

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.

Deborah Moskowitz, Resource Renewal Institute, dmoskowitz@rri.org
Three conservation groups today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the National Park Service's controversial management plan for expanding private agriculture at California's Point Reyes National Seashore, one of a handful of national parks that p
Three conservation groups today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the National Park Service's controversial management plan for expanding private agriculture at California's Point Reyes National Seashore, one of a handful of national parks that permits cattle grazing.
The Park Service plan paves the way for 20-year leases for beef and dairy ranchers in the park, enshrining and expanding commercial ranching on public lands at the expense of native wildlife and natural habitats. The plan would also allow harmful water pollution to continue, and permit the agency to kill native tule elk -- a unique subspecies found in no other national park -- that ranchers say interfere with cattle operations.
"This plan is a giveaway to the cattle industry," said Deborah Moskowitz, president of the Resource Renewal Institute. "It perpetuates decades of negligence by the very agency charged with protecting this national treasure. The Trump administration fast-tracked the plan without regard for the climate crisis or the hundred rare, threatened and endangered species that depend on this national park. One-third of the national seashore is fenced off from public use."
"The Park Service has long mismanaged Point Reyes by allowing ranchers to use and abuse the park for private profit," said Jeff Miller with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Now the agency wants to treat our beloved tule elk as expendable problem animals to be shot or removed. Point Reyes belongs to the public, not a handful of ranchers. It's time to manage the park the way Congress intended when it passed the Point Reyes Act -- for public benefit and protection of the natural environment."
"The Park Service needs to stop authorizing chronic water contamination, harassment and suppression of Tule elk, degradation of public recreation and destruction of native coastal prairies for the sake of a handful of unsustainable ranching operations," said Laura Cunningham, California director at Western Watersheds Project. "Having studied California's native grasslands for decades, I'm shocked at the destruction of native ecosystems and the epidemic of invasive weeds at the Point Reyes Seashore, and the agency's callous disregard of its mandate to protect and preserve the park's ecosystems and wildlife for the use and enjoyment of the people."
"The Park Service is unlawfully prioritizing the commercial needs of ranchers over the natural environment and the public's use and enjoyment of these majestic public lands," said Lizzy Potter, a staff attorney at Advocates for the West, which represents the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. "The Park Service decided that ranching should continue in perpetuity without fully disclosing its plans or the environmental consequences."
The plan violates several federal environmental laws, including the Point Reyes Act, which established the Point Reyes National Seashore in 1962 for the purposes of "public recreation, benefit and inspiration;" the Organic Act, which requires the agency to leave natural resources "unimpaired" for the benefit of future generations; and the Clean Water Act by allowing ranches to circumvent water quality standards. The Park Service's inadequate environmental review for the plan violates the National Environmental Policy Act.
The plaintiffs -- the Resource Renewal Institute, Center for Biological Diversity and Western Watersheds Project -- first sued the Park Service in 2016 for failing to update its antiquated General Management Plan and perpetuating commercial ranching in the park without adequate environmental review and public comment.
A settlement agreement required the Park Service to produce the first-ever Environmental Impact Statement for Point Reyes ranching. More than 90% of public comments opposed ranching and killing native tule elk. The Park Service adopted the plan in September 2021, ignoring tens of thousands of public comments and coalition letters from more than 100 environmental and social justice organizations representing millions of members calling on the agency to phase out ranching.
Background
For decades the National Park Service has leased about 28,000 acres of public lands within the Point Reyes National Seashore and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area for beef and dairy ranching, despite significant conflicts with natural resources, wildlife and public recreation. Ranching has led to overgrazing, soil erosion, degraded water quality, damaged vegetation and endangered species habitats, increased levels of invasive weeds and suppressed wildlife populations at these parks.
The plan expands the public lands zoned for ranching; quadruples the potential terms of existing grazing leases from five years to a maximum of 20 years; allows ranchers to pursue new commercial activities such as mobile slaughterhouses and row crop production; and provides for ranching to continue in perpetuity. The plan perpetuates overgrazing and does little to restore public lands and resources harmed by ongoing commercial cattle operations in the national park.
It also allows the Park Service to shoot native tule elk to appease ranchers and to harass elk away from leased ranch lands. It sets an arbitrary population cap of 140 elk for the Drakes Beach herd, currently estimated at 138 elk. The Park Service can also kill any free-roaming elk to prevent new herds from forming in the park.
Some 91.4% of public comments submitted on the plan opposed ranching on the Point Reyes National Seashore, while only 2.3 percent approved of allowing cattle ranching to continue.
The Park Service improperly rejected a "no ranching" alternative that would provide maximum protection for the environment -- as required under the Point Reyes Act -- along with reduced-ranching alternatives that would provide greater protection than the adopted plan.
The Park Service also refused to consider whether private ranching operations in the park damage Coast Miwok archeological sites. The Park Service discarded a proposal to protect those sites in 2015 and instead adopted a plan that protects "historic" ranches. The Coast Miwok Tribal Council, lineal descendants of the original inhabitants of Point Reyes, formally objected to the Point Reyes ranching and elk-killing plan.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California. The attorneys for the plaintiffs are Lizzy Potter, Laird Lucas and Andrew Missel with the nonprofit, public-interest, environmental law firm Advocates for the West, and Michael Lozeau, of Lozeau Drury LLP.
Western Watersheds Project is an environmental conservation group working to protect and restore watersheds and wildlife through.
"It is outrageous that the US government would target people for bringing humanitarian aid... But even more disturbing is the cruel and deeply immoral policy the United States continues to impose on Cuba."
The antiwar group CodePink it has yet to be served with any subpoenas after it was reported over the weekend that the Trump administration has opened an investigation into a recent humanitarian trip it helped organize to Cuba, but vehemently denied wrongdoing and said any government probe, if there is one, would only show that "this administration is beyond grotesque."
"Taking medical supplies to pediatric hospitals in Cuba is now a crime?" asked co-founder Medea Benjamin on social media on Saturday after Fox News reported that organizers had been served subpoenas. "Saving the lives of babies is a crime?"
Fox reported that Benjamin and left-wing commentator Hasan Piker had been subpoenaed by federal investigators two months after they were among 40 Americans who sailed to Havana on the Nuestra America Convoy, which carried 20 tons of humanitarian aid to the island nation.
The Fox reporting claimed the subpoenas issued to Benjamin and Piker seek to obtain financial, logistical, and communications information related to the trip, which was organized in response to the Trump administration's decision in late January to threaten to impose tariffs on any country that provided Cuba with oil.
The administration cut off Cuba's main source of fuel at the beginning of the year when it sent US troops into Venezuela to abduct President Nicolás Maduro and took control of the country's vast oil supply.
White House officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, have long desired regime change in the communist country, and rights advocates have warned the administration appears to be moving toward just that as it strangles the island's oil supply—causing frequent blackouts and impacting the healthcare and food systems—and claims the Cuban government poses a threat to the US.
In organizing the Nuestra America Convoy, said Benjamin on Sunday, the advocates were acting "as moral US citizens trying to bring some relief to a population being deliberately starved by the cruel policies of our own government."
"This policy has contributed to catastrophic shortages of medicine and electricity, massive blackouts, transportation collapse, and a public health crisis that has hurt the most vulnerable, especially children and the elderly," said Benjamin. "It is a policy that is, literally, killing babies, as we have seen in the recent tragic doubling of the infant mortality rate. This is why we focused our donations on medical supplies for pediatric hospitals."
The blockade is compounding the suffering caused by the trade embargo the US has imposed for decades, said Benjamin.
The Cuban Assets Control Regulations law prohibits US citizens from conducting unlicensed travel-related transations with Cuba, but the law makes exceptions for humanitarian endeavors and other activities aimed at supporting the Cuban people.
"We traveled to Cuba under the US government-authorized category of providing humanitarian aid to the Cuban people. We brought desperately needed medicines and medical supplies at a time when Cuba is suffering catastrophic shortages caused by the crippling US blockade," said Benjamin.
Benjamin, Piker, and Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim emphasized that the group stayed in Spanish-owned hotels that are "explicitly permitted under" the US law—while right-wing influencer Nick Shirley allegedly stayed in a sanctioned hotel on a recent trip to Cuba.
"It is outrageous that the US government would target people for bringing humanitarian aid to suffering Cuban children," Benjamin said. "But even more disturbing is the cruel and deeply immoral policy the United States continues to impose on Cuba—a policy designed to strangle the island economically, deprive people of food, fuel, medicine, and basic necessities, and make daily life unbearable."
Piker said the reports of the investigation indicate that "the American government would rather try to criminalize delivering aid to a country we’ve starved, than punish the Epstein class."
Benjamin emphasized that the reports of the probe come as the administration intensified its threats against Cuba, having indicted former President Raúl Castro last week on charges related to the shooting down of a plane operated by Cuban-American exiles in the 1990s. Trump and his allies have repeatedly mused about invading the country following his military attacks on Venezuela and Iran.
"President Trump already has his hands full trying to disentangle himself from the disastrous US war with Iran," said Benjamin. "He should not start another one in Cuba. The American people are tired of endless wars, interventions, sanctions, and suffering imposed in our name."
"The pursuit of greater profits cannot justify choices that systematically sacrifice jobs, because the human person is an end, not a means."
Pope Leo XIV on Monday released a 42,000-word encyclical calling for government regulation of artificial intelligence and implored world leaders to ensure the burgeoning technology is used for the benefit of all humankind—not concentrated in the hands of a powerful, profit-seeking few.
Leo warned in the first major theological document of his papacy that unrestrained AI and its potentially far-reaching impacts—including mass job loss, environmental degradation, and increasingly catastrophic warfare—heightens the "risk of dehumanization," subjugating much of humanity in the name of "greater efficiency" and technological advancement.
"As with every major technological shift, AI tends to amplify the power of those who already possess economic resources, expertise, and access to data," Leo wrote in the document, titled Magnifica Humanitas. "In light of the common good and the universal destination of goods, this raises serious concerns, since small but highly influential groups can shape information and consumption patterns, influence democratic processes, and steer economic dynamics to their own advantage, undermining social justice and solidarity among peoples."
Leo warned that eliminating jobs en masse by replacing human beings with robots—an aim of some of the most powerful companies in the world, including the e-commerce behemoth Amazon—without adequate protections and compensation for impacted workers would be morally obscene and calamitous to social order.
"A society that guarantees employment to only a small fraction of the population, despite having a high level of technical development, risks exposing many to forced inactivity, a lack of responsibility, and the absence of daily tasks and stimuli, resulting in human and cultural impoverishment," the pope wrote. "This creates a paradox of material progress and anthropological regression that undermines the foundations of a just and stable social peace."
In the era of #ArtificialIntelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human. We must lovingly safeguard the grandeur of humanity bestowed upon us and revealed in its fullness in Christ, the splendor…
— Pope Leo XIV (@Pontifex) May 25, 2026
Leo cautioned against the growing use of AI in military conflict, a warning delivered alongside the CEO of the artificial intelligence firm Anthropic, which was embroiled in a tense and public dispute with the Trump administration earlier this year over the use of the company's technology for military purposes and mass surveillance. The pontiff has also clashed with the Trump administration, which has attacked Leo for publicly criticizing the US-Israeli war on Iran.
"No algorithm can make war morally acceptable," reads the pope's encyclical. "AI does not remove the intrinsic inhumanity of conflict; indeed it can only bring about conflict more quickly and render it more impersonal, lowering the threshold for resorting to violence, transforming defense into threat prediction and thus reducing victims to data. In this way, it will accustom us to the idea that violence is inevitable and needs only to be optimized."
Leo, whose warnings about the implications of rapid advancements in AI technology echoed concerns expressed by progressive lawmakers in the US and around the world, made clear that he doesn't view new technology, including AI, as inherently "antagonistic to humanity," noting that "technological development has significantly improved the living conditions of humanity."
"At the same time, each phase of progress has also revealed the ambiguity of tools that can cause harm when not oriented toward the good," Leo wrote. "It is necessary to establish adequate regulatory tools capable of upholding justice and curbing the distorting effects of technological power."
"Crucial questions impose themselves on our conscience," he added, "and can no longer be avoided: Where are we going? Toward what goal do we wish to orient ourselves? What direction should we choose as a people and as a human community?"
"We will defeat the oligarchy and the political system that it maintains," said Graham Platner. "The politics of Susan Collins."
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday rallied in Orono, Maine with progressive Senate candidate Graham Platner, who called for transformative political change to reclaim the wealth that has been "stolen by corrupt politicians and the corporations that bought them."
Platner, who effectively locked up the Maine's US Senate Democratic primary after Gov. Janet Mills exited the race last month, placed five-term incumbent Republican Sen. Susan Collins among the corrupt lawmakers who have sold out workers and advanced the interests of the billionaire class, which is shelling out millions to protect Collins' seat.
"We will not just fight the oligarchy," Platner told an audience of 1,400 gathered at the University of Maine, the location of the 40th stop of Sanders' (I-Vt.) nationwide "Fighting Oligarchy" tour. "We will defeat the oligarchy and the political system that it maintains... The politics of Susan Collins. A politics that turns politicians into millionaires but tells you to be grateful for crumbs. It is a lie."
Platner declared that "we need a political revolution," something he said Sanders "has been fighting for for 60 years."
"When we beat back fascism, when we defend our democracy and our freedom, let it be a different kind of freedom," said Platner. "A freedom to not be condemned to scraps and struggle, but to live with the dignity and fulfillment that gives us the society we deserve."
Watch the full rally:
Sanders, who became the first US senator to endorse Platner last August when he was widely seen as a long shot to win the Democratic nomination, said that "what we're talking about"—from Medicare for All to a living wage to union rights for all workers—"is not radical."
"What is radical is when so few have so much," said Sanders. "What is radical is when billionaires control our political system."
Sunday's "Fight Oligarchy" rally came days after a survey showed Platner leading Collins—who has held her seat for nearly three decades—by seven percentage points among likely voters, who appear unfazed by an intensifying wave of attacks on Platner from pro-Collins super PACs and the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
"Susan Collins is spineless and corrupt," Platner wrote on social media ahead of the rally. "And in 163 days, we will defeat her."