

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.

Fight for the Future, 978-852-6457, press@fightforthefuture.org
Today on May Day, 50+ racial justice, civil liberties, and worker advocacy organizations release a joint statement condemning the silencing of front line workers blowing the whistle on unsafe corporate practices during COVID-19. The joint statement calls for an expansion and improved enforcement of legal protections for frontline workers who speak out and organize for a healthy and safe workplace, as a matter of public health.
The statement amplifies and supports worker demands for workplace health and safety standards in line with Center for Disease Control guidelines: implementation of six feet of distance between all individuals in the facility, personal protective equipment for all, time for handwashing, temporarily closing and cleaning exposed facilities to allow for quarantine, independent and transparent reporting, and paid leave policies to help exposed and sick workers to stay home.
Since the COVID 19 outbreak, Amazon has fired six workers who spoke out and organized for these basic standards. Rather than implement necessary safeguards, the technology giant expanded their surveillance system to monitor worker interactions, which risks undermining the right of workers to take action on critical public health issues.
The statement also speaks to the disproportionate number of Black and brown people taking enormous risks as frontline workers. It is egregious that all the warehouse workers Amazon fired are Black. Amazon's actions callously add harm at a time when many Black communities face higher COVID-19 death rates and are bearing the brunt of the economic and health impacts.
The current crisis has elevated the necessity for workers to be able to speak out without retaliation to protect themselves, their communities, and the public.
QUOTES:
"People from across the political spectrum can agree on this: essential workers are our first line of defense against corruption, greed, and dangerous conditions that put public health at risk. Now more than ever we need workers to feel safe speaking out when they see their employers engaging in practices that could lead to loss of life, said Evan Greer, Deputy Director of Fight for the Future. "It's essential we put policies in place to ensure all frontline workers are protected and any violations of these protections trigger an automatic investigation. It's the only way we'll stop companies, like Amazon, from retaliating against whistleblowers and using surveillance to clamp down on workers self-organizing. Anything less is a threat to the safety of workers and the public at large."
"Black and brown workers have always been essential for our nation's economy and public health, but their voices are too often silenced. During this crisis, Amazon and other employers are willing to make this 'essential work' a death sentence for Black and brown frontline workers," said Myaisha Hayes, Campaign Director at MediaJustice. "This blatant disregard for the safety and wellbeing of Black and brown bodies is business as usual for Amazon, who already profits from mass surveillance of over-policed communities through their partnerships with ICE and local law enforcement. On May Day, we stand in solidarity with Amazon workers who are striking, organizing, and taking direct action at the risk of their jobs because they understand what is truly at stake: the health and safety of their communities"
"Our public health and societal well-being require that workers have the power to speak up in these moments, to call attention to employer practices that create unsafe working conditions made more dangerous by the current crisis, and to refuse to work in deadly worksites," said Rebecca Dixon, Executive Director of the National Employment Law Project. "We cannot allow Amazon to retaliate against whistleblowers and silence a disproportionately Black, Latinx, and indigenous workforce, which, in the face of hazardous conditions, is courageously declaring 'We will not accept this," defending both worker and public health."
"While many of us get to stay home and wait out the pandemic, thousands of low-wage Amazon workers are showing up every day and risking their lives to keep Jeff Bezos' unsafe facilities running," said Sandra Fulton, government relations director for Free Press. "A great number of these frontline workers are members of Black and Brown communities that have been hardest hit by COVID-19. Amazon must do more to protect its workers of color, and recognize and reward their daily sacrifices. Instead, it's firing them for exercising their legally protected rights to organize and protest for safe and healthy working conditions."
"Black, brown, Muslim, immigrant workers are already heavily surveilled in their neighborhoods and in their homes. Amazon surveilling essential workers and firing whistleblowers who are bringing to light the horrific public health conditions inside Amazon warehouses in the middle of the deadly COVID-19 pandemic is appalling--but unsurprising. Amazon is already a leader in powering surveillance and state violence, as they provide technology for ICE's detention-deportation machine and partner with police departments via their doorbell camera, Ring," said Lau Barrios, Campaign Manager at MPower Change. "Amazon workers are organizing and taking unprecedented direct action to demand the bare minimum safety conditions because they understand and care about the health of our communities--not the richest man in the world's bottom line. This May Day, it's imperative that we stand with Amazon workers. Worker health is community health--and it's absolutely a racial justice issue."
The signing organizations include: Access Now, Action Center on Race and the Economy, AI Now, Alternate ROOTS, Athena Coalition, Black Alliance for Just Immigration, Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, Color of Change, Community Justice Exchange, Constitutional Alliance, Defending Rights & Dissent, Demand Progress Education Fund, Ella Baker Center, Fight for the Future, Free Press, Freedom of the Press Foundation, Global Action Project, Government Accountability Project, Instituto de Educacion Popular del Sur de California, Just Futures Law, Line Break Media,Make the Road New Jersey, Make the Road New York, Media Mobilizing Project, MediaJustice, MPower Change, Muslim Advocates, National Employment Law Project (NELP), National Immigration Law Center, New America Center on Education and Labor, New America's Open Technology Institute, New York Communities for Change, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Open Markets Institute, Open MIC (Open Media and Information Companies Initiative), Partnership for Working Families, People Demanding Action, People For the American Way, PeoplesHub, Project Censored, Project On Government Oversight, Public Citizen, RootsAction.org, RYSE Center, Secure Justice, Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP). The Awood Center, The Civil Liberties Defense Center, The Tully Center for Free Speech, United for Respect, United We Dream, Warehouse Worker Resource Center, Whistleblower & Source Protection, Program at ExposeFacts, Woodhull Freedom Foundation, XLab.
Fight for the Future is a group of artists, engineers, activists, and technologists who have been behind the largest online protests in human history, channeling Internet outrage into political power to win public interest victories previously thought to be impossible. We fight for a future where technology liberates -- not oppresses -- us.
(508) 368-3026"Drug suspects should be arrested and prosecuted, not summarily executed," a human rights expert said.
The Trump administration continued its illegal bombing of small boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific on Friday, killing two and leaving one survivor in its third such strike in five days.
US Southern Command announced the attack on social media, claiming that "intelligence confirmed the vessel was transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific and was engaged in narco-trafficking operations."
"Under [President Donald] Trump's illegal orders, the US military conducted its third boat strike in five days against supposed drug smugglers, killing at least two. Each of these is a murder. Drug suspects should be arrested and prosecuted, not summarily executed," former Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth wrote on social media Saturday in response to the news.
Friday's strike marks the 57th by the Trump administration and raises the death toll from the boat-strike campaign, which experts say is illegal even if every boat targeted is ferrying drugs, to 192.
"Really absurdly, there’s been no impact on flows of drugs toward the United States."
"What do you call a US citizen who smuggles drugs, SOUTHCOM? A 'narco-terrorist'?" social media user Andrew Marinelli said in response to the Southern Command announcement. "If a US citizen [allegedly] drove drugs into Canada and they blew him away with a drone strike, would you accept it?"
The administration has also not provided evidence for its claims that the boats belong to drug traffickers, and relatives of the victims say at least some of those killed were simply on the water to fish.
Friday's strike was notable in that it left behind a survivor and that US Southern Command said it had activated the US Coast Guard to conduct a search and rescue operation.
The announcement may reflect a response to backlash after news broke last year that, in the administration's first such strike, commanders had ordered a vessel bombed twice when it became clear there were survivors, in keeping with Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth's directive to "kill everybody."
Despite scrutiny, the campaign has continued and even escalated in the past few weeks. There have been three such bombings since the beginning of May, according to The Intercept: One on May 4 in the Caribbean that killed two, one on May 5 in the Pacific that killed three, and the Pacific strike on May 8 that killed two. The reported survivor remains missing.
While the Trump administration claims the strikes have dramatically reduced the flow of illegal drugs into the US, evidence reveals this is not the case, according to an Intercept analysis published May 4.
For example, Trump claimed that drugs entering the US by sea had decreased by 97%, but the administration's own data contradicts this claim, retired Rear Adm. William Baumgartner told The Intercept.
Adam Isacson, the director for defense oversight at human rights group Washington Office on Latin America, said, "Really absurdly, there’s been no impact on flows of drugs toward the United States,” noting that Customs and Border Protection seized 6,000 pounds more cocaine at all US borders in the seven months following the strikes than in the seven months before.
As Sanho Tree, who directs the Institute for Policy Studies' Drug Policy Project, put it, "It wouldn’t be the first time this administration just made up something out of whole cloth."
"Across the South, states are rushing to suppress Black voting power now that they mistakenly believe they can get away with it," one advocate said.
In the latest fallout from the Supreme Court's further weakening of the Voting Rights Act in Louisiana v. Callais on April 29, Alabama and South Carolina on Friday both took steps to further gerrymandering plans that would reduce representation for Black and Democratic voters in their states.
Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signed legislation on Friday that would ignore the results of May 19 primaries and hold a new election if federal courts agree to rescind the creation of a second near-Black majority congressional district in the state.
At the same time, the South Carolina legislature held a meeting to consider creating new maps that could grant the Republican Party the chance to win all of the state's seven seats in the US House of Representatives by redrawing the state's only majority-Black district.
“I was out there in 1965 marching for the right to vote, and now we are back here in 2026 doing the same thing,” Betty White Boynton, who joined a protest outside the Alabama Statehouse on Friday, told The Associated Press.
“What happened here today is that we were set back as a people to the days of Reconstruction.”
The moves, with risk eroding the gains of the civil rights movement, also come in the midst of a redistricting battle set off when President Donald Trump called on GOP-led states to redraw their maps to help his party retain control of the House in the 2026 midterm elections
In Alabama, the Supreme Court case Allen v. Milligan led to the creation of a second district with close to a Black majority and the election of Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures. The new map would leave Black voters with a chance to elect a representative in just 1 of the state's 7 districts, despite the fact that they make up 30% of the population.
“Despite remaining under a court order that bars Alabama from redrawing its congressional map and that voters have already cast ballots in the state’s congressional primary elections, Alabama Republicans are desperately and shamelessly moving to pave the way for reversion to a map that robs Black voters of equal access to representation in the US House," John Bisognano, president of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said in a statement.
Bisognano continued: "What is happening in Alabama is not happening in a vacuum. Across the South, states are rushing to suppress Black voting power now that they mistakenly believe they can get away with it. The Alabama legislature’s fevered rush to diminish Black voting power in their state is clear proof that protections once afforded under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act remain vital still today. Alabamians across the state are rising up in protest to this immoral power grab—their voices must not be silenced.”
After the Republican-majority Alabama legislature passed the bill on Friday, state Sen. Rodger Smitherman (D-18) said, “What happened here today is that we were set back as a people to the days of Reconstruction,” according to AP.
However, it is unclear how successful the Republican effort will be in Alabama, given that the Supreme Court explicitly said in Louisiana v. Callais that its decision did not apply to Alabama, as Figures pointed out at a town hall Friday evening. Also on Friday, a three-judge panel refused to lift an injunction on changing the state's maps, meaning the decision will rest with the Supreme Court on Monday, May 11.
"I feel pretty confident that the lines will stay the same in the immediate future, but it has not changed the efforts of Republicans here in the state of Alabama and across the country," Figures said, as Alabama Reflector reported.
In South Carolina on Friday, legislators held a meeting that would be the first step toward redrawing their districts to eliminate the one currently represented by Democratic Congressman Jim Clyburn. While lawmakers agreed that the Supreme Court's ruling in Louisiana v. Callais would allow for the redistricting, some questioned the wisdom and morality of the act.
“I agree if the law allows us to do it, then we can do It,” state Rep. Justin Bamberg (D-90) said. “But I can slap somebody’s mama and it’s not the right thing to do.”
Bisognano also linked the South Carolina plan to Louisiana v. Callais:
Following the Supreme Court’s shameful decision to gut the Voting Rights Act, South Carolina Republicans are now racing to be second to push through an immoral gerrymander that would demolish the lone congressional district that gives South Carolina’s Black voters a meaningful opportunity for representation in the US House.
This gerrymander is a deliberate attempt by South Carolina Republicans to tear apart a long-standing Black-opportunity district and diminish their vote by spreading Black voters into six districts that stretch over a hundred miles in every direction. On this gerrymander, all South Carolinians would lose. South Carolinians deserve maps that respect communities of interest and protect the fundamental right to vote.
Rep. Clyburn, meanwhile, stood up for his district and criticized state Republicans for prioritizing loyalty to Trump over loyalty to voters.
"Republicans are trying to break apart South Carolina’s 6th District. Not because voters demanded it, but because Donald Trump requested it," Clyburn wrote on social media Thursday.
He continued: "This fight is bigger than one district. It’s about whether our democracy belongs to the people, or to politicians who change the rules when they don’t like the results. We cannot let them succeed."
The Alabama and South Carolina developments capped a dramatic week for national redistricting battles. On Thursday, the Tennessee House voted to break up the state's only Black congressional district. The Senate followed suit, and Gov. Bill Lee promptly signed the new map into law.
On Friday, the Virginia state Supreme Court dealt a blow to Democratic efforts to counteract the new Republican maps, striking down a voter-approved redistricting in Virginia that would favor Democrats.
They put me through a sham immigration process while guaranteeing the outcome in advance," Mahmoud Khalil said.
An immigration court decision that could hasten the deportation of Palestinian rights activist Mahmoud Khalil was marked by irregularities, including unusual speed and the recusals of several judges, The New York Times reported Friday.
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which is housed in the Department of Justice (DOJ) but is legally enjoined to make independent decisions, ruled on April 9 that Khalil could be deported from the US. However, documents obtained by the Times show that the case was fast-tracked in a manner that experts say is unusual.
"This is the due process the administration is offering me, corrupt and unprecedented," Khalil posted on social media Friday in response to the Times' reporting.
Khalil, a student leader of Columbia University protests against the Gaza genocide, was an early target of the Trump administration's crackdown on pro-Palestinian speech when he was abducted by Department of Homeland Security agents while returning to his New York home in March 2025. Despite being a permanent resident married to a US citizen, Khalil was detained in Louisiana for over three months, where he missed the birth of his son.
“In all my decades as an immigration lawyer, I have never seen such a baseless and politically motivated decision."
Despite the BIA's ruling, Khalil cannot be deported while his separate habeas corpus case proceeds through federal courts. However, the Times' reporting raises questions about how fairly he is being treated by the Trump administration and how quickly he could face removal if the federal case falls through.
"This story proves that the Trump administration's treatment of my case has always been corrupt and retaliatory. They put me through a sham immigration process while guaranteeing the outcome in advance," Khalil wrote.
According to the Times:
The case was considered high priority even before the board officially received it. A note from an internal case-tracking file from June said that, even though Mr. Khalil had been released several days earlier, the case was to be handled as if he were still in detention, which would speed it along.
"Please process as quickly as possible,” said another note, from October. Another document shows that the court’s chair—its highest ranking member—oversaw the case from early on.
The decision was made nine days after all the paperwork was submitted, a timeline that Biden BIA appointee Homero López called "unprecedented," as the board often takes years to decide similar cases.
“It’s an insane turnaround, particularly for such a high-profile case on a novel legal issue,” López, who was fired under President Donald Trump, told the Times.
At the same time, people familiar with the situation told the Times that at least three judges had recused themselves from the case, one before it was decided and the others once it became clear it would be published, meaning it would be considered precedent setting.
Former board judge Andrea Sáenz, also fired by Trump, told the Times that judges often recuse themselves because they have somehow been involved with the case before it is appealed.
“How many people touched this case when the immigration judge was handling it the first time?” Sáenz asked.
Former DOJ official David McConnell, who has experience with the immigration appeals process, said that both the quick processing and the recusals were "very unusual." However, he added this did not mean the board necessarily did anything wrong.
However, the BIA's decision was heavily criticized by Khalil's legal team in April, as it upholds Secretary of State Marco Rubio's determination that Khalil could be deported because his activism posed a threat to US foreign policy, which a federal judge in New Jersey said was "likely" unconstitutional and could not be the basis for his detention or deportation. It also justified removal on the grounds that Khalil omitted certain details on green card paperwork, but the government only added those charges after Rubio's foreign policy gambit was challenged.
“In all my decades as an immigration lawyer, I have never seen such a baseless and politically motivated decision. The BIA's decision has absolutely no support in the record, violates a federal court order, and we’ll be fighting it until the end,” Khalil's lead lawyer Marc Van Der Hout said in a statement when the decision was first issued. “Federal courts have already agreed that Mahmoud was targeted for his speech, and there is likely much more evidence of the government’s unlawful retaliation that has yet to come to light. This is a clear continuation of the administration’s retaliation against Mahmoud for exercising his First Amendment rights.”
Responding to the new reporting on Friday, Van Der Hout told the Times that the case's handling suggests it “has been controlled from Day 1 by higher-ups in the administration.”