

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.
“In November, California voters will at last have a chance to make billionaires pay their fair share," said the coalition behind the proposal.
It's official: The proposed California Billionaire Tax Act, which last week was certified for November's election, has a ballot designation—Proposition 40.
"The people of California now have the opportunity to decide what kind of future they want,” Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW) vice president Debru Carthan said on Thursday.
“Proposition 40 asks a simple question: At a time when hospitals are reducing services, working families are being squeezed, and essential services are under attack, should a few hundred billionaires contribute their fair share to protect the state that helped make their extraordinary wealth possible?" Carthan asked. "We believe Californians will answer with a resounding yes."
Drafted by SEIU-UHW, Prop 40 would impose a one-time 5% levy on people worth $1 billion or more, to be paid in annual installments of 1% over five years.
It’s official! The billionaire tax will be on the ballot as Prop 40. This November, Vote YES on Prop 40 to ensure billionaires pay their fair share to keep hospitals and ERs open. #BillionaireTaxNow
[image or embed]
— Billionaire Tax Now (@billionairetaxnow.bsky.social) June 30, 2026 at 1:31 PM
The bil would require the state to spend 90% of revenue from the tax on healthcare and the rest on food assistance and public education. Proponents say the tax would raise roughly $100 billion in revenue. Critics argue that it could drive wealthy residents and investment from California and stall economic growth.
Prop 40 supporters include the Teamsters union and progressive groups like the California Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and Our Revolution, as well as individual progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and Democratic congressional candidate Connie Chan, who is running to replace retiring longtime San Francisco Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.
The measure is opposed by Republicans, business groups, the Democratic Party, and even some progressives, including Chan's opponent, state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-11).
Prop 40's most prominent Democratic opponent is California Gov. Gavin Newsom, whom critics accuse of trying to bamboozle voters with his recently unveiled plan for a national billionaire income tax. Some observers skeptical of the presumed 2028 presidential hopeful contend that his support for an income tax is rooted in knowledge that very rich people actually have relatively little income when compared with their investments and other assets.
Some progressive groups opposing Prop 40—including the California Teachers Association (CTA) and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California—point out that it is a one-off tax on wealth, not income. CTA is backing a separate ballot measure, the Children’s Education and Health Care Protection Act, which would permanently extend Proposition 55, California’s existing high-income-earner tax, which is set to expire in 2030.
In response to Thursday's ballot designation, Billionaire Tax Now said in a statement that "the measure qualified for the ballot after supporters submitted more than 1.6 million signatures from Californians across the state—nearly twice the number required to qualify—making it one of the strongest citizen-led ballot qualification efforts in California history."
"Voters consistently support the billionaire tax by large, double-digit margins," the coalition continued. "For healthcare workers who have dedicated their lives to caring for patients, today’s news isn’t just welcome, it’s critical. With no other viable alternatives proposed by Gov. Newsom, the billionaire tax is the only available option to stop a cascade of hospital and clinic closures spurred by massive federal cuts in HR 1, known as President [Donald] Trump’s so-called 'Big, Beautiful Bill.'"
"In November," Billionaire Tax Now added, "California voters will at last have a chance to make billionaires pay their fair share to help prevent widespread hospital closures, through a commonsense ballot initiative that places a one-time 5% tax on the wealth of approximately 200 billionaires who reside in the Golden State."
“This is not going to be, ‘Billionaires killed this wealth tax’ if it appears on the November ballot,” said Newsom's chief of staff. “It’s going to be Planned Parenthood, doctors, teachers, and labor killed it.”
It comes as no shock that Silicon Valley oligarchs and other plutocrats are trying to keep a proposed billionaire tax backed by California governor and presumptive Democratic presidential aspirant Gavin Newsom off November's ballot. But the participation of progressive groups as "unlikely bedfellows" in the effort to kill the wealth tax has surprised many observers.
Introduced by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW), the California Billionaire Tax would impose a one-time 5% levy on people worth $1 billion or more, to be paid in annual installments of 1% over five years. Proponents say the tax would raise roughly $100 billion in revenue.
The proposal requires the state to spend 90% of revenue from the tax on healthcare and the rest on food assistance and public education. Opponents counter it could drive wealthy residents and investment from California.
