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
For Immediate Release
May, 08 2009, 11:44am EDT
Friday May, 08 2009, 11:44am EDT
Contact:
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological
Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Richard Mayol, Grand Canyon Trust, (928)
774-7488
Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club Grand Canyon
Chapter, (602) 999-5790
Suit Challenges New Uranium Exploration That Threatens the Grand Canyon
FLAGSTAFF, Ariz.
FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. - The Center for Biological Diversity, Grand Canyon Trust, and Sierra Club
today amended
their lawsuit against the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of
the Interior to challenge newly authorized uranium exploration near Grand Canyon National Park. The new uranium
projects are located within a 1-million acre area that was required to be
immediately withdrawn from new mining claims and exploration by a June 25,
2008 emergency resolution of the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources.
Today's amendment challenges new uranium projects authorized by the
Bureau of Land Management on April
23 and April
27, 2009. While the Bureau initially denied that new uranium
exploration activities had been authorized, it has since acknowledged that
exploration on the lands in question could begin whenever the companies
wish.
"The
Bureau's new uranium exploration runs afoul of both the law and a
congressional resolution protecting Grand Canyon,"
said Taylor McKinnon, public lands program director at the Center for
Biological Diversity. "This is an agency in dire need of leadership
from the new administration -- the Grand Canyon
deserves it."
The
U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Natural Resources on June
25, 2008 voted 20-2 in favor of an emergency resolution
requiring the secretary of the interior to immediately withdraw 1 million
acres of public lands surrounding Grand Canyon
from new uranium claims and exploration. New exploration authorized by
then-Secretary Kempthorne violated the required withdrawal and prompted
conservation groups to file the suit in September 2008. The suit cites
violations of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, National
Environmental Policy Act, and other laws. Today's amendment
incorporates the Bureau's new uranium-drilling authorizations based
on the same violations.
Emergency
withdrawals have been enacted four times prior to this, most recently in
1981 and 1983 by the late Arizona Congressman Mo Udall and the House
Interior and Insular Affairs Committee to halt public lands mineral- and
energy-leasing programs pursued by Interior Secretary James Watt.
Congressman Raul Grijalva also introduced the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act
in March of 2008 and again in 2009, legislation that would permanently
withdraw from mineral extraction the same 1 million acres encompassed by
the Committee resolution.
"The
Grand Canyon Trust encourages the Secretary of the Interior to take
immediate action on the emergency withdrawal of these lands in order to
allow time for the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 2009 to make its way
through the legislative process," said Richard Mayol, the Trust's
spokesperson.
Spikes
in the price of uranium in recent years have caused thousands of new
uranium claims, dozens of exploratory drilling projects, and movement to
open several uranium mines on public lands immediately north and south of Grand Canyon. Concerns about damage to wildlife
habitat as well as surface- and groundwater contamination of Grand Canyon
National Park and the Colorado River have been expressed by previous
Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano; the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California; the Southern Nevada Water Authority; the Arizona Game
and Fish Department; the Navajo, Hopi, Havasupai, Hualapai, and Kaibab
Paiute nations; and the Coconino County Board of Supervisors.
"It
is just outrageous that the Bureau is putting the short-term profits of
these mining companies ahead of protection of one of the most amazing
places in our nation, Grand Canyon, risking our water resources, and
flaunting the law," said Sandy Bahr, chapter director of the Sierra
Club's Grand Canyon Chapter.
Plaintiffs
are being represented by attorneys Marc Fink of the Center for Biological
Diversity, Neil Levine of Grand Canyon Trust, and Roger Flynn of Western
Mining Action Project.
Click
on the links below to view the following documents:
April
23, 2007 Bureau of Land Management uranium exploration authorizations
April
27, 2009 Bureau of Land Management uranium exploration authorizations
Map
of newly authorized uranium exploration in violation of emergency
withdrawal
Map
of all uranium exploration authorized since and in violation of emergency
withdrawal
Conservationists'
lawsuit against Kempthorne
Map
of previous uranium exploration authorized in violation of emergency
withdrawal
Map
of uranium claims, seeps, and springs in withdrawal area
Letter
by former Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano
Letter
by Los Angeles Water District
Coconino
County Grand Canyon uranium resolution
Testimony
of Dr. Larry Stevens
Testimony
of Dr. Abe Springer
Testimony
of Robert Arnberger, former Grand Canyon National Park superintendent
Testimony
of Roger Clark
Testimony
of Chris Shuey
Supplement
to Chris Shuey Testimony
Letter
dated July 15 from Department of Interior
Letter
dated July 16 by Congressman Rahall
The
Grand Canyon Trust is a regional,
nonprofit conservation organization
committed to protecting and restoring the Colorado Plateau.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
GOP Congressman Cashed Out Hospital Investments Before Voting for Biggest Medicaid Cut in History
"Congressman Bresnahan didn't just vote to gut Pennsylvania hospitals. He looked out for his own bottom line before doing it," said one advocate.
Aug 18, 2025
Congressman Rob Bresnahan, a Republican who campaigned on banning stock trading by lawmakers only to make at least 626 stock trades since taking office in January, was under scrutiny Monday for a particular sale he made just before he voted for the largest Medicaid cut in US history.
Soon after a report showed that 10 rural hospitals in Bresnahan's state of Pennsylvania were at risk of being shut down, the congressman sold between $100,001 and $250,000 in bonds issued by the Allegheny County Hospital Development Authority for the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.
The New York Times reported on the sale a month after it was revealed that Bresnahan sold up to $15,000 of stock he held in Centene Corporation, the largest Medicaid provider in the country. When President Donald Trump signed the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law last month, Centene's stock plummeted by 40%.
Bresnahan repeatedly said he would not vote to cut the safety net before he voted in favor of the bill.
The law is expected to cut $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next decade, with 10-15 million people projected to lose health coverage through the safety net program, according to one recent analysis. More than 700 hospitals, particularly those in rural areas, are likely to close due to a loss of Medicaid funding.
"His prolific stock trading is more than just a broken promise," said Cousin. "It's political malpractice and a scandal of his own making."
The economic justice group Unrig the Economy said that despite Bresnahan's introduction of a bill in May to bar members of Congress from buying and selling stocks—with the caveat that they could keep stocks they held before starting their terms in a blind trust—the congressman is "the one doing the selling... out of Pennsylvania hospitals."
"Congressman Bresnahan didn't just vote to gut Pennsylvania hospitals. He looked out for his own bottom line before doing it," said Unrig Our Economy campaign director Leor Tal. "Hospitals across Pennsylvania could close thanks to his vote, forcing families to drive long distances and experience longer wait times for critical care."
"Not everyone has a secret helicopter they can use whenever they want," added Tal, referring to recent reports that the multi-millionaire congressman owns a helicopter worth as much as $1.5 million, which he purchased through a limited liability company he set up.
Eli Cousin, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told the Times that Bresnahan's stock trading "will define his time in Washington and be a major reason why he will lose his seat."
"His prolific stock trading is more than just a broken promise," said Cousin. "It's political malpractice and a scandal of his own making."
As Trump's Takeover of DC Grows, So Do Warnings of 'Brazen Abuse of Power'
"If troops or federal agents violate our rights, they must be held accountable," the ACLU said.
Aug 18, 2025
As President Donald Trump escalates the US military occupation of Washington, DC—including by importing hundreds of out-of-state National Guard troops and allowing others to start carrying guns on missions in the nation's capital—the ACLU on Monday reminded his administration that federal forces are constitutionally obligated to protect, not violate, residents' rights.
"With additional state National Guard troops deploying to DC as untrained federal law enforcement agents perform local police duties in city streets, the American Civil Liberties Union is issuing a stark reminder to all federal and military officials that—no matter what uniform they wear or what authority they claim—they are bound by the US Constitution and all federal and local laws," the group said in a statement.
Over the weekend, the Republican governors of Ohio, South Carolina, and West Virginia announced that they are deploying hundreds of National Guard troops to join the 800 DC guardsmen and women recently activated by Trump, who also asserted federal control over the city's Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).
Sending military troops and heavily-armed federal agents to patrol the streets and scare vulnerable communities does not make us safer.
— ACLU (@aclu.org) August 18, 2025 at 12:08 PM
Trump dubiously declared a public safety emergency in a city where violent crime is down 26% from a year ago, when it was at its second-lowest level since 1966, according to official statistics. Critics have noted that Trump's crackdown isn't just targeting criminals, but also unhoused and mentally ill people, who have had their homes destroyed and property taken.
Contradicting assurances from military officials, The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday that the newly deployed troops may be ordered to start carrying firearms. This, along with the president's vow to let police "do whatever the hell they want" to reduce crime in the city and other statements, have raised serious concerns of possible abuses.
"Through his manufactured emergency, President Trump is engaging in dangerous political theater to expand his power and sow fear in our communities," ACLU National Security Project director Hina Shamsi said Monday. "Sending heavily armed federal agents and National Guard troops from hundreds of miles away into our nation's capital is unnecessary, inflammatory, and puts people's rights at high risk of being violated."
Shamsi stressed that "federal agents and military troops are bound by the Constitution, including our rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of speech, due process, and safeguards against unlawful searches and seizures. If troops or federal agents violate our rights, they must be held accountable."
On Friday, the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration to block its order asserting federal authority over the MPD, arguing the move violated the Home Rule Act. U.S. Attorney General Bondi subsequently rescinded her order to replace DC Police Chief Pamela Smith with Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator Terry Cole.
Also on Friday, a group of House Democrats introduced a resolution to terminate Trump's emergency declaration.
The deployment of out-of-state National Guard troops onto our streets is a brazen abuse of power meant to create fear in the District.Join us in the fight for statehood to give D.C. residents the same guardrails against federal overreach as other states: dcstatehoodnow.org
[image or embed]
— ACLU of the District of Columbia (@aclu-dc.bsky.social) August 18, 2025 at 7:23 AM
ACLU of DC executive director Monica Hopkins argued Monday that there is a way to curb Trump's "brazen abuse of power" in the District.
"We need the nation to join us in the fight for statehood so that DC residents are treated like those in every other state and have the same guardrails against federal overreach," she said.
As Trump Wages War on the Homeless, His Budget Will Kill a Policy That Helped Them Find Housing
The National Alliance to End Homelessness estimates that the proposal could increase the number of homeless people in the US by 36%.
Aug 18, 2025
As US President Donald Trump moves forward with a nationwide purge of homeless people from America's streets, his administration is moving to kill a program that has helped many of those in need find permanent housing.
The White House's fiscal year 2026 budget proposes ending a program under the Department of Housing and Urban Development known as Continuum of Care, which has helped cities across the country address or, in some cases, nearly eliminate their homelessness problem.
To receive federal funds, cities are required to adopt community-wide plans to end homelessness with the goal of moving people from the streets into shelters and then into stable housing.
The National Alliance to End Homelessness describes Continuum of Care as "the federal government's key vehicle for distributing homelessness funds."
As the Washington Post reports, Dallas has become a model for the program's effectiveness:
Instead of shuffling people to other neighborhoods, [the city] offered wraparound social services—and a permanent place to live.
The approach worked. Even as homelessness nationwide has surged to record levels, Dallas has emerged as a national model. The city declared an end to downtown homelessness in May after more than 270 people moved off the streets.
Other places, it says, have used Continuum of Care to substantially reduce homelessness, including San Bernardino, California, and Montgomery County, Maryland.
But the White House budget, unveiled in May, would eliminate Continuum of Care, instead shifting its resources to the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) program, which prioritizes shelters and transitional housing, as well as mental health and substance abuse counselling, rather than "Housing First" solutions.
The National Alliance to End Homelessness says the administration's plan to consolidate the program "would place thousands of projects and the hundreds of thousands of people they serve at risk."
The Alliance estimated that the proposal would effectively end funding of permanent supportive housing for 170,000 residents and potentially increase the number of homeless people in the US by 36%.
In addition to eliminating Continuum of Care, the White House budget cuts $532 million in funding to the federal government's Homeless Assistance Grants account. That money, the Alliance says, could fund over 60,000 Rapid Re-Housing Units—enough to serve 8% of the US homeless population.
"Between 2023 and 2024, homelessness increased by 18%, yet this proposal would strip funding for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)'s homelessness programs by 12%," said Ann Oliva, CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness. "That is a recipe for disaster. We know that these programs have been chronically underfunded for decades."
In recent weeks, the Trump administration has declared an all-out war on the nation's homeless population. In July, he signed an executive order requiring states and cities to remove homeless people from public places, expanding cases where they must be involuntarily committed to psychiatric hospitals, and requiring sobriety preconditions for them to receive housing assistance.
During his federal takeover of Washington, DC, Trump ordered homeless people in encampments to move "FAR from the Capital." Press secretary Karoline Leavitt has said those who refuse to accept services at a shelter will face jail time.
The advocacy group Housing Not Handcuffs reported Friday that "police evicted and destroyed the property of homeless people throughout DC, throwing away people's personal belongings, including tents and other property."
"Homelessness is a market failure, a housing problem," said Rob Robinson, a formerly homeless community organizer in New York City, in USA Today. "Rent prices have exceeded income gains by 325% nationally since 1985. Rates of homelessness are tied to rental affordability."
"The White House's recent moves toward the criminalization of homelessness and forced institutionalization," he said, "ignore decades of research and real-world outcomes."
"If Donald Trump really wanted to help people and solve homelessness, he would use his power to lower rents and help people make ends meet," said Jesse Rabinowitz from the National Homelessness Law Center. "Estimates show that taxpayers are spending over $400,000 a day for Trump to use the DC National Guard for photo ops. Why can they find money for that but not for housing and help?"
Most Popular
We cover the issues the corporate media never will.
Please support our journalism.