by Retired Amb. James Story | Jun 18, 2026 | Opinion
A drone strike in Bolívar state, Venezuela, last week killed the founder of Tren de Aragua — and marked a turning point in remote warfare. The United States is now doing in its own hemisphere what it once helped partner nations and allies do for themselves. The question that should be considered is not whether the people who are killed will deserve it, it is whether the policy works — and how long our neighbors will keep taking our calls.
The use of drones to target and kill enemy combatants started in response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and, before this month, had always happened “over there.” On Nov. 3, 2002, a CIA Predator put a Hellfire missile into a Land Cruiser crossing the Marib desert in Yemen. It killed Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harithi (also known as Abu Ali al-Harithi), an architect of the USS Cole bombing, and five other Al Qaeda operatives. It was the first American drone strike outside of a conventional battlefield and the first targeted killing of the war on terror.
The United States is now doing in its own hemisphere what it once helped partner nations and allies do for themselves.
A critical detail is the authorization and signature behind the missile order: President George W. Bush had lifted the standing ban on assassinations after 9/11 and signed a finding authorizing the CIA to pursue Al Qaeda worldwide. Killing a specific man in a country where we were not at war was, in 2002, a presidential act — a decision made at the very top levels of our government and with the host government’s cooperation.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal,
by Lauren Harper | Jun 18, 2026 | culture, Opinion
The Obama Presidential Center in Chicago houses many things: the “Obamalisk,” a 225-foot tower that is currently the tallest structure ever featured at a presidential site; a Chicago public library; a massive athletic complex; and a lot more. It was designed as a grand monument to the legacy of America’s first Black president and as a boon to the community that surrounds it. It is not technically, however, a presidential library.
Unlike many of its predecessors, the Obama Foundation decided not to officially partner with the National Archives and Records Administration to build a government-run library, with on-site government archives. (It will partner with them on a digitized archive.) This decision was at least partially a financial one. Barack Obama would have been the first president to have to pay NARA 60% of the cost to build the facility as an endowment for future maintenance (prior presidents had to pay just 20%). Since the site ultimately cost $850 million, the foundation would have owed NARA over half a billion dollars.
The Obama Foundation decision had a secondary, unintended consequence: It likely made it easier for President Donald Trump to justify his own privatized presidential center.
While perhaps fiscally responsible, the Obama Foundation decision had a secondary, unintended consequence: It likely made it easier for President Donald Trump to justify his own privatized presidential center, which is raising red flags both because of its fundraising tactics and because of the greater control Trump may have over his records than his predecessors.
In late March, Eric Trump, chair of the Trump Presidential Library Foundation, unveiled renderings of a proposed $1 billion, 50-story Miami skyscraper. The affiliated
by Guthrie Graves-Fitzsimmons | Jun 18, 2026 | Opinion
In the latest instance of conservative Christians treating the celebration of diversity as a threat, three pitchers on the San Francisco Giants wrote Bible verses on their Pride-themed caps, ostensibly as a way to reclaim the symbol of the rainbow from the LGBTQ rights movement.
Major League Baseball told the players that writing on their caps violated the league’s uniform policy. Conservative Christians cried foul. The vice president of the United States posted, “Trump won we don’t have to do this anymore.”
This is all further proof that Americans’ conservative Christian persecution complex thrives on trivial controversies.
This is all further proof that Americans’ conservative Christian persecution complex thrives on trivial controversies. The religious right is trying to stretch this weak grievance into extra bases.
But something is missing from this tired narrative of gays vs. God: These players committed an unforced theological error. Genesis 9:12-16, the verse players inscribed on their hats, teaches us the opposite of the condemnation these de facto anti-LGBTQ activists wanted us to hear.
Let’s actually read the Bible, instead of using it as a prop:
And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: I have set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh, and the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy
by Ja'han Jones | Jun 18, 2026 | Opinion
President Donald Trump’s Justice Department is trying to thwart a reparations program in Evanston, Illinois, that was set up to provide recompense to Black residents affected by racist policies.
Officials in Trump’s government apparently think it’s perfectly fine for federally prosecuted perpetrators of a fundamentally racist coup attempt to qualify for payouts via an “anti-weaponization” fund that one GOP representative referred to as “reparations.” Meanwhile, the DOJ moved on Tuesday to intervene in an ongoing federal lawsuit against Evanston’s first-in-the-nation reparations program, arguing that compensating Black victims of racism is illegal.
“Under the pretext of paying reparations for events more than 100 years ago, the City of Evanston has chosen to distribute millions of dollars in cash and housing benefits to people because of the color of their skin or the color of the skin of their parents, grandparents, or great grandparents,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, the Trump loyalist who has used the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division as a weapon to attack civil rights, said in a press release on Tuesday.
Contrary to Dhillon’s claim, no one is slated to receive money simply because they or their ancestors are Black, or because of events that occurred 100 years ago. The reparations program is currently constituted authorized funds collected via a cannabis tax to support a program authorizing housing grants for Black residents and descendants of people targeted by racist housing policies in Evanston. And sure, while those policies may have started a century ago in some cases, their effects are still lingering today. The program’s premise is not to pay people because of their skin color, but because they can show how
by Michael A. Cohen | Jun 18, 2026 | Opinion
In his appearance on the Tuesday edition of “Fox and Friends,” Vice President JD Vance had a complaint: “Iranian propaganda,” he said, is misleading observers regarding the memorandum of understanding, or MOU, signed by the United States and Iran earlier this week.
“Some elements in their society,” Vance said, “are trying to sell this deal as positively as possible to their domestic audience.”
Ironically, Vance’s complaint was an accurate description of the failing sales pitch that he and Trump have made for the deal. The White House agreed to this ceasefire extension that met none of its prewar objectives while providing enormous financial concessions to Tehran. Now, the administration is desperately trying to argue otherwise. Quite simply, Trump got played by the Iranians, and no one is buying his spin job.
Before the conflict began, the Strait of Hormuz was open and free of charge. This agreement simply reaffirms the prewar status quo.
The most telling sign that the ceasefire deal is a dud is the White House waited until Wednesday to share the text of the MOU. It wasn’t sent to Congress; even the Israeli government, which fought alongside the U.S., struggled to get a copy. As Nevada Sen. Jacky Rosen noted, if the deal was “so great, wouldn’t the president have printed it on gold leaf paper and sent it out to all of us?”
Before finally sharing the text, the White House released a set of talking points on Tuesday that only highlighted the deal’s failings and the calamitous decision to go to war in the first place.
For example, the first talking point says, “Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. President
by Austin Sarat | Jun 17, 2026 | Opinion
The campaign to end the death penalty in the United States got an important new ally on Tuesday, when Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine announced his opposition to capital punishment and called on his state’s legislature to abolish it. For a Republican leader of a red state who was a longtime supporter of the death penalty, the change of heart may have outsize influence beyond Ohio’s borders.
DeWine, who is term-limited, is showing that opposition to capital punishment is no longer just the preserve of liberals and progressive reformers. It has gone mainstream.
DeWine’s decision to call for the abolition of the death penalty marks something of a sea change in his views.
Whether or not the Ohio legislature acts on DeWine’s call and abolishes the death penalty, the governor’s stance may help give political cover to governors in other states who are convinced that it is long past time to move past the practice of state-sanctioned executions.
As I have argued previously, Ohio is one of America’s most important death penalty states. The punishment is authorized by law, but it has been more than eight years since the state carried out an execution. And it has a long history of capital punishment, as well as a large death row population.
That’s part of why DeWine’s announcement has a chance to resonate widely, though he has more to do. He needs to commute the death sentences of more than 100 people on Ohio’s death row. If and when he exercises that authority, his example may encourage his fellow chief executives in places like California, Kansas and Pennsylvania — each of whom also opposes the death penalty
