November, 15 2020, 11:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (801) 300-2414, tmckinnon@biologicaldiversity.org
Erik Molvar, Western Watersheds Project, (307) 399-7910, emolvar@westernwatersheds.org
Matt Nykiel, WildEarth Guardians, (719) 439-5895, mnykiel@wildearthgurardians.org
Kate Hudson, Waterkeeper Alliance, (914) 388-5016, khudson@waterkeeper.org
John Weisheit, Living Rivers and Colorado Riverkeeper, (435) 260-2590, john@livingrivers.org
Legal Protest Blasts Plan for 430 Square Miles of Fracking Leases in Wyoming
Trump plan threatens 43 million tons of climate pollution ahead of Biden’s promised leasing ban.
WASHINGTON
Citing harm to wildlife, clean air and the climate, conservation groups filed a legal protest over the weekend challenging a Trump administration plan approving the sale of fracking leases on 275,000 acres of public lands in Wyoming. Fracking those leases would destroy habitat for greater sage-grouse, worsen air quality and cause up to 43 million tons of climate pollution -- as much as a coal-fired power plant emits in 11 years.
The online auction, which will offer 118,219 of the 275,000 approved acres, is scheduled Dec. 15-17. President-elect Biden has pledged to ban new oil and gas leasing on federal public lands and waters when he takes office Jan. 20.
"Each ounce of climate pollution lends urgency to Biden's plan to end fossil fuel leasing on public land and waters," said Taylor McKinnon, a senior campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity. "This Wyoming plan is a recipe for disaster. Our climate can't afford one more acre of public land committed to fossil fuel development."
The leases continue the Trump administration's defiance of climate scientists' call to cut greenhouse gas pollution by half in the coming decade. The Trump administration has offered more than 7 million acres of public lands in the lower 48 states for fracking leases, and 4 million acres have been sold. Lawsuits have so far invalidated the leases on about 60% of those 4 million acres.
"The unrestrained leasing of our public lands for oil and gas extraction not only jeopardizes local and regional water quality and quantity but also intensifies climate impacts across the Western United States," said Kate Hudson, Western US Advocacy Coordinator for Waterkeeper Alliance. "All communities -- but especially our Native American nations -- are increasingly threatened with a devastating combination of irreversible drought and catastrophic fire. We call on the Biden administration to abandon aggressive fossil fuel extraction from our public lands and equitably address the climate crisis before it is too late."
The protest challenges the Bureau of Land Management's failure to analyze harm from climate pollution and assess how volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides will worsen ozone pollution. Wyoming's Upper Green River Basin already suffers pollution levels that exceed federal health standards.
"This last gasp assault on our climate and public lands firmly bolsters the need for President-elect Biden to make good on his commitment to ban federal fossil fuel leasing and reverse the damage wrought by four years of climate and science denial under Trump," said Matt Nykiel with WildEarth Guardians. "For four years now, we've been on the frontlines fighting back against the Trump administration's attempts to sell out our public lands for fracking and we don't intend to back down until President-elect Biden holds true to delivering bold action for climate."
"Regional warming from greenhouse gas pollution is drying the Colorado River and forcing emergency actions to send water from Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Wyoming to Lake Powell in Utah," said John Weisheit with Living Rivers and Colorado Riverkeeper. "The disastrous decision to increase fossil fuel extraction and greenhouse gas pollution at this crucial juncture is a decision that also accepts a future of dangerous water poverty for the Colorado River Basin."
The protest also challenges the Bureau's failure to prioritize leasing outside of sage-grouse habitat and to fully assess potential harms from fracking to grouse populations. Estimates from multiple state wildlife agencies show that grouse populations are plummeting. The grouse once occupied hundreds of millions of acres across the West, but their populations are dwindling as oil and gas development, livestock grazing, roads, powerlines and other activities have destroyed and fragmented their native habitats.
"With its last dying gasp, the Trump administration appears hellbent on committing as much sage grouse habitat as possible to its failing energy dominance agenda," said Erik Molvar, executive director of Western Watersheds Project. "But the courts have made clear that this stampede to lease key sage grouse habitats for drilling and fracking is illegal, and the Biden administration has signaled a pivot to climate-friendly policies on public lands, so this commitment of public lands to industrial destruction may be short-lived indeed."
The protest was filed by WildEarth Guardians, the Center for Biological Diversity, Living Rivers and Colorado Riverkeeper, Waterkeeper Alliance and Western Watersheds Project.
Background
Fossil fuel production on public lands causes about a quarter of U.S. greenhouse gas pollution. Peer-reviewed science estimates that a nationwide federal fossil fuel leasing ban would reduce carbon emissions by 280 million tons per year, ranking it among the most ambitious federal climate-policy proposals in recent years.
Federal fossil fuels that have not been leased to industry contain up to 450 billion tons of potential climate pollution; those already leased to industry contain up to 43 billion tons. Pollution from already-leased fossil fuels on federal lands, if fully developed, would essentially exhaust the U.S. carbon budget for keeping the world below a 1.5 degrees Celsius temperature increase.
Western Watersheds Project is an environmental conservation group working to protect and restore watersheds and wildlife through.
LATEST NEWS
Listen Live: US Supreme Court Hears Outrageous Argument That Trump Is Above the Law
"The American people deserve a Supreme Court that does not hesitate to declare that no one is above the law, including a former president," said one campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
After months of delay, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday will hear oral arguments in a closely watched case on whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from criminal charges stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss—an argument that legal experts say is both absurd and dangerous.
Listen live to the oral arguments, which are set to begin at 10:00 am ET:
Thursday's proceedings mark the high court's final argument of its current term, and pro-democracy campaigners are calling on the justices to quickly reject the former president's sweeping immunity claim so he can face trial on federal election subversion charges before his November rematch with President Joe Biden.
As Bloomberg's Greg Stohr noted earlier this week, Thursday's oral arguments give "Special Counsel Jack Smith only a narrow window to put the former president in front of a Washington jury before voters go to the polls on November 5."
"With the trial on hold until the high court rules," Stohr added, "Smith needs a clear-cut victory, and he needs it quickly."
Sean Eldridge, founder and president of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, said in a statement Thursday that "the Supreme Court's right-wing majority has already handed Trump a temporary victory by stalling this case for months, allowing him to delay accountability for his criminal attempts to cling to power."
"With so much at stake for our democracy, the Supreme Court should rule swiftly and decisively in this case," said Eldridge. "Accountability delayed could mean accountability denied."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grand Jury Indicts Top Trump Aides, 11 Arizona Republicans Over 'Fake Electors' Scheme
Had it succeeded, said the state's attorney general, the scheme would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
Apr 25, 2024
A grand jury in Arizona on Wednesday charged seven aides to Donald Trump and nearly a dozen Republican officials over a "fake electors" scheme in the state that aimed to keep the former president in power after his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden.
Trump, who is currently facing nearly 90 charges across four criminal cases as he runs for another White House term, was described as "unindicted co-conspirator 1" in the 58-page indictment, which was announced by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.
"The people of Arizona elected President Biden," Mayes, a Democrat, said Wednesday. "Unwilling to accept this fact, the defendants charged by the state grand jury allegedly schemed to prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency. Whatever their reasoning was, the plot to violate the law must be answered for."
The indictment names former Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, sitting state Republican Sens. Jake Hoffman and Anthony Kern, former U.S. Senate candidate Jim Lamon, and seven others as the "fake electors" who sought to declare Trump the rightful winner of the state's presidential contest.
The names of other individuals indicted by the state grand jury are redacted, but the document's descriptions make clear that former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, and top Trump legal strategist Boris Epshteyn are among those facing felony charges—including fraud, forgery, and conspiracy.
"In Arizona, defendants, unindicted coconspirators, and others pressured the three groups of election officials responsible for certifying election results to encourage them to change the election results," the document reads. "Discussions about using the Republican electors to change the outcome of the election began as early as November 4, 2020. Those plans evolved during November based on memos drafted by [an attorney for the Trump campaign, Kenneth Chesebro]."
Mayes said Wednesday that had the fake elector scheme succeeded, it would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
"It effectively would have made their right to vote meaningless," said Mayes.
A state grand jury, made up of everyday, regular Arizonans, has handed down felony indictments in the ongoing investigation into the fake elector scheme in Arizona. pic.twitter.com/Nu8GcD4ZqJ
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) April 24, 2024
Alex Gulotta, state director of All Voting Is Local Action Arizona, said Wednesday that "the indictment of the eleven fake electors is one of the first steps required in holding these election deniers accountable for their alleged attempts to take power away from voters by disrupting our free and fair elections."
"Arizonans deserve to trust the election officials responsible for administering our elections and preserving our democracy," said Gulotta, "and this is a positive step forward as we continue to strengthen the foundations of our democracy and restore faith in our elections."
The Arizona Republicreported Wednesday that "several of the Arizona electors have previously claimed they were merely offering Congress a backup plan, though nothing in the documents they sent to Congress and the National Archives backs up that assertion."
"The indictment includes several statements the false electors made on social media that contradict those claims," the newspaper observed.
Jenny Guzman, director of Common Cause's Arizona program, said the indictment "marks the start of a new chapter for the fake elector scheme that has plagued Arizona."
"Arizonans are still dealing with the fallout from the false electors and the Big Lie about the 2020 elections," said Guzman. "We are relieved that the investigation by Attorney General Mayes has concluded and Arizonans can now know that what comes next is accountability. These efforts by these fake electors to undermine the will of Arizona’s voters have had implications far beyond their failed attempt to overthrow the 2020 election."
"This indictment can reassure all Arizonans that if anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, attempts to undermine their vote, consequences will follow," Guzman added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Urges FEC to Investigate Trump Campaign Over Scheme for Legal Fees
"By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much."
Apr 24, 2024
A campaign finance watchdog on Wednesday filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, affiliated political groups, and an accounting firm of violating U.S. law in a scheme "seemingly designed to obscure the true recipients of a noteworthy portion of Trump's legal bills."
The Washington, D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center (CLC) said that "evidence appears to show an illegal arrangement between several Trump-affiliated committees and a compliance firm named Red Curve Solutions that is designed to obscure the identities of those providing legal services and how much they are being paid."
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money."
CLC alleges that the Trump campaign, Trump's political action committee (PAC) Save America, and three affiliated organizations "violated federal reporting requirements based on a scheme in which the committees reportedly paid over $7.2 million—described as 'reimbursement for legal' costs or expenses"—to Red Curve.
The watchdog also said that Red Curve appears to be "making or facilitating illegal contributions that violate either federal contribution limits or the prohibition on corporate contributions."
According to CLC:
Red Curve is a domestic limited liability company that offers compliance and FEC reporting services but does not appear to offer any legal services. It is managed by Bradley Crate, who also serves as the treasurer for each of the five Trump-affiliated committees concerned in this complaint, as well as over 200 other federal committees.
According to filings with the FEC, Red Curve appears to have been fronting legal costs for Trump since at least December 2022, with Trump-affiliated committees repaying the company later. This arrangement appears to violate FEC rules that require campaigns to disclose not only the entity being reimbursed (here, Red Curve) but also the underlying vendor. By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much they are being paid—through this arrangement.
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money," CLC senior director of campaign finance Erin Chlopak said in a statement. "When campaigns and committees obscure that information from the public, not only do they make it difficult to determine if the law has been violated, but they deny voters the ability to make an informed choice when casting a ballot."
"The steps taken by the Trump campaign, its affiliated committees, and Red Curve Solutions concealed information about how campaign funds were used to pay former President Trump's legal expenditures, including the amounts and ultimate recipients of these expenditures—and the FEC must investigate immediately," Chlopak added.
Trump—who is the presumptive 2024 GOP presidential nominee—faces 91 federal and state felony charges related to his role in the January 6 insurrection and his organization's business practices. He is currently on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The twice-impeached former president has been open about his use of campaign donations to pay his legal costs.
The new CLC filing comes a day after the watchdog filed separate FEC complaints urging investigations into a pair of Trump-affiliated "scam PACs," which "pretend to fundraise for major candidates or issues while secretly diverting almost all of their donors' money back into fundraising or the fraudsters' own pockets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular