SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Jeff Miller, Center for Biological Diversity, (510) 499-9185
SAN FRANCISCO -
The Center for Biological Diversity today filed a lawsuit challenging a
politically tainted decision by the Bush administration to strip the Sacramento
splittail, an imperiled fish species native to the Central Valley and San
Francisco Bay-Delta, of Endangered Species Act protections - a 2003 decision
engineered by disgraced former Bush administration official Julie MacDonald. The
lawsuit is part of a larger campaign on the part of the Center for Biological
Diversity to undo Bush-administration decisions that weakened protections for
dozens of endangered species.
"The Bush
administration regularly put industry interests over conservation and let
politics dictate endangered species decisions, but the delisting of the
splittail was one of the most outrageous cases of political interference,
manipulation of science, and blatant conflict of interest," said Jeff Miller,
conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Three
investigations by the inspector general and a report by the Government
Accountability Office to Congress concluded that Julie MacDonald illegally
tampered with the splittail listing decision."
"It should
be a no-brainer for the Fish and Wildlife Service under the Obama administration
to clean up this shameful relict of the Bush legacy and again protect the
splittail," said Miller. "The splittail has severely declined since delisting;
federal protection is needed to prevent the extinction of splittail and other
native fish species that share its habitat in the Delta and Central Valley."
Conservation
groups petitioned for Endangered Species Act protection for the splittail in 1992 and the Fish and Wildlife
Service proposed listing the species in 1994. The agency delayed listing until a
Center lawsuit and court order forced the Service to take action. In 1999 the
splittail was listed as a threatened species. After litigation by water agencies
challenging the listing, a court ordered the Service to review the status of the
splittail. In 2003 the Service removed the splittail from the threatened list
despite strong consensus by agency scientists and fisheries experts that it
should retain its protected status.
The
delisting decision, which expressly ignored the most recent splittail population
trend studies, was overseen by Bush administration official Julie MacDonald,
former deputy assistant secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks at the Department
of the Interior. MacDonald resigned in disgrace following a scathing misconduct investigation
by the Interior Department's inspector general revealing the depths of her
corruption. MacDonald, who owned an 80-acre farm in the Yolo Bypass - a
floodplain that is key habitat for the splittail - edited the splittail decision
in a manner that appeared to benefit her financial interests. Two subsequent
inspector general investigations concluded that MacDonald should have recused
herself from the listing review process, and that she edited and interfered with
the scientific data used in the decision.
Background
The
Sacramento splittail (Pogonichthys
macrolepidotus) is a minnow native to the upper San Francisco Estuary and
the Central Valley. Splittail are primarily
freshwater fish but can tolerate moderately salty water. They are found mostly
in slow-moving marshy sections of rivers and dead-end sloughs, though
floodplains are important for spawning. The splittail once occurred in lakes and
rivers throughout the Central Valley as far north as Redding on the Sacramento
River and as far south as the Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River, as well as in
the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Massive water diversions and alteration
of important spawning and rearing habitat have driven the species to near
extinction. Formerly common in the Sacramento,
San Joaquin, Feather, and American rivers, the splittail is extirpated from all
but a fraction of its former range and now is largely restricted to the Delta,
Suisun
Bay, Suisun Marsh, and Napa
Marsh.
The
splittail is estimated to be only 35 to 60 percent as abundant in the Delta as
it was in 1940, and the percentage decline over the species' historic range is
much greater. Splittail numbers in the Delta have declined steadily since 1980,
and in 1992 numbers declined to the lowest on record. Although population levels
appear to fluctuate widely from year to year based on freshwater outflow, since
the 2003 delisting of the species available data (2003-2007) shows splittail
abundance has dropped to low levels for five consecutive years. The remnant
populations of splittail in the Delta require adequate freshwater outflow and
periodic floodplain inundation to thrive. Splittail are threatened by
unsustainable water diversions, the effects of dams, wetlands habitat loss,
pesticide impacts, and predation and competition by introduced
species.
The
manipulation of science for the benefit of private interests reached new heights
at the Fish and Wildlife Service under the Bush administration. By suppressing,
twisting, and ignoring information from its own biologists, the administration
illegally removed or withheld Endangered Species Act protections for numerous
species. In many cases, government and university scientists carefully
documented the unauthorized editing of scientific documents, the overruling of scientific experts, and the
falsification of economic analyses. Many of the illegal decisions were
engineered by MacDonald.
The Center
kicked off a Cleaning up the Bush Legacy Campaign in 2007, seeking to reinstate protections for 60 imperiled species and more than
8 million acres of habitat wrongly denied federal protection because of
political interference. The campaign has already met with significant success:
in response to Center lawsuits, the Fish and Wildlife Service has agreed to redo
critical habitat designations for 19 species and reconsidered listing the rare,
highly imperiled Mexican garter snake as an
endangered.
Unsustainable
water diversions from the Delta have caused the collapse of many fish runs in
the Delta and Central Valley. Since
2002, delta smelt, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, Sacramento splittail, and striped bass have declined
catastrophically and the state's largest salmon run of Central Valley fall-run
chinook is suffering from record decline, forcing cancellation of commercial and
recreational salmon fishing in California for the second straight year. White
and green sturgeon numbers in San
Francisco Bay and the
Sacramento River have also fallen to alarmingly
low levels. The southern green sturgeon population was federally listed as
threatened in 2006.
Because
federal and state agencies have so mismanaged the Bay-Delta, California's largest and
most important estuary, courts and federal agencies have begun to order changes
in water export operations to protect fish populations. In 2007, an Alameda County court ruled that the California
Department of Water Resources had been illegally pumping water out of the Delta
without a permit to kill delta smelt and other fish species listed under the
California Endangered Species Act. A federal court also rejected a federal
"biological opinion" allowing high water exports and ordered reduced Delta
pumping. In 2008, a federal judge invalidated a water plan that would have
allowed more pumping from the Delta at the expense of protected salmon and
steelhead trout. Earlier this year the National
Marine Fisheries Service determined that pumping operations of the Central
Valley Project jeopardize the
long-term survival of winter and spring-run Chinook salmon, green
sturgeon, Central Valley steelhead, and orcas
that feed on the salmon, and mandated a 5-7% reduction in Delta water exports to
save salmon.
More
information on the Sacramento splittail
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) 623-5252"This sends a chilling message that the U.S. is willing to overlook some abuses, signaling that people experiencing human rights violations may be left to fend for themselves," said one Amnesty campaigner.
After leaked drafts exposed the Trump administration's plans to downplay human rights abuses in some allied countries, including Israel, the U.S. Department of State released the final edition of an annual report on Tuesday, sparking fresh condemnation.
"Breaking with precedent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not provide a written introduction to the report nor did he make remarks about it," CNN reported. Still, Amanda Klasing, Amnesty International USA's national director of government relations and advocacy, called him out by name in a Tuesday statement.
"With the release of the U.S. State Department's human rights report, it is clear that the Trump administration has engaged in a very selective documentation of human rights abuses in certain countries," Klasing said. "In addition to eliminating entire sections for certain countries—for example discrimination against LGBTQ+ people—there are also arbitrary omissions within existing sections of the report based on the country."
Klasing explained that "we have criticized past reports when warranted, but have never seen reports quite like this. Never before have the reports gone this far in prioritizing an administration's political agenda over a consistent and truthful accounting of human rights violations around the world—softening criticism in some countries while ignoring violations in others. The State Department has said in relation to the reports less is more. However, for the victims and human rights defenders who rely on these reports to shine light on abuses and violations, less is just less."
"Secretary Rubio knows full well from his time in the Senate how vital these reports are in informing policy decisions and shaping diplomatic conversations, yet he has made the dangerous and short-sighted decision to put out a truncated version that doesn't tell the whole story of human rights violations," she continued. "This sends a chilling message that the U.S. is willing to overlook some abuses, signaling that people experiencing human rights violations may be left to fend for themselves."
"Failing to adequately report on human rights violations further damages the credibility of the U.S. on human rights issues," she added. "It's shameful that the Trump administration and Secretary Rubio are putting politics above human lives."
The overarching report—which includes over 100 individual country reports—covers 2024, the last full calendar year of the Biden administration. The appendix says that in March, the report was "streamlined for better utility and accessibility in the field and by partners, and to be more responsive to the underlying legislative mandate and aligned to the administration's executive orders."
As CNN detailed:
The latest report was stripped of many of the specific sections included in past reports, including reporting on alleged abuses based on sexual orientation, violence toward women, corruption in government, systemic racial or ethnic violence, or denial of a fair public trial. Some country reports, including for Afghanistan, do address human rights abuses against women.
"We were asked to edit down the human rights reports to the bare minimum of what was statutorily required," said Michael Honigstein, the former director of African Affairs at the State Department's Bureau of Human Rights, Democracy, and Labor. He and his office helped compile the initial reports.
Over the past week, since the draft country reports leaked to the press, the Trump administration has come under fire for its portrayals of El Salvador, Israel, and Russia.
The report on Israel—and the illegally occupied Palestinian territories, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank—is just nine pages. The brevity even drew the attention of Israeli media. The Times of Israel highlighted that it "is much shorter than last year's edition compiled under the Biden administration and contained no mention of the severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza."
Since the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, Israeli forces have slaughtered over 60,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to local officials—though experts warn the true toll is likely far higher. As Israel has restricted humanitarian aid in recent months, over 200 people have starved to death, including 103 children.
The U.S. report on Israel does not mention the genocide case that Israel faces at the International Court of Justice over the assault on Gaza, or the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The section on war crimes and genocide only says that "terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah continue to engage in the
indiscriminate targeting of Israeli civilians in violation of the law of armed conflict."
As the world mourns the killing of six more Palestinian media professionals in Gaza this week—which prompted calls for the United Nations Security Council to convene an emergency meeting—the report's section on press freedom is also short and makes no mention of the hundreds of journalists killed in Israel's annihilation of the strip:
The law generally provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right for most Israelis. NGOs and journalists reported authorities restricted press coverage and limited certain forms of expression, especially in the context of criticism against the war or sympathy for Palestinians in Gaza.
Noting that "the human rights reports have been among the U.S. government's most-read documents," DAWN senior adviser and 32-year State Department official Charles Blaha said the "significant omissions" in this year's report on Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank render it "functionally useless for Congress and the public as nothing more than a pro-Israel document."
Like Klasing at Amnesty, Sarah Leah Whitson, DAWN's executive director, specifically called out the U.S. secretary of state.
"Secretary Rubio has revamped the State Department reports for one principal purpose: to whitewash Israeli crimes, including its horrific genocide and starvation in Gaza. The report shockingly includes not a word about the overwhelming evidence of genocide, mass starvation, and the deliberate bombardment of civilians in Gaza," she said. "Rubio has defied the letter and intent of U.S. laws requiring the State Department to report truthfully and comprehensively about every country's human rights abuses, instead offering up anodyne cover for his murderous friends in Tel Aviv."
The Tuesday release came after a coalition of LGBTQ+ and human rights organizations on Monday filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department over its refusal to release the congressionally mandated report.
This article has been updated with comment from DAWN.
"We will not sit idly by while political leaders manipulate voting maps to entrench their power and subvert our democracy," said the head of Common Cause.
As Republicans try to rig congressional maps in several states and Democrats threaten retaliatory measures, a pro-democracy watchdog on Tuesday unveiled new fairness standards underscoring that "independent redistricting commissions remain the gold standard for ending partisan gerrymandering."
Common Cause will hold an online media briefing Wednesday at noon Eastern time "to walk reporters though the six pieces of criteria the organization will use to evaluate any proposed maps."
The Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group said that "it will closely evaluate, but not automatically condemn, countermeasures" to Republican gerrymandering efforts—especially mid-decade redistricting not based on decennial censuses.
Amid the gerrymandering wars, we just launched 6 fairness criteria to hold all actors to the same principled standard: people first—not parties. Read our criteria here: www.commoncause.org/resources/po...
[image or embed]
— Common Cause (@commoncause.org) August 12, 2025 at 12:01 PM
Common Cause's six fairness criteria for mid-decade redistricting are:
"We will not sit idly by while political leaders manipulate voting maps to entrench their power and subvert our democracy," Common Cause president and CEO Virginia Kase Solomón said in a statement. "But neither will we call for unilateral political disarmament in the face of authoritarian tactics that undermine fair representation."
"We have established a fairness criteria that we will use to evaluate all countermeasures so we can respond to the most urgent threats to fair representation while holding all actors to the same principled standard: people—not parties—first," she added.
Common Cause's fairness criteria come amid the ongoing standoff between Republicans trying to gerrymander Texas' congressional map and Democratic lawmakers who fled the state in a bid to stymie a vote on the measure. Texas state senators on Tuesday approved the proposed map despite a walkout by most of their Democratic colleagues.
Leaders of several Democrat-controlled states, most notably California, have threatened retaliatory redistricting.
"This moment is about more than responding to a single threat—it's about building the movement for lasting reform," Kase Solomón asserted. "This is not an isolated political tactic; it is part of a broader march toward authoritarianism, dismantling people-powered democracy, and stripping away the people's ability to have a political voice and say in how they are governed."
"Texas law is clear: A pregnant person cannot be arrested and prosecuted for getting an abortion. No one is above the law, including officials entrusted with enforcing it," said an ACLU attorney.
When officials in Starr County, Texas arrested Lizelle Gonzalez in 2022 and charged her with murder for having a medication abortion—despite state law clearly prohibiting the prosecution of women for abortion care—she spent three days in jail, away from her children, and the highly publicized arrest was "deeply traumatizing."
Now, said her lawyers at the ACLU in court filings on Tuesday, officials in the county sheriff's and district attorney's offices must be held accountable for knowingly subjecting Gonzalez to wrongful prosecution.
Starr County District Attorney Gocha Ramirez ultimately dismissed the charge against Gonzalez, said the ACLU, but the Texas bar's investigation into Ramirez—which found multiple instances of misconduct related to Gonzalez's homicide charge—resulted in only minor punishment. Ramirez had to pay a small fine of $1,250 and was given one year of probated suspension.
"Without real accountability, Starr County's district attorney—and any other law enforcement actor—will not be deterred from abusing their power to unlawfully target people because of their personal beliefs, rather than the law," said the ACLU.
The state bar found that Ramirez allowed Gonzalez's indictment to go forward despite the fact that her homicide charge was "known not to be supported by probable cause."
Ramirez had denied that he was briefed on the facts of the case before it was prosecuted by his office, but the state bar "determined he was consulted by a prosecutor in his office beforehand and permitted it to go forward."
"Without real accountability, Starr County's district attorney—and any other law enforcement actor—will not be deterred from abusing their power to unlawfully target people because of their personal beliefs, rather than the law."
Sarah Corning, an attorney at the ACLU of Texas, said the prosecutors and law enforcement officers "ignored Texas law when they wrongfully arrested Lizelle Gonzalez for ending her pregnancy."
"They shattered her life in South Texas, violated her rights, and abused the power they swore to uphold," said Corning. "Texas law is clear: A pregnant person cannot be arrested and prosecuted for getting an abortion. No one is above the law, including officials entrusted with enforcing it."
The district attorney's office sought to have the ACLU's case dismissed in July 2024, raising claims of legal immunity.
A court denied Ramirez's motion, and the ACLU's discovery process that followed revealed "a coordinated effort between the Starr County sheriff's office and district attorney's office to violate Ms. Gonzalez's rights."
The officials' "wanton disregard for the rule of law and erroneous belief of their own invincibility is a frightening deviation from the offices' purposes: to seek justice," said Cecilia Garza, a partner at the law firm Garza Martinez, who is joining the ACLU in representing Gonzalez. "I am proud to represent Ms. Gonzalez in her fight for justice and redemption, and our team will not allow these abuses to continue in Starr County or any other county in the state of Texas."
Gonzalez's fight for justice comes as a wrongful death case in Texas—filed by an "anti-abortion legal terrorist" on behalf of a man whose girlfriend use medication from another state to end her pregnancy—moves forward, potentially jeopardizing access to abortion pills across the country.