April, 27 2016, 04:15pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Expert contact: Marissa Knodel, (202) 222-0729, mknodel@foe.org
Communications contact: Kate Colwell, (202) 222-0744, kcolwell@foe.org
Offshore Drilling Opponents Rally Outside D.C. Hearing
Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) appeared yesterday with a crowd of concerned citizens from around the country at a rally in Washington to oppose offshore drilling. The gathering took place outside a public meeting hosted by the Obama Administration collecting public input on its 2017-2022 oil and gas leasing program.
The Administration's plan excludes the Atlantic Ocean from leasing for the next five years - a significant development. However, it leaves the Arctic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico vulnerable to future oil and gas drilling.
WASHINGTON
Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) appeared yesterday with a crowd of concerned citizens from around the country at a rally in Washington to oppose offshore drilling. The gathering took place outside a public meeting hosted by the Obama Administration collecting public input on its 2017-2022 oil and gas leasing program.
The Administration's plan excludes the Atlantic Ocean from leasing for the next five years - a significant development. However, it leaves the Arctic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico vulnerable to future oil and gas drilling.
The group gathered outside the public meeting to celebrate the recent victory over Big Oil in the Atlantic Ocean and called on President Obama to use his authority to permanently protect the pristine Arctic and Atlantic oceans by removing them from not just this 5-year program but all future oil and gas leasing, and to initiate a plan to transition the Gulf of Mexico away from fossil fuels and onto a clean energy economy.
The movement to stop offshore drilling has mobilized millions of Americans across the country calling on President Obama to protect the climate and coastal communities by ending offshore drilling and keeping fossil fuels in the ground.
Also addressing the rally were representatives from frontline Arctic and Atlantic coast communities, as well as Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune and Rev. Lennox Yearwood of the Hip Hop Caucus. The event was organized by a coalition of groups including 350.org, Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, League of Conservation Voters, Alaska Wilderness League, Hip Hop Caucus, Center for Biological Diversity, Environment America, Friends of the Earth U.S., Indigenous Environmental Network, Oil Change International, Greenpeace USA, Rainforest Action Network, Redoil, and Bold Alliance.
Franz Matzner, Director, Beyond Oil Initiative, Natural Resources Defense Council: "This is a profound opportunity for President Obama to change the way we think about drilling and climate change. With the stroke of a pen, he can chart the course for our children and grandchildren for all time, by removing the Arctic and Atlantic from future oil and gas leasing altogether, not just in five year increments."
Marissa Knodel, Climate Campaigner, Friends of the Earth: "President Obama cannot allow his climate legacy to be five more years of dangerous offshore drilling. He must stop handing our public waters to the highest corporate bidder to pad their profits. The Gulf of Mexico and Arctic Ocean deserve permanent protection, not to be treated as energy sacrifice zones. President Obama must end leases and keep fossil fuels in the ground."
Leah Donahey, Arctic Ocean Campaign Director, Alaska Wilderness League: "Opening up the Arctic Ocean in the offshore program takes us in the wrong direction for our climate. This action could hinder the goals set in Paris and reverse our course towards protecting the Arctic and our nation from the impacts of climate change. Instead of opening the Arctic to potential new drilling, the president should be working to protect it by taking any new Arctic leasing off the table for good."
Bernadette Demientieff, Acting Executive Director of the Gwich'in Steering Committee: "Our children deserve to see the world as it was in the beginning, and not just when we are done using it. I traveled here from Fairbanks Alaska to share the same message I gave to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) there: we must not allow new drilling in the Arctic Ocean. We can't think just about the present day, we have to think about our climate and the future generations who will need Mother Earth. Our ancestors took care of the Earth for us, and now it is our responsibility to take care of her. Allowing more Arctic Ocean drilling is not a way to respect our earth and take care of her for the future."
Besse Odom, Anchorage NAACP Youth Council Vice President: "Where one is suffering , it is only natural to be sympathetic but we must take this response a tad bit further and put action with it. Sympathy is not enough without an action to follow through with it. So when our brothers and sisters from the Gwich'in nation are crying out for help because their way of life could be jeopardized by the presence of big oil companies - we must aid them, not only with our sympathy, but we must aid them with our actions."
Cherri Foytlin, Bold Louisiana: "For decades the oil industry has been given a free pass to commit violence against our communities in the form of pollution, ecological damages and devastating health effects. By ending the leasing of Gulf public waters, and instead providing for and encouraging investment in a healthy, clean and just transition away from fossil fuels, this administration can break the Big Oil cycle of abuse that we are experiencing to this day."
Rachel Richardson, Environment America: "More drilling and spilling would worsen the climate crisis; threaten the fragile Arctic; and further harm the Gulf, which is still suffering after the devastation of the BP disaster. President Obama has done right by the Atlantic. Now he should do right by the Gulf, the Arctic, and our kids' future by dropping plans for new drilling, and keeping all fossil fuels in the ground."
David Turnbull, Campaigns Director at Oil Change International: "Offshore drilling is simply inappropriate, if not disastrous, if we have any hope of living up to the Paris climate agreement and tackling the climate crisis. President Obama desperately needs to align our energy policy with the climate imperatives, and when he does he will see that offshore drilling clearly fails the climate test."
Alex Taurel, Deputy Legislative Director, League of Conservation Voters: "Offshore drilling is a dirty and dangerous business that threatens our beaches, our communities, and our climate. We commend President Obama for removing the Atlantic leases from his five-year offshore drilling plan after listening to the voices of east coast communities, businesses, and elected officials concerned about drilling's risks to their beaches and coastal economies. Now we hope he will seize this opportunity to expand his climate leadership by permanently protecting the pristine Arctic and Atlantic Oceans from drilling and by initiating a transition in the Gulf of Mexico toward 100 percent clean energy. The fact is that our public lands and waters, such as these oceans, ought to be managed in the public's best interest, which means not issuing permits to drill and burn oil that will make climate change worse and divert our focus away from our transition to clean energy."
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400LATEST NEWS
Amid Warnings of Atrocities in Sudan, Van Hollen Says Senate 'Missed Opportunity' to Cut Off Arms to UAE
"The United States shouldn't just be talking about ending the slaughter in Sudan," the senator said. "We should actually be using our leverage."
Jun 24, 2026
After the US State Department warned earlier this week of imminent “atrocities” by Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces, Sen. Chris Van Hollen on Tuesday criticized the US Senate for missing a recent opportunity to cut off weapons to the United Arab Emirates, which has supplied the genocidal paramilitary group.
On Monday, the State Department warned that RSF forces were massing near the city of El-Obeid and could commit “mass atrocities” against civilians if allowed to take the city.
"The belligerents must uphold their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect civilians and ensure that those seeking safety can do so without fear or obstruction," the department said.
The statement echoed concerns expressed last week by a coalition of states at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), which said that roughly 500,000 civilians, including more than 100,000 displaced people, could be at risk of violence if RSF escalated its assault.
UN human rights experts have said RSF's October offensive in Darfur bore the "hallmarks of genocide," with more than 6,000 people killed and numerous civilians tortured, raped, and starved during a three-day rampage across the city of El-Fasher.
But while Trump's State Department has sanctioned some entities accused of supplying fighters for the RSF, the Monday statement made no mention of the UAE, which rights groups point out is the group’s principal foreign backer.
A report issued last year by Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) found that the UAE was continuing to provide weapons to the RSF despite telling the US that it was not.
Following previous failed attempts at pushing Congress to impose an arms embargo on Sudan through standalone legislation, Van Hollen attempted to do so again last week by tacking a pair of amendments onto the bipartisan PEACE in Sudan Act, which requires the State Department to assess designating armed Sudanese groups as terrorists and allows Trump to impose optional sanctions on foreign actors funding the war, but stopped short of introducing any hard leverage.
At a markup session for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, Van Hollen introduced an amendment banning the US from selling or transferring military equipment to the UAE as long as it continues supporting the RSF. The amendment failed in a 15-7 vote, with four Democrats—Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (NH), Chris Coons (Del.), Tammy Duckworth (Ill.), and Jacky Rosen (Nev.)—joining every Republican on the committee, aside from Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), in opposition.
A second amendment, which did not single out the UAE specifically but restricted arms sales to any country arming either side of the conflict, also failed 13-9, but received support from Shaheen and Rosen.
Coons said he'd have "enthusiastically" supported the amendment, but voted no because he believed it would "bring down" the broader Sudan bill in a GOP-controlled Senate. Duckworth did not explain her reasoning for voting no.
In light of the State Department's warning this week about RSF's march toward El-Obeid, Van Hollen told a Drop Site News reporter on Tuesday that he believed the no vote on his amendments "was a missed opportunity."
"The United States shouldn't just be talking about ending the slaughter in Sudan. We should actually be using our leverage," he said.
Noting that Trump likely would not support a restriction on arms to the UAE given his extensive financial entanglements with the Emiratis and his previous policy of fast-tracking weapons to the country without any strings attached, Van Hollen said his goal was simply to "keep the pressure on."
He said, "We need to keep showing the hypocrisy of the Trump administration policy, where they claim they want to do something but refuse to take some of the basic actions we can take as a country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Applause as Judge Halts 'Blatantly Illegal and Cruel' ICE Courthouse Arrest Policy Nationwide
"The courthouse is meant to be a refuge for the pursuit of justice, not a hunting ground for ICE," said one attorney.
Jun 24, 2026
A federal judge on Tuesday ordered a nationwide halt to a Trump administration policy expanding immigration enforcement officials' authority to arrest non-citizens at US immigration courthouses.
US District Judge P. Casey Pitts, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, ruled that the courthouse arrests carried out by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) violated the Administrative Procedures Act's requirement for "reasoned decision making" in federal agencies' policy decisions.
After reviewing the evidence, Pitts found that the government "failed to provide reasoned explanations for their actions," which he thus deemed "arbitrary and capricious."
"The expansion of arrests at immigration courthouses results not from merely unreasoned decision making," Pitts emphasized, "but a complete lack of decision making."
The Trump administration last year rescinded previous policies that had restricted ICE agents' ability to make arrests at courts, and allowed agents to keep noncitizens detained for up to 72 hours.
In prior years, noted Pitts, courthouse arrests "would be undertaken only against noncitizens whom ICE had a heightened interest in detaining immediately because, for example, they were ‘suspected of terrorism or espionage,’ had been convicted of crimes, ‘participated in organized criminal gangs,’ or ‘otherwise pose[d] a serious risk to public safety.'"
Pitts' ruling, which the Trump administration is expected to challenge, restores those previous restrictions on courthouse arrests.
Jordan Wells, senior staff attorney at the Bay Area chapter of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, told The San Francisco Chronicle that Pitts' ruling restored the notion that "the courthouse is meant to be a refuge for the pursuit of justice, not a hunting ground for ICE."
“No one, including immigrants, should be forced to choose between their liberty and their day in court," added Wells, whose organization is co-representing a group of asylum seekers who had filed a complaint to overturn the ICE courthouse arrest policy.
Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) hailed Pitts' ruling as "excellent news."
"Immigrants who show up to court—'the right way'—have been targeted by this administration," Escobar wrote in a social media post. "So glad to see this blatantly illegal and cruel policy struck down."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Heritage Foundation Brags That Trump Has Implemented More Than Half of Project 2025
"These actions will have devastating consequences for workers, the environment, public health, and the rights of millions of Americans," warned progressive groups tracking the far-right agenda's implementation.
Jun 24, 2026
The right-wing Heritage Foundation boasted in a fundraising email on Tuesday that US President Donald Trump's administration has implemented more than half of the policy proposals laid out in the group's Project 2025 agenda, a sweeping conservative governance plan that Trump repeatedly claimed to know nothing about during his campaign for a second White House term.
The Heritage Foundation's email, first reported by Bloomberg, stated that 53% of Project 2025 is now federal policy, pointing to the administration's dismantling of the US Agency for International Development and broader attack on "diversity, equity, and inclusion policies" as examples. The group emphasized that its work is far from finished, declaring that "in this special 250th anniversary year, we must work to implement all of Heritage’s policy recommendations to ensure another 250 years of American greatness.”
Heritage's estimate that the Trump administration—which includes Project 2025 chief architect Russell Vought, the head of the White House budget office—has enacted 53% of Project 2025's proposals aligns precisely with a tracker maintained by the Center for Progressive Reform and Governing for Impact. The groups warned that "these actions will have devastating consequences for workers, the environment, public health, and the rights of millions of Americans."
The tracker, last updated in February, shows that the Trump White House had by that point implemented 283 of the 532 policy actions recommended by Project 2025 via executive order—from the dismantling of the Education Department to halting federal grants for environmental organizations to stripping civil service protections from federal workers.
That the Trump administration's policy actions mirror those recommended by Project 2025 should not be entirely surprising, given that the agenda broadly reflects the conservative movement's priorities. But Project 2025's creators have publicly taken credit for the White House's moves.
“This is exactly the work we set out to do,” Paul Dans, who worked in the first Trump administration and oversaw Project 2025's creation, told CNN last year as the administration's early actions mirrored the right-wing agenda. “We wanted to make sure the president was ready to hit the ground running on day one. The rapidity and the depth of what they’ve rolled out this quickly is a testament to the work done in Project 2025."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


