SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Environmental Groups Pushback on Exxon-Related Subpoenas
Members of Congress, legal experts & environmental groups gather to push back on Rep. Lamar Smith’s reckless subpoenas
WASHINGTON
Ahead of a Congressional hearing held by House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX), members of Congress, law experts, and environmental groups gathered at the Capitol to highlight all that Exxon knew and buried about climate change, and to pushback on the Chairman's overreaching subpoenas.
The event featured prominent members of Congress including Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), who have been leading the charge against Exxon to hold the fossil fuel company for its role in orchestrating a decades-long campaign of deception and misinformation about climate change.
At the event, Sharon Eubanks, the former Department of Justice lawyer who led the historical suit against Big Tobacco, echoed the call for a federal investigation into Exxon. Representing the climate movement, May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director, and Jesse Bragg, Corporate Accountability International Media Director, spoke to financial ties between Big Oil and the Science Committee, as well as climate impacts that likely could have been curbed if Exxon had told the truth when its scientists warned executives about climate change.
Rep. Smith's hearing is set to feature professors of law who are expected to exclusively focus on affirming the Committee's authority to subpoena environmental groups and the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts. At least two of Rep. Smith's witnesses, Ronald Rotunda and Elizabeth Price Foley, have significant ties to fossil fuel industry-funded groups such as the Heartland Institute and the Koch-funded Cato Institute, both which have funding ties to "dark money" financial channels Donors Trust and Donors Capital.
Since 1998, Rep. Smith has received a total of $675,597 from the fossil fuel industry, including $24,770 over the course of his career which came directly from ExxonMobil -- making oil and gas his most generous industry contributor throughout his career.
This event took place the day after thousands across the country, with a large rally in Washington, DC, rallied in solidarity with the Standing Rock Sioux and Indigenous Peoples who are protecting people and planet from the Dakota Access Pipeline.
Just this week, NASA confirmed that August 2016 was the hottest month in history, marking it the sixteenth hottest consecutive month on record.
QUOTE SHEET:
May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director said, "This hearing may as well be sponsored by ExxonMobil. Over his career, Rep. Smith has received nearly $700,000 in campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry -- no surprise he's willing to trample our First Amendment rights in his mad dash to their defense. The bottom line is that this hearing is nothing but Smith's attempt to distract us from the real issue: Exxon knew the truth about climate change, and Exxon lied."
Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA) said, "Climate change is the biggest long-term threat to life as we know it. Global warming endangers the health of our families and creates national security risks. The historic flooding in Louisiana is just the latest example of extreme weather events that will only get more frequent and more destructive due to climate change. ExxonMobil knew for decades that its product was causing climate change. But instead of investigating ExxonMobil's decades-long deception on climate change, Republicans in charge of the House Science Committee are attacking attorneys general and nonprofits who are trying to protect the public by holding ExxonMobil accountable for their fraud and deceit. The American people - who are facing the toll of climate change every single day - deserve leaders in Congress who believe in science. We deserve leaders who will protect the people, rather than ExxonMobil."
Representative Katherine Clark (D-MA) said, "I usually am proud to sit on the Science Committee. Sadly, today, the Republican majority spends most of its time undermining scientific consensus on issues like global climate change and stripping down the very institutions that fuel innovation and scientific advancement. The Committee's overreaching subpoenas demonstrate the majority's reckless disregard of the Congress' constitutional and jurisdictional limits. Law abiding attorneys general, who are doing their jobs and serving the public and investigating potential violations of state law, should not be bullied into becoming pawns in the Republican's ongoing ideological assaults on science and fact. I urge the Committee and its leadership to remember what its job is, who it works for, and let's get back to work for the people."
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said, "The really big question, and the one that needs answering here, is how far is the hand of the fossil fuel industry into the glove of this Committee? Because if in fact the true actor here is the fossil fuel industry, and if this committee is being nothing more than its agent, than that raises some very important questions about the subject of an investigation having a congressional tool to obstruct that investigation."
Tamar Lawrence-Samuel, Corporate Accountability International said, "This hearing, orchestrated on behalf of ExxonMobil, is a perversion of this important congressional procedure, and a complete distraction. The only thing this hearing will prove is that Rep. Smith is capable of cherry-picking a panel of witnesses that validate his views. Mr. Smith and his denialist colleagues on the House Science Committee are once again using our government to carry out the head-in-sand agenda of their Big Oil campaign funders and it needs to stop. It's time for Rep. Smith to end this charade and let AGs do what they were elected to do."
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
Who Are the Biggest AI Villains? An Industry Watchdog Has Made a List
"The federal government shares the tech industry’s vision for AI to be embedded everywhere, displacing human thought and labor, and deepening the strains on the environment and climate."
Jul 09, 2026
With backlash against the artificial intelligence industry growing throughout the US, one government watchdog has created a database to help keep tabs on the people it describes as the biggest "AI villains."
The Revolving Door Project on Thursday launched a webpage that tracks the actions of major players in the AI industry and their ties to President Donald Trump's administration.
"The Trump administration is all in on artificial intelligence," the Revolving Door Project explained. "The federal government shares the tech industry’s vision for AI to be embedded everywhere, displacing human thought and labor, and deepening the strains on the environment and climate."
The watchdog added that the government is pursuing an "AI first" policy "despite little proof that its value for the American public is anywhere close to commensurate with its costs."
While there are several well known names on the Revolving Door Project's list—including SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison—it also shines a light on more obscure figures including Chris Lehane, director of government affairs at OpenAI, and Greg Brockman, president of OpenAI.
Lehane is notable due to his long connections to Democratic Party politics, including a stint as a special assistant counsel in the Clinton administration and work as deputy campaign manager for former Vice President Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign. Since then, he has mostly done public relations work for Silicon Valley firms, including Airbnb and Coinbase.
According to The Revolving Door Project, Lehane during the second Trump administration has been a big proponent of an AI regulatory framework that he describes as "reverse federalism" that aims to shut down individual states' powers to put guardrails on the industry.
Brockman, meanwhile, is much more traditionally aligned with the GOP, as he and his wife were the largest donors to the MAGA, Inc. super PAC in 2025, and he is described by the watchdog as "a regular attendee at White House events throughout Trump’s second term."
This coziness has helped Brockman push for policies beneficial to the AI industry such as fast-tracking data center construction and the aforementioned "reverse federalism" regulatory framework.
The Revolving Door Project also pays special attention to Marc Andreesen, co-founder of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), whose allies the watchdog describes as "deeply entrenched" in the Trump administration.
Among the Andreesen acolytes to have worked in the Trump are Sriram Krishnan, a former general partner at a16z who served as a senior AI policy advisor; Peter Bowman-Davis, former engineering fellow at a16z who served as acting chief AI officer at the Department of Health and Human Services; and Scott Kupor, former managing partner at a16z who serves as director of the Office of Personnel Management.
Andreesen himself serves as a member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, which the Revolving Door Project describes as a "vessel... to freely lobby on behalf of the tech industry’s interests without the need for lobbyist intermediaries—especially at meetings with the president and his closest advisors."
In a newsletter explaining the purpose of the tracker, the Revolving Door Project's Fletcher Calcagno wrote that it was needed to help understand why the Trump administration so far has been willing to "accept Big Tech’s maximally irresponsible recommendations" for AI regulation.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘He Did Not Deserve to Die’: Son of Man Killed by ICE Demands Independent Investigation
“We don’t expect the truth from the Department of Justice or from the FBI," said the president of a legal group advocating for the family of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo. "We expect a whitewash.”
Jul 09, 2026
The family of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo is demanding a full, independent investigation into his killing by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Houston earlier this week, as they and their lawyers warn that the government is being dishonest about the incident.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said the agent shot Salgado, a 52-year-old construction worker from Mexico who has lived in the US for over three decades, in self-defense on Tuesday after he attempted to ram them with his vehicle while trying to evade arrest, though it has not provided evidence to corroborate this account.
At a press conference on Wednesday, Salgado's 29-year-old son, Ronaldo, a teacher in Houston, described coming to the harrowing realization that his father had been shot when he saw video of the incident as it circulated on social media.
"I recognized him immediately," Ronaldo said, beginning to tear up. "Not from his appearance, but from his voice crying for help as he lay on the street, bleeding out."
After hearing rumors that "something bad" had happened to his father, Ronaldo said it took hours for him to figure out what had happened—after going to the scene of the shooting, he found that nobody could give him any answers.
He did not find out where his father was until he approached Conchita Reyes, a representative from the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), who contacted Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) and informed Ronaldo that his father was in the hospital.
"I learned of my father's passing from a news report on social media, not the hospital, not law enforcement," he said.
Ronaldo described his father as a "family man" who "dedicated his life in the United States to giving his family the American dream."
DHS described Lorenzo Salgado as an "illegal alien" who was living and working in the US without legal status. Ronaldo said he had lived in the US for 35 years, had no criminal record, and was in the process of obtaining a legal work permit when he was killed.
"We dotted every I, crossed every T, filled every document, attended every appointment," Ronaldo said. "He was close to obtaining his legal status."
He added that his father "worked the last 30 years of his life building homes in the Houston suburbs" and that "part of his dream was to build a house for himself and his family, just like the hundreds he had built for himself over his career."
"And he did, after he built his own house with his crew composed of family members and other loved ones," Ronaldo said. "You could find him every evening after work, resting on his porch, listening to music, petting his dog."
"I am deeply heartbroken to see that the man who taught me the value of hard work, family values, and education will no longer spend an evening on that porch," Ronaldo said.
Ronaldo said he was "calling for a full investigation into the events that transpired yesterday, July 7."
"He did not deserve to die," Ronaldo said. "He deserved to live a quiet life as Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a husband, a father, and a job creator for dozens of men who also wanted the American dream."
Ronaldo noted that three other men, including his uncle, were also "rounded up" by ICE at the scene.
“I have not heard from them,” Ronaldo said, “but I hope that they are able to provide their own statements to prove that my father feared for his life as unmarked cars followed my dad, who only wanted to get back to work and back to us.”
Security cameras near the scene of the incident have captured some footage of Salgado’s white van appearing to be followed by unmarked ICE vehicles, but none captured the events leading up to the shooting, and there is no publicly available visual evidence of ICE’s claim that Salgado attacked officers.
The lawyers representing Salgado's family have called for DHS to release body camera footage of the incident. LULAC leaders called into question ICE's official account, noting that there had been no damage to Salgado's vehicle.
Ronaldo said his father has "always been aware of what to do in the event that he got pulled over" by ICE agents and that "he wasn’t supposed to give them a hard time.”
The legal team representing his family has said Salgado likely panicked when he saw he was being followed by masked men in unmarked cars and feared that criminals were attempting to steal his van and work equipment.
"One of his worst fears is that someone took away his work tools because that is how he made his livelihood," Ronaldo said.
So far, the federal government has not announced plans for a public, independent investigation into the agents involved in Salgado's shooting. The FBI has said it is investigating the alleged assault on the ICE agent, while the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General is conducting an internal investigation.
DHS has not publicly released the name of the ICE agent who shot Salgado, citing what it said were rising threats to federal agents.
“We want a full and transparent investigation," said Juan Proaño, the CEO of LULAC. "Every piece of evidence, body camera footage, dash cam footage, bystander video, dispatch records must all be preserved and released to an independent investigator and to the public.”
In several cases over the past year, DHS and other law enforcement agencies under the Trump administration have claimed that people shot by ICE agents had attempted to harm them, only for video evidence to later prove those assertions to have been exaggerated or outright fabricated.
LULAC national president Domingo Garcia told The Texas Tribune, “We don’t expect the truth from the Department of Justice or from the FBI. We expect a whitewash.”
Garcia and other Democratic members of Congress sent a letter to DHS and ICE on Wednesday calling for an "immediate, fully independent, and transparent investigation" into Salgado's killing.
"This is not the first time ICE agents have used unnecessary, deadly force," she wrote, referencing the killings of US citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti during a surge of immigration agents to Minneapolis in January.
"ICE shot and killed Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in our community. His family deserves answers," she said in a public statement. "ICE cannot investigate itself."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Lots of Pain But Little Gains': Report Shows How Much Trump Tariffs Have Cost Americans
The head of the group behind the analysis called the report "a damning indictment of tariffs’ impact on the US economy."
Jul 09, 2026
A US small business coalition on Wednesday released a state-by-state analysis detailing how President Donald Trump's capricious tariffs have cost American businesses and consumers upward of $317 billion since March 2025.
We Pay the Tariffs launched an interactive map, which uses data compiled by the international research firm Trade Partnership Worldwide, LLC to show the costs from additional tariffs the Trump administration has imposed by illegally invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act—a move blocked by the US Supreme Court in February—and by using Sections 122, 232, and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
With Section 122 tariffs—which impose a 10% surcharge on imports from almost all countries—set to expire on July 24, the Trump administration has said it will replace them with permanent Section 301 tariffs, which, according to We Pay the Tariffs will add "new costs on top of the hundreds of billions of dollars businesses have already paid."
"The latest figures are a damning indictment of tariffs’ impact on the US economy, with lots of pain but little gains for American workers, businesses, and families," We Pay the Tariffs executive director Dan Anthony said on Wednesday. "The trade deficit is up, goods exports and manufacturing jobs are down, and inflation is at its highest level in years. It’s disappointing that the administration is barreling ahead with a flurry of new tariffs despite the results to date."
In an open letter to members of Congress signed by small businesses across the country, the coalition noted that "once new tariffs take effect, history shows they are rarely undone."
"The Section 301 statute says tariffs should terminate after four years. Yet Section 301 tariffs imposed by the first Trump administration in 2018 were continued by the Biden administration, and remain in effect today," the letter states. "So do many Section 232 tariffs imposed in 2018 and expanded upon in 2025. There is no reason to expect this pattern to change."
The coalition argued that this is why "Congress must act before more Section 301 and 232 tariffs take effect."
"This is not a partisan issue. Tariffs are deeply and broadly unpopular with American voters," the letter asserts. "They are hurting small businesses in every state. Tariffs are taxes, and no president should be able to unilaterally impose hundreds of billions in permanent new taxes without a vote of Congress."
Progressive economists and consumer advocates argue that tariffs function as a regressive tax, falling disproportionately on working-class families who spend a larger share of their income on consumer goods. They warn that Trump administration tariff policies have also aided large corporations at the expense of smaller competitors.
Critics also note that the tariffs have failed to deliver the manufacturing renaissance promised by Trump, noting that the sector has still shed tens of thousands of jobs even as output increases due to automation, and that workers have seen few benefits from the hundreds of billions of dollars in additional import taxes paid by businesses and consumers.
"We paid—and will be forced to keep paying—the tariffs," the coalition letter concludes. "We need Congress to act now, before a permanent tariff regime is imposed on small businesses across America."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular