Get ready for local elections on May 17
Voters can champion civil liberties and civil rights by supporting leaders and initiatives who invest in our communities, instead of those who simply support more police and police funding.
Building a more just, equitable and caring Oregon — for and by all of us.
READ THE LATEST
To See the Future of Roe, Look to the States
We don’t know what the final opinion will look like, but here’s what we do know about abortion access nationwide.
Ask an Expert: Free Speech
Our audience asked us hundreds of questions about free speech, and we answered.
Press Releases
VICTORY! City of Bend Dismisses Lawsuit Against Central Oregon Peacekeepers, Agrees to Pay Fees
The City of Bend has agreed to pay the Peacekeepers' and Satcher's attorney fees and costs. If the court accepts the motion, it would bring an end to the City’s attempt to recover some $3,600 from Satcher...
Statement in Response to Audit on Portland Police Bureau Intelligence-Gathering and Surveillance
As the City’s audit recognizes, law enforcement generally, and Portland Police Bureau (PPB) in particular, has a long and troubled history of collecting intelligence information on individuals and groups...
Legislature’s passage of SB 1510, the Transforming Justice Omnibus Bill, to address the disproportionate impacts of systemic racism on BIPOC communities
By passing SB 1510, legislators advanced Oregon’s commitment to equity and racial justice through an array of strategies that were developed by communities and coalitions that came together through the...
In the courts
The Peacekeepers’ original public record request sought information about the Bend Police Department’s response to 2020 racial justice protests in Bend. Instead of providing those records with a fee waiver as ordered by the district attorney, the city sued a community member and the Central Oregon Peacekeepers.
City of Bend v. Satcher/Peacekeepers
As part of the dismissal, the City of Bend has agreed to pay the Peacekeepers’ and Satcher’s attorney fees and costs. The motion, if accepted by the court, would bring an end to the City’s attempt to recover some $3,600 for the purported cost of fulfilling the defendant's public records request.
