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, (415) 669-7357
One hundred organizations in 35 states today formally petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate toxic lead in hunting ammunition to protect public health and prevent the widespread poisoning of eagles, California condors and other wildlife. Up to 20 million birds die each year from lead poisoning after consuming spent lead shot and bullet fragments left in the wild from hunting.
"The unnecessary poisoning of eagles, condors and other wildlife is a national tragedy that the EPA can easily put an end to," said Jeff Miller with the Center for Biological Diversity. "There are safe, available alternatives to lead ammo for all hunting and shooting sports, so there's no reason for this poisoning to go on. Getting the lead out for wildlife is in line with traditional American conservation, hunting and fishing values."
Today's petition follows the EPA's refusal in 2010 to review a petition asking for a ban on lead bullets, shotgun pellets and fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act, and seeks federal rules requiring use of nontoxic bullets and shot for hunting and shooting sports. It was filed by groups representing conservationists, birders, hunters, zoologists, scientists, American Indians, wildlife rehabilitators and veterinarians.
In the United States, 3,000 tons of lead are shot into the environment by hunters every year, while another 80,000 tons are released at shooting ranges. Birds and animals are poisoned when they scavenge on carcasses containing lead-bullet fragments or ingest spent lead-shot pellets, which can cover popular hunting grounds at high densities.
Spent lead from hunting is a widespread killer of bald and golden eagles, trumpeter swans, endangered California condors and more than 75 other species. Nearly 500 scientific papers have documented the dangers to wildlife from lead exposure.
"It's encouraging to see so many groups unite to end lead poisoning of wildlife," said Miller. "This isn't about hunting -- it's about switching to nontoxic materials to stop preventable lead poisoning. Getting the lead out of hunting ammunition will reduce hunters' lead exposure too, as well as the health risks to anyone eating shot game."
There are many commercially available alternatives to lead rifle bullets, shotgun pellets, fishing weights and lures. More than a dozen manufacturers market hundreds of varieties and calibers of nonlead bullets and shot made of steel, copper and alloys of other metals, with satisfactory to superior ballistics. Nonlead bullets and fishing tackle are readily available in all 50 states. Hunters and anglers in states and areas that have lead restrictions or have already banned lead have made successful transitions to hunting with nontoxic bullets and fishing with nontoxic tackle.
"We wisely removed lead from gasoline and paint because of the dangers of lead poisoning, and now it's time to do the same for hunting ammunition. Future generations will thank us," Miller said.
For more information, read about the Center's Get the Lead Out campaign. Media-ready photos and videos are also available here.
Background
Lead has been known to be highly toxic for more than 2,000 years. Its use in water pipes, cosmetics, pottery and food is suspected to have been a contributing factor in the collapse of the Roman Empire. It is dangerous even at low levels; exposure can cause death or severe health effects, from acute, paralytic poisoning and seizures to subtle, long-term mental impairment, miscarriage, neurological damage, impotence or impaired reproduction, and growth inhibition. There may be no safe level of lead for fetuses and the young. In recent decades the federal government has implemented regulations to reduce human lead exposure in drinking water, batteries, paint, gasoline, toys, toxic dumps, wheel balancing weights and shooting ranges.
At least 75 wild bird species are poisoned by spent lead ammunition, including bald eagles, golden eagles, ravens and California condors. Despite being banned in 1992 for hunting waterfowl, spent lead shotgun pellets continue to be frequently ingested by swans, cranes, ducks, geese, loons and other waterfowl. Many birds also consume lead-based fishing tackle lost in lakes and rivers, often with deadly consequences.
Lead ammunition also poses health risks to people when bullets fragment in shot game and spread throughout the meat that humans eat. Studies using radiographs show that numerous imperceptible, dust-sized particles of lead can infect meat up to a foot and a half away from the bullet wound, causing a greater health risk to humans who consume lead-shot game than previously thought. State health agencies have had to recall venison donated to feed the hungry because of lead contamination. Nearly 10 million hunters, their families and low-income beneficiaries of venison donations may be at risk.
In denying the 2010 lead ban petition, the EPA claimed it lacks authority to regulate toxic lead bullets and shot under the Toxic Substances Control Act, which controls manufacture, processing and distribution of dangerous chemicals in the United States, including lead. Yet congressional documents and the language of the Act explicitly contradict the agency's claim. The House report on the history and intent of the Act states it "does not exclude from regulation under the bill chemical components of ammunition which could be hazardous because of their chemical properties." Petitioning organizations sued the EPA over the improper petition denial, but hit a procedural snag and the lawsuit was dismissed in September 2011. The EPA never evaluated lead ammunition risks to wildlife and human health, and the court never ruled on the merits of the petition or lawsuit.
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"It means that you cannot convince people of the correctness of your ideas, and you have to impose them through force."
In an online video address posted one day after the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, Sen. Bernie Sanders offered a solemn message to the country denouncing political violence in all its forms, calling it a threat to the very foundation of democratic ideals and the freedoms upon which the nation claims it was built.
"Freedom and democracy is not about political violence. It is not about assassinating public officials. It is not about trying to intimidate people who speak out on an issue," says Sanders, who represents Vermont as an Independent. "Political violence, in fact, is political cowardice. It means that you cannot convince people of the correctness of your ideas, and you have to impose them through force."
The ability for people to speak their minds and express their political views, said Sanders, "without worrying that they might be killed, injured or humiliated" for doing so, "is the essence of what freedom is about and what democracy is about."
"You have a point of view, that’s great. I have a point of view that is different than yours, that’s great," he continued. "Let’s argue it out. We make our case to the American people at the local, state, and federal level, and we hold free elections in which the people decide what they want. That’s called freedom and democracy. And I want as many people as possible to participate in that process without fear."
The murder of Kirk, the 31-year-old founder of Turning Points USA, who was gunned down by a sniper's bullet on Wednesday during an appearance on a college campus in Utah, has rattled the political landscape over recent days. While the assailant, as of this writing, remains unidentified and potentially still at large, President Donald Trump said during a Friday morning appearance on "Fox & Friends" that a suspect was in custody, though he offered few details and suggested the information was preliminary.
In his address, Sanders said Kirk's assassination "is part of a disturbing rise in political violence that threatens to hollow out public life and make people afraid of participating" in civic life.
"From the January 6, 2021, attack on the United States Capitol, to the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, to the attack on Paul Pelosi, to the attempted kidnapping of Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, to the murder of Minnesota Speaker of the House Melissa Hortman and her husband, to the arson attack on Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, to the shooting of UnitedHealth executive Brian Thompson and the shooting several years ago of Rep. Steve Scalise," said Sanders, "this chilling rise in violence has targeted public figures across the political spectrum."
The murder of Charlie Kirk is part of a disturbing rise in political violence that threatens to hollow out our public life.
A free society relies on the premise that people can speak out without fear or humiliation.
No more political violence. pic.twitter.com/SR71FJkiDz
— Sen. Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) September 11, 2025
"This is a difficult and contentious moment in American history. Democracy in our country and throughout the world is under attack," said Sanders.
While the various reasons for that deserve serious consideration and debate, he said, the bottom line is more straightforward.
"If we honestly believe in democracy, if we believe in freedom, all of us must be loud and clear," concluded Sanders: "Political violence, regardless of ideology, is not the answer and must be condemned."
"Congress is supposed to be a check on the Executive Branch, not a rubber stamp," said Sen. Alex Padilla, Democrat of California. "We won’t forget it."
In a move that allowed for confirmation of a bloc of 48 nominees to a variety of sub-cabinet positions across the executive branch that require Senate approval, Senate Majority Leader John Thune triggered what's been called the "nuclear option" on Thursday by lowering the threshold for passage and allowing group confirmations, an unprecedented change to chamber rules that will now hamper the minorities ability to slow or stop objectionable or unqualified candidates.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the group of nominees "historically bad," and was among those on the Democratic side to warn the move would forever change the nature of the Senate.
As NBC News explains:
The rule applies to executive branch nominees subject to two hours of Senate debate, including subcabinet picks and ambassadors. It will not affect judicial nominations. Republicans say they'll allow their own senators to object to individual nominees in any given block, but the rule will strip away the power of the minority party to do the same thing.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., initiated the process by bringing up a package of 48 Trump nominees, which under longstanding rules has been subject to the 60-vote threshold. The vote to advance them failed due to Democratic opposition. Then, Thune sought to reconsider and Republicans subsequently voted to overrule the chair, setting a precedent and establishing the new rule.
Thune had telegraphed the move for weeks, accusing Democrats of creating an "untenable situation" with historic obstruction of Trump's nominees. The vote was held up for hours Thursday as the two parties engaged in last-ditch negotiations to strike a deal to avoid a rules change.
In the end, those negotiations failed and Thune went ahead with the rule change, which passed along party lines in a 53-45 vote.
"You remember that 'nuclear option' that Republicans warned Democrats to never use because it attacked the fundamental structure of the Senate and put government at risk?" asked Democratic strategist and podcast host Max Burns. "Senate Republicans just used it."
Democratic senators denounced the move in the strongest terms, vowing to remember when political winds shift in the future.
"This 'nuclear' move," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), "allows Republicans to vote through Trump’s unqualified and unfit nominees in bunches—“en bloc”—so they can’t be held directly accountable for the worst and smelliest stinkers in the bunch."
"Republicans have permanently blown up the rules of the Senate to jam through Trump's unqualified nominees," said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.). "Congress is supposed to be a check on the Executive Branch, not a rubber stamp. We won’t forget it."
The GOP effort, said Schumer in his remarks, "was not so much about ending obstruction, as they claim. Rather, it was another act of genuflection to the executive branch... to give Donald Trump more power and to rubber-stamp whomever he wants whenever he wants them, no questions asked."
One ACLU leader warned it "would hand the Trump administration more tools to criminalize immigrants and terrorize communities at the same time they are deploying federal agents and the military to our streets."
Eleven Democrats voted with Republicans in the US House of Representatives on Thursday to advance the so-called Stop Illegal Entry Act, which critics have condemned as "dangerously overbroad" as well as "dehumanizing and horrific."
The final vote was 226-197. The 11 Democrats who joined all GOP members present in backing the bill were Reps. Henry Cuellar (Texas), Don Davis (NC), Laura Gillen (NY), Jared Golden (Maine), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Adam Gray (Calif.), Kristen McDonald Rivet (Mich.), Frank Mrvan (Ind.), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), Tom Suozzi (NY), and Gabe Vasquez (NM).
Introduced by Congresswoman Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), HR 3486 would increase sentences for undocumented immigrants who repeatedly enter the United States illegally or enter the country and then commit a felony. The bill still needs Senate approval to reach the desk of Republican President Donald Trump, who supports it.
After Thursday's vote, Mike Zamore, the ACLU's national director of policy and government affairs, warned that "HR 3486 would supercharge President Trump's reckless deportation drive, which is already damaging our economy and destabilizing communities."
"This legislation would hand the Trump administration more tools to criminalize immigrants and terrorize communities at the same time they are deploying federal agents and the military to our streets. It would also undermine public safety by diverting more resources away from youth services and prevention programs that actually improve community safety," Zamore said. "While the House narrowly passed this bill, we thank the members of Congress who held the line and voted against this harmful legislation."
"At a time when president is threatening American cities and the Supreme Court is greenlighting racial profiling, it is vital that a growing number of elected officials are standing together in rejecting Stephen Miller's dystopian agenda to criminalize and demonize people who come to this country seeking a better life," he added, calling out the White House deputy chief of staff for policy infamous for various anti-migrant initiatives from Trump's first term, including forcible separation of families.
Speaking on the House floor, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), an immigrant herself, called the bill "Republicans' latest attempt to scapegoat and fearmonger about immigrants."
US Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) also spoke out against the bill, saying on social media: "It does nothing to protect communities or make us safer. Instead, it piles on cruel mandatory minimums, explodes prison costs, and treats families seeking safety like violent criminals. We need real immigration reform, not another zero-tolerance failure."
Congressman Dave Min (D-Calif.), the son of immigrants, said in a statement that "in talking with local and state law enforcement officers, I learned that this bill will potentially make it harder for them to do their jobs. By increasing the scope of crimes that local police officers might be expected to enforce, while not providing any funding for this, HR 3486 would effectively reduce the resources our local law enforcement has to keep our communities safe and potentially lead to increases in violent crime."
Min also pointed to the US Supreme Court's Monday ruling that allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to engage in what critics have called "blatant racial profiling."
"This bill, combined with the Supreme Court's clearly wrong decision allowing ICE to detain people based on ethnicity, race, language, or place of employment, will give sweeping new authorities to ICE to perpetuate the mass incarceration of immigrants," he said. "I am deeply concerned that HR 3486 will lead to more violent attacks and unlawful arrests by ICE of the people I represent. For these reasons, I voted no earlier today."