F. Left News

A federal court today declared unconstitutional key portions of President Trump’s executive order restricting mail voting. The executive order, issued in March 2026, unlawfully attempted to seize control of elections by ordering the Department of Homeland Security to compile a list of U.S. citizens and by directing the U.S. Postal Service to restrict mail voting. The decision came in a case brought by 23 states and the District of Columbia, led by California.

The court declared that Sections 2 and 3 of the executive order are legally void and barred federal agencies from using the executive order as a basis to interfere with how plaintiff states maintain their voter rolls or conduct mail voting. The court’s ruling also blocked the U.S. Postal Service from withholding mail ballots from voters not on an approved list in the plaintiff states.

The court is also considering a separate legal challenge to the executive order brought by a coalition of nonpartisan voting rights groups in the case LWVMA, et al., v. Trump, et al.

That suit was filed by the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, the League of Women Voters, Association of Americans Resident Overseas (AARO), U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates (OCA), and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc.

They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of Massachusetts, Brennan Center for Justice, Legal Defense Fund (LDF), Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC (Advancing Justice – AAJC), and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.

Attorneys and plaintiffs in the voting rights group case issued the following joint statement:

“As this ruling makes clear, President Trump’s executive order from March 2026 attempting to seize control of elections is unconstitutional and dangerous.

“This ruling is a critical step in preserving free and fair elections. The court rightly recognized that the President and the executive branch lack both the legal authority and the capacity to compile a complete and accurate list of U.S. citizens or eligible voters in every state. The ruling also rightly recognizes that the U.S. Postal Service has no authority to limit the distribution of mail ballots.

“The court has yet to rule on our request to block the executive order’s provisions on mail voting on behalf of a nonpartisan coalition of voting rights groups. The same reasoning underpinning today’s decision should hold in our case. President Trump’s unlawful executive order violates the separation of powers, threatens the integrity of our elections, and must be enjoined from taking effect in the upcoming primary and midterm elections.”

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a deeply troubling ruling in Monsanto v. Durnell, siding with Monsanto and holding that federal pesticide law preempts state law failure-to-warn claims. The decision deals a major blow to families, farmworkers, and communities who rely on state courts to seek justice when toxic pesticide exposure causes serious illnesses. It also marks a major win for Monsanto and other pesticide manufacturers seeking to avoid accountability in litigation involving Roundup and other dangerous chemicals.

“Today’s ruling allows Monsanto and other chemical companies to avoid responsibility when their labels leave people unprotected from serious harm,” said Patti Goldman, Senior Attorney at Earthjustice. “The fact that EPA approved a pesticide label does not mean a product is safe, and it should not become a shield for companies that fail to warn about cancer risks, neurological harm, and other serious dangers.”

The ruling rests on Monsanto’s argument that state failure-to-warn claims impose labeling obligations in addition to what the EPA has required. However, EPA’s approval of a pesticide is often based on limited information at a single point in time, while the science around pesticide harms continues to develop. In cases involving Roundup, state court litigation helped reveal that Monsanto knew more about cancer risks than it disclosed and failed to provide adequate warnings to the public. By precluding these claims, the Supreme Court has eliminated an important backstop that protects people when federal regulation and oversight falls short.

Federal pesticide law provides no compensation for people injured by toxic pesticides, which means state courts have often been the only place families can recover medical costs, lost income, and damages for life-altering harm. Without state failure-to-warn claims, companies will have little incentive to ensure their pesticides will avoid causing harm.

Congress should pass legislation overriding this decision and making clear that no court ruling can strip people of their right to hold pesticide manufacturers accountable under state law when federal oversight falls short. After recently eliminating pesticide immunity language from the House Farm Bill, Congress should also ensure that no future rider or bill creates a legislative backdoor for chemical companies to secure immunity from state failure-to-warn claims.

Public health leaders and food experts joined America’s small farmers and regenerative agriculture experts to eviscerate today’s bipartisan Supreme Court decision, which they believe sells out the American people to foreign chemical corporations. The decision takes away the rights of family members and those who have died or are sick from glyphosate exposure to hold Bayer/Monsanto legally accountable. The decision was a major victory for Big Poison, which sought immunity from liability.

Below are reactions from policy experts and grassroots leaders.

We’re profoundly disappointed that the Supreme Court has restricted farmers' and consumers’ ability to hold pesticide manufacturers accountable for the harm their toxic products have caused. Now, Congress has a moral responsibility to put people’s health over pesticide industry profits by codifying a legal pathway for those hurt by toxic pesticide exposure. The public will continue demanding change until the EPA takes toxic pesticides off the market for good and Congress invests in the transition to a clean, healthy organic food system that doesn’t depend on toxic pesticides.

• Jason Davidson, Senior Food and Agriculture Campaigner at Friends of the Earth

The Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of foreign chemical companies, which essentially allows them immunity from lawsuits, is a travesty against the American Constitution and federal and state laws. Not only does it remove our Seventh Amendment right to seek justice, but it also allows chemical companies to continue to poison the American people and our soils with impunity. Citizen scientists, activists, and farmers everywhere will only get louder and more creative because of this ruling.

• Zen Honeycutt, Moms Across America

Today’s ruling sets a dangerous precedent by elevating regulatory approval above judicial review and citizen access to justice. The separation of powers exists to provide independent oversight and protect against regulatory capture. No agency should have the final word on corporate accountability when products designed to kill are released into the environment and used throughout our food system.

• Elizabeth Kucinich, human and ecological security specialist, former Director of Policy at the Center for Food Safety

The Supreme Court has chosen to interpret FIFRA in a way that serves corporate interests at the expense of states' rights and public welfare.

• Charles Eisenstein, writer and former speech writer, RFK Jr for President

President Trump campaigned on MAHA and then filed legal briefs protecting Bayer-Monsanto from farmers who got cancer because of their products. That’s a serious betrayal. There's a real awakening happening in this country around food safety and toxic chemicals, and this court ruling cannot stop that. We're going to keep fighting to help farmers transition away from these pesticides, and to hold the corporations that profit from them accountable.

-Tim Ryan, former ten-term member of Congress (D-OH)

It's awful news that the Supreme Court and the Trump Administration sided with Bayer over thousands of Americans who say the company's products caused their cancers. This decision will make it harder for people to hold corporations accountable in the U.S.

• Stacy Malkan, Co-founder, editor, U.S. Right to Know

For decades, Republicans have preached about the importance of states’ rights and “pro-life values,” but today’s ruling in favor of Bayer-Monsanto’s right to shield themselves from cancer lawsuits is more proof that this is just empty rhetoric from a morally bankrupt party and a Supreme Court that continues to put corporate profits over the health of Americans.

• David Murphy, founder of United We Eat, former finance director for RFK, Jr’s presidential campaign

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with pesticide manufacturer Bayer in Monsanto Company v. Durnell, ruling that federal law preempts lawsuits brought by cancer patients who allege its Roundup product was to blame for their disease. The Trump administration sided with Bayer in the litigation. The ruling extends this legal shield to all pesticide corporations, leaving patients harmed by these toxic agricultural chemicals without the recourse of litigation that has cost Bayer billions of dollars.

Meanwhile, Senator Cory Booker’s introduced Pesticide Injury Accountability Act would restore the right to sue over pesticide harms.

In response, Food & Water Watch Legal Director Tarah Heinzen issued the following statement:

“Once again, the Supreme Court has sided with big business over people and the environment. Today’s ruling is a disaster for public health — and it has Trump’s name written all over it. If one needed any further proof that the president’s feigned mission to ‘Make America Healthy Again’ was a farce, today’s decision is all the evidence needed. Trump has been all too willing to endorse Bayer’s crusade to pollute with impunity, while the administration doubles down on a failed pesticide regulatory scheme.

“Industrial agriculture is poisoning America. The fight against toxic pesticides does not end here. Congress must pass the Pesticide Injury Accountability Act to safeguard access to justice for all harmed by these toxic chemicals, and a Farm Bill that finally puts public health first. Until then, the Supreme Court has shut the courthouse doors to tens of thousands of sick and suffering Americans.”

Today’s ruling comes despite a litany of evidence suggesting that glyphosate, the key ingredient in Bayer’s ubiquitous Roundup pesticide, is carcinogenic, and that the Environmental Protection Agency’s pesticide registration process is fatally flawed. The World Health Organization has defined glyphosate as a probable carcinogen since 2015. Roundup is the most widely used pesticide in the United States.

The decision completes Bayer’s yearslong, well-financed quest to stifle cancer lawsuits cutting into its bottom line. Since purchasing Monsanto in 2018, Bayer has spent over $11 billion settling over 100,000 cancer lawsuits related to Roundup. Bayer has been pushing widely-opposed Cancer Gag Act bills nationwide, seeking to shield pesticide corporations from health-related lawsuits in multiple states and Congress. So far this year, the immunity legislation has failed in 11 states and was stripped from the House Farm Bill and left out of the Senate version.

In an act deemed “going apeshit against enemies of the Reich,” two judges just levied brutal prison sentences of 30 to 100 years, a combined penance of 450 years, on eight anti-ICE members of a scary if imaginary “North Texas Antifa cell” convicted of terrorist-abetting “crimes” like protesting, lighting fireworks and moving a box of zines. The case, widely seen as a test of regime efforts to criminalize dissent or any unwelcome speech, moved one defendant to muse, “What kind of people are not against fascism?”

The grievous injustice against the group, dubbed The Prairieland Defendants for the ICE concentration camp they were protesting, comes amidst almost daily court victories elsewhere against the regime. Last week, three key rulings in federal district courts saw judges strike down administration election meddling, abuses against immigrants and, in a blistering 29-page decision, “blatantly unlawful and unethical use” of a grand-jury subpoena targeting Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. To date, there have been at least 272 wins against Trump, several from judges he appointed; after one especially irksome loss, Stephen Goebbels memorably whined, “Judge Sparkle (sic) decrees that America belongs to any random alien on Planet Earth.”

Faced with mounting losses in other endeavors - wars, pools, polls - more regime lackeys are also getting testy. Newly back from having a baby but still hyper-toxic, Press Barbie went on Hannity to shriek about “deranged leftists desecrating our federal monuments” with algae: “Only the Democrats could hate beautifying our Capitol.” Of six people arrested for “vandalism” - more than for raping minors - many are “longtime donors to the Democrat Party,” who “completely destroyed our country,” also to “Barack Hussein Obama” and, gasp, ACTBlue. With fear-mongering truly all they’ve got, Hannity joined in on Dem “radicals...You’ve got Mr. Nazi Tattoo Platner, and six-gender, God-is-non-binary Talarico, and Pocahontas, and Mamdani...”

Amidst a “rolling coup“ in an increasingly fascist America, where threats from the left have always loomed larger than on the right and today’s despots cling frantically to a power they somehow know is illegitimate, it’s little wonder principled citizens protesting vulnerable brown people being locked up in concentration camps have become ”the new Red Scare.“ It’s helpful to remember that everything earlier autocrats did - Hitler, Stalin, Pinochet - was legal; they just changed the rules to do it. ”This is Soviet shit,“ wrote one observer, summoning the terror of Stalin’s staged show trials in the 1930s to eliminate most of Lenin’s staff and other ”saboteurs,“ from Bukharin to, via pickaxe, Trotsky exiled in Mexico; in the end, only ”Stalin the Executioner“ remained.

The “legal,” in Trump’s case, was last year’s menacing national security directive “NSPM-7: Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” which explicitly declared a fictional Antifa - in fact any American who opposes fascism, supports the rule of law and uses their First Amendment rights to defend it - a “MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION” and “SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER,” whether “it exists or not.” Prairieland, the first case successfully brought under NSPM-7, tests the state’s ability to quell dissent by perceived “enemies,” and could shape a future playbook for using the Antifa label - and “creative and highly theoretical claims by the state” - as “a catchall designation to criminalize activists writ large.”

The surreal sentences inflicted this week on eight mostly non-violent Prairieland activists came three months after their convictions on terrorism and other charges stemming from last year's July 4 protest at the for-profit Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas. The action began as a noise demonstration, a typically safe, festive event where fireworks are set off "to remind people inside they are not forgotten." That day, it devolved into vandalism - of cars, a guard shack, a security camera - by several protesters. Some brought guns - a red flag to many activists, but common in open-carry Texas where queer or trans people can face armed counter-protesters. When one cop drew his weapon, a protester in the nearby woods shot him in the shoulder.

At trial, eight defendants - Autumn Hill, Zachary Evetts, Benjamin Hanil Song, Savanna Batten, Meagan Morris, Maricela Rueda, Elizabeth Soto, and Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada - were convicted of rioting and explosive charges, and "providing material support to terrorists." They are much like protesters anywhere: teachers, engineers, tattoo artists, animal-lovers, anti-ICE advocates, parents, straight, queer, trans, vegan. Some had organized the action together, some produced anarchist zines and belonged to a book club named for anarchist Emma Goldman, who 99 years ago this month was arrested on conspiracy charges for organizing against the First World War draft; some were members of a Socialist gun club; some weren't even at the protest.

From the outset, the regime played hardball. The DOJ called them “members of a North Texas Antifa cell“; the indictment said Antifa "is a militant enterprise made up of networks of individuals and small groups primarily ascribed to a revolutionary anarchist or autonomous Marxist ideology.” They were held on multimillion-dollar bonds in squalid jail cells, denied medical care, frequently strip-searched; two trans women were held - unsafely, illegally - in men's facilities. State agents ransacked homes, detained children, used flash-bang grenades to intimidate, went after anyone in their political orbit, often unearthing new charges. It was, one defendant said, "a nightmare made real...seeing the prosecution jump from lie to lie," abuse to abuse.

The case became a sinister "laboratory" where constitutionally protected free speech and civil disobedience became "rioting" and solidarity became "conspiracy." Fireworks were “explosives," a home where friends gathered a "staging area," black clothing and the use of encrypted Signal a way "to aid and abet those engaged in illegal acts." A home printer became "a printing press" producing "insurrectionary materials" - anti-fascist zines, handouts of "8 Things You Can Do To Stop ICE," packets of vegetable seeds, poems, patches, bumper stickers of swastikas X-ed out and “Zines Are Not A Crime." A teacher had home-made first aid kits he used to bring to school in case of a shooting; feds used their presence as evidence protesters had planned violence.

The shocking sentencing hearings were held by two judges, one each appointed by Bush and Trump, in two Fort Worth courtrooms. They were inexplicably scheduled even before either judge heard long-filed motions to overturn convictions in a trial, lawyers argued, "saturated with evidence designed to evoke fear, political bias, and guilt by association" and widely deemed "untethered from credible evidence or witness testimony." Prosecutors folded into the case people who didn't help plan the protest, weren't there, or left when police asked them to. An attorney for Hill cited no evidence they believed in violence; Hill was so conscientious they stayed after the fireworks went off to pick up trash left behind; she still got a 50-year sentence.

The case ostensibly centered on the alleged attempted murder of the cop shot in the shoulder. Marine Corps reservist Benjamin "Champagne" Song said they were in the woods and fired "a warning shot" to distract the cop when he drew his gun on another protester; citing Renee Good and Alex Pretti, Song said, “I never want to see good people, standing for what they believe in, gunned down." Song charges the state is imposing "collective punishment, guilt by association" on other activists, and the facts of the shooting remain unclear; feds first said there were multiple shooters and rounds fired, then said they have no medical records from the hospital where the cop was reportedly quickly released. Still, Song was given a 100-year sentence.

Batten, Evetts, Hill, Morris, and Soto each got 50 years for rioting, providing support to terrorists, and conspiracy to use an explosive ie: attending a loud protest. Said Soto, trying to laugh, "I guess they didn't like my book club." Rueda was sentenced to 70 years for also conspiring to "conceal documents" by asking her husband Sanchez-Estrada, not at the protest, to remove a box of zines from their house. "Being guilty of possessing literature is a concept fundamentally incompatible with a free society," said one advocate. "We don’t need a constitutional right to possess only what the government likes." Sanchez-Estrada got a 30-year sentence for moving the box. "I am a father, a husband, a teacher, a poet," he told the judge. "I am many things, Your Honor, but I am not a terrorist."

Many observers noted all the sentences were far harsher than those handed down to Jan. 6 rioters - who were then pardoned - or even the longest sentences for murder or rape - this, though prosecutors offered almost no evidence of the alleged crimes. And despite their obsession with the lethal threat posed by imaginary Antifa forces, even the judges questioned the need to mention "antifa" to jurors, who in turn seemed to reject Judge Reed O’Connor's narrative of "an ambush" and "assault on democracy" by acquitting everyone but Song of attempted murder. One legal expert said that fortuitous rejection underscored how easily prosecutors can fashion or twist the law to create a "conspiracy"; said one attorney, “People should be scared."

In total, 22 people have been charged in connection with the Prairieland protest. Five others took plea deals, another five have state charges pending, three more were indicted last month. Regime lackeys have gleefully touted their rare victory, with a hyperbolic DOJ press release blaring, "Leader of Antifa Cell Members Sentenced to 100 Years in Prison for Terrorist Attack on ICE Facility." After the trial, Pam Bondi gloated they'd taken down "Antifa" - repeated 16 times - to "finally halt their violence on America's streets." After sentencing, Todd Blanche celebrated the regime's "swift and uncompromising justice." Of villainous Antifa, he crowed, "Their violent extremism has no place in our country," presumably because only the fascist kind does.

As young activists mull lives stolen - and tenuously bank on appeals or pardons - their family, friends, supporters voice horror at “the absolute travesty” of the lies that led to their convictions and sentences. “We’ve fallen so far so fast it’s nose-bleed inducing,” said one. Another insisted, "The outcome of this trial is not the end. It is the beginning." Autumn Hill’s wife Lydia Koza said she is "livid in the face of this grotesque distortion of anything that could ever have called itself due process...There is no ‘appropriate’ sentence for a wholly fictitious crime." On their loved ones "being thrown away for the rest of their lives," one noted the regime's own actions "have proved the righteousness of their actions...This sentencing is a punishment for solidarity itself."

Finally, from Flying Penguin, a grim reminder the Prairieland fates mirror that of too many in a nation and world whose history is rife with 'other righteous "crimes": BLM protesters, Black Panthers, AIM activists, civil rights marchers, union workers, “your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” To wit: "Today’s news is Andrew Jackson, ordering Congress to criminalize antislavery speech. Today’s news is Stalin’s Article 58, where ‘anti-Soviet agitation’ was a crime that meant whatever it needed to. Today's news is the McCarthy-era ruling that upheld the conviction of Americans for organizing and teaching political theory.Today's news is South Africa’s 1967 Terrorism Act, making terrorism anything that endangers 'law and order.' Today’s news is Trump and a white police state." Warns Sanchez-Estrada, "People need to be aware - it’s not just the defendants on trial.”

Defendants clockwise from top left: Estrada-Sanchez; Song and Gibson; Hill and Koza; Batten; Sanchez; Elizabeth and Ines Soto; Morris and Hill Composite Image from Dallas-Fort Worth Support Committee

Today, President Trump announced on Truth Social that he is cancelling plans to sign major bipartisan legislation on housing affordability, threatening to veto the bill unless the anti-voter Save America Act is passed first.

Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, issued the following statement in response:

“Donald Trump’s full-on commitment to authoritarianism could not be more clear: He’s happy to block enactment of a bipartisan bill to address, modestly, Americans number one stated concern — high housing prices — in order to drive forward his election sabotage agenda.

“It’s plain what Congress should do: Listen to the American people, not Donald Trump. Pass the housing bill over his veto, if he follows through with today’s threats. And reject his demand for anti-voter, anti-democracy legislation.”

The Trump administration has paid federal employees at least $11 billion – and likely much more – not to work, according to a new Public Citizen report. The total reflects only the lower end of estimated costs for the Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) and it does not look at other federal efforts to reduce the number of federal workers.

The report dives into the gross mismanagement of taxpayer funds, the major personnel losses across government agencies and what, instead, the federal government could have spent $11 billion on effectively.

Here are some key findings:

• The Trump administration paid nearly 140,000 federal employees who took part in the Deferred Resignation Program at least $11 billion to stop working for the American public and to stay home or take vacation until they separated from federal service.

• More than 106,000 federal employees separated from federal service in September 2025 under the Deferred Resignation Program, and an additional 24,000 employees in the DRP left federal service by the end of December 2025.

• As a result of the DRP, the Department of Defense lost more than 48,000 civilian employees last year, the Department of Treasury lost 23,000 federal employees, and the Department of Agriculture more than 14,500 employees.

• Several federal court cases ruled that some of the Trump administration’s layoffs were illegal and demanded that terminated employees at the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Interior, Labor, and other agencies return to work. However, there are a multitude of ongoing court cases and some of those initial court decisions have been overruled in federal appeals courts.

• At least 10 federal agencies were forced to rehire employees that had chosen to take part in the Deferred Resignation Program because they realized these employees were essential to the agency’s Congressionally mandated work on behalf of all Americans.

“The Trump administration’s efforts to shrink the federal government have been stupid, costly and deadly,” said Douglas Pasternak, Public Citizen researcher who authored the report. “The administration has spent more than $11 billion on the Deferred Resignation Program alone, paying 140,000 federal workers to stay home or take vacation while they were still being paid by the American taxpayer. Multiple agencies had to rehire those who took part in this program because Trump officials realized how vital they were to managing critical national programs. Even worse is the work left undone by the coerced departure of these workers, costing billions of dollars and putting untold numbers of lives at risk as the federal government fails to perform crucial functions.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today welcomed Amendment #2 to the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), submitted by Representatives Thomas Massie (R-KY), Ro Khanna (D-CA), Jim McGovern (D-MA), Jesús “Chuy” Garcia (D-IL), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).

The bipartisan amendment would strike Section 219, formerly Section 224, the “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,” which would expand U.S.-Israel defense technology cooperation, research partnerships, intelligence coordination, and military-industrial integration.

CLICK HERE: READ CAIR’S LETTER

CAIR also called on the House Rules Committee to reject Amendment 151, which would expand federal anti-boycott restrictions to boycotts promoted by international governmental organizations (IGOs), including bodies such as the United Nations, and Amendment 362, which would require the Secretary of Defense to certify that Department of Defense contractors do not participate in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement targeting Israel. Both amendments raise serious concerns about free speech and First Amendment protections.

Earlier today, CAIR submitted a letter to the House Rules Committee urging members to support Amendment 2 and oppose Amendments 151 and 362. Next week, the committee will consider all amendments to the House’s version of the NDAA. CAIR is urging every American to take action by sending a message to members of Congress to strike Section 219 to stop American military merger with the Israeli government.

TAKE ACTION NOW! – TELL YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO BLOCK ALL U.S.-ISRAEL MILITARY MERGER BILLS

In a statement, CAIR Government Affairs Department Director Robert McCaw said:

“Americans should never be asked to surrender their First Amendment rights to protect the political interests of a foreign government. Amendment 151 would further expand anti-boycott laws that chill peaceful political expression, while Amendment 362 would impose an ideological litmus test on federal contractors based on their participation in a constitutionally protected form of political advocacy.

“Congress was right to reject this anti-boycott proposal in committee last week, and it should reject this latest attempt to revive the same policy through the NDAA amendment process.

“At the same time, Section 219 would take the extraordinary step of further binding the United States and Israel through deeper military, intelligence, technological, and defense-industrial integration at a moment when the Israeli government stands accused of genocide, apartheid, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. As disturbing reports continue to emerge of torture, abuse, and sexual violence against Palestinian detainees, Congress should not be creating new mechanisms for military and technological integration that risk further implicating the United States in these abuses rather than helping bring them to an end.

“We urge every member of the House Rules Committee to reject Amendments 151 and 362, make Amendment 2 in order, and send a clear message that the constitutional rights of the American people, the principles of accountability, and the interests of our nation come before the demands of any foreign government.”

The proposed expansion of U.S.-Israel defense cooperation comes at a time when the Israeli government faces allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity, apartheid, and genocide, as well as documented reports of abuse and sexual violence against Palestinian detainees, including children. Deepening military, intelligence, and technology integration under these circumstances risks further entangling the United States in actions that much of the international community has condemned and undermines efforts to secure accountability for violations of international law.

CAIR noted that last week, Rep. Michael Lawler (R-NY), who is sponsoring the IGO Anti-Boycott Act provision, was forced to withdraw the amendment before consideration by the House Foreign Affairs Committee following outreach from CAIRand other civil liberties advocates.

That earlier proposal sought to revive the controversial IGO Anti-Boycott Act by extending federal anti-boycott restrictions to boycotts associated with international governmental organizations such as the United Nations. For the past two years, CAIR has warned members of Congress that the measure threatened constitutionally protected political speech and advocacy and welcomed its withdrawal before last week’s markup.

On the four-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Reproductive Freedom for All announces the launch of My Body. My Ballot., a $23.5 million campaign to mobilize voters, hold anti-abortion politicians accountable, and elect reproductive freedom champions in key races across the country.

At the center of this campaign is a simple truth: support for abortion access is popular across party lines – more popular than any individual politician or political party. As many voters turn away from Trump and the MAGA movement because of their continued attacks on abortion access, Reproductive Freedom for All is seizing the opportunity to elect pro-abortion candidates up and down the ballot.

The campaign marks Reproductive Freedom for All’s largest-ever midterm electoral program and will focus on persuading and mobilizing voters – including independents, soft Republicans, and split-ticket voters – whose support for abortion access puts them at odds with Trump and his endorsed candidates. It will deploy a layered strategy that includes on-the-ground organizing, research, digital engagement, and political accountability. The program will include deep investments in direct voter contact, including coordinated canvassing programs designed in direct partnership with specific campaigns. It will also include relational organizing training with our members, with priority investments across Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, California, and Georgia. Top-tier targets will include AZ-06, MI-07, and NV-03 congressional districts, alongside critical statewide races and ballot initiatives. The campaign will also include a national communications and digital program designed to reach voters across legacy media, podcasts, creator platforms, and social media ecosystems where public opinion and cultural conversation are increasingly shaped.

Four years after Dobbs, reproductive freedom remains one of the most salient issues in American politics. Anti-abortion politicians and extremists have made clear they will not stop at overturning Roe. They are attacking medication abortion, undermining emergency abortion care, defunding Planned Parenthood, gutting Medicaid, and pushing policies that raise costs for families already struggling to make ends meet. My Body. My Ballot. seizes on a critical political moment as divisions deepen within the Republican Party. As anti-abortion groups pressure the Trump administration to go even further, Republicans are caught between a radical anti-abortion movement demanding a nationwide ban and the 8 in 10 voters who support legal abortion and overwhelmingly oppose political interference in personal medical decisions.

Reproductive Freedom for All President and CEO Mini Timmaraju released the following statement:

“Abortion is popular – more popular than any individual politician. What’s not popular is Trump and the MAGA movement, who continue to lose voter support with every new attack on abortion access. Instead of lowering costs or helping families plan their futures, MAGA Republicans have advanced policies that make it harder for people to decide whether, when, and how to grow their families.

My Body. My Ballot. is about making sure every voter understands how the issues they care most about are connected: our bodies, our families, our health care, our economic security, and our freedom. We have the members, the political power, and the organizing infrastructure to turn outrage into action.

Four years after Dobbs, abortion bans have created a dangerous and chaotic patchwork where access to care depends on where someone lives, how much money they have, and whether they can travel. Anti-abortion politicians created this crisis, and this November, Americans will make sure they are held accountable.”

New Reproductive Freedom for All polling underscores the opportunity for this campaign. The research, conducted by Impact Research, surveyed likely voters in battleground U.S. House districts, including an oversample of voters who did not support Kamala Harris in 2024 but voted “yes” on abortion rights ballot measures statewide in Arizona, Michigan, and Nevada. The results show that voters overwhelmingly want lawmakers to protect reproductive health care—and that communicating clearly about politicians’ efforts to gut health care access, undermine medical privacy, and prioritize abortion restrictions over families’ needs can meaningfully move voters.

Eight in 10 voters surveyed said it is important for lawmakers to protect access to reproductive care, including 58% who said it is very important. Battleground voters also rejected additional abortion restrictions: Half said lawmakers should pass laws protecting abortion access nationwide.

Support for a nationwide abortion ban carries significant political consequences. More than 4 in 10 voters said a politician’s support for a nationwide abortion ban would be a total dealbreaker—placing it among the most disqualifying positions tested, alongside raising taxes on middle-class families and cutting Medicaid. After hearing messaging about attacks on health care access and privacy and politicians’ misplaced priorities, voters backed a generic Democratic congressional candidate by 12 points, 48% to 36%—a net five-point gain from the start of the poll (45% to 38%).

The campaign launch also kicks off Reproductive Freedom for All’s National Week of Action, running June 22–28, with events across the country designed to educate voters, train volunteers, elevate storytellers, and drive direct action in target states and districts. The week will feature 11 in-person events across our chapter states, alongside 12 national activations — including multiple phone banking actions and shifts, as well as a national text bank.

Key components of the campaign include:

• A national organizing program powered by members:Reproductive Freedom for All will activate its 4.5 million members nationwide to grow its volunteer leadership infrastructure and launch direct voter contact and visibility events in priority districts and regions. The campaign will span canvases across our chapter states — including cities like Phoenix, Tucson, Bakersfield, and Savannah — alongside Pride marches, rallies, community roundtables, and press conferences with elected leaders and stakeholders. It will also feature multi-day phone banks at both the in-person and virtual levels.
• Direct voter contact in priority states and districts:The program will include deep investments in direct voter contact, including coordinated canvassing programs designed in direct partnership with specific campaigns. It will persuade and mobilize voters – including independents, soft Republicans, and split-ticket voters – whose support for abortion access puts them at odds with Trump and his endorsed candidates. The program will also include relational organizing training with our members, with priority investments across Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, California, and Georgia. Top-tier targets will include AZ-06, MI-07, and NV-03 congressional districts, alongside critical statewide races and ballot initiatives.
• Research-backed messaging on freedom, care, and economic security:The campaign will use Reproductive Freedom for All’s latest research to connect abortion access to the economic pressures families are already facing, including the reality that deciding whether to have a child is one of the biggest economic decisions a person can make. Campaign messaging will also educate voters on threats to medication abortion, emergency care, health privacy, and access to reproductive health care nationwide.
• Candidate endorsements and accountability:Reproductive Freedom for All will endorse reproductive freedom champions and hold anti-abortion politicians accountable for their records, including those aligned with anti-abortion groups pushing the Trump administration to restrict access even further. The campaign will make clear who is working to protect abortion access—and who is working to push care further out of reach.
• State ballot measures. Reproductive Freedom for All will support ballot measure work in Virginia, Missouri, and Nevada, as part of a broader strategy to engage voters around reproductive freedom up and down the ballot. This work will connect ballot measure engagement to the campaign’s broader voter contact, persuasion, and turnout strategy.
• Digital and creator program to mobilize voters:Reproductive Freedom for All will run a comprehensive digital program across social media, podcast platforms, creator partnerships, paid digital, email, SMS, and rapid-response content. The creator strategy will go beyond paid amplification by partnering with trusted messengers, independent creators, storytellers, and issue-adjacent voices who can authentically reach persuadable audiences and encourage voter engagement.

The campaign builds on Reproductive Freedom for All’s latest research, which connects reproductive freedom to economic security and the freedom to decide whether, when, and how to grow a family. That research will inform the campaign’s ads, field scripts, digital content, volunteer trainings, and voter conversations—including outreach to independent and soft Republican voters who are frustrated by rising costs and alarmed by continued attacks on abortion access.

Stand Up America Managing Director of Policy and Political Affairs, Brett Edkins, issued the following statement in response to Trump’s refusal to sign the bipartisan affordable housing bill in an effort to pressure congressional Republicans into passing the SAVE Act:

“Donald Trump has been clear: The SAVE Act is his #1 legislative priority––not lowering costs for working people, creating good-paying jobs, or helping families afford a roof over their heads. Today, he decided it was more important to help Republicans avoid accountability for the cost-of-living crisis than actually do something about it.

“Trump was born on third base, and it shows. He has no clue what it’s like to struggle to make rent, save for a down payment, pay a mortgage, or worry that your kids will be able to afford a home of their own. Trump could’ve signed bipartisan legislation today to help lower housing costs and give Republicans something––anything––to show voters that they deserve reelection this November. Instead, he told working families to screw themselves. It’s selfish, petty, and self-defeating.”

Today marks the fourth anniversary of President Trump’s hand-picked Supreme Court ending the federal right to abortion with the Dobbsv. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision. Since then, more people have suffered and died because of restrictive anti-abortion laws, which have banned some or all abortion in 20 states.

To mark the anniversary, Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, released the following statement:

“Four years after President Trump’s handpicked Supreme Court ended the constitutional right to abortion, their decision continues to devastate people across the country. With each passing day, more people are hurt, more families are broken, and more people’s lives are upended. Anti-abortion rights lawmakers continue to weaponize the Court’s decision to make it harder for everyone, everywhere to get the care they need. On this anniversary, it’s clearer than ever that it’s on all of us to fight back against an unpopular political agenda that has blocked people’s health, lives, and freedoms.”

President Trump and his backers in Congress have spent their time in office making it harder for everyone, everywhere to get lifesaving reproductive health care, including abortion. Last July, they passed a law that “defunded” Planned Parenthood for one year by attempting to bar patients from using their Medicaid insurance at Planned Parenthood health centers. The harm they’ve caused is clear:

• Since the start of the Trump-Vance administration more than 50 Planned Parenthood health centers have been forced to close. More than 20 of those closures came after President Trump signed the law “defunding” Planned Parenthood.
• A Senate report examining the harm of “defunding” Planned Parenthood showed that in the six months since the “defunding” of Planned Parenthood took effect, fewer people have been able to get reproductive care at Planned Parenthood health centers in 2025 compared to the same period in 2024:
  • The number of breast exam visits fell by 25% in Dec., increasing the risk of delayed breast cancer detection and avoidable, more serious illness.
  • Visits for IUDs and other long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) dropped by 41% in Nov. and 36% in Dec.– the steepest decline across all services measured.
  • STI testing declined by 11% in Nov. and 4% in Dec., limiting early diagnosis and treatment and increasing preventable spread and long-term health consequences.
  • And there were 20% fewer visits for birth control pills in November.
• Now, House Republicans want to permanently “defund” Planned Parenthood because, where legal, Planned Parenthood health centers provide abortion.

Kudos to VJayBombs, ingenious street artists who once emblazoned L.A. with projections of ICE hauling off Jesus, and who just hit D.C. to plaster “Guardians of Pedophiles" on the Kennedy Center's "literal cover-up" and murky regime minions - bats, worms, turtles - on the besieged Reflecting Pool. Growing more ideological as the fascist stakes rise, they use peaceful but splashy projection bombing to "make our voices heard," sensibly arguing, "If you're gonna say something, say something."

It seems only apt an anonymous collective of renegades chooses as weapons the visual tools of their oppressors, slathering multiple regime cover-ups - like the attempted removal from National Parks of information on slavery and other historical facts that “disparage Americans past or living” - with their own rowdy retorts. Large-scale, dissident projections are part of a relatively new protest tradition, "accessible, disruptive, but not violent," that evidently grew from the Occupy movement. In 2013, using an Illuminator- like projector that came out of a car roof like a turret, one Charles Lechner projected an image of a ballot box stuffed with dollar bills onto Michael Bloomberg’s New York apartment; the Mayor, unamused, had him arrested.

projecting abstract visuals onto nearby buildings during house parties. That pastime evolved during the lead-up to the 2024 election into "Life's Projections," peaceful guerrilla protest that "sits right in the sweet spot of all our skill sets"; they now have over 300,000 online followers and merch - ICE guy with gun: "Our humanity" - to help raise funds. Moving through group chats, location-scouting, brainstorming - what will resonate, how to highlight absurdity and communicate clearly in seconds - they've progressed from "total novices" who blew a fuse by trying to run power through a car lighter to a large-venue projector.

Their goal is to effectively merge message with architecture in a story that unfolds like a digital billboard or comic strip and gets "the longest legs online - as many eyes as possible." Their projections across L.A. have ranged from No Kings messages to Matt Gaetz as Butt-Head to a spoof of Trump's endless, babbling State of the Union speech, with Trump holding the Statue of Liberty hostage amidst flashing messages of "Immigrant Bad!" and “Forget the Files!” A Super Bowl parody, "Redacted Bowl," featured Trump and cronies as football players with their stats matching their references in the Epstein files. Last week's UFC cage match became Donald Trump vs. the Epstein Files celebrating "the pound-for-pound best cover-up in history."

D.C.'s besieged Kennedy Center and besmirched Reflecting Pool - now the surreal scene of a Stalinist police stop - were logical, tempting next stops. A week after a court ruling forced the removal of Trump's name from the Center, the tarp hung in the dark to hide a fragile narcissist's shame and fury from a gleeful crowd is still there, obscuring not just the spot where the name allegedly came down but the entire facade. In a June 19 court filing, Center lackeys say it's to do maintenance on the marble. Lawyers for Rep. Joyce Beatty, who filed the original lawsuit, say it's a lame move to soothe "broken egos,” one that both conceals whether officials have in fact complied with the court and reduces a once-vaunted arts venue into a "lifeless husk."

Frustrated visitors to the site have their own ideas: One suggested Trump is focused on "trying to deface America’s symbols before he finishes defacing the country," and another proposed using the tarp to cover the brackish debacle that is now the Reflecting Pool. Others have simply moved on to pay tribute to VJayBombs artists for giving Trump "a lesson in the law of unintended consequences" and projecting "what we all wanted" on the Kennedy Center: A "Guardians of Pedophiles" montage of Trump, Epstein, regime toadies - Bondi, Johnson, Patel - with, "No one bends the knee like the GOP,” and a guy climbing a ladder towards the name "Donald," its letters slowly cascading down to form the word "pedo."

In their weekend art spree, VJayBombs also took to other D.C. landmarks. At the Lincoln Pool, they placed in that now-sorry site a fitting array of swamp creatures: McConnell as turtle, Hegseth as crocodile, Vance as worm, Rubio as fish, Stephen Goebbels Miller a bat hanging upside-down, bald head glinting. At the DOJ, Ted Cruz popped up as a grotesque sex worker in Trump underwear. Hard to unsee, but VJayBombs argue, these dark days, it's "more important than ever to use whatever skills we have to push back." Their art "gives people a new way to engage," they say. "We all have more power than we think...Real change doesn’t come from one big event - it comes from countless small acts that, together, move the needle."

Heat records are again being smashed across Europe as the region is engulfed in another historic heat wave this week. France, Spain, and the United Kingdom face the most severe threat—Monday is on track to be France’s hottest day on record. The heat is affecting millions, as schools are closed, outdoor recreation and festivities are limited, and fatalities are already starting to add up. A recent attribution analysis found that Europe’s record-breaking heat this year “has the fingerprints of climate change all over it.”

In response, Aaron Regunberg, director of Public Citizen’s Climate Accountability Project, issued the following statement:

“Across Europe, millions are suffering from heat that would have been practically unimaginable a generation ago. This isn’t a natural disaster. The fossil fuel industry’s pollution and decades of deception about the impact of burning fossil fuels has spurred this extreme heat, which has already killed multiple people. Decades ago, scientists at Exxon were discussing with other oil companies research connecting climate change with ‘suffering and death due to thermal extremes.’ These companies knew of evidence that their conduct would cause these harms, and orchestrated campaigns of climate denial to undermine that evidence. They should be held accountable.”

The Center for Biological Diversity sued the Trump Department of Agriculture today seeking records revealing who advocated behind the scenes for — and potentially ghost-wrote — the president’s Feb. 18 executive order directing the department to accelerate domestic production of glyphosate.

The order to increase U.S. production of the nation’s most-used herbicide was issued under the emergency powers granted to the president by the Defense Production Act — a Cold War-era law designed to address wartime shortages of critical goods.

Despite annual glyphosate use of more than 300 million pounds, the Trump executive order declared that increasing production of the pesticide was critical to national defense and ordered the federal government to ensure its continued availability.

Of Trump’s 13 executive orders invoking the Defense Production Act, the glyphosate order is unique for its language granting immunity to the chemical companies that make glyphosate should they take otherwise illegal actions in complying with the order.

“This executive order is another corrupt giveaway to the pesticide industry, and people have a right to know who pushed for it behind the scenes,” said Brett Hartl, the Center’s government affairs director. “The pesticide industry is doing everything they can to avoid accountability for the harms their products have caused across this country, and the only reason this administration is hiding these important records is that they will almost certainly show just how deeply the poison-makers’ influence permeates the Trump government.”

The executive order also declared elemental phosphorus, a key ingredient for glyphosate production, to be critical for national security. The order’s language mimics text that artificial intelligence generates when prompted to explain consumption of elemental phosphorus in the United States, including language that the nation imports “more than 6,000,000 kilograms” from other nations annually. The glyphosate executive order is the only executive order in the history of the nation to use the word “kilogram.”

“Everyone knows that Trump doesn’t write, let alone often read, the executive orders he signs,” said Hartl. “But the chatbot slop that makes up the majority of this executive order shows that virtually anything can reach the president’s desk if the right levers of power are pulled around Trump and his cronies.”

Glyphosate has been linked to a variety of human health impacts including cancer, liver disease, and developmental and metabolic disorders in young children that could lead to diabetes and cardiovascular disease later in life.

Recent analysis has shown that despite acknowledged links between pesticides and cancers, regulators in the United States have consistently allowed pesticides to go to market with a cancer risk as high as 1 in every 100 people exposed, a far greater level than the EPA’s benchmark of a one in a million chance of developing cancer.

The executive order was released at the same time that the Trump administration was intervening in support of a lawsuit at the Supreme Court that could broadly shield pesticide makers from liability when their products fail to warn of their “likely” human carcinogenic qualities.

The Center submitted its Freedom of Information Act request in February but has not yet received any response from the USDA. The law is meant to ensure public access to information about the functioning of federal agencies by guaranteeing a response within 20 business days of a request.

Today’s lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Center expects to receive records from the suit in the next two to three months.

The House Committee on Ways and Means is currently considering a set of cryptocurrency taxation bills that could potentially offer huge tax benefits to President Trump’s sons as well as his allies and donors in the crypto industry. Concerningly, a number of members who have benefited greatly from cryptocurrency donations and SuperPAC spending in recent elections will decide whether or not to create massive new tax loopholes for the industry.

One bill in particular would create a functional subsidy for cryptocurrency firms by allowing them to defer taxes owed on their mined coins indefinitely and without interest, so long as the firms do not sell the coins. These firms—which could then borrow against these assets without ever having paid taxes on them as received income—are expecting recipients of the industry’s largesse to enshrine these proposed giveaways to its oligarchs. For example, Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith received $105,168 from the industry in the 2026 cycle, more than a tenfold increase in the donations he received from them last cycle.

Many others, Democrats and Republicans alike, have received significant sums, with Nevada Democrat Steven Horsford alone receiving close to $2 million from the industry in the past two cycles. A full report on cryptocurrency donations to the Ways and Means Committee can be viewed here. An executive summary is also available here.

The bill that would allow for deferral of tax payment on cryptocurrency mining could prove particularly valuable for the sons of President Trump. Eric and Donald Trump Jr. reportedly hold a 20% stake in the bitcoin mining firm American Bitcoin, which mined 817 bitcoin in Q1 of 2026 alone. At current prices, this represents a value of more than $50 million, and the company has stated that it already intends to hold assets it mines. If passed, this loophole could mean millions of dollars in taxes owed by the Trump sons’ firm could be deferred endlessly. Larger firms in the industry would receive even more benefits from this loophole.

Warning of this potential payoff to the Trump family and the crypto insiders who have funneled money to candidates on both sides of the aisle, The Revolving Door Project’s Executive Director, Jeff Hauser said the following: “The cryptocurrency industry believes it is owed massive tax loopholes and functional subsidies because it has bought the president, paid for his ballroom project, and has funded dozens of congressional campaigns. The lack of campaign finance reform is the principal reason that the ludicrously corrupt Trump family is set to enjoy yet another tax loophole to exploit. Polls have repeatedly shown that voters are not in support of the crypto industry’s agenda, yet sweetheart legislation continues to be this Congress’ highest priority. If Members of Congress wish to prove that their influence is not for sale, rejecting the industry that has lavished them with so much support is the perfect opportunity to do so.”

Revolving Door Project Assistant Director Timi Iwayemi chimed in, adding “The cryptocurrency industry has facilitated the Trump family’s corruption at every turn. Lawmakers should be wary of creating new tax loopholes to benefit the Trump family and their donors in the crypto industry. Rewarding this behavior will embolden the crypto industry and other corporate lobbies eager to seize on our elected representatives’ prioritization of donor interests at public expense.”

First Past the Post is no longer fit for purpose, writes Livvy Gibbs

The post Elections 2026: Britain’s electorate has changed – our voting system needs to keep up appeared first on Red Pepper.

Amid the war on Iran, UK economic policy allows the super-rich to profit while the public struggle with living costs, writes Jake Woodier

The post Corporate profiteering and the war on Iran appeared first on Red Pepper.

On Thursday, President Donald Trump nominated U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton to be Director of National Intelligence. Last year, former Attorney General Pam Bondi assigned Clayton to carry out Trump’s directive to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Democrats—an investigation that legal experts have warned could be a pretext to withhold some of the Epstein files. After the recent elections in California, Clayton also recently encouraged conspiracy theories about voter fraud saying “the American people are right to question it.”

After Trump’s announcement, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) said he has “great respect” for Clayton and Rep. Jim Himes (D-NH) said Clayton’s record “will make him a terrific DNI.” Both Warner and Himes have worked with Republican leadership to hand Trump warrantless surveillance powers through Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

The following is a statement from Demand Progress Executive Director Sean Vitka:

“No Democrat should find solace in the fact that Trump has once again named a partisan hatchet man to be the nation’s top spy. Just as Trump asked Bill Pulte to investigate Letitia James and Adam Schiff, he also has asked Jay Clayton to investigate Democrats’ ties to Jeffrey Epstein. The fact that Sen. Warner and Rep. Himes would gush so effusively over Clayton shows their clear desire to sabotage a deal on FISA privacy reforms and hand President Trump the unfettered surveillance powers that he is asking for. Both Pulte and Clayton have already shown that they will carry out Trump’s directive to weaponize the government against his political enemies. Putting either of them at ODNI at a time when Trump is asking for warrantless surveillance powers through FISA is too big of a risk.”

A robust set of resources on the need for privacy reforms for FISA are available here and here, and additional background, context, polling, reform demands, resources and other information is available here. A video on Pulte from Jessica Craven can be found here and a sample of the ways FISA has been used to wrongfully target protesters, journalists, politicians and others is available here. An explainer on why FISA won’t actually “go dark” on June 12 can be found here.

Today, Public Citizen released a new report analyzing the lobbying and political spending of 88 corporations that paid zero in corporate income taxes in 2025. The corporations in question were identified in a recent report by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), which found that at least 88 corporations paid no federal corporate income taxes last year, despite raking in millions — if not billions —in profits.

The American tax code already enshrines massive giveaways to wealthy corporations, thanks to decades of Republican efforts on their behalf. This report finds that those same corporate tax dodgers then poured millions into lobbying and political campaigns that yielded further tax breaks, which in turn bankrolled even more political influence. The result is a self-reinforcing loop where corporate cash buys policy, and policy pays cash back.

“The largest and richest corporations in the country are paying zero in federal income tax and that is a slap in the face to the American taxpayers who are struggling to afford necessities like groceries and health care,” said Eileen O’Grady, a researcher with Public Citizen and author of the report. “Meanwhile, these companies are spending money that could have gone to the public good on lobbying for even more special advantages and tax breaks. In this backwards, cash-fueled system, the deck is being stacked ever higher in favor of corporations, and against working people.”

Key findings from the report include:

• The 88 corporations that paid no federal corporate income tax in 2025 spent nearly $852 million on political spending over the last three election cycles. This total includes $712 million in lobbying and $140 million in campaign contributions.
  
• Comparing the taxes the corporations saved against the cost of their political spending, they collectively made a 3,000% return on investment.
  
• Coinbase Global spent the most of any company ($89 million) followed by CVS Health ($66 million), Honeywell International ($56 million), American Electric Power ($47 million), and Duke Energy ($35 million).
  
• On average each year, these companies together have sent 1,119 lobbyists to influence the federal government, including on tax issues and legislation that changed the tax code in favor of corporate giveaways.
  
• Since the beginning of 2025, these companies have collectively laid off at least 21,200 workers and announced plans to lay off thousands more.

The Trump administration has awarded nearly $103 million in federal contracts and grants for the nation’s 250th anniversary celebrations to a network of politicized entities under the control of Trump administration officials and political allies, according to a new report released today by Public Citizen and the Revolving Door Project.

Of the $126 million in grants awarded to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, over 80% of the awards have gone to build out a politicized series of events, at the public’s expense, according to the report. Among the recipients of the federal grants are entities controlled or influenced by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Trump’s former campaign manager Chris LaCivita, and Meredith O’Rourke, Trump’s former presidential campaign finance director.

Trump has spent the first years of his second administration turning the 250th celebrations into a celebration of his supporters and of himself — as evidenced by this weekend’s White House lawn cage match fight on Trump’s birthday.

After an unsuccessful attempt to take over the bipartisan, Congressionally-authorized America 250 nonprofit, the Trump administration bypassed the entity, creating a new, opaque organization known as Freedom 250.

Freedom 250 displaced America 250 as the Trump Administration’s preferred partner in the 250th anniversary celebrations, a preference made clear by actions like linking to Freedom 250 at the bottom of the White House’s landing page.

Freedom 250 is also gaining financial support from a host of large corporations. Among the donors to Freedom 250, corporations that face major federal regulatory issues, including ExxonMobil, Oracle, Lockheed Martin, Palantir, and United Airlines have contributed undisclosed sums with no oversight.

Freedom 250, for its part, has been directly allocated at least $79 million in federal funds, with one $10 million grant dispensed to the National Park Foundation to support a “Freedom Trucks” mobile museum exhibit created in partnership with conservative PragerU and Hillsdale College, a Christian university in Michigan. Another $5 million grant was originally obligated to the organization in December to support “A250 Events,” but increased to $68.3 million in obligated funds in March of 2026.

“This Trumpified version of the 250th anniversary is mostly about lionizing Trump and catering to his political base,” said Alan Zibel, research director with Public Citizen. “The 250th anniversary of the country should be a moment to reflect on the values of the nation. Apparently, the Trump administration is replacing those values with grift, self-dealing, and enriching friends with taxpayer dollars.”

“Donald Trump has spent his life obsessively scarring everything in his path with his likeness, his name, and his gaudy, dictatorial taste in faux gilding,” said Toni Aguilar Rosenthal, program director with the Revolving Door Project. “Ultimately, the rings of ethical impropriety cascading from Trump’s Freedom 250 contracting scandals are just another manifestation of elite impunity. The Trump administration has once again found an avenue to tilt the scales in favor of corporate interests even as millions struggle to believe in the dream of America 250 years after the signing of the Declaration.”