Judge Tanya Chutkan overturned the Trump administration’s termination of a $20 billion clean energy program, ordering the release of funds to eight nonprofits. The ruling found the EPA’s actions unlawful due to a lack of evidence of fraud and improper termination procedures. The Trump administration plans to appeal the decision, arguing the court lacks jurisdiction and that the funds belong to taxpayers. The program, funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, supports clean energy and efficiency projects across various states.
Read More
The Trump administration’s plan to overturn hundreds of state-level bans on toxic chemicals, including PFAS, would significantly increase public exposure to substances linked to various health problems. This is achieved by altering the EPA’s chemical risk evaluation process, effectively preempting state laws and potentially negating federal prohibitions like the upcoming asbestos ban. The revised evaluation method focuses on individual chemical uses rather than the overall risk, allowing manufacturers to claim minimal risk due to low concentrations in individual products, despite significant cumulative exposure. Opponents argue this undermines state efforts to protect public health and could severely hamper the progress made in reducing exposure to these dangerous chemicals.
Read More
A federal judge has questioned the Trump administration’s abrupt cancellation of billions of dollars in climate research grants, demanding evidence of wrongdoing to justify such drastic action. The EPA, under administrator Lee Zeldin, cited unspecified regulations in the termination letters, a claim deemed insufficient by the judge. Climate United, one of several groups suing over the cancellations, argues the EPA failed to follow proper legal procedures. The judge requested further filings from both parties, leaving the fate of the grants and the lawsuits unresolved.
Read More
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced a sweeping rollback of environmental regulations, aiming to overturn more than a dozen rules concerning emissions, pollution, and the scientific basis for climate action. This plan, described as ending the “Green New Scam,” seeks to reduce regulatory costs and boost business growth by reassessing rules impacting oil, gas, and coal industries. Key amongst the targeted regulations is the 2009 endangerment finding that establishes greenhouse gases as a threat, a decision environmental advocates vow to challenge legally. The move has sparked outrage from environmental groups and some EPA staff, who deem it unprecedented in scale and potentially damaging to public health.
Read More
The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision weakens the Clean Water Act by restricting the EPA’s ability to set generic pollution limits for permit holders. The ruling, authored by Justice Alito, sided with San Francisco’s challenge to EPA permits that held permittees responsible for overall water quality. The majority opinion argued the EPA possesses sufficient tools to obtain necessary information without resorting to “end-result” requirements. Dissenting justices argued this decision contradicts the Clean Water Act’s mandate for stringent limitations to meet water quality standards. The ruling represents a significant shift in environmental regulation.
Read More
A grand jury’s recommendation to immediately abolish an Alabama police department is a stark indictment of the system, highlighting a situation where serious misconduct went unchecked for an extended period. The sheer audacity of a dispatcher casually removing evidence – drugs, specifically – from the evidence room, walking down the hall with it, and using it in his office without raising a single eyebrow speaks volumes about a deeply ingrained culture of disregard for rules and accountability.
This blatant disregard for procedure wasn’t just an isolated incident; it apparently took the dispatcher overdosing on the job, surrounded by illicit substances, before any action was taken.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood