

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.

Timothy Preso, Earthjustice, (406) 586-9699
Arlene Montgomery, Friends of the Wild Swan, (406) 886-2011
Kyla Maki, Montana Environmental Information Center, (406) 437-2846
A federal judge has blocked a plan to carve new roads into a 36,700-acre block of secure grizzly bear habitat within the Stillwater State Forest in northwest Montana. The judge's ruling, issued late Thursday, preserves the "Stillwater Core" grizzly bear habitat from elimination under a plan by the State of Montana that called for building new roads to open the area to increased logging.
In the ruling, U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy concluded that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service violated the Endangered Species Act by approving the state plan and issuing a permit to the state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation ("DNRC") that would have allowed the agency to "take" grizzly bears in the Stillwater Core. "Take" refers to habitat destruction that drives the bears out of their territory leading to reduced reproduction. Grizzly bears are listed as a threatened species under the Act.
The ruling stems from a case filed in March 2013 by the public-interest environmental law firm Earthjustice on behalf of three conservation groups--Friends of the Wild Swan, Montana Environmental Information Center, and Natural Resources Defense Council--to challenge federal approval of a 50-year "take" permit and associated habitat conservation plan that authorized increased road building and logging across approximately 550,000 acres of Montana state lands.
A key feature of the state plan involved elimination of the only unroaded grizzly bear habitat area remaining on Montana state lands. State land managers proposed to build new logging roads into the Stillwater Core but claimed to minimize impacts to grizzly bears by imposing seasonal restrictions on road use and logging.
"A mother grizzly bear trying to raise young cubs needs a wild landscape, not a maze of roads with complicated seasonal closure rules," said Earthjustice attorney Timothy Preso, who represented conservationists in the case. "Federal officials played fast and loose with the science in claiming otherwise. Fortunately we have courts in this country that require federal officials to make rational decisions and follow the rule of law."
"This is incredibly important to grizzly bears on the Stillwater State Forest," said Arlene Montgomery, Program Director for Friends of the Wild Swan. "Bears don't use calendars to know when an area is safe to raise their young and avoid conflicts with people. The court's ruling ensures that bears get a fair shake."
Matt Skoglund, Director of NRDC's Northern Rockies Office in Bozeman, Montana, said, "50 years is a long time, especially with the sobering reality of the impact of climate change in the Northern Rockies, and building new roads in secure grizzly habitat is a dangerous road to go down. We applaud the court's ruling as it relates to grizzly bears."
The judge's ruling found that federal officials lacked a rational scientific basis for their decision to approve new road-building in the Stillwater Core based on the state's plan.
"The Service has not rationally justified its finding that the approach under the Plan constitutes a complete offset--much less a net benefit--such that additional mitigation measures did not even need to be considered," the judge ruled. "Absent independent investigation into the impracticability of greater mitigation measures, the Service's finding that the Plan mitigates take of grizzly bears to the maximum extent practicable is arbitrary and capricious."
While agreeing with the conservation groups regarding the Stillwater Core issues, the judge upheld federal approval of a different portion of the DNRC's plan that authorized increased road construction and logging in habitat for the bull trout, an imperiled native fish species. The judge concluded that federal biologists properly issued DNRC a "take" permit for bull trout based on a state plan to inventory and remediate logging roads that are harming bull trout habitat. The conservationists promised to monitor the state's implementation of that mitigation program to ensure that the DNRC lives up to its promise to mitigate harms to bull trout.
LEGAL DOCUMENT: https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/14-08-21%20ORDER.pdf
ONLINE VERSION: https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2014/judge-halts-plan-to-eliminate-secure-grizzly-bear-habitat-in-northwest-montana
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460"Congress has not authorized military force against Venezuela," said Sen. Adam Schiff. "And we must assert our authority to stop the United States from being dragged—intentionally or accidentally—into full-fledged war."
With President Donald Trump floating potential military action within Venezuela and authorizing operations by the Central Intelligence Agency after launching several deadly strikes on boats near the South American country, three lawmakers from both sides of the aisle on Friday said they would force a new vote on blocking the White House from carrying out an attack there.
Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) last week introduced a measure to rein in Trump's bombing of boats in the Caribbean, which the White House has claimed are being used to traffic drugs into the US and present an imminent threat.
The measure failed, with one Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) joining most of the GOP in opposing it and two Republicans, Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), supporting it.
Kaine and Schiff on Friday were reportedly hoping that a new bipartisan measure, introduced with Paul, would garner more support from the Republicans.
They said they would force a vote on a war powers resolution to block the use of force by US troops "within or against" Venezuela unless it was "explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force."
The 1973 War Powers Act requires Congress to consider and vote on resolutions regarding a president's power to enter an armed conflict without congressional authorization.
"Congress has not authorized military force against Venezuela. And we must assert our authority to stop the United States from being dragged—intentionally or accidentally—into full-fledged war in South America," said Schiff.
"Americans don’t want to send their sons and daughters into more wars—especially wars that carry a serious risk of significant destabilization and massive new waves of migration in our hemisphere."
The lawmakers announced the resolution as it was reported that two survivors of the military's most recent drone strike on a boat have been detained by US forces, with legal experts questioning whether they are prisoners or war or criminal suspects.
The White House has insisted it is acting within its rights to defend US security by striking boats it believes are carrying drugs—even as details have emerged calling into doubt the allegations that the vessels pose a threat.
Venezuela is not a significant source of drugs that are trafficked into the US—a fact that Secretary of State Marco Rubio dismissed when a reporter brought it up soon after the military began bombing boats, at least six of which have been struck so far. At least 27 people have been killed, and the grieving family of one victim spoke out Thursday and said they had not been involved in drug trafficking.
Even if the vessels were carrying illegal substances, legal experts and critics in Congress have stressed in recent weeks that they should be dealt with, as in the past, by federal law enforcement agencies, as Congress has not authorized military action against Venezuela or drug cartels.
“The American people do not want to be dragged into endless war with Venezuela without public debate or a vote," said Paul. "We ought to defend what the Constitution demands: deliberation before war."
Kaine told reporters on Thursday the Congress' knowledge of legal rationale for the boat strikes amounts to “a complete black hole."
Meanwhile, Trump has suggested this week he could further escalate attacks on Venezuela, saying the Caribbean Sea is "very well under control"—even though Vice President JD Vance has joked that the US could accidentally strike fishing boats in its operations there.
"We are certainly looking at land now," Trump said Wednesday.
Kaine said he was "extremely troubled that the Trump administration is considering launching illegal military strikes inside Venezuela without a specific authorization by Congress."
"Americans don’t want to send their sons and daughters into more wars—especially wars that carry a serious risk of significant destabilization and massive new waves of migration in our hemisphere,” said Kaine. “If my colleagues disagree and think a war with Venezuela is a good idea, they need to meet their constitutional obligations by making their case to the American people and passing an authorization for use of military force."
"I urge every senator to join us in stopping this administration from dragging our country into an unauthorized and escalating military conflict," said the senator.
The New York Times reported that Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) could potentially join the effort to pass the war powers resolution after voting against last week's measure, which he said was too broad.
"I am highly concerned," Young said after the vote last week, "about the legality of recent strikes in the Caribbean and the trajectory of military operations without congressional approval or debate and the support of the American people."
"Don’t miss this chance to be part of the largest expression of free speech we’ve ever had," said progressive filmmaker Michael Moore.
Organizers are expecting Saturday's nationwide "No Kings" rallies to be among the largest single-day demonstrations in US history, and many activists and politicians on Friday sent messages of encouragement to demonstrators.
Leah Greenberg, the co-founder and co-president of Indivisible, which is one of the main organizers of the demonstrations, told Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! on Friday that she and her group are "engaging in the most American activity in the world, which is coming together in peaceful protest of our government."
Greenberg then addressed attacks from President Donald Trump and other Republican lawmakers over the last week that the "No Kings" events were a "hate America" rally.
"This is a classic exercise of the authoritarian playbook, to try to create fear, to try to threaten, to try to make people back off preemptively," she said. "We're not going to do that... we won't be cowed."
Former US Labor Secretary Robert Reich also hit back at GOP claims that the "No Kings" rallies were anti-American, and he argued that the people attending them will be doing so out of a deep sense of patriotism.
"We’re rallying tomorrow because we LOVE America," he wrote in a post on X. "It's an opportunity for all of us who love this country to express our determination that our nation’s ideals not be crushed by the Trump regime."
Progressive filmmaker Michael Moore encouraged his supporters to take part in Saturday's demonstrations, and he wrote on his personal Substack it was of the utmost importance for Americans to make their voices heard in the face of authoritarian threats from the Trump administration.
"Don’t miss this chance to be part of the largest expression of free speech we’ve ever had," he said. "Time has run out. One year from now, don’t find yourself wishing you had done something. Said something. This is our last chance, the final moment to stop the madness. I implore you to join us."
Several Democratic politicians also expressed support for the demonstrations.
Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) blasted Trump and the GOP for attacking the patriotism of the "No Kings" protesters.
"I'll be damned if I'm gonna let the Draftdodger-in-Chief tell me what a patriot is," he wrote in a social media post. "We're STANDING UP, SPEAKING OUT, and FIGHTING BACK. No Kings in America. See you Saturday."
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sent out a video message expressing solidarity with Chicago and Portland, Oregon, two cities in which Trump has tried to deploy National Guard soldiers, and let them know that they fighting against authoritarianism by themselves.
"The people everywhere are standing up, in all 50 states and thousands of towns and cities across America," he said. "We have no kings here, no crowns, no thrones."
A Message for No Kings Weekend: The millions rallying across the country love America and are defending it with joy, wit, defiance and courage. Everyone who stands with us now will win the affection and gratitude of people for all time. pic.twitter.com/xmHD5MjTpm
— Jamie Raskin (@jamie_raskin) October 17, 2025
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) accused Trump and Republicans of waging a campaign of intimidation aimed at frightening Americans out of exercising their rights to peacefully demonstrate.
"The Republicans' attacks on the No Kings protests are sickening," he wrote in a post on Bluesky. "To them, only pro-Trump speech is protected. If you oppose Trump, you 'hate America' or you're a 'terrorist.' What they're trying to do is simple: suppress turnout this weekend. Don't let them win."
The administration had already paused more than $28 billion worth of infrastructure funding, virtually all to Democratic congressional districts.
Russell Vought, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget announced Friday that he would cut another $11 billion from federal projects in blue cities.
"The Democrat shutdown has drained the Army Corps of Engineers' ability to manage billions of dollars in projects," Vought wrote on social media. "The Corps will be immediately pausing over $11 billion in lower-priority projects and considering them for cancellation, including projects in New York, San Francisco, Boston, and Baltimore."
Vought's post did not specify which projects would be halted, stating that more information would be "soon to come" from the Army Corps of Engineers. Many of the Corps' major projects involve infrastructure and water maintenance, as well as environmental restoration and cleanup efforts.
As the government shutdown enters its third week, the Trump administration has plainly stated its goal of using it to punish Democrats and liberal cities. On Tuesday, the New York Times reported that of the more than $28 billion worth of projects frozen during the shutdown, $27.24 billion of it has come from Democratic-leaning congressional districts.
Among those frozen funds are $18 billion for infrastructure projects in New York City, including the Hudson River Tunnel and Second Avenue Subway, and $8 billion slated for climate-related projects exclusively in blue states.
Vought, an architect of the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 agenda, has also been in charge of President Donald Trump's efforts to use the shutdown to carry out mass layoffs of federal workers. A federal judge halted that effort Wednesday, describing it as "both illegal and in excess of authority and... arbitrary and capricious." Prior to the ruling, Trump had said that those laid off by his administration were "gonna be Democrats.”
This is not the first time the administration has used the Army Corps of Engineers as a political tool. As Aidan Quigley, a reporter for Roll Call, noted on social media, it "has been prioritizing red states over blue states for Army Corps of Engineers projects under the current continuing resolution."
He reported that in the 2025 full-fiscal year stopgap spending law signed in March, "nearly two-thirds of Army Corps of Engineers construction funding is going to red states, a sizable shift from former President Joe Biden’s final budget request and the initial fiscal 2025 House and Senate Energy-Water appropriations bills, which were all closer to an even split."
The report noted that "funding for projects in California, which would have received over $125 million in Biden’s budget request and both chambers’ appropriations bills, has been zeroed out under the new corps work plan."
Brendan Duke, the senior director for federal budget policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, pointed out that the Trump administration's shutdown plan published last month stated that the Corps' projects would not be affected by the shutdown because 97% of their funding does not come from annual appropriations.
"Why on Earth would any projects need to be paused, much less considered for cancellation?" he asked.