Posted in Politics and Movements: US

‘Serious threat to the First Amendment’ as Trump admin wins first antifa terror charge

“A case like this helps the government kind of see how far they can go in criminalizing constitutionally protected protest,” one legal advocate said.

by Olivia Rosane March 16, 2026 (therealnews.com)

Signs supporting protesters charged with domestic terrorism over an anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protest are seen outside the courtroom in Fort Worth, Texas on March 11, 2026. Photo via DFW Support Committee/X

Get fearless, uncompromising truth in your inbox. Subscribe to The Real News.Sign up

This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Mar. 15, 2026. It is shared here under a Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) license.

The government has largely won its first case bringing material-support-for-terrorism charges against protesters alleged to belong to “antifa,” which President Donald Trump designated as a domestic terror group in 2025 despite the fact that no such organized group exists and the president has no legal authority to designate organizations as domestic terror groups.

A federal jury in Fort Worth, Texas agreed on Friday to convict eight people of domestic terrorism because they wore all black to a protest outside Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Prairieland Detention Facility in Alvarado, Texas on July 4, 2025, at which one of the protesters shot and wounded a police officer. Legal experts say the verdict could bolster attempts by the administration to stifle dissent.

“A case like this helps the government kind of see how far they can go in criminalizing constitutionally protected protests and also helps them kind of intimidate, increase the fear, hoping that folks in other cities then will think twice over protesting,” Suzanne Adely, interim president of the National Lawyers Guild, told The Associated Press.

The administration promised it would be the first such case of many.

“The US lost today with this verdict.”

“Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization that has been allowed to flourish in Democrat-led cities—not under President Trump,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement Friday. “Today’s verdict on terrorism charges will not be the last as the Trump administration systematically dismantles Antifa and finally halts their violence on America’s streets.”

The trial revolved around a nighttime protest at which participants planned to set off fireworks in solidarity with the around 1,000 migrants detained inside the Prarieland ICE facility. Some participants brought guns, which is legal in Texas, as The Intercept reported.

Sam Levine explained in The Guardian what happened next:

Shortly after arriving at the facility, two or three of the protesters broke away from the larger group and began spray painting cars in the parking lot, a guard shack, slashed the tires on a government van, and broke a security camera. Two ICE detention guards came out and told the protesters to stop. A police officer arrived on the scene shortly after and drew his weapon at one of the people allegedly doing vandalism. One of the protesters was standing in the woods with an AR-15 and hit him in the shoulder. The officer would survive.

At first, the federal government charged those arrested after the event with “attempted murder of a police officer,” according to NOTUS.

However, that changed after Trump’s designation of antifa as a terror group in September and the release of National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7), which directs federal law enforcement to target left-leaning groups and activities. The next month, the government’s case expanded to include terrorism charges.

“This wouldn’t be a terrorism case if it weren’t for that memo,” one defense lawyer told NOTUS on background.

The prosecution argued that the fact that the protesters wore black clothes to the protest was enough to convict them of material support for terrorism.

“Providing your body as camouflage for others to do the enumerated acts is providing support,” Assistant US Attorney Shawn Smith said during closing arguments, as The Intercept reported on Thursday. “It’s impossible to tell who is doing what. That’s the point.”

The defense, meanwhile, warned the jury about the free speech implications of the charge.

“The government is asking you to put protesters in prison as terrorists. You are the only people who can stop that,” Blake Burns, an attorney for defendant Elizabeth Soto, said, according to The Guardian.

“When the villain is a made-up boogeyman then the target becomes ‘anyone who disagrees with Trump’—and this is the result.”

Ultimately, the jury decided to convict eight defendants of material support for terrorism as well as riot, conspiracy to use and carry an explosive, and use and carry of an explosive. However, they dismissed attempts by the state to argue that the protest constituted a pre-planned ambush and charge four people who had not shot at the police officer with attempted murder and discharging a firearm during a crime. Only Benjamin Song, the alleged shooter, was charged with one count of attempted murder and three counts of discharging a firearm.

The jury also convicted a ninth defendant, Daniel Rolando Sanchez Estrada, of conspiracy to conceal documents. Sanchez Estrada, who was not at the protest, had simply moved a box of zines out of his wife’s home after she was arrested for the protest, according to The Intercept.

“The US lost today with this verdict,” Sanchez Estrada’s attorney, Christopher Weinbel, said, as AP reported.

Support the Prarieland Defendants said in a statement, “Everything about this trial from beginning to end has proven what we have said all along: This is a sham trial, built on political persecution and ideological attacks coming from the top.”

However, the group commended the solidarity that had sprung up among the defendants and their allies and vowed to continue to support them.

“We have a long journey ahead of us to continue fighting these charges along with the state level charges,” they said. “What happens here sets the tone for what’s to come. We are here and we won’t give up.”

Outside observers warned about the implication for the right to protest under Trump.

“Remember all the people who dismissed the alarm over NSPM-7 because ‘ANTIFA isn’t even a real organization’? We told you that didn’t matter. When the villain is a made-up boogeyman then the target becomes ‘anyone who disagrees with Trump’—and this is the result,” said Cory Archibald, the co-founder of Track AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee].

Content creator Austin MacNamara said: “The Prairieland trial was given almost zero media coverage because of the blatant lies by DHS [Department of Homeland Security] and Police. This verdict now sets a precedent for criminalization of dissent across the board. Noise demos, Black-Bloc, pamphlets/zines/red cards, all of this can be used to imprison you.”

Academic Nathan Goodman wrote that convicting people of terrorism based on clothing was a “serious threat to the First Amendment.”

The verdict gives new poignancy to what defendant Meagan Morris told NOTUS ahead of the jury’s decision: “If we win, I think it shows that Trump’s mandate is not working, that the people understand that you can’t criminalize, you know, First and Second Amendment-protected activities. And I think if we lose, then… a lot of the country is OK with what’s going on. And it will be a much darker time, it’ll just signify a much increased crackdown on political opposition and free speech.”

Olivia Rosane

Olivia Rosane is a staff writer for Common Dreams.More by Olivia Rosane

People participate in a “No Kings” national day of protest in Washington, DC, on October 18, 2025.

 (Photo by Amid Farahi/AFP via Getty Images)

“Our data on the USA goes back to 1789. What we’re seeing now is the most severe magnitude of democratic backsliding ever in the country.”

Brad Reed

Mar 17, 2026 (CommonDreams.org)

A report released on Tuesday by the V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden has found that President Donald Trump and his administration are dismantling democracy in the US at a speed that “is unprecedented in modern history.”

In its report, V-Dem categorizes the first year of Trump’s second term as “a rapid and aggressive concentration of powers in the presidency.”

RECOMMENDED…

‘Batshit Authoritarianism’: Trump Allies Drafting Order to Give Him ‘Extraordinary Power Over Voting’

Call Grows to Impeach Trump, ‘The Most Dangerous Man on the Planet’

In fact, V-Dem says that the Trump administration has accomplished in just one year what most budding autocracies take a decade to achieve, adding that “the speed of decline is comparable to some coups d´état.”

Of particular concern is the failure of the legislative branch of the US government to apply any kind of oversight or check upon the executive branch, the report explains.

“The Republican-controlled Congress seems to have abdicated its constitutional role in favor of the executive branch, ceding significant legislative, fiscal, and oversight powers during 2025,” the report says. “The Trump administration has de facto repeatedly taken over the Congressional ‘power of the purse’—enshrined in the Constitution and in the 1974 Impoundment Control Act—unilaterally cancelling or reallocating federal funding.”

The report also points fingers at the US Senate for repeatedly rolling over and confirming unqualified Trump nominees, which it says is tantamount to letting the White House “sideline” the upper chamber’s authority altogether.

