May, 05 2009, 02:31pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Cinda Waldbuesser, Senior Program Manager, National Parks Conservation Association, P: 215.327.2529
Park Advocates Move Forward With Legal Challenge to Ordinance Permitting Inappropriate Development in Valley Forge National Hist
Lower Providence residents and the nonprofit National Parks
Conservation Association (NPCA) yesterday followed the direction of the
federal court and moved forward in Montgomery County Court of Common
Pleas with their case to protect Valley Forge National Historical Park
(NHP) from inappropriate development. In addition, residents and the
National Parks Conservation Association filed an appeal of the federal
court decision not to hear the claims.
PHILADELPHIA
Lower Providence residents and the nonprofit National Parks
Conservation Association (NPCA) yesterday followed the direction of the
federal court and moved forward in Montgomery County Court of Common
Pleas with their case to protect Valley Forge National Historical Park
(NHP) from inappropriate development. In addition, residents and the
National Parks Conservation Association filed an appeal of the federal
court decision not to hear the claims.
"While we respectfully disagree with Judge Brody's decision, we are
nevertheless taking steps to do as she said by moving forward with our
case in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas," said Cinda
Waldbuesser, Pennsylvania senior program manager. "We look forward to
showing the Court of Common Pleas that the ordinance is invalid."
Filed on December 1, 2008, with the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the lawsuit asserts that the
ordinance is preempted by federal law because it would interfere with
and undermine the National Park Service's role in managing Valley Forge
NHP. The suit also claims the zoning is unlawful under Pennsylvania
law as "spot zoning" because it permits development that is
inconsistent and incompatible with the neighboring national parkland
and other open space.
In her April 7, 2009, decision, Judge Brody did not decide the case
on its merits, but rather decided that the issue was a local matter and
not one the federal court should hear.
"Because we disagree with Judge Brody's decision that this is a
local matter, we are also appealing the decision to the U.S. Court of
Appeals in Philadelphia," said Waldbuesser. "Valley Forge is a
national icon belonging to all Americans, which must be protected for
our children and grandchildren to enjoy."
The historic land at risk is an area that was vital to the
Continental Army encampment during the winter of 1777-1778. The parcel
of land is almost totally surrounded by parkland, in a remote location
not easily accessible by visitors to the park. Moving forward with this
inappropriate development proposal would forever change the historic
character of Valley Forge. For additional information, please click here.
Since 1919, the nonpartisan, nonprofit National Parks Conservation
Association has been the leading voice of the American people in
protecting and enhancing our National Park System. NPCA, its 325,000
members, and allies work together to protect the park system and
preserve our nation's natural, historical, and cultural heritage for
generations to come.
The National Parks Conservation Association and its co-plaintiffs
are represented in this lawsuit by the law firm of Arnold & Porter
LLP.
NPCA is a non-profit, private organization dedicated to protecting, preserving, and enhancing the U.S. National Park System.
LATEST NEWS
Biden Hold on Bomb Delivery 'Must Be a First Step' to Ending US Complicity, Says Sanders
"The U.S. must now use ALL its leverage to demand an immediate cease-fire, the end of the attacks on Rafah, and the immediate delivery of massive amounts of humanitarian aid to people living in desperation."
May 08, 2024
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders said Wednesday that the Biden administration must go much further than merely delaying shipments of two types of Boeing-made bombs to Israel, whose long-feared ground assault on the overcrowded Gaza city of Rafah is currently underway.
Sanders (I-Vt.) said U.S. President Joe Biden was "absolutely right" to halt the delivery of thousands of bombs to "this extreme, right-wing Israeli government" as it inflicts an "unprecedented humanitarian disaster" on Gaza's population.
"But this must be a first step," said the Vermont senator. "The U.S. must now use ALL its leverage to demand an immediate cease-fire, the end of the attacks on Rafah, and the immediate delivery of massive amounts of humanitarian aid to people living in desperation. Our leverage is clear."
President Biden is right to halt bomb deliveries to this extreme Israeli government.
But this must be a first step. The U.S. must now use ALL its leverage to demand a ceasefire, stop attacks on Rafah, and secure delivery of massive humanitarian aid throughout Gaza. pic.twitter.com/Td3aRfpBya
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) May 8, 2024
The Biden administration has approved more than 100 weapons sales for Israel since it began its latest assault on Gaza in October. Last month, Biden signed into law a foreign aid package that includes billions of dollars in unconditional U.S. military assistance for Israel.
The New York Timesreported Tuesday that Biden "withheld 1,800 2,000-pound bombs and 1,700 500-pound bombs that he feared could be dropped on Rafah, where more than one million Gazans have taken refuge." Israel has dropped hundreds of U.S.-made 2,000-pound bombs on Gaza since October.
"The administration is reviewing whether to hold back future transfers, including guidance kits that convert so-called dumb bombs into precision-guided munitions," the Times added.
A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) downplayed the importance of the delay on Wednesday and said the U.S. and Israel will resolve their disagreements "behind closed doors."
The Biden administration's decision to suspend a bomb shipment for the first time in the seven-month war came amid growing pressure from human rights organizations, United Nations experts, and U.S. lawmakers to halt all offensive weapons deliveries to Israel, which has repeatedly used American arms to commit atrocities in Gaza.
"Over the years, the United States has provided tens of billions of dollars in military aid to Israel," Sanders said Wednesday. "We can no longer be complicit in Netanyahu's horrific war against the Palestinian people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Utah's Anti-Trans Bathroom Snitch Line Flooded With 'Bogus' Complaints
State Auditor John Dougall said that "concerned citizens should directly contact the bill sponsor, Rep. Birkeland," who doubled down on her support for the recently enacted law.
May 08, 2024
In just a week since its launch, Utah's " snitch line" for a new law restricting transgender people's access to some bathrooms and changing facilities was inundated with around 10,000 "bogus" reports, state Auditor John Dougall revealed Tuesday.
Dougall, a Republican running to represent the state's 3rd Congressional District, shared the figure with Utah News Dispatch and released a lengthy statement detailing his office's efforts to comply with House Bill 257, which GOP legislators passed and Gov. Spencer Cox signed earlier this year.
The law prohibits trans students in K-12 public schools from using bathrooms or changing rooms that align with their gender identity, according to an online resource from the ACLU of Utah and Equality Utah. The restrictions also apply to changing rooms in government-owned or -controlled buildings—such as the Utah Capitol and city or county recreation centers—but not to the facilities in private spaces such as restaurants, shopping malls, or theaters.
Since Dougall's office launched the online complaint form last week, Utahans and other opponents of H.B. 257 have posted the link on social media with messages like, " You know what to do." Some people even shared screenshots of their fake submissions.
Among the critics of the form was state Sen. Jennifer Plumb (D-9), who
said on social media last week: "Apparently Utah's solution to people feeling unsafe in restrooms is to encourage folks to take photos of and focus extreme attention on the private parts of others who are taking care of a biological need to eliminate waste? What could possibly go wrong?"
Dougall responded that "our hotline has historically allowed complainant to upload additional supporting information. My office has no interest in those types of photos which, of course you know, would be illegal." The auditor went back and forth with Plumb, who stressed that "these 'hotline' reporting spaces are what make people unsafe."
In his Tuesday statement, Dougall said that he has not received "a single legitimate complaint" and that his office "only investigates alleged violations of the statute by government entities" and "will not investigate the actions of any private individuals."
"The office created the complaint form to comply with a statutory mandate—a role we did not request. Indeed, no auditor sets out to become a bathroom monitor," Dougall continued. He noted that "the bill was rushed to final passage" and neither its sponsor, state Rep. Kera Birkeland (R-4), "nor any other legislator consulted with this office regarding this newly mandated obligation."
"I recognize that many Utahns feel trampled by an invasive and overly aggressive Legislature that too often fails to seek input from those most affected," he added. "The Legislature crafted these public policies, and only the Legislature can revise them. Concerned citizens should directly contact the bill sponsor, Rep. Birkeland, and other legislators at le.utah.gov."
Responding to Dougall's statement on social media Tuesday, Birkeland
said in part that "it's not surprising that activists are taking the time to send false reports" and "backlash from this legislation was completely expected."
"But that isn't a distraction from the importance of the legislation," she added, claiming that the law protects women and girls, and that opposition to it comes from "a loud and vocal minority."
Since North Carolina passed the nation's first bathroom bill in 2016, similar laws and other state-level legislation attacking various trans rights have been advanced by Republican lawmakers throughout the United States, often provoking legal challenges.
As trans journalist Erin Reed, who tracks anti-trans legislation across the country, highlighted Tuesday:
The ordeal over the bathroom reporting tool in Utah mirrors problems seen in many other anti-trans bathroom laws targeting transgender adults. These laws are extremely difficult to enforce. Questions of enforcement were brought up often in the debate, with many pointing out that you can't always tell who is transgender. This sentiment was shared in the Senate Business and Labor Committee by Dustin Parmley, a public defender, who stated: "This bill is impossible to enforce. It relies on citizens to determine if someone is feminine or masculine enough to use it. The exceptions are for hidden conditions, such as someone's surgery or birth certificate. It will lead to unnecessary police investigations."
"Other attempts to create such forms have similarly failed,
such as in Virginia, where Gov. Glenn Youngkin's tip line was flooded with complaints about Beowulf, or in Missouri, where scripts for the Bee Movie were sent in," Reed noted. "In this case, it appears that when faced with problems enforcing anti-trans laws, the state of Utah attempted to sidestep the issue by abdicating the responsibility of enforcement to its citizens."
Keep ReadingShow Less
77% of Top Climate Scientists Think 2.5°C of Warming Is Coming—And They're Horrified
"I expect a semi-dystopian future with substantial pain and suffering for the people of the Global South," one expert said.
May 08, 2024
Nearly 80% of top-level climate scientists expect that global temperatures will rise by at least 2.5°C by 2100, while only 6% thought the world would succeed in limiting global heating to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels, a survey published Wednesday by The Guardian revealed.
Nearly three-quarters blamed world leaders' insufficient action on a lack of political will, while 60% said that corporate interests such as fossil fuel companies were interfering with progress.
"I expect a semi-dystopian future with substantial pain and suffering for the people of the Global South," one South African scientist told The Guardian. "The world's response to date is reprehensible—we live in an age of fools."
"What blew me away was the level of personal anguish among the experts who have dedicated their lives to climate research."
The survey was conducted by The Guardian's Damian Carrington, who reached out to every expert who had served as a senior author on an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report since 2018. Out of 843 scientists whose contact information was available, 383 responded.
He then asked them how high they thought temperatures would rise by 2100: 77% predicted at least 2.5°C and nearly half predicted 3°C or more.
"What blew me away was the level of personal anguish among the experts who have dedicated their lives to climate research," Carrington wrote on social media. "Many used words like hopeless, broken, infuriated, scared, overwhelmed."
The 1.5°C target was agreed to as the most ambitious goal of the Paris agreement of 2015, in which world leaders pledged to keep warming to "well below" 2°C. However, policies currently in place would put the world on track for 3°C, and unconditional commitments under the Paris agreement for 2.9°C.
The survey comes on the heels of the hottest year on record, which already saw a record-breaking Canadian wildfire season as well as extreme, widespread heatwaves and deadly floods. The first four months of 2024 have also been the hottest of their respective months on record, and the year has already seen the fourth global bleaching event for coral reefs.
"They can say they don't care, but they can't say they didn't know."
"I think we are headed for major societal disruption within the next five years," Gretta Pecl of the University of Tasmania told The Guardian. "[Authorities] will be overwhelmed by extreme event after extreme event, food production will be disrupted. I could not feel greater despair over the future."
Scientists said that governments and companies that profit from the burning of fossil fuels had prevented action. Many also blamed global inequality and the refusal of the wealthy world to step up, both in terms of reducing their own emissions and helping climate vulnerable nations adapt.
"The tacit calculus of decision-makers, particularly in the Anglosphere—U.S., Canada, U.K., Australia—but also Russia and the major fossil fuel producers in the Middle East, is driving us into a world in which the vulnerable will suffer, while the well-heeled will hope to stay safe above the waterline," Stephen Humphreys at the London School of Economics said.
Despite their grim predictions, many of the scientists remained committed to researching and speaking out.
"We keep doing it because we have to do it, so [the powerful] cannot say that they didn't know," Ruth Cerezo-Mota, who works on climate modeling at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, told The Guardian. "We know what we're talking about. They can say they don't care, but they can't say they didn't know."
Others found hope in the climate activism and awareness of younger generations, and in the finding that each extra tenth of a degree of warming avoided protects 140 million people from extreme temperatures.
"I regularly face moments of despair and guilt of not managing to make things change more rapidly, and these feelings have become even stronger since I became a father," said Henri Waisman of France's Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations. "But, in these moments, two things help me: remembering how much progress has happened since I started to work on the topic in 2005 and that every tenth of a degree matters a lot—this means it is still useful to continue the fight."
Peter Cox of the University of Exeter added: "Climate change will not suddenly become dangerous at 1.5°C—it already is. And it will not be 'game over' if we pass 2°C, which we might well do."
"I'm not despairing, I'm not giving up. I'm pissed off and more determined to fight for a better world."
Many of the scientists who still saw a hope of keeping 1.5°C alive pinned it on the speeding rollout and falling prices of climate-friendly technologies like renewable energy and electric vehicles. Also on Wednesday, energy think thank Ember reported that 30% of global electricity came from renewables in 2023 and predicted that the year would be the "pivot" after which power sector emissions would start to fall. Experts also said that abandoning fossil fuels has many side benefits such as cleaner air and better public health. Though even the more optimistic scientists were wary about the unpredictable nature of the climate crisis.
"I am convinced that we have all the solutions needed for a 1.5°C path and that we will implement them in the coming 20 years," Henry Neufeldt of the United Nations' Copenhagen Climate Center told The Guardian. "But I fear that our actions might come too late and we cross one or several tipping points."
Several scientists gave recommendations for things that people could do to move the needle on climate. Humphreys suggested "civil disobedience" while one French scientist said people should "fight for a fairer world."
"All of humanity needs to come together and cooperate—this is a monumental opportunity to put differences aside and work together," Louis Verchot, based at the International Center for Tropical Agriculture in Colombia, told The Guardian. "Unfortunately climate change has become a political wedge issue… I wonder how deep the crisis needs to become before we all start rowing in the same direction."
The publication of The Guardian's survey prompted other climate scientists to share their thoughts.
"As many of the scientists pointed out, the uncertainty in future temperature change is not a physical science question: It is a question of the decisions people choose to make," Texas Tech University climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe wrote on social media. "We are not experts in that; And we have little reason to feel positive about those, since we have been warning of the risks for decades."
Aaron Thierry, a graduate researcher at the Cardiff School of Social Sciences, pointed out that The Guardian's results were consistent with other surveys of scientific opinion, such as one published in Nature in the lead-up to COP26, in which 60% of IPCC scientists said they expected 3°C of warming or more by 2100.
James Dyke of the University of Exeter's Global Systems Institute argued that there was room for scientists to share more negative thoughts without succumbing to or encouraging defeatism.
"I hear the argument that we must temper these messages because we don't want people to despair and give up. But I'm not despairing, I'm not giving up. I'm pissed off and more determined to fight for a better world," Dyke said on social media.
NASA climate scientist Peter Kalmus shared the article with a plea to "please start listening."
"Elected and corporate 'leaders' continue to prioritize their personal power and wealth at the cost of irreversible loss of essentially everything, even as this irreversible loss comes more and more into focus. I see this as literally a form of insanity," Kalmus wrote, adding that "capitalism tends to elevate the worst among us into the seats of power."
However, he took issue with the idea that a future of unchecked climate change would be only "semi-dystopian."
"We're also at risk of losing any gradual bending toward progress, and equity, and compassion, and love," Kalmus said. "All social and cultural struggles must recognize this deep intersection with the climate struggle."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular