January, 22 2020, 11:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Brett Benson
Communications Director, MN350 Action
brett@mn350action.org, (651) 368-1226
Environmental Groups Launch Pressure Campaign Urging Presidential Candidates to Oppose Line 3
State, national orgs appeal to field for leadership on climate change.
WASHINGTON
As most presidential campaigns continue to avoid offering specific and bold proposals to protect our climate, a coalition of national and state environmental groups today launched a grassroots campaign to pressure candidates directly to speak out against the proposed Line 3 oil pipeline in Northern Minnesota.
"If you are running for president of the United States, you need to be at the table," said Winona LaDuke of Honor the Earth, a Native environmental advocacy organization and one of the campaign organizers. "That means candidates running for president of the United States, you need to stand up and oppose climate change. You need to stand up and oppose Line 3."
Canadian oil giant Enbridge Energy has proposed a massive expansion and rerouting of the current Line 3 pipeline from Canada's tar sands region to Superior, Wis. The new pipeline would carry tar sands crude over 200 bodies of water and would contribute carbon pollution equivalent to 50 coal plants.
"We expect clear leadership from those who say they're ready to be president," said Andy Pearson of MN350 Action, another campaign sponsor. "And clear leadership means calling out the incompatibility of expanding fossil fuel infrastructure and fighting the climate crisis. It means promising to put our communities ahead of Big Oil's profits."
Among presidential candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders announced in January 2019 that he opposes Line 3. Sen. Elizabeth Warren followed with a public statement in August. Also in August, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota returned a campaign contribution from an Enbridge employee. But Klobuchar has not spoken out against Line 3, and the rest of the Democratic field has been silent.
"We call on Sen. Klobuchar and the rest of the candidates to join Sen. Warren and Sen. Sanders in opposing Line 3, a project that would be disastrous for the climate and for Indigenous communities," Pearson said. "We need you to speak out now."
MN350 Action is affiliated with the national advocacy group 350 Action.
"As we enter the climate decade, real leaders need to stand with Indigenous peoples and communities over fossil fuel billionaires," said John Qua, 350 Action spokesperson. "We stand in solidarity with Minnesotans and people across America demanding all candidates for this country's top office oppose the toxic and unnecessary Line 3 pipeline and fight for a world that puts our health and safety first."
Another campaign sponsor, Oil Change U.S., worked with Bold Nebraska and community partners to successfully lobby 10 Democratic presidential candidates to commit to stopping the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would pass through Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Tom Steyer, and Pete Buttigieg all signed that pledge while Amy Klobuchar, Deval Patrick and Joe Biden did not.
"Our request for candidates on Line 3 is simple: Stand with Indigenous communities and oppose this climate-wrecking disaster of a pipeline," said Collin Rees of Oil Change U.S. "We know that existing fossil fuel infrastructure is enough to doom the world to climate crisis. The last thing we need is another massive pipeline. It's time for all candidates who want to be climate leaders to publicly oppose Line 3, acknowledge the need to leave fossil fuels in the ground, and get serious about investing in a just transition that leaves no one behind."
Honor the Earth and MN350 Action were two of several organizers of September's Gichi-gami Gathering to Stop Line 3, which attracted 1,200 pipeline opponents to the shores of Lake Superior.
"For the past seven years, we have been fighting a pipeline--760,000 barrels a day of tar sands oil that no one needs," LaDuke said. "We don't need it added to our atmosphere, and we don't need it across our pristine lake country."
350 Action is the independent political action arm of the non-profit, non-partisan climate justice group 350.org.
LATEST NEWS
'Obscene Transfer of Wealth' Continues as Another Oil Giant Posts Massive War-Fueled Profits
"The war enriches shareholders as it impoverishes citizens," said a campaigner with 350.org.
Apr 29, 2026
France-based TotalEnergies on Wednesday became the latest fossil fuel giant to report massive profits juiced by the US-Israeli war on Iran, which has sent global oil prices surging and jacked up costs for consumers.
TotalEnergies announced in its first-quarter earnings report that it would increase returns to shareholders through a higher dividend and stock buybacks after seeing $5.8 billion in profits and $8.6 billion in cash flow during the first three months of 2026. The company attributed its profit growth to its "ability to capture price upside," corporate-speak for cashing in as consumers face rising energy costs.
“While families watch their bills skyrocket, TotalEnergies posts some of its best financial results without even paying its fair share of taxes," said Fanny Petitbon, France country manager at the environmental group 350.org. "We are witnessing an obscene transfer of wealth: The war enriches shareholders as it impoverishes citizens."
"We demand that France stop yielding to oil lobbyists and introduce, without delay, a permanent and ambitious tax on fossil fuel profits," Petitbon added. "Every day of inaction is a deliberate political choice in favor of shareholders and against citizens.”
TotalEnergies' report came a day after the British oil giant BP reported that its profits more than doubled compared to the first quarter of last year.
In an analysis released over the weekend, Oxfam projected that six of the world's largest fossil fuel companies—including BP and TotalEnergies—will rake in $2,967 in profits per second this year, an increase of roughly $37 million per day compared to last year.
"Families around the world continue to be pushed into energy poverty as geopolitical instability, the impacts of escalating violence in the Middle East that has already taken many lives, and the sharp increase in the wealth of the super-rich in contrast to everyone else are leaving ordinary people struggling to make ends meet," said Oxfam.
350.org warned earlier this week that energy market disruptions caused by the US-Israeli war on Iran could hit households, businesses, and governments around the world with more than $1 trillion in extra costs.
“It is a staggering injustice that fossil fuel corporations are once again posting record-breaking profits while families struggle to keep the lights on," said Rukiya Khamis, 350.org's East Africa country manager. "Right now, power is concentrated in the hands of those who thrive on crisis and scarcity."
"It’s time to end our forced dependence on fossil fuels, tax the profiteers who benefit from our hardship, and redirect that wealth into building a fair, clean energy system," Khamis said. "We aren’t just asking for a lower bill; we are demanding a system that values human dignity over corporate greed."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fetterman Helps GOP Senators Sink Democrat Effort to Block Trump War on Cuba
"The last thing working Americans need right now is another war," said the Senate's top Democrat.
Apr 28, 2026
The US Senate on Tuesday defeated a Democrat-led bid to stop President Donald Trump from following through on his threat to wage war on Cuba, whose long-suffering people are reeling from the American administration's tightened economic stranglehold.
Upper chamber lawmakers voted 51-47 on a procedural motion to block further debate Sen. Tim Kaine's (D-Va.) SJ Res. 124, "a joint resolution to direct the removal of United States armed forces from hostilities within or against the republic of Cuba that have not been authorized by Congress."
Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky voted to advance the resolution, while John Fetterman of Pennsylvania joined his GOP colleagues in voting to sink the measure.
The vote effectively sidelines the measure, one of many failed attempts to curb Trump's ability to wage war on countries including Iran and Venezuela, as well as rein in his high seas boat bombing spree.
“The American people are not asking for another war," Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.)—one of SJ Res. 124's dozen co-sponsors—said following Tuesday's vote. "They want us focused on building housing in Arizona, not bombing housing in Havana. They want us to lower the cost of healthcare not condemn a generation of veterans to a lifetime of hospital visits. They want us to make their lives more affordable, not spend their tax dollars on unnecessary wars."
Kaine called the GOP move "purely a regime change effort."
"Why do they want it? You'll have to ask them," he added. "What we're doing with respect to Cuba, if somebody was doing it to us, we would consider it an act of war. But because they don't pose a security threat to the United States, it's clearly an effort to change the regime."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who also co-sponsored the resolution, said, "The last thing working Americans need right now is another war—let alone one that’s 90 miles south of the US."
Resolution co-sponsor Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) said on Bluesky after the vote, "A conflict with Cuba would cost hardworking Americans billions of dollars, deepen the humanitarian crisis in Cuba, and put American service members in harm’s way."
"The Constitution is clear: Only Congress has the authority to declare war," Alsobrooks added.
Trump has attacked seven countries since returning to office and 10 since the start of his first term—more than any other president.
The situation in Cuba is dire, as a result of both the 65-year US economic chokehold on the island and mismanaged central planning by its socialist rulers.
Trump has been ramping up military threats and economic pressure on Cuba, whose people were already suffering from generations of US sanctions. His administration's tightened embargo has severely restricted fuel imports, worsening an energy emergency in which blackouts have become the norm, threatening the lives of vulnerable Cubans—especially sick people and children.
The US president said that “we may stop by Cuba after we’re finished" with the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran that’s killed thousands of people, including hundreds of children. Trump has also said that he believes he’ll “be having the honor of taking Cuba."
The United States already took Cuba once, during an 1898 war waged against Spain under highly dubious pretenses that ended with the US also acquiring Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Guam—with Hawaii also annexed that year under the guise of security.
American presidents have been trying to force out Cuba's socialist government since shortly after the revolution that overthrew a US-backed dictatorship in 1959. US efforts have included carrying out or backing an armed invasion, terrorist attacks, assassination attempts, and other acts of aggression.
Cuba commits no such acts against the United States or anyone else, yet Trump added the country to the US State Sponsors of Terrorism list.
Following Tuesday's vote, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said that "Trump should learn the law of holes: If you find yourself in one, stop digging."
"Instead of threatening that ‘Cuba is next,’ President Trump should remove his blockade against Cuba, which has devastated Havana’s economy and healthcare system, and has created a deepening humanitarian crisis," Markey added.
The United Nations General Assembly has overwhelmingly condemned the blockade 33 times since 1992.
“With its catastrophic Iran war of choice, the Trump administration has lost all credibility on issues of war and peace," Markey asserted. "The American people do not want yet another endless war that will only costs more lives and more taxpayer dollars, and undermine US security.”
Progressive International co-general coordinator David Adler warned Tuesday that "Trump is preparing military action against Cuba," calling the Senate vote possibly "the last chance for US Congress to stop it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FCC Moves to Yank Disney Broadcast Licenses as Trumps Demand ABC Fire Kimmel
"This is a clear attack on the First Amendment and a political stunt designed to intimidate critics, retaliate against a comedian practicing free speech through satire, and send a message to anyone who dares to speak out."
Apr 28, 2026
Press freedom advocates on Tuesday forcefully condemned the Republican-dominated Federal Communications Commission—and FCC Chair Brendan Carr in particular—for moving to challenge Disney-owned ABC's broadcast licenses as President Donald Trump again pressures to network to fire late-night television host Jimmy Kimmel.
"The First Amendment and the FCC's mandate do not permit the agency to use broadcast licenses as weapons to punish broadcasters for constitutionally protected content they air," declared Freedom of the Press Foundation chief of advocacy Seth Stern.
"Brendan Carr was once a serious communications lawyer, and has repeatedly and correctly said that the FCC has no role in policing content, whether news reporting or comedians’ late night jokes," Stern pointed out. "Carr's decision to abandon his principles to kiss up to Trump to advance his career does not change the law that Carr knows full well applies."
"The FCC is neither the journalism police nor the humor police," he added. "This is nothing but illegal jawboning intended to intimidate ABC into kissing the ring."
Kimmel—whom ABC briefly suspended last year amid pressure from Carr over comments the comedian made about assassinated right-wing activist Charlie Kirk—joked last Thursday that the first lady, Melania Trump, had "a glow like an expectant widow." Two days later, a gunman attempted to enter the White House Correspondents' Dinner—and on Monday, he was charged with trying to assassinate the president.
Also on Monday, both Donald and Melania Trump separately took to social media, calling for Kimmel to be fired. The comedian, meanwhile, opened his Monday night monologue to crowd chants of "Jimmy" and defended his joke, highlighting the Trumps' age gap.
On Tuesday, Semafor reported the FCC's plans to challenge the ABC licenses, which weren't slated for review until at least 2028. Other outlets began confirming the reporting, citing unnamed sources, and the agency ultimately issued the anticipated order—which says that "the FCC has been investigating Disney's ABC stations for possible violations of the Communications Act of 1934 and the FCC’s rules, including the agency's prohibition on unlawful discrimination."
The order, signed by David J. Brown, chief of the Video Division, directs ABC to "file license renewals for all of their licensed TV stations within 30 days—in other words, by May 28, 2026." Those stations are WABC-TV (New York), KABC-TV (Los Angeles), WLS-TV (Chicago), WPVI-TV (Philadelphia), KTRK-TV (Houston), KGO-TV (San Francisco), WTVD-TV (Raleigh-Durham), and KFSN-TV (Fresno).
As CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter explained: "The order will not affect the local stations right away. It is just the start of a protracted legal process, and ABC has broad legal protections. Nevertheless, the FCC order is an extraordinary escalation by the Trump administration."
"The FCC had not filed an early-renewal order in decades, according to a source familiar with the matter, until Monday, when the agency took action against a small station license holder called Bridge News," Stelter noted. "Both Bridge and Disney will now go through a lengthy hearing process, giving the stations multiple chances to respond."
Disney said in a statement that "we have received the Federal Communications Commission's order initiating an accelerated review of the licenses held by ABC's owned television stations. ABC and its stations have a long record of operating in full compliance with FCC rules and serving their local communities with trusted news, emergency information, and public‑interest programming."
"We are confident that record demonstrates our continued qualifications as licensees under the Communications Act and the First Amendment, and are prepared to show that through the appropriate legal channels," the company continued. "Our focus remains, as always, on serving viewers in the local communities where our stations operate."
Commissioner Anna Gomez—currently the FCC's only Democratic appointee—said that "the effort to challenge the licenses of ABC/Disney-owned stations is the FCC's most egregious attack on the First Amendment to date. But it will fail. This should be a lesson to media companies that no amount of capitulation to this administration will buy them protection."
Jessica J. González, co-CEO of the advocacy group Free Press, was similarly optimistic. She said that "Carr will try to dress up this latest attack like a legitimate FCC procedure, but his motivations are clear. He is using his position of power to silence dissent at the president's beck and call. This extraordinary and unconstitutional attack on the media is nothing more than another favor to the most fragile president in U.S. history."
"The FCC’s ongoing attack on lawful and important diversity, equity, and inclusion programs is immoral," she argued. "The timing of this move suggests unconstitutional retribution for a joke Donald Trump didn't like. Either way, this dangerous attack on free speech won’t stand up to any First Amendment test. We've seen Carr violate his oath to uphold the Constitution again and again. It's time for Congress to impeach him."
González added that "for its part, ABC and Disney leadership need to stand strong on behalf of their First Amendment right to air content without government intrusion and censorship. Buckling in advance to pressure by this administration and its obsequious FCC chairman didn't work for the broadcaster when it suspended Kimmel last year. It would be a grave mistake to buckle in advance again to these kinds of chilling government threats from Trump's censorship czar."
The organization MoveOn has launched a petition in support of Kimmel, which already has over 257,000 signatures.
"The Trump administration's targeting of ABC's broadcast licenses sends a chilling message: Fall in line or face consequences," said MoveOn Civic Action chief communications officer Joel Payne. "This is a clear attack on the First Amendment and a political stunt designed to intimidate critics, retaliate against a comedian practicing free speech through satire, and send a message to anyone who dares to speak out."
"ABC and Disney must not back down to Donald Trump or any bureaucrat in his administration doing his bidding," Payne stressed. "This is bigger than just an attempt to bully Jimmy Kimmel—this is about telling the American people what to think, what to laugh at, what to say, and what to criticize. Our members will fight any efforts to weaponize the government to punish speech and will hold corporations who bow to this pressure accountable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


