

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.
Tom Waldo, Earthjustice, (907) 586-2751
Mike Jackson, Organized Village of Kake, (907) 785-6471, ext. 124
Hunter McIntosh, The Boat Company, (202) 468-8055
Niel Lawrence, Natural Resources Defense Council, (360) 534-9900
Lindsey Ketchel, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, (907) 586-6942
Carol Cairnes, Tongass Conservation Society, (907) 617-8908
Mark Rorick, Sierra Club, (907) 789-5472
Mark Fink, Center for Biological Diversity, (218) 525-3884
Jessica Brand, Defenders of Wildlife, (202) 772-0239
A diverse coalition of Alaska Native, tourism industry, and environmental organizations celebrated a decision by a federal district judge in Anchorage on Friday, March 4, which reinstates roadless rule protections for the Tongass National Forest, America's great temperate rainforest.
Read the decision here:
https://earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/judge-reinstates-roadless-rule-protections-for-tongass-national-forest
The groups had sued the federal government in December 2009 challenging the Bush-era exemption of the Tongass National Forest from the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Tongass roadless areas are needed to maintain healthy populations of wolves, bears, goshawks, deer, marten, and five species of Pacific salmon, among other species, and to support jobs in the tourism and fishing industries.
The American public has overwhelmingly supported including the Tongass in the Roadless Rule.
The decision in Organized Village of Kake v. U.S. Department of Agriculture strikes down the 2003, Bush-era decision to "temporarily" exempt the Tongass from the national Roadless Rule, which protects nearly 60 million acres of undeveloped backcountry throughout the national forest system. The court's decision finds that the Tongass Exemption was illegally adopted and reinstates the Roadless Rule in the Tongass.
"This protects remote backcountry areas all over the Tongass that are critical for tourism, fishing, hunting, customary uses, and for everyone who benefits from intact old growth forests in Southeast Alaska," said Tom Waldo of Earthjustice, who is co-counsel in the lawsuit along with Natural Resources Defense Council.
"We brought this lawsuit to protect customary and traditional uses from damaging logging proposed by the Bush administration," said Mike Jackson, Organized Village of Kake. "For Tribal members, these lands are essential sources of food, medicine, clothing, and traditional items for artistic and spiritual use. Our deer hunting and other customary uses of the forest have suffered too much already from past logging," he added.
The ruling is good news for the thousands of people in Southeast Alaska with jobs in tourism and fishing.
"There are more than 3,200 jobs in Southeast Alaska in recreation and tourism," said Hunter McIntosh of The Boat Company, which operates a small tour business in the region. "And there are another 3,800 jobs in the seafood industry, which depends critically on salmon spawning streams in the old growth forests of the Tongass."
While strongly supporting jobs in tourism and fishing, the court's decision will not cause job losses in the timber industry or other economic sectors. The Forest Service is not currently planning to proceed with any roadless area timber sales, but is in the midst of a transition away from old growth logging in the Tongass. Nevertheless, the decision is extremely important to secure this transition and protect against any future backsliding.
The court's decision specifically found no support for claims that the Roadless Rule hurt local communities and jobs. The rule allows for new highways and for power lines to connect communities in the region.
"The natural values of these watersheds are essential for the survival of small businesses around Southeast," explained Kent John of the Alaska Wilderness Recreation & Tourism Association. "Very few folks will pay to go see clearcuts and decaying logging roads. This is a great decision for the local economy."
"Intact areas of the Tongass National Forest are the foundation of our unparalleled Southeast Alaska quality of life and of the fish and wildlife that make this forest a global treasure," explained Lindsey Ketchel of the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council.
Mark Rorick of the Sierra Club's Juneau Group said, "The Bush administration had no business opening up Tongass roadless areas to destructive industrial logging. We are pleased that loophole has been closed for good."
Carol Cairnes of the Tongass Conservation Society said, "The Tongass is an icon, the last fully functioning national forest ecosystem left, and the only one where wildlife and fish exist in something like the abundance they enjoyed in days gone by. The court's decision will ensure the protection this ecosystem has always deserved."
"The roadless areas on the Tongass National Forest are critical for providing habitat for wildlife species found only in America's rainforest, and are deserving of strong and permanent protection," said Marc Fink of the Center for Biological Diversity.
"There are so many beneficiaries of this wise decision by the judge, reflected in part by the diverse coalition of organizations that brought the case," said Defenders of Wildlife Alaska Director Karla Dutton. "As with so many of Alaska's wild places, there is much more to be gained from protecting the Tongass than plundering it."
The plaintiffs, represented by Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council, include the Organized Village of Kake, Alaska Wilderness Recreation & Tourism Association, The Boat Company, Sierra Club, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, Tongass Conservation Society, Greenpeace, Wrangell Resource Council, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, and Ca
"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.
After failing to use the government's might to bully Jimmy Kimmel off the air earlier this fall, President Donald Trump is once again threatening to bring the force of law down on comedians for the egregious crime of making fun of him.
This time, his target was NBC late-night host Seth Meyers, whom the president said, in a Truth Social post Saturday, "may be the least talented person to 'perform' live in the history of television."
On Thursday, the comedian hosted a segment mocking Trump's bizarre distaste for the electromagnetic catapults aboard Navy ships, which the president said he may sign an executive order to replace with older (and less efficient) steam-powered ones.
Trump did not take kindly to Meyers' barbs: "On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? - NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!"
It is, of course, not "illegal" for a late-night comedian, or any other news reporter or commentator, for that matter, to be "anti-Trump." But it's not the first time the president has made such a suggestion. Amid the backlash against Kimmel's firing in September, Trump asserted that networks that give him "bad publicity or press" should have their licenses taken away.
"I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said. "All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.”
His FCC director, Brendan Carr, used a similar logic to justify his pressure campaign to get Kimmel booted by ABC, which he said could be punished for airing what he determined was "distorted” content.
Before Kimmel, Carr suggested in April that Comcast may be violating its broadcast licenses after MSNBC declined to air a White House press briefing in which the administration defended its wrongful deportation of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media following Trump's tirade against Meyers. "Why? Because Trump believes he—not the people—decides the law. This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover."
"An ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien," said the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.
Immigration agents are using facial recognition software as "definitive" evidence to determine immigration status and is collecting data from US citizens without their consent. In some cases, agents may detain US citizens, including ones who can provide their birth certificates, if the app says they are in the country illegally.
These are a few of the findings from a series of articles published this past week by 404 Media, which has obtained documents and video evidence showing that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents are using a smartphone app in the field during immigration stops, scanning the faces of people on the street to verify their citizenship.
The report found that agents frequently conduct stops that "seem to have little justification beyond the color of someone’s skin... then look up more information on that person, including their identity and potentially their immigration status."
While it is not clear what application the agencies are using, 404 previously reported that ICE is using an app called Mobile Fortify that allows ICE to simply point a camera at a person on the street. The photos are then compared with a bank of more than 200 million images and dozens of government databases to determine info about the person, including their name, date of birth, nationality, and information about their immigration status.
On Friday, 404 published an internal document from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) which stated that "ICE does not provide the opportunity for individuals to decline or consent to the collection and use of biometric data/photograph collection." The document also states that the image of any face that agents scan, including those of US citizens, will be stored for 15 years.
The outlet identified several videos that have been posted to social media of immigration officials using the technology.
In one, taken in Chicago, armed agents in sunglasses and face coverings are shown accosting a pair of Hispanic teenagers on bicycles, asking where they are from. The 16-year-old boy who filmed the encounter said he is "from here"—an American citizen—but that he only has a school ID on him. The officer tells the boy he'll be allowed to leave if he'll "do a facial." The other officer then snaps a photo of him with a phone camera and asks his name.
In another video, also in Chicago, agents are shown surrounding a driver, who declines to show his ID. Without asking, one officer points his phone at the man. "I’m an American citizen, so leave me alone,” the driver says. "Alright, we just got to verify that,” the officer responds.
Even if the people approached in these videos had produced identification proving their citizenship, there's no guarantee that agents would have accepted it, especially if the app gave them information to the contrary.
On Wednesday, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), told 404 that ICE agents will even trust the app's results over a person's government documents.
“ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,” he said.
This is despite the fact that, as Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told 404, “face recognition technology is notoriously unreliable, frequently generating false matches and resulting in a number of known wrongful arrests across the country."
Thompson said: "ICE using a mobile biometrics app in ways its developers at CBP never intended or tested is a frightening, repugnant, and unconstitutional attack on Americans’ rights and freedoms.”
According to an investigation published in October by ProPublica, more than 170 US citizens have been detained by immigration agents, often in squalid conditions, since President Donald Trump returned to office in January. In many of these cases, these individuals have been detained because agents wrongly claimed the documents proving their citizenship are false.
During a press conference this week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem denied this reality, stating that "no American citizens have been arrested or detained" as part of Trump's "mass deportation" crusade.
"We focus on those who are here illegally," she said.
But as DHS's internal document explains, facial recognition software is necessary in the first place because "ICE agents do not know an individual's citizenship at the time of the initial encounter."
David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, explains that the use of such technology suggests that ICE's operations are not "highly targeted raids," as it likes to portray, but instead "random fishing expeditions."