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
Groups File Suit to Block Trump's Pro-Corporate Deregulation Scheme
'When presidents overreach, it is up to the courts to remind them no one is above the law...This is one of those times'
Feb 08, 2017
A coalition of progressive groups filed suit on Wednesday to block President Donald Trump's executive order instructing federal agencies to roll back two regulations for every new one implemented.
The plaintiffs, including Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the Communications Workers of America (CWA), are asking the U.S. District Court for D.C. to issue a declaration that the order--which requires a $0 net cost for new rules this fiscal year--is not lawful and bar the agencies from putting it into effect.
"No one thinking sensibly about how to set rules for health, safety, the environment, and the economy would ever adopt the Trump executive order approach--unless their only goal was to confer enormous benefits on big business," Public Citizen president Robert Weissman said. "If implemented, the order would result in lasting damage to our government's ability to save lives, protect our environment, police Wall Street, keep consumers safe, and fight discrimination."
The lawsuit (pdf) names Trump, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the chiefs of more than a dozen executive departments as defendants. It charges that the agencies cannot lawfully implement the order because it violates the Administrative Procedure Act--which governs how they operate internally and interact with the public--among other statutes.
"By irrationally directing agencies to consider costs but not benefits of new rules, it would fundamentally change our government's role from one of protecting the public to protecting corporate profits."
--Robert Weissman, Public Citizen
Trump's mandate "will block or force the repeal of regulations needed to protect health, safety, and the environment, across a broad range of topics--from automobile safety, to occupational health, to air pollution, to endangered species," the lawsuit states.
The order also instructs federal departments to look only at the cost of regulations and ignore their benefits, which will "force agencies to take regulatory actions that harm the people of this nation," the lawsuit continues.
"By irrationally directing agencies to consider costs but not benefits of new rules, it would fundamentally change our government's role from one of protecting the public to protecting corporate profits," Weissman said.
In a draft 2016 report (pdf) to Congress, the White House OMB estimated that the annual benefits from all major regulations over the past 10 years, taking both cost and benefit into account, were between $269 billion and $872 billion in 2014 dollars--while the costs were between $74 billion and $110 billion.
Trump's order would "deny Americans the basic protections they rightly expect," said NRDC president Rhea Suh.
"New efforts to stop pollution don't automatically make old ones unnecessary," Suh said. "When you make policy by tweet, it yields irrational rules. This order imposes a false choice between clean air, clean water, safe food, and other environmental safeguards."
Patti Goldman, an attorney for Earthjustice, which is representing the plaintiffs, added, "When presidents overreach, it is up to the courts to remind them no one is above the law and hold them to the U.S. Constitution. This is one of those times."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
A coalition of progressive groups filed suit on Wednesday to block President Donald Trump's executive order instructing federal agencies to roll back two regulations for every new one implemented.
The plaintiffs, including Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the Communications Workers of America (CWA), are asking the U.S. District Court for D.C. to issue a declaration that the order--which requires a $0 net cost for new rules this fiscal year--is not lawful and bar the agencies from putting it into effect.
"No one thinking sensibly about how to set rules for health, safety, the environment, and the economy would ever adopt the Trump executive order approach--unless their only goal was to confer enormous benefits on big business," Public Citizen president Robert Weissman said. "If implemented, the order would result in lasting damage to our government's ability to save lives, protect our environment, police Wall Street, keep consumers safe, and fight discrimination."
The lawsuit (pdf) names Trump, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the chiefs of more than a dozen executive departments as defendants. It charges that the agencies cannot lawfully implement the order because it violates the Administrative Procedure Act--which governs how they operate internally and interact with the public--among other statutes.
"By irrationally directing agencies to consider costs but not benefits of new rules, it would fundamentally change our government's role from one of protecting the public to protecting corporate profits."
--Robert Weissman, Public Citizen
Trump's mandate "will block or force the repeal of regulations needed to protect health, safety, and the environment, across a broad range of topics--from automobile safety, to occupational health, to air pollution, to endangered species," the lawsuit states.
The order also instructs federal departments to look only at the cost of regulations and ignore their benefits, which will "force agencies to take regulatory actions that harm the people of this nation," the lawsuit continues.
"By irrationally directing agencies to consider costs but not benefits of new rules, it would fundamentally change our government's role from one of protecting the public to protecting corporate profits," Weissman said.
In a draft 2016 report (pdf) to Congress, the White House OMB estimated that the annual benefits from all major regulations over the past 10 years, taking both cost and benefit into account, were between $269 billion and $872 billion in 2014 dollars--while the costs were between $74 billion and $110 billion.
Trump's order would "deny Americans the basic protections they rightly expect," said NRDC president Rhea Suh.
"New efforts to stop pollution don't automatically make old ones unnecessary," Suh said. "When you make policy by tweet, it yields irrational rules. This order imposes a false choice between clean air, clean water, safe food, and other environmental safeguards."
Patti Goldman, an attorney for Earthjustice, which is representing the plaintiffs, added, "When presidents overreach, it is up to the courts to remind them no one is above the law and hold them to the U.S. Constitution. This is one of those times."
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
A coalition of progressive groups filed suit on Wednesday to block President Donald Trump's executive order instructing federal agencies to roll back two regulations for every new one implemented.
The plaintiffs, including Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the Communications Workers of America (CWA), are asking the U.S. District Court for D.C. to issue a declaration that the order--which requires a $0 net cost for new rules this fiscal year--is not lawful and bar the agencies from putting it into effect.
"No one thinking sensibly about how to set rules for health, safety, the environment, and the economy would ever adopt the Trump executive order approach--unless their only goal was to confer enormous benefits on big business," Public Citizen president Robert Weissman said. "If implemented, the order would result in lasting damage to our government's ability to save lives, protect our environment, police Wall Street, keep consumers safe, and fight discrimination."
The lawsuit (pdf) names Trump, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the chiefs of more than a dozen executive departments as defendants. It charges that the agencies cannot lawfully implement the order because it violates the Administrative Procedure Act--which governs how they operate internally and interact with the public--among other statutes.
"By irrationally directing agencies to consider costs but not benefits of new rules, it would fundamentally change our government's role from one of protecting the public to protecting corporate profits."
--Robert Weissman, Public Citizen
Trump's mandate "will block or force the repeal of regulations needed to protect health, safety, and the environment, across a broad range of topics--from automobile safety, to occupational health, to air pollution, to endangered species," the lawsuit states.
The order also instructs federal departments to look only at the cost of regulations and ignore their benefits, which will "force agencies to take regulatory actions that harm the people of this nation," the lawsuit continues.
"By irrationally directing agencies to consider costs but not benefits of new rules, it would fundamentally change our government's role from one of protecting the public to protecting corporate profits," Weissman said.
In a draft 2016 report (pdf) to Congress, the White House OMB estimated that the annual benefits from all major regulations over the past 10 years, taking both cost and benefit into account, were between $269 billion and $872 billion in 2014 dollars--while the costs were between $74 billion and $110 billion.
Trump's order would "deny Americans the basic protections they rightly expect," said NRDC president Rhea Suh.
"New efforts to stop pollution don't automatically make old ones unnecessary," Suh said. "When you make policy by tweet, it yields irrational rules. This order imposes a false choice between clean air, clean water, safe food, and other environmental safeguards."
Patti Goldman, an attorney for Earthjustice, which is representing the plaintiffs, added, "When presidents overreach, it is up to the courts to remind them no one is above the law and hold them to the U.S. Constitution. This is one of those times."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.