Connect with us


Exclusive: In 2021, MoveOn members rose up against injustices and ran inspiring campaigns!



rotating image of petitions and petition deliveries

#MoveOn #members #rose #injustices #ran #inspiring #campaigns

2021 was quite a year, and the work we did together is an inspiration—whether MoveOn members were working locally to stop a toxic pipeline project, holding corporations accountable for profiting off of right-wing conspiracy theories, or helping to keep people in their homes during the global pandemic, we have rallied together in moments of uncertainty and injustice.Here are a few of the inspiring moments from 2021, where MoveOn’s incredible members and progressive partners used the MoveOn petition’s tool to power their campaigns. There are many other ways MoveOn campaigns as well and many other critical ongoing fights we are a part of, but these achievements show how progressive change can start with signing or starting a petition!

• When the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) suspended Sha’Carri Richardson from running in the Tokyo Olympics due to an irrational, outdated, and arbitrarily enforced rule around marijuana in July, nearly 600,000 MoveOn members came together and signed the petition demanding that the USADA drop their penalty and let Sha’Carri run! MoveOn members later partnered with NORML Colorado, a leading advocate for changing our country’s marijuana laws, to organize a relay race to deliver the petition to the USADA.

The massive petition by MoveOn members was included in tons of articles by ESPN, on “The Today Show,” NBC’s “Nightly News,” and NPR, and in Black Enterprise and other magazines, and the petition and hashtag #LetShaCarriRun took over Twitter, with celebrities and influencers like Debra Messing, David Zirin, and Adina Porter showing their support in droves!

The fight against the criminalization of Black, brown, and Indigenous people and communities for marijuana use continues. And just weeks after Sha’Carri’s story was all over the news, U.S. Senators Cory Booker, Charles Schumer, and Ron Wyden introduced legislation that is a historic first step in undoing the harms caused by unjust drug policies.

• In January, MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell was photographed with written notes to give Trump, instructing him to overturn the 2020 election by way of martial law. So MoveOn member Dennis C. started a petition demanding that Costco, MyPillow’s second-largest retailer, drop MyPillow. After nearly 300,000 MoveOn members signed Dennis’s petition, the campaign won, and Costco removed MyPillow from all of its stores! This is what’s possible when we take action together.

• After the deadly, white supremacist-led January 6 insurrection, many corporations like General Motors (GM) pledged to either stop or pause political donations to Republicans who fueled the insurrection. GM broke that promise and donated PAC money to seditious Republicans. We cannot normalize their behavior or let corporations off the hook for supporting the elected officials who attack our democracy. So, in July, nearly 20,000 MoveOn members signed the petition to tell GM’s PAC: Keep your word and stop funding insurrection.

• In May, when the Israeli government was forcibly evicting, killing, and displacing Palestinians from their homes and violence was spreading, over 73,000 MoveOn members signed the petition asking President Biden to take action to secure an immediate ceasefire and to achieve a just solution grounded in human dignity.

• In August, when Afghans were suffering from decades of a forever war, MoveOn partner Afghans for a Better Tomorrow started a petition pushing the Biden administration and Congress to ensure the safety of the most vulnerable in Afghanistan by increasing refugee caps, keeping the airport in Kabul open, expanding visas, and providing humanitarian aid to support Afghans. Over 128,000 MoveOn members signed the petition, to fight for a future for Afghans without war, violence, or a humanitarian crisis. Since then, Afghans for a Better Tomorrow has become a leader in the progressive movement and is continuing its advocacy for the dignity and protection of Afghan people.


• In September, the Supreme Court refused to stop the heinous Texas abortion ban from going into effect. UltraViolet started a petition demanding that the U.S. Senate pass the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) to protect access to abortion for all American. Over 227,000 MoveOn members signed the petition and we supported UltraViolet in delivering these signatures to Senator Richard Blumenthal and Representative Judy Chu, two of the bill’s co-sponsors.

• In June, Honor the Earth, an Indigenous-led group, started a petition asking President Biden to stop the construction of Enbridge Inc.’s Line 3 toxic tar sands pipeline project that threatens Indigenous treaty rights, clean water, and the climate. Over 84,000 MoveOn members signed the petition. And in October, the petition was delivered by Indigenous climate leaders and allies who hosted a #PeoplevsFossilFuels week of action in D.C. to demand a fossil free future and real climate solutions that are rooted in justice.

• At the end of July, millions of Americans were facing eviction despite the global pandemic. So over 62,000 MoveOn members signed the petition to echo Congresswoman Cori Bush’s call asking the Biden administration to extend the eviction moratorium so people wouldn’t lose their homes.

Congresswoman Cori Bush took bold action and spent days and nights on the steps of the Capitol to demand that millions of Americans not get evicted. Representative Bush was joined by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Representative Ayanna Pressley, and MoveOn Executive Director Rahna Epting!

• In October, human rights lawyer Steven Donziger was jailed for exposing that Chevron intentionally dumped 16 billion gallons of toxic oil onto Indigenous land in Ecuador, which poisoned Indigenous and poor communities in Ecuador’s Amazon region. Over 43,000 MoveOn members signed the petition to demand that the U.S Department of Justice review Steven Donziger’s case.

• Later that month, when news broke that Apple was giving Trump and his new social media app a platform even after Trump incited the deadly white supremacist-led January 6 insurrection, MoveOn member Matthew Witten started a petition demanding that Apple drop Trump’s new social media app. Over 204,000 MoveOn members signed the petition!

• In January, MoveOn partner Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide started a petition demanding that the Department of Justice save the life of Lisa Montgomery, a victim of abuse, who was going to be wrongly executed by the federal government. Over 312,000 MoveOn members signed this petition as we tried to accomplish the nearly impossible, a stay of execution in the face of insurmountable odds. MoveOn members showed up in support of Lisa and her sister.

• In July, Ben & Jerry (yes, THAT Ben & Jerry from the ice cream) started a petition asking Congress to tax the ultra-wealthy and corporations so they can pay their fair share in taxes, instead of expending unnecessary resources to send themselves into space. Nearly 125,000 MoveOn members signed the petition. This was an essential tenet of our advocacy around Build Back Better, given that the gap between the ultra-wealthy and working people continues to widen.

• And in August, after Republicans in states across the country passed hundreds of voter suppression laws, Common Cause started a petition to push President Biden to do everything he can, including calling for an end to the racist Jim Crow filibuster, to protect our sacred voting rights. Over 40,000 MoveOn members joined Congresswoman Nikema Williams, who serves in the same district that was long represented by civil rights champion John Lewis, and signed the petition. Then, MoveOn members partnered with Black Voters Matter, Common Cause, Stand Up America, Fix Our Senate, People for the American Way, the family of the late Congressman John Lewis, and other progressive allies to deliver over 400,000 petition signatures to the White House.

MoveOn’s free petition platform is a powerful place where MoveOn members and progressive partners are able to run impactful campaigns on issues impacting their communities. From rising up to advance climate justice, racial justice, voting rights, or economic justice, it was so inspiring to see MoveOn members take action all year long.

Throughout the entire year, MoveOn members signed petitions, started petitions, called their members of Congress, hosted and attended rallies and events, delivered petitions, and so much more. And all of these campaigns started with a petition on MoveOn’s free petition platform!


In 2022 and beyond, MoveOn members and progressive partners will continue using the petition platform as a tool to organize and build power for our communities. And you can use the platform to start a petition on an issue you care about too!

In solidarity,

–Jensine, Isbah, and the MoveOn Petition Platform Team


Exclusive: Democrats Hopeful in Retaining Senate Control –




Compelling Television

#Democrats #Hopeful #Retaining #Senate #Control

“When asked to share their candid thoughts about the Democrats’ chances of hanging onto their House majority in the coming election, party strategists often use words that cannot be printed in a family newsletter,” the New York Times reports.

“But a brighter picture is coming together for Democrats on the Senate side. There, Republicans are assembling what one top strategist laughingly described as an ‘island of misfit toys’ — a motley collection of candidates the Democratic Party hopes to portray as out of the mainstream on policy, personally compromised and too cozy with Donald Trump.”

LoadingSave to Favorites

Continue Reading


Exclusive: The Precedential Value of Shadow Docket Cases –




No Pseudonymity in Challenge to Federal Vaccination Mandate

#Precedential #Shadow #Docket #Cases

Over the past year, the Supreme Court decided three important cases concerning the major questions doctrine. The third decision, West Virginia v. EPA, was decided on the regular docket. But the first two cases, like most COVID cases, were rendered on the shadow docket.

First, Alabama Association of Realtors v. HHS declared unlawful the eviction moratorium. Second, NFIB v. OSHA declared unlawful the vaccine/testing mandate. Both unsigned opinions relied on the major questions doctrine. At the time, I wrote that the Court has treated these shadow docket cases as precedential.

Now, we have West Virginia v. EPA. And the Court cites the Alabama case as part of the major questions canon. Here, the Court invokes Alabama and Brown & Williamson in the same breath:

Such cases have arisen from all corners of the administrative state. In Brown & Williamson, for instance, the Food and Drug Administration claimed that its authority over “drugs” and “devices” included the power to regulate, and even ban, tobacco products. Id., at 126–127. We rejected that “expansive construction of the statute,” concluding that “Congress could not have intended to delegate”such a sweeping and consequential authority “in so cryptic a fashion.” Id., at 160. In Alabama Assn. of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Servs., 594 U. S. ___, ___ (2021) (per curiam) (slip op., at 3), we concluded that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could not, under its authority to adopt measures “necessary to prevent the . . . spread of ” disease, institute a nationwide eviction moratorium in response to the COVID–19 pandemic. We found the statute’s language a “wafer-thin reed” on which to rest such a measure, given “the sheer scope of the CDC’s claimed authority,” its “unprecedented” nature, and the fact that Congress had failed to extend the moratorium afterpreviously having done so. Id., at ___–___ (slip op., at 6–8).

And here, the Court lists Alabama in a string cite with Brown & Williamson and Gonzales v. Oregon:

And the Agency’s discovery allowed it to adopt a regulatory program that Congress had conspicuously and repeatedly declined to enact itself. Brown & Williamson, 529 U. S., at 159–160; Gonzales, 546 U. S., at 267–268; Alabama Assn., 594 U. S., at ___, ___ (slip op., at 2, 8). 

The Court also cites NFIB v. OSHA in the same passage as Gonzales v. Oregon:

Similar considerations informed our recent decision invalidating the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s mandate that “84 million Americans . . . either obtain a COVID–19 vaccine or undergo weekly medical testing at their own expense.” National Federation of Independent Business v. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 595 U. S. ___, ___ (2022) (per curiam) (slip op., at 5). We found it “telling that OSHA,in its half century of existence,” had never relied on its authority to regulate occupational hazards to impose such aremarkable measure. Id., at ___ (slip op., at 8). 

By contrast, Fulton, quite deliberately did not cite Tandom v. Newsom or Roman Catholic Diocese.

I think the Court is signaling that a published decision with some analysis should be treated as precedential, even if rendered in the absence of full briefing and oral argument. Relatedly, Judge Trevor McFadden and Vetan Kapoor wrote a helpful article summarizing whether an emergency stay order is precedential.


Continue Reading


Exclusive: Opinion: Alito, Thomas Think Reality of Gun Violence Shouldn’t Concern SCOTUS –




Opinion: SCOTUS Unleashes Reign of Terror on Americans

#Opinion #Alito #Thomas #Reality #Gun #Violence #Shouldnt #Concern #SCOTUS

While the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has come under increasing scrutiny–and earned mounting disapproval and mistrust–because of a host of recent rulings, the July 4th mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois should, sadly but hopefully, call into question not just any one of these specific rulings, but their approach and method to Constitutional law itself.

The concern I want to raise is with a more generalized and thoroughgoing approach of the Supreme Court to the law and the Constitution itself—to reading it, to interpreting it, and, most importantly, to understanding its relationship to serving the lives of Americans.

The approach I’m talking about is one of bad faith and one that is disarmingly anti-intellectual–in addition to being absolutely lethal for Americans, as the July 4th shooting in Highland Park makes clear, demonstrating SCOTUS’s supreme disregard for American lives.

To explain this point, let’s start with Justice Samuel Alito’s attack on Justice Stephen Breyer’s dissent in the court’s recent ruling striking down New York’s concealed carry gun law, in which Justice Clarence Thomas’ majority opinion made it much more difficult to regulate the possession of firearms going forward, according to Justice Stephen Breyer.

Alito expressed outrage in the concurrence he wrote supporting Thomas’ majority opinion, accusing Breyer of writing and arguing beyond the scope of the case in referencing the epidemic gun violence and killing in America.

“Much of the dissent seems designed to obscure the specific question that the Court has decided,” he wrote, continuing, “That is all we decide. Our holding decides nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun.”

He excoriated Breyer’s dissent, writing “It is hard to see what legitimate purpose can possibly be served by most of the dissent’s lengthy introductory section.”

Most pointedly, he asks, “Why, for example, does the dissent think it is relevant to recount the mass shootings that have occurred in recent years?”


Breyer’s first line does reference the fact that in 2020, 45,222 Americans were killed by firearms.

But somehow, in Alito’s mind, this fact that links the largely unregulated proliferation of gun ownership to tens of thousands of murders is not relevant?!?

God forbid, I guess, that the laws we craft actually respond to the problems of the world in which we live!

As Jesus reminded the Pharisees in the gospel according to Mark, the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

That is, laws are supposed to work for the benefit of human life, for those of living within the social world our legal system regulates.

Of course, Thomas in his majority opinion in this particular case and Alito in his decision overturning Roe v. Wade both relied on the absolutely invented principle that for a law to have validity it must be rooted in the history and traditions of the nation, meaning, as far as one can tell, that if one can’t find legal precedent dating back before the mid-nineteenth century, well, then, we simply can’t create a new law.

The July 4th murderous shooting, of course, underlines how deeply embedded gun violence and, well, murder, are rooted in the history and tradition of our country.

Rather than assess our history and re-think traditions that are unhealthy, indeed lethal, for us, SCOTUS, lead by the illogical minds of Alito and Thomas, use tradition to validate laws and decisions that are harmful to–deadly for–Americans.

In their view, we don’t look at the conditions of contemporary reality as we make law to regulate and support human life.

They refuse to look at how gun violence and the easy access Americans have to assault weapons put American lives in danger.

And yet, Alito attacked the justices who dissented from his overturning of Roe v. Wade, writing, “The most striking feature of the dissent is the absence of any serious discussion of the legitimacy of the States’ interest in protecting fetal life.”


I’m quite sure the rights of potential lives are not discussed in the Constitution.

Yet these justices overlook the reality of life in American now.

Their attempt to invent a reality—or ignore reality—as the basis for their decisions recalls Chief Justice John Roberts’ decision in 2013 gutting the Voting Rights Act.  He played amateur sociologist and professional denier of reality in basically insisting that racism was no longer an issue in the United States, so that since the conditions of racism that made the Voting Rights Act necessary didn’t exist, the conditions of the act didn’t need to exist either.

Roberts’ ruling, of course, prompted the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to compare the decision to one throwing away one’s umbrella in a rainstorm because one is not getting wet.

Alito and Thomas, like Roberts, ignore reality, and even worse they conceptualizes law-making, as we see in Alito’s lashing out at Breyer, as an act divorced from the concrete reality in which live.

Not representing, and not crafting law to serve, those living in our contemporary reality is not just a big problem, it’s a form of aiding and abetting murder.


Continue Reading


Copyright © 2022 Talk Of News.