

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.
Paul Paz y Miño, Amazon Watch at paz@amazonwatch.org or +1.510.281.9020 x302
 Beatrice Olivastri, Friends of the Earth Canada at beatrice@foecanada.org or +1.613.724.8690
 Doug Olthuis, Steelworkers Humanity Fund at dolthuis@usw.ca
This morning, Friends of the Earth Canada, the Steelworkers Humanity Fund of the United Steelworkers of Canada, and Amazon Watch filed an application to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice calling on the court to unseal documents in the historic legal effort to enforce one of the largest environmental judgments in history.
The Ecuadorian judgment was rendered in 2011 against Chevron Corporation, the U.S. oil giant, for deliberately polluting the Ecuadorian Amazon by dumping over 16 billion gallons of toxic oil waste waters and creating massive environmental destruction and a health crisis for tens of thousands of Amazonian inhabitants. In anticipation of a negative verdict, Chevron fled Ecuador, and shed its assets. Since the initial verdict and its affirmation by the Ecuadorian Supreme Court, the oil company is forcing the Ecuadorian communities to seek justice in Canada where the company holds more than enough assets to satisfy the now $12 billion debt to affected Ecuadorian indigenous and farmer communities who are in dire need of a clean-up, clean water, and health care. This is a legal delay strategy the likes of which has never before been seen. The Ecuadorian affected communities are attempting to seize Chevron's Canadian assets to cover its now US$12 billion debt to fund clean-up and health-care costs for affected peoples. Chevron operates 1,500 subsidiaries with $225-billion annual revenues, while Ecuadorian villagers have an average income of about $20 a day.
Later this month, a hearing will be held in Toronto before the Superior Court of Ontario where the Ecuadorians will appeal a lower court decision, essentially protecting Chevron Canada's assets from being seized to cover the debts of its parent company. Chevron has thus far been able to hide the documents in this case from public scrutiny and has argued that the assets of its subsidiary Chevron-Canada cannot be seized. These documents, also hidden from Chevron shareholders, may show that the Canadian company takes direction from Chevron management in the U.S. and operates as little more than a holding company.
The motion filed today asserts that preventing the public from accessing Chevron's filings violates the principle of open justice and is similar to one submitted to the court this same week by the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company). The Ontario Court of Appeal has also stated in a recent ruling that the case against Chevron is "public interest litigation" and that "there can be no doubt that the environmental devastation to the appellants' lands has severely hampered their ability to earn a livelihood." To date, Chevron has benefited from the fact that much of the proceedings are being conducted to a great degree behind a "shroud of secrecy."
Chevron's actions in this case, one which it famously promised to "fight until hell freezes over and then fight it out on the ice," have been repeatedly condemned by prominent international human rights and environmental organizations. Chevron legal intimidation tactics against its critics in the U.S. and abroad have helped to usher in a new era of corporate retaliation against the efforts of civil societies to hold them to account. In fact, many Canadian organizations have already publicly declared their support for the Ecuadorian communities seeking justice in this case and an end to Chevron intimidation tactics which have not only targeted environmental NGOs, but shareholders and journalists as well.
"Canada has a long-standing record of applying the polluter pays principle," says Beatrice Olivastri, CEO, Friends of the Earth Canada. "The Ecuadorian court rendered its judgment against Chevron Corporation as a polluter in 2011. Now, in the interests of transparency and open justice, the Canadian public at large needs to have access to the full, unredacted court record as the Canadian court deliberates on the enforcement of the Ecuadorian judgement. Allowing Chevron Corporation to continue to hide their activities from the Canadian public sets a dangerous precedent for future cases."
"The Canadian public has a right to know what Chevron has done in Ecuador, and what the relationship is between Chevron Corporation and Chevron Canada. In Canada we have a commitment to transparency and aversion to impunity, and Chevron is abusing both in this case. We have an interest in justice being served and can't accept legal delay and avoidance tactics. Canadian courts have an important role to play to ensure Ecuadorian communities have access to justice and remedy," said Doug Olthuis, Executive Director, Steelworkers Humanity Fund.
"Chevron continues to try to hide everything it can from public scrutiny, but the truth is it can't hide the evidence of what it did in Ecuador. The oil company has lost every appeal in Canada and continues to try to delay while the affected communities in Ecuador continue to sicken and die from contamination. The oil company continues to waste shareholder funds on legal battles it ultimately can never win. The public needs to see the truth behind Chevron's justice aversion and efforts of impunity in what is the most important corporate accountability case in history. We hope the Canadian courts recognize this and approve our request to open these files up to the public," said Paul Paz y Mino, Associate Director of Amazon Watch.
Amazon Watch is a nonprofit organization founded in 1996 to protect the rainforest and advance the rights of indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with indigenous and environmental organizations in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability and the preservation of the Amazon's ecological systems.
"Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?" asked Sen. Bernie Sanders.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday implored his Democratic colleagues in Congress not to cave to President Donald Trump and Republicans in the ongoing government shutdown fight, warning that doing so would hasten the country's descent into authoritarianism.
In an op-ed for The Guardian, Sanders (I-Vt.) called Trump a "schoolyard bully" and argued that "anyone who thinks surrendering to him now will lead to better outcomes and cooperation in the future does not understand how a power-hungry demagogue operates."
"This is a man who threatens to arrest and jail his political opponents, deploys the US military into Democratic cities, and allows masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to pick people up off the streets and throw them into vans without due process," Sanders wrote. "He has sued virtually every major media outlet because he does not tolerate criticism, has extorted funds from law firms and is withholding federal funding from states that voted against him."
If Democrats capitulate, Sanders warned, Trump "will utilize his victory to accelerate his movement toward authoritarianism."
"At a time when he already has no regard for our democratic system of checks and balances," the senator wrote, "he will be emboldened to continue decimating programs that protect elderly people, children, the sick and the poor while giving more tax breaks and other benefits to his fellow oligarchs."
Sanders' op-ed came as the shutdown continued with no end in sight, with Democrats standing by their demand for an extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits as a necessary condition for any government funding deal. Republicans have so far refused to negotiate on the ACA subsidies even as health insurance premiums skyrocket nationwide.
The Trump administration, meanwhile, is illegally withholding Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding from tens of millions of Americans—including millions of children—despite court rulings ordering him to release the money.
In a "60 Minutes" interview that aired Sunday, Trump again urged Republicans to nuke the 60-vote filibuster in the Senate to remove the need for Democratic support to reopen the government and advance other elements of their agenda unilaterally. Under the status quo, Republicans need the support of at least seven Democratic senators to advance a government funding package.
"The Republicans have to get tougher," Trump said. "If we end the filibuster, we can do exactly what we want. We're not going to lose power."
Congressional Democrats have faced some pressure from allies, most notably the head of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), to cut a deal with Republicans to end the shutdown and alleviate the suffering it has inflicted on federal workers and many others.
But Democrats appear unmoved by the AFGE president's demand, and other labor leaders have since voiced support for the minority party's effort to secure an extension of ACA subsidies.
"We're urging our Democratic friends to hold the line," said Jaime Contreras, executive vice president of the 185,000-member Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ.
In his op-ed on Sunday, Sanders asked, "Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?"
"If the Democrats cave now, it would be a betrayal of the millions of Americans who have fought and died for democracy and our Constitution," the senator wrote. "It would be a sellout of a working class that is struggling to survive in very difficult economic times. Democrats in Congress are the last remaining opposition to Trump's quest for absolute power. To surrender now would be an historic tragedy for our country, something that history will not look kindly upon."
"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.
After failing to use the government's might to bully Jimmy Kimmel off the air earlier this fall, President Donald Trump is once again threatening to bring the force of law down on comedians for the egregious crime of making fun of him.
This time, his target was NBC late-night host Seth Meyers, whom the president said, in a Truth Social post Saturday, "may be the least talented person to 'perform' live in the history of television."
On Thursday, the comedian hosted a segment mocking Trump's bizarre distaste for the electromagnetic catapults aboard Navy ships, which the president said he may sign an executive order to replace with older (and less efficient) steam-powered ones.
Trump did not take kindly to Meyers' barbs: "On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? - NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!"
It is, of course, not "illegal" for a late-night comedian, or any other news reporter or commentator, for that matter, to be "anti-Trump." But it's not the first time the president has made such a suggestion. Amid the backlash against Kimmel's firing in September, Trump asserted that networks that give him "bad publicity or press" should have their licenses taken away.
"I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said. "All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.”
His FCC director, Brendan Carr, used a similar logic to justify his pressure campaign to get Kimmel booted by ABC, which he said could be punished for airing what he determined was "distorted” content.
Before Kimmel, Carr suggested in April that Comcast may be violating its broadcast licenses after MSNBC declined to air a White House press briefing in which the administration defended its wrongful deportation of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media following Trump's tirade against Meyers. "Why? Because Trump believes he—not the people—decides the law. This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover."