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
new york
Gov. Hochul, Stop Blocking a Greener Future and Implement Cap-and-Invest
Hochul’s decision to delay the implementation of New York’s Cap-Trade-and-Invest Program is a deeply misguided one that ignores the connection between the climate crisis and our city’s affordability crisis.
Mar 15, 2025
“Mom, there’s smoke coming from the Palisades!” Those were the words my 15-year-old son yelled to me last fall as he gazed out our apartment window in Upper Manhattan, overlooking the Hudson River. Looking over, there was indeed a plume of smoke rising across the river. By the next day, our apartment building smelled like a campfire. Over the following week, I read urgent social media posts from neighbors about brush fires in nearby Inwood Hill and Fort Tryon Parks. It felt dystopian, out of place for New York. The experience reminded me of talking with my young niece in the Bay Area, who once matter-of-factly told me that she couldn’t play outside because the air quality was bad. That wasn’t so unusual for California. But experiencing it here in New York? That was something entirely new.
Those fires of November 2024 made clear something we as New Yorkers have been largely ignoring since Superstorm Sandy: The frontlines of the climate crisis have reached the Big Apple. Given that urgency, Gov. Kathy Hochul’s decision in January to delay the implementation of New York’s Cap-Trade-and-Invest Program (NYCI) is deeply misguided. It’s a shortsighted decision with no political upside that ignores the connection between the climate crisis and our city’s affordability crisis. It is imperative that the governor quickly reverse course.
Back in 2019, New York leapt to the fore in setting ambitious benchmarks for greenhouse gas reduction and a just transition to a renewable economy. New York’s landmark Climate Law set out a process for this transition, and the law is now a model for other states and helped inspire former President Joe Biden’s climate policy.
Just as planting a tree is an act of faith in the continuity of community, investing in a livable, sustainable future for all New Yorkers is keeping a promise to our children, who will reap the benefits for generations to come.
But now we’re playing catch-up: Our state is failing to hit its emissions targets. Add to that a hostile presidential administration that largely denies the existence of the climate crisis, and is resolutely committed to investing in polluting fossil fuels, and you’d think the governor would step up to the plate. But instead, Gov. Hochul is retreating into a corner at the worst time.
Cap-and-invest policies are popular and effective. As recently as this past November, voters in Washington State voted overwhelmingly to continue their state’s cap-and-invest program. Why? Because Washingtonians saw the benefits of cap-and-invest in their everyday lives: greater access to affordable and free public transit; cleaner air in and around schools with zero-emissions school buses and efficient HVAC systems; and lower energy bills for low-income households and small businesses, who receive support for upgrading their gas furnaces to efficient electric alternatives. California, whose cap-and-invest program has been in place for over a decade, has seen even greater benefits thanks to the more than $26 billion that the law has generated.
New York has been part of a regional cap-and-invest program since 2009 called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). RGGI has cut power plant pollution by 50% in participating states and generated over $2 billion in revenue in New York alone. The proceeds funded job creation, air pollution monitoring in affected communities, and the installation of over 4,000 electric vehicle charging ports.
By refusing to implement NYCI, Governor Hochul is depriving our state of at least $2 billion in additional annual revenue. NYCI would support thousands of new jobs. It would facilitate new efficient electric heat pumps for homes across the state, which would save the average household $1,000 per year in energy bills. It would enable the buildout of EV infrastructure and empower communities to develop and implement a range of local clean energy initiatives. And at a time when the Metropolitan Transportation Authority is facing a severe budget shortfall, NYCI would help make public transit more efficient, accessible, and reliable. All of that would reduce pollution—meaning a cleaner future for all.
NYCI isn’t free. But the costs of the program pale in comparison to the price we pay for climate-fueled extreme weather events and the health effects of fossil fuel pollution. We also know that the costs of inaction in New York State far outpace the costs of meeting our 2030 and 2050 emissions targets—by $115 billion.
Implementing NYCI isn’t just a financial issue, it’s a moral one. As someone organizing for climate action within my Jewish community, I often turn to Jewish tradition for inspiration. I think about a Jewish folk tale, about an old man planting a fig tree. When a passerby skeptically asks him if he expects to live long enough to consume the fruits of his labor, the old man replies, “My ancestors planted for me, and now I plant for my children.” Just as planting a tree is an act of faith in the continuity of community, investing in a livable, sustainable future for all New Yorkers is keeping a promise to our children, who will reap the benefits for generations to come.
It’s time for Gov. Hochul to avoid further inaction and implement the NYCI. At a time when the costs of climate action have never been higher, Gov. Hochul should take responsibility and lead New York toward a just transition toward a cleaner future.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judge Says Trump Admin Is Violating Order to Halt Funding Freeze
"Judge McConnell's ruling in our favor was swift, and unsurprising," said Rhode Island's attorney general. "It is now time for the administration to come into full compliance."
Feb 10, 2025
U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. on Monday demanded that the Trump administration comply with his earlier order to halt a freeze on federal funding that's being challenged in multiple court cases.
McConnell, appointed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island by former Democratic President Barack Obama, is responsible for the case brought by Democratic attorneys general of the District of Columbia and 22 states. He is one of two judges who have issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the administration's attempted freeze.
A week after McConnell granted the TRO, the attorneys general on Friday filed a motion for enforcement of it, telling the judge that "plaintiff states and entities within the plaintiff states continue to be denied access to federal funds" and "these denials continue to cause immediate irreparable harm," putting "jobs, lives, and the social fabric of life" at risk.
"This is a country of laws. We expect the administration to follow the law."
Although the Trump administration claimed that it had engaged in "good-faith, diligent efforts to comply with the injunction" and called for the motion to be dismissed, McConnell wrote Monday that "the states have presented evidence in this motion that the defendants in some cases have continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement."
"The defendants now plea that they are just trying to root out fraud," the judge noted in a five-page order. "But the freezes in effect now were a result of the broad categorical order, not a specific finding of possible fraud. The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country. These pauses in funding violate the plain text of the TRO."
McConnell—the first judge to accuse the second Trump administration of violating a court order—issued six clear directives to the Trump administration:
- restore frozen funding;
- end any funding pause;
- take every step necessary to effectuate the temporary restraining order;
- comply with the plain text of the TRO not to pause any funds based on pronouncements incorporated in a now-rescinded Office of Management and Budget memo;
- restore withheld funds—including those appropriated in the Inflation Reduction Act and the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law; and
- resume funding agencies such as the National Institute for Health.
Welcoming the new order in a Monday statement, Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha said that "Judge McConnell's ruling in our favor was swift, and unsurprising."
"Judge McConnell's order confirmed what we have been saying from the beginning. It is now time for the administration to come into full compliance," Neronha continued. "This is a country of laws. We expect the administration to follow the law. Our office and attorneys general across the country stand ready to keep careful watch on the actions of this administration that follow, and we will not hesitate to go back to court if they don't comply."
New York Attorney General Letitia James shared a similar response on social media, stressing that Republican President Donald Trump "does not have the power to cut whatever spending he wants."
The Associated Pressreported Monday that "the White House did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment" but the U.S. Department of Justice "appealed the ruling to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals."
The other TRO was issued a week ago by D.C.-based District Judge Loren AliKhan, an appointee of former Democratic President Joe Biden, in a case filed by nonprofits.
As Common Dreamsreported Sunday, in the face of multiple recent rulings against the second Trump administration, both Vice President JD Vance and billionaire Trump ally Elon Musk suggested that the power of judges should be limited or disregarded.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Students Sue Columbia Over Suspensions for Pro-Palestine Activism
"They singled out a few of us to try to make an example out of us," said one of the student plaintiffs.
Feb 03, 2025
Three Columbia University students on Monday filed a lawsuit against the school administration challenging their suspensions related to pro-Palestine activism, according to an exclusive from the outlet Drop Site.
The students, Aidan Parisi, Brandon Murphy, and Catherine Curran-Groome, were all set to graduate this coming spring prior to their suspensions. After "a monthslong convoluted, and often intimidating, disciplinary process," Parisi and Murphy were given one-year suspensions and Curran-Groome was given a two-year suspension.
According to Drop Site, the complaint alleges that "the university violated its own policies during the disciplinary process, that the university targeted the students for their views, and that it violated New York's landlord tenant laws when it evicted the students from university housing."
"They singled out a few of us to try to make an example out of us," Curran-Groome told Drop Site. "None of us, absolutely none of us, deserved what we've experienced this year at Columbia in terms of the targeting and the discrimination and the violence and the repression."
The university was also sued back in March 2024 by the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal, a legal advice and advocacy group, over its suspension of the school's chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace.
Columbia University was the site of vigorous pro-Palestine (and pro-Israel) activism starting in fall 2023, following a deadly Hamas attack on Israel that prompted a devastating Israeli military campaign in the Gaza Strip. Pro-Palestine students and student groups at Columbia demanded that the university divest from companies with ties to Israel.
In spring 2024, students launched two successive Gaza solidarity encampments on Colombia's campus. The launch of the first encampment coincided with an appearance by the university's then-president, Minouche Shafik, before Congress. (Shafik resigned in mid-August.)
Curran-Groome and Parisi were first suspended on an interim basis prior the launch of the first encampment for their involvement in a March 2024 event that featured speakers who discussed the history of different strategies for confronting occupation and colonialism, including armed resistance, according to Drop Site. Curran-Groome helped organize the event in her capacity as co-president of the Palestine Working Group, an official student organization.
According to the legal complaint, Curran-Groome sought approval to hold the event on campus. However, after sharing biographies of the speakers with the administration, a university official told her that the group would need approval for the event to be held on campus, per the complaint. The university officials allegedly said that the group could have the event on zoom, hold it on another date, or move it off campus. The Palestine Working Group chose the third option, according to Drop Site.
After the event, Columbia issued a statement calling it "unsanctioned" and "unapproved." Later, the school told Parisi and Curran-Groome they had been interim suspended for violating university policy and compromising the "well-being and safety of the university community," according to Drop Site, quoting the email that the students received.
"After the encampment was established, the students received an additional interim suspension, alleging they violated the first order by being on campus," according to Drop Site.
The school "used that suspension to then levy additional disciplinary actions, alleging that the plaintiffs had violated that first illegitimate interim suspension by then returning to campus," James Carlson, an attorney representing the students, told Drop Site.
The outlet did not give the specific circumstances around Murphy's suspension.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular