Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams

Conservation groups that sued this summer over President Donald Trump’s administration rescinding the regulatory definition of “harm” in the Endangered Species Act updated their legal challenge on Thursday after yet another attack on the landmark law.

The coalition’s supplemental complaint explains to a federal court in Seattle that since the lawsuit was first filed in July, administrative leaders have directed various agencies to interpret the ESA to mean that only intentionally killing or wounding a protected species is illegal—a shift that critics condemned as “an all-out war on America’s wildlife.”

As the “harm” rescission took effect on September 14, US Fish and Wildlife Service Director Brian Nesvik issued a related memorandum with that interpretation—effectively allowing “incidental” killing. John Luce, general counsel at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, sent the same directive to eight sections of NOAA.

These memos “violate the plain language and overarching purpose of the ESA; they also lack any reasoned basis, are arbitrary and capricious, and failed to comply with applicable notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements,” the new filing argues, citing the Administrative Procedure Act. The coalition is asking the court to vacate the memos and bar the agencies from using their interpretations of the 1973 law.

“This despicable effort to legalize most killings of endangered wildlife would essentially mean open season on species already on the brink of annihilation,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species co-director at the Center for Biological Diversity, in a Thursday statement. “It’s the most serious attack on imperiled animals since the Endangered Species Act was passed more than 50 years ago.”

“Without protection against the daily assaults of our modern world, Florida manatees, spotted owls, snowy plovers, and so many other animals that bring color to our world won’t stand a chance,” he warned, noting that “habitat destruction is the single biggest cause of species endangerment and extinction” in the United States and beyond.

Greenwald added that “with this destruction, the perils faced by plants and animals have grown exponentially. Such peril doesn’t come down the barrel of a gun, but it’s still a deadly threat, and the Endangered Species Act can and must protect our imperiled wildlife from this kind of careless killing.”

In addition to the center, the coalition behind the case includes Columbia Riverkeeper, Conservation Law Foundation, Conservation Northwest, Friends of the Wild Swan, Oregon Wild, Sierra Club, Swan View Coalition, and WildEarth Guardians, with legal representation by Earthjustice.

After the memos were exposed last month, Earthjustice attorney Ben Levitan declared that “the government’s new legal position is a prescription for extinction.”

“It says that as long as you claim you didn’t mean to kill an endangered species, the law can’t and won’t stop you,” he stressed. “That’s ridiculous—and a totally illegal, active misreading of the Endangered Species Act. We’ll see the Trump administration in court about this.”

Elected Democrats—and even the Senate’s top Republican appropriator—blasted President Donald Trump late Friday for rescinding nearly $1 billion in congressionally approved spending that the White House deemed “wasteful and harmful” through a legally contested process.

In a statement announcing what was targeted, the administration celebrated funding cuts for what it called “pro-illegal immigration programs,” a “nefarious” Department of Justice subagency, a program that “propagates America Last climate alarmism,” an office that promotes diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI)—or “discrimination, and radical woke ideologies”—and more.

House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) responded in a statement that “Donald Trump knows he can’t get these cuts through Congress, so he is illegally making them through the back door.”

“Trump’s actions are a blatant attack on Congress’ constitutional power of the purse,” he added. “It is exactly why we need to pass my Congressional Power of the Purse Act and stop any president from illegally overriding Congress.”

The Associated Press reported that “under federal law, Congress has 45 days to review the president’s proposed spending cuts before they take effect. But Trump made that all but impossible by announcing them with just five days left in the federal fiscal year and the House out of session through the November election.”

Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) stressed on social media that “a pocket rescission is an illegal line-item veto. It is the president saying that he and he alone will convert a bipartisan spending bill (that has been signed into law) into a partisan spending bill. He is canceling the lines of spending he doesn’t like.”

“This violates the core separation of powers embedded in our Constitution in which it is the Congress, not the president, who decides what programs are designed and at what level they are funded,” he continued. “Republican colleagues said they would never let this happen. Well, here it is. They should ask themselves: ‘How would I like to have a Democratic president canceling out the Republican flavored programs he or she doesn’t like in a bipartisan spending bill that has been signed into law?’ If they have any integrity or any spine, they will join us in ending this practice.”

Noting that the cuts will impact everything from critical health research, to combating the international illicit narcotics trade, Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) declared: “This is theft from the American people, plain and simple. These are funds Congress has delivered on a bipartisan basis and should be helping people—not cut off by a president more focused on building a ballroom than investing in families.”

She specifically called out Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought—a co-author of Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation-led blueprint for a right-wing overhaul of the federal government, who was recently condemned as an “unelected shadow president” by the House Democrat who introduced impeachment articles against him. According to Murray, “Every Republican who voted for these bills should be furious because Vought is saying their votes don’t count.”

Murray also pointed out that during negotiations for the recently enacted stopgap spending legislation, “Democrats fought to include language to prevent the Trump administration from once again usurping Congress’ power—but for the second time in a year, Republicans refused to take common sense action and prevent this from happening.”

“While Trump spends tax dollars on ads promoting himself, Congress needs to reassert its powers to help people, and it’s past time Republicans join us in that fight,” she argued. “Russ Vought’s message to Congress is that your votes don’t count, and your laws are optional. It is now time for my Republican colleagues who said they would never let this happen to stand up and join us to stop this, and remind this administration this is not how this works.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) emphasized the impact of the administration’s move, saying that “Trump is gleefully eviscerating programs and protections that help hardworking American families live a safe and healthy life, all while he continues to punish them with skyrocketing gas and grocery prices.”

“With this rescissions package, the Trump administration is illegally stripping nearly $1 billion in critical funding that supports kids, K-12 students, small businesses, and health and clean air research,” he highlighted. “Americans are crying out for relief.”

“Instead of ending his Iran War and tariff chaos that are driving up costs, Trump is rolling out the red carpet for our adversaries while stealing funds meant to help American families,” he added. “Senate Democrats will challenge Trump’s illegal cuts at every turn and continue the fight to help American families, lower healthcare costs and secure our communities.”

The administration’s rescission announcement came less than six weeks away from the midterm elections. Democrats aim to win majorities, while Trump’s Republican Party is fighting to keep control of both chambers of Congress. One of the nationally watched races is that of Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine).

As some congressional Republicans cheered the Friday action, Collins put out a statement denouncing it. She said that “without warning or consultation, Congress just received an $810 million package of pocket rescissions from the administration,” which she called OMB's most recent attempt “to undermine Congress’ constitutional power of the purse.”

“This move shows that OMB intentionally withheld these funds for months to execute this unlawful cancellation of appropriations that were approved on a bipartisan basis and signed into law,” Collins continued. “Not only is the delay itself an impoundment that was not reported to Congress, but also it is a usurpation of Congress’ appropriations powers. OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding.”

“The independent Government Accountability Office has concluded that pocket rescissions are unlawful and not permitted by the Impoundment Control Act,” she added. “Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law. I will work with my colleagues to address these illegal actions.”

While some Democrats had called for their Republican colleagues to make such promises, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) fired back at Collins on social media, writing that “Senate Republicans had chance after chance to stop Trump’s illegal seizure of taxpayer money. Time after time, they pledged allegiance to Trump instead of to citizens. And he’ll keep rolling them if the Senate doesn’t change hands.”

So did Troy Jackson, the former Democratic Maine Senate president running to unseat Collins. He said that “Susan Collins voted for Trump’s pick to lead the OMB. Now she’s surprised he’s doing exactly what he promised to do? She’s the appropriations chair who voted with Trump 96% of the time. Expressing concern isn’t enough. Mainers see through the bull----.”

Misael Ramos, a democratic socialist running for City Council in Austin, was arrested by Texas troopers on Saturday morning for protesting US Immigration and Customs Enforcement after an ICE agent shot Wilber Rafael Garcés Pérez in the state’s capital.

“At approximately 8:50 am this morning, two neighbors witnessed several state troopers, including many in unmarked vehicles, approach Misael while he was walking his dog and proceed to detain him,” his campaign said on social media. “They never showed him a warrant for his arrest, but proceeded to arrest him anyway.”

The Travis County Sheriff’s Office website shows that the 40-year-old candidate for District 1 was booked at the county jail shortly after that and charged with a Class B misdemeanor for “riot participation.” His campaign said the charge appears to be “related to his participation in the protest last Sunday at the site of Wilber’s shooting by ICE.”

The Austin American-Statesman reported that the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) could not be reached for comment.

“That these officers felt emboldened to do this to me, as a candidate on the ballot, speaks volumes to the level of impunity they feel to do this to our neighbors, who are living in fear of these kinds of abductions every day,” Ramos said in a statement from jail. “We must end the terror in our communities created by the fascist administration in Washington and here in Texas—I will never stop standing up and speaking out for our community.”

ABC affiliate KVUE reported that “at least four people were arrested by DPS and the Austin Police Department during Sunday’s demonstration, including for charges of rioting, obstructing a highway, resisting arrest, and assault on a peace officer. Ramos’ campaign said additional arrests have been made on DPS warrants throughout the week.”

Ramos’ campaign held a Saturday afternoon press conference outside the jail with representatives from various organizations, including the Austin chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)—which has endorsed him—as well as the Austin Lawyers Guild and Texas State Employees Union.

“People have a constitutional right to gather, speak, protest, and criticize the government,” George Lobb, an attorney and spokesperson for the Austin Lawyers Guild, said in a statement ahead of that event. “Arresting someone does not establish that they committed a crime, and pretrial conditions must comply with the Constitution.”

Ramos was released from jail during the press conference, eliciting cheers from the crowd gathered outside. He made his way to the podium, hugging audience members, and began by thanking everyone who “spoke up” and “spoke out” on Saturday, including a neighbor who recorded his arrest and notified people he asked her to contact.

“This should not be happening on our streets,” but “this is why I fight,” the candidate declared, reiterating that he was approached while walking his dog—which one officer threatened to shoot—and never shown a warrant. “Thank you again, and let’s keep fighting.”

The crowd broke out into chants of “this is what solidarity looks like,” and “F--- ICE, ICE OUT.”

Protests have been held in Texas since an ICE agent shot Garcés Pérez during a traffic stop last Sunday while he was making DoorDash deliveries. A federal judge has temporarily barred President Donald Trump’s administration from deporting the 28-year-old Venezuelan, who remains in ICE custody, despite having a bullet lodged in his back, near his spine.

Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas), whose district includes Austin, visited Garcés Pérez at a detention center in Pearsall on Wednesday. Afterward, according to The New York Times, the congressman told reporters that a doctor has advised the immigrant to have surgery to remove the bullet.

“If Wilber and his wife decide that he needs to go through his surgery, then ICE needs to expedite his care,” said Casar. “I am making it very clear to every part of the federal government that ICE needs to take the medical care of Wilber Garcés extremely seriously.”

Since returning to office last year, Trump has deployed ICE in cities across the United States as part of his mass detention and deportation campaign. Members of the agency and Customs and Border Protection have shot immigrants and US citizens alike—some fatally—and violated the rights of numerous others. Additionally, over 50 people have died in ICE custody.

Hundreds of advocacy groups and members of Congress on Tuesday called on President Donald Trump’s administration to reject a proposal to hand over part of Yosemite National Park in California to a private developer.

The Washington Sun—formerly known as NOTUS—revealed late last month that federal staffers were under political pressure to keep working on a possible land swap for a quarter-mile strip of the famed park with “a company that, through a web of limited liability companies, is operated by real-estate developer and investment firm Kingsbarn Realty Capital.”

California’s Democratic US senators, Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, partnered with two other Democrats from the state, House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Jared Huffman and Congressman Jim Costa, to spearhead a Tuesday letter to Trump’s interior secretary, Doug Burgum, about the future of the park.

Yosemite “is a cornerstone of the National Park System and is one of California’s crown jewels,” wrote the bipartisan group of over 150 lawmakers. “We are extremely concerned that the Department of the Interior is considering selling off portions of the park to private development, and we strongly oppose the proposed land transfer.”

According to the Sun, the developer owns 83 acres west of the park and wants “to build a short road connecting the property to one of Yosemite’s central thoroughfares,” providing “the land exceptionally rare private access to a park that is otherwise almost entirely buffered by national forests.”

The lawmakers noted similar previous efforts that were blocked in court and argued that “at its core, this proposal appears to provide a private benefit at the expense of land that belongs to all Americans.”

“This transaction does not seek to expand public access to Yosemite, improve visitor services, or address transportation deficiencies in park access,” they emphasized. “Rather, this land exchange seeks to merely cut down on driving time for a select few on private property. Any decision to relinquish public land to private ownership should be supported by a clear and compelling public benefit, not merely the economic interests of a private party.”

“We were alarmed that the Department submitted to Congress a proposal to use money from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) authority to facilitate this exchange. That fund exists to acquire and protect public lands for the benefit of the American public—not sell them off to corporate developers,” the lawmakers wrote, noting that a Senate subcommittee has not agreed to move forward.

The lawmakers also pointed out that “in response to inquiries from Congress, the department indicated that it has not identified any land to be exchanged for the parcel of Yosemite National Park that the department is seeking to sell to the private developer. This gives further credence to the notion that this exchange is not being done in the public interest, but rather solely to benefit a private developer.”

“Public lands belong in public hands. Protection of public lands is a bipartisan issue, overwhelmingly supported by the American people from all walks of life,” they concluded. “We oppose any effort to privatize, sell off, give away, or otherwise undermine the continued existence of public lands, in Yosemite or across the country. We ask that you honor congressional objections and abandon this effort to sell off a piece of Yosemite National Park.”

Separately on Tuesday, a coalition of over 150 advocacy organizations—led by the Center of Biological Diversity—sent a similar letter to Burgum.

“Trump wants to carve off a chunk of Yosemite so a private equity firm can turn it into a playground for billionaires,” said Laiken Jordahl, national public lands advocate at the center. “The federal government should be protecting our national parks, not parceling them out behind closed doors to benefit the wealthy and politically connected. If Yosemite can be chopped apart, no national park in America is safe.”

The center was joined by groups including the American River Conservancy, California Environmental Justice Coalition, Greenpeace USA, Public Citizen, Public Lands Conservancy, Save Our Parks, Sierra Club, and Yosemite Rivers Alliance.

The coalition described Yosemite as “sacrosanct—the cradle of American conservation, and the first land the federal government protected purely for its scenic value,” and warned that “ceding national park land to a developer sets a dangerous precedent: America’s parks are for sale to whoever has the money and power to take them.”

Highlighting that “Kingsbarn CEO Jeff Pori is a donor to Trump’s campaign... and the firm is represented by politically connected lawyer Lanny Davis,” the groups stressed that “deals like this undercut the public’s faith in government.”

“In your confirmation hearing,” the coalition reminded Burgum, “you said ‘we need to support and protect every single inch’ of our national parks. Yosemite is invaluable, and no portion of it should end up on Kingsbarn’s ledger. We expect you to keep your promise and to abide by your statements to Congress.”

Just two weeks after Maine gubernatorial candidate Bobby Charles drew national headlines with his comments about sending immigration agents to polling stations, the Republican’s sister publicly explained why she won’t be voting for him in November, calling out his campaign rhetoric and platform as well as his relationship with an infamous pedophile.

The campaign website for Bobby Charles, a former Washington, DC lobbyist, highlights that their mother was a public school teacher. In a Wednesday opinion piece for The Portland Press Herald, Anita Charles, a longtime educator herself, wrote that their mother taught them both “that how we treat other people matters.”

“She taught us to be compassionate, not to name-call or judge people by their race, gender, religion, country of origin, or who they love. She taught us that differences do not diminish us, and that we have a responsibility to treat others with dignity. Those lessons shaped my entire life, as well as my career,” according to Anita Charles. “They are also the reason I cannot support my brother’s campaign for governor.”

Anita Charles acknowledged that “Bobby and I have never agreed politically. For most of our adult lives, we have managed those differences with civility. But as divisive rhetoric has become central to his campaign, I can no longer remain silent. It shows up in how he talks about our schools, our vulnerable communities, and about women’s healthcare.”

She noted that “there is one issue I cannot discuss without speaking from the deepest part of my own experience: sexual assault.”

As she detailed:

Bobby was a close friend and colleague of former House Speaker Dennis Hastert from 1995 to 1999. He praised Hastert and benefited from their relationship as he built his career in Washington. Hastert later admitted to sexually abusing children and was convicted of illegally paying hush money to conceal that abuse. Bobby has never publicly renounced that association.

That is difficult for me to understand because my own childhood was marked by sexual violence. Someone who was part of our lives for more than a decade was a pedophile who repeatedly assaulted me. My brother has known what happened to me for 50 years.

Under the anti-choice positions Bobby holds today, even in cases of rape, I would not have been able to make a decision about my own body should that have become necessary. This isn’t a debate I’m observing from a distance; it’s about my childhood. And it’s about my ongoing health and well-being as a woman.

As the Bangor Daily News noted Wednesday, Bobby Charles’ current “campaign website doesn’t list any proposals about abortion,” but he has “called abortion ‘abhorrent’ and supported the 2022 US Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.”

Arguing that “Maine deserves leadership rooted in empathy, dignity, intellectual honesty, and respect for every person who calls this state home,” Bobby Charles’ sister concluded that she will be voting for Democrat Hannah Pingree for governor.

The op-ed quickly circulated on social media after its publication. Local writer Anthony Emerson said that an “atom bomb dropped in the Maine governor’s race this morning.”

Anita Charles’ article came as her brother continues to face criticism for boasting about his ties to President Donald Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, at a Maine Young Republicans event and claiming that he would ask the federal official to send US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and US Marshals to the state’s voting booths.

Maine AFL-CIO president Cynthia Phinney said in a Wednesday statement that “in Maine and the United States, voters elect our leaders in free and fair elections. Calling for masked federal agents to be deployed around polling locations is a cynical attempt to intimidate voters.”

“No one should be afraid to show up and exercise their constitutional right to vote, but that’s exactly what this is trying to do,” Phinney continued. “Our union movement rejects this desperate political tactic, and we know our democracy is strongest when all of us show up to exercise our democratic rights in peaceful elections free from fear or intimidation.”

Trump’s weaponization of ICE has been a key issue in Maine politics this cycle—including the contest between Republican US Sen. Susan Collins and Democratic challenger Troy Jackson—particularly since an agent fatally shot Biddeford resident Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in July.

“Every Mainer deserves to feel safe in their own neighborhood,” Pingree said last month. “As governor, I’ll demand real, independent oversight, not empty promises. I’ll keep fighting for accountability. ICE out of Maine.”

The US National Domestic Violence Hotline can be reached at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233), by texting “START” to 88788, or through chat at thehotline.org. It offers 24/7, free, and confidential support. DomesticShelters.org has a list of global and national resources.

Although President Donald Trump was surrounded by farmers and ranchers while signing a pair of beef-related executive orders in the Oval Office on Friday, some critics cast doubt on their effectiveness—plus highlighted how one proposal could prove lethal for protected wolves.

Trump is facing high beef prices and the looming midterm elections. After meeting with Brazilian billionaire Joesley Batista, a key shareholder for JBS, the world’s largest meatpacker, the president last month paused tariffs on 300,000 metric tons of beef for 90 days to be sold at a discount. While signing the new orders on Friday, Trump signaled that the cheaper beef will be imported from Argentina, Brazil, and “a couple of other places.”

Trump’s latest orders are intended to appease the US cattle industry, which was angry about the August proclamation, by “cracking down on major meatpackers’ dominance of the industry and seeking to implement new labeling standards,” Politico explained. However, “it’s not clear whether any of the steps announced Friday will assuage ranchers’ concerns or have any impact in the short term, given that most of them would require regulatory changes or congressional action.”

Food & Water Watch (FWW) food policy director Rebecca Wolf said in a statement that “President Trump is on an apology tour after his deal to flood US markets with foreign-imported beef—it’s not working. Today’s executive orders will do nothing to reverse the last two years of Trump’s disastrous food policy.”

“Under his watch, consumer beef prices are at record highs, and ranchers can’t make ends meet, all while the multinational meat monopolies profit hand over fist,” she stressed. FWW found last month that while JBS reported $131.7 billion in revenue and $2.4 billion in profit, and fellow industry giant Tyson reported $82.65 billion in revenue and $681 million in profit, “prices are up 23% for choice beef, 24.2% for ground beef, 24.7% for ground chuck, and 25.2% for chuck roast.”

Wolf noted that “US agencies charged with protecting market competition sit on the sidelines, made toothless by Trump’s reckless job cuts,” pointing to thousands of staff reductions across the Agricultural Marketing Service, Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and threats to slash funding for the Department of Agriculture (USDA) Packers and Stockyards Division.

Since Congress repealed mandatory country-of-origin labeling (MCOOL) for beef and pork in 2015, FWW has been among those pushing for its restoration. Trump’s order directs Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, to “review all statutory and regulatory authorities that may permit the establishment” of MCOOL for beef products, then issue or amend regulations, as permitted by law, and develop legislative recommendations.

As a diverse coalition that includes FWW circulates a “Label Our Beef” petition, Wolf said Friday that “it is clearer than ever that Congress must heed popular demand and restore mandatory country-of-origin labeling to give American producers an even playing field. And Trump must put his money where his mouth is and fund antitrust and fair trade enforcement to truly help American families and ranchers.”

While FWW declared that “Trump’s beef executive orders won’t help consumers or ranchers,” Angela Huffman, president and CEO of Farm Action, was more diplomatic, welcoming the language on MCOOL, meat processing, and Packers and Stockyards Act enforcement.

“These actions show the administration is listening to problems farmers and ranchers have raised for years, and we appreciate that,” Huffman said. “They move in the right direction, but stop short of the stronger reforms independent producers need.”

Farm Action supports legislation to restore MCOOL for beef, as well as Packers and Stockyards Act enforcement, but has argued that the latter “should be paired with stronger producer protections” and urged USDA “to reverse its planned rescission of the Inclusive Competition and Market Integrity rule, which would protect producers against undue prejudice, unjust discrimination, retaliation, and deceptive practices.”

As for the harm that Trump’s orders could do, one directs Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum to “make a determination as to whether the gray wolf and the Mexican wolf have met the recovery criteria for delisting or downlisting under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and, if he determines that the recovery criteria has been met,” begin the process to end protections.

In addition to working with other officials on a legislative recommendation to strip federal protections from wolves, Trump told Burgum to “engage with states to encourage them to delist gray wolves and Mexican wolves from any state-specific lists of protected species and to revise their standards” for killing the animals “to assist ranchers in combating predation.”

During an exchange in the Oval Office, Trump falsely suggested that ranchers can now shoot protected wolves.

Kitty Block, president and CEO of Humane World for Animals, responded Friday that “the war on wolves needs to end, not escalate. They remain absent from much of their historic range and vulnerable to the same cruel trophy hunting, recreational trapping, bounties, and other relentless killing that nearly wiped them out of the lower 48 states. Rolling back federal protections now—or setting that process in motion—would jeopardize decades of recovery and open the door for brutal killing.”

“Gray wolves are essential to healthy ecosystems, and decisions about their survival should be based on science, not political favors to farmers and ranchers whose livelihoods are threatened not by wolves but by tone-deaf global trade policies,” she added.

Advocates at the Center for Biological Diversity, Grand Canyon Wolf Recovery Project, Sierra Club Grand Canyon Chapter, Western Watersheds Project, WildEarth Guardians, Wildlife for All, and Wolf Conservation Center also ripped the order’s wolf language.

“This is a huge distraction to placate a handful of ranchers and make them believe that wolves are a greater threat than President Trump’s own policies,” said Greta Anderson, deputy director of Western Watersheds Project. “The impact of wolves on the livestock industry [pales] in comparison to the impacts of recent trade agreements and the reality of ranching in the arid West under changing climate conditions.”

Claire Musser, executive director of the Grand Canyon Wolf Recovery Project, emphasized that “the Mexican gray wolf is not recovered simply because the population has grown... With just 317 wolves in the wild and a population still facing serious genetic challenges, weakening federal protections now would put decades of recovery work at risk. Decisions about the future of lobos must be based on the best available science and what these wolves need for long-term recovery, not political pressure.”

Arguing the wolves “desperately need more care and less persecution,” Michael Robinson, a senior conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity, promised that “we’re prepared to prove in court that downlisting Mexican wolves and a steep increase in killings would not only be cruel but also deeply unwise and illegal.”

The US Department of Justice on Friday moved to throw out its criminal case against David Hearn, the Olympian it accused of vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington, DC, sparking demands for, at minimum, an apology from the DOJ.

“The Trump administration’s case against Davey Hearn should have never been brought,” said his attorneys, Norm Eisen of Democracy Defenders Fund, Mary Dohrmann of Washington Litigation Group, and Steve Levin of Steptoe LLP, in a joint statement.

“Its dismissal today does not erase the abuse of government power in arresting and charging a patriotic American who did nothing wrong,” they continued. “The government’s approach was ready, fire, aim. The administration owes Mr. Hearn an apology."

President Donald Trump in April announced plans to renovate the Reflecting Pool for the country’s 250th anniversary. Two months later, despite the administration spending millions of dollars on resurfacing, the water turned green from algae. That led to a hydrogen peroxide treatment and a $1.7 million no-bid contract for a company whose owner is a Trump donor, after which multiple ducks were found dead.

Hearn, one of several people accused of tampering with the pool, was arrested in June. Early last month, Jeanine Pirro, the Trump-appointed US attorney for the District of Columbia, revealed that her office had secured a felony indictment against him. The 67-year-old, who faced up to a decade in prison, pleaded not guilty and had a trial scheduled for September.

“I didn’t vandalize anything,” Hearn, an Olympic canoeist, said in an interview with The Washington Post, explaining that he had touched a piece of pool lining that was already peeling off. “I didn’t destroy or break or peel anything. By the time I realized what was going on, I was being put in handcuffs.”

In its Friday motion to dismiss the case, Pirro’s office said that after the return of the indictment, the US Department of the Interior (DOI) provided information indicating that the damage “was the result of flawed installation by the contractor, Atlantic Industrial Coatings (AIC), and the rush to complete the project prior to events associated with the America 250 celebration in the weeks surrounding Independence Day 2026.”

“It is difficult to attribute the widespread damage to the Reflecting Pool to vandalism, let alone to establish that fact beyond a reasonable doubt,” the document also states.

MS NOW legal analyst Lisa Rubin highlighted Pirro’s previous promise to “prove beyond a reasonable doubt” that Hearn caused the damage.

NBC News noted that “a spokesperson for Pirro said the filing spoke for itself. Her office also moved to dismiss at least one of the other three misdemeanor cases that had been brought in connection with the Reflecting Pool.”

It’s not just Pirro’s office and the DOJ under fire for this debacle. While welcoming the motion to dismiss, Tim Whitehouse, executive director of the nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), took aim at DOI in a Saturday statement.

“This project has become a poster child for corruption and why competitive bidding and transparency in federal contracting matter,” Whitehouse said. “Transparency in contracting prevents waste, self-dealing, and exactly the kind of expensive, embarrassing failure this project has become. Decisions about the best way to repair public infrastructure should rest with engineers and career experts following open, competitive bidding, not with political officials chasing a photo-op deadline ordered by the president while steering money to favored contractors.”

“The use of false charges and criminal prosecutions to deflect blame away from politically powerful leaders and their allies is an abuse of the justice system that cannot be tolerated,” he added. “The Interior Department officials responsible for this failure—the no-bid contract, the botched renovation, lying to the public and the rush to blame an innocent man—owe the public a full accounting. PEER calls on Congress to investigate and demands that those responsible face real consequences.”

Meanwhile, Trump took to his Truth Social platform to make clear that he “100%” disagrees with Pirro, sparking speculation about whether he may fire her.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum then claimed that “the evidence is clear, vandals have repeatedly caused damage to the Reflecting Pool,” in a post on the platform X that New York Times reporter Trip Gabriel described as “repeating the boss.”

Hearn’s attorneys said that “Trump and Burgum are attacking Pirro because she admitted what we established in our legal filings all along: Trump’s botched renovation was responsible for the damage—not Davey Hearn. However, Pirro’s claim that she and her office were previously duped by Interior is nonsense.”

“Starting immediately after arraignment, our motions repeatedly proved that the administration was to blame for the Reflecting Pool failures, not Davey,” they added. “This is far from over, as we consider all legal remedies.”

Mainers descended on the city of Biddeford Monday after a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer fatally shot a 26-year-old Colombian man, with protesters demanding an end to a federal agency that has killed citizens and immigrants alike.

“Is this the America we want?” asked a sign carried by a woman through the streets of the city, which is about 18 miles southwest of Portland. Other messages included “Abolish ICE,” “ICE Out Now,” “ICE Kills,” and “Murderers.”

The agency’s deadly invasions of US cities—including in Maine earlier this year—as part of President Donald Trump’s mass detention and deportation campaign have fueled growing calls for abolishing ICE.

“It is horrific. ICE needs to be disbanded. People who work for ICE are untrained. And we want them out of Biddeford,” Maine resident Marcia Hanes told WGME. “Killing people in cold blood. They need to be out of Maine. They need to be out of the United States.”

While authorities have not named the man killed on Monday, the Portland Press Herald identified him as Joan Sebastian Guerrero, citing one of his neighbors and an immigrant advocacy organization that said it had been in touch with the family.

The Maine Immigrants’ Rights Coalition (MIRC) and Presente! Maine said in a statement that “the young man was authorized to work in the United States and had been issued a Social Security number,” and that they “are devastated and outraged” by his death.

“Our communities are hurting,” said MIRC executive director Mufalo Chitam. “Today, a 26-year-old member of our community is dead following an incident involving ICE. We are grieving, we are furious, and we will not allow his death to be treated as routine or inevitable. How much more harm must our communities endure before those with the power to act acknowledge that this has gone too far?”

As with previous shootings involving ICE and other Department of Homeland Security agents, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin claimed that the deceased man had “weaponized” a vehicle he was driving, according to US Sen. Angus King (I-Maine).

Videos from earlier shootings have cast doubt on or debunked some of the Trump administration’s claims, including in Texas last week. While some clips of Monday’s encounter have circulated online, King noted that there is apparently no body camera footage.

“Body cameras were not on the agents. So we have no video evidence of what occurred in this case,” the senator said. “We don’t know the circumstances at this point, but my statement to Secretary Mullin, I said, ‘I’m going to say that you have committed to me that this investigation will be full, fair, and transparent. Can I say that? He said, ‘Yes, absolutely.’”

King added that Mullin told him the driver was not the target of the warrant the officers were executing in Biddeford.

The office of Maine Attorney General Aaron M. Frey said that it “is investigating a fatal use of deadly force that occurred this morning,” and “Biddeford, Saco, and the Maine State Police are assisting with the investigation as well as federal authorities.”

Initial statements indicate ICE “was conducting an enforcement operation related to a final order of removal when the subject attempted to flee in a vehicle in the direction of the officer and was fatally shot,” the attorney general’s office said. “We encourage any member of the public to come forward if they have information they feel would be helpful to the investigation. Please contact your local law enforcement agency.”

Some of the protesters headed to the local office of Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who is up for reelection in November.

According to the Press Herald:

As the crowd marched down Main Street and gathered outside Sen. Collins’ Biddeford office, about a dozen people made it inside the entryway, chanting “Vote her out!” and banging their fists on the office’s locked doors.

Staffers inside could be seen on the phone as the crowd grew. Minutes later, five Biddeford police officers pushed through the entryway and placed themselves between protestors and the door.

“This is your fault Susan!” one man shouted.

“You’re a fascist!” another person yelled at the officers.

Collins responded to the shooting by calling for “a full and impartial investigation,” and faced fierce responses from some Democrats running to replace primary winner Graham Platner as her challenger in the November election.

“Sen. Collins voted for the Republican bill to give ICE another $70 billion to terrorize our communities with no accountability. Maybe sit this one out,” said Nirav Shah, who previously led the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention and then served in leadership at the federal CDC. “I’m running for Senate to end this blank check, stop ICE’s lawlessness, and protect Mainers.”

Jordan Wood, another Senate hopeful who was previously a congressional chief of staff, told Collins, “What it requires is for you to have the courage to stop funding this lawless agency that’s been terrorizing our streets for over a year.”

“ICE needs to get out of Maine,” Wood said. He called for ICE to be “abolished and replaced with a new agency that protects and serves the people,” and will “not murder them.”

The national progressive group Our Revolution—which is backing former Maine Senate President Troy Jackson as Platner’s replacement—declared: “Collins voted to hand ICE $70 billion. No reforms. No accountability. She funded this. She owns this. Vote her out!”

As with previous ICE shootings, Monday’s deadly encounter drew alarmed responses from across the United States. “When is shit like this going to end?” asked US Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.).

In Minnesota—where federal agents fatally shot US citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti, and injured Venezuelan national Julio Sosa-Celis, in January—Democratic Gov. Tim Walz said: “Americans are once again watching in horror as Trump’s lawless federal agents took another life—this time in Maine. We must seek accountability and justice and an end to this madness.”

The elected attorney in Minnesota’s Hennepin County, Mary Moriarty, announced Monday that after “six months of relentless collective effort,” prosecutors had finally “obtained hard drives of previously withheld evidence” about the shootings from the federal government.

Tens of thousands of people still haven’t been found after a pair of devastating earthquakes in Venezuela last week—including some Venezuelans who had just been deported from the United States as part of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation push and were being held in a hotel when the temblors hit, The Associated Press revealed Monday.

There were 146 Venezuelans, including 19 women and seven children, on a deportation flight that arrived just hours before the 7.2- and 7.5-magnitude earthquakes, the AP reported, citing a Human Rights First initiative that has tracked thousands of such flights under Trump. They were brought to Hotel Santuario La Llanada in La Guaira, which collapsed because of the quakes.

“Lisbeth Portillo, 58, said she escaped the rubble from the hotel with about 20 other deportees who walked the streets looking for help. They saw people running, some naked and others barefoot as they emerged from the rubble of the building,” according to the outlet.

Another deportee who survived, 24-year-old Jenny Rodriguez, told Telemundo: “I was trapped under the rubble. A colleague who had been on the same flight came by; I managed to free my hand from the debris, grabbed him by the trousers, and begged for help... Thanks to God—and to him—I was able to get out of there.”

Oswadeliz Núñez Ramírez is still “frantically searching for her son,” 28-year-old Daniel Alejandro Núñez Ramírez, who was also on the deportation flight and at the hotel, the Miami Herald reported Monday. A member of the Bolivarian National Intelligence Service who called himself “Jonathan” told her that he had pulled her son from the rubble, but, “skeptical of the official account, his mother has searched every hospital, clinic, and sector of La Guaira and Caracas without success.”

While US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not respond to the AP’s request for comment, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the agency, told the Herald: “This flight safely reached Venezuela, and all illegal aliens on board were returned home. When an individual is no longer in ICE custody, ICE is no longer responsible for them.”

Venezuelan National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez said Monday that the earthquake has left at least 1,719 dead, 5,034 injured, and 15,866 displaced from their homes.

UN News noted Monday that the ongoing search and rescue effort involves more than 2,000 workers from over two dozen countries, plus over 160 dogs, and Gianluca Rampolla, the United Nations resident coordinator in Venezuela, “reported that the UN and Venezuelan authorities had agreed to procure 10,000 body bags in anticipation of the death toll rising further.”

Rampolla said that “together with the search and rescue operations, we are focusing, together with the government, on providing emergency healthcare, shelter, food assistance, water and sanitation, and logistical support to ensure not only the storage but also the distribution of all the supplies arriving in the country, as well as protection.”

As of Monday evening, more than 44,000 people remained missing, according to a reunion website for families. As NBC News detailed Monday:

Even as the chances of finding survivors diminished with every passing hour, Venezuelans continued using shovels, ropes, and their bare hands as they dug through mountains of collapsed concrete.

They were joined by a growing number of international rescue teams, who pulled multiple survivors from the wreckage, offering desperate families a rare glimmer of hope.

Among the rescues, teams from the United States, France, and Venezuela pulled a man and his son from the ruins Sunday morning after they had spent four days trapped beneath the rubble.

Organizations including US-based peace group CodePink and the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a Washington, DC-based think tank, have called on the US and allied countries to lift all sanctions against Venezuela in the wake of the earthquakes.

Trump earlier this year directed an illegal invasion of Venezuela, during which US forces killed scores of people and abducted President Nicolás Maduro, then seized control of the South American country’s nationalized oil industry.

University of Michigan professor Justin Wolfers on Friday joined a growing number of economists and other critics casting doubt on what he called “the Pentagon’s lowball $25 billion estimate” for the cost of President Donald Trump’s illegal war on Iran.

While testifying before Congress last week alongside US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Pentagon comptroller Jules “Jay” Hurst offered the $25 billion figure. However, experts have responded with raised eyebrows. Stephen Semler, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, estimated that the government spent at least $71.8 billion during the first two months of the war, or around $1.2 billion each day.

Although Trump told Congress last Friday—a key deadline under the War Powers Act—that his assault on Iran had been “terminated,” citing the ceasefire deal reached a month ago after his genocidal threat, the administration has maintained its naval blockade and on Thursday bombed what it claimed were “Iranian military facilities responsible for attacking US forces.”

As the threat of more US bombings of Iran loomed, Wolfers wrote Friday in a New York Times opinion piece that “the Pentagon’s stated number reflects only a narrow accounting of the tab that Operation Epic Fury is running up. It’s the price of the more than 2,000 Tomahawk and Patriot missiles already fired, the warplanes already flown and in some cases lost, and the rest of the gear already chewed through. It does not measure the true cost of the war—including the human toll.”

“Since the start of the war, oil markets have been disrupted, consumer confidence has cratered, the global economy is groaning, and military budgets are growing,” the economist continued. “The toll from this upheaval must be counted in lives disrupted, jobs lost, companies shut down (see: Spirit Airlines), and the income and output sacrificed. The less easily quantified costs—death, disability, and mental health—could become much more dramatic should President Trump send troops into Iran, which still can’t be ruled out.”

As David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect, detailed Friday, the war seemingly hasn’t achieved any of Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s shifting objectives:

The US and Israel said they wanted to eradicate Iran’s nuclear program and change its regime. The regime is now composed of more hard-liners than before, and Iran’s nuclear capability has not budged since last summer. Now the two sides are negotiating the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before the conflict, and the terms of Iran’s nuclear program, which they were negotiating before the conflict. Moreover, the compromise being contemplated involves Iran pausing uranium enrichment in exchange for the US lifting sanctions and unfreezing Iranian funds. That sounds suspiciously like the deal President Obama struck in 2015 that Trump ripped up when he took office, complete with the “bags of cash” sent to Iran that Trump flipped out over back then.

All this war has done is killed thousands of people, opened a new front for Israel in Lebanon, damaged most US military sites and most energy production facilities in the region, led to oil spills that are visible from space, created a shipping bottleneck that will take at least a year to fix, raised domestic gas prices to a record for this time of year, cost American consumers $34.3 billion and counting, ended the life of one US airline with more likely to come, and led us down an imminent path to physical shortages of critical commodities like oil, including in the United States.

I have never in my life seen a war that achieved literally none of its objectives while directly causing this many devastating costs, and I lived through Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that the Central Intelligence Agency has privately warned the Trump administration that “Iran can survive the US naval blockade for at least three to four months before facing more severe economic hardship,” and its “analysis might even be underestimating Iran’s economic resilience if Tehran is able to smuggle oil via overland routes.”

The reporting heightened concerns about how long the war may drag on. The International Monetary Fund warned last month that a prolonged conflict could cause a global recession.

Already, the war has “pushed the Federal Reserve Bank into a corner,” and “Wall Street is worried, despite the market touching new highs,” Wolfers wrote Friday. “My estimate—based on the movement of oil prices, along with the S&P 500—is that stocks are about 5% lower than they otherwise would be, suggesting that the war has wiped about $3 trillion off the value of these companies.”

The economist also cited recent research showing that elevated “geopolitical risk leads to lower investment and employment.”

Shortly after launching the war in February, the White House signaled it would need $200 billion for the operation. However, it is now seeking a $1.5 trillion defense budget for the next fiscal year—which Hegseth tried to frame as a fiscally responsible plan that puts “the American taxpayer first” in a widely ridiculed video this week. Wolfers highlighted that the budget request is “a roughly 40% boost over this year. That’s a massive $600 billion increase, or roughly $4,000 per household.”

Like Dayen, Wolfers also pointed to the Iraq War, which economists Linda Bilmes and Joseph Stiglitz estimated cost the US around $3 trillion, after factoring in expenses such as “lifetime medical care and disability benefits for veterans, and the higher recruitment and retention costs that follow a bloody war—all compounded by a rising interest bill.”

“The best any economist can do right now is get the order of magnitude right, and my math suggests the Iran war will cost hundreds of billions of dollars, and very possibly trillions,” Wolfers concluded. “War is hell. And hell comes with a hefty price tag.”

Just hours before the Trump administration conducted what it claimed were “self-defense strikes” against “Iranian military facilities,” The Washington Post reported Thursday that the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that “Iran can survive the US naval blockade for at least three to four months before facing more severe economic hardship.”

Citing four unnamed officials familiar with the analysis, the newspaper highlighted that “the CIA analysis might even be underestimating Iran’s economic resilience if Tehran is able to smuggle oil via overland routes.”

Militarily, “Iran retains about 75% of its prewar inventories of mobile launchers and about 70% of its prewar stockpiles of missiles,” the Post added. “There is evidence that the regime has been able to recover and reopen almost all of its underground storage facilities, repair some damaged missiles, and even assemble some new missiles that were nearly complete when the war began.”

Drop Site News’ Murtaza Hussain responded that if this assessment along with a previous one from the Center for Strategic and International Studies about “remaining US munitions and interceptor capacity are even approximately correct, it goes a long way to explaining why Trump seems so eager to end the war whereas the Iranians have either dug in or escalated their negotiating positions. The missile math of continuing the conflict would be much more favorable to the Iranians, especially if the war continued for a significant time.”

“Prior to the war, interceptor capacity compared to the size of the Iranian missile stockpile seemed like the most rationally incontrovertible reason to avoid fighting such a conflict, even for people who found it politically desirable,” he added. “This also might explain why the US and Israel pivoted towards the end to threatening countervalue strikes against civilian targets if attempts to destroy the underground missile cities by air were ineffective.”

The Post’s reporting came one month into a fragile ceasefire and starkly contrasts the recent framing of conditions in Iran from President Donald Trump and others in his administration, including Defense Secretary Pete Hesgeth.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) responded to the Post’s reporting by quoting Hegseth, who said in March that “never before has a modern, capable military, which Iran used to have, been so quickly destroyed and made combat ineffective.”

Murphy declared: “They lied through their teeth. Just straight up fabricated shit.”

Still, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly stuck to the administration’s framing in a Thursday statement to the Post.

“During Operation Epic Fury, Iran was crushed militarily,” Kelly said. “Now, they are being strangled economically by Operation Economic Fury and losing $500 million per day thanks to the United States military’s successful blockade of Iranian ports. The Iranian regime knows full well their current reality is not sustainable, and President Trump holds all the cards as negotiators work to make a deal.”

Meanwhile, some experts were unsurprised that the CIA privately delivered a “sober” assessment contradicting the administration’s public commentary on the conflict—which it now claims is no longer an active “war,” seemingly to dodge a key congressional deadline.

“Nice to know that a confidential CIA analysis is confirming what close observers of the Iranian economy have been saying publicly for weeks! Intelligent policymakers rely on intelligence. But Trump jeopardized diplomacy by instigating a blockade that was never going to work,” said Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies in Europe and founder of the think tank Bourse & Bazaar Foundation.

Sharing the reporting on social media, Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at the think tank Defense Priorities, wrote: “As I argued a week into the U.S. blockade, Iran can hold out for months without economic collapse. The costs for the US and the world are increasingly unsustainable, however.”

Earlier this week, Stephen Semler, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, estimated that the US government spent $71.8 billion on the Iran War during its first 60 days, an average of $1.2 billion daily. The International Monetary Fund warned last month that the conflict could cause a global recession.

Last Friday, Trump responded to the War Powers Act’s 60-day deadline by claiming to Congress that his war—which already violated US and international law—had been “terminated.” The White House said at the time that no fire had been exchanged since April 7, when a ceasefire deal was reached just hours after the president issued a genocidal threat against the Iranian people.

However, on Thursday evening, United States Central Command announced that Iran “launched multiple missiles, drones, and small boats” at American warships. CENTCOM added that it “eliminated inbound threats and targeted Iranian military facilities responsible for attacking US forces, including missile and drone launch sites; command and control locations; and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance nodes.”

Defenders of the planet took aim at President Donald Trump’s administration on Wednesday for transferring approximately 1.4 million acres of public lands along the Dalton Utility Corridor from the US Bureau of Land Management to the state of Alaska.

“This corridor encompasses some of Alaska’s most critical transportation and energy assets, including portions of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System corridor, the Dalton Highway, and proposed routes for the Ambler Road and Alaska Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) projects,” the US Department of the Interior noted in a statement, framing the move as part of DOI’s commitment to the Alaska Statehood Act, as well as orders issued by Trump and the agency’s secretary, Doug Burgum.

As Burgum and Republican Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy cheered the development on Wednesday, Andrea Feniger, director of the state’s Sierra Club chapter, declared that “this is less a transfer to Alaskans than a massive giveaway to out-of-state corporations that don’t want to be burdened by the federal protections that safeguard our lands, waters, wildlife, and communities.”

“Gov. Dunleavy has repeatedly shown he is more interested in helping the Trump administration and fossil fuel executives exploit Alaska than standing up for the people who actually live here,” Feniger said. “These companies will not be satisfied until every corner of our state is opened to industrial development and short-term profit, regardless of the permanent damage done to the wild places, subsistence traditions, and communities that make Alaska unique. Alaskans deserve leaders who will protect these lands for future generations, not politicians willing to hand them over to corporate polluters.”

Bloomberg reported that “Alaska’s acquisition along the highway north of Fairbanks is part of 2.1 million acres” that Burgum offered earlier this year, after revoking a pair of decades-old orders. In March, a coalition of environmental groups, including Trustees for Alaska, filed a federal lawsuit over the secretary “unlawfully removing federal protections.”

While Alaska filed a motion to dismiss the case on Wednesday, Bridget Psarianos, senior staff attorney at Trustees for Alaska, told Bloomberg that the land transfer is illegal. She also said that “the interior secretary broke the law when removing federal protections for over 2 million acres of public lands in February without hearings in local communities, without a public comment period, and without addressing that decision’s impacts on land, water, and subsistence users.”

Other groups supporting that suit include the Alaska Wilderness League, Center for Biological Diversity, National Parks Conservation Association, and Sierra Club, whose director of conservation, Dan Ritzman, condemned Wednesday’s transfer.

“This action will only help corporate polluters transform Alaska into an industrial wasteland—destroying irreplaceable landscapes for the sake of expanding the portfolios of mining and oil and gas companies that will never have to live with the consequences of this destruction,” Ritzman stressed. “This decision completely ignores the wishes of local communities and tribes that depend upon these untouched areas for their livelihoods, cultures, and regional identities.”

“Alaska is home to some of the country’s last true wild places, and projects like Alaska LNG and the Ambler Road threaten irreversible damage to these precious landscapes, the wildlife that depend on them, and the communities that have stewarded them for generations,” he added. “These lands belong to all Americans, not corporate special interests looking to exploit them for short-term profit. We are fighting this in court and will continue opposing any other attempts to sacrifice Alaska’s public lands for the benefit of polluters and extractive industries.”

Rebecca Noblin, an Alaska senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, similarly told E&E News that “handing this incredible stretch of federal public lands over to the state puts the communities, fish, and wildlife who live there in danger.”

“Alaska officials envision bulldozing the area for a private industrial mining road and the LNG pipeline boondoggle,” Noblin said. “We’re fighting this transfer of our federal public lands in court, and we’ll keep standing up for Alaska’s wild places.”

Climate and conservation groups have also recently sounded the alarm about Interior’s forthcoming fossil fuel lease sale for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge’s Coastal Plain, and warned—in the words of Kristen Monsell, the oceans legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity—that that Trump’s “ridiculously reckless” plan to dramatically expand offshore drilling, including near Alaska, “could cause thousands of new oil spills, threatening almost every US coast.”

Democracy defenders sounded the alarm just over three months ago, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation executed a search warrant at a Georgia election hub. They expressed concerns again after a court filing revealed late Monday that President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice is demanding the names of Fulton County’s 2020 election workers.

For years, the Republican president has “obsessively propagated the debunked conspiracy theory that Fulton County ‘stole’ the 2020 election from him. And he has made it clear that he seeks retribution against those who refuse to indulge his baseless claims,” notes the county’s Monday filing aimed at blocking the April 20 grand jury subpoena for election workers’ personal data.

The largely Democratic county—which includes most of Atlanta—argued that it should not have to turn over workers’ names, home addresses, emails, and telephone numbers due to federal overreach and First Amendment concerns, according to CBS News. It also suggested the subpoena is politically motivated and highlighted the statute of limitations for 2020 election crimes.

“After illegally seizing our election records in January, the federal government once again is attempting to misuse criminal process,” Fulton County Commission Chairman Robb Pitts said in a statement announcing the motion.

“This is yet another act of outrageous federal overreach designed to intimidate and to chill participation in elections. This harassment should not be allowed, so we have asked the court to act,” he continued. “I will always stand up for our elections workers and for the truth. Let me be crystal clear. Fulton County will not be intimidated.”

Voting rights advocates echoed the concerns noted by the filing and Pitts. Lauren Groh-Wargo, who leads Fair Fight Action, told The New York Times that election workers across the United States now face heightened threats and harassment.

“Roughly a third of election officials are threatened on the job, and more than half worry it’s making it harder to hire and keep election workers,” Groh-Wargo said. “They’re trying to break our democracy by attacking the infrastructure, but we are fighting back hard.”

All Voting Is Local Georgia state director Kristin Nabers stressed in a statement that “the conspiracy theories and lies that dictate White House policy have real-world consequences beyond appeasing the president’s fragile ego—they are being weaponized to target the people from our communities who run our elections and ensure our votes are counted.”

“This is a clear attempt to seize and hold power over our elections by sending a message that any county or state that doesn’t vote in favor of the president or his preferred candidates may be subjected to a harassment campaign like that of Fulton County,” she continued. “This intimidation tactic is a slap in the face to the millions of county election workers and volunteers around the country who work tirelessly to make sure our elections run smoothly.”

Nabers added that “the all-out assault on Fulton County and its poll workers creates a blueprint for the administration to see what it can get away with during the midterm elections when results in key counties and states don’t go its way. Election workers in Fulton County and beyond will not be intimidated by this desperate bullying.”

The fight in Fulton County—where Trump and others initially faced criminal charges for their effort to overturn his 2020 loss—comes as some primary elections are underway across the country, and amid mounting concerns about what the president may try in November, particularly if the GOP-controlled Congress passes the attack on voting rights that the White House is pushing.

Michael McNulty, policy director of the group Issue One, said Tuesday that “Americans should be furious” about Trump’s demands in Georgia, which “are based solely on debunked conspiracy theories from 2020 that courts and post-election audits have repeatedly rejected.”

“Targeting these heroic election workers does nothing to strengthen our democracy—it puts ordinary public servants at risk in an attempt to erode trust in elections,” he warned. “The Trump administration’s goal is to make Americans feel distrust and cynicism about the election process. While the administration is framing its actions using the 2020 elections, it is proceeding with this year’s midterms in mind.”

As McNulty detailed, Trump’s “election takeover playbook” includes:

• Spreading false claims to undermine confidence in elections;
• Installing loyalists within the executive branch willing to act on those claims; and
• Using executive power to pressure and intimidate those who actually run our elections.

“If this playbook is left unchecked, the Trump administration will continue to abuse its power and attempt to meddle in elections like authoritarian leaders in other countries,” he said. “Congress must stop this.”

“It should use oversight and funding authority to halt the executive branch from weaponizing federal power against the heroes who run our elections,” McNulty argued. “Members of Congress swore an oath to the Constitution when they agreed to serve, and now is a test of whether they are willing to live up to that oath and protect the American people.”

Some members of Congress joined voting rights advocates in speaking out against the subpoena this week. Sharing the Times report on social media Tuesday, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) declared that “Trump’s attacks on our free and fair elections won’t stop.”

The US Supreme Court on Monday temporarily restored access to mifepristone, a medication commonly used for abortion and early miscarriage care, through the mail while the justices review a decision requiring it to be dispensed in person by a medical provider.

Justice Samuel Alito, who is part of the high court’s right-wing supermajority, oversees the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. He issued a one-week stay for the appellate court’s Friday dispensing decision, which critics had condemned as “sweeping and dangerous.”

“This is not particularly surprising from Alito. He’s the circuit justice here, acting—in essence—until the full court can act,” explained Law Dork’s Chris Geidner. He noted that both Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas, another right-winger, “have issued administrative stays in the past until the full court can rule in similar circumstances, regardless of their ultimate votes on the matters.”

The drug companies Danco Laboratories, which makes the brand-name version of mifepristone, Mifeprex, and GenBioPro, which makes the generic pill, asked the country’s top court to intervene following Friday’s ruling, which threatened patients nationwide.

“Even this Supreme Court can see that this 5th Circuit decision is reckless,” declared Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, on Monday. “While mifepristone access returns to where it was on Friday morning, the whiplash and chaos that patients and providers are navigating have already had real consequences for real people’s lives and futures.”

Brittany Fonteno, president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation, similarly highlighted how “this back-and-forth has created confusion and chaos,” but welcomed that the high court’s “decision provides critical, if temporary, relief for patients and providers and ensures that people can continue to access this essential medication through telehealth while the court considers the case.”

“The lower court’s ruling disregards the well-established safety and efficacy of the use of mifepristone via telehealth, and any future restriction will create medically unnecessary barriers to care for patients across the country,” Fonteno added. “Mifepristone has been safely used for more than 25 years, and is essential to abortion care and miscarriage management in the United States. For many patients, especially those in rural areas or facing financial and logistical barriers, access to telehealth is a critical component of holistic reproductive healthcare.”

Since the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade in June 2022, the anti-choice movement and right-wing politicians have ramped up attacks on reproductive freedom at the state level. Meanwhile, the Biden administration’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) permanently lifted mifepristone’s in-person dispensing requirement in early 2023, allowing doctors in pro-choice states to serve patients across the country via telehealth and the mail, regardless of local laws.

Louisiana responded to the eased restrictions on mifepristone—which is generally taken with another drug, misoprostol, for abortions—by suing, which led to the battle that has now reached the Supreme Court. Prior to Friday’s decision by the infamously far-right 5th Circuit, a district judge in the state paused the case due to what the ACLU on Monday called “a sham FDA review announced by the Trump administration,” which is ongoing.

“While this is a positive short-term development, no one can rest easy when our ability to get this safe, effective medication for abortion and miscarriage care still hangs in the balance,” Julia Kaye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, stressed Monday. “The Supreme Court needs to put an end to this baseless attack on our reproductive freedom, once and for all.”

“We know that if this project goes through, our land and our water are in danger. Our future is in danger,” warned Krystal Two Bulls, one of many community, conservation, and Indigenous group leaders speaking out after President Donald Trump granted a cross-border permit to what critics called “nothing more than an attempt to resurrect the unpopular Keystone XL pipeline.”

Trump’s permit for the Bridger Pipeline Expansion Project authorizes various “petroleum products, including gasoline, kerosene, diesel, and liquefied petroleum gas,” The Associated Press reported Thursday, but Bridger spokesperson Bill Salvin said the company is currently focused on crude oil—550,000 barrels of which could flow daily from Canada, through Montana, to Guernsey, Wyoming, if the pipeline is completed.

“Water protectors are standing up again, like we have always done against all those who threaten Mother Earth,” Two Bulls, an Oglala Lakota and Northern Cheyenne organizer from Lame Deer, Montana, and executive director of Honor the Earth, said Friday. “We fought against the Keystone XL pipeline proposed for these very same lands and won back in 2021. We will fight and win again against the Bridger pipeline.”

Shortly after entering office in 2021, then-President Joe Biden revoked the presidential permit for Keystone XL—which Trump had signed during his first term—as part of the Democrat’s efforts to combat the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency.

While Biden faced criticism from climate advocates for the oil and gas projects he did allow, Trump took a swipe at him on Thursday, telling reporters: “Slightly different from the last administration. They wouldn’t sign a pipeline deal, and we have pipelines going up.”

Trump—who campaigned on a pledge to “drill, baby, drill” and returned to the White House last year with financial help from Big Oil—also dismissed safety concerns about pipelines, saying: “By the way, they’re way underground. They’re not a problem. Nobody even knows they’re there. It’s so crazy. But they wouldn’t approve anything having to do with a pipeline.”

As the AP detailed:

Bridger Pipeline and other subsidiaries of True Company have been responsible for several major pipeline accidents including more than 50,000 gallons (240,000 liters) of crude that spilled into the Yellowstone River and fouled a Montana city’s drinking water supply in 2015, a 45,000-gallon diesel spill in Wyoming in 2022 and a 2016 spill that released more than 600,000 gallons (2.7 million liters) of crude in North Dakota, contaminating the Little Missouri River and a tributary.

Subsidiaries of True agreed to pay a $12.5 million civil penalty to settle a federal lawsuit over the North Dakota and Montana spills.

Salvin said Bridger Pipeline in the years since the Yellowstone spill developed an AI-based leak detection system that allows it to be notified more quickly when there are problems. It also plans to bore 30 to 40 feet (9 to 12 meters) beneath major rivers including the Yellowstone and Missouri to reduce the chances of an accident. The 2015 accident occurred on a line that was constructed in a shallow trench at the bottom of the river.

A public comment submitted to the Trump administration by the legal group Earthjustice on behalf of Honor the Earth, Sierra Club, WildEarth Guardians, and a dozen other organizations acknowledges concerns about this pipeline’s potential impacts to water, land, the climate, air quality, cultural resources, recreation, and more—and called for an intense federal review of the project.

“We know how this system works: More pipelines mean more drilling, more waste, and more spills. And when spills happen, it’s communities, landowners, and tribes who are left dealing with the contamination, not the companies profiting from it,” Rebecca Sobel, climate and health director at WildEarth Guardians, said Friday. “Oil and gas infrastructure fails every day in this country, and expanding that system only increases the likelihood of spills and long-term contamination.”

Sierra Club Montana chapter director Caryn Miske stressed that “while the Trump administration kills affordable energy projects and jobs across the country, it is continuing to side with wealthy corporations and oil executives looking to increase profit regardless of the risks to Montana’s treasured waterways and to families and businesses struggling with high energy costs. These policies aren’t about fair or free markets, it’s welfare for corporations and pollution for everyone else.”

Earthjustice is also representing 350 Montana, Center for Biological Diversity, Families for a Livable Climate, Montana Environmental Information Center, Montana Health and Climate, Mountain Mamas, Red Medicine LLC, Western Environmental Law Center, Western Organization of Resource Councils, Western Watersheds Project, Wild Montana, and Wyoming Outdoor Council.

“The proposed Bridger tar sands pipeline is an environmental disaster waiting to happen,” declared Jenny Harbine, managing attorney with Earthjustice’s Northern Rockies office. “The Trump administration appears more than willing to limit public engagement to force this project through.”

“Communities and tribes in the Northern Rockies have a right to know how this could impact their water sources, historic resources, and ways of life,” Harbine added. “If the administration attempts to sidestep that legal obligation, we’ll see them in court.”

Separately on Friday, Anthony Swift, a longtime leader in the fight against the pipeline and current senior strategist for global nature at Natural Resources Defense Council, said that “no matter what you call the project, the environmental concerns that animated the fight over Keystone XL are no less acute today. Keystone Light will threaten water supplies and exacerbate climate change. This is the moment to get off the oil roller coaster, not double down on the dirtiest oil on the planet.”

“The Trump administration has been lobbing gifts to Big Oil since its first day in office. This is the latest in a long, long, long list of favors that show the oil industry is getting a great return on its billion-dollar investment in the president’s campaign,” Swift added. “President Trump has repeatedly said that America does not need Canada’s oil, so we certainly don’t need Keystone Light.”