July, 07 2017, 10:00am EDT

Groups Launch Campaign to Build Solar Inside the Keystone XL Pipeline Route
Crowdfunding will support solar panel installations in the path of the pipeline.
Omaha, NE
Today, Bold Nebraska, 350.org, Indigenous Environmental Network, CREDO, and Oil Change International launched a campaign, called "Solar XL," to build solar arrays along the route of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline in Nebraska. The solar panels, which will be installed in several locations along the route, will help power the farms and ranches threatened by TransCanada's use of eminent domain for private gain. The campaign will focus on crowdfunding through Bold Nebraska to support installation of the solar panels.
View fundraising campaign online: https://actionnetwork.org/fundraising/solar-xl-resisting-keystone-xl-by-building-clean-energy-in-the-pipelines-path
Download photos of landowners for media use with attribution: https://www.flickr.com/photos/350org/sets/72157683761876090/with/34935558323/
The Solar XL campaign is launching one month before the Nebraska Public Service Commission (PSC) is expected to hold the main legal hearing for TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline. Nebraska is the last state to review the pipeline and the PSC has the ability to approve, reject or alter TransCanada's proposed route. Tens of thousands of comments have been submitted to the PSC from across the country, urging Commissioners to reject the permit.
The Keystone XL pipeline would carry 830,000 barrels a day of foreign tar sands from Canada through Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska then on to the export market. The pipeline would pass through farms, ranches, and Indigenous land, posing a threat to the Ogallala Aquifer and other water sources that could be contaminated by spills and leaks. A worst-case spill study showed the Platte River could be polluted with almost 6 million gallons of tar sands and chemicals like benzene.
The Solar XL campaign will put renewable energy directly in Keystone XL's path, underscoring the need to center solutions to climate change while resisting the expansion of the fossil fuel industry. Pipelines like Keystone XL would lock in disastrous levels of warming, exacerbating the climate crisis. With the Trump administration attempting to undermine U.S. action on climate, the need for a just transition to 100% renewable energy has never been greater.
The campaign will focus on crowdfunding through Bold Nebraska to support the installation of the solar panels in the lead up to the Nebraska Public Service Commission hearings on Keystone XL in August. On August 6th, one day before the hearings begin, pipeline opponents will march through the streets of Lincoln and urge commissioners to reject the Keystone XL permit and deny the use of eminent domain for private gain.
The solar panels will serve not only as a form of clean energy, but as a symbol of job creation and job growth in renewable energy, making a just transition away from fossil fuels all the more urgent. In 2016, solar power employed more people than oil, coal and gas combined, according to a report from the U.S. Department of Energy. These findings starkly contrast Trump's promises to "bring back" coal jobs, and his administration's work to dismantle climate protections. If permits are granted for Keystone XL construction in Nebraska, TransCanada will have to tear down homegrown clean energy in order to build, and will galvanize people across the country to fight back.
Quotes from landowners building clean solar energy in the path of Keystone XL:
"I am vehemently opposed to the Keystone XL pipeline mainly because of the properties of the contents of the tar sands oil it will carry -- this is not your Mother's crude oil, it is the Devil's, and it can kill," said Nebraska landowner Jim Carlson. "We must be focused on clean, renewable energy and America can get along just fine without this foul concoction they call bitumen that TransCanada wants to pipe across our precious soil and water."
"The need for the KXL pipeline product is non-existent in the United States," said Nebraska landowner Bob Allpress. "The monetary benefit to the peoples of Nebraska will be gone in 7 years, while the risks to our state are for the life of this pipeline. The installation of wind and solar production in Nebraska will provide many good Nebraska jobs and provide years of cheap electricity for everyone in our great state."
Partner quotes:
"Building America means relying on energy that protects our property rights and ensures we have clean drinking water. Foreign tarsands in the Keystone XL pipeline, that would flow to the export market, is not in our public or our state's interest," said Bold Alliance president Jane Kleeb. "When faced with challenges, Nebraskans find solutions together to show our communities' values and the bond to the land that TransCanada cannot break or buy."
"If Nebraska grants a permit to TransCanada, people across the country will be ready to defend this renewable energy project from the fossil fuel industry's grasp," said Sara Shor, 350.org Keep it in the Ground Campaign Manager. "Putting solar panels in the path of Keystone XL is a local effort that mirrors the future we want to see at a massive scale. Fossil fuel pipelines like Keystone XL are driving us towards disastrous levels of warming, and we're already seeing its effects. Meanwhile the pipeline route continues to cut through indigenous lands that are calling for alternatives. With a complete lack of leadership in the highest levels of government, it's up to us to fight for and build the renewable energy future we need."
"As protectors of the water, Mother Earth, and our communities, our resolute stance against dirty projects like the Keystone XL pipeline must be equally founded upon a belief in good projects like renewable, sustainable energy," said Dallas Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network Campaign Organizer. "It's time to see a Just Transition away from fossil fuels, and like any tremendous moments of social change, it's frontline communities, leading the way. With these solar systems we are building literal beacons of change along the proposed route of what needs to end, the KXL pipeline and the fossil fuel regime it represents."
"Our fight against Keystone XL is two-fold: we're working to stop the pipeline from being built and to create the renewable energy solutions we need for a livable future," said Wayne Frederick, member of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. "On the Rosebud reservation in South Dakota, renewable energy projects are already serving Indigenous peoples, and more are being planned. From Nebraska to Alberta, Indigenous peoples, farmers, and communities along Keystone XL's route know that our best resistance is through putting the answers in the path of the problem."
"The Keystone XL pipeline is an even worse idea now than it was nearly a decade ago when it was first proposed," said CREDO Deputy Political Director Josh Nelson. "By building solar panels directly in the proposed pipeline's path, the Solar XL project will serve as a powerful reminder that the future belongs to clean sources of energy like wind and solar, not dirty tar sands pipelines like Keystone XL."
"Keystone XL is yesterday's pipeline to transport yesterday's energy that even the Wall St. Journal now notes is no longer needed or wanted by oil companies" said Stephen Kretzmann, Executive Director of Oil Change International. "KXL is the 21st century version of the C&O Canal, which was made obsolete before it even opened by the new technology of railroads. The SolarXL project will amplify community and native concerns with the pipelines of the past, and light the way for all of us towards a clean energy future."
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
'No Safety in Appeasement': Law Firms That Fought Trump Vindicated as DOJ Drops Cases
"Another significant victory for the rule of law over Trump's reign of lawlessness," said Rep. Jamie Raskin.
Mar 03, 2026
Congressman Jamie Raskin said the US Department of Justice's decision Monday to abandon its legal cases against law firms that refused to capitulate to President Donald Trump should serve as "a reminder that those who fight back against authoritarianism are winning."
The DOJ asked the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to dismiss its cases against law firms including Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey, and Jenner & Block, which won legal challenges they filed last year after Trump issued executive orders saying they should lose government contracts and their employees should be blocked from government buildings.
Those executive orders were signed because the firms represented and employed high-profile Democrats and other opponents of Trump.
Other law firms, including Skadden Arps and Paul Weiss, angered lawyers within their ranks and the larger legal community when they signed deals with Trump; the latter firm agreed to end its internal diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and provide $40 million in free legal work for the president and causes he supports.
The Trump administration's decision on Monday proved, said Raskin (D-Md.), that "there’s no safety in appeasement.”
“When the Trump administration tried to bully and silence law firms by banning them from federal buildings, courthouses and contracts, a handful—like Susman Godfrey, Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale—fought back," said Raskin. "Today, those firms forced Trump to back down and abandon his blatantly unconstitutional effort to punish lawyers, clients, and causes because Trump disagrees with their speech. Meanwhile, the firms that chose to roll over saddled their associates and partners with doing billions of dollars-worth of free legal work for Trump, his twisted administration and his MAGA allies."
While other firms caved to Trump's demands last year, the companies that didn't quickly won legal victories, with one federal judge saying the executive order targeting Jenner & Block was “doubly violative of the Constitution" because it targeted the clients it represents as well as a lawyer it once employed—Andrew Weissman, who was part of former special counsel Robert Mueller's team that investigated Trump.
“This order, like the others, seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the executive branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers," US District Judge John Bates wrote last May. "It thus violates the Constitution and the court will enjoin its operation in full.”
"This episode will be remembered as demonstrating the difference between institutions that had the ethical courage to uphold the Constitution and fight bullying and then won, and those that compromised their ethics and gained nothing."
Jenner & Block said Monday that "the government’s decision to withdraw its appeals makes permanent the rulings of four federal judges that the executive orders targeting law firms, including Jenner & Block, were unconstitutional."
"Our partnership is proud to have stood firm on behalf of its clients, and we look forward to continuing to serve them—guided by these bedrock values—for many decades to come," said the firm.
Brian Hauss, deputy director of the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project at the ACLU, said the DOJ had finally admitted "what everyone knew on Day 1: There is no way to defend these unconstitutional executive orders."
“This shameful assault on the rule of law has failed, thanks to the brave lawyers who refused to compromise their integrity," said Hauss.
Vanita Gupta, former associate attorney general under the Biden administration, told NBC News that the law groups that struck deals with the White House had "undermined the rule of law and the legal profession in this country."
"This episode will be remembered as demonstrating the difference between institutions that had the ethical courage to uphold the Constitution and fight bullying and then won, and those that compromised their ethics and gained nothing," Gupta said. "Let’s hope that media companies, universities, and other organizations pay heed."
In addition to his attacks on law firms, the president has threatened universities with funding cuts and federal investigations into what the White House views as antisemitism and extremism on campus and the colleges' efforts to promote diversity and inclusion.
At least six universities have struck deals with Trump. The University of Pennsylvania agreed to ban transgender student athletes from participating on women's sports teams and Columbia University agreed to further crack down on campus protests like those that erupted in 2024 against US support for Israel's assault on Gaza—protests that both the Biden and Trump administrations claimed were antisemitic.
Harvard sued the administration over its decision to freeze $2.2 billion in research funding and was granted a restraining order last year to protect international students whom the White House had threatened with visa restrictions.
On Monday, Raskin said the DOJ's decision to back down from the attacks on law firms was "another significant victory for the rule of law over Trump's reign of lawlessness."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Netanyahu Insists Iran Assault Is 'Not an Endless War' as US Sends More Forces to Middle East
Benjamin Netanyahu infamously predicted that the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 would "have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
Mar 03, 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted in a Fox News appearance late Monday that the intensifying assault on Iran "is not an endless war," even as Trump administration officials declined to provide a clear timeline for the ongoing military operations, deployed more forces to the region, and signaled a more intense bombing campaign is ahead.
As elements of Trump's MAGA base expressed outrage over the war, which is broadly unpopular with the American public, Netanyahu claimed in an appearance on "Hannity" that the US-Israeli onslaught "will create conditions of peace," remarks that came as the Middle East descended into regional war as Iran retaliated against the illegal attacks with strikes on sites in at least nine countries.
The Israeli prime minister's comments recalled his infamous prediction in 2002, ahead of the US invasion of Iraq, that "if you take out Saddam, Saddam's regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region."
Netanyahu's remarks to Trump loyalist Sean Hannity echoed those of US Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth, who told reporters and the public earlier Monday that "this is not Iraq," dismissing criticism of the administration for plunging the US into another disastrous Middle East war.
"This is not endless," Hegseth said. The Pentagon chief later bristled at a question about President Donald Trump's suggested timeline of "four weeks or less," calling it a "typical NBC sort of got-you type question."
"President Trump has all the latitude in the world to talk about how long it may or may not take four weeks, two weeks, six weeks," Hegseth said. "It could move up, it could move back. We're going to execute at his command."
During the same press conference, Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the US would be sending more forces to the region, declining to offer specifics so as not to "tip the enemy off." Caine also said the US expects to "take additional losses."
"This work is just beginning and will continue," Caine said.
Trump, for his part, said the timeline for the war is "whatever it takes" for the US and Israel to achieve their stated objectives, which have ranged from knocking out Iran's nuclear energy program to full-scale regime change.
"Right from the beginning we projected four to five weeks, but we have the capability to go far longer than that," Trump said.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, meanwhile, warned that "the hardest hits are yet to come from the US military" and said that "the next phase will be even more punishing on Iran than it is right now." Rubio also indicated that Trump decided to join Israel in attacking Iran because the planned Israeli attack was likely to spark retaliation against US forces in the region, a justification that critics described as "insane."
The Iranian Red Crescent said Tuesday that Iran's death toll from the assault is now close to 800 and counting. The US has confirmed six deaths from an Iranian strike on a military installation in Kuwait.
"That we would just follow an ally into a war of choice that puts hundreds of Americans' lives, if not thousands of Americans' lives, at risk should be bone-chilling to Americans," US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said late Monday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Group Leads Push for UN to Declare US-Israeli Assault on Iran 'War of Aggression'
"No legal framework, international or domestic, can justify this."
Mar 02, 2026
A leading human rights group on Monday urged the United Nations General Assembly to declare the unprovoked US-Israeli assault on Iran—which has already killed more than 500 people in just three days, including many children—a "war of aggression."
In a letter sent to the permanent missions of all UN member states in New York City, Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN) "called on governments to formally request an emergency special session of the UN General Assembly to declare the assault a war of aggression in violation of the UN Charter and to demand the immediate cessation of all hostilities."
"The [UN] Security Council is unable to make that determination because the United States, as a permanent member and a party to the conflict, will veto any resolution," DAWN explained. "The General Assembly should act in its place."
DAWN's call came as the death toll from three days of US-Israeli bombardment of cities, towns, and sites throughout Iran rose to at least 555, according to the Iranian Red Crescent Society. Multiple massacres—including a bombing of a girls' school in Minab that officials said killed at least 180 people, many of them students—have been reported.
"The United States has initiated a war of aggression, which UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 defines as 'a crime against international peace' and which the Nuremberg Tribunal—established by the United States itself—called 'the supreme international crime,'" the group noted.
DAWN continued:
The US and Israeli decision to go to war violates the foundations of jus ad bellum, the body of international law governing when a state may lawfully use force against another. Under UN Charter Article 2(4), all member states are prohibited from using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state. There are only two explicit exceptions: self-defense under Article 51, or authorization by the UN Security Council under Chapter VII. Neither applies here. Article 51 permits self-defense only "if an armed attack occurs," and Iran had not attacked the United States. Even under the doctrine of anticipatory self-defense, the war is unlawful.
"No legal framework, international or domestic, can justify this US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran," DAWN executive director Omar Shakir said in a statement. "This war is patently illegal, and it must be stopped."
DAWN's call came on the same day that US First Lady Melania Trump chaired a UN Security Council meeting about the role of education in "advancing tolerance and world peace."
Just to be clear, sending his wife Melania to preside over the United Nations Security Council is a display of contempt for the UN by Trump.During his first term, Trump similarly sent his daughter Ivanka to multiple United Nations General Assembly sessions.
[image or embed]
— Leah McElrath (@leahmcelrath.bsky.social) March 2, 2026 at 1:02 PM
"We've become the laughingstock of the entire world," lamented the social media group Occupy Democrats. "This is an unprecedented appearance by an American first dady and yet another sign that [President] Donald Trump prizes loyalty and proximity to himself over competence."
"In fact, this is the first time that the spouse of ANY world leader has been allowed to take the president's seat on the Security Council," Occupy Democrats added. "It sends a clear signal to the world that the United States is now little more than a nepotistic, tin-pot dictatorship."
DAWN also sent a letter to members of Congress urging them to pass a pair of war powers resolutions that would bar US forces from waging an unconstitutional war on Iran. H.Con.Res.38 and S.J.Res.59—introduced last year respectively by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)—would direct Trump to withdraw US forces from unconstitutional attacks on Iran.
"The question before Congress is not whether to authorize this war retroactively," the letter states. "Given that... this war has been illegal under US domestic law from the moment it began... the question before you is whether to end it now, and Congress has the power to do so."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


