March, 13 2026, 03:39pm EDT
EPA Bows to Corporate Polluters, Abandons Duty to Protect Public from Sterilizers’ Ethylene Oxide Emissions
More than 14 million people in the US live near sterilizer facilities that emit one of the most toxic air pollutants regulated by the agency
Today, the Trump Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a proposed rule to roll back public health regulations adopted in 2024 for commercial sterilizer facilities that use ethylene oxide to sterilize medical equipment and spices. Ethylene oxide, one of the most toxic air pollutants EPA regulates, is a highly carcinogenic flammable gas capable of damaging DNA even in small doses.
The 2024 regulations require most sterilizer facilities to reduce emissions and have continuous emissions monitoring systems by April 6, 2026. According to the EPA, the 2024 safeguards when fully implemented would eliminate over 90% of ethylene oxide emissions from commercial sterilizer facilities and reduce the number of people exposed to unacceptable cancer risks from ethylene oxide by 92%.
“The 2024 standards would have delivered enormous public health benefits. EPA knows that ethylene oxide is carcinogenic and determined that sterilizers can install effective and affordable pollution controls,” said Earthjustice senior attorney Deena Tumeh. “EPA has no basis to repeal this well-supported rule. By rolling back the rule, the Trump EPA is bending the knee to the sterilizer industry at the expense of millions of people’s health.”
If finalized, Trump EPA’s proposal will allow sterilizer facilities to emit more ethylene oxide. Based on EPA’s own data, this proposal would subject at least 85,000 more people to unacceptable cancer risks compared to the 2024 rule. Many facilities are already in compliance with one or more of the emission limitations in the 2024 rule, but Trump EPA’s proposal would allow these facilities to reduce or eliminate their emission controls and monitoring equipment.
Nearly 14 million people in the United States and Puerto Rico live within five miles of a commercial sterilizer, according to a 2023 report from the Union of Concerned Scientists. Inhaling ethylene oxide can increase the risk of cancer, including breast cancer and cancer of white blood cells.
Children are particularly vulnerable to ethylene oxide harm because the chemical remains in their bodies longer than it does in adults. Many commercial sterilizer facilities are in low-income neighborhoods and communities of color, and compound existing health risks from other local sources of pollution. In 2018, the first Trump EPA determined that ethylene oxide was a major driver of elevated cancer risks that the Agency is now ignoring.
In June 2025, the Trump administration exempted more than 40 percent of sterilizers in the United States from complying with the 2024 rule for two years. These exemptions came after EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin invited corporations to email the agency to request exemptions from clean air standards.
The 2024 sterilizer protections were the result of a successful 2022 lawsuit brought by California Communities Against Toxics, Clean Power Lake County, Rio Grande International Study Center, Sierra Club, and the Union of Concerned Scientists, represented by Earthjustice.
Quotes from our clients and partners:
“I remember the EPA informing us that Steri-Tech’s ethylene oxide emissions in my hometown of Salinas, Puerto Rico, were so high that we had one of the highest rates of toxic air cancer risk in the United States” said Victor Alvarado, founder and coordinator for Comité Diálogo Ambiental. “Eliminating the new protections against ethylene oxide emissions is unjust.”
“We understand that industry applied heavy pressure to weaken the previously finalized rule. We also understand that industry remains more concerned with their profits than the lives of those who live near sterilizer facilities, like my community in Laredo,” said Tricia Cortez, executive director of Rio Grande International Study Center. “Sterilizer facilities, like Midwest must be held accountable for their dangerous, cancer-causing emissions. We need an EPA that works to protect us, the people, not financial interests and corporations that continue to cause so much harm to so many.”
“EPA’s decision to roll back commercial sterilizer safeguards is an affront to countless families and workers who were unknowingly exposed to ethylene oxide—a cancer-causing gas—for years, even decades,” said Darya Minovi, senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “The rule was based on a growing and robust body of evidence showing the toxicity of long-term exposure to ethylene oxide, which EPA, international institutions, and the National Academies have affirmed. Rolling back these protections will undoubtedly harm people’s health, especially children’s.”
“Walking back key regulations for ethylene oxide sterilizer facilities is essentially giving a highly polluting industry a get-out-of-jail-free card. Sterilizers are some of the largest, most toxic chemical manufacturing facilities in the country,” said Jane Williams, executive director of California Communities Against Toxics and chair of the Sierra Club National Clean Air Team. “Rather than regressing on key protections, these facilities need even more controls in place to ensure the safety of workers and nearby communities.”
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
Oil Giants' Profits Soar as Trump's Iran War Estimated to Deliver $1 Trillion Hit to World Economy
"Gas prices have jumped to the highest level in four years," said Rep. Ted Lieu. "What are Trump and Republicans focused on? Spending $400 million dollars of taxpayers' money for a White House ballroom."
Apr 28, 2026
A fossil fuel industry watchdog is estimating that US President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran could deliver a $1 trillion hit to the global economy—while oil and gas giants reap the benefits.
According to a Tuesday report in The Guardian, climate advocacy group 350.org is estimating that the Iran war will impose between $600 billion and over $1 trillion in additional costs to households, businesses, and governments, depending on how long the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.
The Guardian noted that even this eye-popping economic cost "is likely to be an underestimate because it does not include the substantial knock-on effects of inflation, particularly higher fertilizer and food costs, lower economic activity, and rising employment."
350.org's analysis came on the same day that US gas prices rose to their highest level since Trump launched the Iran war in late February.
As reported by The New York Times, the average price for a gallon of gas jumped by 1.6% to $4.18 on Tuesday, the highest price for a gallon of gas since April 2022, shortly after Russia disrupted global energy markets with its invasion of Ukraine.
While consumers are paying more at the pump, fossil fuel companies are raking in massive profits. British oil giant BP on Tuesday posted a profit of $3 billion for the first quarter of 2026, which exceeded Wall Street analysts' expectations and was more than double the profit it reported in the first quarter of 2025.
Clémence Dubois, global campaigns director at 350.org, said that BP's blowout earnings report showed how Big Oil's business model depends on the suffering of working people.
"Families are being pushed to the brink by spiraling energy bills, while fossil fuel companies turn a war into a windfall," said Dubois. "This is not just unjust, it’s unacceptable. Fossil fuels companies don’t just heat the planet, they fuel and thrive on geopolitical tension, insecurity, and human suffering. The solutions exist, what’s missing is the political will to stop polluters [from writing] the rules."
In a Tuesday social media post, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) more succinctly echoed Dubois' message.
"It's day 59 of Trump's war with Iran," she wrote. "Gas prices are 40% higher since the war began."
Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) similarly pinned the blame on Trump for high gas prices, and took at shot at her Republican colleagues who have spent the last two days lobbying to build the president's proposed $400 million luxury ballroom with public funds.
"Gas is $4.18 and rising because of Trump’s war with Iran," Garcia wrote. "Republicans are ripping away healthcare and pushing millions off SNAP. And their priority? $400 million in taxpayer money for Trump’s ballroom. They don’t give a damn about helping working people."
Rep. Tim Lieu (D-Calif.) expressed a similar sentiment.
"Gas prices have jumped to the highest level in four years," he wrote. "What are Trump and Republicans focused on? Spending $400 million dollars of taxpayers' money for a White House ballroom that most Americans will never be able to access, and building a giant arch in DC for Trump."
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, marveled at the political tone deafness of Republicans pushing to fund Trump's ballroom amid a cost-of-living crisis.
"Republicans seem to be betting that Americans will stop worrying about the Iran war and high gas prices," he wrote, "when they hear the good news that they’ll also be paying for Trump’s ballroom."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sharing 'Grim' Survivor Stories, Amnesty Renews Call for War Crimes Probe of US Strike in Yemen
"I have nothing left that keeps me going," said a survivor who lost a leg. "I want them to provide any type of reparation that will help with our life in any way possible. Something that will revive my hope."
Apr 28, 2026
A week after Democratic senators launched an investigation into US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's assault on federal efforts to mitigate civilian harm, Amnesty International on Tuesday renewed its call for a war crimes probe of the American airstrike on a migrant detention center in Yemen that killed dozens of people last April.
While the United States has been bombing Yemen since 2002 as part of the so-called War on Terror, the Trump administration stepped up attacks last spring, in response to Houthi rebels' resistance to Israel's genocidal war on the Gaza Strip.
"The Trump administration's approach to its airstrikes in Yemen from March to May 2025 should have set off alarm bells in the USA and around the world, clearly signaling an urgent need to strengthen measures to protect civilians," Amnesty International USA director Nadia Daar said in a statement exactly one year after the bombing in Saada.
"Instead, the US administration has systematically weakened safeguards, shrinking offices aimed at reducing civilian harm, while simultaneously displaying a dangerous disregard for the lives of civilians endangered by armed conflicts," she continued. "Against that backdrop, attacks such as the US attack on a school in Minab in Iran, which killed [155] people, including 120 children, were a tragically foreseeable consequence of a failure to implement robust civilian-harm mitigation efforts."
Amnesty concluded last month that the US bombing of the Iranian school "packed full of children" on February 28 was "a serious breach of international humanitarian law" and those responsible "must be held accountable."
Erika Guevara Rosas—Amnesty International's senior director of research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns—stressed at the time that "the US authorities could, and should, have known it was a school building. Targeting a protected civilian object, such as a school, is strictly prohibited under international humanitarian law."
In a potential preview of what Iranian families impacted by that strike will face, Guevara Rosas noted Tuesday that one year after the attack in Yemen, "US officials have failed to hold anyone accountable or even to clarify the status or outcome of the investigations they had announced a year earlier."
"Families of those killed in the attack on the detention center in Yemen are still being denied basic information about what happened, [and] remain without justice for their loved ones," she explained. "Survivors continue to struggle, lacking the means to secure a decent living or even receive adequate medical treatment."
Amnesty interviewed over a dozen survivors identified by pseudonyms, including Araya, a 22-year-old Ethiopian man, who sustained a serious arm injury and said: "If I don't take a painkiller, I feel hopeless and wish to die. I think about how, at such a young age, I can't even support myself and still rely on help from others. The metal rod inside me is very painful and uncomfortable. It drives you insane."
Jirata, a 30-year-old Ethiopian man, has a metal rod in one of his legs, and lost the other in the attack. He told Amnesty that "I have lost hope and I have nothing left that keeps me going. I came here [to Yemen] to work like everyone else to help my family and change mine and their life for the better... Now people carry me to the toilet."
"The US government caused all this and as a result [of the airstrike], I can no longer work and support myself," he detailed. "I want them to provide any type of reparation that will help with our life in any way possible. Something that will revive my hope."
Another Ethiopian man, 32-year-old Abay, similarly said that "I went to Yemen to change my family's life, but now I made my family's life even harder than it was before," due to his leg and hand injuries.
"I feel broken whenever I see their faces," said Abay, who returned to Ethiopia. "You can see the sadness on their faces. I hoped for a better life, to work and change our lives, but everything turned upside down."
Guevara Rosas said that "the story of these migrants is grim and heartbreaking. Traveling to Yemen in search of better opportunities, they were detained by the Houthis, denied their freedom, then attacked in a US airstrike. Those who survived have been left in limbo, with no justice or reparation in sight, nor an explanation for why this happened to them, an acknowledgment of the wrong done to them, or any support offered to help them carry on with their lives."
She argued that "they must receive full, effective, and prompt reparation, including restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, and guarantees of nonrepetition, through an effective and accessible mechanism."
According to Airwars, US forces have killed 443-642 people in Yemen since 2009. The official government estimate for civilian deaths in that time is just 13. The deadline for the Pentagon's next annual report on civilian casualties is May 1.
Guevara Rosas declared that "in order to stop this deadly spiral, the USA must ensure prompt, transparent, impartial, independent, and effective investigations into attacks that have resulted in civilian casualties, including those in Yemen and Iran."
"The US Congress must also urgently step up its oversight role and demand answers, including a public accounting of these strikes and the adequate and prompt provision of reparation to the civilians that have been harmed, and ensure it is not appropriating funds that may contribute to breaches of international law," she added.
So far, both Republican-controlled chambers of Congress have declined to pass a war powers resolution reining in President Donald Trump's illegal war on Iran, invasion of Venezuela, or bombings of boats allegedly transporting drugs on the high seas. Still, Democratic Sens. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Tim Kaine (Va.), and Adam Schiff (Calif.) intend to force a Tuesday vote on a measure aimed at blocking the president's use of US forces in unauthorized hostilities against Cuba.
Keep ReadingShow Less
To End 'New Gilded Age,' House Progressives Unveil Bill to Raise Federal Minimum Wage to $25 Per Hour
"We need an economy that reflects the realities of 2026, not one stuck over a decade ago," said the newly sworn-in Rep. Analilia Mejía, who helped lead the campaign to raise wages in her home state of New Jersey.
Apr 28, 2026
A pair of progressive Democrats unveiled a bill on Tuesday that would raise the federal minimum wage to $25 per hour, considered the bare minimum a single adult needs to meet the cost of living in much of the US.
The Living Wage For All Act is the first bill to be introduced by the newly sworn-in Rep. Analilia Mejía (D-NJ), who won a special election earlier this month after helping to lead the fight for a $15 minimum wage in her home state of New Jersey.
Citing data from MIT's Living Wage Calculator, the Living Wage For All campaign backing the legislation argues that $25/hour is needed for a single adult in most parts of the country to afford basic necessities like housing, food, and healthcare.
As the cost of living has skyrocketed over the past decade and a half, the federal minimum wage has remained frozen at $7.25 and hour since 2009.
"This is unacceptable," Mejía said. "We need an economy that reflects the realities of 2026, not one stuck over a decade ago."
The bill is cosponsored by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), the daughter of Guatemalan immigrants who, she said, worked multiple minimum-wage jobs just to get by.
“I remember being in the fourth grade, and my mom talked about her job, and she was getting paid $4.75 an hour,” the 42-year-old congresswoman said during a press conference on Capitol Hill Tuesday. “Yet the federal minimum wage is barely $7.25, many years later.”
"Today, as we think about companies reporting record high earnings, working people are still struggling to survive," she said. "People are working full-time jobs and still cannot afford to live."
A USA TODAY survey from January found that around 40% of workers say their paychecks have not grown enough to meet the rising cost of living, which has been further exacerbated by spiking inflation caused by President Donald Trump's erratic tariff regime and war in Iran. Another survey conducted by Resume Now in April found that about half of workers fear their wages will never catch up to the cost of living.
While some states and cities have gradually raised their minimum wages above the federal level and have seen modest declines in poverty as a result, none have been raised to the point of being considered a living wage.
The bill introduced by Mejía and Ramirez would similarly phase in its increase to the federal minimum wage over more than a decade, with larger employers leading the transition.
Companies with more than $1 billion gross revenue or more than 500 employees would be scheduled to increase their minimum pay to $25/hour by 2031, while smaller employers would be on a longer timeline to reach $25/hour by 2038.
To ensure wages don’t lag again in the following years, the bill also requires the minimum wage to automatically grow each year to reach the equivalent of two-thirds the national median hourly wage. It also eliminates the subminimum wage, which is paid to tipped workers, youth workers, and workers with disabilities.
The bill is almost certainly dead on arrival in a Republican-controlled Congress. Even if Democrats retake both chambers come November, it would likely face an uphill battle to pass.
In 2021, the last time Democrats had a governing trifecta, eight centrist members of the Democratic caucus killed an amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to include a $15/hour minimum wage in then-President Joe Biden's post-Covid budget reconciliation package, the American Rescue Plan.
But as Democrats seek to address rising fears about America's "affordability" crisis, Saru Jayaraman, the president of One Fair Wage, said politics are starting "to catch up to reality."
"Across the country—from California to the Midwest to the East Coast—workers are organizing for $25 and $30 because that is what it takes to live," she said. "The polling shows this is not just popular, it is necessary."
“We cannot talk about affordability without talking about what people are paid,” added Stuart Appelbaum, the president of the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union.
More than 20 Democrats have signed onto the bill as cosponsors, including Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
The effort is being spearheaded by the Living Wage For All Coalition, a national collective of labor unions, civil rights groups, and other economic justice organizations that are simultaneously pushing legislation to adopt a living wage in states like New York, Illinois, and Maryland, and municipalities such as Los Angeles and Washington, DC.
April Verrett, the international president of the Service Employees International Union, which has more than 2 million members across North America, said that “the introduction of the Living Wage for All Act is a powerful testament to the worker-led movement that is forcing a new baseline for livable wages.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular