What Do We Hope to Achieve by Filing Suit Against US Lawmakers Over Gaza Genocide?

Spread the love

Original article by Norman Solomon republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

A Palestinian medic carries an injured child from an ambulance as the wounded being transported to Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital for treatment following an Israeli attack on the Shuja’iyya neighborhood in Gaza City, Gaza on January 01, 2025. (Photo by Dawoud Abo Alkas/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Organizing together under the name Taxpayers Against Genocide, constituents served notice that no amount of rhetoric could make funding of genocide anything other than repugnant.

On the last day of 2024, the deputy general counsel for the House of Representatives formally accepted delivery of a civil summons for two congressmembers from Northern California. More than 600 constituents of Jared Huffman and Mike Thompson have signed on as plaintiffs in a class action accusing them of helping to arm the Israeli military in violation of “international and federal law that prohibits complicity in genocide.”

Whatever the outcome of the lawsuit, it conveys widespread anger and anguish about the ongoing civilian carnage in Gaza that taxpayers have continued to bankroll.

By a wide margin, most Americans favor an arms embargo on Israel while the Gaza war persists. But Huffman and Thompson voted to approve $26.38 billion in military aid for Israel last April, long after the nonstop horrors for civilians in Gaza were evident.

Back in February — two months before passage of the enormous military aid package — both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International found that, in the words of the lawsuit, “the Israeli government was systematically starving the people of Gaza through cutting off aid, water, and electricity, by bombing and military occupation, all underwritten by the provision of U.S. military aid and weapons.”

When the known death toll passed 40,000 last summer, the UN’s high commissioner for human rights said: “Most of the dead are women and children. This unimaginable situation is overwhelmingly due to recurring failures by the Israeli Defense Forces to comply with the rules of war.” He described as “deeply shocking” the “scale of the Israeli military’s destruction of homes, hospitals, schools and places of worship.”

No one should put any trust in the court system to stop the U.S. government from using tax dollars for war. But suing congressmembers who are complicit in genocide is a good step.

On Dec. 4, Amnesty International released a 296-page report concluding that Israel has been committing genocide “brazenly, continuously and with total impunity” — with the “specific intent to destroy Palestinians,” engaging in “prohibited acts under the Genocide Convention.”

Two weeks later, on the same day the lawsuit was filed in federal district court in San Francisco, Human Rights Watch released new findings that “Israeli authorities are responsible for the crime against humanity of extermination and for acts of genocide.”

Responding to the lawsuit, a spokesperson for Thompson said that “achieving peace and securing the safety of civilians won’t be accomplished by filing a lawsuit.” But for well over a year, to no avail, the plaintiffs and many other constituents have been urging him and Huffman to help protect civilians by ending their support for the U.S. pipeline of weapons and ammunition to Israel.

Enabled by that pipeline, the slaughter has continued in Gaza while the appropriators on Capitol Hill work in a kind of bubble. Letters, emails, phone calls, office visits, protests and more have not pierced that bubble. The lawsuit is an effort to break through the routine of indifference.

Like many other congressional Democrats, Huffman and Thompson have prided themselves on standing up against the contempt for facts that Donald Trump and his cohorts flaunt. Yet refusal to acknowledge the facts of civilian decimation in Gaza, with a direct U.S. role, is an extreme form of denial.

“Over the last 14 months I have watched elected officials remain completely unresponsive despite the public’s demands to end the genocide,” said Laurel Krause, a Mendocino County resident who is one of the lawsuit plaintiffs.

Another plaintiff, Leslie Angeline, a Marin County resident who ended a 31-day hunger strike when the lawsuit was filed, said: “I wake each morning worrying about the genocide that is happening in Gaza, knowing that if it wasn’t for my government’s partnership with the Israeli government, this couldn’t continue.”

Such passionate outlooks are a far cry from the words offered by members of Congress who routinely appear to take pride in seeming calm as they discuss government policies. But if their own children’s lives were at stake rather than the lives of Palestinian children in Gaza, they would hardly be so calm. A huge empathy gap is glaring.

In the words of plaintiff Judy Talaugon, a Native American activist in Sonoma County, “Palestinian children are all our children, deserving of our advocacy and support. And their liberation is the catalyst for systemic change for the betterment of us all.”

As a plaintiff, I certainly don’t expect the courts to halt the U.S. policies that have been enabling the horrors in Gaza to go on. But our lawsuit makes a clear case for the moral revulsion that so many Americans feel about the culpability of the U.S. government.

To hardboiled political pros, the heartfelt goal of putting a stop to the arming of the Israeli military for genocide is apt to seem quixotic and dreamy. But it’s easy for politicians to underestimate feelings of moral outrage. As James Baldwin wrote, “Though we do not wholly believe it yet, the interior life is a real life, and the intangible dreams of people have a tangible effect on the world.”

Organizing together under the name Taxpayers Against Genocide, constituents served notice that no amount of rhetoric could make funding of genocide anything other than repugnant. Jared Huffman and Mike Thompson are the first members of Congress to face such a lawsuit. They won’t be the last.

In recent days, people from many parts of the United States have contacted Taxpayers Against Genocide (via classactionagainstgenocide@proton.me) to see the full lawsuit and learn about how they can file one against their own member of Congress.

No one should put any trust in the court system to stop the U.S. government from using tax dollars for war. But suing congress members who are complicit in genocide is a good step for exposing — and organizing against — the power of the warfare state.

Original article by Norman Solomon republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue ReadingWhat Do We Hope to Achieve by Filing Suit Against US Lawmakers Over Gaza Genocide?

Sanders Lays Out Plan to Fight Oligarchy as Wealth of Top Billionaires Passes $10 Trillion

Spread the love

Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Elon Musk and the wife of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) applaud during a House Republican Conference meeting on November 13, 2024 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

“If there was ever a moment when progressives needed to communicate our vision to the people of our country, this is that time,” wrote Sen. Bernie Sanders. “Despair is not an option.”

Bloomberg analysis of billionaire wealth published Tuesday found that the combined fortunes of the 500 richest people on the planet surpassed $10 trillion this year, a finding that came shortly after U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders issued an urgent call to action to prevent the emergence of “an oligarchic and authoritarian society.”

The new analysis notes that the world’s top 500 billionaires “got vastly richer” this year with the help of “an indomitable rally in U.S. technology stocks.”

Just eight billionaires—Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Jensen Huang, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, Michael Dell, Larry Page, and Sergey Brin—added more than $600 billion to their collective wealth in 2024 and accounted for 43% of the $1.5 trillion increase in net worth among the world’s 500 richest people, according to Bloomberg.

“But it was Musk—the so-called ‘first buddy’ of President-elect Donald Trump after unprecedented support for his reelection campaign—who dominated the world’s wealthiest in 2024,” Bloomberg observed, adding that Trump himself also saw his fortune surge to a record high this year, “boosted by the performance of his majority stake in Trump Media & Technology Group Corp.”

Musk’s use of his enormous fortune to influence the U.S. political system—including via his purchase of one of the world’s largest social media platforms and donations to Trump’s 2024 campaign—amplified existing concerns about the corrosive impact of massive wealth concentration on democracy.

And wealth inequality in the U.S. could soon get worse, with Trump and the incoming Republican-controlled Congress set to pursue another round of tax cuts for the ultra-rich and large corporations.

“They do not believe in democracy—the right of ordinary people to control their own futures. They firmly believe that the rich and powerful should determine the future.”

In an email to supporters on Monday, Sanders (I-Vt.) called the rapid shift toward oligarchy in the U.S. “the defining issue of our time,” warning that billionaires have come to increasingly dominate not only “our economic life, but the information we consume and our politics as well.”

“A manifestation of the current moment is the rise of Elon Musk, and all that he stands for,” Sanders wrote, pointing to Musk’s outsize influence on the 2024 election and his key role in shaping Trump’s billionaire-dominated Cabinet.

“But it’s not just Musk. Billionaire owners of two major newspapers overrode their editorial boards’ decisions to endorse Kamala Harris, while many others are kissing Trump’s ring by making large donations to his inauguration committee slush fund,” the senator continued. “They do not believe in democracy—the right of ordinary people to control their own futures. They firmly believe that the rich and powerful should determine the future.”

Progressives, Sanders wrote, have a “radically different vision,” one that prioritizes “an economic system based on the principles of justice,” “a vibrant democracy based on one person, one vote,” and making “healthcare a human right.”

“Even though we are not going to succeed in achieving that vision in the immediate future with Trump as president and Republicans controlling Congress, it is important that vision be maintained and we continue to fight for it,” wrote Sanders.

Since Trump’s victory in the 2024 election, Sanders has focused heavily on the need to organize the working class to combat the threat posed by Musk and other far-right billionaires who have amassed obscene wealth and political power.

In his email on Monday, the senator said he intends to “travel, organize, hold events, and create content that reaches people where they are” in the coming weeks as part of the “struggle to determine where we go from here.”

“Will this effort be easy?” asked Sanders. “No, of course it will not. Can it be done? We have no choice. If there was ever a moment when progressives needed to communicate our vision to the people of our country, this is that time. Despair is not an option. We are fighting not only for ourselves. We are fighting for our kids and future generations, and for the well-being of the planet.”

Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingSanders Lays Out Plan to Fight Oligarchy as Wealth of Top Billionaires Passes $10 Trillion

UN Chief’s Message to the World as Blistering 2024 Ends: ‘We Must Exit This Road to Ruin’

Spread the love

Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres speaks at the U.N. headquarters on February 22, 2023. 
(Photo: Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)

“This is climate breakdown—in real time,” said United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said in a year-end message on Monday that “we have no time to lose” in the face of the worsening global climate crisis, which pushed temperatures to a record high this year and supercharged deadly extreme weather around the world.

“Today, I can officially report that we have just endured a decade of deadly heat,” Guterres said in a video message posted to social media. “The top 10 hottest years on record have happened in the last 10 years, including 2024.”

“This is climate breakdown in real time. We must exit this road to ruin,” he continued. “In 2025, countries must put the world on a safer path by dramatically slashing emissions and supporting the transition to a renewable future. It is essential—and it is possible.”

https://twitter.com/i/status/1873655412198916332

Sorry, this content could not be embedded.
X

Guterres’ call to action came in the waning days of what scientists say is almost certain to be the hottest year on record and the first full year to breach the critical 1.5°C temperature threshold.

Celeste Saulo, secretary-general of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), echoed Guterres’ warning about the dire consequences of the status quo, saying in a statement Monday that “if we want a safer planet, we must act now.”

“It’s our responsibility. It’s a common responsibility, a global responsibility,” Saulo said. “Every fraction of a degree of warming matters, and increases climate extremes, impacts, and risks. Temperatures are only part of the picture. Climate change plays out before our eyes on an almost daily basis in the form of increased occurrence and impact of extreme weather events.”

Last month, with emissions continuing to surge as the rich nations most responsible for the climate emergency refuse to ditch fossil fuels, world leaders convened for a U.N. climate summit in Azerbaijan that was swarmed by oil and gas lobbyists. The key gathering ended with a deal that climate advocates described as a step backward in the necessary push to rein in fossil fuel emissions.

Climate-denier and fossil fuel booster Donald Trump’s looming return to office in the U.S.—the world’s largest historical emitter—has campaigners and scientists increasingly concerned about the future of existing global climate agreements such as the Paris accord, from which the president-elect has pledged to withdraw once again.

One recent analysis projected that a second Trump administration could unleash an additional 4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030, which would inflict $900 billion in global climate damages and deal a devastating blow to efforts to forestall runaway warming.

Throughout 2024, Guterres used his role as head of the U.N. to sound the alarm about the world’s dangerous trajectory, saying in an October address that “there is a direct link between increasing emissions and increasingly frequent and intense climate disasters.”

“We’re playing with fire,” he said, “but there can be no more playing for time.”

Original article by Jake Johnson republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingUN Chief’s Message to the World as Blistering 2024 Ends: ‘We Must Exit This Road to Ruin’

Trump Is Turning the White House Into a Billionaire Time-Share

Spread the love

Original article by Bob Burnett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

President-elect Donald Trump and Elon Musk talk ringside during the UFC 309 event at Madison Square Garden on November 16, 2024 in New York City. (Photo: Chris Unger/Zuffa LLC)

It appears that Trump has entered into a power-sharing agreement with Musk and several other wealthy individuals including Vivek Ramaswamy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and David Sacks.

Democracy decays into oligarchy when a few individuals accumulate most of the political power.

The reelection of Donald Trump has accelerated the decline of the United States into oligarchy. Trump has had billionaire donors for each of his presidential campaigns, but in 2024 the role of these wealthy donors expanded. Donors such as Elon Musk made gigantic contributions to Trump’s campaign; in return for this they are taking an active role in the Trump White House. Perhaps, this time around, Trump turned the oval office into a time-share.

On December 19, Elon Musk led the call for House Republicans to repudiate a continuing resolution they had just negotiated to keep the federal government running through the end of the year. Perhaps Musk’s charter includes coordination with Congress.

When Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy speak of increasing government efficiency, they usually start with services for the unfortunate.

It appears that Trump has entered into a power-sharing agreement with Musk and several other wealthy individuals including Vivek Ramaswamy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and David Sacks. However this arrangement works, it’s likely that the Trump administration will cater to billionaires—Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) observed that the 13 billionaires chosen by Trump to serve in his administration have a combined wealth of at least $383 billion.

What do these billionaires want? The oligarchs and billionaires want lower taxes and reduced government regulations. Of course, each billionaire has a particular set of interests; for example, David Sacks, Trump’s “AI and crypto czar,” is a venture capitalist with heavy investment in AI and crypto. Sadly. most of the oligarchs are climate-change deniers.

The oligarchs want more wealth. Robert Reich observes:

Since [1980], the median wage of the bottom 90% has stagnated. The share of the nation’s wealth owned by the richest 400 Americans has quadrupled (from less than 1% to 3.5%) while the share owned by the entire bottom half of America has dropped to 1.3%… The richest 1% of Americans now has more wealth than the bottom 90% combined.

The oligarchs share a fiscally conservative agenda. They intend to shrink the size of the federal government. The particulars vary but the oligarchs are not concerned with the size of the defense budget; their cost-cutting focus is on programs that service the poor and disadvantaged—such as Medicaid. When Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy speak of increasing government efficiency, they usually start with services for the unfortunate.

What are the practical consequences of this shift to oligarchy? It’s unsettling to be in a political situation where we do not understand who is in charge at the White House. We don’t know how power-sharing will work. The relationship between Trump and Congress has been fraught. The shift to oligarchy will make this relationship even more difficult.

Will the oligarchs fix the economy? Trump was elected because he promised to fix the economy. Most Americans believed he would drive down inflation; they thought Trump would reduce the cost of food, housing, and household and medical expenses. Since November 5, Trump has given no indication of how he plans to do this. Perhaps he has lost interest.

During the presidential campaign, Trump said his inflation-fighting agenda would rely upon tariffs, but it’s likely that the oligarchs will influence how Trump’s tariff strategy plays out. Musk has huge business interests in China, and it’s unlikely that he would support a tariff policy that would hurt his relationships with the country.

Trump has appointed a “czar” for immigration (Tom Homan), energy (Doug Burgum), and AI & Crypto (Sacks). Trump has not appointed a czar for inflation. With much fanfare, Trump has appointed a commission on “government efficiency;” they’ve already started meeting. Trump has not appointed to a commission to curb inflation.

After January 20, Trump will own inflation and the economy. Trump’s immigration “purge” will drive up the cost of food. Trump’s tariffs will drive up the cost of household expenses.

Trump’s trying to ignore inflation. Or turn it over to an oligarch co-president. Stay tuned.

Original article by Bob Burnett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingTrump Is Turning the White House Into a Billionaire Time-Share

‘Concentration Camps’: Border Czar Says Trump to Detain Migrant Families

Spread the love

Original article by Jessica Corbett republished form Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Incoming White House ‘border czar’ Tom Homan speaks during Turning Point’s annual AmericaFest 2024 in Phoenix, Arizona, on December 22, 2024. (Photo: Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images)

“Decent people all over the world will hate this country… and they should,” said one critic.

Adding to alarm over U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s immigration plans, his “border czar” told The Washington Post in an interview published Thursday that the administration plans to return to detaining migrant families with children.

Tom Homan, who served as acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during Trump’s first term, said that ICE “will look to hold parents with children in ‘soft-sided’ tent structures similar to those used by U.S. border officials to handle immigration surges,” the Post summarized. “The government will not hesitate to deport parents who are in the country illegally, even if they have young U.S.-born children, he added, leaving it to those families to decide whether to exit together or be split up.”

Since Trump beat Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris last month, migrant rights advocates have reiterated concerns about the Republican’s first-term policies—such as forced separation of families—and his 2024 campaign pledges, from mass deportations to attempting to end birthright citizenship, despite the guarantees of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Homan—who oversaw the so-called “zero tolerance” policy that separated thousands of migrant kids from their parents—said: “Here’s the issue… You knew you were in the country illegally and chose to have a child. So you put your family in that position.”

Incoming "border czar" Tom Homan on shipping U.S.-born children out of the country with their undocumented parents: “You knew you were in the country illegally and chose to have a child.”"Chose"? That's an odd word choice. The right wants to force women to give birth, not give them a choice.

Mark Jacob (@markjacob.bsky.social) 2024-12-26T14:30:08.168Z

Harris and President Joe Biden have come under fire for various immigration policies, but their administration did stop family detention—and when it was reported last year that the White House was weighing a revival of the practice, 383 groups urged the president to keep the pledge he made when he took office “to pursue just, compassionate, and humane immigration policies.”

Under Biden, the government ended mass worksite immigration raids and—eventually—the “Remain in Mexico” policy that stopped asylum-seekers from entering the United States. Homan told the Post that the next Trump administration should bring them back.

Less than a month before Trump’s inauguration, Biden is now facing pressure to “use the power of the pen to protect those seeking sanctuary from the coming deportation machine that will crush the human rights of our immigrant neighbors and those who have dreams of finding refuge here,” as Amnesty International USA executive director Paul O’Brien put it earlier this month.

The Post reported that “of all the border hard-liners in the incoming administration, Homan is perhaps the most cognizant of the limits of the government’s ability to deliver on promises of mass deportation—and the potential for a political backlash.”

Those hard-liners include dog-killing Republican South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Homeland Security; family separation architect Stephen Miller, the president-elect’s homeland security adviser and deputy chief of staff for policy; and Caleb Vitello, the next acting ICE director whom Miller previously tried to install at the Office of Refugee Resettlement.

“We’re going to need to construct family facilities,” Homan told the newspaper. However, he also said: “We need to show the American people we can do this and not be inhumane about it… We can’t lose the faith of the American people.”

Critics of the next administration have suggested that—although Trump won the Electoral College and the popular vote last month—pursuing the GOP immigration policies, including “concentration camps” for migrant families, will anger the public.

Maximum cruelty is the goal https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2024/12/26/immigration-border-tom-homan-trump/

Ric Steinberger (@ricst.bsky.social) 2024-12-26T14:29:05.618Z

“Decent people all over the world will hate this country… and they should,” media columnist and Brooklyn College professor Eric Alterman said on social media in response to the Post‘s reporting.

Author and New York University adjunct associate professor Helio Fred Garcia said: “Trump’s next border czar previews performative cruelty. In the first term it included kidnapping of children from their parents and returning the parents to their home countries, with no record of which kids came from which parents. A crime against humanity.”

Lee Gelernt, an ACLU attorney who has argued many major immigration cases, told the Post that “the incoming administration has refused to acknowledge the horrific damage it did to families and little children the first time around and seems determined to once again target families for gratuitous suffering.”

“The public may have voted in the abstract for mass deportations,” he added, referring to the November election, “but I don’t think they voted for more family separation or unnecessary cruelty to children.”

Original article by Jessica Corbett republished form Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Continue Reading‘Concentration Camps’: Border Czar Says Trump to Detain Migrant Families