Privacy Rights

ACLU Responds to Flock's 

Proposed Changes As Opposition 

to Surveillance System Grows

    NEW YORK – (ACLU) -- 8/13/2026 -- Amid nationwide outcry against its automatic license plate readers, Flock Safety announced today that it will reduce its standard data retention policy and allegedly provide more control over local data searches, among other changes. However, according to American Civil Liberties Union’s new analysis, many of the proposed changes seem to be a thinly veiled PR attempt to counter communities’ genuine privacy concerns with its mass surveillance system with largely hollow security promises, rather than an earnest effort to address them. While the ACLU acknowledges one potentially positive development, most of the proposed changes stand little chance of making a positive difference for civil liberties.

    “Transforming an exceptionally dangerous mass surveillance system into one that is fully protective of civil rights and civil liberties is a difficult, if not impossible task. That is even more the case with a company like Flock, whose nearly $1 billion in venture capitalist funding has locked it into an operational model that seeks to trade our privacy for massive profits,” said Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel at ACLU. “Given that Flock’s latest announcement still appears more focused on addressing a PR problem than the significant privacy and other harms its products create, we will continue to analyze the company’s proposals fairly and honestly. We just won’t be holding our breath.”

    Flock operates more than 120,000 automatic license plate readers in at least 6,000 cities across the country, raising serious concerns around mass surveillance, data privacy, and how police and the government can use this data to go after immigrants, protestors, and others. Just this week, the Institute for Justice published a database with more than 100 incidents of ALPR abuse, including romantic stalking, wrongful stops and detentions, non-law enforcement use, and other types of misconduct.

    One of the changes announced is that Flock will decrease its standard data retention option to one week from 30 days. This seems positive at first blush, but as the ACLU’s breakdown explains, the devil will be in the details. For example, an exception to the data retention policy is something called “Evidence Mode, which is “when a search is tied to a case number, that data is preserved instead of aging out after 7 days.” As the ACLU notes, “If ‘Evidence Mode’ only retains hit result data that police determine may be evidence in an active investigation of a specific case, then the change may be a positive one. But if Evidence Mode triggers the retention of any ALPR data that is searched, then the new mode could indefinitely retain all the ALPR data Flock collects and shares nationally.”

    Another “change” the company is implementing is that local police will be able to decide what types of offenses other Flock customers can search their data for. The ACLU contends that this is not new. Flock has attempted this before, and the security measure failed because police were easily able to circumvent the system’s requirement that they input the purpose of their search.

    Finally, Flock announced that in response to the reports of police abuse, they will now require reasons for a search, and that they plan to universally roll out its audit assistance tool to detect police misuse. Flock’s announcement fails to note how easily users have circumvented “search reason” security measures in the past or how its new policy improves the quality of the feature. And while providing “Audit Assistance” to all departments makes sense, the ACLU notes that there is no evidence that the tool works consistently to address what the Washington Post observed is a growing pattern of police officers turning Flock into a personal stalking tool. To determine the efficacy of this tool, Flock needs to have it analyzed by an independent evaluator. Until then, the ACLU says, “we don’t know if the tool is a real security measure or just window dressing.”

    Dozens of communities across the country have successfully convinced their leaders to cancel Flock contracts, suspend their ALPR programs, or deactivate the cameras, with many more cities considering new legislation to rein in this mass warrantless surveillance tech. In June, the ACLU launched its “Get the Flock Out” campaign to bring together the litigation, advocacy, and legislative efforts of ACLU affiliates in each state, show how communities across the country are fighting back against the spread of Flock and other license plate readers, and lay out how lawmakers at the local, state, and federal level can best protect our rights.

Litigation

AU Lawsuit Forced So-Called 

Religious Liberty Commission 

to Release Documents to the Public

    New York – (AU) -- 8/1/26 -- A federal judge dismissed a challenge July 27 brought against the Trump administration’s so-called “Religious Liberty” Commission by a multifaith coalition that challenged the unlawful creation and operation of the biased body.

    Earlier this year, Interfaith Alliance, Muslims For Progressive Values, Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund, and Hindus For Human Rights united to file a lawsuit challenging the unlawful creation of the so-called “Religious Liberty” Commission. The lawsuit highlights violations of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), including the unbalanced and biased viewpoints assembled for the panel and the unlawfully secretive refusal to disclose public documents and information related to the Commission’s work.

    The coalition is represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State and Democracy Forward in the matter.

    The order dismissing the case comes on the heels of a significant victory in the matter for the coalition. In a major milestone on April 28, government disclosures in the lawsuit revealed many of the documents the unlawful and secretive commission had been hiding from the public. In a late-night filing just before a court deadline, the government notified the court that it had finally publicly posted many of the Religious Liberty Commission’s transcripts, meeting minutes, witness testimonies, run of show, hearing summaries, and hearing recommendations. Those documents are available here.

    The long overdue publication of these documents was a resounding concession by the government and a significant victory for the coalition that demonstrated the necessity of challenging the administration’s unlawful actions.

    Today’s order ends the case for now in the district court, after crucial documents have been released. In addition, after plaintiffs filed suit, the commission agreed to make a draft report available for public comment and hold a public meeting to respond to issues raised by interested parties and members of the public. These actions increase transparency and give the public an opportunity to be heard.
Religious Liberty Commission does not promote true religious freedom

    In response to the ruling, the coalition issued the following joint statement:

    “Even before this decision, our litigation helped uncover the information the Trump-Vance administration attempted to hide from the public about this biased and unlawful body. Religious liberty and pluralism are foundational American values, and we remain committed to fighting for a democracy that does not promote a single religious belief and ignores others. We are grateful that this case achieved a major goal by forcing greater transparency, and we will continue our work.”

    The case was Interfaith Alliance et al. v. Trump et al. and the legal team on this case included Jenny Samuels from Americans United and Anna Deffebach, Robin Thurston, and Ayesha Khan from Democracy Forward.

    Read the original complaint here.

*Perryman also serves as a member of the Board of Interfaith Alliance.

Healthcare

Report: Cuts, Red Tape, Could 

Drive Historic Healthcare Losses

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — (SPLC) -- 7/28/26 -- A national coalition of nine leading civil rights and healthcare advocacy groups issued a stern warning that record cuts to public health insurance programs and new bureaucratic barriers to enrollment will likely cause historic coverage losses across the United States for years to come.

    The nine organizations released a report outlining comprehensive recommendations for legislators and federal agencies to safeguard civil rights and the health of the American people. The report, Seamless, Accountable and Fair: A Civil Rights Agenda for Reconstructing Insurance Affordability Programs, calls attention to the disproportionate harm that will fall on historically marginalized communities if policymakers do not act. The Congressional Budget Office projects that drastic healthcare cuts under the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act and the failure to extend Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits will cause nearly 15 million people to become uninsured by 2034. The report estimates that 60% of newly uninsured people will come from communities of color.

    “As millions of Americans, including Latinos, struggle with high costs, our leaders must reverse recent cuts and then rebuild our health programs to ensure affordable health coverage for all, regardless of race, ethnicity or ZIP code,” said Janet Murguia, president and CEO, UnidosUS. “Coverage protects family finances, improves health outcomes and saves lives. And in places where nearly everyone has health coverage, a better-funded provider infrastructure lowers costs, while improving healthcare access and quality for the entire community.”

    While calling for the rescission of recent cuts, the report stresses the need to systematically rebuild Medicaid and the ACA marketplace in order to guarantee coverage to eligible families. The organizations say that current cuts to Medicaid and ACA health coverage are only part of what will drive record coverage losses in future years. They warn of new bureaucratic barriers, like more frequent eligibility checks and work requirements that terminate Medicaid when families don’t meet onerous new paperwork demands.

    “On issue after issue — healthcare, SNAP, voting rights and more — the administration and its congressional allies are aggressively erecting unmanageable administrative barriers to deny over-burdened, under-resourced Americans access to critical programs and protections,” said Marc Morial, president and CEO, National Urban League (NUL). “When the time comes to restore and rebuild the country’s healthcare programs, an equally aggressive effort to eliminate administrative burdens will be essential to securing healthcare for families from all backgrounds — but it will be especially important to communities of color, which too often bear the greatest burden when essential services are put out of reach.”

    To bring quality, affordable insurance to everyone in America, without leaving behind people from marginalized communities, the coalition urges three core reforms:

    -- Make healthcare significantly easier for hardworking families to navigate. Eliminate enrollment paperwork for the vast majority of eligible people by automatically qualifying families for health coverage based on their participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and on information already in their tax returns. Create a single eligibility system in each state that includes all health programs, so families don’t have to go from agency to agency looking for insurance. Fund independent consumer assistance programs to help families navigate healthcare complexities.

 -- Hold public programs accountable to the public. Give health agencies the resources needed to provide good customer service. Then set performance standards that limit coverage denials based on arbitrary, poorly understood or onerous procedures. When a state Medicaid agency violates federal law or causes serious and unjustified harm based on race or ethnicity, let injured families go to court to stop the violation.

 -- Treat all people fairly, regardless of race, ethnicity or ZIP code. Offer ACA coverage to adults with incomes below the poverty threshold in states that still refuse to expand Medicaid. That will prevent poor adults from being uninsured simply because of the state where they happen to live. Qualify lawfully present immigrants for health programs without penalizing them when they seek healthcare for their families.

 -- “Healthcare coverage disparities have widened dramatically over the past year, leaving our nation’s most vulnerable communities further behind,” said Juliet K. Choi, president and CEO, Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum (APIAHF). “Today, two-thirds of uninsured Americans come from historically underserved communities. Every increase in the coverage gap deepens existing inequities. We must act now to make healthcare more affordable and ensure that every family can access, afford and navigate the care they need.”

 -- The coalition presenting the recommendations reflects the views of civil rights, healthcare and consumer advocacy leaders. It includes the APIAHF, the NAACP, the National Council of Negro Women, the NUL, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), UnidosUS, the Coalition on Human Needs, Community Catalyst and Families USA.
    

    “America is facing an affordability crisis. Every day, Americans struggle to pay for basic necessities, yet leaders have chosen to cut families off from health insurance lifelines, a cruel and counterintuitive move that undermines the promise to make America a healthier society,” said LaShawn Warren, chief policy officer, SPLC. “Our government has a responsibility to provide everyone in our society access to healthcare and address existing disparities in access. These recommendations offer a practical path forward for lawmakers to ensure every person can access the care or treatment they need without going bankrupt.”

    “The attack on healthcare access is also an attack on civil rights,” said Derrick Johnson, president and CEO, NAACP. “Black Americans are disproportionately harmed when policymakers create barriers that make it harder for eligible families to enroll in or keep health coverage. We have already seen millions lose coverage because of paperwork and bureaucratic obstacles rather than ineligibility. As lawmakers consider the future of our healthcare system, they must reject policies that widen racial disparities and instead build programs that are seamless, accountable and fair for the communities that have too often been left behind.”  --   Date of original release: 7/16/26

Legal Ruling

Peace Scholar Detained by 

ICE For Speech Ordered Released

    RICHMOND, Va. – (ACLU) -- 7/24/26 -- The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals today (7/23) rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to re-detain Georgetown scholar Dr. Badar Khan Suri and affirmed a lower court order that required the government to release him on bail as his case proceeded. The court also rejected the government’s request to move the case from Virginia to Texas.

    “[In] our view,” the court wrote, “denying judicial review of detention claims like Suri’s misreads Congress’ statutes and undermines the protections guaranteed all persons on American soil by the writ of habeas corpus.”

    The court later expanded: “[An] unbroken line of caselaw also accords with common sense: if a noncitizen is challenging their detention pending removal, then waiting for their removal proceedings does them no good. They have already been detained, allegedly in violation of the Constitution. This ‘absurd’ reading of the INA would make such detention claims ‘effectively unreviewable,’ and the Supreme Court has repeatedly refused to embrace it.”

    In March 2025, ICE arrested and detained Dr. Suri, a lawful visa holder from India whose wife is a U.S. citizen, outside his Virginia home in retaliation for his associations and speech in support of Palestinian rights. Dr. Suri was detained for nearly six weeks over a thousand miles away from his wife and children at an infamous private detention center in Texas known for its human rights abuses. A federal judge ordered his release from detention in May 2025 while his case continued in federal court.

    “Today reaffirms my faith that an independent judiciary remains the truest guardian of liberty, due process, and the rule of law. I am profoundly grateful to the judges who upheld these constitutional principles and gave my case the careful, deliberate consideration it deserved,” said Dr. Badar Khan Suri. “I remain, as ever, committed to the pursuit of justice through lawful and peaceful means. We should remember that a democracy without an accessible writ of habeas corpus is a democracy in name only; as the honorable court so aptly observed, the scope of habeas corpus ‘must not be subject to manipulation by those whose power it is designed to restrain.’ I am proud of those who fought for me, and I am proud of every moment of life. Be courageous and stand for justice. Free Palestine.”

    On appeal, the Trump administration argued that federal district courts don’t have the authority to review the constitutionality of Dr. Suri’s detention until the Department of Justice-controlled immigration process, which can take months or even years, is completed. The administration also argued that because it quickly swept Dr. Suri out of Virginia without notice to his family or lawyers, the Virginia court does not have jurisdiction to hear his petition, and that it should be handled by a court in Texas, where it chose to take him.

    Today, a panel of judges from the Fourth Circuit rejected both arguments 2-1, finding that federal courts must be able to review constitutional claims stemming from immigration detention, and that his case should stay in Virginia.

    “We are elated that Dr. Suri will remain free with his family and we are grateful that the court has seen through the government's brazen attempts to silence pro-Palestine speech,” said Noor Zafar, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “The federal government cannot do an end run around the First Amendment by locking people up for their speech and denying them their day in court. Immigration laws cannot be abused to silence dissent, and we are grateful that today, justice prevailed.”

    This ruling is the third opinion from a federal court of appeals addressing the question of whether the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) bars immediate federal court review of a noncitizen’s claim of unlawful detention in retaliation for their speech. In January, the Third Circuit ruled against Mahmoud Khalil, holding that the INA does bar such claims. And just two days ago, the Second Circuit ruled against Mohsen Mahdawi, agreeing with the Third Circuit’s analysis. Addressing the Khalil v. Trump decision, the Fourth Circuit was clear: “We disagree.”

    “We are gratified that the court recognized the basic principle that the government cannot escape judicial review of their patently unconstitutional actions — here, arresting Dr. Khan Suri, transferring him far away from his family and community, and detaining and attempting to deport him for nothing more than his associations and constitutionally protected advocacy for Palestinian rights,” said Astha Sharma Pokharel, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights.

    Similar to the cases of Mr. Khalil, Mr. Mahdawi, and other students, Dr. Suri was arrested in retaliation for his speech in support of Palestinian rights. He was additionally targeted because of his U.S. citizen wife’s speech, her Palestinian origins, and her familial ties. On social media, Dr. Suri criticized U.S. support of Israel’s assault on Gaza, motivated by the time he spent volunteering in Gaza and fear for his wife’s family members who still lived there with no way to flee during the war. The administration has falsely argued that Dr. Suri’s presence in the United States “compromised a compelling foreign policy interest” and therefore, under a rarely used section of the INA, it had the right to deport him. Dr. Suri’s immigration court proceedings remain ongoing.

    “ICE abducted Dr. Khan Suri from his home in Virginia before moving him among five different ICE facilities across three states in a shameless attempt to find a court that would be friendlier to his unlawful detention,” said ACLU-VA Legal Director Eden Heilman. “We are elated that the Fourth Circuit saw through the Trump administration’s blatant attempt to bend the law to their will and rejected their bid to re-detain our client thousands of miles away from his family in Virginia. The First Amendment protects all of us — regardless of citizenship — and we will continue to fight for his constitutional rights.”

    Dr. Suri is represented in his federal lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Virginia, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Van Der Hout LLP.

    The opinion can be read here.

Finance

Billions in Tax Exempt Religious

Property Subsidies

Leave Public Finance Blind Spot

    If you're looking for sources of tax revenue to provide for things like healthcare, here's one idea, remove the tax exemption on religious property. According to Dallin Overstreet: "The United States has roughly 370,000 religious congregations. All are exempt from federal income tax. Each are exempt from local property taxes. Combined, the estimated value of tax-exempt religious property in America runs somewhere between $300 billion and $600 billion. Nobody knows the precise number, because nobody is required to count . . . The result is an enormous blind spot in American public finance: we subsidize hundreds of billions of dollars in tax-exempt property and have essentially no systematic data on what the public gets in return. His full analysis is here: How Much Revenue Would Taxing Churches Generate?  -- S.R.  7/19/26

Law and Justice

Appeals Court Rejects ICE 

Policy of Mandatory 

Detention Without Bond

    DENVER — (ACLU) -- 7/5/26 -- The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a Trump administration policy on Tuesday, June 30, that mandated the detention of Rigoberto Santillan-Quiroz, a longtime U.S. resident, without bond. The court ordered a bond hearing for Santillan-Quiroz, who, after eight months of detention, will finally have an opportunity to demonstrate that there is no justification for his continued detention. The Tenth Circuit’s ruling joins three appeals courts and decisions from over 450 district court judges across the country. Judges have mandated that the Trump administration release many of these immigrants from detention, routinely finding that their categorical detention without a bond hearing is unlawful.

    “Every person has rights protected by the Constitution, no matter the color of our skin, the languages we speak, or our immigration status,” said Travis Handler, ACLU of Oklahoma legal fellow. “With this order, the court unanimously found that all people residing within the Tenth Circuit who are detained by ICE are entitled to a bond hearing and, absent special circumstances, are eligible for release on bond. This is a huge step toward ending the mass deportation machine. We will continue to hold this administration accountable and fight for the safety of our communities.”

    Santillan-Quiroz has lived in the U.S. for about twenty years, is married to a legal permanent resident, and has a U.S. citizen stepdaughter. He was detained in November 2025 after a traffic stop and held without bond per the Trump administration’s new policy, despite not being a flight risk nor a danger to public safety. Santillan-Quiroz filed a habeas petition seeking his release. A magistrate judge recommended a bond hearing and his release, but an Oklahoma district court ultimately denied his habeas petition. Santillan-Quiroz, with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, ACLU of Oklahoma, ACLU of Colorado, and immigration attorney Kelli Stump appealed the district court’s decision in January 2026.

    "This is a huge victory for thousands of people currently being held without access to bond in immigration detention centers across Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. These individuals are now entitled to have the bond hearings that should result in release for many after months of being wrongfully held by ICE,” said Tim Macdonald, ACLU of Colorado legal director. “This ruling from the Tenth Circuit sends a message that the Trump administration cannot unilaterally change the law and create unlawful policies that violate the rights of immigrants in our country and deny them fundamental fairness and due process.”

    In July 2025, the Trump administration issued new guidance that denies bond to people in detention while their immigration cases proceed in court, impacting millions of people in the country. This new guidance defies longstanding Department of Homeland Security (DHS) practices, federal law, and fundamental due process protections. It also exacerbates longstanding problems with immigration detention, including overcrowding, medical neglect, inadequate nutrition, and more.

    “The courts have once again correctly rejected the government’s attempt at rewriting our immigration laws to categorically deny immigrants like Mr. Santillan-Quiroz their right to basic review of their detention,” said My Khanh Ngo, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, who argued the appeal. “This order checks that executive overreach and we are thrilled that our client will finally have the chance to be reunited with his family.”

    "Immigration detention is intended to ensure appearance at proceedings — not to impose punishment before a case is decided," said Kelli Stump, Santillan-Quiroz' initial habeas attorney and co-immigration counsel. "The Tenth Circuit's decision recognizes that liberty cannot depend on a blanket policy. Every person deserves an individualized determination based on the law and the facts, and that is exactly what Congress required."

Reconciliation Bill

ACLU Issues Statement on 

Senate Vote to Add $70 Billion to 

ICE and Border Patrol's Bloated Budget

    WASHINGTON – (ACLU) -- 7/5/26 -- The Senate passed a reconciliation bill today that would provide an additional $70 billion in taxpayer funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol without any meaningful reforms to limit violent and abusive tactics by federal agents.

    The vote comes after a months-long standoff between members of Congress over funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), prompting Republicans in Congress to bypass normal Congressional procedures and use an obscure hyper partisan process called reconciliation. In July 2025, Congress also used the reconciliation process to give DHS over $170 billion in immigration enforcement funding – $150 billion of which remains unused, according to a recent analysis.

    In response to this news, Kate Voigt, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, had the following reaction:

    “Once again, President Trump’s allies in Congress are bypassing normal Congressional procedures to strong-arm billions more in taxpayer dollars to fuel ICE and Border Patrol’s assault on our communities. Instead of passing commonsense reforms to rein in ICE abuses or funding programs that would actually help American families, the Senate is choosing to add $70 billion to ICE and Border Patrol’s already bloated budget.

    “Make no mistake: a vote in favor of more ICE and Border Patrol funding is a vote to prioritize President Trump’s cruel mass deportation agenda. We now call on our House Representatives to hold the line and say no to any more funding for these abusive agencies that have killed and attacked our neighbors, demanded people show their papers based on the color of their skin, and tear thousands of families apart. The safety of our communities and our freedom depend on it.”

Voting Rights

Voting Rights Group Seeks Ruling

to Prevent Federal Interference

Before 2026 Midterms

    Washington, D.C. — (Common Cause) -- 5/21/2026 -- The group Common Cause and four individual voters have filed a motion for partial summary judgment in their federal lawsuit to stop the Trump administration from attempting to compile voters’ personal data and take over elections from the states. With just months before the midterm elections and primaries already underway, the plaintiffs are asking the court to block the Department of Justice (DOJ) from unlawfully creating a national voter database for surveilling voters and revoking voter registrations.

    There is no doubt that the DOJ’s actions are as illegal as they are dangerous. The law is clear that the DOJ does not have the authority to amass voters’ sensitive data and purge them from their state voter lists. Simultaneously, the DOJ is violating numerous federal laws meant to protect voters’ privacy and ensure government transparency. The plaintiffs argue that the court can and should move quickly to stop the DOJ’s ongoing unlawful attempts to destabilize the democratic process and trample on fundamental rights.

    The motion emphasizes that voters deserve to know immediately that their personal information is protected, their registrations are secure, and the federal government will not attempt to interfere with the administration of free and fair elections this November. The lawsuit seeks to stop the Trump administration’s efforts to create widespread confusion among eligible voters—or worse, prevent them from voting altogether.

    “I’ve been a U.S. citizen for over a decade and a voter for nearly as long,” said Anthony Nel, a plaintiff from Texas who was removed from voter rolls 30 days after the SAVE system flagged him as a potential noncitizen. “I found out my voter registration was canceled because the government is using a system it knows doesn’t work correctly for people like me. The DOJ should not be building a national database out of our most sensitive, personal information when it can’t even get this right.”

    On April 21, the group—represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia (ACLU-D.C.), Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the Democracy and Rule of Law Clinic at Harvard Law School, and Protect Democracy—sued the DOJ over its demands that states hand over confidential voter information, including home addresses, partial social security numbers, and past voting history.

    In 2025, the DOJ demanded that states provide their unredacted voter rolls. The agency plans to compare state voter lists with the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) notoriously inaccurate Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system in an effort to identify suspected noncitizens on state voter rolls. As the lawsuit explains, however, the SAVE system has often mistakenly flagged lawful citizens as ineligible to vote. Nevertheless, the DOJ is claiming authority to demand that states remove any flagged voters within 45 days of informing states.

    At least eighteen states (Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming) have voluntarily complied with the DOJ’s demands for their unredacted state voter rolls, putting their voters’ data at risk of misuse and security breaches.

    “The Constitution gives states the authority to administer elections, and Congress has passed laws to protect voters against exactly this kind of abuse of power,” said Sara Chimene-Weiss, Counsel with Protect Democracy’s Free & Fair Elections program. “Here, this administration has brazenly ignored all of these legal guardrails. We’re moving for partial summary judgment because the legal violations are plain and the ongoing harm is serious: the government is invading voters’ privacy and putting their sacred right to vote at risk, all while baselessly casting doubt on our elections, which are secure.”

    Since 2025, the DOJ has sued 30 states to force them to turn over their non-public voter files. Common Cause has taken action in 16 of these states plus D.C., and judges in six states—Arizona, Michigan, Oregon, California, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island—have dismissed the DOJ’s lawsuits, holding that the DOJ cannot collect this confidential voter data.

Law and Liberty

Event Criticized as Shocking

Mix of Church and State

    (FFRF) -- May 13, 2026 -- The White House’s “Rededicate 250: A National Jubilee of Prayer, Praise & Thanksgiving” on May 17 is an unprecedented and shocking mix of church and state.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is sounding the alarm over the prayer fest’s sponsor, “Freedom 250,” a public/private initiative aligned with the White House to mark the nation’s 250th anniversary with explicitly Christian nationalist programming.
    President Trump promoted the all-day prayer fest on the National Mall during his remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast: “On May 17, 2026, we are inviting Americans from all across the country to come together on our National Mall to pray, to give thanks, and to rededicate America as one nation under God.”
    The all-day spectacle of prayer, testimony, Scripture and worship calls on Americans to gather for “Scripture, testimony, prayer, and rededication of our country as One Nation to God.” The overtly sectarian gathering is dominated by Christian nationalist figures and promoted with government involvement. FFRF’s Freedom of Information Act request seeking information on public funding is on appeal, so financial details are murky.
    The event overwhelmingly features Christian leaders and activists, including those among the Trump cabinet, with token non-Christian representation. Besides House Speaker Mike Johnson and cabinet members Pete Hegseth and Mark Rubio, they include a long list of pastors and religious figures, including Rev. Franklin Graham, Eric Metaxas (a vocal proponent of Christian nationalist ideology), White House Faith Adviser Paula White and Rev. Robert Jeffress, who has repeatedly argued that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. All but one of the 15 religious leaders are Christian.
    Military and other governmental bands will perform alongside religious choirs, such as with the extremist Christian Hillsdale College.
    “This is not a celebration of America’s founding principles — but an overtly sectarian, exclusionary event catering to evangelicals and other conservative Christians, with participation and the full blessing of the federal government,” says FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. “Our Constitution is godless by design. The government has no authority to organize religious revivals, much less use them to promote a Christian nationalist agenda.”
    FFRF Co-President Dan Barker adds, “This isn’t subtle. They are openly declaring a goal of redefining America as a Christian nation and using the machinery of government to do it.”
    Major corporations — including Mastercard, Deloitte, SAP and Lockheed Martin — have signed on as sponsors of Freedom 250, even as questions mount about the initiative’s sectarian agenda and lack of transparency. Critics have called out the companies for potentially enabling what amounts to a government-backed religious campaign.
    The United States belongs to all of us — not just conservative Christians, FFRF points out. Our government was founded on secular principles to ensure freedom of conscience for everyone.
    FFRF is calling on federal officials to immediately cease any involvement in sectarian events, and on corporate sponsors to reconsider their support.
    “The 250th anniversary of our nation should celebrate liberty, equality and the constitutional separation of church and state,” Gaylor concludes. “Anything less betrays the very ideals the Declaration of Independence set in motion.”

    Original date of release: May 5/26

Economic Trends

Law Center Report: GOP Bill Will 

Worsen Hospital Closure Trend 

    MONTGOMERY, Ala. — (SPLC) -- 5/12/2026 -- The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) recently released Critical Condition: Rural Health Care Access Following HR 1, a report that examines how implementation of the so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” could exacerbate a dangerous trend of hospital closures throughout the rural South.

    Between 2005 and 2023, at least 146 rural hospitals across the country stopped offering inpatient services, with 34 located in the Deep South. New analysis from the SPLC shows that an additional 99 rural hospitals in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi could also be at risk of closing.

    “For people living in the rural South, hospital closures aren’t just an inconvenience; they can be the difference between whether a person survives a trip in an ambulance or doesn’t make it in time to receive lifesaving care,” said Gina Azito Thompson, policy analyst, SPLC. “Unfortunately, these critical lifelines are under threat thanks to devastating cuts to programs that ensure Americans in these areas have health insurance. In a region with alarming rates of chronic illness, diabetes and high blood pressure, making healthcare more expensive will result in people forgoing necessary visits to the doctor, causing treatable problems to turn deadly.”

    The current U.S. healthcare system relies heavily on patients’ insurance to ensure that doctors and hospitals get paid for providing care. As the report notes, many rural hospitals are already operating on slim profit margins, with residents in their areas less likely to be able to afford their medical expenses.

    The legislation passed by Congress in 2025 cut more than $1 trillion of federal funding from healthcare programs including Medicaid, which the Congressional Budget Office forecasts could result in millions of low-income Americans losing health insurance. This could in turn cut off critical revenue streams for rural hospitals.

    “When we talk about making America healthy, one of the fundamental ways to do that is to ensure everyone can see a doctor or health professional without the fear of taking on tremendous medical debt,” added Azito Thompson. “By kicking people off of their insurance, this administration’s signature piece of legislation will only worsen so many of the health disparities that already exist across the Deep South.”

    In addition to exploring how rural Southerners’ insurance could be impacted by HR 1, the report also outlines recommendations for policymakers to help strengthen rural healthcare infrastructure and prevent unnecessary hospital closures.

Voting Rights

New Florida Congressional 

Map Called Unconstitutional;

Groups File Lawsuit To Stop It

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (SPLC) -- 5/6/2026 -- Common Cause, the League of Women Voters of Florida (LWVFL) and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Southern Coalition for Social Justice (SCSJ) and Democracy Defenders Fund, filed a lawsuit on May 5 in the 2nd Judicial Circuit Court in Leon County to stop the new Florida congressional map.

    You can view the lawsuit here.

    The lawsuit argues the new map specifically violates the Fair Districts Amendments, which prohibit the state Legislature from drawing maps that favor one political party. More than 60% of Florida voters approved the amendments in 2010.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the new congressional map into law after the Legislature passed it in a special session. Common Cause, LWVFL and LULAC immediately filed suit.

    “The fact that this is a partisan gerrymander is as obvious as it is unconstitutional,” said Bradley Heard, deputy legal director, SPLC. “And while this unnecessary map is egregious in how it advantages Republicans and disadvantages Democrats, the people who will suffer the most if it is allowed to stand are once again Black and Brown communities, whose voices are consistently silenced in these redistricting battles. The SPLC will not allow this governor to turn back the clock on voting rights in Florida.”

    “The governor’s ploy to impose maps for an unfair partisan advantage is exactly why voters made it illegal in 2010 — and why we’re going to court,” said Amy Keith, executive director, Common Cause Florida. “This governor and Republican lawmakers will stop at nothing to put their finger on the scale because they are afraid of being held accountable by the people. We expect the courts to be the adults in the room and honor the Florida Constitution and the will of Florida voters.”

    The new congressional map was engineered by DeSantis and rammed through a hastily convened special session of the Florida Legislature with no meaningful opportunity for public input. DeSantis personally directed its drawing, releasing a color-coded version of the map to Fox News with proposed districts shaded red and blue. Notably, the Governor’s own mapmaker admitted to using partisan data to create the map.

    “When a map is distributed in a red/blue format to the media before being transmitted to the Legislature, and when the governor’s staff openly acknowledges in committee that there is no new Census data being used to justify a new map, Florida voters can’t help but suspect that this is a partisan gerrymander,” said Jessica Lowe-Minor, President, League of Women Voters of Florida. “Floridians have consistently said they are not interested in political gamesmanship within redistricting, which is why they passed the Fair Districts standards overwhelmingly in 2010. We hope the courts restore the rule of law and uphold the Florida Constitution’s explicit prohibition against partisan gerrymandering.”

    “Gov. DeSantis and lawmakers think they’re above the Florida Constitution and above the people,” said Adrianne Spoto, counsel for voting rights, SCSJ. “We’re here to say otherwise.”

    “More than 60% of Florida voters made partisan gerrymandering illegal in 2010, but Governor DeSantis just stamped his name on an electoral map that does exactly what voters forbade. We’re litigating on behalf of Floridians because this dangerous playbook ends in a democracy where your voice only counts if you agree with the president and his allies,” said Amb. Norm Eisen (ret.), co-founder and executive chair, Democracy Defenders Fund. “Even the Roberts Court’s shockingly wrong decision in the Callais case does not allow this. This gerrymander violates state law and the will of the Florida voters, and we are asking the court to strike it down.”

    “For decades, the Voting Rights Act protected Black communities from the legacy of Jim Crow, and those same federal protections safeguarded Latino communities. Governor DeSantis and the state legislature wasted no time thumbing their noses at these communities after the Court’s devastating decision in Callais,” said Juan Proaño, chief executive officer, LULAC. “This gerrymander intends to marginalize and silence Black and brown communities. We will not sit idly by while the people we elected to represent us abuse that power and try to silence us.”

    For more information, visit www.splcenter.org.

Founding Principles

President's 'Religious Liberty 

Commission' Tramples on Constitution,

Separation of Church and State

   

     (FFRF) -- 4/20/26 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation is castigating the recently held final hearing of President Trump’s so-called Religious Liberty Commission.
    At the seventh and concluding hearing held at the Museum of the Bible (a privately owned facility underwritten by Hobby Lobby) recently, commissioners and witnesses repeatedly denigrated the foundational constitutional principle of state/church separation. Commission Chair and Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick called it “the biggest lie that’s been told in America since our founding.” Helen Alvaré, a professor at Antonin Scalia Law School, described the principle as “unfortunate, historically and culturally inaccurate” while openly advocating for greater integration of religion into public schools, government policy and civic life.
    FFRF is putting the commission on notice that it will contest any unconstitutional proposals.
    “This commission has once again made its agenda unmistakably clear,” FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor said. “It is not about protecting religious liberty. It’s about dismantling it. But we don’t intend to let that happen.”
    Patrick boasted that Texas has passed legislation requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, a mandate FFRF is actively challenging in court with our allies. Dismissing the constitutional concerns, he remarked, “Of course we’re being sued, but that’s okay. That comes with the territory.” On that point, he’s right: When government officials flout the Constitution, legal challenges are not only expected, they are necessary. FFRF is proud to be holding Texas accountable for this clear violation of the First Amendment and the right of a captive audience of schoolchildren and their parents to be free from state interference and coercion over private religious beliefs.
    Over nearly five hours, commission members and witnesses advanced a series of deeply troubling ideas rooted in Christian nationalism rather than constitutional principles. Among the most egregious to undermine the wall of separation:

• A proposal to engineer a legal challenge, by encouraging the IRS to deliberately penalize a church for political activity, to the Johnson Amendment, which bars electioneering with tax-exempt funds by churches and other nonprofits. 
• Claims that religious liberty originates exclusively from Christianity and that not all faiths are equal under the law. 
• Suggestions to expand government funding pipelines to religious organizations without sufficient safeguards. 
• Advocacy to teach children a distorted, sectarian version of American history that would erase the nation’s commitment to secular governance.

    The commission, established by executive order in 2025, is expected to deliver a final report to the president next month. Based on the rhetoric and recommendations previewed at the final hearing, FFRF warns that the report will serve as a roadmap for advancing Christian nationalist policies at the federal level.
    FFRF notes that these proposals are not about religious freedom, but privileging Christianity via its elevation above all other beliefs. True religious liberty requires government neutrality — neither hostility nor favoritism. If the administration attempts to implement any of these unconstitutional recommendations, FFRF will fight them, and vigorously defend the right of Americans to believe, or not believe, without government encroachment or compulsion.

    The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to defending the constitutional principle of separation between state and church and educating the public on matters relating to nontheism. With more than 41,000 members, FFRF is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics and humanists) in North America. For more information, visit ffrf.org.

Church and State

Court Issues Permanent 

Injunction Against Unconstitutional  

10 Commandments Law

   
    FAYETTEVILLE, ARK. (AU) – 3/23/26 -- In a victory for religious freedom and church-state separation, a federal district court issued a permanent injunction on March 16 in Stinson v. Fayetteville School District No. 1, prohibiting the school district defendants from implementing an Arkansas law that requires all public schools to permanently display a government-chosen, Protestant version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom and library.
    In his decision U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Brooks wrote, “Act 573 must be permanently enjoined. Failing to do so would violate the Establishment Clause rights of all Arkansas public-school children and their parents and also violate Plaintiffs’ Free Exercise rights.”
Ruling that the law would lead to unconstitutional religious coercion of the child plaintiffs and interfere with their parents’ rights to direct their children’s religious education, Brooks explained: “Act 573’s purpose is only to display a sacred, religious text in a prominent place in every public-school classroom. And the only reason to display a sacred, religious text in every classroom is to proselytize to children. The State has said the quiet part out loud.”
    Brooks added: “Nothing could possibly justify hanging the Ten Commandments—with or without historical context—in a calculus, chemistry, French, or woodworking class, to name a few. And the words ‘curriculum,’ ‘school board,’ ‘teacher,’ or ‘educate’ don’t appear anywhere in Act 573. Accordingly, there is no need to strain our minds to imagine a constitutional display mandated by Act 573. One doesn’t exist.”
    The injunction, issued by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, permanently prohibits the school-district defendants, including Bentonville School District No. 6, Conway School District, Fayetteville School District No. 1, Lakeside School District No. 9, Siloam Springs School Dist. No. 21, and Springdale School District No. 50, from “complying with Act 573.” Last year, the court issued a preliminary injunction temporarily barring the school district defendants from displaying the Ten Commandments in classrooms and libraries.
    “Act 573 is a direct infringement of our religious-freedom rights, and we’re pleased that the court ruled in our favor,” said Samantha Stinson, who is a plaintiff in the case along with her husband, Jonathan Stinson. “The version of the Ten Commandments mandated by Act 573 conflicts with our family’s Jewish tenets and practice, and our belief that our children should receive their religious instruction at home and within our faith community, not from government officials.”
    Represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, the ACLU, and the Freedom from Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel, the plaintiffs in Stinson v. Fayetteville School District No. 1 are a group of 10 multifaith and nonreligious Arkansas families with children in public schools.
    “Today’s decision honors the Constitution’s promise of church-state separation and religious freedom,” said Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “It will ensure that Arkansas families – not politicians or public-school officials – get to decide how and when their children engage with religion.”
    John C. Williams, legal director for ACLU of Arkansas, stated: “Today’s ruling is a resounding affirmation that public schools are not Sunday schools. The Constitution protects every student’s right to learn free from government-imposed religious doctrine. Arkansas lawmakers cannot sidestep the First Amendment by mandating that a particular version of the Ten Commandments be displayed in every classroom. As the court recognized, this law served no educational purpose and instead placed the authority of the state behind a specific religious message. We’re grateful that the court has permanently blocked this unconstitutional law and protected the religious freedom of Arkansas students and families of all faiths and none.”

Law and Politics

ACLU Urges Congress to Block 

Any New War Funding After 

Bipartisan Resolution Fails 

    WASHINGTON, DC — (ACLU) -- 3/8/26 -- The U.S. House of Representatives failed to pass the bipartisan Massie-Khanna War Powers Resolution in a March 5 vote which would have required that all U.S. forces be withdrawn from Iran, until and unless Congress separately declares war.

    “This failed war powers vote is nothing short of cowardly, but Congress can’t dodge the Constitution forever,” said Christopher Anders, director of ACLU’s democracy and technology division. “By refusing to rein in President Trump’s unauthorized war with Iran, Congress has allowed President Trump to make a mockery of the Constitution and is trying to duck responsibility for putting servicemembers and civilians in great danger. But, this disgraceful vote does not change Congress’ legal duty, and it certainly does not silence the millions of Americans who oppose another illegal war. We will hold President Trump accountable for this abuse of power.”

    The ACLU is now urging Congress to use its funding authority to block all supplemental funding requests for war funding from the Department of Defense while President Trump is engaging in this unconstitutional war. Without Congress authorizing additional funds, the military will simply run out of money to spend on the war.

Civil Rights

People for the America Way 

Honors Martin Luther King Jr. Day

    Washington, DC – (PAW) -- 1/20/2026 -- In honor of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, People For the American Way President Svante Myrick released the following statement:

    “Today in our country, one man’s thirst for power has overwhelmed the rule of law. Politicians twist the truth to justify cruelty. Institutions fail the people they were meant to protect. MAGA forces try to drape their actions in patriotism while pushing us ever closer to authoritarian rule.

Photo: marines.mil via WikiMedia Commons

    "Martin Luther King Jr. understood this kind of danger. And more importantly, he showed us how to confront it – with discipline, love, and an unshakable moral center.

    "He taught that nonviolence isn’t weakness. It’s a form of strength. Not the kind that avoids conflict, but the kind that meets injustice head-on – with clarity, with purpose, and with a refusal to be broken. It doesn’t appease power. It holds it accountable.

    "He called nonviolent resistance ‘a courageous confrontation of evil by the power of love.’ And that courage is exactly what this moment demands.

    "Because nonviolence is not about silence. It is not surrender. It is action – deep, disruptive, demanding action that forces the world to look at the cruelty and the harm and dares us to imagine what justice can still become.”

Peaceful Protests

Peaceful Protestors Respond

To Deadly ICE Shooting

    WASHINGTON — (ACLU) -- 1/11/2026 --Peaceful protests and vigils kicked off the ICE Out For Good Weekend of Action July 10 to honor the lives lost at the hands of ICE, demand accountability, and make visible the human cost of this administration’s actions. The nonviolent, lawful, and community-led actions continued on Sunday, January 11, culminating in more than 1,000 events over the weekend. 

    ICE Out For Good is a broad, national coalition, including Indivisible, MoveOn Civic Action, the American Civil Liberties Union, Voto Latino, United We Dream, 50501, the Disappeared in America Campaign of the Not Above the Law coalition, and partner organizations across the country. All actions under the ICE Out For Good banner are grounded in moral witness, public accountability, and collective care. We remain committed to nonviolent organizing.

See coverage below from across the country on the first day of the ICE Out For Good Weekend of Action:

• The Guardian: More than 1,000 events planned in US after ICE shootings in Minneapolis and Portland

• USA Today: Where are ICE protests taking place this weekend? Here's what to know

• Axios: ICE and Border Patrol shootings spark hundreds of weekend vigils and protests

• CT Insider: Connecticut holds ICE protests Saturday in response to Renee Good shooting death

• Knoxville News Sentinel: Hundreds gather in Knoxville to protest ICE shooting in Minneapolis

• CBS Philadelphia: Philadelphia protesters want "ICE out for Good" after videos show agent killing woman in Minnesota

• ABC11: North Carolina cities join nationwide anti-ICE protests after Minneapolis, Portland shootings

• ABC7: ICE Out For Good rally in Sarasota

• FOX5: Virginia protest against ICE as new video of MN shooting emerges

• TCPalm: Group gathers in Stuart, Florida for 'ICE Out For Good' protest

• AZ Central: Renee Good Nicole shooting spurs nationwide 'ICE out for Good' protests

-------------------------------

Leaders from the partner organizations issued the following statements:

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

    “The shootings in Minneapolis and Portland weren’t the beginning of ICE’s cruelty, but they must be the end. Today, we saw communities across the country gather peacefully to mourn the lives lost at the hands of ICE and to demand accountability. These protests are further proof that public opposition to ICE and this administration’s abuses is growing by the minute. Whether it's by joining a protest, attending a know your rights training, or demanding that our Congresspeople stop funding these out-of-control agencies, Americans across the country are saying “NO. Not on our watch.”

– Deirdre Schifeling, Chief Political and Advocacy Officer, ACLU

INDIVISIBLE

    “Renee Nicole Good should be alive today. Her death has sparked grief and outrage across the country as the latest horrific incident in a mounting toll of enormous harm and horror caused by ICE. This weekend, people all over are coming together not just to mourn the lives lost to ICE violence, but to confront a pattern of harm that has torn families apart and terrorized our communities. We demand justice for Renee, ICE out of our communities, and action from our elected leaders. Enough is enough."

– Leah Greenberg, Co-Executive Director of Indivisible

POPULAR DEMOCRACY

    “Every person ICE has killed had a family, a community, and a life that mattered. Pouring billions of public dollars into a rogue enforcement agency that terrorizes our communities while denying people health care, housing, food security, and education is morally indefensible and profoundly reckless. This cruelty flows directly from the agenda of fear and punishment pushed by extremists like ​​Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, embraced and strengthened by the President himself. We demand accountability for the killing of Renee Nicole Good and for the countless lives lost at the hands of ICE. The lesson is clear: this violence will not stop until ICE is abolished.”

— DaMareo Cooper, Executive Director, Popular Democracy

50501

    "This weekend's actions are prompted most immediately by the tragic death of Renee Good in Minneapolis, and her murder at the hands of ICE is unspeakable. We will uplift her this weekend, and we will uplift all those in our communities whom ICE has targeted and brutalized, from Silverio Gonzales to Marimar Martinez to all of those people in marginalized communities whose names must not be forgotten. This is our moment. We must conjure the souls of our brave ancestors and remember we stand on the shoulders of giants."

– Sarah Parker, 50501 Spokesperson and Executive Director, Voices of Florida Fund

MOVEON CIVIC ACTION

    “For a full year, Trump’s masked agents have been abducting people off the streets, raiding schools, libraries, and churches. As ICE’s unnecessary, reckless, and escalatory deployment goes unchecked, the killing of civilians will only continue. None of us want to live in a country where federal agents with guns are lurking and inciting violence at schools and in our communities. This is why MoveOn members will be uniting once again this weekend in peaceful, nonviolent, powerful protests in stark contrast to the unrepentant, ruthless violence of this administration.”

– Katie Bethell, MoveOn Civic Action Executive Director

PUBLIC CITIZEN, NOT ABOVE THE LAW COALITION

    “Masked, power-hungry federal agents are treating the streets of America like the Wild West. The intimidation tactics, the deadly attacks against our communities and the brazen lawlessness by immigration enforcement must stop now. As ICE and border patrol agents commandeer neighborhoods, people in detention centers, in ICE custody or simply in their own personal vehicles fear for their lives. This militarization of immigration enforcement is endangering everyone. What’s more alarming is the Department of Homeland Security, the vice president and president of the United States are endorsing ICE and CBP’s violent behavior. The Trump Administration must stop ICE deployment now, we must deeply investigate this unjust killing, and the American people must file peacefully into the streets to resist this illegal, overreaching use of government power. We must stand together to effectively defend ourselves.”

– Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen and co-chair of the Not Above the Law Coalition which formed the Disappeared in America Campaign.

NDLON

    “We immigrants know what authoritarian violence is. Many of us come from countries where we had to endure the kind of hatred and terror we saw in Minneapolis. Many of us fled brutal regimes to seek survival here.”

    “We grieve for Renee Nicole Good and all the victims of this Administration's shameful and senseless brutality — the growing list of the dead and injured. But we are not just sorrowful. We are defiant. We, the people, will stand together against all efforts to dehumanize us, polarize us, terrorize us and kill us.”

    “They want to provoke us into responding to violence with violence, to meet hate with hate. They are desperate to justify their cruelty with ever more brutality.”

    “But we immigrants know how to confront authoritarianism. We will resist the government's attacks by building community, by documenting atrocities, by protesting nonviolently, by showing kindness and solidarity at all times. We will meet them in the streets, in the courts, at the day labor corners. We will meet them everywhere. And we will win.”

    “We are not afraid or discouraged. And we will not be defeated. The more we stand together as a community of determination and love, the harder it will be for them to divide and destroy us.”

– Pablo Alvarado, Co-Executive Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network

THE WORKERS CIRCLE

    “The tragic killing of Renee Good — a U.S. citizen exercising her fundamental rights — by a federal ICE agent is not just a catastrophic loss for her family and community; it is a stark warning to all of us about where unchecked power leads. This administration’s expanding use of force against our neighbors erodes the very rights and safety that define who we are as a nation. As a Jewish organization, we know what unchecked power has done in the past. We must not let that take root here, today. Now, more than ever, we must demand transparency, accountability, and policies that protect human life, human dignity and civil liberties for everyone. Allowing federal forces to act without independent oversight undermines justice and threatens the safety of us all.”

– Ann Toback, CEO, The Workers Circle

UNITED WE DREAM

    “Using your first amendment rights to speak out and show up for your neighbors during the growing anti-immigrant violence in our cities should be a protected constitutional right, not a death sentence. This brutal killing is a horrifying reminder of the threat armed forces pose to our collective safety, especially at a time when local, state and federal officials have consistently called on the federal government to invest in the resources working families truly need —health care, housing, access to food— instead of indiscriminate terror in our communities. Billions poured into immigration raids for the sake of ripping apart communities in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago and Minneapolis does nothing but lead to irreparable damage, violence and death. In 2025 alone, 32 people died in immigration detention. We demand an immediate end to this cruelty and for elected leaders at every level to speak out in defense of immigrant communities and our shared safety.”

– United We Dream

VOTO LATINO

    “Under Donald Trump’s leadership and Kristi Noem’s direction of the Department of Homeland Security, ICE has become more aggressive, more reckless, and more deadly — with 2025 marking its deadliest year in two decades. The killing of Renee Nicole Good, a U.S. citizen shot and killed by federal agents in Minneapolis, is not an isolated failure but the predictable outcome of a political agenda that rewards force and dehumanization.”

    “Trump and Noem have normalized the erosion of constitutional rights, framing brutality as enforcement and accountability as weakness. Their rhetoric and policies have sent a clear message down the chain of command: push limits, ignore safeguards, and expect protection from consequences. This is not about partisan politics — it is about defending human life and the rule of law. We stand with Renee Nicole Good’s family and with communities nationwide to demand accountability and to stop the unchecked enforcement born of Trump and Noem’s leadership before more lives are lost.”

– Voto Latino