More stories

  • in

    The way universities can survive the Trump era? Band together in an alliance | David Kirp

    Higher education is under attack from the person who inhabits the White House. Universities are being threatened with an array of punishments, including the cutoff of their federal contracts and grants, the loss of their nonprofit status and a tax on their endowment. The Trump administration is demanding a say in whom they admit, whom they hire and even what courses they teach.It’s a grim message – abandon your fundamental values, or else. The idea of an “existential moment” has become a cliche, but this situation warrants that grim description. Academic freedom, the lifeblood of higher education, is being threatened.How should these colleges and universities respond?Columbia University has learned the hard way that you can’t negotiate with an autocrat – give an inch and he’ll just come back for more. Harvard has been widely praised for saying “no” to Trump, and justifiably so. But Harvard couldn’t have done anything else. The demands were so outrageous that if the university had capitulated it might as well have closed its doors.The cutoff of $2.2bn in federal contracts and grants, as well as the threat to rescind the university’s tax-exempt status, will take a bite out of research, teaching and financial aid, if ultimately upheld by the courts. But Harvard is, far and away, the richest university in the world, with an endowment north of $50 billion. That’s larger than the gross domestic product of nearly 100 countries. With its deep pockets, it is uniquely situated to carry on, while its phalanx of best-in-the-nation lawyers do battle in the courtroom.Other schools in Trump’s sight include far less wealthy private universities like Northwestern, as well as flagship public universities like the University of California-Berkeley, which have a comparative pittance to draw on. If they say shut the door when Trump & Co. come calling, the consequences would doubtlessly be devastating. But the Columbia debacle shows that there is really no option.Universities compete on many fronts. They vie for contracts and grants, professors and students and endowment contributions. Because they fetishize prestige, they take aggressive action to boost their place in the US News pecking order.But in these desperate times such competition is a ruinous course. The only strategy with a prayer of succeeding is for universities – public and private, well-endowed and scraping by – to come together, making it crystal-clear that they won’t give in to assaults on academic freedom.That’s precisely what happened last week, when more than 200 college and university presidents signed a statement, issued by the American Association of Colleges and Universities, which forcefully condemns the federal government’s “political interference” and overreach” for “endangering higher education.”Stanford, Chicago and Dartmouth are among the top-ranking schools that didn’t sign on. Perhaps their presidents believe that “duck and cover” is their best strategy. As Columbia – which did sign – can tell them, good luck with that.Higher education has long rested on its laurels, confident that Americans appreciate its intrinsic value, but that hasn’t been true for years. The just-issued statement of principle should be coupled with a full-throated campaign to make their case—to demonstrate the importance of universities and colleges in preparing the coming generation to contribute to society as well as carrying out essential, cutting-edge research.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe AACU manifesto makes a great start, but more is needed to win this war. Well-off universities need to come to the aid of their financially weaker brethren, underwriting essential and expensive legal support, when the anti-university forces come calling.“Nato for higher education” – a mutual defense pact is a long-shot approach, but it might just convince the bully in the White House to back off. The tariff mess is just the latest example of how the Mister “Art of the Deal” turns tail when confronted with strong opposition.What’s more, colleges and universities have no viable option – to borrow a line from Benjamin Franklin, they can “hang together or hang separately.”

    David Kirp is professor emeritus at the University of California-Berkeley and the author of The College Dropout Scandal More

  • in

    Trump 100 days: White House action plan makes Project 2025 look mild

    When Donald Trump chose a Project 2025 author to lead a key federal agency that would carry out the underpinnings of the conservative manifesto’s aims, he solidified the project’s role in his second term.Shortly after he won re-election, the US president nominated Russ Vought to lead the office of management and budget. Vought wrote a chapter for Project 2025 about consolidating power in the executive branch and advances a theory that allows the president to withhold funds from agencies, even if Congress has allocated them. Consolidating power, in part through firing a supposed “deep state” and hiring loyalists, is a major plank of the project – and of Trump’s first 100 days.Trump tried, repeatedly, to distance himself from the project, led by the conservative thinktank the Heritage Foundation, on the campaign trail after the left used it as shorthand for the dismantling of government that would take place if he won. Since he’s taken office, the illusion that his ideas were drastically different from the project has fallen.“The whole distancing themselves from Project 2025 may have pulled some voters,” said Manisha Sinha, a history professor at the University of Connecticut, but “my sense is that they’re going to try and push all the items within Project 2025 as much as they can.”Many of Trump’s moves in his first 100 days come directly from Project 2025, which involved more than 100 conservative organizations and represented a sort of consensus among the Trumpist right about what he should do in a second term. In some instances, he has gone beyond the project’s suggestions. And in other cases, because the project was written in 2023, subsequent policy ideas from the Heritage Foundation have shaped his actions and goals.For instance, the project predated Elon Musk’s outsized role in the election and then in the Trump administration, but the goal to slash government programs using the so-called “department of government efficiency” fits the spirit of the project. It also predates the war in Gaza and the crackdown on speech in the US in the name of antisemitism, but Heritage’s Project Esther laid out a strategy to crack down on civil society groups that support Palestinian rights.Trump’s campaign once said people associated with the project wouldn’t get jobs in his administration. Instead, several hold prominent roles, in some cases now carrying out the plans they wrote about in the project.He chose Peter Navarro as a trade adviser; Navarro wrote a chapter for the project that advocates for increased tariffs and a restructuring of US trade, which Trump is now working on. His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, appeared in training videos for Project 2025. Brendan Carr, Trump’s nominee to chair the Federal Communications Commission, wrote the chapter on the FCC.The former director of the project, Paul Dans, stepped down from his role amid concerns that the project was derailing Trump’s re-election effort. Dans told Politico in March that Trump’s second term was “actually way beyond my wildest dreams”.“What we had hoped would happen has happened. So I can’t imagine how anything could end really any better,” Dans said.Will Dobbs-Allsopp, policy director of Governing for Impact, and James Goodwin, policy director at the Center for Progressive Reform, have publicly tracked the executive actions suggested for 20 different agencies in Project 2025 as Trump has carried some of them out. Of the 532 proposals in the project that fall under these actions, Trump has already proposed, attempted or completed 153 of them – about 29%.The belief that Trump was not fully prepared, and the broader conservative ecosystem was not aligned completely with his agenda, underpinned his first term. For his second term, conservative donors put major money into efforts to get the right on the same page and to come up with plans and personnel who would stand ready to implement these plans immediately if Trump won.While thinktanks often seek to influence policymakers, the project stands out for its focus on Trump.“Really, it was written for Trump or Trumpism,” Goodwin said. “There really was an audience of one in mind … Trump had as much gravitational pull on Project 2025 as Project 2025 hopes to have on Trump. It’s just a very unusual thinktank-policymaker relationship.”Where Trump has used the projectThe threads of Project 2025 are visible across the federal government in Trump’s second term.He is in the process of firing people disloyal to the Trump agenda, a first step in creating a government more beholden to him. An executive order signed in April called for tens of thousands more roles being listed as political appointments rather than career civil servants, a move Project 2025 promoted as a way to drive out the kinds of people who stood in the way of success in his first term.Project 2025 called for dismantling the Department of Education, which would require congressional action. Trump signed an executive order calling on the education secretary to start the dismantling process by shutting down major parts of the department’s work.The project wanted to scale back the US Agency for International Development. Trump axed it.“Libs are realizing that Project 2025 was the watered down version of this White House action plan,” Tyler Bowyer, a leader with conservative youth group Turning Point, said on X in early February.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe project said that programs related to climate change should be ended; Trump has ended a host of climate programs and has withdrawn from the Paris climate agreement.The Department of Justice should be reconfigured, ending a host of policies and enforcement that came during the Biden years, the project says. Trump has weaponized the department to achieve his goals and to go after his enemies.In nearly all agency recommendations, the project suggested scrapping any diversity efforts. Trump ended diversity, equity and inclusion programs government-wide. He has taken actions to prohibit transgender people in sports and in the military and limited access to gender-affirming care, which aligns with ideas in the project that seek to reinforce binary genders.The project recommended a host of ways to deport undocumented immigrants, end visa programs for people to come to the US legally, and restrict border crossings – a key part of Trump’s first 100 days, though the project didn’t suggest using the Alien Enemies Act, as Trump has, or going after birthright citizenship.Trump signed an executive order that would make states carry more of a burden for disaster relief, another idea suggested by Project 2025, which also said withholding disaster funds was one way to enforce immigration laws.The FCC, now led by a Project 2025 author appointed by Trump, is investigating National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System and will potentially defund them, which Carr wrote about in the project.What could happen nextThe first wave of Project 2025-aligned actions has been conducted largely by executive orders. A second wave of recommendations requires the rulemaking process at agencies and others would require congressional action.“They’re only just now starting their kind of policy, deregulatory effort, rescinding regulations in earnest. They haven’t even really gotten there yet. They’ve been so focused on agency operations and personnel for the past few months,” Dobbs-Allsopp said. “We would expect that at six months or a year, they will be even further along.”Sinha predicted that the full-scale dismantling of the administrative state, if successful, could bring the US “back to the era of tainted meat and lead in hot water”.Project 2025 represented the extreme version of what the Republican party has been selling since the Nixon and Reagan years, she said. It mixes the anti-government rhetoric with demonizing immigrants, poor people and people of color. “The Republicans have trafficked on this for a very long time,” she said.“The people who hate government basically are running government,” she said. More

  • in

    May Day: protesters rally across US over workers’ and immigrants’ rights

    Protesters rallied nationwide on Thursday in support of workers’ and immigrants’ rights in the latest round of demonstrations against Donald Trump and his administration.May Day, commemorated as international workers’ day, comes after two massive days of protests in April – 5 April’s hands off rallies and 19 April’s day of action – drew millions to the streets across the country.The 1 May protests were supported by hundreds of organizations and set to take place in nearly 1,000 cities, organizers said, with a focus on rallying against the Trump administration and “billionaire profiteers”. Turnout was predicted to be lower than the previous two April protests because 1 May is a weekday, but tens of thousands were expected to turn out. Cities across the US from New York to Seattle to Anchorage, Alaska, saw major demonstrations.“This is a war on working people – and we will not stand down,” a website for the national day of action says. “They’re defunding our schools, privatizing public services, attacking unions, and targeting immigrant families with fear and violence. Working people built this nation and we know how to take care of each other. We won’t back down – we will never stop fighting for our families and the rights and freedoms that propel opportunity and a better life for all Americans. Their time is up.”View image in fullscreenA map of May Day protests showed several major metro areas had more than one rally planned. A coalition of groups in Los Angeles started the day with an early morning rally, then a program and march to show solidarity with the city’s workers and immigrants. In New York, protests were planned throughout the day.In New York, protesters turned out to support workers, immigrants and others under attack by the Trump administration. Some of those attending the New York rally spoke against Columbia University’s capitulation to Trump’s demands.“Today, we saw lots of new people who are getting energized and activated. The Trump administration is clearly coming for all of these rights that we’ve won, and all of us are taking up the task to fight back,” said Saidi Moseley, 25, an education coordinator and one of the organizers of the May Day march in Union Square.Betsy Waters held a sign saying “due process for all”. The 67-year-old retiree who volunteers full-time said she had come to several marches. “I feel that we have to be out here. We have to be out here making a stand as much as we can,” Waters said. “So I am out here making a stand, saying that what is happening in our country is just not right.”Lydia Howrilka, a 25-year-old librarian from Queens, was holding a “only you can stop fascism” sign. “I am standing in solidarity with my immigrant brothers and sisters in New York. I am standing in defense of democracy,” Howrilka said.Grant Miner, one of a handful of speakers at the New York rally, was abruptly expelled by Columbia University in March for participating in pro-Palestinian protests.View image in fullscreen“I’m trying to speak out about the things that are affecting my workers, which include the ongoing cuts to higher education, as well as the targeting of students for student protests, which are two very big issues facing our workplace reality,” said Miner, who also serves as president of UAW 2710, the Student Workers of Columbia union.As Trump surpassed 100 days in office, a period filled with slashing and burning of the federal government and democratic norms, a resistance has taken shape, growing in size since February. People have started to organize in larger numbers to pressure Democrats to stand up more strongly to Trump.Trump’s approval ratings have fallen from positive to negative, with more people disapproving of him than approving. The focus on workers and immigrants comes as Trump has fired a host of federal workers and his administration has ramped up deportations, including of people who the courts have said were not supposed to be deported.“Everyone deserves respect and dignity, no matter who they are, where they were born, or what language they speak,” the May Day protest website says. “Immigrants are workers, and workers are immigrants. Our fight for fair wages, safe workplaces, and dignity on the job is the same fight for immigrant justice.”Organizers behind the May Day protest in Washington DC said they expected to see up to 3,000 people join the rally in the nation’s capital to demand safety on the job, legal protections and an end to unjust deportations.“We’re seeing people abducted off the streets every day in some of the most violent and cruel ways. We’re seeing people like Kilmar Ábrego García – and he’s only one story. His story is not unusual,” said Cathryn Jackson, the public policy director at Casa, a group that provides critical services to immigrant and working-class families.View image in fullscreenÁbrego García’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, was expected to speak at Thursday’s rally as she continues to fight for her husband to be released from prison in El Salvador and to be returned to the US.“Hundreds and hundreds of people are being deported to some of the worst prisons across the country with no due process,” Jackson said. “This rally today is about solidarity. It’s about saying no matter what the Trump administration tries to do, we are determined to fight back.”Also among the speakers scheduled to address the Washington rally was María del Carmen Castellón, whose husband, Miguel Luna, died in the Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore last year.The story of Luna and the five other construction workers who died during the tragedy is “symbolic”, Jackson said. The six men were all construction workers originally from Latin American countries.“This is the story of men working in the middle of the night while all of us were sleeping, getting the roads together, doing the work that many people don’t want to do,” Jackson continued. “We are literally physically building this country, and then being treated the way we are in return.”Delia Ramirez, a Democratic representative of Illinois, addressed the crowd in Franklin Park as the “proud daughter of Guatemalan immigrants”.View image in fullscreen“Today on International Workers’ Day, we are united,” Ramirez said. “We’re united because we understand that this president wants to silence us. He wants to divide us, pit us against each other. But we are not going to be silenced.”The Trump administration knows that “the only thing that will stop fascism is mobilization”, she continued, acknowledging that there will be “really hard days” ahead. “But as long as you keep organizing, I can amplify that voice and continue to stand up to fascism.”Jorge Mújica, the strategic organizer for Arise Chicago and an organizer of the city’s May Day protest, said on Democracy Now that “the Trump administration miscalculated completely” by targeting so many constituencies in its first 100 days.“They are attacking everybody at the same time, and that [has] enabled us to gather a really broad coalition with labor unions, with federal workers, with students, with teachers at universities, and every other community and put together this event on May Day,” Mújica said. More

  • in

    Trump news at a glance: Rubio now holds four titles after Waltz out as national security chief

    Secretary of state Marco Rubio – ridiculed as “Little Marco” by Donald Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries – has become one of the most powerful players in the president’s cabinet.Trump appointed Rubio interim national security adviser on Thursday after Mike Waltz was forced to leave the post, alongside his deputy, Alex Wong, as sources said officials had lost confidence in their leadership.Waltz has been under intense pressure since the Signal scandal, in which he inadvertently added a journalist to a chat that included real-time operational details on US strikes in Yemen.It’s an enormous rise for Rubio, the son of undocumented Cuban migrants, who now holds four titles in the Trump administration. Rubio is also the acting administrator for USAID and acting archivist for the National Archives and Records Administration.Trump picks Waltz for UN role after exitWaltz may be out of the picture for now, but he is on course to reemerge in the world of international diplomacy – Trump said he will nominate Waltz as the country’s ambassador to the UN. Trump briefly considered firing Waltz over the Signal episode, but decided he did not want the media to claim the ouster of a cabinet official weeks into his second term. Trump was also mollified by an internal review that found Waltz mistakenly saved the Atlantic editor’s number.Read the full storyTrump readies first sale of military equipment to UkraineThe Trump administration will approve its first sale of military equipment to Ukraine since Donald Trump took office, in an indication that the minerals deal signed by the two countries this week may open a path to renewed weapons shipments.Read the full storyJudge says alien act doesn’t allow Trump to deport alleged gang membersThe 18th-century Alien Enemies Act does not authorize Donald Trump to deport Venezuelan immigrants alleged to be members of the Tren de Aragua gang, a federal judge in Texas ruled on Thursday.The decision is significant because it is the first sweeping and permanent injunction directly addressing whether the government can use the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to deport alleged members of Tren de Aragua. It applies only to migrants detained in Rodriguez’s judicial district, the southern district of Texas, which includes Brownsville, McAllen and Houston. Trump appointed Rodriguez to the federal bench in 2018.Read the full storyDoJ civil rights division loses 70% of lawyersMore than 250 attorneys in the justice department’s civil rights division have either left, been reassigned, or accepted a deferred resignation offer since January, according to an estimate provided to the Guardian by people familiar with the matter. The significant decrease in personnel underscores how Donald Trump is gutting the arm of the federal government responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws.Read the full storyWhite House reveals new allegations against Ábrego GarcíaThe legal team behind Kilmar Ábrego García, the Maryland man unlawfully deported to El Salvador, is demanding that the Trump administration “bring him back and give him a full and fair trial” as the administration releases new domestic abuse allegations.Read the full storyTrump’s bid to host UK golf tournament could violate US constitutionThe British government’s attempts to curry favor with Donald Trump by nudging golf executives to host one of the world’s most prestigious golf tournaments at a Scottish venue owned by the US president could ultimately lead to a violation of the US constitution, ethics experts have warned.Read the full storyWhite House launches site to promote favorable coverageThe Trump administration has unveiled a news-style website that publishes exclusively positive coverage of the president on official White House servers, and is styled like the rightwing website the Drudge Report.Read the full storyRFK Jr falsely claims vaccine includes ‘aborted fetus debris’Health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and his department have made a series of misleading statements that alarmed vaccine experts and advocates in recent days – including that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine includes “aborted fetus debris”.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

    Trump has launched an unprecedented environmental assault, pushing 145 rollbacks of clean air, water, and climate protections in his first 100 days, more than in his entire first term.

    The US approached China for talks on Trump’s tariffs, according to a state-linked Chinese account, suggesting Beijing may be open to negotiations.

    Trump officials have asked the supreme court to help strip temporary protected status from more than 300,000 Venezuelans, a move that would clear the way for their deportation.
    Catching up? Here’s what happened on 30 April 2025. More

  • in

    Rubio comes a long way to become most dominant US diplomat since Kissinger

    Marco Rubio, you have come a long way.From being ridiculed as “Little Marco” by Donald Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries, the former Florida senator now stands – on paper, at least – as the US’s most powerful diplomat since Henry Kissinger half a century ago after his former nemesis appointed him acting national security adviser to replace the departing Mike Waltz.The appointment means Rubio, the child of undocumented Cuban immigrants, will be the first person since Kissinger to hold the national security adviser and secretary of state positions at the same time.Kissinger – who himself arrived on America’s shores as an immigrant – achieved that feat in September 1973 after being tapped to take over the state department following four tumultuous and high-profile years as Richard Nixon’s national security adviser, during which he helped pave a historic opening to communist China and was – contentiously – awarded the Nobel peace prize for ending US involvement in the Vietnam war.The backdrop then was Watergate, a scandal just gaining momentum at the time but which was ultimately destined to consume Nixon’s presidency. But it left Kissinger free to conduct American foreign policy virtually single-handed, at least until Nixon was forced from office.Today’s context is different, though hardly less turbulent.Trump has just completed perhaps the most extreme first 100 days of US presidential history, producing a sea of uncertainty, upending the country’s international alliances, shattering democratic and legal norms at home, and leaving even its future status as the world’s leading democracy unsure.This unpredictable landscape is what confronts Rubio in his new position.An orthodox Republican in foreign policy matters, Rubio, 53, has frequently appeared uncomfortable – occasionally miserable, even – during the first three months at the state department under Trump, never more so than during the disastrous clash with Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February, when the Ukrainian president subjected to a public browbeating by the president and JD Vance in the Oval Office.In the Senate, he had been one of Ukraine’s staunchest supporters against Russia’s invasion. He then saw that principled position so openly and brutally overturned and was forced to justify the volte face in public as Trump has conspicuously sympathised with Vladimir Putin.Equally galling has been Elon Musk’s gleeful gutting of USAID, America’s main foreign assistance agency – which Rubio has previously championed and which fell within his purview as secretary of state – under the auspices of the tech billionaire’s unofficial “department of government efficiency” project, also known as Doge.The tensions led to a shouting match between the two men in front of Trump, with Rubio reportedly responding aggressively to Musk’s accusation that he had failed in the mission of firing enough state department staff.Despite that unpromising background, Rubio – who was once tipped as a future president – now suddenly finds himself, in addition to being in charge of a still mighty department, having direct access to the inner workings of the White House and to the president himself.Even if it has come about thanks to the default of the less-than-surefooted Waltz – whose credibility never recovered from inadvertently inviting one of Trump’s least favourite journalists on to to a Signal chat about strikes on Yemeni Houthis – it is quite the turnaround.It puts Rubio in the same vantage point from which Kissinger, the renowned exponent of realpolitik and great power balances, carved out a role as arguably the US’s most influential – if highly controversial – foreign policy strategist of the 20th century.With Trump just as consumed with domestic political enemies as Nixon ever was, it raises the unexpected question of whether Rubio can achieve the same level of prominence.It seems unlikely. Yet even two months ago, who would have guessed that the once-derided “Little Marco” would hold the levers of power of two separate institutions in his hands? More

