August, 25 2020, 12:00am EDT
Lawsuit Fights Trump Administration Plan to Open 18 Million Acres of Western Arctic to Oil and Gas Drilling
Environmental groups head to court to fight energy development plan that will damage pristine wilderness and critical habitat and deepen the climate crisis
ANCHORAGE, Alaska
Conservation groups today sued the Trump administration over its plan to allow oil and gas drilling on 18.7 million acres on the western side of America's wild Arctic, known as the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (Reserve). The Bureau of Land Management's final "environmental impact statement" will likely open up about 82% of the Western Arctic to drilling, rolling back many of the key safeguards that are currently in place to protect its unique ecosystems and the people and cultures that depend on them.
Earthjustice filed the lawsuit and is representing the National Audubon Society, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, and Stand.Earth. Read the legal document.
The lawsuit is one of several recent legal challenges contesting the Trump administration's aggressive push to vastly increase oil and gas leasing, exploration and development across America's Arctic. The proposed land-management plan is a dramatic reversal of course from the current IAP, carving 7 million acres from protected status, thereby threatening important subsistence use areas as well as essential habitats for birds, caribou, marine mammals and other species, including most of the highly sensitive Teshekpuk Lake Special Area. While the Reserve is not as well known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the subject of lawsuits filed by Indigenous and conservation groups on Monday to challenge a controversial oil and gas leasing plan, it is no less ecologically important.
"The Bureau of Land Management has gone back on its promise after working with Audubon to develop a plan that would issue protections for special areas across the western Arctic and balance responsible oil and gas development," said Natalie Dawson, executive director, Audubon Alaska. "The agency has buckled under political pressure and is throwing away protections for these special areas, completely erasing important nesting habitats for some of the world's most iconic birds and fragmenting critical habitat for caribou. Development will splinter the critical wetlands across the Teshekpuk Lake Special Area for tens of thousands of molting geese, nesting shorebirds, and countless other species that have been reliable sights as they migrate through the backyards and community parks of the contiguous United States. Ways of life of Arctic Indigenous Peoples that are centered on the importance of intact habitats are threatened by an industry-influenced agency that has used its power to plow over the voices of people and the calls of Yellow-billed Loons."
"This is one of the most remarkable places on the planet and it's unconscionable that the Trump administration is trying to turn it into an industrial zone," said Kristen Monsell, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Caribou, polar bears and other Arctic wildlife will face noise pollution, oil spills and even more climate chaos. We can't let that happen."
"At a time when the world is grappling with a grave climate crisis, we cannot allow the oil industry to continue to expand its grip on America's Arctic, where it will drill and destroy one of our most extraordinary, yet fragile, natural treasures," said Rebecca Noblin, a staff attorney at Earthjustice, which has worked to protect the Reserve from destructive oil and gas development for two decades. "The plan is environmentally irresponsible and indefensible."
"Time and time again, this administration has sacrificed our environment and our communities to prop up the dirty fossil fuel industry," said Marcie Keever, legal director for Friends of the Earth. "This latest attack against America's Arctic is an outright assault against a cherished wild space, its unique ecosystem, and the people and cultures that depend on it. The Trump Administration's continued attacks on our environment must be stopped."
"This is yet another example of the Trump administration abusing environmental laws to prop up a predatory oil industry. Oil extracted from the Western Arctic would likely go to refineries in Washington and California--at a time we need our world leaders to encourage a ramp down of oil extraction and consumption and push for a rapid transition to a clean energy economy. The Western Arctic is one of the last truly wild landscapes--it's time to ensure there's no more pressure to expand oil extraction into sacred places," said Matt Krogh, US oil and gas campaign director at Stand.Earth.
The IAP is the result of a rushed and incomplete process and is significantly flawed on numerous counts:
- It fails to accurately assess oil and gas infrastructure impacts on several species, including polar bears, caribou and muskoxen, as well as to a wide range of bird species. It disregards best scientific approaches for analyzing those impacts, particularly on caribou.
- The alternative that BLM has put forth as its preferred alternative was not presented to the public during the process until the final environmental impact statement was published and was never the subject of any public review or comment.
- The new plan also completely eliminates the Colville River Special Area, which provides water and fish to western Arctic communities and was listed just two years ago as among the nation's most endangered rivers due to the threat of oil and gas extraction.
- Under the new IAP, the Trump administration can initiate lease sales by this fall, allowing oil companies into previously-protected special areas that support a rich diversity of wildlife and subsistence traditions.
The new management plan comes as America remains mired in a national health crisis and global oil markets are experiencing continued volatility, yet the Trump administration has once again opted to barrel forward with unnecessarily aggressive oil and gas development. While catering to the fossil fuel industry, the Trump administration refuses to recognize the economic, environmental and social justice crisis communities in the region are already facing, in addition to the unacceptable impacts on health, food security and cultural sovereignty due to existing industry activity.
Background: About the Western Arctic Reserve
The Reserve is the largest tract of undisturbed public land in the United States, and its 23 million acres are recognized as a globally important ecological resource, home to bears, musk oxen, caribou and millions of migratory birds. The lakes and lagoons of the Reserve, including the Teshekpuk Lake Special Area, are one of the most productive wetland complexes in the world; a haven for up to 100,000 molting geese, more than half a million shorebirds, and high densities of loons and eiders; and, an important calving ground for the Teshekpuk Caribou herds. The Reserve provides calving, insect relief, and migration areas for three of the state's caribou herds--the Western Arctic, Central Arctic and Teshekpuk Caribou herds--which provide vital subsistence resources for more than 40 communities in northern and western Alaska. The area also includes designated critical habitat for polar bears along the coastal areas of the Reserve and important habitat for other marine mammals, including Pacific walruses and ice seals. Congress recognized the extraordinary wildlife, wilderness, cultural, subsistence, recreational and historical values of the Reserve when it transferred the management of it from the U.S. Navy to BLM in 1976.
Additional Background:
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
No Outside Probe, US Reiterates as Gazans Reportedly Buried Alive in Mass Grave
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself?" asked one incredulous reporter.
Apr 25, 2024
A Biden administration spokesperson once again brushed off calls for an independent investigation into how hundreds of Palestinians found in mass graves near Gaza hospitals died when asked Thursday about new reports that many of the victims were tortured, summarily executed—and in some cases, buried alive by Israeli invaders.
During a Thursday U.S. State Department press conference in Washington, D.C., a reporter noted Gaza officials' claim that mass grave victims "including children were tortured before being killed" and that "some even showed signs of being buried alive, along with other crimes against humanity."
"What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Noting calls by Palestinian officials and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk for an independent probe into mass graves, the reporter said that "this administration repeatedly said that it asks... the Israeli government to investigate itself."
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself and provide reports that you have previously said that you actually trust?" the reporter asked State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel. "What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Patel replied: "We continue to find these reports incredibly troubling. And that's why yesterday you saw the national security adviser for this to be thoroughly investigated."
While National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan on Wednesday called reports of mass grave atrocities "deeply disturbing" and said that "we want answers" from Israel, he did not call for an independent investigation.
When the reporter pressed Patel on the legitimacy of asking Israel to investigate itself, Patel said, "we believe that through a thorough investigation we can get some additional answers."
Thursday's exchange followed a similar back-and-forth on Tuesday between Patel and Said Arikat, a journalist for the Jerusalem-based
Palestinian news outlet al-Quds who asked about the mass graves.
At least 392 bodies—including numerous women and children—have been found in mass graves outside Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, where Palestinian Civil Defense and other workers have been exhuming victims for nearly a week. Officials believe there are as many as 700 bodies in three separate mass graves.
Based on more recent exhumations, local Civil Defense chief Yamen Abu Sulaiman said during a Wednesday press conference that "we believe that the occupation buried alive at least 20 people at the Nasser Medical Complex."
"There are cases of field execution of some patients while undergoing surgeries and wearing surgical gowns," he stated, adding that some victims showed signs of torture and 10 bodies had medical tubes attached to them.
Gaza Civil Defense official Mohammed Mughier told reporters that "we need forensic examination" to definitively determine the causes of death for the 20 people believed to have been buried alive.
Previous reporting on the mass graves quoted rescue workers who said they found people who were apparently executed while their hands were bound, with some victims missing heads, skin, and internal organs.
Other mass graves have been found in Gaza, most notably on the grounds of al-Shifa Hospital, where Israeli forces last month committed what the Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor called "one of the largest massacres in Palestinian history."
It's also not the first time there have been reports of Israeli troops burying victims alive during the current war, in which Palestinian and international officials say Israeli forces have killed or wounded more than 122,000 Gazans, including at least 11,000 people who are missing and feared dead. Israeli forces attacking Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahia last December reportedly bulldozed and buried alive dozens of injured patients and displaced people.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Columbia Students File Civil Rights Complaint After Arrests, National Guard Threat
"The violent repression we're facing as peaceful anti-war protesters is appalling."
Apr 25, 2024
A day after Columbia University officials warned it may call on the National Guard to remove nonviolent student protesters who have been occupying campus lawns since last week in solidarity with Gaza, advocacy group Palestine Legal on Thursday filed a federal civil rights complaint demanding an investigation into the school's "discriminatory treatment of Palestinian students and their allies."
The school discriminated against pro-Palestinian protesters last week when President Minouche Shafik summoned New York Police Department officers in riot gear to arrest more than 100 students, said Palestine Legal.
The complaint details how the escalation against students, who have set up an encampment on campus to demand Columbia divest from companies that work with the Israeli government and to support calls for a cease-fire in Gaza, is part of a monthslong pattern of the university's targeting of pro-Palestinian students.
According to Palestine Legal, students of all backgrounds who have demanded an end to Israel's U.S.-backed massacre of Palestinians in Gaza "have been the target of extreme anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and Islamophobic harassment, including receiving multiple death threats, being harassed for wearing keffiyehs or hijab, doxxed, stereotyped, being treated differently by high-ranking administrators including... Shafik, an attack with a chemical agent that led to at least 10 students requiring hospitalization and dozens of others, including a Palestinian student, seeking medical attention, and more."
Columbia student Maryam Alwan, who Palestine Legal is representing in the complaint to the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, said the university has "utterly failed to protect [her] from racism and abuse."
"Beyond that, the university has also played a role in this repression by having me arrested and suspended for peacefully protesting Israel's genocide in Gaza," said Alwan. "The violent repression we're facing as peaceful anti-war protesters is appalling. Palestinian students at Columbia deserve justice and accountability, not only for Israel's decadeslong oppression and violence against our people, but for the racism and discrimination we've experienced here on Columbia's campus."
Palestine Legal is representing four students in the case, as well as Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine, which was suspended from the campus late last year after holding anti-war protests.
The group called Columbia's threat to call in the National Guard "gravely concerning."
"Columbia's vicious crackdown on student protests calling for Palestinian freedom amidst an ongoing genocide should alarm us all. Students have always been at the forefront of the most pressing social issues of the day," said Palestine Legal staff attorney Sabiya Ahamed.
College campuses have been the sites of frequent pro-Palestinian protests since October, and the NYPD's crackdown on Columbia students last week galvanized students at universities across the country.
The Biden administration has said little about the student demonstrations, but President Joe Biden referred to them broadly as "antisemitic protests" this week.
"We urge federal civil rights officials to do what Columbia has disgracefully failed to," said Ahamed. "Ensure the rights of Palestinian and allied students are protected at a moment when their voices are most essential."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Top G20 Ministers Back 2% Wealth Tax for Global Billionaires
"It is time that the international community gets serious about tackling inequality and financing global public goods."
Apr 25, 2024
Ministers from four major economies on Thursday called for a 2% wealth tax targeting the world's billionaires—who currently only pay up to 0.5% of their wealth in personal income tax—to "invest in public goods such as health, education, the environment, and infrastructure."
Fernando Haddad, Brazil's finance minister; Svenja Schulze, Germany's minister for economic cooperation and development; Enoch Godongwana, South Africa's finance minister; Carlos Cuerpo, Spain's minister of economy, trade, and business; and MarÃa Jesús Montero, Spain's first vice president and finance minister, made their case in an opinion piece for The Guardian.
"The argument behind such tax is straightforward: We need to enhance the ability of our tax systems to fulfill the principle of fairness, such that contributions are in line with the capacity to pay," they explained. "Persisting loopholes in the system imply that high-net-worth individuals can minimize their income taxes."
"What the international community managed to do with the global minimum tax on multinational companies, it can do with billionaires."
Brazil, Germany, and South Africa are all Group of 20 members while Spain is a permanent guest. The ministers noted that "Brazil has made the fight against hunger, poverty, and inequality a priority of its G20 presidency, a priority that German development policy also pursues and that Spain has ambitiously addressed domestically and globally."
"By directing two-thirds of total expenditure on social services and wage support, as well as by calibrating tax policy administration, South Africa continues to target a progressive tax and fiscal agenda that confronts the country's legacy of income and wealth inequality," they wrote.
The ministers continued:
It is time that the international community gets serious about tackling inequality and financing global public goods. One of the key instruments that governments have for promoting more equality is tax policy. Not only does it have the potential to increase the fiscal space governments have to invest in social protection, education, and climate protection. Designed in a progressive way, it also ensures that everyone in society contributes to the common good in line with their ability to pay. A fair share contribution enhances social welfare.
With exactly these goals in mind, Brazil brought a proposal for a global minimum tax on billionaires to the negotiation table of the world's major economies for the first time. It is a necessary third pillar that complements the negotiations on the taxation of the digital economy and on a minimum corporate tax of 15% for multinationals. The renowned economist Gabriel Zucman sketched out how this might work. Currently, there are about 3,000 billionaires worldwide. The tax could be designed as a minimum levy equivalent to 2% of the wealth of the superrich. It would not apply to billionaires who already contribute a fair share in income taxes. However, those who manage to avoid paying income tax would be obliged to contribute more towards the common good.
The five ministers cited estimates suggesting that "such a tax would potentially unlock an additional $250 billion in annual tax revenues globally—this is roughly the amount of economic damages caused by extreme weather events last year."
"Of course, the argument that billionaires can easily shift their fortunes to low-tax jurisdictions and thus avoid the levy is a strong one. And this is why such a tax reform belongs on the agenda of the G20," they added. "International cooperation and global agreements are key to making such tax effective. What the international community managed to do with the global minimum tax on multinational companies, it can do with billionaires."
Guardian economics editor Larry Elliott reported Thursday that "Zucman is now fleshing out the technical details of a plan that will again be discussed by the G20 in June. France has indicated support for a wealth tax and Brazil has been encouraged that the U.S., while not backing a global wealth tax, did not oppose it."
The French economist told Elliott that "billionaires have the lowest effective tax rate of any social group. Having people with the highest ability to pay tax paying the least—I don't think anybody supports that."
Except the billionaires, of course. "I don't want to be naive. I know the superrich will fight," Zucman added. "They have a hatred of taxes on wealth. They will lobby governments. They will use the media they own."
A few months ago, no one wanted to talk int. taxes, let alone on the super rich. Now we have a process (#G20), finance ministers (\ud83c\udde7\ud83c\uddf7 \ud83c\uddeb\ud83c\uddf7 \ud83c\uddff\ud83c\udde6 \ud83c\uddea\ud83c\uddf8 & others) supporting it, \ud83c\udde9\ud83c\uddea in part & everyone agreeing that proceeds should help fund climate and dev: https://t.co/ZldF557pAL— (@)
The ministers' opinion piece follows the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank's Spring Meetings last week, during which anti-poverty campaigners pressured the largest economies to address inequality with policies like taxing the superrich and to pour resources into the global debt and climate crises.
"The IMF and World Bank say that tackling inequality is a priority but in the same breath back policies that drive up the divide between the rich and the rest," Kate Donald, head of Oxfam International's Washington D.C. office, said last week. "Ordinary people struggle more and more every day to make up for cuts to the public funding of healthcare, education, and transportation. This high-stakes hypocrisy has to end."
Oxfam America policy lead Rebecca Riddell declared Thursday that "extreme inequality stands in the way of solving our most urgent global challenges. We need to tax the ultrawealthy."
"Read this brilliant new op-ed on the case for a global tax on billionaires, by ministers from Brazil, Germany, South Africa, and Spain," Riddell added, posting the piece on social media.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular