Lemdro.id

Tommy Lee Walker was executed in the electric chair in May 1956 for the rape and murder of 31-year-old Venice Parker.

Nearly 70 years after a Texas Black man was executed in a case that prosecutors now say was based on false evidence and was riddled with racial bias, officials have declared that he was innocent in the killing of a white woman in Dallas.

At the time of the trial, prosecutors had alleged Walker attacked Parker, a store clerk who was on her way home, on the evening of Sept. 30, 1953. Parker’s killing took place during a time of panic and racial division in the Dallas area as there were reports that a Peeping Tom believed to be a Black man was terrorizing women, according to the Dallas County Criminal District Attorney’s Office.

But an extensive review of Walker’s conviction by the Dallas County Criminal District Attorney’s Office, along with the help of the Innocence Project of New York and Northeastern University School of Law’s Civil Rights and Restorative Justice Project, found multiple problems with Walker’s case.

A DHS official went to Los Angeles in June to brief officers on the new policy ahead of an immigration enforcement action, two administration officials told NBC News.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers began forcibly entering homes without judicial warrants last summer, two administration officials told NBC News.

An internal document, dated May 12, 2025, but made public by two whistleblowers earlier this week, told officers they could rely on an administrative warrant to enter homes if there was an order to remove someone from the country.

Administrative warrants are signed by officials in ICE field offices and generally permit officers and agents to make arrests — a lower legal standard than a warrant signed by a judge or magistrate, which is broadly what is needed when law enforcement enters a home.

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/7404864

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/21445

The city government of Miami Beach is under fire from civil rights groups after police visited the home of a woman about posts she made on social media critical of the mayor.

In a video posted online last week, two detectives with the Miami Beach Police Department were filmed questioning Raquel Pacheco, a former candidate for statewide office and longtime resident of the seaside resort city, over a post she made criticizing what she said was Mayor Steven Meiner’s hypocrisy around Israel and Palestine.

“This Facebook post was protected speech, and it’s not a close question — not remotely,” said Daniel Tilley, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. “In context, the actions and statements by government officials here are likely to have a chilling effect on those who would otherwise voice their critique of the government.”

Pacheco, a frequent critic of the Miami Beach mayor, said she didn’t think much of a Facebook comment she wrote on January 7, in which she pointed out the mayor’s hypocrisy over calling the city a safe haven for all.

“The guy who consistently calls for the death of all Palestinians, tried to shut down a theater for showing a movie that hurt his feelings, and REFUSES to stand up for the LGBTQ community in any way (even leaves the room when they vote on related matters) wants you to know that you’re all welcome here,” she wrote, following up with three clown emojis.

Pacheco’s comment came in response to a post by Meiner in which he called out New York City for alleged antisemitism after Mayor Zohran Mamdani rescinded his predecessor’s controversial executive orders on Israel. Meiner post echoed the Israeli government’s response to Mamdani.

“Our city is consistently ranked by a broad spectrum of groups as being the most tolerant in the nation,” Meiner wrote on January 6. “By contrast, certain places like New York City are intentionally removing protections against select groups, including promoting boycotts of Israeli/Jewish businesses.”

“He claims Miami Beach is a safe haven for everyone, but the post itself is addressed to a specific group of people.”

Pacheco said she was irritated by the insinuation by Meiner that New York City was rife with antisemitism, or that Miami Beach was free of bias. So she fired back.

“I was pointing to the hypocrisy of his statement,” Pacheco told The Intercept. “He claims Miami Beach is a safe haven for everyone, but the post itself is addressed to a specific group of people and makes false allegations against NYC.”

Meiner, who is Jewish, is a staunch supporter of Israel’s war on Gaza. He has used his office to clamp down on pro-Palestine speech. In March of last year, Meiner sought to evict an independent cinema from its city-owned space over plans to air “No Other Land,” a documentary on attempts by Israeli forces to demolish a Palestinian town in the occupied West Bank. Meiner called the Oscar-winning film “hateful propaganda.”

Pacheco acknowledged that Meiner may not have verbatim called for the death of all Palestinians, but said she was taking aim at his “blind support for Israel” and the connotations of that support in light of the genocide in Gaza.

“He may not have said it in those words, but that was my interpretation,” she said.

Pacheco said she thought little of the post until days later, on January 12, when a pair of plainclothes detectives with the Miami Beach Police Department knocked on her door wishing to discuss the post.

In the video of the interaction filmed by Pacheco and provided to The Intercept, Pacheco answers the door to a pair of officers, one of whom is holding a cellphone with a screenshot of Pacheco’s Facebook post on the screen. One of the officers asks several times if Pacheco was the author of the post, but she declines to confirm.

[

Related

Man Jailed for Facebook Meme Is Freed in Tennessee](https://theintercept.com/2025/10/30/larry-bushart-tennessee-free-speech-charlie-kirk-meme/)

“What we’re just trying to prevent is someone getting agitated or agreeing with the statement,” the officer says, before reading aloud from the post in which Pacheco accused Meiner of “consistently calling for the death of all Palestinians. “

“That can probably incite someone to do something radical. That’s what we’re here to talk about,” he says. “I would think to refrain from posting things like that, because that could get something incited,” he continues.

“I appreciate your concern,” Pacheco responds, while still declining to confirm that she was the author of the post and saying she would only answer questions with a lawyer. A few seconds later, the officers depart.

Shortly after the incident at her home, and after consulting with a lawyer, Pacheco decided to post the video of the police visit online, kicking off a local controversy in Miami Beach.

[

Read our complete coverage

Chilling Dissent ----------------](https://theintercept.com/collections/chilling-dissent/)

In response to criticisms from the ACLU of Florida and other groups, Miami Beach Police Chief Wayne A. Jones took responsibility for sending the detectives to Pacheco’s home.

“Given the real, ongoing national and international concerns surrounding antisemitic attacks and recent rhetoric that has led to violence against political figures,” Jones said in a statement on January 16, “I directed two of my detectives to initiate a brief, voluntary conversation regarding certain inflammatory, potentially inciteful false remarks made by a resident to ensure there was no immediate threat to the elected official or the broader community that might emerge as a result of the post.”

Representatives for Meiner and Jones did not respond to requests for comment from The Intercept.

Pacheco, for her part, said she hopes the controversy might make city government think twice before pulling a similar move with other critics.

She said, “This stops at my door.”

The post She Criticized the Mayor’s Support for Israel on Facebook. Then the Cops Showed Up at Her Door. appeared first on The Intercept.

From The Intercept via This RSS Feed.

Police arrested about 100 clergy demonstrating against immigration enforcement at Minnesota’s largest airport Friday, and several thousand gathered in downtown Minneapolis despite Arctic temperatures to protest the Trump administration’s crackdown.

The protests are part of a broader movement against Donald Trump’s increased immigration enforcement across the state, with labor unions, progressive organizations and clergy urging Minnesotans to stay away from work, school and even shops.

The faith leaders gathered at the airport to protest deportation flights and urge airlines to call for an end to to what the Department of Homeland Security has called its largest-ever immigration enforcement operation.

Guy posted picture of himself playing Crusader Kings inside a nuclear sub while deployed without even attempting to scrub metadata from his personal phone.

The Pentagon’s unclassified version of the National Defense Strategy places the homeland as the department’s number one priority above the Indo-Pacific, and seemingly signals cuts to come to US forces in Europe and South Korea.

However, the document denies a push towards “isolationism” while calling for greater burden sharing from allies and increased investments in the defense industrial base.

The NDS, which lays out how the Defense Department will follow the guidance of the National Security Strategy (NSS), is traditionally considered a foundational document for the Pentagon. But in a contrast with past releases, the department chose an unusual lack of fanfare: it emailed the document with no warning at almost 7:00 pm on a Friday, when the entire east coast is focused on a major snowstorm that is approaching.

Document: https://web.archive.org/web/20260124041748/https://media.defense.gov/2026/Jan/23/2003864773/-1/-1/0/2026-NATIONAL-DEFENSE-STRATEGY.PDF

Donald Trump is facing backlash from Canadian veterans after suggesting NATO allies did little during the war in Afghanistan, comments veterans say ignore their painful sacrifices.

In an interview with Fox News on Tuesday, Trump said the United States had “never needed” its NATO partners and characterized allied contributions in Afghanistan as minor, saying they “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.”

His remarks didn’t sit well with Canadian veterans who were part of the Afghan conflict, which represented the country’s largest overseas deployment since the Second World War. More than 40,000 Canadian Armed Forces members served in the region between 2001 and 2014. In total, 158 Canadians were killed and thousands more were injured.

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/33220298

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/7404871

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/21425

Photo by Darren Halstead on Unsplash

Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.

Early Tuesday morning, final appropriations bills for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education—and related agencies—were released, marking the last major funding measures to be negotiated in the aftermath of the record-breaking government shutdown fight in 2025. That standoff featured multiple appropriations bills loaded with anti-transgender riders and poison pills for Democrats, ultimately ending in a short-term continuing resolution that punted many of those provisions to the end of January. While other “minibus” packages funding individual agencies moved forward, the Education and HHS bills were conspicuously absent, as they contained some of the most sweeping and consequential anti-trans riders ever proposed in Congress. Now, with the final bills released, it is clear that no anti-transgender riders were included—meaning transgender people will largely be spared new congressional attacks through most of 2026 should they pass as-is.

As the government shut down on Oct. 1, the state of appropriations bills needed to reopen the federal government for any extended period was extraordinarily dire for transgender people. Dozens of anti-transgender riders were embedded across House appropriations bills, even as those provisions were largely absent from the Senate’s versions. The riders appeared throughout nearly every funding measure, from Commerce, Justice, and Science to Financial Services and General Government. The most extreme provisions, however, were concentrated in the House HHS and Education bills, including language barring “any federal funds” from supporting gender-affirming care at any age and threatening funding for schools that support transgender students. Taken together, those measures would have posed a sweeping threat to transgender people’s access to education and health care nationwide.

Those fears eased somewhat when the government reopened under a short-term continuing resolution funding operations through the end of January. In the months that followed, Democrats notched a series of incremental victories for transgender people, advancing multiple appropriations “minibus” packages that stripped out anti-trans riders as the government was funded piece by piece. As amendment after amendment fell away, those wins grew more substantial, including the removal of a proposed ban on gender-affirming medical care from the NDAA—even after it had passed both the House and Senate. Still, the most consequential question remained unresolved: what would ultimately happen to the high-impact anti-trans provisions embedded in the HHS and Education bills.

Now, the package has been released—and for the moment, transgender people can breathe again. The final HHS and Education bills contain no anti-transgender provisions: no ban on hospitals providing gender-affirming care to transgender youth, no threats to strip funding from schools that support transgender students or allow them to use the bathroom, and no mandate forcing colleges to exclude transgender students from sports or activities like chess or esports. The bills are strikingly clean. As such, they avert yet another protracted shutdown fight in which transgender people are once again turned into political bargaining chips—and, at least for now, remove Congress as the immediate vehicle for new federal attacks, should they pass as-is.

When asked about the successful stripping of anti-trans provisions, a staffer for Representative Sarah McBride tells Erin In The Morning, “Rep. McBride works closely with her colleagues every day to defend the rights of all her constituents, including LGBTQ people across Delaware. In the face of efforts by the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress to roll back health care and civil rights, she was proud to work relentlessly with her colleagues in ensuring these funding bills did not include anti-LGBTQ provisions. It takes strong allies in leadership and on committees to rein in the worst excesses of this Republican trifecta, Rep. McBride remains grateful to Ranking Members DeLauro, Murray, and Democratic leadership for prioritizing the removal of these harmful riders.”

This does not mean that transgender people will not be targeted with policies and rules that affect them in all areas of life. The Trump administration has acted without regard to law in forcing bans on sports, pulling funding from schools and hospitals, and banning passport gender marker updates. The Supreme Court has been increasingly willing to let the office of the presidency under Trump do whatever it would like to transgender people. However, the lack of passage of bills targeting transgender people means that these attacks will only last for as long as we have Trump in the White House, and a future president should hopefully be easily able to reverse the attacks.

Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.

From Erin In The Morning via This RSS Feed.