

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.

Today Sierra Club and Public Citizen sued the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for its approval of ONEOK’s Saguaro Connector Pipeline that would export massive amounts of methane gas from West Texas to Mexico for further transport, liquefaction, and export primarily to Asia. The organizations will argue in the D.C. Circuit Court that FERC improperly limited its review to only 1,000 feet of the pipeline – just a fifth of a mile – when the law requires a more thorough analysis – including climate and community impacts – of the entire 157 miles of the pipeline in the U.S.
The lawsuit comes after Sierra Club and Public Citizen requested that FERC reconsider the Saguaro approval due to these flaws, but FERC failed to act on the request, resulting in a de facto rejection. The pipeline would threaten vulnerable communities, waterways, and cultural sites along its route; would pose a significant risk of rupture due to seismic activity and local hydrological features; and would lock us into decades of increased gas development and export, increased climate-warming emissions, and higher domestic gas prices.
ONEOK, headquartered in Tulsa, OK, would build and own the Texas portion of the pipeline, seizing landowners’ property and placing them at risk of leaks, fires, groundwater contamination, and explosions. Not a single federal or state agency has evaluated the risks of the pipeline passing through communities, such as Van Horn. Mexican Pacific Limited, a Houston-based company, would build and own the 500-mile connecting pipeline infrastructure in Mexico and the liquified natural gas (LNG) export terminal in Puerto Libertad, Sonora. LNG companies have been looking for a faster, cheaper way to ship their methane gas to Asia by avoiding the Panama Canal, but states along the U.S. West Coast – and their more affluent white residents – have successfully fought such polluting export facilities.
STATEMENTS FROM PETITIONERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS
“Ever since FERC approved the Saguaro pipeline after doing one of the most flawed analyses we’ve seen the agency conduct, we knew it was necessary to push back,” said Doug Hayes, attorney for the Sierra Club’s Environmental Law Program. “FERC rubber-stamps every oil and gas project it considers, so we must try to seek justice for the impacted communities along the pipeline’s entire path, and ensure that climate change is considered as Texans face another summer of record-breaking heat, potential grid blackouts, and more extreme storms.”
“The Saguaro pipeline will harm communities and property owners along its entire 157-mile path through Texas, but it will not benefit American consumers because the gas it will transport is destined for Asia,” said Tyson Slocum, Public Citizen’s Energy Program Director. “FERC understood this but arbitrarily limited its environmental analysis to only .12% of the pipeline’s entire length. With this lawsuit, we seek to ensure that FERC cannot turn a blind eye to all of the environmental harms caused by the Saguaro project.”
“We’re already grappling with failing water infrastructure and potential risks that threaten our water supply further, such as increased seismic activity from fracking and contamination by pipeline companies as evidenced by past incidents in towns like Blanco, Texas,” said Yolanda Carmona, a resident of Van Horn. “The presence of such a pipeline could deter potential businesses from investing in our town, halting the much-needed economic growth and development we strive for.”
“ONEOK wants to build their dangerous infrastructure through a low-income, rural area of Texas, just so it can establish a cheaper way to ship methane gas to Asia without having to go through the Panama Canal,” said Bill Addington, a local community member. “This is the opposite of environmental justice, and it speaks volumes that FERC refused to consider the full impacts of the project. These lands are sacred, and our communities and fragile desert ecosystems should not be saddled with all the impacts of a gas export project that will only benefit some out-of-state corporation.”The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500"We don’t need more corporate Democrats in the Senate. We need Peggy Flanagan, who’ll fight for working people."
Calling for more Democratic lawmakers who have “the guts to stand up for working people," Sen. Bernie Sanders weighed in on another US Senate primary on Monday, hours after a handful of Democrats agreed to reopen the federal government without Republican concessions on healthcare.
Sanders (I-Vt.), who earlier this year announced his support for Democratic Senate candidates Graham Platner in Maine and Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, has now formally endorsed Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan's candidacy for the US Senate.
In his endorsement, Sanders said that the Senate needs lawmakers who will stand up "against the billionaires and the corporate interests," and argued that Flanagan understands the needs of working-class people personally due in part to her own blue-collar background.
"Peggy knows what it is to struggle," he said. "She was raised by a hard-working single mother who needed [the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] to help put food on the table and Medicaid for healthcare. And she’s dedicated her career to fighting for working families."
Sanders also hailed Flanagan's accomplishments as both lieutenant governor and Minnesota state legislator, and he said she would work to fight for progressive priorities on a national level.
"Peggy fought to raise the minimum wage and she got it done," he said. "She fought for paid family leave and she got it done. We need fighters who are from the working class and for the working class here in the Senate. Peggy will fight for Medicare for All, to raise the minimum wage to a living wage, and to address the crises we face in childcare, education, and housing."
Sanders concluded his endorsement by arguing that "we don’t need more corporate Democrats in the Senate. We need Peggy Flanagan, who’ll fight for working people."
Progressive political consultant Rebecca Katz hailed Sanders' endorsements of Flanagan, Platner, and El-Sayed, whom she described on X as "three good candidates who understand the stakes and know how to fight back."
Flanagan is running to replace retiring Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.), who has been serving in the Senate ever since former Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) resigned in 2018. Flanagan will be facing off against Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn), a centrist Democrat who has several endorsements from the Democratic establishment, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
According to Minnesota Reformer, Flanagan has also scored endorsements from Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who both stumped for her at the Minnesota State Fair this past summer.
While experts hope the justices will reverse an "objectively insane" appellate decision, a ruling in favor of the Republican National Committee could reduce the rights of Americans who vote by mail.
As President Donald Trump on Monday pardoned leaders who tried to overturn his 2020 loss, the US Supreme Court took up the national Republican Party's argument that counting mailed ballots shortly after Election Day violates federal law.
Voting by mail has long been a target of the GOP president, who has falsely claimed that the practice fuels voter fraud. This case concerns a Mississippi law that allows mailed ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted as long as they arrive within five business days, which three Trump appointees on the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit struck down last year.
That lawsuit was brought by the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Mississippi Libertarian Party. Another Republican, Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch‚ is asking the nation's top court to reject the 5th Circuit's decision, arguing that it "defies statutory text, conflicts with this court's precedent, and—if left to stand—will have destabilizing nationwide ramifications."
The Supreme Court—which has a conservative supermajority that includes three Trump appointees—agreed to hear Watson v. RNC and decide "whether the federal Election Day statutes preempt a state law that allows ballots that are cast by federal Election Day to be received by election officials after that day."
The Supreme Court will review an objectively insane 5th Circuit decision that prohibited states from counting ballots that were mailed before Election Day but arrive shortly after. (More than half the states have such laws.) www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
[image or embed]
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) November 10, 2025 at 9:44 AM
The Associated Press pointed out Monday that "Mississippi is among 18 states and the District of Columbia that accept mailed ballots received after Election Day as long as the ballots are postmarked on or before that date," and "an additional 14 states allow the counting of late-arriving ballots from some eligible voters, including overseas US service members and their families."
Legal experts have condemned the appellate decision as "awful" and "bonkers." The justices are expected to hear arguments early next year and issue a ruling by the end of June, months before the crucial midterm elections.
National Vote At Home Institute executive director Barbara Smith Warner welcomed their decision to take the case and potentially reverse the 5th Circuit's "upside-down" opinion, telling Democracy Docket: "The idea that a ballot that is postmarked on or by Election Day and received afterwards... is like voting after Election Day? That is ridiculous."
Unfortunately I am here to tell you: it's time to worry about what the Supreme Court is going to do to mail ballots postmarked by election day that arrive after election day, in states across the country. This could be enormous.www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/...
[image or embed]
— jen rice (@jenrice.bsky.social) November 10, 2025 at 11:19 AM
Alexia Kemerling, director of accessible democracy at the American Association of People with Disabilities, was also hopeful.
"We really hope that the Supreme Court takes the responsibility seriously to make sure that every voter can use their power," she said. "'The millions of voters with disabilities who cannot vote in person or voters who are overseas who cannot vote in person—this is their only way to participate in the system. They should not be disenfranchised for the ways that our system moves slowly."
The New York Times noted that Watson v. RNC "is a potential blockbuster and adds to the court's other elections and voting cases for the term, which include a case about who can sue to challenge Illinois' mail-in ballot rules and a challenge to the Louisiana congressional district map that could gut a remaining pillar of the Voting Rights Act."
"Until we elect Democrats that understand that fighting is what we need to do," US Senate primary candidate Graham Platner said, "we're going to find ourselves in this position over and over and over again."
One public opinion researcher said Sunday that there may be one positive aspect of the capitulation of eight Senate Democratic Caucus members—none of whom will face voters in a reelection campaign next year—who joined Republicans in voting to end the government shutdown without securing concessions on the central issue of healthcare.
"The only silver lining about this completely pointless, cowardly, and tone-deaf cave is that it’ll accelerate the complete overhaul of the leadership—and god willing, direction—of the Democratic Party," said Adam Carlson of Zenith Research.
To that end, progressive organizers and lawmakers on Monday morning said that with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) having reportedly coordinated the "yes" vote from the eight senators, voters must remove the lawmakers from office at their earliest opportunity.
"We want to celebrate a Democratic Party that fights back," said the grassroots group Indivisible. "But after this latest surrender, the next step is primaries and new leadership. We get the party we demand, and we intend to demand one that fights."
[image or embed]
— Indivisible ❌👑 (@indivisible.org) November 10, 2025 at 8:11 AM
Ezra Levin, co-founder of the organization, emphasized that anger should be directed not just at the eight Democrats who voted with Republicans on a cloture vote that paved the way to reopening the government without concessions from the GOP.
The eight senators were Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Dick Durbin of Illinois, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Angus King of Maine, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, but Levin said many more centrist lawmakers were likely "in on the play."
On MSNBC Monday, Shaheen acknowledged that Schumer was "kept informed" of the eight senators' negotiations with the GOP regarding reopening the government.
"It's the same reason why they scheduled the surrender for after the election this week," Levin said. "They didn't want people pissed at Democrats right before an election."
This isn’t just about the eight Senate Democrats who surrendered. 👇
[image or embed]
— Indivisible ❌👑 (@indivisible.org) November 10, 2025 at 8:35 AM
The elections last week, along with recent polls, revealed that the Republican Party and the White House are the target of ire from US voters, with President Donald Trump himself saying the Democratic victories showed the GOP would have to take action to end the shutdown.
New Republic writer Greg Sargent said that Schumer had given up crucial leverage by caving to the GOP's demand that the shutdown end and pushing senators to support a deal that contains no restoration of Medicaid funding gutted by the Republicans earlier this year, end to Trump's recissions that cut billions of dollars in public funding, or extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies.
"You've changed the story from 'GOP hurting millions of Americans to please unpopular, failing, delusional despot who's destroying his party' to 'Dems are too weak and divided in the face of Trump's strength to take a stand and protect Americans,'" said Sargent, addressing Schumer on social media.
Attorney Max Kennerly suggested that the Sunday night vote revealed more than just the party's views on the current shutdown, and said Democrats who voted "no" should receive "zero credit until they demand a change in leadership."
"The coordinated nature of this—none [of the lawmakers who voted yes] are facing voters in 2026—means that either Schumer approved it or failed in his job as Senate [minority] leader to stop it," said Kennerly.
Schumer, who is up for reelection in 2028, has topped the list of Democratic lawmakers who should face a primary challenge in recent months, following his refusal to endorse New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani's campaign and his earlier capitulation to Republicans in March, when he supported a continuing resolution to keep the government funded even though to expanded Trump's control over congressional spending.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who is reportedly considering either a 2028 presidential run or a primary challenge to Schumer, suggested the Democratic leader had abandoned the fight to ensure already-high healthcare costs don't rise for people who buy insurance through the ACA marketplace.
"People want us to hold the line for a reason," she said. "This is not a matter of appealing to a base. It’s about people’s lives. Working people want leaders whose word means something."
“Chuck Schumer should step down as Senate minority leader immediately," said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution. "If he secretly backed this surrender and voted ‘no’ to save face, he’s a liar. If he couldn’t keep his caucus in line, he’s inept. Either way, he’s proven incapable of leading the fight to prevent healthcare premiums from skyrocketing for millions of Americans. The country can’t afford his failed leadership any longer.”
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said the cave provided the latest evidence that "Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced," and that "it's time for those in the back to make it to the front and for the old guard to make way."
“You’ve had Schumer cheerleading the Iraq War, cheerleading a blank check to [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, betraying us on the first shutdown," Khanna told "Breaking Points" host Krystal Ball Monday. "This is the culmination of someone who just doesn't get it, who doesn't get how much people are hurting, doesn't get where the base of this party is."
Congressman @RoKhanna goes off on Chuck Schumer. “You’ve had Schumer cheerleading the Iraq War, cheerleading a blank check to Netanyahu, betraying us on the first shutdown…and now he’s not even willing to fight!” pic.twitter.com/TQxu3gcXBr
— Krystal Ball (@krystalball) November 10, 2025
In Maine, US Senate candidate Graham Platner—who is facing Gov. Janet Mills in the Democratic primary to unseat Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) after Schumer pushed Mills to join the race—said millions of families had woken up to a "bleak morning" on Monday after the Democratic leader orchestrated the capitulation.
"Now, up the 20 million Americans are going to watch their healthcare premiums double, triple, and in some cases quadruple," said Platner. "Now we are on a path to watch 15 million Americans possibly lose access to healthcare insurance in the first place. This happened because Chuck Schumer failed in his job yet again, because they do not understand that when we fight, we win."
"We need to elect leaders that want to fight," he added, urging voters to call their senators and "tell them that Chuck Schumer can no longer be leader."
Chuck Schumer should step down. pic.twitter.com/6OhX2cCo9u
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) November 10, 2025
"Until we elect Democrats that understand that fighting is what we need to do," Platner said, "we're going to find ourselves in this position over and over and over again."