August, 09 2018, 12:00am EDT
Court Reinstates EPA Ban on Brain-Harming Pesticide
In a decision released this morning, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals mandated that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must finalize its ban on the neurotoxic pesticide chlorpyrifos within 60 days. The judge determined that EPA broke the law by allowing continued use of the pesticide -- applied to fruits, vegetables and nuts -- despite scientific evidence linked to impacts on children's developing brains.
Seattle, WA
In a decision released this morning, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals mandated that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must finalize its ban on the neurotoxic pesticide chlorpyrifos within 60 days. The judge determined that EPA broke the law by allowing continued use of the pesticide -- applied to fruits, vegetables and nuts -- despite scientific evidence linked to impacts on children's developing brains.
Hawai'i recently banned the pesticide in that state, and California scientists recently listed it as an air contaminant and developmental toxicant, noting it poses risks to children in their air, water and food. The decision today was in response to years-long litigation brought by Pesticide Action Network (PAN), NRDC, Earthjustice, and more recently, farmworker organizations.
Kristin Schafer, Executive Director of Pesticide Action Network North America, released the following statement:
"Children, farmworkers, rural families and science are all huge winners today. The court affirmed that EPA's job is to protect public health, not industry profits -- and found that their reversal of the planned ban of this brain-harming pesticide was in fact illegal. Sadly, under this administration it takes judges to force our public agencies to stand up to corporate interests and do their jobs."
Background:
Chlorpyrifos is a widely used and highly-volatile neurotoxic chemical that study after study has shown is harming the development of children's brains. One study even used MRI technology to link chlorpyrifos exposure to changes in brain architecture. And when mothers are exposed during pregnancy, their children have lower IQs, developmental delays and increased risk of autism.
Based on dozens of studies like those mentioned above -- and in response to a 2007 lawsuit by PAN and our partners -- EPA scientists put forward a proposal in late 2015 to withdraw all uses of chlorpyrifos on food crops. In fall 2016, they published a follow-up assessment of health risks that found that, through their diet, infants were being exposed to the pesticide at levels 140 times what could be considered safe. The scientists also found that workers were exposed at unsafe levels in the field, and that drinking water was contaminated at concerning levels.
The proposal to effectively ban chlorpyrifos was moving forward in time for a court-ordered deadline, and the agency pulled together a strong scientific case to back up the action. Then in an about-face decision in March 2017, former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt called the science on chlorpyrifos "unresolved," and said agency experts will continue thinking about it until at least 2022.
PANNA (Pesticide Action Network North America) works to replace pesticide use with ecologically sound and socially just alternatives. As one of five autonomous PAN Regional Centers worldwide, we link local and international consumer, labor, health, environment and agriculture groups into an international citizens' action network. This network challenges the global proliferation of pesticides, defends basic rights to health and environmental quality, and works to ensure the transition to a just and viable society.
LATEST NEWS
After Months of Delay, US Supreme Court to Rule on Trump Immunity Claim
"The court has no excuse for the lack of urgency on such a crucial issue."
Jul 01, 2024
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule Monday on whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from criminal charges stemming from his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
But the high court's delay in handing down its decision has already "helped the former president in his effort to avoid trial before the November 5 election," Reutersnoted Sunday, leading to accusations that the court's right-wing supermajority has essentially intervened in the presidential contest on Trump's behalf.
It's been more than four months since the court agreed to take up the case, and more than two months since oral arguments. Trump nominated three of the justices who currently sit on the Supreme Court.
"By not issuing a decision before the debate, the MAGA justices on the Supreme Court have in effect granted Donald Trump the immunity from trial he seeks—at least through the election," attorney Norm Eisen and Mike Podhorzer of the Defend Democracy Project said in a statement after yet another week passed without a decision in the closely watched case.
"By agreeing to take up the presidential immunity case at all, and then piling on delays, MAGA justices on the court, like the deeply conflicted Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito, have used this case to interfere in the course of the 2024 presidential election," Eisen and Podhorzer continued. "By stalling so long that a trial is now unlikely, the justices have already succeeded in effectively giving Trump immunity regardless of the content of their ruling."
The immunity decision is one of four expected on Monday, with the rulings set to be released beginning at around 10:00 am ET.
"It's long overdue and frankly outrageous that the Supreme Court has dragged their feet and delayed Trump's January 6th trial for months," Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington wrote on social media. "The court has no excuse for the lack of urgency on such a crucial issue."
"Trump's argument that former presidents are forever immune from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office finds no support in the Constitution's text and history."
Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought the election subversion charges against Trump last year, has urged the Supreme Court to reject the former president's sweeping claim that he should be "absolutely immune from prosecution" for actions he took as president.
"The Framers never endorsed criminal immunity for a former president, and all presidents from the founding to the modern era have known that after leaving office they faced potential criminal liability for official acts," Smith wrote in a filing to the Supreme Court in April.
NBC Newsreported ahead of Monday's ruling that "based on the oral arguments, it appeared likely the court would conclude that there could be some conduct alleged in the indictment that is subject to immunity."
"The justices could set a new test for determining what official acts receive immunity and then send it back to lower courts to determine how that affects Trump's indictment," the outlet added.
In an amicus brief, a group of constitutional law experts rejected the notion that Trump should enjoy immunity from prosecution for official acts, writing that the former president's claims "reflect a misreading of constitutional text and history as well as this court's precedent."
"Trump's argument that former presidents are forever immune from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office finds no support in the Constitution's text and history," the experts wrote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After First Round of Voting, Will France's Centrists Drop Out to Stop the Fascists?
Leftist Jean-Luc Mélenchon said his party's third-place candidates would withdraw from three-way runoffs to help prevent the far-right from seizing power.
Jul 01, 2024
Leaders of France's left-of-center parties vowed Sunday to withdraw their third-place candidates from runoff races in an effort to prevent Marine Le Pen's fascist National Rally from securing an absolute majority in the country's Parliament.
But will centrist candidates follow suit?
That question became critical following the first round of voting in snap parliamentary elections called by French President Emmanuel Macron last month after his party suffered a stinging defeat in European elections. Macron's decision appears to have backfired in a major way.
Le Pen's viciously xenophobic Rassemblement National (RN) prevailed in round one on Sunday, winning 33.2% of the vote, while the Nouveau Front Populaire (NFP)—an alliance of left-of-center parties formed ahead of the snap elections to counter the far-right—came in second at 28%. Macron's centrist Ensemble coalition landed in third with 22.4% of the vote.
The decisive second round will be held on July 7, and efforts to stop Le Pen's party from seizing outright control of the National Assembly likely hinge on electoral cooperation between the center and the left. The Financial Timescalculated that the first round of voting "produced more than 300 three-way runoffs... an unprecedented number, although the final figure will depend on how many candidates drop out."
In races qualifying for runoffs, according to FT, Macron's Ensemble alliance had 95 third-place candidates after round one while the left-of-center NFP had 129.
Speaking to supporters Sunday, leftist La France Insoumise (LFI) leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon said his party would withdraw candidates from races in which they placed third and the far-right NR was in the lead—a vow that the heads of other left-wing parties echoed.
"Our instructions are simple, direct, and clear: not one vote, not one more seat for the RN," said Mélenchon.
"The question that should be asked of every Macronist in the next couple days: Does this line extend to La France Insoumise or not? Right now, it's not clear."
The centrists were much less direct about their intentions.
French Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, who acknowledged the far-right is "at the gates of power," said the centrist alliance would withdraw candidates from runoffs if their presence would hinder "another candidate—who, like us—defends the values of the Republic," without specifically saying whether he includes leftist LFI candidates in that category.
"The question that should be asked of every Macronist in the next couple days: Does this line extend to La France Insoumise or not? Right now, it's not clear," France-based journalist Cole Stangler wrote Sunday.
Macron similarly urged voters to back candidates who are "clearly republican and democratic." But as The Washington Postobserved, the French president "has at times portrayed the far-left as equally dangerous as the far-right," raising concerns that centrists could allow the far-right to win close races by splitting votes in three-way runoffs that include candidates from Mélenchon's LFI.
As Reutersreported, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire "ruled out calling on voters to choose an LFI candidate" in a radio interview—a position that one senior Greens member denounced as "cowardly and privileged."
One government minister, Roland Lescure, did explicitly urge "all voters to block the extreme right without hesitation by voting for the best-placed alternative candidate," even if it's an LFI candidate.
"The real danger for France today is an absolute majority National Rally," said Lescure. "And we must do everything to prevent it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Unprecedented' and 'Very Dangerous,' Hurricane Beryl Explodes Into Category 4 Storm
"The climate crisis is here. This is an emergency. Politicians need to start acting like it."
Jun 30, 2024
Meteorologists, climate campaigners, and extreme weather experts expressed shock and horror Sunday as Hurricane Beryl exploded into an "extremely dangerous" Category 4 storm as it headed into the warm waters of the southern Caribbean with a level of intensification characterized as unprecedented.
The National Hurricane Center on Sunday morning called it a "very dangerous situation" due to "potentially catastrophic hurricane-force winds, a life-threatening storm surge, and damaging waves" for the numerous mainland and island nations in Beryl's path.
According to the NHC, the Windward Islands of St. Vincent, the Grenadines, and Granada will be the first at highest risk from the storm as well as St. Lucia and Barbados. People on those islands and elsewhere in the region were told that all preparations for the storm "should be rushed to completion" without delay.
Weather Undergroundreports that subsequent locations that may face Beryl's wrath later this week could be Jamaica, the Cayman Islands, Belize and Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula, though noted "there's uncertainty in that exact track" of the hurricane as detailed in the following graphic:
Possible storm tracks for Hurricane Beryl. (Source: Weather Underground / wunderground.com)
Citing records going back to 1851, the Washington Postreported Sunday that there "is no precedent for a storm to intensify this quickly, nor reach this strength, in this part of the ocean during the month of June."
Eric Blake, a hurricane expert, said that Beryl on Sunday was "rewriting the history books in all the wrong ways," as he urged people in its path to "be very safe and take this hurricane seriously" as "very few will have experienced a hurricane this strong" on those islands.
"This is unreal," said Nahel Belgherze, a journalist focused on extreme weather. "Hurricane Beryl continues to defy all known logic, now becoming the first June Category 4 hurricane ever recorded in the Atlantic Basin. I can't even stress enough just how completely absurd that storm is."
"The climate crisis is here," said the Sunrise Movement in a social media post showing the extreme power and historic nature of Hurricane Beryl. "This is an emergency. Politicians need to start acting like it."
The group took the opportunity to re-share its petition calling on President Joe Biden to "declare a climate emergency" as a way to unlock federal funds and escalate the government's response to the crisis of fossil fuels that are the main driving of surging global temperatures.
In May, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted that the 2024 hurricane season—which officially runs from June 1 to the end of November—would be "extraordinary" and "above-normal," largely due to rising ocean temperatures attributable to human-caused global warming couple with La Niña conditions.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular