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
December, 09 2025, 12:58pm EDT
Contact:
Mark Drajem mdrajem@nrdc.org
Media Director
Court Rules Trump Administration’s Wind Ban is Illegal
A federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that the Trump administration’s ban on new wind projects is illegal, an important legal victory for the industry that has faced myriad attacks from this administration.
The Interior Department issued the “wind ban” in response to the presidential memorandum issued on the first day of President Trump’s term. Today’s decision comes in response to cases filed by attorneys general from 17 states and the District of Columbia, and by the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, a trade group. NRDC and other environmental groups filed amicus briefs in the case.
The following is a comment from Kit Kennedy, managing director for power at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council):
“This decision is a win for consumers, union workers, U.S. businesses, clean air and the climate.
“From the beginning of its time in office, the Trump administration put a halt to the wind energy projects that are needed to keep utility bills in check and the grid reliable. In the months since, this action has been a devastating blow to workers, electricity customers, and the reliability of the power grid.
“This ban on wind projects was illegal, as this court has now declared. The administration should use this as a wake-up call, stop its illegal actions, and get out of the way of the expansion of renewable energy.”
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700LATEST NEWS
Federal Agent Tells Maine ICE Observer She's Going in 'Nice Little Database' for 'Domestic Terrorists'
"Ironically these kinds of threats do more to radicalize opposition to ICE," said one observer.
Jan 23, 2026
A masked federal immigration enforcement agent was caught on camera this week telling a legal observer in Maine that she was being put in a database for purported "domestic terrorists."
At the start of a video that spread across social media on Friday, the masked agent appears to be scanning a license plate number before walking toward the woman recording him.
The woman informs the agent that it's legal for her to record and then asks him why he's trying to gather information on her.
"Because we have a nice little database, and now you're considered a domestic terrorist," the agent responds.
At this point the woman starts laughing incredulously at him.
"For videotaping you?!" she asks him. "Are you crazy?!"
ICE agent in Portland, Maine tells legal observer she is a domestic terrorist for peacefully recording him, adds her to "nice little database" pic.twitter.com/6miHpXUdT7
— Nathan Bernard (@nathanTbernard) January 23, 2026
Democrats on the US House Homeland Security Committee were quick to denounce the actions of the agent on the video.
"Big government Republicans have unleashed a secret police state on peaceful American citizens," they wrote in a social media post. "This should shake every American to their core."
Other critics, however, noted that it isn't just Republicans who have been supporting the right-wing police state. Seven US House Democrats, including Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), voted with the vast majority of Republicans on Thursday to give US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) an additional $10 billion.
"Corporate Democrats are complicit with the full breakdown of our constitutional rights," commented Sunrise Movement.
Greg Krieg, media director at political consulting firm Slingshot Strategies, took particular aim at Golden for shoveling more money to ICE despite documented evidence of agents violating Americans' civil liberties.
"Thank you Jared Golden, special man who understands Maine better than anyone on the planet, for telling us how much people actually like this horseshit," he wrote sarcastically.
Nico Perrino, executive vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, said the agent's behavior crossed a line that should be condemned by Americans of all political persuasions.
"I hope the vast majority of freedom-loving Americans are uncomfortable with the idea," he wrote, "that masked police are now telling people engaged in First Amendment-protected activity that they are 'domestic terrorists' who will be added to a secret government database."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, predicted that federal agents' aggressive taunts against legal observers would backfire politically against the Trump administration.
"Ironically these kinds of threats do more to radicalize opposition to ICE tactics than they do to stop people from recording ICE," he observed.
Isaac Saul, founder of Tangle News, also thought the optics of the Maine video were terrible for Republicans.
"It's hard to overstate how unpopular this crap is with normie Americans," Saul wrote. "On top of the gross civil rights violations, that Trump is letting these goons loose in Maine, a state where Democrats could actually pick up a Senate seat in nine months, it's political malpractice."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Press Freedom Coalition Urges Congress to Probe FBI Raid of WaPo Journalist's Home
"We look to you to defend our First Amendment freedoms against executive overreach and abuse."
Jan 23, 2026
Over a dozen press freedom groups on Friday urged congressional leaders to examine the Federal Bureau of Investigation's recent raid of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson's Virginia home and the seizure of her electronic devices as part of a probe into a government contractor accused of illegally possessing classified documents.
Their letter came after US Magistrate Judge William B. Porter—who authorized the FBI's search of Natanson's home in Alexandria—ruled Wednesday that prosecutors "must preserve but must not review" data on the journalist's phone, computers, and smart watch.
Noting that the US Department of Justice (DOJ) may have obtained the search warrant "under false pretenses and potentially in violation of the Privacy Protection Act of 1980," 17 groups argued that "congressional intervention is necessary because the FBI's January 14, 2026 raid of Natanson's home represents a perilous escalation in the executive branch's use of law enforcement powers against the free press and a citizenry that depends on fearless newsgathering."
"The available facts suggest... the weaponization of legal process to engage in a fishing expedition into more than 1,000 confidential sources cultivated by Natanson inside the federal workforce," the coalition wrote to top Republicans and Democrats on four relevant committees.
"By raiding Hannah Natanson's home and seizing her devices, the government threatened bedrock principles of our Constitution and a free society."
Specifically, the letter explains, given that the criminal complaint doesn't accuse contractor Aurelio Perez-Lugones of disseminating classified information, and he and his devices were already in custody when Natanson's house was searched, there is a "grim possibility" that the raid "was a pretextual attempt to threaten the press, to uncover whistleblowers, and to chill newsgathering unflattering to the government."
The Privacy Protection Act "allows law enforcement to conduct searches and seizures of journalists' work product materials only under narrow exceptions, such as where the journalist is alleged to be involved in a crime," notes the letter. "But again, the government has not accused Natanson of any wrongdoing."
"Congress has an independent and co-equal duty to oversee the Department of Justice," the missive stresses. "If the Department of Justice has nothing about its own conduct to hide from Congress and the public, this administration should welcome the opportunity to prove the necessity of its actions."
"If, however, federal officials have misled a judge in order to expose the identities of whistleblowers and to intimidate the press, Congress must know immediately," the coalition concluded. "We look to you to defend our First Amendment freedoms against executive overreach and abuse."
Since returning to office a year ago, President Donald Trump has waged a "war on free speech," as the group Free Press detailed in a report last month. Highlighted actions include taking control of the presidential press pool, Trump's alarming speech to the DOJ, blocking the Associated Press from the Oval Office for using the term Gulf of Mexico, an executive order to defund National Public Radio and Public Broadcasting Service, suing over Wall Street Journal reporting on the president's ties to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, threatening to sue over the BBC's documentary about January 6, 2021, the Pentagon's new press policy, and getting late-night host Jimmy Kimmel suspended.
Those actions are part of a broader crackdown on dissent targeting Trump critics, government employees who worked on accountability for January 6, and protesters—including people in the streets over the administration's anti-immigrant operations.
Emily Peterson-Cassin, policy director at Demand Progress, one of the organizations behind the new letter, said in a statement that "by raiding Hannah Natanson's home and seizing her devices, the government threatened bedrock principles of our Constitution and a free society... Congress has a responsibility to investigate whether the government is undermining the First Amendment and a free press by targeting and threatening a reporter like this."
The other signatories are the American Society of Journalists and Authors, Amnesty International USA, Association of Foreign Press Correspondents in the USA, Defending Rights and Dissent, Democratic Messaging Project, Freedom of the Press Foundation, Journalism and Women Symposium, Media and Democracy Project, National Press Photographers Association, PEN America, People for the American Way, Public Citizen, Radio Television Digital News Association, Reporters Without Borders, and Society of Professional Journalists.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Philadelphia Sues Over Trump's Removal of Slavery Exhibits From George Washington’s Home
"The message is clear. American history no longer includes all Americans."
Jan 23, 2026
The city of Philadelphia has sued the US Department of the Interior and the National Park Service after officials were filmed dismantling exhibits on slavery at the President's House historical site at Independence Park on Thursday.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court by the office of Mayor Cherelle Parker, says “the National Park Service has removed artwork and informational displays" from the site, where George Washington lived as president from 1790 until 1797, in order to follow an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in March, which requires national parks, museums, and monuments to portray an "uplifting" message about American history.
The President's House monument, unveiled in 2010, contained information about nine enslaved people whom Washington brought with him to the nation's "first White House," and Washington's history as a slaveowner. By the time of his death in 1799, there were more than 300 enslaved people at his estate in Mount Vernon, Virginia.
Information about the President's House site and its ties to slavery still remains online. It states:
Washington brought some of his enslaved Africans to this site and they lived and toiled with other members of his household during the years that our first president was guiding the experimental development of the young nation toward modern, republican government...
The president's house in the 1790s was a mirror of the young republic, reflecting both the ideals and contradictions of the new nation. The house stood in the shadow of Independence Hall, where the words "All men are created equal" and "We the People" were adopted, but they did not apply to all who lived in the new United States of America.
A monument acknowledging this history, however, appears to have run afoul of the portion of Trump's order requiring the Interior Secretary to see that sites "do not contain descriptions, depictions, or other content that inappropriately disparage Americans past or living."
As BillyPenn.com reported:
Starting after 3 pm, placards were ripped from the wall around the site with crowbars as people walked by, some heading to the Liberty Bell Center. Signs were unbolted from the poles overlooking the dig site where America’s first “White House” had stood until 1832. They were stacked together alongside a wall, and then taken away around 4:30 pm in a park service truck. No indication was provided where the signs and exhibition parts will go
One of the employees, who did not give his name, told the Philadelphia Inquirer that his supervisor had instructed him to take down the monuments earlier that day.
“I’m just following my orders,” the employee repeatedly said.
In a statement to the Washington Post, Interior Department spokesperson Elizabeth Peace later confirmed that the placards were indeed removed in accordance with the order.
"The president has directed federal agencies to review interpretive materials to ensure accuracy, honesty, and alignment with shared national values,” she said. “Following completion of the required review, the National Park Service is now taking action to remove or revise interpretive materials in accordance with the order."
The city of Philadelphia says it was not given notice about the placards being removed. The lawsuit says their removal was "arbitrary and capricious" and says the “defendants have provided no explanation at all for their removal of the historical, educational displays at the President’s House site, let alone a reasoned one."
In a Facebook post, criminal defense attorney Michael Coard, who pushed for the monument's creation for nearly a decade, called its destruction "historically outrageous and blatantly racist."
It is the latest example of Trump's order being used to justify the removal of monuments related to slavery and Black history in the United States.
The infamous 1863 "Scourged Back" image—a picture of an enslaved man's back with severe whip scars that was used to promote the end of slavery during the Civil War—was removed from the Fort Pulaski National Monument in Georgia in September, along with other information about slavery.
The administration has also removed more than 20 displays at the Smithsonian Museum of American History, some of which dealt with slavery, civil rights, and race relations, a move that came after Trump lamented that the museum put so much focus on "how bad Slavery was."
The National Park Service also deleted information about abolitionist activist Harriet Tubman and many references to slavery from its webpage about the Underground Railroad for months last year, before restoring it following public backlash.
Pages on the Arlington Cemetery website that recognize the contributions of Black and Hispanic soldiers have also been removed.
The order has also led to the removal or alteration of numerous monuments, museum exhibits, and web pages recognizing the achievements or struggles of other racial minority groups, women, LGBTQ+ people, and Native Americans.
In a statement to NBC News, Philadelphia City Council President Kenyatta Johnson said, "Removing the exhibits is an effort to whitewash American history."
"History cannot be erased simply because it is uncomfortable," he added. "Removing items from the President’s House merely changes the landscape, not the historical record."
Daniel Pearson, a columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer, said: "The message is clear. American history no longer includes all Americans."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular