Connect with us

BREAKING NEWS

‘I Cannot Think of Many Things More Frightening’: Justice Kagan Rebukes SCOTUS Conservatives Over EPA Ruling

Published

on

In a sharply-worded dissent, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan leveled extremely strong criticism against her right-wing colleagues who ruled in a 6-3 decision that the Environmental Protection Agency does not have broad authority to regulate greenhouse gasses as the climate warms to what experts warn are dangerous levels.

“The subject matter of the regulation here makes the Court’s intervention all the more troubling,” Justice Kagan writes in her dissent. “Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change. And let’s say the obvious: The stakes here are high. Yet the Court today prevents congressionally authorized agency action to curb power plants’ carbon dioxide emissions. The Court appoints itself—instead of Congress or the expert agency—the decision-maker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening.”

Justice Kagan began her lengthy dissent by saying: “Today, the Court strips the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power Congress gave it to respond to ‘the most pressing environmental challenge of our time.'”

The Clean Air Act, first signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson and amended over the years by Democratic and Republican presidents, has been used by the EPA for decades, successfully saving “millions of lives and trillions of dollars.”

Kagan highlights that “there was no reason to reach out to decide this case,” as it examines an executive branch policy that was never enacted, and criticizes what she sees as the Supreme Court’s previous “unprecedented” interference in the EPA’s activities.

“This Court has obstructed EPA’s effort from the beginning. Right after the Obama administration issued the Clean Power Plan, the Court stayed its implementation. That action was unprecedented: Never before had the Court stayed a regulation then under review in the lower courts.”

And she appears to be accusing the conservative majority of just making things up.

“The majority claims it is just following precedent, but that is not so. The Court has never even used the term ‘major questions doctrine’ before.”

The case is West Virginia v. EPA.

 

 

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

BREAKING NEWS

Watch: Santos Responds to Report He Joked About Hitler, ‘The Jews’ and Black People

Published

on

U.S. Rep. George Santos (R-NY) allegedly made a social media post appearing to praise Adolf Hitler while referring to “the Jews and Black” people, and frequently made pejorative “jokes” about being Jewish according to friends interviewed by Patch and screenshots of now-deleted social media posts.

In 2011, Santos “commented on a Facebook post with what appear to be intended-jokes about Hitler, a phrase that appears to salute Hitler and observations about ‘the Jews and black[s],’ exclusive screenshots obtained by Patch show.”

Patch, which published a screenshot of  what appear to be Santos’ comment, reports he had written this: “hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh hiiiiiiiiiiiitlerrrrrrrrrrr (hight hitler) lolololololololololololol sombody kill her!! the jews and black [sic] mostly lolllolol!!! Dum”

Sarah Fishkind, whose LinkedIn profile describes her as a political organizer, posted video Thursday afternoon of her conversation with Rep. Santos.

“Do you have any comments about your most-recently-leaked Facebook comments about killing all Jews and Black people?” she asked, according to her post.

“I’m sorry?” Santos, appearing to be stunned, replied.

READ MORE: ‘Big No-No’: Santos May or May Not Have a Campaign Treasurer Prompting Questions About Whose Signature That Is

“It’s on the news right. now,” she responded, “that you Facebook commented.”

Santos replied with a frustrated huff, then said: “That’s going to be hard to hold.” It’s unclear what he meant by that comment.

Santos ran and won his congressional seat claiming to be a gay Jewish Republican, only later to falsely claim he never said he was Jewish, but “Jew-ish.” He also lied about his grandparents fleeing the Holocaust.

Jewish groups have condemned his false claims of Jewish heritage, which include false claims that his grandparents were “Holocaust refugees.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. 

Continue Reading

BREAKING NEWS

Trump to Get His Facebook Account Back Two Years After Losing It for ‘Inciting Violent Insurrection’

Published

on

Donald Trump, the one-term ex-president who lost the 2020 election by 7 million votes and proceeded to incite a violent and deadly insurrection, will have his Facebook and Instagram accounts reinstated after losing them for what CEO Mark Zuckerberg one day after the 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol said was the “use of our platform to incite violent insurrection against a democratically elected government.”

Facebook’s parent company, Meta, “will allow former President Donald Trump to return to Facebook and Instagram in the coming weeks, the company announced Wednesday,” CNBC reports.

Trump’s attorneys recently sent Meta a letter urging the social media behemoth allow the former president, who currently is under several federal and state criminal investigations as he launches a third run for the White House, to return.

“As a general rule, we don’t want to get in the way of open, public and democratic debate on Meta’s platforms – especially in the context of elections in democratic societies like the United States,” Nick Clegg, Meta’s president of global affairs, wrote in a blog post announcing the decision, CNBC adds. “The public should be able to hear what their politicians are saying – the good, the bad and the ugly – so that they can make informed choices at the ballot box.”

READ MORE: Trump Moves to Return to Twitter and Facebook After Being Banned Over Risk of ‘Incitement of Violence’ and to Public Safety

At 8:36 PM on January 6, 2021, Facebook had publicly announced it was imposing a 24-hour block on then-President Donald Trump, following the deadly riot and insurrection on Capitol Hill. The following day Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced the social media giant had banned Trump “indefinitely and for at least the next two weeks until the peaceful transition of power is complete.”

But later that year in June, Facebook’s Oversight Board decided Trump’s suspension would be in place for just two years, starting in January of 2021, but also appeared to make clear the suspension would be lifted after that time.

“When the suspension is eventually lifted,” Facebook’s Oversight Board said at the time — making clear the suspension would be lifted “when,” and not “if” — “there will be a strict set of rapidly escalating sanctions that will be triggered if Mr. Trump commits further violations in future, up to and including permanent removal of his pages and accounts.”

 

This is a breaking news and developing story. 

Continue Reading

BREAKING NEWS

Santos to FEC: My $500,000 Personal Loan to My Campaign Wasn’t Actually From My Personal Funds

Published

on

U.S. Rep. George Santos (R-NY) revealed on Tuesday that the mysterious half-million dollars he had reported to the Federal Election Commission as a personal loan of his personal funds to his political campaign wasn’t actually from his personal funds.

The Daily Beast reports that Tuesday afternoon, “Santos’ political operation filed a flurry of amended campaign finance reports, telling the feds, among other things, that a $500,000 loan he gave to his campaign didn’t, in fact, come from his personal funds as he’d previously claimed.”

The question many have been asking remains the same: where did that money come from?

It remains unanswered.

And it’s not just the $500,000.

READ MORE: Watch: Top Trump Ally Lindsey Graham Defends Biden In Classified Docs Probe

“Another amended filing on Tuesday disclosed that a $125,000 ‘loan from the candidate’ in late October also did not come from his ‘personal funds,’ but like the $500,000 question, did not say where the money came from, when the loan was due, or what entity, if any, backed the money.”

One expert appeared stunned.

“Santos’ campaign might have unchecked the ‘personal funds of candidate’ box, but it is still reporting that the $500,000 came from Santos himself,” Brendan Fischer, deputy executive director of government watchdog Documented and a campaign finance expert, told The Daily Beast. “If the ‘loan from candidate’ didn’t actually come from the candidate, then Santos should come clean and disclose where the money really came from. Santos can’t uncheck a box and make his legal problems go away.”

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s Robert Maguire provides the visual proof.

This is a breaking news and developing story. 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.