

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.

Natural Resources Defense Council – Anne Hawke, 646.823.4518, ahawke@nrdc.org
Oceana – Dustin Cranor, 954.348.1314, dcranor@oceana.org
Southern Environmental Law Center – Mike Mather, 434.333.9464, mmather@selcva.org
Earthjustice – Maggie Caldwell, 415.217.2084, mcaldwell@earthjustice.org
Center for Biological Diversity – Kristen Monsell, 914.806.3467, kmonsell@biologicaldiversity.org
Coastal Conservation League – Caitie Forde-Smith, 252.714.4790, caitiefs@scccl.org
Sierra Club – Gabby Brown, 914.261.4626, gabby.brown@sierraclub.org
Surfrider Foundation – Angela Howe, 949.732.6414, ahowe@surfrider.org
Leading environmental groups sued the federal government today to prevent seismic airgun blasting in the Atlantic Ocean. This extremely loud and dangerous process, which is used to search for oil and gas deposits deep below the ocean's surface, is the first step toward offshore drilling. If allowed, seismic airgun blasting would harm marine life, including whales, dolphins, fish and zooplankton - the foundation of the ocean food web.
The lawsuit, filed in South Carolina, claims that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) violated the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act when it issued Incidental Harassment Authorizations (IHAs) in late November. Those permits authorize five companies to harm or harass marine mammals while conducting seismic airgun blasting in an area twice the size of California, stretching from Cape May, New Jersey to Cape Canaveral, Florida. The legal complaint is HERE.
The government has estimated that seismic airgun blasting in the Atlantic could harass or harm marine mammals like dolphins and whales - which depend on sound to feed, mate and communicate - hundreds of thousands of times. Seismic airgun blasting would also jeopardize the iconic North Atlantic right whale, a critically endangered species, according to 28 leading right whale experts.
Below are statements from the groups involved in the lawsuit:
"This action is unlawful and we're going to stop it," said Diane Hoskins, campaign director at Oceana. "The Trump administration's rash decision to harm marine mammals hundreds of thousands of times in the hope of finding oil and gas is shortsighted and dangerous. Seismic airgun blasting can harm everything from tiny zooplankton and fish to dolphins and whales. More than 90 percent of the coastal municipalities in the blast zone have publicly opposed seismic airgun blasting off their coast. We won this fight before and we'll win it again."
"The Trump administration has steamrolled over objections of scientists, governors and thousands of coastal communities and businesses to enable this dangerous activity. Now it wants to steamroll the law," said Michael Jasny, director at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "Allowing seismic blasting at this scale in these waters is not consistent with the laws that protect our oceans."
"Ignoring the mounting opposition to offshore drilling, the decision to push forward with unnecessarily harmful seismic testing defies the law, let alone common sense," said Catherine Wannamaker, senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC). "An overwhelming number of communities, businesses, and elected officials have made it clear that seismic blasting-a precursor to drilling that no one wants-has no place off our coasts."
"Seismic airgun surveys pose a dual threat to the biologically rich waters off the Atlantic coast," said Steve Mashuda, managing attorney for oceans at Earthjustice. "Their continuous blasts can injure and deafen whales, dolphins and other marine life, and they are the sonic harbingers of even greater risks associated with offshore oil and gas drilling."
"The Trump administration is letting the oil industry launch a brutal sonic assault on North Atlantic right whales and other marine life," said Kristen Monsell, ocean program legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Right whales will keep spiraling toward extinction if we don't stop these deafening blasts and the drilling and spilling that could come next. That's why we're taking the administration to court."
"South Carolina has spoken: We don't want offshore oil and gas drilling," said Laura Cantral, executive director at Coastal Conservation League. "Seismic blasting is a big step in that direction, threatening our fragile coast and economy. We will firmly defend our communities and vulnerable marine life."
"Seismic blasting poses unacceptable risks to vulnerable marine wildlife, especially the critically imperiled North Atlantic right whale," said Jane Davenport, senior staff attorney at Defenders of Wildlife. "The species already faces effective extinction within a few short decades. The right whale simply cannot withstand the direct harm and habitat degradation seismic blasting will cause."
"Seismic testing and offshore drilling is incompatible with our coast in North Carolina," said Todd Miller, executive director at North Carolina Coastal Federation. "There's never a window that would be a good time for seismic testing to happen. Studies show that seismic affects the behaviors of marine mammals, fish and zooplankton, and seismic is harmful for fisheries. And on top of all that, it's a precursor to offshore drilling which is strongly opposed here in North Carolina."
"With a vibrant commercial fishery industry and the only known calving ground for endangered North Atlantic right whales just off our coast, Georgians oppose seismic testing for offshore oil exploration and the threats it poses to our state's wildlife, wild places, and quality of life," said Alice Keyes, vice president at One Hundred Miles. "Our coastal communities have spoken out for years against seismic testing and offshore drilling because they understand what's at stake--risks to our coastal economy and wildlife ranging from right whales to zooplankton. We are proud to stand with our fellow Georgians and thousands of others across the East Coast in opposition to this dangerous plan."
"As usual, the Trump administration is pulling out all the stops to give favors to the fossil fuel industry, whatever the cost to coastal communities and wildlife," said Athan Manuel, program director at Sierra Club. "We will continue to fight back against their dangerous plans to subject our coasts to seismic blasting and expanded offshore drilling."
"Seismic testing can be harmful and even fatal to the hundreds of thousands of dolphins, whales and other marine animals in the Atlantic," said Angela Howe, legal director at the Surfrider Foundation. "This litigation is aimed at protecting the Atlantic Ocean from the destruction of seismic testing, which is the first step of proposed offshore oil drilling. We will continue to stand up to protect our marine environment and our ocean ecosystems for this and future generations."
As of today, opposition and concern over offshore drilling activities in the Atlantic includes:
Background
In April 2017, President Trump issued an executive order to expedite permitting for harmful seismic airgun blasting, reversing the previous administration's decision to deny all pending permits for such activity in the Atlantic.
The Obama administration concluded that the "value of obtaining the geophysical and geological information from new airgun seismic surveys in the Atlantic does not outweigh the potential risks of those surveys' acoustic pulse impacts on marine life."
NMFS issued permits to five companies on November 30, 2018. Before those companies can begin seismic airgun blasting, they must also receive permits from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.
A recent economic analysis by Oceana finds that offshore drilling activities, including seismic airgun blasting, along the Atlantic threaten over 1.5 million jobs and nearly $108 billion in GDP, and would yield less than seven months'-worth of oil and less than six months'-worth of gas.
A May 2017 poll by Oceana, NRDC and the International Fund for Animal Welfare revealed that 76 percent of Americans support protecting marine mammals from threats, including injury and death resulting from offshore oil and gas drilling.
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700"If Graham Platner and all of you find a way to build that redemption through this campaign," Congressman Ro Khanna told a Maine crowd, "maybe you would show a way for this country to start to redeem itself."
Since The New York Times on Thursday published reporting about some of US Senate candidate Graham Platner's past relationships—including allegations of physical aggression that the Democrat denied—Mainers have continued to rally with and donate to the political newcomer's disruptive campaign, which has focused on promoting working-class priorities and defeating the oligarchy.
Maine's primary is on Tuesday, but Platner has been the presumptive Democratic nominee to challenge Republican Sen. Susan Collins in November since Gov. Janet Mills suspended her campaign over a month ago, citing a lack of financial resources.
In the wake of the Times reporting, Platner "raised more money than on any day since Gov. Mills' withdrawal from the race," according to his campaign. Specifically, as of 7:00 pm ET Friday, the 41-year-old oyster farmer and combat veteran had collected "over $200,000, from over 5,000 donors, with an average contribution of $40."
A Graham for Maine spokesperson said in a statement that "the people of Maine know what's on the ballot Tuesday: not Graham Platner's past, but whether their voice in the Senate works for them—or billionaires and special interests."
The Times spoke with more than two dozen people, including six women who had been romantically involved with Platner. The interviews arranged by his campaign were with three exes who now support his candidacy. The other three "offered a far more complicated assessment, describing volatile and 'toxic' relationships that were unsettling and at times emotionally wrenching."
Much of the coverage and commentary has focused on Lyndsey Fifield, who dated Platner from roughly 2013-15. The 40-year-old previously worked for former Republican South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley's 2024 presidential campaign and right-wing organizations such as the Heritage Foundation, the US Chamber of Commerce, the Independent Women's Forum, and Ladies for Kavanaugh—a group she co-founded to support the US Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, who faced sexual misconduct allegations but was still confirmed as a justice by a majority of senators, including Collins.
"I know it looks like a bitter ex-girlfriend Republican trying to take down a Democrat—it has nothing to do with that," she told the Times. "If he was running as a Republican, I would be doing this exact same thing."
Fifield said that Platner's offensive posts on Reddit—an early controversy in his campaign—"reminded me of just how much he hated women," and she challenged his insistence that he did not know the skull and crossbones tattoo he got with fellow Marines in Croatia closely resembled a Nazi symbol until last fall, when it became another campaign controversy, and he got it covered up.
According to the Times:
Mr. Platner could be rough with her, Ms. Fifield said, particularly when they were drinking, leaving her shaken and sometimes afraid. In the interviews, Ms. Fifield grappled with how to process her experiences. She was quick to note that he "never hit me, he never punched me."
But she said he regularly grabbed her by the shoulders—sometimes hard enough to leave marks—and, on one occasion, yanked her out of a cab by her wrist after an argument when she wanted to stay in the car.
During one argument, she recalled, he twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom, and held the door closed from the other side so she couldn't get out, telling her to remain there until she was "calm." Eventually, Ms. Fifield said, she fell asleep and left the next morning.
"It hurt," she said. But she added: "It didn't cause an injury, it didn't break my arm."
Platner acknowledged to the newspaper that he had "too often self-medicated with alcohol, and was a far from perfect boyfriend" during what he called a "very dark period of my life," but he also strongly denied any claims of physical intimidation or altercations with past partners or knowing about the tattoo's Nazi ties.
Phil Proschko, who served with Platner in the Marines and also got the symbol tattooed on him, said in a brief interview with Zeteo on Friday: "No, we did not purposely get hateful fucking shit because we're racist people... We got matching tattoos because we were in our 20s, drunk in Croatia, and that's it. That's all that fucking happened."
Platner reiterated his responses to the Times during a nearly 25-minute interview with Chris Hayes on MS NOW. After the host read portions of Fifield's allegations, Platner said that "anything alleging physicality" and "anything alleging that I knew what my tattoo was" is "simply not true," and is coming from "someone who's politically motivated."
"I've been very upfront since the beginning of this campaign that that was a pretty dark period of my life after I came back from my combat service," added Platner, a veteran of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
Hayes also invited the candidate to discuss reporting by the Times and The Wall Street Journal late last month that during an internal vetting process, Platner's wife, Amy Gertner, told campaign staff that he had exchanged sexual messages with multiple other women early in their marriage, and they had addressed it in counseling—plus Gertner's video response supporting her husband, which Platner shared on social media.
Since Thursday, some have criticized the Times, with reporters from other outlets saying that the paper "breezed past" the full scope of Fifield's right-wing work history for an article seen by critics as "a hit job against an anti-oligarchy, anti-Israel populist."
Fifield also spoke out against the final product, writing in a long social media post on Friday that "it dawned on me that this really was a setup all along. The journalists I trusted who convinced me to share a story I never wanted to tell methodically delayed and twisted this into a gift to the Platner campaign."
Responding to Fifield's post, a spokesperson for the Times told Newsweek: "We published accounts provided by several women who were in romantic relationships with Graham Platner. Our story accurately presents each of these accounts as told to our reporters and according to our standards. We stand by our reporting of the accounts from Ms. Fifield and the other women, who provided a revealing look at the behavior of a major candidate for the US Senate."
After the sexting reports, Mills said that "people have the impression that I 'withdrew' or 'dropped out,' but I simply suspended active campaigning. I am still on the ballot." The newer reporting on Platner's exes has directed fresh attention toward the governor.
As NBC News detailed late Friday:
A source close to Mills told NBC News: "The governor remains on the ballot, and in the wake of this week's stories, people across Maine are reaching out to tell her they're voting for her and encouraging her to get fully back into the race."
One Democrat who had been involved in Mills' campaign said she would move forward anew only if Platner were to step aside, not to challenge him. The Democrat said losing to him "especially now" would serve as an embarrassment to the outgoing governor.
That person, and others, noted that Tuesday's primary was not the deadline they are looking at, but rather a mid-July deadline under state law. That's when Platner would have to step aside to be replaced as the nominee.
Platner made clear during his interview with Hayes that he hasn't considered stepping aside, and since the Times' Thursday reporting, MS NOW and Fox News have spoken with various voters on Maine streets who continue to back the candidate:
Actual Maine voters stand by Graham Platner:
“Does he have a problematic past? Yes, but I would rather have a redemption story than somebody telling you how wonderful they are, how much research they do, and yet they still make the wrong decision for the people of Maine”
“Would… pic.twitter.com/sTbOiElBrp
— Marco Foster (@MarcoFoster_) June 5, 2026
Actual Maine voters continue to back Graham Platner:
“The Democratic party’s come up short in a lot of ways in terms of like whitewashing our candidates and being so morally elitist and kind of entitled at times. We have to be willing to get dirty”
“His baggage is nowhere near… pic.twitter.com/CrSzvJ7pdb
— Marco Foster (@MarcoFoster_) June 6, 2026
“He’s the best candidate by far. And probing into the minutia of his personal relationships when you don't do that for any other candidate is ridiculous” pic.twitter.com/FUDTqkCf1M
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 5, 2026
Platner has stayed on the campaign trail, joining Maine gubernatorial candidate Troy Jackson; Matt Dunlap, who is running for the state's 2nd Congressional District; and Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a potential 2028 presidential candidate, for a "Changing the Tides" rally in Bar Harbor on Friday.
Platner stressed that "we are up against one of the most powerful political systems in the history of the world. It is a system of billionaires and special interests. It is a system of corrupted politicians like Susan Collins... who for years has given us some charade that she's a moderate, that she stands up against her party, that she cares more about her constituents more than she cares about those that donate money to her. We see through it."
He also addressed the various controversies throughout his campaign, saying: "Since the beginning, Maine, you had my back. When hurtful things I said on the internet a decade ago came out into the public, as I shared my personal journey through PTSD and darkness, of recovery and accountability and growth, Maine had my back."
"Now, as every single piece of that past and journey gets dug up, litigated, and weaponized, you have my back," he told a cheering crowd. "And when politically motivated, serious, and false accusations are made against me, Maine, you have my back. The state of Maine raised me, and the state of Maine saved me. And to all of you out there, Maine, I will always have your back."
Meanwhile, Khanna, a Philadelphia-born son of immigrants, said during the event that "sometimes I think we're broken right now as a country," with so many Americans who "feel unseen, unheard, undervalued."
"We can barely talk to each other. Sometimes it feels like we're having different conversations, even about the situation we see with Graham and Amy... no ability to have dialogue," he continued. "For this country to heal, we need to find some way of having grace. We need to find some way of having redemption. We need to find some way of saying that if someone... felt hurt by Graham in a past relationship, we can listen to them, and we can listen to Graham, and we can have conversations as mature Americans, as fellow citizens."
"If Graham Platner and all of you find a way to build that redemption through this campaign, through this transformation," he added, "maybe you would show a way for this country to start to redeem itself, because we sure need that as we approach this 250th anniversary."
From Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who initially backed Mills in the Maine primary, to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), an early supporter of Platner who caucuses with Democrats and twice sought their presidential nomination, the party "is united" behind "a single goal," Khanna also told the crowd. "We will defeat Susan Collins in November."
Sanders renewed his support for Platner in a Saturday social media post highlighting key campaign issues:
US Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) is set to help rally donors for Platner during a virtual event on Sunday. As Politico noted: "The event is the first public stamp of approval from Schatz, who has not endorsed Platner previously. Making it even more notable is Schatz’s status as a rising leader in the party: He is currently deputy conference secretary and chief deputy whip for the Senate Democratic Caucus, and he has secured the votes—and Chuck Schumer's endorsement—to take over the No. 2 role next year."
"This protects every Oregon family who depends on these programs to put food on the table," said the state's attorney general, who is among the 21 AGs behind the case.
A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked an attempt by the US Department of Agriculture to force state governments to comply with President Donald Trump's positions on gender and immigration or lose out on billions of dollars in funding, including for food assistance.
The attorneys general of the District of Columbia and 20 Democrat-led states sued the department and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins in March, arguing that "USDA has now thrown unconstitutional and unlawful roadblocks between the programs created by Congress and the states that rely on them, threatening critical nutrition support, vital agricultural research, and the safety of our national food chain and communities."
Specifically, the Trump administration imposed "a vague set of funding conditions relating to USDA's purported anti-discrimination 'policies,' 'gender ideology,' 'fair athletic opportunities' for women and girls, and immigration," without specifying the policies or even confirming "that certification is limited to currently existing policies," says the complaint, filed in the District of Massachusetts.
The March filing also makes the case that "even if USDA went back and cured its vagueness problem and conducted a reasoned analysis before taking final agency action, the challenged conditions would still be unlawful."
While US District Judge Myong Joun has not explicitly agreed, the appointee of former President Joe Biden granted a preliminary injunction sought by the AGs and said he would issue a memorandum explaining his decision at a later date.
Welcoming the judge's unexplained decision on social media, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield highlighted that the move safeguards funding for school lunches, emergency aid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
"This protects every Oregon family who depends on these programs to put food on the table," Rayfield said. "The court rejected the Trump administration's attempt to hold school lunches, WIC, and SNAP hostage to its political agenda. These are lifelines for 86,000 Oregon kids, working families, seniors, and rural communities—and they will remain protected."
New York Attorney General Letitia James also celebrated that "we won a court order protecting billions of dollars in USDA funding as our lawsuit continues," and pledged that "my office will keep fighting to protect New Yorkers and stop the federal government from punishing our state for refusing to bend."
NEW: When Trump tried to gut billions in USDA funding for states refusing to comply with his anti-immigrant agenda, we sued.The court just ruled in our favor, blocking his cuts while our case continues.These grants are a lifeline - I'll always fight to protect food assistance for families.
— AG Andrea Joy Campbell (@massago.bsky.social) June 5, 2026 at 4:58 PM
The other states involved in the case are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. Collectively, according to the complaint, "'plaintiff states receive over $74 billion annually in funding from USDA."
The judge's decision came on the heels of four Democrats in the US House of Representatives voting with Republicans to approve legislation that the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) has estimated would strip modest fruit and vegetable benefits from "nearly 5.4 million toddlers, preschoolers, and pregnant and postpartum WIC participants."
Already, since congressional Republicans passed and Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year, at least hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost federal food assistance. Last month, Trump's USDA chief suggested that some of them were receiving SNAP benefits fraudulently—without offering evidence—while others are "moving into the American dream and off of welfare."
Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst at CBPP, responded that "unless the Trump administration has redefined 'the American dream' to mean 'losing the help your family needs to afford groceries because of federal cuts,' I have some bad news for Secretary Rollins."
"The murder of a 7-month-old baby by Israeli forces in the illegally occupied West Bank and an Israeli massacre at a wedding in Gaza are horrific crimes that should shock the conscience of every person," said a US-based group.
Gunfire from at least one Israeli soldier killed a 7-month-old Palestinian boy and injured his parents, who were traveling in their vehicle in the occupied West Bank on Friday, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health.
The Palestinian National Authority's WAFA reported that Sam Fahd Abu Haikal lived in Bethlehem with his mother and father, Fahd Abdul Aziz Abu Haikal, a lecturer at Bethlehem University. The family—which also included the baby's grandmother and 11-year-old sibling—intended to visit Hebron when they were struck by at least one bullet that left both parents with "moderate injuries" and ultimately killed the infant, who "succumbed on Friday evening to critical wounds."
As Reuters detailed:
The baby's grandmother said the family was driving near Checkpoint 17 when they saw Israeli military vehicles and soldiers in the distance and stopped the car. She said shots were then fired toward them, which they initially believed were warning shots.
"One bullet struck my grandson, traversed his face and crossed his head, striking his mother's cheek where it lodged," she said, adding that the bullet had also grazed the father's finger, and that the mother was in hospital.
A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces told CBS News that soldiers "perceived a vehicle accelerating toward them" and responded by firing single shots, which injured three Palestinians who were evacuated for medical treatment. The spokesperson added that an initial inquiry "found that those injured were uninvolved civilians," and that the IDF "expresses deep sorrow for any harm caused to uninvolved individuals."
Fahd Abdul Aziz Abu Haikal told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that "the soldier was about 10 meters away from me. He saw me, he saw my wife, and the children. The car windows were not dark, it was daylight, and everything was clear. You can't say he didn't see that it was a family."
The father added that "this case must not be closed without an investigation and without accountability. At least I don't intend to give up."
The baby's death sparked a fresh wave of criticism against the IDF, which is widely accused of committing genocide against Palestinians in the wake of the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. The Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip has killed over 72,000 people.
Since October 2023, Israeli forces and settlers have also ramped up attacks in the illegally occupied West Bank, killing over 1,000 Palestinians, including at least 240 children, according to the United Nations.
In a Saturday statement, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States, condemned the baby's killing as well as a deadly Israeli attack on a wedding in Gaza.
"The murder of a 7-month-old baby by Israeli forces in the illegally occupied West Bank and an Israeli massacre at a wedding in Gaza are horrific crimes that should shock the conscience of every person," CAIR said. "No military force that repeatedly kills children, medical workers, journalists, and civilians—using American taxpayer-supplied weapons—should continue to enjoy impunity or the support of our own government."
"We call on our government and the international community to stop enabling these atrocities," the group said, "and to take concrete action to protect Palestinian civilians, end the occupation, and uphold international law."
This post was updated with a newly available photo and reporting from Haaretz.