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.
WASHINGTON - Statement from the President and CEO, Rachel Bronson, PhD, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists:
The year just past proved perilous and chaotic, a year in which many of the risks foreshadowed in our last Clock statement came into full relief. In 2017, we saw reckless language in the nuclear realm heat up already dangerous situations and re-learned that minimizing evidence-based assessments regarding climate and other global challenges does not lead to better public policies.
Although the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists focuses on nuclear risk, climate change, and emerging technologies, the nuclear landscape takes center stage in this year's Clock statement. Major nuclear actors are on the cusp of a new arms race, one that will be very expensive and will increase the likelihood of accidents and misperceptions. Across the globe, nuclear weapons are poised to become more rather than less usable because of nations' investments in their nuclear arsenals. This is a concern that the Bulletin has been highlighting for some time, but momentum toward this new reality is increasing.
As you will see in the discussion that follows, the Bulletin's Science and Security Board has once again assessed progress--actually, lack thereof--in managing the technologies that can bring humanity both relief and harm. It is my hope that the statement focuses world attention on today's dangerous trajectory and urges leaders and citizens alike to redouble their efforts in committing to a path that advances the health and safety of the planet. The Board has provided recommendations for how we might go about achieving this end, and it is urgent that we take heed.
I commend the members of the Science and Security Board for the work they undertake every day to put us on a safer footing. As always, John Mecklin's talented pen has helped pull together wide-ranging contributions and allowed a large group of engaged experts to speak with one voice. The Bulletin couldn't serve its proper role without financial support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the MacArthur Foundation, and the many other foundations, corporations, and individuals who contribute regularly to the Bulletin's mission. We are deeply grateful for this ongoing support.
It is urgent that, collectively, we put in the work necessary to produce a 2019 Clock statement that rewinds the Doomsday Clock. Get engaged, get involved, and help create that future. The time is now.
The Bulletin equips the public, policymakers, and scientists with the information needed to reduce man-made threatsto our existence.
"On what legal basis can he treat the people of Maine differently depending on if their governor apologizes to him? None," wrote one Georgetown University professor.
U.S. President Donald Trump took to his social media platform Truth Social on Saturday to demand an apology from Maine Gov. Janet Mills, a Democratic, after the two had a heated exchange at the White House in February over an executive order banning transgender women and girls from playing in women's sports.
This new scrutiny on Maine comes as the state has been subject to numerous probes and funding cuts following that exchange that "have been widely interpreted as retaliatory," according to the local outlet the Maine Morning Star.
"While the state of Maine has apologized for their governor's strong, but totally incorrect, statement about men playing in women's sports while at the White House House Governor's Conference, we have not heard from the governor herself, and she is the one that matters in such cases," Trump wrote on Truth Social.
"Therefore, we need a full throated apology from the governor herself, and a statement that she will never make such an unlawful challenge to the federal government again, before this case can be settled," he added.
The statement, according to Politico, implied that the Trump administration would continue to target Maine unless Trump receives the apology he wants.
"King Trump demands an apology from the Governor of Maine because she embarrassed him" wrote former NBCUniversal studio executive Mike Sington. "Pathetic."
Multiple outlets reporting on the remarks from Trump noted it was not immediately clear what Trump meant when he said that the "state of Maine" had apologized.
On Saturday, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows wrote on Bluesky: "Can confirm 'state of Maine' hasn't apologized. (As the official keeper of all state records and guardian of the seal ;))."
Jonathan Ladd, an associate professor Georgetown University's public policy school, wrote that "Trump is constitutionally required to take care that U.S. laws be faithfully executed. On what legal basis can he treat the people of Maine differently depending on if their governor apologizes to him? None."
The dispute between Trump and Mills stems from an interaction at a White House event as part of the National Governors Association on February 21.
"We're going to follow the law sir. We'll see you in court," Mills told the president in a heated exchange, referring to the Maine Human Rights Act, which was amended four yeas ago to include gender identity as a protected class. Mills and Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey have argued that the law supersedes the president's edict barring transgender girls from participating in sports that match their gender identity.
Since that episode, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services investigated and found Maine to be in violation of Title IX for allowing transgender girls to compete in women's sports, the U.S. Department of Agriculture launched and resolved a probe into the University of Maine System's Title IX compliance, and the Trump administration briefly imposed an end to the practice of allowing parents to register their newborns for a social security card at the hospital, among other measures.
"The American people will not allow Trump to move us into oligarchy and authoritarianism. We will fight back. We will win," said Sanders.
On the heels of record-breaking attendance at a "Fighting Oligarchy" event in Tempe, Arizona earlier this week, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York held a rally in Denver, Colorado on Friday evening that drew more than 34,000 people—making it largest event that Sanders or Ocasio-Cortez have ever held.
Sanders, an Independent, wrote on social media on Friday that the turnout is a sign that "the American people will not allow Trump to move us into oligarchy and authoritarianism. We will fight back. We will win."
According to Anna Bahr, Sanders' communications director, the senator's largest rally prior to Denver took place in Brooklyn, New York in 2016, when he was running for president.
Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat, wrote online that "something special is happening... Working people are ready to stand together and fight for our democracy. Thank you Colorado!"
At the rally, which took place at Denver's Civic Center Park, the two lawmakers hit on the same themes they spoke about in Arizona.
"The American people are saying loud and clear, we will not accept an oligarchic form of society," Sanders said, according to Colorado Public Radio. "We will not accept the richest guy in the world running all over Washington, making cuts to the Social Security Administration, cuts to the Veterans Administration, almost destroying the Department of Education—all so that they could give over a trillion dollars in tax breaks to the wealthiest 1%."
"If you don't know your neighbor, it's easier to turn on them," said Ocasio-Cortez, per CPR. "That's why they want to keep us separated, alone, and apart. Scrolling on our phones thinking that the person next to us is some kind of enemy, but they're not."
Sanders launched his "Fighting Oligarchy: Where We Go From Here" tour in February, with the aim of talking to Americans about the "takeover of the national government by billionaires and large corporations, and the country's move toward authoritarianism."
The series of "Fighting Oligarchy" events have been taking place as some Democrats have gotten an earful at town halls back home, where constituents have come out to implore them to do more to counter efforts by the Trump administration.
Earlier in the day, Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders also held a rally in Greeley, Colorado—which is represented by Republican Gabe Evans in the House of Representatives—which drew more than 11,000 people.
Semaforreporter David Weigel, who attended both the Greely and Denver rally, posted online that at the Greeley rally it wasn't easy to find people in the crowd who had voted for Sanders in the 2020 presidential primary. Weigel also wrote that the Sanders team told him that half of the RSVPs to the rallies were not from the lawmaker's supporter list.
Eric Blanc, an assistant professor the School of Management and Labor Relations at Rutgers University, wrote on Bluesky on Saturday that it is "pretty remarkable how AOC and Bernie have become leaders not just of lefties, but of the Democratic Party's mainstream liberal base."
While its dangerous that "establishment liberals" are yielding to Trump, he wrote, "the silver lining is that this has enabled anti-corporate forces such as labor unions and AOC-Bernie to set the tenor of Resistance 2.0."
"Because today's anti-Trump resistance is more focused on economic concerns, more rooted in labor unions, and more anti-billionaire, it has the potential to sink much deeper roots among working people and, in so doing, to definitively overcome MAGA," wrote Blanc.
"Columbia's capitulation to fascist government intervention is so severe when you really look at the details," wrote an assistant professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Columbia University received a wave of criticism on Friday after it agreed to a number of demands from the Trump administration as part of negotiations over $400 million in federal grants and contracts that the Trump administration had pulled due to the school's alleged "inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students."
The school agreed to a ban on masks and to appoint a senior vice provost with broad power to oversee both the department of Middle East, South Asian, and African Studied and the school's Center for Palestine Studies, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the news. Also, Columbia has hired over 30 "special officers" who will have the ability to remove individuals from campus and arrest them, per the memo from the school announcing the update.
On Friday evening, writer Ross Barkan wrote on X, "I confess I don't get Columbia folding. Don't they have an endowment worth many billions? Very rich alumni? Alumni who hate Trump? They could do a massive 'resistance' fundraiser to make up for lost federal dollars. Very odd and very weak." Others echoed this sentiment.
"Columbia's capitulation to fascist government intervention is so severe when you really look at the details," wrote Nour Joudah, an assistant professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, on X. "This is pathetic."
Leaders at Columbia's Knight First Amendment Institute expressed sadness. "The administration held up the university at gunpoint, but I can't help but feel that Columbia has lost something it may never regain," wrote the litigation director at the Knight Institute, Alex Abdo, on Friday.
Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight Institute, wrote on Bluesky that it is "a sad day for Columbia and for our democracy."
The episode highlight's the Trump administration's escalating scrutiny of higher education.
In February, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order with the purported aim of rooting out antisemitism on college campuses, and has vowed to go after foreign-born students who have engaged in pro-Palestine protests, which he has deemed "anti-American activity." The Department of Education—which the Trump administration is endeavoring to shut down—has also launched investigations into dozens of universities over alleged "race-exclusionary practices."
But Columbia has so far been at the center of the administration's feud with universities. In a March 7 press release, members of Trump's Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism announced the cancellation of $400 million, and a day later immigration agents arrested a recent Columbia University graduate who played a major role in pro-Palestine demonstrations last year. The arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident, has been widely decried.
On March 13, the Trump administration sent a letter to Columbia University Interim President Katrina Armstrong outlining a series of steps that Columbia must comply with in order to maintain a "continued financial relationship" between the school and the government.
Among the nine demands was a call for disciplinary proceedings for students involved in last year's Gaza Solidarity Encampments and occupation of Hamilton Hall. The same day Columbia received the letter it issued expulsions, multi-year suspensions, and temporary degree revocations for students involved in the Hamilton occupation.
An senior administrator at Columbia told the Journal that the university had considered legal challenges to resist the demands, but decided that the federal government had too many ways to take back money from the university. Columbia has an endowment of about $15 billion, though according to the outlet it would not "take long for it to cease to operate in any recognizable form without government money."
"Additionally the school believed there was considerable overlap between needed campus changes and Trump's demands," according to the Journal.