

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.

Today, against a backdrop of recent reports of global mass extinction, the Trump administration released final regulations weakening the Endangered Species Act, the nation's most effective tool in saving wildlife from extinction.
Today, against a backdrop of recent reports of global mass extinction, the Trump administration released final regulations weakening the Endangered Species Act, the nation's most effective tool in saving wildlife from extinction. The Trump Extinction Plan would gut critical endangered species protections by making it much more difficult to extend protections to threatened species, delaying lifesaving action until a species' population is potentially impossible to save; making it more difficult to protect polar bears, coral reefs, and other species that are impacted by the effects of climate change; allowing economic factors to be analyzed when deciding if a species should be saved; and making it easier for companies to build roads, pipelines, mines, and other industrial projects in critical habitat areas that are essential to imperiled species' survival.
These changes come in the wake of tremendous public opposition to weakening the protections of the Endangered Species Act. After the proposed rules were announced, more than 800,000 public comments were submitted opposing the changes. Last fall, 105 Members of Congress and 34 U.S. Senators sent letters to Trump's Department of the Interior to protest the harmful rollbacks. Ten states and the District of Columbia are also on record opposing the weakening of the Endangered Species Act as are more than 30 tribal nations.
The Endangered Species Act has been extremely effective; more than 99 percent of animals, plants and insects protected by the law have been saved from extinction. Endangered Species Act protection has saved some of the nation's most celebrated wildlife including the bald eagle, Florida manatee, American gray wolf and humpback whale. A 2018 survey found that four out of five Americans support the Endangered Species Act and just one in ten say they oppose it.
In response groups issued the following responses:
"Undermining this popular and successful law is a major step in the wrong direction as we face the increasing challenges of climate change and its effects on wildlife. The Endangered Species Act works; our communities-- both natural and human-- have reaped the benefits. This safety net must be preserved." -- Lena Moffitt, Our Wild America Campaign Senior Director, Sierra Club
"We are in the midst of an unprecedented extinction crisis, yet the Trump Administration is steamrolling our most effective wildlife protection law. This Administration seems set on damaging fragile ecosystems by prioritizing industry interests over science. We intend to fight these regulatory rollbacks so that we can preserve the natural world for generations to come." -- Rebecca Riley, Legal Director of the Nature Program, Natural Resources Defense Council
"The US Fish and Wildlife Service's decision to rescind these longstanding regulations eliminates many essential conservation tools that have protected imperiled species and their habitats for decades. With this drastic revision of core components of the ESA, the current administration is favoring industry at the expense of vulnerable wildlife. Increased threats from development and a changing climate necessitate the strong and full enforcement of the ESA now more than ever." -- Cathy Liss, president of the Animal Welfare Institute
"The Endangered Species Act protects ocean wildlife such as the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale, which faces a multitude of threats. The genius of the Endangered Species Act is its recognition that not only do we need to protect vulnerable species, but also allow them to recover so they no longer need the protection of the Act. The Trump Administration's new regulations allow federal agencies to water down key elements of the law, putting the North Atlantic right whale and other endangered wildlife at greater risk of extinction." -- Lara Levison, Senior Director, Federal Policy for Oceana
"It is particularly egregious that the Trump Administration is steamrolling through unpopular rules that were issued by a Secretary of Interior who is under multiple investigations. Losing our biodiversity isn't something that any American can afford. We don't live in an enclosed man-made bubble--our health and safety, the health and safety of our children and grandchildren, our access to clean air and water, actually depends on biodiversity." -- Leda Huta, Executive Director of the Endangered Species Coalition
"The US Fish & Wildlife Service's decision to dismantle further the Endangered Species Act in favor of special interest groups will decrease critical protections and add increased pressure to species and entire ecosystems causing immeasurable death and destruction to wildlife and their habitat. The ESA has proven to be the most important law to preserve wildlife, and the American public must fight to uphold those critical protections." - Angela Grimes, CEO of Born Free USA
"Trump and Bernhardt's rollbacks undermine the very purpose of the Endangered Species Act which is to prevent extinction, recover imperiled animals and plants, and protect the ecosystems on which they depend. These rollbacks are a gift to their pals in industry that squarely violates federal law, which is why we're going to court." -- Drew Caputo, Earthjustice Vice-President of Litigation for Lands, Wildlife, and Oceans.
"At a time when nature is facing unprecedented challenges from a changing climate and the increasing sprawl of the human footprint on native habitats, weakening the Endangered Species Act is the last thing we should do. The ESA is a law that has worked brilliantly well for many decades because it gets the politics out of the way and requires all decisions affecting the fate of rare and imperiled plants and animals to be based solely on science instead. The proposal to tinker with the law that saved species ranging from the bald eagle to the black-footed ferret to the peregrine falcon is a cynical move designed to permit the extinction of the Earth's rich diversity of life." -- Erik Molvar, Executive Director of Western Watersheds Project
"As the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), releases a report detailing the deteriorating state of ecosystem health and the predicted mass loss of biodiversity, the Trump Administration is attempting to weaken Federal ESA protections that remain essential to facilitate species and habitat protection. Human population growth and conversion of natural habitats has led to environmental change unparalleled in history. We must do everything we can to maintain healthy populations of plants and animals in a time of rapid disappearance. Our very lives may depend on us paying our debts to the land and seeking balance between a growing human population and the diminishing resources of our planet." --Chris Bachman, Wildlife Program Director, The Lands Council
"Threatened and endangered fish, wildlife and plants in our national parks already face habitat changes and impacts of a climate crisis that is accelerating each year. Instead of working with Congress and states to better protect and restore wildlife as the climate changes, the Trump administration is reinterpreting the Endangered Species Act to weaken protections. The National Parks Conservation Association strongly opposes these final rules." -- Bart Melton, Wildlife Director for the National Parks Conservation Association.
"Weakening the Endangered Species Act is yet another example of the Trump administration's careless disregard for our nation's public lands and wildlife, and a blatant giveaway to extractive industries. It is especially egregious considering the recent U.N. report indicating that nearly 1 million species are threatened with extinction. We need to strengthen and fully fund the Act, not tear it down. We won't stand for it, and we will fight back to protect our natural heritage." --Taylor Jones, endangered species advocate, WildEarth Guardians
"The most comprehensive assessment of biodiversity ever completed was released earlier this year and shows that more than one million species are at risk of extinction. These species are inextricably linked to our own well-being, livelihoods, economies, food security, and overall survival. Gutting key protections of the Endangered Species Act is precisely the wrong action for the U.S. to be taking at this critical point in time. We must protect and conserve vulnerable species so that we may all thrive together." - Beth Allgood, U.S. Country Director, International Fund for Animal Welfare
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) 977-5500The United Nations Children's Fund warned that Israel's continued assault on Lebanon "poses a grave risk to the ceasefire and the efforts toward a lasting and comprehensive peace."
A United Nations agency said late Thursday that Israel's massive bombardment of Lebanon earlier this week killed or wounded more than 180 children, a statement issued as the Israeli military vowed to continue assailing the war-ravaged country—potentially derailing ceasefire efforts in Iran and across the region.
The UN Children's Fund, widely known as UNICEF, said the toll from Israel's assault on Wednesday brought the total number of children killed or wounded in Lebanon since March 2 to at least 600. The agency said it is "receiving reports of children being pulled from under the rubble, while others remain missing and separated from their families."
"Many are experiencing trauma, having lost loved ones, their homes, and any sense of safety," UNICEF said. "Across the country, more than one million people have been uprooted, including an estimated 390,000 children, many for the second, third, or even fourth time."
UNICEF went on to echo growing concerns in the region, and around the world, that Israel's continued bombing and invasion of Lebanon "poses a grave risk to the ceasefire and the efforts toward a lasting and comprehensive peace."
"The children in Lebanon cannot be left behind," the UN agency said.
UNICEF's statement came as the chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces said Lebanon is the Israeli military's "primary combat" zone and that the IDF is "in a state of war, we are not in a ceasefire."
US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have both insisted that Lebanon was not included in the Iran ceasefire agreement announced late Tuesday—a claim that Iranian leaders and Pakistan's prime minister, who is mediating peace talks, have said is false.
On Thursday, Trump said Netanyahu agreed during a phone call to "low-key it" in Lebanon. But in a recorded statement addressed to residents of northern Israel on Thursday, Netanyahu declared: “There is no ceasefire in Lebanon. We continue to strike Hezbollah with force, and we will not stop until we restore your security.”
Netanyahu's decision to escalate Israel's attacks on Lebanon—killing hundreds of people and leveling entire neighborhoods—just hours after Trump announced the ceasefire deal with Iran fit with a longstanding pattern of the Israeli government undercutting diplomacy.
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, wrote for The Intercept on Thursday that Israel "has worked ceaselessly to prevent any off-ramp from confrontation between the US and Iran," noting that "in 1995, when Iran and the US flirted with economic rapprochement by opening the Iran oil industry to American investment and development, Israel and AIPAC lobbied Congress and President Bill Clinton to block it."
"Netanyahu is widely thought to benefit from wars—from Gaza to Iran and now, most critically, in Lebanon—to shore up his political fortunes. He faces an election in October, and losing could lead to the revival of corruption charges that might land him in prison," Abdi noted. "The question now may unfortunately not be whether Iran and the US can find a compromise. Instead, the fate of the global economy and, not least, Iranians themselves, could rest between Netanyahu and Trump, who faces his own political challenges in midterm elections this year."
US Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) wrote Thursday that "Netanyahu urged Trump to start this war, now Trump must demand he help end it."
"Who's calling the shots here?" Van Hollen asked.
"Ultimately, if this rule is finalized, human health will suffer, and taxpayers will be left with the cost of cleaning up their rivers and drinking water."
Amid mounting calls for the removal of US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin, the EPA chief on Thursday announced proposed changes to coal ash rules, which critics blasted as another gift to polluters at the expense of public health.
Officially called coal combustion residuals (CCR), "coal ash—the toxic byproduct of burning coal—contains hazardous pollutants, including arsenic, boron, cadmium, chromium, lead, radium, and selenium, which are linked to serious health harms such as cancer, heart disease, and brain damage, among other lasting impacts," noted the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
Specifically, as The Associated Press reported, the EPA "proposed easing standards for monitoring and protecting groundwater near some coal ash sites, rolling back rules forcing the cleanup of entire coal properties instead of just places where ash was dumped. The revisions would also make it easier to reuse coal ash for other purposes."
While Zeldin claimed the "commonsense changes to the CCR regulations reflect EPA's commitment to restoring American energy dominance, strengthening cooperative federalism, and accommodating unique circumstances at certain CCR facilities," Environmental Protection Network's Marc Boom responded that "letting companies avoid cleaning up waste sites that may be leaching toxic metals into groundwater and nearby waterways, while weakening protections and accountability, is not common sense."
"EPA's top priority should be protecting people's health, not sacrificing it for corporate expediency," argued Boom, senior director of public affairs at the group, which is made up of former agency staff. "EPA may call these safeguards 'impractical,' but anyone living downstream of coal ash sites holding thousands of tons of waste knows that requiring cleanup and monitoring is a necessary and basic standard."
NRDC senior attorney Becky Hammer called the pending rollback just "the latest in a long, long, line of Trump administration giveaways to fossil fuels industries," which have also included repealing EPA rules that targeted chemical pollution from coal-fired power plants, declaring a national energy emergency, and scrapping the 2009 "endangerment finding" that underpins all federal climate regulations.
Other advocacy organizations were similarly critical of Thursday's announcement. Daniel Estrin, Waterkeeper Alliance's general counsel and legal director, pointed out that "coal ash is contaminating water at nearly every active and retired coal plant in the US."
"By gutting these safeguards, EPA is abandoning its duty to protect impacted communities by allowing preventable contamination of our rivers, lakes, streams, and groundwater," he said. "The longer the coal industry is allowed to delay closing and cleaning up its toxic waste sites, the more difficult and costly it becomes to fix the damage. By failing to enforce the law, EPA is letting polluters continue harming people and wildlife without accountability."
Like Estrin and Hammer, Earthjustice senior counsel Lisa Evans framed that proposal as "yet another handout to the coal power industry at the expense of our health, water, and wallets," and warned of the dangers of delaying closure and cleanup. She said that "ultimately, if this rule is finalized, human health will suffer, and taxpayers will be left with the cost of cleaning up their rivers and drinking water."
Although "the Trump administration just took a sledgehammer to the health protections in place for toxic coal pollution," Evans added, "Earthjustice has successfully defended these safeguards in court and will do so again."
Nick Torrey, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, which has secured commitments to clean up over 270 million tons of coal ash in US communities, similarly said that "doing the bidding of industrial polluters instead of protecting ordinary families and clean water is shameful, but we are ready to keep fighting against coal ash pollution."
"Letting coal-burning utilities set the agenda has been a disaster for communities across the South, resulting in coal ash spills and hundreds of families forced to live on bottled water for years under the threat of coal ash pollution," Torrey highlighted. "The Trump administration and coal ash polluters want to take us back to the bad old days of arsenic, lead, and mercury from coal ash contaminating our water."
In addition to facing a flurry of lawsuits over policies prioritizing the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry—whose campaign cash helped President Donald Trump return to the White House last year—the administration has recently been hit with demands to remove Zeldin from more than 160 advocacy groups and nearly 300 health experts.
"This EPA's actions to put polluters first, at the expense of our health, are dangerous and will be deadly," states the health experts' open letter, organized and released Thursday by the Climate Action Campaign. "Administrator Zeldin has abandoned his sworn duty and must be held accountable for his agenda."
“America’s small businesses, workers, and families are really feeling pain at the pump—all thanks to Trump’s illegal war on Iran,” the Massachusetts Democrat said.
An analysis published Thursday by the office of US Sen. Ed Markey estimates that the average American motorist will pay nearly $1,100 extra for gasoline in 2026 due to President Donald Trump's war of choice on Iran.
"The data highlights a worsening affordability crisis, with the average American family facing an annual increase of $1,096 this year if gas prices remain at $4.14 per gallon—a shocking increase of $1.16 per gallon since Trump launched his war on Iran in February," Markey's (D-Mass.) office said.
"These numbers are likely an underestimate," the analysis notes. "Many analysts predict gasoline prices will rise higher without a permanent end to the war. Instead of investing in energy independence, Trump has done everything in his power to destroy American-made affordable clean energy... and double down on the fossil fuels that are now skyrocketing in price."
"As Americans pay more at the pump, fossil fuel industry executives profit," Markey's office said. "During Trump’s first year in office, the five largest oil companies—ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell, and BP—made more than $75 billion dollars in profits."
Fossil fuel interests spent $445 million to help elect Trump and other Republicans in 2024. And while some Big Oil executives are reportedly upset that the ceasefire agreement with Iran apparently includes Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz and the power to charge tolls to tankers passing through the vital waterway, industry executives sold a reported $1.4 billion in shares before and during the war that they may subsequently buy back during market dips fueled by the volatility caused by Trump's actions.
“America’s small businesses, workers, and families are really feeling pain at the pump—all thanks to Trump’s illegal war on Iran," Markey, the ranking member of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, said in a statement introducing the analysis. "Instead of delivering real relief to the American people, Trump is doubling down on his reckless economic policies, which are only driving up energy prices, enriching his oil and gas buddies, and worsening the affordability crisis for everyone else."
“In uncertain times like these, gas prices go up like a rocket but come down like a feather," he added. "This administration must get serious about alleviating the crisis he alone created, or risk further throttling families’ finances and putting even more pain on Main Street.”
A Pew Research Center survey published earlier this week revealed that gas prices are Americans' biggest concern about the Iran War, with 69% worried about higher fuel costs. By comparison, 61% said they were concerned about sending ground troops to invade Iran, 59% fretted over high casualties among US troops, and 56% said they fear a terror attack on the United States.
This isn't the first time that Markey has shined a spotlight on the economic harm to American families caused by the actions of a president who campaigned upon core promises of lower consumer prices—including gasoline—and no new wars. Last month, Markey asked the Bureau of Labor Statistics to “immediately undertake and publish a comprehensive analysis of the likely consumer price impacts” of the war over the next 6-12 months.
Our nation is at a moral crossroads.Trump asked Congress for over 1 trillion to fund the Department of Defense and his war of choice. To get it, MAGA Republicans want to defund childcare. Healthcare. Education. I won't stand for that.
[image or embed]
— Ed Markey (@edmarkey.bsky.social) April 9, 2026 at 3:31 PM
Markey's analysis came on the same day that the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies published a report estimating that the average American taxpayer gave $4,000 to the federal government last year “for militarism and its support systems."
That cost is likely to rise even further if Congress approves Trump's request for a record $1.5 trillion US military budget for the next fiscal year.