

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.
"Let's be clear. Trump's arrest of Judge Dugan in Milwaukee has nothing to do with immigration. It has everything to do with his moving this country toward authoritarianism."
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders led congressional progressives on Friday in condemning the Trump administration's arrest of a county judge in Wisconsin for allegedly helping an undocumented man evade capture by federal immigration agents.
FBI agents arrested 65-year-old Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan, who faces felony charges of obstruction and concealing an individual, whom she is accused of giving refuge in her chambers as federal officers sought to arrest him.
In a statement accusing President Donald Trump of "illegally usurping congressional powers," Sanders (I-Vt.) said: "Let's be clear. Trump's arrest of Judge Dugan in Milwaukee has nothing to do with immigration. It has everything to do with his moving this country toward authoritarianism."
"Trump continues to demonstrate that he does not believe in the Constitution, the separation of powers, or the rule of law."
"He is suing media that he dislikes. He is attacking universities whose policies he disagrees with. He is intimidating major law firms who have opposed him," Sanders continued. "He is ignoring a 9-0 Supreme Courtdecision to bring Kilmar Abrego García back from El Salvador, where he was illegally sent. He is threatening to impeach judges who rule against him."
"Trump's latest attack on the judiciary and Judge Dugan is about one thing—unchecked power," the senator asserted. "He will attack and undermine any institution that stands in his way. Trump continues to demonstrate that he does not believe in the Constitution, the separation of powers, or the rule of law. He simply wants more and more power for himself."
"It is time for my colleagues in the Republican Party who believe in the Constitution to stand up to his growing authoritarianism," Sanders added.
Other progressive lawmakers also condemned Dugan's arrest, with Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) calling this "a red alert moment" that we "all must rise against."
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said on the social media site X: "Judge Dugan's arrest is outrageous and a fear tactic to our independent judiciary. Trump has always thought he was above the law, but now he's enabling his goons to push that limit as far as it can go. His reckless deportations and flaunting of the Constitution will fail."
Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.)
said on social media that "arresting judges is the kind of crackdown you see in a police state."
"This is how dictators take power," Lee warned. "They manufacture crises, undermine our institutions, and erode our checks and balances. If they'll come for one, they'll come for all."
Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) said that "Trump's playbook is simple: punish anyone who stands in his way."
"This ain't law and order—it's a rise of authoritarianism in real time," she added.
The FBI arrested a Wisconsin judge who stood up for due process for immigrants. This is unprecedented. All of us need to stand up and speak out against arresting judges in this country. We are living in dangerous times.
[image or embed]
— Rep. Ro Khanna ( @khanna.house.gov) April 25, 2025 at 11:07 AM
Accusing the Trump administration of a "shocking" willingness to "weaponize federal law enforcement," Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) contended that the FBI "coming into a community and arresting a judge is a serious matter" that would require a "high legal bar."
Moore added, "I am very alarmed at this increasingly lawless action of the Trump administration," including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has "been defying courts and acting with disregard for the Constitution."
Advocacy groups including Voces de la Frontera, Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression (MAARPR), and Milwaukee Turners led a Friday afternoon protest against Dugan's arrest outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse.
HAPPENING NOW: A HUGE crowd of protesters have gathered outside a Milwaukee courthouse to support Judge Hannah Dugan after her arrest earlier today
[image or embed]
— Marco Foster ( @marcofoster.bsky.social) April 25, 2025 at 1:46 PM
"To refer to this heinous attack as alarming would be an understatement," MAARPR said in a statement accusing FBI Director Kash Patel of "intentionally being public with his announcement and accusations" and "seeking to bypass Dugan's due process and label her as a criminal before she even has an opportunity to speak up."
"It's no coincidence that Patel and the FBI have acted this way when the agency has a long history of bypassing any due process," the group said. "They are seeking to send a clear message: Either you play along with Trump's agenda, or pay the consequences."
MAARPR continued:
During this period of racist and political repression, we must stand together to denounce today's actions by the FBI. What happened to Dugan is not new. The FBI and other agencies have been emboldened in recent months, snatching people off the streets, separating families, terrorizing communities, breaking doors down of pro-Palestine activists, and contributing to the unjust deportation of immigrants who don't have criminal records. What is new is that they have gone after a judge.
"The conditions we face are scary, but it will be the people united who can put an end to this terror by the FBI, ICE, and all other agencies committing such acts of injustice," the group added. "The people united will stand against Trump and his agenda."
"Emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," said Rep. Delia Ramirez.
Progressives in Congress and other migrant rights advocates sharply criticized U.S. President-elect Donald Trump for his comments on immigration during a Sunday interview, including on his hopes to end birthright citizenship.
During a 76-minute interview with NBC News' Kristen Welker, Trump said he "absolutely" intends to end birthright citizenship, potentially through executive order, despite the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Among many lies the Republican told, he also falsely claimed that the United States is the only country to offer citizenship by birth; in fact, there are dozens.
In response,
outgoing Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said on social media Monday: "This is completely un-American. The 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship. Trump cannot unilaterally end it, and any attempt to do so would be both unconstitutional and immoral."
Congresswoman Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) similarly stressed that "birthright citizenship is enshrined in the Constitution as a cornerstone of American ideals. It reflects our belief that America is the land of opportunity. Sadly, this is just another in the long line of Trump's assault on the U.S. Constitution."
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), the daughter of Guatemalan immigrants, said in a statement: "'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.' It is important to remember who we are, where many of us came from, and why many of our families traveled here to be greeted by the Mother of Exiles, the Statue of Liberty."
Ramirez argued that "the story of our nation wouldn't be complete without the sweat, tears, joy, dreams, and hopes of so many children of immigrants who are citizens by birthright and pride themselves on being AMERICANS. It is the story of so many IL-03 communities, strengthened by the immigration of people from Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Mexico, and Guatemala, among others. It is the story of many members of Congress who can point to the citizenship of their forebears and ancestors because of immigration and birthright."
"Let's be clear: Trump is posing the question of who gets to be an American to our nation. And given that today's migrants are from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and Latin and Central America, it is clear he is questioning who are the 'right' people to benefit from birthright citizenship," she continued. "Questioning birthright citizenship is anti-American, and eliminating it through executive action is unconstitutional. Donald Trump knows that."
"But emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the Constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," she warned. "I—like many sons and daughters of immigrants and first-generation Americans—believe in and fight for a land of freedom, opportunities, and equality. To live into that promise, we must stand against white nationalism—especially when it is espoused at the highest levels of government."
Although Republicans are set to control both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives next year, amending the Constitution requires support from two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures, meaning that process is unlikely to be attempted for this policy.
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) highlighted the difficulties of passing constitutional amendments while discussing Trump in a Monday appearance on CNN. The incoming chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus was born in the Dominican Republic and is the first formerly undocumented immigrant elected to Congress.
As Mother Jones reporter Isabela Dias detailed Monday:
Critics of ending birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants argue it would not only constitute bad policy, but also a betrayal of American values and, as one scholar put it to me, a "prelude" to mass deportation.
"It's really 100 years of accepted interpretation," Hiroshi Motomura, a scholar of immigration and citizenship at UCLA's law school, told me of birthright citizenship. Ending birthright citizenship would cut at the core of the hard-fought assurance of equal treatment under the law, he said, "basically drawing a line between two kinds of American citizens."
Trump's NBC interview also addressed his long-promised mass deportations. The president-elect—whose first administration was globally condemned for separating migrant families at the southern border and second administration is already filling up with hard-liners—suggested Sunday that he would deport children who are U.S. citizens with undocumented parents.
"I don't want to be breaking up families, so the only way you don't break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back," Trump told Welker.
Responding in a Monday statement, America's Voice executive director Vanessa Cárdenas said, "There's a growing consensus that the Trump mass deportation agenda will hit American consumers and industries hard, but the scope of what Trump and his team are proposing goes well beyond the economic impact."
"Trump and allies are making clear their mass deportation agenda will include deporting U.S. citizens, including children, while aiming to gut a century and a half of legal and moral precedent on birthright citizenship," she added. "In total, their attacks go well beyond the narrow lens of immigration to the fundamental question of who gets to be an American."
"The bill provides millions of dollars in tax relief for the wealthy and pennies for the poor," said Rep. Rosa DeLauro.
The U.S. House late Wednesday passed legislation that would modestly expand the child tax credit for low-income families while reviving significant business tax breaks, a trade-off that some progressive lawmakers rejected as far too lopsided in favor of corporations.
The Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024 passed the House in an overwhelming 357 to 70 vote, with 169 Republicans and 188 Democrats supporting the measure.
Nearly all of the 23 House Democrats who voted against the bill are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), a roughly 100-member coalition whose chair backed the $78 billion legislation.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said following Wednesday's vote that she opposed the bill because it is "deeply inequitable—at a time when we have seen the greatest rise in inequality with the biggest corporations making super profits at the expense of the consumer."
The American Prospect's David Dayen has estimated that "in the time period when all the tax credits are actually in place, the business tax changes are five times more costly than the CTC changes."
"It is a mockery of who representative government works for," DeLauro argued. "This bill delivers massive tax cuts for the biggest corporations while denying middle class families the economic security they had under the expanded, monthly child tax credit. This is a reversal of the largest middle-class tax cut in history. The bill provides millions of dollars in tax relief for the wealthy and pennies for the poor."
Unlike the 2021 child tax credit expansion that eliminated the program's regressive phase-in and drove the U.S. child poverty rate down to a record low before expiring at the end of that year, the legislation passed by the House on Wednesday would exclude families with less than $2,500 in annual income—the very poorest.
The bill, which now heads to the closely divided U.S. Senate, would also not restore the monthly payments that families received under the 2021 expansion. Eligible families would claim the CTC when filing their annual tax returns.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has estimated that the CTC changes in the House-passed bill would benefit around 16 million children in low-income families and lift around 400,000 kids out of poverty in the first year of enactment.
Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.), a CPC member who voted against the legislation, said that while she welcomes the bill's improvements to the CTC and the low-income housing tax credit, the measure "makes compromises that I cannot accept."
In a scathing statement ahead of Wednesday's vote, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) said that "the richest 120,000 households would get a larger share of the tax benefits than the bottom 88 million families" during the bill's first year.
"The poorest 20% of families would receive just $60 on average, while the richest .1% get an average of $57,530 in tax breaks," said Tlaib, pointing to research by the Tax Policy Center. "Meta—a company making tens of billions in profits—would see its effective tax rate drop from 25% to -2% under this bill. Working families in my district should never be paying higher taxes than the richest companies on Earth."
Other Democrats, including CPC chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), similarly criticized the bill's corporate tax giveaways but argued that the benefits for children warranted a yes vote.
"While I find this trade-off troubling and I strongly believe that we need to do everything possible to ensure the wealthy pay their fair share, this vote was for the working families in Seattle and communities across the country who will benefit from an expanded CTC, and I recommit myself to ensuring that we fully fund the CTC to the benefit of as many people as possible when Democrats are back in control of the House," Jayapal said in a statement.
The bill's prospects in the narrowly Democratic Senate are uncertain, and Republicans could wield the chamber's 60-vote filibuster to tank the legislation.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) suggested that GOP senators could oppose the bill to deny President Joe Biden an election-year legislative victory.
"I think passing a tax bill that makes the president look good—may allow checks before the election—means that he can be reelected and then we won't extend the 2017 tax cuts," Grassley said, referring to Trump-era tax breaks for the rich.
"House Republicans' approach is dangerous and destabilizing," warned Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. "Republicans are gambling with Americans' savings, benefits, and lives, all to play a political game."
Congressional Democrats on Thursday forcefully called out their Republican colleagues for holding the economy hostage by refusing to raise the country's $31.4 trillion debt ceiling without major spending cuts, risking the first-ever U.S. default.
Democrats declined to even try to raise the nation's arbitrary and arguably unconstitutional borrowing limit while they still controlled both chambers of Congress during last year's lame-duck session, setting up the current fight. Because the ceiling has already been hit, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is now taking "extraordinary measures" to give lawmakers more time to act, but the deadline to do so looms, with a default possible as early as June, based on the latest federal estimates.
"This report shows that a Republican default crisis means real dollars coming out of American families' wallets and savings decimated."
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) along with other key party members came together Thursday to unveil an alarming six-page Joint Economic Committee (JEC) Democratic staff report.
"This report shows that a Republican default crisis means real dollars coming out of American families' wallets and savings decimated. This is not a hypothetical exercise to the millions of Americans—including veterans and seniors—who rely on the United States government for benefits, pensions, and disability," Schumer said in a statement.
"House Republicans' approach is dangerous and destabilizing," he added. "Even the threat of a breach will raise costs on everything from car loans to mortgages. Republicans are gambling with Americans' savings, benefits, and lives, all to play a political game."
Specifically, according to the report, if the GOP forced a historic and "catastrophic" default:
"A decade ago credit rating agencies downgraded the U.S. credit rating after Republican debt limit brinkmanship, and it drove borrowing costs for the American people higher in a variety of ways," noted Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.). "This Joint Economic Committee report quantifies what kind of damage regular people could see if that happens again, and it is very bad."
"This would affect everyone who borrows money, including the United States government, which would have to pay more in its borrowing costs," he explained. "In other words, Republican hostage-taking on the debt limit would actually increase the deficit."
Beyer, Schumer, and Jeffries were joined at the news conference Thursday by Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) as well as Sens. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the JEC chairman-designate, who stressed that "the debt ceiling is not a bargaining chip."
While several of them slammed "MAGA Republican in the House," 71-year-old Moore chose to describe the GOP lawmakers whose actions are jeopardizing not only the U.S. but also the global economy another way.
"I have a great-granddaughter that falls out and rolls on the floor when she can't have her way. I tell her she needs to get up because she's not gonna get it," Moore said. "Republicans need to get up and stop holding our economy hostage."
"We are not going to devastate our seniors and our children, and we will not sabotage the world's standard credit rating," the congresswoman declared. "Republicans need to get up off the ground and raise the debt limit!"
Adding to concerns about the U.S. and global economies are recent bank turmoil and repeated interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve—which, along with Congress, is facing criticism for regulatory rollbacks that experts tie to the bank failures.
As Punchbowl News reported Wednesday:
Instead of expressing caution, senior GOP lawmakers are leaning into their plans to demand spending cuts in return for raising the nation's borrowing limit. The Republicans we spoke to doubled down, arguing the same factors that led to the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank necessitate urgency in reducing government spending.
"This is the best time to do it," House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said of the debt limit fight. "That interest rate pressure that is creating some risk in the banking industry is a result of the inflation that has been induced by the massive amounts of spending."
[...]
Arrington's panel will play a central role in the Republican posture heading into negotiations with President Joe Biden. While House Republicans have yet to release their budget, GOP leaders have vowed to roll back spending to FY2022 levels. That would mean a cut of roughly $130 billion from last year's funding level. Democrats and the White House have assailed the plan as an attack on working families, seniors, and veterans, while Republicans insist the cuts are necessary to rein in inflation.
The Texas Republican said it "makes sense that when you have a debt ceiling negotiation," lawmakers would "reflect on the indebtedness of our country" and look to cut spending at the same time.
Punchbowl noted similar remarks this week from Reps. Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.) and John Rose (R-Tenn.) along with GOP Conference Secretary Lisa McClain.
Biden introduced his budget blueprint for FY2024 earlier this month. Though progressives condemned the president's historically high request for military spending as "madness" they also praised his push for massive social investments as well as tax hikes targeting wealthy individuals and corporations.
Meanwhile, "House Republican leaders did not respond to multiple questions from USA TODAY about when the GOP budget would be ready," the newspaper reported Wednesday.
As USA TODAY detailed:
An initial proposal from the House Budget Committee includes cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency, Biden's student debt cancellation, and funding for electric vehicles for the U.S. post office.
It also includes reinstating work requirements to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.
A proposal from the House Freedom Caucus includes $131 billion in cuts for fiscal year 2024.
"Extreme MAGA House Republicans are showing us what they value: tax breaks for the rich," Biden said of the caucus' proposal. "They demand the biggest Medicare benefits cut in decades, ship jobs overseas, defund law enforcement, devastate our national and border security. It's a gut punch to the middle class."
As Liz Zelnick from the watchdog Accountable.US warned, "The MAGA extremists running the House fully intend to manufacture a disastrous default crisis by making demands they know to be nonstarters—like letting wealthy tax cheats and big polluters off the hook."
"I had been told without an immediate abortion, or dilation and evacuation, that my life was at risk," said Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez. "I got the care I needed, and now I'm the mother of my 17-month-old son."
As thousands of people gathered at pro-choice rallies across the United States, multiple congresswomen marked the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade on Sunday by sharing their own experiences with abortion care and renewing calls to protect reproductive rights in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court reversing its landmark ruling.
"I'm one of the 1 in 4 women in America who has had an abortion. Terminating my pregnancy was not an easy choice, but more importantly, it was MY choice," tweeted Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, who has previously shared her story in a New York Times opinion piece and during a House hearing.
"Everyone's story is different, but I know this for certain: The choice to have an abortion belongs to pregnant people, not the government. We are not free if we cannot make these fundamental choices about our bodies," she continued. "MAGA Republicans' extreme abortion bans aren't about saving lives, they're about control. We must stand up and fight these bans. Together."
Fellow Washington state Democrat Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez, who was sworn in for her first term earlier this month, wrote on Twitter: "Three years ago I miscarried in the second trimester of a pregnancy. It's a painful memory but something many women have experienced. I traveled hours to the nearest clinic, and I encountered anti-choice protesters. Thankfully I got the care I needed that day."
"I had been told without an immediate abortion, or dilation and evacuation, that my life was at risk. That I could die, or not be able to have children in the future. I got the care I needed, and now I'm the mother of my 17-month-old son," she said. "On what would've been Roe v. Wade's 50th anniversary, I'm thinking of the millions of Americans with stories like mine who are forced to go without access to safe reproductive care. I won't stop fighting to restore this fundamental right and defend reproductive freedom for all."
Nearly seven months since the high court's right-wing majority overturned Roe with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, "abortion is currently unavailable in 14 states, and courts have temporarily blocked enforcement of bans in eight others," according to a December review by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, which tracks state laws.
Just after the Dobbs decision leaked last May, Elle published a roundtable discussion with the only five then-members of Congress who had publicly shared abortion stories: Jayapal; Sen. Gary Peters, whose ex-wife got a potentially lifesaving emergency abortion in the 1980s; and Reps. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), and Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), who did not seek reelection last year.
In the weeks that followed, Reps. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) and Marie Newman (D-Ill.)—who lost her June primary after redistricting—also detailed their abortions when they were each 19 years old. During a House hearing, Rep. Lucy McBath (D-Ga.) shared that "when my doctor finally induced me, I faced the pain of labor without hope for a living child."
"Would it have been after the first miscarriage, after doctors used what would be an illegal drug to abort the lost fetus?" McBath asked. "Would you have put me in jail after the second miscarriage?"
McBath took to Twitter Sunday to highlight that testimony and warn that "without Roe, all reproductive care is on the line."
Bush—who has spoken about seeking an abortion after becoming pregnant as a result of rape at 17—said in a statement Sunday that "the Roe v. Wade decision was not only historic in that it protected people accessing abortions; it also served as precedent for several more court cases and laws to follow that would further advance gender equality, reproductive rights, and our collective freedoms."
"Unfortunately, we all know what happened last June. Republicans spent decades stacking the federal judiciary with far-right anti-abortion judges and successfully stripped millions of people of their right to safe, legal, and accessible abortion care, particularly Black, Brown, LGBTQ+, and other marginalized communities," she said. "And, let's be clear, Republicans aren't stopping with Roe."
"In just their first couple of days in power, House Republicans passed two anti-abortion bills in a blatant attempt to lay the groundwork for a national abortion ban," added Bush, who was among the 17 federal lawmakers arrested in July while protesting Dobbs at the Supreme Court. "As a congresswoman, a mother, a pastor, and as a person who has had abortions, I will never stop fighting for a person's bodily autonomy, reproductive rights, and for a country that lives up to its proclamation of freedom."
Moore—who represents a state where abortion is now unavailable due to a contested 1849 ban—issued a similar warning in a series of tweets, declaring that "this Roe anniversary is a reminder of what we've lost, and we must fight for a future that creates more equitable healthcare access for all."
"The chaos we've seen over the past six months is the environment anti-abortion politicians have worked for decades to create, and they won't stop with Roe. While we work to protect and restore access to abortion, more attacks on sexual and reproductive health are happening now," she said. "The path ahead will be challenging. It will require us to think bolder than ever before to ensure our very basic rights and freedoms are permanently protected—not subject to whoever happens to be in power."