Civil Rights, Criminalizing Dissent, Freedom Of Speech, Human Rights, Racist Police Violence, worker's rights
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
We’re Coming for You and Your Whole Rotten System
Tens of thousands of socialists, union members, and working people fought alongside Kshama Sawant and her city council office to win historic victories, like the $15 an hour minimum wage, Amazon tax on businesses, renter rights and more. Long before AOC and Bernie Sanders became household names, Kshama won elections as a socialist to the office of city council in Seattle in 2013.
Twelve years ago the demand for $15 an hour was dismissed as utopian by the Democrats in Seattle and the corporate media. They won and moreover, they won an escalation clause. Seattle workers are now getting over $20 an hour, the highest in the country.
In 2020, her office won the historic Amazon tax which funds affordable housing and other needs to the tune of $214 million a year by taxing the city’s, wealthiest corporations. Sawant launched the people’s budget campaign, organizing hundreds of activists every year and winning millions of dollars in funding for affordable housing, renters needs, including defense against evictions, and social services.
They won a law after the Roe versus Wade decision making abortion free in Seattle for all those who need it. They won a resolution making Seattle the largest city to pass the strongest cease-fire resolution condemning Israel’s genocide against the Palestinian people. Why is KShama and the forces around her been able to defeat big business interests, the right wing, and the Democratic Party establishment again and again whereas Bernie Sanders and the Squad have not?
Guest – Jonathan Rosenblum, the author of the recently published book We’re Coming for You and your Whole Rotten System to answer this question. Mr. Rosenblum worked on the Sawant’s staff at the Seattle City Council office throughout the decade of 2010s. He’s a journalist, labor organizer, and a member of the National Writers Union.
—-
Netflix Documentary and Innocence Project Help Exonerate Falsely Imprisoned Killers
The black political leader, Malcolm X was assassinated 50 years ago in the Audubon ballroom in Harlem, in the City of New York. Assassination is a political murder. The story that we were all to believe was that Malcolm X, as a member and leader of Elijah Muhammad’s nation of Islam, developed differences with Elijah Mohammad. That he left the nation of Islam. And that he was later killed by members of the NY and Newark chapters, who came across the Hudson River and shot him while he spoke out at the ballroom.
But as we have learned recently, that story is not the full truth. The truth started coming out when Netflix did a six-part documentary on the assassination. This was followed up by the work of the Innocence Project, who along with help from the Manhattan district attorney’s office got two of the falsely imprisoned supposed killers exonerated.
We have learned of the FBI’s intelligence program called Cointelpro. One of its aims was to neutralize any future black leaders. Malcolm X‘s daughters have retained a team of civil rights attorneys who are suing the New York Police Department and the FBI over their possible involvement in the assassination of Malcolm X, and it’s cover-up.
Guest – Flint Taylor of the Peoples Law Office. Taylor is a nationally recognized civil rights attorney. He represented the family of Fred Hampton demonstrating that the Chicago Police Department and the FBI were responsible for the assassination of the young Black Panther leader. He’s written the book “The Killing Machine: Racism and Police Violence in Chicago”. He is one of the editors of the “Police Misconduct Law Reporter. He’s the author of The Torture Machine: Racism And Police Violence In Chicago.
——————————–
Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Criminalizing Dissent, Freedom Of Speech, Gaza, genocide, Human Rights, Prison Industry
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
From The Flag To The Cross: Fascism American Style: Live Event
From The Flag To The Cross: Fascism American Style is the title of a newly published book edited by Zachary Sklar and our own Michael Smith. The book draws from seven key interviews with prominent socialist thinkers in the United States and Canada. They include Margaret Kimberly, Henry Giroux, Dianne Feeley and Bill Mullen. Last month publishers OR books held a live book launch event taking place at Live On Avenue C in the East Village. Speakers included economist Rick Wolff, New York-based writer Margaret Kimberly and economist Kshama Sawant.
—-
What Is Pretrial Justice?
On any given day, roughly 7,000 people are held in New York City jails—mostly at Rikers Island—awaiting trial. Many are there not because they’ve been convicted of a crime, but because they can’t afford bail or have been remanded to custody. Critics argue that New York’s approach to pretrial detention is both unjust and unsustainable and that meaningful reform is long overdue. Detaining people before they’ve been found guilty turns the presumption of innocence upside down.
This system hits Black and Latino New Yorkers hardest. Lower average incomes and heavier policing in their neighborhoods make them far more likely to be jailed pretrial. Beyond the human toll, pretrial detention drives up expenses for staffing, security, medical care, and administration—all paid by taxpayers. And the social costs ripple outward. Lock-up before trial separates families, jeopardizes jobs, housing, and pressures individuals into pleading guilty simply to go home.
Recently, the Pretrial Justice Institute joined forces with NYU’s Center on Race, Inequality, and the Law, and the Bronx Defenders to convene directly impacted people, public defenders, advocates, and service providers to reimagine a more just system. Their report, A City Without Cages: Creating Pretrial Safety and Liberty in NYC, outlines what that future could look like.
Guest – Guisela Marroquín, Executive Director of the Pretrial Justice Institute in New York. There, she leads cross-sector efforts to advance racial equity and transform pretrial systems. Before that, she was Senior Director of Programs at the New York Women’s Foundation.
—————————
Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Freedom Of Speech, Human Rights, Right To Dissent, War Resister
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Non Citizens And Free Speech Rights: AAUP v Rubio
On September 30, 2025 a federal judge in Boston issued one of the most important decisions that has been rendered during the 9 months of Donald Trump’s second term. Following a nine-day trial in July that included the testimony of 15 witnesses and the admission of scores of documents, US District Judge William G. Young of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled that the Trump administration’s policy of arresting, detaining, and deporting noncitizen students and faculty members for their pro-Palestinian advocacy violates the First Amendment. Judge Young was nominated by President Ronald Reagan and has served on the court for over 40 years. While there have been over 200 other court rulings involving Trump since January, this was the first decision following a full-dress trial.
The case, known as AAUP v Rubio, was brought by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, partnering with the law firm of Sher Tremonte LLP, representing the American Association of University Professors, including AAUP chapters at Harvard, Rutgers, and NYU, and the Middle East Studies Association (MESA). The associations’ members include tens of thousands of faculty and students across the country.
In his historic ruling, Judge Young wrote, “This case—perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court—squarely presents the issue whether non-citizens lawfully present here in [the] United States actually have the same free speech rights as the rest of us. The Court answers this Constitutional question unequivocally ‘yes, they do.’ ‘No law’ means ‘no law.’ The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction and it is not to be found in our history or jurisprudence.”
Jameel Jaffer, executive director at the Knight First Amendment Institute, called it “a historic ruling that should have immediate implications for the Trump administration’s policies. If the First Amendment means anything, it means the government can’t imprison people simply because it disagrees with their political views. We welcome the court’s reaffirmation of this basic idea, which is foundational to our democracy.” Todd Wolfson, president of the AAUP, issued the following statement shortly after Judge Young issued his historic ruling: “The Trump administration’s attempt to deport students for their political views is an assault on the Constitution and a betrayal of American values. This trial exposed their true aim: to intimidate and silence anyone who dares oppose them. If we fail to fight back, Trump’s thought police won’t stop at pro-Palestinian voices—they will come for anyone who speaks out. Defending democracy means standing up now—loudly, visibly, and together.”
Having found that the policy violates the First Amendment, in the coming weeks, Judge Young is expected to turn to the question of what appropriate judicial relief should be granted.
Guest – Ramya Krishnan, senior staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute. Ramya served as lead counsel at the trial and presented the opening and closing arguments to the court. She holds a B.A. and LL.B. from the University of Sydney, where she served as an editor of the Sydney Law Review, and an LL.M. from Columbia Law School, where she was a Raymond J. Baer Scholar.
—
Algorithmic Literacy for Journalists
Artificial intelligence is transforming the newsroom—from how stories are written, and headlines are chosen, to which readers see which articles. Algorithms, those invisible sets of instructions that guide everything from Google searches to social media feeds, are now shaping journalism itself. They can amplify—or silence—voices, and determine which stories gain traction in the public sphere. For journalists, understanding how these systems work isn’t just technical—it’s essential to democracy.
Algorithmic Literacy for Journalists is a new online resource that helps reporters and editors navigate this complex new terrain. The project equips journalists to hold technology platforms accountable, explain AI’s influence to the public, and confront the hidden biases and power structures embedded in algorithmic systems.
Guest – founder of Algorithmic Literacy for Journalists, Dr. Andy Lee Roth the editor-at-large for Project Censored and its publishing imprint, The Censored Press. He co-edits the State of the Free Press yearbook series and co-authored The Media and Me: A Guide to Critical Media Literacy for Young People. A sociologist, since joining Project Censored in 2006, Andy has led media literacy initiatives, including developing Algorithmic Literacy for Journalists, a web resource helping reporters understand how AI shapes—and sometimes distorts—news and society.
———————-
Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Freedom Of Speech, Human Rights, Illegal Immigration, Immigration
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Court Watchers: Immigrant Solidarity Working Group Monitor Deportation Cases
In New York City, a quiet act of resistance is taking place every week inside the federal immigration courts. Members of the Professional Staff Congress—the union representing faculty and staff across the City University of New York—have been showing up not as lawyers or law enforcement, but as witnesses. They call themselves court watchers. Their goal: to stand beside immigrants facing possible deportation, document abuses, and assert the public’s right to observe what happens inside these halls of power.
The union’s Immigrant Solidarity Working Group launched this effort over the summer, after reports that armed ICE agents were making mass arrests in and around federal courthouses—even detaining people who had appeared voluntarily for hearings. For many PSC members, this was a line they couldn’t ignore. Each Friday morning in Foley Square, educators gather before entering the courthouse. They’re trained to document what they see, to provide moral support, and to help loved ones locate those taken into detention. Their presence sends a message: that New Yorkers will not turn away from injustice carried out in their name.
What began as an act of witness has become a form of civic education. Teachers who spend their days in classrooms are now learning new lessons about power, vulnerability, and courage. In the process, they’re showing their students—and the city—what solidarity looks like in action.
Guest – PSC Secretary Andrea Vásquez is an associate director of the American Social History Project at the CUNY Graduate Center, and a managing director of the New Media Lab.
—-
Defining Hate Crimes
Across the country, tensions are high as hate-fueled incidents make headlines almost daily. Just last month, a transgender woman in Washington State was assaulted by a mob yelling transphobic slurs while one attacker choked her. In this charged environment, politicians are weighing in — some pledging to crack down, others blurring the line between hateful speech and protected expression.
The Trump administration formed a Federal Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism and is targeting universities across the nation. Attorney General Pam Bondi has said the Department of Justice will “target” and “go after” individuals who threaten others with hate speech. But what does it mean when political figures invoke hate crime laws as tools of ideology rather than justice? And what are the real implications for free speech, civil rights, and public safety?
Guest – Zachary Wolfe, editor of Hate Crimes Law and a leading scholar on how the United States defines, prosecutes, and debates hate-motivated offenses. He’s here to help us understand how these laws are being used—and sometimes misused—in today’s polarized climate. Blog: profzwolfe.com
——————————————–
Academic Freedom, Censorship, Civil Liberties, Freedom Of Speech, Right To Dissent
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
The Library Freedom Project
Soon after the attacks of September 11, 2001, when federal agents demanded library circulation records under the USA Patriot Act, librarians became unlikely whistleblowers for democracy. The “Connecticut Four” successfully sued the FBI in 2005 over secret National Security Letters that sought patron data and imposed gag orders. They reminded the nation that a book borrowed in silence should never be grounds for suspicion.
The Library Freedom Project was born in this climate of intrusion. It equips librarians with new skills: teaching prompt literacy so they can critically evaluate generative AI outputs; training them in deepfake and voice-clone detection; and raising awareness about the growing use of AI surveillance in schools and communities. In doing so, the project prepares librarians to guide the public through one of the most disruptive technologies of our time.
Guest – Alison Macrina, activist librarian and founder of the Project. Since 2015, she has built a network of librarians committed to protecting privacy, defending intellectual freedom, and challenging power structures through organizing and education. Recognized with a 2023 Electronic Frontier Foundation Award, Macrina and her colleagues argue that libraries are among the last truly public goods—accessible to everyone, regardless of income or background—and that defending these spaces means defending the very foundation of free expression and information democracy.
—-
Media Censorship: A Structural Problem
As the Trump administration seeks to expand presidential authority, it’s not surprising that the First Amendment is making headlines. Enacted in 1791 to protect fundamental freedoms – such as speech and the press – it serves as a safeguard against potential abuses of government power, including censorship and other efforts to stifle dissent. Trump and his allies have made no secret about their intention to silence prominent comedians who are critical of the administration.
On July 17th, CBS announced the cancellation of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, a move that Trump publicly applauded, adding that Jimmy Kimmel would be next. Within days, the FCC approved a merger involving CBS’s parent company, Paramount. On Sept. 17th, FCC Chair Brendan Carr warned that if Disney did not suspend Jimmy Kimmel for making comments about MAGA and Charlie Kirk, the FCC could get involved with ABC’s licensing. Disney immediately took Jimmy Kimmel Live off the air. And even though it started back up on Sept. 23rd, many ABC affiliates refuse to air it. Oh, and by the way, Trump has warned that Jimmy Fallon and Seth Meyers at NBC will be next to go.
Guest – Jeff Cohen is a highly regarded progressive critic of the media. Indeed, he was recently quoted in an important article in the Washington Post about the disclosure that FOX News hosts were advising the White House during the January 6th insurrection. Jeff Cohen, along with Martin Lee, were the co-founders of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, or “F.A.I.R.,” which is the anti-corporate media group that monitors and reports on the mainstream media’s bias, spin and misinformation. Jeff Cohen is also a lecturer on these matters and the author of the book, Cable News Confidential.
————————-
Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Criminalizing Dissent, Freedom Of Speech, Human Rights, police accountability, U.S. Militarism
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Defending My Enemy: Skokie and the Legacy of Free Speech in America
At the heart of Trump’s blizzard of chaotic, cruel, and corrupt attacks on our democracy is one of the most turbulent, disruptive, and consequential assaults on freedom of speech in American history. Trump and his obedient underlings have enlisted the full force of the federal government’s overwhelming criminal, civil, administrative, immigration, and national security apparatus to illegally crush protest, dissent, and free speech.
On an unprecedented scale, directly and indirectly, Trump is violating the First Amendment rights of every person in the United States to express and receive information and ideas free of government censorship. He is going after the Voice of America, the Smithsonian Museum, the Associated Press, NPR, PBS, ABC, CBS, the Library of Congress, local public libraries, foreign and domestic students, immigrants, colleges and universities, elected officials, law firms, and judges. And by silencing all of these voices, he is denying the constitutional right of every American to hear what those voices have to say.
The United States is in a constitutional crisis. It is imperative that we vigorously defend our rights. The reissuance of the seminal book Defending My Enemy: Skokie and the Legacy of Free Speech in America by Aryeh Neier could not have come at a better time to remind us of the importance of defending the essential freedom upon which all others depend – freedom of speech.
Defending My Enemy was originally published in 1979. At that time Neier was the national executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which agreed to represent the Nazis in the Skokie controversy. Defending My Enemy was a brave book when it was originally published, and almost 50 years later it remains an indispensable guide to help us navigate today’s convulsive debates over free speech on American campuses and throughout our society.
This edition of Defending My Enemy is enhanced by a new foreword by Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, a new afterword by Nadine Strossen, president of the ACLU from 1991 to 2008, and an extensive new chapter by Neier himself offering his views on the contemporary challenges facing free speech in America. In addition to previously serving as Executive Director of the ACLU, Neier co-founded Human Rights Watch, and is President Emeritus of the Open Society Foundations, where he remains active in their work. He has written seven books and over three hundred articles and op-eds on civil and human rights.
—-
![]()
National Guard Occupy The Streets Of DC
Soldiers in uniform are still patrolling the streets of Washington, D.C. They’re not just on guard duty — they’ve been spotted picking up trash, spreading mulch, and even posing with tourists. And now their mission has been extended indefinitely. The Army has ordered nearly a thousand National Guard members to remain on active duty through November 30, 2025. Donald Trump could end it sooner, or push it even further, but for now the deployment is open-ended. Another 1,300 Guard troops from states like Louisiana and Ohio are also staying through December.
The official line is they are tackling “out of control” crime. But many residents and local officials see something else: a military force filling civic space, performing chores that look more like public relations than public safety. Ward 1 Commissioner Peter Wood called the outreach “uncomfortable and concerning,” stressing that soldiers patrolling civilian neighborhoods creates more fear than comfort.
This isn’t just about crime or clean-up crews — it’s about what kind of country we want to be when soldiers become part of daily civic life.
Guest – Attorney Mara Verheyden-Hilliard from the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund and the Center for Protest Law and Litigation in Washington, DC. Mara is one of the nation’s leading litigators defending protesters and winning numerous reforms in police practices at mass assemblies and demonstrations.
———————
