June, 29 2020, 12:00am EDT

GW Commits to Fossil Fuel Divestment
On Monday morning, the George Washington University Board of Trustees announced GW's commitment to fully divest the university endowment from the fossil fuel industry by 2025, achieve carbon neutrality by 2030, and further sustainability measures on campus.
WASHINGTON
On Monday morning, the George Washington University Board of Trustees announced GW's commitment to fully divest the university endowment from the fossil fuel industry by 2025, achieve carbon neutrality by 2030, and further sustainability measures on campus.
The Sunrise GW leadership team released the following statement in response to the announcement:
"The decision today is a profound victory for the GW community. Eight years ago, GW students launched a campaign to force our university to reckon with the climate crisis and divest from the fossil fuel industry. The climate crisis is an existential threat to humanity, and has been caused not by everyday people, but by a handful of fossil fuel executives who have put their profits over our future. Continued investment in fossil fuel corporations is complicity in their crimes. We commend GW for taking this action, but we want to make clear that this would not have happened without years of student organizing. For too long, the Board of Trustees has ignored and dismissed student voices. We hope that the Board continues to act on issues brought forth by students. Today, we celebrate our victory, and tomorrow we go back to our fight for a livable and just future for all."
Sunrise GW led the successful fossil fuel divestment campaign at George Washington University, is fighting for action on the fossil fuel industry-backed GW Regulatory Studies Center, and is building support for the Green New Deal, the only solution that meets the climate crisis at the scale that science and justice demand.
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
GOP Budget Bill Falling Apart as Senate Parliamentarian Strikes Dozens of Provisions
"With more decisions to come, this guidance results in more than $250 billion in healthcare cuts removed from the Republicans' big bad bill," said Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden.
Jun 26, 2025
Key elements of the sprawling Republican budget package—including major components of its assault on Medicaid—are crumbling under scrutiny from Democratic staffers and the Senate parliamentarian, who has deemed dozens of provisions in violation of reconciliation rules.
On Thursday, Elizabeth MacDonough—who was appointed as parliamentarian in 2012 and has served under both Republican and Democratic leadership—advised against nine provisions of the GOP legislation that are under the Senate Finance Committee's jurisdiction.
One of the provisions seen as running afoul of the so-called Byrd Rule was the Senate GOP's proposal to sharply limit provider taxes that states use to fund their Medicaid programs—a change that experts said would result in catastrophic healthcare cuts.
Provisions targeted by the parliamentarian would be subject to a 60-vote threshold in the Senate if kept in the bill, meaning they would require Democratic support to pass. Republican leaders have indicated that they're rewriting some of the targeted provisions in an attempt to bring them into line with budget reconciliation rules, which bar provisions that don't have direct budgetary impacts.
"The parliamentarian has made clear that reconciliation can not be used to manipulate state provider tax policies, which would have resulted in massive Medicaid cuts that hurt kids, seniors, Americans with disabilities, and working families," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement Thursday following news of the parliamentarian's latest advisory rulings.
"With more decisions to come, this guidance results in more than $250 billion in healthcare cuts removed from the Republicans' big bad bill," said Wyden. "Democrats fought and won, striking healthcare cuts from this bill that would hurt Americans walking on an economic tightrope. This bill is rotten to its core, and I'll keep fighting the cuts in this morally bankrupt bill until the end."
Senate Budget Committee Democrats, led by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), provided a summary of the latest provisions deemed in violation of reconciliation rules:
"Democrats are continuing to make the case against every provision in this Big, Beautiful Betrayal of a bill that violates Senate rules and hurts families and workers," Merkley said in a statement Thursday. "Democrats are fighting back against Republicans' plans to gut Medicaid, dismantle the Affordable Care Act, and kick kids, veterans, seniors, and folks with disabilities off of their health insurance—all to fund tax breaks for billionaires."
Under a behind-the-scenes process known as a "Byrd Bath," Senate committee staffers and the parliamentarian confer over whether a bill's provisions meet reconciliation guidelines.
In recent days, the parliamentarian has determined that dozens of provisions in the GOP legislation—including certain attacks on federal food aid, public lands, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—don't comply with the Byrd rule and must either be removed or face a 60-vote threshold in the upper chamber.
Bobby Kogan, senior director of federal budget policy at the Center for American Progress, praised minority staffers on the Senate Budget and Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committees on Wednesday after the parliamentarian ruled against six separate provisions of the GOP bill.
"Republicans just lost 10% of the affirmative savings they wanted to get in reconciliation. Truly in awe of the Bernie Sanders HELP staff and the Jeff Merkley Budget staff," Kogan, a former Senate Budget Committee staffer, wrote on social media.
In a Thursday post responding to the parliamentarian's latest decisions, Kogan wrote, "We won on trans care in Medicaid, provider taxes, [Federal Medical Assistance Percentage], immigrants in Medicaid, and other issues."
"These victories are amazing for the people they help—and cost Rs more than $250 billion of their savings by rough calculations, largely not curable," Kogan added.
Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee indicated Thursday that the parliamentarian is still reviewing a number of provisions, including a section of the Republican bill that would prohibit Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.
"Republicans are scrambling to rewrite parts of this bill to continue advancing their families lose and billionaires win agenda, but Democrats stand ready to fully scrutinize any changes and ensure the Byrd Rule is enforced," Merkley said Thursday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Authoritarianism 101': Observers Decry DOJ's Lawsuit Against Maryland Federal Bench
"It's hard not to see this challenge as further escalation by the administration of its opposition to courts that have sought to check illegal government conduct," said one lawyer and director at the Brennan Center for Justice.
Jun 26, 2025
In an escalation of the Trump administration's tense relationship with the judiciary, the U.S. Department of Justice on Tuesday sued the entire 15-judge bench of Maryland's U.S. District Court over a recent immigration-related order, a move that was met with alarm by several observers.
The lawsuit comes in response to an order by Chief Judge George L. Russell III, who in May imposed a stay for a period of two days on the deportation of any immigration custody detainee in Maryland who files a petition for habeas corpus, which is a legal action challenging the lawfulness of a person's detention. The plaintiffs in the new case are the United States and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
According to The Washington Post, the complaint makes the case that the order was "unlawful" and "antidemocratic." It also alleges that the order runs afoul of Supreme Court precedent and intrudes "on core Executive Branch powers." Russell's order applies not only to cases before him, but also the 14 other district judges in Maryland, per the Post.
"President [Donald] Trump's executive authority has been undermined since the first hours of his presidency by an endless barrage of injunctions designed to halt his agenda," said U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi in a statement announcing the lawsuit. "The American people elected President Trump to carry out his policy agenda: This pattern of judicial overreach undermines the democratic process and cannot be allowed to stand."
Adam Bonica, a political science professor at Stanford University, called the DOJ's core claim in the lawsuit "stunning." On his Substack, Bonica wrote that the DOJ is essentially arguing that the Trump administration is being injured "by the very existence of judicial oversight."
Several legal experts characterized the lawsuit as an attack on judicial independence, as did the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight.
"This isn't about process. It's about punishing judges for rulings the administration doesn't like. That's authoritarianism 101," the group said in a post on X on Wednesday.
Alicia Bannon, the director of the Judiciary Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, addedthat "if the administration's challenge is successful, it will be far easier to evade the courts altogether in future immigration cases."
"It's hard not to see this challenge as further escalation by the administration of its opposition to courts that have sought to check illegal government conduct," she said.
The judges named in the lawsuit have ruled on major cases involving the Trump administration this year. For example, Judge Paula Xinis, one of the defendants, is overseeing the high-profile case of a Maryland man who was wrongly deported to El Salvador earlier this year. He is back on U.S. soil now after the Trump administration delayed returning him to the country.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Wealth of Global 1% Has Skyrocketed by Over $33 Trillion Since 2015: Report
"Governments should heed widespread demands to tax the rich—and match it with a vision to build public goods from healthcare to energy," said the executive director of Oxfam International.
Jun 26, 2025
An Oxfam report published Wednesday estimates that the richest 1% globally have seen their wealth surge by more than $33.9 trillion over the past decade, with just 3,000 billionaires accounting for $6.5 trillion of that increase.
The report, released ahead of June 30 development financing talks in Seville, Spain, argues that the international community's plan to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals agreed upon in 2015 has failed utterly as global inequality has continued to expand, efforts to end poverty have stagnated, and the climate crisis has spiraled further out of control.
"There is glaring evidence that global development is desperately failing because—as the last decade shows—the interests of a very wealthy few are put over those of everyone else," said Amitabh Behar, executive director of Oxfam International. "Rich countries have put Wall Street in the driver's seat of global development. It's a global private finance takeover which has overrun the evidence-backed ways to tackle poverty through public investments and fair taxation."
"It is no wonder governments are abysmally off track, be it on fostering decent jobs, gender equality, or ending hunger," Behar added. "This much wealth concentration is choking efforts to end poverty."
According to Oxfam's analysis, the roughly $34 trillion wealth increase enjoyed by the global 1% since 2015 would be enough to eliminate annual poverty "22 times over."
"It's time we rejected the Wall Street Consensus and instead put the public in the driving seat."
The report argues that "a new agenda is needed" to break free from the private profit-centered global development model that has allowed international crises to run rampant while letting the ultra-wealthy continue growing their massive fortunes unabated.
The upcoming conference in Seville, the report states, represents a key opportunity for countries that are willing to "work together to tackle extreme inequality" and "reject the 'Wall Street Consensus' around financing development."
"They can start by taxing the very wealthiest—a new global survey finds 9 out of 10 people support taxing the super-rich to raise the revenue needed to invest in public services and climate action," the report notes. "Reforms to the international financial architecture and restoring aid are also key."
The report comes as the world's wealthiest countries, including the United States under President Donald Trump, are making unprecedented cuts to development aid spending, a surefire way to reverse any recent progress toward reducing global hunger, poverty, and disease.
Behar said Wednesday that "trillions of dollars exist" to tackle such emergencies, "but they're locked away in private accounts of the ultra-wealthy."
"It's time we rejected the Wall Street Consensus and instead put the public in the driving seat," said Behar. "Governments should heed widespread demands to tax the rich—and match it with a vision to build public goods from healthcare to energy. It's a hopeful sign that some governments are banding together to fight inequality—more should follow their lead, starting in Seville."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular