SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Hochul Must Stand Firm Against Trump’s Ludicrous NY Pipeline Plan
Trump has stated his intention to revive the long-dead Constitution Pipeline, which would bring fracked gas from Pennsylvania to New York
NEW YORK
The Constitution Pipeline, a proposal to bring fracked gas from Pennsylvania to New York, would be devastating to New York’s environment and climate goals while keeping the state hooked on unreliable, polluting fossil fuels that keep energy costs sky-high for consumers. Despite being soundly rejected by New Yorkers and Governor Hochul five years ago, the Trump administration is reportedly attempting to revive the project.
In response, Laura Shindell, New York State Director at Food & Water Watch, issued the following statement:
“For years now, New Yorkers have demanded an end to new fossil fuel infrastructure throughout our state. Yet Governor Hochul has caved to fossil fuel interests in recent months by approving the Iroquois pipeline expansion, failing to back the NY HEAT clean energy bill and dragging her feet on state climate goals. Now, with Trump trying to force this long-dead fracked gas pipeline down New Yorkers’ throats, Hochul has a ripe opportunity to demonstrate a renewed commitment to clean energy by reaffirming her unequivocal opposition to this foolish, antiquated pipeline plan.”
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
'Travesty of Justice': Jury Finds Greenpeace Must Pay Over $660 Million in Dakota Access Pipeline Case
"We will not be silenced," the green group said in response to the verdict.
Mar 19, 2025
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
Climate campaigners swiftly sounded the alarm on Wednesday after a North Dakota jury awarded Energy Transfer and its subsidiary more than $660 million in the fossil fuel giant's case targeting Greenpeace for protests against the Dakota Access crude oil pipeline.
While Energy Transfer called the verdict a "win... for the people of Mandan and throughout North Dakota," environmentalist Jon Hinck condemned it as a "travesty of justice."
Hinck and others argue the case against Greenpeace International and two of its entities in the United States is a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) intended to intimidate opponents of climate-wrecking fossil fuel projects.
Addressing the legal loss on social media, Greenpeace International vowed that "we will not be silenced."
As The New York Timesreported Wednesday:
Greenpeace had maintained that it played only a minor part in demonstrations led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. It had portrayed the lawsuit as an attempt to stifle oil industry critics, but a jury apparently disagreed.
The nine-person jury in the Morton County courthouse in Mandan, North Dakota, about 45 minutes north of where the protests took place, returned the verdict after roughly two days of deliberating.
Asked by The Associated Press if Greenpeace plans to appeal, senior legal adviser Deepa Padmanabha said, "We know that this fight is not over."
While the case has sparked fears that a loss in court could end Greenpeace, Padmanabha told AP that the globally known group's work "is never going stop." The adviser added, "That's the really important message today, and we're just walking out and we're going to get together and figure out what our next steps are."
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Lawmaker Drowned Out by 'Tax the Rich' Chant at Town Hall in Deep-Red Nebraska District
Voters were not impressed with Rep. Mike Flood's claim that massive cuts to public spending are needed to achieve a "balanced budget."
Mar 19, 2025
A small Nebraska city where U.S. President Donald Trump easily won the 2024 election was the site of the latest chaotic Republican town hall on Tuesday evening, with Rep. Mike Flood facing a roomful of about 200 voters, many of whom refused to accept his excuses for the Trump administration's drastic cuts to the federal government.
Flood came to the Columbus High School auditorium prepared with a graphic showing the national debt, with a giant screen showing the sum ticking up to $36 trillion—evidently confident that the number would help explain to voters why Republicans are pushing for hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to Medicaid and Social Security while backing billionaire Elon Musk's massive cuts to the federal workforce.
But when he displayed the number and told one voter who asked about cuts to the National Institutes of Health that, "ultimately, where we need to go is to a balanced budget," he was met with loud booing.
"How can you be against a balanced budget?" Flood asked the room—which prompted the reply, "tax the rich!" to ring out across the auditorium.
Flood was meeting with voters in Nebraska's deep-red 2nd District for the first time since Trump took office. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) recently advised GOP lawmakers to avoid town halls and claimed protesters who have shown up to numerous meetings with Republican representatives are "Democrat activists who don't live in the district," but he and other critics have presented no evidence that the anger directed at Trump's allies in Congress is coming from anywhere but their constituents.
Flood also faced questions about Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), with one attendee asking, "What makes Elon Musk a better person to audit our government for waste, fraud, and abuse than the inspectors general that Donald Trump fired?"
"Elon Musk gets $40 billion a year in funding from the federal government. What makes you think he has no conflict of interest?" asked the voter. "Do you think he would cut that before he would cut our Medicare, or our Social Security, or our jobs?"
Flood replied that he supports both Musk and DOGE, prompting more loud booing and thumbs-down gestures.
With Republican lawmakers facing angry voters, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in recent weeks has toured states including Iowa, Nebraska, and Michigan, speaking to large crowds in Republican districts. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is scheduled to join him this week, while Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz has also been holding town halls.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Alito and Thomas Urged to Recuse From Key Case Over 'Cozy Ties' to Right-Wing Kingpin
"Americans deserve a legal system that isn't influenced by billionaires and special interest backers pushing an agenda at the expense of working families," said a watchdog group leader.
Mar 19, 2025
Ahead of U.S. Supreme Court arguments next week, a watchdog group asserted Wednesday that right-wing Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas must recuse themselves from a case "whose outcome could have sweeping consequences," citing "significant conflicts of interest" due to their relationships with "conservative kingpin Leonard Leo."
In Federal Communications Commissionv. Consumers' Research, a right-wing group is challenging the constitutionality of the FCC's Universal Service Fund program.
Vox's Ian Millhiser reported Wednesday that "if the Supreme Court accepts an argument raised by a federal appeals court, which struck down the federal program, it would bring about one of the biggest judicial power grabs in American history, and hobble the government's ability to do, well, pretty much anything."
In the new report about Alito and Thomas, the watchdog Accountable.US issued a similar warning about the case's potential impacts: "Effectively defunct for almost a century, the nondelegation doctrine prohibits Congress from passing off its legislative power to federal agencies... Reviving the doctrine would cripple agencies' ability to govern consumer safeguards, social security, Medicare, and more during a time when the Trump administration has begun to slash federal agencies."
"Now before the high court, the case presents an obvious conflict of interest for many of the justices who are personally tied to (and in some cases, friends of) the conservative activist Leonard Leo, who is closely connected to Consumers' Research," the analysis explains, pointing to reporting that Leo is the group's "main backer."
While "all six conservatives now sitting on the Supreme Court can credit Leo with helping to shepherd their confirmations," the watchdog's report states, the right-wing legal activist is "close personal friends" with Alito and Thomas.
According to the report:
- Leo has known Justice Thomas since the early 1990s when Leo was clerking in D.C. Since then, Leo has traveled with Thomas and invited him to his personal residence in Maine. The justice is also the godfather to one of Leo's daughters. Justice Thomas' wife, Ginni, has previously called Leo her "hero" and "mentor." Over the past 15 years, Leo and Ginni have worked together on several projects, operationalizing the outside game of conservative dark money and politics.
- Leo has also traveled with Justice Alito, most notably to Alaska on a private fishing trip (which Justice Alito did not disclose at the time). Leo's Federalist Society has also sponsored numerous trips overseas for Alito, some of them attended by Leo himself.
"Americans deserve a legal system that isn't influenced by billionaires and special interest backers pushing an agenda at the expense of working families. Justices Thomas and Alito's cozy ties to Leonard Leo and thereby Consumers' Research fly straight in the face of that, and present a clear conflict of interest impeding their ability to rule impartially on the case," said Accountable.US president Caroline Ciccone in a statement.
"Public trust in the Supreme Court is already at an all-time low because of misguided conduct by justices–this case threatens to degrade it further," Ciccone continued. "The Supreme Court simply cannot be trusted to defend the Constitution if it doesn't adopt an obligatory, enforceable code of conduct that cleans up the impropriety that's existed on the court for years. Thomas and Alito must recuse themselves and restore a semblance of integrity to the highest court."
In addition to releasing the report, Accountable.US and two other groups, Take Back the Court and United for Democracy, argued for Alito and Thomas' recusal in a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts—who on Tuesday publicly condemned right-wing attacks on the federal judiciary.
"The Supreme Court has been engulfed by corruption scandals, many of which centering around the right-wing justices' overly friendly relationships with powerful billionaires and special interests," United for Democracy senior adviser Meagan Hatcher-Mays said Wednesday. "At the same time that Justices Thomas and Alito were accepting lavish gifts and trips from billionaires, they were hearing cases with those same billionaires' legal interests at stake."
"It's impossible for the American public to trust in Supreme Court rulings when this kind of glad-handing is taking place," she added. "The appearance of impropriety is clear in FCC v. Consumers' Research given Leonard Leo's long-time friendship with Justices Thomas and Alito and his financial entanglements with Consumers’ Research. Justices Thomas and Alito must recuse themselves immediately."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular