Among the partners for the State Department’s new “Freedom Tech Excellence Program” is Palantir, the AI and data integration firm started by right-wing powerbroker Peter Thiel. Under the program, company employees will go on temporary assignments to advise the government on “digital freedom and freedom of expression,” including counter-surveillance and dealing with First Amendment issues.

“FTEP brings private sector talent to the Department for limited-term assignments to advance diplomatic efforts on key issues including online freedom of expression, privacy-enhancing technologies, countering digital surveillance, and responsible AI governance,” according to the State Department’s website.

Palantir is best known for building large-scale data analysis platforms. In addition to corporate contracts, the company’s massive government tenders include database, surveillance, and tracking tools for police and federal authorities. Among its government clients are the military, the State Department itself, and U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Palantir and its key personnel have also been involved in multiple lawsuits against journalistic outlets.

The firm’s history has raised criticisms of its role in the new State Department initiative, especially given the Trump administration own’s dubious track record on First Amendment issues.

“To some extent, this announcement and this program sound like doublespeak,” said Carrie DeCell, a senior staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute. “Certainly neither this State Department, nor the partners they have announced so far, are trustworthy leaders in what they identify as online freedom of expression or countering digital surveillance.”

The new initiative is planned to run through the beginning of 2029, according to the State Department’s press office. While participants could be placed anywhere in the agency and may require security clearances, the Freedom Tech Excellent Program “is not geared towards bolstering the Department’s internal application or operational use of AI technologies,” the department said in a statement to The Intercept.

Anduril, a military tech firm with links to Palantir and Thiel, was also listed as a partner in the State Department initiative. Anduril’s executive chair Trae Stephens is a partner at Thiel’s Founders Fund, which has invested about $2.6 billion in Anduril. Besides a mutual appreciation of “The Lord of the Rings,” Thiel shares similar politics with Anduril co-founder Palmer Luckey and has backed Luckey’s new bank, Erebor.

Neither Anduril nor Palantir responded to requests for comment.

Palantir and the Feds

Palantir’s work has brought it notoriety across the globe, though at times defining what it does can be complex. It has repeatedly eschewed its label as a surveillance firm. Palantir CEO Alex Karp denied on a podcast last year that the company engages in unconstitutional surveillance work.

And, in an unsigned blog post last year, Palantir wrote, “Contrary to some media reports, we are not a surveillance company.”

Palantir, though, enabled U.S. mass surveillance by bolstering the National Security Agency’s global data collection efforts, according to documents provided to The Intercept by the whistleblower Edward Snowden. Palantir helped the NSA expand a program that became notorious for its ability to hoover up Americans’ communications along with those from abroad.

More recently, the firm has become a focal point for protests in the U.K. over its massive contract with the National Health Service and its ties to the Israeli military. Just this week, the NHS apologized after admitting it had falsely stated that Palantir did not have access to identifiable patient data.

Related

Palantir Is Helping Trump’s IRS Conduct “Massive-Scale” Data Mining

Stateside, the company had a contract with New York City public hospitals that gave it access to patient information. The contract was allowed to expire after it came under scrutiny in an Intercept report. The Intercept also reported this year that Palantir has access to sensitive federal databases for its contract to aid in Internal Revenue Service investigations.

Palantir’s IRS work led to a letter last year from 10 members of Congress to Karp requesting information about the “mega-database” built off IRS data. In response, the firm again denied that it was engaging in widespread surveillance of Americans and that it was building any such database.

Palantir also has a 15-year relationship with ICE. The Intercept found that its contracts with the agency have aided immigration raids, including ones that led to family separations. And Palantir built bespoke software for ICE that helps track self-deportations and visa overstays.

In April, Reps. Dan Goldman and Nydia Velázquez, both Democrats from New York, sent a list of questions directed to ICE and its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, demanding information about how they were leveraging Palantir’s technology to create “a mass surveillance ecosystem.”

Attacks on Free Press

Along with eccentric far-right views and donations to MAGA Republicans, one of Thiel’s most well-known acts was his involvement in the lawsuit that drove the news outlet Gawker into bankruptcy.

Thiel had become upset with Gawker over the media company’s reporting about his personal life. He went on to spend $10 million secretly bankrolling lawsuits against the company, finally scoring with a major judgment in favor of the wrestler Hulk Hogan that caused Gawker to close and sell off its assets.

Journalism advocacy group Reporters Without Borders said that Thiel constituted a “serious threat” to the group’s principles of “freedom of press and independence of media,” particularly in light of the secrecy around his role in the case. His actions were, RSF said, “nothing different to governments using legal or economic leverage to shut down a media that happens to displease them.”

Related

Kash Patel Is Using MAGA’s Favorite Tool to Muzzle the Free Press

Palantir also recently filed a suit against Swiss online news magazine Republik for reporting on how Palantir repeatedly failed to land contracts with the Swiss government. Palantir claimed that Republik had an obligation to run a list of rebuttals from the firm.

A Swiss court, however, handed Palantir a defeat by siding with the outlet on all but one of the 23 charges and forcing Palantir to pay most of Republik’s legal fees. (In a since-deleted post on Medium responding to the Republik lawsuit, Palantir once again denied that it is a surveillance company.)

David Greene, senior counsel for anti-surveillance nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation, said that positioning Palantir as a bulwark for civil rights undermined the government’s own free speech initiative.

“There’s a big problem right now with the U.S. government and the people outside government who exercise power, in terms of trying to claim free speech as a value when they clearly don’t sincerely hold that value,” Greene said. “It really lowers the esteem of the U.S. in terms of having any moral authority on freedom of expression grounds.”

The post State Department Wants Palantir’s Advice on Free Speech and “Countering Digital Surveillance” appeared first on The Intercept.

Over 50,000 people last week risked their lives to cross the border between Morocco and Ceuta, the tiny Spanish enclave in north Africa, in the hope of making it to mainland Europe.

The vast majority have already been returned to Morocco; fewer than 2,000 refugees remain on Ceuta and are, according to on-the-ground reports, in urgent need of food and shelter. Over 80 people reportedly died during the crossings, most from drowning.

The crisis for those seeking to enter Europe through Ceuta last week, including those who have been sent back, has already been framed according to a putrid, far-right political fulcrum. As a wide array of responses to the situation on Ceuta make clear, a commitment to harsh border regimes is not the sole preserve of the far right.

Once again, liberals and centrists who claim to decry the right’s anti-immigrant stances are themselves treating immigrants as a threat to be secured against.

For the international far right, images of thousands of desperate young African men entering European Union territory — little matter that Ceuta is, in fact, not on mainland Europe — has been fodder for predictable racist fearmongering and calls for extremist border rule. Far-right leaders blamed the crossings of the left-wing Spanish government’s extremely reasonable plans to regularize over 1 million undocumented immigrants who have already been living and working in Spain for at least five months.

“It’s terrible. Remember that picture. That’s going to be us in three years if the wrong side gets in,” President Donald Trump told Fox News, in a groundless attempt to use the suffering on Ceuta to his advantage. A spokesperson for the White House decried Spain’s new immigration regularization proposal as “far-left, globalist policies.”

Related

From the Mediterranean to Mexico, Capt. Pia Klemp Believes Rescuing Refugees Is Worth Facing Prison Time

Meanwhile, conservative and right-wing leaders across Europe and the U.K. echoed similar sentiments, conjuring the old lie of an “invasion” confronting the West. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni proposed Spain be suspended from the Schengen Area. A total of 22 EU leaders, including Meloni and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, wrote a joint letter to the European Commission expressing “serious concerns” about how Spain’s decision to grant legal status to immigrants served as a “pull factor.”

In response to these attacks and criticisms, several liberal and centrist politicians, institutions, and media organs have pushed back. Analyses in the New York Times and The Atlantic have stressed, for example, that not one of the people who crossed into Ceuta managed to make it to mainland Europe. These responses are framed as a counterpoint to Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s right-wing critics.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also defended Sánchez against right-wing attacks, by praising the Spanish authorities’ “swift handling” in “successfully preventing illegal movement onwards to mainland Spain and Europe.”

Sanchez himself took a similar line.

“In less than 48 hours, my government has succeeded in fully restoring control over the border,” he wrote on Saturday in a response to criticism from other European leaders.

The mainstream defense against far-right fearmongering, then, was merely a regurgitation of the right’s anti-immigrant premise. Stopping immigrants who have been forced to take irregular routes, according to this logic, is a good thing. What the far right got wrong, by the lights of these centrists and liberals, was not their virulent racism, but rather that the claims of an “invasion” of Europe are not factually accurate.

“Spain and Germany’s centrist responses have been to ‘assure’ the E.U. that borders are fortified,” wrote migrant justice organizer and scholar Harsha Walia on Instagram. “This rebuttal simply buttresses the premise of border securitization.”

The reasons for the surge in crossings are not yet fully known; speculation abounds about the role of Moroccan and other state forces. A few things are, however, clear: Misinformation had spread in the preceding days on social media suggesting, falsely, that a recent Supreme Court ruling in Spain would prevent the Spanish authorities returning immigrants.

Related

Trump’s National Killer Police Force

In a world of increasing and inevitable mass migration, it is a moral failure to treat the swift removal of immigrants as a victory. Such a framing is also a gift to the far right, who will continue to benefit within a political consensus that treats immigration as a bad thing.

Only a few voices on the European left have placed focus where it belongs: with supporting immigrants who remain on Ceuta.

“What is happening in Ceuta is not a natural disaster, but the result of political decisions,” said Clara Bünger, a member of Germany’s The Left Party. “Germany and the EU have a duty to help with providing for refugees and to take in those seeking protection.”

“People are fleeing war, poverty, and the climate crisis,” she noted. “Higher walls won’t stop them; they will only make the escape more deadly. The most important thing now is that no one else dies.”

The post Liberals Are Ceding Ground to the Far Right on Ceuta Border Crossings appeared first on The Intercept.

Seeking to highlight ties between Columbia University and Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, the campus protest movement had culminated in a building occupation that ended with dozens of arrests, sparking activism on campuses across the country. At Columbia, classes went virtual or used a hybrid model.

On the day classes resumed their regular scheduling in September, one protester splattered the university’s famous Alma Mater statue in red paint.

Following the incident, New York Police Department investigators deployed an extensive array of high-tech surveillance and investigative tools to identify the alleged vandal, according to documents from the court case provided exclusively to The Intercept. Police leveraged networks of surveillance cameras and facial recognition software to pinpoint a suspect.

In July 2025, Jakhi Isaiah, a New Jersey-based activist whose legal last name is McCray, was charged for the incident.

As the nationwide protest movement against Israel’s genocide in Gaza became a national lightening rod and the Trump administration began to throw its weight against activists, authorities at all levels began to expend tremendous resources against pro-Palestine demonstrators. Using intensive surveillance tools in response to relatively minor crimes became typical in cases against pro-Palestine protesters.

“I think it deliberately sends a very chilling message that you better not dissent,” said Bina Ahmad, a civil rights and criminal defense attorney has represented pro-Palestine protesters but is not working on Isaiah’s case. “How many [resources] they used for such a small charge kind of says they will go to any length to grab who they want to grab and charge what they want to charge.”

The documents obtained by The Intercept also detail how NYPD investigators appeared to have abandoned the case, before being spurred to reopen it by federal officials. Both the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives and the U.S. Marshals Service, according to the documents, were participating in a separate federal investigation into Isaiah.

Facial Recognition

Columbia claimed that the paint protest had caused thousands of dollars in damage to the statue, but maintenance crews were able to clean it up almost immediately. Photographs taken by students show that, by the end of the day, all the paint had had been removed.

The hunt for the alleged vandal soon got underway.

In the days following the incident, NYPD detectives used 21 different camera angles and tracked the person that they allege is Isaiah as he moved both inside and out of Columbia’s campus.

“If you go around New York, there’s fucking cameras literally everywhere,” Isaiah told The Intercept. “That’s freaky as hell.”

Related

Police Raid Pro-Palestine Students’ Home in FBI-Led Graffiti Investigation

Investigators claim to have followed Isaiah’s movements using surveillance footage for more than two continuous hours surrounding the incident, tracking him even after he entered a university building and changed clothing. The person on video footage during the vandalism was masked and wore a hat. (Neither the NYPD nor Columbia responded to requests for comment.)

A camera eventually captured someone dressed in similar clothing with their mask removed while running down a nearby city street, according to the discovery documents. NYPD detectives then took the maskless image and used facial recognition tools to generate a hit on Isaiah.

Following the facial recognition ID, a probable cause to arrest notice was issued, meaning that officers Isaiah encountered would have discretion on whether or not to bring him into custody and charge him with the vandalism offenses.

Months later, Isaiah was arrested at an unrelated anti-ICE protest. Despite being in custody, he was not charged or arraigned on any offenses relating to the Columbia University incident, suggesting that the NYPD investigation against him had stalled.

Later, internal communications obtained by The Intercept revealed that while Columbia’s public safety department eventually asked the NYPD to terminate the investigation, they reversed course less than a day later, citing a “miscommunication” between university officials and the NYPD.

Newfound Attention

In June 2025, some 10 months after the paint incident, Isaiah received newfound attention from law enforcement. He was accused of being the perpetrator behind a multi-car arson carried out against NYPD vehicles at a Brooklyn precinct.

The NYPD investigation seemed to have languished, Isaiah said. Despite the police’s probable cause to arrest notice tied to his identity, Isiah said he had several run-ins with NYPD, including the ICE protest arrest, where officers stopped Isaiah, but opted not to charge him with any offenses related to the Columbia investigation.

After the federal investigation into Isaiah for arson, however, the NYPD detectives seemed to revive the case against him related to the Columbia vandalism.

Internal communications obtained by The Intercept from one week after the arson investigation began show NYPD detectives saying that “due to recent incident that occurred in the confines of the 83 Precinct involving wanted perpetrator, case has become federal and the federal authorities will continue to follow up.” Two wanted posters — one for the arson, and one for the vandalism — were attached to the email.

Following a weekslong manhunt by federal law enforcement related to the fires, Isaiah surrendered to police. (He has since pleaded guilty to one count of arson in federal court.) Following his detention by federal authorities, prosecutors in New York charged him in the Columbia paint incident.

Related

Trump’s Communist Boogeyman Playbook: Charging Protesters as Terrorists

Federal cooperation with local law enforcement agencies has ramped up in the wake of the national protest movement against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, spurred in part by initiatives like Donald Trump’s National Security Memorandum-7 and his executive order that designated “antifa” as a domestic terror group. Highly politicized federal agencies are now more regularly working hand in glove with local police departments, who now have a mandate to pursue politicized cases, said Brendan McQuade, a criminologist at the University of Southern Maine.

“This is collaboration institutionalized,” said McQuade.

When Isaiah was finally arraigned for the Columbia paint charges, an NYPD report featured a list of 41 different “associates” — people police suspected to be contacts or who he’d been arrested alongside at protests. Isaiah believes the list is part of a wider pattern of repression and investigation of pro-Palestine protesters. He wonders whether if he had not turned himself in, the list may have been used against people in his community.

“It’s just very obvious network mapping,” he said. “If they hadn’t found me, they probably would have kept going through that list.”

Isaiah is expected to stand trial for three vandalism and graffiti-related charges in August but says that he sees his case as emblematic of larger trends in American society.

“The repression on the movement, the surveillance on the movement is often just a microcosm of the larger repression of communities as a whole,” he said.

He nonetheless remains hopeful: “Communities are still finding a way to prosper and live their lives, despite this intense level of omnipresence.”

The post NYPD Used High-Tech Surveillance to Find Gaza Paint Splatter Protester, Docs Show appeared first on The Intercept.

Dem Frontmann der britischen Punk-Rap-Band Bob Vylan wurde aufgrund seiner pro-palästinensischen Aussagen unlängst die Einreise nach Deutschland verweigert. Er wurde am Berliner Flughafen festgehalten und schließlich zurück nach England abgeschoben.

Die Bundespolizei begründete die Einreiseverweigerung des Sängers am 15. Juni mit seinem Auftritt beim Glastonbury Festival im vergangenen Jahr, wo er den Sprechchor „Death, death to the IDF“ („Tod, Tod der IDF“ – der israelischen Armee) angestimmt hatte.

Ende Juli hoben die Behörden das Einreiseverbot gegen den Sänger, der mit bürgerlichem Namen Pascal Robinson-Foster heißt, in einem entsprechenden Schreiben wieder auf, verweigerten jedoch jede Auskunft darüber, warum die Maßnahme aufgehoben wurde; oder wie die Entscheidung über das Einreiseverbot zustande gekommen war.

Die polizeiliche Akte zu Robinson-Foster, die The Intercept vorliegt, wirft ihm vor, antisemitische Narrative und Hamas-Propaganda zu verbreiten, die zur „Radikalisierung einzelner Bevölkerungsgruppen“ beitragen und terroristischen Gruppen oder Einzelpersonen als „ideologische Begründung“ dienen könne.

Related

Germany Turns to U.S. Playbook: Deportations Target Gaza War Protesters

Zudem heißt es, Robinson-Foster stelle „eine Gefahr für die öffentliche Sicherheit und Ordnung“ in Deutschland dar. Seine Einreise würde dem internationalen Ansehen sowie der Glaubwürdigkeit der Bundesrepublik „erheblichen Schaden“ zufügen; dadurch entstünde der Eindruck, Deutschland unternehme keine Anstrengungen, „den propagierten Antisemitismus und dazugehörige Aufrufe zur Gewalt, insbesondere grenzüberschreitend, zu unterbinden“.

Detaillierte Fragen zu dem inzwischen aufgehobenen Einreiseverbot beantwortete die Bundespolizei nicht. Sie berief sich dabei auf Belange der öffentlichen Sicherheit und Datenschutz. Auf einen Fragenkatalog zum Entscheidungsprozess hinter der Einreiseverweigerung, ihrer Rechtsgrundlage, zu beteiligten Behörden sowie zu den Gründen der Aufhebung der Einreiseverweigerung erklärte Bundespolizei-Sprecher Nikolai Jaletzke gegenüber The Intercept, man äußere sich nicht zu Gefährdungsbewertungen, operativen Maßnahmen oder Abstimmungsprozessen zwischen Behörden.

„Zu behaupten, ich würde eine Gefahr für die nationale Sicherheit Deutschlands darstellen, ist schlicht absurd“, sagte Robinson-Foster The Intercept. „Genauso absurd ist die Behauptung, wir würden Propaganda im Namen irgendeiner verbotenen Organisation verbreiten.“

Bob Vylans Auftritt beim Glastonbury Festival sorgte weltweit für Aufmerksamkeit. Er kam zu einem Zeitpunkt, als immer mehr Kulturschaffende begannen, sich öffentlich gegen die Zerstörung Gazas durch Israel auszusprechen. Der Auftritt – insbesondere der Sprechchor „Death, death to the IDF“ – wurde von Politiker, darunter dem damaligen britischen Premierminister Keir Starmer, sowie von mehreren pro-israelischen jüdischen Organisationen scharf verurteilt. Der Antisemitismusbeauftragte der Bundesregierung Felix Klein bezeichnete den Auftritt als „Hass und Hetze“ und rief Konzert- und Festival-Veranstalter in Deutschland dazu auf, Bob Vylans Konzerte abzusagen.

Kurz nach dem Glastonbury-Auftritt waren Robinson-Foster und seinem Bandkollegen Wade Laurence George Visa für ihre Einreise in die USA entzogen worden. Deutschland ist jedoch das erste Land, das einem Mitglied der Band die Einreise verweigert und ihn abgeschoben hat.

Die The Intercept vorliegenden Dokumente betreffen ausschließlich die Umsetzung des Einreiseverbots – nicht den dahinter liegenden Entscheidungsprozess. „Unsere Position ist simpel“, sagte Alexander Gorski – der deutsche Anwalt, der Robinson-Foster vertritt. „Es gibt ein verfassungsmäßiges Recht darauf, die Akte zu kennen, auf deren Grundlage eine solche Entscheidung getroffen wird.“

Nach Robinson-Fosters Abschiebung stellte Gorski beim Bundespolizeipräsidium Potsdam einen Antrag auf Löschung der Einreisesperre aus dem Nationalregister sowie auf Einsicht in die zugrundeliegenden Akten. Kurze Zeit später hob die Bundespolizei das Einreiseverbot wieder auf – ohne jedoch zu erklären, warum. In dem zweiseitigen Schreiben, das The Intercept ebenfalls vorliegt, heißt es lediglich, dass dem Antrag stattgegeben wird und keine weitergehenden Informationen erteilt werden könnten.

„Natürlich ist es gut, dass das Einreiseverbot aufgehoben wurde“, sagte Gorski The Intercept. „Aus rechtsstaatlicher Sicht ist es jedoch hochproblematisch, wenn jemand wegen einer politischen Äußerung, die keinen Straftatbestand erfüllt, an der Einreise gehindert wird – und ihm anschließend noch der Zugang zu den zugrunde liegenden Akten verweigert wird.“

Gorski legte daraufhin formell Widerspruch ein, um Einsicht in interne Akten zu erhalten, die zur Verhängung des Einreiseverbots führten. Robinson-Foster habe ein Recht darauf zu erfahren, auf welcher rechtlichen Grundlage ihm die Einreise nach Deutschland verweigert wurde. Nicht nur, um die Rechtmäßigkeit des Vorgangs überprüfen zu können – sondern auch, um zu verstehen, welches Verhalten die deutschen Behörden zukünftig als Grundlage für eine Einreiseverweigerung ansehen.

„Wenn ein Künstler sich an das Gesetz halten will, muss er wissen, was die Regeln sind“, so Gorski.

Bislang ist unklar, wie es dazu kam, dass ein britischer Musiker, dem weder in England noch in Deutschland eine Straftat zur Last gelegt wird, von deutschen Behörden als Gefahr für die öffentliche Sicherheit eingestuft wurde. Die britische Polizei hatte entsprechende Ermittlungen zu Bob Vylans Glastonbury-Auftritt Ende letzten Jahres eingestellt und erklärt, es gebe „keine ausreichenden Beweise für eine realistische Aussicht auf eine Verurteilung“.

„Es fehlt nicht an Beweisen, es fehlt an einer Straftat“, sagte Robinson-Foster gegenüber The Intercept. „Die BBC hat den Auftritt übertragen. Man kann ihn sich einfach ansehen.“

Für Gorski steht der Fall paradigmatisch für einen grundlegenden Wandel im Umgang mit deutschem Migrationsrecht gegenüber pro-palästinensischen Stimmen. Letztes Jahr hatte das Land Berlin Abschiebeverfahren gegen vier ausländische Staatsangehörige eingeleitet, die sich an Protesten gegen Israels genozidalen Krieg in Gaza beteiligt hatten.

Gorski argumentiert, die deutschen Behörden würden das Migrationsrecht verstärkt dazu nutzen, um „unerwünschte Stimmen zum Schweigen zu bringen“, indem etwa Kritiker Israels die Einreise verweigern wird – oder indem sie des Landes verweisen werden. Ähnliche Bedenken äußerte zuletzt auch Thomas Oberhäuser, Vorsitzender im Geschäftsführenden Ausschuss der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Migrationsrecht im Deutschen Anwaltverein. Auch Oberhäuser sieht Anzeichen dafür, dass das Migrationsrecht in Deutschland zunehmend für politische Zwecke eingesetzt wird.

Gorski verwies im Gespräch auf frühere Fälle, etwa den Fall des britisch-palästinensischen Chirurgen Ghassan Abu Sitta sowie den Fall des ehemaligen griechischen Finanzministers Yanis Varoufakis. Gorski hat beide in vergleichbaren Verfahren vertreten. In beiden Fällen hatten deutsche Behörden versucht, ihre Einreise zu verhindern, um ihre Teilnahme an pro-palästinensischen Veranstaltungen zu unterbinden.

Robinson-Foster sagte gegenüber The Intercept, er sei im Juni privat nach Deutschland gereist. Er habe vor der Veröffentlichung des neuen Albums der Band Freunde und Musikerkollegen besuchen wollen. Bob Vylan tourte in den letzten Jahren mehrfach auch in Deutschland. Obwohl die deutschen Behörden das Einreiseverbot jetzt aufgehoben haben, habe der Vorfall „eine Büchse der Pandora geöffnet“.

„Es scheint, als hätte die Einreiseverweigerung in Deutschland dazu geführt, dass wir bei der Einreise in andere Länder nun immer wieder Probleme bekommen“, berichtete Robinson-Foster. Seit seiner Abschiebung seien sowohl er als auch sein Bandkollege bei Einreisen in andere EU-Länder mehrfach intensiv befragt worden. In einem Fall hätten belgische Grenzbeamte den Schlagzeuger der Band zu dem Vorfall in Deutschland befragt – obwohl dieser selbst nicht nach Deutschland eingereist sei.

„Wir möchten weiterhin Konzerte in Deutschland spielen“, sagte Robinson-Foster. „Wir sind in den letzten fünf Jahren regelmäßig auf Tour dort gewesen. Es wäre wirklich bitter, wenn wir den Kontakt zu den Menschen verlieren, die uns dort unterstützen.“

The post Nach Abschiebung wegen Anti-Israel-Parole: Bob-Vylan-Frontmann wehrt sich erfolgreich gegen Einreiseverbot appeared first on The Intercept.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., has made it his mission to put Dr. Anthony Fauci in prison.

Last month, the chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee subpoenaed Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases who led the nation’s response to the Covid pandemic, to answer still more questions related to the origins of the disease.

Related

Rand Paul’s Attack on Anthony Fauci Chills Scientific Debate Over Gain-of-Function Research

Paul insists the novel coronavirus was the result of the National Institutes of Health having funded gain-of-function research at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology — essentially that the virus was created in a lab in China and unleashed on an unsuspecting public.

Fauci has maintained that while the mostly likely source of the Covid-19 virus was animal-to-human transmission but that we cannot know for certain. Paul thinks he deliberately misled the public about the coronavirus’s origins and called him to testify before the Homeland Security Committee based on supposed new evidence that comes from Fauci’s diaries.

Over 7 million people worldwide have died from Covid, with about 1.2 million of those deaths occurring in the U.S.

While the quick work to produce a vaccine undoubtedly saved many millions of lives, that level of loss is difficult to account for and has certainly taken an emotional and psychic toll on the world since. We, the public, deserve answers about what went wrong during that time and how our governments are preparing for similar outbreaks in the future such that they can prevent the loss of so much life.

That is not what Paul and his Fauci subpoena are focused on. Instead, Paul sunk his libertarian teeth into a xenophobic conspiracy theory that reinforces his ideological priors: too many government agencies that spend too many public dollars.

It’s the same reason Paul avoids the real, persistent public health crisis underlying huge spike in deaths in the U.S. from Covid — and a host of other diseases: the lack of universal healthcare.

Did the virus come from a lab in Wuhan? I certainly don’t trust Paul’s ideologically infused takes, but I’ll leave it for others to decide.

To focus on it at the exclusion of all other public health policy, though, is clearly a mistake. It’s learning the wrong lesson from the Covid pandemic.

The United States remains the only “developed” country without universal healthcare coverage.

The insurance companies and for-profit medical system insist that this is the best system to provide people with the best healthcare, but during early days of the Covid pandemic, its limitations came into stark relief. The pandemic put so much stress on our system that resulted in shortages in staff, and a decreased quality of care for those infected with virus, and all others who needed care.

Underlying medical issues exasperated Covid deaths. These are exactly the types of chronic illnesses that people suffer from because of a lack of preventative care or a failure to get treatment because of prohibitive costs — respiratory diseases, heart conditions, blood pressure issues.

Related

Network of Right-Wing Health Care Providers Is Making Millions Off Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, Hacked Data Reveals

It’s notable that some of the greatest successes of Covid policy arose not from private health insurers acting on their mandates for profit, but rather by mandates and funding from local, state, and federal government. Acts of Congress forced healthcare insurers and providers into covering certain services. When testing became a feasible method of helping to prevent the spread of Covid, federal funding made it far more widely available — even for the uninsured, with the government providing reimbursement for healthcare providers who tested those without coverage.

This is to say nothing of a federal program to speed along a Covid vaccine and rush its distribution — the key to creating enough immunity to weaken the virus and lower death rates. For those who got Covid, antiviral medication, which could drastically reduce symptoms and prevent hospitalizations and even death, was available for free thanks to federal funding. In the first two years of the pandemic, around 6 million people took the drug without paying a thing.

In 2020, the American Public Health Association released a policy statement that began: “The COVID pandemic adds a new sense of urgency to establish a universal health care system in the United States. Our current system is inequitable, does not adequately cover vulnerable groups, is cost prohibitive, and lacks the flexibility to respond to periods of economic and health downturns.”

This remains true, as the Trump administration and the Republican-led Congress continue their assault of existing forms of federal healthcare spending.

While Paul is focused on trying to place Fauci in prison for not confirming a conspiracy theory, more people are being crushed by the weight of medical debt due to our inadequate system, more people aren’t getting the care they need because of the costs, and more people are dying.

Related

CDC Didn’t Tell New York About Resident on Hantavirus-Plagued Cruise

The fight for universal healthcare coverage remains a vital one, as the uncertainty of when we could face another pandemic looms over us all. The longer the delay, the more unprepared we become for what’s next.

Whatever Fauci said from his perch at the National Institutes of Health about the virus’s origins, the fact of the matter remains that the government’s interventions during the Covid pandemic were overwhelmingly lifesaving. Its biggest failure — then as now — was the inability to provide healthcare coverage for all Americans.

There should be accountability for whatever role the government played in the Covid pandemic, but let’s be clear that deaths spiked in large part because of the failures of our healthcare system to cover all Americans, not because of what Fauci said in his diaries.

The post Fauci’s Diary Isn’t the Key to Why Covid Ravaged the U.S. — Our Broken Healthcare System Is appeared first on The Intercept.

On Saturday night, a man drove a van into a crowd near Berlin’s Pride Festival, before getting out and stabbing several people, leaving one woman dead and dozens injured.

The suspect, identified as 21-year-old Abdul Ballout, a German national and reported supporter of the Islamic State group, was shot dead by police on Sunday following a daylong manhunt.

“We do not want this deed to be used for political ends,” said the organizers of the festival, also known as Christopher Street Day, in a statement on Sunday before the attacker had even been located. “We don’t want any groups to be placed under suspicion for this. People are trying to divide our society and set some people against others. We will not allow this.”

Amid the shock and grief, the organizers saw the immediate need to stop malign political forces using the horrific attack and the queer community’s suffering to fuel Germany’s already fervent anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, and anti-immigrant sentiment.

They had reason for concern. The far-right Alternative for Germany Party, or AfD — which decries trans people as a “cult,” opposes marriage equality and gay adoption, defines a family as only “father, mother and children,” and condemns so-called “gender ideology” — had moved to weaponize the attack within hours.

“The AfD has been warning for years: Islamism is and remains the greatest security threat to our country,” said AfD member of parliament Martin Hess in a statement. He remarked that “we also urgently need a genuine shift in migration policy” — despite the fact that Saturday’s suspect was born and raised in Germany.

The AfD, which is currently the most popular German party according to recent polls, boasts numerous state-level branches classified as extremist organizations by Germany’s intelligence agencies.

Alliance for Bigotry

The party is using a familiar playbook. In 2016, the day after the deadly Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump called for a total ban on immigration from Muslim countries. His two presidencies have since been dedicated to destroying both trans lives and Muslim lives with vigor.

Trump has sought to leverage attacks abroad, including in Germany, to galvanize his anti-Muslim base. The president was quick to condemn the 2016 massacre at a Berlin Christmas market to double down, once again, on his Muslim ban plan.

Related

Germany Turns to U.S. Playbook: Deportations Target Gaza War Protesters

So far, Trump hasn’t said anything about the Berlin Pride attack — perhaps his demonization of Muslims has been so thorough that he no longer needs to feign concern about queer lives to gin up Islamophobia — but the alliances that inform these bigotries nonetheless remain a powerful political force.

Trump and his allies have long boosted the very German politics that is cynically leveraging the Berlin attack for political gains.

Last year, anti-trans zealot Elon Musk threw his support and his social media platform behind the far-right party.

“Only the AfD can save Germany,” he wrote on X.

The Right’s Own Attacks

Day in and day out, meanwhile, it is the likes of the AfD and other conservative German parties, and the Republicans at home, who are assaulting the LGBTQ+ rights.

A spike in anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes in Germany in recent years has been directly linked to a rise in far-right extremism, including more than two dozen attacks at Pride events.

The attacks themselves, however, are only part of the story.

“Politicians are now shamelessly exploiting the suffering of the queer community for their own agenda, while cutting funding for queer organizations, aid projects, and cultural initiatives,” wrote Mohamed Amjahid, a columnist for German newspaper, Taz.

It’s true. Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democratic Party, in its role in the coalition leading Berlin’s municipal government, has cut funding for queer community programs in the city and banned drag story hour readings in public libraries.

Of the perpetrators of Saturday’s brutality, Merz said: “They want to take away the most important things we have: our openness, our freedom.”

This purported shared “openness” and “freedom” had not been on display when Merz opposed plans to fly a rainbow flag atop the Reichstag Building to honor Pride last year.

“The Bundestag is not a circus tent,” the conservative chancellor said.

Just hours before Ballout rammed a truck into Pride attendees, Berlin riot police had focused their energies on making arrests and aggressing attendees at the explicitly anti-colonial, anti-capitalist Internationalist Queer Pride march elsewhere in Berlin.

Part-Time Solidarity

As Berlin-based journalist James Jackson noted, Merz’s statement on the attack, along with statements by three other senior conservative politicians, wholly failed to explicitly mention gay or queer people.

The statements defended “tolerance” and “freedom,” but when queer and trans people are attacked and killed, it is not “freedom” that is threatened in the abstract, it is specific forms of life — the very ways of being in the world that have been under assault by far-right politics and centrist complicity, across Europe and the United States.

On Sunday, thousands gathered for a vigil in front of the Brandenburg Gate, which was lit up in rainbow colors by night.

“Last year they refused to let us fly the rainbow flag in front of the Bundestag, because it’s not a circus tent, after all,” said one vigil speaker who identified as Muslim and gay. “Today the flags are flying at half-mast. But solidarity shouldn’t be a knee-jerk reaction after a tragedy.”

It’s a lesson that self-identifying allies in the U.S., above all Democrats who continue to fail trans people, would do well to learn, too.

The post The Right Seeks to Capitalize on Berlin Pride Attack — Even as It Poses Its Own Existential Threat to Queer Lives appeared first on The Intercept.

Sen. John Fetterman may switch parties, and the reason is simple: The Democrat from Pennsylvania loves nothing like he loves media coverage.

Adam Jentleson, Fetterman’s former chief of staff who now heads the centrist Searchlight Institute think tank, said as much this week.

“I think, if he is the majority-maker, he will flip, because it would give him a massive amount of attention,” Jentleson said.

It’s not hard to see why someone as addicted to attention as Fetterman would make a big deal out of leaving his party, nor why he has doubled and tripled down on it in the past week. After all, this is the same man who has made a spectacle of his appearance, walking around the Senate halls in a hoodie and shorts rather than conform to the business dress code of his peers.

Since October 2023, his relationship with the progressive wing of his party has been strained, primarily because of a divide over support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza. 

Fetterman is now willing to use his leverage as key player for control of the chamber to help Israel — the main reason he’s said he could change sides. If Democrats continue to oppose Israel, he said, specifically if they do so in their party platform, Fetterman says he’s likely to split.

“If our party ever becomes, and just makes it official, the anti-Israel party, that’s when I would leave because that’s been a moral clarity for me,” Fetterman said at a convention in Washington last week.

Swiping at his own party aren’t out of character, and are part of what has led to a rift with the Democratic base. Fetterman’s closeness to right-wing media and penchant for punching left, as well as his loyalty to Israel, make him both a target of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party and one of the least popular incumbents in the country.

Related

Fetterman Is Sole Democrat to Vote Against Blocking Caribbean Drug Boat Attacks

Predictably, a bare majority of Pennsylvania Democrats want him to leave the party, almost assuring he won’t make it out of a primary. But switching to the GOP wouldn’t lead to a cakewalk reelection either.

By his own admission, Fetterman would be dogged by his own very socially liberal voting record in a Republican primary where he’s also certain to face defeat.

That leaves running as an independent who caucuses with Republicans, a move guaranteed to play spoiler for one party’s hopes to control the Senate in 2028, though it’s unclear who he’d hurt more.

Presidential Run?

Antipathy to the left now defines much of his politics.

Earlier this year, in June and July, Fetterman was receiving lots of attention for his criticisms of former Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner, repeatedly claiming that there were intimate images of the upstart Democrat online and referring to him as his Reddit moniker, “P-Hustle.”

On June 10, the day after Platner won his primary, NOTUS reporter Igor Bobic posted on X that Fetterman was haranguing him about the Maine Democrat — “You wanna talk about P-Hustle? You wanna talk about P-Hustle?” — as soon as Bobic entered the Senate building. Fetterman continued with a line that must have been rehearsed: “Have we become the pro-dick party?”

He ignored that due to pressure from the Democratic Party that Platner dropped out of the general election race earlier this month.

This level of embarrassing, childish behavior calls to mind Elon Musk, whose awkward hamming it up to fulfill his need for attention culminated in a number of humiliating appearances on the campaign trail alongside Donald Trump in 2024.

Fetterman doesn’t appear to be quite ready to go onstage and leap around with a MAGA hat on, but testing the waters for a party switch is certainly a step forward into whatever comes next.

There are signs the next move could be Fetterman’s own run for president.

Related

Fetterman Staff Quit Amid Frustration Over “Just Working on Israel All the Time”

According to reporting from the Philadelphia Inquirer in May, Fetterman lost interest in the day-to-day of the Senate and has his sights set on the White House. One aide described the senator as “disengaged” and said “he doesn’t read memos, he’s taking very few meetings … the job is just a platform for him to run for president, that’s all he cares about.”

A run for president would be welcome news to friend Bill Maher, the acerbic right-wing comedian, who has been pushing for a Fetterman 2028 run since last year.

Maher isn’t the only conservative giving Fetterman a platform. Fox News hosted him more than 50 times in 2026 alone, according to the Washington Examiner, giving the senator the incentive to continue to make news by attacking fellow Democrats.

He’s taken to the role with gusto, recently attacking New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani for protecting Haitian migrants from the federal courts and scolding Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., for endorsing Michigan Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed.

Anything for attention — and Fox is smart enough to take advantage of that.

Don’t Negotiate

One might try to explain away this behavior by pointing to Fetterman’s well-publicized health struggles.

Last May, New York Magazine reported his behavior has become increasingly erratic since a stroke in 2022, shortly before he was elected to the Senate.

The article lists several serious claims, including that Fetterman reads news articles on his phone while driving at high speeds, got into a car accident that injured his wife, and bought a gun.

Putting this all on the stroke and subsequent health issues, however, is too easy. Fetterman’s affinity for Israel was enough of a selling point for Democratic Majority for Israel that the group celebrated his willingness to “lean into” the relationship in an April 2022 press release.

Related

Harlan Crow Maxed Out Campaign Donations to John Fetterman

And for all the progressive political rhetoric he relied on to make his pitch to voters, Fetterman has always prioritized the stingy approval of his hard-right Republican father, who now calls the senator to congratulate him whenever he appears on Fox News.

Whatever the case, the attention-seeking, left-punching Fetterman is who we have now.

The best way to handle a child who is acting out is to ignore them and not reward their behavior. As Jentleson put it, they “should not debase themselves by trying to negotiate with him.”

That’s the approach Democrats should take: Leave Fetterman to serve out the rest of his term as a marginal member of a bare majority, should it come to that.

The post Fetterman Might Leave Democratic Party Because the Only Thing He Loves More Than Israel Is Attention appeared first on The Intercept.

The directive was initially passed down through ICE field offices on the evening of July 13 — just hours after the Maine shooting — followed by an official agencywide memo that made the rounds the next morning.

Then, on July 15, President Donald Trump took to his social media platform Truth Social and directed ICE to resume its vehicle stops, presumably reversing the orders announced the day before by ICE internal leadership.

Despite Trump’s apparent reversal of the ICE directive, immigration enforcement officers in at least 4 so-called areas of responsibility — ICE’s regional jurisdictions — did not resume vehicle stops, according to officials who spoke with The Intercept.

“I follow policy that comes down the appropriate channels,” said one ICE official, who works in a southern regional office and requested anonymity to avoid retaliation. “The president says one thing but in reality we all follow established policy.”

A second ICE official, who operates in the Western U.S., told The Intercept, “Following the orders of the guys I’ve worked with in the field and have my back vs the head of an administration that treats me like a meme? It’s a no brainer.”

Three other ICE whistleblowers from areas of responsibility in the Midwest, South, and Northeast also told The Intercept that vehicle stops did not resume in their areas of responsibility over the past week. (ICE did not respond to a request for comment.)

Now, however, a new official vehicle stops policy has been passed down through the proper channels at ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division.

An internal agencywide email, sent on July 22 and obtained by The Intercept, ordered the resumption of vehicle stops, with new guidelines that change how deportation officers will engage with vehicles moving forward.

“ERO law enforcement officers are authorized to conduct vehicle stops,” says the email. “Officers must continue to coordinate with their immediate supervisors regarding any enforcement activities.”

Killings in Maine and Texas

The pair of deadly ICE shootings, just six days apart in the second week of July, both involved officers traveling in and engaging with vehicles. The killings — of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston, Texas, and a Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Biddeford, Maine — sparked nationwide outrage and catapulted ICE back in to the news cycle.

ICE quickly came under pressure from both the public and government officials to hold the officers involved in the shootings accountable and offer more transparency about ICE’s tactics when engaging with vehicles.

One glaring issue that arose was the fact that, according to the Department of Homeland Security, the officers involved in both shootings were not wearing body cameras.

Related

ICE Officers at Maine Shooting Scene Were Wearing Body Cameras. They Were Not Turned On.

In the case of the Maine shooting, The Intercept previously reported, officers on the scene were wearing multifunctional devices designed to work as body cameras, but they were unable to record video on the devices because they didn’t have a required cloud-based subscription service.

The new ICE vehicle stops policy addressed the apparent failure in Maine and Texas to capture the incidents on video. Now, according to the new policy, at least one officer involved in a vehicle stop must be wearing “an issued and activated body worn camera.”

The rollout for ICE body cameras, however, is proceeding slowly. About half of ICE officers have been issued cameras, according to DHS, with the other half to receive them in the next two months. Officers will then need to complete a training process with the body cameras before they can use them in the field.

Gutted Training Standards

Starting in summer 2025, in an effort to ramp up deportations, the Trump administration implemented an accelerated ICE training and hiring spree that lasted until June 30, 2026.  

During that time, ICE hired more than 12,000 new recruits and cut more than 40 percent of its basic training curriculum.

Among those new recruits, according to The Atlantic, was the ICE officer who allegedly pulled the trigger in the Maine shooting.

The new ICE policy distributed on Wednesday now lists training as a requirement for officers making vehicle stops.

“The officer or officers conducting the stop must have successfully completed an ICE-administered vehicle stop training,” the guidance says.

The policy guidance says that ICE officers may make vehicle stops in cases of criminal arrests or while executing search warrants, but only when a certified member of a Special Response Team — ICE’s equivalent of SWAT — conducts the stop.

The post Leaked Email Reveals New Requirements for ICE Vehicle Stops appeared first on The Intercept.

The nationwide policy, shared with The Intercept by a Department of Homeland Security whistleblower and confirmed by multiple ICE officers, details a new set of appearance standards aimed at making it easier for the public and fellow law enforcement officials to recognize ICE officers in the field.

“Law enforcement officers performing field operations shall wear readily identifiable ICE attire, including a ballistic vest during high-visibility operations,” says a guidance memo signed by Acting ICE Director David Venturella. “Appropriate field attire includes khaki or coyote brown tactical type pants, paired with an ICE polo, or dark blue or black polo.”

The memo adds, “Clothing such as jeans, sweatshirts, hoodies, non-collared shirts, or apparel displaying graphics or screen prints is not authorized during field operations.”

The new directives for ICE’s Employee Code of Conduct came in the wake of a botched arrest last week in Las Vegas by two ICE officers wearing hooded sweatshirts, with one attempting to pull a hood down over his face as onlookers recorded video. (ICE did not respond to a request for comment.)

The officer attempting to make the arrest “looked like a kidnapper,” said one ICE official who spoke to The Intercept on the condition of anonymity to protect their livelihood.

“Ending the era of ICE agents making arrests in hoodies and unbranded street clothes is a long-overdue admission that unidentifiable immigration enforcement is dangerous, instills fear, and erodes public trust,” Nick Wilson, the senior director of public safety policy at Center for American Progress, told The Intercept. “Real public safety requires holding federal agents to the exact same standards of visibility, training, state and local oversight, and independent investigations of civil rights violations as local law enforcement.”

Along with the use of masks, ICE officers’ failure to clearly identify themselves amid arrests and other enforcement actions have drawn criticisms from the public and raised the ire of elected officials. Attorneys general have pleaded with Congress to pass legislation requiring that ICE officers wear identifying insignia, and members of Congress have themselves urged ICE to require officers better identify themselves to the public.

Botched Las Vegas Arrest

The new dress code, two ICE officials told The Intercept, came in direct response to the recent fatal ICE shootings in Texas and Maine and the botched arrest attempt by two plainclothes ICE officers on July 13 at Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas.

“It’s because of the incident that happened in Las Vegas,” said the ICE official.

Video of the Las Vegas airport incident, recorded by a bystander, shows two people in hooded sweatshirts tackling a man in the middle of a busy terminal. After passersby draw near, the officers abandoned the arrest but left the man handcuffed on one hand. The man tackled in the video, later identified as Phu Nguyen, a 57-year-old Australian national who allegedly overstayed his visa, was arrested by ICE the following day at Los Angeles International Airport.

“It blew all our minds,” the ICE official said. “It didn’t look professional. They didn’t present a badge when they initiated.”

The new ICE dress code policy mandates that all arresting officers must clearly display an ICE badge while conducting arrests.

“During low-visibility operations, the ICE badge must remain visible at the time of arrest.” the policy says.

Another ICE official, who also cited the Las Vegas airport incident, said a wave of new ICE recruits and relaxed training standards had contributed to the lack of professionalism.

“What an embarrassment the Vegas video was,” said the second ICE official, who also requested anonymity. “Those two fucking clowns should’ve been immediately fired. Half these fucking new DOs” — deportation officers — “don’t even know the basics of immigration law or how to process an alien. They hired a bunch of fucking clowns and they look sloppy as shit.”

In a statement to the press, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson blamed bystanders for the botched arrest in Vegas.

“As officers attempted to arrest Nguyen, a crowd of anti-ICE agitators surrounded officers,” the statement said. “To de-escalate the situation and for officer safety, officers did not proceed with the arrest.”

According to ICE officials who spoke to The Intercept, the new dress code could be the first step toward a major shift in ICE’s long-standing status as a plainclothes agency.

“I would say the writing’s on the wall,” said one ICE official. “I wouldn’t be surprised if we go to a uniformed agency.”

The post ICE Mandates Dress Code After Killings and Botched Arrest appeared first on The Intercept.

Related

How ICE Arrests Went Quiet — and Got Even More Deadly

After an ICE officer shot and killed a 25-year-old Colombian national this week in Biddeford, Maine, Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin reportedly told Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, that officers involved in the shooting were not wearing body cameras.

Yet the ICE officials who spoke with The Intercept, all of whom requested anonymity to protect their livelihoods, identified cameras among the equipment worn by two ICE officers nearby in the immediate aftermath of the shooting.

The body-worn devices were not designed solely to capture evidential video, and are used primarily as remote microphones for ICE officers’ radio communications. (ICE did not respond to a request for comment.)

ICE officials who spoke to The Intercept identified the accessories worn by ICE officers on the scene of the Maine shooting as Motorola SVX Video Remote Speaker Microphones, a wireless radio mic with one other important feature: a camera. (Motorola did not respond to a request to comment.)

Although the Motorola SVX worn by ICE officers are designed to work as body cameras, the ICE official said the function isn’t used.

“They have multiple functionalities,” one ICE official who identified the Motorola SVX at the scene in Maine told The Intercept. “However, we are currently only using them as mics because of the AXON contract.”

The Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency, purchases body-worn cameras through a contract with Axon, a law enforcement tech firm. (Axon did not respond to a request for comment.)

Another ICE official showed The Intercept where, on their own Motorola SVX, a cover can be attached to the top of the device where the camera lens is, comparing it to the tech worn by officers at the Maine shooting scene.

“This is where the cover clips over the camera lens,” the second ICE officer said. “Since the cameras don’t work they just leave the cover on.”

The SVX mics worn by ICE are designed to record internally, capable of storing over 100 hours of standard-definition video, according to Motorola promotional materials and a technical support line. The video-recording function on the SVX mic, however, requires a subscription.

No Bodycam Footage

Motorola is a giant in the world of government law enforcement and security work.

Related

Two Companies Fight to Corner the Police Body Camera Market

According to a document published on the Department of Homeland Security’s website, ICE alone expects to spend more than $100 million on a six-year contract for Motorola’s line of APX Next All-Band Smart Radios and accessories, which would include the SVX mic.

The deadly ICE shooting of Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Maine stoked national outrage, coming on the heels of another fatal ICE shooting of Mexican immigrant Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston.

Neither man, according to news reports, had been the intended targets of the ICE arrest teams. And neither man’s death was captured by federal officers’ body-worn cameras, according to official reports.

Shortly after the Maine shooting, ICE ordered its officers in the field to halt nearly all traffic stops. After reports of the order emerged and Trump complained, border czar Tom Homan pivoted to say the ICE vehicle stops would continue.

Widely known today for its body cams, Axon used to be called Taser, named for the stun gun that built its reputation and which it still carries. The company does brisk business with ICE.

Last month, presidential financial disclosures raised eyebrows over an ICE public request for a $220 million stun gun contract that appeared tailor-made for Axon’s Tasers. Only two weeks before the request for information went out, according to the disclosures, President Donald Trump purchased as much as $5 million in shares from Axon.

During Trump’s winter immigration crackdown in Minnesota, ICE announced that it would be purchasing and distributing body cameras to every arrest team in the agency.

After the deaths of Durán Guerrero and Salgado Araujo over past week, however, the Trump administration said the distribution was incomplete.

“The body cameras have been ordered,” Homan, Trump’s border czar, said in a press conference. “There’s a deployment schedule on the books.”

The Homeland Security Department said that half of ICE field offices already had body-worn cameras and the rest were expected to get them in the next two months.

The new body cameras were funded through a $20 million congressional appropriation to expand ICE’s camera program, which includes contracts with Axon for the devices.

The post ICE Officers at Maine Shooting Scene Were Wearing Body Cameras. They Were Not Turned On. appeared first on The Intercept.

The directive, handed down in at least three of ICE’s administrative regions Monday and effective immediately, came after a pair of killings in Texas and Maine by ICE agents that involved attempts to stop cars.

The ICE officers who spoke with The Intercept, who asked for anonymity to discuss internal orders, said the shift was meant to mitigate the chances of shootings like the ones that sparked outrage by taking the lives of two immigrants over the past week.

“We have been told to either grab them before they leave their parking spot, or follow them and arrest them where they stop (ie a gas station or place of work) to avoid these situations,” said an ICE official from the South.

“This shit isn’t normal,” the official said. “Whatever these chucklefucks did in Maine and Houston is serious.”

ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The five officials who spoke to The Intercept about the directive all hail from ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division, which carries out most of the federal government’s street immigration arrests. (ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations, the agency’s criminal investigative arm, did not receive a directive about vehicle stops, according to two special agents.)

The directive to ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations, which was first reported by the New York Times, didn’t come down as written orders, two of the ICE officials told The Intercept.

Instead, said one of the ICE officials who works in the Mountain West region, the order came down through field office directors to avoid red tape associated with putting an official policy in place.

Related

Chicago Woman Shot by Border Patrol Reacts to Minneapolis ICE Killing: “Of Course This Happened”

Along with street arrests, vehicle stops had become go-to tactic for ICE in the second Trump administration, with ramped-up enforcement that has included crackdowns on large cities like Minneapolis. Under past administrations, including President Donald Trump’s first term, ICE relied mostly on transfers from local jails and prisons to satisfy its enforcement priorities.

The vehicle stops also contributed to a recent explosion of immigrant detentions, with ICE announcing roughly 10,000 arrests over a five-day period in late June 2026.

Ending the vehicle stops, said the ICE official based in the South, “definitely hinders enforcement.”

Killings in Vehicle Stops

In a recent period of less than a week, Mexican national Lorenzo Salgado Araujo was shot and killed by ICE officers in Houston and Colombian national Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero was shot and killed in Biddeford, Maine.

Details surrounding the shootings are still emerging, but Department of Homeland Security officials have said that neither Salgado Araujo nor Durán Guerrero were the intended targets of the ICE enforcement operations that claimed their lives. The officers involved in the shootings were not wearing body cameras in either case.

The killings sparked public outrage and probes at both the state and local levels.

Related

ICE Drives Unmarked Cars. This Public Database Tracks Their License Plates.

In addition to investigations by FBI and the Homeland Security Department’s Office of the Inspector General, Maine’s attorney general and the attorney general in Harris County, Texas, which includes Houston, launched investigations. Local police departments in both Maine and Texas are assisting with the investigations.

There are few precedents for ICE to cut off its enforcement division agencywide from using vehicle stops to make apprehensions.

As federal agents surged into mostly Democratic major cities, confrontations between ICE and demonstrators, activists, and immigrants led to violence — especially after the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti during ICE’s Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis over the winter.

The outrage over the shootings led to operational guidance emphasizing de-escalation and reducing confrontations during field operations, with several field offices even briefly suspending proactive street enforcement or vehicle-stop tactics following orders of ICE upper management.

Since Operation Metro Surge’s end in mid-February, ICE has focused on smaller, decentralized “at-large” enforcement operations under the leadership of new Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, a strategy that has allowed ICE to, until recently, operate with a lower profile, while maintaining previous arrest quotas.

The post ICE Orders an End to Vehicle Stops After Deadly Shootings by Federal Agents appeared first on The Intercept.

The raid, which saw federal agents deploying flash-bang grenades and using armored vehicles, was authorized by a federal search warrant related to an ongoing federal investigation into an alleged bomb plot at a June 14 Ultimate Fighting Championship event at the White House. The Justice Department characterized the case as an assassination plot against high-ranking officials using of explosive drones and sniper rifles.

The search warrant in Midlothian was issued as part of federal agents’ search for evidence of several potential charges, including conspiracy to commit murder, according to documents viewed by The Intercept.

The subject of the raid in Texas claimed that, in the days after the raid, federal agents returned to her home and offered her up to $200,000 to act as an informant for federal law enforcement. The resident, “Doberman,” who asked only to be identified only by her social media handle because of ongoing threats to her safety, has not been indicted on any charges. Doberman also said she was visited by agents from the FBI and Secret Service weeks before the raid.

The raid was part of a sweeping effort by the federal government and far-right media figures to spin up a vast far-left conspiracy casting antifascist activists as well-organized extremists who pose a threat to public safety.

Related

Trump’s Communist Boogeyman Playbook: Charging Protesters as Terrorists

President Donald Trump has made attacks on antifascist activists a centerpiece of his domestic crackdown on the left, designating antifa a terrorist organization and issuing directives like the National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 to focus resources on going after left-wing activists.

The crackdown recently helped spur centuries’ worth of combined prison sentences for a clutch of left-wing activists who launched a protest at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Prairieland Detention Facility, just a 20-minutes drive from Midlothian.

First Amendment advocates said the Midlothian raid fit into the widespread pattern of aggressive policing tactics being used against the left, including other attempts to flip activists.

“They are stress-testing the limits of NSPM-7, both by trying to cast various groups or voluntary associations that are protected by the First Amendment as being antifa, or as falling within the ambit of this sort of very broad definition of terrorism,” said Moira Meltzer-Cohen, a New York-based attorney who represents defendants in federal cases but is not working on the Midlothian raid. “We see that with this thing in North Texas, we saw that in Prairieland, and we’re seeing that in Minneapolis” — a reference to the recent indictments of 15 anti-ICE activists in Minnesota.

Doberman is a well-known activist in north Texas left-wing circles. She has been filmed armed at protests and is a member of a group known as the Community Liberation Brigade.

In the days before the raid, a Dallas Express op-ed by a local right-wing activist identified Doberman as a leader of the Community Liberation Brigade. The article suggested that Doberman had ties to the Pairieland defendants — a case that saw the government’s first successful prosecution under Trump’s directives against antifa. It’s unclear what role, if any, the Dallas Express op-ed played in the raid.

Related

The FBI Paid a Violent Felon to Infiltrate Denver’s Racial Justice Movement

Doberman, who told The Intercept she doesn’t have any ties to the Prairieland defendants, said she was questioned about the case during the raid. Authorities also asked Doberman about people named in recent federal indictments surrounding the UFC plot, where the most serious charges included conspiracy to commit murder — the same charge that appeared on the search warrant for Doberman’s home.

Because of the ongoing investigation, the Secret Service directed questions about Doberman’s case to the Justice Department. The Department of Homeland Security referred questions to the FBI. Neither the Justice Department nor the FBI immediately responded to requests for comment.

“Rifles Trained Directly at Me”

Two weeks before the Midlothian raid, federal agents tried to question Doberman about the alleged plot to attack the UFC 250 event, an extravagant mixed martial arts performance hosted by the White House as part of its celebrations of 250 years of American independence.

Two men who identified themselves as federal agents from the FBI and Secret Service arrived at Doberman’s door, according to video footage of the encounter obtained by The Intercept.

In the footage, one of the agents assures Doberman that she is “not in trouble” and asks her if she knows anything about an impending attack. Doberman replies that she doesn’t know anything about any plot. When asked if she plans to travel to Washington, she says she is “broke as fuck.” Shortly after, Doberman declined to answer further questions and instructs the agents to come back with a warrant.

Two weeks later — just days after the Dallas Express piece published — federal agents arrived during the early morning hours in Bearcat armored vehicles. They broke down Doberman’s door in a “no-knock” raid, a controversial tactic that has led to the deaths of innocent people.

“I was woken up by a loud crack, a loud bang,” Doberman told The Intercept in her first media interview since the raid. “I shot up and looked directly to my door, where I was then briefly blinded by a very fucking bright flash of light. After I got my vision back, I saw three rifles trained directly at me.”

Officers placed Doberman in handcuffs, she said, and led her to a local police cruiser parked nearby. Doberman, who is transgender, was denied the opportunity to put on clothes, even after being detained and handcuffed by agents. She was then forced outside in her underwear.

“I’m a trans woman — so, trans woman in a very red state, in a very red city, in feminine underwear. Not the best look,” she said. 

According to a seizure receipt viewed by the The Intercept, Doberman’s cellphone was the only item taken during the raid.

In the days after the raid, another FBI agent, whom Doberman said did not give their name, returned her cellphone.

During the exchange, Doberman said, the agent offered her hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a confidential informant. 

“He said, ‘Hey, we know that you’re struggling financially. We know that the people you hold dear are struggling financially. We are willing to offer monetary gain if you can give us any information on bad actors,’” she recalled.

“The agent said $100,000 to $200,000, which is a life-changing amount,” Doberman said.

Doberman said she told the agent that she would think about the offer. In an interview with The Intercept, however, she said she had no intention of accepting.

Shortly after the offer was made, Doberman spoke to Xavier de Janon, an attorney with the National Lawyers Guild who confirmed the account to The Intercept. De Janon says that proposals like the one received by Doberman could be indicative of the larger network of resources being poured into federal investigations under Trump’s NSPM-7 directive.

“Getting money in exchange for information isn’t new for this government. It’s actually pretty old. I think what is a bit surprising is the amount,” he said. “These cash payouts are really large and probably reflect the very large budgets that these federal agencies have under Trump.”

De Janon said large financial offers to potential collaborators raise questions about the validity of information provided by informants.

Related

FBI Counterterrorism Informant Spent a Decade Committing Fraud

“Even without cash payments, federal informants and state-level informants, too, are pressured so much to give out information that they start behaving in ways that creates criminal situations and questionable moments that wouldn’t have happened to begin with,” he said.

Informant programs have been riddled with issues and allegations that the government targets and takes advantage of vulnerable people, and alleged criminal plots are frequently conceived and proposed by the informants themselves.

For her part, Doberman was rattled by the raid. Though she was not accused of any crimes, the violent raid left her in a persistent state of anxiety. “I’ve been working on my PTSD for years,” she said. “It’s gotten so much worse. And every night now, constant nightmares.”

The post FBI Raided Texas Activist’s House — Then Offered Her $200,000 to Become Antifa Informant appeared first on The Intercept.

Editor’s note: This article contains graphic descriptions of sexual violence.

The months after the October 7, 2023, attacks saw a wave of questionable mainstream news stories about alleged sexual assault in Hamas’s attacks that day on Israel.

It would be years before the American press began to deal with sex crimes against Palestinians imprisoned by Israel as part of its brutal occupation.

It’s a reckoning that is long overdue.

Sexual violence by Israeli forces against Palestinians in detention is both a systematic and a decades-old practice — a well understood dynamic that is being put in the spotlight this week in a new report from the Palestinian Feminist Collective, a group of Palestinian and Arab feminist researchers and organizers.

The extensive 188-page report, parts of which were shared with The Intercept in advance of publication, situates recent, high-profile news stories detailing the rape and sexual assault of Palestinians in Israeli detention as part of “a wider system of sexualized and gendered violence spanning detention, warfare, surveillance, reproductive destruction, family separation, domicide, and the desecration of Palestinian bodies” over decades.

The report, “A Predatory State: Israeli Systemic Sexualized and Gendered Violence Against Palestinians,” brings together witness and survivor testimonies; news coverage; academic research; United Nations reports; and findings from human rights groups, like the Gaza-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, and Israel-based B’Tselem; along with declassified Israeli archival material.

A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces denied allegations of mistreatment of Palestinians in detention and said the military could not comment on specific cases without more information about the detainees.

“The IDF rejects allegations concerning the systematic abuse of detainees, including allegations of stripping detainees of their clothes and sexually assaulting detainees during interrogations in detention facilities under its responsibility,” the spokesperson said in a statement to The Intercept. “Allegations of misconduct by IDF soldiers are examined and handled accordingly. In appropriate cases, criminal investigations are opened by the Military Police.”

The United Nations added Israel in May to a blacklist of countries found to be committing sexual violence in war zones, citing 31 cases of sexual violence perpetrated in the last two years by Israeli forces against Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The new Palestinian Feminist Collective report underlines that the U.N.’s findings are merely the tip of the iceberg.

Related

The Story Behind the New York Times October 7 Exposé

The compilation of harrowing details from a multiplicity of sources offers a chilling rebuke to those who have sought to discredit Palestinian victims’ claims or dismiss cases of sexual assault and rape perpetrated by Israeli forces as rare aberrations.

Crushed testicles, genital beatings, rapes of detainees including children and the elderly — the report, like a number of the previous human rights reports it draws from, shows that such abuse is, according to the authors, “institutional practice rather than individual misconduct.”

Rape by Trained Dogs

A section of the report shared with The Intercept includes the detailed testimonies of multiple released Palestinian prisoners. A 42-year-old woman arrested in Gaza while going through an Israeli military checkpoint in November 2024, for example, described being stripped, blindfolded, and handcuffed to a metal table and raped vaginally and anally by Israeli soldiers.

Related

YouTube Quietly Erased More Than 700 Videos Documenting Israeli Human Rights Violations

“I felt a penis penetrating my anus and a man raping me,” the woman said, in testimony originally collected by the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights. “I started screaming, and they beat me on my back and head while I was blindfolded. I felt the man who was raping me ejaculate inside my anus.”

She then recounted subsequent vaginal rapes.

A 41-year-old Palestinian father arrested at Kamal Adwan Hospital in December 2023 and held for 22 months in Israeli prison reported, “One of the soldiers raped me by violently inserting a wooden stick into my anus. After about a minute he removed it and then inserted it again more forcefully.”

Other accounts from boys and men detail anal rape by soldiers and prison guards using carrots, bottles, batons, and other sharp objects.

The report also includes multiple accounts claiming the use of trained dogs as sexual threats and tools of direct sexual violence.

When the New York Times’s Nicholas Kristof last month reported on widespread and extreme sexual torture of Palestinians in Israeli detention, including the use of trained dogs to rape detainees, the backlash from Israeli authorities and pro-Israel mouthpieces was as swift as it was predictable.

The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs slammed the article as “one of the worst blood libels ever to appear in the modern press” — a typical retort that deems any criticism of Israeli brutality to be antisemitic. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threatened to sue the Times for defamation. No such lawsuit has materialized, bound as it would be to fail and risk a court process revealing further horrors perpetrated by Israeli forces.

Related

The Media Calls Israeli Captives “Hostages” and Palestinians “Prisoners”

Meanwhile, for Palestinians and advocates of Palestinian liberation, Kristof’s report was perhaps only surprising for its presence in the New York Times. Reports of rape, sexual violence, and sexual humiliation in Israeli custody have been widespread well established for years.

Pro-Israel media outlets like Bari Weiss’s The Free Press attempted to discredit and debunk the testimonies in Kristof’s article, particularly those from formerly detained Palestinians who alleged that trained dogs were used to rape prisoners. Such abuse was impossible, the critics claimed — despite the fact that, according to survivors, Augusto Pinochet’s regime in Chile, as well as Nazi prison commander Klaus Barbie, reportedly used dogs to rape and sexually torture prisoners.

The “Predatory State” report lists 10 specific incidents of rape or severe sexual assault involving trained dogs, as reported to human rights groups by victims themselves or firsthand witnesses.

“The shock came when they forced me to lie down, and a dog climbed on top of me and tried to insert its penis into me,” one detainee testified, in a report first compiled by Euro-Med and cited by the Palestinian Feminist Collective. “At first, I did not understand what was happening, but then I realised that I was being raped.”

“They unleashed police dogs on us again, allowing them to tear into our flesh,” a 48-year-old man arrested at Al Shifa Hospital in Gaza told the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights in further testimony cited by the Palestinian Feminist Collective. He reported that one dog attacked a fellow detainee and “started mauling his genitals (penis). He bled to death in my arms.”

“Violence Across Decades”

The report authors note that “sexual torture has often preceded the deaths of detainees and prisoners and therefore must be considered part and parcel of the crime of genocide waged against the Palestinian people.”

This statement covers more than just Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza: The Palestinian Feminist Collective report is explicit in including accounts of sexual violence reportedly carried out by soldiers as well as settlers in the West Bank.

“They zip-tied my penis, tightened it and then dragged me all around the village,” a Palestinian man, Qusai Abu-al Kebash, told B’Tselem of a reported assault at the hands of settlers in his West Bank village earlier this year.

In response to credible claims of sexual assault, particularly in Israel’s Sde Teiman military prison, Israel’s defenders have attempted to downplay incidents as aberrations or outliers in the fog of war.

“This is a story about how Israel was institutionally overwhelmed by events after October 7,” Jonathan Conricus, a former Israeli military spokesperson, now fellow at the neoconservative think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington, told The Free Press.

He was responding to an incident caught on video of Israeli soldiers appearing to beat and brutally sodomize a Palestinian prisoner with a knife. Conricus blamed “reservists without the right training” who “were called up to be prison guards” — but rejected any claims of systematic abuse.

All charges were dropped against the soldiers accused of sexually assaulting the detainee. Numerous Israeli lawmakers, including far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, condemned the military for even attempting to charge the soldiers.

Reports like the Palestinian Feminist Collective’s further give the lie to excuses like Conricus’s.

“The Sde Teiman footage should have shattered the fiction that Palestinian testimony is unproven until Israeli perpetrators record themselves,” legal scholar and human rights attorney Noura Erakat told The Intercept. “Still the debate focuses on whether individual soldiers received direct orders, rather than how a state has sanctioned, protected, and repeated this violence across decades.”

Related

Video of Sexual Abuse at Israeli Prison Is Just Latest Evidence Sde Teiman Is a Torture Site

In a statement shared with The Intercept, Loubna Qutami, a member of the Palestinian Feminist Collective, said, “This report names what Palestinians have long known and what the world has too often refused to hear: Israel’s sexualized and gendered violence against Palestinians is systemic, historical, and constitutive of Israeli colonial rule.”

According to Igal Dotan, an Israeli attorney cited in the Palestinian Feminist Collective’s report, “The situation before the war was very bad, but it is not comparable to what happened in Israeli prisons after October 7.”

Dotan’s clients include a “severely disabled” 14-year-old Palestinian boy, diagnosed with autism, who was, the report notes, “reportedly sexually, physically, and psychologically assaulted while in detention.”

Before October 7

The Palestinian Feminist Collective refuses to begin its history of sexual and gendered violence on October 7. The report includes testimonies of sexualized violence gathered from oral histories, declassified archives and historical documents, dating back to the Nakba in 1948, the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from what are today’s Israel’s internationally recognized borders.

The long history of systematic displacement and dehumanization of Palestinians is run through with sexualized violence — as is common in situations of oppressive, militarized violence and population control.

“‘A Predatory State’ documents how sexual torture is a technology of Israeli rule: a means of terrorizing Palestinians and advancing a project of destruction,” Erakat told The Intercept. “Accountability must go beyond a handful of soldiers to reach and tear down the legal, military and political structures that command and then protect these crimes.”

With the genocide in Gaza ongoing and Israeli expansionist violence continuing in the West Bank, Lebanon, and Syria, such accountability seems beyond our current horizons of expectation.

More evidence of the sort compiled by the Palestinian Feminist Collective is unlikely to change that; it is not for lack of evidence that Israeli forces continue to carry out war crimes with impunity.

The urgency is to act on the ample evidence we have.

“The report is a call upon all responsible citizens to stay united,” said Francesca Albanese, U.N. special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, in a statement on the Palestinian Feminist Collective report, “not just to end genocide, but to fight once and for all this testosteronic model of power that roots and grows through subjugation and repression.”

Update: July 2, 2026
This story has been updated to include a statement from the Israeli military received after publication.

The post How to Show That Israel’s Sexual Violence Against Palestinians Is Systemic — and Has Gone on for Decades appeared first on The Intercept.

The far-right Supreme Court majority marked the final day of Pride month with an anti-trans decision upholding state bans on trans girls from playing girls’ sports. That the ruling from the right-wing court had been long expected made it no less horrendous.

With a 6–3 judgment applying to two cases, one from Idaho and one from West Virginia, the court gave states nationwide carte blanche to discriminate against trans girls who want to play on teams consistent with their gender. The ruling does not constitute a nationwide ban on trans athletes, and trans girls can continue to compete in states without bans. Twenty-seven states currently have bans on the books against trans girl athletes. All those bans — and whatever new ones come into place — can stay in place.

One of the cases was just about a single girl seeking to participate in her school sports.

Pointing to the absurdity, the legal scholar and trans rights advocate Alejandra Caraballo wrote on Bluesky, “Just absolutely insane to me how many millions were spent and the massive political and legal effort exhausted just so a state can ban a single trans girl from playing sports with her friends in school.”

This was always the plan for the anti-trans zealots who saw girls’ sports as an easy entry point from which to decimate trans people’s civil rights protections. It’s no surprise then that the consequences of the rulings threaten to go far beyond school and college athletics.

Related

The Right-Wing Campaign to Purge Women From Women’s Sports

As multiple critics of anti-trans sports bans stress, efforts to exclude trans athletes also open the door to the abuse and harassment of any girls alleged to appear insufficiently feminine. Genital inspection and genetic testing requirements are the next logical steps — steps that have already been proposed by Republicans in several states.

The Supreme Court majority argued that the anti-trans bans do not violate either Title IX, the landmark civil rights law that proscribes sex-based discrimination, or constitutional guarantees of equal protection.

Even the dissenting liberal justices ceded vital ground in the moral struggle for trans rights. Though they sided with the trans students’ claims under the equal protection clause, they agreed with the conservatives that trans-exclusionary, sex-segregated school sports bans did not violate Title IX’s prohibitions in schools.

The liberal stance paints a telling picture of the decimated state of trans rights. The far right has been able to pursue its trans-eliminationist agenda to an extraordinary degree in part because liberals and even some leftists have been willing to throw trans people under the bus, if not fully align with fascistic anti-trans fearmongering.

The idea that trans girls pose a threat or danger to cisgender girls playing sports remains a myth without any evidence or grounding, conjured from whole cloth by anti-trans ideologues looking for a wedge issue to pass overreaching anti-trans laws.

Related

An Anti-Trans Bathroom Bill With a Cruel New Twist

Today, the strategies dreamt up by well-funded think tanks and advocacy groups like the rabidly anti-trans Alliance Defending Freedom have again paid off: According to the highest court in the land, trans exclusion in sex-segregated sports does not violate civil rights.

Even more anti-trans bathroom bans and other policies of exclusion from public life will no doubt follow.

Anti-Trans Eliminationism

The West Virginia case was brought by Becky Pepper-Jackson, a high school student who has identified as a girl since she was 8 years old, takes puberty blockers, has a birth certificate recognizing her as female, and just wanted to compete on the athletics team with other girls.

Writing the majority opinion upholding the ban against her participation, Justice Brett Kavanaugh described trans girls and women and “biological males.”

Related

DOJ Escalates War on Trans Youth Healthcare With Criminal Subpoenas

Earlier this week, anticipating the court’s ruling, the American Civil Liberties Union’s Chase Strangio wrote, “I hope that everyone who, like me, loves sports will pause to think about what it means to exile a group of young people from the social, cultural, and emotional experience of being part of a team.”

The legal arguments for permitting anti-trans discrimination are by now familiar: The bans are not discriminatory, anti-trans bigots say, because they apply equally to those they deem biologically male and those they deem biologically female.

The fact that anti-trans discrimination is unavoidably a matter of sex-based discrimination is neatly avoided in a way that erases the sex-based reality of trans people from existence. Little matter that no current state laws are on the books relating to boys’ sports.

It evidently matters even less to the Supreme Court justices that sex and gender do not exist in the sharp binary that sports bans and other anti-trans policies demand.

In an unnecessary and cruel concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas went out of his way to note, “Men and boys with gender dysphoria are not women or girls, even if they believe they are.”

This tells us all we need to know about the right’s designs on trans existence, reflecting an anti-trans eliminationist ideology that flies in the face of medical consensus and empirical evidence.

As New York Times Magazine writer Ruth Padawer noted in an extensive 2016 feature on the practice of so-called “sex-testing” in sports, endocrinologists and geneticists have for decades challenged the delineations and exclusions such tests purports to achieve.

“Relying on science to arbitrate the male-female divide in sports is fruitless, they said, because science could not draw a line that nature itself refused to draw,” Padawer wrote.

Not that this has mattered to the sports regulators and gender-conformity zealots, committed as they are to the brutal racist legacy of gender policing, and desperately pushing to exclude trans people from public life.

“No student-athlete on either side of the issue, whether a biological female or transgender, deserves to be ostracized or vilified,” Kavanaugh had the audacity to say at the end of his opinion, upholding laws designed precisely to ostracize and vilify trans children.

The post Even the Liberal Supreme Court Justices Ceded Ground in the Fight for Trans Existence appeared first on The Intercept.

Donald Trump’s Department of Justice unsealed a federal indictment on Tuesday announcing hefty charges against 15 antifascist protesters for alleged actions taken in response to the brutal U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement surge in Minneapolis earlier this year.

The federal prosecutor in the case, Minnesota U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen, warned that more arrests and charges could follow.

Once again, prosecutors are throwing extreme and overreaching charges at activists in a scrambling effort to criminalize organized, collective opposition to Trump’s most violent policies.

The Minneapolis indictment exemplifies the Trump regime’s escalating strategy: Criminalize whole political movements with claims of collective liability and “conspiracy,” and treat typical acts of protest, constitutionally protected speech, association, and political identification as criminal acts.

Call it the spaghetti-against-the-wall approach.

Related

“Terrorist”: How ICE Weaponized 9/11’s Scarlet Letter

The indictment, Rosen said, is a part of Trump’s National Security Presidential Memorandum-7, or NSPM-7, initiative to target and prosecute leftists and antifascists as terrorists.

Minneapolis is not an incidental target for Trump’s Department of Justice. The city unleashed an oftentimes-inspiring response to the ICE crackdown: mutual aid organizing, confrontational protest, blockades, and strikes in response to brutality set a national example for how to fight back when federal agents descend on a city to kidnap our immigrant neighbors.

 “Conspiracy” to What?

The “conspiracy” in Minneapolis according to the government, involves purported antifa activists acting with the aim of impeding ICE operations and injuring officers. The indictment names no federal officer injuries, and only minor incidents of property damage — like a protester leaving a dent in an ICE vehicle from kicking it.

Among other pieces of evidence cited for the alleged criminal conspiracy are the most basic protest strategies, including self defense, nonviolent tactics, and First Amendment-protected activity.

Related

How Did the Feds Get Into Anti-ICE Activists’ Signal Messages?

The use of encrypted Signal chats to communicate protest plans is cited again and again in the indictment.

The government points out that organizers employed phrases like “become ungovernable” — a liberatory slogan so common it has spread to cute animal memes.

Demonstrators are accused of building and advocating for the use of shields at protests outside an ICE detention facility — the sort of protests in which, in Minneapolis and nationwide, federal agents have beaten people and fired rubber bullets and tear-gas canisters directly at heads and bodies.

The indictment even claims that people tracking ICE vehicles and alerting others to their presence, as agents prowled neighborhoods looking for immigrants to kidnap, is evidence of criminal conspiracy.

That certain protest activities may have indeed impeded ICE in its efforts to ruin lives and whiten the country do not make those activities illegal. Minor violations and property damage may involve unlawful acts, but do not constitute a mass criminal conspiracy.

Certainly, none of it calls for unleashing the vast resources of the federal government against protesters. The Trump administration, however, has made its own strategy clear: Make the stakes of association with political movements dangerously high.

And if the cases fall apart? Well then, movements have still been disrupted by lengthy, frightening, and expensive legal processes; antifascist political activity is chilled nonetheless.

Nationwide Assault on the Left

The Minneapolis charges do not stand alone. Recent weeks have seen an array of federal arrests, prosecutions and raids aimed at Trump’s favored targets: antifascists, Palestine solidarity activists, and voting rights advocates. 

Protesters who participated in the Atlanta-based Stop Cop City movement were hit last week with new federal charges under the NSPM-7 initiative — despite the fact that state cases against the movement for the very same incidents have consistently collapsed.

This month, the FBI also raided the homes of numerous Palestine-solidarity activists connected to the University of Michigan, with eight activists indicted on federal charges for allegedly aiming to “intimidate” university officials in protests aimed at ending the school’s investment in Israel’s genocide. FBI agents also raided the offices of an Ohio voter-registration organization, seizing employees’ phones and computers.

These are unabashed authoritarian tactics to chill whole swathes of political activity, the likes of which have a long history in this country, from multiple Red Scares and the deadly COINTELPRO effort last century against Black-liberation struggle, to the mass repression in response to Black Lives Matter uprisings in the last decade.

Such repression is not the sole preserve of Trump’s regime or Republican administrations, but we are witnessing an escalation in authoritarian efforts to criminalize political resistance.

The assault on the left has been, perversely, carried out in tandem with brazen attempts to lavish Trump’s violent far-right supporters with impunity, government jobs, and even financial rewards.

When the Spaghetti Sticks

Sometimes the spaghetti does stick. In March, a Texas jury found eight defendants guilty of terrorism charges for simply being present and wearing black at a protest in which a shooting took place outside ICE’s Prairieland Detention Facility in Northern Texas.

Related

Why We Have to Fight Back Against ICE Protesters’ Terror Convictions

The ruling was a major victory for the Justice Department — a case in a Trump-friendly jurisdiction, presided over by a Trump-appointee judge, the government’s flimsy effort won through.

In Spokane, Washington, three anti-ICE demonstrators were convicted in May on conspiracy charges for impeding federal officers in a case with similarities to the Minneapolis indictment. The original federal prosecutor in the Spokane case resigned instead of signing indictments against protesters; he did not believe they were warranted, he said. As is a pattern with Trump’s Department of Justice, however, the prosecutor’s successor moved forward with charges. Six people took plea deals, but three refused, wanting to defend their First Amendment rights in court. For typical protest activity, they were convicted of federal conspiracy charges. They face up to six years in prison.

Trump’s lawyers are not famed as skilled practitioners, but they know how to navigate an unjust system with brute force, willing to pour unending resources into crushing ideological enemies and symbols of resistance.

Just consider the extraordinary, ongoing efforts to deport Palestinian activists like Mohsen Madawi and Mahmoud Khalil, or a Salvadorian immigrant with legal status, Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

With an ideologically aligned far-right Supreme Court, Trump has ample reason to relentlessly push politically motivated cases, even those thrown out in lower courts.

Antidote to Collective Guilt

Cases like Prairieland threaten to set frightening precedents, but the lesson they offer is not that federal prosecutors have somehow now cracked the mass-prosecution code after other collective liability efforts had failed. Rather, the lesson is an older one, about solidarity.

Prosecutors in the Prairieland case relied heavily on the testimony of cooperating defendants, who testified against co-defendants as a part of plea deals. Without that testimony, the case would likely not have played out the same way.

“If people hadn’t cooperated in Prairieland, the case would’ve been extraordinarily different,” said Xavier T. de Janon, an attorney with the People’s Law Collective, which is representing Stop Cop City protesters in state-level cases. “Their entire prosecution was made possible by cooperators, and their investigation was successful because people cooperated very quickly.”

De Janon nonetheless stressed that, while the federal government was successful in the Prairieland trial, the Justice Department has accrued “hundreds of failures.”

In Stop Cop City cases so far, as was the case in the mass federal prosecution against the so-called J20 protesters at Trump’s first inauguration, no defendants aided prosecutors as cooperating witnesses. Efforts to isolate and criminalize “bad protesters” failed, and collective prosecutions, based on the flimsiest of claims, collapsed.

The response to ICE in Minneapolis and St. Paul was powerful precisely because residents blended tactics of mutual aid, community support, mass mobilization, and militancy. The worst possible response to the Justice Department’s sweeping indictment would be for certain elements of the movement to follow the government’s lead and demonize antifa associations and confrontational protest.

The government is escalating a well-worn strategy to disarticulate and defang movements.

“This is a fascist society, not just the government, but the fabric of society,” said de Janon. “People thinking, ‘If I go to a rally, I might be charged with a federal felony and spend 25 years in prison’ — it is outrageous.”

There is no denying that the Department of Justice is attempting to make the stakes devastatingly high for even minimal association with today’s liberatory movements, from antifascist immigrant defense to Palestine solidarity.

The price for failing to stand together against this fascist overreach is, however, far higher still.

The post Trump’s Spaghetti-Against-the-Wall Indictment Against ICE Protesters — and How to Fight It appeared first on The Intercept.

Chair Andrea Lucas, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, proposed to rescind the “Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964” rule on May 27. The rule has proved a barrier to her efforts to bring lawsuits on behalf of white men who say they were discriminated against at work — a barrier the rescission would get rid of.

The move, which was previously unreported, comes amid Lucas’s quest to characterize all employer efforts at diversity, equity, and inclusion as illegal race discrimination. The agency has filed lawsuits under her watch on behalf of white men at the New York Times and Coca-Cola, as well as investigations into Nike and Northwestern Mutual.

“This proposed rescission is part of this administration’s continued assault on equality for people of color and for women,” said former EEOC commissioner Jocelyn Samuels, who added that the change reflects Trump’s “solicitude for the fortunes of white men.”

The EEOC did not respond to a request for comment.

Rule to Fight Discrimination

The rule Lucas wants to do away with was crafted shortly after the EEOC was granted litigation authority in 1972.

Racial discrimination had been rampant throughout American workplaces, and some employers wanted to act to correct those long-standing discriminatory practices and racial disparities in an affirmative way.

Responding to the call, the EEOC crafted the rule to allow for very narrow circumstances in which it would be permissible for employers to take race into account in such efforts.

To take advantage of the rule, employers have to do an analysis showing they had shut out women or people of color for a long time — in other words, that there were “prior discriminatory practices.” Only then can a hiring process favor, say, Black candidates for a job position.

Related

Lawyer on EEOC’s New York Times Lawsuit Has History Battling Discrimination Against Men

The rule also gives employers some cover. Under the Civil Rights Act, employers can’t be held liable for taking action done in good faith to follow an EEOC regulation that was voted on by the commissioners, such as the affirmative action rule.

At least one large employer in the Trump EEOC’s sights has cited the rule. In its motion to dismiss the EEOC’s lawsuit, Coca-Cola referred to the agency’s affirmative action rule as proof that the agency has encouraged the very behavior it is now penalizing.

Samuels, the former EEOC commissioner, said Lucas’s move to get rid of the rule “could be part of an effort to remove a potential defense.”

Upheld at Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has found narrow approaches to affirmative action to be constitutional.

In the 1987 case Johnson v. Transportation Agency and the 1979 case United Steelworkers of America v. Weber, the court allowed employers, in the case of what it called a “manifest imbalance,” to temporarily take sex and race into account as part of plans to increase representation in particular jobs until women or people of color are commensurate with their share of the population.

Those decisions still stand.

“The law is set by the statute and the Supreme Court’s interpretation,” said Charlotte Burrows, a senior affiliated research scholar at New York University’s School of Law and a former EEOC chair. “The EEOC can’t change that.” 

That’s true despite the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College that struck down affirmative action in college admissions; that decision doesn’t apply to Title VII, which governs employment discrimination.

That doesn’t mean the administration isn’t trying to change the law.

After Lucas asked the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice to weigh in, the department released an opinion that says, among other things, that the agency’s affirmative action guidelines “run further into unconstitutional territory.”

Lucas may be trying to blur the lines between affirmative action and DEI policies, but “they are two very distinct things,” Burrows said.

Employers can engage in a variety of perfectly legal approaches to diversity, such as having DEI programs that don’t give women or people of color more advantages but simply open the doors to more people.

“It is a messaging exercise that is part of this administration’s campaign to brand any form of proactive conduct on the part of employers to anticipate, preempt, and address barriers to equal employment opportunity as unlawful, race-based decision-making that disadvantages white men,” Samuels said. “This administration’s pronouncements have had really damaging effects on proactive programs that were designed to identify and address potential barriers before they ripened into discrimination.”

Assault on DEI

Lucas recently scrapped the EEOC’s previous Strategic Enforcement Plan that included as a priority that the agency “support employer efforts to implement lawful and appropriate diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) practices.” It was crafted through a lengthy public process and was slated to remain in place through 2028.

Related

The Supreme Court Ends Multiracial Democracy as We Know It 

Instead, Lucas replaced the plan with a National Enforcement Plan that prioritizes going after DEI policies.

That move came after she had already directed agency officials to compile a list of cases in line with her own personal priorities, including “rooting out unlawful DEI-motivated race and sex discrimination,” and recorded a direct-to-camera video soliciting complaints from white men who feel they’ve been discriminated against at work.

Such cases have been accelerated through the agency’s processes, according to the New York Times, although staff have struggled to find complaints with merit.

The post Trump Admin Wants to Make It Easier for White Men to Sue for Discrimination appeared first on The Intercept.

Aerial imagery from Bint Jbeil, the seat of a municipality by the same name, shows what residents describe as burn marks at sites where official records were kept: civil registration files, land deeds, the paper infrastructure of a city’s legal existence.

With the notary gone, civil administration buildings bulldozed, and widespread destruction of homes that contained important personal documents, residents of the 36 villages of the Bint Jbeil district fear Israel’s total war has meant the destruction of all their records could permanently untether them from the homes they left behind when they fled under Israel’s evacuation orders.

That could make reconstruction after the war a nightmare. Bint Jbeil is Lebanon’s most southwestern district and the site of an Israeli campaign to evacuate entire populations before flattening their villages.

Some Lebanese even see it as an intentional tactic, part of Israel’s plan to empty out southern Lebanon and establish a buffer zone south of the Litani River Israeli leaders hope will put northern Israel out of the reach of Hezbollah’s rockets.

A mukhtar, or local official, confirmed to The Intercept that civil registry records had been digitized up to 2020 only, which offers limited reassurance. Much, however, remains unaccounted for. There are the last six years of records along with countless others that were not officially registered thanks to Lebanon’s notoriously chaotic bureaucracies and lax enforcement of registration rules, which are at times flouted to avoid paying taxes.

At the center of the crisis is Bint Jbeil’s Grand Serail, the old administrative building that houses land deeds for thousands of families across more than 20 villages in the district. Since Israeli forces moved in, Lebanese authorities have not been able to reach it, despite making efforts through the International Committee of the Red Cross with requests to the so-called Mechanism Committee that administers the Israeli-Lebanese ceasefire agreement.

“The Ministry of Interior has not yet been able to obtain the civil registry records for Bint Jbeil district, because the ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) has not received approval from the Mechanism Committee, which includes Israel, to enter the area, despite submitting a request to do so, in order to retrieve the records and transfer them to the Interior Ministry in Beirut,” a ministry spokesperson told The Intercept.

In a statement to an Intercept journalist in New York, a spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces declined to comment on the ICRC request and said the Lebanese group Hezbollah installs military assets in civilian areas.

Related

“I Want to Occupy”: Inside the Israeli Movement Pushing to Raze and Settle Southern Lebanon

“IDF directives permit the execution of clearing operations of structures used for military purposes, or when there is an essential operational necessity that justifies the full or partial demolition of a structure, in accordance with international law,” the statement said.

Destruction of civilian infrastructure in war is permissible by the laws of armed conflict only under narrow conditions, including that there be a military purpose and that the destruction be incidental to that military purpose.

Israel has flattened entire border towns in Lebanon. Experts have said the actions could constitute war crimes. Israel’s defense minister has previously said, “All houses in villages near the Lebanese border will be destroyed.”

The Grand Serail

Lebanese Finance Minister Yassine Jaber has been monitoring the Grand Serail by satellite.

“The walls are still standing mostly,” he told The Intercept, “but satellites don’t have keys to doors. We don’t know what happened inside. Were the records destroyed? Were they confiscated? The truth is still behind the front lines.”

For four weeks, Jaber ran what amounted to a crisis operations room: calls to Lebanese army command, coordination with military intelligence, repeated attempts to reach the Mechanism Committee — the multilateral body, including Israel, that monitors the its mid-April ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah — and appeals to UNIFIL, a United Nations force in Lebanon.

Their goal was to establish a corridor for a single journey to Bint Jbeil to recover the records.

“We tried everything,” Jaber said. “But Bint Jbeil today is a forbidden zone.”

Even the International Committee of the Red Cross has been unable to reach the records.

“The ICRC supported the Ministry of Interior in the evacuation of some civil registries in southern Lebanon at the beginning of the escalation,” said Sally Aoun, a spokesperson for ICRC Lebanon. “It was not possible to support the evacuation in Bint Jbeil because of ongoing hostilities.”

Jaber has had some successes in other areas where recovering records proved a challenge. When fighting reached Marjayoun, in Lebanon’s south, a team of civil servants went in under bombardment to get the civil records. The same thing happened in the Hasbaya distrcit.

Records from the southern city of Tyre are now held further up the coast in Sidon. The ministry also managed to evacuate files from Meiss El Jabal, Tibnine, Jbaa, Jouaya, and Nabatieh to Beirut. The Ministry of Interior in Beirut designated one day each week for each of the district registries to process civil documentation requests from displaced southerners.

Bint Jbeil remains the missing piece.

A Legal Trap

Lebanon does have a partial digital backup. The Finance Ministry holds electronic records for most registered properties in the south — a safety net for deeds that were formally logged. Thousands of transactions, however, were never registered.

Take the case of Ali Khreizat, known by the honorific Abu Hassan, who was displaced from his home in the village of Aitaroun in Bint Jbeil district. When the village faced Israeli bombardment, Abu Hassan left — but he left behind, in a drawer in the corner, a worn leather bag holding the bill of sale for the land he had lived on for five years.

Abu Hassan has made peace with the destruction of his house, but his far more profound worry is that he will never be able to prove he ever owned the property.

“The house I built stone by stone is dust now,” he said. “And the paper that says it was mine has gone to God.”

Even five years after moving in, his bill of sale never reached the land registry. Like many in Lebanon, Abu Hassan felt no particular rush to make bureaucratic deadlines — with the legendary inefficiencies of the Lebanese state offering little encouragement to do so. Now, he has heard from locals still in the area that even the notary’s office was destroyed, leaving diminishing hopes that a copy of his bill of sale exists anywhere.

With little enforcement of registration rules — whether the failure to do so is born of a lackadaisical ethos around bureaucratic paperwork or another reason, like wanting to dodge taxes — the problem of unregistered homes could leave people with no way to show they ever bought properties.

“This will create a major legal problem in proving ownership,” Jaber said. “Who owns what? Who protects the buyer’s right if the paper contract has disappeared?”

When Jaber took office in February 2025, he said, he found a registry system unfit for our modern, online era. He is now overseeing a full overhaul to digitize documents, a project he estimates will take six months to complete.

“A digital vault,” he said, “that no shell can reach and no fire can erase.”

Erasing the Map

The damage to land records in Bint Jbeil may run deeper than any individual document.

A key concern is the fate of Bint Jbeil’s land survey division. The technical unit holds the measurement records tying property lines to fixed geographic reference points, some dating to the French Mandate. Those points are connected, through a chain of historic surveys, to a reference coordinate in Homs, Syria, which has served as an anchor for Lebanon’s national cadastral map since the 1920s.

If those physical survey markers have been destroyed, said Riyad Al-Asaad, a civil engineer from the south, the question becomes: Who holds the GPS data that defines the boundaries? Lebanon or Israel?

The risk, Al-Asaad said, is that properties could be redrawn using Israeli measurements, a new geographic reality imposed on top of the old one.

Retired Lebanese Gen. Yaarab Sakhir sees this as part of a deliberate pattern — pointing to the Dahiya Doctrine, an Israeli military strategy named for the Beirut suburb where it was first implemented. The strategy calls for disproportionate attacks and targeting civilian infrastructure to create a high cost for Israel’s enemies, thereby creating a strong deterrent.

“Israel, when it applies the Dahiya Doctrine, as it did in Gaza, dividing it into a 55/45 split between an Israeli corridor and a Palestinian zone — it is doing the same thing now south of the Litani,” he said. “First, displacement and depopulation. Second, repeated strikes. Third, when areas fall militarily — Bint Jbeil first — they mine, demolish, bulldoze, and erase every feature to make these areas uninhabitable and prevent residents from returning.”

Official buildings, Sakhir said, become specific Israeli targets under this program.

“Israel focuses on civil registry offices and government serails,” he said. “The archive in Bint Jbeil’s serail covers not just the city but all the villages in the district.”

In its statement to an Intercept journalist in New York, the Israeli military denied targeting civilian infrastructure as such.

“The IDF,” the spokesperson said, “does not operate against the institutions of the State of Lebanon, the Lebanese Armed Forces, or Lebanese civilians, and rejects allegations of intentional harm to population registries, civil documents, land registry records, or administrative institutions, or any intent to disconnect residents from their land or harm their property rights.”

Ghosts in Their Own Country

The Interior Ministry’s internal figures name 190,000 people registered on the 2025 voter rolls for Bint Jbeil district. Add the generation of young people and children not yet on those rolls, and the number approaches a quarter million — all of them, in varying degrees, affected by the disappearance of their district’s official records.

Mohamed Sarhan, the mukhtar, or local leader, of Kfarkela, a village north of Bint Jbeil district, told The Intercept that residents and civil servants from the area reported that Israeli forces confiscated land registry records belonging to Bint Jbeil district. The fate of the civil registration records remains unclear. No one can say with certainty whether they were burned in the bombardment, taken, or simply lost in the chaos.

Dalia Boussi left Bint Jbeil under the sound of shelling. Like everyone else who fled last fall, she grabbed what she could. Boussi, a local video producer, is not in a panic; she brought her documents with her. She worries, however, about those who left without papers and about what the state must do when people return.

“There is complete destruction in the city center, as we can see in satellite images. When we return, we’ll have to redraw the borders of properties from scratch and determine what public land is and what’s private before reconstruction can begin,” Boussi said. “It’s important that the state and the relevant ministries show flexibility to ease things for citizens. Within each town and city, a crisis cell should be established specifically to follow up on property files and civil registration records, and to ensure every person has their official papers.”

She paused, then added: “Whatever happens, no one is going to lose their identity and no one is going to shave years off their age.” It was a lighthearted joke that belies an underlying reality: The people of Bint Jbeil still exist. The records may be gone, but the local residents know who they are and know what was theirs.

As Abu Hassan, the Aitaroun resident whose bill of sale was likely destroyed with his home, said, “Tomorrow’s battle won’t only be reconstruction. It will be a battle to prove we exist, with an archive that has been looted or set on fire.”

The post Civil Records for Hundreds of Thousands of Lebanese Could Be Wiped Out By Israel’s Total War appeared first on The Intercept.

The battle over “60 Minutes” can teach us a lot about how someone like CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss can wreak havoc on our media ecosystem. What has gotten a lot less attention, however, is the way the fight shows us how ill-equipped our media institutions already were when it comes to covering the Trump administration and MAGA-era politics.

The strife at the famous magazine television news program reached a fever pitch last week, when, during a staff meeting, longtime correspondent Scott Pelley unloaded on Nick Bilton, Weiss’s pick to run the show. Pelley was fired and took to the media to defend himself.

In a long interview with the New York Times over the weekend, Pelley talked about how Weiss had injected herself into the show’s editorial process.

The most revealing part of the discussion centered on Pelley’s own “60 Minutes” coverage of President Donald Trump’s surge of immigration enforcement officers into Minneapolis, the uprising against the invasion, and the subsequent crackdown that led to the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents.

Weiss’s role in the story was clearly toxic, but Pelley’s description of his own editorial process before Weiss got involved should also raise eyebrows.

“I felt it was very important to identify that the protesters themselves were being very aggressive and that they were half of these confrontations, and so I instructed my producers to find images in which we see the protesters acting aggressively,” Pelley said. “I thought we’d done a really good job with this.”

Pelley said they found evidence of protesters chest-bumping officers and hitting them with snowballs. The Minnesotans screamed at federal agents, Pelley said, and Pretti himself could be seen in one picture kicking out a police car taillight.

Striving for “Balance”

It’s a striking passage because it shows a revered journalist searching for a balanced narrative where there simply wasn’t one. If, after scouring hours and hours video to find evidence of “aggressive” protesters, all you can find is a chest bump and a thrown snowball, perhaps that’s a sign that your narrative that both sides were aggressive isn’t all that accurate.

Related

Amy Goodman on the Media’s “Access of Evil”

The truth is that the Minneapolis protesters were remarkably restrained in the face of egregious state violence and brutality. Yes, they were angry, loud, persistent, and rude. Demonstrators yelled insults at officers, blew whistles, and recorded with their cellphones. Yet that is all First Amendment-protected activity, no matter how many times Stephen Miller or Kristi Noem try to call it “terrorism.”

There’s a reason why the criminal charges against protesters have rarely held up in court: There was never any merit to them. Over and over, when it came time to present actual evidence, the government backed down, was reprimanded by a judge, or was rejected by a grand jury.

Likewise, Pretti’s confrontation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement days before he was killed has nothing to do with whether immigration officers were justified in killing him. Videos of the killing show that Pretti did nothing to justify being confronted, beaten, and shot 10 times.

Pelley’s remarks, by themselves, offer a lesson in the pitfalls of striving for “balance” under an administration that lies by default, lies when it doesn’t need to, and lies as a demonstration of its power.

Enter Weiss

Weiss, her billionaire Paramount bosses David and Larry Ellison, and the other tech billionaires who fund her publication the Free Press are all of the belief that the legacy media is overwhelmingly left of center.

They’re correct in a very broad sense. Generally, journalists who work for legacy outlets have personal politics that skew liberal, but it’s more complicated than that. Legacy media journalists also tend to be institutionalists and deferential to authority. That can make them defensive of power and often skeptical of those who challenge it.

As Pelley’s Minneapolis story shows, these journalists also want to be seen as fair, which can drive them to seek balance even when there is no credible “other side.” Contrary to Weiss and the MAGA world’s claims that legacy media is hopelessly blinkered, the more urgent problem right now is that even the most revered journalistic institutions aren’t equipped to sort through the firehose of lies and propaganda pouring out of Trump’s far-right movement.

Related

Bari Weiss Is Doing Exactly What She Was Installed at CBS to Do

Weiss’s role at both the Free Press and now at CBS News has been to make that task even more even more difficult. Her editorial feedback for Pelley, for instance, only served to muddy the waters.

“About four hours after our deadline,” Pelley told the New York Times, “Bari Weiss sends an email to my boss, Tanya Simon. Two of the things in the email include — can we make the protesters look more violent? Now, I’m paraphrasing. I don’t have the quote, but that’s what was communicated to me. And the other thing: Renee Good’s car. You need to describe her as driving toward the officer.”

Weiss’s editorial advice to Pelley wasn’t about clearer or fairer or more contextual journalism. She was asking for propaganda.

If Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who shot Good, reasonably feared for his life, he was legally justified in killing Good. And if Good was driving toward him, that bolsters his claim to have reasonably feared for his life.

The problem is that there’s no evidence that she was. In fact, CBS News did its own analysis of the video footage, which clearly demonstrated that Good’s wheels were pointed away from Ross — as did several other outlets. As television producer Tim Carvell pointed out, however, CBS’s analysis never aired on the network; it was relegated to YouTube.

Weiss’s alleged directive also glosses over how Ross and his fellow agents also created the very volatility they claimed justified his use of lethal force. And it ignores how the agents violated multiple Department of Homeland Security policies during the encounter — for example, by putting themselves in front of Good’s car, and by rushing toward her door.

At the time of Good’s death, the administration and its supporters had also been pushing a much more destructive and conspiratorial narrative: that a cabal of far-left donors had been training protesters and ICE watchers to weaponize their cars against immigration officers. Not only was there zero evidence for this, it provided cover for what the agents themselves were doing. Video and witness accounts repeatedly showed agents ramming and boxing people in with their vehicles, then falsely claiming they were the victims who had been rammed. Slandering Good just reinforced the narrative.

If Weiss had really wanted to provide relevant context for Good’s death, there were plenty of places to look. Perhaps Good feared for her safety because immigration officers surging into liberal cities were pulling people out of their cars and beating them. Or maybe it was relevant that Border Patrol officers have a long history of improperly placing themselves in front of moving vehicles, then using that as justification to fire at those vehicles.

Weiss didn’t demand any of that. For her, balance and nuance meant telling Pelley to make his story more palatable to MAGA.

Crisis of Disinformation

We now live in an era in which one of the two major parties has given itself over to wild conspiracy theorists, white nationalists, and the whims and biases of a disturbed billionaire.

Related

Another Assassination Attempt, More Fertilizer for Conspiracy Theories

The mere fact that Trump leads that party means the airwaves are already polluted with nonsense like whether windmills cause cancer, whether immigrants are eating neighborhood pets, and whether developing countries are “emptying their insane asylums” into the U.S.

The fact that half the Congress, about 40 percent of the public, and the entire executive branch now subscribe to anti-vaccine bullshit, election denialism, and “great replacement theory” doesn’t make any of those claims legitimate. So long as a good portion of the country is in the throes of MAGA, however, there will be ongoing pressure to platform even the looniest claims out of a sense of fairness and representation. Weiss isn’t the cause of all of this, but she is an accelerant.

Pelley told the New York Times that he refused to make Weiss’s changes, and that his piece aired without them. That may be encouraging, except that not everyone has the institutional stature of Scott Pelley to insulate themselves from reprisals — not even Scott Pelley, it turns out.

Related

Kash Patel Is Using MAGA’s Favorite Tool to Muzzle the Free Press

The request itself, however, testifies to a disinformation crisis that’s only going to get worse, particularly as Weiss starts replacing departed staff with her own people and Trump keeps leaning on media outlets.

Another way it could get worse is if media honchos like those who own CBS keep gaining clout. Weiss’s own bosses, for example, have now set their sights on CNN — with Weiss reportedly expected to lead editorial at both news operations.

The post Scott Pelley Shows How Legacy Media Got It Wrong — Before Bari Weiss Made It Worse appeared first on The Intercept.

The man, Akram Mahmoud Omar, 77, lived in the U.S. for 50 years until ICE abruptly seized him during a routine check-in last October and soon sent him to “Camp 57,” the ICE detention camp within the notorious Angola, Louisiana, state prison.

The stress of the poor conditions there contributed to Omar’s heart attack, according to the habeas petition he filed in April. On May 29, a federal judge found ICE had violated Omar’s constitutional rights and ordered his immediate release. 

Then on Monday, just 10 days after his release, ICE seized Omar again and tried to whisk the still-recovering man onto a deportation flight the next morning, according to his lawyer Ken Mayeaux. 

Following an emergency motion from Mayeaux, the same judge again ordered ICE to release Omar and cautioned the agency not to make another deportation attempt.

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (‘ICE’) shall IMMEDIATELY RELEASE Omar from ICE custody,” said the Monday order from Judge Brian Jackson in Louisiana’s Middle District. “ICE shall not RE-DETAIN or REMOVE Omar from the United States during the pendency of Omar’s Emergency Motion to Enforce the Court’s May 29 Order.”

In the May order, the judge found that ICE had violated Omar’s constitutional rights by unlawfully detaining him and denying him the chance to prepare for an orderly departure.

ICE directly defied that order by seizing him without warning for immediate deportation, the emergency motion alleges, blocking him from arranging his affairs or even saying goodbye.

“Petitioner’s re-detention and planned removal are in direct contempt of this Court’s prior order,” reads the June 8 emergency motion. The government “lied to Mr. Omar, telling him and his family that he did not need to report to ICE/ERO” — ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division — “until December, but now, Respondent is racing to remove petitioner within hours.”

In a statement to The Lens and The Intercept, ICE spokesperson Angelina Vicknair said, “ICE complies with all court orders, and any allegation that a judge’s orders were not followed are categorically false.”

Federal courts are now constantly dealing with flagrant violations of judicial orders by ICE, said Bridget Pranzatelli, an attorney with the National Immigration Project.

Related

“Warehousing Human Beings”

“This level of cruelty and disrespect for federal courts is the rule, not the exception,” said Pranzatelli, who is familiar with the case. “The Court looked at the entire record before it and issued a well-reasoned decision, which specifically mandated certain protections for this very elderly, very sick man, and ICE ignored it.”

ICE’s actions in Omar’s case are also in line with the way that the government is using extreme measures to target Palestinians, Pranzatelli said. Omar was born in Palestine before the formation of the state of Israel; in 1975, he moved to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident.

“If In Fact He Survives the Flight”

After his release last month, Omar attended his regular ICE check-in on the first Wednesday in June; his next check-in would be in December, he was told. But last Friday, he received a letter telling him to report to an ICE office on Monday morning, June 8.

After Omar received the letter, Mayeaux emailed the ICE office in Bossier City, Louisiana, where Omar lives, warning immigration officials that “any attempted removal of Mr. Omar in June would be in direct contempt of the Court Order,” according to a copy of the email included with the motion. “I am instructing my client not to report as requested.”

Related

ICE Said They Were Being Flown to Louisiana. Their Flight Landed in Africa.

Instead, on Monday, ICE came to Omar’s home and arrested him again. Omar’s wife immediately called Mayeaux. Only hours later did ICE tell Omar’s family he was being taken nearly two hours away, to an ICE staging area for deportation flights, and would be put on a plane the next morning to Israel.

By early afternoon, Mayeux had filed the emergency motion. 

His client’s health, Mayeux wrote in the emergency motion, was his main concern. Omar is still recovering from his April heart attack and open-heart surgery. His wife told the arresting ICE officer that she was planning to take Omar to a cardiologist later that day, and that he could not move well. 

According to the filing, a doctor was prepared to testify that the roughly 14-hour flight without medical clearance raised serious concerns about Omar’s health, “if in fact he survives the flight.” 

“Heartless and Cruel”

Omar had been in the U.S. for half a century when ICE picked him up in Mississippi during a routine check-in last fall. There was no readily apparent cause: ICE had long known about two minor, nonviolent convictions, one in 2005 and one in 2022, but Omar had lived in the U.S. for years under ICE supervision and had complied with required immigration check-ins. 

“Incredibly, despite these undisputed facts, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (‘ICE’) considers Omar to be both a ‘flight risk’ and a ‘priority for removal,” said the May release order from Jackson, a federal judge in Baton Rouge. “Omar has been held in ICE detention since October 28, 2025 — 7 full months — with no end in sight.” 

Jackson ruled that ICE had to abide by its own regulations: If ICE were to deport him, the agency needed to give him advance notice, a reason, an opportunity for an orderly departure, and an informal interview to respond to ICE’s deportation efforts.

ICE did not serve Omar’s counsel with notice until he was already back in ICE custody. 

“The Notice also makes a mockery of the Court’s Order,” says Mayeaux’s June 8 emergency motion. “It was only after he was taken back into custody — in contravention of the Court’s Order — that he was informed of the existence of the travel document and of his imminent removal.” 

But even at that point, the motion alleged, ICE didn’t give Omar the chance to speak directly with counsel.

The court had also directed ICE to facilitate communication with Omar’s doctors and family “to ensure the most efficient and effective continuation of his required medical treatment upon his release.”

Related

Deportation, Inc.

ICE appears to have violated most of Jackson’s orders when its agents re-detained Omar. Even when ICE SUVs showed up at his door to bring him to the Bossier City field office, the agents continued to say that it was only a routine check-in. Not until less than 24 hours before the flight was scheduled to depart were family members told he was being deported.

Again, an order from Jackson mandated Omar’s immediate release. ICE agents returned him to his home around 7 p.m. Monday evening — leaving his family relieved, but shaken.

“They’re all completely traumatized,” Mayeaux said of his client’s family.

While ICE’s letter last week had made him suspicious, he said, “I couldn’t believe they would be so heartless and cruel as to do this to a 77-year-old man who’s ill. I just didn’t.”

The post ICE Defied Direct Order From Federal Judge and Re-Detained Elderly Palestinian appeared first on The Intercept.

If there’s one thing we know about the 2022 school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, which left 19 children and two teachers dead, it is this: The police failed to stop it. This was not for an absence of well-funded, trained officers on the scene. They were there.

Rather than placing themselves potentially in harm’s way, however, the cops waited outside for over an hour and aggressively confronted desperate parents who begged for them to enter, including handcuffing one mother.

Related

Uvalde Police Didn’t Move to Save Lives Because That’s Not What Police Do

This failure to save lives was not, as I wrote at the time, a failure of police work. It in fact exemplified what police critics and abolitionists have stressed for decades, with reams of evidence. Police do not save lives or prevent crime. Policing is not the “thin blue line” between social peace and chaotic violence. And the work of policing is a far cry from the heroic myth so stubbornly lodged in the American imagination.

This was not, of course, the lesson learned by Texas authorities after the shooting. Instead, the state’s response was as predictable as it was doomed to produce only more violence in Texas schools: They added more cops.

There were no well-researched, pragmatic policy changes around limiting assault rifles, regulating the hyper-destructive expanding bullets that ripped children’s bodies apart, and increasing mental health support — things that could actually stop shootings like in Uvalde, which was carried out by a troubled 18-year-old.

Texas school districts instead poured billions of dollars into stationing police at every public school campus in the state. The results, as a New York Times report published this week found, has been an horrific spate of violent police abuse against children in schools across the state.

There is no official use-of-force data on the over 11,000 cops stationed across Texas’s 400-plus school district police departments, the Times reported, and scant oversight. Despite the limited access to information, journalists were able to pinpoint “more than 2,600 use-of-force incidents” in a nearly four-year period using only the “small share of records” available.

There are horrific details. Kids are routinely slammed to the ground for minor misbehavior. Police punch children in the face. They shock students with Tasers for being in the wrong place. Or point guns at unarmed teens. Cops put handcuffs on a 6-year-old who later cried to his father, “The police wants me to die!” In some cases, low-level disciplinary infractions that should lead to no more than a trip to the principal’s office left children facing criminal charges; the well-documented school-to-prison pipeline in all its ignominy.

According to policing experts who spoke with the paper, Texas lawmakers “embraced school policing without establishing safeguards required for meaningful accountability.” A cop was mildly disciplined for having hogtied a 10-year-old boy with a behavioral disorder; apparently hogtying kids was a pattern for the officer. In response to the incident, the school district had to ban the practice of binding children by their hands and feet. The risks of bodily harm coming to kids across the state, however, remain tremendous: As in 16 other states, corporal punishment is legal in Texas schools.

And there is no mention in the Times investigation of the demographic profiles of the children abused by cops, but the videos in the report overwhelmingly show what appear to be nonwhite children enduring violent police abuse.

Filling school campuses with cops, meanwhile has not even worked to achieve the policy’s stated aim of stopping school shootings in Texas. In late March, a 15-year-old student in Bulverde, Texas, shot and injured a teacher and then took his own life.

Policing: A Twisted Civic Religion

After Uvalde, it was obvious to many of us that, despite widespread and high-profile criticisms of the police officers’ actions that day, we were unlikely to see a radical shift in mythic perceptions around the value of policing as a source of public safety.

The conflation of police presence and public safety maintains a powerful ideological hold, resistant to revision, regardless of recalcitrant evidence. Even the Supreme Court affirmed in 2005 that police departments are not in fact obligated to provide protection to the public.

In a gun-drenched, law-and-order conservative state like Texas, police lionization is a twisted civic religion. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a law in 2016 to designate police officers a protected class, “making it a hate crime for anyone to commit a crime against a law enforcement officer out of bias against the police.”

Related

Envisioning an America Free From Police Violence and Control

As I wrote in 2022, just after the Uvalde shooting, it would be too generous to those in power to grant that they have simply been misled by pro-police propaganda. By insisting that we double down on policing, leaders like Abbott make clear that they too uphold what the institution of policing defends: property, power, and racial hierarchy.

When it comes to the teachers and students whose lives are infused with greater violence and risk because of increased police presence, support for ever-present cops is more surprising. Even with ample evidence of police escalating confrontations and instigating violence against kids of all ages, sources who spoke to the Times reaffirmed the necessity of cops in schools.

“In interviews, dozens of parents, teachers, principals and students said that they believed police officers were needed to keep schools safe,” the Times reported.

Writer Patrick Blanchfield noted in 2020 that the police “are in our minds as a solution rather than as a problem.” There is a powerful false consciousness at play, violently reinforced when every social problem is met solely with a carceral, policing-based solution.

“We don’t know what our nation without police would look like,” the abolitionist scholar Mariame Kaba wrote. “But we know that our society with police is violent, racist, precarious, unequal, and unfree.”

As the response to Uvalde makes clear, this is not a knowledge problem. It is well established what flooding schools with police does and does not do. It does not promote safety; it does increase life-altering incidents of violence against children.

Texas is not alone in choosing violence.

The post After Uvalde, Texas Stuffed Schools Full of Cops. They Brutalized Students. appeared first on The Intercept.