

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.

Ingrid Skjoldvær, Nature and Youth, + 47 977 02 181, ingridsk@nu.no
Truls Gulowsen, Greenpeace, + 47 901 07 904, truls.gulowsen@greenpeace.org
Julia Olson, Our Children’s Trust, + 1 415 786 4825, julia@ourchildrenstrust.org
Today young people filed a constitutional climate lawsuit against the Norwegian government for allowing oil companies to drill for new oil in the Arctic Barents Sea, endangering young people and future generations with more climate pollution. The plaintiffs, Nature and Youth - the largest youth-led organization in Norway - and Greenpeace Norway, argue that Norway has violated citizens' and future generations' constitutional right to a healthy environment, joining youth around the world who are taking actions against their governments.
Today young people filed a constitutional climate lawsuit against the Norwegian government for allowing oil companies to drill for new oil in the Arctic Barents Sea, endangering young people and future generations with more climate pollution. The plaintiffs, Nature and Youth - the largest youth-led organization in Norway - and Greenpeace Norway, argue that Norway has violated citizens' and future generations' constitutional right to a healthy environment, joining youth around the world who are taking actions against their governments.
"We will argue in court that the Norwegian government has an obligation to keep its climate promises and will invoke the people's right to a healthy environment for ours and future generations. This is the People vs. Arctic oil," said Ingrid Skjoldvaer from Nature and Youth.
The lawsuit demands that Norway uphold its constitutional guarantee for future generations as it is written in article 112 of Norway's Constitution:
"Every person has the right to an environment that is conducive to health and to a natural environment whose productivity and diversity are maintained. Natural resources shall be managed on the basis of comprehensive long-term considerations which will safeguard this right for future generations as well. The authorities of the state shall take measures for the implementation of these principles".
"Signing [the Paris Agreement] while throwing open the door to Arctic oil drilling is a dangerous act of hypocrisy. By allowing oil companies to drill in the Arctic, Norway risks undermining global efforts to address climate change. When the government fails to redress this we have to do what we can to stop it," said Truls Gulowsen, Greenpeace Norway.
"Youth are rising up globally and taking their governments to court to seek protection of their inalienable rights to a stable climate system," said Julia Olson, executive director of Our Children's Trust, and lead counsel on another climate lawsuit brought by 21 young people against the United States government. "This case filed today in Norway builds on similar cases brought by young people in Sweden, Pakistan, Uganda, the Philippines, and in states across the U.S. Our Children's Trust is working in partnership with young people around the world to elevate their voices and provide them with legal and scientific support. This youth legal movement is growing."
The lawsuit follows on the footsteps of other climate actions led by young people to hold governments' accountable. One month ago, young people from around the U.S. had their landmark constitutional climate lawsuit heard before U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken, and during that same week, Swedish youth sued Sweden for moving forward with a disastrous coal deal.
Our Children's Trust is a nonprofit organization, elevating the voice of youth, those with most to lose in the climate crisis, to secure the legal right to a healthy atmosphere and stable climate on behalf of present and future generations. We lead the global human rights and environmental justice campaign to implement enforceable science-based Climate Recovery Plans that will return atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration to levels below 350 ppm. Youth have secured judicial rulings in their favor in WA, NM and MA, and in their landmark U.S. federal climate lawsuit, and have multiple other cases pending. www.ourchildrenstrust.org/
Natur og ungdom ("Nature and Youth") is Norway's largest environmental organization for young people. The organization was founded in 1967 and is an independent youth organization with an independent board, national assembly and national congress. As of 31 December 2015, the organization had 7,672 members and 88 local chapters throughout Norway. One of the organization's objectives is to strive to ensure far-sighted utilization, protection and fairer distribution of the world's resources. In accordance with its Articles of Association, the organization has resolved to base its work on the premise that the future of the human race is dependent on the preservation of the natural environment's functions, productivity and diversity.
Greenpeace is an independent global campaigning organization that acts to change attitudes and behavior, to protect and conserve the environment and to promote peace by: catalyzing an energy revolution, defending our oceans, protecting the world's ancient forests, working for disarmament and peace, creating a toxic free future, and campaigning for sustainable agriculture. Greenpeace is present in more than 55 countries across Europe, the Americas, Asia, Africa, and the Pacific. www.greenpeace.org
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000"Congress must say enough is enough and immediately open an investigation into just how deep the rot at Burgum’s Interior goes," said one critic.
Ethics experts this week raised red flags over a senior US Interior Department official's failure to disclose her family's financial interest in the nation's largest lithium mine, which opponents say was illegally approved by the Trump administration.
In 2018, Frank Falen, husband and former law partner of current Associate Deputy Interior Secretary Karen Budd-Falen—the third-highest ranking Department of Interior (DOI) official—sold the water rights from a family ranch in Humboldt County, Nevada to a subsidiary of Lithium Americas for $3.5 million.
The subsidiary, Lithium Nevada, wanted to build a highly controversial $2.2 billion open-pit lithium mine—Thacker Pass—that required both massive amounts of water and approval from the DOI. Falen's water rights sale also hinged upon DOI approving the mine.
At the time, Budd-Falen worked as the DOI's deputy solicitor for wildlife. In 2019, she sat down for a lunch meeting with Lithium Americas executives in the DOI cafeteria.
“They just happened to mention to me they were going to DC, and I was like, ‘Well, my wife is back there,’” Falen said of the Lithium Americas executives in a New York Times interview. “It was my fault because I just said, ‘Yeah, you should stop by and say hi to my wife.’"
The US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), part of DOI, approved the mine during the final days of Trump's first administration via an expedited process to circumvent lengthy environmental review. Indigenous and conservation groups, working together in the Protect Thacker Pass coalition, subsequently sued over what they argued was the mine's illegal approval.
A Lithium Americas spokesperson told the Times: "We haven’t worked directly with Karen Budd-Falen related to Lithium Americas, nor have we ever met with her in a formal capacity regarding our project.”
However, ethics experts question the financial ties between Falen and Thacker Pass and why Budd-Falen did not publicly disclose her husband's $3.5 million water deal.
“Did she have any oversight of the environmental review process regarding Thacker Pass?" Kyle Roerink, executive director of the Great Basin Water Network, a Nevada conservation group, said during an interview last week with High Country News. “If she didn’t recuse herself, it would fly in the face of the impartial decision-making that Americans expect from government officials.”
Doug Burgum’s third-in-command Karen Budd-Falen made millions after the Trump administration fast-tracked what’s now the nation’s biggest lithium mine. Illegal, conflict of interest, corruption, or whatever you want to call it, there’s a rot in our Interior Department. https://nyti.ms/3LfBVWM
[image or embed]
— Save Our Parks (@saveourparks.us) January 5, 2026 at 1:00 PM
Robert Weissman, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, told the Times: "It’s not clear that Karen Budd-Falen knew she had a conflict, but it’s clear she should have known, and that the public should have known. It’s also clear that she should not have met with Lithium Nevada."
Green groups and Indigenous peoples—including the the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, Burns Paiute Tribe, and Summit Lake Paiute Tribe—fiercely oppose the mine. Opponents argue the project lacks consent, had a rushed environmental review, and that the mine would threaten wildlife and water and desecrate sacred Indigenous sites.
Thacker Pass, whose name means "rotten moon" to all three tribes, is also the site of an 1865 massacre of dozens and perhaps scores of Northern Paiute men, women, and children by US Cavalry troops. The tribes want it listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
In September, the Trump administration and Lithium Americas reached a deal under which the government will take a 5% equity stake in both the company and the Thacker Pass mine in return for Department of Energy loan money as demand for lithium—a key component of electric vehicle batteries, cellphones, and laptops—is surging worldwide.
The apparent conflict of interest involving Budd-Falen continues a history of corruption at Trump's DOI in both the president's first and current terms. First-term Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke's tenure was plagued by ethics violations and abuse of office. Federal investigators found that Zinke lied to them about his involvement in private land deals while in office, had improper relationships with developers, and improperly used taxpayer funds to pay for chartered aircraft and helicopter flights.
Zinke resigned in 2019. His eventual successor, David Bernhardt, was called a "walking conflict of interest" and "as corrupt as it gets" due to his prior work as a fossil fuel lobbyist.
Budd-Falen could also benefit from the Trump administration's invasion of Venezuela. According to reporting from Public Domain's Jimmy Tobias and Chris D'Angelo, Budd-Falen or her husband hold tens of thousands of dollars worth of stock in fossil fuel companies including ExxonMobil and pipeline firm Enterprise Products Partners.
Responding to Budd-Falen's failure to disclose her family's interest in the Thacker Pass mine, Save Our Parks spokesperson Jayson O’Neill said Monday:
This raises substantial questions about the lack of transparency, clear conflicts of interest, and potential illegal self-dealing at the Interior Department under [Interior Secretary] Doug Burgum. It wasn’t enough for Burgum’s top lieutenant, Karen Budd-Falen, to hold tens of thousands of dollars in Big Oil stocks while advancing their interests at Interior. Now we find out that she worked behind the scenes with Lithium Americas’ representatives and lobbyists, which received fast-track approval, making her and her husband millions.
"This naked corruption and self-dealing is par for the course at Doug Burgum’s Interior Department, which is more focused on self-serving and special interests than the American people and our outdoor heritage," O'Neill added. "Congress must say enough is enough and immediately open an investigation into just how deep the rot at Burgum’s Interior goes.”
"Today's ruling affirms what we have always known: that abortion is essential healthcare," said one advocate.
The first piece of state legislation in the US explicitly banning the use of abortion pills was struck down on Tuesday as Wyoming's state Supreme Court ruled that it, along with the state's near-total abortion ban, violated the state's constitutional right to bodily autonomy.
Both laws were passed in 2023, following the US Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade. One of them banned abortion in nearly all cases, except when the pregnant patient's life is threatened or in cases of rape or incest—a measure similar to those in several other red states.
But while many states' abortion bans have effectively outlawed the use of abortion drugs like mifepristone and misoprostol, Wyoming's was the first to outlaw the use of these pills in its text.
According to a 2023 study by the Guttmacher Institute, 63% of abortions nationwide are done using medications.
In 2012, Wyoming voters approved a constitutional amendment guaranteeing each competent adult the "right to make his or her own healthcare decisions."
Ironically, the amendment was heavily promoted at the time by conservatives who believed it would protect them from what they viewed as "undue governmental infringement" by former President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act. But reproductive freedom advocates have since used it as a weapon to protect abortion.
In 2023, Wyoming's only remaining abortion clinic, Wellspring Health Access in Casper; the abortion rights group Chelsea’s Fund; and four women, including two obstetricians, sued the state, arguing that the laws violated this constitutional right.
The state's attorneys attempted to argue that the amendment did not apply to abortion, which they claimed is not "healthcare."
In November 2024, a district judge halted both laws, deeming them unconstitutional. Abortion has since remained legal in the state while the lawsuit went ahead.
In a 4-1 ruling, the Wyoming Supreme Court on Tuesday also sided with abortion rights advocates, ruling that both of these laws conflicted with the state’s constitution.
“A woman has a fundamental right to make her own healthcare decisions, including the decision to have an abortion,” the ruling states.
“The state did not meet its burden of demonstrating the abortion laws further the compelling interest of protecting unborn life without unduly infringing upon the woman’s fundamental right to make her own healthcare decisions,” the court added. “As such, the abortion laws do not constitute reasonable and necessary restrictions on a pregnant woman’s right to make her own healthcare decisions.”
Wyoming’s Supreme Court is the state’s highest judicial authority, meaning that the pair of laws is permanently blocked. However, the court said “lawmakers could ask Wyoming voters to consider a constitutional amendment that would more clearly address this issue.”
Janean Forsyth, the executive director of Chelsea's Fund, said the court's decision "is a landmark victory for reproductive freedom in Wyoming, and we are gratified and heartened by the ruling."
"Today's ruling affirms what we have always known: that abortion is essential healthcare, and Wyoming women have the constitutional right and the freedom to make their own healthcare decisions without government interference," she added.
The ruling is a victory for abortion rights at a time when they have come under systemic attack by the Trump administration during his first year back in power, as the Center for Reproductive Rights documented in a report released Monday.
The administration has withdrawn federal guidance that directed emergency rooms to perform abortions in cases where the mother suffers deadly pregnancy complications, which have increased by as much as 50% in states with abortion bans.
A new policy at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), meanwhile, prevented veterans on VA health insurance from receiving abortions, including in cases of rape, incest, or severe risk to personal health.
The massive cuts to Medicaid under last year's Republican budget reconciliation bill have also resulted in the closure of at least 50 Planned Parenthood health centers across the nation, and reduced services at many more.
GOP attempts to restrict mifepristone access are also currently being litigated in Florida, Texas, and Missouri.
Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr said during a Senate hearing in May that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently reviewing its regulations on mifepristone, which was first approved by the FDA 26 years ago. That review has reportedly been delayed until after the 2026 midterm elections in November.
"Too many people wrongly believe that President Trump is done attacking abortion access, and that overturning Roe v. Wade was his endgame,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “But in his first year back in office, the Trump administration is not ‘leaving it to the states’ to decide abortion policy, but wielding federal power to go after abortion access even in states where abortion is legal."
She described "the looming fear that the FDA will soon gut access to abortion pills, which have been a lifeline in post-Roe America," adding that "the threat to further limit access to abortion throughout the nation is real and must be met with vigorous opposition.”
Lin Jian, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said the US abduction of Nicolás Maduro "seriously violates Venezuela’s national sovereignty and destabilizes international relations."
A spokesperson for China's Foreign Ministry on Tuesday demanded the immediate release of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife from US custody and condemned the Trump administration's trampling of international law.
"The US disregards President Maduro’s status as head of state, blatantly prosecutes him, and puts him on a so-called 'trial' in a domestic court," Lin Jian wrote in a social media post. "This seriously violates Venezuela’s national sovereignty and destabilizes international relations."
"No country should put its domestic rules above international law," Lin added. "China calls on the US to release President Maduro and his wife at once and ensure their personal safety."
The U.S. disregards President Maduro’s status as head of state, blatantly prosecutes him and puts him on a so-called “trial” in a domestic court. This seriously violates Venezuela’s national sovereignty and destabilizes international relations.
No country should put its… pic.twitter.com/v1xQqE4Cqo
— Lin Jian 林剑 (@SpoxCHN_LinJian) January 6, 2026
The Chinese official's remarks came a day after Maduro said Monday during his first appearance before a federal court in New York City that he is "still president" of Venezuela—a sentiment echoed by the country's interim leader—and considers himself a "prisoner of war." Maduro pleaded not guilty to narcoterrorism conspiracy and other charges pursued by the Trump Justice Department.
During a press conference on Monday, Lin called the US abduction of Maduro a "clear violation of international law, basic norms in international relations, and the purposes and principles of the UN Charter," expressing a view widely held by legal experts.
"China calls on the US to ensure the personal safety of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, release them at once, stop toppling the government of Venezuela, and resolve issues through dialogue and negotiation," said Lin.
Under international law, sitting heads of state are immune from prosecution in other countries' courts. The Trump administration argues Maduro's leadership was illegitimate. But President Donald Trump, in his social media post announcing the weekend attack on Venezuela, described Maduro as president of the South American country.
"If the Justice Department plans to argue that Nicolás Maduro is not protected by head of state immunity," asked Francisco Rodríguez, a senior fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, "then why did President Trump announce his capture referring to him as 'President Maduro'—a designation that the US government had stopped using in 2019?"
An unsealed US indictment against Maduro characterizes him as "previously the president of Venezuela."
Chimène Keitner, a professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law, wrote Tuesday that the Trump administration "appears to feel that its military and economic superiority allow it to act unilaterally in violation of international law, and that cooperation and alliances are overrated."
"That might seem appealing in the short term, but the world has already seen where unchecked expansionism and claimed spheres of influence lead," wrote Keitner. "The benefits of following agreed-upon rules have often been recognized only after significant harm caused by their disregard."