

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.

Tom Pelton, Environmental Integrity Project, (443) 510-2574 or tpelton@environmentalintegrity.org
Jackie Filson, Food and Water Watch, (202) 683-2538 or jfilson@fwwatch.org
Nydia Gutierrez, Earthjustice, (212) 284-8030 or ngutierrez@earthjustice.org
Twelve conservation and community groups, representing millions of people, today sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its decision not to update national standards restricting water pollution from slaughterhouses.
EPA's decision allows thousands of meat and poultry processing plants to continue using outdated pollution-control technology, leading to the contamination of waterways across the country.
The Environmental Integrity Project and Earthjustice filed today's lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond on behalf of Cape Fear River Watch, Rural Empowerment Association for Community Help, Waterkeepers Chesapeake, Animal Legal Defense Fund, Center for Biological Diversity, Comite Civico del Valle, Environment America, Food & Water Watch, The Humane Society of the United States, and Waterkeeper Alliance.
More than 8 billion chickens, 100 million pigs, and 30 million cattle are processed each year in more than 5,000 slaughterhouses across the country. An estimated 4,700 of these slaughterhouses discharge polluted water to iconic waterways, including the Chesapeake Bay, either directly or indirectly through municipal sewage treatment plants.
"EPA's national standards for water pollution from slaughterhouses are either weak and outdated or nonexistent," said Sylvia Lam, Attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project. "It is well past time for EPA to crack down on this public health hazard. Cleaner plants have already installed technology to lessen the pollution they send into their local rivers and streams. By not updating these nationwide standards, EPA is rewarding dirty slaughterhouses at the expense of the public."
The federal Clean Water Act requires EPA to set industry-wide water pollution standards for slaughterhouses and to review those standards each year to decide whether updates are appropriate to keep pace with advances in pollution-control technology.
On October 24, 2019, EPA announced its decision in the Federal Register that it would not revise the federal water pollution standards for slaughterhouses that discharge processed wastewater directly into waterways, and that it would not create standards for plants that send their wastewater to sewage plants before discharging into rivers or streams. This is despite the fact that EPA identified slaughterhouses as the largest industrial source of nitrogen water pollution without updated standards.
EPA last revised standards for slaughterhouses that discharge polluted water directly into waterways 15 years ago. More than a third of these slaughterhouses are still operating under guidelines that date back to 1974 or 1975.
Meanwhile, EPA has never set standards for slaughterhouses that send their waste to sewage treatment plants before discharging into waterways, even though these slaughterhouses make up a substantial portion of the industry.
"Some of EPA's technological requirements for slaughterhouses date from the mid-1970s," said Earthjustice attorney Alexis Andiman. "Technology has changed a lot since then, and EPA needs to catch up. EPA's failure to update pollution standards for slaughterhouses is illegal--and it allows a major industry to continue cutting corners at the expense of communities and the environment."
Many slaughterhouses are owned by large corporations, with the 100 top slaughterhouse companies each reporting to have received between $83 million and $40 billion in revenues in 2019. The five largest corporations- Tysons Foods, JBS USA, Cargill, SYSCO, and Smithfield Foods - each generated more than $15 billion in annual revenue this past year.
In an October 2018 report, the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) found the average slaughterhouse discharged over 330 pounds of nitrogen per day in 2017 - the amount of pollution in untreated sewage from a town of 14,000 people. About two-thirds of the 98 slaughterhouses studied by EIP discharge to waterways that are impaired by one or more pollutants found in slaughterhouse wastewater. At least 66 of the 98 plants surveyed by EIP are owned by companies that each reported more than $2 billion in annual revenues.
Meat processing plants discharge water contaminated with blood, oil and grease, and fats. This wastewater contains nitrogen and phosphorus pollution, pathogens, and other contaminants. When released into waterways, pollution from slaughterhouses can cause algae blooms that suffocate aquatic life and turn waterways into bacteria-laden public health hazards.
America's largest slaughterhouses are clustered in rural areas, such as eastern North Carolina and portions of Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania.
"Smithfield's Tar Heel slaughterhouse northwest of Wilmington, N.C., is the largest pork slaughterhouse on Earth and discharges its waste just upstream from the drinking water intakes for hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians," said Kemp Burdette, Cape Fear Riverkeeper with the nonprofit group Cape Fear River Watch. "The fact that EPA is failing to protect drinking water supplies and ecosystems by allowing slaughterhouses like the one in Tar Heel to operate under extremely outdated guidelines is dangerous and irresponsible."
"EPA has the authority and responsibility to stop slaughterhouses from polluting our water," said Devon Hall, co-founder of the Rural Empowerment Association for Community Help based in eastern North Carolina. "If EPA doesn't do its job, who will?"
Updated pollution standards could lead to significant improvements in waterways across the country, especially in areas where slaughterhouses are concentrated. The most technologically advanced slaughterhouses already release far less pollution than the dirtiest plants, proving that improved technology exists. Under the Clean Water Act, EPA must ensure that all slaughterhouses adopt up-to-date and effective technology.
Quotes from participating organizations:
Humane Society of the United States Managing Attorney for Farm Animal Litigation, Peter Brandt, said: "Billions of animals - most raised in an industrialized system of cruel and extreme confinement - are killed each year at slaughterhouses whose discharges pollute waterways causing harm to aquatic and other wildlife. EPA needs to adequately limit these discharges to protect the environment and the animals and people in it."
Environment America Clean Water Program Director John Rumpler said: "Some of the world's largest meat companies are dumping huge volumes of pollution into America's rivers -- pollution that contributes to toxic algae and puts our drinking water at risk. Surely, it is not too much to ask that those who produce our food stop polluting our water."
Animal Legal Defense Fund Senior Attorney Cristina Stella said: "EPA cannot continue allowing the substantial pollution caused by processing animals at industrial facilities to go unchecked. Slaughterhouses need to be regulated as the industrial polluters that they are."
Food & Water Watch Senior Staff Attorney Tarah Heinzen said: "Unsurprisingly, the Trump EPA is continuing to prop up Big Ag by failing to hold meat companies accountable for the pollution from their slaughterhouses, which has been harming waterways and threatening public health across the country for far too long."
Center for Biological Diversity Senior Attorney Hannah Connor said: "The Trump administration's failure to stop meatpackers from using rivers and streams as sewers for their slaughterhouses is endangering public health and harming wildlife."
Waterkeeper Alliance Senior Attorney Kelly Hunter Foster said: "EPA acknowledges that harmful algal blooms from uncontrolled nitrogen and phosphorus pollution are a major problem in all 50 states - a problem that can sicken or kill people exposed to extremely dangerous toxins, destroy fisheries, and decimate local economies. Slaughterhouses are a major source of this pollution; EPA must take action to protect the public from these dangerous discharges."
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) 683-2500Despite denials of being involved in the Texas state senate special election, Trump endorsed the losing candidate on three separate occasions over the last three days.
Hours after the Republican Party suffered an upset defeat in a special election in a deep-red district in Texas, President Donald Trump falsely claimed he had nothing to do with the race.
While speaking to reporters at his Mar-a-Lago resort on Sunday, Trump was asked what he made of the GOP losing a Texas state senate election in a district that he carried by 17 percentage points in 2024.
"I'm not involved in that, that's a local Texas race," Trump replied.
Reporter: A Democrat won a special election in Texas in an area that you won by 17 points
Trump: I’m not involved in that. That’s a local race. I don’t know anything about it. I had nothing to do with it. pic.twitter.com/MfWU1DZkar
— Acyn (@Acyn) February 1, 2026
In fact, Trump endorsed losing Republican candidate Leigh Wambsganss on three separate occasions in just the last three days, including a Saturday post on Truth Social where he called her "a phenomenal Candidate" and "an incredible supporter of our Movement to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN."
Trump's attempt to distance himself from someone whom he enthusiastically endorsed just one day ago elicited instant ridicule from many of his critics on social media.
"Two days ago, the president used his social media platform to endorse this 'phenomenal candidate' and to urge 'all America First Patriots' in the district to get out and vote for her," remarked Princeton historian Kevin Kruse. "Today, he says he doesn't know anything about it and had nothing to do with it. He's lying or demented or both."
Zak Williams, a political consultant at Zenith Strategies and a native Texan, wrote that Trump was "intimately involved" in the campaign, noting that Republicans outspent Democrats in the race by a margin of 10 to 1.
Joe Walsh, a former Republican congressman who left the GOP over his disgust with Trump, expressed astonishment at the president's blatant dishonesty.
"He’s such a horrible person," wrote Walsh. "And such a dishonest person. Yes, he was involved in that race. He endorsed the losing candidate, and she lost 100% because of him. She lost 100% because of this past year of his chaos, his cruelty, and his incompetence. Her loss was a total rejection of him."
Journalist James Barragán of TX Capital Tonight, argued that the Wambsganss loss calls into question just how effective Trump's endorsements will be in moving voters in the 2026 midterm elections.
"President Trump says he’s 'not involved' in SD 9 race where his endorsed candidate (who he boosted multiple times in the runup) lost a +17 Trump district," wrote Barragán. "He’s either not being truthful or it makes you question how much stock people should put into his social media endorsements."
"This was a bribe," said one critic.
A bombshell Saturday report from the Wall Street Journal revealed that a member of the Abu Dhabi royal family secretly backed a massive $500 million investment into the Trump family's cryptocurrency venture months before the Trump administration gave the United Arab Emirates access to highly sensitive artificial intelligence chip technology.
According to the Journal's sources, lieutenants of Abu Dhabi royal Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan signed a deal in early 2025 to buy a 49% stake in World Liberty Financial, the startup founded by members of the Trump family and the family of Trump Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.
Documents reviewed by the Journal showed that the buyers in the deal agreed to "pay half up front, steering $187 million to Trump family entities," while "at least $31 million was also slated to flow to entities affiliated with" the Witkoff family.
Weeks after green lighting the investment into the Trump crypto venture, Tahnoon met directly with President Donald Trump and Witkoff in the White House, where he reportedly expressed interest in working with the US on AI-related technology.
Two months after this, the Journal noted, "the administration committed to give the tiny Gulf monarchy access to around 500,000 of the most advanced AI chips a year—enough to build one of the world’s biggest AI data center clusters."
Tahnoon in the past had tried to get US officials to give the UAE access to the chips, but was rebuffed on concerns that the cutting-edge technology could be passed along to top US geopolitical rival China, wrote the Journal.
Many observers expressed shock at the Journal's report, with some critics saying that it showed Trump and his associates were engaging in a criminal bribery scheme.
"This was a bribe," wrote Melanie D’Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, in a social media post. "UAE royals gave the Trump family $500 million, and Trump, in his presidential capacity, gave them access to tightly guarded American AI chips. The most powerful person on the planet, also happens to be the most shamelessly corrupt."
Jesse Eisinger, reporter and editor at ProPublica, argued that the Abu Dhabi investment into the Trump cypto firm "should rank among the greatest US scandals ever."
Democratic strategist David Axelrod also said that the scope of the Trump crypto investment scandal was historic in nature.
"In any other time or presidency, this story... would be an earthquake of a scandal," he wrote. "The size, scope and implications of it are unprecedented and mind-boggling."
Tommy Vietor, co-host of "Pod Save America," struggled to wrap his head around the scale of corruption on display.
"How do you add up the cost of corruption this massive?" he wondered. "It's not just that Trump is selling advanced AI tech to the highest bidder, national security be damned. Its that he's tapped that doofus Steve Witkoff as an international emissary so his son Zach Witkoff can mop up bribes."
Former Rep. Tom Malinkowski (D-NJ) warned the Trump and his associates that they could wind up paying a severe price for their deal with the UAE.
"If a future administration finds that such payments to the Trump family were acts of corruption," he wrote, "these people could be sanctioned under the Global Magnitsky Act, and the assets in the US could potentially be frozen."
In a speech before cheering supporters, Democrat Taylor Rehmet dedicated his victory "to everyday working people."
Democrats scored a major upset on Saturday, as machinist union leader Taylor Rehmet easily defeated Republican opponent Leigh Wambsganss in a state senate special election held in a deep-red district that President Donald Trump carried by 17 percentage points in 2024.
With nearly all votes counted, Rehmet holds a 14-point lead in Texas' Senate District 9, which covers a large portion of Tarrant County.
In a speech before cheering supporters, Rehmet dedicated his victory "to everyday working people" whom he credited with putting his campaign over the top.
This win goes to everyday, working people.
I’ll see you out there! pic.twitter.com/kPWzjn2LhW
— Taylor Rehmet (@TaylorRehmetTX) February 1, 2026
Republican opponent Wambsganss conceded defeat in the race but vowed to win an upcoming rematch in November.
“The dynamics of a special election are fundamentally different from a November general election,” Wambsganss said. “I believe the voters of Senate District 9 and Tarrant County Republicans will answer the call in November.”
Republican Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick reacted somberly to the news of Rehmet's victory, warning in a social media post that the result was "a wake-up call for Republicans across Texas."
"Our voters cannot take anything for granted," Patrick emphasized.
Democratic US Senate candidate James Talarico, on the other hand, cheered Rehmet's victory, which he hinted was a sign of things to come in the Lone Star State in the 2026 midterm elections.
"Trump won this district by 17 points," he wrote. "Democrat Taylor Rehmet just flipped it—despite Big Money outspending him 10:1. Something is happening in Texas."
Steven Monacelli, special correspondent for the Texas Observer, described Rehmet's victory as "an earthquake of Biblical proportions."
"Tarrant County is the largest red county in the nation," Monacelli explained. "I cannot emphasize enough how big this is."
Adam Carlson, founding partner of polling firm Zenith Research, noted that Rehmet's victory was truly remarkable given the district's past voting record.
"The recent high water mark for Dems in the district was 43.6% (Beto 2018)," he wrote, referring to Democrat Beto O'Rourke's failed 2018 US Senate campaign. "Rehmet’s likely to exceed 55%. The heavily Latino parts of the district shifted sharply to the left from 2024."
Polling analyst Lakshya Jain said that the big upset in Texas makes more sense when considering recent polling data on voter enthusiasm.
"Our last poll's generic ballot was D+4," he explained. "Among the most enthusiastic voters (a.k.a., those who said they would 'definitely' vote in 2026)? D+12. Foreseeable and horrible for the GOP."
Bud Kennedy, a columnist for the Forth Worth Star-Telegram, argued that Rehmet's victory shows that "Democrats can win almost anywhere in Texas" in 2026.
Kennedy also credited Rehmet with having "the perfect résumé for a District 9 Democrat" as "a Lockheed Martin leader running against a Republican who had lost suburban public school voters, particularly in staunch-red Republican north Fort Worth."