Tag: environment

Federal Judge Blocks Border Wall Construction in Big Bend Region in Texas

A federal judge on Friday blocked border wall construction in the Big Bend region in Texas.

US District Judge Kathleen Cardone, a George W. Bush appointee, issued a preliminary injunction blocking border wall construction in Texas’s Big Bend region and Big Bend National Park.

The scope of Judge Cardone’s order includes patrol roads, border barriers or related infrastructure.

Environmental advocacy group Center for Biological Diversity filed the lawsuit in April and argued that the border wall construction lacked approval from Congress.

Judge Cardone sided with the plaintiffs on Friday and stopped the bulldozing and road-clearing by contractors while the lawsuit makes its way through the courts.

The Texas Tribune reported:

A judge on Friday blocked further border barrier construction in the Big Bend region, approving an environmental group’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

At the end of Friday’s hearing, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone asked the courtroom to remain calm while she read her order aloud from the bench.

She ruled that the plaintiffs’ constitutional claims to halt the construction were likely to succeed and her preliminary injunction against “ground-distrurbing activities” would remain in effect while the suit continued to play out in court.

The legal team at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental advocacy group, filed the lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security and its secretary in April on behalf of the Friends of the Ruidosa Church, a nonprofit dedicated to preserving a historic church in Presidio County, and Danny William Miller, a Rio Grande river guide and landowner who stands to lose his property in Redford to the wall.

The lawsuit argues that the five contracted border wall projects in the region are unconstitutional for a range of reasons, including violating the constitutional separation of powers and depriving citizens of their land.

Keep reading

Google Accused of Illegally Killing a Massive Forest for Its New Data Center Project

As the AI race reaches white-hot temperatures, big tech companies are caught up in a heated race to build as many pollution-belching and power-sucking data centers as they can.

And while the Trump administration is largely clearing their way by easing environmental rules for the polluting facilities, other governments are less inclined to give companies a pass.

As Finnish newspaper Kaleva reported last month, Google is under fire for clearing over 300 hectares — the equivalent of almost 500 football fields — for two new data centers in the northern part of the European nation without concluding the necessary environmental assessments.

Despite the assessments still being in progress, the tech giant’s contractors started clearing trees in the area months ago, raising the alarm bells at the Finnish Nature Conservation Association.

“Either this is gross incompetence from Google’s Finnish project company, Tuike Finland Oy, or gross disregard for Finnish legislation, or at worst both,” said the association’s chair, Hanna Halmeenpää, in a statement, as translated by Wood Central.

Satellite images show that four separate sites were bulldozed to make way for two new data centers.

Google maintains that its felling of the trees met the requirements of the country’s Forestry Act and that it had completed extensive environmental evaluations.

Nonetheless, the Finnish Nature Conservation Association has since asked Finnish regulators to suspend activities until the conclusion of the ongoing environmental assessments.

Halmeenpää said she was worried that local bird species may have been impacted by the area being razed. The forest also serves as a critical ecological connection, allowing animals to spread from one habitat to another.

The incident highlights the explosive growth in new AI data center projects across the globe, a major infrastructure undertaking that could have a significant impact on the local environment.

Meanwhile, Google is hoping to appease the Finnish government by having picked it for its largest single investment in the continent, to the tune of $15 billion.

Keep reading

Where are the Environmentalists? Illegals Destroying Connecticut’s Natural Resources

In Westport, Connecticut, residents are facing the devastating environmental impact of illegals refusing to follow local laws to protect marine life.

Although there are laws meant to limit the harvesting of shellfish in the state, to protect the population of clams, steamers, oysters, and mussels, illegals are ignoring the laws and creating what could become devastating for the shellfish population in the area.

The Connecticut Sentinel notes that Connecticut General Statutes § 26-228 “prohibits taking any shells or shellfish from the shores or waters of the state between sunset and sunrise. The penalty is a fine of $100–$500 and/or up to 30 days in jail. Westport’s recreational shellfishing regulations explicitly adopt this rule. Harvesting is allowed only from sunrise to sunset.”

A resource guide from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), notes, “Shellfish are important to Connecticut’s coastal communities and economies, the waters of Long Island Sound and the many species of marine wildlife that rely upon them.”

“The harvest and cultivation of shellfish along our shores provides local food, jobs, contributes to the maritime economy, and shellfisheries are an important part of the state’s history and culture.”

“Connecticut’s aquaculture industry is an important agriculture sector. Aquaculture is the 7th highest valued agriculture product in the state according to the USDA Census of Agriculture. Marine aquaculture is the largest sector.”

Keep reading

The End EPA Abuse Act targets regulatory overreach and the climate hysteria baked into onerous regulations

The conflict between the EPA and congressional conservatives is not a recent development, but rather the culmination of decades of increasingly aggressive interpretations of the Clean Air Act. Originally enacted in 1970 to address visible air pollution, the statute has been used by successive administrations, particularly under Presidents Obama and Biden, to pursue broader climate policy objectives that many legal scholars argue were never intended by Congress.

The Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, which sought to shift the nation’s electricity generation away from coal, was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2022 under the major questions doctrine, which holds that agencies cannot make decisions of vast economic and political significance without clear congressional authorization. The Biden regime continued this approach by pushing electric vehicle mandates and greenhouse gas standards that functioned as indirect bans on traditional combustion engines, according to the bill’s supporters.

Senator Lee did not mince words when describing the EPA’s actions, stating, “They’ve exploited any power they can grab to push Biden and Obama’s climate psychosis at the expense of our energy security.” The senator’s language reflects a growing frustration among conservatives with what they perceive as a regulatory assault on American industry.

Senator Lummis echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the importance of restoring power to elected officials, noting, “The End EPA Abuse Act puts Congress back in the driver’s seat where we belong.” Representative Clyde, who introduced the House companion bill, specifically called out the Biden administration’s approach, saying the EPA “increasingly treated the Clean Air Act as a blank check to push de facto electric vehicle mandates, jeopardize reliable energy sources, and impose costly regulations on American consumers and businesses.”

One of the most contentious aspects of the bill is its prohibition on waivers granted to California, which has historically received special permission under the Clean Air Act to set stricter emissions standards than the federal government. Due to California’s enormous market size, its regulations effectively dictate vehicle production decisions for the entire nation, as automakers cannot afford to produce separate vehicle lines for different states. The bill would eliminate this waiver authority, which supporters argue would return market forces to the automobile industry and bring down costs for all Americans. Democrats contend that California’s leadership has driven innovation in vehicle emissions technology for decades, and removing the waiver could weaken environmental protections in states that choose to adopt stricter standards.

Keep reading

Illegals Raping Natural Resources In Westport, Cops Don’t Care, Town Doesn’t Care, State Doesn’t Care

There are a lot of people in Westport, CT who profess to care for the environment, or is that just a control mechanism to gain political power?

Because, no one cares in Westport when their environment is being destroyed as long as its being done by illegal aliens. By the hundreds. Every Night. Till there is nothing left.

Night harvesting is banned statewide

Connecticut General Statutes § 26-228 prohibits taking any shells or shellfish from the shores or waters of the state between sunset and sunrise. The penalty is a fine of $100–$500 and/or up to 30 days in jail. Westport’s recreational shellfishing regulations explicitly adopt this rule. Harvesting is allowed only from sunrise to sunset.

Limits and permit requirements

  • A Westport recreational shellfish permit is required (annual or one-day). Children under 17 do not need their own permit but must be with a permitted adult. The permit must be displayed while harvesting.
  • Daily limit: ½ bushel of shellfish per person in any 24-hour period. “Unlimited” is not allowed.
  • Size limits apply (examples): hard clams (quahogs) must be at least 1.5 inches or 1 inch thick; oysters at least 3 inches; soft-shell clams 1.5 inches; razor clams 4 inches; mussels 2 inches. Undersized shellfish must be returned immediately.
  • Harvest is for personal/family consumption only, not sale.

But, illegal night harvesting is happening at a massive scale in Westport, and across the state.

“Unbelievable, isn’t it? Take a ride by old Mill and look at the Spanish guys with Minor’s hats on, responded one resident we asked who lives in the Compo Beach area when asked if what was going on nightly is legal.

“There’s no blue crabs left. No steamers. No Clams. No mussels.

“The answer to your question absolutely not especially now it’s been closed down with all the rain.”

Another resident of Old Mill told us, “There’s nothing left, they stripped the place clean.”

Keep reading

“A War On Nature Is A War On All Of Us”: Trump Admin Slashing Environmental Protections At Record Pace

While most headlines regarding the assaults of the Trump administration on everyday life center around attacks on constitutional protections, civil liberties, and human rights, behind these prominent headlines lies a quieter but just as pervasive onslaught.

From his very first day back in office in January of 2025, President Donald Trump has made rescinding environmental protections a key part of his administration. From the very outset, this corporate kleptocracy has served in the interests of oligarchs, whether they be the Silicon Valley technocrats, or Trump’s deep ties with Big Oil unleashing the fossil fuel industry at their behest, the maximized profits of modern day robber barons has taken precedent over people and the planet.

Promoting Pesticides

First reported by TFTP colleague Derrick Broze, under Trump’s second term biotech and pesticide corporations are experiencing a major boon as the Trump administration promoted the excessive production of the carcinogenic herbicide glyphosate. As Broze reports:

On February 18, 2026, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) titled “Promoting the National Defense by Ensuring an Adequate Supply of Elemental Phosphorus and Glyphosate-Based Herbicides.” The order invokes the Defense Production Act (DPA) and states that the production of glyphosate-based herbicides is essential to US national security.

Bayer, the parent company of major glyphosate producer Monsanto, has significant ties to the Trump White House, having lobbied extensively to protect its pesticide empire and leverage its influence in Washington DC to wreak havoc with its hazardous chemicals.

As reported by US Right to Know,

Bayer’s big wins with the Trump administration come as the company seeks sweeping legal protections from cancer lawsuits – at a time when a growing body of scientific research links glyphosate to cancer and other chronic diseases, and cancer rates are rising among young people across the U.S. Corn Belt.

Furthermore, the administration has carried out notable betrayals of the Make America Healthy Again movement by withdrawing proposed limits on the use of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) chemicals which cause significant damage to ecosystems as well as the people exposed to them.

National Forests On The Chopping Block

One of the most devastating assaults on the American wilderness comes in the form of the administration’s targeting of national forests, once considered to be protected but now in the crosshairs of opportunists seeking to extract resources at the expense of destabilizing some of the United States’ most pristine ecosystems.

Along the US-Mexico border in Texas, bulldozers and excavators arrived in early August to begin clearing sections of Big Bend National Park to make way for the construction of a portion of Trump’s border wall following the Department of Homeland Security waiving several key environmental protection laws in June, despite a statistically insignificant (0.045%) percentage of unauthorized crossings in the region. The project, which has been characterized as “inflicting an irreversible scar on the national park”, is anticipated to also utilize heavy dynamite blasting in areas such as Mariscal Mountain.

Due to recent backlash, the construction of the section of the border wall in Texas has been paused, although a similar project in Arizona which also decimates sections of Big Bend National Park as well as sacred indigenous sites is still ongoing.

Elsewhere, the administration is rolling back protections of national forests for logging operations. The Associated Press has reported on the recent roll back of a 25 year old U.S. Forest Service regulation, the roadless rule, which prohibited road construction and large scale timber harvesting in over 58 million acres of the national forest system, approximately 30% of national forest lands nationwide.

Politicians that support rescinding the rule, such as Utah Governor Spencer Cox, have attempted to capitalize on the latest wildfire fearmongering craze to justify the move, despite data consistently indicating wildfire activity has continued to decrease over the years. 

“The roadless rule protects some of the most valuable public lands that belong to all Americans,” said Drew Caputo, a senior attorney with the environmental group, Earthjustice. “It is the most important land protection measure of the last 60 years.”

From Land To Sea

The Trump administration’s attacks against environmental protections have also expanded to affecting the oceans off the coasts of America’s shores. 

A recent order signed by Trump has opened nearly 500,000 square miles of previously protected federal waters to commercial fishing, removing conservation measures across three marine national monuments in the Pacific.

According to Oceanographic, “the move revokes protections in the Mau and Ho’omalu Zones of Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, the Islands Unit of the Mariana Trench Marine National Monument, and the Rose Atoll Marine National Monument – areas established to safeguard some of the most ecologically sensitive and culturally significant ocean habitats under US jurisdiction.”

The recent proclamation is the third such action in Trump’s second term. In February, President Trump issued an order which opened the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts monument, the only US Marine National Monument in the Atlantic, to commercial fishing operations.

In April of 2025, a similar executive order removed protections for the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument, which covers 490,000 square miles of ocean southwest of Hawaii.

“The Trump administration is dismantling our marine national monuments without public debate,” … “These marine monuments are the ocean’s equivalent of our national parks – places that benefit marine life and cultural heritage and are too important to risk for short-term gain. When we treat protected areas as just another place for industrial activity, we risk undermining those benefits for future generations.” said Dr Miriam Goldstein, Executive Director of the National Ocean Protection Coalition.

Ocean conservationists have characterized the move as selling out America’s natural resources for industry profit.

Keep reading

The Militarized Insanity of This American Moment

There’s so much militarized crazy in America today that it’s entirely overwhelming. Here’s a “top ten” list:

1. The illegal and unconstitutional war against Iran.

Remember when Trump told us he wouldn’t start wars? Remember when attacks on Iran began, the Trump administration told us they’d be over in a matter of days, perhaps a few weeks, ending in Iran’s total defeat? Instead, the U.S. government and military is engaged in yet another disastrous losing undeclared war that is unsupported by most Americans. As if our opinions matter!

2. The continued blanket support of Israel’s genocide against Gaza, pogroms in the West Bank, and demolition/seizure of land in Lebanon.

The Trump administration remains 100% committed to the project of a “Greater Israel,” no matter how many Palestinians suffer and die in the process.

3. The obscene $500 billion increase in military spending in FY2027.

The U.S. military hasn’t won a major war since 1945. It’s failed eight audits in a row. The “punishment” is a vast increase in military spending in the next fiscal year.

4. The escalatory and nearly impossible Golden Dome proposal.

The golden dome missile defense system is a golden boondoggle for weapons makers. It’s unlikely to work, and if it does, if only partially, it may make nuclear war more likely.

5. The unnecessary “modernization” of the nuclear triad at a projected cost of $2 trillion.

U.S. militarists still believe the nuclear triad is the Holy Trinity. It isn’t. Land-based ICBMs and nuclear bombers should be scrapped as obsolete. The Navy’s Trident-missile-firing submarines are all the U.S. needs for nuclear deterrence.

6. The continued headlong pursuit of artificial intelligence (AI) and the ongoing empowerment and enlargement of the surveillance state.

AI combined with ever-more intrusive cameras and digital monitoring is creating a dystopic “Big Brother” state. Imagine sweeping AI with a steroidal Homeland Security; now imagine the total disappearance of privacy.

7. The war against the ICC and UN and indeed any legal check on U.S./Israeli aggression.

As the U.S. and Israel engage in global aggression, they attack institutions such as the International Criminal Court and the United Nations that attempt to limit and stop that aggression.

8. Related to (7), the proposal to merge the U.S. military with Israel’s for research and development, intelligence sharing, and the like.

Incredibly, the Trump administration is proposing a merger between the U.S. and Israeli militaries that would compromise U.S. national security at the highest levels of classification. Obedient to Aipac and Israeli imperatives, Congress seems prepared ultimately to support it.

9. Continued environmental damage due to war and military operations and the complete disregard of climate change.

Rarely in the U.S. do you hear any talk of how war and global military actions accelerate global warming and aggravate environmental damage. Check out the documentary by Abby Martin, “Earth’s Greatest Enemy,” and her interview with Chris Hedges.

Keep reading

BUSTED: Democrat Rep. Gabe Vasquez’s Account Made It Look Like He Was Working in New Mexico — While He Was on $11,535 Alaska Backpacking Trip Sponsored by Anti-Drilling Group

Democrat Rep. Gabe Vasquez is facing fresh scrutiny after his congressional office published a steady stream of New Mexico district content while the vulnerable congressman was thousands of miles away on a privately sponsored backpacking trip.

According to a report from the Santa Fe New Mexican, Vasquez’s official X account posted on August 10, 2025, about a supposed visit to Hobbs High School.

“I visited Hobbs High School to help serve lunch and hear about how school meals are keeping kids healthy and focused,” the post read.

There was just one problem. Vasquez was not in Hobbs that day.

Official House travel records show that Vasquez departed El Paso at 7 a.m., flew through Denver, and arrived in Fairbanks, Alaska, later that evening for a weeklong trip sponsored by the American Lands Project.

The trip, which ran from August 10 through August 16, was valued at approximately $11,535 and included transportation, lodging, meals, air-taxi flights, guided hikes, camping, and other expenses.

Keep reading

‘Scandalous, irrational and irresponsible’: French beekeepers’ fury at lifting of pesticides ban

Beekeepers and environmentalists in France have reacted furiously after parliament approved a bill reauthorising two banned pesticides scientists say can poison bees.

“There are no words to describe the frustration,” said Carolyn Bouguet, a beekeeper in Essonne, greater Paris. “Bee populations have already been badly compromised by climate change, new parasites and loss of habitat. And now this.”

Henri Clément, a beekeeper in the southern Lozère department and spokesperson for the French beekeeping association, UNAF, said the measure was “an absolute disaster for our sector, and for biodiversity as a whole”.

For bees, the risk was “very high mortality rates and reduced harvests”, Clément told local media. “It’s just incomprehensible these pesticides have been reauthorised. We’ve been fighting them for 30 years. It’s scandalous, irrational and irresponsible.”

The law, passed on Tuesday, allows France’s food and environmental safety agency, Anses, to grant waivers authorising the use of the pesticides acetamiprid and flupyradifurone in struggling farm sectors and under exceptional circumstances.

The use of the pesticides, allowed in the EU but banned in France, will be authorised to combat aphid-borne diseases that can ruin crops of sugar beet, apples, hazelnuts and cherries, which has led producers to claim they can no longer compete with European rivals.

Scientific studies have established that acetamiprid, a neonicotinoid with powerful neurotoxic effects, can poison bees, affecting their foraging capacity and memory. A 2024 study suggested flupyradifurone could be lethal to some honeybees.

Greenpeace France said the country’s centrist government and its rightwing allies in parliament were “trampling on science, health, the environment and the clear will of the people”, describing the legislation as “deeply concerning” and “a disgrace”.

France’s environment minister, Monique Barbut, said the legislation was “one environmental setback too many” and submitted her resignation on Wednesday, but was later persuaded to stay on after meeting President Emmanuel Macron.

Keep reading

B.C. municipality considers recognizing legal rights for trees

A councillor in Saanich, B.C., is asking the municipality to recognize what supporters describe as the “rights of trees” by endorsing the Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Tree.

The motion, introduced this week, would have Saanich formally implement the declaration, which sets out three core principles. It states that trees are living beings and a common good shared by humanity, that all life on Earth depends on their existence, and that people have a responsibility to act toward trees in “fraternity and solidarity.”

The proposal is intended to guide the municipality’s approach to protecting urban forests and recognizing the ecological importance of trees. Supporters argue the declaration reinforces the role trees play in biodiversity, climate resilience and public health.

If adopted, Saanich would join a growing movement to incorporate broader environmental rights into local government policies. The declaration itself is not legally binding, but supporters say it provides an ethical framework for municipal decision-making involving forests and green spaces.

Council is expected to consider the proposal as part of its ongoing discussions on environmental and urban forest policy.

Keep reading