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
climate justice alliance
As Heatwave Cooks US, 150+ Groups Urge Leaders to Ban Deadly Utility Shutoffs
"Millions of lives are at risk this week as extreme heat scorches our country," said one campaigner. "Trump and his billionaire buddies will have blood on their hands."
Jun 24, 2025
With extreme temperatures fueled by human-caused global heating gripping much of the United States, a coalition of more than 150 advocacy groups on Tuesday urged federal, state, and local elected leaders to ban potentially deadly utility disconnections, increase worker protections, and tax polluters to finance renewable energy.
The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) led two letters—one to Democratic congressional leaders and another to governors and mayors—arguing that U.S. President Donald Trump "has put millions of lives at risk by dismantling federal agencies and lifesaving programs that help working families keep their homes cool and survive deadly heatwaves like the one this week."
"Since taking office Trump has stripped Americans of access to lifesaving measures, including the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program and Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program, which help more than 8 million working families pay their utility bills," CBD noted.
"Every day of extreme heat in the United States claims about 154 lives."
The Trump administration has also laid off staff at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, "crippling the agency's ability to help communities before and after disaster strikes. And the country's first-ever proposed federal heat standard, which would prevent heat-related illness and injury in workplaces, is stalled after staff cuts at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration."
CBD said that extreme heat is the deadliest weather-related phenomenon, "claiming more lives each year than hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods combined."
"Every day of extreme heat in the United States claims about 154 lives," the group added. "In the past seven years there has been a nearly 17% increase each year in heat-related deaths. Among those most harmed by extreme heat are outdoor workers and children."
The diverse groups signing the letter—which include Climate Justice Alliance, Food & Water Watch, Free Press Action, Friends of the Earth U.S., Sunrise Movement, and Utility Workers Union of America—centered the voices of people who are most vulnerable to exposure to extreme heat, including outdoor workers like José, a Florida roofer.
"I've felt dizzy, weak, unable to breathe, with cramps, and my heart beats very fast, desperate," the 24-year-old said. "The heat suffocates me and many times I've been close to going to the hospital. While working on the roofs, it feels like the heat is over 110°F or 115°F and we only take one or two short breaks. I need this work to survive, but as the summers get hotter, I worry that one day I will collapse."
CBD senior attorney and energy justice program director Jean Su said in a statement Tuesday that "millions of lives are at risk this week as extreme heat scorches our country. Trump and his billionaire buddies will have blood on their hands."
"Corporations are taking advantage of working people and stripping them of access to lifesaving utilities, clean water, and a safe and resilient future," Su added. "Congress and especially state leaders must deliver emergency relief and tax greedy polluters who are endangering our lives and the climate. Everyone deserves heat-resilient homes, schools, and workplaces."
Will Humble, executive director of letter signatory Arizona Public Health Association, said: "We're not asking for the moon here. We're just looking for state and federal officials to help keep people alive during the summertime."
"Heat kills as many people in Arizona as influenza and pneumonia, and every one of those heat deaths is preventable," Humble added. "The least our elected officials can do is make sure people have places of refuge from these deadly fossil fuel-driven heatwaves. We also need stronger limits on summertime electricity shutoffs, so people aren't dying because the utility company has turned off their power."
"We're just looking for state and federal officials to help keep people alive during the summertime."
Last week, Oregon became the latest of more than two dozen states to ban power disconnections during high summer heat. However, as CBD and others have noted, utilities still find ways to shut off utilities during hot periods.
Six major investor-owned utilities—Georgia Power, DTE Energy, Duke Energy, Ameren Corporation, Pacific Gas & Electric, and Arizona Public Service—"shut off power to households at least 400,000 times during the summertime," according to a CBD report published in January. Those six utilities raked in $10 billion in profits while collectively hiking their customers' rates by at least $3.5 billion since 2023.
"Mayors and governors must act now with bold, local solutions, including expanded public transit and community-centered strategies like neighborhood cooling hubs," Climate Justice Alliance executive director KD Chavez said in a statement. "We also urge stronger labor protections, including municipal and state-level heat standards, to protect postal workers, farmworkers, and all outdoor workers who are increasingly exposed to deadly heat without adequate safeguards."
"Extreme heat has been endangering communities across the country," Chavez added. "We're feeling it closely this week and know it will only get worse. Our growing dependence on aging buildings, air conditioning and a fragile, fossil fuel-dependent power grid is putting lives at risk, especially in frontline, low-income neighborhoods and U.S. territories without government representation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Sigh of Relief' as Supreme Court Gives EPA Another Temporary Win
"Fossil fuel interests lost, and clean air won," one group declared.
Oct 16, 2024
The climate movement on Wednesday welcomed a victory at the U.S. Supreme Court, the third temporary win for the Biden administration's environmental policies this month.
Although the right-wing justices have a record of rulings that have alarmed environmental and public health groups, the high court declined to block an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule intended to limit power plants' planet-heating pollution as a legal challenge to the April policy plays out.
"Given its rulings in recent years undercutting environmental protections, the refusal of the majority on the Supreme Court to block this vital rule is a victory for common sense. This warrants a sigh of relief from the millions of Americans experiencing the impact of the climate crisis," said Meredith Hankins, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
"Today's ruling rejects the latest abuse of the Supreme Court's shadow docket by industry and some state attorneys general. The high court made the right call," she continued. "The Supreme Court evidently saw through their phony arguments."
"Power producers don't need immediate relief from modest standards that kick in eight years from now. And states have plenty of time to begin their planning process," Hankins stressed. "Now the case goes back to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is moving quickly to decide the merits of this case. We will be helping to defend the standards there. The climate crisis demands that we do."
Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, similarly said that "the climate crisis is actually an emergency affecting tens of millions of people across the globe every day. Today the court rejected the big polluters' attempt to seek an emergency stay based on their trumped-up allegations. We are in the middle of what will be the hottest year on record, with devastating and deadly extreme storms occurring regularly."
"The EPA's carbon pollution standards for power plants set reasonable targets for utilities and states to cut their carbon pollution, allowing years for them to meet those goals. The Supreme Court's decision rejected the big polluter arguments against slashing carbon pollution and paved the way for less climate pollution in the future," Alt added. "Of course, the fight isn't over. The D.C. Circuit must still rule on the merits. We support the EPA's authority to set commonsense pollution protections to slash climate pollution and protect our kids and communities from climate change and other dangerous air pollution."
The decision came after the justices in early October rejected industry-backed petitions to issue injunctions on new Biden administration rules for methane and mercury. However, conservative Justice Samuel Alito did not participate in Wednesday's decision due to financial conflicts and Justice Clarence Thomas said he would have granted the emergency request from GOP-led states and groups to block the rule.
Additionally, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, said the states and groups "have shown a strong likelihood of success on the merits as to at least some of their challenges," but there is no need for emergency action at this time "because the applicants need not start compliance work until June 2025," so "they are unlikely to suffer irreparable harm" before a final decision.
As The New York Times reported Wednesday:
The dispute was the latest bid by Republican-led states to undercut the Biden administration's ambitious climate agenda. The challenge carries similarities to a case the Supreme Court considered in the term that ended in July. Three states, Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia, joined with industry groups to challenge an EPA proposal aimed at limiting the flow of air pollution across state lines, asking the Supreme Court to intervene even as the challenge continued to be litigated in lower courts.
In June, the justices paused the proposal, known as the "good neighbor" plan, which requires factories and power plants in the West and Midwest to cut ozone pollution that makes its way into Eastern states.
Although green groups are pushing to preserve the April policy, some have argued that the Biden administration should have gone further with its actions to combat the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency.
Climate Justice Alliance interim executive director KD Chavez said Wednesday that while the group applauds the path the latest Supreme Court decision "charts for what can be construed as a coal phaseout, this rule is still riddled with loopholes that give a lifeline to the fossil fuel industry to continue operations and experiment on frontline communities by exposing them to the dangers and health effects of unproven technologies such as carbon capture and storage."
"The rule does not go far enough to push the needle towards a fossil fuel phaseout and a just transition for the energy sector, the communities where energy projects are sited, and the workers who could tap into renewable energy jobs," Chavez emphasized. "Frontline communities deserve more, and given this rule won't be applied until next year, we will continue to work to ensure stronger power plant regulations that meet the growing threat of climate catastrophe we all currently face."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Pledge to Loss and Damage Fund Called 'Insulting... Paltry... Shameful'
"The United States refuses to acknowledge historic responsibility for the decades of damage that has been done to communities bearing the brunt of climate change and the fossil fuel industry," said one advocate.
Dec 01, 2023
Climate justice advocates, outraged over the inadequate funding that was pledged to the "loss and damage" fund as the United Nations Climate Change Conference opened this week, reserved particular disdain on Friday for the United States delegation and its refusal to contribute a meaningful amount to the fund.
The Climate Justice Alliance said the U.S. contribution of just $17.5 million for the loss and damage fund—a tiny fraction of the nearly $900 billion President Joe Biden requested for his military budget earlier this year and the annual fossil fuel subsidies distributed by the U.S. government—sent a clear message to the Global South: that "the U.S. is completely uninterested in prioritizing or being accountable to the climate impacts frontline communities are facing."
"The amount pledged by the United States is insulting," said Bineshi Albert, co-executive director of the organization. "It is a paltry, shameful amount of money... By comparison, island nations have requested at least $100 billion over the first four years."
The sum also made clear that the Biden administration is following through on Special Presidential Climate Envoy John Kerry's remarks at a hearing in July, in which he said that "under no circumstances" would the U.S. provide funding to countries in the Global South that are increasingly facing prolonged droughts, rising sea levels, and severe storms, among other climate impacts as a result of planetary heating.
"The United States refuses to acknowledge historic responsibility for the decades of damage that has been done to communities bearing the brunt of climate change and the fossil fuel industry," said Albert.
The U.S. is by far the largest historic emitter of planet-heating emissions, while many countries that are already facing the worst impacts of the climate emergency, such as small Pacific island nations, shoulder the least blame for the crisis.
Albert called the $17.5 million pledged by the U.S. "a drop in the bucket compared to the annual $20.5 billion in fossil fuel subsidies handed out by the US government, which recently surged to $7 trillion in 2022."
To help governments in the Global South rebuild damaged communities, prevent further destruction, and relocate displaced people, developing countries have said they will ultimately need about $400 billion annually.
$17.5 million "is not only ineffective to address these harms and injustices but it is minuscule compared to the hundreds of billions in loan, grants, and tax breaks available from the Inflation Reduction Act to corporations to further build out or prolong the life of fossil fuel infrastructure and energy intensive fuels like hydrogen," said Albert.
She added that it is not lost on advocates that the U.S. government pushed for contributions to the loss and damage fund to be voluntary: "another clear sign that the United States does not take responsibility for its harmful past actions nor does it consider the needs of the most impacted and marginalized communities seriously."
With contributions from other wealthy governments ranging from just $10 million (Japan) to $245 million (the European Union), Amnesty International climate adviser Ann Harrison said wealthy countries committed "barely enough to get the fund running, and little more."
"Billions of dollars are needed to make a substantive difference to communities in desperate need of help to rebuild homes after storms, or to support farmers when their crops are destroyed, or those permanently displaced by the climate crisis," said Harrison. "Considering the vast and excess profits accrued by fossil fuel companies last year while they continue to trash the climate, and that some the donor states today were responsible for a large proportion of historical greenhouse gas emissions, this is a disappointingly small initial sum."
High-income countries that continue to produce fossil fuels despite clear warnings from energy and climate experts, said Harrison, must "make new and additional commitments to the fund on a scale which reflects the global nature of climate crisis, and the threat it presents to billions of people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular