

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.
Kevin Regan, Earthjustice, (206) 343-7340, ext. 21
Kathleen Sutcliffe, Earthjustice, (202) 667-4500, ext. 235
Suzanne Struglinski, Natural Resources Defense Council, (202) 289-2387
Heather Pilatic, Pesticide Action Network, (415) 694-8596
Luis Medellin, El Quinto Sol, (559) 723-4119
Community groups joined environmental advocates in filing a lawsuit today to force the Environmental Protection Agency to decide once and for all whether or not it will ban the toxic pesticide chlorpyrifos.
Chlorpyrifos -- sprayed on corn, oranges, almonds and other crops --
is acutely poisonous and is among a class of pesticides initially
developed for World War II-era chemical warfare. Short term effects of
exposure to chlorpyrifos include chest tightness, blurred vision,
headaches, coughing and wheezing, weakness, nausea and vomiting, coma,
seizures, and even death. Prenatal and early childhood exposure has been
linked to low birth weights, developmental delays and other health effects.
In recognition of the particular risks the chemical presents for
children, EPA banned residential uses of chlorpyrifos in 2001. But the
pesticide is still widely used in fields and orchards across the
country. This continued use puts nearby rural communities in harm's way,
and chlorpyrifos ends up in our nation's food and water supplies,
leading to even more widespread exposure (click here for a list of foods with documented chlorpyrifos residue.)
Luis Medellin has experienced the dangers of this pesticide
firsthand. Medellin lives with his parents and three little sisters in
the agricultural town of Lindsay, California, where chlorpyrifos is
sprayed routinely on the orange groves surrounding his home. During the
growing season, the family is awakened several times a week by the
sickly smell of nighttime pesticide spraying. What follows is worse:
searing headaches, nausea, vomiting. After undergoing testing for
pesticides in his body, the 24-year-old Medellin discovered
concentrations of chlorpyrifos breakdown compounds nearly five times the
national average for adults, as calculated by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
"When I found out I had this chemical in my body, it scared me. But
what really worries me is how my little sisters might be affected." said
Medellin, a community organizer with the Lindsay-based El Quinto Sol.
"I wish the growers would stop using such dangerous chemicals so my
family and I can be safe."
In September 2007, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and
Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) filed a petition with EPA
asking the agency to ban chlorpyrifos. In the nearly three years since,
the agency has not responded. Today's lawsuit,
filed by the nonprofit environmental law firm Earthjustice on behalf of
NRDC and PANNA, would force EPA to make a decision on the pesticide's
ban.
"This dangerous pesticide has no place in our fields, near our
children, or on our food," said Earthjustice attorney Kevin Regan.
"We're asking a court to rule so that EPA will finish the job and ban
this poison."
An estimated 8 to 10 million pounds of chlorpyrifos are applied to U.S. crops each year (click here for a map showing where this pesticide is used.)
"The overwhelming evidence shows that chlorpyrifos is dangerous,
especially to children and fieldworkers," said Aaron Colangelo, a senior
attorney with NRDC. "There's no good reason for EPA to take three years
to decide what to do about it."
Exposure to chlorpyrifos in agricultural communities is widespread.
California Air Resources Board monitoring in the state's San Joaquin
Valley detected chlorpyrifos in one-third of all ambient air samples,
sometimes at levels that pose serious health risks to young children.
Monitoring by PANNA and community groups in Washington state and Luis
Medellin's hometown of Lindsay, California has shown that daily exposure
to chlorpyrifos can be substantial, regularly exceeding the
"acceptable" 24-hour acute dose for a one-year-old child established by
the EPA.
In one 2000 incident, dozens of students and staff at an elementary
school in Ventura, CA fell ill after chlorpyrifos applied to a nearby
lemon orchard drifted onto school grounds.
"Chlorpyrifos is among a class of pesticides that targets developing
nervous systems -- in insects and humans alike. These pesticides are
linked to a host of devastating diseases ranging from ADHD to childhood
brain cancer," said PANNA senior scientist Dr. Margaret Reeves. "Their
human health costs are just too high and farmers are farming
successfully without them. There's no defensible reason for continuing
to use chlorpyrifos."
BACKGROUND
A copy of the lawsuit is available here: https://www.earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/2073-complaint
A fact sheet on chlorpyrifos is available here: https://www.panna.org/docsOPs/cpffactsheetoct06%5b1%5d.pdf
A map documenting where chlorpyrifos is used is available here: https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/usage/maps/show_map.php?year=02-=m6009
A list of foods with documented chlorpyrifos residue is available here: https://www.whatsonmyfood.org/pesticide.jsp?pesticide=160
A study linking chlorpyrifos to low birth weights is available here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1247388/pdf/ehp0112-001125.pdf
A study linking chlorpyrifos to developmental delays is available here: https://www.cumc.columbia.edu/dept/mailman/ccceh/pdf-papers/LovasiAJPH2010.pdf
"I will give," said the Republican mega-donor with a smile.
Billionaire Miram Adelson on Tuesday night suggested the legal obstacles for President Donald Trump to serve an additional term in office after 2028 are not insurmountable as the far-right Republican megadonor vowed another $250 million to bolster a run that experts say would be unlawful and unconstitutional on its face.
Adelson, a hardline Zionist who, along with her now deceased husband, Sheldon Adelson, has given hundreds of millions to US lawmakers who back a strong relationship between the US and Israeli governments, was sharing the podium with Trump during a Hanukkah candlelighting event at the White House when she made the remarks.
With a reference to Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, Adelson said they had discussed "the legal thing of four more years"—something Trump has repeatedly gestured toward and many of his backers have called for—and told Trump, “So, we can do it, think about it.”
A chant in the crowd then broke out for "For four more years!" as Adelson whispered something in Trump's ear.
“She said, ‘Think about it, I’ll give you another $250 million,’” Trump then said into the microphone. "I will give," Adelson said with a smile.
Watch the exchange:
Adelson: I met Alan Dershowitz.. he said.. four more years. We can do it. Think about it.
Crowd: *chants four more years*
Trump: She said think about it, I’ll give you another 250 million pic.twitter.com/eOc7Zazyns
— Acyn (@Acyn) December 17, 2025
For Trump's 2024 presidential campaign alone, Adelson gave at least $100 million to support the Republican candidate with Super PAC she established, according to federal filings.
In his remarks on Tuesday, Trump credited Adelson with providing him $250 million overall—"directly and indirectly"—during his 2024 bid.
"When someone can you $250 million, I think that we should give her the opportunity to say hello," Trump said, when introducing her. "And Miriam, make it quick, because $250 million is not what it used to be."
"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," warned one Democratic senator.
US President Donald Trump late Tuesday declared a blockade on "all sanctioned oil tankers" approaching and leaving Venezuela, a major escalation in what's widely seen as an accelerating march to war with the South American country.
The "total and complete blockade," Trump wrote on his social media platform, will only be lifted when Venezuela returns to the US "all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us."
"Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America," Trump wrote, referring to the massive US military buildup in the Caribbean. "It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before."
The government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, which has mobilized its military in response to the US president's warmongering, denounced Trump's comments as a "grotesque threat" aimed at "stealing the riches that belong to our homeland."
The US-based anti-war group CodePink said in a statement that "Trump’s assertion that Venezuela must 'return' oil, land, and other assets to the United States exposes the true objective" of his military campaign.
"Venezuela did not steal anything from the United States. What Trump describes as 'theft' is Venezuela’s lawful assertion of sovereignty over its own natural resources and its refusal to allow US corporations to control its economy," said CodePink. "A blockade, a terrorist designation, and a military buildup are steps toward war. Congress must act immediately to stop this escalation, and the international community must reject this lawless threat."
The announced naval blockade—an act of aggression under international law—came a week after the Trump administration seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela and made clear that it intends to intercept more.
US Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), one of the leaders of a war powers resolution aimed at preventing the Trump administration from launching a war on Venezuela without congressional approval, said Tuesday that "a naval blockade is unquestionably an act of war."
"A war that the Congress never authorized and the American people do not want," Castro added, noting that a vote on his resolution is set for Thursday. "Every member of the House of Representatives will have the opportunity to decide if they support sending Americans into yet another regime change war."
"This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
Human rights organizations have accused the Republican-controlled Congress of abdicating its responsibilities as the Trump administration takes belligerent and illegal actions in international waters and against Venezuela directly, claiming without evidence to be combating drug trafficking.
Last month, Senate Republicans—some of whom are publicly clamoring for the US military to overthrow Maduro's government—voted down a Venezuela war powers resolution. Two GOP senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, joined Democrats in supporting the resolution.
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote Tuesday that "the White House minimized Republican 'yes' votes by promising that Trump would seek Congress’ authorization before initiating hostilities against Venezuela itself."
"Trump today broke that promise to his own party’s lawmakers by ordering a partial blockade on Venezuelan ships," wrote Williams. "A blockade, including a partial one, definitively constitutes an act of war. Trump is starting a war against Venezuela without congressional authorization."
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) warned in a television appearance late Monday that members of the Trump administration are "going to do everything they can to get us into this war."
"This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it," he added. "This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela."
"Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it," Sen. Mark Kelly said of administration officials after the meeting.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Tuesday that the Pentagon will not release unedited video footage of a September airstrike that killed two men who survived an initial strike on a boat allegedly carrying drugs in the Caribbean Sea, a move that followed a briefing with congressional lawmakers described by one Democrat as an "exercise in futility" and by another as "a joke."
Hegseth said that members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees would be given a chance to view video of the September 2 "double-tap" strike, which experts said was illegal like all the other boat bombings. The secretary did not say whether all congressional lawmakers would be provided access to the footage.
“Of course we’re not going to release a top secret, full, unedited video of that to the general public,” Hegseth told reporters following a closed-door briefing during which he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio fielded questions from lawmakers.
As with a similar briefing earlier this month, Tuesday's meeting left some Democrat attendees with more questions than answers.
“The administration came to this briefing empty-handed,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) told reporters. “If they can’t be transparent on this, how can you trust their transparency on all the other issues swirling about in the Caribbean?”
That includes preparations for a possible attack on oil-rich Venezuela, which include the deployment of US warships and thousands of troops to the region and the authorization of covert action aimed at toppling the government of longtime Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Tuesday's briefing came as House lawmakers prepare to vote this week on a pair of war powers resolutions aimed at preventing President Donald Trump from waging war on Venezuela. A similar bipartisan resolution recently failed in the Senate.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and co-author of one of the new war powers resolution, said in a statement: “Today’s briefing from Secretaries Rubio and Hegseth was an exercise in futility. It did nothing to address the serious legal, strategic, and moral concerns surrounding the administration’s unprecedented use of US military force in the Caribbean and Pacific."
"As of today, the administration has already carried out 25 such strikes over three months, extrajudicially killing 95 people," Meeks noted. "That this briefing to members of Congress only occurred more than three months since the strikes began—despite numerous requests for classified and public briefings—further proves these operations are unable to withstand scrutiny and lack a defensible legal rationale."
Briefing attendee Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)—who is in the administration's crosshairs for reminding US troops that military rules and international law require them to disobey illegal orders—said of Trump officials, "Obviously, they have issues with what is in that video, and that’s why they don’t want everybody to see it."
Defending Hegseth's decision to not make the boat strike video public, Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) argued that “there’s a lot of members that’s gonna walk out there and that’s gonna leak classified information and there’s gonna be certain ones that you hold accountable."
Mullin singled out Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who, along with the Somalian American community at large, has been the target of mounting Islamophobic and racist abuse by Trump and his supporters.
“Not everybody can go through the same background checks that need to be cleared on this,” he said. “Do you think Omar needs all this information? I will say no.”
Rejecting GOP arguments against releasing the video, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said after attending Tuesday's briefing: “I found the legal explanations and the strategic explanations incoherent, but I think the American people should see this video. And all members of Congress should have that opportunity. I certainly want it for myself.”