SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Flaunting "the peculiar Trumpian stupidity," the mad king's giddy "liberation" of the global economy - by witlessly slapping tariffs on every country except Russia based on a simplistic, "insane" formula that instantly crashed U.S. and foreign markets - has been universally slammed. And that was before we learned several tariff targets are in fact remote outcroppings of ice and rock populated by no humans but many freeloading penguins and seals, who thank God won't be "looting and pillaging" us any more.
In his announcement we've finally been liberated from being able to buy things from other countries, the fragile, unloved man-child with a terror of being mocked or fleeced based his "batshit crazy" action on a sociopathic "you hurt us, we hurt you" world view, wielding random tariffs as a weapon to "fight back" against countries that have “taken advantage of us." "For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far," he said of the richest nation in the world. Holding a big chart of his shiny new tariff plan, he repeatedly trotted out a new word he just added to the 17 he already knows. "Reciprocal," he proclaimed, “That means they do it to us, and we do it to them. Very simple. Can’t get simpler than that." Or, it turns out, dumber. Evidently orchestrated by some "willing sycophants," the moronic method he used to calculate trade and economic figures for every country in the world - except Russia - has been compared to "a science project by a stoned high schooler."
In their "back-of-the-envelope calculations" - but with Greek letters! - the White House looked up our trade deficit with each country, divided it by that country's exports, and to be "kind" halved that figure. But obtusely using tariffs to target countries, not products - the only way they can sometimes work - is so random, over-simplified and counter-productive that Thom Hartmann compares it to Yosemite Sam chasing Bugs Bunny around with a shotgun, blasting holes in everything while completely missing his target. As a result of what one expert calls this "extraordinary nonsense," the tariffs bear almost no relation to the economic realities of many countries: There are "grotesque” tariffs of almost 50% on poor countries like Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, tiny Lesotho in southern Africa, and even the UK, with an almost $12 billion surplus, got a 10% tariff. And thanks to America's voters "handing the keys to the world’s largest economy to a low-wattage imbecile who went broke running casinos," US companies will be hardest hit.
Ironically, the worst will be the biggest - Microsoft, Amazon, Nike, Meta, Tesla, Target, Lululemon, Dollar Tree - whose supply chains depend on overseas manufacturing, mostly in China or Vietnam; Apple will reportedly see $275 billion in market value wiped out. Overall, the "uninformed tariff song-and-dance" meant an economy months ago deemed “the envy of the world” saw markets abruptly plunge into a free-fall that erased nearly $2 trillion from U.S. stocks, a nosedive of over 800 points, the biggest decline in years. Within minutes, over 80% of companies in the S&P 500 were trading lower, a market response traders called "worse than the worst case scenario." In one surreal moment, Trump appeared on air declaring, "Stocks will soar," even as a split screen showed stocks plummeting in real time. A flood of disastrous headlines quickly followed: Stocks "tank," "dive," "slide," "plunge," "dip," ""tumble" as investors "flee," along with the broad consensus, "There really is no positive outcome to this." So much winning.
Donny tried to avoid possible - albeit so unfair - criticism by waiting till 4 p.m. when the markets closed to announce his swell new idea. He failed (again): The backlash was swift. The Shovel: "In 'a massive fucking surprise,' a man who has run six companies into bankruptcy and wasn’t even able to make money out of A CASINO has absolutely no idea what he is doing while in charge of the world’s largest economy." Paul Krugman called the "crudity" of his tariff plan "malignant stupidity." Many cited its fatal flaws: The US isn't "spinning up new Nike factories overnight," employment will soar, so will China's economy in the vacuum, rage will greet ruined retirement funds, even coffee - no we don't make it - will be hit. "There is no reality in which the American consumer does not get majorly fucked," said one sage. "The trouble with tariffs," said a JP Morgan executive, "is they raise prices, slow economic growth, cut profits, increase unemployment, worsen inequality (and) increase global tensions. Other than that, they’re fine.”
Still, being "a blithering idiot," "a fucking moron" and "a Barely Sentient Shitstain," Trump blithely praised himself for allegedly lowering prices on "groceries, an old-fashioned word but beautiful. It's a bag with different things in it." Responses to the "groceries" lecture from "a demented madman who's never set foot in a grocery store": "Good thing we've never heard of them because we can't afford them now," "Give me 2 groceries, my good man!" "President Poopypants is learning us bigly," "You're paying $20 or $30 for a banana? We're going to bring it back down to $10 dollars or whatever you grocery people pay," "And don't forget your ID!" "Stable genius doing stable genius shit here," "A man for the people, just not our people." "It’s like watching a bad episode of South Park," "We are living in the stupid timeline." He also took credit for the word "gasoline - usually we talk about fuel prices. Gas. I love that word." More responses from those paying up to $12 on eggs: "I'd throw eggs at him but they cost more than gasoline." And, "What planet is he living on? Because this one has had enough of him."
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Still, the idiocy went on. Because the list of the world's countries "plundering" the U.S. was evidently assembled by some clueless MAGA intern who looked them up in Wikipedia, it turns out several targeted with tariffs are a. not countries, b. mostly inhabited by American military and c. have little to no economies and/or no people. They include Tokelau, a New Zealand territory of three atolls in the South Pacific, population 1,600, exports around $100,000; The Marshall Islands, 34 atolls in the North Pacific, home to 82,000 mostly American military at a U.S. base for missile testing; the British Indian Ocean Territory, ditto about 3,000 British and U.S. military and contractors; Saint Pierre and Miquelon, eight small French-owned islands near Newfoundland (few thousand residents, modest shellfish exports somehow hit with 50% tariff; also Australia’s Norfolk Island (big oops), Norway’s Svalbard (polar bears, one town) and remote, volcanic Jan Mayan in the Arctic Ocean, home to 18 researchers at a meteorological station.
The most outlandish, admittedly a tough call, are the Heard and McDonald Islands in the southern Indian Ocean, a collection of small remote islands (not countries) managed by Australia's Antarctic Division, listed as UNESCO World Heritage Sites, and only accessible by sea. Heard, dominated by active volcano Big Ben, is ice, snow and glaciers; McDonald's 100 acres are rocky, and it's had no economic activity since 1877, when the elephant seal trade ended. Mostly used for scientific research, both are uninhabited by humans, but have large populations of penguins, seabirds and elephant seals who don't export anything except cuteness and an occasional waft of "eau de penguin." Still, slap a tariff on those wingless, waddling, fish-gulping, tuxedo-wearing moochers all dressed up with no place to go who've been taking advantage of us way too long: "Flippers up!" "Eat tariffs." "Goddamn woke penguins have to pay up - it's time we stood up to 'em." "Penguins will never menace America again." Etc.
Australia's so pissed they started a government petition topermanently ban Trump, his family, and his flunkies: "Australians have VALUES of mateship, hard work, righting wrongs, and fighting for the underdog" and Trump, opposite, is "an agent of hate and a danger to world peace." Online, almost all the hundreds of comments are from Americans, also Canadians, asking if they can sign, or start their own, or can the Aussies "change your mind, take him and keep him." At home, a Senate resolution just passed rejecting the tariffs, but it'll likely die in the House. FYI: As with deportations and other executive orders, they're treated as laws only because Congress, which ordinarily imposes them, has abandoned its co-equal role before Trump's claim of "national emergency." And servile MAGA bizarrely plays along. On his tariff malpractice, Agriculture Sec. Brooke Rollins praised Trump's "genius" even as a ticker showed stocks down 1,200 points, gushing, "We are really, really excited, and very grateful for (his) leadership (sic)."
The next morning, Trump was likewise delusional. "THE OPERATION IS OVER!” he wrote. “THE PATIENT LIVED, AND IS HEALING! (aka global markets are plummeting like we've never seen). THE PROGNOSIS IS THAT THE PATIENT WILL BE FAR STRONGER, BIGGER, BETTER, AND MORE RESILIENT THAN EVER BEFORE." To reporters, he babbled, "I think it’s going very well... I said this would exactly be the way it is. Now the rest of the world wants to see if there is any way they can make a deal. It’s going to be unbelievable. We’ve never seen anything like it.,,The stock is going to boom. The country is going to boom." (The tricky part: just what kind of boom.) Then he left for a golf dinner with Saudi reps, skipping the viewing of the coffins of four soldiers killed in Lithuania. But one patriot helpfully finished his narrative: "So this penguin came up to me, big penguin, strong penguin, tears running down his flippers, and he came up to me and said ‘Sir, thank you sir, my fellow penguins, they’ve been taking advantage of you sir, in ways that nobody has ever seen, sir...’"
“It’s now clear that the Administration computed reciprocal tariffs without using tariff data. This is to economics what creationism is to biology, astrology is to astronomy, or RFK thought is to vaccine science." - Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers
Climate campaigners swiftly sounded the alarm on Wednesday after a North Dakota jury awarded Energy Transfer and its subsidiary more than $660 million in the fossil fuel giant's case targeting Greenpeace for protests against the Dakota Access crude oil pipeline.
While Energy Transfer called the verdict a "win... for the people of Mandan and throughout North Dakota," environmentalist Jon Hinck condemned it as a "travesty of justice."
Hinck and others argue the case against Greenpeace International and two of its entities in the United States is a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) intended to intimidate opponents of climate-wrecking fossil fuel projects.
"This case should alarm everyone, no matter their political inclinations," saidSushma Raman, interim executive director of Greenpeace's U.S. entities, in a statement. "It's part of a renewed push by corporations to weaponize our courts to silence dissent. We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech. These rights are critical for any work toward ensuring justice—and that's why we will continue fighting back together, in solidarity. While Big Oil bullies can try to stop a single group, they can't stop a movement."
As The New York Timesreported Wednesday:
Greenpeace had maintained that it played only a minor part in demonstrations led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. It had portrayed the lawsuit as an attempt to stifle oil industry critics, but a jury apparently disagreed.
The nine-person jury in the Morton County courthouse in Mandan, North Dakota, about 45 minutes north of where the protests took place, returned the verdict after roughly two days of deliberating.
Addressing the legal loss on social media, Greenpeace International vowed that "we will not be silenced."
Greenpeace International executive director Mads Christensen echoed that sentiment and pointed to U.S. President Donald Trump's second term as a danger to people and the planet. As the advocacy leader put it: "We are witnessing a disastrous return to the reckless behavior that fueled the climate crisis, deepened environmental racism, and put fossil fuel profits over public health and a livable planet. The previous Trump administration spent four years dismantling protections for clean air, water, and Indigenous sovereignty, and now along with its allies wants to finish the job by silencing protest."
Asked by The Associated Press if Greenpeace plans to appeal just after the verdict, senior legal adviser Deepa Padmanabha said, "We know that this fight is not over."
While the case has sparked fears that a loss in court could end Greenpeace, Padmanabha told AP that the globally known group's work "is never going stop." The adviser added, "That's the really important message today, and we're just walking out and we're going to get together and figure out what our next steps are."
An independent trial monitoring committee said in a statement that the verdict "reflects a deeply flawed trial with multiple due process violations that denied Greenpeace the ability to present anything close to a full defense."
Marty Garbus, a longtime First Amendment lawyer who is part of the committee, said: "In my six decades of legal practice, I have never witnessed a trial as unfair as the one against Greenpeace that just ended in the courts of North Dakota. This is one of the most important cases in American history."
"The law that can come down in this case can affect any demonstration, religious or political. It's far bigger than the environmental movement. Yet the court in North Dakota abdicated its sacred duty to conduct a fair and public trial and instead let Energy Transfer run roughshod over the rule of law," he added. "Greenpeace has a very strong case on appeal. I believe there is a good chance it ultimately will win both in court and in the court of public opinion."
Greenpeace International general counsel Kristin Casper later said in a statement that "Energy Transfer hasn't heard the last of us in this fight. We're just getting started with our anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Energy Transfer's attacks on free speech and peaceful protest. We will see Energy Transfer in court this July in the Netherlands."
As the
Times detailed, the global group "this year had countersued Energy Transfer in the Netherlands, invoking a new European Union directive against SLAPP suits as well as Dutch law."
After U.S. President Donald Trump announced long-anticipated sweeping tariffs at the White House Rose Garden on Wednesday, economists, labor leaders, American lawmakers, and other critics reiterated that the move will negatively impact people worldwide.
The president revealed that on April 5, he will impose a 10% tariff on all imported goods and additional penalties for dozens of countries, including major trading partners—ignoring warnings that, as Jeffrey Sachs wrote in a Common Dreams opinion piece, his "tariffs will fail to close the trade and budget deficits, raise prices, and make America and the world poorer."
Trump's related executive order states that he finds "that underlying conditions, including a lack of reciprocity in our bilateral trade relationships, disparate tariff rates and nontariff barriers, and U.S. trading partners' economic policies that suppress domestic wages and consumption, as indicated by large and persistent annual U.S. goods trade deficits, constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States."
The order adds that the "threat has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States in the domestic economic policies of key trading partners and structural imbalances in the global trading system," and declares a national emergency.
NBC Newsreported Wednesday that "global markets reacted sharply and swiftly... with investors fleeing U.S. stock indexes and companies that rely on global supply chains seeing their stocks plummet." The outlet noted that Dan Ives, an analyst at the investment firm Wedbush Securities, wrote, "President Trump just finished his tariff speech at the White House and we would characterize this slate of tariffs as 'worse than the worst case scenario' the street was fearing."
Trump framed this step in his trade war as "liberation day" and claimed that the duties are "reciprocal," but economists pushed back. Justin Wolfers at the University of Michigan said: "Trump announces his tariffs, which are (somehow?) related to the trade barriers other countries are imposing on the U.S. But... THE NUMBERS HE'S PRESENTING BEAR NO RELATION TO REALITY. It would be absurd to call these reciprocal tariffs. They're grievances."
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens
said in a statement that "Americans have one simple request of President Trump: lower prices. Instead of answering the call, he's taking a sledgehammer to the economy and pursuing unpopular, reckless trade policies that will do nothing to benefit workers and only serve to increase costs for consumers."
"But Trump doesn't care about what happens to working families, as long as his billionaire donors and advisers are happy," she continued. "Republicans are already
chomping at the bit to use any potential tariff revenue to fund their next massive billionaire tax break."
Kobie Christian, a spokesperson for the national campaign Unrig Our Economy, similarly concluded that "there is no other way to say it—this is an out-of-touch policy designed by a billionaire and for billionaires."
"Virtually no one will benefit from these Republican-backed tariffs—except for the ultrawealthy who will get yet another tax break, paid for by working families," Christian added. "Small business owners will be forced to raise their prices to keep their businesses afloat, and Americans will have to pay even more for everyday goods. These tariffs could even push the economy into a recession. American workers need lower costs, not more tariffs and billionaire handouts."
American Economic Liberties Project's Rethink Trade director, Lori Wallach, declared that "the businesses that profiteered from our old broken trade system should pay for the necessary transition to more balanced trade, not American workers and consumers. President Trump must take immediate action to stop corporations from using the pretext of these tariffs to price gouge the very Americans already slammed by decades of bad trade policy and corporate greed."
Wallach was among those who pointed out that tariffs can be a vital tool. She explained that "Trump's announcement goes much broader, but tariffs against mercantilist countries like China, Germany, Korea, Taiwan, and Japan to counter systemic trade abuses can help restore America's capacity to produce more of the critical products needed for American families to be healthy and safe and for our country to be more resilient and secure."
"But to deliver more American production and good jobs, the goal must be to balance trade, not equalize tariff rates, and tariffs must be consistent," she stressed. "Tariffs must be accompanied by other industrial policies like tax credits to build demand for U.S.-made goods, incentives for investment in new production capacity and bans on stock buybacks, and easier union formation so gains go to wages, not just profits."
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest federation of unions, also said that "the strategic use of tariffs can be an effective tool to support our industries and protect jobs at home. But they must be accompanied by policies that invest in our manufacturing base and a strong commitment to promoting workers' fundamental right to organize trade unions and bargain collectively."
"Unfortunately, the Trump administration's attacks on trade union workers' rights at home, gutting of the government agency that works to discourage the outsourcing of American jobs, and efforts to erode critical investments in U.S. manufacturing take us backward," she asserted. "We will continue to fight for trade policy that prioritizes the interests of working people without causing unnecessary economic pain for America's working families."
Some congressional Democrats shared similar criticism. Michigan Congresswoman Debbie Dingell said that "when used strategically, tariffs are a critical tool to bring back jobs and support American workers and industries," but "I'm concerned about the chaotic and immediate implementation of these wide-reaching tariffs."
U.S. Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.)
wrote on social media that "Trump's dumb tariffs are going to drive up costs for real working people. Like the dad who is trying to save money by fixing his car at home. Those parts from AutoZone are made somewhere else and the prices will go up!"
As the White House circulated a multipage sheet of targeted countries, Gomez and Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) were among those who noticed that Russia—which is waging a yearslong war on Ukraine—is absent from the list.
Meanwhile, as critics including Aaron Reichlin-Melnick at the American Immigration Council highlighted, the list included the Australian territory of the Heard Island and McDonald Islands—even though the islands are "completely uninhabited."
"Population zero. I guess we're going to tariff the seagulls?" quipped Reichlin-Melnick. "It kind of feels like a White House intern went through Wikipedia's list of countries and just generated this list off of that with no further research."
Organizer Max Berger
wrote on Bluesky Wednesday, "I like how no one knows whether the president of the United States is going to tank the global economy because he's a fucking idiot—or if he's just doing a bit."
A new analysis indicates Republicans' plan to extend soon-to-expire provisions of their party's 2017 tax law, as well as their push to tack on additional tax breaks largely benefiting the rich and big corporations, would cost $7 trillion over the next decade, a figure that a group of congressional Democrats called "staggering."
The analysis from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), published on Thursday, updates previous estimates that suggested the GOP effort to extend expiring provisions of the 2017 law would cost $4.6 trillion over a 10-year period. The new assessment shows that extending the law's temporary provisions—which disproportionately favored the wealthy—would cost $5.5 trillion over the next decade.
The projected cost of the GOP agenda balloons to $7 trillion after adding Senate Republicans' call for $1.5 trillion in additional tax cuts in the budget resolution they advanced in a party-line vote on Thursday. The GOP has come under fire for using an accounting trick to claim their proposed tax cuts would have no budgetary impact.
"The Republican handouts to billionaires and corporations will come at a staggering cost, and it's unconscionable that their plan to pay for those handouts includes kicking millions of Americans off their health insurance, hiking the cost of living with tariffs, and driving up child hunger," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), and Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) said in a joint statement issued in response to the JCT figures.
"Even after making painful cuts that will inflict hardship on typical American families, Republicans will still risk sending us into a catastrophic debt spiral that does permanent harm to our economy," the Democrats added. "What Republicans are trying to jam through Congress right now is a level of economic recklessness we've never seen before."
The JCT's updated cost analysis came as President Donald Trump plowed ahead with what's been characterized as the biggest tax hike in U.S. history, one that will hit working-class Americans in the form of price increases on household staples and other goods.
Trump administration officials, not known for providing reliable numbers, have claimed the president's sweeping new tariffs could produce roughly $6 trillion in federal revenue over the next decade. The Trump tariffs have sent financial markets into a tailspin, heightened recession fears, and prompted swift retaliation from targeted nations, including China.
In an appearance on MSNBC on Thursday, Boyle—the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee—said Trump's tariffs represent "the single largest tax increase in American history."
"It's a tax that everyone will pay in this country, based on the goods that they buy," said Boyle. "However, it's also a tax that is highly regressive—the poorest amongst us will end up paying a higher percentage of their income."
A previous version of this story incorrectly stated the analysis was conducted by the Congressional Budget Office. It was conducted by the Joint Committee on Taxation.
"This is the precedent Trump needs to send you to a concentration camp," said one advocate for due process rights as President Donald Trump's administration claimed it had made an "administrative error" in sending a Maryland father to a prison in his home country of El Salvador—leaving the federal government with no way of bringing him back to his children and wife, a U.S. citizen.
In a court filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, an acting field office director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Robert L. Cerna, told Judge Paula Xinis that the removal of Kilmar Abrego Garcia on March 15 "was in error." Abrego Garcia was one of hundreds of people rounded up by the Trump administration and sent to a "Terrorism Confinement Center" in El Salvador, with the White House invoking the Alien Enemies Act for the first time since World War II and claiming many were members of gangs including MS-13 and Tren de Aragua.
Cerna's filing reveals the result of a mass expulsion operation in which hundreds of people were afforded no due process rights in violation of the U.S. Constitution: At least one person with legal protected status in the United States who was not convicted of a crime is now imprisoned in a country where a U.S. federal court had previously found he could face persecution and torture.
As Joshua Eakle of Project Liberal warned, Abrego Garcia's detention and the administration's claim that it can do nothing to help him also creates precedent for Trump to do the same to anyone else it sees fit to target.
"This is how it starts. You must pay attention," said Eakle. "If Trump can disappear Abrego Garcia, he can disappear you. If Trump can strip his rights with no accountability, he can do it to anyone. This is why due process matters. Without it, America slides into dictatorship."
As the news spread of Abrego Garcia's mistaken expulsion, Vice President JD Vance "smeared him as a 'convicted gang member,'" claiming to cite the court filing from Monday, and accused podcast host Jon Favreau of having sympathy for "gang members getting deported while ignoring citizens they victimize."
Cerna's filing states that Abrego Garcia was denied bond in 2019 because "the evidence show[ed] that he is a verified member of [Mara Salvatrucha] ('MS-13')]" and therefore posed a danger to the community." As Kyle Cheney wrote at Politico, the accusation was "sharply contested" by Abrego Garcia and "credited to information gleaned from a confidential informant."
"That's not a conviction," said Cheney.
The 2019 court filing regarding the bond denial notes that Abrego Garcia "has no criminal conviction" and that the government erroneously stated at the time that Abrego Garcia was "detained in connection to a murder investigation."
Further, noted Cheney, the court at the time found that Abrego Garcia was likely a member of MS-13, but that he had a credible fear of persecution in his home country of El Salvador and should not be deported there—or expelled via an operation like Trump's mass expulsion campaign, in which those sent overseas have not been afforded due process.
Vance's claim that Abrego Garcia is a "convicted gang member" was "a lie," said Krystal Ball of the online news show "Breaking Points."
"But JD's comment reveals his deportation was not really a 'mistake,'" she said. "They put whoever they could round up on those planes without regard for guilt, innocence, immigration status, or court orders. If this man can be permanently disappeared into a foreign dungeon, anyone can."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick of the American Immigration Council said it was "shocking that the vice president of the United States would so callously, and so falsely, accuse someone of being a convicted gang member. It's especially bad when his own administration just admitted to illegally deporting that person due to 'administrative error.'"
Trump's Justice Department is now urging Xinis to reject a petition filed by Abrego Garcia's attorneys to secure his return to the U.S., saying that since the Maryland resident is now in custody in his home country, the administration and the court system can't force El Salvador to return him.
"People should go to prison over this," said Paul Blest, a reporter for More Perfect Union.
Antonio De Loera-Brust, communications director for United Farm Workers, suggested the Trump administration is now refusing to push for Abrego Garcia or other potentially innocent people who have been expelled from the U.S. "because then they will be able to speak for themselves and the full extent of this atrocity will become clear."
Shannon Watts, founder of the gun violence prevention group Moms Demand Action, called on the Democratic Party to ensure the administration can't ignore the demand for Abrego Garcia's release.
"I don't care what the polls say about immigration, this is a legal assault on the Constitution and humanity," said Watts. "Democratic leaders must publicly pressure the Trump administration to rescue Kilmar Abrego Garcia."
International human rights organizations joined the world's top war crimes tribunal in condemning Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Hungary, expected to begin Wednesday evening—with the leader freely traveling to the European country without fear of being arrested under a warrant issued last year for Netanyahu's actions in Gaza.
Hungarian President Viktor Orbán said last year that he rejected the warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC), which directed member countries to arrest Netanyahu and then-Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes they have committed in Gaza starting October 8, 2023.
Hungary's far-right president—who took control of his country's court system several years ago and has used it to further his own political goals, and who banned LGBTQ+ pride events last month—invited Netanyahu to visit Budapest, while his foreign minister called the warrants "shameful and absurd."
Fadi El Abdallah, a spokesperson for the ICC, said Wednesday that it is not up to ICC signatories to "unilaterally determine the soundness of the court's legal decisions," which member countries are legally obligated to follow, including by making arrests when a suspect who is subject to a warrant sets foot within their borders.
"Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the court shall be settled by the decision of the court," said El Abdallah.
Orbán said in February that he would "review" Hungary's membership in the ICC after U.S. President Donald Trump approved the use of sanctions against ICC officials.
Al Jazeera reported that Hungary may announce its withdrawal from the ICC this week during Netayahu's visit, which is scheduled from Wednesday until April 6.
Liz Evenson, international justice director for Human Rights Watch, called Orbán's welcoming of Netanyahu "an affront to victims of serious crimes."
"Hungary should comply with its legal obligations as a party to the ICC and arrest Netanyahu if he sets foot in the country," said Evenson.
Western European countries including France, Italy, and Germany have also refused to carry out Netanyahu's arrest under the ICC warrant, with the French foreign ministry claiming the prime minister and Gallant have "immunities" because Israel does not recognize the authority of the ICC.
German Christian Democrats Leader Friedrich Merz said last month that he would "find ways and means for [Netanyahu] to visit Germany and also to be able to leave again without being arrested in Germany," adding that it was "a completely absurd idea that an Israeli prime minister cannot visit the Federal Republic of Germany."
Earlier this week, Erika Guevara-Rosas, the head of global research, advocacy, and policy at Amnesty International, said that every trip Netanyahu takes "to an ICC member state that does not end in his arrest" will embolden Israel " to commit further crimes against Palestinians" in Gaza and the West Bank.
"Netanyahu's visit to Hungary must not become a bellwether for the future of human rights in Europe," said Guevara-Rosas. "European and global leaders must end their shameful silence and inaction, and call on Hungary to arrest Netanyahu during a visit which would make a mockery of the suffering of Palestinian victims of Israel's genocide in Gaza, its war crimes in other parts of the occupied Palestinian territory, and its entrenched system of apartheid against all Palestinians whose rights it controls."
In the U.S., which like Israel does not recognize the ICC and which has backed the Israeli assault on Gaza, Netanyahu received a standing ovation last year when he addressed Congress—while progressive lawmakers protested his visit.
The alleged war crimes Netanyahu and Gallant have been accused of include intentionally attacking civilians and starving Gaza's 2.3 million Palestinian residents since Israel began its military assault on the enclave in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack.
Anita Zsurzsán, an independent scholar based in Budapest, wrote at Jacobin on Wednesday that "liberal critics" of the Hungarian president are doing little to challenge Orbán for inviting Netanyahu to the country.
"It seems that the principle of 'never again' is routinely ignored in Hungary. Netanyahu's visit presents a historic opportunity for Hungarians to challenge Orbán on hosting a war criminal," said Zsurzsán. "But, instead of upholding international law and doing what is right, forces across the Hungarian political spectrum have opted for compliance and silence. As has often happened in Hungarian history, this risks leaving an indelible stain of acquiescence to fascism and genocide on our collective conscience."
"The fact that an internationally charged war criminal can walk free in Hungary with no resistance shows that the fascization of Hungarian society is continuing apace," she added.
Evenson called Orbán's decision to ignore the ICC warrant his "latest assault on the rule of law, adding to the country's dismal record on rights," and called on other ICC members to pressure Hungary to comply with the court's statutes.
"All ICC member countries need to make clear they expect Hungary to abide by its obligations to the court," said Evenson, "and that they will do the same."
"Our economy should be judged on how well it takes care of working people, not on how many billionaires it mints in a calendar day," said the founder of the economic justice group.
With economists warning that U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war will raise the cost of living for millions of American families and could soon fuel a recession, the economic justice group Patriotic Millionaires on Monday unveiled a "bold, surprisingly simple economic framework" to stop the oligarchy from amassing more power at the expense of working people and "permanently stabilize the economic lives of working people."
Four pieces of legislation would form the basis of America 250: The Money Agenda, which Patriotic Millionaires proposed at an "expert town hall" titled "How to Beat the Broligarchs."
The agenda would include:
The latter proposal, said Patriotic Millionaires, "is a long overdue response to Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis' warning from a century ago: 'We can have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated into the hands of a few, but we can't have both.'"
"The extreme concentration of wealth has always, without fail, translated into an extreme concentration of political power. The stakes for the nation couldn't be more clear," said the group. "We must act immediately."
At the How to Beat the Broligarchs event on Monday, the group assembled experts including economist Stephanie Kelton, Helaine Olen of the American Economic Liberties Project, and historian Rutger Bregman to discuss how unchecked wealth in the U.S. has captured the political and judicial systems—with "broligarchs" like tech CEO Elon Musk and others "working to pull the strings of the government towards their interests at the expense of the American people."
"America's slide into oligarchy necessitates bold actions in order to reclaim democratic capitalism and forge a prosperous, equitable, and just future," said Erica Payne, founder and president of Patriotic Millionaires. "America 250: The Money Agenda is the only plan that will get us there. It will change not just our own lives, but the future and direction of our country. Our economy should be judged on how well it takes care of working people, not on how many billionaires it mints in a calendar day. By that measure, America is flunking its economics class. The only way to get better marks—and stop our country's slide into oligarchy—is by fixing our tax code."
Erica Payne: "This economy should be judged on how well it takes care of people, not on how many billionaires it prints in a calendar day. Every great country starts with a great economy." pic.twitter.com/DXofvmwYNO
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 7, 2025
Morris Pearl, board chair of the group, said that if Congress enacts the legislative agenda proposed on Monday, "we will build a community dedicated to the common purpose of improving the lives of all working people in our country—not just the ultrawealthy."
"America 250 will bring to account the politicians and their enablers who are sustaining our backwards status quo and demand better leaders to put us on a better, more sustainable path," said Pearl. "The time for economic exploitation is over."
If he prevails at the Supreme Court, U.S. President Donald Trump "could gain extraordinary powers to investigate and penalize private businesses and individuals, tilt elections," and more, one outlet noted.
The full D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday issued a divided ruling that reinstated two members of labor-focused independent agencies whom the Trump administration had sought to remove. The ruling is likely not the end of the legal saga and the case appears headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The federal appeals court voted 7-4 to reverse an earlier decision by a three-member panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the Trump administration's dismissal of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member Gwynne Wilcox and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) member Cathy Harris.
Since Trump's return to the White House, Harris and Wilcox have been repeatedly removed and reinstated following contradictory rulings, according to The Guardian.
Monday's ruling was split along partisan lines, with the four dissenting judges all appointed to the court by Republican administrations, perThe Guardian.
Wilcox was first appointed to the NLRB, which safeguards private sector workers' rights to organize, in 2021 by then-President Joe Biden and was re-confirmed for a five-year term by the Senate in 2023. Wilcox's removal meant the body did not have a quorum, because it needs three members to have a quorum. It once again has a quorum and can issue decisions.
As a member and former chair of the MSPB, Harris helped lead an agency that reviews federal employee firings, suspensions, and whistleblower claims.
According to the outlet Democracy Docket, the court ruled Monday that the administration's dismissal of Wilcox and Harris ran afoul of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Humphrey's Executor v. U.S., a 1935 case that upheld removal restrictions for government officials on multimember adjudicatory boards.
"Trump's Department of Justice said it believes congressional limitations on the president's removal power are unconstitutional and that it will urge the Supreme Court to overturn Humphrey's Executor," Democracy Docket reported. "If the Supreme Court ultimately grants Trump the ability to fire members of independent bodies, he could gain extraordinary powers to investigate and penalize private businesses and individuals, tilt elections, and use monetary policy for political purposes."
"South Sudan is about to blow up into potentially another country-wide civil war, putting civilians at risk. But yea let's force people to go back now," wrote one professor.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Saturday announced that the United States is revoking visas for all South Sudanese passport holders, "effective immediately"—sparking criticism from several observers, including those who pointed out that the country could soon tip into another civil war.
Rubio announced on X that the move, which includes restricting any "further issuance" of visas, comes in response to the South Sudanese government's failure to return "its repatriated citizens in a timely manner."
"This is wrongheaded cruelty," wrote Rebecca Hamilton, a professor at American University Washington College of Law and executive editor at the digital law and policy journal Just Security, on X on Saturday. "The vast majority of South Sudanese in this country (or, frankly inside South Sudan, right now) have no say in what their government does. They are here working, studying, building skills essential for their nascent country."
Mike Brand, an adjunct professor at the University of Connecticut and Georgetown University who focuses on human rights and atrocities prevention, wrote on Saturday: "South Sudan is about to blow up into potentially another country-wide civil war, putting civilians at risk. But yea let's force people to go back now."
South Sudan is the world's youngest country, having only declared independence from Sudan in 2011 following two lengthy civil wars.
The young nation was once again plunged into civil war in 2013 due to violence between warring factions backing President Salva Kiir and his deputy, Riek Machar. A peace deal was brokered in 2018, though the country has still not held a long-delayed presidential election and Kiir remains in power today, according to Time.
Fears of full-on civil war returned when, last month, Machar was arrested and his allies in government were also detained. Machar's opposition political party declared the country's peace deal effectively over, per Time.
Shortly after Rubio's announcement on Saturday, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau wrote on X that the government of South Sudan had refused to accept a South Sudanese national who was "certified by their own embassy in Washington" and then repatriated. "Our efforts to engage diplomatically with the South Sudanese government have been rebuffed," Landau wrote.
On Monday, the government of South Sudan released a statement saying that the deportee who was not permitted entry is a citizen of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, not South Sudan. The government also said it has maintained consistent communication and cooperation with the U.S. government regarding "immigration and deportation matters."
In the early 2000s, thousands of "lost boys" stemming from a civil war in Sudan that began in the 1980s and eventually led to South Sudan's independence were resettled in the United States.
John Skiles Skinner, a software engineer based in California, reacted to Rubio's announcement by writing on Bluesky: "I taught a U.S. citizenship class to South Sudanese refugees in Nebraska, 2006-2007. Fleeing civil war, they worked arduous jobs at a meat packing plant. Many had no literacy in any language. But they studied hard for a citizenship exam which many native-born Americans would not be able to pass."
In 2011, the Obama administration granted South Sudan nationals in the United States "temporary protected status" (TPS)—a designation that shields foreign-born people from deportation because they cannot return home safely due to war, natural disasters, or other "extraordinary" circumstances. The Biden administration extended it, but the designation is set to expire early next month.
As of September 2024, the U.S. provides TPS protections to 155 people from South Sudan.
In a Monday post for Just Security, Hamilton of American University and a co-author wrote that "while there has been no public determination by the secretary of homeland security regarding an extension of TPS for South Sudanese, Rubio's announcement presumably means [U.S. Department of Homeland Security] Secretary Kristi Noem is planning to terminate their TPS."
Observers online also highlighted that Duke University star basketball player Khaman Maluach, whose family left South Sudan for Uganda when he was a child, could be impacted by the State Department's ruling.