SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Brett Abrams, Courage Campaign | 516-841-1105 | brett@unbendablemedia.com
Ileene Anderson, Center for Biological Diversity | 323-654-5943 | ianderson@biologicaldiversity.org
CALIFORNIA - Federal court today, declared Nestle's reliance on a long-expired permit valid, ruling in favor of the US Forest Service for allowing the Swiss conglomerate to continue its use of a four-mile pipeline that siphons water from the San Bernardino National Forest despite the Forest Service's lack of action on any permit renewal for 28 years.
"The court has just confirmed what many Americans fear, massive corporations play by a different set of rules than the rest of us. Nestle has been pulling a fast one for nearly 30 years, taking a public resource, depriving plants and animals of life-sustaining water, and selling that water at an obscene profit without the right to do so, but apparently our justice system is OK with that." said Eddie Kurtz, Executive Director of Courage Campaign Institute.
"We're shocked by the court's decision to let Nestle continue its operations, and we will continue to stand with hundreds of thousands of Californians and people across the nation to take back control of this public water. This fight is far from over." added Michael O'Heaney, Executive Director of the Story of Stuff Project.
"The court's decision is disappointing, but the real tragedy lies in the fact that Strawberry Creek is drying up, dooming the plants, fish and animals that have relied on it for tens of thousands of years" said Ileene Anderson, senior scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Bottling water is not worth sacrificing Strawberry Creek, so we're considering our options for appeal."
In 2015 alone, an estimated 36 million gallons were piped away from the forest to be bottled and sold under Nestle's Arrowhead brand of bottled water. The permit expired in 1988 but the piping system remains in active use, siphoning about 98,000 gallons of water a day out of the forest last year. Reports from the end of 2015 and the summer of 2016 indicate that water levels at Strawberry Creek are at record lows, threatening local wildlife that are already dealing with the ongoing drought in Southern California.
In October 2015, Courage Campaign Institute, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Story of Stuff Project jointly filed a lawsuit claiming that the Forest Service allowed Nestle to continue using its siphons to collect millions of gallons of water for 28 years after its permit had expired. The lawsuit spurred the Forest Service to open a review of Nestle's application for a new permit and the State Water Board to conduct an investigation into the validity of Nestle's claimed water right.
In June, activists from the Story of Stuff Project, the California-based Courage Campaign Institute and the Center for Biological Diversity rallied outside the U.S. District Court building in Riverside, California as Judge Bernal considered a challenge to Nestle's four-mile pipeline.
For more information, or for interviews, please contact Brett Abrams at 516-841-1105 or by email at brett@unbendablemedia.com.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252President Donald Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship "seeks to repeat one of the gravest errors in American history, by creating a permanent subclass of people born in the U.S. who are denied full rights as Americans."
A coalition of immigrant rights groups sued the Trump administration on Monday over the newly inaugurated president's executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship, a move that campaigners and legal experts condemned as both immoral and flagrantly unconstitutional.
The lawsuit was filed by several branches of the ACLU, the Asian Law Caucus, the State Democracy Defenders Fund, and the Legal Defense Fund on behalf of groups with members whose children born in the United States would be denied citizenship under President Donald Trump's new order, which runs up against the clear text of the 14th Amendment and more than a century of legal precedent.
Anthony Romero, executive director of the ACLU, said in a statement that "denying citizenship to U.S.-born children is not only unconstitutional—it's also a reckless and ruthless repudiation of American values."
"Birthright citizenship is part of what makes the United States the strong and dynamic nation that it is," said Romero. "This order seeks to repeat one of the gravest errors in American history, by creating a permanent subclass of people born in the U.S. who are denied full rights as Americans. We will not let this attack on newborns and future generations of Americans go unchallenged. The Trump administration's overreach is so egregious that we are confident we will ultimately prevail."
The groups behind the new lawsuit noted that Trump's order leaves many expectant parents across the United States fearful and uncertain about their babies' futures. The organizations pointed to one couple who arrived in the U.S. in 2023 and is awaiting a review of their asylum application.
"The mom-to-be is in her third trimester," the groups said. "Under this executive order, their baby would be considered an undocumented noncitizen and could be denied basic healthcare and nutrition, putting the newborn at grave risk at such a vulnerable stage of life."
"Taken as a whole, Trump's words and actions reveal the enormity of the danger we're facing, which compels us all to mobilize to fight back."
Theo Oshiro, co-executive director of Make the Road New York, said Monday that "birthright citizenship is a cornerstone of our democracy."
"Our members, who come from all over the world, have created vibrant communities, loving families, and built this country over generations," said Oshiro. "To deny their children the same basic rights as all other children born in the United States is an affront to basic values of fairness, equality, and inclusivity. We are grateful for the bravery of our members who have taken on this case, and are prepared to fight alongside them."
The order was part of a flurry of immigration-related actions that Trump took on the first day of his second White House term, including an emergency declaration that directs the U.S. armed forces "to take all appropriate action to assist the Department of Homeland Security in obtaining full operational control" at the southern border.
Trump also signed an executive order suspending refugee programs, a step that had an immediate impact. Reutersreported that "nearly 1,660 Afghans cleared by the U.S. government to resettle in the U.S., including family members of active-duty U.S. military personnel, are having their flights canceled" under the order.
Additionally, The Washington Postreported that "asylum seekers who made appointments to come to the U.S. border Monday afternoon were blocked at international crossings after Trump officials halted use of the CBP One mobile app, which the Biden administration used as a scheduling tool."
"Trump also ended all 'categorical' parole programs that under President Joe Biden allowed 30,000 migrants per month to enter the country via U.S. airports, bypassing the border, for applicants from Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti, and Nicaragua," the Post added.
Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, said that "taken as a whole, Trump's words and actions reveal the enormity of the danger we're facing, which compels us all to mobilize to fight back."
"This is a fight not just to protect immigrants," said Matos, "but to also defend our democracy."
"This move not only erases accountability for one of the darkest days in our nation's history but also emboldens far-right extremists and grants them free license to continue their ideological reign of terror," said one critic.
Democracy defenders on Monday night swiftly condemned U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to pardon roughly 1,500 insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021 and commute the sentences of some others.
The widely anticipated move, which Trump made with television cameras in the Oval Office, came just hours after he returned to power on Monday afternoon—despite being convicted of 34 felonies in New York last year and facing various other legal cases, including for his attempts to overturn his 2020 loss to Democratic former President Joe Biden that culminated in inciting the 2021 Capitol attack.
"Just hours after promising to bring 'law and order back to our cities,' Trump pardoned more than a thousand January 6th rioters and put violent offenders right back in our neighborhoods—people who assaulted police officers, destroyed property, and tried to overturn our freedom to vote," said Sean Eldridge, president and founder of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, in a statement.
"By giving January 6th rioters a free pass, Trump is rewarding political violence and making all of us less safe," he continued. "No one should be above the law in the United States of America, and our first responders and the American people deserve better than this."
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of the grassroots progressive political organizing group Our Revolution, said that "Trump's pardons of January 6 rioters, including those convicted of violence against law enforcement, mark a grave and unprecedented attack on the rule of law and American democracy. This move not only erases accountability for one of the darkest days in our nation's history but also emboldens far-right extremists and grants them free license to continue their ideological reign of terror."
"These are not patriots, these are traitors who will now be free to recruit others into what Trump views as his own personal militia," he asserted. "By granting clemency to these individuals, who sought to overturn the peaceful transfer of power, Trump is signaling that political violence and the rejection of democratic norms are acceptable tactics in service to his authoritarian agenda. This is a direct threat to the foundations of our democracy and the safety of our communities."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of watchdog Public Citizen, said that "it is perhaps on-brand that Donald Trump has kicked off his second term with an assault on our democracy, just as he ended his first term."
"This isn't just about degrading the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law in theory, his disgraceful actions here send a message that political violence is acceptable, so long as it is in support of him and his pursuit of unchecked power," she continued. "We intend to fight against these types of abuses over the next four years to maintain the integrity of the rule of law."
Accusing the Republican of "condoning insurrection," Common Cause president and CEO Virginia Kase Solomón similarly warned that "this will not be the last time President Trump attacks democracy" and vowed that her organization stands "ready to defend it."
During the insurrection, Kase Solomón said, "people died and more than 140 law enforcement officers were injured protecting members of Congress from the attack that followed. These deaths and injuries should not be in vain. To pardon those involved is a blatant and dangerous abuse of power."
"Trump was charged with multiple crimes for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election which ended in the insurrection at the Capitol," she noted. "Only his reelection, coupled with an extremely misguided ruling from the Supreme Court on presidential immunity, allowed him to escape trial. In pardoning those who attempted to violently overturn the election and invalidate 80 million votes, Trump is showing his contempt for our justice system and our democracy."
Noah Bookbinder, a former federal prosecutor who is now president of the watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, warned that "giving a pass to those who participated, all of whom were convicted after trial with ample evidence and process or pleaded guilty to crimes, sends a message that the right of the people to choose our own leaders no longer matters because the results can merely be overturned by force."
"And," he said, "it raises a terrifying question: What happens if Trump doesn't want to leave the White House at the end of his term?"
Trump commuted the sentences of Jeremy Bertino, Joseph Biggs, Thomas Caldwell, Joseph Hackett, Kenneth Harrelson, Kelly Meggs, Roberto Minuta, David Moerschel, Ethan Nordean, Dominic Pezzola, Zachary Rehl, Stewart Rhodes, Edward Vallejo, and Jessica Watkins. The others—whom Trump called "hostages"—received "a full, complete, and unconditional pardon."
"I further direct the attorney general to pursue dismissal with prejudice to the government of all pending indictments against individuals for their conduct related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021," Trump's order said. "The Bureau of Prisons shall immediately implement all instructions from the Department of Justice regarding this directive."
Shortly before leaving office on Monday, Biden issued a final wave of pardons, including for members of the U.S. House of Representatives select committee that investigated the insurrection. The Democrat said that he could not "in good conscience do nothing" to protect them and the pardons "should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing, nor should acceptance be misconstrued as an admission of guilt for any offense."
This post has been updated with comment from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
The bill, noted one opponent, "has some egregious provisions that will have dramatic consequences beyond its stated goal of locking up undocumented individuals like the man who murdered Laken Riley."
A dozen U.S. Senate Democrats on Monday helped the GOP pass the Laken Riley Act—an immigration bill decried as a far-right power grab—just hours after Republican President Donald Trump was sworn in for a second term.
Those 12 Democrats are Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Maggie Hassan (N.H.), Mark Kelly (Ariz.), Jon Ossoff (Ga.), Gary Peters (Mich.), Jacky Rosen (Nev.), Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (Mich.), Mark Warner (Va.), and Raphael Warnock (Ga.). Fetterman and Gallego co-sponsored the bill.
A version of the legislation—named for a 22-year-old woman murdered by a Venezuelan migrant in Georgia last year—was passed by the House of Representatives earlier this month in a 264-159 vote, with support from 48 Democrats. However, it must be approved by the chamber again before it will head to Trump's desk.
"I just voted against the Laken Riley Act," said Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). "This bill won't accomplish its goals. I'm disappointed in its passage as it stands, and I'm deeply concerned about how it will be implemented."
Writing to members of Congress ahead of the Senate's 64-35 vote, over 70 national groups said that "the senselessness of the murder of Laken Riley does not justify making unprecedented changes to immigration detention laws that—like all mandatory incarceration provisions—will only result in more discrimination while doing little to increase public safety."
Urging lawmakers to oppose the bill the coalition explained:
S. 5 would require the mandatory detention—without any possibility of bond—of undocumented persons who are merely arrested for or charged with certain offenses, including misdemeanor shoplifting. It does not require conviction. There is no statute of limitations, and the bill does not specify any process by which a person might contest either their immigration detention or the underlying criminal charges (if charges are even pursued). Mandatory immigration detention on the basis of a mere arrest is unprecedented, and it would invite abuses that almost certainly would disproportionately impact people of color.
We are also concerned with language in the bill that would give states standing to sue the federal government over any allegation that the federal government is improperly implementing immigration laws, such as detention and removal provisions, visa provisions, or its discretionary parole authority. This language would open the floodgates to litigation, and it would enable individual states to shape federal immigration policies.
"Laken Riley should be with us today. Her murder is a tragedy, and the perpetrator should be held fully accountable," said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) after the vote. "The Laken Riley Act, however, has some egregious provisions that will have dramatic consequences beyond its stated goal of locking up undocumented individuals like the man who murdered Laken Riley. Specifically, it requires mandatory imprisonment for undocumented children who have never been charged with or convicted of a crime. This is twisted."
"We've seen time and again the damage the federal government can cause our children with dangerous immigration policies like this," he added. "I will continue to champion proposals that keep all of us safe, fix America's broken immigration system, and strengthen our border security. Our families and communities demand nothing less."
The Senate vote came as Trump began imposing his anti-immigrant agenda with a slew of executive orders. The Republican, who campaigned on mass deportations and ending birthright citizenship, is expected to sign the Laken Riley Act once it reaches him.
"Trump's first actions as president show us exactly who he is and what he believes about America," said Congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.). "While he talked about unity, he used his first moment in the office to stoke fear and fuel division. While he talked about a 'golden age,' he signed unconstitutional and un-American executive orders that gut equality initiatives, criminalize immigrants, end asylum, roll back climate protections, and endanger our national security. There is nothing great about an America that denies peoples' civil rights, refuses refuge to the persecuted, or denies future generations clean air and water."
"I believe America is greatest when we pursue justice, equality, and peace and honor our shared humanity," she added. "This daughter of immigrants, citizen by birthright, and congresista from a district that celebrates our diversity, stands ready to fight for the soul of our nation. Regardless of who is president, I will continue to fight for the policies working people demand: affordable housing and healthcare, good-paying jobs, clean air and water, public safety, and comprehensive immigration reform."