

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.

In an effort to draw a proverbial "line in the sand" against continued investment in fossil fuel projects, activists are taking their fight once again to Wall Street. They are demanding 18 major banks walk away from a $2.2 billion loan with Enbridge, the corporation that is currently attempting to build the Line 3 tar sands pipeline across indigenous lands in Minnesota.
"Less than two months from now, on March 31st, 18 banks have a $2.2 billion loan to Enbridge due for renewal. Between now and then, we are going to do everything in our power to make it loud and clear to bank executives: They must walk away from Line 3 -- or there will be consequences," said Amy Gray, a Co-Coordinator of Stop the Money Pipeline.
Beginning today, Stop the Money Pipeline -- a diverse coalition of over 150 organizations pushing financial institutions to end support for fossil fuels and other climate-harming industries -- will initiate a campaign aimed at banks to #DefundLine3. They will deluge CEOs and board members of targeted banks with emails and phone calls, organize Covid-safe street protests, rallies and social media campaigns to ratchet up the pressure.
Enbridge Inc., a Canadian energy infrastructure company operating across North America, has been pushing to replace its existing Line 3 pipeline with a larger pipe that would carry 760,000 barrels of tar sands oil per day from Edmonton, Alberta, through Minnesota, to Superior, Wisconsin. Instead of safely decommissioning the existing Line 3, Enbridge wants to abandon it in the ground and build an entirely new $7 billion pipeline.
As indigenous activists in Minnesota continue to fight a brutal on-the-ground battle to stall construction by chaining themselves to equipment, standing in front of tractors and using any means available, including the creative use of pianos - to stop construction activities, STMP plans to take its fight directly to the banks.
The banks that activists are targeting include US banks JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, as well as TD Bank, the Royal Bank of Canada and the European banks Barclays Bank, HSBC, Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank. (See full list banks funding Line 3 here.)
For many activists Line 3 represents a watershed moment in the United States ability to move ahead of the impending Climate Emergency in a transformative way. Upon entering office, President Joe Biden cancelled the Keystone XL as promised and the current Dakota Access Pipeline has been derailed by legal challenges - and if they are able to force banks to end financial support to Line 3, it could serve as the death blow to the entire idea of fossil fuels as environmentally sound or acceptable investments.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) groundbreaking report all nations must cut global greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 and to net zero by 2050, if we are to keep global warming below the dangerous level of 1.5 degree Celsius above pre industrial levels. This small window becomes even smaller and some argue impossible unless we shift dramatically from fossil fuel investments and usage.
"If built, Line 3, a massive toxic tar sands pipeline, would destroy the sacred wild rice beds my people depend on for our food, our culture and our way of life. It would contribute as much to the climate crisis as 50 new coal-fired power plants and bring thousands of out-of-state workers to northern MN in the middle of a deadly pandemic, threatening already vulnerable rural, Indigenous communities with the virus even more. It would also endanger 800 wetlands and 200 waterways," said Tara Houska, (Couchiching First Nation) tribal attorney to STMP supporters in an email letter today.
Tara's struggle has drawn national attention and increased hope, particularly after President Biden cancelled Keystone XL. Major figures including Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) have visited the front lines and Rep. Omar recently penned a letter to President Biden saying "Under even the best-case scenarios for climate change, we cannot afford to build more fossil fuel infrastructure. That is especially true for projects like Line 3, which are designed for the dirtiest and most carbon-intensive fossil fuel there is, tar sands crude oil. Climate change is not just a risk, but a risk multiplier - all of the other known and unknown impacts of Line 3 will be greatly exacerbated by climate change."
In a release from the Congresswoman's office, she voiced the concerns of Indigenous communities and activists are also extremely worried about Enbridge's track record of toxic spills which shows "Enbridge has presided over some of the worst pipeline catastrophes in our nation's history. They amassed over 800 spills between 1999 and 2010 alone, including the devastating Kalamazoo River disaster, the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history. They've been sued by multiple states for failing to adequately inspect and operate their pipelines."
The Congresswoman's worries about the environmental impact of Line 3 are not without merit.
For climate activists, Line 3 is symbolic of Donald Trump's toxic legacy to indigenous people and our nation. Its construction would add another 193 million tons of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere annually, which would be as bad as putting another 38 million vehicles on the road.
While increasing numbers of notables are joining the struggle to end Line 3, STMP will utilize the building momentum to engage in a series of protests, as well as media and social media campaigns designed to highlight the role of banks in funding the climate crisis and to reinforce the idea that the return on investments in fossil fuels no longer serves our best interests as a planet and is certainly not worth our future.
"Funding Line 3 is an unconscionable act at any time, but especially during a time when there is but a small window for us to move toward a zero-carbon economy in a way that ensures a future for the next generation simply because some JP Morgan or Bank of America executive prioritize profits over people is sickening. We won't let them take our future - not without a fight," noted Alec Connon, Co-Coordinator at Stop the Money Pipeline.
The Stop the Money Pipeline coalition is over 160 organizations strong holding the financial backers of climate chaos accountable.
"Together, we can break the siege, save lives, and stand up for the cause of Cuban self-determination," said the mission's organizers.
As the Trump administration tightens an already devastating economic embargo of Cuba by targeting the island's fuel imports in a bid to topple the country's socialist government, a coalition of progressive groups on Thursday announced plans for a flotilla to deliver food, medicine, and other essential supplies to the besieged Cuban people.
Members of Progressive International, CodePink, and other direct action and advocacy groups plan to set sail for Cuba next month in the Nuestra América—or Our America—Flotilla, which they said is inspired by the Global Sumud Flotilla missions to break Israel's illegal blockade of Gaza amid the ongoing genocide in the Palestinian exclave.
"We are sailing to Cuba, bringing critical humanitarian aid for its people," the flotilla organizers said on their website. "The Trump administration is strangling the island, cutting off fuel, flights, and critical supplies for survival. The consequences are lethal, for newborns and parents, for the elderly and the sick."
"That is why we are launching the Nuestra América Flotilla, setting sail from across the Caribbean Sea in solidarity with the Cuban people," the organizers continued. "And we are asking for your support, to help us prepare the mission and purchase the food and medicine that we will bring to the Cuban people."
"Together, we can break the siege, save lives, and stand up for the cause of Cuban self-determination," they added.
The announcement of the flotilla came as the Trump administration ratchets up pressure on Cuba's socialist government by further suffocating the island's economy via an oil embargo similar to the one imposed on Venezuela before last month's US invasion and abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
At the time, President Donald Trump threatened the leaders of Colombia, Cuba, and Mexico that they could be next.
Trump reversed former President Joe Biden's eleventh-hour move in January 2025 to remove Cuba from the US state sponsors of terrorism list, a designation utterly divorced from reality. Trump officials have cited Cuba's baseless inclusion on the list as justification for measures taken against the country's government and people.
The US embargo on Cuba dates to the early 1960s when the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations responded to the successful revolution that overthrew a brutal US-backed dictatorship with a blockade accompanied by a decadeslong campaign of state-sponsored terrorism against the Cuban people that left thousands dead and more than $1 trillion in economic damages, according to the Cuban government.
Every year since 1992—with the exception of the Covid-19 pandemic year of 2020—the United Nations General Assembly has voted overwhelmingly to condemn and call for an end to the US blockade of Cuba.
Progressive International co-general coordinator David Adler told El País' Veronica Garrido Thursday, "The US government is drowning the Cuban people, who are running out of light, have no food, no medicine, no energy."
"I do not exaggerate when I say that we are seeing in Cuba the same playbook that Israel applied to the people of Gaza: an encirclement, an act of collective punishment that violates every aspect of international law,” he continued.
"We hope that [the flotilla] will be a mechanism of popular pressure to the governments of the world that have the responsibility, before international law, to protect the fundamental rights of the Cuban people and export the energy required by the island,” Adler said.
“There is nothing illegal about what we are doing," he added. "We are coming to a sovereign country and delivering humanitarian aid. We are ready to take risks in the name of humanity and the fundamental right of the Cuban people."
One expert expressed fear that "something truly spectacular is going to happen in which our 2026 midterm elections are not administered like past elections have been."
A pair of experts warned this week that President Donald Trump is clearly telegraphing his intention to meddle in the 2026 midterm elections.
Stephen Richer, former recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona, said during an interview with The Atlantic published Wednesday that he's grown worried that "something truly spectacular is going to happen in which our 2026 midterm elections are not administered like past elections have been."
When asked to flesh out how Trump could potentially rig the upcoming elections, Richer said it was unlikely that he would deploy US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to polling places across the country, if for no other reason than he lacks the manpower to accomplish such an operation.
However, Richer did express concern about the president's ability to muddy waters in tight races and put pressure on his Republican allies to refuse to seat Democratic winners when he is claiming there are disputes about the results.
"Where I think President Trump is most potent is still in the post-election procedures," he explained, "still in sowing doubt in the minds of enough Americans that they don’t think the elections are legitimate and, therefore... the Congress doesn’t have to seat its new members. That’s certainly a popular theory that’s floating about: that Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), the outgoing speaker, will choose not to seat the new members, because they’re in allegedly disputed elections."
Richer argued that California could be particularly vulnerable to this, since the state infamously takes so long to finish tallying its votes.
In a New York Times editorial published Thursday, Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Brennan Center for Justice's voting rights and elections program, argued that Trump's "campaign to rig our elections is well underway," and he pointed to the president's mass pardon last year of rioters who violently stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 as the beginning of his election subversion campaign.
"We have every reason to expect more actions like these in the coming months," wrote Morales-Doyle. "A few weeks ago, Mr. Trump reiterated his threats to prosecute election officials who ran the 2020 election. Just days later, FBI agents seized ballots and election records from 2020 in Fulton County, Georgia."
However, Morales-Doyle also said there was reason to believe that the American system can withstand the president's assault on its election integrity, and he gave a nod toward several efforts across the country to fight back, including states resisting Trump's demands to hand over their voter rolls and Democrats refusing to let new voter suppression legislation pass through Congress.
"We are already seeing how effective people can be in pushing back," he concluded, "whether on the streets of Minneapolis or at town halls hosted by their representatives in Congress. It will be incumbent on all of us—election officials, advocates, state law enforcement, and voters—to see the administration’s efforts for what they are and to fight back."
Repealing the EPA's endangerment finding "isn’t about saving taxpayers’ money, it’s about saving an industry that has already been exposed as a permanent danger to American families," said the head of 350.org.
In what the Sierra Club described as an act to "formalize climate denialism as official government policy," the Trump administration announced Thursday that it has revoked the long-standing "endangerment finding" that allowed the Environmental Protection Agency to pass regulations fighting the climate crisis.
The 2009 endangerment finding determined that the emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases posed a hazard to public health and welfare by causing the planet to warm dramatically, citing overwhelming scientific evidence, which has only grown more indisputable in the nearly two decades since.
With the US Supreme Court having ruled in 2007 that the EPA could make regulations on climate change if it were deemed a health risk, this finding served as the basis for virtually every climate-related EPA regulation under the 1970 Clean Air Act, including those limiting emissions from motor vehicles, power plants, oil and gas facilities, and other sources of pollution.
The finding has been a target of the fossil fuel industry since it was reached. Under President Donald Trump, who has boasted openly of serving the fossil fuel industry in exchange for hundreds of millions of dollars of financial support during his last election, they have found their hero.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, who has enthusiastically backed Trump's initiatives to expand oil drilling and coal mining, called the repeal of the finding "the largest deregulatory action in the history of America."
Indeed, it is expected to immediately eviscerate fuel-efficiency standards and electric vehicle requirements for cars and trucks, which are already the largest single source of carbon dioxide emissions in the US, contributing about 1.8 billion metric tons in 2022.
While the White House has said the reduced efficiency standards will “save the American people $1.3 trillion in crushing regulations,” this is a drop in the ocean compared to the $87 trillion in economic disruption that a study by researchers at the University of Chicago and the University of Pennsylvania estimated will come over the next 25 years as a result of increased natural disasters and sea-level rise caused by American corporations' fossil fuel outputs.
In the United States, weather disasters—exacerbated by global warming—caused $115 billion in total damages last year, the third most since tracking began in 1980, behind only 2023 and 2024. Last year had more billion-dollar disasters than any other year on record.
Anne Jellema, the executive director of the environmental group 350.org, said repealing the endangerment finding "isn’t about saving taxpayers’ money, it’s about saving an industry that has already been exposed as a permanent danger to American families."
"While the Trump administration can manipulate scientific agencies, it can never suppress the truth that ordinary people in the US and around the world are paying the real price for Big Oil’s profits: Lives are being lost, homes are being destroyed, and costs are soaring," she said.
The Trump administration does not have the last word on the endangerment finding. Climate groups, including Earthjustice, have already stated their intention to challenge the legality of the decision.
"The courts have repeatedly affirmed EPA’s obligation to clean up climate pollution," said Earthjustice president Abigail Dillen. "There is no way to reconcile EPA’s decision with the law, the science, and the reality of disasters that are hitting us harder every year."
Dillen said, "Earthjustice and our partners will see the Trump administration in court.” But it may face an uphill battle.
Though the Supreme Court laid the groundwork for the finding's creation, the current right-wing majority has rolled back its authority in recent years, most notably in 2022, when the justices limited the EPA's authority to impose emissions standards on power plants.
David Arkush, the director of Public Citizen’s climate program, said that "if left to stand," the rollback of the endangerment finding "will hamstring the government’s ability to combat the most terrible environmental threat in human history, harming Americans and the world for decades to come."
“Abundant scientific evidence supports the EPA’s prior conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare," he added. "Americans feel the effects of climate change constantly, as we experience more dangerous hurricanes, furnace-like heat domes, walls of water slamming into our children’s summer camps, raging wildfires, and other extreme weather driven by greenhouse gases.”