

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Thousands of United States service members who lost their military careers after reporting a sexual assault live with stigmatizing discharge papers that prevent them from getting jobs and benefits, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The report is the result of a 28-month investigation by Human Rights Watch, with the support of Protect Our Defenders, a human rights organization that supports and advocates for survivors of military sexual assault. Under pressure from the public and Congress, the US military has in recent years implemented some protection for service members who report sexual assault, but nothing has been done to redress the wrongs done to those who were unfairly discharged.
The 124-page report, "Booted: Lack of Recourse for Wrongfully Discharged US Military Rape Survivors," found that many rape victims suffering from trauma were unfairly discharged for a "personality disorder" or other mental health condition that makes them ineligible for benefits. Others were given "Other Than Honorable" discharges for misconduct related to the assault that shut them out of the Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system and a broad range of educational and financial assistance. The consequences of having "bad paper" - any discharge other than "honorable" - or being labeled as having a "personality disorder" are far-reaching for veterans and their families, impacting employment, child custody, health care, disability payments, burial rights - virtually all aspects of life.
"Military rape victims with bad discharges are essentially labeled for life," said Sara Darehshori, senior counsel in the US program at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. "Not only have they lost their military careers, they have been marked with a status that may keep them from getting a job or health care, or otherwise pursuing a normal life after the military."
"Bad paper" has been correlated with high rates of suicide, homelessness, and imprisonment among veterans. Those with "personality disorder" or other mental health discharges have to live with the additional stigma of being labeled "mentally ill."
Despite the high stakes, there is little veterans can do to fix an unjust discharge, Human Rights Watch found. US law prohibits service members from suing the military for any harm suffered related to their service. The Boards for Correction of Military Records and Discharge Review Boards, the administrative bodies responsible for correcting injustices to service members' records, are overwhelmed with thousands of cases.
Human Rights Watch, with assistance from Protect Our Defenders, conducted more than 270 in-person and telephone interviews, examined documents produced by US government agencies in response to numerous public record requests, and analyzed data on cases in the Boards for Correction reading room that referenced "personality disorder" or "adjustment disorder." Researchers spoke to 163 survivors of sexual assault from the Vietnam War era to the present day.
"As I look back on the incident I have at times cursed myself for speaking up and reporting what happened," one rape survivor said. "I cannot even begin to express how this entire ordeal has affected my life."
In recent years, public attention has been drawn to the problem of combat veterans being given bad discharges for mental health conditions or misconduct that may in fact be symptomatic of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Congress has made it harder to discharge combat veterans on mental health grounds without checking for PTSD. However, the additional protections have not been extended to sexual assault survivors even though they also suffered trauma in service and the prevalence of PTSD is higher among rape victims than combat veterans.
Lack of Recourse for Wrongfully Discharged US Military Rape Survivors
"We regularly hear from people who report sexual assault that they are being threatened with discharge for mental health reasons or trumped-up misconduct charges," said Colonel Don Christensen, president of Protect Our Defenders and a former Air Force chief prosecutor. "Traumatized young service members may be willing to take a bad discharge just to escape their perpetrator without realizing the costs of their decision. Many more buy into the myth that it will be easy to upgrade their discharge later."
The Defense Department's standard response to service members who suffered sexual assault and allege improper discharge is to recommend they seek review by the Boards for Correction of Military Records or Discharge Review Boards. However, well over 90 percent of those applying to the Boards are rejected with almost no opportunity to be heard or any meaningful review. Lawyers for veterans say their cases often include considerable evidence and supporting documents. Yet Board members often spend only a few minutes deciding a case and may reach a decision without reading the submitted material. Because the courts give special deference to military decisions, judicial oversight of the Boards is virtually nonexistent.
"Military lawyers and veterans see the Boards as a virtual graveyard for their cases," Darehshori said. "Many veterans we spoke with were reluctant to put themselves through the trauma of reliving their assault to try to fix their record when they saw no hope for success."
Congress should require the Defense Department to expedite review of cases of sexual assault victims who believe they were wrongfully discharged. The defense secretary should instruct the Boards to be more open to considering upgrade requests from sexual assault victims, bring evidentiary requirements for proving a sexual assault into line with those used by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and create a presumption in favor of changing the reason for discharge from personality disorder to "Completion of Service," in certain cases.
To ensure that all service members receive due consideration of their claims, Congress should create a right to a hearing before the Boards for Correction of Military Records and provide greater information to the public on all decisions. A representative working group should be created to study standards for granting relief and determine best practices and procedures.
"Immediate reform is desperately needed to ensure that military sexual assault survivors can get a meaningful remedy for the wrongful discharges that darken their lives," Darehshori said. "They deserve support, not censure."
The following are quotes from rape survivors and advocates interviewed by Human Rights Watch or contained in documents Human Rights Watch reviewed. Starred victims' names have been replaced with pseudonyms to protect their privacy.
"Why should I be discharged because I was raped? I did what I was supposed to do. Had I never come forward I truly believe I would still be in the Air Force."
-A1C Juliet Simmons,* November 2012
"I carry my discharge as an official and permanent symbol of shame, on top of the trauma of the physical attack, the retaliation and its aftermath."
-Brian Lewis, March 2013
"Although agencies exist to which you may apply to upgrade a less than Honorable Discharge, it is unlikely that such application will be successful."
-Army Developmental Counseling Form
"I defy any of you not to have mental consequences if you were raped and harassed repeatedly and even set on fire, while management looked the other way and just laughed."
-Testimony of Amy Quinn before the Judicial Proceedings Panel on Sexual Assault in the Military, May 19, 2015
"I was 18 years old, was a mental mess, and was terrified to be back aboard [the ship] any longer than I had to. I wasn't protected, I wasn't helped, I wasn't safe from any type of harm! So how did I actually know what I was signing or even in fact what an OTH [Other Than Honorable] discharge was to mean? How was I to know that from all the sexual attacks that I had to suffer and the harassment, assaults, threats to my life and safety that for all these years [the discharge would be] a huge factor to how I lived and how my life ended up?"
-SR Heath Phillips, 2013
"It is bad enough to go through military sexual trauma, but to be discredited and labeled is difficult to overcome and causes so much damage. PD [Personality Disorder] is another level of betrayal because it is so stigmatizing.... People think there is something wrong with me and don't realize it was a label just stuck on people."
-PFC Eva Washington*, October 2013
"I have practiced law in Texas for 31 years now, and I've appeared in different state and federal courts in a variety of administrative settings and this is the only time that I've been before a discharge review board. It was a horrific experience ... I found myself being cut off and my client being screamed at which was unlike any experience I have ever had before. My client was just completely re-victimized. They didn't really care what we had to say. We got a decision a few months later that was erroneous in a number of different respects ... and it was a 5-nothing decision not to upgrade."
-JoAnn Merica, attorney for a veteran who was discharged for misconduct after reporting sexual harassment, March 2016
"As I look back on the incident I have at times cursed myself for speaking up and reporting what happened but ... I thought I was doing the right thing ... I cannot even begin to express how this entire ordeal has affected my life; it won't go away and I still struggle with self-esteem and trust and the entire myriad of symptoms victims of sexual assault suffer ... the Navy discarded me like a piece of scrap iron or less; truthfully, this ordeal continues to haunt me ... I am a broken man."
-SA Ken Nelson,* October 2012
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
"Donald Trump and Stephen Miller want unfettered surveillance powers without any chance to enact protections, and Democrats must not give it to them," one campaigner warned.
A week after four Democrats helped Republicans pass a short-term extension of a controversial spying power with a dead-of-night vote in the US House of Representatives, Speaker Mike Johnson on Thursday released a bill that would renew the authority for three years—double the amount of time the Louisiana Republican and President Donald Trump were previously pushing.
As that bill text circulated, Demand Progress—one of the scores of civil society groups calling for privacy reforms to be included in any renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—took aim at those Democrats: Reps. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), Jared Golden (Maine), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), and Tom Suozzi (NY).
"Just like last time, Speaker Johnson's latest proposal lacks any meaningful privacy reforms, but this time, they're trying to renew FISA for three more years—twice as long as the Trump administration asked for," said Demand Progress senior policy adviser Hajar Hammado in a statement.
"Donald Trump and Stephen Miller want unfettered surveillance powers without any chance to enact protections, and Democrats must not give it to them," Hammado argued, referring to Trump's deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser.
"We need Reps. Gottheimer, Suozzi, Golden, and Gluesenkamp Perez to stand with the rest of Democrats and hold Donald Trump accountable," the campaigner emphasized. "A vote in support of this FISA bill, especially procedural votes to advance it, is both a vote to allow Donald Trump to continue invasive, warrantless surveillance of private American citizens, and to sabotage even the chance of protecting privacy."
FISA's Section 702 allows the US government to surveil electronic communications of noncitizens located outside the United States to acquire foreign intelligence information, without a warrant. However, it's been abused at least hundreds of thousands of times by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) alone—which has fueled calls for reforms, including closing the data broker loophole that agencies use to buy their way around the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution.
"Speaker Johnson wants to pretend this bill is reform, but it's the same type of empty-calorie proposal that failed last week," warned Jake Laperruque, deputy director of Center for Democracy and Technology's Security and Surveillance Project. "There is nothing in this bill that would have prevented the abuses of FISA 702 we've already seen—snooping on lawmakers, protesters, and campaign donors—and there is nothing that would stop even worse abuses in the future."
"Members of Congress have a clear choice: They can support this proposal and give the FBI and other intelligence agencies a three-year blank check, or they can stand strong and demand real reforms to protect the American people," he said.
Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program, similarly stressed how the latest bill is "almost identical to the one that failed last week," explaining on social media that "the main 'reform' in Johnson's first proposal was a provision that merely restated existing law, under which the government may not 'target' Americans under Section 702 but may do so with a warrant or FISA Title I order."
"That provision was titled 'warrant requirement,' even though it imposed no new warrant requirement whatsoever. And it had zero relevance to the issue at the heart of the debate over Section 702, namely, backdoor searches," she noted. "Backdoor searches are not considered to be 'targeting' Americans for surveillance. Rather, they are searches of collected communications of foreign targets outside the United States for Americans' communications that were 'incidentally' swept in."
"Astonishingly, Johnson has chosen to feature this same do-nothing provision in his new proposal. This time, the drafters have dropped any pretense of creating new law and titled the provision 'Fourth Amendment Requirement for Targeting United States Persons,'" Goitein continued. "This is not a reform bill, and it's not a compromise. It's a straight reauthorization with eight pages of words that serve no serious purpose other than to try to convince members that it's NOT a straight reauthorization."
According to her: "House members didn't fall for it last week, and they shouldn't fall for it now. Speaker Johnson must allow the House to vote on the reforms that members and the American people are demanding, including a warrant requirement to access Americans' communications."
The GOP narrowly has the numbers to pass legislation with a party-line vote in the House, but some of the chamber's Republicans have joined in the calls for privacy reforms. Libertarian leaders, including Justin Amash, a former Republican congressman from Michigan, have forcefully spoken out against Johnson's efforts.
"House Republicans are spitting on the Constitution and spitting in all our faces," Amash said of the bill unveiled Thursday.
Calling out the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and vast US Intelligence Community, Patrick Eddington, a senior fellow in homeland security and civil liberties at the libertarian Cato Institute, declared that "this is an HPSCI, SSCI, IC Trojan horse bill masquerading as something Fourth Amendment-compliant."
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) "is threatening to take over negotiations if the House GOP can’t resolve differences quickly," according to Politico. In the upper chamber, Republicans need at least some Democratic support to pass a reauthorization bill.
"The American people are done grinding to get by while our tax dollars fund wars abroad and concentration camps at home."
A broad coalition of organizations is banding together to stage thousands of planned May Day events across the US based around the theme of building an economy for "workers over billionaires."
May Day Strong, an initiative anchored by 500 labor and community organizations, is set to host more than 3,000 events throughout the country to demand higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans, an end to US Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the war with Iran, and an expansion of democracy over corporate rule.
Organizers of the events are asking participants to refrain from engaging in any economic activity on May 1, which means "no work, no school, no shopping." This particular action was inspired by the one-day general strike that residents of Minneapolis waged in January to protest against the occupy of their city by federal immigration enforcement officers.
Flagship demonstrations will be held in major US cities from coast to coast, with thousands of smaller events scheduled to take place in all 50 states.
Neidi Dominguez, executive director of Organized Power in Numbers, said the rallies are being organized to ensure "our tax dollars going to good jobs, schools, and housing, not to sending federal agents into our cities to attack our neighbors."
Rebecca Winter, executive director of Mass 50501, framed the events as a way for Americans to exert economic leverage to protest injustice.
"The American people are done grinding to get by while our tax dollars fund wars abroad and concentration camps at home,” said Winter. “We pay more for everything while those in power cash in. On May 1, we hit back with our wallets—no work, no school, no shopping. We the people are the economy, and we decide when it stops."
Greg Nammacher, president of Minnesota-based Service Employees International Union Local 26, drew on the Minneapolis experience to explain what the May Day protests are trying to achieve.
"In January in Minnesota this year we experienced the power when community and workers act together to defend our rights and shared values," Nammacher said. "This May Day is a chance for us locally, and nationally, to build on those lessons: We are ready to fight to protect our families and our cities from the billionaire agenda of division and hate."
Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), said the protests would also highlight inhumane US immigration policies and demand a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.
"On May Day, we rise because worker justice is immigrant justice," Salas said. "It's been 40 years since the last time this nation recognized the contributions of immigrants by approving a pathway to citizenship. And it's been 20 years since La Gran Marcha—when millions of people took to the streets to reject exclusion, racism, and criminalization of immigrant communities—and we are still facing the same forces, especially under the Trump administration."
Braxton Winston, president of the North Carolina State AFL-CIO, described the demonstrations as a good way to bring new people into the movement and strengthen future actions.
"Now is the time to build coalitions between unorganized workers, unions, and community members for mass actions to disrupt the well-organized, joint efforts of corporations and the White House to exploit American workers," Winston said. "The actions we take on International Workers Day are about building the political, social, community, and labor coalitions needed to disrupt the status quo. The power we flex this May Day will fuel our unwavering commitment to building a bigger, more effective, unified labor movement to win victories for working families."
“Across the country people are going bankrupt and dying prematurely because of lack of healthcare, but the US government has billions to spend on imperialist violence to enrich corporations," said one researcher.
As the basic needs of millions of Americans are sacrificed upon the altar of waning US global domination, an analysis unveiled Thursday revealss that the Trump administration has spent billions of dollars on illegal military aggression against Venezuela and civilian boats alleged without evidence to be smuggling drugs off the coast of Latin America.
The Costs of War Project at Brown University's Watson School of International and Public Affairs published an analysis by a pair of researchers who "found that spending on Operation Southern Spear and Operation Absolute Resolve in Venezuela, the Caribbean, and the Eastern Pacific cost at least $4.7 billion from August 1, 2025 to March 31, 2026."
The researchers—Hanna Homestead of the Institute for Policy Studies' National Priorities Project and Jennifer Kavanagh of the think tank Defense Priorities—also found that "costs will continue to mount as some naval assets and aircraft remain in the region and strikes continue."
"This estimate is only partial due to lack of information, and does not include long-term budgetary costs such as veterans benefits," an introduction to the analysis states.
BREAKING: Since August 2025, the U.S. has spent at least $4.7 billion on operations in Latin America and the Caribbean, including the operation to oust Maduro. [THREAD, 1/11]
[image or embed]
— The Costs of War Project (@costsofwar.bsky.social) April 23, 2026 at 8:41 AM
In addition to the financial burden, the analysis notes the human costs of enforcing the so-called "Donroe Doctrine."
"While not the topic of this paper, they are essential to note at the outset," the publication states. "The raid and capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro during Operation Absolute Resolve resulted in approximately 75 known fatalities. These include 32 Cuban personnel killed, at least 23 Venezuelan security officers killed, and at least two civilian deaths."
US strikes "against unarmed vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific between September 2, 2025 and March 31, 2026 have killed at least 163 people," the authors added. "In addition, at least one American service member died while deployed to the Caribbean in February 2026 when two US ships collided."
The toll from Trump's boat-bombing spree has since risen to more than 180 following additional reported strikes. Survivors of somemi bombings allege they were tortured by their US captors. The US military and Trump administration have provided no solid evidence to support their claims that the boats were transporting illicit narcotics.
Homestead and Kavanagh noted in their analysis that "to date, Congress has not authorized the use of force in the Caribbean or Eastern Pacific and the Pentagon has not provided information about costs of Venezuela-related operations, even as they continue to mount."
There have been more than 50 boat bombings since Trump launched his campaign last September. Relatives of people killed in or missing after the strikes insist their loved ones were fishers with no links to the drug trade, an assertion echoed by leaders in Venezuela, Colombia, and some Caribbean island nations.
Multiple war powers resolutions aimed at reining in Trump's ability to wage war on Venezuela or bomb boats on the high seas without congressional authorization have been rejected by the Republican-controlled Congress.
In addition to the bombing and invasion of Venezuela and the boat strikes, the Trump administration has deployed troops to Ecuador as part of a joint campaign against alleged drug gangs dubbed Operation Total Extermination. Trump has also ordered the military to plan an invasion to seize the Panama Canal, threatened to "take" Cuba, possibly attack Mexico and Colombia, invade and annex Greenland, and somehow make Canada the "51st state."
That's just in the Western Hemisphere. Overall, Trump has bombed seven countries around the world since returning to the White House and 10 nations over the course of his two terms—including Iran, where he launched an illegal war with Israel.
The Costs of War Project rose to prominence by tracking the human and financial price of the so-called US War on Terror, which since September 2001 has resulted in over 940,000 direct deaths, including at least 432,000 civilians, in five studied countries, at a monetary cost of around $8 trillion.
Homestead and Kavanagh wrote in their analysis that the $4.7 billion figure "is a conservative estimate, and the greatest costs may yet be to come," as "operations do not have a clear end date and are actively expanding."
"They carry significant human, financial, and strategic costs and risk," the researchers contended. "American taxpayers, who are increasingly unable to afford basic needs, have a right to know how their tax dollars are spent."
Homestead told The Intercept on Thursday that "across the country people are going bankrupt and dying prematurely because of lack of healthcare, but the US government has billions to spend on imperialist violence to enrich corporations—from Venezuela to Iran—without any regard for human rights, life, or rule of law."
“This situation illustrates why greater restraint on Pentagon spending—which primarily benefits private contractors—is so necessary," she added.
This, as Trump seeks a record $1.5 trillion allocation for military spending in the next federal budget—despite the national debt approaching a staggering $40 trillion—while proposing billions of dollars in cuts to vital social programs.