The Gävle Goat Lives
At the fraught start of an apocalyptic new year, we find a slight, weird sliver of hope in the improbable survival of Sweden's Gävle Goat, a massive straw goat that sanguine residents have built each Christmas since 1966 but that malevolent humanity has, most years, implacably destroyed. Typically, they burn him down; he's also been beaten, run over, bird-pecked to collapse and shot with flaming arrows by perps dressed as Gingerbread Men. But this year, he boasts, "Still standing!"
Because we are a mystifying species with often-impenetrable rituals, the Yule Goat is erected each year on the first day of Advent at Slottstorget in the center of Gävle, about a hundred miles north of Stockholm. A 45-foot-high replica of a Northern European Christmas symbol, Gävlebocken seems to have sprung from German paganism fused with Norse tradition. He is based on ancient proto-Slavic beliefs that honor Devac (Dažbog), the god of the harvest and fertile sun, typically depicted as a white goat; he also celebrates Devac's bestie the Norse god Thor, who rode the sky in a chariot drawn by two goats, Tanngrisnir and Tanngnjóstr. By tradition, the last sheaf of grain bundled in the harvest is imbued with magical properties that symbolize the sacred spirit of the harvest. In today's late-stage capitalism, the goat just brings presents.
While the Goat may have originated in Söder, a neighborhood in Stockholm, local historians in Gävle say he was conceived - and drawn on a pastry shop napkin - by their merchants, either ad man Stig Gavlén, trader Harry Ström, or Inga Ivarsson, whose family had already created the world's largest chair and skis so why not a goat. Local firemen grabbed the napkin drawing and ran with it, the highly flammable beginning of "a long, unfortunate relationship between the Gävle Goat and the local fire department." On Dec. 1 in 1966, the first Goat was laboriously put into place; it weighed three tons. On New Year’s Eve, at midnight, the goat went up in flames. The perpetrator was caught and charged with vandalism, but it was the first of many such grim fates for Gävlebocken: In 57 years and incarnations, he's survived intact till New Year's Day just 19 times.
The Goat's long litany of affronts is part Book of Job, part Laurel and Hardy. In 1970, he lasted just six hours before being set on fire by two drunk teenagers. In 1972, he imploded due to unknown sabotage. In I973, a local man stole him and put him up in his backyard; the thief got two years in prison. In 1976, a student rammed him with his sweet Volvo 122, causing the hind legs to collapse. In 1979, someone burned him down before he was put up. A reprieve: In 1985 he first entered the Guinness Book of Records as the world's largest goat. In 1987, he was "heavily impregnated" with fire retardants but still burned down. In 1988, he survived, prompting bookies to start betting on survival odds. In 1990, volunteer guards began patrolling, leading to several peaceful years; the town also installed a live web-cam, further ensuring tranquility. Briefly.
In 1995, a Norwegian crossed the border and tried to burn him down, but failed. In 2001, after growing publicity, a tourist from Cleveland, Ohio was arrested for torching him; he said he thought it was a legal tradition. In 2005, "unknown vandals" dressed as Santa Clauses and Gingerbread Men shot flaming arrows at the Goat; a few days later they were featured on Sweden’s TV3 "Most Wanted" program. In 2008, after many chemical immersions, officials decided to skip drenching his straw in fire retardants because they made the goat look ugly, "like a brown terrier." Intrigued arsonists failed twice; a third succeeded. The next year, goat-burners were so determined they first hacked the webcam, launching a denial of service to knock it offline before they did the fiery deed. They were never caught. More fences and guards were added.
Gävlebocken survived intact in 2010, despite a reported plot by "two mysterious men" to kidnap him using a helicopter after first trying to bribe the security guard. In 2011, he prevailed only five days; in 2012, the fire "started it his left hind leg"; in 2014, the Goat went to China to visit their sister city Zhuhai; in 2016, he was burned to the ground a few hours after a grand 50th birthday party. Except for the hackers, the indignities were typically visited upon the Goat - beaten with clubs, hit by vintage cars, legs singed or collapsed, vicious online responses to the latest conflagration: "Cook him to nothing but ashes" - by less than stellar, often sooty miscreants. After one perp was detained by a guard, the local press reported he was "quickly identified" because he had "a singed face, smelled of gasoline, and was holding a lighter in his hand."
Arson as a Christmas Tradition: The Gävle Goat
Gävlebocken has also been beset by envious wannabees. For years he's been challenged by a Yule Goat built by the Natural Science Club of the School of Vasa; when their goat Little Brother failed to make it into Guinness, they began making it bigger and bigger, and in 1985 they made the world record. Of course Stig Gavlén, the reported creator of the original, was graceful in defeat. Just kidding: He argued the Science Club's goat shouldn't have won because he wasn't as attractive as Gävlebocken, and his neck was too long. In 2016, Little Brother got to take Gävlebocken's place after he was burned down, but then Little Brother got hit by a car. Several years, both goats have been torched. By now, given its grievous history, Yule Goats of any variety have come to be viewed as "perhaps the world's most endangered animal."
In 2022, Gävlebocken encountered a new nemesis. Due to Sweden's unusually wet summer, the straw had more grain stuck to it, and flocks of jackdaw birds descended to peck him into ragged squalor. After the assault, the city's Goat Committee - yes, there is one - held an emergency meeting, but decided to take no further action. Citing the good will of Christmas, they said they didn't want to hurt or frighten away birds just following their hungry instincts, so the Goat would "continue to spread that Christmas spirit." On his X account - yes, he has one - Gävlebocken gloated, "I did not go down without a fight." In fact, many of hisposts have that snarky-bro ring: "I'm the one and only," "Halfway through and this goat is still looking good," "I know, I'm hard to resist," "I made it!", "Looks aren't everything but I have them just in case."
Still, the bluster is understandable: Sweden's "arson goat" reigns. The live goat-cam has over 14,000 subscribers; it even has a live chat. There are still people tracking and betting on his market value and survival odds; this year's started at a 6% chance to make it to New Year's. A website offers merch, from a Kidnapped Christmas sweater complete with helicopter to a burning goat tree ornament: "To die for you is my greatest honor." Online - "Get notified if the Gävle Goat is burning!" - people update, monitor, speculate: "It's goat-burning season! What's it gonna be? Fire? Automobile? Hungry birds?" "Security guard caught smoking," "Only 27 hours left - will the Gävle Goat survive?" Reddit (category: "Goats in the News") ranges from optimists - "Still holding on this year" - to sadists: "The destruction of this goat is my favorite holiday tradition."
What's the draw of an event that comes down to, If you build it, they will come to burn it down? To some, it symbolizes "the eternal battle between goat-erectors and goat-burners," between the forces of commercialization and "the primeval urge to set something huge on fire because the sun has disappeared and who knows when it’s coming back." Perps are "possessed by the spirit of our pagan ancestors" who want to "bring warmth and light back into the universe, one goat at a time." After a year "like the world’s worst mashup of the real housewives of New Jersey and the show Jackass," a war over a large straw goat has a certain wholesome, guileless allure. It could, and likely soon will be, much worse. This year, thanks to a double fence, 24-hour guards and better straw, the Gävle Goat still stands. If he can survive vandals in benign-looking costumes shooting flaming arrows at him, maybe we can too.
As Big Oil Ally Trump Returns, Industry Set to Turn Lobbying Machine on US Consumers
The first Trump administration was a boon for fossil fuel executives, and a new analysis shows the efforts the industry is already making to ensure it benefits when Trump takes office again in January, including by directing their lobbying efforts at the American public.
"Many of the tactics already being deployed by industry are reminiscent of the first Trump presidency, indicating a continuation of familiar fossil fuel tactics to shape climate policy and politics," reads the analysis by InfluenceMap.
The analysis shows fossil fuel companies have already revived three key tactics from the first Trump term ahead of the president-elect's inauguration:
- Shifting from a defensive to offensive position as it lobbies for Trump to roll back specific climate policies;
- Heavily advocating for permitting reform, and
- Strategically using narratives to position themselves as "protecting" consumers—even as they continue to extract planet-heating fossil fuels and put communities at risk of devastating climate disasters.
"It is alarming to see the extent to which fossil fuel actors are gearing up to use their old tactics to roll back climate policy and present themselves as the 'good guys' ahead of the next presidency," said Kendra Haven, director of projects at InfluenceMap.
The report details how ahead of the first Trump term, fossil fuel interests like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute (API) filed a number of lawsuits to challenge and weaken Obama-era climate regulations, many of them already weaker than experts said was necessary, including the Clean Power Plan.
But after Trump took office in 2017, the groups shifted their attention to lobbying for rollbacks which, according to Carbon Brief, would amount to "a staggering 4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030, equivalent to the annual emissions of the EU and Japan combined."
Starting in January, InfluenceMap said, fossil fuel industry groups "will likely issue various statements and comments urging and supporting these moves," such as the "5-Point Policy Roadmap" API released just after the election on November 12, calling for the next Trump administration to repeal the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) tailpipe rules, retain the 21% corporate tax rate, and take other industry-friendly steps.
API's roadmap also called for a heavy focus on permitting reform, demanding changes to the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), which requires federal agencies to consider the environmental impacts of projects before approving them, and the Clean Water Act.
"In 2025 and the years following, issues of permitting, infrastructure, and the future of gas are likely to remain a focus of corporate advocacy," said InfluenceMap.
Fossil fuel companies have submitted numerous public comments regarding state-level efforts to phase out the use of fossil gas as an energy source, with WEC Energy Group submitted several comments "promoting the 'crucial role' of fossil gas" in Illinois and warning that "'forced electrification' would inhibit the competitiveness of the state's economy."
But while fossil fuel groups are expected to continue lobbying policymakers to support industry-friendly measures, InfluenceMap noted that oil and gas interests also spent a "vast amount of time and resources that fossil fuel companies invest in reaching the public to protect their 'social license' or public reputation."
With "a supportive administration that has pledged to protect their interests" taking office next month, industry groups "may turn attention to influencing the public."
The strategy for influencing the American people is evident in API's policy roadmap, which uses a phrase the InfluenceMap points to several times in its analysis: "consumer choice."
"In 2024 alone, there were over 100 instances of corporate interests centering the 'consumer choice' narrative in their public advocacy on autos," reads the analysis.
The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) criticized Vice President Kamala Harris' electric vehicle mandates as harming "consumer choice," and just after the election Toyota urged the incoming Trump administration to protect "consumer choice" by overturning federal greenhouse gas emissions standards.
"Recognizing industry narratives is a critical component of any action to confront industry influence over climate policy," said InfluenceMap, "particularly given that many fossil fuel interests are likely to publicly position themselves as proponents of climate action leading up to and throughout the new administration."
Haven said the group expects "industry associations to be at the forefront of the most negative advocacy in the U.S. going into 2025, just as they were during the first Trump term, providing essential cover for individual companies."
"The science is clear, as is the long-term harm this advocacy will cause to climate and communities," said Haven. "Misleading narratives from industry must be challenged accordingly."
In Win for Agribusiness, Trade Panel Backs US Challenge to Mexican GM Corn Ban
A trade dispute panel under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement ruled on Friday that Mexico violated the trade accord with its ban on genetically modified corn for human consumption.
The decision was a win for the agribusiness industry and the Biden administration, which called for the panel in August of last year after negotiations with the Mexican government failed. However, civil society groups condemned the ruling, saying it overlooked threats to the environment, public health, and Indigenous rights while overstating potential harm to U.S. corn exporters.
"The panel ignores the mountains of peer-reviewed evidence Mexico presented on the risks to public health and the environment of genetically modified (GM) corn and glyphosate residues for people in Mexico who consume more than 10 times the corn as we do in the U.S. and do so not in processed foods but in minimally processed forms such as tortillas," Timothy A. Wise, an investigative journalist with U.S. Right to Know, told Common Dreams. "Mexico's precautionary policies are indeed well-grounded in science, and the U.S. and the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) have no business using a trade agreement to undermine a domestic policy that barely affects trade between the two countries."
"This ruling will make winners out of agrochemical corporations and losers out of everyone else."
Then-Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) first announced a ban on GM corn and glyphosate in 2020, to go into effect by 2024. This was then amended in February 2023 to scratch the 2024 deadline for animal feed and industrial uses of corn, but immediate ban GM corn for tortillas and tortilla dough. While the deleted deadline was widely seen as a concession to pressure from the Biden administration, the U.S. still went ahead with challenging the rule under the USMCA.
In response to Friday's decision, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack commended the panel for affirming that "Mexico's approach to biotechnology was not based on scientific principles or international standards."
"Mexico's measures ran counter to decades' worth of evidence demonstrating the safety of agricultural biotechnology, underpinned by science- and risk-based regulatory review systems," Vilsack continued. "This decision ensures that U.S. producers and exporters will continue to have full and fair access to the Mexican market, and is a victory for fair, open, and science- and rules-based trade, which serves as the foundation of the USMCA as it was agreed to by all parties."
Yet several U.S. environmental groups backed Mexico's case and said the science used by the U.S. to establish the safety of GM corn was out-of-date and insufficient. For example, the U.S. relies on studies from when GM or genetically engineered corn was first introduced to the market and does not account for how pesticides and herbicides are currently used on the corn.
"Trade agreements should not allow multinational pesticide and biotech companies to imperil the health of people and the environment," said Kendra Klein, PhD, deputy director of science at Friends of the Earth U.S. "The science is clear that GMO corn raises serious health concerns and that production of GMO corn depends on intensive use of the toxic weedkiller glyphosate."
Mily Treviño-Sauceda, the executive director of the Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, condemned Friday's decision.
"Mexico's policies to ban the use of GM corn and glyphosate were enacted to protect biodiversity, cultural heritage, and the rights of Indigenous people," Treviño-Sauceda said. "This decision will continue to adversely impact the quality and nutritional value of food reaching Mexican households. This is just another step in the direction of consolidating agricultural power to the U.S. agro-industrial complex that we will continue to challenge until we see real change for the benefit of the public and our health."
Other trade justice and agricultural advocates said the decision was a missed opportunity to transform trade and food systems beyond Mexico.
"The USMCA was hailed as a new kind of trade agreement, taking some steps forward on issues like labor rights and investment," said Karen Hansen-Kuhn, director of trade and international strategies at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. "This dispute shows how far we still need to go. Mexico has every right to try to transform its food system to better feed its people and enhance rural livelihoods and biodiversity. The U.S. was wrong to challenge that initiative, and the panel is wrong to back them up"
Farm Action President Angela Huffman added: "We are disappointed in the panel's ruling today, which shows the U.S. successfully wielded its power on behalf of the world's largest agrochemical corporations to force their industrial technology onto Mexico. Mexico's ban GM corn and glyphosate presented a tremendous premium market opportunity for non-GM corn producers in the U.S. Instead of helping U.S. farmers transition to non-GM corn production, our government has continued to force GM corn onto people who don't want it and propped up agrochemical corporations based in other countries—such as Germany's Bayer and China's Syngenta. This ruling will make winners out of agrochemical corporations and losers out of everyone else."
Business interests, on the other hand, reacted positively to the news.
"This is the clearest of signals that upholding free-trade agreements delivers the stability needed for innovation to flourish and to anchor our food security," Emily Rees, president of plant-science industry group CropLife International, said, as Reutersreported.
The president of the U.S. National Corn Growers Association, Kenneth Hartman Jr., also celebrated the news, saying, "This outcome is a direct result of the advocacy efforts of corn grower leaders from across the country," according toThe Associated Press.
The Mexican government said it disagreed with the decision, but would abide by the panel's ruling.
"The Mexican government does not agree with the panel's finding, given that it considers that the measures in question are aligned with the principles of protecting public health and the rights of Indigenous communities," the country's Economy Department said. "Nonetheless, the Mexican government will respect the ruling."
The decision comes as U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to set a 25% tariff on all imports to the U.S. from Mexico and Canada unless the two countries decrease the number of migrants and the amount of fentanyl that enters the U.S. via their borders. As this would likely violate the USCMA, it puts additional pressure on Mexico to abide by the agreement in order to reinforce norms against Trump's challenge.
Wise criticized the panel for ruling against Mexico when real threats to trade governance loom on the horizon.
"At a time when the U.S. president-elect is threatening to levy massive tariffs on Mexican products, a blatant violation of the North American trade agreement, it is outrageous that a trade tribunal ruled in favor of the U.S. complaint against Mexico's limited restrictions on genetically modified corn, which barely affect U.S. exporters," Wise said in a statement.
GOP Trifecta to Feature Legislative Attacks on Voting Rights
A key GOP lawmaker made clear in an interview published Thursday that Republicans plan to push for a pair of their voting-related bills when they take control of both chambers of Congress and the White House next month.
Congressman Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), who campaigned for U.S. President-elect Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), chairs the Committee on House Administration. He shared the GOP's plans for the American Confidence in Elections (ACE) Act and the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act in comments to The Associated Press.
"As we look to the new year with unified Republican government, we have a real opportunity to move these pieces of legislation not only out of committee, but across the House floor and into law," he said. "We need to improve Americans' confidence in elections."
The AP pointed out that "Republicans are likely to face opposition from Democrats and have little wiggle room with their narrow majorities in both the House and Senate. Steil said he expects there will be 'some reforms and tweaks' to the original proposals and hopes Democrats will work with Republicans to refine and ultimately support them."
Steil's ACE Act, which "includes nearly 50 standalone bills sponsored by members of the House Republican Conference," is "the most conservative election integrity bill to be seriously considered in the House in over 20 years," according to his committee.
Dozens of organizations wrote to Steil and Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), the panel's ranking Democrat, last year that "we believe Congress has an important role to play in safeguarding free and fair elections and ensuring all Americans have the freedom to vote. Rather than furthering this goal, the ACE Act would be a substantial step backwards."
"The act would nationalize harmful and unnecessary restrictions on voting rights and roll back many of Washington, D.C.'s current pro-voter laws," the coalition explained. "Instead of proceeding with this legislation, Congress should take actions that will help voters and promote democracy such as passing legislation that will strengthen protections against discrimination in voting and expand access to the ballot for all communities."
While that bill didn't get a floor vote in the House this session, Rep. Chip Roy's (R-Texas) SAVE Act did—it was passed by the House 221-198 in July. Every Republican present voted for the bill and all but five House Democrats rejected it.
However, Democrats narrowly controlled the Senate, so the SAVE Act—which would require proof of U.S. citizenship to vote in federal elections—never went further in Congress, despite GOP attempts to tie it to government funding.
Morelle suggested to the AP there could be bipartisan support for some voting policies—such as federal funding for election offices, restricting foreign money in U.S. races, and possibly even identification requirements with certain protections for voters—but he also called out Republicans for spreading conspiracy theories about widespread voting by noncitizens in November.
"You haven't heard a word about this since Election Day," he noted. "It's an Election Day miracle that suddenly the thing that they had spent an inordinate amount of time describing as a rampant problem, epidemic problem, didn't exist at all."
Speaking broadly about voting bills, Morelle told the AP that "our view and the Republicans' view is very different on this point."
"They have spent most of the time in the last two years and beyond really restricting the rights of people to get to ballots—and that's at the state level and the federal level," he added. "And the SAVE Act and the ACE Act both do that—make it harder for people to vote."
Responding to the reporting on social media Thursday, lawyer and Democracy Docket founder Marc Elias said that "Trump is an autocrat. The GOP wants these 'changes' to spread disinformation, justify election denialism, and gain partisan advantage."
"Democrats need to oppose this effort," he warned. "If the GOP enacts new voter suppression laws, I can promise we will sue and win."
'Godfather of AI' Demands Strict Regulations to Stop Technology From Wiping Out Humanity
Warning that the pace of development of artificial intelligence is "much faster" than he anticipated and is taking place in the absence of far-reaching regulations, the computer scientist often called the "Godfather of AI" on Friday said he believes chances are growing that AI could wipe out humanity.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's "Today" program, Geoffrey Hinton said there is a "10% to 20%" chance AI could lead to human extinction in the next three decades.
Previously Hinton had said he saw a 10% chance of that happening.
"We've never had to deal with things more intelligent than ourselves before," Hinton explained. "And how many examples do you know of a more intelligent thing being controlled by a less intelligent thing? There are very few examples. There's a mother and baby. Evolution put a lot of work into allowing the baby to control the mother, but that's about the only example I know of."
Hinton, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics this year for his research into machine learning and AI, left his job at Google last year, saying he wanted to be able to speak out more about the dangers of unregulated AI.
"Just leaving it to the profit motive of large companies is not going to be sufficient to make sure they develop it safely."
He has warned that AI chatbots could be used by authoritarian leaders to manipulate the public, and said last year that "the kind of intelligence we're developing is very different from the intelligence we have."
On Friday, Hinton said he is particularly worried that "the invisible hand" of the market will not keep humans safe from a technology that surpasses their intelligence, and called for strict regulations of AI.
"Just leaving it to the profit motive of large companies is not going to be sufficient to make sure they develop it safely," said Hinton.
More than 120 bills have been proposed in the U.S. Congress to regulate AI robocalls, the technology's role in national security, and other issues, while the Biden administration has taken some action to rein in AI development.
An executive order calling for "Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence" said that "harnessing AI for good and realizing its myriad benefits requires mitigating its substantial risks." President-elect Donald Trump is expected to rescind the order.
The White House Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights calls for safe and effective systems, algorithmic discrimination protections, data privacy, notice and explanation when AI is used, and the ability to opt out of automated systems.
But the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act was a deemed a "failure" by rights advocates this year, after industry lobbying helped ensure the law included numerous loopholes and exemptions for law enforcement and migration authorities.
"The only thing that can force those big companies to do more research on safety," said Hinton on Friday, "is government regulation."
Summer Lee Leads Call for US Action to Aid Civilians in War-Torn Sudan
With only a few weeks left of President Joe Biden's administration, the progressive Squad member Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) is spearheading a call urging Biden to increase U.S. humanitarian aid to the war-torn country of Sudan, among other requests.
In a letter sent Monday, Lee—as well as Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.)—warned that "without decisive global engagement, violent conflict in Sudan threatens to destabilize the entire region, with devastating implications for countless lives and communities."
Sudan has been racked by violence since fighting erupted between the between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF)—the nation's official military—and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in April 2023. The civil war has also led to widespread hunger in the country. According to the letter, roughly half of Sudan's population is in acute need of food, and over the summer, famine was declared in a refugee camp in Sudan's Darfur region. The letter notes that nearly 12 million people have been displaced due to the conflict.
The letter writers are asking Biden to act swiftly, including through "multilateral fora" to protect civilians by establishing safe zones and setting up humanitarian corridors. They are requesting an increase in U.S. humanitarian aid, specifically that a portion of that funding go toward supporting Sudanese organizations and entities that are aiding civilians on the ground.
The trio is also urging the U.S. to renew Temporary Protected Status for Sudan, a program that gives migrants whose home countries are deemed unsafe the ability to live and work in the U.S. for a period of time, and are asking for an update to the December 2023 "atrocity determination" to include new crimes committed by both the RSF and SAF.
The atrocity determination that the three lawmakers reference was issued by Secretary of State Antony Blinken in December 2023, declaring "that members of the SAF and the RSF have committed war crimes in Sudan. I have also determined that members of the RSF and allied militias have committed crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing."
Lee of Pennsylvania, Meeks, and Lee of California are not the only leaders urging more action. In September, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization, said during a visit to Sudan that "the scale of the emergency is shocking, as is the insufficient action being taken to curtail the conflict, and respond to the suffering it is causing."
The insufficient global action in the face of such warnings has caused many observers to call the conflict the world's "forgotten war," according to the think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). "As the humanitarian situation deteriorates, sorely needed aid is not arriving, signaling a historic failure in the global aid system," wrote CFR in September 2024.
The three Democratic lawmakers also point out that "the massive refugee flows from Sudan have placed extraordinary burdens on neighboring countries—Chad, Egypt, Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, and Ethiopia—each already struggling with their own domestic challenges."
"We therefore believe it is critical to continue our diplomatic work to secure a cease-fire, protect civilians, and ensure unobstructed humanitarian access," they conclude. "We urge you to take these bold and immediate actions."
House GOP Tries to Protect Netanyahu From ICC With Rules Package
"How did a bill to protect Netanyahu make it into the House rules package to be voted on immediately after the speaker vote?" asked one lawmaker. "Where are our priorities?!"
A Republican congressman known for sometimes clashing with his own party's leaders called them out on Wednesday for part of the proposed rules package that is an apparent response to a global court issuing arrest warrants for top Israeli politicians over the U.S.-backed assault on the Gaza Strip.
The GOP-controlled U.S. House Representatives for the 119th congressional session is scheduled to meet Friday afternoon to swear in members, hold a speaker election, and consider the 36-page package released Wednesday. Proposed changes include renaming or reestablishing some panels, making it harder to remove the speaker, and promoting electronic committee voting.
The rules resolution also states that once it is adopted, members shall consider a dozen bills listed at the end of the document. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) took issue with the inclusion of the eighth bill, which would impose sanctions over any International Criminal Court (ICC) "effort to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute any protected person of the United States and its allies."
The ICC issued warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, also known as Mohammed Deif, in November. Although Israel, like the United States, is not a party to the treaty establishing the ICC, the court has jurisdiction over occupied Palestinian territories—Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.
Massie said on social media Wednesday: "The United States is a sovereign country, so I don't assign any credibility to decisions of the International Criminal Court. But how did a bill to protect Netanyahu make it into the House rules package to be voted on immediately after the speaker vote? Where are our priorities?!"
Massie's comments on the rules package came two days after he publicly disagreed with President-elect Donald Trump's endorsement of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to keep his job for the upcoming session, saying that "we've seen Johnson partner with the Democrats to send money to Ukraine, authorize spying on Americans, and blow the budget."
So far, at least one other lawmaker—Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)—joined Massie on Wednesday in criticizing what he referred to as a "special protection provision for Netanyahu." Like her colleague from Kentucky, the Georgia Republican took aim at the court that prosecutes individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression.
"I will not support giving any credibility or power to the International Criminal Court in our House rules package," Greene said of the ICC, which has faced opposition from both Democrats and Republicans over the years. "This clause needs to be removed."
Amid speculation that the ICC would issue the arrest warrants—as it ultimately did—the House passed Rep. Chip Roy's (R-Texas) Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act with bipartisan support in June. It never received a floor vote in the Democrat-controlled Senate, though the Biden administration reportedly worked with the Israeli government in a bid to block the warrants.
Under the American Service Members' Protection Act, a 2002 law that critics call the Hague Invasion Act, Biden has the authority to "use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release" of an American or allied person detained or imprisoned by or on behalf of the ICC. Soon, the person with that power will be Trump.
Both Biden and Trump have spoken out against the ICC warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, while a few progressive lawmakers—including Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), a leading critic of the Israeli assault on Gaza and the only Palestinian American in Congress—have welcomed them and called out the U.S. government for providing billions of dollars in weapons to Israel.
"The International Criminal Court's long overdue decision to issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity signals that the days of the Israeli apartheid government operating with impunity are ending," Tlaib said in November. "Our government must urgently end our complicity in these violations of human rights and international law."
'Historic': NC Gov. Cooper Commutes 15 Death Sentences
Calling Cooper "courageous," executive director of the state's ACLU noted that with this decision, the Democrat "has commuted more death sentences than any governor in North Carolina's history."
Death penalty abolitionists are praising former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper for one of his final actions in office: The Democrat on Tuesday commuted the sentences of 15 men on death row to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Term-limited Cooper—who passed the torch to Democratic Gov. Josh Stein on Wednesday after eight years in office—announced the decision following a campaign by racial justice advocates and outgoing President Joe Biden's decision last week to commute the sentences of 37 people on federal death row to counter an expected killing spree under President-elect Donald Trump.
Although no executions have occurred in North Carolina in nearly two decades due to ongoing litigation, Cooper received clemency petitions from 89 of the 136 people on death row in the state, according to his office. After reviewing each case, the governor—who previously served as the state's attorney general for 16 years—granted 15.
"These reviews are among the most difficult decisions a governor can make, and the death penalty is the most severe sentence that the state can impose," Cooper said in a statement. "After thorough review, reflection, and prayer, I concluded that the death sentence imposed on these 15 people should be commuted, while ensuring they will spend the rest of their lives in prison."
Big news in North Carolina: Governor Cooper, on his final day in office, commuted the sentences of 15 people on death row. (That's roughly 10% of the state's row.) www.npr.org/2024/12/31/g... We had reported last year on the urgent campaign to get Cooper to commute on his way out:
[image or embed]
— Taniel ( @taniel.bsky.social) December 31, 2024 at 7:35 PM
Welcoming the announcement, Chantal Stevens, executive director of ACLU of North Carolina, said that "with this action, Gov. Cooper has commuted more death sentences than any governor in North Carolina's history and joins the ranks of a group of courageous leaders who used their executive authority to address the failed death penalty."
"We have long known that the death penalty in North Carolina is racially biased, unjust, and immoral, and the governor's actions today pave the way for our state to move towards a new era of justice," Stevens continued. "This historic decision, following President Biden's decision to commute the sentences of 37 people on federal death row, reflects growing recognition that the death penalty belongs in our past, not our future."
"With 121 people still on death row in our state, we know there is much more work to be done to realize that vision, and the ACLU of North Carolina will continue to advocate for the end of the death penalty once and for all," she added.
Thank you Gov. Roy Cooper for sparing 15 lives from the death penalty. The carceral system should not be allowed to use taxpayer dollars to put people to death – it's the cruelest and only irreversible punishment. #ncpol www.cbs17.com/news/north-c...
[image or embed]
— Prison Policy Initiative ( @prisonpolicy.bsky.social) December 31, 2024 at 4:32 PM
Stevens' group as well as the national ACLU's Capital Punishment Project, the Center for Death Penalty Litigation (CDPL), the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), and Durham attorney Jay H. Ferguson have represented Hasson Bacote, who brought the lead case challenging the death penalty under North Carolina's Racial Justice Act (RJA).
Bacote, a 38-year-old Black man convicted of first-degree murder in Johnston County in 2009, was among those who had their sentences commuted on Wednesday. According to Cooper's office, the other 14 men are:
- Iziah Barden, 67, convicted in Sampson County in 1999;
- Nathan Bowie, 53, convicted in Catawba County in 1993;
- Rayford Burke, 66, convicted in Iredell County in 1993;
- Elrico Fowler, 49, convicted in Mecklenburg County in 1997;
- Cerron Hooks, 46, convicted in Forsyth County in 2000;
- Guy LeGrande, 65, convicted in Stanly County in 1996;
- James Little, 38, convicted in Forsyth County in 2008;
- Robbie Locklear, 52, convicted in Robeson County in 1996;
- Lawrence Peterson, 55, convicted in Richmond County in 1996;
- William Robinson, 41, convicted in Stanly County in 2011;
- Christopher Roseboro, 60, convicted in Gaston County in 1997;
- Darrell Strickland, 66, convicted in Union County in 1995;
- Timothy White, 47, convicted in Forsyth County in 2000; and
- Vincent Wooten, 52, convicted in Pitt County in 1994.
"We are thrilled for Mr. Bacote and the other... people on death row who had their sentences commuted by Gov. Cooper today," said Cassandra Stubbs, director of the ACLU's Capital Punishment Project. "This decision is a historic step towards ending the death penalty in North Carolina, but the fight for justice does not end here. We remain hopeful that the court will issue a ruling under the state's Racial Justice Act in Mr. Bacote's case that we can leverage for relief for the many others that still remain on death row."
The North Carolina General Assembly passed the RJA, which barred seeking or imposing the death penalty based on race, in 2009. Although state legislators then repealed the law in 2013, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that those who had already filed claims under it should still receive hearings.
Bacote's evidentiary hearing began last February, and the court heard closing arguments in August. LDF senior counsel Ashley Burrell noted Tuesday that "the RJA hearing demonstrated that racial bias infiltrates all death penalty cases in North Carolina, not just Mr. Bacote's and those in Johnston County."
Shelagh Kenney, deputy director of the Durham-based CDPL, similarly said that "Mr. Bacote brought forth unequivocal evidence, unlike any that’s ever been presented in a North Carolina courtroom, that the death penalty is racist."
"Through years of investigation and the examination of thousands of pages of documents, his case revealed a deep entanglement between the death penalty and North Carolina's history of segregation and racial terror," Kenney added. "We are happy Mr. Bacote got the relief he deserves, and we hope Gov. Cooper's action will be a step toward ending North Carolina's racist and error-prone death penalty for good."
NC Newslinereported that "the commutations came as inmates in North Carolina face a ticking clock on the death penalty, which has been on hold for nearly 20 years amid challenges to the punishment's legality. Should the courts in North Carolina rule against those challenges, executions could resume with haste, as dozens of the state's death row inmates have exhausted all other avenues for appeal."
Separately on Tuesday, Cooper announced commutations for 54-year-old Brian Fuller, who has served 27 years after being convicted of second-degree murder in Rockingham County, and 63-year-old Joseph Bromfield, 63, who has served 34 years after being convicted of first-degree murder in Cumberland County. They will both become parole eligible immediately.
Cooper also pardoned 43-year-old Brandon Wallace, who was convicted of conspiracy to traffic cocaine and marijuana in Lee County in 2007, and 53-year-old John "Jack" Campbell, who was convicted of selling cocaine in Wake County in 1984
The decisions capped off Cooper's two terms as governor, during which he often had to contend with Republicans' veto-proof legislative majorities. Due to that experience, the Democrat frequently faces speculation that he may pursue federal office.
"If you're going to run for public office again, you must have your heart and soul in it, you must have the fire in the belly," Cooper
toldThe Associated Press in December, explaining that he plans to spend the next few months considering his future. "I'm going to think about how I can best contribute to the things that I care about."
'Shame': Sweden to Start New Year With Controversial Wolf Hunt
"The Swedish government since 2010 has been blatantly disregarding the wolf's special protection status, allowing a yearly licensed quota hunt and thereby breaking E.U. law," one campaigner said.
Sweden is set to start a controversial wolf hunt on Thursday that could see its declining wolf population fall by another 8%.
The country has authorized the killing of 30 of the nation's 375 wolves—or five entire families—in a move that conservationists say is illegal under European Union law. Ultimately, the Swedish government wants to nearly halve the minimum number of wolves for "favorable conservation status" from 300 to 170.
'Imagine... the outcry if this were Sri Lanka killing leopards, or Botswana lions, both much trickier animals to live with," U.K. environmentalist Ben Goldsmith wrote on social media. "Shame, shame on Sweden."
"If Sweden, one of the richest countries in the world with a population of 10.5 million people, can't accept a population of 375 wolves, what hope is there for the planet's biodiversity?"
Under the Council of Europe's Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, or Bern Convention, countries must preserve the populations of protected species so that they remain above a sustainable level. However, Magnus Orrebrant, the chair of the Swedish Carnivore Association, toldThe Guardian that E.U. law has not meant much for Sweden's wolves.
"The Swedish government since 2010 has been blatantly disregarding the wolf's special protection status, allowing a yearly licensed quota hunt and thereby breaking E.U. law," Orrebrant said. "We filed a formal complaint to the E.U. commission, leading to an infringement procedure against Sweden, as yet to no avail."
Excessive wolf hunting has been a problem in Sweden for decades, and was part of the reason that the country had no breeding population at all between 1966 and 1983. In addition, increased hunting slashed the population by nearly 20% between 2022 and 2023.
Beyond licensed hunts, Sweden's wolf population also faces pressure from poachers, according to conservation group Revolution Rov, with DNA evidence suggesting that up to 80 wolves are killed illegally each year.
"In many license hunting decisions on wolves in recent years, it has been argued that if legal hunting is allowed, illegal hunting will disappear, but that has not happened at all... Instead, even more wolves have had to die," the group wrote in a petition against 2024's hunt.
The group also wrote that Sweden's wolf population is genetically vulnerable, with many mating pairs being closely related. For the population to remain healthy, it needs an influx of new genes from wolves migrating from Finland or Russia, but these wolves are often killed before they can pair off.
Wildlife advocates outside of Sweden also criticized the 2025 hunt.
"I believe that one of the hallmarks of human progress is learning to coexist with other species that our ancestors once feared," wrote Wildlife Trusts CEO Craig Bennett on social media. "And sadly, it often feels like we still live in the Dark Ages."
Ecologist and conservationist Alan Watson Featherstone wrote: "I really do despair about humanity—we are such a selfish species. If Sweden, one of the richest countries in the world with a population of 10.5 million people, can't accept a population of 375 wolves, what hope is there for the planet's biodiversity?"
However, Sweden is not alone in Europe in its hostility to wolves. The Bern Convention in December accepted an E.U. proposal to lower the wolf's status from "strictly protected" to "protected." The decision followed complaints from farmers that the continent's rebounding wolf population was harming livestock, but conservationists say that allowing the killing of wolves will threaten the species in a vulnerable moment and is not the solution to livestock killings.
"The wolf is still endangered in many parts of Europe, and weakening its protection will only lead to further conflict and threaten its recovery," Ilaria Di Silvestre, regional director of policy at the International Fund for Animal Welfare, toldThe Associated Press in December.
The Bern Convention's decision, which will go into effect on March 7, will clear the way for the European Commission to alter its habitats directive for wolves to reflect their higher numbers in the mountains and forests of Scandinavia and Western Europe, which will then make it easier to approve more wolf killings.
"We are very critical to the path that the E.U. is now taking, downgrading the protection status of the wolf," Orrebrant told The Guardian. "If the E.U. follows up the latest Bern Convention decision by changing the wolf's protection status in the habitat directive, the result will be very negative not only for the wolves, but for all wildlife in Europe."