

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.
Climate activist Ken Ward, the "valve turner" who was arrested and prosecuted for closing the emergency valve on an oil sands pipeline, and who argued in front the jury with considerable success that the urgency of climate change compelled him to act, was sentenced Friday in Skagit County Superior Court in Washington State. His sentence of two days in jail has already been fulfilled.
After a first trial ended in a hung jury, in a second trial earlier this month, the jury found Ward technically guilty of second degree burglary, but deadlocked (for the second time) and failed to find him guilty of the charge of sabotage.
The facts of Ward's action were not in dispute, only whether his motive of helping prevent harm to the climate and calling attention to the climate crisis can be used in court as justification for acting as he did. Ward and his legal team were not permitted by the judge to argue a "necessity defense," which means they could not call expert witnesses or submit expert testimony about the harms that carbon-intensive oil sands do to the climate, and how climate change will affect the region, to justify Ward's action. But in his own testimony, Ward got enough of his point across that one jury refused to convict him of burglary, and two juries refused to convict him of sabotage. In the second trial, the second jury did reluctantly convict him of burglary.
For that conviction, Judge Michael Rickert used the "First-Time Offender Waiver" and sentenced Ward to 32 days, including 2 days in custody (served when he was arrested) and 30 days (240 hours) community service in Skagit County, plus six months' community supervision. The state may still file for restitution. The judge dropped bail, and released Ward on his own Personal Recognizance. The State declined to re-file the sabotage charge.
"Given we weren't allowed allowed to offer the defense that makes any sense, i.e. that climate change necessitates citizen action like mine, this was a remarkable outcome in both trials," said Ward. "Juries considered these two charges twice, and three of the four deliberations ended in a hung jury. In the fourth, they gave me a minimalist conviction of burglary. But after the trial the jurors told us they were reluctant to hand it down, and that if they had been given more leeway by the judge they probably wouldn't have convicted me. The conviction is not final. We are appealing it with full confidence that we will win. I expect to be back in court trying these issues all over again.'
"It was also interesting to listen to Judge Rickert, who found this a very difficult sentencing decision to make," Ward said.
In announcing the sentence, Judge Rickert, who retires in five days, said, "I've thought about this a lot since the first trial." He pointed out that "we abandoned the head-on-the-pike sentences hundreds of years ago," but said he believed there is validity to sending a message that might influence the actions of others. He noted that Kinder Morgan, though unpopular, "has to be protected too." But he said he viewed Ward's case as a rarity: "No monetary motive, no greed or addiction. If I was going to break into something I'd at least have a beer with me."
During the sentencing hearing, Lauren Regan, Ward's attorney, reminded Judge Rickert that Ward's action was highly principled. It was planned months in advance, and Ward took painstaking safety precautions. She also pointed out that continuing to pump tar sands every day exacerbates climate change and endangers the community. Ward believed so strongly in that danger, Judge Rickert said, that "he was willing to throw the tea off the boat into the harbor....Will jail change his behavior? Will it change other people's behavior? No."
Meanwhile the pipeline company Kinder Morgan is not changing its behavior. It is proposing to double the size of its oil sands pipeline. Ward argues the industry and the federal government doubling down on carbon-intensive fossil fuels regardless of climate impacts underscores the importance of adjudicating climate action in the courts. "I think we're entering a time where we can really expect to the courts to be the place we should pursue change, more so than in other civic forums," he said. "The courts are now the one forum where facts matter, and where there is a clear mechanism to distinguish facts from non-facts. As the question of the legality of citizen climate actions like mine continues to make its way through the courts, it will lead to cracks in the armor of denial, and wider recognition that it's time for citizens to stand up to protect the climate."
More climate activists are facing charges for taking part in the related "valve turner" actions including Leonard Higgins in Montana, and Annette Klapstein, Emily Johnston, Ben Joldersma, and documentarian Steve Liptay in Minnesota. They are also pursuing a necessity defense. The pre-trial hearing for the Minnesota defendants is scheduled for August 15th in Clearwater County District Court in Bagley, Minnesota.
Climate Disobedience Center is an organization designed to serve as a catalyst for direct action, creating points of vivid moral clarity, emboldening both climate activists and the unlikeliest of allies, to capture the heart and soul of the climate debate.
"Israeli soldiers have been posting images of their war crimes and cultural desecration for two and a half years straight without interruption," said one journalist.
The Israel Defense Forces have spent close to two months in Lebanon killing more than 2,100 people, destroying an estimated 1,000 homes—sometimes leveling entire communities—blowing up schools, bombing healthcare infrastructure, and forcibly displacing more than 1 million people, including close to 400,000 children.
But so far, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has spoken out against just one attack on civilian infrastructure—saying on Monday that he condemned "in the strongest terms" an image that went viral over the weekend of an IDF soldier taking a sledgehammer to the head of a statue of Jesus Christ in southern Lebanon.
"Of all the shocking war crimes [Palestinian journalist] Younis Tirawi has exposed, it’s the sledgehammer to a Jesus statue... that finally gets Netanyahu to comment," said Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim, referring to the reporter who posted the image on social media.
Tirawi reported that the statue belonged to the Christian town of Debel, which the Catholic Near East Welfare Association said last week is home to 1,700 people who have been "in total isolation" in recent weeks as the Israeli occupation has forced the Lebanese Army to withdraw from the area. CNEWA said an archbishop in the village has tried to get an aid convoy to Debel, where residents earlier this month had no safe drinking water and enough food to last “no more than two days," but the IDF's shelling in the area has forced air trucks to turn back.
"If [Netanyahu] finds this one offensive," said Grim of the photo of the IDF soldier, "I suggest he not scroll the last few years of posts from Younis Tirawi."
Tirawi reported extensively on the IDF's destruction of civilian infrastructure in Gaza. He posted a video on social media on April 11 of the IDF demolishing a United Nations school in the southern part of the exclave, and one on April 10 that showed a double-tap strike that killed 33-year-old Palestinian Man Yousef Mansour in al-Mawasi.
Netanyahu said in an interview with Newsmax last week that Israel "is the only country in the Middle East and one of the few countries in the world who stands up for Christians."
In a statement Monday, the IDF said that it is "operating to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure established by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, and has no intention of harming civilian infrastructure, including religious buildings or religious symbols."
But the destruction of the Jesus statue in Debel came after a double-tap strike that killed Father Pierre al-Rahi, a Manonite Catholic priest, in another southern Lebanese town last month. Historic Christian churches have also been destroyed by IDF attacks in Gaza.
"The smashing of Christ's statue in Lebanon is latest example of the impunity with which Israeli soldiers have attacked and desecrated religious sites in occupied Palestinian territories," said TRT World.
War correspondent Steve Sweeney, who is based in Beirut, shared footage of a church the IDF destroyed in southern Lebanon in October 2024, in an attack that killed at least eight people.
Sweeney also noted that a month after that attack, Israeli soldiers "desecrated the St. Mema Church in the Christian village of Deir Mimas, southern Lebanon."
The IDF "said the conduct was contrary to its values" at the time, said Sweeney.
Despite officials' expressions of shock on Monday, "Israeli soldiers have been posting images of their war crimes and cultural desecration for two and a half years straight without interruption," said Grim.
UN experts have warned as Israel has carried out its attacks in Lebanon since early March that "deliberately attacking civilians or civilian objects amounts to a war crime."
While the destruction of the Jesus statue drew condemnation Monday from Netanyahu, the IDF, and US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee—who called for "swift, severe, and public consequences"—it was far from the only attack waged by Israel in Lebanon over the weekend.
Despite a ceasefire that was announced Friday and a statement from President Donald Trump that further IDF attacks were "PROHIBITED," Israel continued demolishing infrastructure and shelling areas in southern Lebanon over the weekend, and three people were injured in an Israeli drone strike near the Litani River on Monday.
"Big businesses that get refunds need to get the money back to their customers; ‘everyday low prices’ is not the way to do it," said US Sen. Ed Markey.
The Trump administration on Monday launched a portal designed to facilitate refunds on around $166 billion taken in from tariffs that the US Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional earlier this year.
But only businesses that directly paid President Donald Trump's sweeping import taxes are eligible for relief—not the millions of Americans who paid higher prices as a result of the illegal tariffs. As The New York Times observed, "The extent to which consumers realize any gain hinges on whether businesses share the proceeds, something that few have publicly committed to do."
US Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), the top Democrat on the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, said in a statement Monday that big corporations that passed tariff costs onto consumers are set to "benefit the most" from the Trump administration's refund system, given that they are better-equipped to deal with the complicated application process and potential issues with the newly created portal.
Markey faulted the administration for its "shortsighted decision to not issue automatic refunds," instead choosing a convoluted application system that's expected to face issues due to massive demand. The Associated Press noted that "companies must submit declarations listing the goods on which they collectively put billions of dollars toward the import taxes the court subsequently struck down."
"If [Customs and Border Protection] approves a claim, it will take 60 to 90 days for a refund to be issued," the outlet observed. "The government expects to process refunds in phases, however, focusing first on more recent tariff payments. Any number of technical factors and procedural issues could delay an importer’s application, so any reimbursements businesses plan to make to customers likely would trickle down slowly."
"Big businesses must help ease the ongoing affordability crisis by passing on any refund savings they receive to customers and small businesses."
Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee (JEC) estimated that, prior to the US Supreme Court's ruling in February, Trump's tariffs had cost US families over $1,700 each. Overall, American consumers paid more than $231 billion in tariff costs from February 2025 to January 2026, according to the JEC.
Markey said Monday that “American small businesses and families deserve to get their money back with interest."
"Big businesses that get refunds need to get the money back to their customers; ‘everyday low prices’ is not the way to do it," the senator said. "There must be no further delay or complicated hoops to jump through. CBP must ensure quick and easy refunds without further documentation. Big businesses must help ease the ongoing affordability crisis by passing on any refund savings they receive to customers and small businesses who paid them rather than waiting around for a rebate that may never come.”
Unlikely to receive relief from the Trump administration, some consumers harmed by tariffs are taking legal action against corporations that jacked up prices.
The American Prospect reported Monday that "while companies are pursuing tariff refunds and the Trump administration is levying new global tariffs to replace what was struck down, some consumers are filing their own lawsuits seeking relief for higher prices paid because of tariffs."
"Lawsuits have been filed against at least five corporations that plaintiffs say raised prices to pay for tariffs—costs set to be refunded to companies," the Prospect noted. "The proposed class action suits target Costco, EssilorLuxottica (the maker of Ray-Ban sunglasses), activewear company Fabletics, UPS, and FedEx."
US Energy Secretary Chris Wright told CNN on Sunday that gas prices might not drop below $3 until next year.
US President Donald Trump on Monday said his own energy secretary, former fracking executive Chris Wright, was incorrect when he said gasgas prices may not get below $3 per gallon until next year.
In a Sunday interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, Wright was asked when Americans could expect to see gas prices fall significantly after they spiked to over $4 per gallon on average nationwide because of Trump's illegal war of choice with Iran.
"I don't know," Wright responded. "That could happen later this year. That might not happen until next year."
In an interview with The Hill on Monday, Trump said Wright was "totally wrong" about the projection, and insisted that gas prices would plummet "as soon as [the war with Iran] ends."
Despite Trump's claims that gas prices will come down rapidly after the end of the war, The New York Times reported on Monday that the negative effects of Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has choked off roughly 20% of global petroleum shipments, is just starting to be felt.
The impact of the strait's closure is being felt most acutely in East Asia, where oil supply shortages are having a ripple effect that is likely to spread throughout the world if the strait remains closed for much longer.
"Even if there is a peace deal soon," the Times reported, "the future... will likely include months of canceled flights, surging food prices, factory pauses, delayed shipments and empty shelves for products long considered quick and easy to buy worldwide: plastic bags, instant noodles, vaccines, syringes, lipstick, microchips and sportswear."
The Times added that "even if the Strait of Hormuz stabilizes tomorrow, it could take years for oil and gas output and shipping to reach fat prewar levels."
Bob McNally, founder and president of the consulting firm Rapidan Energy Group, echoed the Times' analysis in an interview with Newsweek published on Monday.
"It is likely we will feel the effects of energy disruptions through the end of the year," McNally explained. "Even if the conflict and disruptions were to end today, the ripple effects would be felt for many months. Just restarting Gulf production and flows would take three to four months. Repairing damage to facilities could take longer."
Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, also projected more financial pain for US consumers in the months ahead.
"It doesn’t look like gasoline prices will return to pre-war levels anytime soon," Zandi wrote in a Sunday social media post. "That’s even if the war ends soon, which looks iffy, to say the least. And this abstracts from what Americans will need to shell out for higher prices on everything from groceries to airfares in the coming weeks and months. The financial pain caused by the war and its fallout on consumer spending and the economy is set to intensify."