*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Beloved tenured History professor and Socialist Horizon member Tom Alter was summarily fired on September 10th by Texas State University President Kelly Damphousse for expressing his views in a virtual conference unrelated to the university. This action cannot stand. Socialist Horizon calls on people everywhere to join us and demand that Professor Alter be reinstated to his tenured position.
President Damphousse fired Dr. Tom Alter based solely on a video published online by an extreme rightwing provocateur who infiltrated and secretly video-recorded segments of a virtual socialist conference with the intention of publishing information to slander and attack conference participants. In videos posted on their website, this person declares that they are a proud fascist, who tries to monetize exposure of the left as an “anti-communist cult leader”. This grifter publicly exhorts followers to embrace fascist ideology and take action, is an antisemite that states that Jewish people ‘chose to die in the Holocaust’, is a self-declared racist and xenophobe, a homophobe and a transphobe that spews hate speech throughout their platform that is solely designed to inflame and incite.
After the fascist’s ‘exposure video’ reached President Damphousse, he summarily fired Dr. Alter, a tenured professor, without questioning or investigating the content, without considering its authenticity or validity, without any form of due process, and violating existing state law and campus policy which requires a formal due process procedure.
Alter spoke against this cruel and unjust system and argued in favor of replacing it with socialism, and he advocated organizing politically to achieve this. Alter’s political views reflect those of nearly half of the total US population. Almost half now oppose capitalism and 40% favor socialism over capitalism. Alter’s views are far from subversive, they reflect the mainstream. It is a just cause that more and more people are joining, one people believe to be worth fighting for, and represents a change in thinking that is scaring the bigots, fascists, and capitalists.
It is in fact the fascist infiltrator who incites violence against oppressed people, and in this case, directly against Alter. It is Alter’s employer Texas State University that inflicted violence: stripping Alter of his job, refusing him any due process, casting him and his family into the uncertainty of unemployment and making them a target for the extreme right, while slamming the door shut on his free speech and academic freedom. Alter’s First Amendment right to speak, guaranteed by the Constitution, has been violated, as has his academic freedom– a protected right developed by his national faculty union, the American Association of University Professors.
We call on President Damphousse to stop this flagrant attack on constitutionally-protected free speech, to undo this wrongful termination, and to immediately reinstate Dr. Tom Alter to his teaching position.
The termination of Dr. Alter is a serious attack that upends his livelihood, his professional and academic career, and sets a very dangerous precedent. President Damphousse’s actions appear to be in accordance with the far-right politics of Texas politicians Greg Abbot and Ted Cruz, as well as being in-line with that of Donald Trump who has used the office of the presidency to wage war on his political opponents.
Damphousse’s actions align with Trump and the far right forces trying to impose and enforce an authoritarian regime that wants to silence critics, crush political dissent, and attack anyone they perceive to be oppositional to their project. Even more threatening, Damphousse’s actions strengthen the power and influence of fascists and enable the most violent and reactionary groups to also attack and take action against anyone they deem to be part of the left.
It is Trump who inflicts violence against millions through his authoritarian political attacks that target people of Color, women, transpeople, immigrants and refugees, people with disabilities, impoverished and unhoused people, and the working class as a whole . It is the far right and the fascists who are building movements to harm innocent and vulnerable people. It is this capitalist system that Alter spoke against that inflicts mass violence condemning billions to hunger, poverty and war while a handful accumulates ever growing obscene amounts of wealth that is stolen from the rest of us.
Alter is being attacked because he is telling a truth that many people in the United States believe today: that capitalism is ruining their lives and that socialism is a better system. If Dr. Tom Alter can be fired for expressing his personal beliefs and principles, then people everywhere are in danger. If he can be fired for expressing a point of view at a conference, away from his work and in his daily private life, then none of us are safe.
His case must draw support from people of all sectors of society: workers, teachers, nurses, students—anyone and everyone who upholds the value of free speech. As the great anti-slavery abolitionist Frederick Douglass once said, “The law on the side of freedom is of great advantage only when there is power to make that law respected”.
We call on everyone to join us in building the broadest possible solidarity campaign to win this decisive battle.
The attacks on Dr. Tom Alter and socialist politics will not intimidate Socialist Horizon. We will defend our comrade and we will continue fighting for the very cause he is being attacked for: justice, freedom, and equality. We will also continue building the organization that it will take to win it.
Dr. Tom Alter is not only a beloved faculty member at Texas State but also an advisor to several student organizations. He is the author of a celebrated history of socialism in the American South, Toward a Cooperative Commonwealth: The Transplanted Roots of Farmer-Labor Radicalism in Texas (University of Illinois Press). He is also the father of two children. Socialist Horizon demands that Texas State University immediately restore Tom Alter’s position as Associate Professor of History.
Socialist Horizon also calls on all organizations and individuals that defend the basic democratic right to free speech and reject fascism and authoritarianism, and all socialists in particular, to join this fight. This is an attack on all of us. We need to confront it with the broadest unitary campaign for Alter’s immediate reinstatement, in defense of free speech and against fascism.
This is an attack on all of us. We need to confront it with the broadest unitary campaign for Alter’s immediate reinstatement, in defense of free speech and against fascism.
What you can do to support:
—Donate to help Tom Alter and his family with living and legal expenses: https://gofund.me/27c72f26d
—Sign and share this petition demanding Tom Alter be given his job back: https://www.change.org/p/texas-state-university-give-tom-alter-his-job-back
—Write to and call the President and Provost at Texas State University demanding that Tom Alter be given his job back:
President Kelly Damphousse: president@txstate.edu
President’s Office Phone: 512-245-2121
Provost Pranesh Aswath: xrk25@txstate.edu
Provost Office Phone: 512-245-2205
For more information about the reason for the firing of Dr. Tom Alter, read:
Fired for Advocating Socialism: Professor Tom Alter Speaks Out
Ashley Smith Interviews Dr. Tom Alter
—CounterPunch, September 24, 2025
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Stop Cop City Bay Area
Did you know about a proposed $47 million regional police training facility in San Pablo—designed for departments across the Bay Area?
We are Stop Cop City Bay Area (Tours & Teach-Ins), a QT+ Black-led grassroots collective raising awareness about this project. This would be the city’s second police training facility, built without voter approval and financed through a $32 million, 30-year loan.
We’re organizing to repurpose the facility into a community resource hub and youth center. To build people power, we’re taking this conversation on the road—visiting Bay Area campuses, classrooms, cafes, and community spaces via our Fall 2025 Tour.
We’d love to collaborate with you and/or co-create an event. Here’s what we offer:
Guest Speaker Presentations—5-minute visits (team meetings, classrooms, co-ops, etc.), panels, or deep dives into:
· the facility’s origins & regional impacts
· finding your role in activism
· reimagining the floorplan (micro-workshops)
· and more
· Interactive Art & Vendor/Tabling Pop-Ups — free zines, stickers, and live linocut printing with hand-carved stamps + artivism.
· Collaborations with Classrooms — project partnerships, research integration, or creative assignments.
· Film Screenings + Discussion — e.g., Power (Yance Ford, 2024) or Riotsville, U.S.A. (Sierra Pettengill, 2022), or a film of your choice.
👉 If you’re interested in hosting a stop, open to co-creating something else, or curious about the intersections of our work: simply reply to this email or visit: stopcopcitybayarea.com/tour
Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to connecting.
In solidarity,
Stop Cop City Bay Area
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Dear Organization Coordinator
I hope this message finds you well. I’m reaching out to invite your organization to consider co-sponsoring a regional proposal to implement Free Public Transit throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.
This initiative directly supports low-income families, working people, seniors, youth, and others who rely on public transportation. It would eliminate fare barriers while helping to address climate justice, congestion, and air pollution—issues that disproportionately affect disadvantaged communities.
We believe your organization’s mission and values align strongly with this proposal. We are seeking endorsements, co-sponsorship, and coalition-building with groups that advocate for economic and racial equity.
I would love the opportunity to share a brief proposal or speak further if you're interested. Please let me know if there’s a staff member or program director I should connect with.
A description of our proposal is below:
sharethemoneyinstitute@gmail.com
Opinion: San Francisco Bay Area Should Provide Free Public Transportation
The San Francisco Bay Area is beautiful, with fantastic weather, food, diversity and culture. We’re also internationally famous for our progressiveness, creativity, and innovation.
I believe the next amazing world-leading feature we can add to our cornucopia of attractions is Free Public Transportation. Imagine how wonderful it would be if Muni, BART, Caltrain, AC Transit, SamTrans, SF Bay Ferries, and all the other transportation services were absolutely free?
Providing this convenience would deliver enormous, varied benefits to the 7.6 million SF Bay Area residents, and would make us a lovable destination for tourists.
This goal - Free Public Transportation - is ambitious, but it isn’t impossible, or even original. Truth is, many people world-wide already enjoy free rides in their smart municipalities.
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani is promoting free transit, with a plan that’s gained the endorsement of economists from Chile, United Kingdom, Greece, and the USA.
The entire nation of Luxembourg has offered free public transportation to both its citizens and visitors since 2020. Tallinn, the capital of Estonia, has given free transit to its residents since 2013. In France, thirty-five cities provide free public transportation. Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, offers free rides to seniors, disabled, and students. In Maricá (Brazil) – the entire municipal bus system is free. Delhi (India) – offers free metro and bus travel for women. Madrid & Barcelona (Spain) offer free (or heavily discounted) passes to youth and seniors.
Even in the USA, free public transit is already here. Kansas City, Missouri, has enjoyed a free bus system free since 2020. Olympia, Washington, has fully fare-free intercity transit. Missoula, Montana, is free for all riders. Columbia, South Carolina, has free buses, and Chapel Hill, North Carolina, has enjoyed free transit for over a decade. Ithaca, New York, and Madison, Wisconsin, offer free transit to students.
But if the San Francisco Bay Area offered free transit, we’d be the LARGEST municipality in the world to offer universal Free Transit to everyone, resident and visitor alike. (Population of Luxembourg is 666,430. Kansas City 510,704. Population of San Francisco Bay Area is 7.6 million in the nine-county area)
Providing free transit would be tremendously beneficial to millions of people, for three major reasons:
1. Combat Climate Change - increased public ridership would reduce harmful CO2 fossil fuel emissions. Estimates from Kansas City and Tallinn Estonia’s suggest an increase in ridership of 15 percent. Another estimate from a pilot project in New York City suggests a ridership increase of 30 percent. These increases in people taking public transportation instead of driving their own cars indicates a total reduction of 5.4 - 10.8 tons of emissions would be eliminated, leading to better air quality, improved public health, and long-term climate gains.
2. Reduce Traffic Congestion & Parking Difficulty - Estimates suggest public transit would decrease traffic congestion in dense urban areas and choke points like the Bay Bridge by up to 15 percent. Car ownership would also be reduced. Traffic in San Francisco is the second-slowest in the USA (NYC is #1) and getting worse every year. Parking costs in San Francisco are also the second-worst in the USA (NYC #1), and again, it is continually getting worse.
3. Promote Social Equity - Free transit removes a financial cost that hits low-income residents hard. Transportation is the second-biggest expense after housing for many Americans. In the Bay Area, a monthly Clipper pass can cost $86–$98 per system, and much more for multi-agency commuters. For people living paycheck-to-paycheck, this is a significant cost. People of color, immigrants, youth, seniors, and people with disabilities rely more heavily on public transit. 55–70% of frequent transit riders in the Bay Area are from low-to moderate-income households, but these riders usually pay more per mile of transit than wealthy drivers. Free fares equalize access regardless of income or geography.
Free transit would help people 1) take jobs they couldn’t otherwise afford to commute to, thus improving the economy, 2) Stay in school without worrying about bus fare, 3) Get to appointments, child care, or grocery stores without skipping meals to afford transit.
To conclude: Free Public Transit should be seen as a civil rights and economic justice intervention.
The Cost? How can San Francisco Bay Area pay for Free Transit throughout our large region?
ShareTheMoney.Institute estimates the cost as $1.5 billion annually. This sum can acquired via multiple strategies. Corvallis, Oregon, has had free public bus service since 2011, paid for by a $3.63 monthly fee added to each utility bill. Missoula, Montana, funds their fare-free Mountain Line transit system, via a property tax mill levy. Madison, Wisconsin’s transit is supported by general fund revenues, state and federal grants, and partnerships/sponsorships from local businesses and organizations.
Ideally, we’d like the funds to be obtained from the 37 local billionaires who, combined, have an approximate wealth of $885 billion. The $1.5 billion for free transit is only 0.17% of the local billionaire's wealth. Sponsorship from the ultra-wealthy would be ideal. Billionaires can view the “fair transit donation” they are asked to contribute not as punishment or an “envy tax”, but as their investment to create a municipality that is better for everyone, themselves included. They can pride themselves on instigating a world-leading, legacy-defining reform that will etch their names in history as leaders of a bold utopian reform.
Our motto: “we want to move freely around our beautiful bay”
——
Hank Pellissier - Share The Money Institute
Reverend Gregory Stevens - Unitarian Universalist EcoSocialist Network
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........* *..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*  Russia Confirms Jailing of Antiwar Leader Boris Kagarlitsky In a secret trial on June 5, 2024, the Russian Supreme Court’s Military Chamber confirmed a sentence of five years in a penal colony for left-wing sociologist and online journalist Boris Kagarlitsky. His crime? “Justifying terrorism” — a sham charge used to silence opponents of Putin’s war on Ukraine. The court disregarded a plea for freedom sent by thirty-seven international luminaries. Kagarlitsky, a leading Marxist thinker in Russia’s post-Soviet period, recently addressed socialists who won’t criticize Putin: “To my Western colleagues, who…call for an understanding of Putin and his regime, I would like to ask a very simple question. [Would] you want to live in a country where there is no free press or independent courts? In a country where the police have the right to break into your house without a warrant? …In a country which…broadcasts appeals on TV to destroy Paris, London, Warsaw, with a nuclear strike?” Thousands of antiwar critics have been forced to flee Russia or are behind bars, swept up in Putin’s vicious crackdown on dissidents. Opposition to the war is consistently highest among the poorest workers. Recently, RusNews journalists Roman Ivanov and Maria Ponomarenko were sentenced to seven, and six years respectively, for reporting the military’s brutal assault on Ukraine. A massive global solidarity campaign that garnered support from thousands was launched at Kagarlitsky’s arrest. Now, it has been revived. This internationalism will bolster the repressed Russian left and Ukrainian resistance to Putin’s imperialism. To sign the online petition at freeboris.info —Freedom Socialist Party, August 2024 https://socialism.com/fs-article/russia-jails-prominent-antiwar-leader-boris-kagarlitsky/#:~:text=In%20a%20secret%20trial%20on,of%20Putin's%20war%20on%20Ukraine. Petition in Support of Boris KagarlitskyWe, the undersigned, were deeply shocked to learn that on February 13 the leading Russian socialist intellectual and antiwar activist Dr. Boris Kagarlitsky (65) was sentenced to five years in prison. Dr. Kagarlitsky was arrested on the absurd charge of 'justifying terrorism' in July last year. After a global campaign reflecting his worldwide reputation as a writer and critic of capitalism and imperialism, his trial ended on December 12 with a guilty verdict and a fine of 609,000 roubles. The prosecution then appealed against the fine as 'unjust due to its excessive leniency' and claimed falsely that Dr. Kagarlitsky was unable to pay the fine and had failed to cooperate with the court. In fact, he had paid the fine in full and provided the court with everything it requested. On February 13 a military court of appeal sent him to prison for five years and banned him from running a website for two years after his release. The reversal of the original court decision is a deliberate insult to the many thousands of activists, academics, and artists around the world who respect Dr. Kagarlitsky and took part in the global campaign for his release. The section of Russian law used against Dr. Kagarlitsky effectively prohibits free expression. The decision to replace the fine with imprisonment was made under a completely trumped-up pretext. Undoubtedly, the court's action represents an attempt to silence criticism in the Russian Federation of the government's war in Ukraine, which is turning the country into a prison. The sham trial of Dr. Kagarlitsky is the latest in a wave of brutal repression against the left-wing movements in Russia. Organizations that have consistently criticized imperialism, Western and otherwise, are now under direct attack, many of them banned. Dozens of activists are already serving long terms simply because they disagree with the policies of the Russian government and have the courage to speak up. Many of them are tortured and subjected to life-threatening conditions in Russian penal colonies, deprived of basic medical care. Left-wing politicians are forced to flee Russia, facing criminal charges. International trade unions such as IndustriALL and the International Transport Federation are banned and any contact with them will result in long prison sentences. There is a clear reason for this crackdown on the Russian left. The heavy toll of the war gives rise to growing discontent among the mass of working people. The poor pay for this massacre with their lives and wellbeing, and opposition to war is consistently highest among the poorest. The left has the message and resolve to expose the connection between imperialist war and human suffering. Dr. Kagarlitsky has responded to the court's outrageous decision with calm and dignity: “We just need to live a little longer and survive this dark period for our country,” he said. Russia is nearing a period of radical change and upheaval, and freedom for Dr. Kagarlitsky and other activists is a condition for these changes to take a progressive course. We demand that Boris Kagarlitsky and all other antiwar prisoners be released immediately and unconditionally. We also call on the authorities of the Russian Federation to reverse their growing repression of dissent and respect their citizens' freedom of speech and right to protest. Sign to Demand the Release of Boris Kagarlitskyhttps://freeboris.infoThe petition is also available on Change.org *..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........* *..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........* |
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Mumia Abu-Jamal is Innocent!
FREE HIM NOW!
Write to Mumia at:
Smart Communications/PADOC
Mumia Abu-Jamal #AM-8335
SCI Mahanoy
P.O. Box 33028
St. Petersburg, FL 33733
Join the Fight for Mumia's Life
Since September, Mumia Abu-Jamal's health has been declining at a concerning rate. He has lost weight, is anemic, has high blood pressure and an extreme flair up of his psoriasis, and his hair has fallen out. In April 2021 Mumia underwent open heart surgery. Since then, he has been denied cardiac rehabilitation care including a healthy diet and exercise.
Donate to Mumia Abu-Jamal's Emergency Legal and Medical Defense Fund, Official 2024
Mumia has instructed PrisonRadio to set up this fund. Gifts donated here are designated for the Mumia Abu-Jamal Medical and Legal Defense Fund. If you are writing a check or making a donation in another way, note this in the memo line.
Send to:
Mumia Medical and Legal Fund c/o Prison Radio
P.O. Box 411074, San Francisco, CA 94103
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Updates From Kevin Cooper
A Never-ending Constitutional Violation
A summary of the current status of Kevin Cooper’s case by the Kevin Cooper Defense Committee
On October 26, 2023, the law firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP wrote a rebuttal in response to the Special Counsel's January 13, 2023 report upholding the conviction of their client Kevin Cooper. A focus of the rebuttal was that all law enforcement files were not turned over to the Special Counsel during their investigation, despite a request for them to the San Bernardino County District Attorney's office.
On October 29, 2023, Law Professors Lara Bazelon and Charlie Nelson Keever, who run the six member panel that reviews wrongful convictions for the San Francisco County District Attorney's office, published an OpEd in the San Francisco Chronicle calling the "Innocence Investigation” done by the Special Counsel in the Cooper case a “Sham Investigation” largely because Cooper has unsuccessfully fought for years to obtain the police and prosecutor files in his case. This is a Brady claim, named for the U.S. Supreme court’s 1963 case establishing the Constitutional rule that defendants are entitled to any information in police and prosecutor's possession that could weaken the state's case or point to innocence. Brady violations are a leading cause of wrongful convictions. The Special Counsel's report faults Cooper for not offering up evidence of his own despite the fact that the best evidence to prove or disprove Brady violations or other misconduct claims are in those files that the San Bernardino County District Attorney's office will not turn over to the Special Counsel or to Cooper's attorneys.
On December 14, 2023, the president of the American Bar Association (ABA), Mary Smith, sent Governor Gavin Newsom a three page letter on behalf of the ABA stating in part that Mr.Cooper's counsel objected to the state's failure to provide Special Counsel all documents in their possession relating to Mr.Cooper's conviction, and that concerns about missing information are not new. For nearly 40 years Mr.Cooper's attorneys have sought this same information from the state.
On December 19, 2023, Bob Egelko, a journalist for the San Francisco Chronicle wrote an article about the ABA letter to the Governor that the prosecutors apparently withheld evidence from the Governor's legal team in the Cooper case.
These are just a few recent examples concerning the ongoing failure of the San Bernardino County District Attorney to turn over to Cooper's attorney's the files that have been requested, even though under the law and especially the U.S. Constitution, the District Attorney of San Bernardino county is required to turn over to the defendant any and all material and or exculpatory evidence that they have in their files. Apparently, they must have something in their files because they refuse to turn them over to anyone.
The last time Cooper's attorney's received files from the state, in 2004, it wasn't from the D.A. but a Deputy Attorney General named Holly Wilkens in Judge Huff's courtroom. Cooper's attorneys discovered a never before revealed police report showing that a shirt was discovered that had blood on it and was connected to the murders for which Cooper was convicted, and that the shirt had disappeared. It had never been tested for blood. It was never turned over to Cooper's trial attorney, and no one knows where it is or what happened to it. Cooper's attorneys located the woman who found that shirt on the side of the road and reported it to the Sheriff's Department. She was called to Judge Huff's court to testify about finding and reporting that shirt to law enforcement. That shirt was the second shirt found that had blood on it that was not the victims’ blood. This was in 2004, 19 years after Cooper's conviction.
It appears that this ongoing constitutional violation that everyone—from the Special Counsel to the Governor's legal team to the Governor himself—seems to know about, but won't do anything about, is acceptable in order to uphold Cooper's conviction.
But this type of thing is supposed to be unacceptable in the United States of America where the Constitution is supposed to stand for something other than a piece of paper with writing on it. How can a Governor, his legal team, people who support and believe in him ignore a United States citizen’s Constitutional Rights being violated for 40 years in order to uphold a conviction?
This silence is betrayal of the Constitution. This permission and complicity by the Governor and his team is against everything that he and they claim to stand for as progressive politicians. They have accepted the Special Counsel's report even though the Special Counsel did not receive the files from the district attorney that may not only prove that Cooper is innocent, but that he was indeed framed by the Sheriff’s Department; and that evidence was purposely destroyed and tampered with, that certain witnesses were tampered with, or ignored if they had information that would have helped Cooper at trial, that evidence that the missing shirt was withheld from Cooper's trial attorney, and so much more.
Is the Governor going to get away with turning a blind eye to this injustice under his watch?
Are progressive people going to stay silent and turn their eyes blind in order to hopefully get him to end the death penalty for some while using Cooper as a sacrificial lamb?
An immediate act of solidarity we can all do right now is to write to Kevin and assure him of our continuing support in his fight for justice. Here’s his address:
Kevin Cooper #C65304
Cell 107, Unit E1C
California Health Care Facility, Stockton (CHCF)
P.O. Box 213040
Stockton, CA 95213
www.freekevincooper.org
Call California Governor Newsom:
1-(916) 445-2841
Press 1 for English or 2 for Spanish,
press 6 to speak with a representative and
wait for someone to answer
(Monday-Friday, 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. PST—12:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. EST)
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
Resources for Resisting Federal Repression
https://www.nlg.org/federalrepressionresources/
Since June of 2020, activists have been subjected to an increasingly aggressive crackdown on protests by federal law enforcement. The federal response to the movement for Black Lives has included federal criminal charges for activists, door knocks by federal law enforcement agents, and increased use of federal troops to violently police protests.
The NLG National Office is releasing this resource page for activists who are resisting federal repression. It includes a link to our emergency hotline numbers, as well as our library of Know-Your-Rights materials, our recent federal repression webinar, and a list of some of our recommended resources for activists. We will continue to update this page.
Please visit the NLG Mass Defense Program page for general protest-related legal support hotlines run by NLG chapters.
Emergency Hotlines
If you are contacted by federal law enforcement, you should exercise all of your rights. It is always advisable to speak to an attorney before responding to federal authorities.
State and Local Hotlines
If you have been contacted by the FBI or other federal law enforcement, in one of the following areas, you may be able to get help or information from one of these local NLG hotlines for:
Portland, Oregon: (833) 680-1312
San Francisco, California: (415) 285-1041 or fbi_hotline@nlgsf.org
Seattle, Washington: (206) 658-7963
National Hotline
If you are located in an area with no hotline, you can call the following number:
National NLG Federal Defense Hotline: (212) 679-2811
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
1) What Happened to Human Rights for Palestinians?
By Agnès Callamard and Federico Borello, Oct. 1, 2025
Ms. Callamard is the secretary general of Amnesty International. Mr. Borello is the acting executive director of Human Rights Watch.
Ben Hickey
When the world emerged from the horrors of World War II and vowed “never again,” nations laid the foundation for the system of international justice that now exists to address the planet’s worst crimes. Today, the United States is actively trying to dismantle it.
The Trump administration on Sept. 4 imposed sanctions on three leading Palestinian human rights organizations: Al Haq, founded in 1979 and a pioneer in documenting violations in occupied Gaza and the West Bank; Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, which for more than two decades has meticulously chronicled laws of war violations in Gaza; and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, which has long provided legal aid to victims, particularly from Gaza.
In June, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on another leading Palestinian rights group, Addameer, under a different set of measures.
This is part of a broader Trump administration effort aimed at those who support justice for Palestinians. The stated reason for the September sanctions was that the three groups had helped the International Criminal Court in its investigation of Israel “without Israel’s consent.” But the U.S. government has also gone after officials of the court, which has taken on an investigation that covers allegations of grave crimes by Israeli forces in Gaza; it has issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and former defense minister Yoav Gallant, accusing them of crimes against humanity and war crimes. The administration has placed sanctions on the I.C.C. prosecutor, deputy prosecutors and six of the court’s judges, as well as Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Gaza and the West Bank.
Beyond what has been done to the Palestinians, the Trump administration has undermined the rule of law, protection of human rights and international justice, which all lie at the heart of a rules-based global order. The administration has slashed funding to the United Nations and threatened more cuts while disengaging from the U.N. Human Rights Council. It abruptly terminated nearly all U.S. foreign aid, which had supported human rights defenders and provided lifesaving humanitarian assistance around the world. Cuts to grants by the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor and offices on refugees, women and global justice further downgraded America’s commitment to human rights.
Al Haq, Al Mezan and the Palestinian Center are award-winning organizations that in extraordinarily difficult circumstances have exposed violations of human rights and environmental law by Israeli and Palestinian authorities, armed groups and businesses. They are the voice of Palestinian victims, amplifying stories of injustice that would otherwise remain unheard.
The groups have continued their courageous work in Gaza over nearly two years. Al Mezan and the Palestinian Center are based in Gaza, and Al Haq, based in Ramallah in the West Bank, has staff there as well. They have faced bombardment that has resulted in the killings or wounding of staff members and hundreds of their relatives as well as starvation and forced displacement. On Sept. 7, Israeli bombings flattened the high-rise building that housed the Palestinian Center’s headquarters. The offices of Al Mezan across Gaza were damaged and destroyed in 2024.
The U.S. sanctions will not only disrupt the critical work that they are still able to do but also send a chilling signal to human rights defenders whose work implicates powerful actors or their allies. The Palestinian groups have been vocal in their support of the I.C.C.’s investigation into Israeli conduct and have made submissions to the court’s prosecutor.
Our organizations, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have worked closely with these groups for decades and, consistent with our longstanding and independent mandates to speak out in protecting human rights, we can attest that their work is indispensable to the human rights community not only in the region but internationally.
This work is part of a broad global movement advancing justice for victims and survivors of the human rights abuses. A credible system of international justice that addresses genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity is an essential element of building respect for human rights.
The International Criminal Court is a central pillar of this system. Created through a treaty in 1998, the court is a forum of last resort. Governments intended to deliver on the post-World War II promise of “never again” by establishing such a permanent institution. The system is not perfect, but its capacity to seek to hold accountable even those in the highest positions of power can help end cycles of abuses. This power of the law is now at risk.
Further sanctions or other actions by the United States, including extending sanctions to the court as a whole, would jeopardize the rights of victims across the globe. Governments should rise to the occasion to protect the system they created.
When Israel designated leading Palestinian human rights groups including Addameer and Al Haq as “terrorist organizations” in 2021, nine European Union member states rejected the allegations as unsubstantiated. That pushback was likely a major reason Israel did not go further.
So far, other governments have carefully balanced their reactions to the U.S. sanctions for fear of provoking the Trump administration. This is a flawed strategy and out of step with the urgency the situation demands.
Governments need to condemn efforts to undermine the I.C.C.’s independence and to silence those who are documenting abuses. They should use regional and national laws, like the European Union Blocking Statute, which can be employed to nullify external laws in the union, to mitigate the impact of U.S. sanctions on those working with the court. Those who helped establish the international court and claim to uphold the values underpinning it must step up to defend them.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
2) Israel Said It Intercepted the Flotilla Headed to Gaza. Here’s What to Know.
The Israeli government said it had detained activists onboard boats trying to take humanitarian goods to the enclave.
By Ephrat Livni and Emma Bubola, Published Oct. 1, 2025, Updated Oct. 2, 2025
Greta Thunberg on the flotilla on Thursday. She is one of several high-profile activists in the group. Stefanos Rapanis/Reuters
The Israeli government said on Thursday that its forces had intercepted most of a flotilla trying to bring humanitarian goods to Gaza and detained activists from around the world who were onboard.
After several boats were intercepted, activists said communications had been cut. Screen grabs of the flotilla’s livestream showed Israeli soldiers on board the vessels, and activists in life jackets raising their hands.
Flotilla organizers said on social media that the Israeli Navy had “illegally intercepted” several boats in international waters, calling it an “attack on unarmed humanitarians.” They also posted a video showing water cannons targeting boats. They said in a statement that Israel had stopped them in waters in which it had no jurisdiction.
The Israeli military said on Thursday that one boat was still far from the conflict zone, and that if it tried to approach Gaza it would be “prevented” from doing so. It was not clear how many boats had been part of the flotilla.
Israel’s foreign ministry said on social media on Wednesday night that “several vessels” had been “safely stopped.” Passengers will be transported to an Israeli port and deported, Israeli officials said. The ministry posted a video showing the climate activist Greta Thunberg — one of several high-profile participants in the flotilla — calmly engaging with a person wearing military gear as a boat was boarded.
Around the world, large protests were organized in support of the flotilla.
Who is on the flotilla?
The boats are part of the Global Sumud Flotilla, a group protesting Israel’s war in Gaza. The activists’ mission is to deliver food during the humanitarian crisis there.
The flotilla set sail from Spain in September and was joined by other vessels as it crossed the Mediterranean Sea. It carried about 500 people, according to Suhad Bishara, a lawyer with the Adalah legal center, which said it would represent the activists before the Israeli authorities. High-profile participants included Ms. Thunberg; Mandla Mandela, a grandson of Nelson Mandela; and lawmakers from Italy, which has been rocked by antiwar protests in recent weeks.
News of the interceptions sparked more protests in Italy, as well as in Belgium, Colombia, France, Germany, Greece, Malaysia, Mexico, Spain and Turkey, according to video and posts on social media. Italy’s largest labor union announced a general strike set for Friday to protest the interception.
On Wednesday night, President Gustavo Petro of Colombia announced the end of a free-trade agreement with Israel and the expulsion of Israel’s diplomatic delegation from Colombia. He said two Colombians were detained in international waters. Turkey’s foreign minister called the “attack” on the flotilla “an act of terrorism.”
France’s and Italy’s foreign ministers said they are working with the Israeli authorities to ensure the activists’ protection.
What is the group’s aim?
The activists say they want to break the siege on Gaza and open a humanitarian corridor to provide aid by sea. They also seek to raise awareness about suffering in the enclave, which has been under an Israeli blockade since shortly after Hamas seized power there in 2007.
Israel’s restrictions on goods entering Gaza have become more severe during the war, which began in response to the Hamas-led attack of Oct. 7, 2023. More than 65,000 Palestinians have been killed since the start of the conflict, according to the health authorities in Gaza, who do not distinguish between civilians and combatants.
Parts of the enclave have been suffering from famine in recent months, according to a United Nations-backed panel of food experts whose findings Israel has rejected.
A video posted by flotilla organizers Wednesday night shows Thiago Ávila, a Brazilian activist on the group’s steering committee, on one of the boats, responding to a demand by the Israeli authorities to turn back.
“We are a peaceful, nonviolent humanitarian mission,” Mr. Ávila says, adding that the group carried only food, medical supplies and items like water filters.
The activists had expected the encounter with Israeli forces. Videos have showed them training for nonviolent responses to encounters with Israeli commandos.
How has Israel responded?
Israel has said it will do whatever is necessary to keep the ships from reaching Gaza. It also has accused the flotilla of having ties to Hamas, allegations that the group’s organizers have denied.
On Wednesday night, the Israeli foreign ministry said the flotilla had been asked to “change course” because it was “approaching an active combat zone and violating a lawful naval blockade.”
The ministry has called on the group to deposit its aid at a port in Israel for delivery to Gaza.
The flotilla’s organizers have rejected the proposal as disingenuous and suggested that Israel was involved in jamming their communications and attacking them with drones as they sailed.
After those episodes, Italy and Spain sent naval ships to accompany the flotilla for parts of its journey, and Turkey had drones monitor the boats.
But as the flotilla drew closer to Gaza, Spanish officials urged it not to proceed. Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, also called on the flotilla to turn back, saying that she feared it could undermine attempts to reach a peace deal.
Rawan Sheikh Ahmad contributed reporting.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
3) ‘Enough Is Enough’: Many Palestinians Say Hamas Must Accept Cease-Fire Plan
Interviews in Gaza suggest wide support for a proposal that calls for an immediate end to a war that has brought immense civilian suffering.
By Liam Stack, Reporting from Tel Aviv, Oct. 2, 2025
Palestinians fleeing northern Gaza with their belongings along the coastal road near Wadi Gaza on Wednesday. Abdel Kareem Hana/Associated Press
Palestinians in Gaza have spent almost two years longing for an end to the war that has destroyed their communities and killed tens of thousands of their neighbors. Many say their best hope yet is the latest cease-fire plan proposed by the United States — if only Hamas would accept it.
“Hamas must say yes to this offer — we have been through hell already,” said Mahmoud Bolbol, 43, a construction worker who has remained in Gaza City with his six children in the battered shell of their home throughout the war.
President Trump unveiled the proposal while meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel at the White House on Monday. Mr. Trump said that if Hamas did not accept its terms, then he would give Israel the green light to “finish the job” of destroying the armed group.
Hamas has not yet given its response to the proposal, but interviews with Palestinians in Gaza on Wednesday suggested widespread public support for the plan. It calls for an immediate end to a war that has brought immense civilian suffering.
For the past two days, Mr. Bolbol said, his neighbors have talked about almost nothing but the cease-fire proposal. If Hamas rejects it, he said, his family would finally leave Gaza City and head for what he hoped would be the relative safety of the enclave’s south.
“Hamas needs to understand: Enough is enough,” Mr. Bolbol said. Most Gazans are not members of the group, he added, “so why drag us into this?”
The plan requires Hamas to release all of the remaining hostages it seized during the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on southern Israel within 72 hours of the proposal going into effect. That includes an estimated 20 abductees believed to still be alive and the bodies of about 25 others.
In exchange, Israel would release about 250 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences in Israel, an additional 1,700 Gazans detained during the war and the remains of 15 dead Gazan prisoners for each Israeli hostage whose body is returned.
But the proposal contains several elements that Hamas has said are unacceptable.
Those include a ban on the group exercising future power in Gaza, a requirement that it disarm and the establishment of a transitional government overseen by foreign officials, including Mr. Trump and Tony Blair, the former British prime minister.
The proposal unveiled on Monday sent a rare flash of hope through Gaza, people said in interviews. But others are less hopeful.
Some people said the terms of the proposal made them doubt that Hamas would agree. Others said their doubts grew from something more basic and bitter: They simply did not believe that Hamas would put the interests of the Palestinian people above the interests of the organization.
“We are dying for nothing, and no one cares about us,” said Nasayem Muqat, 30, who fled Israel’s expanding military campaign in Gaza City for the territory’s south on Monday with her young daughter, Selene. “Hamas needs to think more of us and what we have been through.”
Abdelhalim Awad, 57, who manages a bakery in Deir al Balah, in central Gaza, said he would accept almost “any price” to end the war. But he said he did not believe that Hamas could say the same thing.
“They don’t care about what people think or public opinion,” Mr. Awad said. “If they cared about that, we wouldn’t be in this situation.”
In Khan Younis, in southern Gaza, Mahmoud Abu Mattar, 35, said he hoped the United States could somehow force Hamas to accept the deal and then make both the armed group and Israel abide by all its terms.
“My wish is that Trump forces it as a reality on both sides, directly, without giving a choice,” said Mr. Abu Mattar, who once sold electrical appliances in Gaza City.
He said that fighting had forced him to move around northern Gaza 10 times with his wife and three children until last week, when they fled to the south for the first time.
He said he was disgusted with the negotiators in faraway conference rooms who seem to control his family’s fate.
“The ones negotiating on my behalf are sitting in air-conditioned rooms,” he said. “They are not the ones living in sand, walking half an hour to fetch water or searching for a bag of flour and getting killed.”
Reporting was contributed by Abu Bakr Bashir, Rawan Sheikh Ahmad, Aaron Boxerman, Iyad Abuheweila and Ameera Harouda.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
4) Americans’ Views of Israel-Gaza War Shift Alongside Changing Social Media Posts
Nearly two years into the conflict, social media is increasingly capturing the day-to-day toll in Gaza, as U.S. public opinion on the war shifts.
By Sheera Frenkel and Steven Lee Myers, Reporting from San Francisco, Published Oct. 1, 2025, Updated Oct. 2, 2025
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/01/business/israel-gaza-war-social-media.html
Palestinians waiting outside a charity kitchen to receive a free meal amid the worsening economic situation and widespread famine in the Gaza Strip last month. Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
Images of Palestinians in Gaza fleeing Israeli airstrikes, digging in the ashes of collapsed buildings for loved ones and surveying the ruins of their cities have flooded the social media feeds of Americans for nearly two years.
But in recent months, as an increasing number of Gazans grapple with starvation, more videos posted on TikTok, Instagram and X have shown emaciated children begging for food and hunting for clean water, giving people a close-up view of the war’s grinding toll.
The change in online content has unfolded alongside Americans’ shifting views on Israel. In a poll from The New York Times and Siena University this week, more Americans sided with Palestinians over Israelis for the first time since The Times began asking voters their sympathies in 1998.
The rising disapproval of the war was driven by a sharp decline in support from Democratic voters, the poll found. While Republican voters largely continued supporting Israel, the poll also showed a modest drop in their support.
Many factors account for the shift, but social media has played a role as the Israel-Gaza war has been widely discussed in online communities, internet experts said.
“Israel’s public position — a nation forced into a defensive war and making every effort to minimize civilian casualties — is eroded by more documentary evidence each day” online, said Emerson Brooking, the director of strategy at the Digital Forensic Research Lab of the Atlantic Council, which studies online communities.
Modern wars are increasingly playing out on social media. From Ukraine to Myanmar to Sudan, people have documented and uploaded footage from conflict zones to the internet. In Gaza, the videos and photographs have played out over a longer period amid bursts of violence over the years.
That has prompted Israelis and Palestinians to use social media as a battleground for public opinion. Their efforts escalated after Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas militants launched cross-border attacks into Israel from Gaza that left more than 1,200 Israelis dead and at least 250 kidnapped, leading to the war.
Online, Israel began campaigns focused on swaying Black and Democratic lawmakers to its side by using fake social media accounts to argue pro-Israeli positions. Hamas militants also released footage of the Oct. 7 attacks, and hijacked the social media accounts of some Israelis they held hostage to spread terror.
In the initial months after the Oct. 7 attacks, Times polls showed that U.S. public opinion was broadly favorable to Israel, with 47 percent siding with Israelis and 20 percent with Palestinians.
Since then, many Palestinians have used Instagram and TikTok to tell their own stories of the war. Photojournalists in Gaza also posted photos and videos showing the aftermath of Israeli airstrikes.
Firsthand accounts from Gaza have become more difficult to document and verify as dozens of journalists have been killed in the conflict and Palestinians have been displaced. But a network of Palestinian photographers and photojournalists still publish images daily to their social media accounts.
Among them are Wissam Nassar, a Gaza-based photographer, and Motaz Azaiza, a photographer who fled Gaza last year but frequently posts images from family members and friends in the coastal enclave. Each has a large Instagram following.
On Tuesday, Mr. Nassar and Mr. Azaiza posted tributes on Instagram to Yahya Barzak, a Palestinian photographer known for his pictures of newborn babies. Their posts said Mr. Bazak had been killed in an Israeli airstrike on a cafe in Gaza.
Mr. Nassar and Mr. Azaiza did not respond to requests for comment.
Instagram and TikTok are highly popular among young Americans, who were the most likely to oppose additional economic or military aid to Israel, according to this week’s poll from The Times and Siena University. Some Israeli and U.S. lawmakers have accused TikTok of intentionally promoting pro-Palestinian content. The video app has denied those claims, saying it is neutral with policies against antisemitic content.
In contrast, Israel’s attempts at reaching online audiences have faltered, said Mr. Brooking of the Atlantic Council. The Israeli government appeared to be “de-emphasizing persuasion altogether,” he said, in favor of trying to shut down Palestinian social media posts by targeting cellphone and internet towers in Gaza.
How people form views on the Israel-Gaza war has been complicated by influence campaigns, as well as artificial intelligence-generated images and bots that may be pushing one-sided content.
“There’s a direct link between the rise of polarization on issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the ways in which this has been repeatedly reinforced by zero-sum thinking and conspiracy theories on social media,” said Amy Spitalnick, the chief executive of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a coalition of advocacy groups.
Last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel talked of the power of social media in the war. In a meeting with American influencers at Israel’s Consulate General in New York, he called social media platforms “the most important weapon” that his country had “to secure our base of support the U.S.,” according to a video published by Debra Lea, an influencer who attended the event.
Mr. Netanyahu also accused nongovernment agencies and other groups of intentionally spreading anti-Israeli and antisemitic messages to Americans through social media. TikTok was the most important platform for swaying people’s opinions, with X a close second, he added.
Mr. Netanyahu’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
According to the Times and Siena University poll, 34 percent of Americans now express broader sympathy for Israelis and 35 percent for Palestinians; 31 percent said they were unsure or backed both equally.
A majority of American voters now also oppose sending additional economic and military aid to Israel, in a major reversal since the Oct. 7 attacks. Among voters under 30, nearly seven in 10 opposed such aid, regardless of party affiliation, the poll found.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
5) What It Takes for a Working-Class Kid to Get a College Education
By Beth Macy, Oct. 2, 2025
Ms. Macy is the author of “Dopesick” and the forthcoming “Paper Girl: A Memoir of Home and Family in a Fractured America.” She wrote from Urbana, Ohio.
Like many Americans, I left my small Ohio town for college and then followed professional opportunities to a larger city. My working-class parents hadn’t gone to college, but I did, thanks to nurturing K-12 schools and to the federal government’s Pell grant program for poor kids, of whom I was certainly one.
Over the years I have worked as a journalist and author, dropping back into Urbana for holidays and reunions. But around 10 years ago I began to go for longer stretches, to look in on my aging mom.
My hometown still had the same postcard-cute facade, but I quickly realized something drastic was underway. For the first time I noticed Confederate flags flying in a town once heralded as an Underground Railroad hub.
I didn’t recognize the place in which I had once known people on nearly every block of every street. I wanted to retain that recognition not just for myself, but also because I want to live in a country where believing different things doesn’t mean complete estrangement.
This desire lead me to meet Silas James, a high school senior and marching band drum major whom the teachers at Urbana High described as “a young Beth Macy,” by which they meant a relatively smart and hard-working kid whose family situation was insecure verging on chaotic and who needed help.
Silas’s future seemed bright except for at least one detail. He didn’t have a car. But it’s not just having a car that starts every time that people on the other side of poverty might take for granted.
I’m not exaggerating when I say it was a miracle that I left Urbana for college in my mom’s rusted Mustang, praying the whole way that its slippy clutch would not give out. I managed the good fortune to leave town before falling into premature parenthood or addiction, both of which have saddled generations of my family. My dad died of late-stage alcoholism and lung cancer when I was 19.
As I got to know Silas, I was struck by how much steeper the climb out of poverty was for him. I grew up with examples of success all around me. I counted not just teachers and parents of my friends but also a local judge, his librarian wife and our mailman (whose route overlapped with my paper route) among my loudest cheerleaders.
Not so for Silas. In Champaign County, of which Urbana is the seat, the number of food stamp recipients has nearly doubled since 1990, and foster-care placements have tripled since 2015. It would not be an exaggeration to say that Silas is just one of many struggling people in Urbana.
As Silas led the marching band onto the field, crowds cheering, he was homeless and couch surfing at friends’ houses, and dealing with the aftermath of having been sexually abused by an acquaintance while his parents were in jail. Silas’s father, an intermittent presence in his life, was also struggling and would die of a methadone overdose combined with Covid and a heart blockage.
No one doubted Silas had the intellectual chops to attend a four-year university, but his steadiest mentor, his band director, urged him to enter a short-term trade program at a community college so he could avoid crushing student debt. A job as a certified welder, which Silas determined would be his future, paid more than twice as much as his McDonald’s shifts.
Pell grants covered my tuition, room and board, and even my books. Because of skyrocketing college costs and the drastic defunding of higher education dating back to the 1980s, today’s Pell grants cover roughly 30 percent of a poor kid’s four-year education. Silas got scholarships for his community college program, but they covered tuition; he had no funding for reliable transportation for his two-hour daily commute (no public transit was available), nor could he pay for housing near the college that would have also removed him from his family’s traumatic environment.
Throughout the 2023-24 school year, I watched as Silas went through five clunker cars and four low-wage jobs while attending community college. While I worked work-study jobs for beer and pizza money during college, Silas worked full time for living expenses.
Hardships in his family were a constant drag on his psyche. He dropped out the first week of his first semester after his mother got into a car wreck and required round-the-clock supervision for a concussion. During his second semester, his mother began using drugs again and lost custody of Silas’s younger siblings. By the time Silas earned his welding certification, the best welder in his class, he was 19 and about to be named the legal guardian of two teenage siblings.
His only debt was a small loan he took out to buy the most reliable car he could afford to get himself through the program’s final months — a Honda Accord with 211,000 miles that was younger than Silas by a year.
I could not have handled the responsibility of being a teenager raising teenagers, but Silas has largely thrived. He’s engaged to be married to his boyfriend (whose teacher parents are supportive) and is employed in a managerial position with benefits in a nearby town.
Silas’s transition into adulthood has no doubt been complicated by his parents’ choices. But the degree to which he has had to literally pay for those choices is stark. My own parents struggled, but thanks to robust schools and college grants (that I have more than paid back through my taxes), I was able to turn the page on those struggles in a way that Silas, perhaps, will never be able to do.
While college completion rates have been trending upward for decades, a degree remains out of reach for a lot of Americans, many of whom have bought the story that they wouldn’t want to go anyway. The flywheel of economic fatalism and resentment, fueled by wages that don’t seem to budge, has been spinning now for two generations.
That sense of hopelessness is a primary driver of partisan hatred and inequality. For the past 40 years, Republican and Democratic leadership alike stopped thinking of higher education as a public good and basically privatized it to the tune of more than $1.7 trillion in individual student debt.
I’m no better than Silas, and it’s not fair that he and his siblings continue to face such fierce headwinds without the help I took for granted.
We owe him more. We owe all our children more.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
6) At Saudi Comedy Fest, American Free Speech Becomes the Punchline
American comics used Saudi Arabia’s first global comedy festival to skewer a debate raging at home. Critics said the event was part of Saudi efforts to draw attention away from a political crackdown.
By Ismaeel Naar and Erika Solomon, Oct. 2, 2025
Ismaeel Naar attended the Riyadh Comedy Festival in the Saudi capital over the weekend. Erika Solomon reported from Cairo.
The comedian Dave Chappelle performing in Martha's Vineyard, Mass., in August. He was a headline act at the Riyadh Comedy Festival in Saudi Arabia this past week. Credit...Arturo Holmes/Getty Images
For weeks, ridicule poured in against the American comedians set to perform this week in Saudi Arabia — a country not known for its civil liberties.
But by the time they took to the stage, the comedians had turned the joke on U.S. free speech.
“Right now in America, they say that if you talk about Charlie Kirk, that you’ll get canceled,” the comedian Dave Chappelle quipped on Saturday at the Riyadh Comedy Festival, the first event of its kind in Saudi Arabia. “I don’t know if that’s true, but I’m gonna find out.”
A headline act, Mr. Chappelle was met with whoops, cheers and applause as he told an audience of 6,000, “It’s easier to talk here than it is in America.”
Though happening thousands of miles away from the United States in the conservative Saudi kingdom, Mr. Chappelle’s act tapped into the strange currents of American politics that were coursing through the event.
He was performing in Riyadh at the same time as a divisive free speech debate was roiling the United States. It began after the late-night television host Jimmy Kimmel was briefly pulled from the airwaves after growing criticism by many conservatives and a federal regulator over a monologue about the killing of the right-wing activist Charlie Kirk. Mr. Kimmel returned to television last week.
Despite the furor, President Trump has called on regulators to consider revoking licenses for networks that broadcast his critics.
More than 50 of the biggest names in American and Western comedy have been scheduled to perform at the Riyadh festival, which runs through Oct. 9. The acts were paid for by the Saudi government, which harshly curtails free speech — an ideal many of those same comedians claim to champion.
Mr. Chappelle has talked frequently about being canceled after an uproar caused by his jokes mocking trans people. But in Riyadh, he also took aim at the recent suspension of Mr. Kimmel.
Like other comedians at the event who said they felt muzzled by American political correctness, Mr. Chappelle reveled in making uncouth jokes in Saudi Arabia. Yet he overlooked an eight-year crackdown that has led to many of the country’s writers, businesspeople, activists, clerics and social media influencers being arrested.
The irony was not lost on the Saudi audience, who marveled at the idea of watching political satire skewering the United States in their once famously austere Islamic society.
“I found it so interesting to hear political jokes targeting Trump and Charlie Kirk,” said Abdulrahman Mohammad, a 23-year-old dental student. He said it was “surprising to hear him talk about it in Riyadh, when just recently America canceled Jimmy Kimmel doing the same.”
Playing host to major entertainment events, like the comedy festival, is part of Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 agenda, spearheaded by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The plan aims to diversify the kingdom’s economy, which is highly dependent on oil, and create a more relaxed social environment for overseas investors and ordinary Saudis alike.
For Saudis, the event — featuring stars including Kevin Hart, Jimmy Carr and Bill Burr — was a sign of how the country was changing. Music, once effectively prohibited in public, thumped from loudspeakers outside, as D.J.s spun techno remixes of Jennifer Lopez and 50 Cent songs.
The festival has been held at Boulevard City, a sprawling entertainment complex with a quarter designed to resemble Times Square.
Young Saudis gathered in gender-mixed spaces beneath the glare of giant screens rather than the watchful gaze of the once-feared religious police, whose powers were stripped by the crown prince as part of his reform drive.
Women in flowing black abayas, paired with jeans and T-shirts, mingled with women in conservative face veils and with men, many of whom sported a white robe known as a thawb, along with a baseball cap.
Still, societal transformation has its limits. Political humor was warmly received; the sex jokes, not so much.
When the comedian Cipha Sounds began a gag about men airdropping photos of their genitalia, uncomfortable laughter rippled through the arena. “Oh, sex jokes don’t land in Riyadh,” he conceded with a wry smile. “Got it.”
As the Saudi authorities have loosened social restrictions, they have also been whittling away the space for domestic political discourse. For that reason, the comedians who performed at the festival have faced harsh criticism from rights organizations and other comics.
They accuse participants of “artwashing” — allowing their performances to draw attention away from the Saudi government’s troubling human rights record. That record includes the gruesome 2018 killing of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Consulate in Turkey, and the imprisonment and alleged torture of several women’s rights activists.
Joey Shea, a researcher at Human Rights Watch, said that the festival came at the same time as “a crackdown on free speech, which many of these comedians defend but people in Saudi Arabia are completely denied.”
In the audience for Mr. Hart’s performance on Sunday, some Saudis argued that refusing to engage with their country was not the answer.
“It doesn’t mean we should be cut off from the world, and vice versa,” said Taher al-Naser, 27. “If they want to call it whitewashing, so be it, but we’re still on the path of transformation.”
In the past, Prince Mohammed has defended the political crackdown as a necessary step in the country’s reshaping, saying that it was “a small price” to pay to “get rid of extremism and terrorism without civil war.”
Mr. Hart acknowledged the public controversy. “But I love what y’all are doing here,” he told the audience. “I’ll continue being a positive ambassador of your change to the world.”
Facing flak from their peers, other comedians framed their participation in the event as a form of cultural exchange to promote free speech.
Ahead of the event, Jim Jefferies, an invited performer, told the podcast “This Last Weekend” that festival organizers had invited “some edgy-ass comedians.”
“If you don’t agree with how they run their place, isn’t this a step in the right direction?” he said.
Not every comedian took up Saudi Arabia’s offer. Some said they had declined to perform on principle, saying that there was censorship embedded in the contracts they were asked to sign.
The American comedian Atsuko Okatsuka, who boycotted the festival, posted screenshots of what she said were parts of the contract. According to the posts, organizers prohibited “any material considered to degrade, defame, or bring into public disrepute, contempt, scandal, embarrassment, or ridicule” the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Any jokes about the Saudi royal family, or any religions, were also forbidden.
One comedian, Tim Dillon, was upfront about how money had been a motivating factor to perform. Mr. Dillon — who was later dropped by organizers after making slavery jokes about migrant workers in the kingdom — said he was offered $375,000 and that others had received up to $1.6 million.
The General Entertainment Authority, the main organizer of the festival, did not respond to questions about the payments the comedians received or whether participants were contractually obliged to censor their material.
Israel, and its conduct of the war in Gaza, also factored in Mr. Chapelle’s show. The comedian, who has been critical of Israel before, ended his act by telling the audience that he feared returning to the United States, because, “They’re going to do something to me so that I can’t say what I want to say.”
To alert his fans that this had happened, he said he would use a code phrase.
“It’s got to be something I would never say in practice, so if I actually say it, you’ll know never to listen to anything else I say after that,” he said. “Here’s the phrase: I stand with Israel.”
For Patrick Sellers, an American expatriate at the festival, the shifting boundaries of what constituted free speech in the United States were troubling.
Mr. Sellers, a 40-year-old consultant, said he was disconcerted that American comedians were telling jokes in Riyadh that they felt they “might have to pay for” back home.
“Once we lose the ability to laugh at ourselves,” he said, “we start losing our freedoms.”
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
7) Trump’s ‘Compact’ With Universities Is Just Extortion
By Erwin Chemerinsky, Oct. 2, 2025
Mr. Chemerinsky is the dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley.
On Wednesday, the Trump administration sent letters to nine major universities proposing a “compact.” As The Times reports, the agreement would, among other things, require these universities to freeze tuition rates for five years, limit the enrollment of foreign students and be bound to specific definitions of gender. It would also require them to prohibit anything that would “punish, belittle and even spark violence against conservative ideas.”
In exchange, these universities would receive “multiple positive benefits,” including “substantial and meaningful federal grants.” The schools were warned that they were free to go a different route if any of them “elects to forgo federal benefits.” A senior White House adviser indicated that the administration wants to extend this compact to all institutions of higher education.
This is extortion, plain and simple.
It is not hyperbole to say that the future of higher education in America requires that every university reject it. If any schools capitulate, the pressure will be enormous on all to fold. The only solution is solidarity and collective action against this effort at federal control over higher education.
President Trump is trying to circumvent the legislative and judicial branches of our government by presenting this as a deal with schools. Nothing in the Constitution or federal law authorizes the president to do this unilaterally. The Supreme Court has been clear that Congress can set conditions on federal funds so long as the requirements are constitutional, clearly stated, related to the purpose of the program and not unduly coercive. Mr. Trump’s compact fails every part of that test.
A Supreme Court decision in 2012 about the Affordable Care Act explains why Mr. Trump’s proposal is unduly coercive and thus unconstitutional. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that the A.C.A., also known as Obamacare, was substantially constitutional. But it declared unconstitutional a provision of the law that required states to expand their Medicaid programs or lose all federal Medicaid funds.
No state is required to take federal Medicaid money (just as no university has to take federal funds for its research and its programs). Nonetheless, the Supreme Court said that forcing states to make that choice was unconstitutional. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts described this as a “gun to the head” and “dragooning” the states. The administration’s proposed compact is similarly impermissibly coercive.
Moreover, there is a basic principle of constitutional law — the unconstitutional conditions doctrine — that the government cannot condition a benefit on a recipient having to give up a constitutional right. But that is exactly what the compact would do. When it calls for universities to effectively ban anything deemed to punish or belittle conservative ideas, it tramples the right to freedom of speech.
The core of the First Amendment is that the government cannot use its power to discriminate on the basis of the viewpoint expressed. But this provision would do just that in treating conservative ideas differently from liberal ones. And any restriction on belittling an idea is obviously unconstitutional; there always is a right to disagree with an idea, even in strong language. (As with “belittle,” the meaning of “conservative” is vague, leaving the definition up to the whims of members of the administration.)
I’ve seen a copy of the compact and note that it would violate the First Amendment in another way: requiring universities to have policies prohibiting “all university employees, in their capacity as university representatives,” to abstain from “actions or speech relating to societal and political events except in cases in which external events have a direct impact upon the university.” It would be hard to come up with a more explicit attempt to restrict freedom of speech.
Requiring adherence to the administration’s definitions of gender is clearly another effort to further marginalize transgender students. It also very likely would be illegal, as the Supreme Court has held that the prohibition of sex discrimination in federal laws, such as employment discrimination statutes, forbids discrimination based on gender identity.
Beyond the unconstitutional aspects of the compact, there is its odious demand to intrude on the autonomy of these schools. Every aspect of it seeks to dictate decisions that have traditionally been left to each university — a degree of control over higher education that is characteristic of authoritarian countries. As someone who has spent his career as a professor and as a dean, it is chilling to contemplate universities relinquishing their freedom in this way. Indeed, if any of these universities cave, it’s hard to imagine any limit to what the administration might try to demand next.
We all learned long ago on the playground that trying to appease a bully only makes things worse. It’s equally hard to imagine how higher education will recover if colleges and universities begin conceding to Mr. Trump’s illegal compact.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
8) Why Young Men Are Losing Faith in Science
By Adam Frank, Oct. 3, 2025
Dr. Frank is a professor of astrophysics at the University of Rochester.
Christian Philip Scott
A few years ago, on a flight, I was seated next to a man in his mid-20s. He looked at the astrobiology textbook I was reading and asked if I was a scientist. When I told him I was, his face lit up and he told me how much he loved science. He listened to podcasts like “The Joe Rogan Experience” and others where scientists came on as guests and talked about quantum mechanics, black holes and ancient aliens.
Encouraged by his enthusiasm, I told him that not everything on those shows was science (case in point: ancient aliens). I advised him to be on his guard. Then, with all earnestness, he told me while I was clearly OK, it was common knowledge that sometimes, on some subjects, science hid the truth.
After 30 years as a researcher, science communicator and university science teacher, I’ve been unsettled by what appears to be a growing skepticism of science among some of my Generation Z students, shaped in part by the different online cultures these young people have grown up in. While I cannot speak to what happens in every corner of the internet, I can speak to the one I’ve been invited into: the “manosphere” — a loose network of podcasts, YouTubers and other male influencers. I’ve appeared on some of the manosphere’s most popular shows, including Joe Rogan’s. I’ve watched how curiosity about science can slide into conspiracy-tinged mazes rooted in misinformation. And I believe the first step out of the maze for young men begins by reasserting to them the virtue of hard work — an often grueling but indispensable part of finding the right answers in science.
Of course, women can be antiscience just as much as men; for example, some studies suggest women have more reservations about new vaccines than men. But the male tendency to view debates as adversarial contests that must be won at all costs is what may help to create a more alarming antiscience dynamic in the manosphere.
The manosphere can foster genuine interest in science among young listeners. But framing science as a debate to be won makes it easy to paint established scientists as opponents who must be overcome. And one of the easiest ways to win the debate is to suggest scientists are either self-satisfied elites who won’t consider new ideas or, worse, liars who know the truth and are hiding it.
While there can seem to be a sincere desire in the manosphere to learn more about topics like black holes and neuroscience, discussions in these communities can sometimes devolve into a compelling story about searching for “the truth” about the moon landings, ancient technology and climate change. That powerful story, repeated enough times, can become the background against which manosphere audiences come to see all science.
The way to counter this story is, ironically, already there in the manosphere. Research shows young men and women today want a higher purpose, a call to something greater than themselves. In the manosphere, figures like Jordan Peterson, a clinical psychologist with an immensely popular podcast, speak directly to this desire among young men.
Mr. Peterson has framed virtues like personal responsibility, honesty and a purpose-driven life as qualities that are important to manliness. Those same values surface in other manosphere interests, like rigorous athletic training and disciplined health regimens.
What does not get much airtime, however, is recognition that these are also the very virtues that guide science and its principal values of veracity, accuracy and precision — seeking the right answer. Essentially this is just honesty when it wears a lab coat. Reframing scientific inquiry as another area where these values are lived can help counter science skepticism.
All the scientific marvels on which modern society depends are the fruit of extreme dedication. Rockets, computers and lifesaving medicines all come from decades of effort by scientists hunkered over pages of calculation or the laboratory bench. They required the same tireless, single-minded effort every elite athlete understands. The fringe science appearing in young men’s online social media feeds, however, requires none of that effort. Instead, it stands on proclamations based on profound ignorance and a disinterest in even the most basic scientific principles like those I’m teaching my freshmen this semester.
Good scientists are intimate with the limits of what they know and stand ready to learn in domains outside their expertise. They don’t just claim they are right. Instead, they know the cure for their ignorance is to actively and rigorously test their own assertions. That kind of humility is no different from enduring the hardships required to become a champion middleweight boxer, a great rock climber or a master musician.
It’s time to make that connection explicit, and the best place to start is with members of Gen Z themselves. If I could talk to that young man on the plane again, I would not simply tell him to exercise caution when it comes to fringe experts. I would instead explain the long traditions of scientific discipline and determination that built the jet he’s flying in. Einstein’s relativity, evolution and genetics, climate physics on any planet (even alien ones) — these topics are a thousand times more compelling than faked moon landings because they are not the fever-dreams of hucksters but a direct vision of nature’s outrageous beauty and complexity. Make the effort to walk down that road, embrace its honesty and humility and you’ll be hooked forever.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
9) What’s Lost When Community Colleges Go Virtual
By Daniel Seddiqui, Oct. 3, 2025
Mr. Seddiqui is the author of “50 Jobs in 50 States: One Man’s Journey of Discovery Across America.”
Joanne Joo
I grew up in Cupertino, Calif., the home of De Anza College, one of the state’s many community colleges. In the 1990s, as a teenager, I took a few courses at the college, so I spent plenty of time there. The campus culture I look back on was about friendships, dating, sports and activities. B.B. King came to De Anza in 1996, Bruce Hornsby in 1998. Sometimes on weekends, there were bustling flea markets, and the recreational center was loud.
De Anza is still home to flea markets and has vibrant on-campus club days. But for some community college students, the campus atmosphere these days can be different.
In no small part because of the Covid-19 pandemic, community colleges have increasingly embraced online classes, and many students avail themselves of these offerings. It’s a trend that has made classes more accessible, but has also diminished the campus experience at some of these schools — institutions that have been rightly described as the backbone of higher education.
How we got here is understandable: During the pandemic, students at all educational levels, not to mention many white-collar workers, were at home and on Zoom full time. As life got back to (almost) normal, the increased popularity of online classes remained: In the fall 2022 semester, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, 58 percent of two-year college students took at least one distance learning course; 31 percent of two-year college students took distance learning classes exclusively. (At four-year colleges, those numbers were 53 percent and 25 percent.)
For those whose work schedules don’t mesh with a traditional class schedule, online classes offer more options for studying and working at the same time — a flexibility that’s baked into the mission of community colleges.
But have we fully considered the downsides? Research has shown that online students tend to do worse than students who attend courses in person. For many course subjects, in-person learning is the better way to go, especially with direct access to services like tutoring and counseling.
There’s also the question of academic integrity: When so many students are taking classes online, there are more ways for them to cheat.
College campuses, including those of two-year schools, offer students more ready access to instructors, career services staff, laboratories, libraries and workout facilities. There is a classroom culture that forms in courses taught online, but it’s not the same as being on campus.
I sometimes travel to community colleges to talk to students about connecting with the real world through hands-on immersive experiences, offering a perspective that grew out of the journey I cataloged in my book. I talk about how I varnished wood with Amish craftsmen in Pennsylvania, braced the ceiling of a coal mine in West Virginia and hoisted lobster traps off the shores of Maine — and how I came to appreciate the way in-person learning fosters a deep understanding of concepts, etches lessons into memory and provides human social interaction that can make the world feel less daunting and more connected.
My position as a youth employment counselor for a work force development organization in Oregon is designed to help young people succeed in the labor market. Some of the students I serve have dropped out of high school and need to improve their basic reading comprehension and math skills — a circumstance made worse by the pandemic, when many of them were in middle school. It was a challenge for them to stay disciplined, motivated and connected and to understand the relevance of course materials. Some of them are skeptical about pursuing a college education, in part because of their experiences with remote learning.
They are among those who would benefit most from an in-person community college experience. At Central Oregon Community College, where I facilitate programming, local businesses attract students to campus by funding stipends for pre-apprenticeship programs that include certifications for operating a forklift, performing C.P.R. and more.
In a world where the rapid development of artificial intelligence has the potential to eliminate some entry-level jobs, the focus at community colleges on hands-on fields increases their value. De Anza, for instance, has a longstanding program in registered nursing and offers certificates and associate’s degrees in automotive technology.
The students I advise are diligently completing coursework, but in many cases, they just aren’t getting the three-dimensional experience of college life that would help them become well-rounded professionals. In our increasingly digital world, online classes are here to stay, but there’s no substitute for being on campus.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
10) Trump Sets Sunday Deadline for Hamas to Agree to Cease-fire Plan With Israel
President Trump said Hamas would be “extinguished” if it did not agree to a cease-fire proposed by the United States.
By Katie Rogers, Reporting from Washington, Oct. 3, 2025
Displaced people in the southern Gaza Strip last week. Credit...Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
President Trump warned Hamas officials on Friday that time was running out to sign on to a cease-fire deal with Israel to end their fighting in Gaza, setting a deadline of Sunday evening and instructing innocent Palestinians to flee for “safer parts” of the territory.
Just days ago, Mr. Trump stood at the White House with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and hailed the U.S.-led peace plan, calling it “potentially one of the great days ever in civilization.”
Mr. Trump’s threats, delivered in a 300-word missive on social media, were a sign that he was growing frustrated with Hamas officials, who had said they were considering the proposal but rejected its presentation as an ultimatum.
“Hamas is discussing this plan with seriousness,” Mohammad Nazzal, a senior Hamas official, told Al Jazeera in an interview on Thursday. He added that Hamas had “comments” on the 20-point plan and was looking for “gray areas” that it could work with.
On social media, the president warned Hamas fighters that thousands of them had already been killed and that many more would be if they did not agree to a deal by 6 p.m. on Sunday.
“Most of the rest are surrounded and MILITARILY TRAPPED, just waiting for me to give the word, ‘GO,’ for their lives to be quickly extinguished,” he wrote.
“I am asking that all innocent Palestinians immediately leave this area of potentially great future death for safer parts of Gaza,” Mr. Trump added. “Everyone will be well cared for by those that are waiting to help.”
For many people living in Gaza, uprooting is difficult or impossible. Hundreds of thousands live near Gaza City, the site of the latest Israeli ground invasion, and are unable or unwilling to flee to overcrowded areas with scarce resources.
The 20-point proposal calls for Hamas to release all Israeli hostages and for the group to disarm. The plan also stipulated a phased withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. After Mr. Trump unveiled the proposal, he told reporters in Washington that he would give Hamas “three or four days” to respond, meaning the Sunday deadline is already an extension.
Adam Rasgon contributed reporting from Tel Aviv.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
11) Jane Fonda Revives Her Father’s McCarthy-Era Free Speech Group
The actress is leading the revival of the Committee for the First Amendment, a free-expression group that Hollywood stars including her father, Henry Fonda, formed in the 1940s.
By Matt Stevens, Reporting from Los Angeles, Oct. 3, 2025
Jane Fonda and the other new members recalled when the government “repressed and persecuted American citizens for their political beliefs” and warned that “those forces have returned.” Credit...Julien De Rosa/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Jane Fonda and hundreds of members of the entertainment industry have revived the Committee for the First Amendment, a free-expression group that was originally formed by Hollywood stars including her father, Henry Fonda, during the McCarthy era.
The original group was formed in 1947 to oppose the work of the House Un-American Activities Committee, whose investigations into the film industry led to the blacklist of actors, writers and directors who were suspected of Communist sympathies. The original Committee for the First Amendment included Mr. Fonda, Lucille Ball, Judy Garland, Humphrey Bogart, Gene Kelly, Frank Sinatra and others who rallied to defend free expression.
In announcing the revival of the group, Ms. Fonda and the other new members recalled the “dark time when the federal government repressed and persecuted American citizens for their political beliefs” and warned that “those forces have returned.”
“The federal government is once again engaged in a coordinated campaign to silence critics in the government, the media, the judiciary, academia, and the entertainment industry,” they said in a statement, which was signed by Ms. Fonda, Spike Lee, Billie Eilish, Pedro Pascal and more than 800 others.
In a video posted on her social media account Wednesday night, Ms. Fonda, 87, said that she was heartened by the many people who had reached out seeking to be added to the committee. Still, she said, “We’re not looking to build an organization. We’re looking to grow a movement.”
She called for “creative, nonviolent noncooperation” and held up, as one example, the move by some to cancel their Disney+ subscriptions after the late-night host Jimmy Kimmel was suspended by ABC.
“We’re artists, we’re creatives,” she said. “Freedom of expression is essential to what we do.”
Though the committee’s statement condemned the federal government, it did not explicitly mention President Trump or any member of his administration. The White House appeared to get the message nonetheless, issuing a statement that attacked Ms. Fonda and what they said were her “bad opinions.”
“As someone who actually knows what it’s like to be censored, President Trump is a strong supporter of free speech and Democrat allegations to the contrary are so false, they’re laughable,” Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, said in a statement.
The New York Times wrote about the original Committee for the First Amendment when it was formed 78 years ago, in October 1947. At that time, the House committee was “conducting an inquiry into the degree of Communist infiltration in the film industry,” according to a Times report. Several actors had been summoned to Washington to testify.
Another group of actors formed the Committee for the First Amendment to oppose the inquiry. Twenty-five actors on the committee, including Mr. Bogart and John Huston, flew to Washington to protest the inquiry. A radio program that the group produced was broadcast nationwide.
Organizers of the renewed effort have posted the radio program online.
“Hollywood fights back!” a man intones to begin it.
Ms. Garland is the first of many stars to speak. “It’s one thing if someone says we’re not good actors. That hurts. But we can take that,” she said. “It’s something again to say we’re not good Americans. We resent that!”
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
12) Judge Finds ‘Likelihood’ That Charges Against Abrego Garcia Are Vindictive
The ruling was an astonishing rebuke of both the Justice Department and some of its top officials, including Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general.
By Alan Feuer, Oct. 3, 2025
Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr. at a naturalization ceremony in 2018. Judge Crenshaw found that Trump officials may have sought to punish Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia for having filed a lawsuit successfully challenging his initial “unlawful deportation” to El Salvador. Credit...Larry McCormack/The Tennessean, via Imagn
A federal judge in Nashville ruled on Friday that there was a “realistic likelihood” that the indictment filed against Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the immigrant who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador in March and then brought back to face criminal charges, amounted to a vindictive prosecution by the Justice Department.
The ruling was an astonishing rebuke of both the department and some of its top officials, including Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general. Mr. Blanche was called out by name in the ruling for remarks he made about Mr. Abrego Garcia’s case on the same day in June he was returned to U.S. soil to face the charges in Federal District Court in Nashville.
In a 16-page decision, Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr. said there was evidence that Mr. Abrego Garcia’s prosecution “may stem from retaliation” by the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Judge Crenshaw found that Trump officials may have sought to punish Mr. Abrego Garcia for having filed a lawsuit successfully challenging his initial “unlawful deportation” to El Salvador.
Moreover, Judge Crenshaw indicated how he was serious about getting to the bottom of the issue of vindictiveness. He said he intended to permit Mr. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers to pry, at least in part, into the Trump administration’s process of deciding to bring an indictment in the first place and how the charges related to the deportation case.
Vindictive prosecution motions are exceedingly difficult to win because of the high threshold required to prove that prosecutors acted improperly by filing criminal charges. Under the law, cases can be considered vindictive only if defendants can show that prosecutors displayed animus toward them while they were seeking to vindicate their rights in court, and that the charges would not have been brought except for the existence of that animus.
While Judge Crenshaw has not yet made a final decision on the issue of vindictiveness, the fact that he is even considering doing so in Mr. Abrego Garcia’s case is a hugely embarrassing blow to the Trump administration. From the moment Trump officials acknowledged that they had mistakenly expelled Mr. Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, President Trump and his top aides began a relentless barrage of attacks against him, calling him a violent member of the street gang MS-13, a wife beater and even a terrorist, effectively blaming him for being the victim of their own administrative error.
The judge’s ruling highlighted the ways in which the habit many Trump officials have of speaking out of court about legal cases has — or could — come back to haunt them.
When Mr. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers filed their motion in August, they pointed out that the administration had removed their client from the United States in violation of a 2019 court order that expressly barred him from being sent to El Salvador. They added that instead of taking the traditional path and quickly bringing him back to U.S. soil, the White House “began a public campaign to punish” him “for daring to fight back, culminating in the criminal investigation” that led to his indictment.
That indictment accused Mr. Abrego Garcia, whom the government is now trying to deport again, of having taken part in a yearslong conspiracy to smuggle undocumented immigrants across the United States. At the heart of the case was a 2022 traffic stop during which he was pulled over and discovered to be driving several Hispanic men, some of whom were in the country illegally.
Even though federal agents learned about the stop at the time, they decided not to do anything about it and Mr. Abrego Garcia was released without charges.
Judge Crenshaw homed in on that fact in his ruling, noting that the Justice Department did not seek to charge Mr. Abrego Garcia until 903 days after the initial stop. The one important event that had occurred during that time, he pointed out, was that Mr. Abrego Garcia had complained about his wrongful deportation in a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Maryland and succeeded in persuading three courts — including the Supreme Court — that he should be freed from Salvadoran custody.
The judge also noted that a top prosecutor in the Nashville U.S. attorney’s office, Ben Schrader, had quit on the same day that Mr. Abrego Garcia’s indictment was returned. Moreover, he suggested that administration officials may have strong-armed Mr. Schrader’s boss, Robert E. McGuire, the acting U.S. attorney in Nashville who obtained the indictment, into charging Mr. Abrego Garcia to begin with.
“The timing of Abrego’s indictment suggests a realistic likelihood that senior D.O.J. and D.H.S. officials may have induced Acting U.S. Attorney McGuire (albeit unknowingly) to criminally charge Abrego in retaliation for his Maryland lawsuit,” Judge Crenshaw wrote.
The judge also had harsh words for Mr. Blanche, the No. 2 official at the Justice Department who once served as Mr. Trump’s private defense lawyer. On the day Mr. Abrego Garcia was brought back to the United States to face indictment, Mr. Blanche went on Fox News and declared that the government had started “investigating” the case only after a judge in Maryland had “questioned” the administration’s decision to deport Mr. Abrego Garcia and found that it “had no right.”
“Deputy Attorney General Blanche’s remarkable statements could directly establish that the motivations for Abrego’s criminal charges stem from his exercise of his constitutional and statutory rights to bring suit against the executive official defendants,” Judge Crenshaw wrote, “rather than a genuine desire to prosecute him for alleged criminal misconduct.”
Mr. Abrego Garcia’s lawyers may be able to determine with more certainty if that in fact occurred as they start asking questions and demanding documents from the administration as part of the discovery process Judge Crenshaw intends to set in motion.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
13) Israel and Hamas Say They’ll Work With Trump’s Gaza Plan, but Gaps Remain
Israel said it would cooperate with the White House to end the war, but much is still unclear about Hamas’s future and whether it will agree to disarm.
By Aaron Boxerman, Adam Rasgon and Natan Odenheimer, Reporting from Jerusalem, Oct. 4, 2025
Images of Israeli hostages, still held by Hamas inside Gaza, on a banner at a beach in Tel Aviv on Saturday. Credit...David Guttenfelder/The New York Times
Israel and Hamas signaled a readiness to move forward with parts of President Trump’s cease-fire plan in what many hoped would lead to a diplomatic breakthrough, but significant gaps will need to be negotiated to bring an end to the war in Gaza.
The Israeli government said on Saturday morning that it was preparing for the “immediate implementation” of the first steps of Mr. Trump’s proposal. Hours earlier, Hamas said in a statement that it would release all of its remaining hostages, a key part of the plan, but the group did not directly address many other parts of it.
Mr. Trump exuded confidence that a deal was imminent, saying it was a “big day” while also exhorting Israel to stop bombing Gaza. He conceded that negotiators still needed “to get the final word down in concrete.”
Neither Israel nor Hamas were explicit in their statements about what had long been seen as the major sticking points to reaching an agreement. Hamas’s statement did not say whether it would accept Mr. Trump’s stipulation, backed by Israel, that the group disarm.
It was also unclear whether Israel was willing to accept any major changes to Mr. Trump’s plan, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said he supported during a visit to the White House this week.
Israeli negotiators were preparing on Saturday to travel to Egypt for indirect talks with Hamas in the coming days, but it was not known when they would leave, four officials in the region said, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive political matters.
Mediators from Qatar and Egypt were holding their own talks with Hamas about the proposal, while the United States was speaking with Israel, according to another two diplomats with knowledge of the contacts, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy.
Israelis and Palestinians were caught between disbelief, tentative hope and utter confusion after the back-to-back developments, which many hoped could at least bring an end to the nearly two-year war.
The Israeli military said it was also preparing for the potential release of hostages. Israeli forces had been instructed to shift to a defensive posture, although they were not withdrawing from their positions in Gaza, said three Israeli officials, who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
But it was unclear what that meant for Palestinians in Gaza, where around 66 people were killed on Friday, local health officials said, whose tolls do not distinguish between civilians and combatants. Israeli forces have been conducting a sweeping operation in Gaza City that has destroyed blocks of residential neighborhoods and forced hundreds of thousands to flee.
Avichay Adraee, an Israeli military spokesman, warned displaced Palestinians against seizing on the optimism around a cease-fire to try to return to the north of the enclave. Israeli soldiers “are still surrounding Gaza City, and attempting to return there poses extreme danger,” he said on social media.
Two Palestinians in Gaza said explosions and gunfire continued into the early morning, suggesting continued Israeli military activity. Many Gazans, exhausted and traumatized by the war, say they hope Hamas makes whatever concessions necessary to reach a deal with Israel.
“Get us out of this situation in any way possible, and quickly,” said Abdelkarim al-Harazin, a doctor who recently fled Gaza City for the south of the enclave. “We’ve been through this before, a million times, thinking that it might happen — only to get burned.”
Earlier this week, Mr. Trump released a 20-point-plan to release the remaining hostages held in Gaza and to end Israel’s deadly military campaign there. At least 20 living hostages and the bodies of around 25 others are still believed to be held in Gaza.
Under the plan, Hamas would free the remaining hostages within 72 hours and hand over its weapons, and end its rule in Gaza. Israeli forces would gradually withdraw from Gaza and allow an internationally supervised Palestinian administration to assume responsibility for public services there.
Hamas submitted its response to Mr. Trump’s proposal late Friday night. In a statement, the group said it agreed to release all the remaining hostages according to the terms laid out in the plan. That would mean the release of 250 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences in Israel, along with 1,700 others detained since the start of the war. The bodies of 15 Gazans would be exchanged for each dead Israeli captive.
But Hamas also said it wanted certain conditions on the ground to facilitate the exchange and that this would require further negotiations. The group was vague about whether it would be willing to disarm or fully relinquish its dominant role in Gaza, as Mr. Trump’s plan envisions.
Osama Hamdan, a Hamas official, said on Friday that “security measures” were needed to free the living hostages and he suggested that locating the bodies of others would take time.
“Some have been buried, some are in areas under the occupation’s control, and some — as a result of the destruction and leveling that took place — need to be looked into,” he told Al Araby TV, a Qatar-based broadcaster.
Mr. Trump hailed Hamas’s response as evidence that the group’s leaders “are ready for a lasting PEACE” in a post on social media. He said Israel should “immediately stop the bombing of Gaza” to enable the hostage release to go ahead.
Several hours later, Mr. Netanyahu’s office issued its own statement, saying that Israel was preparing for “the immediate release of all the hostages” and would keep working with Mr. Trump “to bring the war to an end in accordance with the principles set forth by Israel.” Separately, the military reinforced the need “for a rapid response to neutralize any threat.”
David M. Halbfinger, Isabel Kershner and Ronen Bergman contributed reporting.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
14) Cautious Optimism on Gaza Peace Plan, but No Guarantees. Here’s What to Know.
Israel and Hamas said they would work with President Trump’s plan to end the war, but a number of sticking points could derail efforts to reach a diplomatic breakthrough.
By The New York Times, Oct. 4, 2025
Smoke rose from Gaza City from shelling on Thursday. Credit...Saher Alghorra for The New York Times
Israel said on Saturday that it was preparing to implement the first steps of President Trump’s plan to end the war in Gaza, hours after Hamas said that it was ready to release all remaining Israeli hostages.
Yet several sticking points remain. Hamas did not address stipulations in Mr. Trump’s 20-point peace plan that the group disarm, which has been a key demand of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. The group also signaled that it wished to make changes to the plan, which could be a problem for Mr. Netanyahu.
Mr. Trump extolled Hamas’s response, while also demanding that Israel stop bombing Gaza. The president acknowledged that the details would need to be worked out.
For its part, Israel did not address the ambiguities in Hamas’s statement, and it was unclear whether Mr. Netanyahu would be willing to accept any major changes to Mr. Trump’s plan.
Interviews with Palestinians in the enclave suggest widespread support for Mr. Trump’s proposal, with many hoping that it could finally bring an end to the war.
What happened?
Mr. Trump presented a 20-point-plan on Monday to release the remaining hostages held in Gaza and end Israel’s military campaign against Hamas. At least 20 living hostages and the bodies of about 25 others are believed to still be in Gaza.
On Friday, hours after Mr. Trump said on social media that an agreement must be reached within days, or Hamas would face “all HELL,” the group announced it was prepared to release all of the hostages according to the terms of the plan.
In Mr. Trump’s proposal, the hostages would be exchanged for 250 Palestinian prisoners held in Israel and 1,700 Gazans detained during the war.
Mr. Trump hailed Hamas’s response, saying the group was “ready for a lasting PEACE” in a post on social media.
Yet it remained unclear whether Hamas would agree to give up its weapons. And the group did not say whether it accepted to have no future role in the governance of Gaza, saying only that it would hand over administration of the enclave “to a Palestinian body of independent technocrats.”
Mr. Netanyahu has repeatedly said that he would not accept any deal in which Hamas remains in Gaza.
How did Israel respond?
Several hours after Hamas released its statement, Mr. Netanyahu’s office said that Israel was preparing for “the immediate release of all the hostages” and would keep working with Mr. Trump “to bring the war to an end in accordance with the principles set forth by Israel.”
The statement made no mention of the uncertainties in Hamas’s response to the plan.
Israeli forces in Gaza have been instructed to shift to a defensive posture, although they were not withdrawing from their positions, said three Israeli officials, who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
The military launched an expanded ground offensive in Gaza City in September, which has caused hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to flee from the city to the south of Gaza. Israel has said that Gaza City is one of the last remaining strongholds of Hamas.
Palestinians in Gaza said that explosions and gunfire continued into early Saturday morning.
Avichay Adraee, an Israeli military spokesman, warned displaced Palestinians against seizing on the optimism around a cease-fire to try to return to the north of the enclave, adding that Israeli soldiers were “still surrounding Gaza City, and attempting to return there poses extreme danger.”
What happens now?
Hamas’s response to the plan, while welcomed by Mr. Trump and a number of world leaders, does not settle crucial questions about how to end the war.
Negotiations were expected to resume in Egypt, where Israeli negotiators were preparing to travel for indirect talks with Hamas in the coming days, though it was not known when they would leave, according to four officials from the region. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive political matters.
Mediators from Qatar and Egypt were also holding talks with Hamas about the proposal, while the United States was speaking with Israel, according to two diplomats with knowledge of the contacts, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy.
The Israeli military has said it is preparing for the potential release of the remaining captives in Gaza. But Osama Hamdan, a Hamas official, said on Friday that “security measures” were needed to free those hostages still alive, and suggested that locating the bodies of others would take time.
“Some have been buried, some are in areas under the occupation’s control, and some — as a result of the destruction and leveling that took place — need to be looked into,” he told Al Araby TV, a Qatar-based broadcaster.
Have we been close to a breakthrough before?
Efforts to halt the fighting in Gaza have previously ended in frustration. Israel and Hamas have agreed only to temporary cease-fires before: for about a week in November 2023 and for less than three months early this year.
A fundamental obstacle to lasting peace has been that Hamas wants a permanent cease-fire in which it retains influence in postwar Gaza, while Israel has ruled out any agreement that keeps the group in power there.
Hamas’s statement on Friday, indicating willingness to release all of the Israeli hostages, brought at least some optimism that recent negotiations would have an enduring effect.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
15) This Program Rescued Army Recruiting
The defense secretary cites a ‘Trump bump.’ But the Army’s recruiting surge wouldn’t have been possible without the program started three years ago at Fort Jackson.
By Greg Jaffe, Visuals by Kenny Holston, Reporting from Fort Jackson, S.C., Oct. 4, 2025
Joseph King, 42, had given up on ever meeting the military’s enlistment standards until he heard about the Army program that offered assistance.
His journey to the Army began last year when he lost his job as a hotel maintenance man and could only find work picking up trash at an Amazon warehouse.
At 42, Joseph King had given up on ever meeting the military’s enlistment standards.
Then he heard about an Army program, launched three years ago during one of the worst recruiting droughts in U.S. history, that helps those who aren’t eligible to join because they are overweight or unable to pass the military’s aptitude exam.
In late August, Joseph was sitting in a classroom at Fort Jackson, S.C., with 13 other trainees, most of whom were half his age. The instructor was showing them how to calculate a salesperson’s income based on salary, sales and commission.
“What’s a commission?” the teacher asked.
The trainees were silent.
“Guys, I know this is insanely boring,” she said, “but we still have to learn it.”
Joseph rubbed his face. He knew what was at stake: health benefits, housing, a better life for his wife and five children.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has credited the military’s strong recruiting numbers this year to a nationwide surge in patriotism and a love for President Trump. “What changed is a commander in chief that America’s young people believe in,” Mr. Hegseth told lawmakers this summer. “You can feel it in the ranks.”
Mr. Trump echoed the sentiment: “We’re getting the best people that you’ve ever seen.”
Mr. Trump’s election win and a higher unemployment rate among people ages 16 to 24 could have played a small role in improving recruiting, Army officials said. The Army’s recent success, though, would not have been possible without the program at Fort Jackson. About 22 percent of the Army’s more than 61,000 new recruits this year came in through the Future Soldier Preparatory Course, a senior Army official said.
Trainees in the program have 90 days to meet the Army’s minimum academic and body fat standards, or they are sent home. Those who pass go directly to 10 weeks of basic training.
A New York Times reporter was granted access to the program at Fort Jackson for a week in August. None of the dozens of trainees interviewed cited Mr. Trump’s election as a factor in their decision to enlist.
Many said they had come to Fort Jackson because they saw no other choice.
“I was tired of being homeless,” a 22-year-old trainee, who had grown up on a South Dakota Indian reservation, said.
A 34-year-old from Ivory Coast graduated from an online college that promised him an I.T. career but instead left him $90,000 in debt. Others had joined to escape home or to make their families proud. Some said their recruiters had told them that military service would protect their undocumented parents from deportation.
Joseph had been trying to pass the test since he was an 18-year-old living in Birmingham, Ala., and knew this class was his last, best chance. Like all the other trainees, he had surrendered his cellphone and was assigned a metal bunk in an open bay.
If he could just make it to basic training, Joseph was sure he would be able to keep up with the younger recruits. “I know it without a shadow of a doubt,” he said. “I know me and my competitive side.”
The class broke for the day, and the civilian teachers went home. The students, their camouflage pants tucked neatly into their combat boots, marched with their drill sergeants to evening chow. Thirty minutes later, they were back in the classroom.
Several trainees who had grown up speaking languages other than English quizzed each other from a list of vocabulary words that frequently appear on the test.
A drill sergeant noticed Joseph’s leg bouncing nervously under the table and walked over to offer help. Joseph’s white scratch paper was a jumble of numbers and equations. The same problems always seemed to trip him up.
“Why are you trying to overcomplicate shit?” the sergeant asked. “It’s so simple.”
Joseph erased his work in a flurry and tried again.
Trainees in the academic portion of the program get three shots at the test during their 90-day stay.
Joseph’s second try was a week away.
‘This was my only option’
Each Monday new trainees needing to raise their test scores or lose weight arrive at the base, where they are immediately greeted by screaming drill sergeants in Smokey Bear hats.
“Let’s go! Move your ass!” one yelled as the newbies rushed to find their green duffel bags. “I don’t have all freaking day to wait for you!”
Once they were in formation — backs straight, heels together, feet at a 45-degree angle — an officer gave them some advice. “This is a place where you find your motivation,” he explained. “You figure out your why, and you stick with it.”
The Army’s why for the course began in 2022, when it missed its recruiting goal by about 15,000 troops, or 25 percent. The following year the Army, Navy and Air Force all missed their goals.
The Pentagon was battling declining interest in military service and a shrinking pool of qualified applicants, caused by falling test scores, high obesity rates and an increase in young people reporting mental health problems. About three-quarters of American youth do not meet the minimum requirements to serve, according to the Pentagon.
Army officials tried to fix their recruiting problem with bigger enlistment bonuses. When that didn’t work, they launched the Future Soldier Preparatory Course at Fort Jackson. Today, about 95 percent of recruits in the program make it to basic training.
The Army still needs the program to make its recruiting goals, said Lt. Gen. Brian Eifler, the Army’s top personnel officer. The program also offers benefits that are harder to measure, he said. It has become a lifeline for people searching for housing, stability and a piece of the American dream.
One of those people was Jonathan Gleich, 34, from Marysville, Ohio. Eight months ago, when he walked into the recruiting office, Jonathan weighed about 330 pounds. He was cleaning medical offices at night. To pay for diapers and formula for their newborn son, he and his wife were donating plasma twice a week.
The recruiter told Jonathan that he had to lose 30 pounds before he could even go to Fort Jackson.
“This was my only option to provide my family a future,” Jonathan recalled.
He worked out at least twice a day with the other trainees in his platoon. In between, they took classes on nutrition, where they learned to think of food as fuel, and on mental resilience, where they were reminded that all “pain is temporary.”
A few weeks in, when Jonathan’s weight plateaued, he began volunteering for extra workouts with the drill sergeants and was now down to about 260 pounds. To meet the Army’s body fat standard, he had to lose a few more pounds and another half an inch from his waistline.
The next weekly weigh-in and tape measuring — Jonathan’s ninth since arriving at the base — was scheduled for the following morning.
Nearby, Mayra Cruz, 18, of Ventura County, Calif., was squeezing in an extra session on a treadmill. One of the walls in the small, airless gym was covered with sticky notes on which the trainees had written their reasons for joining.
“To get out of the hopeless pit that my life was headed to,” one read.
“To show my family that I am not a disappointment,” another trainee had written.
Mayra Cruz was motivated to join the program to help her undocumented mother avoid deportation.
Mayra’s why revolved around her undocumented mother, who had immigrated from Mexico a year before she was born. Her recruiter told her about a program called “Parole in Place,” which allows the parents, spouses or children of active-duty service members to avoid deportation.
Mayra wanted to become a tank crew member. And she wanted to make sure her mother, stepfather and two brothers, ages 1 and 8, were safe.
“It’s pretty ugly right now in California,” she said.
The weekly weigh-in and measuring for the 263 trainees in the fitness program started at 5:30 a.m. The women went first, their black Army T-shirts tucked into the bottom of their bras so the drill sergeants would be able to quickly measure their waists.
“Female! Why are you still looking at me?” a drill sergeant yelled when one of the trainees hesitated in line. Some cried when they learned that they had not lost weight or inches. Others received quiet messages of encouragement.
“You got this, female!” a drill sergeant whispered to one recruit. “You got this!”
Mayra, who had lost 21 pounds and five inches during her two months at the base, came up just short of passing. She had three weeks left to lose the last bit of body fat.
Once the women had finished, the men followed.
Jonathan stepped on the scale, which showed he had shed two more pounds. His biggest worry was his waistline. A decade earlier, his weight had peaked at 430 pounds, leaving folds of skin that no amount of exercise could melt away. A drill sergeant with cold hands looped a tape measure around his stomach.
Then he followed a strip of dingy white tape on the floor to the last station, where he gave his numbers to an officer who plugged them into a laptop and told him that he had made it.
He pumped his fist and smiled. A trainee from his platoon rushed over to hug him.
“This whole process has been absolutely life-altering,” he said.
He still had to endure another 10 weeks of basic training without his phone, his freedom or his family, but if everything went as planned, he would make it back to Ohio for Thanksgiving. By then, he would be a soldier.
The sun was rising. All the trainees had been weighed and measured, and now they were marching in a tight formation to breakfast. A drill sergeant shouted the cadence for them to repeat.
“My way’s the right way,
Your way’s the wrong way,
If you wanna be a soldier
you gotta do it my way.”
Another nerve-racking test day
It was test day for Joseph and the other 13 trainees in his platoon. They filed into a room with scuffed yellow walls and took a seat behind a computer screen.
A drill sergeant ordered them to lift their arms over their heads to show they hadn’t scribbled any notes on their skin. To pass, the trainees needed to score in the 31st percentile or higher. They had three hours.
Beneath the table, Joseph’s leg was pumping anxiously.
The first recruits finished with an hour to spare and strode to the back of the room. They dropped their scratch paper on a table, stood with their hands folded behind their back and waited for the drill sergeant to tell them their score.
“Let’s go!” a 19-year-old from Idaho quietly cheered when she learned she had passed.
She took a seat with a few other trainees who had also notched passing scores. “In a few months we’re actually going to be soldiers,” she whispered. “That’s wild.”
Joseph was among the last to finish. A drill sergeant asked for the last four digits of his Social Security number and glanced down at his computer.
“You got a 24,” he said tersely. “Sit over there.”
Joseph joined the other trainees who had finished the test. Those who had passed spoke in hushed tones about the Army jobs that might now be available to them. One trainee was hoping to be a helicopter mechanic. Another wanted an airborne infantry slot.
“I don’t care what job I get,” a third said, “as long as I get out of here.”
Joseph closed his eyes, rested his forehead on the table. Somehow, despite three weeks of studying, his score had dropped four points.
“I don’t get it,” he said to himself.
He thought about all the times he had taken the test and failed — at least five since he turned 18. And he thought about how much he missed his family. The youngest of his children had turned 1 only a week earlier.
The recruits gathered in front of the brick barracks where they attended class, studied and slept. Ten of the 14 trainees had passed.
Lawrence Flores, a 21-year-old from Guam, was among those moving on to basic training. A few minutes earlier he had been celebrating. Now, as he approached Joseph, tears were streaming down his face.
Joseph didn’t want to take away from his friend’s joy.
“Don’t think it’s bad because one person can’t go with you,” Joseph told him. “Savor the moment. Savor the moment.”
One last chance
A recruiter was waiting nearby to help the trainees who had passed pick a job.
Most Army recruits have some say over their career field. Those who come in through the Future Soldier Preparatory Course are typically limited to the toughest-to-fill positions — another reason the Army has been eager to keep the program in place.
First up was Bryan Soto, 27, who told the recruiter that he had joined to provide a better life for his daughter in Puerto Rico. He had raised his score by more than 30 points — the biggest jump in his class — and was hoping for a job as a helicopter mechanic.
“Realistic expectations,” the recruiter sighed.
His options: infantry, artillery or armor.
He settled for artillery.
The other trainees cycled through just as fast. The Army recruiter asked about their why, and they talked about providing for their families and pushing themselves out of their comfort zones.
Then she laid out their choices: “Do you want to train to kill? Do you want to learn to blow stuff up or do you want to ride in a tank?” Most reluctantly picked artillery. They were going to blow stuff up.
Joseph and the other trainees who came up short on the test were cleaning the barracks. He was trying to decide whether he should take the exam one last time or go home to his family. His drill sergeants, who could see the makings of a good soldier, were urging him to stay.
Joseph replied that he was going to “pray on it.” Privately, though, he said he was leaning toward leaving.
There are many reasons why people join the Army. In this moment, his lowest since arriving at Fort Jackson, Joseph had begun to think that maybe his why had changed.
“I’ve touched a lot of lives,” he said. “That was the main purpose. To see them leave and do good in their lives makes me happy.”
In the days that followed, Joseph decided to take his drill sergeants’ advice. He studied for three more weeks and on Thursday took the exam for a third and final time.
This time Joseph passed. He was on his way to basic training and a new life as a soldier.
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
16) What Happens When Socialists Are in Charge? Portland Offers a Glimpse.
A West Coast version of Zohran Mamdani’s campaign is playing out in Portland. But the socialist city councilors, who say the city has been “run by the rich” for too long, are facing significant opposition.
By Kellen Browning, Photographs by Jordan Gale, Reporting from Portland, Ore., Oct. 4, 2025
A group of socialists on the City Council in Portland, Ore., have faced establishment backlash as they promise sweeping changes aimed at improving the lives of everyday residents.
A group of socialists on the City Council in Portland, Ore., have faced establishment backlash as they promise sweeping changes aimed at improving the lives of everyday residents.
Too extreme. Too inexperienced. An absolute disaster.
Mainstream politicians are sharpening their attacks, and the wealthy are threatening to move away as a socialist revolution sweeps through the city.
They’re not talking about Zohran Mamdani or his plans for New York City.
Rather, they are agonizing over the scene in Portland, Ore., where the democratic socialist principles espoused by Mr. Mamdani — the front-runner to become New York’s next mayor — have already taken root at City Hall.
Four members of the Democratic Socialists of America, along with their left-wing allies, have occasionally formed a working majority on Portland’s 12-person City Council this year, promising sweeping changes aimed at improving the lives of everyday residents. The socialists advocate raising taxes on the rich, enacting a widespread government-owned housing plan and opening city-run grocery stores — an idea Mr. Mamdani has also endorsed.
The establishment backlash to their tenure echoes the opposition Mr. Mamdani has faced in New York since winning the Democratic primary. Gov. Tina Kotek of Oregon, a Democrat, has criticized Portland’s high taxes and a costly universal preschool program the socialists cherish. Portland’s business community is warning that a war on capitalism and an exodus of job creators could send the city spiraling.
“If you start trying to create a socialist utopia in Portland, Oregon, I don’t see how you can avoid the fact that people with money are not going to be attracted to it,” said Frank Dixon, the former chair of the Oregon Democratic Party. “Isn’t that common sense?”
Still, for all the outrage, the first nine months in office for the Portland socialists — some of whom speak glowingly of Mr. Mamdani and display posters with his face and the phrase “Hot Commie Summer” at their offices — offer a cautionary tale about political outsiders’ abilities to upend the status quo.
The socialists have been limited by the same barriers that snarl more traditional politicians: a finite budget, the votes needed to pass legislation and an occasionally dysfunctional government. Although moderates are spooked by their talk of higher taxes and social housing — government-owned units not subject to fluctuations in rental prices — the socialists have not yet tried to muscle through such policies.
The socialists themselves say they have big goals but are trying to be responsible leaders, studying the impact of policies before working to enact them. They argue that the dire rhetoric about them reflects the anxieties of an out-of-touch establishment, refusing to cede power to a younger generation focused on the working class.
“Portland is a progressive city, but it hasn’t had progressive politics in a meaningful sense,” said Mitch Green, one of the socialist councilors. “This city has generally always been run by the rich, for the rich.”
Mr. Green traveled to Vienna last month to study that city’s government-owned housing program — a taxpayer-funded trip skewered by critics. (He plans to propose a similar program for Portland next May.)
He said he and his allies had been “hammered” by business interests urging them to lower taxes and cut regulations, so watching Mr. Mamdani rise “as an unabashed, pro-working class hero” was inspiring.
“It’s a reminder that I got elected because I talked about those same things,” he said. “We’re building a movement, from coast to coast.”
Portland’s Peacocks
The socialists’ emergence traces back to 2022, when voters approved changes to Portland’s century-old form of governance. They expanded the City Council to 12 members, from five, and adopted ranked-choice voting.
Nearly 100 candidates ran for the new City Council last year, and a handful earned the backing of Portland’s D.S.A., which plays an outsize role in a city where Republicans are an endangered species. Three D.S.A. members — Mr. Green, Sameer Kanal and Tiffany Koyama Lane — were elected. Another new councilor, Angelita Morillo, joined the D.S.A. in March.
The extent to which the four socialists and two other left-wing councilors were working together became clear in May, when they won a contentious vote to reallocate $2 million from the city’s proposed police department budget to parks maintenance. It was a provocative move at a time when many Democrats have backed away from calls to defund the police.
The hand-wringing over the socialists’ cohesion escalated in August, when Willamette Week, a local newspaper, reported on a group text in which the six progressives, referring to themselves as “Peacock” — shorthand for “progressive caucus” — closely coordinated their votes and occasionally mocked their more moderate colleagues.
Those six occasionally pick up support from a seventh councilor, giving them a majority on some legislation.
Rather than making its mark with a flurry of left-wing legislation, however, much of the council’s tenure has been defined by gridlock and infighting as it works out the basics of a new government on the fly.
That was on display last month, when Mr. Kanal and Eric Zimmerman, a moderate, traded barbs from the dais over a mundane procedural issue.
Olivia Clark, another moderate, chimed in. “What this conversation says to me,” she said, “is that we really need some marriage counseling.”
Some have tried. Two consulting firms offered to help mediate disputes, but some councilors balked. Dan Ryan, one of the moderates, said he was pushing for a more drastic step: a three-month pause on meetings so councilors could work out disagreements.
In the 2010s, millennials flocked to Portland, and the city’s restaurants and quirky cultural scene attracted national headlines.
But in recent years, the city became known for boarded-up storefronts, open-air drug use, homeless encampments and explosive protests. Portland’s real estate market ranked 80th out of 81 cities in a national survey last year, ahead of only Hartford, Conn., underscoring a slow pandemic recovery. Oregon decriminalized all drugs in 2020, then reversed course last year after a surge in overdose deaths. Portland’s new mayor, Keith Wilson, has escalated sweeps on homeless encampments.
Last week, President Trump said he was authorizing the deployment of the National Guard to protect Portland, which he described as “war-ravaged,” as a small group of protesters camped outside an immigration enforcement facility have occasionally clashed with law enforcement. City and state leaders sued to block him.
Despite Mr. Trump’s rhetoric, violent crime has declined, and many of Portland’s leafy neighborhoods remain as appealing as ever. Still, the downtown was nearly empty on a recent muggy afternoon, and tents dotted the sidewalks.
How to respond to the problems here is at the heart of the divide between the socialists and the moderates.
Councilors like Ms. Clark and Mr. Ryan say they are plenty progressive themselves — simply more moderate by Portland’s standards — but residents want leaders focused on public safety, not expansive programs. The socialists counter that wealth disparity and an affordability crisis are at the root of Portland’s problems — a debate also reminiscent of New York’s mayoral race.
One of moderates’ biggest gripes is over taxes. The socialists have mulled higher taxes on the rich, but some residents and business owners say they already endure some of the highest taxes in the country without seeing improvements in basic city services.
“Why are you chasing the shiny objects when you really should be taking care of your fire stations, your parks, your streets?” Ms. Clark said. “Things are really deteriorating.”
They argue that high taxes are pushing wealthy residents away. Though not definitive, some data supports that premise: Fewer top filers contributed to the preschool tax in 2023 than in 2021, the county found. And federal migration data analyzed by the local research firm ECOnorthwest showed that the average income of those leaving the area has been outpacing those arriving.
The issue remains hotly debated, and Mr. Green’s office has published studies arguing that the claims are overhyped.
The moderate voices seem to have an ally in the governor’s mansion. A task force advising Ms. Kotek has urged the Portland region to lower taxes, and the governor has exhorted the county to “ease the current tax burden” imposed by the universal preschool program that local voters passed in 2020 — a request that Portland’s D.S.A. said was tantamount to “declaring war on preschool.”
At a downtown art gala last month, affinity for Portland’s socialists among champagne-sipping attendees was in short supply. The event celebrated the opening of a museum exhibit showcasing the collection of Jordan Schnitzer, a local billionaire and philanthropist.
Echoing concerns over Mr. Mamdani’s proposed tax on millionaires in New York, Mr. Schnitzer said many of his wealthy friends had left Portland in recent years, which he feared was harming the local economy.
Portland’s socialists “think business is a dirty word,” Mr. Schnitzer said.
But the socialists say Portland’s existential problems call for ambitious solutions, and the pushback comes from conservatives intent on maintaining the status quo.
“If the Democrats had been delivering materially and emotionally for the public, there would not be a need for socialists in office,” said Ms. Morillo, who was homeless for a time in college. “We would not see Zohran Mamdani succeed in New York.”
In a city considered one of the most progressive in the country, the debate over just how far-left to be has amused some longtime residents.
“In Portland, our political spectrum is not Republican to Democrat,” said Amy Ruiz, a local political consultant and lobbyist. “It’s, ‘Which shade of blue are you?’”
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*..........*
