September, 19 2019, 12:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Andy Gheorghiu, Food & Water Europe: agheorghiu@fweurope.org, 0049 160 20 30 974
Peter Hart, Food & Water Action: phart@fwwatch.org, 732-839-0871
On the Eve of Global Climate Strikes and Summit, Celebrities, Advocates and Grassroots Groups Call on UN to Endorse Worldwide Fracking Ban
Prominent activists, hundreds of groups urge U.N. to champion a global ban, call fracking a climate and human rights disaster
WASHINGTON
On the eve of international youth-led climate strikes and next week's United Nations Climate Change Summit, nearly 500 grassroots groups, faith communities, celebrities, activists and organizations from across the world are calling on the United Nations to endorse a worldwide ban on fracking.
Actors Mark Ruffalo, Emma Thompson and Amber Heard, authors and activists Naomi Klein, Bill McKibben, Karenna Gore and Wenonah Hauter, fashion icons Vivienne Westwood and Joe Corre, human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson, iconic children's singer Raffi, climate experts Dr. Robert Howarth and Dr. Sandra Steingraber, and nearly 500 grassroots groups sent an open letter to U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres stating that the "continued production, trade and use of fracked hydrocarbons for energy, petrochemicals and plastics torpedoes our global efforts to tackle climate change and violates basic human rights."
The letter was organized by the American advocacy organization Food & Water Action (FWA) and its European arm, Food & Water Europe (FWE), as well as the Breathe Project, a Pittsburgh-based clearinghouse for information on air quality in Pennsylvania.
Wenonah Hauter, founder and executive director of Food & Water Action and Food & Water Europe, said: "In more than a decade of fighting fracking in the U.S., we've banned it in multiple states and made great progress elevating the issue globally. But there is much more work to do. The fracking surge in the U.S. has been a boon for the polluting petrochemical industry, which turns fracked gas into plastics. Our planet and our oceans are drowning in plastic and fracking companies are profiting. This needs to stop once and for all. We need a global ban on fracking."
Banning fracking has been an urgent priority of climate activists for years. But it has recently moved onto the political stage as a key issue in the U.S. Democratic presidential race, with many top-tier candidates embracing the urgent call for a total ban.
"The climate emergency is a casting call for heroes, and we need everyone to show up. Step one is to stand up and say, loudly and clearly, that there is no place for fracking on a climate-destabilized planet," said actor and longtime fracking activist Mark Ruffalo.
"Every well and every pipeline adds more methane and carbon dioxide to the atmosphere and pushes us closer to the edge of the climate cliff. The science demands, and our children demand, a global ban on fracking," said actress and U.N. Human Rights Champion Amber Heard.
The signatories to the letter -- including the Break Free From Plastic Movement, Friends of the Earth, Concerned Health Professionals of New York, European Environmental Bureau, Oil Change International, Heinrich-Boll-Foundation, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, Alianza Mexicana contra el Fracking, Support Centre for Land Change South Africa, Frack Free United, SumOfUs, Women Engage for a Common Future -- point to the overwhelming scientific documenting the significant negative climate impacts of fossil gas and the environmental and disastrous public health implications of fracking.
"'Fracking sounds nearly as ugly as it actually is. For the sake of the climate we need this obscenity to end right now!" said renowned author and 350.org founder Bill McKibben.
The letter also draws a direct line between fracking and the global plastic pollution crisis. As Food & Water Watch recently documented, a substantial amount of the gas drilling and related infrastructure being proposed is intended to use cheap fracked hydrocarbons to make plastic.
"Over the past decade, methane levels have been rising rapidly in the atmosphere, contributing significantly to the unprecedented global climate disruption seen in recent years," said Cornell Professor of Ecology and Environmental Biology Robert Howarth, whose research on methane leaks has shed considerable light on the climate impacts of fracking. "Over 60 percent of the increased global methane emissions are from the oil and gas industry, and shale gas development in North America is responsible for one-third of the increased emissions from all sources. Fracking for shale gas is a climate disaster."
A number of United Nations bodies have weighed in over the years on the dangers of fracking. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESR) and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) have expressed concerns regarding the threat fracking represents for achieving the climate targets under the Paris Agreement and its impacts on human rights. And as early as 2012, the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP) issued a "Global Alert" on fracking, concluding that it may have adverse environmental impacts even if done properly.
As fashion icon Vivienne Westwood and environmental campaigner Joe Corre said: "Because fracking causes birth defects, in March 2019, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) took the harmful environmental and climate change impacts of fracking seriously enough to strongly urge the British Government to completely ban fracking. It speaks for itself that this highly respected U.N. body saw this legislative measure as the only solution to protect the human rights of women in rural areas in Britain".
"A decade ago, when there were only nine scientific studies on the impacts of fracking, some political leaders suggested that fracking might serve as a bridge to a stable climate. Now there are 1,800 studies, and the science is clear. Fracking is making the climate crisis worse," said Sandra Steingraber, PhD, biologist, co-founder of Concerned Health Professionals of New York. "Fracking is destroying drinking water and undermining human rights around the world. Fracking is harming health through toxic air pollution and supporting a polluting plastics industry that is killing our oceans. Our planet is on fire, but fracking is not an evacuation bridge nor a fire extinguisher. Fracking is an arsonist that needs to be stopped everywhere and right now."
Prominent actress and activist Emma Thompson said: "Fracking is the fossil fuel world's worst idea to date. It's pointless, expensive, doesn't create jobs that will serve a community, but it does pollute, damage and contribute to wrecking the climate. Its poisonous presence in our green and pleasant land is an affront to common sense, common health and the safety of the planet as a whole."
"The climate crisis is the greatest ever threat to human rights. As the recent UN report on climate change and poverty makes clear, fossil fuel companies are the main driver of climate change and over-reliance on profit-driven actors in mitigating this crisis will almost guarantee massive human rights violations,'" said human rights lawyer and barrister with Doughty Chamber Streets Jennifer Robinson. "What we really need is a global ban."
The letter concludes by referring to the final advisory opinion of the Permanent People's Tribunal (PPT) on Human Rights, Fracking and Climate Change, which recommended that fracking be banned, and that "the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment be asked to investigate the violations of the rights of humans and nature by the Unconventional Oil and Gas Extraction industry."
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
Sanders Slams Private Equity Scrooges Ending Paid Holidays for Walgreens Workers
"While the rich get richer, workers are struggling, and your decision to cut workers' paid vacation is making the problem worse."
Dec 23, 2025
Independent US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday urged the private equity firm that recently acquired Walgreens to reverse its decision to strip hourly workers at the second-largest US pharmacy chain of paid days off on Christmas and other major holidays.
After Sycamore Partners finalized its $10 billion purchase of Walgreens in late August, the pharmacy chain—now headed by CEO Mike Motz—eliminated paid holidays for New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. Workers were notified of the move, which was first reported by Bloomberg, in October.
The move is typical of what private equity firms—sometimes called vulture capitalists—often do in order to maximize profits. In addition to slashing paid time off and benefits, they often reduce or freeze pay, fire workers, close locations, introduce aggressive sales targets, and reduce job security by replacing full-time positions with hourly or independently contracted workers. Walgreens announced last year that it planned on closing around 1,200 of its roughly 8,000 US stores, citing their struggling performance.
"This Thanksgiving, Walgreens' hourly workers faced the impossible choice between losing pay and spending the holiday with their loved ones," Sanders (Vt.)—who is the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee—wrote Tuesday in a letter to Sycamore Partners founder and managing director Stefan Kaluzny.
"Walgreens employs 220,000 employees, the vast majority of whom are hourly workers... Sycamore Partners' decision to cut paid holidays for these hourly workers is unfortunately not surprising," the senator continued. "The firm follows the private equity playbook of buying businesses and aggressively extracting profit while using and abusing workers."
"For example, just one year after Sycamore Partners purchased Staples, the firm extracted $1 billion from the company as it closed 100 stores and laid off 7,000 workers," Sanders noted. "That same year, Sycamore Partners drove Nine West into bankruptcy and was accused of siphoning off over $1 billion in funds."
"Meanwhile, from 2016-22, companies owned by Sycamore Partners racked up over $3 million in labor violations, including wage-and-hour and workplace safety and health violations," he added.
During the holiday season, we all want to spend time with our loved ones. And yet, just two months after buying Walgreens for $10 billion, the private equity firm Sycamore Partners stripped hourly workers of paid vacation, including Christmas and New Year’s Day. Shameful.
[image or embed]
— Senator Bernie Sanders (@sanders.senate.gov) December 23, 2025 at 9:41 AM
Sanders contrasted a reality in which "60% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck" with the fact that "more private equity managers make over $100 million annually than investment bankers, top financial executives, and professional athletes combined."
"While the rich get richer, workers are struggling, and your decision to cut workers' paid vacation leave is making the problem worse," he stressed. "Some Walgreens workers make as little as $15 an hour. Cutting their paid leave will make it even more difficult for these workers to pay for housing, childcare, healthcare, and groceries."
"In short," Sanders concluded, "Sycamore Partners is forcing workers to sacrifice their basic needs for private equity profit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Dangerous and Cruel': Trump VA Quietly Bans Abortion Even for Rape and Health Risks
"This decision endangers the health, lives, and futures of the people who have served our country—and it proves what we've long warned: Trump and his allies won't stop until they've imposed a national abortion ban."
Dec 23, 2025
Defenders of reproductive rights on Tuesday responded with alarm after President Donald Trump's administration quietly imposed an abortion ban at the US Department of Veterans Affairs following a legal opinion penned by a deputy assistant attorney general.
After the 2022 Roe v. Wade reversal, the Biden administration allowed the VA to provide abortion counseling and care for service members and beneficiaries in cases of rape, incest, or if the pregnancy threatened the health of the patient. Once Trump returned to power, the department proposed a rule that would end those exceptions—though the VA would continue treating ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, and allow abortions "when a physician certifies that the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term."
Although that rule hasn't taken effect, the US Department of Justice last week issued a memo in which Joshua Craddock of the Office of Legal Counsel concludes that the 2022 policy wasn't legally valid. The VA on Monday issued its own internal memo—obtained by the legal group Democracy Forward and reported by MS NOW—announcing immediate compliance with the DOJ's opinion, effectively implementing the proposed rule without finishing the formal process for doing so.
"DOJ's opinion states that VA is not legally authorized to provide abortions, and VA is complying with it immediately," Pete Kasperowicz, press secretary for the VA, confirmed to MS NOW, without answering further questions. "DOJ's opinion is consistent with VA's proposed rule, which continues to work its way through the regulatory process."
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said in a statement that "denying veterans essential healthcare and abortion access—even in cases of rape or serious health risk—after they have sacrificed so much for our country is callous and inhumane."
Democracy Forward represented Minority Veterans of America in submitting a comment opposing the proposed rule, and Perryman pledged that "we will continue to fight its implementation now that it has been finalized."
"This abortion ban makes it clear that the Trump administration will always choose its dangerous political agenda, even if the cost is veterans and their families' access to essential care."
Minority Veterans of America co-founder and executive director Lindsay Church also denounced the "dangerous and cruel" policy shift.
"Veterans face unique challenges that make it critical for us to be able to access abortion care, including possible exposure to toxic chemicals, waiting to start a family until after our service, and experiencing sexual assault," she said. "Abortion should not be a political issue—it is necessary, life-saving medical care, and denying this care will put veterans and their loved ones' lives in danger."
Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of the National Women's Law Center, warned that "the Trump administration is confirming what we've always known: its promise to leave abortion to the states was a lie. No one is safe from their anti-abortion crusade, not even our nation's veterans."
Goss Graves called on federal lawmakers to "pass legislation to reverse this harmful new policy and reinstate abortion access to all veterans and their loved ones who depend on the VA for care," though such a bill is unlikely to advance in the current Republican-controlled Congress.
Reproductive Freedom for All president and CEO Mini Timmaraju similarly declared that "this decision endangers the health, lives, and futures of the people who have served our country—and it proves what we've long warned: Trump and his allies won't stop until they've imposed a national abortion ban."
Nancy Northup, president and CEO at the Center for Reproductive Rights, argued that "everyone should be appalled by this heartless policy. President Trump said he would leave abortion to the states, but he continues to seize new opportunities to restrict it nationally."
This means the VA won't cover abortions EVEN in the case of rape, incest, or serious threat to the health of the patient. The DOJ memo was authored by Josh Craddock, one of the chief legal advocates for fetal personhood, i.e. imposing a nationwide abortion ban through the courts.
[image or embed]
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) December 23, 2025 at 2:18 PM
Planned Parenthood Federation of America highlighted that "this ban goes into effect as the Trump administration and its allies in Congress continue a full-scale attack on access to sexual and reproductive health: stripping veterans of essential healthcare, slashing Medicaid, and 'defunding' Planned Parenthood."
Alexis McGill Johnson, the group's president and CEO, said that "this abortion ban makes it clear that the Trump administration will always choose its dangerous political agenda, even if the cost is veterans and their families' access to essential care."
Earlier this year, House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Ranking Member Mark Takano (D-Calif.) and Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) led over 230 of their colleagues in submitting a public comment against the Trump administration's proposed rule. Takano and other members of the House panel also spoke out on Tuesday.
"As a country, we made a solemn promise to honor veterans' service and ensure they receive the healthcare they have earned. Veterans should be able to trust that promise and know they can walk into a VA medical center and receive the care they need," said Takano. "Instead of trusting veterans to make the healthcare decisions that are best for them, VA is allowing political opinion to supplant its duty to veterans."
"Instead of allowing veterans to discuss all their healthcare options openly and honestly with their providers, VA has decided that the government should be in charge of making healthcare decisions, even in matters of life and death," he continued. "And instead of fulfilling its duty to provide needed healthcare to veterans, VA has refused to acknowledge the unique and complex healthcare needs of veterans who are more likely to have complex health conditions that can increase the risks associated with pregnancy. Veterans fought for our rights. Now it's our responsibility to fight for theirs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Supreme Court Deals Trump Major Loss on Illinois National Guard Deployment
"Trump is losing his grip on the dictatorial power he so covets," said one legal analyst.
Dec 23, 2025
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday dealt President Donald Trump a major loss by rejecting the administration's request to strike down a temporary restraining order that barred him from deploying the National Guard in Chicago.
In a 6-3 ruling that featured dissents from Justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court determined that the Trump administration had not met statutory requirements needed to justify deploying the National Guard in a state over the objections of its own government.
The court noted that the administration justified its Illinois deployment—pursued alongside a federal crackdown on undocumented immigrants in and around the state's largest city—by pointing to a law stating that the president may federalize the National Guard in the event that he is "unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States."
However, the court found that the "regular forces" referenced in the statute refers to the US military, not civilian law enforcement officials. This is relevant because the president faces significant restrictions on his ability to deploy the military domestically under the Posse Comitatus Act.
"Because the statute requires an assessment of the military’s ability to execute the laws, it likely applies only where the military could legally execute the laws," the justices wrote. "Such circumstances are exceptional: Under the Posse Comitatus Act, the military is prohibited from 'execut[ing] the laws' 'except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or act of Congress.'"
The justices further said that the Trump administration so far "has failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois" and has not invoked any statute that would provide an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act.
In conclusion, the court wrote that the federal government "has not carried its burden to show" that the law "permits the president to federalize the guard in the exercise of inherent authority to protect federal personnel and property in Illinois."
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, who had sued the Trump administration over the deployment, cheered the ruling and said that "the extremely limited circumstances under which the federal government can call up the militia over a state's objection do not exist in Illinois."
Raoul added that he was "pleased that the streets of Illinois will remain free of armed National Guard members as our litigation continues in the courts."
Glenn Kirschner, a former federal prosecutor, celebrated the Supreme Court's ruling as a victory for the rule of law.
"Trump is losing his grip on the dictatorial power he so covets," Kirschner commented on X.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said he was "genuinely shocked" by the court's ruling, and he credited an amicus brief written by Georgetown University Law Center professor Marty Lederman with swaying the court, as it centered the definition of "regular forces" in the statute as central to determining the legality of Trump's actions.
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen and co-chair of the Not Above the Law Coalition, hailed the court's ruling but warned that the danger posed by the Trump administration's authoritarian ambitions has not ended.
"With a lawful administration that understood the limits of executive power, this would be the end of the question," she said of the ruling. "Unfortunately, we are living under an authoritarian regime that persists in every possible effort to expand its power and override guardrails. With an administration that displays utter disregard for the Constitution, we must now watch diligently how it will respond to a decisive Supreme Court decision against its lawless power grab."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


