July, 13 2020, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Andrew Hawley, Western Environmental Law Center, hawley@westernlaw.org
Amy Kober, American Rivers, akober@americanrivers.org
Bob Nasdor, American Whitewater, bob@americanwhitewater.org
Nic Nelson, Idaho Rivers United, nic@idahorivers.org
Walter “Redgie” Collins, California Trout, rcollins@caltrout.org
Outdoor Recreation and Conservation Advocates Challenge EPA Rule Granting Industry Priority Over State, Public in Clean Water Decisions
Citing breathtaking levels of overreach, conservation, fishing, and paddling advocates today filed a complaint in federal court challenging the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
SEATTLE
Citing breathtaking levels of overreach, conservation, fishing, and paddling advocates today filed a complaint in federal court challenging the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) final rule effectively sidelining the role the states and the public have long played in permitting decisions affecting clean water.
"With this rule change, the Trump administration has given corporations the green light to run roughshod over local communities, and has proven it is more interested in corporate rights than states' rights," said Andrew Hawley, attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. "The judicial branch must intervene to preserve some semblance of balance in our nation. What an opportunity for the courts here: To stop this flagrant overreach steamrolling states and Tribes while preserving an essential public health and clean water protection."
The new rule guts the Clean Water Act's Section 401 provisions, which for nearly 50 years have provided for states' and authorized Tribes' self-determination in permitting for a wide array of projects requiring federal approval within their borders. The rule also suppresses state and Tribal public participation processes that moor U.S. water policy in the harbor of democracy.
"Now is not the time to be rolling back protections for our rivers and clean water," said Chris Williams, senior vice president for conservation at American Rivers. "We need to be doing more, not less, to ensure healthy rivers can provide clean drinking water and support strong communities and local economies. The Trump administration's unlawful new 401 rules abandon the Clean Water Act's commitment to providing a voice for Tribes, states, and communities in how their rivers and streams are protected and managed, allowing potentially harmful projects to escape critical local review. We must protect the rights of states and Tribes to defend clean water safeguards."
"The rule changes will have a long-term and devastating effect on California's ability to manage its clean water resources," said Redgie Collins, staff attorney at California Trout. "Unless changed, this gives hydroelectric dam operators the ability to skirt State Water Board regulations that protect the health, safety, and welfare of all Californians."
This rule change is separate from rollbacks to the Waters of the U.S. Rule (WOTUS), which eliminates protections for many waterbodies throughout the country, but represents an equally dangerous threat to clean water and public health nationwide: Section 401 applies broadly to any proposed federally licensed or permitted activity that may result in a discharge into any waterway that is covered under the law. Projects that may be approved against states' and Tribes' wishes include pipelines, hydropower, industrial plants, municipal facilities, and wetland development.
Working in combination, the Section 401 and WOTUS rollbacks will make it virtually impossible for states, Tribes, and communities to stand in opposition to projects that will pollute and harm their rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands.
Further, the new rule limits the information on proposed projects that may be made available to the states, Tribes, and the public.
"These new regulations are a brazen attack on the Clean Water Act with the goal of undermining the public's ability to protect our rivers from harmful impacts of federally-licensed energy projects on the environment and outdoor recreation," said Bob Nasdor, American Whitewater legal director. "Rather than protecting and restoring our rivers, these rules will weaken water quality by limiting the information, time for review, and ability of the states to require that projects meet state standards."
"Under the cover of COVID-19, the Trump administration has again stripped one of our bedrock environmental laws and is giving extractive and polluting industries the power to dictate their own pollutant levels in our rivers, lakes, and wetlands, all in the name of profit," said Nic Nelson of Idaho Rivers United. "By effectively silencing public review and participation processes for these projects, they will have equally degraded our basic rights of democracy."
The new rule, finalized without Congressional input, directly overturns Congress' intent to integrate state and federal authority for permitting decisions affecting state waterways.
Letters (public comments) from states, Tribes, and organizations opposing Section 401 rollbacks:
Opposition Letter: State of South Dakota (scathing)
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/v.mLY3z2d_20191021South_Dakota_CWA_401_commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Arkansas
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/5RTbsrt8~_AR_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of California
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/F1zojtGKa_20191021_Ltr_to_A_Wheeler_re_SWRCB
Opposition Letter: Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/FoaQ2zvAh_20191021Yakama_Nation_Section_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: Inter Tribal Association of Arizona
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/.jk5nJ1oK_InterTribal_Assn_of_AZ_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Idaho
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/kZlX31CB7_ID_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Louisiana
October 19, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/F52ivsrg._LA_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin
October 22, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/UTuKpy6FF_Menominee_Tribe_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Montana
October 17, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/SnoPVhxYj_MT_401_rule_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Nevada
October 17, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/0BeC6MkzI_NV_401_Rule_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of New York
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/c0.jrsYs~_NY_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Pennsylvania
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/Q9h7qFprp_PA_Comments_on_401_rulepdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: Seattle City Light
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/XDTlaYaTh_Seattle_City_Light_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: Skokomish Indian Tribe
October 20, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/NKCE.ps4l_20191020Skokomish_Tribe_Section_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: Standing Rock Sioux
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/67Ar2EyV8_Standing_Rock_Sioux_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Tennessee
October 21, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/e7PdQltny_TN_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Texas
October, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/SS5mPC48m_TX_401_commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians
October 14, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/hiNTrBCKr_Twenty_Nine_Palms_Band_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: State of Washington
May 24, 2019
https://pdfhost.io/v/21GYgD4xa_WA_401_Commentspdf.pdf
Opposition Letter: National Governors' Association
October 18, 2019
https://www.nga.org/policy-communications/letters-nga/natural-resources-committee/
Opposition Letter: Western Governors' Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, Council of State Governments, Western Interstate Region, Association of Clean Water Administrators, Association of State Floodplain Managers, Association of State Wetland Managers, Western States Water Council
October 16, 2019
https://www.ncsl.org/Portals/1/Documents/standcomm/scnri/EPA_NPRM_CWA_401_Comments_FINAL.pdf?ver=2019-10-17-150909-880×tamp=1571346568787
Opposition Letter: Earthjustice, Sierra Club, and 31 other organizations
October 21, 2019
https://www.sierraclub.org/sites/www.sierraclub.org/files
Opposition Letter: Sens. Carper, Duckworth, and Booker
October 21, 2019
Opposition Letter: Southern Environmental Law Center
October 21, 2019
Opposition Letter: Rep. Peter DeFazio
July 29, 2019
https://transportation.house.gov/imo/media/doc/2019-7-29%20PAD_LTR%20to%20EPA%20re%20401Certification.pdf
The Western Environmental Law Center uses the power of the law to safeguard the public lands, wildlife, and communities of the American West in the face of a changing climate. We envision a thriving, resilient West, abundant with protected public lands and wildlife, powered by clean energy, and defended by communities rooted in an ethic of conservation.
(541) 485-2471LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular