February, 10 2021, 11:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Erin Fitzgerald, efitzgerald@earthjustice.org
Brian Willis, Brian.Willis@sierraclub.org
Anne Hawke, ahawke@nrdc.org
Stuart Ross, sross@catf.us
Angela Gonzales, agonzales@npca.org
Lisa Caruso, lcaruso@cbf.org
"Do Nothing" Toxic Ozone Rule Challenged by Health and Environmental Groups
Ground-level ozone harms public health and nature, yet inaction continues. 
WASHINGTON
Today, fourteen health and environmental groups, half of them represented by Earthjustice, challenged ozone standards in a lawsuit in a federal appeals court. The move comes in response to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Trump administration's last-minute refusal to strengthen the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, or NAAQS, for ozone, and less than a month after Earthjustice sued the EPA over a similar rule affecting particulate matter.
EPA issued the flawed rule in late December, leaving 2015 standards in place. Those standards were set at a level that allowed pollution in our cities that scientific studies show harms vulnerable populations and children's health. Since 2015, additional scientific evidence confirms that ground level ozone at levels allowed by EPA is harmful to human health. Last month, Washington, DC's circuit court struck down rules that relaxed EPA's implementation of ozone standards and closed important loopholes, ensuring that states will have to take necessary steps to bring polluted areas into compliance with ozone standards.
"The Trump administration corrupted and rushed the scientific review process of this rule as it walked out the door, just so industrial polluters can sit and do nothing for the harm they cause," said Seth Johnson, lead Earthjustice attorney on the case. "These outdated ozone standards must be corrected not just for children's safety and public health, but also because they are critical to addressing the climate crisis."
While ozone is good as a protective layer in the stratosphere, ground-level ozone causes asthma attacks and other respiratory problems. It is linked to premature deaths, damages plants and forests, and stunts tree and crop growth. Formed by emissions from cars, trucks, and factories, ozone is also a greenhouse gas, and curtailing it is a powerful way to help solve the climate crisis.
"The most recent science shows that ozone standards are simply not strong enough to protect the lungs of our neighborhoods, or the crops and forests we depend on," the coalition of groups challenging the rule said. "As we fight in court for long overdue safeguards, we call on the Biden administration to listen to the science and take action."
According to a recent report by the American Lung Association, more than 134 million people live in counties that have dangerous levels of ozone -- many of which are disproportionately low income communities and communities of color.
Earthjustice represents the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, Appalachian Mountain Club, National Parks Conservation Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Sierra Club. The Clean Air Task Force represents the Clean Air Council, Conservation Law Foundation, and Natural Resources Council of Maine. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Environment America, Environmental Defense Fund, and Environmental Law & Policy Center have also signed on to the challenge. The suit was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Quotes from our clients and partners:
Georgia Murray, Staff Scientist for the Appalachian Mountain Club (AMC):
"The delays in protection of our health, ecosystems, and climate by this inaction are unacceptable. Tropospheric ozone continues to pollute outdoor spaces which should instead be healthy for all. The science clearly shows that a stronger limit is needed to protect public health and also support separate standards to protect plants and the environment. The negative impacts of ozone to plants and ecosystems include a litany of insults including visible foliar injury, productivity declines, biomass loss, altered nutrient and water cycling, changes in community structure, and disruption of plant-insect interactions. We need stronger science-based standards to address ozone's impacts on the air we breathe and natural ecosystems that cherish."
Stephanie Kodish, Clean Air Program Director for the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA):
"Despite the overwhelming evidence that keeping the current, insufficient ozone standards in place will result in continued harm to the health of our communities and national parks, the Trump Administration chose to disregard the science and turn its back on our most vulnerable populations and the environment. People visit national parks thinking the air is clean, but ground level ozone contributes to poor air quality, affecting parks across the country from Cape Cod National Seashore in Massachusetts, to Yosemite in California. Ozone is a potent greenhouse gas contributing to climate harms in Arctic landscapes and ecosystems in Denali. It also damages park plants like the Quaking Aspen tree at Rocky Mountain, reduces crop yield and limits tree growth. The EPA must revise ozone standards to follow the science and protect the health of our people and environment; otherwise, the consequences could be dire."
Vijay Limaye, climate and health scientist, NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council):
"For nearly half a century, the Clean Air Act has helped protect the country from the health consequences of dirty air. That protection is critical for all of us, but especially children, older people, communities of color and low income communities who are disproportionately burdened by higher levels of pollution in the air. This case challenges the Trump Administration's abdication of its responsibility under that law to protect people by following the science. The science clearly calls for more protective ozone standards."
Al Armendariz, Senior Director of Federal Campaigns, Sierra Club:
"Watching a child have an asthma attack is one of the most heart wrenching experiences that any parent can have, but it happens all too often in our country due to lax clean air safeguards like the ones the Trump administration left unchanged on its way out the door. Our lawsuit isn't some partisan exercise to spike the football: it's about the child who feels their chest tighten when they are outside in the summer and the worried look their parents get when they hear them start wheezing. No child and no parent should have to experience this in the United States, and it's the EPA's job to honestly and forthrightly put in place standards to protect families from this. Our lawsuit is about making sure EPA lives up to those expectations, because every family deserves clean air and peace of mind."
Ann Weeks, Legal Director, Clean Air Task Force:
"The Trump EPA sidelined the science and ignored mounting evidence that serious health harms occur due to ozone exposures at levels below the current national standards. We urge the Biden administration to prioritize setting a standard based in science that recognizes these harms. Stronger ozone standards are needed to better protect public health and to reduce damage to the environment. Implementing stronger standards will also reduce climate pollution. In short, stronger ozone standards are needed to help to achieve the administration's climate and environmental justice goals."
Ariel Solaski, Staff Litigation Attorney, Chesapeake Bay Foundation:
"The Trump EPA's refusal to strengthen ozone standards not only endangers people's health, it undermines the Chesapeake Bay cleanup effort. Federal ozone controls are essential to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides, an ozone precursor. Airborne nitrogen causes roughly one-third of nitrogen pollution fouling the Bay and its waterways. Ozone damages trees and plants critical to improving water quality. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation will fight for science-based standards that fulfill EPA's responsibility to restore and protect the Bay, as well as the health of the watershed's most vulnerable residents."
Rachel Fullmer, Senior Attorney, Environmental Defense Fund:
"The EPA is legally required to ensure that our national standards are set at a level that protects public health - including a margin of safety for particularly impacted groups. Tens of millions of Americans already live in an area with unhealthy levels of ground-level ozone pollution, and the Trump EPA's rushed decision to maintain the current standard particularly harms those who are more susceptible to air pollution, including children, the elderly, anyone working outdoors, and people with asthma or other heart and lung diseases. This action has significant environmental justice impacts and disproportionately harms Black communities and low-income communities where there are higher rates of childhood asthma and other chronic diseases."
Ann Jaworski, Staff Attorney, Environmental Law & Policy Center:
"When the Trump EPA found that the 2015 ozone standard was still adequate to protect human health and the environment, it ignored the Clean Air Act's requirement to use the best available science. We hope that the court will reverse this decision and that the Biden administration will respect the science and enact tougher standards so that people living in the U.S. are assured cleaner, safer air to breathe."
Morgan Folger, Destination: Zero Carbon Campaign Director, Environment America:
"No one should experience one day of polluted air--let alone months. Ozone pollution is getting worse and the current pollution standards are not doing enough to prevent people from getting sick. Tens of thousands of people have their lives cut short annually from adverse health impacts linked to air pollution. This legal challenge is just part of a necessary overall effort to ensure we strengthen air quality protections in order to save lives."
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
Privacy Defenders Decry 'Spy Draft' in Section 702 Renewal Advanced by Senate
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," explained one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Civil liberties defenders on Thursday decried the U.S. Senate's advancement of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which critics say lawmakers are trying to ram through without protection against warrantless surveillance and with a provision that would effectively make every American a spy whether they like it or not.
Senators voted 67-32 in favor of a cloture motion to begin voting on RISAA, a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expires on Friday. FISA—a highly controversial law that has been abused hundreds of thousands of times—allows warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens but also often sweeps up Americans' communication data in the process.
In a 273-147 vote last week, House lawmakers passed RISAA, including an amendment critics say dramatically expands the government's unchecked surveillance authority by compelling a wide range of individuals and organizations—including businesses and the media—to cooperate in government spying operations.
This so-called "Make Everyone a Spy" clause would allow the attorney general or director of national intelligence to force electronic communication service providers to "immediately provide... all information, facilities, or assistance" the government deems necessary.
"This bill would basically allow the government to institute a spy draft," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned Thursday. "It will lead to significant distrust between journalists and sources, not to mention everyone else."
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," he added. "Regardless of whether the end target of the surveillance is a foreigner, it's indisputable that the people the government can enlist to conduct the surveillance are Americans. And what's more, these civilians ordered to spy would be gagged and sworn to secrecy under the law."
In addition to the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision, civil libertarians have sounded the alarm over the House lawmakers' rejection of an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the legislation.
Critics accuse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and colleagues including Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) of trying to rush a vote on RISAA while disingenuously claiming Section 702's powers will expire with the law on Friday. That's a misleading claim, as a national security court earlier this month approved the government's request to continue a disputed surveillance program even if Section 702 lapses.
"There is simply no defense of Majority Leader Schumer and Sen. Warner's duplicity," Sean Vitka, policy director at the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement. "House Intelligence Committee leaders poisoned this bill with one of the most repugnant surveillance expansions in history, and apparently the administration was too busy attacking commonsense privacy protections to notice. They know it, we know it, and now the American people know it."
"There can be no mistake: Sens. Schumer and Warner just helped hand the next president an unspeakably dangerous weapon that will be used against their own constituents," Vitka added. "And there is only one vote left to stop it."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—who
said earlier this week that the bill would dragoon the American people into becoming "an agent for Big Brother"—on Thursday argued that "this issue demands a debate about meaningful reforms, not a rushed vote to rubber-stamp more warrantless government surveillance powers."
In an attempt to tackle the warrantless surveillance issue, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) on Thursday proposed a RISAA amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before accessing Americans' private communications.
However, the amendment contains exceptions to the warrant requirement in the event of unspecified emergencies and cyberattacks.
"If the government wants to spy on the private communications of Americans, they should be required to get approval from a judge—just as our Founders intended," Durbin said in a statement. "Congress has a responsibility to the American people to get this right."
The Biden administration and U.S. intelligence agencies vehemently oppose the Durbin-Cramer amendment. The White House called the measure "a reckless policy choice contrary to the key lessons of 9/11 and not grounded in any constitutional requirement or statute."
"The amendment outright bars the government from gaining access to lawfully collected information using terms associated with U.S. persons," the administration added. "Exceptions to that prohibition are narrow and unworkable. They are insufficient to protect our national security."
On Wednesday, the House also passed the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act, which would prohibit the government from buying Americans' information from data brokers if it would otherwise need a warrant to obtain the data, which includes location and internet records. The Senate will now take up FANFSA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Opposite of Leadership': US Vetoes Palestine's UN Membership
Palestine's permanent observer at the United Nations said the resolution's failure "will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination."
Apr 18, 2024
U.S. President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday used the country's veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block Palestine's bid to become a full member of the U.N.
While 12 nations voted in favor of Palestinian membership and two abstained, the United States is one of five countries—along with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom—who have veto authority at the Security Council.
Since Israel launched what the International Court of Justice has said is a "plausibly" genocidal assault of the Gaza Strip in response to a Hamas-led October attack, the Biden administration has blocked three cease-fire resolutions at the Security Council. Under mounting global pressure, the U.S. finally abstained last month, allowing a cease-fire measure to pass.
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, the Biden administration was pressuring other countries to oppose the Palestinian Authority's renewed membership effort so it could possibly avoid a veto, according to leaked cables obtained by The Intercept.
"Take a moment to ponder how isolated Biden has made the U.S.," said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, after the veto. "Biden lobbied Japan, South Korea, and Ecuador HARD to oppose the Palestine resolution so that the U.S. wouldn't have to veto. They refused. So Biden cast his fourth veto in seven months (!!) This is the opposite of leadership."
In addition to the nations Parsi highlighted, Algeria, China, France, Guyana, Malta, Mozambique, Russia, Sierra Leone, and Slovenia voted for giving Palestine full U.N. membership while Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstained.
After the vote, U.N. Newsreported on remarks from Riyad Mansour, a U.N. permanent observer for the state of Palestine:
"We came to the Security Council today as an important historic moment, regionally and internationally, so that we could salvage what can be saved. We place you before a historic responsibility to establish the foundations of a just and comprehensive peace in our region."
Council members were given the opportunity "to revive the hope that has been lost among our people" and to translate their commitment towards a two-state solution into firm action "that cannot be maneuvered or retracted," and the majority of council members "have risen to the level of this historic moment, and they have stood on the side of justice and freedom and hope, in line with the ethical and humanitarian and legal principles that must govern our world and in line with simple logic."
"The fact that this resolution did not pass will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination," Mansour added. "We will not stop in our effort. The state of Palestine is inevitable. It is real. Perhaps they see it as far away, but we see it as near, and we are the faithful."
Parsi said that "a Western-friendly senior Global South diplomat" told him of Biden's veto: "Whatever agonizing claim the U.S. had to lead a self-appointed free world has died a very loud public death on the Security Council horseshoe tonight. YOU CAN'T LEAD IF YOU CAN'T LISTEN."
Biden, a Democrat seeking reelection in November, has faced fierce criticism in the United States and around the world for U.S. complicity in Israel's war on Gaza—which Hamas, not the Palestinian Authority, has controlled for nearly two decades. In under seven months, Israeli forces have killed 33,970 Palestinians, injured another 76,770, displaced most of the besieged enclave's 2.3 million population, devastated civilian infrastructure, and severely limited the flow of lifesaving humanitarian assistance.
Israel—which already got $3.8 billion in annual U.S. military aid before October 7—continues to receive weapons support from the Biden administration, even as a growing chorus of critics, including some Democrats in Congress, argues that the arms transfers violate U.S. and international law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': Columbia Greenlights Police Crackdown on Anti-War Encampment
Even after dozens of students were arrested, hundreds "rushed to take the place of their classmates" and continued the protest.
Apr 18, 2024
The arrests of dozens of Columbia University and Barnard College students on Thursday "galvanized" other supporters of Palestinian rights on the campuses, as hundreds of students occupied the school's western lawn after New York City police filled at least two buses with protesters who had been detained for setting up an encampment.
"Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest," chanted hundreds of students as they marched around the area where organizers had set up a tent encampment early Wednesday morning.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik informed the campus community on Thursday that she had authorized the police to clear the encampment.
As it has been in the past, the school has become a center of anti-war protests—and crackdowns by school officials and the police—since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in October.
Pro-Palestinian students and alumni have demanded that Columbia divest from companies that profit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories and cancel its dual degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia in November suspended the campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine—an action that pushed the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal to file a lawsuit on behalf of the students last month.
On Thursday, police and Columbia employees took down about 50 tents that had been up for more than a day and disposed of them in trash cans and alleyways—but The New York Times reported later that "demonstrators repitched a couple of tents, and ... recovered the main signage from the encampment as well," while hundreds of students were "still gathered and chanting on the south side of the grass."
The arrests came a day after Shafik testified before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on campus.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose daughter, Isra Hirsi, was among the Barnard students who were suspended on Thursday for participating in the encampment protest, questioned Shafik about whether antisemitic protests have actually taken place at Columbia, prompting the president to say there have not.
"There has been a rise in targeting and harassment against anti-war protesters, because it's been pro-war and anti-war protesters is what it seems, like, correct?" asked Omar.
"Correct," replied Shafik.
On Thursday, Omar posted on social media two images of protesters at Columbia: one from the encampment this week, and one from 1968, when students protested the U.S. war in Vietnam.
New York City Council member Tiffany Cabán was among those who condemned the university's crackdown on the protests on Thursday.
"Suspending and arresting Columbia/Barnard student activists and disbanding student organizations—including Jewish students and organizations—doesn't combat antisemitism or increase safety," said Cabán. "All it does is punish and intimidate those who believe in human rights for Palestinians. Shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular