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
u s house of representatives
Dems, Don’t Give Trump the Tools to Crush Protest Groups He Doesn’t Like
A bipartisan bill that would enable the next administration to strip nonprofits of their status is an example of how the crackdown on pro-Palestinian activism could make it easier for Trump to crush all dissent.
Nov 20, 2024
You could see this one coming.
It seems like about five years ago—in this crazy, mixed-up world of ours—but it was just last April when student protests over Israel’s post-October 7 attacks on Gaza and the deaths of Palestinian civilians roiled dozens of college campuses from coast-to-coast.
The tent encampments and student-led marches, from the Penn campus here in Philly to UCLA some 3,000 miles away, hearkened back to the youth unrest of the 1960s, but things were a little different this time. In an overheated election year, with some leading politicians accusing the protesters of antisemitism, university leaders were quicker to call in the police, who didn’t hesitate to make arrests or use force.
it’s hard to know much reluctance to take to the streets is also driven by the fresh memories of the riot cops on campus last spring and their aggressive tactics, which led to more than 3,100 arrests.
At the time, a few pundits warned that the aggressive police-state tactics felt like a grim foreshadowing of what could await all protesters—not just those in opposition to Israel’s far-right government and its war tactics—if an authoritarian Donald Trump won the November election. One wrote: “By the time a returned-to-the-White-House Trump makes good on his vow to send out troops and tanks to put down any January 20, 2025, inauguration protesters, America might be numb to such images.”
OK, I cheated: That pundit was me. But now that Trump is indeed the president-elect, with a vow of retribution against his political enemies, there’s growing concern that the incoming administration will clamp down hard on the right of dissent that is supposed to be guaranteed in the First Amendment. In a 4:00 am posting to his Truth Social website, the 45th and soon-to-be 47th POTUS confirmed that he plans to use the U.S. military for his sweeping mass-deportation agenda, which did little to calm fears that troops could also put down protests.
Meanwhile, and even more urgently, a bipartisan bill is racing through the current lame-duck session of Congress that—in an echo of the police-state style crackdown against the Gaza protests, which were often in Democratic-run jurisdictions—could have a much more sweeping impact.
The Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act—also known as H.R. 9495—emerged from the uproar over the Gaza protests to give an administration’s treasury secretary, without further input from Congress, the ability to potentially devastate nonprofit groups by stripping their nonprofit status if they determine the group is “a terrorist supporting organization.” The bill’s bipartisan backers proposed the measure with more radical pro-Palestinian groups in mind, and also tied the bill to an understandably popular second measure that removes the threat of tax penalties for Americans held hostage overseas, including as many as four to seven now in Gaza.
Some 52 Democrats, including the staunchest supporters of Israel’s conduct, joined the GOP House majority last week in an effort to fast-track the bill that needed a two-thirds majority and fell just short. This week, the bill is moving toward final House approval that would only require a simple majority—even as progressive Democrats are increasingly alarmed that the incoming Trump administration will use to measure to punish other left-leaning groups that have nothing to do with Palestine.
“I think in view of Trump’s election, this bill basically authorizes him to impose a death penalty on any nonprofit in America or any civil society group that happens to be on his enemies list and claim that they’re a terrorist,” Rep. Lloyd Doggett, a Texas Democrat, told The Washington Postin voicing the growing liberal alarm over the measure. The congressman said those fears would apply to “a hospital performing an abortion, a community news outlet that he doesn’t think is giving him sufficient attention—or basically anyone, certainly groups that might be trying to assist migrants in this country.”
The measure is also opposed by groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and the international anti-famine organization Oxfam International, which chillingly compared H.R. 9495 to what it’s confronted around the globe trying to function in authoritarian regimes. “This bill follows the same playbook Oxfam has seen other governments around the world use to crush dissent,” its American CEO said last week in a statement. “Now we are seeing it here at home.”
Mother Jones also notes in a new piece that the anti-Gaza-protest playbook will likely inspire a Trump regime in other ways, including following through on his campaign threats to deport campus protesters. Cornell University grad student Momodou Taal—a protester whose student visa was revoked but has dodged deportation, for now—told the magazine that last spring’s crackdown set an awful precedent, saying: “I think what [President Joe] Biden has allowed for is that the clampdown is made easier for Trump now because the groundwork has already been laid.”
Indeed, Cornell’s moves to suspend Taal and other pro-Palestinian students who disrupted a job fair in September is just one part of a campus crusade against dissent and, arguably, free speech that seems to have succeeded in sharply reducing protests against the killing of civilians in Gaza—or against anything else for that matter.
In the two weeks since Trump’s election to another term, protests have been—with a handful of exceptions involving the socialist far left—a dog that hasn’t barked, in sharp contrast to Trump’s initial victory in 2016. Mostly that’s because many who formed a “Trump Resistance” eight years ago have concluded that mass protest isn’t the most effective tactic, but it’s hard to know much reluctance to take to the streets is also driven by the fresh memories of the riot cops on campus last spring and their aggressive tactics, which led to more than 3,100 arrests.
But this much is clear: If Democrats are serious about serving as the last line of defense against Trump’s most monarchical tendencies, the last thing they should be doing right now should be giving the incoming president a tool to quash protest groups he doesn’t like, using dictatorial fiat. Over the last 14 days, I’ve received a ton of reader emails asking what they can do to make a difference and not surrender to the end of American democracy as we’ve known it. Here’s one simple and easy thing: Call your member of Congress and urge them to oppose an un-American piece of legislation called H.R. 9495.
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Progressives Challenge Biden's 'Unauthorized' Mideast Militarism
"Absent an imminent or actual sudden attack on the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces, the executive branch may not introduce U.S. armed forces into hostilities without Congress' prior approval."
Nov 01, 2024
A handful of progressive Democrats in the House of Representatives on Friday accused President Joe Biden of violating the Constitution and the War Powers Act by deploying U.S. troops to help Israel's war effort and urged his administration to pursue "de-escalatory action" in the Middle East.
"We are deeply concerned about the increasing role and involvement of the U.S. armed forces in expanding wars across the Middle East," Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), and André Carson (D-Ind.)—who all sponsored last year's " Cease-fire Now" resolution—wrote in a letter to Biden.
"Congress has the sole power to declare war."
This includes the deployment of U.S. commandos and intelligence officers to Israel just days after last year's Hamas-led attack that left more than 1,100 Israelis and foreign nationals dead—some of them killed fratricidally—and over 240 others taken prisoner, as well as a crew to operate an anti-ballistic missile battery following Iran's barrage against Israel last month.
"Congress has the sole power to declare war under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution," the lawmakers wrote. "As Section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution of 1973 makes abundantly clear, Congress holds the power to direct the removal of any armed forces engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization."
"Absent an imminent or actual sudden attack on the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces, the executive branch may not introduce U.S. armed forces into hostilities without Congress' prior approval," they stressed.
The letter—which came shortly before Election Day and is backed by over a dozen peace, progressive, and faith-based groups—continues:
Despite the administration's stated goal of avoiding a regional war, increasingly dangerous escalations have been made possible by transfers to the Israeli government of billions of dollars worth of weapons and military aid, comprehensive intelligence sharing and operational coordination, and diplomatic cover from the United States in the face of widespread condemnation from the international community...
Meanwhile, recent reporting indicates American military officials have discussed unauthorized U.S. military strikes against Iran. We have already seen an increase in U.S. service members deployed to the region in areas where there is a clear and present danger of hostilities.
"This current involvement, and any additional involvement or deployment, of the armed forces in the Israeli government's expanding regional war fall under the definition of 'hostilities' in the War Powers Resolution and are not in response to an imminent or actual attack against the United States," the lawmakers wrote. "As such, these actions are unauthorized and are subject to Congress' authorities pursuant to the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution."
The legislators ask Biden to explain his administration's "legal or constitutional justification" for "proposed hostilities" against Iran, whether the U.S. is "providing military services of any nature" for Israel, and for clarification of claims that U.S. attacks on Houthi rebels in Yemen were conducted in accordance with the Constitution's self-defense authority.
The lawmakers stressed:
De-escalatory action is urgent and essential. Since October of last year, the Israeli government has killed over 43,000 Palestinians in Gaza, with this number likely a significant undercount. This includes over 16,700 children. Over 90% of the population has been displaced, and Palestinians throughout Gaza continue to face famine and starvation. In this same period, the Israeli government has killed over 2,700 people in Lebanon, the vast majority of whom have been killed since the start of the Israeli military's ground invasion and bombing campaign last month. Over 1.2 million people in Lebanon have already been displaced. These campaigns of collective punishment have continued to spread, with sieges on Palestinian cities and refugee camps in the West Bank, the bombing of critical civilian infrastructure in Yemen, and escalations of belligerence with Iran and Syria.
"These destructive wars must end, as must any unauthorized U.S. involvement in them," the letter concludes. "The American public deserves a say on the issue of war. Thus, Congress' involvement and debate are necessary. Every day that passes without a cease-fire produces catastrophic loss of life and threatens further death and destruction. We have an obligation to both the living and the dead to put an immediate end to this devastation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UK Court Rules Fired Professor's Anti-Zionist Views Are 'Not Antisemitic'
David Miller was terminated by the University of Bristol for expressing beliefs including that Zionism is "ideologically bound to lead to the practices of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide."
Oct 15, 2024
An employment court in the United Kingdom this week published its full ruling in the case of David Miller, a University of Bristol professor whose firing due to alleged antisemitism was deemed wrongful by the same tribunal earlier this year.
In February, the Employment Tribunal found that Miller was unjustly dismissed in 2021 from his position as a professor of political sociology at the University of Bristol following complaints by Jewish students who felt "unsafe and unprotected" on campus.
Miller argued before the tribunal that Zionism—the movement for a Jewish homeland in Palestine—"necessarily calls for the displacement and disenfranchisement of non-Jews in favor of Jews, and it is therefore ideologically bound to lead to the practices of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide."
Employment Judge Rohan Pirani wrote in the tribunal's new unanimous 120-page judgment that Miller's views on Zionism are "worthy of respect in a democratic society," are "not incompatible with human dignity," and are not in "conflict with the fundamental rights of others."
Pirani said Miller's stance "amounted to a philosophical belief" and that while it was "ill-judged to express himself in the way he did," his actions were legal, "not antisemitic, did not incite violence, and did not pose any threat to any person's health or safety."
In a social media post on Tuesday, Miller welcomed the tribunal's finding that his beliefs are "protected" and are not—as the University of Bristol attempted to argue—"akin to Nazism."
"It is self-evident that racism is wrong and offensive to human dignity," Miller added. "Zionism, being inherently racist, imperialist, and colonial, is therefore also offensive to human dignity. It is because I believed this and was 'prepared to say it out loud' that I believe I lost my job."
In the tribunal's ruling, Pirani wrote that Miller's views on Zionism were "related to his area of academic expertise and research and were informed by that research and expertise."
According to the decision:
The claimant went on to explain what he regards as the overtly racist and colonial framing within the works of Zionism's founding ideologues. He also references the fact that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have found Israel to be "an apartheid state." The claimant gave examples in his evidence of what he regards as "racist laws" which he claims are a necessary corollary of Zionism and Israel's laws regarding emigration or "return."
"We conclude that [Miller's views] have played a significant role in his life for many years," Pirani wrote. "We are satisfied that they are genuinely held. He is and was a committed anti-Zionist and his views on this topic have played a significant role in his life for many years."
Numerous pro-Palestine academics, artists, media professionals, and others have been fired or otherwise punished in Western nations since before the current war on Gaza for which Israel is on trial for genocide at the International Court of Justice. Such incidents have increased dramatically since last October. Jews who support Palestinian liberation and oppose Israeli crimes in Palestine and beyond have not been spared from such repercussions.
The U.K. tribunal's judgment stands in stark contrast to a pair of bills passed since last October by the U.S. House of Representatives declaring that anti-Zionism is antisemitism and affirming the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) controversial working definition of antisemitism, which, while not explicitly mentioning anti-Zionism, includes "denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination" and "claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavor."
Pirani's ruling cites a professor who noted that the IHRA definition is "controversial," with "some believing that it is imprecise and can be used to conflate criticism of the policies of the Israeli government and of Zionism with antisemitism."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular