

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.

Scientists and environmentalists today condemned a recent press release by researchers at the University of British Columbia announcing they have created genetically engineered (GE) poplar trees for paper and biofuel production, opening the prospect of growing these GE trees like an agricultural crop in the future. [1]
The poplars were genetically engineered for altered lignin composition to supposedly make them easier to process into paper and biofuels. Groups, however, warn that manipulation of lignin, and the potential contamination of wild poplars with the GE trait, could be extremely dangerous. [2]
Lignin is a key structural component of plant cell walls and a major component of soils. [3] It is also the product of millions of years of natural selection favoring sturdy, healthy and resilient plants. Contamination from GE poplars with altered lignin could have devastating effects on forests, ecosystems, human communities and biodiversity.
Poplars include at least 30 species, are widespread throughout the Northern Hemisphere [4] and have a high potential for genetic dispersal. [5]
"Because poplar trees generate so much pollen and seed that can travel so far, poplars genetically engineered for paper or biofuels are likely to inevitably and irreversibly contaminate native forests," stated Anne Petermann, Executive Director of Global Justice Ecology Project. "The only way to prevent this potential ecological disaster is to stop the release of GE trees."
Martha Crouch, PhD, a plant biologist consulting for the Center for Food Safety is likewise concerned. "The reports that genetic engineers have restructured poplar wood to make it easier to process into biofuels makes it sound as if this technology is right around the corner. However, no ecological studies have been done yet, and methods for keeping genes from escaping into forests are unproven and likely to fail. All of this hype distracts us from truly sustainable solutions that work safely with what nature has already provided," she concluded.
Commercial and industrial scale biofuels and bioenergy are creating vast new demands for wood, and driving the conversion of climate stabilizing forests and other natural ecosystems to fuel crops. Rainforests in Indonesia are being burned to make way for plantations of oil palm, for example. Genetically engineering trees to be easier to manufacture into bioenergy will further contribute to the problem by increasing economic pressure to convert land into GE tree plantations.
Rachel Smolker, PhD, Co-Director of Biofuelwatch adds, "The whole idea of engineering trees for biofuels is outrageous. There is no question that we must end our fossil fuel addiction, but pretending we can simply substitute living plants is horribly misguided. Even the tiny fraction of fuel currently produced from industrial bioenergy has had huge impacts on forests, water, human rights and food security. Forests purify water and regulate the climate. They are home to most of the world's biodiversity and many Indigenous Peoples. We need to protect and restore forests while drastically reducing overconsumption. Engineering trees is moving in exactly the wrong direction."
Contact:
Dr. Rachel Smolker, Biofuelwatch, +1.802.482.2848 rsmolker@riseup.net
Anne Petermann, Executive Director, Global Justice Ecology Project, +1.802.578.0477 globalecology@gmavt.net
Abigail Seiler, Center for Food Safety, +1.202.547.9359 aseiler@centerforfoodsafety.org
Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator, Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, +1.613.809.1103 coordinator@cban.ca
For More Information:
"Genetically Engineered Trees: The New Frontier of Biotechnology" - Center for Food Safety, https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/files/ge_pages_final_nov-1_80728.pdf.
"Genetically Engineered Trees and Bioenergy: A Growing Threat to Forests and Communities" - Global Justice Ecology Project
https://globaljusticeecology.org/files/Analysis%20of%20the%20State%20of%...
"Wood Bioenergy: Green Land Grabs For Dirty 'Renewable' Energy" - Biofuelwatch https://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/2013/2013-wood-bioenergy-report/
Notes to Editors:
[1] "Researchers design trees that make it easier to produce paper" https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-04/uobc-rdt040314.php
[2] Biofuelwatch https://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/, Canadian Biotechnology Action Network https://www.cban.ca/, Center for Food Safety https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/, Global Justice Ecology Project https://globaljusticeecology.org
[3] Lignin Biosynthesis: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.arplant.54.031902...
[4] American Journal of Botany, https://www.amjbot.org/content/91/9/1398.full
[5] "Transgene escape -Global atlas of uncontrolled spread of genetically engineered plants" https://www.testbiotech.org/sites/default/files/Testbiotech_Transgene_Es...
Center for Food Safety's mission is to empower people, support farmers, and protect the earth from the harmful impacts of industrial agriculture. Through groundbreaking legal, scientific, and grassroots action, we protect and promote your right to safe food and the environment. CFS's successful legal cases collectively represent a landmark body of case law on food and agricultural issues.
(202) 547-9359While the vice president "infantalizes people on the right to defend them," said one journalist, "he never shows the same charity to the left (like, for instance, students that Trump has tried to deport)."
Since the killing of far-right activist Charlie Kirk last month, Vice President JD Vance has led the charge among right-wing politicians who have railed against "left-wing extremists" and what he has claimed is a "network" of advocacy groups that foment and perpetrate violence—suggesting the "rhetoric" of progressives who are critical of President Donald Trump and his allies is akin to violence.
But confronted with racist, antisemitic messages and jokes about rape that were sent in a group chat by members of the group Leaders of Young Republicans on Wednesday, the vice president dismissed the outrage that has ensued over the chats as "pearl clutching" over the actions of "young boys."
The "young boys" who sent messages that explicitly praised Adolf Hitler, lauded Republicans who they believe support slavery, and said their political foes should go to "the gas chamber," were between the ages of 24-35.
“The reality is that kids do stupid things, especially young boys,” Vance said on The Charlie Kirk Show. “They tell edgy, offensive jokes. That’s what kids do. And I really don’t want us to grow up in a country where a kid telling a stupid joke—telling a very offensive, stupid joke—is cause to ruin their lives.”
Since the messages were leaked, some of the Young Republicans who took part in the group chat have stepped down from their jobs—which they held, in some cases, with state lawmakers and the New York state court system. One member, Vermont state Sen. Samuel Douglass, who was the only elected official in the chat and made a racist remark about South Asian people, has faced calls to resign.
"Lil' JD defends Nazi-loving Republicans as 'boys,' though they're almost his age. I wonder how his wife feels about his waving away anti-Indian slurs?" said The Nation's Joan Walsh, referring to Usha Vance, whose parents immigrated to the US from India.
On CNN Wednesday evening, I've Had It podcast host Jennifer Welch said Vance's defense of racism—despite the fact that he has a South Asian wife and biracial children—offers the latest evidence that he's unlikely to fight for the rights of anyone, including those who voted for him.
Welch nailed it:
“JD Vance is married to an Indian woman. He has mixed-race children. If he won’t even defend them—his own family—from white supremacist jokes and Hitler worship… what makes you think he gives a damn about you?”
If a man won’t stand for his own, he’ll sell out… pic.twitter.com/5rAtLCZ61j
— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) October 16, 2025
Vance's suggestion that the fallout from the Young Republicans' praise for Hitler and other comments could "ruin their lives" comes as the vice president and other far-right leaders have called for federal investigations and other actions to "disrupt" groups that express disagreement with the Trump administration—for example, those that call the deployment of armed immigration agents in US cities "authoritarian."
The administration and its allies have also already taken extreme actions against individuals who exercise their First Amendment rights—detaining pro-Palestinian protesters like Mahmoud Khalil and Rümeysa Öztürk and trying to deport them for speaking out against US support for Israel's genocidal military campaign in Gaza. A man in Tennessee was charged with threatening mass violence and held in jail for weeks after he posted a meme with a quote from Trump after Kirk's killing, and more than 145 people have been fired for making comments about the activist's assassination.
While Vance "infantalizes people on the right to defend them," said journalist Zaid Jilani, "he never shows the same charity to the left (like, for instance, students that Trump has tried to deport)."
When asked by Politico, White House spokesperson Liz Huston rejected the idea that the ideas expressed in the group chat was reflective of rhetoric that Trump and other Republicans use in public and claimed that "no one has been subjected to more vicious rhetoric and violence than President Trump and his supporters."
Trump megadonor and former special government employee Elon Musk displayed what appeared to be a Nazi salute at an inauguration event for the president, and both Vance and Musk embraced the neo-Nazi political party Alternative for Germany before the country's election earlier this year.
On Wednesday, US Capitol Police opened an investigation after a modified US flag that displayed a swastika was seen in a video taken in Rep. Dave Taylor's (R-Ohio) office.
But on Thursday, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) joined Vance in dismissing questions about the group chat's participants, whose group has been expressly supported by GOP leaders.
"I don't know who any of these people are," said Johnson, before acknowledging that a photo had been posted online showing him standing with some of the group chat participants.
With Vance attempting to deflect attention away from the group chat this week, Massachusetts state Rep. Manny Cruz (D-7) reminded him that "these are the leaders of the Young Republican National Federation, the GOP’s 15,000-member political organization for Republicans between 18 and 40 years old."
"As leaders of national organizations and staff in state government," said Cruz, "they are rightfully being held accountable."
"Courts cannot offer more protection to fossil fuel companies seeking to preserve their profits than to young Americans seeking to preserve their rights," said the plaintiffs' lead attorney.
American children and young adults suing over President Donald Trump's anti-climate executive orders plan to keep fighting after a federal judge on Wednesday dismissed their case, citing a previous decision from the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
Eva Lighthiser, Rikki Held—of the historic Held v. State of Montana case—and 20 other young people filed a federal suit in Montana in May, taking aim at Trump's executive orders (EOs) declaring a "national energy emergency," directing federal agencies to "unleash" American energy by accelerating fossil fuel development, and boosting the coal industry.
"The founders of this country believed our rights to life and liberty were the fundamental tenets of a reasoned and just society, among the most sacred of rights to protect from government intrusion and overreach," said Daniel C. Snyder, director of the Environmental Enforcement Project at Public Justice, one of the groups representing the young plaintiffs.
"Not only should Americans be outraged by unlawful executive actions that trample upon those rights, but also because the harm these executive orders have inflicted was acknowledged by the court—showing the serious nature of plaintiffs' case," Snyder continued. "Allowing the burning of fossil fuels to continue will eventually render our nation unlivable for future generations."
"Allowing the burning of fossil fuels to continue will eventually render our nation unlivable for future generations."
US District Judge Dana Christensen "reluctantly" dismissed Lighthiser v. Trump on Wednesday, pointing to the 9th Circuit's 2020 opinion in Juliana v. United States, a constitutional climate case that the US Supreme Court effectively ended in March.
"Plaintiffs have presented overwhelming evidence that the climate is changing at a staggering pace, and that this change stems from the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide, caused by the production and burning of fossil fuels," wrote Christensen. "The record further demonstrates that climate change and the exposure from fossil fuels presents a children's health emergency."
The appointee of former President Barack Obama also said that he was "troubled by the very real harms presented by climate change and the challenged EOs' effect on carbon dioxide emissions." Specifically, he noted, "plaintiffs have shown the challenged EOs will generate an additional 205 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually by 2027, an increase which plaintiffs convincingly allege will expose them to imminent, increased harm from a warming climate."
While Adam Gustafson, acting assistant attorney general of the Environment and Natural Resources Division at the US Department of Justice, cheered the dismissal of what he called "a sweeping and baseless attack on President Trump's energy agenda," the judge wrote that "if the 9th Circuit disagrees" with his decision, he "welcomes the return of this case to decide it on the merits."
Lawyers for the youth plaintiffs have already set their sights on the higher court. Lead attorney Julia Olson of Our Children's Trust stressed that "Judge Christensen said he reached his decision reluctantly and invited the 9th Circuit to correct him so these young Americans can have their case heard—and the 9th Circuit should do just that."
"Every day these executive orders remain in effect, these 22 young Americans suffer irreparable harm to their health, safety, and future," she noted. "The judge recognized that the government's fossil fuel directives are injuring these youth, but said his hands were tied by precedent."
"We will appeal—because courts cannot offer more protection to fossil fuel companies seeking to preserve their profits than to young Americans seeking to preserve their rights," Olson added. "This violates not only the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent, but the most basic principles of justice."
"They want to ban protests," warned journalist Mehdi Hasan. "They want to kill the First Amendment."
Doubling down on efforts by Republicans to smear the peaceful "No Kings" protest movement as "terrorism," Sen. Ted Cruz on Wednesday called for the passage of legislation he introduced earlier this year to "prosecute" those funding the protests.
This weekend, organizers expect millions to gather in over 2,500 locations around the country in protest against President Donald Trump, including at the National Mall in Washington, DC.
In a Fox News interview on Wednesday, Cruz (R-Texas) claimed that the rallies were funded by the billionaire liberal donor George Soros, whom the Trump administration has indicated it plans to target using the criminal division of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
"You look at this No Kings rally and there's considerable evidence that George Soros and his network is behind funding these rallies, which may well be riots all across the country," Cruz said. "So I've introduced legislation called the Stop FUNDERs Act that would add rioting to the list of predicate offenses for RICO."
Cruz said that the legislation would allow the Department of Justice to "prosecute the money that is funding the antisemitic protests on campuses," (referring to pro-Palestine protests), "the pro-open border protests in [Los Angeles] and other cities" (protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement), and these 'No King' protests."
RICO refers to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which has historically been used to prosecute organized crime leaders for violence carried out by members of their organizations.
In the wake of the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller suggested that RICO should be used as part of an effort to "dismantle" left-wing nonprofits, which he claimed have incited violence and terrorism through First Amendment-protected speech criticizing Kirk's views.
Subsequent reporting from Reuters last week confirmed that the Trump administration was waging a "crackdown on the finances and activities of liberal nonprofits and groups opposed to his agenda," describing it as "a multi-agency effort with top White House aide Stephen Miller playing a central role."
Several Republicans, including Trump, have accused liberal nonprofits of funding "domestic terror networks" throughout the country, though they've presented little evidence for the assertion.
Soros' group, the Open Society Foundations, has pushed back on the administration's claims with a spokesperson stating: "Neither George Soros nor the Open Society Foundations fund protests, condone violence, or foment it in any way. Claims to the contrary are false."
While Cruz stated that his Stop FUNDERs Act, introduced in July, would protect "freedom of speech and peaceful protest," the acronym "FUNDERs" is short for "Financial Underwriting of Nefarious Demonstrations and Extremist Riots," which implies that even nonviolent protests deemed objectionable by the DOJ could be targeted.
There have already been several No Kings rallies around the country since Trump took office in January. The largest one, which took place on June 14, is estimated by the Crowd Counting Consortium to have had anywhere from 2 million to 4.8 million participants, making it the second-largest single day of nonviolent protest in the Trump era, second only to the nationwide Women's Marches and other demonstrations following Trump's first inauguration in 2017.
The group's analysis, published in August, examined thousands of events across the country and found that 99.5% of the reported protests had no injuries or property damage. Of the 10 documented events that did involve violence or property damage, it was often directed against the protesters. At one demonstration in Salt Lake City, an armed "safety volunteer" shot and killed a peaceful demonstrator and wounded another. In several other cases, police and opponents of the protests have brandished weapons at the demonstrators.
Their report also noted that "the No Kings coalition has hosted several online trainings... that have attracted hundreds of thousands of views. The July 16 virtual training was probably the largest nonviolence training in US history, with over 130,000 registered."
As author Mike Rothschild noted on X, "previous No Kings protests have been so peaceful and anodyne that I've seen far-left folks complaining they aren't accomplishing anything. There's no conspiracy here, no Soros-paid agitators, just people walking and holding funny signs. You can't make something out of nothing."
Despite this, in the days leading up to this weekend's No Kings protests, Republican leaders have attempted to portray it as a violent movement. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) described it as a "hate America rally" that would include "Antifa," a group that the Trump administration has designated as a "domestic terrorist" organization and threatened with lethal military force. Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said this weekend's marches were being run by the "terrorist wing" of the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) said that "we'll have to get the National Guard out" to combat the demonstration, adding: "Hopefully it will be peaceful. I doubt it."
Responding to Cruz's pledge to prosecute the funders of No Kings, Mehdi Hasan, founder of the media outlet Zeteo, warned: "They want to ban protests. It's insane and should scare every American. They want to kill the First Amendment."