Supporters of the billionaire tax have submitted more than 1.5 million signatures, far more than the roughly 875,000 valid signatures required to qualify for November's ballot. The signatures are still being verified, and the office of California Secretary of State Shirley Weber has until June 25, 2026 to determine whether the initiative qualifies.
The measure is backed by numerous progressive groups including the Teamsters union, California Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and Our Revolution, as well as individual progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and Democratic congressional candidate Connie Chan, who is running to replace retiring longtime San Francisco congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.
However, opponents are trying to stop the proposal from qualifying for the ballot, while preparing for a fight in the likely event that it does.
Newsom, the California Democratic Party, and a growing list of groups—including the California Teachers Association (CTA), Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California (PPAC), and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California—are publicly opposing the tax and are urging SEIU-UHW to pull the proposal before June 25.
Republicans, the California Chamber of Commerce, and other capitalist interests oppose the billionaire tax, as do both candidates for California governor, Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton, and Chan's opponent in the San Francisco congressional race, state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-11).
Newsom said that the proposed tax "makes no sense" and would be "really damaging to the state."
CTA argues that the tax is a one-time revenue source, while California schools and healthcare programs need permanent, recurring funding. To that end, the union is backing a separate ballot measure—the Children's Education and Health Care Protection Act—which would permanently extend Proposition 55, California's existing high-income-earner tax, set to expire in 2030.
Jodi Hicks, PPAC's president, recently said that the California Billionaire Tax's "uncertain impacts on the state budget and lack of specificity on healthcare allocations will do more harm than good in the long term."
PPAC and aligned groups including California Medical Association and California Primary Care Association also support extending Prop 55.
Meanwhile, tech billionaires and Silicon Valley executives—including Google co-founder Sergey Brin, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, and Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen—have raised tens of millions of dollars for Building a Better California, a political action committee dedicated to defeating the proposed tax at the ballot box.
Building a Better California is also backing separate initiatives designed to weaken or nullify the billionaire tax, including a ban on retroactive wealth taxation, restrictions on how any new tax revenue can be allocated, and the imposition of new auditing requirements.
Newsom and his allies have a useful weapon to deflect claims that he's helping billionaires who are trying to defeat the proposed tax.
“This is not going to be, ‘Billionaires killed this wealth tax’ if it appears on the November ballot,” Nathan Barankin, Newsom’s chief of staff, told The New York Times Wednesday. “It’s going to be Planned Parenthood, doctors, teachers, and labor killed it.”
SEIU-UHW accused opponents of the proposed tax of “carrying water for a few of the world’s most controversial billionaires."
“Their complicity with billionaires at the expense of patient interests is no surprise,” SEIU-UHW chief of staff Suzanne Jimenez told the Times.
“We believed that she was being authentic and honest with us," said one Virginia labor leader. "She just flat-out flipped."
Labor unions are feeling betrayed after Virginia's Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger vetoed a bill on Thursday that would have restored collective bargaining rights for half a million public sector workers.
Virginia is one of the most restrictive states in the country for public sector bargaining, a holdover from the Jim Crow era when the General Assembly and other state legislatures across the South sought to crush the power of a public workforce with many Black employees.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, Virginia has one of the largest public sector pay gaps in the country, with state and local government employees making about 27% less on average than their private-sector peers, and it is similarly stratified in other states with weak collective bargaining rights.
Spanberger, a former US representative who was elected governor this past November, made pro-union messaging central to her affordability-focused platform. She decried President Donald Trump's executive order stripping federal workers of collective bargaining rights last year and said that as governor, she'd "look forward to working with members of our General Assembly to make sure more Virginians can negotiate for the benefits and fair treatment that they earn.”
But since taking office, Spanberger's support for restoring public sector union rights has been more tepid as she's gotten an earful from fiscally conservative Right-to-Work and taxpayer advocacy groups who claimed higher salaries for public employees would drain state funds and raise the cost of services.
When a bill to immediately mandate collective bargaining rights to 500,000 workers was proposed in the Democratic-controlled General Assembly, she introduced amendments aimed at watering down the bill—making it optional for employers to recognize unions, delaying the full implementation until 2030, and introducing what unions called a "kill-switch" that would have allowed future governors to revoke collective bargaining power.
The legislature shot Spanberger's amendments down and passed the bill in its original form. On Thursday, the governor vetoed it altogether.
In her veto message, Spanberger said she wanted the bill's other collective bargaining provisions for state employees, home care workers, and higher education employees to go into effect first "in order to demonstrate the efficacy of this new system" before it was opened up to all public employees.
But the unions that advocated for the bill say Spanberger led workers on with false promises.
"This veto is a devastating betrayal to the hundreds of thousands of public employees who have spent years, and in many cases decades, fighting for a seat at the table," said Doris Crouse-Mays, the president of the Virginia AFL-CIO. "Spanberger campaigned publicly and privately on promises [of] affordability, to support working families and respect workers' rights... Instead, when presented with the opportunity to make history and deliver on those promises, she chose to side with fear, political calculation, business, and the same anti-worker arguments that have been used for generations to deny workers power in Virginia."
LaNoral Thomas, the president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Virginia 512—a union which helped lead the charge to pass the bill—told the Virginia news site Dogwood that her union had "high hopes" for Spanberger when she was elected.
“We believed that she was being authentic and honest with us," Thomas said. "She just flat-out flipped. It is shocking.”
"Public employees are not a special interest. They are our neighbors. They are the educators, bus drivers, social workers, librarians, custodians, and first responders who hold our communities together," said a joint statement from Carol Bauer, president of the Virginia Education Association, and Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association.
They emphasized that the veto also carried "a deep racial and gender impact," noting that "Virginia’s public sector bargaining ban is rooted in a Jim Crow era effort to silence Black workers at the University of Virginia Hospital who organized for fair pay and dignity." They said, "Preserving that legacy today disproportionately harms women and workers of color, who make up so much of the public-service workforce and who have the most to gain from fair wages, safer workplaces, and a real voice on the job."
Lee Saunders, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)—the largest national union of public sector workers in the US, with more than 1.4 million members—said that Spanberger had caved to "anti-worker extremists [who] have sidelined working people while starving the public services Virginia families rely on, earning the state a reputation as one of the most anti-worker in the country."
"While the governor has broken her word," Saunders said, "AFSCME members are deeply grateful to the bill’s sponsors and the leadership of both chambers, who kept theirs. Their commitment to working people stands in stark contrast to the governor and will not be forgotten."
"Gov. Spanberger made a choice today," he added. "Working people will remember it."
"This is a direct threat to patient care across California," said the chief of staff at the union sponsoring the ballot measure.
The labor union leading the fight for California's billionaire tax on Wednesday pointed to recent reporting about hospital layoffs to make the case for the ballot measure, which would impose a one-time 5% tax on state billionaires' wealth to fund healthcare.
The Orange County Register reported last week that "the more than 400 hospitals statewide have already laid off more than 3,400 healthcare workers as of mid-March, with as many as 1,600 coming from Santa Barbara to Orange County and the Inland Empire area, according to a tally of layoffs provided by the state's Employment Development Department and data collected by Paul Young, senior vice president of public policy and reimbursement with the California Hospital Association of Southern California."
As the newspaper detailed, hospital executives "are hinting of a second wave of layoffs," citing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or HR 1, that congressional Republicans passed and President Donald Trump signed last summer. The law will cut about $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next decade, which is expected to significantly impact the state's Medi-Cal program that covers more than 15 million lower-income residents.
The Center for Labor Research and Education at the University of California, Berkeley "estimates the Medi-Cal cuts could lead to a loss of 72,000 to 145,000 healthcare jobs throughout California, representing 3% to 5% of the state's 2.65 million healthcare positions," the Register noted. "These job losses include positions in hospitals, clinics, and home care."
The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the lead sponsor of the ballot measure that Californians are set to vote on in November, highlighted the reporting in a Wednesday statement. SEIU-UHW chief of staff Suzanne Jimenez declared that "this is a direct threat to patient care across California."
"When hospitals lose funding, they lose staff," Jimenez said. "And when they lose staff, patients face longer wait times, fewer services, and reduced access to lifesaving care. Without urgent action, communities across California will lose access to the care they depend on."
In the union's statement, Mayra Castañeda shared concerns about losing her job as an ultrasound technologist at a hospital in Lynwood, California. She said: "Every day I come to work thinking about my patients, making sure they get the care they need, that they feel safe, that they're not alone. Now, I'm also thinking about whether I'll still have a job next month."
"We're already stretched thin, and the idea that more staff could be cut is terrifying," Castañeda continued. "It doesn't just impact us as staff. It impacts every patient who walks through our doors. You can't keep taking resources out of healthcare and expect people not to suffer."
Opinion: Unlike billionaires, we don’t need mansions or yachts. We're just asking for health care that our families can rely on.www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...
[image or embed]
— Billionaire Tax Now (@billionairetaxnow.bsky.social) April 1, 2026 at 3:40 PM
Experts estimate that, if passed, the billionaire tax ballot measure would raise about $100 billion from 2027-31 from California's 200 richest residents. Recent polling suggests the proposal is on its way to success.
It's drawn support from national progressive figures such as US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who last month partnered with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to introduce the Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act. The bill would impose a 5% annual wealth tax and direct the revenue toward reversing GOP healthcare cuts from HR 1, expanding Medicare, building affordable houses, helping families pay for childcare, boosting teacher salaries, and sending direct payments to members of households making $150,000 or less.
Unlike the California ballot measure, that federal "tax the rich" bill and another introduced last month by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) have no clear path to passage in the Republican-controlled Congress. However, hospital layoffs as a result of HR 1—which featured more tax giveaways for wealthy Americans—aren't limited to California.
According to a Public Citizen report released Tuesday, 446 hospitals across the United States could close or reduce services due to HR 1's cuts to Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program. The publication notes that these "hospitals collectively have 68,986 beds and served approximately 6.6 million patients in 2024. They employ approximately 275,458 direct patient care workers (this does not include nonmedical workers, such as administrative staff)."
Public Citizen researcher and report author Eileen O'Grady stressed that "Trump's cuts to Medicaid will hurt millions of low-income and disabled Americans, and will deepen financial strains that are already plaguing rural and safety-net hospitals—compromising their ability to deliver care, potentially leading many to close."
"Congress should take urgent action to restore all Medicaid funding cuts enacted by Trump and Republicans in Congress," O'Grady argued, "and should extend the enhanced premium tax credits for coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces."
"No nurse should be asked to accept less pay, fewer benefits, or less dignity for doing lifesaving work," said New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Thousands of nurses are hitting the picket lines in what will be the largest nurses strike in the history of New York City.
The New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA) on Monday announced that nearly 15,000 nurses at Mount Sinai Hospital, Mount Sinai Morningside and West, Montefiore, and NewYork-Presbyterian are going on strike after "greedy hospital management at these wealthy private hospitals have given frontline nurses no other choice."
The NYSNA posted a long list of sticking points on contract negotiations, including "safe staffing for our patients, protections from workplace violence, and healthcare for frontline nurses."
NYSNA president Nancy Hagans said that any patients in need of care at these hospitals should enter them, emphasizing that "going into the hospital to get the care you need is not crossing our strike line." She also encouraged patients to join the picket line with the nurses after receiving care.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani spoke out in solidarity with the striking nurses, while also emphasizing the importance of "ensuring New Yorkers have the care they need... especially during flu season."
"No New Yorker should have to fear losing access to healthcare," Mamdani wrote in a social media post. "And no nurse should be asked to accept less pay, fewer benefits, or less dignity for doing lifesaving work. Our nurses have kept this city alive through its hardest moments. Their value is not negotiable."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also expressed support for the striking nurses, while denouncing "NewYork-Presbyterian, Montefiore, and Mount Sinai hospitals for being willing to spend millions on replacement nurses rather than bargain for a fair contract."
The NYSNA also got a boost from 1199SEIU, which is the largest union of healthcare workers in New York.
"At this time of unprecedented cuts to Medicaid and other healthcare programs by Republican leaders in Washington, DC healthcare workers should not bear the brunt of funding shortfalls," said 1199SEIU president Yvonne Armstrong. "More than ever, we need stability in our healthcare system, which means investing in the type of good healthcare jobs which are fundamental to the wellbeing of caregivers and the communities they serve."
Armstrong also called on the hospitals to "bargain in good faith with NYSNA, refrain from committing unfair labor practices, and sign fair contracts that honor nurses’ contributions."
"Today’s strike isn’t just about Starbucks. It's about a broken system where billionaires and CEOs keep getting richer while the politicians they bankroll gut our wages, healthcare, and rights."
