

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.
Peter Raabe, American Rivers, (919) 682-3500,
praabe@americanrivers.org.
Andrew Lester, Roanoke River Basin Association, (434) 250-1185,
raincrow2000@hotmail.com.
Cale Jaffe, Southern Environmental Law Center, (434) 977-4090,
cjaffe@selcva.org.
Chris Miller, Piedmont Environmental Council, (703) 507-5790,
cmiller@pecva.org.
Lifting a state-wide ban on uranium mining would threaten the Roanoke River and other rivers as well as drinking water supplies in the region with radioactive pollution and toxic chemicals, American Rivers said today. The threat from a proposed uranium mine in the Roanoke basin earned the river a spot on the organization's annual list of America's Most Endangered Rivers(tm). https://selc.southernenvironment.org/site/R?i=c3voZl0rxAA6AWS03p3Jng..
The Roanoke flows from the Blue Ridge Mountains in Virginia to North Carolina's Outer Banks. It provides drinking water to more than one million people in Virginia Beach, Norfolk and other communities. Recently, Raleigh, North Carolina applied to tap 50 million gallons a day from the basin.
The dangers of extracting uranium ore, which requires intensive use of water and chemicals and leaves behind radioactive and contaminated waste, inspired the Virginia state legislature to place a ban on uranium mining in 1982. A uranium mining company is now pushing to lift the ban and develop a deposit on a tributary of the Roanoke in Pittsylvania County. Geologists believe there are other deposits elsewhere in Virginia and the East.
American Rivers says that if the Virginia legislature succumbs to industry pressure and fails to uphold its 30-year ban on uranium mining, the health of rivers and communities in the region will be at risk for centuries to come. American Rivers and its partners called on the Virginia legislature to uphold its ban on uranium mining to protect the Roanoke and rivers statewide.
"This uranium operation would generate millions of tons of toxic, cancer-causing waste," said Peter Raabe of American Rivers. "We're talking about a radioactive legacy that would last for generations."
"The Roanoke River, spawned on the Blue Ridge of Virginia and North Carolina, wanders through the hills, farmland, and communities of both states on its way to the ocean. The region's history, culture and future are forever bound to the river. We are grateful to American Rivers for shining a national spotlight on this incredible resource and on the irrefutable threat from potential uranium mining, milling and waste disposal," said Andrew Lester, executive director of the Roanoke River Basin Association.
"Virginia Uranium says it will mine safely, just as BP said it would drill safely. The lesson here is that things do not always go according to plan, and we should not be playing high-stakes roulette with a waterway that serves local growers, local anglers and a vibrant tourist economy from Virginia Beach to the Outer Banks," said Cale Jaffe, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center.
"The evidence that Virginia is subject to unusually heavy and concentrated rainfalls has continued to accumulate since the 1980's, with several instances of more than 20 inches of rain in 24 hours. This characteristic of Virginia's climate that caused so many local and state leaders concern in the 1980's makes the engineering of liquid waste lagoons and radioactive soils to ensure no radioactive material is released exceptionally difficult. Flooding and storm water discharge of radioactive material is a probability, not a possibility," said Chris Miller, executive director of Piedmont Environmental Council.
The potential health impacts of exposure to uranium and mining chemicals are well-documented, and include cancer, birth defects, hormone disruption, and damage to vital organs. Developing a uranium industry in Virginia is considered especially risky because of the region's high rainfall and frequently severe hurricanes and storms (like the tornado that touched down April 17 just a few miles from the proposed mine site). Severe weather could result in wastewater contaminating rivers, streams, and drinking water supplies.
"Virginia's leaders demonstrated great foresight and moral courage when they banned uranium mining thirty years ago," said Raabe. "The question now is whether they will continue to protect our clean water, or allow this mining company to create a poisonous future for the region's communities."
About America's Most Endangered Rivers
For 26 years, American Rivers has sounded the alarm on 360 rivers through our America's Most Endangered Rivers report. The report is not a list of the "worst" or most polluted rivers, but is a call to action for rivers at a crossroads, whose fates will be determined in the coming year. By shining the spotlight and mobilizing grassroots action, we help save rivers from sewage pollution, new dams, mining, and other threats.
Our staff and scientific advisors review nominations for the following criteria:
* A major decision that the public can help influence in the coming year
* The significance of the river to people and wildlife
* The magnitude of the threat, especially in light of climate change
America's Most Endangered Rivers(tm) is sponsored by Orvis, the oldest mail order company in the US, which has been outfitting customers for the sporting traditions since 1856. Orvis is a long-time supporter of American Rivers. This is the third consecutive year that they have sponsored America's Most Endangered Rivers and have also provided American Rivers with a 2010 Conservation Grant. Orvis donates 5% of their pre-tax profits annually to protect nature.
Israel is seeking to invalidate the ICC's arrest warrants for fugitive Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Appellate judges at the embattled International Criminal Court on Monday rejected Israel's attempt to block an investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes committed during the Gaza genocide.
The ICC Appeals Chamber dismissed an Israeli challenge to the assertion that the October 7, 2023, attacks and subsequent war on Gaza were part of the same ongoing "situation" under investigation by the Hague-based tribunal since 2021. Israel argued they were separate matters that required new notice; however, the ICC panel found that the initial probe encompasses events on and after October 7.
The ruling—which focuses on but one of several Israeli legal challenges to the ICC—comes amid the tribunal's investigation into an Israeli war and siege that have left at least 250,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing and 2 million more displaced, starved, or sickened.
The probe led to last year's ICC arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhau and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, including murder and forced starvation. The ICC also issued warrants for the arrest of three Hamas commanders—all of whom have since been killed by Israel.
Israel and the United States, neither of which are party to the Rome Statute governing the ICC, vehemently reject the tribunal's investigation. In the US—which has provided Israel with more than $21 billion in armed aid as well as diplomatic cover throughout the genocide—the Trump administration has sanctioned nine ICC jurists, leaving them and their families "wiped out socially and financially."
The other Hague-based global tribunal, the International Court of Justice, is currently weighing a genocide case against Israel filed in December 2023 by South Africa and backed by more than a dozen nations, as well as regional blocs representing dozens of countries.
University of Copenhagen international law professor Kevin Jon Heller—who is also a special adviser to the ICC prosecutor on war crimes—told Courthouse News Service that “the real importance of the decision is that it strongly implies Israel will lose its far more important challenge to the court’s jurisdiction over Israeli actions in Palestine."
Although Israel is not an ICC member and does not recognize its jurisdiction, Palestine is a state party to the Rome Statute, under which individuals from non-signatory nations can be held liable for crimes committed in the territory of a member state.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry condemned Monday's decision, calling it "yet another example of the ongoing politicization of the ICC and its blatant disregard for the sovereign rights of non-party states, as well as its own obligations under the Rome Statute."
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Washington, DC-based advocacy group, welcomed the ICC decision.
“This ruling by the International Criminal Court affirms that no state is above the law and that war crimes must be fully and independently investigated," CAIR said in a statement. "Accountability is essential for justice, for the victims, and survivors, and for deterring future crimes against humanity.”
"Wales and Sanger must be stopped from trying to censor the Wikipedia ‘Gaza genocide’ entry that clearly documents Israel’s horrifying crime against humanity.”
More than 40 advocacy groups on Monday called on Wikipedia editors and the Wikimedia board of trustees to reject efforts by the web-based encyclopedia's co-founders to censor the site's entry on the Gaza genocide.
After months of internal debate, editors of the Wikipedia article titled “Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza” renamed the entry "Gaza genocide" in July 2024, reflecting experts' growing acknowledgement that Israel's annihilation and siege of the Palestinian exclave met the legal definition of the ultimate crime. The entry also notes that the Gaza genocide is not settled legal fact—an International Court of Justice case on the matter is ongoing—and that numerous experts refute the claim that Israel's war is genocidal.
The move, and the subsequent addition of Gaza to Wikipedia's article listing cases of genocide, sparked heated "edit wars" on the community-edited site—which has long been a target of pro-Israeli public relations efforts. In the United States, a pair of House Republicans launched an investigation to reveal the identities of the anonymous Wikipedia editors who posted negative facts about Israel.
"Israeli officials and pro-Israel organizations are attempting to hide the horrifying reality... by putting pressure on institutions like Wikipedia to engage in genocide denial."
Wikipedia co-founders Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger have intervened in the dispute, with Wales—a self-described "strong supporter of Israel"—publicly stating that the Gaza genocide entry lacked neutrality, failed to meet Wikipedia's "high standards," and required "immediate attention" after an editor blocked changes to the article.
"Wales and Sanger are using their roles as Wikipedia founders to bypass the normal editing and review process and introduce their
own ideological biases into an entry that has already undergone exhaustive vetting and review by Wikipedia editors, including thousands of edits and comments," the 42 advocacy groups said in a letter to Wikimedia's board and site editors.
"Their efforts deny the documented reality of Israel’s genocide in Gaza and contradict the broad consensus among genocide scholars, international human rights organizations, UN experts, and both Palestinian and Israeli human rights organizations," the groups continue. "In doing so, Wales and Sanger are engaging in attempted censorship and genocide denial."
The letters' signers include the American Friends Service Committee, Artists Against Apartheid, Brave New Films, CodePink, Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), Doctors Against Genocide, MPower Change Action Fund, Peace Action, and United Methodists for Kairos Response.
Since the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack, Israel's retaliatory obliteration and siege on Gaza—for which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes—have left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing. Around 2 million other Palestinians have been forcibly displaced, sickened, or starved in what hunger experts say is an entirely human-caused famine.
"The simple reality is that Israeli officials and pro-Israel organizations are attempting to hide the horrifying reality of Israel’s genocide in Gaza by pretending that there is a substantive debate and by putting pressure on institutions like Wikipedia to engage in genocide denial," the groups' letter asserts.
"Wales’ 'both sides' framework for denying the Gaza genocide," the groups warned, "could also be used to legitimize Holocaust denial, denial of the Armenian genocide, or to platform 'flat-earthers' who deny the Earth’s spherical shape."
"Healthcare is a human right. That’s why we need Medicare for All," said one senator. "And the American people agree!"
In Maine, only one of the top two candidates in the Democratic US Senate primary has expressed support for the specific healthcare reform proposal that continues to be treated by the political establishment as radical—but which is supported by not only a sizable majority of Mainers but also most Americans surveyed in several recent polls.
Graham Platner, a veteran and oyster farmer who was a political novice when he launched his campaign in August and has polled well ahead of Gov. Janet Mills in several recent surveys, and a poll that asked Mainers about healthcare on Saturday showed he is in lockstep with many people in the state.
As the advocacy group Maine AllCare reported, the Pan Atlantic 67th Omnibus poll found that 63% of Mainers support Medicare for All, the proposal to transition the US to a system like that of other wealthy countries, with the government expanding the existing Medicare program and guaranteeing health coverage to all.
Those results bolster the findings of More Perfect Union in October, which found 72% of Mainers backing Medicare for All, and of Data for Progress, which found last month that 65% of all Americans—including 78% of Democratic voters—support a "national health insurance program... that would cover all Americans and replace most private health insurance plans.”
Even more recently, a Pew Research survey released last week found that 66% of respondents nationwide said the government should guarantee health coverage.
Platner has spoken out forcefully in support of Medicare for All, saying unequivocally last month that the proposal "is the answer" to numerous healthcare crises including the loss of primary care providers in many parts of the country and skyrocketing healthcare costs.
He made the comments soon after Mills said at a healthcare roundtable that "it is time" for a universal healthcare system, but did not explicitly endorse Medicare for All.
Maine AllCare noted that the latest polling on Medicare for All in the state comes as Maine "is on the verge of a multi-pronged healthcare crisis" due to Republican federal lawmakers' refusal to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies—which is projected to significantly raise monthly premiums for many Maine families as well as millions of people across the country. People in Maine and other states are also bracing for changes to Medicaid, including eligibility requirements.
Those changes "alongside long-standing affordability and access gaps, are projected to cost Maine billions and trigger deep operating losses in already strained hospitals," said Maine AllCare.
The group emphasized that that the Republican budget reconciliation law that President Donald Trump signed in July is projected to have a range of economic impacts on Maine, including a $450 million decline in statewide economic output, the loss of 4,300 state jobs, and the loss of $700 million in revenue at the state's hospitals due to Medicaid cuts.
“Maine needs a sustainable and universal healthcare system now. Poll after poll show people want Medicare for All. Our leaders can let the current health system continue collapsing—harming families, communities, and the economy of our state—or they can meet the moment and fight like hell to enact change that protects both the people and the future of the state," said David Jolly, a Maine AllCare board member. "That is the work Mainers elected them to do and that is what they must do now.”
Despite the broad popularity of the proposal to expand the Medicare program to everyone in the US—a system that would cost less than the current for-profit health insurance system does, according to numerous studies—supporters, including the 17 cosponsors of the Medicare for All bill in the US Senate and the 110 cosponsors in the US House, continue to face attacks from establishment politicians regarding the cost and feasibility of the proposal.
On Monday, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) explained to Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo how the Affordable Care Act that was passed by the Democratic Party is "not the solution" to the country's healthcare crisis, because it keeps in place the for-profit health insurance industry.
"The solution, as everyone knows, in my view, who has studied this, is Medicare for All," said Khanna. "People should have national health insurance. Healthcare is a human right. You should not be subject to these private insurance companies that have 18% admin costs, that are making billions of dollars in profits."
I made the case for Medicare for All on @MorningsMaria with @MariaBartiromo with facts and basic economics. https://t.co/ExZpCNQT7B pic.twitter.com/F226Kutv16
— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) December 15, 2025
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) also spoke out in favor of the proposal, pointing to the recent Data for Progress poll that showed 65% of Americans and 78% of Democrats backing Medicare for All.
"Healthcare is a human right. That’s why we need Medicare for All," said Merkley. "We need to simplify our system and make sure folks can get the care they need, when they need it. And the American people agree!"