June, 14 2021, 03:36pm EDT
Oil Change International Responds to Minnesota Court of Appeals Ruling on Line 3
WASHINGTON
Today, a three-judge panel of the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision to uphold the Minnesota state Public Utilities Commission (PUC)'s issuance of a certificate of need and route permit for the Line 3 oil pipeline to pipeline builder Enbridge. Judge Peter Reyes dissented, noting that the PUC "committed legal errors and acted arbitrarily or capriciously by granting [Enbridge] a certificate of need that is unsupported by substantial evidence.
The decision also increases pressure on President Joe Biden to step in and stop the Line 3 pipeline, which was permitted by Trump's administration and clearly fails to align with President Biden's climate goals. The decision can be appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
In response to the decision, Collin Rees, Senior Campaigner with Oil Change International, released the following statement:
"Today's Minnesota Court of Appeals decision is a clear example of our legal system failing communities and our climate. As Judge Peter Reyes noted in his dissent, Enbridge has repeatedly failed to support its arguments that this pipeline is needed.
"This incorrect decision means President Biden and Gina McCarthy must act immediately to stop Line 3's construction and revoke Trump's fraudulent permits. Line 3 would emit the equivalent of 50 new coal-fired power plants -- it's a colossal disaster for the climate and for communities.
"Every day President Biden refuses to stop the Line 3 pipeline is a slap in the face to environmental justice communities and a renewed breaking of his promises on climate and Indigenous rights. Climate leadership means ending the fossil fuel era and stopping Line 3."
Oil Change International is a research, communications, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy.
(202) 518-9029LATEST NEWS
Under Pressure From Anti-Oligarchy Protests, Bezos Moves Venice Wedding Party Venue
"We're just citizens who started organizing and we managed to move one of the most powerful people in the world," said one protest organizer.
Jun 25, 2025
Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez on Tuesday relocated their upcoming lavish Venice wedding celebration, a move cheered as an "enormous victory" by protesters whose recent demonstrations in the northeastern Italian city have highlighted the socioeconomic and climate damage caused by billionaires.
Bezos—who is currently the world's fourth-richest person, according to lists published by Bloomberg and Forbes—is set to marry Sánchez, a journalist, later this week, and the couple is planning to celebrate the occasion with a three-day extravaganza costing an estimated $46-56 million, according toReuters.
Around 90 private jets are scheduled to land in area airports and local yacht harbors are fully booked, underscoring the climate and environmental impact on a city struggling to survive on one of myriad frontlines of the planetary emergency.
"We are very proud of this! We are nobodies, we have no money, nothing!"
The nuptial celebration has been relocated from the Scuola Grande della Misericordia to the Arsenale di Venezia, a historic fortified palace about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) away from the original location. Officials cited concerns for the security of guests including several members of U.S. President Donald Trump's family.
Members of groups including No Space for Bezos, Greenpeace Italy, and Everyone Hates Elon—which targets Elon Musk, the world's richest person—have staged a series of demonstrations, including one on Monday at which protesters laid out a massive banner with Bezos' face and the message "If You Can Rent Venice for Your Wedding You Can Pay More Tax" in Piazza San Marco.
Responding to the celebration's relocation, Tommaso Cacciari of No Space for Bezos told the BBC Wednesday: "We are very proud of this! We are nobodies, we have no money, nothing!"
"We're just citizens who started organizing and we managed to move one of the most powerful people in the world," Cacciari added.
Wedding-related festivities are set to kick off Thursday evening, and city officials have blocked off parts of central Venice. While some residents have welcomed the money and fanfare the event will bring to a city with a long and storied history of oligarchs and opulence, others bristle at what they see as the transformation of their home into a playground for the superrich.
"There's only one thing that rules now: money, money, money, so we are the losers," Venice resident Nadia Rigo toldReuters. "We who were born here have to either move to the mainland or we have to ask them for permission to board a ferry. They've become the masters."
In the United States, critics contrasted the stratospheric cost of Bezos' celebration with the multicentibillionaire's history of personal and corporate tax dodging—and the hyper-capitalist system that enables it.
"Jeff Bezos is worth $230 billion and is reportedly spending $20 million on a three-day wedding in Venice while sailing around on his $500 million yacht," former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich said Wednesday on the social media site X. "If he can afford to do that, he can afford a wealth tax and to pay Amazon workers a living wage. Hello?"
This is oligarchy. This is obscene.While 60% live paycheck to paycheck & kids go hungry, Jeff Bezos, worth $230 billion, goes to Venice on his $500 million yacht for a $20 million wedding & spends $5 million on a ring while his real tax rate is just 1.1%.End this oligarchy.
— Senator Bernie Sanders (@sanders.senate.gov) June 24, 2025 at 9:04 AM
While No Space for Bezos organizers are celebrating their victory and have canceled plans to fill Venice's canals with inflatable crocodiles in a bid to block celebrity guests from accessing the Scuola Grande della Misericordia, they said they still plan on protesting the festivities by holding a "No Bezos, No War" rally and march.
"It will be a strong, decisive protest, but peaceful," Federica Toninello of the Social Housing Assembly network toldEuronews Wednesday. "We want it to be like a party, with music, to make clear what we want our Venice to look like."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Iran Suspends Cooperation with IAEA, Accusing Nuclear Watchdog of 'Complicity' in Trump Strikes
"The IAEA, which did not even formally condemn the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, has put its international credibility up for sale," said Iran's parliament speaker, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf.
Jun 25, 2025
The Iranian parliament approved a bill Wednesday suspending its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The resolution states that weapons inspectors with the United Nations nuclear watchdog organization will not be allowed to enter the country unless it guarantees the security of Iran's nuclear facilities and their ability to pursue peaceful nuclear activities.
Ahead of the vote, lawmakers denounced the IAEA, accusing it of enabling U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities Saturday—strikes Iran, as well as other observers of international law, have denounced as a clear violation of its sovereignty.
"The IAEA, which did not even formally condemn the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, has put its international credibility up for sale," said Iran's parliament speaker, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf. "For this reason, the [Atomic Energy Organization of Iran] will suspend its cooperation with the Agency until the security of its nuclear facilities is guaranteed, and Iran's peaceful nuclear program will proceed at an even faster pace."
In response to the resolution, IAEA chief Rafael Grossi said that "the return of inspectors to Iran's nuclear facilities is a top priority."
Independent inspectors have not yet been able to inspect the damage to the three nuclear sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan—hit by the U.S.
Following the strikes, U.S. President Donald Trump claimed that Iran's nuclear sites were "completely and fully obliterated."
However, reporting by CNN and The New York Times on Tuesday, based on unnamed sources familiar with an internal assessment by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, undercut that claim, stating that the strikes only set back Iran's nuclear program by a matter of months.
Grossi said Monday that the airstrikes likely inflicted "very significant damage" at Fordo, but that no conclusions could be reached until independent inspectors are allowed to examine the site and account for Iran's uranium stockpile.
The latest IAEA report issued on May 31 found "no credible indications of an ongoing, undeclared structured nuclear program" being pursued by Iran—a finding echoed by U.S. intelligence agencies.
However, the IAEA did find that Iran had significantly increased its uranium stockpile enriched to 60%, near weapons-grade, which it said was a violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Despite no "imminent threat," according to the most recent intelligence assessments, the Trump administration cited those IAEA findings to justify its attacks.
As a result, Iran's nuclear organization has questioned the IAEA's credibility as a neutral broker, accusing them of "deliberate inaction," following American and Israeli strikes. It said in a statement Sunday that these strikes were carried out "with the IAEA's silence, if not complicity."
Some critics have argued that the IAEA's decision to declare Iran in violation of the NPT was the result of significant U.S. arm-twisting and that the IAEA has not applied similar scrutiny to Israel's nuclear weapons program.
Iran maintains that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and that strikes upon its nuclear facilities violate the NPT, which grants countries an "inalienable right" to develop nuclear energy for nonmilitary purposes.
Nuclear experts warn that the U.S. strikes on Iran have undermined the credibility of the NPT, prompting some factions in Iran to call for the nation's exit altogether.
Kelsey Davenport, the director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, suggested Monday that U.S. attacks may only embolden Iran and other nations to violate the treaty and pursue nuclear weapons, perceiving them as necessary for their protection.
"From a nonproliferation perspective, Trump's decision to strike Iran was a reckless, irresponsible escalation that is likely to push Iran closer to nuclear weapons in the long term," Davenport said. "Politically, there's greater impetus now to weaponize."
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Mamdani Victory, Progressives Call for Primary Challenges to Democratic Establishment
"The establishment has never been more weak than they are now," one advocate told potential progressive candidates. "You need to run."
Jun 25, 2025
New York state Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani's victory over disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary was quickly dismissed by some commentators as one that likely wouldn't be replicated in federal elections and that said little about the views of Democratic voters at large.
But the news that Cuomo had conceded on Tuesday night left many progressives eager to continue the momentum started by Mamdani's (D-36) campaign—one characterized by a laser-sharp focus on making life more affordable for working people, a rejection of the outsized influence of billionaires and corporations on elections, and a demand for the Democratic Party to end its insistence that popular economic justice proposals are impossible to achieve in the United States.
Instead of viewing Mamdani's victory as an aberration, said journalist and organizer Daniel Denvir, the left should treat it as "an earthquake" that threatens the entire Democratic establishment—and its prioritizing of wealthy donors over the needs of ordinary voters.
"The left everywhere must dedicate itself to an insurgency against Democratic incumbents," said Denvir. "The Democratic establishment has lost credibility with its base in the face of a fascist threat. The base is looking leftward for new leadership. We are the opposition party."
Several progressive observers urged potential primary challengers to look to other upcoming races in New York, with several expressing hope that New York City Comptroller Brad Lander—another mayoral candidate who was widely praised for boosting Mamdani's campaign by cross-endorsing with him—will continue his political career by fighting for a U.S. Senate or House seat.
New York Democratic centrists including U.S. Rep. Dan Goldman and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer were named as lawmakers Lander could challenge in a primary. Goldman is up for reelection in 2026, and Schumer could face a primary in 2028.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who has angered progressive advocates during President Donald Trump's second term by complaining about their demands for the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), a vehement supporter of Israel who attacked Mamdani and accused him of antisemitism when he spoke out in support of Palestinian rights, were also mentioned as incumbents who should be challenged.
Mamdani won both Jeffries' and Goldman's House district, according to political analyst Armin Thomas.
Organizer Aaron Regunberg pointed to an article published by Politico last week detailing how 40% of Cuomo's endorsements came from lawmakers who had previously called for his resignation when he was accused of sexually harassing more than a dozen women.
"Politico ran this very convenient piece listing out every New York Democrat who needs to get primaried!" said Regunberg.
All the centrists named would likely have vast financial resources at their fingertips should a progressive vie for their seats, with powerful groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) liable to spend heavily on their campaigns—but so did Cuomo, who benefited from a super political action committee that raised $25 million, including from right-wing billionaires.
"But if all of Cuomo's advantages led to a thorough election thrashing, perhaps they weren't advantages," wrote Jeet Heer at The Nation on Wednesday. "Mamdani proved to be a superb campaigner with a message about affordability that resonated with voters... Mamdani's victory is a sign that the Democratic Party establishment is in trouble, and the party is ready for a wider revolt. The next move of progressive Democrats is to start running insurgent candidates in primaries to harness the anger of the moment."
CNN political analyst Harry Enten also acknowledged that "the Democratic establishment" will likely feel threatened by Mamdani's victory, which follows "poll after poll showing Democratic voters fed up with their leaders in Washington."
In his victory speech, Mamdani himself suggested broader lessons should be taken from his campaign, during which he walked the length of Manhattan to talk directly to New Yorkers, spoke to Trump voters in the outer boroughs about their concerns over the cost of living, and advocated for fare-free buses and no-cost universal childcare.
"This is a victory for every New Yorker who has been told they don't have a voice," Mamdani said in his victory speech. "It's proof that organized people can beat organized money."
In a column at Common Dreams Wednesday, writer David Andersson wrote that "Mamdani's win signals a seismic shift in the balance of power between entrenched political institutions and a new generation demanding change. The sheer scale of resources the establishment mobilized—and still fell short—reveals the depth of their fear of losing control over the city's financial and political machinery."
"New York City, and perhaps the nation, is at a turning point," he added.
David Hogg, the anti-gun violence activist who was recently pushed out of his position as vice chair of the Democratic National Committee after he advocated for primary challenges to "asleep-at-the-wheel" Democrats in blue districts, urged young progressives to consider launching their own campaigns.
"It has never been more clear—the establishment has never been more weak than they are now," he said. "You need to run."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular