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
nancy mace
'Narrow-Minded and Xenophobic' Nancy Mace Ripped for Proposed Ban on Naturalized Citizens Serving in Congress
Called out by name, Rep. Pramila Jayapal said her Republican colleague had introduced "racist legislation that denies the very history of a country that has been proudly shaped by immigrants."
May 20, 2026
US Rep. Pramila Jayapal called on her colleagues from both sides of the aisle to condemn legislation proposed by Republican Rep. Nancy Mace on Wednesday, which would bar naturalized citizens from serving in Congress, on the federal judiciary, and as Senate-confirmed Cabinet members.
“Instead of working to help the American people, as so many cannot keep the lights on, keep food on the table, or pay their rent, Nancy Mace is instead introducing racist legislation that denies the very history of a country that has been proudly shaped by immigrants," the Washington Democrat said in a statement. "This is also insulting to the hundreds of thousands of constituents who elected naturalized citizens into office."
Jayapal was one of three Democratic members of Congress who were specifically called out by Mace (R-SC) when she posted about her proposal on social media Wednesday. She also named Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), a frequent target of openly racist Republican attacks, and Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.).
Mace claimed that the foreign-born elected officials make clear "every single day their loyalty is not to America," without naming any examples to back up the spurious and hateful allegation.
"The people writing America's laws, confirming America's judges, and representing America on the world stage should have one loyalty: America," said Mace. "Not any other country. For too long we have allowed foreign-born members to hold seats in this government while making clear they are America last, not America first. We see it every day."
The proposed legislation would amend the US Constitution to say only people who were citizens at birth can serve in Congress.
The Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus was quick to point out that several Republican members of Congress, including President Donald Trump ally Reps. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who was born in Colombia, and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.), would be forced out of Congress if the legislation passed.
Mace announced her proposal a day after Vice President JD Vance said the US Department of Justice is investigating Omar, who came to the US as a refugee from Somalia as a child, for alleged immigration fraud. There is no evidence the congresswoman committed fraud to come to the US.
Jayapal issued a reminder that "with the exception of Native Americans, every person in this country—including Nancy Mace—is descended from immigrants. And America is made stronger by the people from across the world with diverse talents who come here to live and work."
“This narrow-minded, xenophobic legislation has no place in Congress, and I call on all my colleagues—including my Republican colleagues who are naturalized citizens—to condemn this.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'This Isn't Over': AOC Says Pam Bondi Must Still Testify on Epstein Files Despite Firing
"We must also investigate the continued breaking of the law around the DOJ still hiding Epstein files from the public," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Apr 03, 2026
Pam Bondi may no longer be US attorney general, but that doesn't get her out of previously scheduled testimony before the House Oversight Committee about her handling of criminal case files related to late billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), in a Thursday social media message posted shortly after Bondi's termination, warned the one-time AG that being fired by President Donald Trump "still doesn’t get her out of testifying to Congress about Epstein."
"We must also investigate the continued breaking of the law around the DOJ STILL hiding Epstein files from the public," Ocasio-Cortez added. "This isn’t over."
Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement that Bondi "will not escape accountability and remains legally obligated to appear before our Committee under oath" on the scheduled date of April 14.
"Oversight Democrats have been leading serious investigations into Bondi and Secretary Kristi Noem," Garcia added. "If they think we are moving on because they were fired, they are gravely mistaken."
The calls for Bondi to follow through with her planned testimony aren't only coming from Democrats, as Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) told CNN on Friday that she has no plans to back off her demands that the former AG speak under oath later this month.
"When I issued this subpoena that was voted on by the Oversight Committee a number of weeks ago, we did it by name and not by the title of the attorney general," said Mace. "So she's still compelled and required by law to come before the Oversight Committee, and at this juncture I'm not backing away from that or backing down from that. I do believe that handling of the Epstein files was done in a very poor manner."
Rep. Nancy Mace: "The subpoena is by name and not by the title of the attorney general, so she's compelled and required by law to come before the Oversight Committee, and at this juncture I'm not backing away from that" pic.twitter.com/UULq6e9Q4m
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 3, 2026
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, also cited Bondi's handling of the Epstein files as a permanent and emblematic stain on her legacy as the nation's top law enforcement officer.
"[Bondi] ran an historic and egregious cover-up right out of the Justice Department," Raskin said. "Investigations into co-conspirators were shut down. She withheld three million pages of documents in defiance of the law. The names of abusers, enablers, accomplices and co-conspirators were redacted from public view while the identities of victims were exposed to the world. Under Bondi, perpetrators were coddled and survivors given the back of the hand."
In addition to her handling of the Epstein files, which earned bipartisan criticism, Bondi also ceded to President Donald Trump's demands to file criminal charges against political enemies including former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Leticia James.
Both of those cases were tossed last year by a federal judge who found that Trump's handpicked US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was illegally installed in the position.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ilhan Omar Slams Latest Trump Attack on Venezuelan Boat as 'Egregious Violation'
"There is NO legal justification," the progressive congresswoman said. "It risks spiraling into the exact type of endless, pointless conflict that Trump supposedly opposes."
Sep 16, 2025
US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar on Tuesday condemned the Trump administration's attack the previous day on a second boat allegedly transporting drugs off the coast of Venezuela as blatantly illegal, highlighting her introduction last week of a war powers resolution in a bid to stop the aggression.
President Donald Trump announced Monday that the US destroyed what he said was a boat used by Venezuelan drug gangs, killing three people in what one Amnesty International campaigner called "an extrajudicial execution."
The strike followed a September 2 US attack on another alleged drug-running boat that killed 11 people, which Omar (D-Minn.) called a "lawless and reckless" action.
Responding to Monday's attack, Omar said on the social media site X that the Trump administration "is once again using the failed War on Drugs to justify their egregious violation of international law."
"There is NO legal justification," she said of the attack. "It risks spiraling into the exact type of endless, pointless conflict that Trump supposedly opposes. I have a war powers resolution to fight back."
Introduced last Thursday, the measure aims to stop the US attacks, which coincide with Trump's deployment of a small armada of warships off the Caribbean coast of Venezuela, a country that has endured to more than a century of US meddling in its affairs.
"All of us should agree that the separation of powers is crucial to our democracy, and that only Congress has the power to declare war," Omar said at the time.
The War Powers Act of 1973—enacted during the Nixon administration at the tail end of the US war on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos—empowers Congress to check the president’s war-making authority. The law requires the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours and mandates that lawmakers must approve troop deployments after 60 days.
Also last week, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) led a letter signed by two dozen Democratic colleagues and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) asserting that the Trump administration offered “no legitimate justification” for the first boat strike.
Omar's condemnation of the US attacks followed Monday's announcement by US Reps. Nancy Mace (R-SC) and Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) of separate resolutions to strip Omar of her committee assignments and, in the case of Mace's measure, censure the congresswoman after she reportedly shared a video highlighting assassinated far-right firebrand Charlie Kirk's prolific bigotry.
Trump also attacked Omar on Monday, calling her a "disgraceful person," a "loser," and "disgusting."
Omar is no stranger to censure efforts, which critics say are largely fueled by Islamophobia—and haven't just come from Republicans. In 2019, she was falsely accused of antisemitism by leaders of her own party and was the subject of an anti-hate speech resolution passed by House lawmakers after she remarked about the indisputable financial ties the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and members of Congress.
In February 2023, Omar was ousted from the House Foreign Affairs Committee for years-old comments that allegedly referenced antisemitic tropes.
Last year, Congressman Don Bacon (R-Neb.) introduced a censure resolution after Omar said of Jewish students at Columbia University, "We should not have to tolerate antisemitism or bigotry for all Jewish students, whether they're pro-genocide or anti-genocide."
The measure failed to pass, as did another put forth earlier last year by Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) after she mistranslated remarks Omar made in Somali.
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Investigation Pressures Wikipedia to Reveal Identities of Editors Accused of 'Bias' Against Israel
The effort furthers the goals of the Heritage Foundation, which has launched a plan to "identify and target Wikipedia editors" using a number of underhanded tactics.
Aug 28, 2025
A pair of House Republicans is moving forward with an investigation that will seek to reveal the identities of Wikipedia editors who have edited articles to include information that portrays Israel negatively.
On Wednesday, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chair of the House Oversight Committee, and Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), chair of the House Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government Innovation, sent a letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that owns the free encyclopedia.
The representatives asked Wikimedia's CEO, Maryana Iskander, for "assistance in obtaining documents and communications regarding individuals (or specific accounts) serving as Wikipedia volunteer editors who violated Wikipedia platform policies as well as your own efforts to thwart intentional, organized efforts to inject bias into important and sensitive topics."
The letter requested information about "nation state actors" or "academic institutions" that may have been involved in efforts to "edit or influence content identified as possibly violating Wikipedia policies."
A spokesperson for the Wikimedia Foundation told The Hill that they were reviewing the request.
"We welcome the opportunity to respond to the committee's questions and to discuss the importance of safeguarding the integrity of information on our platform," the spokesperson said.
The GOP investigation coincides with a long-standing objective of the far-right Heritage Foundation, which has accused Wikipedia of anti-conservative bias and promoting content that portrays Israel in a negative light, and sought to unmask the identities of the internet users who run it.
The letter sent by Comer and Mace requests that Wikimedia provide Congress with "records showing identifying and unique characteristics of accounts (such as names, IP addresses, registration dates, user activity logs) for editors" who have been "subject to actions" by Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, which resolves internal disputes between editors.
It was, in essence, a request by Congress for Wikipedia to "dox" many of its editors.
"In the culture of Wikipedia editing, it is common for individuals to use pseudonyms to protect their privacy and avoid personal threats," wrote tech writer and Wikipedia expert Stephen Harrison for Slate in February. "Revealing an editor's personal information without their consent, a practice known as doxing, is a form of harassment that can result in a user's being permanently banned from the site."
Of chief concern to the legislators is investigating Wikipedia's handling of content related to Israel. They cited a report from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a pro-Israel lobbying group, which the legislators said "raised troubling questions about potentially systematic efforts to advance antisemitic and anti-Israel information in Wikipedia articles related to conflicts with the state of Israel."
The ADL report makes the allegation that 30 "bad-faith" Wikipedia editors, whose identities are not public, were collaborating to edit pages about the Israel-Palestine conflict by "spotlighting criticism of Israel and downplaying Palestinian terrorist violence and antisemitism," and in the process violating Wikipedia's commitment to neutrality.
That report, however, has been heavily criticized, including by some of the academics it cited. In a piece for The Forward, Shira Klein, whose research on Wikipedia's documentation of the Holocaust appears in the report, said the ADL "inaccurately" used her work, and the work of others, as part of its "ramped-up efforts to police public discourse about Israel," and quoted other researchers who felt the same.
Klein described the study's interpretation of the facts as "very skewed" and said it was reliant "on a faulty premise: that criticism of Israel or Zionism is inherently antisemitic."
"To establish foul play, the ADL would need to demonstrate that Wikipedia content about Israel and Zionism regularly expresses as fact ideas that diverge from broadly held scholarly opinions on the matters in question," Klein said. "But where is the evidence of editors repeatedly misrepresenting or contradicting peer-reviewed literature? There is none. The report simply wants us to take the ADL's word for it."
The ADL's report, as well as a similar report from the Atlantic Council alleging that Wikipedia editors had conspired to spread pro-Kremlin propaganda, are the sole pieces of evidence cited by Comer and Mace in their request for identifying information on Wikipedia's editors.
However, right-wing efforts to undermine Wikipedia's independence and attack the privacy of its editors go back much further.
In January, documents obtained by The Forward's Arno Rosenfeld revealed a secret plan by Heritage, the think tank behind the authoritarian Project 2025 playbook, to "identify and target Wikipedia editors" who the organization said were "abusing their position."
Among the methodologies it directed Heritage employees to use include "analyzing text patterns, usernames, and technical data through data breach analysis, fingerprinting, [human intelligence], and technical targeting."
The targeting methods also included "creating fake Wikipedia user accounts to try to trick editors into identifying themselves by sharing personal information or clicking on malicious tracking links that can identify people who click on them."
According to Rosenfeld, "The Heritage Foundation sent the pitch deck outlining the Wikipedia initiative to Jewish foundations and other prospective supporters of Project Esther, its roadmap for fighting antisemitism and anti-Zionism."
Jewish Voice for Peace has described Project Esther as Heritage's "blueprint for using the federal government and private institutions to dismantle the Palestine solidarity movement and broader US civil society, under the guise of 'fighting antisemitism.'"
"Even if you take issue with how the site is currently framing the conflict, that doesn't justify Heritage's plan," Harrison wrote. "Targeting Wikipedia editors personally, instead of debating their edits on the platform, marks a dangerous escalation."
Coming amid the Trump administration's crackdowns against campus protests and efforts to deport immigrants over pro-Palestine speech, critics have described the House Republican investigation as the latest GOP attempt to censor criticism and the spread of unflattering information about Israel.
Adam Johnson, a co-host for the political podcast Citations Needed, described it in a post on X as "House Republicans working with the ADL and Atlantic Council to discipline Wikipedia into parroting the Israeli and NATO line."
Johnson noted that this push was coming as the clear majority of Americans, including an overwhelming number of Democrats, now oppose US support for Israel, with many now believing the country is committing a genocide.
"Rather than end the genocide," Johnson said, "the response instead is to continue firing, doxing, smearing, and attempting to censor inconvenient narratives."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Profiles in Cowardice' Award Seeks to Identify Leaders Enabling Rise of Fascist Trump
The nominees "took an oath to 'support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,'" said retired Maj. Gen. Dennis Laich. "Through their actions, or inaction, they are violating that oath."
Jul 09, 2025
A network of former intelligence, military, and national security officials on Tuesday launched the Profiles in Cowardice Award and urged the public to vote for nominees who are "silent in the face of the country's descent into fascism," a march led by U.S. President Donald Trump.
"We are in a constitutional crisis," says the Eisenhower Media Network's (EMN) website for the award. "Trump is amassing power in the executive branch, ignoring Congress and the courts. Meanwhile, leaders who have sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution are sitting on their hands."
The new honor is the inverse of the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award, created by the late president's family "to recognize and celebrate the quality of political courage that he admired most." This year's recipient is Trump's former vice president, Mike Pence, "for putting his life and career on the line to ensure the constitutional transfer of presidential power on January 6, 2021," when Trump incited an insurrection and his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol.
"We, the American people, are here to remind them of who they serve, and that it's time to do their constitutional duty by standing up to this administration and its authoritarian bent."
Nominees for the inaugural Profiles in Cowardice Award are former President George W. Bush, former Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), retired Gens. David Petraeus and Mark Milley, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Republican members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
"The 'Profiles in Cowardice' Award was created to call out those weak souls who are failing to engage in efforts to keep our country from sleepwalking into fascism," said EMN's director, retired Maj. Gen. (ret.) Dennis Laich, in a statement.
"These leaders, both past and present, took an oath to 'support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,'" he noted. "Through their actions, or inaction, they are violating that oath. We, the American people, are here to remind them of who they serve, and that it's time to do their constitutional duty by standing up to this administration and its authoritarian bent."
The public can vote at ProfilesInCowardice.org until August 1, after which the award will be presented to the winner "at the most inconvenient time possible," according to the website.
The site lays out why people were nominated as "cowards." For example, "Bush has a long and storied history of cowardice" and "is solidifying his legacy" by retreating rather than serving as a leader in the Republican Party and standing up to Trump.
In Congress, "Mace is a one-woman culture war content machine—exactly how the military-industrial complex and mainstream media like it," the site continues. Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, "has chosen to push through Trump's agenda of unfettered militarism and confirm unqualified MAGA loyalists like Pete Hegseth," the defense secretary. Republicans on that committee also "rubber-stamped Pete Hegseth to cater to Trump and his blindly loyal MAGA cronies."
Among former military leaders, the site says, "Milley attempted to make a principled stand after the January 6th insurrection—but cowardice won out in the end," and Petraeus said at a conference that "the world was in for 'exciting times' under Trump."
"The Joint Chiefs of Staff are tasked with defending the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic," the site notes. "But as reckless U.S. military actions push the world closer to nuclear catastrophe, they've chosen silence over service. No resignations. No public warnings."
As for Blinken, who served under former President Joe Biden, "he ignored a flood of real-time reports detailing Israeli human rights violations—and now we know his public claims of 'working overtime' on cease-fires were outright lies," the site adds. "With American diplomacy in free fall, Blinken chose complicity and cover stories over truth and action."
Christian Sorenson, EMN's associate director, said that "it takes courage to do the right thing... It takes even more courage to do the right thing when the system itself fosters militarism and war profiteering."
"Targeting 'leaders' in the nation's capital, Profiles in Cowardice highlights the craven and the pushovers, as well as those who eagerly abet authoritarianism and nonstop war for personal and professional gain," Sorenson added. "Virtue and public service will arrive in D.C. one way or another. Profiles in Cowardice is part of that broader effort."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Muslim Lawmakers Decry 'Vile' Bipartisan Islamophobic Attacks on Zohran Mamdani
The lawmakers asserted that "smears from our colleagues on both sides of the aisle" cannot be allowed to continue.
Jun 27, 2025
All four Muslim members of the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday condemned their colleagues' Islamophobic attacks on Democratic New York City mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, which have come not only from Republicans but also from at least two congressional Democrats representing the candidate's home state.
"The vile, anti-Muslim, and racist smears from our colleagues on both sides of the aisle attacking Zohran Mamdani cannot be met with silence," Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), André Carson (D-Ind.), and Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.) said in a joint statement.
"At a time of increased violence against elected officials, we cannot allow the attacks on Zohran Mamdani to continue."
Mamdani—a democratic socialist who would be the first Muslim mayor of the nation's largest city if he wins November's general election—has come under fire by Republicans including Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee, who on Thursday formally appealed to U.S. Attorney Pam Bondi to initiate proceedings to denaturalize and deport "little Muhammad."
Earlier this week, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) posted a photo of Mamdani wearing a traditional tunic with the caption, "After 9/11 we said, 'Never Forget.' I think sadly we have forgotten."
As of Friday afternoon, no Democratic member of Congress from New York had explicitly condemned their GOP colleagues' Islamophobic remarks. To the contrary, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) falsely claimed Thursday that Mamdani had made references to "global jihad" and spuriously asserted that "globalize the intifada"—a call for Palestinian liberation and battling injustice—is a call to "kill all the Jews."
Freshman Rep. Laura Gillen (D-N.Y.) also falsely accused Mamdani of "a deeply disturbing pattern of unacceptable antisemitic comments."
The four Muslim lawmakers said in their statement that "these hateful, Islamophobic, and racist tropes have become so entrenched and normalized in our politics."
"We know these attacks all too well," they added.
Omar and Tlaib have been on the receiving end of Islamophobic attacks by House colleagues and outside death threats for years, stemming in part from Omar's status as refugee and Tlaib's as the only Palestinian American in Congress.
Like Mamdani, both lawmakers have also been targeted from both sides of the aisle for their support for Palestinian liberation, as well as their opposition to Israel's invasion, occupation, colonization and apartheid in Palestine, and the assault and siege of Gaza that are the subject of an ongoing International Court of Justice genocide case.
Advocacy groups have reported a sharp increase in anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian hate incidents since the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led assault on Israel, a climate reminiscent of the pervasive Islamophobia following the September 11, 2001 attacks. There has also been a surge in antisemitism as Israeli forces obliterate Gaza, although critics have decried the widespread conflation of opposition to Zionism with hatred of Jewish people by groups including the Anti-Defamation League.
"At a time of increased violence against elected officials, we cannot allow the attacks on Zohran Mamdani to continue," the four lawmakers stressed. "They directly contribute to the ongoing dehumanization and violence against Muslim Americans. We unequivocally reject the normalization of anti-Muslim hate and fearmongering and call on elected leaders across our country to speak out."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) also issued a statement Friday condemning the "outpouring of disgraceful, dangerous, racist ideology from sitting members of Congress and [Trump] administration officials following Zohran Mamdani's win in the New York mayoral primary."
Jayapal continued:
The constant displays of Islamophobia are an affront to the millions of Muslim Americans and Muslims around the world. One of the most jarring called for the denaturalization and deportation of Mr. Mamdani, an American citizen who just won a massive Democratic primary with more votes than that member, Mr. Ogles, could ever hope to win. This is an insult to voters in New York City who take democracy seriously.
Denaturalization of U.S. citizens is part of the Trump playbook to attack all legal immigration. It is completely outrageous and flies in the face of the laws of this country.
"The hateful language directed at Mr. Mamdani will get someone killed, and we all should be outraged," Jayapal added. "It must end. Every person who cares about democracy, freedom of religion, and the right for all Americans to be treated equally should speak out immediately against these insane and dangerous attacks."
Correction: This article originally misidentified Rep. Gillen as "Lauren" Gillen.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Vicious Islamophobia': GOP Calls for Deportation of US Citizen Mamdani
Journalist Mehdi Hasan demanded "any leadership at all from the Democrats against brazen Islamophobia against their own presumptive mayoral candidate."
Jun 27, 2025
The victory of New York state lawmaker Zohran Mamdani in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary this week quickly ushered in what one progressive media outlet called "mask-off racism and fascism" from several Republicans in Congress, with U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles going as far as making an official request to the Trump administration for "denaturalization proceedings" for the U.S. citizen.
Mamdani would be the first Muslim mayor of the nation's largest city if he wins the general election in November—a fact that appears to have enraged the Tennessee Republican, who wrote to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to call for a federal investigation into rap lyrics Mamdani wrote before he became a naturalized citizen and began his political career.
Ogles pointed to the lyrics, "Free the Holy Land Five / My guys"—a reference to the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, a major Muslim charity that was shut down by the George W. Bush administration and designated a terrorist group after the September 11, 2001 attacks—even though it donated money to Palestinian charities that the U.S. government also supported.
Dozens of major U.S. and international rights organizations have also called for five philanthropists who worked for the Holy Land Foundation—who were sentenced to up to 65 years in prison even though they were not accused of directly funding terrorism—to be pardoned and released, but Ogles accused Mamdani of publicly glorifying "a group convicted of financing terrorism."
Ogles also pointed to Mamdani's refusal to condemn the phrase "globalize the intifada," which includes the Arabic word for "uprising" and is associated by supporters of the Israeli government with Hamas' violent attacks on Israel—but evidently not with Palestinians' numerous peaceful acts of protest against Israel's apartheid policies.
Mamdani said in a podcast interview before the primary election this week that the word intifada means "very different things" for different people, including "a desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights"—comments many New Yorkers who voted for him, including as many as 1 in 5 Jewish Democrats, according to some polls—appeared to agree with.
But Ogles claimed the remarks bolstered the case for Mamdani's denaturalization seven years after he became a U.S. citizen, and suggested without evidence that the New York state assemblymember "concealed relevant associations" when he applied for citizenship.
"Publicly praising the [Holy Land] Foundation's leadership as 'My Guys' raises serious concerns about whether Mr. Mamdani held affiliations or sympathies he failed to disclose during the naturalization process," Ogles claimed.
In a post on X announcing his request to Bondi, Ogles referred to Mamdani as "little muhammad" said, "He need to be deported."
