SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
November, 15 2021, 02:40pm EDT
Contact:
Erin Fitzgerald, efitzgerald@earthjustice.org
Michigan Approves Another Polluter in Flint
Asphalt plant will pump more pollution into the air in a community not yet recovered from lead poisoning.
WASHINGTON
Today, the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, or EGLE, approved the air permit for a hot mix asphalt plant in Flint, a community still reeling from lead poisoning, as well as ongoing and legacy industrial pollution.
The Ajax asphalt plant will be located in Genesee Township, less than 1600 feet from public housing in a low-income Black neighborhood in Flint that is already overwhelmed by high levels of air toxics, particulate matter from the concentration of industrial activity. Nearby facilities include Genesee Power Station, Universal Coating, Inc. Ace-Saginaw Paving Company, Buckeye Terminals, Superior Metals, RJ Industrial Recycling, and many others. The asphalt plant, which will emit many air contaminants, including lead, is slated to be in extremely close proximity to residential housing and the St. Francis Prayer Center, which serves residents of the public housing community, among others in Flint.
A coalition of many Flint-based groups have been fighting the issuance of this permit. In response to the comments of this coalition and other advocates, EGLE changed the draft permit. However, EGLE never undertook a proper an analysis of the cumulative impacts that this asphalt plant will have on the Flint community.
On behalf of coalition members Flint Rising, Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint, and the St. Francis Prayer Center, Earthjustice and the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center submitted a Title VI civil rights complaint to the Environmental Protection Agency's Civil Rights' Office, seeking an investigation of the state environmental agency's actions in this permitting process and a request for a broader review of and the state environmental agency's compliance with civil rights laws more broadly.
"It is unconscionable that EGLE allowed another source of pollution, including lead and other air toxics, in our community. Our community, our families, our children, cannot and should not take more chemical pollution," said Deborah Hawley, Director, St. Francis Prayer Center. "We demand Ajax and EGLE to pause the construction and operation of this asphalt plant until more can be learned about its impacts."
"This permitting decision perpetuates a legacy of environmental racism in Flint and in Michigan. We are disappointed that the Whitmer Administration's environmental agency is not following through on its commitment to environmental justice, said Nayyirah Shariff, Director, Flint Rising.
"We will keep building power and fighting for access to clean air and a healthy environment for Flint and Genesee Township residents, said Mona Munroe-Younis, Executive Director, Environmental Transformation Movement of Flint.
The following statement is from Nick Leonard, Executive Director, Great Lakes Environmental Center:
"The draft air permit, or permit to install, for this hot mix asphalt plant was gravely deficient under the Clean Air Act and under civil rights laws. The plant will be an additional source of air pollution in a community of color that already has one of the highest rates of asthma hospitalizations in the state. This asphalt plant should not have been permitted and should not be constructed or operated until the cumulative risks or impacts of adding this burdened Flint community are properly considered."
The following statement is from Debbie Chizewer, Earthjustice managing attorney:
"Michigan's environmental agency has failed to consider the adverse impacts on this Black, low-income community that will result from permitting this asphalt plant in this community. This failure comes even after our clients, EPA, and HUD all submitted comments raising serious civil rights concerns about the disparate impact that would result to a low-income predominantly Black community."
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
Pro-Palestine Students, Faculty Sue UC Santa Cruz Over 'Unconstitutional' Ban
The lawsuit was filed "to vindicate the fundamental democratic and constitutional rights to free speech, free assembly, and due process against overreach by university authorities," the text said.
Sep 09, 2024
Students and staff at the University of California, Santa Cruz launched a lawsuit against the school on Monday for barring them from campus without due process after they were arrested at a pro-Palestinian protest in the spring.
The lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Foundation of Northern California, the Center for Protest Law & Litigation, and civil rights attorney Thomas Seabaugh, is demanding that the University "cease summarily banishing" people who exerciser their First Amendment rights as the new academic year beings.
"The bans were incredibly punitive and profoundly unfair," Rachel Lederman, senior counsel with the Center for Protest Law & Litigation, said in a statement. "They went into effect on the spot, instantly cutting students and faculty off from classes, jobs, and other school resources, such as meal plans and healthcare. On-campus residents were rendered homeless. Academic performance suffered."
"It's time to hold UCSC accountable for its illegal use of Section 626.4 campus bans against students and faculty as a tool of censorship."
One impacted student was Elio Ellutzi, a plaintiff and undergraduate who was not only made homeless and cut off from their campus job, they were forced to the miss a pre-scheduled doctor's appointment and delay treatment until the fall.
"It was terrible to miss that appointment and be cut off from my home, the library, and my notes," Ellutzi said. "This all happened during final exams and, even though I had been on the honor roll for the last two quarters, I struggled to complete my coursework and my grades really suffered."
Fellow plaintiff and UCSC undergraduate Laaila Irshad also suffered academically.
"I was a resident assistant living and working in campus housing, so the ban was devastating," Laaila said. "I failed my school courses as I could not access my computer, attend classes, or complete assignments."
The bans were issued to more than 100 students and faculty members who were arrested on the night of May 30, when the university called in more than 100 police officers to clear the school's Palestine solidarity encampment.
Everyone arrested that night was banned from campus under section 626.4 of California's Penal Code, which allows a university to withdraw its consent for an individual's presence on campus for up to two weeks. However, in order for a university to make use of the code, it must first either hold a hearing or decide that an individual poses "a substantial and material threat." Neither criteria were met in the case of those arrested in May, in violation of both state and federal law.
Chessie Thacher, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Northern California, said the bans were "unconstitutional and overbroad, depriving students and faculty of their due process rights."
The lawsuit explained further:
The campus police, acting under defendants' direction, handed out identical one-page Section 626.4 notices to arrestees. The officers handed out so many of these form notices en masse that they eventually ran out of paper and resorted to verbally informing students and faculty of the ban. Some people were also purportedly banned without getting either written or verbal notice. No hearing or opportunity to be heard was provided before any of these bans went into effect. No individualized findings were made about how, post-arrest, "the continued presence" on campus of each summarily banned person presented "a substantial and material threat of significant injury to persons or property."
The notices were also handed out after an arrest experience that was harrowing in and of itself, according to first-hand testimony from plaintiffs.
Christine Hong, a professor of critical race and ethnic studies, said she had gone to the encampment on May 30 to support her students:
When I arrived, I saw a line of officers advancing in militarized formation, moving forward, then stopping, and waiting before continuing their slow march down to the base of campus until they were just two to three feet in front of the line of students. From that point forward, they repeatedly attacked us in waves of violence. The police used their batons to force us so tightly into each other that some protesters were dry heaving from the batons being thrust violently into their organs. When students tried to move the batons away from their stomachs, they were ordered to stay still and bear the pain. The person next to me was later hospitalized for their injuries. In what appeared to be their efforts to pluck off protesters for arrest, officers in full riot gear were unrestrained in their violence, including grabbing people by the neck. One person sustained injuries so severe that they suffered neurological damage and now walks using a cane.
Once arrested, both Hong and Irshad described spending time in police vans with their hands tightly zip-tied and no chance to access facilities.
Irshad recalled:
I was arrested at 6:00 am, while other protesters remained on-site into the morning, still without basic necessities. We were then handcuffed tightly with zip ties and loaded into vans, where static radio blared at deafening volumes. When we pleaded for relief, the volume was increased, and when I asked to use the restroom, I was met with scorn and laughter. It was a shock to be treated so cruelly simply for exercising my right to protest.
The lawsuit stated that it was filed "to vindicate the fundamental democratic and constitutional rights to free speech, free assembly, and due process against overreach by university authorities."
"It's time to hold UCSC accountable for its illegal use of Section 626.4 campus bans against students and faculty as a tool of censorship," Seabaugh said in a statement. "Our clients did not engage in conduct that posed a threat of significant injury to anyone or anything. Banning them on the spot was not just heavy-handed, it was unconstitutional and a violation of basic democratic rights and academic freedoms. We're suing to ensure that in the coming school year, UCSC officials comply with the law and respect the constitutional limits on their power to ban students and faculty from campus."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most US Voters Want Plastics Industry Held Accountable for Recycling Deception: Poll
"No one is really OK with a corporation lying to consumers. What jumps out here is the overwhelming agreement among voters that it's deceptive and wrong for companies to label a product as recyclable when it's not."
Sep 09, 2024
Most U.S. voters would support officials in their state taking legal action against the plastics and fossil fuel industries for creating plastic pollution, based on evidence that they misled the public about the viability of recycling their products, according to a poll released Monday.
The poll, conducted by Data for Progress and the Center for Climate Integrity, follows a report CCI released in February that showed decades of industry deception about the recyclability of plastics and a yearslong, ongoing investigation by the California attorney general, which could lead to a lawsuit.
The poll indicates that 70% of voters support such a lawsuit and even 54% of Republicans do so.
"Regardless of your politics, no one is really OK with a corporation lying to consumers," Davis Allen, a CCI researcher, said in a statement. "What jumps out here is the overwhelming agreement among voters that it's deceptive and wrong for companies to label a product as recyclable when it's not."
Allen's colleague Alyssa Johl, a CCI vice president, argued that the poll bolsters the case that attorneys general should pursue lawsuits against industry for its role in creating plastic waste and deceiving the public about recycling.
"As we're watching to see what comes from California's investigation, it's clear that the public is very concerned about the plastic waste crisis and would support holding Big Oil and the plastics industry accountable for the fraud of plastic recycling," she said. "Any attorney general or public official who is considering action on this issue should know that both the law and public opinion are on their side."
📣 New poll from us & @DataProgress:
The vast majority of U.S. voters — including 54% of Republicans — support legal action against Big Oil & the plastics industry for lying about the viability of plastic recycling and causing the plastic waste crisis. https://t.co/YFjmxzeOYT pic.twitter.com/0oHAMHPtem
— Center for Climate Integrity (@climatecosts) September 9, 2024
The survey, conducted on 1,231 web panel respondents, also included a number of other plastics-related questions. More than two-thirds of respondents, after being prompted with information during the course of the survey, said the plastics industry should have "a great deal of responsibility" to address the plastic crisis, while 59% said the same about the fossil fuel industry. The industries are in fact connected; almost all plastics are made out of fossil fuels.
More than 60% of respondents strongly agreed—and 85% agreed at least "somewhat"—that it was deceptive to put the "chasing arrows" symbol on products that were not in fact recyclable. California restricted the practice with a 2021 law, and the Federal Trade Commission is revising its guidelines following recommendations issued last year by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which said the use of the symbol can be "deceptive or misleading."
The poll showed that Americans tend to overestimate the amount of plastic being recycled. The average respondent guessed that about 45% of plastic gets recycled, when in fact a 2021 Greenpeace report indicated that the real figure is about 6%.
Despite the negative impacts of plastic waste, plastic production continues to increase worldwide. About 220 million tons of plastic waste are expected to be generated this year alone. Last week, a study in Nature, a leading journal, estimated global plastic waste emissions at about 52 million metric tons per year.
Recycling plastic is logistically challenging because many products are made of composites of different types of plastic and because the quality of the material goes down with each generation of use.
The poll comes out during the final stages of negotiations on a global plastics treaty, which has been in the works for several years. Ahead of United Nations General Assembly meetings this week, a group of celebrities including Bette Midler called for strong action on plastics in an open letter published by Greenpeace.
The final global plastics treaty negotiations will be held in Busan, South Korea starting November 25. The previous major round of negotiations, in April, was dominated by corporate lobbyists, advocates said. Activists and Indigenous leaders were also left out of a smaller meeting in Thailand last month, drawing criticism.
The call for accountability for plastics producers comes as the fossil fuel industry already faces legal action for its role in perpetuating the climate crisis. Dozens of cities and states have filed suits. None has yet reached the trial stage. The one that is closest to doing so, City and County of Honolulu v. Sunoco et al., has been the subject of political and legal wrangling, with the industry trying to have the suit dismissed.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Calculated Brutality': Israelis Killing a Palestinian Child Every 2 Days in Occupied West Bank
"The international community must act urgently to enact an arms embargo and sanctions to protect Palestinian children's lives," said one campaigner.
Sep 09, 2024
Israeli soldiers and settlers have killed more than 140 Palestinian children in the illegally occupied West Bank since last October—a rate of one child every two days—according to an analysis released Monday.
The report, published by Defense of Children International-Palestine (DCIP), details how Israeli occupation forces "routinely targeted Palestinian children with live ammunition and aerial attacks, prevented ambulances and paramedics from reaching wounded children, and confiscated children's bodies in violation of international law" in the 10 months after the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas-led militants.
"Israeli forces are killing Palestinian children with calculated brutality and cruelty all throughout the occupied Palestinian territory," DCIP general director Khaled Quzmar said in a statement. "The international community must act urgently to enact an arms embargo and sanctions to protect Palestinian children's lives."
DCIP field researchers conducted interviews and collected evidence documenting 141 children killed by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops and settlers in the West Bank between October 7, 2023 and July 31, 2024. As Common Dreams recently reported, that's around a 250% increase from the nine months preceding the October 7 attack.
Among the report's key findings:
- 20 percent of the Palestinian children killed by Israeli forces and settlers in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, since 2000 have been killed after October 7, 2023—a rate of one child every two days;
- Israeli forces deliberately target and shoot unarmed children with live ammunition and trained snipers;
- Israeli forces and authorities systematically deny Palestinian children their right to medical care by preventing ambulances, paramedics, or bystanders from aiding them;
- Israeli authorities and forces systematically, deliberately, and specifically embolden Israeli settler violence towards Palestinian children;
- Israeli forces present during armed Israeli settler attacks fail to prevent the aggression, fail to help the Palestinian victims, and often collaborate with the settlers in inflicting lethal harm;
- The fatal shootings of child protesters in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza and the use of expanding bullets during the crackdowns constitute war crimes prosecutable at the International Criminal Court;
- Israeli authorities' practice of confiscating and withholding Palestinian bodies is a violation of international humanitarian law and international criminal law; and
- Israeli authorities work to ensure Israeli forces continue enjoying impunity and face no consequence for the extrajudicial killing of Palestinian children.
According to DCIP, there are "no known accounts of accountability" during the period covered by the report.
"When an Israeli soldier targets a Palestinian child, or an Israeli military official orders the targeting of a child, they are in violation of international human rights, humanitarian, and criminal law," DCIP accountability program director Ayed Abu Eqtaish said Monday. "Not a single person has been held accountable for the killing of these children, emboldening Israeli forces to continue killing with impunity."
The new report comes amid the biggest and deadliest Israeli escalation in the West Bank in decades and as Israel's far-right government pushes forward with plans to build new settler colonies and expand existing ones by stealing more West Bank lands from Palestinians.
On Monday, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk pointed to the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) recent opinion that the Israeli occupation is an illegal form of apartheid that must end immediately as he implored the world to reject Israel's "blatant disregard for international law."
Israel is currently on trial for genocide at the ICJ for its conduct in the war on Gaza. According to the Gaza Health Ministry and U.N. agencies, Israel's 339-day assault on Gaza has left at least 145,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing while forcibly displacing, starving, and sickening millions more. More than 17,000 Palestinian children are believed to have been killed in Gaza.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular