May, 19 2022, 10:24am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Barbara Chillcott, Western Environmental Law Center, chillcott@westernlaw.org
Ben Tettlebaum, The Wilderness Society, ben_tettlebaum@tws.org
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, tmckinnon@biologicaldiversity.
Natasha Léger, Citizens for a Healthy Community, natasha@chc4you.org
Groups petition Interior to use existing, long-dormant authority to rein in oil and gas
Yesterday, a coalition of 30 environmental and community groups petitioned the Department of Interior to use the agency's longstanding authority and responsibility under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) to center public lands as a cornerstone of ecological and community resilience in the face of a changing climate.
WASHINGTON
Yesterday, a coalition of 30 environmental and community groups petitioned the Department of Interior to use the agency's longstanding authority and responsibility under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) to center public lands as a cornerstone of ecological and community resilience in the face of a changing climate. By adopting the climate and conservation-centered regulations proposed in the petition, Interior would empower federal public lands to serve as one of our country's key climate solutions.
Right now, public lands are, unfortunately, a major climate problem. Fossil fuel extraction from federal public lands is a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions and associated climate and community impacts. Interior's highly permissive approach to oil and gas development of federal public lands and minerals has undercut the Biden administration's ability to deliver on its climate commitments. Oil and gas companies own leases conveying the right to drill 26.6 million acres of federal public lands and minerals. Although nearly 53 percent of those leased acres are non-producing, 96,000 wells have already been drilled and Biden's Interior has approved, without imposing any climate mitigation measures, an industry stockpile of more than 9,000 additional drilling permits. Adding insult to injury, the administration just announced its intent to sell an additional 144,000 acres of oil and gas leases.
The coalition requests that Interior set public lands as the foundation of the nation's efforts to respond to the global climate crisis by immediately initiating a rulemaking to leverage FLPMA's mandate that Interior prevent the "permanent impairment" and "unnecessary or undue degradation" of public lands from oil and gas development. For decades, the agencies have mothballed these critical provisions in favor of promoting a massive expansion of climate-damaging oil and gas production on public lands.
The coalition's recommended regulatory framework would require that Interior and BLM adhere to science-based climate guardrails, already agreed to by the Biden administration, to constrain warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to actively pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius. In so doing, the petition would provide a vehicle for the administration to further its commitments to reduce emissions, curb the impacts of fossil fuel extraction on federal public lands, and to reach the 30x30 and 50x50 conservation milestones. Climate action specifically focused on the federal public lands and minerals oil and gas program is absolutely necessary to mitigate the worst effects of the climate crisis.
As we close in on the 50th anniversary of this landmark law, it is time for Interior to fulfill FLPMA's promise by adopting a framework that meets the urgency demanded by the climate crisis and opens new doors for public lands to contribute to a thriving, resilient future.
"The intersecting geopolitical, energy, and climate crises we face demand strong action. Using the power of the environmental laws that require federal land managers to protect public lands for the long term, this administration can open new doors to a thriving, resilient future for all people, with our public lands as a cornerstone of ecological and community resilience," said Barbara Chillcott, senior attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. "We know public lands hold the key to resilience in the face of a warming climate--so why aren't we using the full power of the law to protect them and ourselves?"
"There is no more impactful climate action the administration can take than stopping the ongoing exploitation of public lands by the fossil fuel industry over any other competing use," said Adam Carlesco, staff attorney with Food & Water Watch. "The proposed regulatory changes within this petition are aimed at ensuring that Interior upholds its statutory obligations to preserve these lands for future generations."
"Public lands contribute 4.5 times more carbon to the atmosphere than they sequester, largely due to energy extraction activities, like oil and gas drilling," said Shelley Silbert, executive director of Great Old Broads for Wilderness. "We can mitigate the devastating effects of climate change by putting in place this proposed framework for public land management. If we care about our kids and grandkids, why wouldn't we want to do this?"
"The bedrock laws governing our public lands are intended to conserve these cherished places and their vital resources, not auction them off for private profit," said Ben Tettlebaum, senior staff attorney with The Wilderness Society. "This framework would help fulfill the promise that public lands benefit all of us - current and future generations. It's long past time for Interior to honor our voices - the people and communities who depend on these lands for clean air, clean water, subsistence, recreation, and a climate-resilient future."
"The impacts of public land exploitation are especially devastating for New Mexico's low-income communities and communities of color. The Administration must take concrete action to mitigate these impacts and address our worsening climate conditions. They can start right now by implementing the recommendations in this proposed framework and protecting public lands," said Oriana Sandoval, chief executive officer of the Center for Civic Policy.
"Protecting public lands is an American idea - some call it 'America's best idea','' said Demis Foster, executive director of Conservation Voters New Mexico. "Congress created the tools necessary to undo decades of degradation and ensure that our federal public lands can be used to address the climate crisis, provide equitable access to the outdoors and support a growing outdoor recreation economy, and provide the basis for a future our children can be proud of."
"We must ensure responsible stewardship of our land and resources," said Hannah Burling, president of the League of Women Voters of New Mexico. "Growth must follow the findings of a comprehensive analysis of the climate, environmental, and social impacts of such development."
"By adopting the rules proposed in this petition, Interior will open new doors to usher in an era of sustainable public land use that can mitigate past and present harmful practices, rein in climate change, and create opportunities for disproportionately impacted frontline communities to thrive," said Mara Yarbrough, campaign director of the New Mexico Permian Basin Climate Justice Coalition. "We urge Interior to act within its authority and take definitive climate action by adopting this proposed framework."
"Our public lands are not just resources to be exploited. They are critical to ensuring that life support ecosystems remain intact," said Natasha Leger, executive director of Citizens for a Healthy Community. "It is time for the Department of Interior's regulations to match the statutory intent of preventing irreparable harm to our environment and ensure the regulatory standards and thresholds necessary to tackle the climate crisis."
"This will further empower President Biden to avoid more climate harm to forests, rivers, wildlife and people from greenhouse gas pollution," said Taylor McKinnon, senior public lands campaigner with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Climate science makes clear that any new fossil fuel leasing and production is incompatible with avoiding the catastrophes of warming. The Biden administration needs to heed that reality and take urgent, meaningful action now."
"It's time to wind down and ultimately phase out fossil fuel production from public lands," said Jeremy Nichols, climate and energy program director of WildEarth Guardians. "For our climate, we need to end fracking, stop mining coal, and start safeguarding the lands that are vital to this nation."
"This framework will empower Interior to take climate action in line with the public interest and merited for the scale of the crises we face," said Mattea Mrkusic, policy lead at Evergreen Action. "Climate commitments have to be observed in reality, not just in rhetoric."
The Western Environmental Law Center uses the power of the law to safeguard the public lands, wildlife, and communities of the American West in the face of a changing climate. We envision a thriving, resilient West, abundant with protected public lands and wildlife, powered by clean energy, and defended by communities rooted in an ethic of conservation.
(541) 485-2471LATEST NEWS
Nigerian Village Bombed by Trump Has 'No Known History' of Anti-Christian Terrorism, Locals Say
“Portraying Nigeria’s security challenges as a targeted campaign against a single religious group is a gross misrepresentation of reality,” said Nigeria's information minister.
Dec 27, 2025
When President Donald Trump launched a series of airstrikes in Nigeria on Christmas, he described it as an attack against "ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria who have been targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians."
But locals in a town that was hit during the strike say terrorism has never been a problem for them. On Friday, CNN published a report based on interviews with several residents of Jabo, which was hit by a US missile during Thursday's attack, which landed just feet away from the town's only hospital.
The rural town of Jabo is part of the Sokoto state in northwestern Nigeria, which the Trump administration and the Nigerian government said was hit during the strike.
Both sides have said militants were killed during the attack, but have not specified their identities or the number of casualties.
Kabir Adamu, a security analyst from Beacon Security and Intelligence in Abuja, told Al Jazeera that the likely targets are members of “Lakurawa,” a recently formed offshoot of ISIS.
But the Trump administration's explanation that their home is at the center of a "Christian genocide" left many residents of Jabo confused. As CNN reported:
While parts of Sokoto face challenges with banditry, kidnappings and attacks by armed groups including Lakurawa–which Nigeria classifies as a terrorist organization due to suspected affiliations with [the] Islamic State–villagers say Jabo is not known for terrorist activity and that local Christians coexist peacefully with the Muslim majority.
Bashar Isah Jabo, a lawmaker who represents the town and surrounding areas in Nigeria's parliament, described the village to CNN as “a peaceful community” that has “no known history of ISIS, Lakurawa, or any other terrorist groups operating in the area.”
While the town is predominantly Muslim, resident Suleiman Kagara, told reporters: "We see Christians as our brothers. We don’t have religious conflicts, so we weren’t expecting this."
Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation with more than 237 million people, has a long history of violence between Christians and Muslims, with each making up about half the population.
However, Nigerian officials have disputed claims by Republican leaders—including US Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas)—who have claimed that the government is “ignoring and even facilitating the mass murder of Christians.”
The senator recently claimed, without citing a source for the figures, that "since 2009, over 50,000 Christians in Nigeria have been massacred, and over 18,000 churches and 2,000 Christian schools have been destroyed" by the Islamist group Boko Haram.
Cruz is correct that many Christians have been killed by Boko Haram. But according to reports by the US-based Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project and the Council on Foreign Relations, the majority of the approximately 53,000 civilians killed by the group since 2009 have been Muslim.
Moreover, the areas where Boko Haram is most active are in northeastern Nigeria, far away from where Trump's strikes were conducted. Attacks on Christians cited in October by Cruz, meanwhile, have been in Nigeria's Middle Belt region, which is separate from violence in the north.
The Nigerian government has pushed back on what they have called an "oversimplified" narrative coming out of the White House and from figures in US media, like HBO host Bill Maher, who has echoed Cruz's overwrought claims of "Christian genocide."
“Portraying Nigeria’s security challenges as a targeted campaign against a single religious group is a gross misrepresentation of reality,” said Nigerian information minister Mohammed Idris Malagi. “While Nigeria, like many countries, has faced security challenges, including acts of terrorism perpetrated by criminals, couching the situation as a deliberate, systematic attack on Christians is inaccurate and harmful. It oversimplifies a complex, multifaceted security environment and plays into the hands of terrorists and criminals who seek to divide Nigerians along religious or ethnic lines."
Anthea Butler, a religious scholar at the University of Pennsylvania, has criticized the Trump administration's attempts to turn the complex situation in Nigeria into a "holy war."
"This theme of persecution of Christians is a very politically charged, and actually religiously charged, theme for evangelicals across the world. And when you say that Christians are being persecuted, that’s a thing," she told Democracy Now! in November. "It fits this sort of savior narrative of this American sort of ethos right now that is seeing itself going into countries for a moral war, a moral suasion, as it were, to do something to help other people."
Nigeria also notably produces more crude oil than any other country in Africa. Trump has explicitly argued that the US should carry out regime change in Venezuela for the purposes of "taking back" that nation's oil.
Butler has doubted the sincerity of Trump's concern for the nation's Christians due to his administration's denial of entry for Nigerian refugees, as well as virtually every other refugee group, with the exception of white South Africans.
She said: "I think this is sort of disingenuous to say you’re going to go in and save Christianity in Nigeria, when you have, you know, banned Nigerians from coming to this country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Russia Launches Drone Barrage on Kyiv Ahead of Zelenskyy-Trump Meeting
The attacks came as Trump and Zelenskyy are expected to discuss critical questions in a Ukraine-Russia peace deal, including its territorial sovereignty, NATO protections, and control over its natural resources.
Dec 27, 2025
As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy made his way to Florida for a pivotal set of talks this weekend with US President Donald Trump, Russia launched a barrage of drone and missile attacks on Kyiv early Saturday morning.
At least two people were killed in the Ukrainian capital during the 10-hour attack, with 44 more—including two children—injured. Hundreds of thousands of residents are left to brave near-freezing temperatures without heat following the attack, which cut off power supplies.
The attack came as Zelenskyy prepared to stop in Canada before meeting with Trump on Sunday to discuss a 20-point plan to end the nearly four-year war with Russia that has been the subject of weeks of negotiation between US and Ukrainian emissaries.
Zelenskyy is seeking to maintain Ukraine's territorial sovereignty without having to surrender territory—namely, the eastern Donbass region that is largely occupied by Russian forces. He also hopes that any agreement to end the war will come with a long-term security guarantee reminiscent of NATO.
On Friday, Zelenskyy told reporters that the peace deal was 90% complete. But Trump retorted that Zelenskyy "doesn't have anything until I approve it."
Trump has expressed hostility toward Zelenskyy throughout his presidency. In February, before berating him in a now-infamous Oval Office meeting, Trump insisted falsely that Ukraine, not Russia, was responsible for starting the war in 2022.
Zelenskyy's latest peace proposal was issued in response to Trump's proposal last month, which was heavily weighted in Russia's favor.
It called for Ukraine to recognize Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea and cede the entirety of the Donbass, about 2,500 square miles of territory, to Russia, including territory not yet captured. Trump's plan puts a cap of 600,000 personnel on Ukraine's military and calls for Ukraine to add a measure in its constitution banning it from ever joining NATO.
Earlier this year, Trump demanded that Ukraine give up $500 billion worth of its mineral wealth in what he said was "repayment" for US military support during the war (even though that support has only totalled about $175 billion).
In his latest proposal, Trump has pared down his demands to the creation of a "Ukraine Development Fund" that would include the "extraction of minerals and natural resources" as part of a joint US-Ukraine reconstruction effort.
While those terms appear less exploitative, the reconstruction program is expected to be financed by US loans from firms like BlackRock, which have been heavily involved in the diplomatic process.
"The infrastructure rebuilt with these loans—ports, rail lines, power grid—won’t be Ukrainian in any meaningful sense. It’ll be owned by international consortiums, operated for profit, with revenues flowing out to service the debt," wrote the Irish geopolitical commentator Deaglan O'Mulrooney on Tuesday. "In other words, Ukraine will be gutted."
Despite the criticism, Zelenskyy has signaled support in principle for the US reconstruction proposal as an alternative to direct expropriation.
The "red lines" for Zelenskyy heading into his talk with Trump are related to Ukraine's territorial integrity. He has said he will not recognize Russian control of the Donbass, or the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest nuclear facility in Europe, which Russia currently controls. He has also demanded that all terms of a peace agreement come up for a referendum among the Ukrainian people, which is strongly against territorial concessions.
At the same time, however, he insisted Saturday that "Ukraine is willing to do whatever it takes to stop this war."
Keep ReadingShow Less
British Activist Blasts 'Sociopathic Greed' of Big Tech After US Judge Blocks His Detention
"I chose to take on the biggest companies in the world, to hold them accountable, to speak truth to power. There is a cost attached to that," said Imran Ahmed, one of five Europeans targeted by the Trump administration.
Dec 26, 2025
After a US judge on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump's administration from detaining one of the European anti-disinformation advocates hit with a travel ban earlier this week, Imran Ahmed suggested that he is being targeted because artificial intelligence and social media companies "are increasingly under pressure as a result of organizations like mine."
Ahmed is the CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). The 47-year-old Brit lives in Washington, DC with his wife and infant daughter, who are both US citizens. While the Trump administration on Tuesday also singled out Clare Melford of the Global Disinformation Index, Josephine Ballon and Anna-Lena von Hodenberg of HateAid, and Thierry Breton, a former European commissioner who helped craft the Digital Services Act, Ahmed is reportedly the only one currently in the United States.
On Wednesday, Ahmed, who is a legal permanent resident, sued top Trump officials including US Attorney General Pam Bondi, Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting Director Todd Lyons, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in the District Court for the Southern District of New York.
"Rather than disguise its retaliatory motive, the federal government was clear that Mr. Ahmed is being 'SANCTIONED' as punishment for the research and public reporting carried out by the nonprofit organization that Mr. Ahmed founded and runs," the complaint states. "In other words, Mr. Ahmed faces the imminent prospect of unconstitutional arrest, punitive detention, and expulsion for exercising his basic First Amendment rights."
"The government's actions are the latest in a string of escalating and unjustifiable assaults on the First Amendment and other rights, one that cannot stand basic legal scrutiny," the filing continues. "Simply put, immigration enforcement—here, immigration detention and threatened deportation—may not be used as a tool to punish noncitizen speakers who express views disfavored by the current administration."
Just a day later, Judge Vernon Broderick, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, issued a temporary restraining order, blocking the administration from arresting or detaining Ahmed. The judge also scheduled a conference for Monday afternoon.
The US Department of State said Thursday that "the Supreme Court and Congress have repeatedly made clear: The United States is under no obligation to allow foreign aliens to come to our country or reside here."
Ahmed's lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said that "the federal government can't deport a green-card holder like Imran Ahmed, with a wife and young child who are American, simply because it doesn't like what he has to say."
In the complaint and interviews published Friday, Ahmed pointed to his group's interactions with Elon Musk, a former member of the Trump and administration and the richest person on Earth. He also controls the social media platform X, which sued CCDH in 2023.
"We were sued by Elon Musk a couple of years ago, unsuccessfully; a court found that he was trying to impinge on our First Amendment rights to free speech by using law to try and silence our accountability work," Ahmed told the BBC.
Months after a federal judge in California threw out that case last year, Musk publicly declared "war" on the watchdog.
CCDH's work is being targeted by the U.S. State Department trying to sanction and deport our CEO, Imran Ahmed. This is an unconstitutional attempt to silence anyone who dares to criticize social media giants. But a federal judge has temporarily blocked his detention.More in BBC ⤵️
[image or embed]
— Center for Countering Digital Hate (@counterhate.com) December 26, 2025 at 4:05 PM
"What it has been about is companies that simply do not want to be held accountable and, because of the influence of big money in Washington, are corrupting the system and trying to bend it to their will, and their will is to be unable to be held accountable," Ahmed told the Guardian. "There is no other industry, that acts with such arrogance, indifference, and a lack of humility and sociopathic greed at the expense of people."
Ahmed explained that he spent Christmas away from his wife and daughter because of the Trump administration's track record of quickly sending targeted green-card holders far away from their families. He said: "I chose to take on the biggest companies in the world, to hold them accountable, to speak truth to power. There is a cost attached to that. My family understands that."
The British newspaper noted that when asked whether he thought UK politicians should use X, the former Labour Party adviser told the Press Association, "Politicians have to make decisions for themselves, but every time they post on X, they are putting a buck in Mr. Musk's pocket and I think they need to question their own consciences and ask themselves whether or not they think they can carry on doing that."
Ahmed also said that it was "telling that Mr. Musk was one of the first and most vociferous in celebrating the press release" about the sanctions against him and the others.
"He said it was great, and it is great, but not for the reasons that he thinks," the campaigner said. "Because what it has actually done is give a chance for the system to show that the advocacy that we do is both important and protected by the First Amendment."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


