May, 18 2022, 07:31pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Natasha Léger, Citizens for a Healthy Community, (970) 399-9700, natasha@chc4you.org
Melissa Hornbein, Western Environmental Law Center, (406) 471-3173, hornbein@westernlaw.org
Jeremy Nichols, WildEarth Guardians, (303) 437-7663, jnichols@wildearthguaridans.
Legal Protests Target Biden's Plans to Resume Oil, Gas Leasing on Public Lands
Fossil fuel expansion undermines Biden’s climate goals, campaign promises.
WASHINGTON
Climate, conservation, and community groups from across the country filed administrative protests today challenging the Biden administration's plans to resume oil and gas leasing in June, saying the president should end new leasing to heed his own climate goals while protecting communities, water and wildlife.
The June lease sales, which follow the administration's brief pause on new oil leasing, involve 144,000 acres in Wyoming, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Utah, with a majority of acres in Wyoming.
Today's protests say the U.S. Bureau of Land Management isn't legally required to conduct lease sales and that its plans fail to prevent climate pollution and harm to people and the environment. The leasing plans also ignore the incompatibility of federal fossil fuel expansion with the U.S. goal of avoiding 1.5 degrees Celsius of global warming, the groups say.
The protests, which cite harm to people, air, water, public land and wildlife like the embattled greater sage grouse and other endangered species, call for a halt to federal fossil fuel leasing and a nationwide programmatic environmental review to align federal fossil fuel management with the goal of avoiding climate change's most catastrophic effects.
Several analyses show that climate pollution from the world's already-producing fossil fuel developments, if fully developed, would push warming past 1.5 degrees Celsius, and that avoiding such warming requires ending new investment in fossil fuel projects and phasing out production to keep as much as 40% of developed fields in the ground.
Thousands of organizations and communities from across the United States have called on President Biden to halt federal fossil fuel expansion and phase out production consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5deg Celsius.
The administration's promised comprehensive climate review of the federal oil and gas programs under Executive Order 14008 culminated in a Black Friday report that mentioned climate only twice and proposed modest royalty rate increases and other changes that presume no end to federal oil and gas leasing. The Biden administration approved more drilling permits in 2021 than President Trump did in the first year of his presidency, according to federal data analyzed by the Center for Biological Diversity.
Climate pollution from federal fossil fuels is hastening the extinction crisis while impacting communities nationwide with extreme weather, wildfires, regional aridification and river drying, droughts, heat waves and rising seas. Federal fossil fuel extraction disproportionately harms Black, Brown and Indigenous communities.
The June lease sales come amid record oil and gas industry profit-taking. The watchdog organization Accountable.US reported in February that Shell, Chevron, BP and Exxon made more than $75.5 billion in profits in 2021 -- some of their highest profits in the past decade. Major oil companies also reported billions in profits in the first quarter of 2022.
Statements from Protesting Groups:
"Montana is in the throes of major climate change impacts, including less water in our rivers, more intense wildfires across the state, and a prolonged and an intense drought over much of our landscape," said Derf Johnson, staff attorney with the Montana Environmental Information Center. "The Biden administration's decision to continue leasing our public lands for fossil fuel extraction flies in the face of his stated goal to reduce emissions and address the climate crisis."
"The West is on the verge of another Dust Bowl. We are in the nation's climate hotspot, disproportionately impacted by climate change, having warmed double the global average, more than 2 degrees Celsius," said Natasha Leger, executive director, Citizens for a Healthy Community. "Climate leadership means ending new oil and gas leasing that just locks in more climate catastrophe. A lease sale in areas that have already warmed 1.5 degrees Celsius is beyond reckless."
"In spite of candidate Biden's promises to ban new oil and gas extraction on federal lands, his administration is doing the opposite," said Daniel E. Estrin, general counsel and advocacy director for Waterkeeper Alliance. "If stopping catastrophic climate change is truly a key administration priority, it's irrational to lease nearly 150,000 additional acres of public lands to Big Oil. We again call on the president to keep his promises, and for his administration's actions to match its climate messaging."
"Tens of thousands of people have spoken up against drilling on public lands. And now it's up to the BLM to listen and put an end to leasing once and for all," said Dan Ritzman, lands, water and wildlife director at the Sierra Club. "For far too long our public lands have been monopolized by the oil and gas industry, leaving behind toxic pollution in their wake, harming local communities, wildlife, and our special places. As we come dangerously close to reaching the 1.5C threshold, it is critical we keep fossil fuels in the ground. It's time for our public lands and waters to be part of the climate solution, not the problem."
"Only raising royalty rates ignores the quarter of all U.S. climate emissions caused by fossil fuel extraction on public lands, as well as the climate costs shifted onto society," said Nicole Ghio, senior fossil fuels program manager at Friends of the Earth. "If Biden wants to be a real climate leader, he must keep his promise to end new oil and gas drilling, not turn over more public lands to Big Oil when there is no legal obligation to do so."
"Avoiding catastrophic climate change requires no more fossil fuel expansion anywhere, starting now, including on public lands," said Taylor McKinnon with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Each new oil lease is a choice for more megafires, drier rivers, worsening heat waves and hastened extinctions. The president should use his power to keep his climate promise and end fossil fuel leasing on public lands and waters."
"Selling public lands to the oil and gas industry is absolutely, 100% guaranteed to keep fueling the climate crisis," said Jeremy Nichols, climate and energy program director for WildEarth Guardians. "President Biden's belief that we can open the door for more fracking and protect our climate is simply out of touch with truth, reality and what's right."
"Public lands and minerals should be managed for the public benefit, not to maximize the profits of fossil fuel corporations," said Erik Molvar, executive director of Western Watersheds Project. "Wildlife from sage grouse to elk and pronghorn are harmed by drilling on public lands, and so is the global climate, so one necessary solution to both the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis is to stop leasing the public's minerals to fossil fuel corporations. The highest and best use of federal coal, oil, and gas deposits is to keep them safely sequestered underground."
"The Administration's attempt to take a more nuanced approach to federal fossil fuel development may be politically convenient, but it ignores scientific reality: for a 50/50 shot at avoiding the 1.5degC threshold, nearly 40% of currently-producing or under-construction fossil fuel reserves must stay in the ground" said Melissa Hornbein, senior attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. "Even if that 40% is kept underground, our odds of staying below 1.5degC are worse than a game of Russian Roulette. Why is the government rigging this dangerous game of speculation in favor of the oil industry, when a livable climate is at stake? The science is clear: there is simply no room for additional oil and gas leasing."
WildEarth Guardians protects and restores the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the American West. Driven by passion, we've tackled some of the West's most difficult and pressing conservation challenges over the past three decades. We've celebrated small victories (banning leghold trapping in the state of Colorado), monumental triumphs (ending logging on more than 21 million acres in the Southwest), and everything in-between.
(206) 417-6363LATEST 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