March, 28 2016, 11:30am EDT

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Effort to Overturn Tongass National Forest Protections
Victory: Court leaves rules in place that protect Tongass rainforest wildlands from damaging logging, road construction
WASHINGTON
The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to hear a last-ditch effort by the State of Alaska to exempt America's largest national forest from a national rule protecting undeveloped, road-free national forest areas from logging and road construction. The State sought to overturn a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that kept the Roadless Area Conservation Rule in effect in the vast Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska. The Ninth Circuit agreed with a federal District Court in Alaska that the Bush administration improperly exempted the Tongass from that landmark conservation measure.
A coalition including the Organized Village of Kake (a federally recognized Alaska Native tribe), tourism businesses, and conservationists joined the federal government in urging the Supreme Court to leave the lower court rulings intact.
"Today's court order is great news for Southeast Alaska and for all those who visit this spectacular place," said Earthjustice attorney Tom Waldo. "The remaining wild and undeveloped parts of the Tongass are important wildlife habitat and vital to local residents for hunting, fishing, recreation, and tourism, the driving forces of the local economy. The Supreme Court's decision means that America's biggest national forest--the Tongass--will continue to benefit from a common-sense rule that applies nationwide."
"It feels terrific to put this case to bed once and for all," added Niel Lawrence, senior attorney and Alaska Director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Punching clearcuts and logging roads into America's last great rainforest wildland produced nothing but controversy, conflict, and uncertainty. The region can now move ahead on a path that benefits from and sustains the fabulous natural values that attract people to the Tongass. And all Americans can celebrate, knowing that wefll pass on the crown jewel of national forests to future generations as wild and wonderful as it is today."
"Southeast Alaska has moved on," said Buck Lindekugel, Grassroots Attorney for the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council. "Clearcutting old-growth forests in the remote wildlands of our region, with expensive new logging roads no one can afford to maintain, is a thing of the past. We are pleased to see the Supreme Court put this issue to rest and call on the State of Alaska to do the same."
"The Supreme Court's decision today is a victory for wildlife in the Tongass National Forest, the state of Alaska, the region and the nation," said Peter Nelson, senior policy advisor for federal lands for Defenders of Wildlife. "The Roadless Rule protects the wildlands that form the heart of America's largest national forest within the most expansive temperate rainforest in the world. Future generations will now have the opportunity to experience the majesty of this ecosystem and the salmon, bears, wolves, birds and the myriad wildlife that depend on it."
"The Roadless Rule protects our intact ancient forests that salmon, bears, and wolves depend upon. Alaska's temperate rainforest is a treasure and today's decision will help keep the Tongass protected from more logging and destruction," said Marc Fink, Senior Attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity.
"We're pleased to see the Roadless Rule upheld again. Over the past decade we've seen that the rule works. It has protected millions of acres of forests across the country, ensuring that both wildlife and American families have space to live and explore. In the face of a rapidly changing climate, protecting forests like the Tongass is even more important," said Alli Harvey, with the Sierra Club's Our Wild America campaign in Alaska. "It's common sense to protect this wild national icon for future generations to enjoy."
Background
The so-called "Roadless Rule" was designed to protect "large, relatively undisturbed landscapes" in national forests from logging roads and clear-cuts, while allowing other economic development--including hydropower projects, transmission lines, tourism, federally-financed public roads, and even mining--to continue.
Today's ruling is good news for the many residents of the region and local businesses who use and depend on the Tongass' outstanding natural values, as well as visitors who come to see America's last great rainforest, teeming with fish and wildlife that thrive in its undeveloped roadless areas. Little practical change is expected, however, since even when the Bush-era exemption was in effect, cost and controversy kept almost all logging out of roadless areas. And last year, a federal advisory committee including representatives of the timber industry and the State formally and unanimously recommended against further logging of those wildlands.
The 17 million-acre Tongass spans 500 miles of coastal Southeast Alaska, encompassing alpine meadows, deep fjords, calving glaciers, dense old-growth rainforest, and over 1,000 islands and islets. After much debate and hundreds of thousands of comments, in 2001, the Agriculture Department decided that the Roadless Rule should apply to the Tongass but included special measures to blunt the impact of the rule on Alaska's timber industry. Not applying the rule, the department found, "would risk the loss of important roadless values" in the Tongass. When the Bush administration reversed course and tried to exempt the Tongass from the Roadless Rule, it relied on factual findings at odds with those that justified its original decision and ignored the economic mitigation package for the Tongass. It asserted, without support, that the rule was not needed to protect Tongass wildlands and would cause widespread economic hardship.
The Ninth Circuit's ruling--and today's decision by the Supreme Court not to review that ruling--reinforced the settled rule that federal agencies cannot arbitrarily change policies and ignore previous factual findings simply because a new president has taken office.
Attorneys from Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council represent the following groups in the case: Organized Village of Kake, The Boat Company, Alaska Wilderness Recreation and Tourism Association, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, Natural Resources Defense Council, Tongass Conservation Society, Greenpeace, Wrangell Resource Council, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Cascadia Wildlands, and Sierra Club.
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.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
UAW Becomes Largest US Union to Back Gaza Cease-Fire
"From opposing fascism in WWII to mobilizing against apartheid South Africa and the Contra war, the UAW has consistently stood for justice across the globe," said United Auto Workers president Shawn Fain.
Dec 01, 2023
Fresh off historic contract victories, the United Auto Workers on Friday became the largest U.S. union to endorse a cease-fire in Gaza as Israel resumed its bombardment of the Palestinian territory following a weeklong pause.
"I am proud that the UAW International Union is calling for a cease-fire in Israel and Palestine," UAW president Shawn Fain wrote in a social media post on Friday. "From opposing fascism in WWII to mobilizing against apartheid South Africa and the Contra war, the UAW has consistently stood for justice across the globe."
The union's cease-fire endorsement was made public by Brandon Mancilla, director of UAW Region 9A, in remarks outside the White House, labor activist Mindy Isser reported for In These Times.
"Mancilla was at a news conference where labor leaders and union members from across the country had journeyed to Washington, D.C. to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with a broad, multiracial coalition of politicians, organizers, and activists who have been on a five-day hunger strike outside of the White House to demand a permanent cease-fire," Isser noted.
On social media, Mancilla announced that the UAW's International Executive Board "will also be forming a Divestment and Just Transition Working Group to study the history of Israel and Palestine, our union's economic ties to the conflict, and explore how we can have a just transition for U.S. workers from war to peace."
The UAW's cease-fire call makes the 400,000-member union part of a growing segment of the American labor movement that is pushing for a negotiated end to the bloodshed in the Gaza Strip, where U.S.-backed Israeli bombing has killed more than 15,000 people in less than two months.
Dozens of unions have signed onto a petition launched by the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America, which demands the release of all hostages, an end to Israel's siege of Gaza, and a cease-fire that sets the stage for "negotiations for an enduring peace."
Despite growing labor support, the AFL-CIO—the largest federation of unions in the U.S.—has yet to back a cease-fire and has actively pushed back against its affiliates' efforts to build support for one.
During a meeting of the AFL-CIO's executive council in late October, just one union leader—Mark Dimondstein, president of the American Postal Workers Union (APWU)—spoke up in support of a cease-fire, The New York Timesreported at the time. Last month, the APWU called for "an immediate cease-fire, the release of hostages, and urgently needed humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza."
"The cries of humanity demand nothing less," the union said.
Dimondstein echoed that message at Friday's press conference outside the White House.
"As working people we stand with the oppressed and the innocent, thousands of whom have lost their lives over the last two months," he said. "We unite with unions and people of goodwill around the world in calls for justice and peace."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Congress Urged to Reject 'Unconscionable' Asylum Changes in Funding​ Talks
"The long-term result from such short-sighted extremist policy will be further chaos at the southern border and further loss of life and human dignity," warned one campaigner.
Dec 01, 2023
As a bipartisan group of U.S. senators negotiates a deal on war assistance, rights groups and some congressional Democrats this week have condemned possible GOP policies that would make it harder for migrants to seek asylum in the United States.
"Refugees International is alarmed at Senate negotiations to potentially condition funding for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan on permanent changes to asylum law and parole authority that would put the lives of people seeking safety at risk," said Yael Schacher, the group's director for the Americas and Europe, in a statement Thursday.
"Heightening the asylum standard and deeming transit countries safe would violate international law and do nothing to stop people from coming to the border," Schacher asserted. "And limiting parole would end a program that has proved a lifeline for tens of thousands of Ukrainians and so many others for 70 years."
Stressing that "the rise in migration to the border is attributable to worsening political and humanitarian crises abroad that have produced historically high numbers of people needing protection," she urged Congress and President Joe Biden's administration to instead "focus on scaling up our ability to humanely and efficiently provide protection to meet this growing need."
"Instead of appeasing the xenophobia of the far right, the Biden administration and Senate Democrats should be working to make the United States more welcoming."
Advocates from Americans for Immigrant Justice, Human Rights First, Immigrant Defenders Law Center, Oxfam America, and other groups have released similar statements. Calling the proposal "unacceptable," #WelcomeWithDignity campaign manager Melina Roche declared Wednesday that "emergency funding should not come at the expense of others who need help themselves to escape persecution and violence."
ACLU senior policy counsel Sarah Mehta warned that "using a one-time spending package to permanently gut our asylum system sets a dangerous precedent and undermines our nation's values, laws, and commitment to protect those seeking safety."
Denouncing Republicans' demands as "radical" and "utterly shameful," Center for Gender & Refugee Studies director Karen Musalo said that "they would result in the persecution, torture, and deaths of families, children, and adults seeking safe haven at our nation's doorstep."
Along with increasing risks for asylum-seekers, the changes sought by the GOP would be ineffective, campaigners argued. International Refugee Assistance Project policy director Sunil Varghese said that "the long-term result from such short-sighted extremist policy will be further chaos at the southern border and further loss of life and human dignity."
"Trading fundamental human rights protections for a one-time supplemental funding request is unconscionable, outrageous, and fundamentally misguided," Varghese argued. "Instead of appeasing the xenophobia of the far right, the Biden administration and Senate Democrats should be working to make the United States more welcoming, not more hateful."
Faith groups and religious leaders have also spoken out this week, including representatives from the American Friends Service Committee, Church World Service, Franciscan Action Network, and Unitarian Universalists for Social Justice.
"New restrictions will only make it more likely that people will be deported to dangerous conditions because they failed to navigate a complicated asylum system in an unfamiliar country," said Amanda Craft, assistant stated clerk of the Presbyterian Church (USA) General Assembly. "Women, Black migrants, LGBTQ+ migrants, and indigenous-language speakers will be particularly impacted."
"Our Christian faith tells us to center the voice of 'the least of these,' the most vulnerable people with the fewest resources," Craft continued, citing scripture. "Instead of restricting asylum, Congress should robustly fund migrant services through the Shelter and Services Program and support communities that are welcoming migrants."
Democratic lawmakers are also raising concerns. Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.) and the CHC's Border and Immigration Task Force co-chairs, Reps. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) and Rob Menendez (D-N.J.), said Thursday that "we are strongly opposed to any potential measures in a rushed border supplemental that would permanently restrict asylum access for immigrants."
Separately, Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) called Republican efforts "morally bankrupt and grossly irresponsible," and pledged to vote against "any supplemental that dismantles U.S. asylum policy, adds 'third-country' limiting provisions or travel bans, or restricts our ability to receive people into the country on parole."
In the upper chamber, Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) led 10 colleagues—Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—in a statement opposing "harmful changes to our asylum system."
"We remain committed to working in good faith to modernize our outdated immigration system on a bipartisan basis and through a deliberative process," they added, emphasizing the need for "increasing lawful pathways for migration and legalizing long-time undocumented immigrants who put food on our tables, care for our elderly, and form the fabric of our communities."
The Associated Pressreported that U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Wednesday "told GOP senators behind closed doors that he needs real border security changes as part of Biden's broader war funding package."
Referring to the House GOP's Secure the Border Act, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in floor remarks Thursday, "I was deeply troubled by reports yesterday that Speaker Johnson joined Senate Republicans and made a push to inject more H.R. 2 provisions into the Senate supplemental."
"Democrats are willing to work with Republicans on commonsense, realistic border security, but we can't have the hard right essentially say its H.R. 2 or nothing," he added. "If Speaker Johnson, or for that matter the negotiators, feel they have to listen to what Speaker Johnson can pass just amongst his caucus, we'll never get anything done."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'To Hell With This Place,' George Santos Says After Expulsion From Congress
"A majority of Republicans voted against Santos' expulsion. That speaks volumes about the state of the Republican Party," said one observer.
Dec 01, 2023
The U.S. House voted overwhelmingly to expel Republican Rep. George Santos on Friday, ending a brief tenure in Congress that was engulfed by glaring and often bewildering scandals.
Santos—who is facing 23 criminal counts including wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States—left the House chamber before the vote was complete. The final tally was 311-114, with 112 Republicans—including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.)—and two Democrats voting against expulsion.
"Why would I want to stay here? To hell with this place," Santos told reporters following the vote.
Santos, the sixth lawmaker to ever be expelled from the House, flipped New York's 3rd Congressional District seat from Democratic to Republican in the 2022 midterms, but he began facing calls to step aside before he was even sworn in after it became clear that he fabricated aspects of his biography.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Justice Department unsealed a 13-count indictment accusing Santos of money laundering, wire fraud, and theft of public funds, among other charges. Santos pleaded not guilty.
In October, federal prosecutors filed 10 additional charges against Santos, intensifying calls for his resignation or expulsion. Last month, the House Ethics Committee released a report alleging that Santos used campaign funds on credit card bills, gambling, Botox, and luxury shopping.
"George Santos' expulsion from the House of Representatives is long overdue," Lisa Gilbert, the executive vice president of Public Citizen, said in a statement. "His removal is a testament to the tireless advocacy of ethics advocates and his constituents. Residents of NY-03 were lied to throughout his campaign and denied competent representation in Congress for nearly a year. They now have a chance for honest representation."
"What should have been an open-and-shut case of defrauding voters became a year-long MAGA circus as former Speaker [Kevin] McCarthy, current Speaker Johnson, and other extreme House leaders shielded Santos from accountability—abandoning ethical responsibility in favor of one additional vote for their dangerous and unpopular agenda," Gilbert added. "We are all better off now that Santos no longer holds a seat in Congress."
"Now that Santos has been expelled from Congress, we look forward to seeing him held accountable by our legal system."
Santos' ouster triggers a special election early next year that analysts believe is a toss-up. The New York Timesreported Friday that the race is "expected to be one of the most high-profile and expensive off-year House contests in decades."
"It has the potential to further shrink Republicans’ paper-thin majority and offer a preview of the broader battle for House control next November," the Times noted. "More than two dozen candidates have already expressed interest in running, and labor unions, super PACs, and other groups have begun earmarking millions of dollars for TV ads."
Brett Edkins, managing director of policy and political affairs at Stand Up America, said following Friday's vote that "until the very end, Republican leaders tried to protect Santos, putting cronyism and political expediency over principled leadership."
"A majority of Republicans voted against Santos' expulsion. That speaks volumes about the state of the Republican Party," said Edkins. "The campaign finance laws that Santos clearly violated are essential to preventing and punishing corruption and helping voters make informed decisions at the polls. Now that Santos has been expelled from Congress, we look forward to seeing him held accountable by our legal system."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular