37% of Google Maps results for abortion services in trigger states directed people to fake clinics, nonprofit says

Isobel Asher Hamilton

Sun, June 12, 2022

Abortion rights are under threat in the US.TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty Images

• 11% of Google results for abortions in "trigger states" were for anti-abortion fake clinics, per a story.

• On Google Maps, 37% of results were for fake clinics that didn't offer abortions.

• There are 13 US "trigger states," which have laws to criminalize abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

People looking on Google for information on abortion in "trigger states" are likely to be served with details for anti-abortion fake clinics that don't offer abortions, a report from nonprofit the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) found.

Trigger states are those that have laws on the books that would criminalize abortion immediately if the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade. This is a distinct possibility, according to a draft opinion from the Supreme Court leaked in May.

The states in question are: Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Texas, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.

For its report, London-based CCDH ran Google searches from each of the 13 states using a browser extension that lets people set their computers to different locations in the world.

The CCDH used Google Search and Google Maps to see what results came up on the first page when key terms like "abortion clinic near me" and "abortion pill" were entered.

Out of a total 445 recorded results, 11% directed users to anti-abortion fake clinics.

The problem was particularly acute on Google Maps results, where the CCDH found 26 out of 70 results directed users to fake clinics — a return rate of 37%.

The CCDH used the first three locations presented by Google Maps to collect its sample. The nonprofit isn't the first to report on the issue of anti-abortion clinics slipping into Google results for abortion services.

The BBC reported in May that it had found misleading adverts high up in Google search results, which appeared to be clinics offering abortions, but were actually anti-abortion centres.

One woman told the BBC she went to one clinic after she saw it offered "a free abortion consultation" but once there she was given misinformation about abortions, including claims they were linked to infertility and breast cancer.

The CCDH found on Google Search that 28% of Google ads displayed at the top of search result pages were for anti-abortion fake clinics.

The CCDH said when it visited the websites of the fake clinics surfaced by Google it found misinformation. These included claims that "suicidal impulses" were common after abortions and suggestions that a hysterectomy might be needed to stop an abortion.

A Google spokesperson told Insider: "Across our products, we work to make high-quality information easily accessible, particularly on critical health topics."

It continued: "Any organization that wants to advertise to people seeking information about abortion services on Google must be certified and show in-ad disclosures that clearly state whether they do or do not offer abortions."

The spokesperson added that the company was always looking at ways to improve its results to help people find what they're looking for, or understand if what they're looking for may not be available.

The CCDH said Google did label ads for anti-abortion clincs with a label stating: "Does not provide abortions," but their placement at the top of the results pages was still a problem.

"When people search for information or services relating to their sexual and reproductive health, Google is sending them to sites that users expect to contain robust, scientific, evidence-driven healthcare information – but they actually contain ideologically-driven opinion and misinformation," CCDH chief executive Imran Ahmed said in a statement sent to Insider.

Online data, medical records could be used to put women in jail under new abortion laws

Tami Abdollah, USA TODAY

Sun, June 12, 2022, 

If the Supreme Court rules to overturn Roe v. Wade this month, lawmakers and law enforcement may have varied means to go after women and health care providers who participate in abortions in large part because of technology that didn't exist before the 1973 landmark ruling protecting abortion rights.

That means period tracking apps, tele-health appointments, mail-in pharmacy requests and other online medical records and data could be used as evidence in criminal cases, experts said.

At least 26 states are expected to move quickly to ban abortion if the court's conservative majority strikes down federally-protected abortion rights. Among them are 13 – including Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, Idaho, Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming – that have "trigger laws" that would take effect automatically or through a quick state action if Roe no longer applies, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research and policy organization.

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers concluded in a report in August that anti-abortion measures will lead to "rampant criminalization through regulatory enforcement and to mass incarceration on an unprecedented scale," especially if Roe is overturned.

Because some states have already passed laws redefining "personhood" to include an unborn child, it's possible people who seek out abortions or anyone who helps them could face charges of feticide or aggravated assault, the report said.

Most of the rhetoric around penalizing illegal abortions has targeted healthcare workers who help people obtain abortions rather than pregnant women, said Brietta Clark, a health law and reproductive justice professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. But she said that unless laws clearly state women won't be prosecuted for the outcomes of their pregnancy, they are still at risk.

Many states regularly bring criminal cases against women who are seen as putting their unborn child's life at risk, including charges of child abuse, child neglect or endangerment or feticide, manslaughter and murder, said Dana Sussman, acting executive director of the National Advocates for Pregnant Women. The group has documented 1,331 cases from 2006 through 2020 where a woman was arrested, detained or otherwise deprived of their liberty for a reason related to their pregnancy. Altogether, since the Roe ruling, the researchers found more than 1,700 of these cases, which they noted is likely an undercount. The majority were economically disadvantaged women of color who often must rely on publicly run or funded hospitals.

"Our criminal codes have ballooned, the War on Drugs has transformed the types of charges that are brought, how many people are criminalized and the communities impacted," Sussman said. "And we have used the criminal legal system to respond to public health crises, to mental health crises, to poverty, to education, in ways that I don't think were fully understood or fully applied back in 1973."

New York City Mayor Eric Adams, wearing a black cap and carrying a pink sign, marches with abortion-rights activists on May 14, 2022, in New York.

Even in California, which has vowed to become a sanctuary for women seeking abortions, the state's attorney general issued a legal alert in January to law enforcement advising them that the state's penal code "intended to hold accountable those who inflict harm on pregnant individuals, resulting in miscarriage or stillbirth, not to punish people who suffer the loss of their pregnancy."

The proclamation came after two women in California's Central Valley in 2018 and then in 2019 gave birth to stillborn infants and were flagged by medical staff after testing positive for methamphetamine. Both of the women were jailed and eventually charged with fetal murder. The charges against one woman were dismissed in May 2021 and the other woman was freed in March after years in prison.

"Women who have to rely on public healthcare systems have the least amount of privacy, there’s a lot that the state can do through that process to basically monitor, surveil and control," said Clark, the law professor.

It's possible some prosecutors will shy away from pursuing criminal charges against a pregnant person or anyone who helps her seek an abortion.

To date, more than 80 elected district attorneys and attorneys generals around the country, including in red states, have committed to using their discretion to not charge individuals or those who help them in ending a pregnancy should Roe be overturned, said Miriam Krinsky, executive director of Fair and Just Prosecution, an organization that advocates for criminal justice reform.

The nonprofit has been reaching out to elected prosecutors around the country willing to make such a commitment should Roe be overturned, Krinsky said, noting that prosecutors frequently decide whether to use their limited resources to prioritize certain crimes over others.

Anti-abortion activists demonstrate at the U.S. Supreme Court.

"We are now facing a moment where elected public prosecutors are going to be the last line of defense," Krinsky said. "Just because something can be prosecuted doesn’t mean it should be prosecuted."

Tom Jipping, a senior legal fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, said "rogue prosecutors" are "going to be a problem" for lawmakers who want laws criminalizing abortion to be enforced.

"This is not about prosecutorial discretion, it’s about who gets to make the law, and it’s not prosecutors," Jipping said. "If this is something they want to do they ought to run for the legislature."

Jonathan Mitchell, Texas’ former solicitor general who crafted the state’s abortion law SB 8, which enforces a ban on abortion as early as six weeks by enabling private citizens to sue those who aid and abet, told USA TODAY that he doesn’t believe most of the existing legislative efforts by states to ban abortion will be very effective.

In many red states, abortion clinics are located in more liberal cities where the prosecutor won’t bring charges or where it would be hard to get juries to convict even if they do, Mitchell said. And since states do not run the postal service, it's additionally difficult to detect and prosecute those who distribute pregnancy-ending pills on the black market.

“I think anti-abortion advocates who pushed for these trigger bans are going to be disappointed when they take effect,” Mitchell said. “Laws of this sort worked in 1970 or 1960 when every state banned abortion, they didn’t have abortion pills and didn’t have one of our two major political parties committed to the ideology of legal abortion. Also, they didn’t have widespread internet access. What worked in the United States in 1970 is not necessarily going to work in the United States in 2022.”

Unlike in 1973, conservative lawmakers are increasingly concerned about not just ensuring their residents don't undergo abortions in their states, but also outside their borders, legal experts said.

Although it's a "dicey question" as to whether a state can regulate abortions that occur outside its borders, "you'll definitely see efforts to address the issue of abortion travel," Mitchell said.

If states “really want to reduce abortion, they’re going to have to resort to tactics that go beyond the trigger bans,” Mitchell said, such as what SB 8 did.

He added that states are "going to have to rely on private civil enforcement to overcome the unwillingness of local district attorneys to bring charges.”

The risk of criminal charges could stop many women from receiving lifesaving medical care and impact her relationship with her doctor, experts said.

For more vulnerable individuals, like victims of rape or incest, there may be a greater reluctance to report crimes to law enforcement if it complicates their ability to later pursue an abortion while under the watchful eye of law enforcement, said Krinsky of Fair and Just Prosecution.

If there are any complications from these unsafe procedures and the patient turns up at the emergency room seeking help, she may be incentivized to lie to workers or face legal repercussions, Clark said. That could prompt doctors to flag her for law enforcement.

Despite HIPAA, the federal health privacy law, in many states healthcare providers can, and sometimes must, disclose protected information to law enforcement if they believe a crime occurred. Investigators can also subpoena records, for example, from period-tracking apps to build a case against someone – or engage in other types of surveillance, which has prompted some women's health clinics to move to paper records or encrypted communications.

"There's a whole digital footprint question that’s gonna come up a lot in these cases: What research did you do? Who did you text with? Did you go to a crisis pregnancy center?" said Sussman of the National Advocates for Pregnant Women. "That’s a whole other level of potential surveillance that can be coordinated with law enforcement. What credit card purchases did you make? You can almost do nothing without leaving a trail."

Period-tracking app Clue said in a statement that the health data it collects, including about pregnancies, pregnancy loss or abortion "is kept private and safe." Because it is a European company, developed by a Berlin-based tech company, Clue is required to abide by strict protections to health data and "will not disclose it," the company said.

And for victims of domestic violence, these new anti-abortion laws may become another tool of coercion for an abuser, said TuLynn Smylie, who oversees Sojourn, a domestic violence program run by The People Concern, one of Los Angeles County's largest social services agencies.

"He could use that to threaten, 'If you leave me, I'll disclose you had an abortion or you want an abortion,'" Smylie said. "That could definitely become another element of control."

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: New abortion laws could see many women, doctors face criminal charges

Models speak out about allegedly being sexually assaulted by fashion titan Gerald Marie

"It is completely unregulated, Fashion actually thrives on the abuse of girls. I mean, they go hand in hand."

Holly Williams
Sat, June 11, 2022, 9:03 PM·3 min read

A former titan of the fashion industry is facing multiple accusations of sexual assault. Fifteen women have gone to the French authorities with allegations of sexual assault against Gerald Marie, who for decades was one of the most powerful men in the world of modeling.

Two of his accusers, Laurie Marsden and Lisa Brinkworth, shared their stories with CBS News.

"I started in New York City, and then I went to Milan, which is sort of the trajectory that a lot of models go through," Laurie Marsden said. "And then my Milanese agency said, 'Why don't you try Paris?'"

Marsden was a top model in the 1980s. She arrived in Paris at the age of 19. Her agent was Marie, who at the time was one of the most powerful men in the modeling industry. Marsden claims Marie told her she'd be a star. However, at a house party, he attacked her, Marsden said.

"He jumped on top of me and he had me pinned down," Marsden said. "And he tried to rape me. I finally got out from under him, and then I fled."

"There was no question that he was there for sex," Marsden said when asked whether she believed it was an attempted rape. "And the fact that he wasn't stopping, and the fact that he was pulling my clothes off, there came a moment where I said to myself, 'You are going to be raped.'"

Marsden says she didn't go to the police at the time because she thought she wouldn't be taken seriously.

The accusations from the 15 women were brought to French authorities in September of 2021. The alleged assaults occurred in the 1980s and 1990s.

Another one of Marie's alleged victims is Lisa Brinkworth. In 1998, Brinkworth was an undercover journalist working on a documentary about the abuse of young models. She was posing as a model herself. She says she encountered Marie at a nightclub with other modeling executives.

"Gerald Marie was next to me, and he was becoming very, very insistent that we would sleep together," Brinkworth said. "And then, all of a sudden, without any warning, he straddled me and pinned me at the back of my chair, and sort of simulated sex. And this went on for some time. I was absolutely terrified I was going to be raped. And I was shouting, 'No, no.' Then eventually he got off me."

Brinkworth says she recorded a video account immediately after the attack, which was obtained by "60 Minutes Australia."

"It was just absolutely horrific," she said in the video.

However, she says she was prevented from going to the authorities because it could have impacted the documentary.

"After dinner, Gerald Marie offers to have a drink at his house. Sometimes he just says that they need to talk about the job, and finally, when they got there, you know, he attacks them," Anne-Claire Le Jeune, a French attorney representing the 15 alleged victims, told CBS News in Paris, the world's fashion capital, where Marie once sat at the pinnacle of the modeling business.

Le Jeune says most of the alleged attacks occurred outside the French statute of limitations, too long ago for Marie to be charged. Marie is now retired.

"The modeling industry creates a perfect storm for predators," Marsden said. "You have very savvy older men, and then you have very young girls — 15, 16, 17 years old — who are thrown together."

"It is completely unregulated," Brinkworth said. "Fashion actually thrives on the abuse of girls. I mean, they go hand in hand."

Marie, who is now in his 70s, has never been charged with a crime.

"We are easily attacked," he said in a 1999 interview, when asked about some of the accusations.

His attorney told CBS News in a statement that Marie "firmly objects to the defamatory and false allegations made against him" and is "withholding his statements for the justice system."

Dr. Oz says he'll fight to end illegal immigration. A business owned by his family, in which he is a shareholder, faced the largest fine in ICE history for hiring undocumented workers.

Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert
Sun, June 12, 2022

Dr. Oz is running as a Republican for an open Senate seat in Pennsylvania.Alexi Rosenfeld/Getty Images

Dr. Oz on Sunday tweeted he will "fight to end illegal immigration" if he's elected to the Senate.


In 2017, his wife's family business faced the largest fine in ICE history for hiring undocumented immigrants.

Asplundh Tree Experts, Co. remains family-run; Dr. Oz is listed as a shareholder of the company.

In a Sunday tweet, Mehmet Oz vowed to "fight to end illegal immigration" should he be elected to the Senate, despite the fact that his family's business faced a record-breaking fine from ICE for hiring undocumented workers.

"As your United States Senator, I will fight to end illegal immigration and soft-on-crime policies that release dangerous, undocumented criminals into sanctuary cities," Oz tweeted

The former heart surgeon turned-TV personality turned-Trump-endorsed politician quickly faced backlash from users, who called Oz a liar and shared stories related to a fine levied against a business started by his wife Lisa's grandfather.



Asplundh Tree Experts, Co., a business for which Oz is listed as a shareholder on FEC documents, settled with US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement in 2017 after a six-year investigation and audit revealed a systemic effort to hire undocumented workers for their tree-pruning company.

"Asplundh Tree Experts, Co., one of the largest privately-held companies in the United States, headquartered in Willow Grove, Pennsylvania, ('Asplundh'), pleaded guilty today to unlawfully employing aliens," an ICE press release regarding the settlement read, "in connection with a scheme in which the highest levels of Asplundh management remained willfully blind while lower level managers hired and rehired employees they knew to be ineligible to work in the United States."

The company, which has donated $12,000 to Oz's Senate campaign, was sentenced to pay forfeiture in the amount of $80 million dollars and an additional $15 million dollars "to satisfy civil claims arising out of their failure to comply with immigration law," an amount which represented the largest payment ever levied in an immigration case.

"Neither Dr. Oz nor Lisa Oz have even worked at the company or had any involvement in decision-making regarding its business practices, period," campaign spokeswoman Erin Perrine told The New York Post. "The company reached a civil settlement in 2017 with the federal government with no further action taken since then. Dr. Oz and Lisa Oz are passive shareholders in the company along with 200+ other family members. As passive, minority shareholders, Dr. Oz and Lisa Oz had zero involvement in the settlement."

Dr. Oz's campaign did not respond to Insider's request for comment.

Antonucci: US actions only making things worse in Ukraine

Amy Antonucci
Sun, June 12, 2022

Amy Antonucci

I have been watching the violence between Russia and Ukraine with the same sorrow and horror as many others. I share the wish to protect people and stand up for justice and freedom. I am concerned, however, that our current approach to doing so is counter-productive and dangerous.

I have been involved with NH peace groups since the 1990s, currently serving on the board of directors for NH Peace Action. I have mourned scenes like those we are shown from Ukraine many times. I am encouraged to have so many other Americans join me in outrage over the brutal reality of war. In the past, vigiling against aggression towards Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran I have more often been yelled at and threatened. I might risk that same reaction now when I ask that people take a broader view of war and peace in the world.

Watching another military conflict unfold is heartbreaking but it has only deepened my belief in nonviolence as the only reasonable way to resolve our problems, using diplomatic solutions instead of weapons shipments. As we watch the destruction of much of Ukraine and live under the growing possibility that escalation of this conflict will lead to a nuclear war the futility and tragedy of war seems increasingly apparent.

If you have not been following foreign relations closely for decades, Russia's attack on Ukraine may be shocking and confusing. For those of us who have been engaged on these issues, it is tragic but makes sense in the context of politics and power in the world. While an invasion cannot be justified the world must understand that Russia has legitimate security concerns that need to be heard during negotiations to end the conflict.

I believe we are, in fact, especially responsible for our own country's behavior, which includes 20 years of the War on Terror, withdrawing from treaties, updating our nuclear arsenal, refusing to support the International Criminal Court (ICC), and pushing for the expansion of NATO.

None of this excuses another country's aggression, and I support bringing all leaders who initiate violence against any country to the ICC. But understanding is imperative to finding solutions and to avoiding further tragedy. If what we have been doing has not been creating a culture of peace, can we consider changing our approach?

The US response of sending weapons, refusing to join in negotiations, and adding our bellicose rhetoric instead leads to terrible destruction for Ukraine and for the world. We have seen multiple conflicts in the world exacerbated by the influx of more firepower, including Afghanistan, a particularly relevant example. The ends do not justify the means, in fact, often the process is reflected in the results. Research now shows that stable democracies are most often birthed by nonviolent struggles.

Every conflict ends the same way. People who feel they are bitter enemies sit down and work it out. The question is just how much bloodshed and destruction will there be between now and then. Committing to the difficult work of negotiation and peace-making is daunting but worthwhile. Here in NH we have the example of the Portsmouth Peace Treaty of 1905 to remind us of what is possible. Considered one of history's great peace negotiations, officials and NH citizens helped to end the Russo-Japanese War, an achievement we continue to honor and can still learn from today.

In my years of working on these issues I have seen that people everywhere are more alike than different, that we can understand each other and bridge divides if we hold on to our own and each other's humanity. I wish I could convey the world I know is possible if we commit to moving ahead with humility, a willingness to learn, and to see all others as our equals.

As Martin Luther King, Jr. said: "It is no longer a choice, my friends, between violence and nonviolence. It is either nonviolence or nonexistence." In these times of nuclear weapons and environmental problems, we see how intertwined our fates are.

I hope that this experience will lead to many expanding the circle of their compassion to places and people who might look and live differently than we do. I hope that even when attention has shifted away from Ukraine, people will remember the horror of war - every war, not just this one - and support actions and policies to address the root causes of conflict and lead to a more peaceful world.

Amy Antonucci of Barrington has been involved in agriculture, the arts and activism in Seacoast NH for 30 years. She has especially worked on issues of environmental health, sustainable agriculture, human rights and peace.

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: U.S. actions only making things worse for Ukraine, rest of the world

Fish leather is here, it’s sustainable – and it’s made from invasive species to boot



Richard Luscombe in Miami

THE GUARDIAN
Sun, June 12, 2022

Aarav Chavda has been diving off the coast of Florida for years. Each time he became increasingly depressed by the ever-growing void, as colourful species of fish and coral reefs continued to disappear.

A significant reason for that disappearance is the lionfish, an invasive species that has boomed in Atlantic waters from Florida to the Caribbean in recent decades, and in numerous other places from Brazil and Mexico to the Mediterranean.

Lionfish have no natural predators outside their native range – in the Indian and Pacific Oceans and the Red Sea – and are all-consuming, devouring an estimated 79% of young marine life within five weeks of entering a coral reef system. “You can see the impacts on the reefs when you dive now – it’s less vibrant, it’s less cacophonous,” Chavda said.

“We know there are solutions for some of the problems – such as coral-friendly sunscreens to help protect the reefs – but nobody’s been able to do anything about the lionfish.”

So Chavda and a team of ecologically aware fellow scuba enthusiasts decided to act by establishing Inversa, which turns lionfish into a new product: fish leather. On Wednesday, World Oceans Day, the team was recognised as one of nine finalists in the Global Ocean Resilience Innovation Challenge (Oric).

Chavda, 27, and his childhood friend from Texas, Roland Salatino, set up the Florida-based company to make the leather. They process the fish hides by tanning them with drying agents and dye them before selling the leather to partner companies to fashion into high-end products including wallets, belts and handbags. Fish skin is thin but because the fibre structure runs crossways, it is stronger than many other types of leather.

Each hide, Chavda says, can save up to 70,000 native reef fish.

The hides are also more sustainable than traditional animal leathers, which generally require grazing on huge amounts of pasture – degrading soils and producing high carbon emissions.

Inversa does not hunt the lionfish itself. Instead, it relies on educating and encouraging largely poor fishermen and women in often remote places to catch them.

“A lot of the geographies, especially the lower-income Caribbean area, have no market at all [for lionfish] – and so this fish is not only destroying the coral reefs, which sustain these fishing cooperatives’ livelihoods, but they also can’t do anything about it,” Chavda said.

“They could hunt lionfish, but that takes time, and it means they’re not hunting other things. They’d be spending their precious time not on lobster, not on grouper – so it’s very unfortunate.”

Related: Crab-22: how Norway’s fisheries got rich – but on an invasive species

The Inversa project that impressed the Oric judges seeks to address that problem. The company is proposing to set up well-equipped fishing cooperatives in Quintana Roo, Mexico, by underwriting the fishers’ risk with a “100% catch-to-cash guarantee” for lionfish. This would finance the purchase of equipment, then offer premium incentives and prompt payment for lionfish.

“We’re really sort of empowering the consumer and fashion by doing something for the planet – then we empower dive communities in the fishing cooperatives all throughout the Caribbean to do something for themselves,” Chavda said.

#ABOLISHSCOTUS

How the Supreme Court's major climate case could change the course of Biden's presidency

John Fritze, USA TODAY

Sat, June 11, 2022

WASHINGTON – Fifteen years ago, a divided Supreme Court ruled the federal government had the power to regulate carbon dioxide from car emissions – a decision hailed by environmentalists as a landmark win in the effort to curb climate change.

But as the high court prepares to decide another major climate case in the coming days and resolve a controversy over water pollution this fall, the mood among environmental groups is more gloomy – and the sense of foreboding, experts say, is likely justified.

That's not only because the Supreme Court is more conservative than it has been in decades – and perhaps more willing to reconsider precedent – but also because environmental rules are caught up in a broader fight over whether federal agencies may regulate businesses without explicit approval from Congress.

The answer to that question will have sweeping implications for President Joe Biden's administration beyond the Environmental Protection Agency if Republicans capture control of Congress this year. Presidents of both parties often turn to agency regulations when they’re unable to move their agenda through Congress – even though those policies frequently run into trouble in court.

"Environmentalists are holding their breath to see just how bad it will be," said Robert Percival, director of the environmental law program at the University of Maryland. "It seems likely that they're going to be making major cutbacks in the EPA's authority."

Power plant emissions

In one of the most significant climate cases to reach the high court in years, the justices will soon decide whether the EPA may regulate carbon emissions from power plants. Nineteen states, led by West Virginia, challenged climate regulations approved by the Obama administration and later abandoned by President Donald Trump.

The decision will land as scientists and international groups issue dire warnings about the Earth's changing climate. A United Nations report in April found that without significant and immediate emission reductions, limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius – a threshold that risks more severe effects – would be "beyond reach."

As the Supreme Court prepares to decide a major climate case in the coming days and resolve a controversy over water pollution this fall, the mood among environmental groups is more gloomy.

The debate over how much leeway federal agencies have to regulate isn’t limited to the environment. Recent Supreme Court decisions striking down a nationwide eviction moratorium – a policy crafted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic – and blocking a mandate that employers create vaccine-or-testing programs raised the same issues.

In the eviction case, the Trump and Biden administrations relied on a 1944 public health law that lets officials "make and enforce such regulations" as they deem "necessary to prevent the…spread of communicable diseases." But the law, the court said, doesn’t say anything specifically about halting evictions during a pandemic.

"It strains credulity to believe" Congress meant to give the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "the sweeping authority" it used to impose the moratorium, a majority of the court ruled in August. "We expect Congress to speak clearly when authorizing an agency to exercise powers of 'vast economic and political significance.'"

President Barack Obama's EPA required states to reduce emissions by shifting power plants away from coal. The Supreme Court blocked enforcement of those rules in 2016 and Trump repealed them a year later, prompting a new round of lawsuits. While the court’s three liberal justices signaled support for the EPA during oral arguments in February, the court’s six-member conservative bloc was harder to read.

One of the issues the justices debated then was the "major questions doctrine," the principle that Congress can delegate some decisions to agencies but not those that involve "vast" economic or political matters. One sticky issue with that doctrine is that there’s no clear definition of "vast significance." Those who oppose the doctrine say that if a law is vague then Congress intended to give agencies wide deference to interpret it.

Another case the high court will take up later this year deals with the 1972 Clean Water Act which requires Americans to obtain a permit before putting certain pollutants into the "waters of the United States." The law doesn’t define exactly what that term means.

In 2007, a couple began building a home near Idaho's Priest Lake, but the EPA asserted their lot contained wetlands subject to federal regulation.

In one of the most significant climate cases to reach the high court in years, the justices will soon decide whether the EPA may regulate carbon emissions from power plants.

The couple told the court last year that the agency's interpretation was "emblematic of all that has gone wrong with the implementation of the Clean Water Act." Their lot, they said, doesn't include a stream, river, or lake – the kind of navigable waterways usually covered by the federal requirements.

But the Biden administration countered in court filings that EPA's designation was made eight years before the family bought the property and that the couple dumped nearly 2,000 cubic yards of gravel and sand to fill the wetlands anyway. The wetlands are adjacent to water that eventually feeds into Priest Lake, the government concluded.

'Pushing the boundaries of their powers'

Legal experts point to several factors they say explain why complicated questions about agency power pop up so often in environmental cases. Some of it has to do with how the legal system works broadly as it weighs the impact of laws and regulations.

One of the challenges environmentalists face in federal court is demonstrating the cost of not protecting the environment. It's easier for industries to quantify the expense of updating a power plant to reduce emissions, for instance, than it is to tally up the costs that climate change may impose on an entire society.

"Because we all bear the costs of pollution, the benefits of regulation are often spread broadly, while the costs of reducing pollution are concentrated where they belong – on polluters," said Sambhav Sankar, senior vice president of programs at Earthjustice, an environmental law group.

And while there's often an economic incentive for industries to challenge environmental regulations, there's not always a similarly powerful force to support those rules.

"So that means that this is always a target for pro-industry conservatives," Sankar said. "And when these cases show up in court, the court sometimes struggles to appreciate the value of regulation to society as a whole."

Adam White, a senior fellow at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said the agencies themselves also have a role to play. Administrations may decide that getting legislation through Congress is impossible and so turn to regulations instead. Lawmakers may not be compelled to take a difficult vote if they think the administration is going to act on its own. And agencies, sometimes, may just overstep their authority.

"The agencies with a lot of political wind in their sails have a kind of emergency mentality that they need to do as much as they can as fast as they can," said White, who is also the co-director of the Center for the Study of the Administrative State at George Mason University. "They end up pushing the boundaries of their powers."

Another problem with deferring to agencies, White argued, is that their leadership changes every time a new president is sworn into office.

The upside to that, he said, is that presidential elections "have consequences."

"But the downside is that every four or eight years you get a total overhaul in regulatory policy," White said. "At some point, everybody – the courts, the private sector, all of us – we can look at this and say, 'That's no way to run a country.'"

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court climate case may have big implications for Joe Biden

WTO holds big meeting to tackle vaccines, food shortages

JAMEY KEATEN
Sun, June 12, 2022, 

GENEVA (AP) — The head of the World Trade Organization predicted a “bumpy and rocky" road as it opened its highest-level meeting in 4-1/2 years on Sunday, with issues like pandemic preparedness, food insecurity and overfishing of the world’s seas on the agenda.

At a time when some question WTO's relevance, Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala hopes the meeting involving more than 120 ministers from the group's 164 member countries yields progress toward reducing inequality and ensuring fair and free trade.

Okonjo-Iweala acknowledged the Geneva-based trade body needs reform but said she was cautiously optimistic that a deal might be reached on at least one of the meeting’s main ambitions like fisheries or COVID vaccines.

“The road will be bumpy and rocky. There may be a few landmines on the way,” Okonjo-Iweala said. “We’ll have to navigate those landmines and see how we can successfully land one or two deliverables.”

In her opening address, she said a “trust deficit” had emerged over the years following the failure of negotiations known as the Doha Round more than a decade ago.

“The negativism is compounded by the negative advocacy of some think tanks and civil society groups here in Geneva and elsewhere who believe the WTO is not working for people," she said. "This is, of course, not true, although we’ve not been able to clearly demonstrate it.”

She cited an array of crises facing the world such as the COVID-19 pandemic; environmental crises like droughts, floods and heat waves; and inflationary pressures that have been compounded by food shortages and higher fuel costs linked to Russia's war in Ukraine. She noted higher prices are“hitting poor people the hardest.”

“With history looming over us, with that multilateral system seemingly fragile, this is the time to invest in it, not to retreat from it,” Okonjo-Iweala said. “This is the time to summon the much-needed political will to show that the WTO can be part of the solution to the multiple crises, the global commons that we face.”

The WTO chief insisted that trade has lifted 1 billion people out of poverty, but poorer countries – and poor people in richer ones – are often left behind.

Blockaded ports in Ukraine have impeded exports of up to 25 million tons of grain from the key European breadbasket.

Ministers at the meeting will consider whether to lift or ease export restrictions on food to help countries facing a shortage of wheat, fertilizer and other products because of the war in Ukraine. They also will decide whether to increase support for the U.N.’s World Food Program to help needy countries around the world.

“I strongly urge the WTO members with the capabilities to commit at MC12 to exempt their donations to the World Food Program from any export restrictions,” said Katherine Tai, the U.S. trade representative, referring to the 12th ministerial conference at the WTO.

Okonjo-Iweala hopes the member nations, which make decisions by consensus, also can strike an agreement about whether to temporarily waive WTO’s protections of intellectual property on COVID-19 vaccines.

The topic has generated months of contentious negotiations. The pharmaceutical industry wants to protect its innovations while advocacy groups say the pandemic's devastation merits an exemption to the usual rules and developing countries say they need better access to vaccines.





WTO Ministers MeetingProtestors hold up banners during a demonstration against the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Geneva, Switzerland, Saturday, June 11, 2022. For the first time in 4 1/2 years, after a pandemic pause, government ministers from WTO countries will gather for four days starting Sunday. (Valentin Flauraud/Keystone via AP)

Some experts and diplomats say two decades of WTO efforts to limit overfishing in the world's seas appears to be as close as it ever has to reaching a deal.

The draft text on fisheries aims to limit government subsidies — such as for fuel — to fishing boats or workers who take part in “illegal, unreported and unreported” fishing, or national subsidies that contribute to “overcapacity or overfishing.” Some workers in developing countries could qualify for exemptions.

“This agreement is crucial to the 260 million people around the world whose livelihoods depend directly or indirectly on marine fisheries,” Okonjo-Iweala said. “It is also central to the sustainability of our oceans, where the latest studies show close to 50% of stocks for which we have data are overfished.”

An umbrella group of nongovernmental groups, “Our World Is Not For Sale,” said over 50 NGOs were stripped of access that they had been previously granted to attend the opening day events.

WTO spokesman Daniel Pruzin said that because of “space limitations” at WTO and events inside, “we were unfortunately unable to grant accredited NGOs access, both civil society groups as well as business groups.” He said they would be granted access for the rest of the ministerial starting Monday.

The World Trade Organization, created in 1995 as a successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, has seen a slow unraveling — often because U.S. objections have largely hamstrung its dispute-resolution system.

The WTO hasn’t produced a major trade deal in years. The last one, reached nearly a decade ago, was an agreement that cut red tape on goods clearing borders and was billed as a boost to lower-income countries.

 

Food vs fuel: Ukraine war increases scrutiny on use of crops for energy

Madeleine Bruder

 

Soaring food prices caused by the war in Ukraine have increased the risk of famine, raising pressure on producers of low-carbon fuels derived from crops and sparking a “food versus biofuel” debate.

Before Russia’s invasion, global biofuel production was at a record high. In the US, the leading biofuels producer, 36 per cent of total corn production went into biofuels last year, while biodiesel accounted for 40 per cent of soyabean oil supplies.

But some food companies and policymakers are calling for an easing of mandates for blending biofuels into petrol and diesel to increase global grain and vegetable oil supplies.

“Now is not the time [for governments] to be encouraging the conversion of food crops to energy through artificial policy incentives or mandatory blending targets,” said the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute.

Between them, Russia and Ukraine produce nearly a fifth of the world’s corn and more than half its sunflower oil, but crop exports from the countries are at a fraction of prewar levels. Hundreds of millions of people are at risk of “hunger and destitution” because of food shortages caused by the war, the UN’s secretary-general warned last week.

The total amount of crops used annually for biofuels is equal to the calorie consumption of 1.9bn people, according to data firm Gro Intelligence, highlighting the volume of agricultural commodities that could be diverted from energy use if the food security crisis worsened.

Do biofuels cause problems in food markets?

Biofuels — ethanol made from corn and sugarcane and biodiesel made from vegetable oils including soyabean oil and palm oil — have been blended into motor fuel since the early 2000s to boost energy supplies and reduce the environmental impact of fossil fuels.

Biofuels were blamed in part for the last food crisis in 2007-08. Studies, including from the World Bank and IMF, suggested that the growth of biofuels contributed 20-50 per cent to the price increase of corn during the crisis. Their rising use was described as “a crime against humanity” by the UN’s then-food rights rapporteur.

But biofuel producers argue they have played a minimal role this time around. “Biofuels didn’t cause this crisis — either the price or the contraction in supply,” said James Cogan of Ethanol Europe, an industry lobby group.

High prices are not about demand but reflect “erratic trading conditions and high energy prices”, he added. Reducing biofuel production “wouldn’t materially ease the price crisis”.

Would limits on biofuels reduce world hunger?

A 50 per cent reduction in the grain used for biofuels in Europe and the US would compensate for all the lost exports of Ukrainian wheat, corn, barley and rye, according to the World Resources Institute, a Washington think-tank.

Although crop production has risen along with biofuel output, meaning the amount available for food supplies has not decreased, biofuel usage cannot rise exponentially without damage to the environment, campaigners said.

“In a world that is food insecure, we need to be thinking really critically about these limited resources as we try to feed the world and solve the climate crisis,” said Oliver James, a researcher at Princeton University who helped compile the WRI data.

Maik Marahrens, of Brussels-based environmental campaign group Transport & Environment, said that in the EU, about 10,000 tonnes of wheat, equal to 15mn loaves of bread, are burnt daily as ethanol in cars.

The ethanol industry says such comparisons are unfair. Most of the grain used to produce fuel is feed wheat, which goes into animal food, rather than milling wheat, which is made into bread, the industry has argued.

Biofuel sector executives said the amount of wheat used for biofuels was negligible — about 2 per cent of the total crop, according to industry association UFOP.

“In that context, it’s a bit surreal to be elevating wheat ethanol even to a topic of conversation in the current crisis about bread,” said Eric Sievers, director of investments at ClonBio, which owns Europe’s largest grain biorefinery, located in Hungary, as well as at Ethanol Europe.

A Russian missile in a winter wheat field in Soledar, in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region © Gleb Garanich/Reuters

Would it be more harmful to limit biofuels?

Industry executives argue that biofuels create efficiencies that nourish animals and, indirectly, humans.

The industry is a significant producer of animal feed since the process of turning grains into ethanol creates protein and fat by-products that are fed to chickens, cows and pigs.

Citing the impact on the EU alone, Cogan said limits on biofuel production “would result in lost renewable energy, lost energy independence, lost jobs, lost farm income security, increased fossil fuel imports, increased carbon emissions and increased soy meal imports [for animal feed] from the Americas”. 

Are biofuel policies changing?

In the EU, Belgium and Germany are considering easing biofuel blending mandates to address food security.

The International Energy Agency cut its biofuels growth forecast for this year by 20 per cent, forecasting global demand to increase 5 per cent from 2021 to 8.5bn litres.

In the US, where cheaper corn-based ethanol is the main biofuel, Washington has tried to tamp down rising gasoline prices by allowing the higher blending level, normally cut during the summer months because of polluting concerns, to temporarily continue.

But government incentives for biodiesel and the decline in global exports from Ukraine have added to competition for soyabean oil, squeezing supplies for US food groups.

“[Soyabean oil suppliers] can’t give me a [price] quote because they can’t take my business. There’s not enough oil to go around,” said Ed Cinco, purchasing director at Schwebel’s, a bakery in Ohio.

While China has warned ethanol producers that it will “strictly control processing of fuel ethanol from corn”, India is pushing ahead with targets to raise blending quotas. Prices for sugar, the country’s main bioethanol feedstock, have increased less than other crops.

Although co-ordinated action on food security has moved swiftly up the agenda, there has been little debate on limits to biofuels at an international level.

Instead, countries using biofuels must balance food security and sustainability with energy costs and independence, said Nicolas Denis, a partner at McKinsey. Governments need to decide “what sustainable use of land looks like, given the different priorities”, he added.

SEE LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for BIOFUEL