V-Dem goes on to document the administration’s repeated assaults on the judicial branch and the rule of law in general during his second term, starting when Trump issued a mass pardon to more than 1,500 alleged or convicted criminals who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Since then, the administration has waged a pressure campaign against judges who rule against it consisting of “impeachment resolutions and misconduct complaints,” while also using executive orders to punish major law firms simply for representing the president’s political enemies in court.

The lone bright spot in US democracy, says V-Dem, is that the administration has not yet been able to attack states’ powers to administer their own elections, although not for lack of effort.

“Actions taken in 2025 raise concerns regarding the integrity of the 2026 midterms,” the report warns. “This primarily concerns attempts to assert federal control over election processes, which must be decentralized and state-run, according to the Constitution.”

The report notes that Trump has issued an executive order that attempts to override states’ election laws by restricting mail-in voting and mandating voter IDs at polling places nationwide, but adds that “many provisions of this order have been blocked and others are still being challenged in federal court.”

In an interview with The Guardian, V-Dem founder Staffan Lindberg used historical context to explain why Trump’s assault on US democracy is truly without precedent.

“Our data on the USA goes back to 1789,” he said. “What we’re seeing now is the most severe magnitude of democratic backsliding ever in the country.”

He also said that other authoritarian leaders have taken much more time in ripping down their states’ democratic institutions than Trump has.

“For Orbán in Hungary, it took about four years,” Lindberg said, “for Vučić in Serbia, it took eight years, and for Erdoğan in Turkey and Modi in India, it took about 10 years to accomplish the suppression of democratic institutions that Trump has achieved in only one year.”

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Brad Reed

Brad Reed is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

Full Bio >

US Attorney General Pam Bondi attends a Women’s History Month event in the East Room of the White House on March 12, 2026 in Washington, DC. 

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

“We live in a country where we have one reality for everyday people and another for the rich, the well-connected, and the well-protected,” Lee said. “And that cannot continue to be our reality.”

Stephen Prager

Mar 17, 2026 (CommonDreams.org)

Democratic Rep. Summer Lee introduced articles of impeachment against US Attorney General Pam Bondi on Tuesday and accused the nation’s top prosecutor of “breaking the law to protect pedophiles” and prosecute President Donald Trump’s “political opponents.”

“We live in a country where we have one reality for everyday people and another for the rich, the well-connected, and the well-protected. And that cannot continue to be our reality,” Lee (D-Pa.) said in a video posted to her social media on Tuesday announcing the articles.

RECOMMENDED…

DOJ Under Fire for Withholding Epstein Files Related to Alleged Trump Child Sex Assault

Call Grows to Impeach Trump, ‘The Most Dangerous Man on the Planet’

Two of the five articles pertain to Bondi’s conduct surrounding the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) release of files related to the late billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which the DOJ has been accused of covering up to protect Trump.

One article accuses Bondi of obstruction of Congress for failing to comply with a subpoena in July 2025, which required the DOJ to release the full, unredacted files to the House Oversight Committee in August as part of a congressional inquiry.

“The Department of Justice refused to adhere to the subpoena and withheld substantial evidence; evidence logs indicate that amongst the withheld evidence are FBI interviews with a survivor who accused Trump of sexual abuse,” the article reads.

In February, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee announced that they were investigating the DOJ’s handling of an accusation made against Trump to the FBI in 2019. A woman accused the president of having sexually assaulted her at the age of 13 in the 1980s.

Another impeachment article accuses Bondi of violating the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), signed into law in November, which required the DOJ to release “all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials” pertaining to the Epstein case without redacting information to protect powerful figures from embarrassment.

The DOJ missed the December 19 deadline to release the files and has since released only about 3 million pages of documents as part of its “final” trove, while millions more remain unavailable.

The pages that have been released, the article says, “were heavily redacted” to scrub the names of Trump and other powerful figures, but sensitive information about many of Epstein’s victims—including identifying details and nude photographs—was released, even though the law said redacting this information was permitted.

Meanwhile, it says the DOJ “continues to withhold documents,” including FBI interviews with the Trump accuser.

Three of four memos detailing the interviews with the accuser were posted to the DOJ website in March. They include the victim’s graphic claims that Trump hit her after she bit his penis when he attempted to force her to perform oral sex.

Trump has denied the allegations, and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has called the alleged victim “disturbed.”

Approximately 37 pages of FBI records related to the accusation, including the fourth memo and pages of agent notes, remain unreleased to the public, according to Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).

“Pam Bondi is complicit in the most egregious cover-up in American history, hiding documents that reveal a young woman reported being sexually assaulted by Donald Trump when she was just a minor,” said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), a cosponsor of Lee’s impeachment articles. “Bondi’s actions are not only disgusting and wrong. They are also illegal.”

Another article accuses Bondi of having “abused” the DOJ and FBI’s powers in a partisan fashion—to target Trump’s enemies and shield his friends from accountability. It also cites Bondi’s attempts to criminalize protesters who express anti-Trump viewpoints by designating them as “domestic terrorism threats” and creating secretive lists of organizations and individuals to be targeted.

Bondi is also accused of misleading courts on several occasions—including in the cases against former FBI Director James Comey and the Salvadoran national Kilmar Ábrego García and says she presented “demonstrably false allegations in court to support baseless prosecutions against protesters.”

She is also accused of perjury before Congress during her confirmation hearing, where she pledged not to politicize her office or target journalists. It also accused her of lying during last month’s contentious hearing in which she claimed that there was “no evidence” in the Epstein files “that Donald Trump has committed a crime.”

No US attorney general has ever been impeached by the US House, which requires a simple majority. Trump was impeached twice by a Democratic-controlled House during his first term of office, though neither resulted in a conviction in the Senate, which requires a two-thirds majority.

Outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had articles of impeachment filed against her in January by more than 80 cosponsors following the shooting of two US citizens by immigration agents.

Earlier this month, Noem became the highest-ranking Trump official to be fired in his second term, and earlier this week, Democrats on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees referred her to the DOJ for prosecution, also for perjury.

In addition to Ansari, Lee’s impeachment articles against Bondi are cosponsored by Reps. Valerie Foushee (D-NC), Dave Min (D-Calif.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), and Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.). Previous articles of impeachment against Bondi have been introduced by Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) earlier this month.

Lee emphasized that while Bondi “deserves to be held accountable,” this “is also about what we want our government to be, and who we want it to work for.”

“This is our chance to get justice,” Lee said, “to hold people accountable who, time and again, have gotten away with screwing us over.”

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Stephen Prager

Stephen Prager is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

Full Bio >

• Take Action Now: Stop the Republican Attack on Voting Rights
•  Take action: Tell Congress to reject the SAVE Act bills
• Take action: Tell Congress to subpoena Hegseth about the Iran school attack
• Take action: Tell Congress to stop Trump from sending American troops into Iran — and vote no on the draft
•  Take action: Call Congress at (202) 224-3121 today — and every day until the vote — and urge your senators and representative to vote no on Mullins for DHS and NO on the SAVE ACT
• Bonus action: Register to vote, vote in every election, and help your community do the same. Reproductive freedom is won and lost at the ballot box.
• Bonus action: Sign up for the next national No Kings Day of Action and show up in solidarity with everyone whose rights are under attack. The Complete Guide to the No Kings Day of Action is now available.

No Kings Rally 3
March 28, 11:30am–4pm
Embarcadero Center to City Hall
More info

In June 2025, 5 million people took to the streets across 2,100 locations to protest the Trump administration’s policies. By October, 7 million people rallied in all 50 states for No Kings 2.

Since then, we’ve seen more unlawful abductions, invasions, civilian casualties, and countless other abuses of power. We need to make the next rally the largest peaceful demonstration yet to show we resist Trump and the Republican Congress who enables him.

Organized by Indivisible.

posted by SF League of Pissed-Off Voters | theleaguesf.org
March 16, 2026

Our membership voted to endorse the following candidates and ballot measures for the June 2026 election.

San Francisco Offices

US House, Congressional District 11: Connie Chan
US House, Congressional District 15: No Endorsement

Board of Supervisors, District 2: Lori Brooke
Board of Supervisors, District 4: Natalie Gee
SFUSD Board of Education: Virginia Cheung
Superior Court Judge, Seat 16: Alexandra Pray

State Assembly, District 17: No Endorsement
State Assembly, District 19: No Endorsement

Local Propositions

Prop A: $535M Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond: Yes
Prop B: Lifetime Term Limits: No 
Prop C: Decrease Business Taxes: No
Prop D: Excessive CEO Salary Tax: Yes 

Statewide Offices

Governor: Tom Steyer
Lieutenant Governor: Oliver Ma
Secretary of State: Shirley Weber
State Controller: Meghann Adams
State Treasurer: No Endorsement
Attorney General: No Recommendation
Insurance Commissioner: Jane Kim
State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Richard Barrera
Board of Equalization, District 2: Sally Lieber

Stay tuned for our full Pissed Off Voter Guide, coming soon!

US President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media on board Air Force One on March 15, 2026.

 (Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images)

US Sen. Ed Markey warned that the Trump administration is engaged in a “blatant attempt to muzzle the free press.”

Jake Johnson

Mar 16, 2026 (CommonDreams.org)

US President Donald Trump late Sunday floated “treason” charges against media outlets that he accused of reporting false information about the Iran war as the human and economic costs of his illegal military assault continued to mount.

In a tirade posted to his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote that media outlets he accused of circulating “fake news” should “be brought up on Charges for TREASON for the dissemination of false information.” The maximum penalty for treason in the US is death.

RECOMMENDED…

Trump’s FCC Chair Threatens to Pull Broadcast Licenses Over Negative Iran War Coverage

As Trump Marches US Toward Iran War, Critics Ask: Where’s the ‘Pushback’ From Dems and Media?

Trump specifically called out the Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal for reporting over the weekend that “five US Air Force refueling planes were struck and damaged on the ground at Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia.” Citing two unnamed US officials, the Journal noted that “the tankers were hit during an Iranian missile strike on the Saudi base,” and that the planes were “damaged but not fully destroyed and are being repaired.”

The US president called the story “false reporting” without substantively refuting its content. Trump wrote that four of the refueling planes are “in service” and one “will soon be flying the skies”—none of which is inconsistent with the Journal’s reporting.

Trump, who regularly uses his social media platform to circulate AI-generated videos and photos, also complained about an AI video purportedly showing the USS Abraham Lincoln on fire. The president claimed the video was “distributed by Corrupt Media Outlets,” without offering any examples. AFP published a fact-check of the video last week, deeming it “fabricated footage.”

Trump’s latest attack on the US media came after his Federal Communications Commission chair, Brendan Carr, threatened Saturday to pull the broadcasting licenses of media outlets he accused of “running hoaxes and news distortions.” Carr did not provide specific examples.

The US president said Sunday that he was “thrilled to see” Carr’s threat, railing against “Corrupt and Highly Unpatriotic” news organizations.

Trump and other administration officials, including Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth, have openly whined in recent days about what they’ve deemed negative coverage of the Iran assault, now in its third week with no end in sight.

Aboard Air Force One on Sunday, Trump attacked a reporter as “a very obnoxious person” after she asked the president why he’s sending 5,000 US Marines and sailors to the Middle East.

US Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) warned in a letter to Carr on Sunday that the Trump administration is engaged in a “blatant attempt to muzzle the free press” if outlets don’t align their coverage of the Iran war “with Trump’s preferred narrative.”

“Your Saturday post follows that same logic but extends it to the coverage of an active military conflict, where the chilling effect on journalists and the damage to the public’s right to know are most severe,” Markey wrote to Carr.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Jake Johnson

Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.

Full Bio >

Protest art representing President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein near the US Capitol on March 11, 2026. Its plaque satirically commemorates a friendship “seemingly built on luxurious travel, raucous parties and secret nude sketches”. © Jose Luis Magan, AP (from France24.com)

It was Taiwan, not Gaza, that got top billing as Chinese-speaking grandpas took meticulous notes throughout the evening. 

by Yujie Zhou March 15, 2026 (MissionLocal.org)

Supervisor Connie Chan, a self-described “Chinatown daughter” and the only major Chinese American candidate in the race to replace Nancy Pelosi in Congress, leaned into identity politics at a Saturday forum in front of more than 200 residents at Chinatown’s Victory Hall.

“This is a historical moment for us, for our community to take our voice from San Francisco to Washington, D.C,” said Chan who talked about immigrating with her single mother and a brother to San Francisco’s Chinatown without knowing a single word of English. “I understand our pain and I understand our voices.” 

Although there have been two earlier forums, Saturday was the first time the three leading candidates shared a stage since Jan. 7. In that forum, State Sen. Scott Wiener’s failure to clearly answer a question about genocide in Gaza created a backlash. Wiener now uses the word genocide in regard to Gaza.

It was Taiwan, not Gaza, however, that got top billing on Saturday night. The audience listened closely to the candidate’s answers, with Chinese-speaking seniors taking meticulous notes on slips of paper throughout the evening. 

Taiwan is the foreign policy issue that figures most prominently among Chinese American voters, who account for more than 16 percent of the electorate in California’s 11th congressional district. Whoever wins this race will replace Rep. Pelosi, who in 2022 became the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit the island in 25 years. That visit aggravated mainland China’s government, which subsequently encircled the island with unprecedented military exercises.

“I do not agree with her decision,” said Saikat Chakrabarti, a centimillionaire candidate, who received the loudest applause and cheers of the evening in response to that question on Pelosi’s visit.

Chinese American voters here largely saw the visit as inflammatory. They rank maintaining peace with China around Taiwan as a top priority. 

“That was a provocative action, and the absolute worst thing that could happen right now is a full-on war with China,” Chakrabarti added.

He said he sees a bipartisan hawkishness towards China in Washington, which has resulted in a Cold War that led to an increase in anti-Asian hate within the United States. “In Congress, I will fight to stop the Cold War with China,” he said. The audience burst into applause. 

In January, however, Chakrabarti was the only candidate who, when asked whether the United States should use force to defend Taiwan if it was invaded by China, said yes, it should. Both Wiener and Chan sidestepped the question.

Wiener got booed, a bit, when he said he supports Pelosi’s decisions. 

Chan, who needs both Chinese votes and Pelosi’s endorsement, avoided directly answering the question, simply emphasizing that the Taiwan issue “is deeply personal” given her years in Hong Kong and Taiwan, and said the United States should be an agent for peace. “I advocate for us to really make sure that we encourage Taiwan and China that direct dialogue is important.”

For much of the evening, the candidates stressed their bona fides. As the only Cantonese speaker, Chan had an apparent advantage, doubling her speaking time by deftly interpreting her own answers into Cantonese. The other candidates relied on interpreters.

Wiener emphasized his contributions to the Chinese community, citing work on affordable housing, expanding access to healthcare, acupuncture benefits, protecting funding for Muni and BART, reinstating eighth-grade algebra, pushing back against anti-Asian hate, fighting against vehicle break-ins, and delivering resources for the Chinese Hospital, the Chinese Cultural Center, Wah Mei School, and Portsmouth Square.

The list he wanted to present was so long that the time-up alert rang before he finished. 

Chakrabarti, who has spent less time courting Chinese American voters and only finalized his Chinese name months ago, tried to dazzle the audience by spotlighting his resume: a Harvard University graduate, a main contributor to Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential campaign, a leading role on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s 2018 congressional campaign, and an author of the Green New Deal. 

An unexpected participant was Marie Hurabiell, whose resume is in a league of its own compared to the other three. Hurabiell was a Trump appointee to the Presidio Trust board, remained a registered Republican until 2022 and wrote in a June 2025 social media post that “Trans women are NOT women.”

“For one end of the spectrum, there are three people in the race. The entire rest of the spectrum … there’s no one,” Hurabiell said in an interview. She said she entered the race two weeks ago because she felt compelled to “give people a choice.” 

During the forum, Hurabiell was often the lone candidate who did not blame Trump for the current state of affairs with China. Hurabiell also runs the pressure group Connected SF, and previously ran unsuccessfully twice for the City College Board of Trustees. Chakrabarti frequently invokes Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez; Hurabiell does not criticize President Donald Trump, and she is running on her association with Mayor Daniel Lurie — her campaign website claims Connected SF played a key role in electing Lurie. 

Hurabiell believes a significant portion of the Chinese American community belongs to the spectrum that she represents, so at Victory Hall she pointed to the ideological similarities. “We have stood shoulder to shoulder in these fights,” she said at her first forum, referring to the 2022 recall of former District Attorney Chesa Boudin, the 2022 recall of school board members, and the fights for algebra in school and to keep merit-based admission at Lowell. 

The forum was co-hosted by San Francisco’s three Chinese political clubs, the Chinese American Democratic club, the Edwin M. Lee Asian Pacific Democratic Club, and Rose Pak Asian American Club. “All three clubs have worked very hard over the past several weeks to make this event possible,” said Jeremy Lee, president of Rose Pak Asian American Club.

To protect the monolingual Chinese-speaking audience and non-Chinese speaking candidates, moderators warned all interpreters that they would be replaced if their interpretation was materially different from the candidate’s statement three times. It worked. 

On several occasions, the bilingual organizers and campaign staff pointed out inaccuracies in the nuanced political translation, and interpreters corrected them immediately.

Throughout the forum, Chakrabarti emphasized cutting the military budget and ending corruption in Congress, including banning members of Congress from doing insider stock trading and ending corporate money in politics. “I’m also the only one willing to take on not just Republicans, but a corrupt Democratic establishment,” he said. He also committed to doing town halls multiple times a year when he becomes San Francisco’s representative.  

Chan pledged to fight for working families and a future that has free City College for all. “We will take our working people’s agenda, our immigrant agenda from Chinatown, from San Francisco, and all the way to Washington, D.C.,” she said. 

Wiener, who recently unveiled an ambitious housing platform to build eight million homes over the next decade, returned repeatedly to housing policy. 

After being led for four decades by a leader “who has moved mountains for San Francisco,” said Wiener, who does the city need next? 

Wiener’s answer: “We need someone who wakes up every morning thinking, what am I going to do for San Francisco today? That is what I do.” 

An earlier version of this article included guidelines the Scott Wiener campaign sent to previous debate organizers, but not the organizers of this event. The reference has been removed.

Join the 3,300 readers who keep Mission Local free for all!

Because of you, Mission Local reached and surpassed our $300,000 year-end fundraising goal. All we can say is thank you. 

Thank you for choosing to invest in a local newsroom rooted in San Francisco’s communities — one that listens first and reports deeply. 

If you haven’t yet had a chance to give, it’s not too late to be part of this community. Your contribution today helps sustain the reporting our city relies on all year long.

We’re grateful you’re here — and we’d be honored to have you join our donors.

Donate

Latest election coverage

Sunset Dunes park supporters face an election with no clear candidate

S.F. ethics probe flags lapses in Mark Farrell’s 2024 mayor campaign

Meet the District 2 Candidates: Should S.F. loosen rules for planting and removing trees?

Yujie ZhouStaff reporter

yujie@missionlocal.com

Yujie is a staff reporter covering city hall with a focus on the Asian community. She came on as an intern after graduating from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism and became a full-time staff reporter as a Report for America corps member and has stayed on. Before falling in love with San Francisco, Yujie covered New York City, studied politics through the “street clashes” in Hong Kong, and earned a wine-tasting certificate in two days. She’s proud to be a bilingual journalist. Find her on Signal @Yujie_ZZ.01More by Yujie Zhou

An offshore oil platform with Santa Cruz Island in the background is seen in Santa Barbara Channel, California. 

(Photo by Marli Miller/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

“Mandating a restart of these defective oil pipelines won’t curb high gas prices, but it will put coastal wildlife at huge risk of another oil spill,” one advocate said.

Olivia Rosane

Mar 14, 2026 (CommonDreams.org)

State leaders and environmental advocates responded with outrage after the Trump administration on Friday ordered the restarting of a California pipeline that caused one of the largest oil spills in the state’s history, a move that comes as oil prices have skyrocketed following President Donald Trump’s launching of an illegal war against Iran and Iran’s subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

After Trump issued an executive order on Friday authorizing the Department of Energy (DOE) to ramp up oil and gas development under the Defense Production Act, Energy Secretary Chris Wright ordered Sable Offshore Corp. to restart operations on the Santa Ynez Unit and Pipeline System, which include an offshore rig and a network of offshore and onshore pipelines along the Santa Barbara coast. Among them is a pipeline that ruptured in 2015, spilling around 450,000 gallons of oil into Refugio State Beach and killing hundreds of marine mammals and sea birds.

RECOMMENDED…

Trump’s Unprovoked War on Iran Triggers 10% Spike in Global Oil Prices

With War on Iran, Trump Is ‘Flooring the Gas Pedal as He Drives US Economy Over a Cliff’

“Californians have repeatedly rejected dangerous drilling off our coast for decades,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement on Saturday. “Now, after dragging the US into a war with Iran and driving up oil prices, the Trump administration is trying to exploit this crisis to further enrich the oil industry at the expense of our communities and our environment.”

In his statement, Wright emphasized the defense benefits of resuming drilling, arguing that “today’s order will strengthen America’s oil supply and restore a pipeline system vital to our national security and defense, ensuring that West Coast military installations have the reliable energy critical to military readiness.”

“Directing a private oil company to push its project through without safety checks and adherence to California laws that keep our coast safe is appalling and illegal.”

The DOE added that “Sable’s facility can produce approximately 50,000 barrels of oil per day, a 15% increase to California’s in-state oil production, that can replace nearly 1.5 million barrels of foreign crude each month.”

Yet, far from a novel response to an unexpected emergency, the order is actually an escalation in a preexisting battle between California and the Trump administration over the future of the pipeline system. The state’s Attorney General Rob Bonta sued to stop the administration from a federal takeover of two of the pipelines in January.

Sable also faces several lawsuits due to its attempts to restart the system after it purchased it from ExxonMobil in 2024, and has not yet cleared all of the state permitting requirements, according to the Center for Biological Diversity.

“In its latest brazen abuse of power, the Trump administration is attempting to seize exclusive federal control over two of California’s onshore pipelines,” Bonta said on social media Friday evening. “We will not stand by as this administration continues their unlawful all-out assault on California and our coastlines, and we are reviewing all of our legal options.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom also spoke out against Wright’s announcement.

“Trump knew his war with Iran would raise gas prices,” he wrote on social media. “Now he wants to illegally resurrect a pipeline shut down by courts and facing criminal charges. And it won’t even cut prices. I refuse to let Trump sacrifice Californians, our environment, or our $51 billion coastal economy.”

The Center for Biological Diversity noted that this order would mark the first time that the Defense Production Act was used to force an oil company to restart out-of-use Infrastructure and to disregard the state permitting process.

“This is a revolting power grab by an extremist president. Trump is misusing this Cold War-era law just to help a Texas oil company skirt vital state laws that protect our coastline, and Californians will pay the price,” Talia Nimmer, an attorney for the center, said. “Mandating a restart of these defective oil pipelines won’t curb high gas prices, but it will put coastal wildlife at huge risk of another oil spill. Overriding state law to let an oil company restart pipelines sets a radically dangerous precedent. It’s clear that no state is safe from Trump.”

The center also promised to push back against the order.

“Directing a private oil company to push its project through without safety checks and adherence to California laws that keep our coast safe is appalling and illegal,” Nimmer said. “We’re exploring all legal avenues. This dangerous action should be swiftly blocked by the courts.”

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Olivia Rosane

Olivia Rosane is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

Full Bio >