  • in

    Apple quarterly earnings beat Wall Street expectations amid Trump trade policy chaos

    Apple’s second-quarter financials came in slightly higher than Wall Street’s expectations on Thursday.The tech giant reported revenue of $95.4bn, up more than 4% over last year, and earnings-per-share of $1.65 per share, up more than 7%. Analysts had predicted revenue of $94.5bn and earnings of $1.62. The company, worth $3.2tn, has beaten Wall Street’s expectations for the previous four quarters.Investors have been keeping their eyes on Apple as it prepared to report its financial results . The tech giant has been working to calm nervous analysts after Donald Trump levied sweeping tariffs on countries around the world that are likely to complicate supply chains for consumer electronics. Since the beginning of the year, Apple’s stock has slumped 16%.In early after-hours trading, the company’s stock dropped by more than 5%, likely due to its services division reporting revenue that missed Wall Street’s expectations, despite growth over last year. The division covers iCloud subscriptions and revenue from various licensing deals. Sales in China also missed estimates.Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, remained positive, however, saying that the company was reporting “strong quarterly results, including double-digit growth in Services”.The iPhone maker is heavily reliant on Chinese manufacturing for its phones, tablets and laptops. Days after Trump instituted soaring tariffs on China, at one point as high as 245%, the president said he would make an exception for consumer electronics.Cook spoke to senior White House officials around this time, according to the Washington Post. It was after these conversations that Trump announced his exception for consumer electronics. Apple’s stock rose 7% in the days after the announcement.However, it is unclear how lasting the reprieve may be. Howard Lutnick, the US commerce secretary, has called the exemption “temporary”, and even Trump later said on social media that there’s been no “exception”.The president has repeatedly said he wants to see more manufacturing in the US. In February, he met with Cook to discuss investing in US manufacturing. “He’s going to start building,” Trump said after the meeting. “Very big numbers – you have to speak to him. I assume they’re going to announce it at some point.”JP Morgan estimates costs would skyrocket for Apple if it moves production to the US, saying in a note this week that it could “drive a 30% price increase in the near-term, assuming a 20% tariff on China”. JP Morgan and other analysts have said Apple could continue to move more of its manufacturing to India, which only faces a 10% tariff.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionApple chartered jets to airlift some $2bn worth of iPhones from India to the US earlier this month to boost inventory in anticipation of price hikes from Trump’s tariffs and panic-buying by worried consumers. This comes as investors have expressed concerned about decreasing iPhone sales in China, the world’s biggest smartphone market. During its last earnings in January, Apple reported that iPhone sales fell by 11.1% in China in the first quarter and missed Wall Street’s expectations for iPhone revenue.In the short term, however, analysts say the tariff confusion could benefit Apple with people panic-buying its products in fear that prices will rise. “What remains to be seen in the longer term is how much of any increased cost will be passed on to consumers,” said Dipanjan Chatterjee, principal analyst for Forrester. “And if [consumers] will absorb these price increases without pulling back on demand for Apple products.” More

  • in

    Justice department sues Michigan and Hawaii over climate suits against big oil

    The US justice department on Wednesday filed lawsuits against Hawaii and Michigan over their planned legal action against fossil fuel companies for harms caused by the climate crisis, claiming the state actions conflict with federal government authority and Donald Trump’s energy dominance agenda.The suits, which legal experts say are unprecedented, mark the latest of the Trump administration’s attacks on environmental work and raise concern over states’ abilities to retain the power to take climate action without federal opposition.In court filings, the justice department said the Clean Air Act – a federal law authorizing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate air emissions – “creates a comprehensive program for regulating air pollution in the United States and ‘displaces’ the ability of states to regulate greenhouse gas emissions beyond their borders”.The justice department argues that Hawaii and Michigan are violating the intent of the act that enables the EPA authority to set nationwide standards for greenhouse gases, citing the states’ pending litigation against oil and gas companies for alleged climate damage.Michigan’s attorney general, Dana Nessel, a Democrat, last year tapped private law firms to go after the fossil fuel industry for negatively affecting the state’s climate and environment.Meanwhile, Hawaii’s governor, Josh Green, another Democrat, plans to target fossil fuel companies that he said should take responsibility for their role in the state’s climate consequences, including 2023’s deadly Lahaina wildfire.When burned, fossil fuels release emissions such as carbon dioxide that warm the planet.Both states’ laws “impermissibly regulate out-of-state greenhouse gas emissions and obstruct the Clean Air Act’s comprehensive federal-state framework and EPA’s regulatory discretion”, the justice department’s court filings said.The justice department also repeated the Republican president’s claims of a US energy emergency and crisis. “At a time when states should be contributing to a national effort to secure reliable sources of domestic energy”, Hawaii and Michigan are “choosing to stand in the way”, the filings said.A spokesperson for the office of the Democratic Michigan governor, Gretchen Whitmer, deferred to Nessel when asked for comment.“This lawsuit is at best frivolous and arguably sanctionable,” Nessel said in a statement, which noted that Michigan had not filed a lawsuit. “If the White House or big oil wish to challenge our claims, they can do so when our lawsuit is filed; they will not succeed in any attempt to pre-emptively bar our access to make our claims in the courts. I remain undeterred in my intention to file this lawsuit the president and his big oil donors so fear.”Green’s office and the Hawaii attorney general’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.But legal experts raised concern over the government’s arguments.Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Columbia University Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, said usual procedure was for the justice department to ask for a court to intervene in pending environmental litigation – as is the case in some instances across the country.While this week’s suits are consistent with Trump’s plans to oppose state actions that interfere with energy dominance, “it’s highly unusual”, Gerrard told the Associated Press. “What we expected is they would intervene in the pending lawsuits, not to try to pre-empt or prevent a lawsuit from being filed. It’s an aggressive move in support of the fossil fuel industry.“It raises all kinds of eyebrows,” he added. “It’s an intimidation tactic, and it’s telling the fossil fuel companies how much Trump loves them.”Ann Carlson, an environmental law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, who has previously consulted on climate litigation, said this week’s lawsuits look “like DoJ grasping at straws”, noting that the EPA administrator, Lee Zeldin, said his agency was seeking to overturn a finding under the Clean Air Act that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare.“So on the one hand the US is saying Michigan, and other states, can’t regulate greenhouse gases because the Clean Air Act does so and therefore pre-empts states from regulating,” Carlson said. “On the other hand the US is trying to say that the Clean Air Act should not be used to regulate. The hypocrisy is pretty stunning.”The Trump administration has aggressively targeted climate policy in the name of fossil fuel investment. Federal agencies have announced plans to bolster coal power, roll back landmark water and air regulations, block renewable energy sources, and double down on oil and gas expansion. More