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) posted on the social media platform X after Mamdani's victory that "we sadly have forgotten" the September 11 attacks, adding a photo of Mamdani wearing a traditional tunic with other Muslims at a gathering in New York.
She later posted a poll on her account, providing no justification or supporting evidence as she asked her more than 500,000 followers whether the Democratic mayoral candidate should be denaturalized and deported.
Journalist Mehdi Hasan of Zeteo pointed out that while both establishment Democratic and Republican lawmakers have joined the corporate media in lobbing accusations of antisemitism at progressive politicians and pro-Palestinian student protesters, they are "totally normalizing and amplifying the worst and most vicious Islamophobia."
"Will Rep. Hakeem Jeffries or Sen. Chuck Schumer be saying anything about this? Condemning it? Calling for a censure vote of Ogles? Any leadership at all from the Democrats against brazen Islamophobia against their own presumptive mayoral candidate?" asked Hasan, referring to the top Democrats in the House and Senate.
Democratic members of the House Homeland Security Committee denounced Ogles for spreading "racist drivel" and issued a reminder that Ogles "faked a $320,000 campaign loan" and "lied about being an economist," but at press time neither Schumer nor Jeffries—both New York Democrats—had publicly addressed the Republicans' attacks on the mayoral candidate and sitting lawmaker from their home state.
Another prominent Democrat in Mamdani's home state, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, appeared to align herself squarely with Republicans like Ogles—proclaiming on "The Brian Lehrer Show" that Mamdani had made references to "global jihad" and saying unequivocally that the phrase "globalize the intifada" is a call to "kill all the Jews."
Hasan was among those who said Gillibrand should "resign for falsely smearing Zohran Mamdani as a terrorist." A spokesperson for the senator later said she "misspoke" when using the phrase "global jihad"—a term Mamdani is not reported to have ever said. At press time Gillibrand herself had not publicly apologized for the remark.
In contrast to Democratic leaders' approach to Mamdani thus far, in November 2023, Palestinian-American Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) faced a censure vote that was supported by 22 House Democrats for expressing support for Palestinian rights and criticizing the Israeli government after a Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.
Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) said "egregious behavior" like that of Ogles "has gone unchecked for too long and will inevitably lead to more political violence."
"It's full-blown, dangerous Islamophobia and racism," said Ansari. "House Republican leadership must condemn it unequivocally and urgently. Enough."
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Very Good Reason 145 Democrats Voted Against a GOP Domestic Violence Bill
"In a perverse move," explained Rep. Pramila Jayapal, "this bill would make it easier to label victims of domestic violence as perpetrators, to make them removable from the country and eliminate existing legal safeguards that protects survivors."
Jan 16, 2025
The eye-catching headlines cropped up across social media platforms and right-wing news outlets on Thursday:
"145 House Dems vote against bill to deport migrants who commit sexual assault," proclaimed Fox News.
"145 Dems vote against deporting illegal immigrants convicted of sex crimes," reported the San Joaquin Valley Sun in Central California.
"The Left were defending rapists, murderers, and pedophiles this morning," said U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) in a post on X, adding that Democrats "have a lot of explaining to do" regarding their opposition to the so-called Preventing Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act (H.R. 30).
Progressive lawmakers were happy to explain why they objected to the legislation, which would mandate that undocumented immigrants, or those with contested legal status, be deported if they are convicted of or admit to committing sexual assault or abuse, domestic violence, stalking, child abuse, or violating a protection order.
Opponents of the bill noted that existing law already allows federal authorities to remove from the country any immigrant with uncertain status who is found guilty of "crimes involving moral turpitude," including rape, sexual assault, or domestic abuse.
But aside from being redundant, said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the bill, which was introduced by Mace, "weaponizes" the Violence Against Women Act "against—you've got it—domestic violence victims."
Although Mace and other supporters heralded the legislation as aiming to protect women and girls from "the lifelong scars, the irreversible scars, these heinous crimes leave behind," Jayapal noted that 200 local and national advocacy groups for domestic violence survivors urged lawmakers to oppose the bill.
"There is actually no gap in the law that needs to be fixed," Jayapal said. "Instead, in a perverse move, this bill would make it easier to label survivors of domestic violence as perpetrators, to make them removable from the country and eliminate existing legal safeguards that protect survivors.
The bill, she said, is meant to "widen the highway to [President-elect] Donald Trump's mass deportation plan."
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) added that under Mace's proposal, "no exceptions would exist any longer for domestic violence victims who have committed minor crimes in the context of resisting their violent abuse."
"This bill will only make the immigration laws much harsher on the victims of domestic violence, sexual battery, and rape, which is the opposite of what we should be doing," he said.
The legislation, which passed 274-145 and garnered the support of 61 Democrats, was passed by the House days after Republicans pushed through the Laken Riley Act, using similar tactics to suggest opponents of that bill supported criminal activity by immigrants.
The Laken Riley Act would require the deportation of any undocumented immigrant accused of theft—a response to the killing last year of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley by an undocumented immigrant who had been cited for shoplifting prior to the murder.
Thirty-seven Democrats joined the House Republican Caucus in supporting the Laken Riley Act, and the Senate is set to vote on the bill in the coming days, likely sending it to Trump's desk to become law after he is sworn in next week.
"The Democratic support for this monstrous, inhuman rhetoric will play a big role in the advancement of authoritarian violence," Alec Karakatsanis, founder of the Civil Rights Corps, said of the legislation. "None of it was possible without propaganda pervading mainstream news about immigrants, shoplifting, bail, and the things that truly affect our safety."
Rep. Jesús "Chuy" García (D-Ill.) called the bill passed on Thursday "harmful" and "counterproductive."
"We must prioritize protections," he said, "not fear."
The U.S. National Domestic Violence Hotline can be reached at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233), by texting "START" to 88788, or through chat at thehotline.org. It offers 24/7, free, and confidential support. DomesticShelters.org has a list of global and national resources.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ohio Governor Signs 'Harmful' Anti-Trans Bathroom Bill
"It's really not about the bathrooms. It's about demonizing and frightening people," said one Ohio lawmaker.
Nov 27, 2024
Pro-LGBTQ+ voices panned an Ohio bill signed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine Wednesday that will bar transgender students in public and private Ohio schools from using "multi-occupancy facility"—bathrooms, as well as locker rooms, changing room, or shower rooms—that match their gender identity.
"We made it clear to Gov. DeWine and Ohio legislators that S.B. 104 does nothing to make trans students safer in schools, and in fact makes life more dangerous for trans kids in Ohio," said Equality Ohio executive director Dwayne Steward in a statement.
"We are deeply disappointed that Gov.DeWine has allowed this dangerous bill to become law that puts vulnerable trans youth at risk for abuse and harassment. Equality Ohio will continue to stand in solidarity with our transgender communities and their families, and we will always fight for fairness in Ohio," Steward added.
The ACLU of Ohio said on social media that "transgender people are part of the fabric of Ohio; our families, our workplaces, and our neighborhoods. We remain steadfast in our commitment to the LGBTQ+ community and are closely considering next steps."
In a statement published after the legislation passed in the Ohio Senate, Jocelyn Rosnick, policy director for the ACLU of Ohio, said that "this bill ignores the material reality that transgender people endure higher rates of sexual violence and assaults, particularly while using public restrooms, than people who are not transgender."
According to Mother Jones, Ohio Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-23), the first openly LGBTQ+ person elected to the Ohio Legislature, said during a floor debate on the bill: "It's really not about the bathrooms. It's about demonizing and frightening people."
The law applies to K-12 and higher education institutions and schools are not allowed to offer gender-neutral multi-stall facilities; however, the bill doesn't prevent schools from establishing "a policy providing accommodation such as single-occupancy facilities or controlled use of faculty facilities at the request of a student due to special circumstances."
But Mallory Golski, civic engagement and advocacy manager at the queer youth support organization Kaleidoscope Youth Center, expressed skepticism that providing access through single-occupancy facilities would really help gender expansive students in an interview with Mother Jones. "I just don't foresee a scenario in which schools that are already historically underfunded are going to be able to drop everything and build new bathrooms," she said. "It's just not possible."
The signing of the anti-trans legislation Wednesday runs counter to a move by DeWine last year. The governor chose to veto a bill that blocked gender-affirming care for trans youth and prevented transgender athletes from playing women's sports (lawmakers later overrode his veto).
Ohio is one of 14 states that have implemented some sort of restriction on transgender people's use of bathroom or facilities consistent with their gender identity, according to the think tank the Movement Advancement Project. Some of those states also have restrictions in place on some government buildings.
The recently signed bill in Ohio comes days after Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace of South Carolina introduced a resolution seeking to prevent trans women employees and members of the House of Representatives from using the women's bathrooms at the U.S. Capitol. Though Mace did not initially name any member of Congress specifically, she later admitted the measure was "absolutely" aimed at incoming Democratic Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware, the first openly trans person elected to Congress.
Keep ReadingShow Less
With South Carolina Ruling, Alito May as Well Fly a Confederate Flag
Forget what's been flown over his homes, look at the decision he wrote before the U.S. Supreme Court this week.
May 25, 2024
Only a few days after Samuel Alito was revealed to have flown pro-coup flags over his two homes, he authored an opinion for the U.S. Supreme Court which makes it all but impossible to challenge racial gerrymandering. According to Alito, state legislatures are presumed to be “acting in good faith” when they move thousands of black voters out of a voting district to ensure more Republican representation.
In the old Jim Crow days, Southern states used violent intimidation and techniques like poll taxes, literacy tests, and even lynching to deny black people the vote. Today, following Alito’s opinion, they can simply gerrymander black voters so their votes just don’t matter. Alito goes a long way towards rendering the post-civil war 13th, 14th, and 15th Reconstruction Amendments, as well as the Civil Rights laws of the 1960’s, null and void.
Alito and his Republican colleagues are effectively overturning not only the Reconstruction Amendments but the purpose of the Civil War, as articulated by President Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address
I’m reluctant to use bombastic rhetoric to comment on the Supreme Court, but it’s not a stretch to say that Alito’s opinion (joined by the five other Republican members of the Court) constitutes White Supremacy. AsThe Wall Street Journal headline about the case proclaims, “High Court Restores White Majority Distrcit.” As columnist Elie Mystal points out in The Nation, it’s appropriate that Alito hang pro-'Stop the Steal' flags since he considers only white votes legitimate and Trump won a majority of white voters.
In the instant case, Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, the Republican-controlled legislature moved about 30,000 black voters (who voted 90% Democratic in 2020) out of Charleston’s First District, to insure the election of conservative white Republican Nancy Mace to Congress. The Federal District Court had made the factual and legal determination that this was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Alito’s opinion restored the Republicans’ gerrymander, overturning the lower court’s factual finding and declaring that that the plaintiffs had not proven that this was a racial gerrymander (still theoretically illegal) and not a partisan political gerrymander, which the decision declared to be perfectly constitutional.
Alito’s opinion was pernicious for two reasons: First, it expanded the right of state legislatures to intentionally gerrymander their voting districts to ensure that the majority party in the state legislature could pick their own voters. Under SCOTUS’s wrongly decided 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Clause, the Court's then five-Justice Republican majority held that while partisan gerrymandering may be unconstitutional, there are no standards by which Federal Courts may determine whether or not a gerrymander is partisan and therefore Federal Courts lack jurisdiction to rule on partisan gerrymandering. SCOTUS still left open the possibility of Federal Courts finding that unconstitutional racial gerrymandering had occurred, which the lower found to have happened.
Alito’s Alexander opinion greatly expanded Rucho. Rather than just saying that partisan gerrymandering cases are non-judiciable in Federal Courts, it affirmatively finds partisan gerrymandering to be fully constitutional, writing at the very beginning of his opinion that “as far as the Federal Constitution is concerned, a legislature may pursue partisan ends when it engages in redistricting.”
Now, per Alito and his five other Republican colleagues, a state legislature may openly proclaim that the purpose of its gerrymandering is to ensure that its majority party (usually Republicans) maintains control. Partisan gerrymandering is now overtly blessed by Alito and his Republican colleagues.
Second, while Alito’s opinion still acknowledges racial gerrymandering may be illegal, he sets such a high new legal bar to proving it that, in real life, challenges to racial gerrymandering will almost always fail.
Alito makes the absurd claim that when redistricting to pick their own voters, state legislatures must be presumed to be acting “in good faith.” According to Alito and his fellow Republican justices, “When a federal court finds that race drove a legislature’s districting decisions, it is declaring that the legislature engaged in ‘offensive and demeaning conduct,’’’ adding “we should not be quick to hurl such accusations at the political branches.” God forbid.
Making claims of racial gerrymandering virtually impossible to prove wasn’t good enough for Clarence Thomas. He wrote a concurring opinion that racial gerrymandering is perfectly legal and even questioned the Supreme Court’s historic Brown vs. Board of Education decision which legally banned school segregation.
In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan called Alito’s opinion “upside-down.” It eviscerates the post-civil war 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, handling “Equal Protection,” for example, as though it were effectively designed to protect white people against discrimination by blacks and other minorities. No wonder that an upside down American flag hung over Alito’s home.
Even if one accepts the conservative majority’s embrace of “originalism” as the sole method of interpreting the Constitution, they look only to the original intent of the founders who wrote slavery into the original Constitution and not to the original intent of the Reconstruction Amendments, which are also part of the Constitution, which were clearly intended to protect the rights of black former slaves from discrimination. Now, it seems, Alito and his colleagues view original intent as protecting whites from discrimination by blacks.
As The Atlantic’s Adam Server tweeted, “I hope people understand that what we are seeing is the systematic destruction of the civil war amendments by the Supreme Court, which are what made America an actual democracy and upon which all minority rights in the United States rely.”
Alito and his Republican colleagues are effectively overturning not only the Reconstruction Amendments but the purpose of the Civil War, as articulated by President Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address: “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.”
If the Republican majority Supreme Court continues down this path, such a nation, “conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal” shall not long endure.Keep ReadingShow Less
See More Stories
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy