New ‘Climate Superfund' Laws Face Widening Legal Challenges
If the law can survive intensifying legal challenges, that is.
On Thursday, the Justice Department filed federal lawsuits against Vermont and New York, the only other state to have enacted a climate superfund law, arguing that the measures were 'a brazen attempt to grab power from the federal government' and force others to pay for the states' infrastructure spending.
Hours later, West Virginia's attorney general, John B. McCuskey, announced that he was leading another challenge to Vermont's law, saying the measure would 'fine America's coal, oil and natural gas suppliers into oblivion.'
Mr. McCuskey had already filed a similar lawsuit against New York's law, which seeks $75 billion from oil and gas companies over the next 25 years. On Thursday, he said Vermont's version might be 'even more dangerous' because it has no monetary cap.
He and 23 other attorneys general are seeking to join a lawsuit filed late last year by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute, an industry group, in federal court in Vermont.
West Virginia is a major producer of natural gas and coal. Its complaint argues that the activities of fossil-fuel companies are legal and that 'Vermont seeks to have its cake and eat it too, by both reaping the benefits of affordable and reliable fuel, yet penalizing the entities that help produce such fuel.'
The climate superfund laws are modeled on the federal Superfund program to clean up hazardous waste sites. Under that program, which has been in existence for decades, old waste dumps or contaminated industrial sites are cleaned up and the companies that contributed to the contamination must help pay the cleanup bill.
The new climate superfund laws are based on the fact that the burning of fossil fuels, which produces planet-warming carbon dioxide and other gases, is the main driver of climate change. So the laws allow states to seek money from fossil fuel producers to help cover the costs of global warming. Similar bills are gaining momentum in several other states, including California, New Jersey and Massachusetts.
Patrick Parenteau, an environmental law expert at Vermont Law and Graduate School, called the Justice Department cases 'virtue signaling' and said he expected them to be dismissed. In the Chamber of Commerce lawsuit, he expects the state to argue that the lawsuit is premature, since officials are still in the midst of deciding how to apply the law, and that the chamber has no standing to sue since it is not directly affected by the measure.
Julie Moore, secretary of the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, who is named in both filings, said her office was reviewing the details of the cases. She added that the Justice Department action was 'not unexpected' given President Trump's April 8 executive order, 'Protecting American Energy From State Overreach.'
That order specifically cited the new Vermont and New York laws, calling them akin to extortion and saying they threaten the country's economic and national security.
Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, who is named in the Justice Department lawsuit, said Thursday that the climate superfund law 'ensures that those who contributed to the climate crisis help pay for the damage they caused.'
Meghan Greenfield, an environmental lawyer who previously worked at the Justice Department and Environmental Protection Agency and is now a partner at the firm Jenner & Block, said legal challenges to such a novel law were inevitable. Some of the arguments being used against the measures are also new and untested in this context, like one about 'equal sovereignty' between states, which is the idea that they should be treated uniformly by the federal government, she said.
'It's kind of hard to predict how it all will go, because we're looking at different layers here, a new kind of law, and new kinds of challenges against that law,' she said.
She said she expected further challenges to more traditional state climate laws as well, such as New York and California measures that specify how much of a state's power supply should come from clean energy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration pushes states to exclude immigrant students from in-state tuition
Texas let undocumented young people qualify for in-state college tuition for 24 years. President Donald Trump convinced the state to unravel the policy in a matter of hours. Since returning to the White House, Trump's Justice Department has launched legal challenges against laws in Texas, Kentucky and Minnesota that allow undocumented students to pay the tuition rate reserved for state residents. That price can often be half of what out-of-state students are responsible for. Discounting tuition for undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children has a long bipartisan history. Texas' law was signed by Republican then-Gov. Rick Perry and 23 red and blue states, plus the District of Columbia, followed, a political mood that's now reversing: Florida repealed its 2014 in-state tuition law this February. There are about 408,000 undocumented students representing less than 2 percent of those in college. The Justice Department argues these tuition laws unfairly offer a benefit to foreigners that is unavailable to U.S. citizens and legal residents living in a neighboring state. The legal offensive to roll back these laws, which is poised to spread, serves as another sign of how thoroughly the second Trump administration is going about enacting the president's promise to discourage illegal immigration and promote 'self-deportation.' 'This was something that used to not be political,' Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, said of the in-state tuition policies for undocumented students. 'It was the idea that if this is the only country you've ever known, that more than likely you will be here your entire life, and we should want you to be educated and productive.' But Kentucky's Republican attorney general, Russell Coleman, sided with Trump this summer, urging the state's council on postsecondary education to 'withdraw its regulation rather than litigate what I believe will be, and should be, a losing fight.' Texas, the first state the DOJ targeted with a lawsuit this year, ended its policy in coordination with the White House. The maneuver came after Attorney General Ken Paxton entered into a joint motion with the Justice Department, agreeing that providing in-state tuition to undocumented students wasn't constitutional. 'In-state tuition for illegal immigrants in Texas has ended,' Republican Gov. Greg Abbott wrote in a post on X last month. The policies are crumbling at a time when college enrollment — and the tuition dollars it brings in — fell about 15 percent between 2010 and 2021, according to the National Center for Education Statistics' most recent report. The math is also looking complicated for many schools because the State Department could impose restrictions on international student enrollment, and there is an overall decline in the number of high school seniors. But the Trump administration said states have created laws that favor undocumented students over U.S. citizens. 'Under federal law, schools cannot provide benefits to illegal aliens that they do not provide to U.S. citizens,' Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement to POLITICO. 'The Justice Department will relentlessly fight to vindicate federal law and ensure that U.S. citizens are not treated like second-class citizens anywhere in the country.' About 119,000 undocumented students are protected under the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program, which spurred in-state tuition laws for these students and received bipartisan support for years. Now, many Republicans are turning against such policies. Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.) introduced the Florida bill in December that eventually ended the tuition break while serving in the state Legislature. He said the laws Trump is challenging amount to incentives for immigrants to cross the border. 'It's immoral to give in-state tuition to someone who shouldn't even be in America,' Fine said in an interview. 'Think about it. A Georgian who wants to go to Florida State is paying more to go to a Florida institution than a foreigner. It's just not right to do and that's why we cleaned it up in Florida. It's time for illegals to go home.' The Florida repeal took effect in July, prompting concern from education advocates who say the legislation could result in Florida institutions losing nearly $15 million in tuition and fees from potential drops in enrollment. In Texas, advocates say more than $461 million annually is at stake. 'What I know for certain is that a significant number of students are living with anxiety,' said Manuel Gonzalez, vice chair of the Austin Community College Board of Trustees, which is suing over Trump's challenge against Texas. 'Not just about how they're going to afford college, but how are they going to navigate an increasingly more hostile political climate that often vilifies their existence.' The National Immigration Law Center, alongside a host of organizations including the ACLU of Texas and Democracy Forward, are seeking to defend the Texas policy, challenging both the outcome and the process that led the state to gut its law. Education advocates argue that making college more expensive is hardly a deterrent for undocumented immigrants looking for a better life for their families. 'Nobody from Guatemala or Mexico starts googling and thinking, 'What state should I move to so that after my child finishes their education, they'll be able to get in-state tuition to a college?'' said Gaby Pacheco, president of The which advocates for DACA students' college education. The policies remain alive in more than 20 states, including California, New York, Kentucky and Minnesota, but opposition from Republicans is rising. A bill to block 'undocumented noncitizens' from accessing Minnesota's North Star Promise program, which makes college tuition free for state residents whose families make less than $80,000 a year, moved through the statehouse during the previous legislative session. Roughly 500 students a year qualify for in-state tuition in Minnesota under the state's Dream Act. The Trump administration's challenges stem from the president's April executive order that directed agencies to crack down on policies that benefit undocumented people and deemed in-state tuition laws illegal. On Wednesday, the Education Department announced five new probes into University of Louisville, University of Nebraska Omaha, University of Miami, University of Michigan and Western Michigan University, arguing that their scholarships for undocumented students are discriminatory. If Kentucky and Minnesota fold alongside Texas, other states could be vulnerable to the administration's efforts, immigration experts fear. 'Just as Texas was the first state to pass a Dream Act in 2001, later inspiring 23 other states and the District of Columbia to pass similar laws, this wrongful and undemocratic repeal of the law is now being pushed as a blueprint to undemocratically end in-state tuition, militarize college campuses and persecute students in other states,' Juan Jose Martinez-Guevara, Texas advocacy manager of the nonprofit United We Dream, said at a Tuesday press conference. Immigration advocates say there is supposed to be a legal carveout specifically for DACA students that allows them to pay in-state tuition rates, but confusion over the law has some Texas colleges charging those students the out-of-state rates. A DOJ spokesperson declined to comment on whether DACA students should be considered exempt. The number of DACA students is dwindling — both because of the program's 2007 arrival cutoff and legal challenges from the first Trump administration and others seeking to end it — but the president's actions could have long-lasting consequences, political analysts say. Trump's legal challenges contradict earlier promises to 'work with the Democrats on a plan' — as he noted in December — for Dreamers. That dissonance might cost Republicans some of the votes Trump received in 2024, particularly from independents and Hispanic Americans, said Brendan Steinhauser, an Austin-based political consultant who's worked with Texas Republicans such as Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Dan Crenshaw. 'He definitely did really, really well with Hispanic Americans, especially in South Texas and other places,' Steinhauser said. 'But he's not running for reelection. So, he may just think, well, it doesn't matter what his approval numbers are.' Steinhauser also insisted the president's legal challenges are in line with his larger crackdown on immigration. 'It's symbolic, yes, but it's all real,' he said. 'And it's having an impact, I believe, in the same way that these raids are having an impact on incentives.' Elena Schneider contributed to this report. Solve the daily Crossword
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Ghislaine Maxwell's meetings with Justice Department shrouded in secrecy
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche completed nine hours of meetings over two days with Ghislaine Maxwell on Friday but made no public statements about what she said or the next steps in the Justice Department's much-criticized Jeffrey Epstein investigation. Former prosecutors said it was highly unusual — and potentially unprecedented — for a the department's No. 2 official to personally interview a witness. Secrecy in a criminal investigation is normal, but the prosecutors involved in the case would typically be included in questioning. 'I've never heard of a deputy attorney general doing anything like this before,' said a former senior Justice Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Victims of Epstein and Maxwell, who was convicted in 2021 of recruiting and grooming multiple teenage girls to be sexually abused by the late financier, questioned the lack of transparency as well. Jack Scarola, a lawyer representing roughly 20 Epstein victims, said he asked to attend the Maxwell interviews but was not included. Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor in New York, said the interviews by Blanche, who worked as Trump's former defense lawyer, may be performative. 'It may be just a way of being able to say, 'Look, we dotted every I and crossed every T,'' she said. 'There's value to being able to say that we've tried to speak to everyone we possibly could, including the co-defendant.' Attorney General Pam Bondi, Blanche and President Donald Trump himself have struggled to quell the uproar since the DOJ and FBI announced on July 6 that an exhaustive Epstein case review had not uncovered evidence that justified investigating other individuals. FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino — who haveboth spread conspiracy theories about the Epstein case — backed those findings and a DOJ decision to release no other Epstein case documents. Catherine Christian, a former Manhattan assistant district attorney and an NBC News legal analyst, said the Maxwell interviews could also be an effort to protect Trump, who now faces one of the largest political crises of his second term in the furor over the Epstein investigation. Trump, like dozens of other wealthy Americans, socialized with Epstein. He is among hundreds of individuals whose names appear in 100,000 pages of Epstein case documents reviewed by the DOJ and the FBI. 'It's hard to believe this is anything but performative,' Christian said. 'Or Todd Blanche, just wanting to have her on the record saying, 'Yes, President Trump had nothing to do with any of this. He was not a client.'' What was Maxwell asked? Maxwell's lawyer, David Oscar Markus, is a top Florida criminal defense lawyer and a friend of Blanche's. Blanche appeared on Markus' podcast in 2024, where the host praised Blanche's legal skills. After Friday's meeting with Blanche and Maxwell, Markus told reporters that the deputy attorney general 'did an amazing job' and asked Maxwell thorough questions. 'She was asked maybe about 100 different people,' said Markus, who did not disclose which individuals Maxwell was questioned about. 'She answered questions about everybody, and she didn't hold anything back,' he said. 'They asked about every single, every possible thing you could imagine, everything.' A senior administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said that Maxwell was granted limited immunity by the Justice Department to answer questions about the Epstein case. Granting limited immunity is common in criminal cases and allows defendants to provide information without fear that it will be used against them in court. The immunity is 'limited' because it only applies if the defendant is telling the truth. If it is determined that a defendant lied during the interviews, then the agreement becomes void. Prosecutors can take into consideration a defendant's cooperation and recommend a plea deal or a reduced sentence. This is not expected in Maxwell's case, as she has already been convicted and sentenced to 20 years in federal prison. Maxwell's lawyer, Markus, has argued that Maxwell's trial was unfair and an appeal of her conviction is pending before the Supreme Court. Potential pardon or commutation Trump, like all presidents, has the power to pardon or commute the sentence of anyone convicted of a federal crime. Asked about Epstein's case on Friday morning, Trump said the focus should be on other people who socialized with Epstein, such as former President Bill Clinton and Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary and Harvard University president. 'You should focus on Clinton,' the president told reporters. 'You should focus on the president of Harvard, the former president of Harvard. You should focus on some of the hedge fund guys.' 'I'll give you a list. These guys lived with Jeffrey Epstein. I sure as hell didn't,' Trump said. Asked if he was considering granting Maxwell a pardon or commuting her sentence, Trump said, 'It's something I haven't thought about.' 'I'm allowed to do it,' he added. Mimi Rocah, a former federal prosecutor in New York, said she believes the recent firing of Maurene Comey, a lead prosecutor in the Maxwell case and the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, was an effort to give Trump appointees full control of the Maxwell case, limit transparency and silence dissent. 'That does not seem coincidental. It seems like they wanted Maurene not to be present in the Department of Justice,' Rocah said. 'To be able to say, 'What the heck, you can't go talk to my client or my defendant.'' Rocah, a Democrat who served as Westchester County district attorney from 2020 to 2024, criticized Blanche's meetings with Maxwell, saying his apparent failure to include a prosecutor with deep knowledge of her crimes was unfair to Epstein's victims. 'The head of that entire institution that is supposed to be about protecting victims is talking to her, giving her a platform to say God knows what, without much way to verify it or not,' Rocah said. 'The real people who could test her truth-telling are the people who worked on the case, not Todd.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
George Conway says Trump not ruling out Maxwell clemency ‘just insane'
Attorney George Conway criticized President Trump on Friday for not completely ruling out a pardon for convicted sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell at the center of the Jeffrey Epstein case. His words came after Trump told reporters earlier in the day that he was 'allowed' to grant Maxwell clemency but hadn't considered taking the measure. 'She is a sexual predator. She was found guilty of doing these things. She [was] found guilty of, she would take the passports away from these girls, who they dragged to Epstein island. She did all of this stuff,' Conway said during an appearance on CNN's 'The Lead with Jake Tapper.' 'She's neck deep, way in.' 'And so the notion that they would give her clemency is just insane,' he added. Conway, a staunch Trump critic, joins a chorus of Democrats and even some conservatives who are railing against the Trump administration for failing to release files related to the Epstein case. Epstein, who died in prison in 2019, and Maxwell, who's now serving a 20-year sentence, were convicted for sex trafficking and other charges. Maxwell appealed her guilty verdict and is fighting to have her case heard before the Supreme Court. This week, she met with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche about the case. During those meetings, the Justice Department granted her limited immunity in exchange for her candor, ABC News reported. However, some, including Conway, said she can't be trusted. 'The Justice Department trashed on her credibility back when they prosecuted her,' he told Tapper on Friday. 'They said that she couldn't be trusted under oath.' Trump was notified that his name was listed in files tied to Epstein's dealings earlier this year. But the president denies any wrongdoing and says those seeking information about his involvement with the deceased financier are engaging in a 'witch hunt.'