The No Kings Alliance on Friday announced that it was mobilizing in support of Starbucks workers who went on strike this week to demand a fair contract.
The alliance, which organized one of the largest demonstrations in US history last month with nationwide "No Kings" protests against the President Donald Trump's administration, pledged solidarity with the striking workers, while highlighting the massive disparity in pay for Starbucks baristas and the company's CEO.
"Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol was paid $96 million for just 120 days of work in 2024, paying himself 6,666 times what the average barista made—the worst CEO-to-worker pay inequity in the country," said the alliance. "At the same time, Trump and his billionaire backers are doing their best to scare people out of speaking up for their rights on the job and in their communities."
"Don't cross the picket line," the alliance urged its supporters, while also encouraging them to sign the "No Contract, No Coffee" pledge, an online petition demanding that the company negotiate with Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) on a just contract.
"I call on you to bargain a fair contract with Starbucks Workers United baristas!" the pledge reads. "I support Starbucks baristas in their fight for a union and a fair contract, and pledge not to cross the picket line. That means I will not patronize any Starbucks store when baristas are on [unfair labor practices] strike."
The striking Starbucks workers also got a pledge of solidarity from the AFL-CIO, which on Thursday urged the company to hammer out a deal with its workers to ensure fair pay and schedules.
"For four long years, SBWU members have fought tirelessly for better pay, fair hours, and adequate staffing for more than 12,000 workers and counting," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler. "Yet Starbucks has dug its heels in, engaging in shameless and persistent union busting... We urge Niccol and Starbucks corporate executives to finally do right by the workers who drive the company’s profit and negotiate a long-overdue fair contract."
SEIU pledged support for the Starbucks workers, while also placing the strike in the context of the broader fight between labor and capital.
"Today’s strike isn’t just about Starbucks," the union wrote in a social media post. "It’s about a broken system where billionaires and CEOs keep getting richer while the politicians they bankroll gut our wages, healthcare, and rights. Baristas are fighting for a fair contract and for a more just society."
Some progressive politicians also gave the striking workers a shoutout.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) vowed to keep out of Starbucks franchises until the workers' demands are met.
"When we strike, we win!" Tlaib exclaimed.
New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani joined the Starbucks boycott and encouraged all of his supporters to follow suit.
"Together, we can send a powerful message: No contract, no coffee," the democratic socialist wrote.
Democratic socialist Seattle Mayor-elect Katie Wilson—whose city is home to the coffee giant's headquarters—attended an SBWU rally where she joined them on the picket line and said, "I am not buying Starbucks, and you should not either."
Socialist Seattle Mayor-elect Katie Wilson's first move after winning the election was to boycott Starbucks, a hometown company. pic.twitter.com/zPoNULxfuk
— Ari Hoffman 🎗 (@thehoffather) November 14, 2025
Starbucks workers began their strike on Thursday, and SBWU has warned the company that it is prepared to dig in for a long fight unless it returns to the negotiating table.
Negotiations between the union and Starbucks stalled out last spring, and more than 90% of unionized baristas last week voted to authorize a strike intended to hit the company during the busy holiday season.
"The American people are fed up with Trump's pathetic attempt at wearing the crown," said one event organizer.
The coalition of progressive organizations that helped organize the nationwide "No Kings" protests this summer are ramping up for a potentially even bigger event in the fall.
The organizations pushed out new publicity on Monday about the "No Kings 2" demonstrations scheduled to take place across the country on October 18. The planned demonstrations come as the Trump administration is accelerating its plans to send the National Guard into US cities and continues to send masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents into immigrant communities.
Sponsors of the No Kings 2 events include ACLU, American Federation of Teachers, Common Defense, 50501, Human Rights Campaign, Indivisible, League of Conservation Voters, MoveOn, National Nurses United, Public Citizen, SEIU, and United We Dream Action.
In an interview with Rolling Stone, Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin said that he expected this fall's No Kings sequel to be even bigger than the first one, which drew an estimated 5 million people into the streets across more than 2,000 events. Levin also outlined the importance of hitting a critical threshold for anti-Trump demonstrations.
"Experts in authoritarianism tell us, based on research, that you need 3.5% of the population engaged, in a sustained way, to successfully push back against an authoritarian regime," he said. "In the American context, that's about 11 or 12 million people. For No Kings 1, we got about halfway there. And we have funneled a lot of those people into our trainings around strategic noncooperation. But we need to come together again."
Jacob Thomas, a United States Armed Forces veteran and communications director for "No Kings 2" sponsor Common Defense, said in a statement that a common theme that has united the organizations is the fight against US President Donald Trump's authoritarian ambitions.
"We must all do our part to fight back against his authoritarianism and military occupation of cities," he said. "We cannot allow a wannabe dictator to destroy our democracy, gut veteran healthcare, keep people from accessing the ballot box, and tank our economy. We must all join together in solidarity to fight back and secure our freedoms."
Human Rights Campaign president Kelley Robinson said the protests were necessary because Trump's actions were direct attacks on the American dream of "freedom afforded to all people."
"Since taking office, he has tried to erode our freedoms and amass power for himself, censoring history, undermining our voting rights, defying the rule of law, and stripping people of basic rights simply because of who they are or who they love," she said. "But this country does not and will never have a king. The power of the people is and will continue to be greater than the man obsessed with keeping power for himself."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, ticked off a list of grievances against the president to argue that mass protests against him are needed now more than ever.
"In less than 10 months of his presidency, Trump has ticked off every box of a king's playbook," she said. "He has plastered his face on banners across DC, weaponized National Guard troops against our communities, disappeared people or thrown them out of the country without due process, attempted to sabotage elections and erode our democracy, and trivialized the power of Congress and the courts. He has violated the Constitution over and over again. The American people are fed up with Trump's pathetic attempt at wearing the crown."
The first set of "No Kings" protests came on Trump's 79th birthday, on the same day he put on a massive military parade that cost $30 million to produce.
"The very institution that is supposed to keep district residents safe is now allowing ICE to jeopardize the safety and lives of hardworking immigrants and their families," said one local labor leader.
The ACLU and a local branch of one of the nation's largest labor unions were among those who condemned Thursday's order by Washington, DC's police chief authorizing greater cooperation with federal forces sent by President Donald Trump to target and arrest undocumented immigrants in the sanctuary city.
Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith issued an executive order directing MPD officers to assist federal forces including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in sharing information about people in situations including traffic stops. The directive does not apply to people already in MPD custody. The order also allows MPD to provide transportation for federal immigration agencies and people they've detained.
While Trump called the order a "great step," immigrant defenders slammed the move.
"Now our police department is going to be complicit and be reporting our own people to ICE?" DC Councilmember Janeese Lewis George (D-Ward 4) said. "We have values in this city. Coordination and cooperation means we become a part of the regime."
ACLU DC executive director Monica Hopkins said in a statement that "DC police chief's new order inviting collaboration with ICE is dangerous and unnecessary."
"Immigration enforcement is not the role of local police—and when law enforcement aligns itself with ICE, it fosters fear among DC residents, regardless of citizenship status," Hopkins continued. "Our police should serve the people of DC, not ICE's deportation machine."
"As the federal government scales up Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations, including mass deportations, we see how local law enforcement face pressure to participate," she added. "Federal courts across the country have found both ICE and local agencies liable for unconstitutional detentions under ICE detainers. Police departments that choose to carry out the federal government's business risk losing the trust they need to keep communities safe."
Understanding your rights can help you stay calm and advocate for yourself if approached by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or police. 🧵
[image or embed]
— ACLU of the District of Columbia (@aclu-dc.bsky.social) August 11, 2025 at 7:30 AM
Jaime Contreras, executive vice president and Latino caucus chair of 32BJ SEIU, a local Service Employees International Union branch, said, "It should horrify everyone that DC's police chief has just laid out the welcoming mat for the Trump administration to continue its wave of terror throughout our city."
"The very institution that is supposed to keep district residents safe is now allowing ICE to jeopardize the safety and lives of hardworking immigrants and their families," Contreras continued. "Their complicity is dangerous enough but helping to enforce Trump's tactics and procedures are a violation of the values of DC residents."
"DC needs a chief who will not cave to this administration's fear tactics aimed at silencing anyone who speaks out against injustice," Contreras added. "We call for an immediate end to these rogue attacks that deny basic due process, separates families, and wrongly deports hardworking immigrants and their families."
The condemnation—and local protests—came as dozens of immigrants have been detained this week as government forces occupy and fan out across the city following Trump's deployment of National Guard troops and federalization of the MPD. The president dubiously declared a public safety emergency on Monday, invoking Section 740 of the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act. Trump also said that he would ask the Republican-controlled Congress to authorize an extension of his federal takeover beyond the 30 days allowed under Section 740.
Washington, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser—a Democrat who calls the occupying agencies "our federal partners"—has quietly sought to overturn the capital's Sanctuary Values Amendment Act of 2020, which prohibits MPD from releasing detained individuals to ICE or inquiring about their legal status. The law also limits city officials' cooperation with immigration agencies, including by restricting information sharing regarding individuals in MPD custody.
While the DC Council recently blocked Bowser's attempt to slip legislation repealing the sanctuary policy into her proposed 2026 budget, Congress has the power to modify or even overturn Washington laws under the District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973. In June, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives passed Rep. Clay Higgins' (R-La.) District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act, which would repeal Washington's sanctuary policies and compel compliance with requests from the Department of Homeland Security, which includes ICE. The Senate is currently considering the bill.
Trump's crackdown has also targeted Washington's unhoused population, with MPD conducting sweeps of encampments around the city.
"There's definitely a lot of chaos, fear, and confusion," Amber Harding, executive director of the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, told CNN Thursday.
David Beatty, an unhoused man living in an encampment near the Kennedy Center that Trump threateningly singled out last week, was among the victims of a Thursday sweep.
Beatty told USA Today that Trump "is targeting and persecuting us," adding that "he wants to take our freedom away."
"Working people deserve leaders who will fight for them, not grovel at the feet of their billionaire donors," said Maurice Mitchell of the Working Families Party, one of the groups involved in the new coalition.
A coalition of dozens of labor groups and other progressive activist organizations has launched a new $50 million initiative to flip the U.S. House of Representatives in 2026 with a coalition of working-class voters.
The political action committee, Battleground Alliance PAC, announced Wednesday that it will seek to flip at least 35 Republican-held districts for Democrats by mobilizing voters angry about the Trump administration's assault on the social safety net and authoritarian attacks on civil liberties.
The groups will target their efforts toward mobilizing voters who have been hit the hardest by the Republican agenda.
"These are parents who will lose healthcare for their kids, families struggling after [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] cuts, seniors not being able to afford their medication, people struggling with higher utility bills, and workers who've watched billionaires get tax breaks while their wages stay flat," the group said Wednesday. "They're not just participating, they're at the center of leading this effort to take back control and make their voices heard at the ballot box next November."
The coalition is attempting to build upon the successes of Battleground New York, which mobilized progressive voters in 2024 to flip back many seats lost to Republicans during the previous cycle. Amid the daily outrages of President Donald Trump's second term, they believe that success can be replicated nationally.
"People are angry for a reason," said Stephanie Porta, campaign manager for the Battleground Alliance. "They've seen their rights stripped, their wages stagnate, their bills skyrocket, their healthcare attacked—and they're done waiting. This isn't about the usual D.C. politics. This is about the majority of Americans saying: enough is enough."
Among the groups taking part in the alliance are the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Working Families Party, Planned Parenthood Votes, Indivisible, and MoveOn.
The announcement of Battleground Alliance came on the same day that the Congressional Progressive Caucus outlined its major priorities for 2026 in a briefing to reporters.
"Working people in America are getting screwed by corrupt politicians and big corporations that are driving costs up and keeping pay and benefits down," said the caucus's chair, Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas).
Casar and his colleagues introduced four "task forces" that "go directly at those big problems facing Americans: fighting corruption and corporate greed in order to lower costs and win better pay and benefits."
The Battleground Alliance is taking a similar approach, focusing on the material effects of the Trump agenda on working people.
" GOP members of Congress betrayed their constituents when they voted to kick 17 million Americans off their health care," said Maurice Mitchell, national director of the Working Families Party. "Working people deserve leaders who will fight for them, not grovel at the feet of their billionaire donors. We're ready to organize in districts all across the country to kick out members of Congress who lied to their constituents and voted for this disastrous budget."
The group is planning to pour $1 million into the most competitive districts in the country, targeting Republicans who voted for Trump's massive budget legislation.
Some of the Republican targets it has already singled out include Rep. David Valadao, whose district in California's San Joaquin Valley is majority Latino and has one of the highest Medicaid enrollment rates in the country; and Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, whose Allentown, Pennsylvania district now has 25,000 people at risk of losing food stamps as a result of the law.
"Working people are done watching politicians in Washington hand out favors to the wealthy while our communities struggle to afford care, housing, and food," said April Verrett, president of SEIU. "Through 2026 and beyond, we will continue to organize in places that they've tried to ignore because that's where real change begins."
Unions and allies in California and across the United States on Saturday are demanding the immediate release of David Huerta, president of SEIU California and SEIU-United Service Workers West, after the highly regarded labor leader was injured and then arrested while witnessing a raid by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents on Friday.
"SEIU California members call for the immediate release of our President, David Huerta, who was injured and detained at the site of one of today's ICE raids in Los Angeles," said Tia Orr, executive director of SEIU California, in a statement.
"This isn't just an overreach—it's a nationwide pattern of suppression." —Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.)
In a later update, the union stated that Huerta—a veteran labor leader whose union represents over 45,000 janitors, airport workers, security guards, and other property service workers—had been released from the hospital, where he received treatment for injuries sustained during his arrest, but that he remained in custody.
The union included remarks from Huerta, who said, "We all collectively have to object to this madness because this is not justice. This is injustice."
"This is about something much bigger" than his arrest, said Huerta. "This is about how we as a community stand together and resist the injustice."
According to a statement released by the Department of Homeland Security, approximately 44 individuals were "administratively arrested" in a series of raids at retail stores in the Los Angeles area. In contrast, one individual, identified as Huerta, was arrested "for obstruction" of federal officers.
"This is what fascism looks like," said California State Senator Scott Wiener, a Democrat. "Secret police raids. Injuring protesters. Arresting labor leaders."
U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, the chief prosecutor in the Central District of California, claimed in a post on social media that "federal agents were executing a lawful judicial warrant at a LA worksite this morning when David Huerta deliberately obstructed their access by blocking their vehicle. He was arrested for interfering with federal officers and will face arraignment in federal court on Monday."
"Let me be clear: I don't care who you are—if you impede federal agents, you will be arrested and prosecuted," said Essayli. "No one has the right to assault, obstruct, or interfere with federal authorities carrying out their duties."
A video posted by Essayli alongside his statement appears to show the moment Huerta is pushed over by ICE agents amid a chaotic scene on a sidewalk where officers are clearing an area in front of a gate for an approaching van.
Federal agents were executing a lawful judicial warrant at a LA worksite this morning when David Huerta deliberately obstructed their access by blocking their vehicle. He was arrested for interfering with federal officers and will face arraignment in federal court on Monday. Let… pic.twitter.com/GIFD34LIcF
— U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) June 7, 2025
Separate footage from a different angle shows Huerta going down backward due to a forceful push by the officers and landing with his neck and head on a hard concrete curb:
"Today, SEIU-USWW President, my friend, and constituent David Huerta was thrown to the ground, tased, injured, and arrested for exercising his First Amendment right to observe and document law enforcement activity," said Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.), who represents areas of Los Angeles. "This isn't just an overreach—it's a nationwide pattern of suppression. We must stand together."
California's Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom also weighed in. "David Huerta is a respected leader, a patriot, and an advocate for working people," said Newsom. "No one should ever be harmed for witnessing government action."
Outrage over Huerta's arrest and ongoing detention, both from the labor union movement and immigrant rights groups, continued to spread on Friday and into Saturday.
"We refuse to stay silent while ICE terrorizes working-class communities," said the California Federation of Labor Unions (CFLU). "We are turning out and standing united in solidarity with SEIU-California, calling on the release of SEIU President David Huerta!"
In a statement, CFLU president Lorena Gonzalez called for "an end to the cruel, destructive, and indiscriminate ICE raids that are tearing apart our communities, disrupting our economies, and hurting all working people. Immigrant workers are essential to our society—feeding our nation, caring for our elders, cleaning our workplaces, and building our homes."
In a post on social media, SEIU California said: "Let’s be clear: ICE injured and detained the president of SEIU California for peacefully observing. ICE picked the wrong side. The wrong state. The wrong person. And the wrong union. David Huerta stood up. And 750,000 SEIU workers are standing with him."