

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.

Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, (240) 462-3216, kevin@beyondnuclear.org, Michael J. Keegan, Don’t Waste Michigan, (734) 770-1441, mkeeganj@comcast.net, Terry Lodge, legal counsel, (419) 205-7084, tjlodge50@yahoo.com
The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear Beyond Nuclear's appeal against the proposed new Fermi 3 atomic reactor. Despite this, the environmental coalition has vowed to continue its resistance.
The appeal focused on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) exclusion of the transmission line corridor from the National Environmental Policy Act's (NEPA) required "hard look" at all environmental impacts of major federal actions, such as NRC approval of a combined construction and operations license application (COLA) for the Fermi 3 atomic reactor, a General Electric-Hitachi (GEH) so-called "Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor" (ESBWR). Fermi 3 is the flagship ESBWR in the U.S., and internationally.
The Fermi nuclear power plant is located in southeast Michigan, on the Lake Erie shoreline, south of Detroit, north of Toledo, immediately adjacent to Ohio and Ontario, Canada.
"We regret that the Supreme Court didn't take the opportunity to teach an instructive lesson to an important regulatory agency that NEPA, the environmental impact statement law, can't be weakened to address only the environmental damage that the agency wants the public to know about," said Terry Lodge, attorney for Beyond Nuclear and the other grassroots opponents of Fermi 3. "The NRC's decision to allow its staff to reshape the project undermines the public's right to know, and worse, mocks the public's right to participate in very important decisions."
Lodge, a Toledo-based attorney, has represented an environmental coalition opposed to Fermi 3 (Beyond Nuclear, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, Citizens Environmental Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, Don't Waste Michigan, and Sierra Club) since NRC docketed the DTE (formerly Detroit Edison) Fermi 3 license application filed in September 2008. DTE first announced its intention to construct and operate Fermi 3 in February 2007.
"DTE investors will be forever indebted to environmental intervenors for having held the company's feet to the fire long enough for them to realize what an economic boondoggle the pursuit of a Fermi 3 reactor would be, one that would leave their company in economic ruin," said Michael Keegan, a four-decade watchdog on the Fermi nuclear power plant in Monroe, MI. "This is now the case at two failed reactors at Summer, SC and at two more failing reactors at Vogtle, GA. Westinghouse has gone bankrupt, and General Electric is on the ropes. The 'Nuclear Renaissance' has failed miserably, and DTE has dodged that radioactive economic bullet, by not proceeding with Fermi 3. Intervenors prevented DTE from breaking ground in January 2011 by forcing compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act. We will be there again to force compliance should a transmission line corridor commence, or any other aspect of this proposed new atomic reactor," stated Michael J. Keegan with Don't Waste Michigan.
NRC's decision to not include the transmission line corridor at Fermi 3 in its NEPA-required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) followed a 2007 agency rule change spearheaded by NRC Commissioner Jeffrey Merrifield. Changes to the definition of "Limited Work Authorizations" (LWAs) for "pre-construction activities" - to include major features such as Fermi 3's proposed 11-mile long, 300-feet wide transmission line corridor - represented a reversal of decades-old NRC policy. In fact, NRC had previously defended its right to regulate transmission line corridor construction and operation, asserting its jurisdiction to include such safety-related structures, systems, and components in its environmental impact statements, at not only Fermi, but other proposed Michigan reactors, as well as those in other states. Merrifield's rule change redefined the word "construction" under NRC regulations, creating a huge loophole in NEPA to excuse major "non-nuclear" construction projects from agency EIS's, despite their major impacts on the environment.
After orchestrating the Orwellian rule change, NRC Commissioner Merrifield went immediately to work for the Shaw Group, an atomic reactor construction firm engaged at that time in new build underway in the U.S. Southeast, for an annual salary of more than one million dollars. An NRC Office of Inspector General investigative report documented that NRC Commissioner Merrifield had been courting his private sector job in the many months during which he also led the LWA rule change, an ethical violation that prompted U.S. attorneys to consider criminal charges, which were ultimately not pursued. The "Merrifield-Go-Round" revolving door scandal is considered one of the worst in NRC's history. (See the Beyond Nuclear comprehensive backgrounder, posted online at: https://www.beyondnuclear.org/new-reactors/2015/7/29/beyond-nuclear-appeals-scandalous-nrc-rule-that-has-long-und.html ).
"We have not yet begun to fight," said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear. "Whether it is educating elected officials at the local, state, and federal level, opposing ratepayer and/or federal taxpayer subsidies, and even non-violent civil disobedience and direct action in the spirit of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., we will remain vigilant until Fermi 3 in cancelled once and for all, Fermi 2 is permanently shut down, and the 'We Almost Lost Detroit' Fermi 1 nuclear power plant is decommissioned, all of the nuclear complex's radioactive contamination completely cleaned up, and its forever deadly highly radioactive wastes safeguarded and secured."
"We Almost Lost Detroit" is the title of a 1975 book by John G. Fuller, as well as a song by Gil Scott-Heron, documenting the October 5, 1966 partial meltdown at the Fermi Unit 1 atomic reactor. Fermi 3 would be built on the exact spot where Fermi 1 partially melted down, as noted by environmental intervenors on the official NRC record (see: https://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2012/7/3/declaration-of-independence-from-proposed-fermi-3-new-atomic.html). The environmental coalition marked the 50th annual commemoration of the Fermi 1 meltdown on October 5, 2016 in downtown Monroe, MI (see: https://www.beyondnuclear.org/nuclear-power/2016/9/26/october-5-2016-50-years-since-the-we-almost-lost-detroit-par.html), three years to the month after the bitterly contested Fermi 3 NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearings in the same location.
In this sense, today's resistance to Fermi 3 carries on the tradition of United Auto Workers attorney Leo Goodman, who challenged the Fermi 1 license on behalf of the health and safety of the union's 500,000 members, and their families, in the immediate area, in the late 1950s and early 1960s. In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC, NRC's forerunner), by a vote of 7 to 2. However, the dissenting opinion, in strong language, described the enabling Atomic Energy Act of 1954, granting the nuclear power industry, and its so-called regulatory agency, carte blanche to put the public at risk, as a dark day for democracy - not to mention for the protection of health, safety, and the environment - in the United States.
The ongoing resistance includes an event on Wed., April 18, 2018, as announced by the Alliance to Halt Fermi 3 at its website: https://www.athf3.org/. The "Radiation Knows No Borders" Emergency Preparedness Forum, will feature presentations by: Paul Gunter of Beyond Nuclear; Shawn-Patrick Stensil of Greenpeace Canada; Bushra Kazmi, M.D. of the Infection Prevention Program at Garden City Hospital; and Michael Keegan of Don't Waste Michigan, and the Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes, and a Monroe County Emergency Planning Zone resident. The event, to be held at the University of Detroit Mercy, Life Sciences Building, Room 113, 4001 West McNichols Road, Detroit, MI 48221, will take place from 7-9pm, Wed., April 18, 2018 - eight days before the 32nd annual commemoration of the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe. The title for the event is "Lessons NOT Learned from Chernobyl: Radiation Knows No Borders."
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.
(301) 270-2209Trump now faces a choice: Ending the war or giving Israel what it wants.
President Donald Trump is facing a choice: Ending the war with Iran, which is tanking his popularity and the economy, or continuing his deference to Israel.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made it clear on Tuesday that he cannot have both.
Following assertions from Israeli leaders that it would not end its occupation of Lebanon, Araghchi reiterated that the memorandum of understanding signed virtually by the US and Iran required in no uncertain terms that "war will be ending everywhere, on all fronts, including Lebanon."
"Due to the relations between war in Lebanon and the aggression of Israel on south Lebanon and the war on Iran, these two fronts—Iran and Lebanon—are quite connected to each other," he said.
“End of the war will be the end of the occupation,” he continued. “And without retreating and withdrawing from the Lebanese occupied territories, then there will not be an end to the war.”
"So any military attack from the Zionist entity against Lebanon will never be accepted," he said. "The continuation of the Israeli occupation of the Lebanese territories is a violation of the memorandum of understanding."
It was a shot across the bow from Tehran following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s assertion the day before that Israeli forces would remain in Lebanon "for as long as necessary” regardless of any US-Iran agreement.
“We established deep security zones around the state of Israel," he said, referring to the roughly 230 square mile occupation area where Israel has forcibly expelled more than 1 million Lebanese civilians and systematically demolished dozens of villages. "I want to make it clear: We will remain in these security zones… to protect our country.”
Other ministers were even blunter. Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said flatly that “Trump’s agreement does not bind us. Israel is not subordinate to the United States. We are an independent and sovereign country.”
Defense Minister Israel Katz said the occupation would go on “without any time limit" while villages would continue to be “cleared of local residents.” He said there would be no withdrawal "despite all the existing pressures" from the US, adding that, "we are committed only to our citizens and to the security of the state of Israel."
Trump has regularly deferred to Israel's preferences and sided with Netanyahu as he's derailed previous ceasefire talks. But during a news conference at the Group of Seven summit in France on Tuesday, Trump took a noticeably different tone with his obstinate ally.
Trump: "Without me, there would be no Israel ... I've had a great relationship with Bibi, but now Bibi has to be more responsible with respect to Lebanon ... I'm not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon and Hezbollah." pic.twitter.com/xvLlEhYqWj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 16, 2026
Trump criticizes Netanyahu and Israel: "Israel has been fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed. You don't need to knock down an apartment every time you're looking for somebody. I suggested to Israel to let Syria take care of Hezbollah, because too be… pic.twitter.com/NAmqoNkhpj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 16, 2026
The president said he "didn't like" the attack Netanyahu launched against the southern suburbs of Beirut on Sunday, where Israeli forces bombed a five-story apartment building, killing three people. "I saw that attack. I saw where that bomb went," he said, describing the attack as "vicious" and "too much."
"You don't need to knock down an apartment every time you're looking for somebody," he said, making perhaps his most forceful criticism ever of Israel's rampant attacks on civilian infrastructure. He continued that "if Israel can't do the job without killing everyone else, Syria should do the job" of fighting Hezbollah.
"Without the United States, there would be no Israel," he went on. "Without me, there would be no Israel, because no other president was willing to do what I did."
Referring to Netanyahu, he said, "I've had a great relationship with Bibi, but now Bibi has to be more responsible with respect to Lebanon," adding that the ongoing invasion "throws a negative light on the big deal, and that's the deal with Iran."
Commentators noted this is hardly the first time a US president has vented their anger with Netanyahu, only for nothing to materially change.
Noting Trump's previous description of Netanyahu as a "very difficult guy" after he attempted to blow up ceasefire talks on Sunday, Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said, "The question is: why does Trump facilitate this obstruction by continuing to provide Israel with arms and military aid?"
Zeteo News editor Mehdi Hasan said: “Such is the madly erratic nature of Trump, that he can go from sounding like the most hawkish, pro-Israel president one day, to the most dovish, anti-Israel president the next day. Which is why listening to Trump is pointless; what matters is paying attention to what he does.”
Trump's comments served as an admission, said one observer, that "the uranium was a false justification for war."
President Donald Trump and his top advisers have spent months insisting that extracting and confiscating highly enriched uranium from Iran was the top objective of the unprovoked war he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began in February—but on Tuesday at the Group of Seven summit in France, he shrugged off the need to rapidly obtain the nuclear reactor component.
There is "no rush" to retrieve uranium from nuclear sites the US bombed in June 2025, Trump said, adding that taking the highly enriched uranium is something the US wants "psychologically," but not enough to prioritize extracting it right away.
One could make the argument, he said, that it wasn't worth the effort to take the material at all.
"Frankly, to go get it—we're going to go get it—but to go get it is a big deal, because they say only China and us have the equipment," said the president. "You could make the case, 'Why do you even bother?' because it's not very valuable, you know. It's probably half a million dollars worth, it's not very valuable stuff."
Trump is backing away from getting Iran's enriched material: "You could make the case, why even bother? It's not very valuable stuff." pic.twitter.com/CgNgnZCaMQ
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 16, 2026
Trump's comments came a day after he and the Iranian government announced they had reached a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to end the war. The president told The New York Times that the agreement includes a requirement that Iran will be limited to enriching uranium only to levels that "could never be used by the military."
White House officials, though, told The Washington Post that details of Iran's nuclear program will be subject to negotiations over the next two months. The question of whether talks on the nuclear program could be held separately, after a deal to end the war was reached, had been a major sticking point for the US leading up to the MOU.
Trump brushed off suggestions that the deal to end the war, in which Iran demonstrated its economic might by effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz and sending energy prices skyrocketing—obtained no guarantees on Iran's nuclear program that hadn't already been secured in 2015 in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which was brokered by the Obama administration and which limited Iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Trump exited the JCPOA during his first term.
Iran will only be able to enrich uranium “for nonmilitary purposes. Forever," said Trump on Monday.
On Fox News on Monday, former National Security Council chief of staff Alex Gray insisted the president had secured a deal that, for the first time, would stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Before the US and Israel began attacking Iran in February, the Middle Eastern country maintained that its nuclear power program was not for military purposes.
While Trump's supporters insisted the war and the MOU had made clear Trump had drawn a hard line on Iran's nuclear capacity, his comments on Tuesday were taken by foreign policy analyst Logan McMillen as an admission that "the uranium was a false justification for war."
"The real purpose was to punish Iran for the crime of being an independent economic power that refused to participate in America’s petro economy," said McMillen.
At CNN, Aaron Blake noted that Trump has spent weeks sending inconsistent messages about his demand that Iran end its nuclear program.
Late last month, the president said on social media that Iran's uranium "will be unearthed by the United States... in close coordination and conjunction with the Islamic Republic of Iran, plus the International Atomic Energy Agency, and DESTROYED.”
But in April, Trump told Reuters that US strikes last year had left Iran's uranium "so far underground, I don’t care about that."
Two weeks later, he again said that the US had "to take that nuclear dust," before telling Fox News last month that destroying the uranium was not "necessary except from a public relations standpoint."
A group of Democratic lawmakers pushed President Donald Trump on whether he would veto legislation that cuts Social Security.
A group of Democratic US senators warned Monday that congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump could be gearing up for a push for raise the retirement age as part of a broader—and deeply unpopular—effort to slash Social Security benefits after the 2026 midterm elections.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) wrote in a letter to Trump that they have "renewed concerns" that his administration is "considering raising the retirement age, cutting the earned benefits of millions of Americans," despite the president's repeated vows to shield the program.
"Republicans have a history of attempting to increase the retirement age, privatize Social Security, or otherwise cut Social Security benefits, and some congressional Republicans have called to raise the retirement age or means-test benefits," the lawmakers wrote, emphasizing that GOP lawmakers "are not alone."
"In an interview this past fall, [Social Security Administration] Commissioner Frank Bisignano said—and later attempted to retract after public outcry—that your administration was considering this idea," the Democratic senators wrote of raising the retirement age, which would cut Social Security benefits across the board.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analysis of a 2024 Republican proposal to raise Social Security's full retirement age found that doing so would cut benefits by an average of 13% for people born after 1971.
The Democratic senators sent their letter to Trump days after Social Security's trustees said in their annual report that the program will be unable to pay out full benefits by the end of 2032—a quarter earlier than projected last year—unless Congress takes action. The finding was seen as evidence of the damage inflicted by Trump's policies, including his tariffs and tax cuts for the rich.
Ahead of the trustees report's release, House Speaker Mike Johnson declared that Social Security needs to be "adjusted and fixed" and said Republicans would release their plan "next year," without specifying what the proposal would entail.
Mike Johnson admits Republicans will cut Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security next year pic.twitter.com/bgyAb4ppyw
— FactPost (@factpostnews) June 8, 2026
In their letter to Trump on Monday, the trio of Democratic senators demanded to know if the president is aware of "Republican plans to cut Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits" and whether he would veto GOP legislation that slashes those programs.
"Raising the retirement age—or otherwise cutting benefits—only worsens the looming retirement income crisis," the lawmakers wrote. "Doing so hurts older Americans, cutting monthly benefits and forcing millions into poverty."