Showing posts sorted by date for query LGBTQ. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query LGBTQ. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Sunday, April 26, 2026

Groups Issue World Cup Travel Advisory Over ‘Deeply Troubling Human Rights Landscape’ in US

The coalition cited the Trump administration’s “racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest.”

 
US President Donald Trump receives the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize from FIFA President Gianni Infantino on December 5, 2025 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
Apr 23, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

A coalition of more than 120 US-based civil society groups on Thursday issued a travel advisory ahead of the upcoming FIFA Men’s World Cup over what the ACLU called the “deteriorating human rights situation” in the United States amid the Trump administration’s deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, suppression of free speech, and more.

Citing the “absence of meaningful action and concrete guarantees from FIFA”—world soccer’s governing body—“host cities, or the US government,” the coalition published a warning urging “fans, players, journalists, and other visitors traveling to and within the United States” for the tournament to “have an emergency contingency plan.”

The US, Canada, and Mexico are jointly hosting the tournament, which is set to kick off with group stage matches in Mexico City and Guadalajara on June 11 and Los Angeles and Toronto the following day.

“World Cup games will be played in 11 different cities across the United States, which, like many localities, have already been the target of the Trump administration’s violent and abusive immigration crackdown,” the coalition wrote.

“While the Trump administration’s rising authoritarianism and increasing violence pose serious risks to all,” the advisory continues, “those from immigrant communities, racial and ethnic minority groups, and LGBTQ+ individuals have been and continue to be disproportionately targeted and affected by the administration’s policies and, as such, are most vulnerable to serious harm.”


According to the groups, those harms potentially include:

Arbitrary denial of entry and risk of arrest, detention, and/or deportation of non-US nationals—even those with prior authorization from the US government;

Expanded restrictions and limitations on travel and entry into the United States, given the Trump administration’s ban or severe restriction on entry of people from 19 Global South nations;

Invasive social media screening and searches of electronic devices as part of admission to the United States;

Violent and unconstitutional immigration enforcement, including racial profiling and other discrimination by law enforcement;

Suppression of speech and protest and increased surveillance; and
Serious risk of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and in some cases, death, while in immigration detention facilities or custody.

The coalition—which includes groups like the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, Center for Constitutional Rights, Committee to Protect Journalists, Haitian Bridge Alliance, Human Rights First, Legal Defense Fund, Mijente Support Committee, NAACP, National Lawyers Guild, and Southern Poverty Law Center—is urging prospective World Cup attendees to take steps to protect themselves. These include knowing their rights, securing their electronic devices, and informing trusted people about travel plans.

Visitors are also advised to download Human Rights First’s ReadyNow! mobile app “to notify trusted contacts in case of possible detention.”

Journalists covering the tournament are urged to “consult resources from the Committee to Protect Journalists or Reporters Without Borders for information on how to keep themselves safe while entering the US and while reporting inside the country.

Daniel Noroña, Americas advocacy director at Amnesty International USA, said in a statement Thursday that “fans, journalists, and others traveling to the United States for the 2026 FIFA World Cup risk encountering a deeply troubling human rights landscape, shaped by the Trump administration’s racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest.”

ACLU human rights program director Jamil Dakwar said that “FIFA has been paying lip service to human rights while cozying up with the Trump administration, putting millions of people at risk of being harmed and their basic rights violated.”

“The Trump administration’s abusive actions continue to threaten our communities, tourists, and fans alike—and it’s past time that FIFA use its leverage to push for meaningful policy changes and binding assurances that will make people feel safe to travel and enjoy the games,” Dakwar added.

FIFA faced worldwide ridicule for awarding President Donald Trump its first-ever Peace Prize last December amid his administration’s illegal high-seas boat-bombing spree, and just ahead of his bombing of Nigeria, kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, launch of the US-Israeli war of choice against Iran, and threats to attack several other countries.

Despite US bombing that’s killed thousands of its people—including hundreds of children—and FIFA’s refusal to relocate its matches outside the United States, Iran, which easily qualified, is planning to take part in the tournament.

On Thursday, Iran’s embassy in Italy decried what it called a “morally bankrupt” effort by US Special Envoy for Global Partnerships Paolo Zampolli to ban it from the tournament and replace its bracket slot with Italy, which is reeling from missing its third consecutive World Cup final.

Friday, April 24, 2026

Singing truth to power: The best protest songs of the past 10 years

Singing truth to power: The best protest songs of the past 10 years
Copyright AP Photo - Canva

By David Mouriquand
Published on 

Musicians have always harnessed the power of music to protest war, inequality and oppression, in the aim of promoting positive change. Euronews Culture delves into the best protest songs of the last decade.

WARNING: This article contains language some may find offensive.

“All of that art-for-art’s-sake stuff is BS. What are these people talking about? Are you really telling me that Shakespeare and Aeschylus weren’t writing about kings? All good art is political! There is none that isn’t. And the ones that try hard not to be political are political by saying, ‘We love the status quo’.” - Toni Morrison -

Despite what some may very foolishly claim, culture and politics do go hand in hand. Art in all its forms is a mirror held up to the world, reflecting the troubled times we live in.

Music has seen its fair share of rebellion and resistance through protest songs, with musicians using their craft as tool to denounce, empower, motivate and inspire change

From Aretha Franklin to Rage Against The Machine, via Nina Simone, Fela Kuti, Bob Marley, Marvin Gaye, Bob Dylan, NWA, Public Enemy, Dead Kennedys, The Clash and Bikini Kill (to name but a few), the tradition of artists releasing politically and socially engaged songs is nothing new.

Those who declare that the age of the protest song peaked in the 1970s are not paying enough attention: the art of the protest song is alive and well today, with artists like System Of A Down, Run The Jewels, Kendrick Lamar and Fontaines D.C. continuing to voice their dissent in song. Only this year, we’ve had Bruce Springsteen releasing ‘Streets Of Minneapolis’, a protest song denouncing “King Trump and his private army” following the killing of Alex Pretti and Rennee Good by ICE agents; U2 putting out two politically charged EPs; and Massive Attack teaming up with Tom Waits to release one of the most powerful protest anthems of the 21st century.

Can music change the world? It certainly can awaken consciousness and empower those who do pay attention.

Here is our non-exhaustive list of the most impactful protest songs of the past 10 years – art from those who believe that music does have the power to change things for the better.

Beyoncé & Kendrick Lamar – Freedom (2016)

Ever since its release in 2016, this gospel-rock song has become an anthem for various social and political movements – most notably for the 2020 George Floyd protests and Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential campaign. It’s a song about discrimination and prejudice, one which opposes oppression in all its forms. When Beyoncé sings: “I can’t move”, the line echoes “I can’t breathe” - Eric Garner’s final words before being choked to death by the police. According to a 2020 New York Times investigation, those three words were used by more than 70 people who died in US police custody.

Key lyrics: “Freedom / Freedom / I can't move / Freedom, cut me loose”

Pussy Riot – Putin Lights Up The Fires (2016)

Russian feminist punk rock collective Pussy Riot have revolted against oppression, homophobia, sexism, and were one of the first groups to take aim at Vladimir Putin. Many of their songs call out Putin (‘Organs’ and ‘Putin Has Pissed Himself’ spring to mind), and ‘Putin Lights Up The Fires’ stands out as a punk anthem that Bikini Kill would have been proud of. More impressively, the collective has made it abundantly clear that even in the face of jail sentences, staying quiet is not an option.

Key lyrics: (Translated) "The country is going to the streets with audacity / The country is going to say goodbye to the regime / The country is a wedge of feminists / And Putin is going"

Kae Tempest – Europe Is Lost (2016)

In ‘Europe Is Lost’, Kae Tempest creates a sharp and hard-hitting call to arms. It’s a cry to end apathy and “thoughts and prayers” armchair activism. Faced with the chaos of the world, they call out hard truths as well as our hypocrisy when confronted with despair happening right in front of us. It’s a perfect companion piece to their 2019 song ‘People’s Faces’ - a heart-ripping track about broken Britain, the ills of Brexit and the solace that can be found in people’s faces

Key lyrics: “Meanwhile the people were dead in their droves / And no, nobody noticed / Well, some of them noticed / You could tell by the emoji they posted”

Anohni – Drone Bomb Me (2016)

A powerful yet delicate song dealing with geopolitics, drone warfare, and the destruction of humanity, 'Drone Bomb Me' is an ode to a young Afghani girl whose family has been killed. The song chronicles how she now wants the same fate. It features on the aptly titled album 'Hopelessness', which also contains the song ‘4 Degrees’ - an engaged track about our hypocrisy when faced with climate change.

Key lyrics: “Drone bomb me / Blow me from the mountains / And into the sea”

Nadine Shah – Out The Way (2017)

Featuring on her politically charged third album ‘Holiday Destination’ (the follow-up to the gorgeous ‘Fast Food’), ‘Out The Way’ deals with nationalism and the right wing demonisation of immigrants. Shah, a second generation immigrant herself, manages to make her confrontational songs both powerful and melodically stunning, calling out dehumanisation in the most meaningful of ways.

Key lyrics: “You say "Out the way! Out the way! Out!" / Where would you have me go? / I'm second generation, don't you know?”

Hurray For The Riff Raff – Pa’lante (2017)

Derived from the Spanish phrase "para adelante" ("onwards"), this song – the penultimate track on the must-hear ‘The Navigator’ - is Alynda Segarra’s rousing call to perseverance. The singer, of Puerto Rican heritage, calls out the systemic oppression and cultural erasure of Puerto Ricans. It’s a cry for hope in the face of economic, cultural and environmental damage, and it also happens to be utterly mesmerising. If ever you have the opportunity to see Hurray For The Riff Raff live, there’s a chance the set closer will be ‘Pa’lante’. Prepare to get goosebumps.

Key lyrics: “Colonized, and hypnotized, be something / Sterilized, dehumanized, be something / Well, take your pay / And stay out the way, be something / Ah, do your best / But fuck the rest, be something”

Kneecap – C.E.A.R.T.A. (2017)

Irish rappers Kneecap released their first single in 2017, the title meaning “rights”. The story goes that a band member and his mate spray painted the word on a bus stop. When arrested by the police, the “peelers” made them spend a night locked up after refusing to speak English. The incident is documented in the song, as well as in the fantastic film Kneecap. ‘C.E.A.R.T.A’ was banned by certain radio stations, but that didn’t stop the track from putting the band on the map. It didn’t hurt that the song’s popularity coincided with the push for the Irish Language Act in the British parliament – which aimed to officially recognize and protect the Irish language.

Key lyrics: (Translated) “I don't give a fuck about any Garda / A lit joint, I'm too fast / You won't see me standing too long”

Childish Gambino – This Is America (2018)

Donald Glover, performing under Childish Gambino, released this catchy but politically charged song in 2018. It addresses Black life in America, calls out entrenched racism and opposes the violence that decries from prejudice. These themes are best heard and seen in the arresting music video, which is symbolically-loaded. With every year that passes in the US, its message continues to grow as a pertinent state of the union.

Key lyrics: “This is America / Don't catch you slippin' now / Look at how I'm livin' now / Police be trippin' now”

Angèle – Balance Ton Quoi (2019)

In the wake of the #MeToo movement (#BalanceTonPorc in French - ‘Squeal on your pig’), Belgian singer Angèle released a candid track which commented on the misogyny that women are faced with in daily life. Her lyrics denounce how women are still being treated as inferior citizens, and the cover for the single saw Angèle wearing a t-shirt that read: “Women need more sleep than men because fighting the patriarchy is exhausting.”

Key lyrics: (Translated) “People say to me, implicitly: ‘For a pretty girl, you're not that dumb’ / ‘For a funny girl, you're not that ugly’ / ‘Your parents and your brother help, they must be useful”

H.E.R. - I Can’t Breathe (2020)

H.E.R. won the Grammy for Song of the Year and the MTV Video Music Award for Video For Good for ‘I Can’t Breathe’ - a mournful track that calls for change in the face of repeated tragedy. The title and the lyrics refer to police brutality and the institutionalised racism at the heart of the US. It’s an eloquent and direct protest song, matched by its music video, which shows footage of different marches around the world protesting police violence and racism. The video also pays tribute to victims of police brutality by naming victims, including George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery and Philando Castile.

Key lyrics: “All of the names you refuse to remember / Was somebody’s brother, friend / Or a son to a mother that’s crying, saying / I can’t breathe, you’re taking my life from me”

Run The Jewels – A Few Words For The Firing Squad (Radiation) (2020)

Run The Jewels have never shied away from making a powerful political statement, and this final song on their stellar fourth album ‘RTJ4’ is another example of their dexterous lyricism and engaged spirit. It's a fiery condemnation of oppression and a call for society to evolve, with the track’s title referring to the tradition of the final words before an execution. The words ‘firing squad’ heavily imply that the person is about to be killed by a repressive regime. Many of the lyrics allude to past protest songs, including the line about bodies hung like “strange fruit” - a callback to Billie Holiday’s civil rights song about the lynching of Black people in the US.

Key lyrics: “This is for the do-gooders that the no-gooders used and then abused / For the truth tellers tied to the whippin' post, left beaten, battered, bruised / For the ones whose body hung from a tree like a piece of strange fruit / Go hard, last words to the firing squad was, "Fuck you too"

Fiona Apple – Under The Table (2020)

The incomparable Fiona Apple has long called out sexist behaviours, complex social relationships and gender inequalities in her songs. In 2017, she even released an anti-Trump song, ‘Tiny Hands’, in honour of the Women’s March on Washington. Three years later, she gave us her masterpiece, the LP titled ‘Fetch The Bolt Cutters’, which featured haunting songs about refusing to stay silent and the possibility of liberation after abuse. ‘Under The Table’ is one of these songs – a passionate call for rejecting the social and cultural expectations routinely imposed on women.

Key lyrics: “Kick me under the table all you want / I won't shut up / I won't shut up”

Bob Vylan – We Live Here (2020)

“This place has got so ugly / But this is my fucking country / And it’s never been fucking lovely.” This intense track from controversial British punk-rap duo Bob Vylan was released during the summer of the Black Lives Matter protest, and takes a wrecking ball to the archetypical depictions of Britain as a supposedly tolerant nation. It paints the picture of a country that is broken and still plagued by racial abuse.

Key lyrics: “Strong black man in the making / Hated by the place I was made in / This country is finished, but they're proud to be British / Who are they kidding?”

Shervin Hajipour – Baraye (2022)

In 2022, Iranian singer Shervin Hajipour shared his song ‘Baraye’ with the world via an Instagram post. The song was recorded in response to the protests ignited by the tragic death of Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old woman who was arrested by Iran’s morality police for allegedly not wearing her hijab properly. She died from injuries sustained during her incarceration. ‘Baraye’ became an anthem for the Woman, Life, Freedom protest movement. The powerful song made history in 2023 for becoming the first winner of the new Grammy category ‘Best Song for Social Change’. Announcing the winner, then-US First Lady Jill Biden described the song as a “powerful and poetic call for freedom and women’s rights.” A year later, Hajipour was sentenced to 3 years and 8 months for "encouraging and provoking the public to riot to disrupt national security". Thankfully, he received a pardon.

Key lyrics: (Translated) “For the tired and sleepless nerves / For men, homeland, eternity / For the girl who wanted a boy / or woman, life, freedom / For freedom / For freedom”

Fontaines D.C. - I Love You (2022)

Like Kneecap, Irish post-punkers Fontaines D.C. have continued to express their anger at modern day politics and the fresh scars of history, as well as their solidarity for Palestinians facing genocide. Described by frontman Grian Chatten as the band’s first “overtly political song”, ‘I Love You’ is a gorgeous track that contains multitudes. On the surface, it seems like an ode to a lover. However, it becomes clear that the song is about Ireland, a protest track describing abandoned youth amidst political uncertainty. Both specific in its call for change in Ireland and universal in the way it describes the heavy emotions linked to the realisation you can never return to the same place you once loved, ‘I Love You’ is a modern masterpiece in the pantheon of protest songs.

Key lyrics: “Selling genocide and half-cut pride, I understand / I had to be there from the start, I had to be the fucking man / It was a clamber of the life, I sucked the ring off every hand / Had 'em plying me with drink, even met with their demands”

Rina Sawayama – This Hell (2022)

‘This Hell’ is the sound of Japanese-British singer Rina Sawayama opposing religious extremists who violently target the queer community. Taken from her second studio album ‘Hold The Girl’, Sawayama winds up homophobes, denouncing hatred and bigotry in her empowering LGBTQ anthem. Upon the song's release, during gay pride month, Sawayama stated that she "wanted to write a western pop song that celebrated COMMUNITY and LOVE in a time where the world seemed hellish."

Key lyrics: “Don't know what I did, but they seem pretty mad about it / God hates us? Alright then / Buckle up, at dawn we're riding”

Iyah May – Karmageddon (2025)

Australian singer and former emergency room doctor Iyah May has garnered much attention and controversy over ‘Karmageddon’, which has become a viral hit on social media. The song - one of the most divisive on this list - reportedly led her management to drop her because she refused to change certain lyrics. Some of these denounce big pharma, cancel culture, violence against women, gun rights, a “man-made virus” (in reference to COVID) and genocide. It’s a scattergun approach to a myriad of topics. Some have applauded her for her DGAF candidness; others bemoan that the song has been embraced by the far-right.

Key lyrics: “Diss tracks about beating up your queen / While women dying doesn't cause a scene / While we're fed all these distractions / Kids are killed from Israel's actions”

Massive Attack & Tom Waits – Boots On The Ground (2026)

This year has seen the release of several protest songs - whether it’s Bruce Springsteen flipping the bird to Trump and paying tribute to the victims of ICE or U2 releasing a politically-charged EP addressing both how “America will rise against the people of the lie” and how one can live compassionately in times of violence. Arguably the most powerful one (so far) has come from British trip-hop icons Massive Attack and legendary American singer-songwriter Tom Waits, who teamed up for ‘Boots On The Ground’. Both a missile aimed at the criminal actions of ICE and the wider state of play ("Across the western hemisphere, state authoritarianism and the militarisation of police forces are fusing again with neo-fascist politics"), the song is uniquely haunting and undeniably impactful. The track was accompanied by a stirring video, made with the work of photo artist thefinaleye. When artists of this caliber deliver songs this rousing, it gives you hope that humanity isn’t completely doomed.

Key lyrics: “Now who the hell are these federal pricks? / Hiding in the Senate like a bloated-ass tick / Air-conditioned fuckstick loafers / Sittin' in a room full of army posters”

Tuesday, April 21, 2026

The Jingoist States of America: Our Cruel Mistreatment of Asylum Seekers

At such a moment in history, a movement that connects the dots between our many struggles is certainly the way forward. The plight of refugees—and how we treat them as a society—is a story that connects us all.


People from El Salvador and Honduras who are seeking asylum in the United States sit outside the El Chaparral border crossing in Tijuana, Mexico.

(Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

TomDispatch



In late March, I sat in the gallery of the Supreme Court for the first time in my life. Throughout my 30 years of grassroots anti-poverty work, I’ve joined countless protests and vigils outside the Court. In 2018, I was even arrested and held in detention for praying on its palatial steps. Now, I was seated with a clear view of the nine justices of the nation’s highest court. I was there as a guest of immigrant rights lawyers, as their team made oral arguments in Noem v. Al Otro Lado, the most significant case on the right to asylum in decades.

In February, the Kairos Center (the organization I direct) authored an interfaith amicus brief on that very case, alongside 31 denominations and organizations representing faith traditions practiced by billions worldwide. Those groups, including the Alliance of Baptists, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Hindus for Human Rights, the Latino Christian National Network, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Reconstructing Judaism, the Union for Reform Judaism, the Unitarian Universalist Association, the General Synod of the United Church of Christ, and the General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church, joined together to declare that our societal obligation to provide for persecuted outsiders is a universally shared moral principle.

Although the case has largely flown under the public radar, there is indeed a lot at stake. Filed on behalf of asylum seekers, Noem v. Al Otro Lado focuses on the legality of a 2018 Trump border policy blocking access to the U.S. asylum process for people arriving at the border with Mexico. Immigrant rights advocates argue that such a turnback policy, under which immigration officers physically stop people seeking safety at official border crossings from setting foot on U.S. soil, flouts decades of settled federal immigration law and our society’s most deeply held legal and moral values.

For more than a century, the government has been required to undertake a legal process of inspection when people seek asylum at official ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border (as they must inspect all noncitizens seeking admission to the United States). That requirement is supposed to ensure that this country doesn’t send vulnerable people back into danger without first allowing them to seek protection. A wide range of immigration lawyers and legal experts argue that the first Trump administration’s turnback policy, euphemistically called “metering,” directly undermined the government’s responsibility to process such asylum claims. As a result, vulnerable children, families, and adults were regularly forced to remain indefinitely stranded in perilous conditions in Mexico.

Although the turnback policy has not been in effect since 2021, when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared it unlawful, the Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to review the case. Should the government win (which is all too possible given the hyperpartisan nature of the current Court), the consequences are sure to be grave and far-reaching. The Department of Homeland Security would have the legal backing to turn away untold thousands of desperate people at the border, potentially clearing the way for even more expansive border closures, while further intensifying the jingoistic nationalism that defines the Trump administration. Alongside other landmark cases this term, like Trump v. Barboza, in which the government seeks to undo the constitutional right to birthright citizenship, the results of Noem v. Al Otro Lado are likely to reveal the lengths to which the Supreme Court is willing to backstop the president’s assault on democracy, including accelerated attacks on the rights of vulnerable populations.

The day I was there, the existential stakes of that case and the larger societal crisis in which it was unfolding did not seem to concern the court’s conservative justices. I had the words of George Washington (written in 1788 to the radical Dutch republican Francis Van der Kemp) in my mind as I sat in the gallery: “I had always hoped that this land might become a safe & agreeable asylum to the virtuous & persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong.”

Unfortunately, having heard the statements and reactions of some of the judges, I fear that the majority of the Supreme Court may no longer agree with that foundational vision for this country.

Courtroom Friezes and Draconian Law


The first thing that struck me on entering the Supreme Court gallery were the stone friezes on the walls of the room. Designed by Adolf Weinman more than a century ago, those large marble reliefs, featuring what he called the “great lawgivers of history,” tower over the space. Among them are prominent religious figures like Moses (holding a scroll of the Ten Commandments), King Solomon, Confucius, and a rendition of the Prophet Muhammad (that is entirely unrecognizable). The friezes also include Roman Emperor Octavian (otherwise known as Caesar Augustus, Jesus’s great nemesis), French King Louis IX (leader of the seventh and eighth crusades), and Draco (a Greek jurist whose legacy lurks in the word “draconian” because of the extreme measures he took to punish minor offenses).

As I stared at those figures, I reflected on the message they convey about the complex civilizational lineages from which the Supreme Court and our legal system derive their authority. In our amicus brief, we reflected on those varied lineages as they pertain to the right to seek asylum:
“Our asylum laws are the modern embodiment of a deeply rooted religious, cultural, and historical heritage that has consistently affirmed society’s obligation to provide refuge for those seeking safety. Asylum reaches back to some of the earliest moments of recorded human history. It was practiced throughout the ancient civilizations that forged the foundation of Western society. This tradition can also be found in the form of church sanctuary asylum, a mainstay of European culture for over a millennium.

“Our very nation began as a haven for persecuted political and religious minorities. This tradition is present throughout our history, from the practices of Native Americans to the Underground Railroad to modern times. Congress adopted our current asylum laws in significant part due to the efforts of faith-based groups seeking to uphold deeply held societal, moral, and cultural principles.”

Despite such deeply held and ancient principles, I couldn’t shake a sense of impending doom as I scanned the faces on the friezes and those of the justices. I thought of the awesome and awful power of Rome, depicted throughout the gallery, and its draconian reign of “peace” (or what Secretary of War Pete Hegseth recently termed “delivering peace through strength”). And I recalled the worsening anti-democratic and pro-oligarchic turn our own Supreme Court has taken in the Trump era.

Just consider the rulings from the past few years: the Court has essentially given immunity to the executive branch (although the Court is supposed to be a critical part of a federal system of checks and balances), criminalized homelessness (although the U.S. claims to be a nation of opportunity and prosperity for all), and degraded voting rights (cutting off the legs of our democracy).

Before oral arguments began in Noem v. Al Otro Lado, I was under no illusion that the Supreme Court delivers equality, freedom, and justice for all. And yet, on an issue as basic and legally sound as the right to seek asylum, I was still shocked by the flippancy of the court’s conservative judges. For hours, they rocked in their chairs, physically broadcasting their disinterest in the case. Rather than take seriously more than 100 years of legal precedent and hundreds more of long-established societal practice, they seemed to enjoy getting into hyper-specific and cherrypicked semantic and rhetorical arguments with Kelsi Brown Cochran, our lawyer.

In preparation for that day, I had brushed up on the history of U.S. asylum law. An important story in that history is the S.S. St. Louis, a ship that in 1939 was carrying 930 refugees from Hamburg, Germany, fleeing the Nazi regime, who were first denied entry to Cuba and then to the United States, only to be returned to Europe, where many of them were taken to the Nazi death camps.

Reflecting on that story at a pre-hearing press conference, Nicole Elizabeth Ramos, border rights project director at Al Otro Lado, a plaintiff in the case, offered this explanation:
“The right to seek asylum is not a policy preference or a loophole — it is a legal right and a moral commitment forged in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Seeking asylum is not like taking a number at a deli counter and waiting for your turn. You cannot ask someone fleeing rape, torture, or death threats to wait in danger indefinitely because a government has decided their lives are inconvenient. We filed this case because the United States has an obligation to follow its own laws — laws duly enacted by Congress. The question before the Court is whether those laws can be set aside by executive action, or whether they remain binding at the border, as written.”

In their apparent willingness to flout precedent and condemn modern-day asylees to harm or even death, the conservative justices unselfconsciously aligned themselves with American nativism and European fascism of the 1930s. If, in their final decision, they uphold Trump’s turnback policy, they will be affirming that, were the S.S. St Louis to sail again today, the ship would still be denied entry and its passengers asylum.

The Moral Crisis Is Not “Border Surges” But the Closing of the Border

The morning of those oral arguments, the Kairos Center and other faith organizations held an interfaith prayer vigil on the steps of the Supreme Court to call attention to the case. Reverend Michael Neuroth, director of the United Church of Christ’s Washington D.C. office, put the matter vividly: “Welcoming and protecting the stranger is not a minor tenet of our faith but is a foundational moral obligation in each of our traditions. Dismantling the right to asylum is morally wrong, strategically short-sighted, and increases insecurity here in our nation. We must be a nation of compassion, a place of refuge to those in need.”

The vigil was organized in the heart of the “holy season” amid Ramadan, Passover, and Easter. As billions of people globally engage in rituals of remembrance, repentance, deliverance, and liberation, our prayers and petitions focused not only on the legal precedent for the right to seek asylum, but on the moral imperative to do so. For Christians, protecting and welcoming the immigrant is one of Jesus’s first and most powerful teachings. It’s also among the highest moral commands of the Torah. As the prophet Jeremiah reminds us, “Do no wrong to the foreigner and do not shed innocent blood.” Asylum and societal hospitality are well-recognized rights within Islamic law and theology, a fundamental Hindu and Buddhist tenet, and part of Native American spiritual teachings.

In our interfaith amicus brief, we wrote: “As the many faiths practiced by this country’s citizens teach, a society that does not protect the least among us is a failed society.” As faith leaders, we had in mind not only the right to seek asylum, but the many ways the Trump administration has deepened and intensified a moral crisis at the heart of our society. We were thinking about the ongoing attacks on immigrant communities — from ICE-led campaigns of terror to family and child detention in places like Dilley, Texas. There was also the stripping of life-saving healthcare and food support from millions of Americans through cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP); the criminalization and forced deprivation of LGBTQ+ people; and the prosecution of anillegal war that threatens the lives of so many in Iran and the broader region, as well as the livelihoods of billions of us across this globe.

In Noem v. Al Otro Lado, the Trump administration is attempting to mask its cruelty and despotism through banal legal arguments. By focusing semantically on when protections start for asylum seekers and debating the meaning of the term “arrives in” (as in this country, of course), its lawyers were ignoring the illegality and immorality of border agents blocking asylum seekers from crossing the U.S.-Mexican border and the larger question of whether the United States can any longer be a place of safety and protection for all families “yearning to be free” of violence and persecution.

The government is, of course, hoping that we don’t make the connections between the stripping away of asylum rights, the larger issue of immigrant rights, and the many other ways that it’s targeting “the least among us.” That’s a mistake we can’t make and where the teachings of our many faith traditions have encouragement to offer. In Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and more, love, justice, and peace are not parceled out only for certain people in certain places. Across our religions, all life is sacred, full stop!

No Turning Back for Anyone


Intermixed with the important lawgivers of history in that marble frieze in the Supreme Court gallery are engraved winged personifications of “Peace,” “The Rights of Man,” “History,” “Authority,” “Fame,” and more. Those winged characters form what looked to me like a Greco-Roman “choir of angels,” proclaiming “law and order” at the expense of rights and dignity for us all.

Sitting there, I reflected on just who was not in that room listening to those arguments or forcing the Supreme Court justices to face the very lives impacted by their decision. I thought about all those who will never have access to that courtroom, or justice of any sort for that matter, the millions of people struggling to fight for their communities and a future where everybody is in and nobody is out.

Those people are — or at least should be — our hope. They are the true “choir of angels” who came out for the recent No Kings Day demonstrations and are standing up for the rights and dignity of communities all over the country. They are also the people who are increasingly giving Donald Trump historically low approval ratings. And here’s the truth of these times: this administration has nothing to offer everyday people, other than hardened borders and wars that nobody wants.

At such a moment in history, a movement that connects the dots between our many struggles is certainly the way forward. Therefore, it seems fitting that the coalition that came together to fight this case and protect the rights of asylum seekers calls itself “No Turning Back.” It reminds me of a song by Emma’s Revolution that I’ve sung many times at protests and gatherings. Its key lines are a reminder of what we all need to keep in mind in this deeply disturbing Trumpian moment of ours:

“Gonna keep on moving forward
Keep on moving forward
Keep on moving forward
Never turning back
Never turning back”


© 2023 TomDispatch.com


Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis
Rev. Dr. Liz Theoharis is co-chair of the Poor People's Campaign. She is the author of "Always with Us?: What Jesus Really Said about the Poor" (2017).
Full Bio >
























Hardt, Michael. Multitude: war and democracy in the Age of Empire /. Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri. p. cm. Sequel to: Empire. Includes index. ISBN 1-59420 ...

Empire / Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri. p. cm. Includes bibliographical ... 4.3 The Multitude against Empire. 393. Notes. 415. Index. 473. Page 11. PREFACE.