Day: August 6, 2026

“Crimes against humanity.”

That’s what an investigation in March 2026 called Russia’s “deportation and forcible transfer” of Ukrainian children and “their enforced disappearance.”

The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine wrote that “thousands of children have been deported to the Russian Federation or transferred to occupied areas in Ukraine by Russian authorities.”

In response to the Russian actions, the U.S. State Department announced, also in March 2026, a new US$25 million effort to identify, return and rehabilitate Ukrainian children and young people forcibly transferred by Russia or otherwise held away from their families and communities. The programs are intended to support both the work of locating children and the services they need after returning.

The U.S. announcement is important because bringing Ukrainian children home is a race against time. Russia is doing more than moving children. It is trying to remake them, from Ukrainians into Russians.

This strategy did not begin with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Since occupying the portion of Ukraine known as Crimea and parts of Ukraine’s Donbas in 2014, Russia has steadily reshaped children’s education, legal status, language and sense of belonging. For many children growing up under occupation, it is the only life they have ever known.

I have spent the past year and a half studying Russia’s treatment of Ukrainian children for my forthcoming book, “Child Abduction in the War in Ukraine: Erasing Ukrainian Identity as a Tool of War,” to be published open-access by Routledge in late fall 2026. The book draws on more than 50 interviews with returned young people, caregivers, Ukrainian officials, investigators, legal experts and child-protection advocates, together with government and nonprofit organization reports, international legal materials, historical research and open-source investigations.

My research points to a simple conclusion: Russia is not just moving Ukrainian children. It is taking away their identities.

Beyond the official count

Ukraine’s Bring Kids Back UA, the official tracker of abducted children, lists over 20,000 possible cases of forcible deportation and transfer of children by Russia. However, Yale University’s Humanitarian Research Lab estimates the number is closer to 35,000.

Only a fraction have returned.

The precise number is difficult to establish because Russia has not provided complete or verifiable information about the Ukrainian children it has forcibly transferred or deported, or their whereabouts.

International humanitarian law prohibits the forcible transfer or deportation of children from occupied territory except in narrowly defined emergency circumstances. Even then, evacuations must be temporary, preserve family unity, maintain records to facilitate reunification, and, when children must be moved outside occupied territory, take them to a neutral country rather than the territory of the occupying power.

Instead, many Ukrainian children have been coercively transferred into camps – organized sites used to house, instruct, reeducate or militarize Ukrainian children – institutions and foster or adoptive placements inside Russia or Russian-controlled territory.

Some are told Ukraine abandoned them, that their families no longer want them, or that their future lies with Russia. In many cases, their names, citizenship and legal status have been changed, making them more difficult to identify and return.

But even the official Ukrainian count does not convey the full scale of the crisis.

Approximately 1.6 million Ukrainian children are believed to be living under Russian occupation or in territories Russia has controlled since 2014.

These children may never have crossed an international border, but their schools, documents, language, media and daily lives are being reorganized around Russian rule. They are required to attend schools using the Russian curriculum, where Ukrainian history and identity are replaced with Russian narratives. Ukrainian-language instruction has been eliminated in occupied areas, and many children have been issued or required to obtain Russian passports.

These measures are designed not simply to govern occupied territory but to reshape how children understand their history, citizenship and future

---

Read more:
We investigated Russia’s military indoctrination of Ukrainian children in occupied territories – what we found was more shocking than we could have imagined

---

A child does not have to be carried across a border to be separated from Ukraine. Occupation itself can become a method of identity removal.

Language that sounds protective

To outsiders, some of Russia’s actions can be difficult to recognize because they are often described in official language that sounds humanitarian or routine.

During the first months of the invasion, Russian forces removed many children from orphanages, residential institutions and other forms of state care, transferring many into Russia or Russian-controlled territory.

Other children were separated from parents or relatives during attacks on their communities, chaotic evacuations and Russia’s “filtration” process – a system of screenings and interrogations used to control civilians fleeing occupied areas.

Once under Russian control, many Ukrainian children were transferred into Russian institutions or placed under guardianship or adopted, making reunification with their families increasingly difficult.

Words used by Russia to describe its actions, such as “evacuation,” “child protection,” “recreation camp,” “guardianship,” “foster care” and “adoption,” usually suggest that adults are protecting children.

In occupied Ukraine, these terms cannot be taken at face value. They must be understood within a system of coercion designed to separate children from their families, communities and Ukrainian identity.

The language of rescue can conceal the reality of coercion.

Changing more than location

Russia’s strategy extends beyond physically removing children from Ukraine. It also seeks to reshape the lives of those who remain under occupation.

Over time, Russian schools, laws and public institutions reinforce the message that these children are Russian rather than Ukrainian, making that identity feel normal and permanent. Children sent to so-called “recreation,” “health” or educational camps inside Russia often experience the same process, as temporary stays are extended and return becomes increasingly difficult.

The goal is not simply to control territory but to influence how children understand themselves.

Russian authorities have portrayed Ukraine as an artificial nation and Ukrainians and Russians as “one people.” Children are especially important to that project of erasing Ukrainians’ independent identity because they carry a nation’s language, family history, citizenship and future. As they grow older, many are also pulled into an expanding system of military-patriotic education that presents service to Russia as a civic duty.

This effort has intensified since the full-scale invasion. Russia has dramatically increased spending on military-patriotic education, expanding youth organizations and military instruction in occupied territories, where participation is often mandatory.

Every day matters

The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants in 2023 for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights, Maria Lvova-Belova, over the alleged unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children.

Yet international legal recognition of this crime has not been effective.

Russia controls the information needed to reunite children with their families. International organizations can document violations and press for returns, but they do not know where many children are and have little independent access to occupied territories or Russian institutions.

As a result, tracing and returning children has largely depended on Ukrainian families, government agencies and civil society organizations working case by case.

The new U.S. funding can help strengthen that work. But it will need to be provided over the long term to be effective. Identifying a child, reconstructing documents and arranging a safe return can take months. Recovery may take much longer. Many need help restoring documents, returning to school, reconnecting with relatives and rebuilding trust.

Oleksandra Matviichuk, chair of Ukraine’s Center for Civil Liberties, which was awarded the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize, told me that one obstacle to an effective international response is a “lack of imagination.” People living in stable societies can find it difficult to believe that a government could invade another country, occupy its territory and attempt to erase the identity of its children.

But that is happening now.

The question is whether the world will act before changed names, lost records and years of forced assimilation make the damage even harder – or impossible – to reverse.

Thom Reilly receives funding from The Rogers Foundation (Las Vegas, Nevada) to make the book open source and to support research assistants.

​Politics + Society – The Conversation

After Luigi Mangione was arrested in December 2024 in connection with the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, the internet did what it often does: It turned something serious into a joke.

Although Mangione has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder in New York and to federal stalking charges, viral memes at the time romanticized him as a popular – and incredibly attractive – man of the people who made corporate elites within the American health insurance industry afraid.

Some of these memes adhered to conventional forms of political satire. One, for example, quoted a speech from the movie “A Bug’s Life,” in which a villainous grasshopper argues for the need to punish the movie’s ant protagonist to keep the other ants in line. In this meme, the political point was clear: Elites preserve power by making examples of insignificant ants who dare to challenge them.

The point was less clear with other memes, including celebrations of Mangione’s fashion-forward shackled ankles in court and mock Burger King advertisements referencing the fact that a McDonald’s employee had been the one to call law enforcement on him: “Burger King: We won’t turn you in to the Feds.” Rather than being ironic, they are unserious.

Nonetheless, memes like those received serious reactions from social commentators and political pundits who interpreted them as evidence that America’s young adults are nihilistic and morally indifferent.

As an experimental psychologist who studies moral judgments about real-world controversies, I have examined these attitudes toward Mangione and the humor surrounding him online.

I believe these reactions are better understood not as a rejection of value but as a refusal to participate in conversations that feel selective and disconnected from young people’s broader economic and political frustrations. In my assessment, Gen Z’s dark and nonsensical humor does not show a lack of moral values, but it’s instead the product of its desire to engage in more authentic conversations about what they believe.

Alienation, not indifference

Research shows deep levels of alienation among Gen Z, or young people born between 1997 and 2012. Having grown up with smartphones and social media, this generation has come of age in an increasingly online world. Despite the internet’s capacity for instantaneous interaction, followers have proved a poor replacement for friends.

Gen Z is among the most socially isolated and psychologically distressed generations on record. Compared with prior generations, fewer friendships and romantic relationships have left many young adults craving connection and solidarity. This alienation is also evident in their skepticism toward institutions and traditional narratives about values.

Many are pessimistic about achieving the American Dream and question the value of higher education. What was once considered the optimal vehicle for living a better life is instead viewed as a barrier.

If the American Dream feels out of reach, and college seems like an expensive obstacle, calls to take them seriously may feel inauthentic, alienating and absurd.

When seriousness gets suspended

Discussions about values require some seriousness if they are to resonate with their audience.

If, for example, a commencement speaker praising the value of artificial intelligence is met with jeers from graduates – as former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was in May 2026 – the speaker’s message is immediately rendered inert.

These students’ jeers fell short of offering an argument against the speaker’s claims; instead, they created an atmosphere that prevented those claims from receiving consideration. For graduates pessimistic about AI’s implications for the labor market, claims professing its value feel inauthentic.

Together, their jeers not only provided an escape from what felt like an alienating and inauthentic message about the value of AI, but they also created a sense of solidarity through a shared suspension of seriousness.

Humor offers an escape

Far from being unique to Mangione, this suspension of seriousness recurs throughout online meme culture.

The OceanGate implosion prompted similar memes, including one depicting a pod of orcas with the caption “The water is safe, send more billionaires.”

Even Charlie Kirk’s assassination became material. In a trend known as “Kirkification,” users superimposed his face onto images ranging from the Mona Lisa to women in bikinis, transforming a grim event into a shared absurdity.

In my assessment, Gen Z’s creation and circulation of memes offers an escape from otherwise serious conversations – for example, conversations about the value of the UnitedHealthcare CEO’s life. This may be especially true when demands to condemn Mangione appear to ignore inequities within an American health insurance system perceived as corrupt and unjust.

Although commentators often dismiss Gen Z’s humor as nonsensical or nihilistic meme slop, scholarship suggests that it acts as a collaborative coping mechanism, driven by a desire for authenticity.

Memes about Mangione, or even campus lookalike contests centered on him, fall short of offering a precise moral argument in favor of largely suspending seriousness.

This style of humor can be seen in Mangione’s alleged decision to leave a backpack containing Monopoly money in Central Park. It was seen, too, on shell casings recovered after Kirk’s killing, which included video game commands, a sexually suggestive internet saying and “if you read this you are gay lmao.”

Miscast explanations of nihilism

With the help of approximately a dozen undergraduate students, I examined the psychological and situational factors associated with Gen Z’s reactions to Mangione and other events – like Kirk’s assassination and the Kamala Harris is “Brat” phenomenon during the 2024 presidential election – in two studies currently under review.

Our findings indicate that favorable attitudes toward Mangione were associated not only with superficial factors, such as his perceived attractiveness, but also with higher levels of political cynicism.

Perceived systemic bias in the American justice system, for example, was addressed in a meme depicting Mangione walking into court with the text “You can kill dozens of kids and get a lesser sentence because their lives don’t matter as much as a CEO’s.” Federal prosecutors were seeking the death penalty against Mangione for a charge a judge dismissed in January 2026.

Casting Gen Z’s reactions as nihilistic obscures the values and institutional distrust connected to them and fails to appreciate their egalitarian and pragmatic ideals. Dismissing them may deepen the alienation that allowed the death of a father of two to become a joke.

Why simple moral messages alienate

Although political commentators disagree about how to interpret the response to Mangione, many accept a seemingly basic principle: Killing should never be justified.

Yet decades of research on moral judgment shows that people do not apply that principle consistently. Instead, in certain situations, like in the famous “trolley problem,” people frequently judge killing to be morally permissible – especially when that killing is expected to promote the well-being of others.

Simplistic and sweeping moral injunctions not only fail to appreciate people’s actual moral attitudes, but they also eliminate the possibility of having authentic and nuanced conversations.

Those conversations need not end by endorsing Mangione as a sympathetic figure. However, an open and authentic conversation about Mangione cannot be realized in spaces that require all discussion of the event to be reduced to affirmations that, as has been advocated by some, “Murder is bad. Period.”

Such requirements can make conversations about significant moral issues – even controversial ones, like the morality of Mangione’s alleged actions – little more than demands for conformity. In this case, those boundaries risk ignoring and, thus, further alienating Gen Z.

Gen Z’s humor shows that almost anything can become a joke. I believe the danger of that is not that young people reject values, but that continued alienation may leave them laughing when seriousness is most required.

Evan Clarkson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

​Politics + Society – The Conversation

Food assistance is one of the most effective tools for fighting poverty in America. New federal rules are testing that reputation.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP, helps low-income people afford groceries. The program’s benefits reach far beyond the grocery bill, with research linking the program to better outcomes for K-12 students and improved overall health among participants.

However, new federal policy changes are making the program harder for many families to use, and participation is shrinking.

In Pennsylvania’s Allegheny County, the number of people who get SNAP benefits has decreased by about 12% since 2025. SNAP enrollment rates vary widely across the Greater Pittsburgh metropolitan area – from 31% of residents in Fayette County to just 13% in Butler County.

In Allegheny County, where Pittsburgh is located, approximately 17,000 people have already lost their benefits. That’s the second-highest total of any county in Pennsylvania. Roughly 162,000 Allegheny County residents receive SNAP, or about 14% of the county’s population.

Across the country, states like Arizona and Florida are seeing similar effects from these SNAP changes. The specifics vary by state, but the underlying pressures on food assistance are shared nationwide.

As a food economist and clinical dietition working in western Pennsylvania, I have seen how SNAP policy changes affect real people firsthand. Many of my patients are having more trouble making ends meet over the past few years, especially as grocery prices have risen roughly 25% in nominal terms since 2022 – a jump that has outpaced wage growth for many low-income households.

New SNAP work requirements

In November 2025, Pennsylvania began implementing the federal government’s expanded work requirements. The rules previously applied to adults ages 18 to 54 without a disability or dependent children, but they now reach up to age 64. Under these rules, these adults must work, volunteer or take part in education or training programs for at least 20 hours a week to keep receiving SNAP benefits.

Certain groups are especially likely to be affected by this rule change, including early retirees, first-time moms, children and people with disabilities who haven’t applied or been approved for disability benefits.

Stricter and more expansive work requirements increase SNAP benefit denials and reduce the number of people who get benefits, including among women who may become pregnant.

The new work requirements could also worsen food insecurity, which occurs when people cannot obtain enough safe and nutritionally adequate food for an active and healthy life.

Up to 5.4 million people nationwide could lose some or all of their SNAP benefits under the expanded work requirements, including 1.5 million children.

In Allegheny County, 43% of food-insecure children were likely ineligible for SNAP and similar benefits in 2025 because their household incomes exceeded 185% of the federal poverty line – US$61,050 for a family of four in 2026.

Stricter rules for SNAP retailers

Supermarkets and other stores that sell food must be certified to accept SNAP benefits for payment. Beyond helping individual households, SNAP spending boosts local economies, as those benefits get spent at grocery stores and other retailers.

Retailers that sell food are now required to offer seven varieties of foods in each of four staple food categories: grains, vegetables and fruits, dairy, and protein. Stores could meet the new requirements for grains, for example, by offering corn tortillas, whole wheat bread, white bread, brown rice, white rice, oats and infant cereal for sale.

In the 12th and 17th congressional districts that make up Allegheny County, 10.4% and 8.7% of people, respectively, live in areas where it is difficult to get healthy foods. According to data from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, there are 191 grocery stores in these districts, about 28% of which are either small chains or independent stores that may have a harder time complying with the new requirements.

Between 2017 and 2023, the number of SNAP-authorized stores in Allegheny County increased by 13%, but this trend could reverse under the new rules.

While the stated goal of the new rules is to increase the availability of healthier foods, simply requiring stores to stock them doesn’t mean that customers will eat a better diet. Whether these new retailer policies ultimately improve diets is an open question.

Additional restrictions on purchases

Some states are placing additional restrictions on what people can buy with benefits. Purchasing hot prepared foods, alcohol, vitamins or diapers with SNAP benefits was already prohibited, but 23 states are now restricting the use of benefits to buy sugar-sweetened beverages and some other items that contribute to nutritionally inadequate diets.

While Pennsylvania has not adopted those additional restrictions, some of its neighboring states, such as Ohio and West Virginia, have.

SNAP helps people pay for groceries, but the benefit amount is typically less than what a household would spend on food. SNAP covers some of what a family would’ve spent on groceries anyway, leaving that money for other needs – rent, diapers, utility bills and the like. As a result, research shows the program doesn’t significantly change what or how much people eat, on average.

In my view, as food insecurity remains high in Allegheny County, policies that make it harder for local residents to get SNAP benefits risk weakening one of the nation’s most effective economic support programs.

Read more of our stories about Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania.

Amelia B. Finaret does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

​Politics + Society – The Conversation

Funding and planning for the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence fell largely to two nonprofits with similar names: America250 and Freedom 250.

That similarity has sowed a lot of confusion over who was in charge of which celebrations. And according to a report House Democrats released on July 2, 2026, one of the groups, Freedom 250, has allegedly engaged in some fraudulent fundraising practices that took advantage of that confusion.

A Freedom 250 spokesperson, Danielle Alvarez, has denied the allegations. But the allegations have piqued my interest because I’m an accounting professor who researches charitable fraud.

America250

America250 is a bipartisan initiative established by Congress in the Semiquincentennial Commission Act of 2016 to encourage nationwide participation in 250th anniversary events. Because it’s a charitable nonprofit with 501(c)(3) status, that organization does not have to pay any taxes, and its donors may be able to deduct their gifts from their taxable income.

America250’s stated mission is to “inspire our fellow Americans to reflect on our past, strengthen our love of country, and renew our commitment to the ideals of democracy through programs that educate, engage, and unite us as a nation.”

It has hosted several major events, including the American Block Party events held July 3-4, 2026, in Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia, Boston and other cities. Its funding comes from money appropriated by Congress, as well as donations from corporations and individuals.

American250’s events are ongoing and throughout the country – both in both Democratic- and Republican-leaning states.

Freedom 250

Freedom 250 is much newer.

It was founded through an executive order President Donald Trump signed in January 2025. The National Park Foundation oversees and owns Freedom 250 LLC, a limited liability company formed at the request of the National Park Service, and it receives federal funding for use at events approved by the park service.

There is no statement on the tax-deductibility of donations on the Freedom 250 website or on the National Park Foundation site. But the law firm Skadden released tax guidance stating that Freedom 250 essentially borrows its tax-exempt status from the National Park Foundation, which is a 501(c)(3) organization eligible for tax-deductible donations.

The White House has described Freedom 250’s purpose, in part, as to “ignite a spirit of adventure and innovation to help our nation succeed for the next 250 years, and invite Americans to pray for our country and our people and rededicate ourselves as One Nation Under God.”

After Congress appropriated US$150 million for 250th anniversary events in the big tax, spending and immigration bill Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025, much of that money flowed to Freedom 250’s coffers. The Trump administration is now asking lawmakers to provide $10 million more in federal funds, citing “elevated security threats against high-profile events in Washington, D.C.”

The White House has actively promoted Freedom 250 events, including the Great American State Fair on the National Mall and the UFC fight on the White House grounds. Up next: The 2026 Patriot Games, a national competition for high school athletes, Aug. 9-11, followed by a Grand Prix, Aug. 22-23 – a 1.66-mile (2.67-kilometer) temporary street circuit around the National Mall. Drivers will complete 125 laps.

Trump has played a central role at Freedom 250 events, giving a keynote speech at the Great American State Fair that emphasized his “Make America Great Again” agenda and a long political speech before the July 4 fireworks display.

Many performers, including country singer Martina McBride and rock musician Bret Michaels, declined to participate in Freedom 250 events due to their political overtones. They said they opted out after finding out the events would not be the nonpartisan celebrations they had originally been led to expect.

Alleged wrongdoing

The House Committee on Natural Resources has oversight responsibilities for the National Park Service. House Democrats on the committee began investigating Freedom 250 to understand why it was created after Congress had established America250.

In their report, those lawmakers said they received incomplete answers from Department of Interior officials, including Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.

In the 55-page interim report, released on July 2, the lawmakers allege that some donors who intended to support America250 were instead given directions to wire funds to Freedom 250’s bank account.

Additionally, the report says that some corporate sponsors and other donors were targeted for donations. Some sponsors allege that they were pressured to support Freedom 250 instead of America250.

This report may appear partisan because a group of Democrats released it. Even so, in my view, these allegations of misleading donors and wire fraud could be grounds for legal charges.

I believe that if these allegations are proven true, Freedom 250 has committed a crime called charitable solicitation fraud.

Charitable solicitation fraud

This kind of fraud occurs when a charity asks for donations using false or misleading claims about who is asking for a gift, where the money will go or what the donated funds will be used for.

Both Freedom 250 and America250 operate and are registered in the District of Columbia. As a result, they are subject to the District of Columbia laws dedicated to charitable solicitations, which can be used to stop unlawful fundraising, dissolve nonprofits or freeze their funds.

The D.C. government can challenge the spending of funds that is not in line with the charitable purpose of nonprofits like these.

The D.C. attorney general’s office has previously used these laws to stop fraudulent solicitations as well as other kinds of charitable wrongdoing.

Additionally, federal law prohibits deceptive charitable solicitation, and it’s up to a government agency, the Federal Trade Commission, to investigate consumer claims of fraudulent fundraising.

The FTC, for example, shut down a massive fraudulent operation in 2021 that raised more than $110 million from 1.3 billion deceptive fundraising robocalls for a variety of charitable causes, including support for homeless veterans, cancer patients and children with autism.

The IRS could potentially get involved as well if there is evidence that Freedom 250, a tax-exempt organization, has violated federal tax laws that apply to nonprofits with that status. And if authorities investigate the wire fraud allegations for Freedom 250, the Department of Justice, and possibly the FBI, may get involved in the investigation.

Even if the Democrats’ allegations don’t lead to lawsuits and official probes by government agencies, it is likely that Freedom 250 will continue to be subject to scrutiny as additional events celebrating America’s founding take place.

The University of Dayton is an academic partner of The Conversation.

​Politics + Society – The Conversation