

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.

The Center for Biological Diversity today filed a formal notice of intent to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for failing to act on petitions to protect more than 417 animals and plants under the Endangered Species Act. The notice includes species from across the United States, including Florida sandhill cranes, coastal flatwood crayfish, eastern diamondback rattlesnakes and many others.
The agency has failed to make a required "12-month finding" for the 417 species, most of which were petitioned for between 2008 and 2010 by the Center and others, meaning the findings are five to seven years late. Long delays in protection of species under the Endangered Species Act have been a persistent problem for decades: At least 42 species have gone extinct waiting for protection.
A recent peer-reviewed study found that on average species waited 12 years for protection during the Endangered Species Act's 40-plus year history.
"Delayed protection can be deadly for species already on the brink of extinction. The longer we wait, the more difficult -- and expensive -- it becomes to save them," said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director at the Center. "Simply put, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service needs to be acting more quickly to decide which species will be protected so the recovery process can begin."
Since 2011 the Fish and Wildlife Service has been implementing a settlement agreement with the Center that required it to make protection decisions for 757 species, but did not include 12-month findings for the 417 species included in today's notice. Under the settlement, which largely comes to a close on Sept. 30, the Service has successfully reduced a backlog of 251 candidate species to 60 today, including protection of 147 species to date. These species represent a small fraction of the true backlog of species needing protection because it does not include the 417 species included in today's notice; nor does it include hundreds of other species arbitrarily dropped from consideration by the Service in 1996 (former "category 2" candidates).
"The Endangered Species Act is incredibly successful at protecting and recovering animals and plants, but it only works if species are actually listed as threatened or endangered," said Greenwald. "These 417 species and hundreds of others are being dangerously neglected for no other reasons than bureaucratic inefficiency and lack of political will."
Overall, under the Obama administration, the agency has protected 232 species, for an average of 31 species per year. Although this represents a vast improvement over the 62 species protected during the entire eight years of the Bush administration, it falls well below the 499 (an average 62 per year) protected under the Clinton administration. The Service routinely requests far less money than it needs to address the backlog of species needing protection and, since 1998, has requested and been granted a cap on the dollars that can be spent for listing of species.
"The Fish and Wildlife Service's head-in-the-sand approach is recklessly endangering hundreds of species that need consideration for protection under the Endangered Species Act," said Greenwald. "The Service needs a systematic plan with binding commitments to consider protection of all U.S. plants and animals that may warrant protection. The list may be long, but it's not infinite -- this is a problem that could be tackled with sufficient resources and political will."
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) 623-5252A 20-year-old suspect was found at the company's headquarters, where he was threatening to burn down the building.
A suspect was arrested in San Francisco Friday after being accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail at the home of Sam Altman, the CEO of the artificial intelligence firm OpenAI.
The 20-year-old man was found at the OpenAI headquarters about three miles away from Altman's home, where he was threatening to burn down the building, San Francisco police said.
The device the suspect threw onto Altman's property in the Russian Hill neighborhood caused a fire on the exterior gate. It was unclear whether Altman and his family were at home.
The suspect was in custody Friday, with charges pending.
Altman's company and other companies have been under fire as AI has expanded rapidly at President Donald Trump's urging, with the president issuing an executive order attacking states' ability to regulate the industry.
Experts have warned the expansion of generative AI threatens jobs and democracy, with political campaigns already using the technology to create fraudulent media in advertisements.
Massive, energy-sucking AI data centers have also been blamed for higher household electricity bills and water consumption.
Protesters have rallied against Altman's company for agreeing to provide its technology to the Department of Defense.
In November, The New York Times reported, a person who had once been associated with the anti-AI group Stop AI "expressed interest in causing physical harm to OpenAI employees," causing the company to lock down its headquarters.
On Friday, Stop AI condemned the attack on Altman's house and emphasized that the group "seeks to protect human life."
"We do not condone any violence whatsoever," said the group. "We pray everyone involved in this situation puts aside violence and finds peace, and we continue to hope the AI industry stops the development of frontier AI systems in the interest of public safety and the preservation of humanity. To the best of our knowledge, this incident did not involve anyone who has ever been associated with our group. And this action is wholly inconsistent with our values."
"While Americans worry about skyrocketing costs and another endless war, President Trump is focused on a taxpayer-funded vanity project," said Rep. Don Beyer.
On the same day that the US Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that inflation spiked at its fastest monthly rate in four years, the Trump administration unveiled renderings of President Donald Trump's proposed gold-covered 250-foot-tall arch to be built at Memorial Circle in Washington, DC.
The renderings, which were produced by architecture firm Harrison Design and posted on social media by the White House's rapid response account, show a gigantic arch that would be flanked on its corners by four gold lions and topped by a 60-foot-tall gold statue of what appears to be an angel.
🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/zcH5TtaOu7
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 10, 2026
According to a Friday report in The Washington Post, some preservationists have expressed concerns that the arch, which would be more than twice the height of the Lincoln Monument, would disproportionately tower over the DC skyline, and would block views of Arlington National Cemetery.
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) slammed the president for pushing construction of a gaudy gold-covered arch at a time when Americans are struggling due to the cost-of-living crisis worsened by his war in Iran.
"While Americans worry about skyrocketing costs and another endless war," he wrote in a social media post, "President Trump is focused on a taxpayer-funded vanity project that would choke traffic, block our skyline, and tower over sacred ground where those who served our nation are buried, including my own parents and sister."
Beyer added that the arch is "about Donald Trump's ego," and vowed, "we're going to stop it."
Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) responded to the renderings by reminding the White House that "Americans can't afford groceries."
Progressive activist Nina Turner had a similar reaction to Clark, posting that "people can’t afford rent" in response to the renderings.
Podcaster Brian Taylor Cohen contrasted the renderings of the arch with a statement Trump made earlier this month when he said "it’s not possible" for the federal government "to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things," because it needs to fund wars instead.
University of Missouri English professor Karen Piper also remarked on the opportunity cost of building the arch, along with other assorted Trump projects.
"This is why they're going to take away your Social Security, saying we can't afford it," she wrote. "Ballrooms, arches, and Don Jr. draining the Treasury."
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been named as a contender for the Democratic Party's 2028 presidential nomination, responded to the arch renderings by accusing Trump of "doing everything he can to wreck this country—this time with our nation's capital."
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) took issue with the decision to inscribe the phrase "one nation under God" at the top of the arch.
"That phrase came from Cold War propaganda, not our Founders," observed Huffman. "Trump stamping it on his vanity arch tells you everything about what this project is: a Christian nationalist monument, paid for with your tax dollars."
"Billionaire-funded super PACs—AIPAC, AI, crypto, and others—are spending hundreds of millions to defeat any candidate who crosses them. They should be banned from Democratic primaries. Period."
Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders on Friday called for a total ban on dark money a day after the Democratic National Committee voted down a resolution that would have condemned the leading US pro-Israel lobby, which has spent nine figures on US elections over the past five years.
The DNC Resolutions Committee rejected the resolution, which condemned “the growing influence” of dark money and corporate-backed outside spending on Democratic races, specifically calling out the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee. United Democracy Project, AIPAC's dark money arm, unleashed a $100 million blitz targeting progressives during the 2024 election cycle.
When combined with other pro-Israel lobby groups, like GOP megadonor Miriam Adelson's Preserve America PAC, that figure soars to over $200 million, according to the public interest group AIPAC Tracker.
Instead, the DNC panel opted for a broader resolution decrying the influence of dark money—defined as undisclosed independent campaign contributions—in the 2026 Democratic primaries.
"The DNC just passed a resolution condemning dark money," Sanders (Vt.) said Friday on X. "That’s a start, but not enough."
"Billionaire-funded super PACs—AIPAC, AI, crypto, and others—are spending hundreds of millions to defeat any candidate who crosses them," the senator added. "They should be banned from Democratic primaries. Period."
Sanders campaigned twice for president, centering his opposition to the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, which effectively ushered in the modern era of secret unlimited political spending.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, dark money spending in federal elections has skyrocketed from negligible amounts before 2010 to over $1.9 billion in the 2024 cycle alone, with over $4 billion in total undisclosed outside financing following the high court's contentious ruling.
Polling has repeatedly affirmed that support for Israel—which stands accused in the International Court of Justice of committing genocide in Gaza and has already been found by the ICJ to be illegally occupying Palestine under apartheid rule—is detrimental to Democrats.
The DNC's own suppressed postmortem of the 2024 presidential election also showed that former President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris' unconditional support for Israel cost Harris votes.
As AIPAC has grown more toxic to US voters amid a litany of Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank under the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza—a growing number of Democrats, including some who once welcomed the group's support, are turning their backs on the lobby.
“AIPAC really is not an organization that I think today I would want any part of," Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker said last month after affiliated groups poured $22 million into House races in his state.
While AIPAC cash was instrumental in unseating congressional progressives including former Reps. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.), its largesse failed to oust others, including Reps. Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.).
Sanders wasn't the only one to criticize the DNC's rejection of the anti-AIPAC resolution.
“The American people are clear: They want our government to invest in life and stop funding the bombs that are destroying lives in Palestine, Lebanon, and Iran," Jewish Voice for Peace political director Beth Miller said Friday.
"The DNC’s failure to pass this simple resolution condemning the outsized spending of an extremist and Republican-funded group like AIPAC in Democratic primaries shows how wildly out of touch the party is with its base," Miller added.