August, 24 2017, 11:15am EDT
Trump Administration Releases Report to Try and Justify Bailing Out Dirty, Expensive Power Plants
Donald Trump's Secretary of Energy, Rick Perry, released a controversial grid report in an effort to pressure market operators, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and utilities to bail out aging coal and nuclear plants by forcing electricity customers to pay more for their expensive electricity.
WASHINGTON
Donald Trump's Secretary of Energy, Rick Perry, released a controversial grid report in an effort to pressure market operators, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and utilities to bail out aging coal and nuclear plants by forcing electricity customers to pay more for their expensive electricity. Some of the report's recommendations echo the unsubstantiated claim that coal and nuclear plants are needed for grid reliability, and recommend that rules be changed to compensate them regardless of their competitiveness against cleaner, cheaper, and more flexible energy sources like wind and solar. But the facts throughout the report don't support those conclusions.
Even before the report was released, its credibility was questioned by electrical engineers, policy experts, and electricity industry stakeholders as a political ploy by the Trump Administration to prop up old dirty energy plants at the expense of the rapidly growing clean energy sector. Their suspicions were confirmed when a draft copy of the report was released early by nonpartisan Department of Energy (DOE) career professionals, and then quickly retracted by DOE's political press office.
The draft report was informed by studies from energy policy experts, major universities, and nonpartisan energy stakeholder reports. It found that wind and solar energy strongly contributed to the affordability, reliability, and resilience of the grid; lowered prices for customers; and would continue to grow rapidly into the future.
The report's secrecy before its release has been unprecedented and even prompted the Sierra Club to file a lawsuit against DOE under the Freedom of Information Act for access to basic information on the report's premises and consultations. Perry has refused input from clean energy jobs creators, outside energy experts, and even members of Congress. The report's release is widely viewed as another instance of the Trump administration turning its back on basic transparency to the public.
In response, Mary Anne Hitt, Director of Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign, released the following statement:
"The failed spin of this study is one more sign that the Trump administration is creating its energy agenda by looking in the rearview mirror, while clean energy passes them by in the fast lane. It's disappointing -- but not surprising -- that Rick Perry took a well-crafted, insightful draft report from nonpartisan Department of Energy professionals and tried to make it into a talking points memo for coal and nuclear subsidies. The recommendations in this report try to downplay the clear benefits of clean energy to our power grid, economy, and electricity customers, and instead construct a fictional world where aging coal and nuclear plants are needed for grid resilience and can compete in today's twenty-first century energy markets.
"There is no evidence, in this report or elsewhere, that coal or nuclear plants are vital to our grid's long-term reliability, or that there will be increasing demand for them. In fact, all trends point in the opposite direction. The spin surrounding this report is nothing more than a half-baked attempt by the Trump Administration and its dirty energy allies to assemble a flimsy rationale in hopes of pressuring FERC, grid managers, and utilities to bail out uneconomical, highly subsidized coal and nuclear plants.
"The truth is simple: coal and nuclear can no longer compete on their own, and they are now pushing Trump to save them. This study is a shoddy attempt to do just that, and considering that Sierra Club just marked the nation's 257th coal plant retirement, it isn't going to work."
The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500LATEST NEWS
Advocates Renew Call for End to US Sanctions After Devastating Venezuela Earthquakes
"This is the time for cooperation, compassion, and respect for Venezuela’s sovereignty," said CodePink.
Jun 25, 2026
Human rights groups on Thursday implored the United States and allied countries to lift all sanctions against Venezuela—which experts say have already killed tens of thousands of people—as the beleaguered South American country reels from Wednesday's devastating earthquakes.
At least 188 people are dead and over 1,500 others injured, with those figures almost certain to rise, following a 7.2-magnitude temblor centered in San Felipe, Yaracuy—about 100 miles west of Caracas—and a 7.5-magnitude quake that struck less than a minute later, also in centered in Yaracuy.
US President Donald Trump, who authorized the illegal invasion of Venezuela and adbuction of President Nicolás Maduro earlier this year, wrote on social media after the earthquakes that his administration “stands ready, willing, and able to help."
“We will be there for our new and great friends," Trump claimed.
Delcy Rodríguez, Maduro's vice president and acting president since his ouster, thanked the Trump administration for "offering support and solidarity to the people of Venezuela in the face of this tragedy that has plunged us into mourning."
However, US sanctions—first imposed during then-President George W. Bush's second term while Hugo Chávez was leading Venezuela and ramped up under the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations—remain in place, complicating relief efforts after one of the country's worst-ever natural disasters.
While the Trump administration has issued narrow exemptions from sanctions to companies looking to profit from Venezuela's crisis and copious natural resources, primarily oil, these waivers have not delivered broad relief to the people who need it most.
"Today’s catastrophe makes clear what we have long argued: When a country is deliberately weakened through economic warfare, its ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters is also weakened," the US-based peace group CodePink said in a statement. "The United States has a responsibility to help address the humanitarian consequences of the policies it has imposed."
🇻🇪 CODEPINK extends our deepest condolences to the people of Venezuela following the devastating earthquakes that have taken hundreds of lives, injured thousands, and left entire communities in urgent need of assistance.Our full statement: buff.ly/QzYcQ3p
[image or embed]
— CODEPINK (@codepink.bsky.social) June 25, 2026 at 2:22 PM
CodePink continued:
Too often, we’ve seen the US and other Western countries exploit natural disasters like this in order to deepen foreign control. In Haiti, the US and its allies have repeatedly pushed militarization and politically conditioned aid instead of genuine recovery led by the country itself. In this moment, the world must refuse to allow Venezuela to be forced down the same path.
We also call on the administration to immediately lift all US sanctions on Venezuela and release Venezuelan funds under US jurisdiction so they can be used for emergency relief, reconstruction, and recovery.
"This is the time for cooperation, compassion, and respect for Venezuela’s sovereignty," CodePink added. "We urge the international community to support relief efforts and stand with the Venezuelan people as they rebuild their homes, their communities, and their future."
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), a Washington, DC-based think tank, said Thursday that "while the Trump administration has issued a series of general licenses to allow foreign businesses and banks to operate in Venezuela in spite of US sanctions, the continued existence of these sanctions significantly discourages international economic and financial actors from expanding operations there."
CEPR co-director Mark Weisbrot said that “we must remember that Venezuela suffered the worst depression in the history of the world, without a war, due to illegal US economic sanctions."
"This deadly destruction was not a mistake, but an expected result that would happen to any country that was cut off by sanctions from the international financial system, and also from the vast majority of its foreign exchange earnings from exports," he continued.
According to a 2019 CEPR report, as many as 40,000 Venezuelans died due to sanctions during the previous two years. The sanctions ostensibly targeted Maduro's government, but made it much more difficult for millions of people to obtain food, medicine, and other necessities.
“Tens of thousands, and more likely hundreds of thousands, of Venezuelans died as a result of those sanctions," Weisbrot said Thursday. "The United States is therefore obligated to help prevent further loss of life in Venezuela."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Groups Argue Trump Orders Have 'Murdered Over 210 Civilians With No Sound Legal or Moral Basis'
“By claiming that these attacks are legal while refusing to provide any evidence or rationale, President Trump shows once again his disdain for basic transparency, human rights, and the rule of law."
Jun 25, 2026
Civil rights groups squared off against the Trump administration in a New York federal court on Wednesday, with the former seeking to compel the release of a secret Department of Justice memo being used to justify illegal bombings of alleged narco-trafficking boats and the latter claiming executive privilege in a bid to avert the document's disclosure.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order on the first day of his second term designating drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and then reportedly signed a secret order directing the Pentagon to use military force against them. Last July, the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued a classified opinion providing the legal rationale for the strikes, which international law experts around the world contend are illegal acts of murder and possibly war crimes or even crimes against humanity.
The ACLU, New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) argued in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York that the Trump administration cannot conceal its legal justification for boat strikes from the American people while repeatedly referring to it.
“People across the country, politicians across the aisle, and the families of victims have been demanding answers as to how our government is justifying the cold-blooded murder of civilians,” ACLU National Security Project staff attorney Jeffrey Stein said in a statement. “The Trump administration has murdered over 210 civilians with no sound legal or moral basis. At a minimum, the administration must disclose to the American people why it thinks this killing spree is lawful.”
The DOJ, which is seeking a summary judgment, claimed that the memo contains classified and highly sensitive information that, if disclosed, would compromise intelligence operations and sources. DOJ attorneys argued that executive privilege shields the memo from disclosure.
“Wouldn’t that be true of any OLC memo?f” US District Judge Paul Engelmayer countered, according to Courthouse News Service. “Is it the government’s position that any presidential communications privilege cannot be waived?"
Stein asserted that the boat strikes are being carried out "on the basis of secret law" that "has no place in a democratic society" and dismissed the government's claim as “contrary to the foundational presidential communications privileges" in Freedom of Information Act cases.
CCR legal director Baher Azmy accused the Trump administration of "displacing the fundamental mandates of international law with the phony wartime rhetoric of a basic autocrat."
“If the OLC opinion seeks to dress up the obvious illegality of these serial homicides in legalese in order to provide cover, the public needs to see this analysis and ultimately hold accountable all those who facilitate murder in the United States’ name," he added.
CCR said that the OLC memo "supposedly validates the ongoing strikes as lawful acts in an alleged 'armed conflict' with unspecified 'drug cartels.'"
"Reportedly, the memo also purports to immunize personnel who authorized or took part in these unlawful strikes from future criminal prosecution for what would otherwise simply be homicides," the group added.
As CCR said Wednesday:
Contrary to the government’s public assertions, the US is not, and could not be, in an armed conflict with Latin American drug cartels. Under international law, an armed conflict between a state and a nonstate actor exists only if the nonstate actor is an “organized armed group” that is structured and disciplined like regular armed forces and is engaged in “protracted armed violence” against the state. There is no plausible argument that any drug cartel satisfies this test vis-à-vis the United States.
Even if the OLC does release the memo, it doesn't mean that its arguments are actually legal under international law. OLC lawyers have notoriously written opinions that affirm the purported legality of their administration's policies, from John Yoo positing during former President George W. Bush's War on Terror that detainee abuse only crossed the threshold of torture when the pain inflicted upon the victim was equal to “organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death," to the Obama-era OLC determining that the president could order the extrajudicial assassination of US citizens under certain circumstances.
Since last September, US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) has publicly disclosed 66 strikes on boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean that it has claimed—without providing evidence—were involved in "narco-trafficking operations." The bombings have killed 215 people and left around a dozen survivors, according to a strike tracker published by The Intercept. In the first of the attacks, a special operations commander ordered a second strike that killed two survivors, reportedly on orders from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to "kill everybody."
Relatives of people killed in previous US boat bombings, as well as officials in Venezuela and Colombia, have said that numerous victims were fishers who were not involved in the illicit drug trade. In January, relatives of two Trinidadian fishers killed in the strikes filed a federal wrongful death lawsuit in Massachusetts.
NYCLU staff attorney Ify Chikezie said Wednesday that "the public deserves to know how the Trump administration is rubber-stamping the killing of civilians."
“By claiming that these attacks are legal while refusing to provide any evidence or rationale, President Trump shows once again his disdain for basic transparency, human rights, and the rule of law," Chikezie added. "The court must step in and order the administration to release these documents immediately.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Judge Blocks 'Unconstitutional and Dangerous' Trump Order Designed to Derail Mail-In Voting
"The court rightly recognized that the president and the executive branch lack both the legal authority and the capacity to compile a complete and accurate list of US citizens or eligible voters in every state."
Jun 25, 2026
On the heels of a federal judge in the District of Massachusetts siding with Democratic state attorneys general who challenged President Donald Trump's executive order requiring Americans to show proof of citizenship when registering to vote, another judge in the same district on Thursday blocked key portions of a second Trump order attacking US elections.
In the latest decision, District Judge Indira Talwani struck down Section 2, which orders the US Department of Homeland Security to create "confirmed citizen lists" of eligible voters, as well as Section 3, which directs the US Postal Service to create rules to limit the mailing of ballots to voters not included on its own lists.
"The Constitution does not grant the president any specific powers over elections. Broadly, the Constitution vests the president with 'executive power' and commands him to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed,'" wrote Talwani, an appointee of former President Barack Obama. "Sections 2 and 3... are legally void as they are ultra vires and unconstitutionally violate the separation of powers."
The judge also struck down Section 5, which requires the US Deparment of Justicee and all other executive agencies "with relevant authority" to "take all lawful steps to deter and address noncompliance with federal law," plus mandates that states and localities "preserve, for a five-year-period, all records and materials—excluding ballots cast—evidencing participation in any federal election (e.g., ballot envelopes, regardless of carriers)." She found that this portion of the order "is merely precatory."
Several state attorneys general were involved in both of this week's cases, including New York Democrat Letitia James, who called Thursday's decision a "major victory" as well as a "critical step in defending the foundation of our democracy and protecting the sacred right to vote."
California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Thursday also cheered the back-to-back wins against the Republican president.
"Just yesterday, President Trump's first elections-related Executive Order was blocked. Now, his second elections-related executive Order has suffered the same fate, and rightfully so. As the federal judge wrote in today's decision, 'The Constitution does not grant the president any specific powers over elections.' Those powers are reserved to the states and Congress," Bonta said. "Democracy doesn't work on its own—it requires constant vigilance. And that's what my fellow attorneys general and I will continue to provide."
The AGs weren't alone in challenging Trump's order. The Association of Americans Resident Overseas, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, League of Women Voters, LWV of Massachusetts, OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates, and US Vote Foundation also filed suit, represented by the national and Massachusetts arms of the ACLU as well as Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Brennan Center for Justice, Legal Defense Fund, and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.
The attorneys and plaintiffs in that case said in a joint statement that as Thursday's decision "makes clear, President Trump's executive order from March 2026 attempting to seize control of elections is unconstitutional and dangerous."
"This ruling is a critical step in preserving free and fair elections," they said. "The court rightly recognized that the president and the executive branch lack both the legal authority and the capacity to compile a complete and accurate list of US citizens or eligible voters in every state. The ruling also rightly recognizes that the US Postal Service has no authority to limit the distribution of mail ballots."
"The court has yet to rule on our request to block the executive order's provisions on mail voting on behalf of a nonpartisan coalition of voting rights groups," they noted. "The same reasoning underpinning today's decision should hold in our case. President Trump's unlawful executive order violates the separation of powers, threatens the integrity of our elections, and must be enjoined from taking effect in the upcoming primary and midterm elections."
Meanwhile, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson signaled the administration will continue the fight, telling multiple media outlets that "President Trump is committed to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of our elections. The president's executive order lawfully protects our elections, and we are confident that we will ultimately prevail in its implementation."
Jackson also reiterated the administration's support for the proposed Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, saying that "President Trump has also urged Congress to pass the SAVE America Act and other legislative proposals that would establish a uniform standard of photo ID for voting, prohibit no-excuse mail-in voting, and end the practice of ballot harvesting to secure our elections for generations to come."
Trump on Wednesday canceled his planned signing ceremony for the bipartisan 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act "until such time as we pass the desperately needed SAVE AMERICA ACT, which I consider to be a National Emergency."
In response, US Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) summarized: "Congress overwhelmingly passed a housing bill to bring down costs. But Trump just threw a tantrum. He's refusing to sign bipartisan legislation to make housing more affordable in a bizarre effort to try to rig the elections."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular