating out a Chevron-backed candidate. “People have all kinds of ways of getting information that isn’t necessarily a traditional newspaper…but there’s a real lack of investigative work, which is required to keep people accountable” said Butt, who runs a blog that some have said has created controversy in the small community.Sara Hylton

Train tracks with a Do Not Enter sign near them.

Railway tracks passing through Richmond. The Richmond-San Pablo area is one of California’s most polluted.Sara Hylton

Landscape scene of houses in Richmond, CA.

A residential neighborhood of Richmond in front of the East Bay’s Berkeley Hills.Sara Hylton

Portrait of a woman standing in a parking lot.

Claudia Jimenez, a Richmond City Council representative who is running for mayor, speaks out against the Chevron refinery. Jimenez was part of an ad-hoc committee who helped to win a $550 million settlement from Chevron. “That idea, for me, of making corporations pay their fair share, is something that’s run throughout my career,” she told the Richmondside in 2024.Sara Hylton

Portrait of a woman standing outside.

Katt Ramos, an organizer and activist, runs tours around Richmond showing the impacts of the Chevron refinery.Sara Hylton

Portrait of woman standing outside of a greenhouse and garden.

Doria Robinson, from Richmond, runs Urban Tilth, an organization that trains Richmond residents to grow their own food and feed the community. Like Jimenez, Robinson was part of the ad-hoc committee who helped win a $550 million settlement from Chevron.Sara Hylton

Portrait of main in a black hoodie sitting on a porch.

Denny Khamphanthong outside of the house he grew up in in North Richmond, a neighborhood next to the Chevron oil refinery. Khamphanthong had severe asthma and was in and out of the hospital, but never asked questions, because conditions like his were prevalent among the kids in the neighborhood. “Running around, trying to be a kid, it’s weird when…you try to do any kind of physical activity, and then you can’t breathe” he said.Sara Hylton

Portrait of man with his hands in his pockets.

BK White, a former Chevron employee, now works as chief of staff for the Richmond mayor’s office. White was a union negotiator and operator at Chevron who was fired by the corporation in 2023—which he alleges was tied to his participation in a strike to fight for better safety and wages.Sara Hylton

Chair outside a barbershop with copies of a newspaper on it.

The Contra Costa Pulse, a weekly newspaper, is mostly filled with stories reported by young people.Sara Hylton

Portrait of man with a white beard.

Steve Brunow has lived in the Richmond community of Atchison Village, next to the refinery, for over 20 years. He says there’s a film of dust on his walls.Sara Hylton

Landscape view of Chevron refinery near houses.

A view of the Chevron refinery, the largest greenhouse gas emitter in California.Sara Hylton

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

“Downright Disgraceful”: Sen. Gillibrand on Stranded Americans Abroad

Without providing clear guidance on how to do so or how it will help, the United States government is advising Americans abroad to depart immediately from 14 countries, including Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Qatar, as its deadly offensive in Iran continues.

Americans abroad remain stuck in place. Thousands of flights have been cancelled and there’s uncertainty surrounding which airspaces will be safe, and when.

New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand told Mother Jones that President Donald Trump “has essentially told the thousands of citizens who are stuck in the Middle East because of a war he started that they are on their own.” Gillibrand, a Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee, called the administration’s actions “completely unacceptable and downright disgraceful.”

Sen. Gillibrand has criticized US actions in the region, saying in a statement on Saturday that, “America voted for lower costs, not forever wars.” She said she’s working with New Yorkers currently in the region to get back to the state.

Since the US and Israel initially launched strikes in Iran earlier this week, Americans in the region have been trying to flee a war that has already resulted in hundreds of deaths. Counterstrikes by Iran, and fear of future strikes, have led the US to close multiple embassies in the region. Others are operating with limited staff—giving Americans even less support as they try to find a way to the states.

When Trump was asked about why there wasn’t a plan for stranded Americans prior to the decision to strike Iran, he said, “well, because it happened all very quickly.”

The State Department has been pointing stranded citizens to a phone number. Yet, the message callers heard hasn’t been providing clear help. As of Tuesday afternoon, according to the Washington Post, callers were told to “not rely on the U.S. government for assisted departure or evacuation at this time. There are currently no United States evacuation points.”

On Wednesday, Gillibrand sent a letter, shared with Mother Jones, to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, relaying the “dismay” her office has heard from Americans abroad and urging him to “respond no later than close of business tomorrow with the Administration’s plan to evacuate American citizens from the region.”

“The Trump administration just told Americans: ‘you’re on your own.”,” Gillibrand’s letter reads, referencing the State Department hotline. “When it comes to the safety of American citizens,” she continued, “‘you’re on your own’ is an unacceptable answer.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The “Zohran Mamdani of North Carolina” Took on an Incumbent Democrat in This Primary Race. Now It’s Likely Headed for a Recount.

A progressive challenger who has embraced comparisons to NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani is narrowly trailing North Carolina incumbent Rep. Valerie Foushee in a contest that seems likely headed to a recount after Tuesday’s primary. Foushee currently leads Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam by about 2,200 votes in North Carolina’s 4th Congressional District, which encompasses deep-blue cities like Chapel Hill and Durham. Though Foushee seems likely to win at this point, the closeness of the race is a testament to the enduring divide between progressives and establishment Democrats, especially those who’ve supported Israel. Many observers saw it as an early referendum on the direction the party might take in the midterms.

Allam, who has been endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, has campaigned as a “true progressive” going against the grain of the “Democratic Party Establishment,” as she puts it. In 2020, she became the first Muslim woman elected to public office in North Carolina when she won a seat on the Durham County Board of Commissioners. She’s called for ICE to be abolished and for a moratorium on AI data centers.

Foushee hasn’t taken as strong a stance on ICE as her opponent, though she has called for the agency to be defunded. Foushee was the first African-American and the first woman to represent the district in Congress. She co-chairs the House Democratic Commission on AI and the Innovation Economy—a key point of contention in the race, considering there’s a data center proposal in the district. For the primary, Foushee earned endorsements from high-profile North Carolina Democrats, including US Senate candidate and former Gov. Roy Cooper and current Gov. Josh Stein.

The winner of the NC-04 Democratic primary is almost guaranteed the seat in the House given the district’s history—Dems have held the seat for nearly 30 years. Tuesday’s primary is a rematch of 2022’s open primary for the seat, where Foushee overtook Allam 46 percent to 37 percent.

Foushee’s positioning on Israel seems to be a key factor in the race’s closeness. In 2022, AIPAC and its affiliates pumped more than $2 million into Foushee’s primary campaign, and Foushee took an AIPAC-organized trip to Israel in March 2024. But in a town hall last August, after receiving heavy criticism from voters and local officials, Foushee walked her support of Israel back and said she wouldn’t accept AIPAC money for this latest congressional bid. After that town hall, Foushee signed on to co-sponsor the Block the Bombs act, which would prohibit the president from selling certain weapons to Israel. More recently, Foushee has also been a vocal opponent of US and Israeli attacks on Iran.

Still, Allam hasn’t let voters forget Foushee’s previous ties to AIPAC or her ties to AI and defense companies. Indy Week reported more than $4.4 million in outside spending, making this North Carolina’s most expensive congressional primary ever.

Though the race hasn’t been officially called, Foushee issued a statement last night declaring victory, while Allam has said she’ll call for a recount. In a post on X today, Foushee welcomed the possibility. “It is critical to our democracy that every lawful vote is counted,” Foushee wrote.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Kristi Noem Doubles Down on the Violence

In her second day of hearings before Congress, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem refused during a House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday to acknowledge that federal agents have and continue to violently detain US citizens in Minnesota and across the country. Forget about that, Noem suggested—blame Democrats.

“Today [Democrats] are defending citizens because they know they shouldn’t be putting illegal aliens in front of citizens,” she said in response to Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.). “They realize that when they’re fighting for people who shouldn’t be in this country to begin with, that’s a losing statement with the American people.”

The observation came after Lofgren showed Noem three videos of federal agents forcibly dragging US citizens out of their cars and homes without judicial warrants or any suggestion of cause.

Lofgren asked Noem: “Do you train agents not to do that, or are they trained to do that?”

“If an individual doesn’t respond to verbal commands [from agents], then they go to soft techniques,” Noem said. She also addressed the lack of judicial warrants in DHS arrests, reiterating the agency’s position that it can administer its own warrants, claiming that the Supreme Court has recognized their validity.

Lofgren disagreed and said arrests of US citizens with onlyadministrative warrants violate the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

“We’re fighting for American citizens, Madam Secretary, because your ICE agents shot them in the face and killed them,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), mentioning by name Renée Good and Alex Pretti, two US citizens who were killed in January by federal agents in Minneapolis.

Raskin is HEATED at Noem

Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-03-04T16:10:03.476Z

Just hours after both killings, and before any investigation, Noem claimed that Good and Pretti had committed acts of “domestic terrorism,” and continued to do so after video evidence contradicted the assertion.

“Were Renée Good and Alex Pretti domestic terrorists?” Raskin asked. Noem did not answer the question, but she later agreed with Raskin that it is unlawful for federal agents to shoot and kill an individual for engaging in peaceful protest, for filming them on a public street, for legally carrying a holstered firearm, or for driving away from them.

“I hope you would rethink what you said about two good, honest, faithful American citizens and what that means to their families,” Raskin stated.

But what my colleague Inae Oh wrote the day after federal agents killed Good continues to be true: “a disdain for facts” and a systemic defense of “ICE officers as they detain, terrorize, sometimes with gunfire, and then brag about it.”

Good and Pretti’s deaths were “an absolute tragedy” and there are still “ongoing investigations,” Noem claimed. But the secretary isn’t rethinking her other statements—she’s doubling down on them.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Future in Texas Is Bright and Terrifying

Get ready to hear a lot more about James Talarico. The Texas state representative won the Democratic US Senate primary on Tuesday, defeating Jasmine Crockett—a high-profile member of Congress representing Dallas—in a race that pitted two candidates with a knack for garnering attention and diverging theories of the electorate.

Talarico, who I recently profiled, is a former public school teacher and current seminary student who has built a following among Democrats inside and outside the state for his sermons and floor exchanges challenging Christian nationalism. Talarico will be an underdog heading into the general election. The race will be a reach, even if he ends up facing Republican Attorney General Paxton—who has, after all, been elected in a cloud of scandal three times before. It will also be absurdly expensive; the tab for a competitive general election will easily exceed nine figures.

I wrote nine years ago that Beto O’Rourke could run the best campaign in Texas in decades and still lose by 5 percentage points. In 2018, he did—and lost by 2.6 points. But Trump is underwater and just blew up the life boat, and the situation for Democrats in the state is not as dire as it seemed a year ago. A state Senate candidate recently flipped a ruby-red district in a bellwether county, and he did it not just through a fluke of special-election turnout, but by peeling off Republican voters. In Talarico, Democrats have landed a well-funded candidate unsullied by doings in Washington—someone whose faith-based populism impressed Joe Rogan and Barack Obama and showed strength in the places the party has been hemorrhaging support. It may not be the situation Democrats need, but it is a situation Republicans absolutely didn’t want.

The semi-regular return of Lone Star Democratic optimism was only one part of the story last night—and maybe not even the most important one. Republicans are the ones who actually run the state, after all, and they are not okay. Fourth-term Sen. John Cornyn is hovering at about 42 percent in his primary, and will face Paxton, the scandal-plagued attorney general, in a May runoff. That Paxton—who had to take remedial ethics classes after being indicted for securities fraud, and was impeached by the Republican-dominated state House—is not just still in office but actively seeking a promotion is a testament to the power of the party’s Christian nationalist faction, and to the broader conservative movement’s principled rejection of consequences and shame. His attempt to overturn the 2020 election through a patently frivolous lawsuit (he spoke on the Mall on January 6) led to a state bar investigation. It’s worked out wonderfully for him.

You don’t dominate a state as Texas Republicans have without a keen, if cynical, understanding of the median voter. But further downballot, the results showed a party increasingly captured by a radical fringe. Take the race to replace Paxton as attorney general, which US Rep. Chip Roy entered with more name recognition than anyone else. Roy, a former Ted Cruz chief of staff, is a hard-right zealot (I do not think he would even consider that an insult), but also a kind of irascible figure in DC with a real and confounding code—he voted to certify the 2020 election results on January 6, for example. You could expect him to take on many of the same fights as Paxton, but without all the scuzziness. He faces a runoff after finishing 8 points behind state Sen. Mayes Middleton, who told voters that he had “defeated the atheists” and was “fighting Sharia law” while accusing Roy—Chip Roy!—of helping “illegals avoid deportation.”

Roy’s colleague in the US House, Rep. Tony Gonzales, is also facing a runoff in a rematch with Brandon Herrera, a gun influencer known as the “the AK guy.” Gonzales has called Herrera a “known neo-Nazi,” in reference to his opponent’s history of posting Nazi memes and Holocaust jokes. (Herrera has said he is not a neo-Nazi and that he simply has an “edgy” sense of humor.) Herrera has accused Gonzales of the far more serious offense of supporting modest gun-control legislation after the 2022 school shooting in Uvalde, which is in the district. But Gonzales may be on the ropes this time; he is now facing a congressional ethics inquiry over allegations he had an inappropriate relationship with a staffer, who later died by suicide. Another Republican incumbent, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, lost his race outright. Crenshaw was once a rising star, but drew opposition on the right for voting to certify the 2020 election, and working with Democrats on a failed border-security bill in 2024.

And then there’s Bo French, an oilman who until recently chaired the Republican party in Tarrant County, which includes Fort Worth, and who advanced to the runoff in the race for railroad commissioner—a powerful statewide office that regulates the energy industry. French ran just 4,000 votes short of the leader, Jim Wright, pulling nearly a third of the vote. French is a gleeful racist who has said that “we are all Rhodesians now” and called for Trump to “remove Third World subtards from America.” Last year he posted a poll on X that asked: “Who is a bigger threat to America?” The poll offered two choices: Jews or Muslims.

That’s the dynamic in the nation’s largest red state heading into the midterms. It is not ideal, for a pluralistic society, but it feels appropriate for 2026: a Democratic Party with maybe a puncher’s chance if its candidates do everything right—and a Republican base testing just how far gone it can go, before it ever pays a price for anything.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

She Quit Her Job to Fight for Her Father’s Freedom—and for Everyone Else Inside Alligator Alcatraz

On a recent Sunday afternoon, Arianne Betancourt stood across the road from the infamous Alligator Alcatraz immigrant detention camp that opened last year in Florida by the Everglades. Her 54-year-old Cuban father, Justo Betancourt, is among the roughly 1,500 immigrants detained there.

Before her father’s arrest, Betancourt, a 33-year-old Miami native, spent her days guiding tourists through the city’s most iconic sites like Little Havana and South Beach. Now, she is holding a microphone and a bright orange sign that reads, “Give Justo Betancourt the right to due process.” She peered across the crowd of about 100. When she came to the weekly vigil for the first time, Betancourt told them she was “absolutely broken.” She then added, “Week after week, I’ve come here, and I’ve felt stronger. I feel love, I feel empathy, compassion from absolute strangers.”

“Week after week, I’ve come here, and I’ve felt stronger. I feel love, I feel empathy, compassion from absolute strangers.”

For 31 consecutive weeks, hundreds have gathered at these vigils held outside Alligator Alcatraz, hastily erected by the DeSantis administration in July to house immigrants swept into Trump’s deportation machine. The facility has detained thousands of people since its opening despite a long trail of reports of harsh conditions and a federal lawsuit that has challenged the legality of the detention camp’s opening within the environmentally protected area of Big Cypress National Preserve. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for April 7.

By now, Betancourt has become a regular presence at the vigils. She hopes that her advocacy will help free her father and other immigrants. Justo Betancourt received an order of removal following his release from prison in 2020 after serving time for drug-related charges. Immigration authorities required him to report to an ICE office in South Florida for yearly check-ins. Then, in July, ICE told him to report every three months. That change troubled Arianne, who was following the news of the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigrants. “I was already mentally preparing myself for the worst outcome,” she recalled, even though family members and friends in Miami didn’t understand why she was so concerned. “I was just like, no, you guys are not paying attention. You’re not seeing the bigger picture. Just because we’re not seeing ICE do the raids that they’re doing elsewhere, it doesn’t mean that they’re not coming for people here, too.”

And indeed, during a routine immigration check-in appointment in October, ICE officers arrested him. Betancourt soon began attending vigils outside Alligator Alcatraz, spoke to local news outlets about her father’s case, and traveled to ICE protests in Chicago and Minneapolis. Just this week, she attended US Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s testimony at a Senate oversight hearing. As Noem left the chamber, Betancourt and others held up photos of people held in immigration detention. She recently quit her tour guide job and was hired as an organizer by the Workers Circle, the organization that is coordinating the so-called Freedom Vigils. Over the past few months, she’s met about 30 families with loved ones in Alligator Alcatraz. Most don’t want to speak out because of the stigma associated with being an immigrant.

“Every time I meet a family, I take on a sense of responsibility,” she said. “You don’t want to speak up, but I’ll speak up for you.”

A person with long, light-brown hair in a ponytail and a black tank top speaks toward a reporter holding a "Local 10 News" microphone. The person points a finger toward a blue poster with handwritten text including "WITHOUT DUE PROCESS" and "RIGHT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS!" In the background, another person holds a white sign featuring a hand-drawn Cuban flag and text that reads "THE BETANCOURT FAMILY," "GIVE HIM HIS INSULIN!" and "KEEP OUR FA..." Another person in a yellow shirt stands to the left, partially obscured by a professional video camera.

Courtesy Noelle Damico

During a summer of rapidly intensifying immigration raids across the country last year, when the Department of Homeland Security faced challenges in finding facilities to house immigrants pending their deportations, the administration of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis swiftly constructed an immigration detention center on a little-used airfield surrounded by wetlands. Crews brought in massive tents, generators, kitchen and restroom facilities, and industrial lighting. In a branding exercise that had become part of these facilities—such as Florida’s Deportation Depot and the Speedway Slammer in Indiana—the state dubbed it Alligator Alcatraz. By July, immigrant detainees were being sent there. Detainees are separated into chain-link fenced areas, each containing 32 beds and three toilets.

Soon, reports of mosquito infestations, flooding, poor medical care, and lackluster food and limited water access inundated social media and news reports. Most of the detainees are from Latin America, according to the ACLU. Many, as the Miami Herald reported, do not have criminal records. The facility became the center of lawsuits that are continuing. Additionally, the state has spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to run the facility, and it remains unclear if the federal government will honor the state’s reimbursement request of $608 million, the Herald also reported.

In addition to the dire circumstances reported by detainees, they also have faced problems in their legal efforts to gain release. The ACLU sued federal and Florida officials in July after attorneys reported issues with seeing their clients, and the government’s failure to designate an immigration court that would accept filings from detainees. After the government finally designated an immigration court for Alligator Alcatraz detainees, a federal judge dismissed part of the lawsuit. The ACLU then filed an amended complaint in September with additional claims, including limited virtual visits and outgoing confidential calls between attorneys and their clients.

Attorneys were also required to submit clients’ documents for review by the facility, a practice that Eunice Cho, an ACLU senior attorney on the case, described as “patently unconstitutional.” At an evidentiary hearing in January, two men who had been detained at Alligator Alcatraz testified that they resorted to writing their attorneys’ phone numbers on the walls with bars of soap after guards refused to provide pen and paper, the Miami Herald reported. A decision on the ACLU case is pending. “What we’re asking for is something very basic: provide confidential outgoing legal calls in detention, make sure this information is posted to make sure detainees know it’s available, let attorneys come to the facility without scheduled visits,” Cho said. “It’s nothing out of the ordinary.”

“What we’re asking for is something very basic: provide confidential outgoing legal calls in detention, make sure this information is posted to make sure detainees know it’s available, let attorneys come to the facility without scheduled visits. It’s nothing out of the ordinary.”

Meanwhile, accounts of abuse have continued. In December, Amnesty International released a report that cited limited access to showers, stadium lights on 24 hours a day, and food and water of poor and limited quality. Other treatment “amounts to torture,” the report states, “including being put in the ‘box’, described as a 2×2 foot cage-like structure people are put in as punishment—sometimes for hours at a time, exposed to the elements with hardly any water—with their feet attached to restraints on the ground.” The US Department of Homeland Security and ICE did not respond to a request for comment on this report. In a written statement, a spokesperson for the Florida Division of Emergency Management, which runs Alligator Alcatraz, called the report “false.” “No guards are punishing detainees. Officers are highly trained and follow all federal and state detention protocols. Additionally, detainees have access to clean working facilities for hygiene and receive three meals per day.”

Florida’s resistance movement against the current climate of punishing immigration policies has not been as visible as that of other states like Minnesota and New York, where ICE raids in public places have fueled protests. In Florida, many arrests happen quietly, with thousands of people being detained through traffic stops and other interactions with police. Out of Florida’s roughly 400 law enforcement agencies, nearly 90 percent have entered into so-called 287(g) agreements that give local officers the authority to arrest and detain immigrants on behalf of ICE.

The weekly vigils outside Alligator Alcatraz are a testament to the deep opposition to these policies that exists in the state, said Noelle Damico, director of social justice with the Workers Circle, a Jewish social-justice organization that has taken the lead in coordinating the gatherings. People come from all over the state, she said, with buses leaving from Naples and Miami to make the 90-minute drive to the facility. There they gather on a sandy stretch of land outside the detention camp’s entrance, holding signs, “Stop Alligator Alcatraz,” “All People are Created Equal,” “Due Process For All.” Often, families of detainees attend and field calls from their loved ones, placed on speaker mode, and broadcast on a mic. “The feeling is one overall of power and of solidarity with one another,” Damico told me. “We cannot let these people be forgotten for one minute.”

The interest in the Workers Circle vigils has caught on in about 35 other communities across the country as well. “People see these vigils matter,” Damico told me. “They are a fundamental building block in the fight for democracy.”

Betancourt’s father has been in custody for more than 100 days. In January, he was transferred to a Texas detention center and then forced to present himself for deportation to Mexican authorities at the border. But due to his health problems, including diabetes, he was turned away, and ICE transferred him back to Alligator Alcatraz, where he remains. Betancourt acknowledges that her father’s past may prompt less sympathy for his detention compared to those without criminal histories. “Regardless, if they have a criminal record or not,” she told me, “they’re all being treated the same way.” In 2016, her father was convicted on drug charges and possession of a firearm (which he did not use, according to court filings in his case). He served four years in federal prison. When ICE issued its order for removal in 2020, Betancourt reported to his check-ins with immigration and was issued a work permit, court filings state.

He made mistakes, he went to prison, he did his time,” Betancourt told me. Since his release, he’s been a devoted father to his daughters and became a grandfather of a baby girl, she said. When Betancourt started her tour guide business, he cobbled together the cash he had and gave it to her to help her get started. During their phone calls, the father and daughter try to keep the conversation light, but details of his time in detention seep through. He is shackled by his hands and feet when he is in the medical unit. He sometimes does not eat enough to balance his insulin. He’s gone a week without a shower. Betancourt recently hired an attorney after fundraising money on GoFundMe. The attorney filed a Habeas Corpus petition to have Justo released on the grounds that his removal order had expired.

No matter what happens in her father’s case, Betancourt says she plans to continue working as an advocate. “As terrible as this whole situation has been, it led me to my purpose,” she said. “To what I want to spend the rest of my life doing.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

A Knock on the Window and a Glimpse of America’s Surveillance Future

When agents came to his workplace armed with guns, gas canisters, and artificial intelligence, Abdikafi Abdurahman Abdullahi, known as Kafi, fought back with quick wit and street smarts. The Somali American engineer-turned-Uber driver is one of the few people willing to speak publicly about being subjected to the Department of Homeland Security’s new facial recognition tool, Mobile Fortify, offering a preview of what routine facial recognition could look like on American streets.

Abdullahi was waiting for a fare in a Minneapolis airport rideshare lot January 7, just hours after Renée Good was shot and killed by federal agents elsewhere in the city. As he watched a video of her death on his phone, there was a knock on his car door. Outside stood roughly a dozen ICE agents, demanding proof of his citizenship.

“I was like, oh, if they killed that young woman and she’s white, then they’re sending a message out, which is it’s game on for everybody,” Abdullahi said.

Abdullahi, who is Black and Muslim, refused to show his ID, arguing that he was being racially profiled. Instead, he began filming, and his unflappable, mischievous comebacks transformed his video into a viral sensation.

As Abdullahi filmed, an agent told him, “I can hear you don’t have the same accent as me.”

“So I should sound like a 6-foot white guy?” Abdullahi later joked. “It’s not possible scientifically.”

Abdullahi became a US citizen in 2016. He moved to the United States at 17 after his family fled Somalia during the civil war. He holds a mechanical engineering degree from Washington State University and recently began working as an Uber driver to help pay off his student loans.

At one point, then–Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino joined the officers encircling Abdullahi’s car, asking whether he was an “illegal alien.” Abdullahi jokingly responded that he might be “from another planet.”

“I knew what they were doing,” he said. “They were stalling me so that they could get more data.”

In video of the confrontation, an officer raises his cellphone and scans Abdullahi. He’s using Mobile Fortify, an app that allows officers to photograph a person’s face and immediately query DHS databases for matches against passport records, visa files, and border entry photos.

But according to Abdullahi, Mobile Fortify misidentified him and pulled up a profile for someone named “Ali.” Facial recognition technology is notoriously error prone and has long been criticized for inaccuracies when identifying people of color. Mobile Fortify has been shrouded in secrecy, and DHS has not publicly disclosed its error rate.

Officers attempted to scan Abdullahi again. By then, a small crowd of spectators had gathered and were also filming the confrontation as Abdullahi continued to heckle the agents. When officers were unable to positively identify Abdullahi, they eventually gave up and walked away.

DHS declined to answer questions about Abdullahi’s experience and his claim that he was racially profiled and misidentified.

Between two parked cars, three men in Border Patrol uniforms face an African American man. The man and one of the agents both hold up cellphones pointed toward each other.

Abdullahi films border agents who are trying to capture his biometric data in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport rideshare parking lot. FTN

I’ve been covering the surveillance technology industry for some time, with a particular focus on the human rights risks posed by unchecked facial recognition tools.

In 2023, while directing my documentary Your Face Is Ours about facial recognition firm Clearview AI for France 24, I filmed with border agents at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. At the time, Francis J. Russo, director of field operations for US Customs and Border Protection’s New York office, insisted that the agency takes privacy concerns seriously and does not “store the data in our systems for US citizens for more than 12 hours.”

But that assurance stands in stark contrast with what court filings reveal about DHS’s Mobile Fortify app.

According to documents filed in a lawsuit by the state of Illinois and city of Chicago against DHS, the agency “retains all biometric information taken using the Mobile Fortify app, including that of US citizens, for 15 years.”

Until recently, DHS had not publicly acknowledged the existence of Mobile Fortify. Journalist Joseph Cox reported on the app in June, but the agency did not confirm its deployment until January, when it quietly listed it in its 2025 AI Use Case Inventory. The inventory revealed that agents had been using the app in the field since May. It also showed the scope of the tool, noting that agents can use it to collect both fingerprints and iris scans.

The inventory also contained the first official confirmation that the app relies on technology developed by Japanese multinational corporation NEC. The company did not respond to a request for comment.

By the time DHS publicly disclosed the existence of Mobile Fortify, it already had been used more than 100,000 times since its launch, according to court filings.

DHS declined to answer detailed questions about how Mobile Fortify is being used. In a written statement, the agency said: “Mobile Fortify is a lawful law-enforcement tool developed under the Trump Administration to support accurate identity and immigration-status verification during enforcement operations.”

Civil liberties advocates say Mobile Fortify marks a dramatic escalation.

“What we’ve never seen before this year is a law enforcement agency putting face recognition technology on law enforcement agents’ phones out in the community and giving them unchecked power to stop people, pull them off the street, and start scanning their faces,” said Nathan Freed Wessler, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. “It is deeply dangerous. It’s irresponsible, it’s unprecedented, and it’s illegal.”

The ACLU recently filed a class-action lawsuit against DHS targeting a broad array of surveillance tactics. Hussen v. Noem alleges that agents are conducting suspicionless stops, warrantless arrests, and face scans based on perceived race and ethnicity.

Advocates like Wessler are now seeing facial recognition technology and other surveillance tools used not only to verify immigration status, but also to identify and track Americans who protest ICE or criticize the agency.

“This is taking a big and very scary step toward a kind of totalitarian checkpoint society that we have always professed to abhor here in the United States,” Wessler said.

A video recorded in Maine in January captured an ICE observer being filmed by an agent who told her that DHS had “a nice little database” and she was now “considered a domestic terrorist.”

“Documenting ICE activity and protesting against it is a right protected by the First Amendment,” Wessler said. “Retaliation for doing so goes against the Constitution.”

A still of a video, seen on a computer screen, shows a close-up of the face of a blue-eyed Caucasian man, who wears a gray beanie and a black neck gaiter pulled up to cover his nose and mouth. A closed caption on the video reads: "cause we have a nice little database."

An ICE observer films a DHS agent in South Portland, Maine, in January 2026.Screenshot courtesy ICE observer

In Minneapolis, protesters at the scene of Alex Pretti’s fatal shooting described what they see as an expanding digital dragnet.

“It’s dystopian. It’s like Black Mirror stuff,” one masked protester told me. “They’re using facial recognition, every advanced tool that they have to try and identify protesters and squash what we’re doing.”

“It’s un-American,” another said.

In October, DHS quietly removed a Biden-era policy from its website that outlined oversight and privacy safeguards for facial recognition and other biometric tools. It has yet to publish a replacement framework clarifying what guardrails, if any, now govern their use. In early February, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and other Democratic lawmakers announced the ICE Out of Our Faces Act to “stop this unaccountable, authoritarian use of facial recognition technologies.”

DHS is now looking to consolidate its various facial recognition and fingerprint databases into a single biometric platform, according to recent reporting by Wired. And in February, reports emerged that data analytics firm Palantir landed a new five-year, $1 billion software purchase agreement with DHS.

“We’ve seen DHS amassing a wide range of surveillance software. Some of it’s not new, but the way it’s being deployed is new,” Wessler said. “Cellphone location data harvested from apps on people’s phones, cellphone tracking tools called stingrays, license plate readers, social media monitoring software, and systems like Palantir that bring all of these together in one easily searchable place.”

Since Abdullahi’s video went viral, he has become something of a folk hero. Strangers recognize him in the street. Teenagers ask for selfies. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) visited to thank him for his bravery. And a Norwegian Parliament member asked him to contribute to a video nominating the people of Minneapolis for the Nobel Peace Prize.

He has a message for President Donald Trump, who has been vocal about craving his own Peace Prize: Stop picking on Somali Americans.

“We don’t submit easily,” he said. “We’ve been through tyrants way worse.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

“How Am I Going to Sell My House With This Crap in My Backyard?”

In the wintertime, when Elizabeth Jacobus steps out onto her front porch for a smoke break, she can see the hulking warehouse through a barren thicket of trees. At night, the 470,000-square-foot facility gleams under the watch of industrial floodlights. “You should come back when it’s dark,” she told me. “It looks like the sun is rising over there.”

Jacobus wasn’t thrilled when the warehouse was built a few hundred feet away from her home in suburban Roxbury Township, New Jersey. But ever since construction wrapped in 2022, the facility has remained vacant. Investors could have written off the Roxbury project—a product of the early 2020s online shopping boom, which drove a glut of new logistics warehouses across the country—as a casualty of the post-pandemic economy.

But then the Department of Homeland Security came to town.

As DHS expands its footprint, it’s making its cruelty manifest in suburban areas like Roxbury—towns that might have once felt insulated from the brutality and chaos that immigration agents have unleashed in US cities.

In February, DHS purchased the Roxbury warehouse for $129.3 million—more than double its assessed value. As part of President Donald Trump’s effort to deport millions of people, DHS is buying up enormous warehouses across the country to turn them into immigration jails. The “ICE Detention Reengineering Initiative,” as one government memo dubs it, will spend $38.3 billion of taxpayer money—allocated through last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act—to acquire and retrofit eight “large-scale detention centers” and 16 “processing sites.” If all goes according to federal government plans, the Roxbury site will be up and running with 1,500 beds by November 30.

That’s a big if.Since the warehouse plans were revealed by the Washington Post in late December, they’ve encountered a relentless stream of bipartisan pushback: from Roxbury residents, members of Congress, the all-Republican town council, and Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill. Similar local opposition has already scuttled warehouse sales in roughly a dozen other cities.

The fight in Roxbury highlights one unexpected consequence of Trump’s supercharged immigration machine. As DHS expands its footprint through the warehouse initiative, it’s making its cruelty manifest in suburban areas like Roxbury—towns that might have once felt insulated from the brutality and chaos that immigration agents have unleashed in major US cities. In the process, DHS is running up against the might of a classic suburban rallying cry: Not In My Backyard.

“I think people think that it won’t happen to them because they’re so far separated from it,” said Faith Jacobus, Elizabeth’s 24-year-old daughter. “But it was separated until it wasn’t.”

On Saturday morning, I arrived at Roxbury Town Hall to find the No ICE North Jersey Alliance (Project NINJA) and the Sussex Visibility Brigade setting up for the day’s protest. Safety volunteers in neon vests arranged traffic cones, shoveled snow off sidewalks, and munched on doughnuts from a plastic container. A folding table was set up with a first-aid station and sign-out sheets for a “costume library”—a rack of the inflatable frog and unicorn mascots that have become ubiquitous at No Kings Day protests.

Pretty soon, protesters from across New Jersey were arriving in droves. They lined up along Route 46 and waved signs that read “Warehouses Are Not Human Storage,” “Stop Evil Shit,” and “Gulags Are Bad! Jesus Is Good.” A boombox played tenderhearted classics like the Beatles’ “Let it Be.” The crowd cheered as an endless stream of passing cars honked their horns in support.

Protestors hold up a sign that says "STOP EVIL SHIT"

A protester holds up a sign at the Rally to End ICE Camps in Roxbury Township, New Jersey, on Saturday.Project NINJA

“Most of our pickleball group is here,” said Marion Atwater, a 73-year-old in a navy visor and puffer jacket. “We did not bring our paddles, but we are here with our signs.” She added that she and her husband, Donald Smith, 76, were “young whippersnappers” compared to the rest of their group.

“I have bad legs so I can’t stand—that’s why I’m sitting,” Smith said. He held a poster board that read, “No concentration camps in America.” He told me that he identifies as “basically a Republican” but doesn’t support the MAGA movement. As a retired safety, health, and environmental affairs engineer, he was particularly concerned about the consequences of turning an industrial warehouse into a facility for human beings. “One of the main screaming points about this facility is that they don’t have enough water to provide sanitary services for the people they’re going to incarcerate,” Smith said. “[It’s] totally inappropriate.”

Concerns about infrastructure were present before the warehouse was even built, city documents show. “The planning of this project has not been without its challenges. It is a site that is not in a sewer service area,” an attorney for the original developer said during a 2020 planning hearing. Virtually every person I spoke with in Roxbury expressed doubt about whether the already-stressed system could handle an additional 1,500 people.

The warehouse’s purchase by DHS has even fueled some in the community to suspect a broader conspiracy. “It’s almost like this shit was planned,” said Chris Lenox, 50, who lives across the street from the warehouse with his wife and two kids. “Who is going to spend that kind of money to build that facility with no pay day? I mean, it’s remained vacant for two and a half years. It’s very bizarre.”

As ICE director Todd Lyons put it at the 2025 Border Security Expo, the administration wants immigration enforcement to operate “like [Amazon] Prime, but with human beings.”

But the reality is much more mundane. The warehouse was sold to DHS by an entity tied to a Goldman Sachs asset management fund and the real estate firm Dalfen Industrial. Dalfen specializes in last-mile properties: facilities near urban areas that serve as hubs for the rapid distribution of consumer goods. This is the type of invisible infrastructure that gets your Amazon package delivered overnight. When Dalfen acquired the Roxbury property from a developer in December 2023, it praised its suburban location outside of New York City. Real estate companies, however, have struggled to cash out on warehouse projects in recent years, and industrial vacancies have doubled since 2023.

That untapped warehouse network has become a convenient resource for enacting Trump’s ambitious deportation agenda. As ICE director Todd Lyons put it at the 2025 Border Security Expo, the administration wants immigration enforcement to operate “like [Amazon] Prime, but with human beings.”

But as it turns out, suburban Americans aren’t exactly thrilled to have massive immigration detention facilities down the street.

“To have it in our backyard, it’s horrible,” Lenox said. “I was thinking about putting my house up for sale. How am I going to sell my house with this crap in my backyard?”

Lenox leans conservative; his neighbor, Elizabeth Jacobus, is a proud Democrat. Meanwhile, town leadership shares their concerns: On January 13, the all-Republican Roxbury town council unanimously passed a resolution “unequivocally oppos[ing]” DHS’s plans. Meeting minutes show that the mayor and one councilmember expressed their support for ICE’s broader mission but said such an operation made no sense in Roxbury.

“The wording used at town halls has been very, very clearly NIMBY,” said Bonnie Rosenthal, a Project NINJA activist. “If the facility was in a nearby town, I think they would be perfectly fine with that.”

“I don’t want my legacy as a councilwoman to be this jail, this camp. I feel like we’re back in World War II with the internment camps for the Japanese.”

But when I called councilmember Jaki Albrecht, she told me she opposes the facility on moral grounds, too. Albrecht has identified as a Republican her entire life, but she said that, “at this point in time, the ‘R’ next to my name is for Roxbury. Because I am appalled more and more every day by what our president is doing.”

“I don’t want my legacy as a councilwoman to be this jail, this camp,” Albrecht said. “I feel like we’re back in World War II with the internment camps for the Japanese.” Albrecht noted she only learned of the warehouse plans when her son called her about the Washington Post piece.

That lack of transparency from the federal government has riled Albrecht and other local officials. On February 20, the town released a scathing statement slamming DHS for providing “absolutely no feedback” to the community throughout the warehouse sale process. “It is also inconceivable and frankly stunning that all of our communications to DHS on issues related to this selection as a detention center were never answered,” the mayor and council wrote.

Roxbury officials also faulted Dalfen for rejecting their alternative offer of a 10-year tax abatement: “It is extremely disappointing that Dalfen Industrial prioritized profits over community,” they wrote, calling the negotiations “not reflective of a good community partner.”

A Dalfen spokesperson disputed officials’ account, emphasized that Goldman Sachs was the majority partner in the transaction, and said the property was sold in lieu of eminent domain. “The company has no involvement in the future operations of the facility,” the spokesperson wrote.

“This property, which sat vacant for two years, was held in a real estate investment fund that we manage,” wrote a Goldman Sachs spokesperson. “We had a fiduciary obligation to investors in the fund to sell it.”

In response to questions about the Roxbury council’s statement, an ICE spokesperson sent five mugshots of “criminal illegal aliens” allegedly arrested by ICE in New Jersey. The spokesperson added that the facilities “will not be warehouses” but rather “very well-structured detention facilities meeting our regular detention standards” that “will undergo community impact studies and a rigorous due diligence process to make sure there is no hardship on local utilities or infrastructure prior to purchase.” The spokesperson claimed that the Roxbury facility and its construction would bring in an estimated $39.2 million in tax revenue. The town has a different view: According to officials’ estimates, the sale of the facility to DHS will lead to $85 million in lost local tax revenue over the next 30 years.

A nighttime view of a parking area and driveway with patches of snow on the ground, bordered by a dense line of bare trees. A dark sedan is parked on the left, and a dark van and car are parked further back. Through the trees in the background, a large, long building is illuminated with bright, cool-toned lights. A wooden utility pole and a small dark post with a hanging object stand on the right near a snow-covered bank.

A neighbor’s view of the Roxbury warehouse at midnight.Faith Jacobus

Project NINJA organizers are willing to accept NIMBY arguments if it means stalling the project long enough that it never becomes a reality—not in Roxbury, not anywhere.

“Anyone with the barest amount of knowledge, it doesn’t matter what their political persuasion is, they understand that it’s a bad deal,” said Project NINJA co-founder William Angus. “It’s not just those ‘liberal protest people.’ It’s all people, from everywhere, who have come together to say this is not appropriate for this town.”

The growing controversy surrounding the DHS warehouse might prove to be political poison for Roxbury’s representative in Congress, Republican Tom Kean Jr.

Angus, a 55-year-old customer service rep with a wiry gray beard, only started protesting after Trump’s second inauguration. Now, he’s become a key organizer behind the Roxbury warehouse resistance. At Saturday’s protest, he wore a black T-shirt printed with the words “empathy,” “inclusion,” and “kindness” in rainbow font. Angus told me he expected to see as many as 1,000 people at the protest, doubling previous turnout. But that afternoon, as he flew his drone camera above Route 46, he looked at the growing crowd in awe.

“Wow, I can’t pan up high enough to take a picture,” Angus said. “I’ve pushed it as far as I can.” Organizers estimate that, all in all, 1,750 people turned out.

The growing controversy surrounding the DHS warehouse might prove to be political poison for Roxbury’s representative in Congress, Republican Tom Kean Jr. His seat is one of the prime targets Democrats hope to flip in the fall. After Roxbury residents—and the town council—rebuked Kean for not doing more to stop the facility, he introduced a bill on February 23 called the “Local Taxpayer Protection Act.” It would allow places like Roxbury to recoup lost property tax revenue in the event a federal immigration facility comes to town.

Angus was unmoved by Kean’s gesture: “We like to call it the ‘We’re Fine With Human Misery As Long As We Don’t Have To Pay For It’ Act,” he said.

Other protesters told me they hoped the immediacy of a massive immigration processing center in the neighborhood would force more conservative Roxbury residents to grapple with the inhumanity of Trump’s agenda.

Sisters Sulma Cabrera, 36, and Cindy Brenes, 41, said they were devastated to see how the deportation machine had wrought terror among their own undocumented family members and friends. Brenes’ sons—aged 10, 13, and 16—told me about how their schoolmates hid in fear last year when they heard ICE agents were in the area.

“I think the reality is settling in on people that are like, ‘We didn’t vote for this,’” Cabrera said. “But they did. And now that it’s happening in such an inhumane way…I think people are changing their minds.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

JD Vance, the New Racist Populism Czar

A version of the below article first appearedin David Corn’s newsletter, Our Land_. The newsletter comes out twice a week (most of the time) and provides behind-the-scenes stories and articles about politics, media, and culture. Subscribing costs just $5 a month—but you can sign up for a free 30-day trial._

During his very loud and very long demagogic State of the Union speech, President Donald Trump railed about fraud in Minnesota, claiming members of the Somali immigrant community had “pillaged an estimated $19 billion.” That number, no surprise, was way off: Estimates for fraud in the state’s Medicaid program and other social welfare operations range between $1 billion and $9 billion over a number of years.

Announcing a “war on fraud,” Trump said he had tapped Vice President JD Vance to lead this effort. He also insisted that his administration could “find enough of that fraud” to “actually have a balanced budget overnight.” That was absurd. The deficit that Trump has helped to supersize is $1.8 trillion. Even if there were the same level of fraud in every state as Minnesota and every dime of the fraud were captured and sent to the federal treasury, the US government would be lucky to bank about $50 billion a year. That’s less than 3 percent of the deficit. Trump is not good at math.

But putting Vance in charge of this initiative is a smart move for Trump because no GOP politician does a better job of blending economic populism and racism. It’s Vance’s specialty.

Powerful interests, Vance says, deploy false accusations of racism to prevent people—white people, that is—from complaining about the economic hardships they face and from challenging the well-heeled who are playing them for suckers.

Look at his acceptance speech at the 2024 GOP convention. Vance praised the people of eastern Kentucky, his family’s ancestral home. It’s one of the poorest regions in the United States, but he hailed its residents as “very hardworking” and “good” people: “They’re the kind of people who would give you the shirt off their back even if they can’t afford enough to eat.” He added, “And our media calls them privileged and looks down on them.” Vance maintained that these folks have been screwed over by ruling elites who have pushed economic policies that benefit the well-off and harm working-class families. (He must have forgotten Donald Trump’s first-term tax cut that heavily favored the wealthy.)

But back to “privileged.” Who refers to the low-income families of Appalachia as privileged? Vance did not explain this. But this sentence was something of a dog whistle and a callback to demagogic rhetoric that Vance has been slinging for years. He meant they are called “privileged” because they are white—as in “white privilege.”

As he has done before, Vance was merging working-class resentment and white racial grievance. In various venues, he has charged that plutocrats (whom he doesn’t name) are conspiring with the woke crowd (whoever they are) to silence Middle America. These powerful interests, Vance says, deploy false accusations of racism to prevent people—white people, that is—from complaining about the economic hardships they face and from challenging the well-heeled who are playing them for suckers. The elites are using woke-ism to economically exploit white working-class Americans.

This is how Vance put it in a 2021 interview with conservative talk show host Bill Cunningham:

Here’s what the elites do. When they say that those people are white privileged, they shut them up. ‘Look, you’re unhappy about your job being shipped overseas? You’re worried that a lawless southern border is going to cause the same poison that killed your daughter to also affect your grandbaby? Don’t you dare complain about that stuff. You are white privileged. You suffer from white rage’…What they do is use it as a power play so they can get us to shut up. So they can get us to stop complaining about our own country. And they get to run things without any control, without any pushback from the real people.

This is deft demagoguery. Two years ago, I described it this way:

Vance conflates legitimate concerns about economic power with racist paranoia. It’s much more sophisticated than the usual GOP playing of the race card. Instead, Vance fuses toxic culture wars to bread-and-butter issues. Look at how he weaved all this together when a train derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, [in 2023 and sparked a chemical fire]. Vance blamed Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and his Department of Transportation’s racial equity initiatives for the catastrophe: “I’ve got to say, the Secretary of Transportation…talking about how we have too many white male construction workers instead of the fact that our trains are crashing…This guy needs to do his job.” So the good (white) folk of East Palestine were victimized supposedly because Buttigieg was spending too much time trying to help Black people.

His message: Wokeness is a tool of the wealthy to repress hardworking and decent white folks.

Now Trump is tying fraud to his anti-immigrant and racial bigotry. He has repeatedly targeted racist rants at Somali immigrants, exclaiming they are “garbage” and “destroying” Minnesota. “We don’t want them in our country,” he bellowed. In December, he said, “These Somalians have taken billions of dollars out of our country”—a baseless claim, even considering the fraud investigations in Minnesota. And for years he has race-baited Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who was born in Somalia. “She shouldn’t be allowed to be a congresswoman,” Trump said in one of his many outbursts directed at her.

This is a perfect opportunity for Vance: He can tell white working-class Americans pissed off by the economy, high prices, and government dysfunction that the problem lies with fraudster immigrants.

After getting elected by falsely asserting Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating dogs and cats, Trump switched to race-bashing the Somalis of Minnesota. And the fraud scandal—a true and troubling scandal in which most of the convicted perps so far are Somali immigrants—has supplied him and Vance plenty of ammunition.

Now the pair can readily associate an immigrant community with serious fraud, while raising questions about the value and effectiveness of safety net programs. (Why fund them if the money is being stolen?) Trump can signal to his MAGA base that the United States would somehow be more prosperous—it would not have this yawning deficit—were it not for these people of color ripping off government programs.

Vance is much experienced in delivering such a false and hate-infused narrative. He can tell white working-class Americans pissed off by the economy, high prices, and government dysfunction that the problem lies with these fraudster immigrants. Dump the blame on those shifty migrants who are cheating salt-of-the-earth Americans and stealing their tax dollars. This is a perfect opportunity for Vance. When it comes to exploiting racism to pose as a phony populist, he’s the best.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Hegseth Complains That Reporting on Dead Troops Is Bad PR for Trump

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday criticized news outlets for highlighting the deaths of six US service members in Iran’s retaliatory strikes, suggesting the coverage was unfair because “the press only wants to make the president look bad.”

“This is what the fake news misses,” Hegseth said during a Pentagon briefing on the escalating US and Israeli campaign against Iran, which he claimed has already secured control of the country’s airspace and waterways. “When a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it’s front-page news.”

Iran launched the drone attack Sunday, striking a US command center in Kuwait in retaliation for US and Israeli strikes that began the day before. At least sixAmerican service members were killed.

Hegseth’s remarks underscored the partisan tone surrounding the military campaign. During the briefing, he called on just ten reporters—including representatives from the Daily Wire, LindellTV, and the Daily Caller, outlets founded by far-right commentators Ben Shapiro, Mike Lindell, and Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel.

Several questions echoed administration talking points, including one about the killing of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei—described in the briefing as “the leader of the group who was trying to assassinate President Trump” —and another about Tehran’s claim that it could outlast US missile defenses. Hegseth dismissed the idea.

Hegseth: This is what the fake news misses. We've taken control of Iran's airspace and waterways without boots on the ground, But when a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it's front page news. I get it, the press only wants to make the president look bad. But try… pic.twitter.com/LNMuKuutTR

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 4, 2026

Still, the deaths of six US service members—and the growing civilian toll in Iran—are difficult to ignore. The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency reported Wednesday that 1,097 civilians have been killed in Iran since Saturday, including 181 children under the age of 10.

At the briefing, Hegseth signaled that the US is preparing for a deeper military engagement.

“We are accelerating, not decelerating,” he told reporters. “More bombers and more fighters are arriving just today.” He added that the US would be deploying a “nearly unlimited” supply of 500-, 1,000-, and 2,000-pound bombs.

America’s Gold Star Families, a nonprofit supporting families of service members killed in the line of duty, issued a statement Tuesday mourning the losses.

“The recent escalation of military conflict between the United States and Iran and the heartbreaking news of U.S. service members killed in action have profound consequences for our nation,” the group said. “But the heaviest burden is borne by the families who now face a chair that will forever stay empty.”

President Donald Trump struck a very different tone. After reports Sunday that three service members had died, he said: “Sadly, there will likely be more before it ends. That’s the way it is.”

A day later, after a fourth death was reported, Trump suggested the war could last weeks—or longer.

“Right from the beginning, we projected four to five weeks,” he said. “But we have capability to go far longer than that.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

War With Iran Could Create “Historic” Disruptions in Global Energy Markets

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

The US and Israeli war against Iran is disrupting energy markets and driving oil and gas prices higher in the United States and globally. While those increases are modest so far, experts say the war has the potential to cause more severe and lasting impacts if Iran damages the region’s energy infrastructure or restricts shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Already, the three-day-old bombing campaign has killed hundreds of people in Iran, including the country’s leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Iran has retaliated by hitting a broad range of targets across the region, including oil and gas sites. On Monday, Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Energy said its Ras Tanura oil refinery sustained “limited” damage after the interception of two drones. QatarEnergy said Monday it was halting production of liquefied natural gas, or LNG, after military attacks on two facilities.

“We are really quickly into a really dangerous phase here of which there is no precedent.”

About one-fifth of global oil and LNG supplies pass through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea. On Sunday only five oil tankers moved through the strait, according to S&P Global Energy, compared with about 60 per day before the war.

Analysts say global markets can withstand these types of cuts over the short term—global oil prices were up about 7 percent Monday compared to the day before bombing began. But the conflict also has the potential to cause “the largest oil supply disruption in history,” said Jim Burkhard, vice president and head of crude oil research at S&P Global Energy, in a note.

“If the reduction in tanker traffic continues for a week or so it will be historic,” Burkhard wrote. “Beyond that it would be epochal for the oil market with prices rising to ration scarce supply and impacts in financial markets.”

Any lasting disruptions could prove even more meaningful for global gas markets, said Daniel Sternoff, senior fellow and head of corporate partnership strategy at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. Countries generally have smaller inventories of gas than oil to cushion disruptions, Sternoff said, though the impacts would be most pronounced in Asia and Europe. The United States is the world’s largest gas producer and a net exporter, so he said consumers would be somewhat insulated.

The biggest question now, Sternoff said, is whether Iran damages oil and gas facilities around the region. “All of this looks like a deliberate Iranian choice to escalate really quickly against its neighbors and to try to use world energy markets and prices as a pressure point,” Sternoff said, referring to the attacks in Saudi Arabia and Qatar. “We are really quickly into a really dangerous phase here of which there is no precedent.”

A sustained increase in crude oil prices will push up the price of gasoline, too. And unlike with natural gas, American consumers are not insulated from the global oil market, experts say. Even though the United States is a net exporter of oil, refiners still import large volumes of crude.

If prices remain elevated for no more than a couple of weeks, there may be little lasting impact, said Alan Krupnick, a senior fellow and director of the industry and fuels program at Resources for the Future, an environmental and energy think tank. But if high prices hang on for months, Krupnick said, that could have ripple effects that cut both ways with respect to climate change and fossil fuel output.

Higher gasoline prices could, over time, push more consumers toward electric vehicles, Krupnick said. But they would also create an incentive for US oil companies to drill more. Domestic oil output fell for the second consecutive month in December, the most recent data available, according to the US Energy Information Administration, and had plateaued in the months before that.

Some environmental advocates have argued that the war’s impact on energy markets highlights the volatility of fossil fuel markets and underscores the need to transition to cleaner sources of energy. As it is, they argue, the attack on Iran will drive up energy costs for consumers everywhere.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Iran, the US, and the Making of a New Middle East

US and Israeli military strikes against Iran that killed several of the country’s top officials, including longtime supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, have ushered in a new and unpredictable era in the Middle East. Within hours, Iran retaliated, striking US allies across the Persian Gulf, including US embassies and a military operations center in Kuwait. At least six US service members had been killed. In Iran, days of military strikes have reportedly killed hundreds of people, including dozens of girls at an elementary school.

Davar Ardalan knows Iran inside and out. She lived in the country before the Islamic Revolution, when it was ruled by the shah, and afterward, when it was run by the country’s ayatollahs. For more than two decades, she was a journalist at NPR, where she produced major stories about the country. She’s also the author of My Name Is Iran: A Memoir, which highlights three generations of women living in both Iran and the US during times of revolution.

“Whether you’re a loyalist to the regime or you want reform, you don’t know what the country is demanding of you right now,” Ardalan tells More To The Story’s Al Letson. “So there’s a lot of uncertainty, a lot of fear, and many people are scared.”

On this week’s episode, Ardalan examines how Iranians inside the country are reacting to the ever-widening conflict, the long history of outside intervention in the region, and who might lead the country moving forward.

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

Even Republicans Are Losing Patience With Kristi Noem

Kristi Noem faced frustration from some Republicans during a Senate oversight hearing Tuesday over how she’s handling her job as secretary of homeland security.

During the nearly five-hour hearing, Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and John Kennedy (R-La.) criticized Noem for refusing to take responsibility for the killings of two U.S. citizens, Renée Good and Alex Pretti, by federal agents in Minnesota, and for allegedly stalling investigations into the Department of Homeland Security while spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on agency ads.

“We’re beginning to get the American people to think that deporting people is wrong,” Tillis said about Noem’s job as DHS secretary. “It’s the exact opposite. The way you’re going about deporting them is wrong.”

The probes into both cases are led by Homeland Security Investigations, an agency within the DHS, and the Office of Professional Responsibility, while excluding local authorities. The Justice Department, which would typically be involved, is not investigating the killing of Renée Good but has initiated a civil rights probe into the killing of Alex Pretti.

“One of the reasons why ICE officers are having threats…is because you’ve cast the pall on them by acting like we should investigate things differently,” Tillis told Noem. “Officer-invovled shootings have a formula that we should go through every time.”

Tillis later mentioned a letter from the Office of Inspector General, saying “10 different instances under Ms. Noem’s leadership where they’ve been misled and not allowed to pursue investigations.” Last month, Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) sent a letter to Noem saying she learned that DHS general counsel told the investigators multiple times that Noem could kill their investigations.

after absolutely eviscerating Kristi Noem and calling for her resignation, Tillis is applauded. He thens threatens to hold up nominees if she doesn't stop stonewalling him. My God.

Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-03-03T17:55:14.620Z

Tillis vowed to put a hold on all “en bloc” nominations, a procedure allowing the Senate to confirm nominees as a group, if he didn’t get a response from Noem to questions he sent a month ago about federal agents in Minneapolis’ use of force. Tillis also criticized DHS for its reliance on administrative warrants to detain citizens.

While Tillis has a long track record of criticizing Noem, including calling for her resignation in January, Kennedy does not.

Kennedy went after Noem for starring in $220 million worth of taxpayer-funded DHS ads.

Kennedy: How do you square that concern for waste when you have spent 220 million dollars on commercials that feature you prominently?

Noem: It would be helpful to know how effective it has been.

Kennedy: They were effective in your name recognition. It puts the president in a… pic.twitter.com/XBryVTezsT

— Acyn (@Acyn) March 3, 2026

Hesuggested that the videos “were effective in [Noem’s] name recognition” rather than promoting the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement.

Kennedy also cited reports that the department sidestepped competitive bidding rules. One of the largest contracts went to Safe American Media, a company created just days before it won the deal. The company is run by the husband of Noem’s former chief spokesperson, Tricia McLaughlin, who also worked on ads for Noem during her time in Congress and as governor of South Dakota.

The hearing came as many Republicans urged Democrats to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security, citing the need to strengthen protections against possible retaliatory terror attacks after US and Israeli strikes on Iran that began Saturday.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

House Intel Member: There’ll Be an Iran Investigation if Democrats Win the Midterms

When Donald Trump announced the launch of his war on Iran in a videotaped message, he declared he was “eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime.” If there were indications that Tehran was about to strike American targets, that would have been reflected in US intelligence reports. Yet a member of the House intelligence committee, Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.), says that no such intelligence was shared with the committee and that the Trump administration for months had refused to provide intelligence on Iran to the committee. “We were kept in the dark,” he notes.

In an interview with Mother Jones, Gomez contends that there is no reason to believe Trump’s claim of an imminent threat, and maintains that Trump was just spinning the nation into a war of choice. He also notes that if the Democrats win control of the House in the coming midterm elections, the House intelligence committee is likely to mount an investigation of the pre-war intelligence, as well as Trump’s use and possible misrepresentation of intelligence regarding other national security matters, including the attack on Venezuela: “We not only have an obligation but we do have a right to conduct these investigations. We have to see if intelligence was politicized…We have to know what really happened….I’m looking forward to holding them accountable.”

Gomez adds, “There are things we have to look at that people don’t even know about, and they’ll never know about.” That sounds ominous.

The Trump administration, he says, “never came to show us the evidence there was an imminent threat to the United States.” The flow of intelligence was shut down after media reports noted intelligence assessments of Trump’s air strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities in June did not back up Trump’s claim the sites had been “obliterated.” And, according to Gomez, the Republicans on the House intelligence committee have not pushed for more access to Iran intelligence. “Now that they have a Republican president, the oversight is not as robust as it was during the Biden administration,” he says.

“There’s no way people should trust what the administration is saying,” he comments. “They’re trying to find facts on the ground to justify whatever goal they have.” Gomez points out that though Trump has said Tehran posed an immediate danger to the United States due to its ballistic missile program, the Defense Department has concluded they are ten years away from developing missiles that can strike America.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump’s DEI Crackdown Hit a Wall in Court. What’s Next?

A federal judge voided a Trump administration directive that pressured educational institutions to end all programs related to diversity, equity, and inclusion last month.

The directive, issued by the Department of Education as a “Dear Colleague” letter to public schools in February 2025, stated that school districts who failed to drop “discriminatory” DEI practices could violate civil rights law and lose federal funding. The letter cited the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ruled that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions are unconstitutional.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit the following month on behalf of the National Education Association, a labor union of about three million educators, arguing that the Education Department’s policy violated due process and First Amendment protections.

On February 3, the Education Department stepped back from enforcing the directive. But the Trump administration continues to pursue other methods to crack down on DEI through executive orders and civil rights investigations.

This decision hit a personal note for me. I attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill while a federal judge considered a case against it that would ultimately kill affirmative action programs in college admissions across the nation.My first article for Mother Jones investigated the ways Asian-American students fit within debates over affirmative action, where many felt they faced discrimination in the college admissions process. SFFA largely latched onto this argument in their lawsuits against UNC and Harvard, painting a monolithic view of Asian American cultural and political identity. The case was a major step in establishing a signature Trump administration policy meant to erase historical inequities, let alone explore attempts to remediate.

To try to understand how last month’s decision fits within the Education Department’s campaign against what they deem to be dangerous discriminatory DEI, I spoke last week with Sarah Hinger, the deputy director of the ACLU Racial Justice Program. Singer also served ascounsel of record for the plaintiffs, who filed the lawsuit against the Education Department with other legal professionals in the ACLU and NEA.

How does the decision on the “Dear Colleague” letter fit within the Trump administration’s efforts to target DEI in schools?

At the end of the first Trump administration, there was an effort to restrict contractors working with the federal government from the ability to talk about equity and diversity along the lines of race [and] gender. Those didn’t really end up coming into effect because of the change in administration, but we saw a series of state legislatures pick these up as concepts and prohibit them from being incorporated across K-12 and higher education.

One of the key problems with these policies were the ways in which they were worded. The laws didn’t just say you can’t talk about race or suggest that affirmative action is a good thing. They tried to get at that through more amorphously-phrased concepts that made it extremely difficult to understand exactly where the line between permissible and prohibited exists. They might apply, for example, to teaching novels or teaching aspects of US history.

The problem that we were faced with is that everyone across the education profession was left in fear to guess at whether or not their program—their livelihood—could come into question by the federal government.

This case [from last month] came on top of those state efforts. In the intervening years, the Department of Education issued guidance in the form of that “Dear Colleague” letter. The Department of Education has issued these over the years to provide some advice to school districts about how to comply with existing civil rights laws.

In this case, they characterized it as a “Dear Colleague” letter, but they did an about-face from prior guidance, which had talked to schools about the ways in which they can create a learning environment that furthers goals of diversity and inclusion.

This letter vaguely said that DEI programs are illegal. [The Trump administration] condemned “illegal DEI,” in which schools were bringing discrimination into their school. But they didn’t define what, in their view, was an illegal DEI program. And so the same issues existed there: It was difficult for any educator or school leader to understand what the administration was claiming was now illegal, particularly when previous guidance had recommended many things that could now be characterized as supporting DEI.

The problem that we were faced with is that everyone across the education profession was left in fear to guess at whether or not their program—their livelihood—could come into question by the federal government. That leads to self-censorship and a chilling effect.

The letter said that schools had two weeks before the administration could potentially hold someone liable. This was followed up very shortly by a newly-announced requirement for school districts and schools to certify their compliance with these new directives under not just the penalties of a potential investigation, but also the revocation of federal funding and liability under the False Claims Act.

This was in line with some of what we’ve seen happening with individual institutions of higher education and the use of any and every lever to convince schools that it would be easier to move away from these practices rather than fight.

Does the case against the “Dear Colleague” directive have any effect on how the Trump administration is using other levers like civil rights investigationsagainst school programs and executive orders?

There are a wide range of schools that are struggling with these cases and the fearmongering that comes as a result. It’s not just the most prominent schools and universities, but it’s also community colleges, K-12 public school districts, and people who create curriculum who are in teacher training programs in colleges.

Yeah, I think they do. We saw the Department of Education say, “we will withhold your funding if you don’t do these things.” It’s now clear that the department will have to more clearly spell out what it thinks complies with or doesn’t comply with existing civil rights laws and how—and that requires more analysis. I think that’s an important precedent going forward. It allows us to assess whether or not that analysis is consistent with the case law and legal precedent and for the education community to assert the value of their work. It also means if the Education Department suggests that school districts are liable for engaging in programs related to DEI, it would be more susceptible to challenge. It’s harder for them to operate in such a sweeping way where they say, in our view, that everything is illegal.

Many states have their own anti-DEI agendas. Does this ruling have any effect on how challenges to state policies may proceed?

Yes, I think we see that this is impactful for states that follow the federal government’s example. New Hampshire was an early effort to create a state corollary and a state law that would prohibit DEI practices in their schools. The ACLU and ACLU of New Hampshire filed a suit against that law, and it’s similarly been enjoined. The court rulings in federal cases cited that there are now a series of cases finding that these types of prohibitions have constitutional flaws. That provided an important source of support for the challenge at the state level.

Is there anything significant that we should consider in trying to understand the scope of these cases against DEI in education?

There are a wide range of schools that are struggling with these cases and the fearmongering that comes as a result. It’s not just the most prominent schools and universities, but it’s also community colleges, K-12 public school districts, and people who create curriculum who are in teacher training programs in colleges.

We saw specifically in this litigation—because of how far-reaching in scope the policy directive was—the range of people who were seeing it show up in their work and the impacts that it was having on them. So you know, community college professors, students who were training to become teachers themselves were teaching special education in colleges.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Justice Alito’s Latest Opinion Is a Very, Very Bad Sign for Voting Rights

The Supreme Court on Monday evening overturned a New York state court ruling that found that the Staten Island-based district of Republican US House Rep. Nicole Malliotakis discriminated against Black and Latino voters and needed to be redrawn. The Supreme Court’s intervention preserves a GOP-led seat that would have been likely to shift to Democrats this November.

The court’s ruling sets a disturbing precedent for voting rights in several ways. Federal courts are supposed to defer to state courts on matters of state law. And the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that courts should not change election laws in the middle of an election season, and in this instance the filing deadline for candidates in New York has already passed.

Alito is essentially saying that districts drawn under the Voting Rights Act or other federal and state laws to remedy centuries of racial discrimination are as racist as the racism they were meant to rectify.

In her dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan, Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasted the court’s conservative majority for using one set of rules to uphold redistricting maps that benefit white voters and Republicans in states like Texas while using a completely different set of rules to strike down maps that benefit racial minorities and Democrats in places like New York.

“Time and again, this Court has said that federal courts should not interfere with state-court litigation,” Sotomayor wrote. “Time and again, this Court has said that federal courts should not meddle with state election laws ahead of an election. Today, the Court says: except for this one, except for this one, and except for this one.”

The majority did not explain its reasoning, but most concerning was the concurring opinion by Justice Samuel Alito, in which he wrote that districts drawn “for the express purpose of ensuring that ‘minority voters’ are able to elect the candidate of their choice” represented “unadorned racial discrimination, an inherently ‘odious’ activity that violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause except in the ‘most extraordinary case.’”

Alito is essentially saying that districts drawn under the Voting Rights Act or other federal and state laws to remedy centuries of racial discrimination are as racist as the racism (including the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow) they were meant to rectify.

Court watchers speculate that Alito, because he has not authored an opinion from the court’s term last October, is writing the majority opinion in a hugely important case the court has yet to rule on concerning the constitutionality of the last remaining section of the Voting Rights Act. If that’s the case, the VRA—and by extension, the fate of American democracy—will be in very, very bad shape.

The Roberts court has repeatedly gutted the VRA and if it were to rule that it is unconstitutional for states to draw districts that allow voters of color to elect their candidates of choice that would essentially spell the death of the country’s most important civil rights law. Based on his opinions in other major voting rights cases and his concurrence in the New York case, Alito seems certain to kill the VRA outright or narrow it to the point of irrelevancy.

If the court were to rule against the VRA this spring, that could shift roughly a dozen seats in the GOP’s favor this year, turbocharging Trump’s efforts to manipulate the midterms. Alito is now telegraphing just how far he’s prepared to go.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

The Culture Wars Are Coming for Your Electricity

This story was originally published b_y Grist and made possible through its partnership with the Salt Lake Tribune, a nonprofit newsroom in Utah. It is reproduced here as part of the_ Climate Desk collaboration.

Relations between states are becoming so strained over their different approaches to fossil fuels and renewables, some politicians are calling for a “divorce.”

Utah Republicans celebrated last week when PacifiCorp, one of the largest utilities in the West, announced it would stop serving customers in Washington state. PacifiCorp mainly operates in Utah, but also in Wyoming and Idaho—and, to the chagrin of some Utah legislators, blue states like California and Oregon. Utah legislators had previously pressured to break their utility’s ties with states with more aggressive climate policies. Now, PacifiCorp is handing over its 140,000 customers in Washington—along with two wind farms, a natural gas plant, and other energy infrastructure—to Portland General Electric for $1.9 billion.

“We want a divorce from the three states that don’t look like Utah,” said Mike Schultz, Utah’s Republican House Speaker. “This is the first step forward.”

In announcing the sale, PacifiCorp noted that navigating “diverging policies” among the six states it serves had “created extraordinary pressure,” a challenge that had affected its financial stability. Utah is still heavily reliant on coal, while California, Oregon, and Washington have been moving forward with policies to shift away from fossil fuels.

Washington, for example, aims to slash greenhouse gas emissions nearly in half by 2030, using 1990 levels as a baseline. As of January, Washington required PacifiCorp to stop charging Washington customers for coal generation, reducing costs for ratepayers by $68 million compared to the status quo—and potentially shifting coal-related costs back onto states like Utah.

“Clean energy is just the way we’re moving… It’s really a question of just how fast we get there.”

It’s not just money driving the wedge, but also identity. “Absolutely, this seems like a culture war thing,” said Matthew Burgess, an environmental economist at the University of Wyoming who studies political polarization. He sees Republican politicians playing up cultural tensions to appeal to their base, particularly in places where coal’s long-term decline has fueled economic anxiety and resentment. “Some of this rhetoric that blames maybe what’s happening in the industry on coastal progressives and their climate histrionics—you can see how that sort of message might be resonant or cathartic with those communities that are having real problems,” Burgess said.

As the divide grows between blue states demanding clean energy and red states seeking to protect coal, oil, and natural gas, the economic realities of sharing the grid have become a point of contention. This is all unfolding at a time when concerns about rising costs have gripped the country. Electricity prices have climbed, with the average US home’s energy bill 30 percent higher in 2025 than it was 2021—a steep rise, but still in line with overall inflation. While Republicans often blame environmental regulations for rising electricity prices, Democrats typically blame Trump’s attacks on clean energy or the rise of energy-hungry data centers.

The tension over sharing energy costs with blue states rose in Utah in 2024, when Rocky Mountain Power, Utah’s largest electricity provider and part of PacifiCorp, proposed a 30 percent rate increase for most of the state’s customers. The utility said the increase was needed to cover the costs of building new infrastructure and complying with regulations in different states. Utah Republicans grilled Rocky Mountain Power and suggested it could break up with PacifiCorp, its parent company, because of the progressive climate policies it had to comply with in California, Oregon, and Washington. Last year, Utah’s Republican governor, Spencer Cox, signed a resolution encouraging an “interstate compact for regional energy collaboration” with Wyoming and Idaho.

“Sadly, we know Utahns are paying more for power because of decisions being made in coastal states, places like Oregon and Washington,” Cox said at the time. “But this is so much more than that.”

This theme has popped up in other parts of the country. Last September, five Republican-led states—Montana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas—asked federal regulators to stop a $22 billion transmission expansion designed to connect cities in the Upper Midwest to the Great Plains. They argued that sharing the cost of the project would effectively force their ratepayers to subsidize wind and solar for the benefit of Democratic states’ clean energy goals.

Yet as Republicans complain about the costs of building clean energy, Democrats are blaming the costs of keeping fossil fuels alive, noting that the Trump administration is forcing expensive coal plants to stay open past their retirement dates in Washington, Colorado, Indiana, and Michigan. The Michigan coal plant cost ratepayers $80 million in the first four months of running it beyond its planned retirement date, according to the chair of the Michigan Public Service Commission.

“Clean energy is just the way we’re moving,” said Meredith Connolly, director of policy and strategy at Climate Solutions, a clean energy nonprofit in the Pacific Northwest. “It’s really a question of just how fast we get there, and do you create these headwinds that slow down the transition or try to give an unfair leg up to fossil fuels? Those are the silly things we’re seeing that actually drive up electricity costs.”

There are plenty of pressures affecting utilities—market forces, the scramble to procure more electricity to power data centers, and even climate-driven risks. In many states, particularly in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic, replacing outdated equipment, protecting power lines, and other measures to withstand more extreme weather conditions is the main driver of rising costs. In California, infrastructure upgrades to reduce wildfire risk (and thus liability costs) are a key factor behind the soaring electricity bills. PacifiCorp, for instance, has faced a slew of lawsuits accusing it of sparking fires in Oregon and California with poorly maintained equipment and has agreed to pay $2.2 billion in settlements.

Some climate advocates worry about what would happen if splitting up the energy market along partisan boundaries became a trend. “Our fates are tied across the energy market,” Connolly said. “And so these would be pretty artificial lines.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Gregory Bovino Is Now Under Criminal Investigation

Former Customs and Border Patrol chief Gregory Bovino’s use of chemical irritants during the Department of Homeland Security’s “Operation Metro Surge”in Minnesota is among 17 criminal investigations now underway in Hennepin County, where Minneapolis is located, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office announced Monday.

County Attorney Mary Moriarty mentioned Bovino’s actions at Monday’s news conference. Footage captured by activist Ben Luhmann shows Bovino throwing a gas canister at protesters and observers in Minneapolis’ Mueller Park on January 21. The canister released green gas that, as Duke University School of Medicine professor and tear gas expert Sven-Eric Jordt told my colleague Samantha Michaels, may contain the carcinogenic reproductive toxicants lead and chromium.

U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Cmdr. Greg Bovino is seen deploying a gas canister at Mueller Park in south Minneapolis this afternoon.Video by Ben Luhmann.

Minnesota Star Tribune (@startribune.com) 2026-01-21T23:57:11Z

Moriarty also stated that the office had launched a Transparency and Accountability Project to examine the 17 cases, staffed by prosecutors and a civilian investigator from the county office.

The project includes a “portal for community members to share photos and video on any incidents that may involve potentially unlawful conduct by federal agents,” Moriarty said, as well as eyewitness accounts of similar experiences—a response to the federal government’s refusal to provide information that could be used to hold its agents to account.

If federal authorities continue to withholdcrime scene evidence from the killings of Renée Good and Alex Pretti, Moriarty said, as well as the shooting of Julio Sosa-Celis, she would consider filing a lawsuit against them.

To date, federal agents have largely gotten away with flagrant, widely recorded, and documented abuses against immigrants, protesters, and observers in Minnesota, including killing unarmed protesters, releasing immigrants from detention while withholding their documents and possessions, detaining children, and tear gassing nonviolent gatherings. This is Bovino’s legacy, and that of the Trump administration.

But at the local level, individuals—increasingly joined by state and county authorities like Moriarty—are continuing to fight back.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Trump Uses Medal of Honor Ceremony to Boast About His “Beautiful Ballroom”

Donald Trump used a Medal of Honor ceremony on Monday, meant to honor three Army soldiers, to gush about the drapes he will add to his new ballroom in the White House’s East Wing.

“I picked those drapes in my first term—I always liked gold,” Trump said. “I believe it’s going to be the most beautiful ballroom anywhere in the world.”

He later joked about the constant loud hammering, which apparently runs from 6am to 11:30pm: “When I hear that beautiful sound behind me, it means money, so I like it,” the president said. “But my wife isn’t thrilled.”

Trump: "See that nice drape? When that comes down right now you see a very very deep hole, but in about a year and half you're gonna see a very very beautiful building. In fact, it looks so nice I think I'll leave it and save money on the doors. I believe it will be the most beautiful ballroom."

Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-03-02T17:01:48.409Z

As John Jay College art historian Erin Thompson told my colleagues at Reveal, Trump’s renovations are “a way to make it seem like things are changing and like Trump is keeping his promises when he’s actually not.”

“The style choices that he’s making are very congruent with his political message, in that he’s appealing to a vision of the past” as “greater than the present,” Thompson continued.

In the remainder of Trump’s opening remarks, he gave his first public comments on US and Israeli strikes on Iran—bombings that reportedly killed over 100 schoolchildren in Minab, a city in southern Iran. The fighting has resulted in the deaths of four US service members, following Iran’s initial attacks in response to the strikes on Saturday. The president mentioned again during the ceremony that military operations were projected to last four to five weeks but sounded open to a “far longer” conflict.

Trump justified the illegal strikes with old talking points, many of which contradict the federal government’s official assessments and those of nuclear policy experts, including the idea that Iran could soon develop nuclear weapons that threaten allies and could soon reach the US itself—at odds with the administration’s own claims, including a June White House release titled “Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Have Been Obliterated—and Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Can James Talarico Convince Democrats He’s the Fighter They Need?

If you ask a bunch of James Talarico supporters when they first heard about the 36-year-old Democratic candidate for US Senate, more often than not they will begin to describe a video. It was on TikTok or YouTube or Instagram. It was sent to them by a friend, or a family member—maybe even someone from out of state.

When I dropped by a rally last December, at a shopping center wedding venue on the north side of San Antonio, voter after voter told me a variation of the same story. Fred Spartz heard about Talarico from his son in Spokane, who told him to “get on the internet and look at this guy.” Cindy Padilla found out about him from her daughter, Julie, who saw a speech on TikTok about keeping religion out of schools. Roy Johnson saw a clip of Talarico talking to Joe Rogan, who had invited the state representative and aspiring pastor on his podcast after a sermon about Christian nationalism on a phone in the green room of his Austin comedy club. Almost everyone I talked to, at a certain point, would refer me to one clip in particular. It was an exchange he had with a Republican colleague two years ago. You’ve probably seen it too.

“They were trying to pass this Ten Commandments rule here in Texas,” explained a retired financial advisor named Ron Smith, referring to a new law that requires all public-school classrooms to display Moses’ divine tablets. “But they were doing it on the Sabbath day.”

Rebekah Cessna, the daughter of a Baptist minister from Tennessee, recalled Talarico’s response almost verbatim: “He said, ‘Would you be willing to postpone this so we can respect the Lord’s Day?”” she recalled. She started sending his sermons to her family back home.

“I said, ‘That’s the man I’ve been looking for.’”

In a party grasping for attention and ideas, Talarico has broken through like few others of his stature, by denouncing billionaires and theocrats in the overtly Christian language of a social-justice seminarian. He’s received a shout-out from Barack Obama, and charmed everyone from Ezra Klein to Rogan to the hosts of The View. CBS, fearing the wrath of Trump’s FCC, recently banned his interview with Stephen Colbert from the airwaves. Their straight-to-YouTube sit-down picked up nine million views. The race in Texas represents one of the party’s best pickup opportunities on a difficult Senate map. With President Donald Trump’s approval ratings cratering, Sen. John Cornyn on the ropes, and the scandal-plagued attorney general Ken Paxton waiting in the wings, polls suggest the former public school teacher has as good of a chance of winning a statewide office as almost any Texas Democrat this century—if he can make it to November.

Talarico’s precociousness can also seem like a familiar type. He’s shared advisors with Pete Buttigieg, the polyglot Episcopalian from South Bend who charmed voters twice his age while positioning himself as a champion of the “religious left.” In lieu of business Norwegian, Talarico peppers his sermons and interviews with an eclectic mix of thinkers—Jenny Odell, Dorothy Sayers, the Sufi mystic Hafez. He worked a hard job for a short time, went to Harvard, and ran for office at an alarmingly young age. Talarico’s high school theater teacher asked him for a letter of recommendation. He is humble and polite and talks reverently about his mom. James Talarico is a nice young man.

A room of supporters cheer and hold signs reading "TALARICO FOR TEXAS"

Alex Denny of Fort Worth holds a sign in support of James Talarico during a rally at UT Dallas on February 26, 2026 in Richardson, Texas. Talarico is facing off against Jasmine Crockett in Tuesday’s democratic senate primary.Richard Rodriguez/Getty

Many of his fellow Democrats consider Talarico’s faith-based appeal to unity a not-so-secret weapon: Kill them with kindness, and secure a Senate majority that can stop Donald Trump in his tracks. But Talarico is not the only Democrat in Tuesday’s primary with a knack for attention, and his is not the only vision of what it takes to win. A few hours after Talarico finished smiling for photos in San Antonio, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, a Dallas Democrat famous for her own, more Old Testament exchanges with Republican colleagues, entered the race with a radically different message. Talarico’s style of politics could change the direction of the Democratic Party. But first, the peacemaker will have to prove that he can throw a punch.

Talarico was born in Round Rock, a city of about 100,000 north of Austin, but it would be just as fair to say that he grew up at St. Andrew’s. He has described his biological father as a “21-year-old high school dropout whose drinking problem sometimes led to violence.” After one such episode, when Talarico was an infant, his mother took him to live in a spare room at the hotel where she worked, until they found a home for themselves—a cramped apartment where the only spot for a nursery was a closet.

St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Austin was a place where the family could start anew. His mother served as a deacon and married Mark Talarico, a church elder. Young James was baptised there, and played Nintendo with the pastor, Dr. Jim Rigby. As he grew older, Talarico taught Vacation Bible School and put on Biblically-themed shows with puppets he made with a friend. (“Jimmy’s Puppets,” or “Juppets” for short.) In a 2018 speech at St. Andrew’s, Talarico described “leaning against my mother as she sang her favorite hymn, ‘Morning has broken,’” and “drifting in and out of sleep, gazing up at the refracted sunlight in the stained glass of the roof.” Of Rigby, he said simply: “He was my dad’s old drinking buddy, he was my mother’s favorite person, and he was my personal hero.”

Rigby was also a rebel, and the St. Andrew’s of Talarico’s youth was ruptured by a series of controversies over the pastor’s social-justice vision. In 2004, he was put on trial by a church governing body for performing dozens of same-sex marriages at the University of Texas. About 150 members quit when Rigby flouted the denomination’s rules and hired LGBT ministers. The church has evolved with the times; when Talarico gave that 2018 speech, an undocumented family whose asylum claim had been rejected was living down the hall.

This knack for challenging authority stemmed from a belief that Christianity had strayed from the teachings of the early church, and been corrupted by moralizers, literalists, and nationalists. People were judging others “by the flesh,” Rigby told me, instead of recognizing their “humanness” as Paul counseled.

“When I heard him preach the first time,” Rigby told me, “I felt I could die—like the torch had been passed and that at least one person understood what I’ve been trying to do.”

Talarico’s sermons and podcast clips are littered with the flotsam of a seminary course catalogue, but they’re suffused as well with what he learned in the pews. His home church is the kind of place where you might think of Jesus as a feminist, and the splitting of the loaves as a parable of wealth—where power is something you’re taught not to crave but to share. Talarico once told an interviewer he had banned the word “troll” in his office because it was “just another way of stripping away each other’s humanness.” Above all, you can hear its influence in how Talarico talks about the relationship between his religion and his politics.

“The powers that be have been taming Christianity, domesticating it, diluting it into something more palatable—pro-war, pro-wealth, pro-white supremacy,” he argued two years ago, in a sermon that’s been viewed nearly two million times. What started as a “countercultural movement” became a “tranquilized, privatized, weaponized religion.”

“When I heard him preach the first time,” Rigby told me, “I felt I could die—like the torch had been passed and that at least one person understood what I’ve been trying to do.”

Talarico has always been the kind of young person, earnest and ambitious, who makes older people melt. In high school, he excelled at debate (“looks good on a college resume,” he wrote in his yearbook) and played Aslan in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. At the University of Texas, he was the model of a particular kind of Obama-era idealism. The second tweet he ever sent was about watching the West Wing. He worked on voter registration drives, managed the student body president’s campaign, testified at the legislature about higher-education funding, and put law school on hold for a two-year stint teaching sixth grade with Teach for America.

“A lot of different folks have different opinions about it, and there’s certainly some problematic aspects of the organization,” Talarico said on a podcast in 2022, about the Peace Corps-style program that sends recent college graduates into poor school districts. But the dynamics that make TFA problematic also made it formative: Dropping a white kid from Round Rock into a Mexican-American neighborhood in San Antonio without any relevant teaching experience will not save the world—but he might learn some things about how it works.

On the Facebook page for his language arts class—“Mr. Talarico’s Freedom Zone”—you can catch a glimpse of an energetic and overworked twentysomething, trying to engage his kids. He used the song “Firework” by Katy Perry to show how to diagram sentences, and coached students on how to fill out a red-and-blue map on election night.

“Happy Spring Break, Free Thinkers! I’m going to spend my week relaxing and reading ‘All The King’s Men’ by Robert Penn Warren,” Talarico wrote that April. “The book is about an idealistic politician who becomes greedy and corrupted by success. Comment on this post and let me know what you’re reading over Spring Break!”

Rhodes Elementary has offered, in Talarico’s campaigns, a sort of secular foundation to go with his religious one. He has talked of encountering 12-year-olds “in the 21st Century in the state of Texas who couldn’t read,” and of juggling 47 kids in one class. It was a “radicalizing experience,” he told Rogan, that nudged him toward a career where he could do better by his kids.

After the 2016 election, as he weighed a run for the Texas legislature, Talarico sought Rigby’s advice. He wanted to know if it was possible to be an ethical politician. “He was very concerned that he could still be prophetic,” he told me. “There are compromises that have to take place at that level. He could be prophetic in his speeches, but whenever you’re talking about real power, you don’t get the pure abstractions of good and evil. It’s like you’re negotiating and balancing and trying to do the best of the good and minimize the evil.”

Not long after, when Talarico launched his campaign, he talked about his experience as a teacher and the inspiration he’d drawn from his mother. But he also extended an olive branch. Talarico promised to vote for a Republican speaker, Joe Straus, who had resisted his party’s Christian nationalist faction—a pledge, he noted, that had drawn criticism from one of his opponents.

“He said I was compromising my values,” Talarico said. “Well I’ve got news for him: Compromise is one of my values.”

The essential appeal of Talarico, then and now, is that people see in him something they believe is missing: morality in an age of malice; humility at a time of hubris; an old direction in a new form. “Is it just me or does he have Barack’s smile?” someone asked on Twitter, not long after he launched his first campaign—to which Talarico replied with a .gif of Obama. State Rep. Diego Bernal told the room in San Antonio that his first reaction to meeting his colleague was, “Who is this baby JFK?’” His first floor speech quoted John Steinbeck. “The sense I got was not necessarily that the people of this district wanted something new,” Talarico told a reporter during a live-streamed 25-mile walk across the district in 2018—a replay of an earlier walk that resulted in him throwing up five times, and slipping into a near-comatose state from diabetic ketoacidosis. “I think they wanted something a little old-fashioned.”

“Something is happening in Texas,” the campaign’s social media posts say—calibrated just so, right down to the filters and the stagecraft and the uplifting piano. The vibe feels both undeniably real and deliberate: It’s Morning-has-broken in America. In 2016, Talarico wrote that he was thinking about Robert F. Kennedy’s remarks in Indianapolis in 1968, when the Democratic senator announced the death of Martin Luther King Jr.: “What we need in the United States is not division, what we need in the United States is not violence…but love and compassion towards one another.”

“Earlier today, Republican activist Charlie Kirk was shot and killed,” Talarico informed a crowd last October. “Charlie Kirk was a child of God; he was our sibling, our brother.” He urged “a politics of love…that can heal what’s broken in this country.”

Talarico’s precociousness can also seem like a familiar type. He shares advisors with Pete Buttigieg, the polyglot Episcopalian from South Bend who charmed voters twice his age while positioning himself as a champion of the “religious left.”

Talarico won that first race by 2,500 votes in a district that Trump previously carried—one of 12 Democrats to flip seats in the lower chamber that fall, as a blue wave smashed through an overly aggressive Republican gerrymander. Early in his first term, Rigby invited him to speak at St. Andrew’s. Talarico, who would soon begin taking classes at a local seminary, zeroed in on how Trumpism corrodes the soul. But he also challenged how Democrats’ response to it.

Talarico confessed to making “morally compromised decisions” in a “dirty and noble” job. Democratic leaders, he said, had “routinely danced with the Devil”—from Bill Clinton’s mass incarceration and bank deregulation, to Obama’s mass deportations and drone strikes. “Our most progressive candidates still use the same violent and bullying rhetoric that we claim to be against,” he continued. “In a 20-minute interview last year, Sen. Elizabeth Warren used the word ‘fight’ once a minute. Our progressive leaders and activists use gun metaphors, war imagery, and dehumanizing language about our opponents all the time.”

“Every time we return hate for hate, bullying for bullying, brutality for brutality, we all become less human,” he said. In his office, Talarico explained, staff were instructed “to avoid violent words or dehumanizing rhetoric”—including “fight, battle, or troll.”

Over the course of four terms in the minority, Talarico has attached his name to a handful of key initiatives, and helped push through a law, inspired by his near-death experience, that capped the cost of insulin. Texas Monthly named him to its list of best legislators during his second term. (It also compared him to “Encyclopedia Brown.”) But his defining influence may be the one you’ve seen—a seemingly endless succession of moments, in which he calmly deconstructs Republican talking points. There was the run-in with Pete Hegseth. The debate about furries. And most famously, l’affaire d’10 Commandments.

A young white man in a suit coat and dress shirt, smiling and wearing a "I VOTED EARLY" sticker.

Texas state Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate speaks to media after he voted in Austin, Texas, Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2026. (Eric Gay/AP

Scott Braddock, editor of the Quorum Report, an authoritative source on the doings in the Texas legislature, invited me to think of the caucus’ different members as pieces of a chess board. “Some of the pieces are doers, some of the pieces are talkers, some of them are more to the left, some of them are more to the center,” he said. “Talarico has started as a left-wing talker and he has moved to a more moderate talker.”

This knack for the spotlight has at times grated some of his Democratic colleagues. Perhaps the clearest source of tension has centered on his handling of the caucus’ decision to break quorum. In the first 24 hours of quorum-break last August, Talarico boasted that he’d done 25 interviews from his Illinois hotel room. When I reached out for a story of my own, I found myself talking to a former Buttigieg advisor—hardly the norm for a state representative. Talarico ultimately stayed away longer than almost anyone else. But the quorum-break in 2021, when Democrats tried to block voter suppression laws, was a different story.

In an op-ed he later published in the Texas Signal, Talarico wrote that he spent his days in DC walking around the Lincoln Memorial, contemplating the American idea. The protest, and the exchange he which he asked Hegseth to acknowledge that Joe Biden had won the 2020 election, helped make Talarico a star. But a few hours after taking part in a caucus-wide meeting in DC, Talarico and three Democrats stunned some of their colleagues by returning to the state capitol. Republicans gaveled-in later that day. They “sold us out,” state Rep. Ana-Maria Ramos said at the time. “JUST WOW!” tweeted her colleague, then-state Rep. Jasmine Crockett. Talarico argued that they’d accomplished what they’d left the state to do by raising the salience of voting rights in DC. Drawn out of his competitive old district in the ensuing redistricting process, he moved to a new safely blue district that was majority non-white. The website Talarico Facts, a repository of opposition research frequently cited by Crockett allies, accused the legislator of taking a seat that could have gone to a Black candidate.

It’s a race that can’t be won with mere civility and that Talarico will not advance out of without some adjustments of his own… Democratic voters aren’t feeling so pastoral right now.

Ramos told me that before Crockett entered the Senate race, she’d actually been supporting Talarico. But the manner in which the quorum break ended caused a rift at the time. Afterwards, Crockett—whose media hits during the DC sojourn helped make her a rising star, too—co-founded the Texas House Progressive Caucus with a few dozen other quorum-breakers to offer a more aggressive posture in the legislature.

The dispute gets at a dynamic that Talarico can’t talk himself out of. The talking, in fact, only makes it worse. It is the sense in some corners that there is something a little too neat about his rise. That he is a young man in a hurry, recycling other people’s message. After a digital creator alleged that Talarico had called former Rep. Colin Allred, the party’s 2024 Senate nominee, a “mediocre Black man”—Talarico said he called Allred a mediocre candidate—Allred, accused Talarico of stealing valor from Black Democrats, such as Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock, who have been modeling progressive Christianity for far longer. Crockett, who said last year she feared the party would close ranks in 2028 around “the safest white boy,” recently attacked Talarico for “running from” his ties to Lis Smith—a former Buttigieg advisor. (Smith has said she has “done some work” for Talarico but is not actively involved in the Senate race.)

There is a familiar bait and switch with a lot of buzzy Democratic candidates—that something about their identity will unlock a prodigal base that has strayed and needs merely to be shown the way in a language they understand. These candidates, as Crockett alluded to, are invariably white and male. They come from not just hometowns but symbols—a Braddock, Pennsylvania; a South Bend, Indiana; a place called Hope. They sing lamentations about lost direction, and then win or lose with the same coalition as everyone else. It’s reasonable to ask whether someone like this has the answers—and why someone like this is always the answer.

Conservative Texas Christians, after all, are familiar with the kinds of teachings you hear in Austin at St. Andrew’s. They do not go to St. Andrew’s, and many of them seem to loathe Austin. The recent evidence suggests many of them would rather dance with the Devil than a church-going Democrat, let alone a seminarian who says “God is non-binary.” Trump does not have the temerity to tell them they are wrong. Talarico, one Republican state representative said on X last fall, “twists [Christianity] to sound sweet to the ears for his own glorification and contorts Jesus to fit a nuanced feel-good justification for sin.”

But if the yearning Talarico taps into wasn’t real, your relatives would not have sent you his videos. For decades, Democrats have longed for messengers, real and imaginary, who can defuse the power of the Christian right. At the apex of the Moral Majority, Aaron Sorkin wrote the West Wing’s Jeb Bartlett as a spiritual foil who quoted Leviticus chapter-and-verse to hypocritical Bible-thumpers. George W. Bush’s real-life successor wrote a bestselling memoir named for the sermon that changed his life. The West Wing, for its part, ended with the only fantasy more persistent than beating a bunch of theocrats at Bible Bonkers—a Democrat rising from obscurity and turning Texas blue.

Jasmine Crockett, a black woman in sunglasses rides in a convertible during a parade, surrounded by supporters holding signs that read "CROCKETT TEXAS TOUGH"

Jasmine Crockett attends the 2026 MLK Unity Parade on January 19, 2026 in Houston, Texas. Marcus Ingram/Getty

What’s notable about the wrangling over Talarico’s record is that policy and job performance are largely disconnected from the primary, in a way that feels both new and foreboding. The Democratic Party’s conflicts in 2018 and 2020 were shaped by differences over health care. In more recent years they have been proxy battles over Israel. The state of play in Texas is more visceral: Talarico and Crockett are two candidates, separated by a common algorithm, clashing over what kind of authenticity voters really want.

If Talarico represents a West Wing-style fantasy, Crockett’s style is a bit more, well—you’ve seen those clips, too. Her version of the Ten Commandments clip came in 2024, when she called Marjorie Taylor Greene a “bleach blonde, bad built, butch body.” (That is not in the Paulian Epistles.) Crockett told Vanity Fair after Kamala Harris’ loss that Latino immigrant voters suffered from “almost like a slave mentality” that she considered “insane,” while comparing them to other demographics. (“I’ve not run into that with the Asian community.”) Talarico launched his campaign by standing on top of an old pickup truck in front of a church; Crockett launched hers by smiling at the camera over audio of Trump calling her names.

Republicans have a clear preference. NOTUS reported that the National Republican Senatorial Committee helped nudge Crockett into the race last year by commissioning polls that showed her leading prospective primary opponents. In February, desperate to save Cornyn, the NRSC released polling that showed Paxton trailing Talarico head-to-head. Crockett was underwater against both; against Cornyn, it wasn’t all that close. The congresswoman has argued that attempting to peel off Republicans, in a state that has not elected a Democrat statewide since the release of Netscape, is unnecessary: “All we’ve ever needed to do was increase voter participation and voter turnout on our side.” (Texas Monthly calls this idea “the biggest lie in Texas politics.”)

But Crockett’s style resonates with a base tired of going high when they go low—that wants a party that will stand up for itself and stick it to ‘em. The Democratic frontrunner, Ramos recently stated, is a “street fighter who will punch the system in the face.” One of the most recent surveys of the primary, from the University of Texas, showed her leading Talarico by double digits.

It’s a race that can’t be won with mere civility and that Talarico will not advance out of without some adjustments of his own. Talarico has been described as a “choir boy” too often to count. He “was always a peacemaker in preschool,” Rigby told me. “This is not a time for sheep, it’s a time for shepherds,” the legislator said in that first race. Democratic voters aren’t feeling so pastoral right now. In San Antonio, he hit upon the themes that shapes his politics: His mother’s strength and his students’ light; corrupt billionaires and false prophets. But if you listened closely, you could detect a slight concession to the kind of politics he once decried—another compromise in a dirty and noble trade.

“They’re comfortable on the coasts and comfortable with the status quo, but there’s something about living in a red state that makes you scrappy,” he said of Democratic leaders.

“We know how to fight.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Trump’s Strikes on Iran

Just one in four Americans supports the Trump administration’s ongoing strikes on Iran, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Sunday.

The disapproval rating was 43 percent, while 29 percent said they were not sure.

About half of respondents—including one in four Republicans—said the president was too open to using military force. The poll surveyed 1,282 US adults starting on Saturday, following news breaking of the strikes.

Even before the attacks, Trump’s handling of Iran was unpopular. Back in January, a Reuters/Ipsos found that only 33 percent of Americans approved of the president’s policy with Iran, while 43 percent disapproved.

For comparison, in the seven months prior to the US invasion of Iraq, a Gallup poll found that somewhere between 52 and 63 percent of Americans favored an invasion. And in the days following the beginning of the war, Gallup found that 72 percent supported the military action. Although these numbers are based on Gallup polling, the both surveys come from samples of over 1,000 US adults and, similarly, note a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

As my colleague Katie Herchenroeder noted on Saturday, there have been massive demonstrations around the world against the US and Israeli strikes against Iran, and United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres condemned the attacks at a UN Security Council meeting. Congress is expected to vote on a war powers resolution this week in an attempt to stop the strikes.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

What a War Powers Resolution Vote on Iran Actually Means

Key members of Congress are calling for a vote on a war powers resolution on Monday to stop the Trump administration from continuing its illegal military assault against Iran without congressional authorization.

The strikes, which began early Saturday, have been widespread, reportedly killed over 100 schoolchildren in Minab, a city in southern Iran, as well as Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran has retaliated, targeting US bases and allies in the region. Three US service members were killed in action on Sunday morning.

The White House reportedly notified some members of the House and Senate Armed Service committees only after the strikes had already begun. Article 1 of the Constitution grants Congress, not the president, the power to declare war, and the War Powers Act all0ws Congress to halt unauthorized military action by requiring troop withdrawal within 60 to 90 days.

The House of Representatives’ bipartisan resolution, led by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), would require Trump “to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran…unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran.”

Trump has launched an illegal regime change war in Iran with American lives at risk. Congress must convene on Monday to vote on @RepThomasMassie & my WPR to stop this. Every member of Congress should go on record this weekend on how they will vote. pic.twitter.com/tlRi3Vz849

— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) February 28, 2026

But in practice, Congress’s power is limited to halt Trump’s military actions, given that any resolution could be vetoed by the president and would require a two-thirds congressional majority to overturn. Even if the resolution on Iran does pass, it will likely be by a narrow margin, since Republican leadership, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), have backed the US and Israeli strikes. In January, Senate Republicans blocked a similar war powers resolution after Trump’s attacks on Venezuela.

As a result, any vote on a war powers resolution would be largely symbolic. But members of Congress say the vote is important anyway to make clear their stance on the war. “The Constitution requires a vote, and your Representative needs to be on record as opposing or supporting this war,” Massie wrote on X on Saturday.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

US Government Is Accelerating Coral Reef Collapse, Scientists Warn

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

Ritidian Point, at the northern tip of Guam, is home to an ancient limestone forest with panoramic vistas of warm Pacific waters. Stand here in early spring and you might just be lucky enough to witness a breaching humpback whale as they migrate past. But listen and you’ll be struck by the cacophony of the island’s live-fire testing range.

Widely referred to as the “tip of the spear” in the American arsenal, Guam—which is smaller than New York City but home to a military community of nearly 23,000—is a dichotomy of majestic nature and military might.

The real powerhouse of the Pacific exists not on land but just below the water’s surface in its biological resilience, which is now threatened by the Pentagon’s quest for strategic deterrence. The weapons that miss their target on the testing range will soon find a different one, sinking down to the most diverse coral reef of any U.S. jurisdiction. A battle between the two is now emerging.

The U.S. government is accelerating coral reef collapse around Guam, alleges a team of international researchers in a letter released this month in Science. They warn administration pressures to prioritize national security—through dredging projects, increased military infrastructure and live firing ranges—will cause harm to endangered habitats.

In 2023, a marine heatwave in Florida resulted in a roughly 98 percent mortality rate of elkhorn and staghorn colonies.

Additionally, a fundamental misunderstanding of coral taxonomy in the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is exacerbating the ecological harm to fisheries and reefs. Without intervention, these Pacific habitats now risk the same “functional extinction” experienced in Florida.

“The United States government seems to be softening conservation policies in ways that allow companies and the military to avoid regulation,” said Colin Anthony, a doctoral fellow at the University of Tokyo and the paper’s lead author.

For a time last summer, conservation seemed ascendant. In July, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) rejected a Navy request to expand exempt military zones in northern Guam, citing conservation benefits outweighing national security concerns at Ritidian Point. On the same day, NOAA finalized a rule designating critical habitat for five threatened coral species across 92 square miles of the Pacific, including in Guam and American Samoa.

However, the victories were short-lived. Following President Trump’s issuance of Executive Order 14154—“Unleashing American Energy”—on his first day in office in January 2025, federal agencies were pressured to remove any “undue burdens” on energy production and security. In November 2025, NOAA followed up by proposing expanded authority to bypass critical habitat regulations.

The provisions sought to remove language that required decision-making to be made “without reference to possible economic or other impacts.” Researchers have warned this prioritizes short-term economic interests over science and opens up vulnerable marine preserves to deep-sea mining, fishing and military expansion.

NOAA’s proposed changes also look to reclassify the “environmental baseline,” meaning the Navy could treat a degraded reef not as a problem to be addressed but as the fixed starting point. Baking in decades of ecological harm effectively insulates activity from ESA scrutiny and allows the Navy to cite “national security” as a blanket justification for any new projects, even if they fall in endangered marine habitats.

Additionally, owing to a “conservation gap” in ESA policy, reef-building corals are disappearing faster than scientists can identify them. Guidelines require clear categorization of species to determine their endangered status, however, corals are “phenotypically plastic,” meaning they change their features depending on light, water flow or depth.

Unlike land animals, it is difficult for researchers to neatly categorize species based on reproduction compatibility. Scientists must instead acquire genetic material and decide on a set of identifiable traits for a species that can sometimes span the entirety of the Pacific Ocean.

“Many of the corals in the Indo-Pacific, such as those in Guam, have not been taxonomically verified via DNA barcoding,” said Laurie Raymundo, a biology professor and director of the University of Guam Marine Laboratory. Although DNA analysis is now the norm, it is costly and time-consuming, meaning endemic species could disappear before ever being documented.

“Unlike Florida, for the Pacific, it’s not too late. We still have corals. They’re recoverable, especially if appropriate policy is implemented.”

Chief among them are Acropora corals, a foundation species that build the structural framework of many reefs. Though all arborescent Acropora corals—those with tree-like branches—from Guam and the wider Pacific are classified as “Endangered” on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List, many remain unprotected under the ESA.

Guam lost between 34 percent and 37 percent of its live coral between 2013 and 2017 due to repeated heatwaves, low tides and infectious diseases. While the island has escaped bleaching episodes since, future heatwaves could prove similarly fatal. “Each year, we brace ourselves for the next one,” said Raymundo, who highlighted how difficult a time it is to be a conservation biologist in the region.

Staghorn Acropora corals also tend to grow in massive thickets hundreds of meters in diameter. Often composed of a single genotype, these corals are unable to self-fertilize and therefore have very little chance of new settlements.

The researchers’ urgency stems from the recent collapse of similar corals in Florida. In 2023, a marine heatwave resulted in a roughly 98 percent mortality rate of elkhorn and staghorn colonies. Now declared “functionally extinct,” these corals do not exist in sufficient numbers in the state’s waters to provide effective coastal protection or thriving habitats for marine life.

“The problem is, if you’re the US military, anything you do can be cited as being for national security,” said Anthony. “Even if the appropriate process would just be an extra round of ecological surveys to make sure everything is done with the best intention to avoid unnecessary harm.”

Indigenous Chamorro people on Guam—who can trace their roots back over 3,000 years—have also not forgotten the environmental harm caused by the military’s past use of PCBs, PFAS and dieldrin.

“I do see signs of anger and frustration among communities impacted by the need of a few to make money,” said Raymundo, highlighting how small island nations contribute little to climate change but are at the forefront of the impacts. “Too often we see that economic gain does not translate into food, health and education security for the majority of people.”

Some outer-lying islands in the region have already lost homes and can no longer grow crops due to salt water intrusion. Meanwhile, in January 2026, NOAA launched a survey to map over 30,000 square miles of waters off American Samoa for critical mineral reserves. A move described as the federal agency “shifting from science to prospecting,” by the New York Times.

Researchers are calling for NOAA to reverse its ESA proposals and extend protections to the Acropora genus, regardless of specific species. They argue this would bypass taxonomic uncertainty, simplify surveys and ensure increased levels of protection.

They note that the ESA already allows for the inclusion of specific populations or sub-species—like the Cook Inlet beluga whale or the southern resident killer whale—and so call for the same logic to be applied before Guam’s rich marine ecosystem goes the way of Florida’s.

“Florida has become a glimpse into the future for the Pacific Ocean,” said Anthony. “Unlike Florida, for the Pacific, it’s not too late. We still have corals. They’re recoverable, especially if appropriate policy is implemented.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Photos: The World Responds to War

As the death toll reportedly rises in Iran and violence spreads through the Middle East, people around the world are responding to the war launched Saturday by the United States and Israel. Confusion, fear, celebration, destruction, and protest have defined the last 12 hours.

Here are some of the scenes unfolding across the globe:

Iran

Smoke rises on the skyline after an explosion in Tehran, Iran, Saturday, Feb. 28, 2026.

Smoke rises on the skyline after an explosion in Tehran, Iran, Saturday, Feb. 28, 2026.AP

Men stand and look at rubble.

Rescue workers and residents search through the rubble in the aftermath of a strike that, according to Iranian state media, killed dozens at a girls’ elementary school in Minab, Iran.Iranian Students’ News Agency/AP

Dozens of people shown from above with flags.

A group of demonstrators wave Iranian flags in support of the government and against US and Israeli strikes in Tehran on Saturday.Vahid Salemi/AP

Bumper to bumper traffic on a wide street.

Motorists make their way along a street in Tehran.ATTA KENARE / AFP via Getty

United States

Trump in a white USA hat stands at a podium.

A screen grab from a video released by President Donald Trump, announcing combat operations against IranPresident Trump Via Truth Social/Anadolu via Getty

Signs read "NO WAR WITH IRAN" and "BOMBS DONT HIDE FILES."

A “March 4 Democracy” protest in Washington, DC, on February 28Ken Cedeno / AFP via Getty

Israel

People duck behind a half wall outside.

People take shelter in Jerusalem as Iran launches missiles and drones in the wake of US-Israeli attacks.Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu via Getty

Missle seen on blue sky.

An intercept missile tracks and chases an incoming Iranian missile, as seen over Jerusalem rooftops.Nir Alon/ZUMA

Around the World

Children look into a destroyed rocket.

Syrian children inspect the wreckage of an Iranian rocket that was reportedly intercepted by Israeli forces in the countryside of Quneitra, near the Golan Heights, close to the town of Ghadir al-Bustan.Bakr ALKASEM / AFP via Getty

A large oval table seats people discussing strikes on Iran.

French President Emmanuel Macron addresses a government meeting in Paris. He called for an urgent meeting of the UN Security Council , saying the escalation “must stop.”Anna KURTH / POOL / AFP via Getty

A long line of cars at a gas station.

Long lines formed at gas stations across Beirut, the capital of Lebanon.Houssam Shbaro/Anadolu via Getty

A man looks into the camera in the remade version of the MAGA hat.

Berlin: At a demonstration, a man wears a cap with the slogan “Make Iran Great Again.”Christophe Gateau/picture alliance via Getty

A sign reads: "AMERIKKKAN IMPERIALISM KILLS"

Protesters opposing the attack on Iran chant slogans and wave placards and flags in London.Guy Smallman/Getty

Palestinians are seen behind the rubble.

Palestinians crowd into markets in Khan Younis to buy goods, fearing price hikes following the outbreak of another war.Abed Rahim Khatib/picture alliance via Getty

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

“Massive” War Launched by a Man With No Plan. Again.

In the wee hours of Saturday morning, President Donald Trump announced he had launched a war against Iran. He insisted that Iran posed a direct threat to the United States. He detailed its past acts of aggression. He claimed he had tried to reach a deal with Tehran to end its nuclear program. He warned the public that American soldiers might die as a result of this attack. He noted that the aim of this war was to end the Iranian regime and urged the people of Iran to rise up and “take over your government.”

What Trump did not say was that he had a plan.

It’s easy for an American president to bomb a country. It’s much tougher to figure out what to do in the aftermath. Trump, who initiated this attack with Israel without seeking congressional authorization (as the Constitution requires), clearly engaged in little, if any, preparation for what comes following this “massive” operation, as he termed it.

Trump appears to be winging it, letting loose the dogs of war and then seeing what the hell happens.

For years, Trump has demonstrated that he often sees no need for plans. He vowed repeatedly during the 2024 campaign that he could end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. But he had no plan to do so. In his first term as president, he said he could deliver cheaper and better health care. But he proposed no plan for that. He also said he would rebuild American infrastructure and, again, put forward no plan. He tends to act impulsively, believing chaos and discord can be exploited by a masterful negotiator, as he sees himself.

Yet one of the most obvious lessons of the past 25 years is that warring requires planning—not just for the initial assault but for what occurs afterward. The best example is the Iraq War. George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld had no idea what to do after the invasion and the toppling of Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical regime. In the violent chaos that ensued for years afterward, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians died, ISIS arose, regional instability reigned—and Iran consolidated power.

It’s not that the brighter bulbs of the Bush-Cheney administration did not see the need to prep for the post-invasion period. As Michael Isikoff and I reported in Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War, in the months prior to the war—when it was evident Bush was committed to attacking Iraq—there were several well-executed projects focused on what would need to be done after Saddam was forcibly removed from power.

A small Pentagon unit examined this question, assuming a high level of violence would continue after Saddam was deposed. Its analysts concluded that an enormous number of US troops would be required to provide security throughout the country—a greater amount than those being sent to Iraq for the invasion.

Separately, the Army deputy chief of staff for operations and plans asked the War College’s Strategic Studies Institute to examine post-war questions, and it produced a report identifying numerous challenges for any occupation. The paper tallied 135 post-invasion tasks that would have to be accomplished to reestablish an Iraqi state. This included securing the borders, setting up local governments, protecting religious sites, maintaining power systems, opening hospitals, and disarming militias. A big concern was what to do about the Iraqi Army. This paper recommended not disbanding it. (The Bush-Cheney crowd did dismantle the army, a move that fueled vicious sectarian violence.) “Massive resources need to be focused on this [post-occupation] effort,” the report said.

The State Department, too, tried to do the responsible thing. A year before the invasion, it established the Future of Iraq project. This operation had 17 working groups, full of Iraqi exiles (lawyers, engineers, academics, and businesspeople), that considered all the steps necessary to remake a post-Saddam Iraq: reorganizing the military and police, creating a new legal system, restructuring the economy, and repairing the nation’s water and electric power system, among many other tasks.

The Bush-Cheney White House wasn’t interested in any of these exercises. In one pre-invasion meeting of the National Security Council, Bush asked Gen. Tommy Franks, the CENTCOM commander in charge of the invasion, about security in Iraq after Saddam’s ouster. Who would maintain law and order? he inquired. Franks said he had that covered: The US would keep the peace, and each major Iraqi town and village would have a “lord mayor”—an appointed US military officer who would be in charge of preserving civic order and administering basic services.

That was an idiotic concept. Worse, there was not even a true plan to designate and install these “lord mayors.” This seemed to be just Franks’ own fanciful notion. No such exercise was even attempted following the invasion. The lack of a post-Saddam game plan led to a debacle.

The Iraq War case illustrates both how much work it took to devise post-war plans and the disastrous results that came from the Bush-Cheney gang eschewing these preparations for the aftermath.

There’s no sign that the Trump administration has spent months—or even days— working out what should be done after this military operation. Instead, his Pentagon spent the hours leading up to the attack feuding with an American AI company, various “woke” universities, and Scouting America. Trump appears to be winging it, letting loose the dogs of war and then seeing what the hell happens.

There’s another Bush-related episode that casts a shadow on Trump’s actions. In his statement, Trump egged on the Iranian people to rebel against the mullahs, declaring: “America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force. Now is the time to seize control of your destiny and to unleash the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach.”

This sounded familiar. At the end of the Persian Gulf War that President George H.W. Bush launched in 1991 to drive Saddam’s forces out of Kuwait, the elder Bush called for “the Iraqi military and the Iraqi people to take matters into their own hands to force Saddam Hussein, the dictator, to step aside.” Many Iraqis took this as a signal that the United States would support them if they mounted a revolution, and they did so. Bush did nothing to assist these rebels, and to quell this uprising Saddam slaughtered tens of thousands of Iraqis.

Trump appears to be following the bad examples of both Bushes. There are no preparations for what to do if he succeeds in driving the ayatollahs out of power and no strategy for protecting the opposition should it heed Trump’s call and face a further violent crackdown.

Trump has no plan for Iran. Just blow shit up, kill some people, and hope for the best. Tehran, for all its horrific transgressions (including its recent killing of thousands of protesters), did not pose an immediate threat to the United States. Perhaps military action against this regime could be justified. But there was ample time to seek congressional authorization and an international alliance for a regime-change war. Instead, Trump proceeded with an unconstitutional action without readying for what is to follow. It is the war of a Mad King.

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

War: US and Israel Attack Iran

The United States and Israel launched a massive military assault against Iran on Saturday—a steep and sudden escalation following negotiations between the US and Iran over the latter’s nuclear program. Iran has retaliated, targeting American bases and US-allied countries across the region.

It’s unclear how many people have been killed so far. Iran’s state-run Islamic Republic News Agency, or IRNA, has reported significant casualties, including dozens killed at a girl’s school during a US-Israel strike; the New York Times said that it was unable to immediately verify that report. According to the United Arab Emirates, one person was killed by falling debris from an Iranian ballistic missile.

In an 8-minute video posted to Truth Social early Saturday, President Donald Trump confirmed the attacks, calling the Iranian regime a “vicious group of very hard, terrible people.” He described the operation as “major combat activities” and said his administration had taken steps to minimize risk to US forces in the region. But, he added, “the lives of courageous American heroes may be lost and we may have casualties. That often happens in war.”

Trump urged the Iranian people to “take over their government” following the attacks. Anti-government protests in the nation have been taking place for months, and the regime has responded with a brutal crackdown. According to the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency, Iranian forces had killed more than 7,000 people as of February 11; tens of thousands more have been arrested.

Trump referred to those atrocities in his video Saturday. He also blamed Iran for the failed nuclear negotiations, claiming, “They rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can’t take it anymore.”

Badr Albusaidi, the Omani foreign minister who was mediating negotiations before the attacks, said Saturday that he was “dismayed.”

“Active and serious negotiations have yet again been undermined. Neither the interests of the United States nor the cause of global peace are well served by this,” Albusaidi wrote on social media. “And I pray for the innocents who will suffer. I urge the United States not to get sucked in further. This is not your war.”

The response from global leaders allied with the US was mixed.

Canada and Australia backed the campaign against Iran. Britain, France, and Germany issued a joint statement, saying they were critical of Iran’s nuclear policies and “the appalling violence and repression against its own people.” But that trio of countries stopped short of explicitly supporting the strikes. “We did not participate in these strikes, but are in close contact with our international partners, including the United States, Israel, and partners in the region,” the statement said. “We reiterate our commitment to regional stability and to the protection of civilian life.”

As US and Israeli strikes continued and Iranian forces launched their own attacks, civilians around the region rushed to whatever safe space they could find. An engineer living in Tehran described the fear in a text message to the New York Times: “My children are crying and scared. We are huddling in the bathroom. We don’t know what to do. This is terrifying.”

Continue Reading…

Mother Jones

Would You Pay $49 a Month to Drink Recycled Wastewater?

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

One day, you’ll appreciate drinking recycled toilet water.

Urban populations are growing as water supplies are dwindling, often due to worsening droughts. In response, some communities are treating wastewater, rendering it perfectly safe for consumption. It is so pure, in fact, that if a treatment facility doesn’t add enough of the minerals the filtering process strips out, it could do serious damage to the human body. And trust me—it tastes great, too.

Cities throughout the American West are already recycling water, easing pressures on dwindling supplies. Now here’s a thought experiment: How much would you pay on your utility bill for the privilege of reused water, if it meant avoiding shortages and rationing in the future?

A recent survey offers one answer. Residents of communities of fewer than 10,000 people said they’d be willing to drop an average of $49 to do so. That money would underwrite water reuse programs, including rain capture systems. “I do think it is a bipartisan issue,” said Todd Guilfoos, an economist at the University of Rhode Island and co-author of the new paper. “It’s often just cheaper than some of the other available solutions.”

Wastewater recycling is not some far-out, prohibitively complicated technology. Western states are already doing a lot of it: A study published last year found that Nevada reuses 85 percent of its water, and Arizona 52 percent. Water agencies do this with reverse osmosis, passing the liquid through fine membranes to filter out solids before blasting it with UV light, which destroys any microbes. On a smaller scale, apartment buildings can house their own treatment infrastructure, cycling water back into units for nonpotable use, like flushing toilets.

Pictured, from left to right: three glasses of liquid are labeled “raw sewage,” “plant effluent,” and “recycled water.”

Glasses depicting raw sewage, plant effluent filtered and recycled water are displayed at an advanced water purification facility in 2015 in Los Angeles, California.Bob Riha, Jr. / Getty via Grist

On the municipal level, though, it’s expensive to build such facilities and run them continuously—it takes a lot of energy, for instance, to force water through those membranes. For a small community, charging each household $49 per month wouldn’t be quite enough to get a system up and running. “While that might be enough for operating, that doesn’t include what it would cost to actually build whatever water reuse infrastructure that you would need,” Guilfoos said. That’s when a town can turn to federal or state grants, or maybe utilize municipal bonds, to break ground. “I think communities need a little bit of a bump, actually, to get there,” Guilfoos added. “I think usually it’s in the face of some crises that these things end up getting built.”

Those crises are piling up across the US. Droughts are forcing some rural areas to pump more and more H2O from aquifers, depleting them. Tapped unsustainably, these underground supplies can collapse like an empty water bottle, making the land above sink, a phenomenon known as subsidence. This is a particularly pernicious problem in agricultural regions—California’s San Joaquin Valley has sunk up to 28 feet in recent decades, to offer just one example.

$49 a month could fund bioswales—ditches full of vegetation that not only collect stormwater, but provide habitat for native plants and pollinators. “

If supplies dwindle, a small community would have no choice but to ration water. Getting more efficient about using what we have can help, like encouraging the adoption of thriftier toilets and spraying less on lawns, as Las Vegas has done. (Those thirsty patches of green are in general an environmental mess, beyond their use of water.) But to truly get more sustainable, a community will have to recycle the H2O it has no choice but to use.

What’s interesting about this study, says Michael Kiparsky, director of the Wheeler Water Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, is the apparent overcoming of the “yuck factor.” “There’s a visceral reaction to drinking reused water, particularly reused wastewater, that’s totally understandable,” said Kiparsky, who wasn’t involved in the research. “But over time, that has faded as the notion of reusing water to augment water supplies, including for drinking water, has become increasingly legitimized.”

At the same time, simple infrastructural improvements can capture heaps of another supply that’s readily wasted: rain. That $49 a month could fund bioswales, for instance—ditches full of vegetation that not only collect stormwater, but provide habitat for native plants and pollinators. Cities like Los Angeles are making themselves more “spongy” in this way, with roadside plots of land that collect runoff in subterranean tanks. Elsewhere, architects are building “agrihoods” around working farms that store precipitation to hydrate their crops through the summer.

In the American West, farmers are also having to contend with water whiplash, meaning years of plenty followed by years of desiccation. Generally speaking, rain is falling more heavily because a warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture, increasing the bounty. But so too does climate change exacerbate droughts, making wastewater reuse especially welcome on farms. “All of this makes the water supply less certain in any given year, and more volatile from year to year,” said Tom Corringham, a research economist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, who wasn’t involved in the new paper. “So any strategies that we can find that can smooth out the water cycle are beneficial.”

In addition to recycling wastewater, farmers are recharging the aquifers beneath their feet: When rains fall heavily, and there’s a surplus of water, channels divert fluid into “spreading grounds”—basically big dirt bowls built into the landscape. That allows precipitation to percolate back into the ground, reducing loss from evaporation, replacing what’s been drawn out, and helping avoid land subsidence. Then, when needed, a farm can pump the water back out of the ground, in which case it doesn’t need to draw from, say, a dam, leaving more water for others to use.

Together with wastewater reuse, aquifer recharge can help bolster the water system for the climatically perilous years ahead. As metropolises like Mexico City and Cape Town run the risk of running out of water, drinking recycled wastewater will be a whole lot more appealing than losing hydration entirely.

Continue Reading…