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
executive order
Judge Blocks Trump Effort to Dismantle Education Department
"The White House is not above the law, and we will never stop fighting on behalf of our students and our public schools and the protections, services, and resources they need to thrive," said one union leader.
May 22, 2025
A federal judge on Thursday halted the Trump administration's efforts to shut down the U.S. Department of Education and ordered that some 1,300 employees who were let go in March be reinstated.
The department can't be shut down without assent from Congress, yet the "record abundantly reveals that defendants' true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute," wrote U.S. District Judge Myong Joun.
On March 11, the Trump administration announced it was firing over 1,300 staff, effectively halving the agency when combined with other staff reductions, such as the administration's "Fork in the Road" email, according to court filings.
Then, on March 20, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order aiming to begin the process of closing the DOE "to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law," and turning over education to the states and local communities.
On Thursday, the court issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Trump administration from carrying out the reductions announced on March 11, and ordered the administration to reinstate those employees. It also bars the Trump administration from implementing the executive order and a related directive given out the following day.
By issuing a preliminary injunction, the court has ruled to keep the status quo in place while the underlying issue is disputed.
The plaintiffs in the suit, who include the Somerville Public School Committee, the Easthampton School District, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), AFT Massachusetts, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Council 93, American Association of University Professors (AAUP), and Service Employees International Union (SEIU), cheered the decision on Thursday.
Ilana Krepchin, chair of the Somerville School Committee, said the group is "deeply encouraged" by the court's decision.
AFT Massachusetts president Jessica Tang said that "the White House is not above the law, and we will never stop fighting on behalf of our students and our public schools and the protections, services, and resources they need to thrive."
"Today, the court rightly rejected one of the administration's very first illegal, and consequential, acts: abolishing the federal role in education," added AFT president Randi Weingarten.
In court, the educators, professors, school districts, and unions had argued that by getting rid of the staff required to meet Congress's requirements, the Trump administration was unlawfully abolishing the DOE and its "statutorily mandated" parts. The judge said that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in demonstrating that the Trump administration is effectively undercutting the DOE ability to carry out its statutory duties.
"A department without enough employees to perform statutorily mandated functions is not a department at all. This court cannot be asked to cover its eyes while the department's employees are continuously fired and units are transferred out until the department becomes a shell of itself," the district court wrote.
The nonprofit legal group Democracy Forward is representing the plaintiffs in court.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Supreme Court Hears Birthright Citizenship Case, Trump Ripped for Attack on Core Constitutional Right
"Any effort to narrow or lift the nationwide injunction on this case would lead to chaos, allowing birthright citizenship to be denied in some states but not others," one campaigner warned.
May 15, 2025
As President Donald Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship got a "frosty" reception at the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, opponents of the Republican's executive order renewed criticism of both that and his broader anti-migrant agenda.
"The Constitution is crystal clear: All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States. As was reaffirmed in court this morning, birthright citizenship is a foundational American principle that has strengthened our communities, our families, and our whole country for generations," FWD.us president Todd Schulte said in a statement after oral arguments.
"Any effort to narrow or lift the nationwide injunction on this case would lead to chaos, allowing birthright citizenship to be denied in some states but not others," he continued. "If the Supreme Court sides with the government, the country will be split in half, with some states granting citizenship to newborn babies and the others denying it. The human cost of siding with the government cannot be overstated."
Schulte warned that "children born in the United States could be denied healthcare, nutrition, Social Security numbers, and other essential services that Congress has made available to all citizens. Children could be subject to deportation even though their parents (for example, someone with a lawful work visa) could not be legally deported."
"It is not a stretch to believe that an administration that is paying other countries to indefinitely detain immigrants will leverage the threats to deport this new undocumented class of children to force whole families here legally to leave the U.S.," he added. "The Supreme Court should be as clear as the Constitution, and rule that ending birthright citizenship, even partially or temporarily, is wrong, unlawful, and should not be allowed."
According toPolitico:
Trump's executive order purporting to end birthright citizenship found no traction Thursday at the Supreme Court, but the justices sounded inclined to rein in a legal remedy judges have used to halt many of Trump's early policy moves, from restricting immigration to cutting federal spending to ending anti-diversity initiatives.
Three district judges have deployed that tool—known as a nationwide injunction—to block Trump from implementing his birthright citizenship order. None of the justices spoke up in defense of the order's legality during more than two hours of oral arguments, and several suggested that the order is almost surely unconstitutional.
The Associated Pressreported that Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices Thursday that judges have issued 40 nationwide injunctions since Trump returned to office for a second term in January.
The high court—which has a right-wing supermajority that includes three Trump appointees—is expected to rule by June. A decision limiting the power of federal judges could impact various other ongoing cases.
As the ACLU said on social media: "Today, the Supreme Court considered judges' power to block unlawful actions by the Trump administration. While this wasn't our case, we're united in mission to protect our civil liberties."
If the President is arguing to strip federal judges of the power to stop him from flagrantly violating the 14th Amendment citizenship rights of Americans - literally rendering some children stateless persons - that context is germane to argument about the legitimate use of the federal court’s power.
[image or embed]
— Sherrilyn Ifill (@sifill.bsky.social) May 15, 2025 at 5:58 PM
Congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), a daughter of immigrants and citizen by birthright, responded to Trump's order by introducing federal legislation on Thursday that would block his attack on the core constitutional right: the Born in the USA Act.
"Trump has posed the question of who gets to be an American. The fact is that every citizen not naturalized in this country is a citizen by birthright. And it is important to remember that our nation's history would not be complete without the children of immigrants who, like me, are citizens by birthright and pride themselves on being AMERICANS," Ramirez said in a statement.
"I am both a daughter of immigrants and the daughter of America; a proud Chapina and an American by birthright," she highlighted. "It is my honor to lead 109 members of Congress to ensure not a single dollar goes to Trump's illegal, unconstitutional attempt to undermine our Constitution, our rights, our liberties, and the soul of our nation."
Although Ramirez's bill is unlikely to advance, given that Republicans control not only the White House but also both chambers of Congress, its supporters include Hispanic Caucus Chair Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), Asian Pacific American Caucus Chair Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Black Caucus Chair Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), and Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.).
The companion bill, introduced by Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) in February, has support from 14 other members of the Senate Democratic Caucus. The legislation is also backed by several local and national groups, including the ACLU, National Immigration Law Center, FWD.us, Haitian Bridge Alliance, Immigration Hub, UndocuBlack, and more.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's Rogue Deep-Sea Mining Order Endangers Our Ocean and Our Future
We must defend international law. We must defend the oceans. And we must reject a broken economic model that gambles our planet's future for corporate gain.
May 01, 2025
On April 24, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to fast-track deep-sea mining in U.S. and international waters that sidelines international law and puts fragile ocean ecosystems, Indigenous rights, and millions of lives that depend on a healthy ocean at risk.
While this is being sold to the American public as a bold move to secure America's mineral supply chain, address climate change, or boost the clean energy transition, science and the tech and auto industries have already debunked that ruse. In the current climate, it will surprise very few that this is instead another giveaway to well-heeled corporate interests that will gamble away the health of our oceans and future for the short-term profit of a few corporations.
Once destroyed, deep-sea ecosystems are likely gone forever, taking with them species and processes vital to planetary health.
The Broligarchy is not just burning fossil fuels and sending rockets into space or dismantling American institutions. They are also gearing up to mine the depths of our last great wilderness in the deep sea. And as we've seen, they won't let details like the well-founded concerns about the cost to people, the climate, or our shared future get in their way.
Breaking the Rules of the Global Commons
For decades, the international community has worked through the United Nation's International Seabed Authority (ISA) to regulate whether and how deep-sea mining might proceed, recognizing the deep sea as the "common heritage of humankind," not a resource to be plundered by any one country or corporation.
Trump's executive order tramples that principle of shared stewardship, reviving a Cold War-era U.S. law that bypasses the U.N. framework and green-lights corporate plunder of the seafloor. This reckless move undermines global legal norms, threatens to unravel international cooperation, and could trigger an unregulated race for the ocean's resources at a time when stronger protections are most needed. As ISA Secretary General Leticia Carvalho warns, dismantling multilateral ocean governance threatens the very foundations of global cooperation, setting a dangerous precedent for the future of all shared global commons.
A Business Model Built on Sand
The economic case for deep-sea mining is collapsing. There is no current shortage of minerals like cobalt or nickel, and advances in battery chemistry, recycling, circular economy models, and alternative materials are rapidly reducing projected future demands for deep-sea minerals. Even if mining started today, it would likely take more than a decade for the industry to bring deep-sea minerals to market at scale.
Early ventures like Nautilus Minerals and Loke Marine Minerals have already failed, exposing the financial risks. On Tuesday, The Metals Company (TMC) upped the ante on its risky bet to fast-track deep-sea mining when it submitted its application under the U.S. Seabed Mining Code to begin commercial mining in areas licensed by the International Seabed Authority. For the president, with his track record on casinos, backing a company like TMC is a gamble whose cost will be borne by coastal communities, Indigenous rights, and investors alike.
Americans already face $150 billion annually in costs from climate change. And our children and grandchildren born in 2024 may have to bear the weight of $500,000 over their lifetime. We can't afford to absorb the cost of another failed venture while the billionaire class does not even pay their fair share of taxes and does little to fix the problems their corporations have created.
A New Colonialism in the Pacific
Perhaps most shamefully, Trump's executive order green-lights a new wave of colonialism, opening the deep sea of Pacific waters to corporate plunder without the consent of Pacific Peoples—communities whose lives, cultures, and economies are deeply intertwined with the ocean.
Trump's executive order shows exactly why the world needs a strong, binding global moratorium on deep-sea mining.
The Pacific has already spoken: American Samoa, Hawai'i, and several Pacific Island nations have called for moratoriums to protect their fisheries and heritage. Indigenous leaders have made it clear—the deep sea is not a sacrifice zone. Yet TMC, which leveraged its partnership with Nauru to fast-track negotiations at the ISA, is now looking to shift its strategy and cut deals under U.S. law, sidelining Pacific voices.
By moving to open adjacent U.S. federal waters for mining, without meaningful consultation, the United States perpetuates a familiar and painful pattern of resource extraction without consent. We cannot allow history to repeat itself in the deep sea.
No Science. No Safeguards. No Justification.
Despite industry assurances, we still know remarkably little about the deep ocean. In mining target zones such as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, over 90% of species have yet to be formally described by science, and essential life-sustaining ecosystem functions like carbon sequestration and nutrient cycling are barely understood.
There is no credible scientific evidence demonstrating that deep-sea mining can be conducted without causing irreversible harm, nor any proven way to prevent, mitigate, or repair it. Once destroyed, deep-sea ecosystems are likely gone forever, taking with them species and processes vital to planetary health.
This week's congressional hearing on deep-sea mining underscores the urgent need for democratic oversight of an industry advancing without sufficient scientific, legal, or public scrutiny. Congress must act to protect the public interest, not hand over our oceans to private companies chasing speculative profits.
The Path Forward: A Global Moratorium
With a dearth of independent science, no enforceable global safeguards, and no justification, deep-sea mining isn't just risky--it's reckless.
Trump's executive order shows exactly why the world needs a strong, binding global moratorium on deep-sea mining.
We must defend international law. We must defend the oceans. And we must reject a broken economic model that gambles our planet's future for corporate gain.
The deep sea belongs to all of us, and we have a duty to protect it, not destroy it. The future of the oceans—and the future stability of global commons governance—demands nothing less.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular