SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Judge Strikes Down Anti-LGBT Bill in Mississippi Hours Before It Becomes Law
ACLU Celebrates Decision in Cases Brought By Civil Rights Advocates
JACKSON, Miss.
In the early hours of the morning, a federal judge struck down the entirety of an anti-LGBT measure that was slated to become law today. The law would have allowed public officials and businesses to refuse to serve LGBT individuals. The ACLU and the ACLU of Mississippi challenged the constitutionality of HB1523 in a separate lawsuit, Alford v. Moulder.
ACLU of Mississippi Executive Director Jennifer Riley-Collins had this response:
"We are thrilled that Judge Reeves ruled on the right side of history in striking down House Bill 1523 and congratulate our allies who brought these cases. This is a huge victory for the state of Mississippi and the nation. The federal ruling clearly states that HB 1523 is unconstitutional, and now this discriminatory law that unfairly targeted LGBT people will not go into effect. One religious view of marriage should not preclude all others or federal law.
"The Supreme Court made it clear one year ago that same-sex couples ought not be treated any differently than different-sex couples. HB 1523, on its face, created a separate system for our clients, Nykolas and Stephen, and for all LGBT Mississippians. That is discrimination, plain and simple."
"While we celebrate this win in the short term, the battle continues to secure full equal rights for LGBT people. The ACLU of Mississippi will continue to stand firmly against discrimination and in solidarity with the LGBT community. We remain vigilant in the fight for equality and justice for all."
The two cases that were considered were Barber v. Bryant and Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant, brought by the Campaign for Southern Equality and the Mississippi Center for Justice. The ACLU and ACLU of Mississippi filed one of the other lawsuits brought to defeat HB1523, Alford v. Moulder. The suit targets the Registrar of Vital Records and was filed on behalf of ACLU of Mississippi members and Nykolas Alford and Stephen Thomas, a gay couple who are engaged to be married and face discrimination as a result of this law.
Read more about the ACLU's case here: https://www.aclu.org/cases/alford-v-moulder
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
'Big Day... for Justice': US Jury Finds Contractor CACI Liable for Abu Ghraib Torture
"This victory is a shining light for everyone who has been oppressed and a strong warning to any company or contractor practicing different forms of torture and abuse," said one of the Iraqi plaintiffs.
Nov 12, 2024
In a landmark verdict cheered by human rights defenders around the world, a federal jury in Virginia found a U.S. military contractor liable for the torture of three prisoners at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison during the invasion and occupation of Iraq in the early 2000s.
The jury ordered CACI Premier Technology to pay each of the three Iraqi plaintiffs $3 million in compensatory damages and $11 million in punitive damages, for a total of $42 million. It is the first time that a civilian contractor has been found legally responsible for abusing Abu Ghraib detainees.
The lawsuit against CACI—filed in 2008 by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of Suhail Al Shimari, Asa'ad Al Zuba'e, and Salah Al-Ejaili—alleged that company officials conspired with U.S. military personnel in subjecting the plaintiffs to torture and other crimes.
As CCR noted Tuesday:
The plaintiffs brought their case under the Alien Tort Statute, a 1789 federal law that allows foreign nationals to seek redress in U.S. courts for certain violations of international law. This historic outcome follows 16 years of litigation, more than 20 attempts by CACI to have the case dismissed, and a previous trial in which the jury was unable to reach a verdict. Never before this case had survivors of U.S. post-9/11 torture testified in a U.S. courtroom. It also featured testimony from U.S. generals, CACI employees, and former [military police officers] involved in the torture.
"Today is a big day for me and for justice," said Al-Ejaili. "I've waited a long time for this day."
"This victory isn't only for the three plaintiffs in this case against a corporation," he added. "This victory is a shining light for everyone who has been oppressed and a strong warning to any company or contractor practicing different forms of torture and abuse."
CCR legal director Baher Azmy said that "our clients have fought bravely for 16 years in search of justice for the horrors they endured at Abu Ghraib, against all of the challenges this massive private military contractor threw in their way over the years to avoid basic accountability for its role in this shameful episode in American history."
"We are awed by our clients' courage and by the power of their testimony in court, and we are grateful that this jury knew enough to credit their story over the deflections of CACI," Azmy added. "We thank the jury for affording our clients the measure of justice they came to a United States court to seek."
Like Guantánamo Bay, Abu Ghraib became a byword for U.S. torture during the Bush administration as it waged a worldwide war on terrorism following the September 11, 2001 attacks. The prison's worldwide notoriety stems from the leak and publication in 2004 of photos showing U.S. troops torturing and abusing Abu Ghraib detainees, both living and dead, often with smiles on their faces.
A 2004 investigation by U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Anthony Jones and Maj. Gen. George Fay found that CACI employees participated in and encouraged the torture of Abu Ghraib prisoners.
Investigators found that employees of CACI and Titan Corporation (now L3 Technologies) tortured Abu Ghraib detainees and encouraged U.S. troops to do likewise. Dozens of Abu Ghraib detainees died in U.S. custody, some of them as a result of being tortured to death. Abu Ghraib prisoners endured torture ranging from rape and being attacked with dogs to being forced to eat pork and renounce Islam.
A separate U.S. Army report concluded that most Abu Ghraib prisoners were innocent, with the Red Cross estimating that between 70-90% of inmates there were wrongfully detained. These include women who were held as bargaining chips to induce suspected militants to surrender.
Eleven low-ranking U.S. soldiers were convicted and jailed for their roles in Abu Ghraib torture. Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the prison's commanding officer, was demoted. No other high-ranking military officer faced accountability for the abuse. Senior Bush administration officials—who had authorized many of the "enhanced interrogation techniques" used at prisons including Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay—lied about their knowledge of the torture. None of them were ever held accountable.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No Excuses': Tlaib Says Every House Dem Should Vote to Defend Nonprofits
The Michigan Democrat warned that the bill "gives Trump and his incoming administration dictatorial powers to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies without due process."
Nov 12, 2024
U.S. Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib on Tuesday was among multiple progressives and other Democrats who forcefully spoke out against legislation that would empower President-elect Donald Trump to strip nonprofits of their tax-exempt status.
Highlighting a letter that a diverse coalition led by the ACLU sent to Congress in September, Tlaib (D-Mich.) took aim at H.R. 9495, or the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, on social media.
"No excuses," she said. "Every single one of my Democratic colleagues should be voting against this bill that gives Trump and his incoming administration dictatorial powers to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies without due process."
Tlaib, the only Palestinian American in Congress, has been a leading critic of U.S. support for the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip. H.R. 9495 is widely seen as an effort to further crack down on protests against the ongoing assault, though opponents of the proposal warn it could also be used to target groups advocating for issues including the environment and reproductive freedom.
The bill would let the Treasury secretary designate an organization as "terrorist-supporting" without any explanation or proof, and then end its 501(c)(3) status. That language is paired with legislation to provide tax relief for people detained or held hostage abroad and their spouses, a decision that critics say was made to force through the nonprofit policy.
Multiple members of Congress spoke out against the proposed attack on nonprofits both online and on the House floor, where the bill was debated and then a recorded vote was requested and postponed on Tuesday evening.
"H.R. 9495 is a giant threat to free speech," declared progressive Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.). "It gives Trump unchecked power to label any nonprofit as 'terrorist-supporting' without evidence or due process—opening the door to crush his opposition and silence dissent."
Tlaib and Lee's fellow "Squad" member Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) similarly warned that "this is a dangerous threat to free speech. No one person should have the authority to silence organizations that dare to challenge government policies or speak uncomfortable truths."
Congresswoman Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) stressed that "dissent is a fundamental part of democracy."
"Emboldened by the possibility of an unchallenged campaign of retaliation and persecution, Republicans are bringing H.R. 9495 to the floor AGAIN to give Trump the power to brand any organization that opposes him or his administration as a 'terrorist,'" she said. "I voted no once, and I will be voting NO again!"
A version of the policy targeting nonprofits previously passed the Republican-held House in April but stalled in the Democrat-controlled Senate. In addition to a White House victory in last week's election, the GOP won both chambers of Congress—meaning that even if H.R. 9495 fails now, it could be revived again next year.
Two outgoing House progressives who lost primaries to candidates backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—Reps. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.)—also blasted H.R. 9495 on Tuesday.
"H.R. 9495 would give Donald Trump unprecedented power to shut down any nonprofit or group that he disagrees with," said Bush. "This is a dangerous threat to our democracy. Congress must vote NO and stop it in its tracks."
Bowman argued that it "will sink us further into authoritarianism. It is an extremely dangerous bill that would give the government unlimited power to stop the work of humanitarian groups and target political enemies. All without transparency or evidence."
"This bill puts organizations like American Muslims for Palestine, American Immigration Council, and ColorOfChange at risk along with so many others doing the critical work of advocating for human rights and making sure starving children are fed and cared for," he continued. "The effects of H.R. 9495 aren't limited to just those organizations. Any nonprofit that crosses the executive branch could be targeted."
"This is authoritarianism and no Democrat should support this bill," Bowman added. "The unchecked powers granted by H.R. 9495 are ripe for abuse and any member of Congress who votes yes on it cannot honestly claim to support peace, justice, and freedom of speech."
Advocacy groups also continued to sound the alarm about the legislation ahead of the anticipated House vote.
"In any other context, this legislation would be seen for what it is, a play from the authoritarian leader's playbook," Paul O'Brien, executive director at Amnesty International USA, said in a Tuesday statement. "Members of Congress must recognize the danger posed and vote down this bill that could shrink civic space and silence civil society organizations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Global Fury After State Dept Claims Israel Not Violating US Law by Blocking Gaza Aid
"This will be the Biden administration's legacy: unconditional support for war crimes and complicity in genocide," said one group.
Nov 12, 2024
Human rights advocates around the world reacted angrily to Tuesday's U.S. State Department determination that Israel is not violating humanitarian law—even as its forces annihilate Gaza and block aid from entering the embattled Palestinian enclave.
Last month, the Biden administration—which has approved tens of billions of dollars in military aid for Israel and provided nearly unconditional diplomatic support since October 2023—sent a letter to the Israeli government threatening to cut off U.S. arms transfers if it failed to take "urgent and sustained actions" to improve humanitarian conditions in Gaza within 30 days.
Asked during a Tuesday press conference if the Israeli government has met the letter's demands, State Department spokesperson Vedant Patel said that "we have not made an assessment that they are in violation of U.S. law."
"The overall humanitarian situation in Gaza continues to be unsatisfactory," Patel continued. "But in the context of the letter, it's not about whether we find something satisfactory or not; it's what are the actions that we're seeing."
"These actions that we have seen, we think that these are steps in the right direction," he added, citing the limited reopening of the Erez border crossing between Gaza and Israel. "We want to see more steps. We want to see these steps sustained over a significant period of time, and ultimately, we want to see these steps have a result on the situation."
Patel insisted that the Biden administration is "not giving Israel a pass."
However, humanitarian aid groups accuse Israel of causing " apocalyptic" conditions in northern Gaza, where thousands of civilians including many women and children have been killed or wounded while others face imminent famine under a plan to starve out the population in order to ethnically cleanse the area.
On Tuesday, a coalition of eight international humanitarian groups including Oxfam International, CARE, Norwegian Refugee Council, Save the Children, and others published a report titled The Gaza Scorecard: Israel Fails to Comply With U.S. Humanitarian Access Demands in Gaza, which found that Israel has failed to fully comply with any of the 19 specific demands in the Biden administration's letter.
The scorecard noted:
The principals of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee now assess that "the entire Palestinian population in North Gaza is at imminent risk of dying from disease, famine, and violence." The findings of this scorecard underscore Israel's failure to comply with U.S. demands and international obligations. Israel should be held accountable for the end result of failing to ensure the adequate provision of food, medical, and other supplies to reach people in need.
"While Israel manipulates the U.S. by allowing some aid trucks into other parts of Gaza in the days leading up to the deadline, the performative act did not bring any humanitarian aid to the besieged northern neighborhoods of Gaza," said Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN). "Even more concerning, no forcibly displaced Palestinian from the northern neighborhoods of Gaza has been allowed to return home."
Indeed, the IDF said it has "no intention of allowing the residents of the northern Gaza Strip to return to their homes."
At the same time, relief workers describe deadly dangers faced by Palestinians who try to flee besieged areas including the Jabalia refugee camp, site of some of the war's worst massacres, including indiscriminate Israeli targeting of refugees without regard for age or gender.
The International Court of Justice in The Hague is in the lengthy process of determining if Israel's atrocities amount to violations of the Genocide Convention. While it is weighing the evidence in the South Africa-led case, the ICJ has issued a series of provisional orders directing Israel to prevent genocidal acts, halt its assault on Rafah, and stop blocking humanitarian aid from entering Gaza. Critics accuse Israel of flouting all three orders.
"As a signatory to the Genocide Convention, the U.S. is obligated to prevent acts of genocide and to avoid complicity in them," DAWN stressed on Tuesday. "The U.S. should halt its military support for Israel to comply with its convention obligations and uphold international legal norms."
This is not the first time that the Biden administration has officially denied that Israel has violated humanitarian law during the Gaza war. In March, the State Department accepted Israel's assertion that the country is using U.S.-supplied arms in compliance with international law, even as more than 100,000 Palestinians had been killed or wounded in Gaza up to that date. The casualty figure has since increased by about 50%.
Congressional progressives and human rights groups pushed back on the Biden administration's claim. In April, a leaked memo revealed that officials at the United States Agency for International Development warned Secretary of State Antony Blinken that Israel was indeed breaking the law by blocking aid from entering Gaza. Another leaked State Department memo raised "serious concern" over Israeli noncompliance with humanitarian law and slammed Israel's claims of legal U.S. weapons use as "neither credible nor reliable."
Palestine advocates fear the Biden administration's refusal to suspend arms shipments to Israel—as experts argue is required under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and Leahy Laws—will open the door for Republican President-elect Donald Trump to back Israeli crimes such as the annexation of Palestinian territories including the West Bank.
"By spending over a year ignoring U.S. law on supplying arms, the Biden administration has handed Trump an excuse to ignore any law he wants," Center for International Policy executive vice president Matt Duss said Tuesday on social media. "And they will have nothing to say about it."
Duss called the Biden administration's new determination "predictable, pathetic, and blatantly illegal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular