Earth science societies take on US climate report after Trump administration dismisses researchers
Follow
Only days after the Trump administration dismissed authors of a congressionally mandated climate report, two of the biggest and most reputable Earth science societies announced they will pick up the slack and pursue a collection of reports in its place.
The announcement Friday morning from the American Geophysical Union and American Meteorological Society is a solicitation for authors to contribute scientific studies that would have gone into the Sixth National Climate Assessment.
The new research will be published in a special collection across 29 peer-reviewed research journals. The official assessment was on track to publish in 2028. It is unclear whether the administration will seek to publish an assessment with a different viewpoint.
'The new special collection does not replace the NCA but instead creates a mechanism for this important work to continue,' the AGU and AMS said in a joint statement.
The move is a pointed response to the administration's actions to either abandon the NCA entirely or produce an alternate report downplaying the threat climate change poses to the United States, according to Brandon Jones, president of AGU.
The dismissals followed other attacks on climate science and efforts to defund climate research, Jones told CNN.
He compared the special collection of studies to a library that will grow over time. 'We're responding in this collaborative way with a sibling society to stand up for science and maintain the missions that we hold dear as societal organizations,' Jones said.
Congress mandated the NCA to be produced every four years, with the next one due out by the end of Trump's second term in office. The assessment provides detailed information on how the climate crisis is affecting the US in terms of extreme weather impacts, adaptation and mitigation options for the country as well as regions, states and localities.
The administration sent an email to about 400 of the report's authors earlier this week, many of them located in academia, and told them their work was no longer needed as the assessment is being rethought.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
16 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump administration pulls billions in funding for high-speed rail project
The Trump administration has canceled billions of dollars in funding for California's high-speed rail project after the state agency rejected the federal government's assessment of the project's failings. The Federal Railroad Administration pulled $4 billion in funding on Wednesday that was intended for construction in the Central Valley, according to a letter that acting FRA administrator Drew Feeley sent to the project's chief executive officer Ian Choudri. Department of Transportation Secretary Duffy has also asked the FRA to review other grants related to the project. The agency said it will consult with the Department of Justice on potentially clawing back other funds. Duffy blamed state leaders for the 'mismanagement' of plans for the train. 'Governor Newsom and the complicit Democrats have enabled this waste for years. Federal dollars are not a blank check – they come with a promise to deliver results. After over a decade of failures, CHSRA's mismanagement and incompetence has proven it cannot build its train to nowhere on time or on budget,' Duffy said in a statement Wednesday. 'It's time for this boondoggle to die.' On X, Duffy said that Newsom and California 'are the definition of government incompetence and possibly corruption.' In response, Newsom said he 'won't be taking advice from the guy who can't keep planes in the sky.' President Donald Trump, a vocal critic of the project who has vowed to defund it, said the decision to pull funding saves taxpayers' money. 'I am thrilled to announce that I have officially freed you from funding California's disastrously overpriced 'high speed train to nowhere,' Trump wrote on social media. 'The railroad we were promised still does not exist, and never will. This project was severely overpriced, overregulated and never delivered.' The high-speed rail project was supposed to be completed by 2020 but is decades off schedule and about $100 billion over budget from its original proposal of $33 billion. No part of the line from Los Angeles to San Francisco has yet to be completed and construction has so far been confined to the Central Valley. The Trump administration initiated a review of the project in February after Republican lawmakers called for an investigation. In a 310-page compliance review released in June, the federal government cited budget shortfalls, missed deadlines and a misleading projected ridership and found 'no viable path forward' for the train. Choudri sent two letters to the Trump administration in response to the review findings. In a letter sent earlier this month, Choudri called the assessment inaccurate and said the administration relied on old information to come to its conclusions, misrepresenting the facts. 'FRA's flawed inputs have led to flawed outputs,' Choudri wrote. 'Rather than rely on the relevant information and documentation provided by the Authority, FRA inexplicably relies on outdated information, unreliable, unsupported third-party sources, and incomplete and flawed analyses to support its conclusions.' Choudri asked the Trump administration for another meeting in early August and for the decision to be delayed. The responses did not satisfy FRA's concerns, the agency said. The high-speed rail authority and state lawmakers have been pushing for private-public partnerships to fund the project outside of government support. The state is also committing $1 billion per year in funding towards the project, which has created thousands of jobs in the Central Valley and has become central to several communities' business revitalization plans.
San Francisco Chronicle
16 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Lawsuit targets ICE arrests at immigration courthouses
Immigration courthouses, once considered safe places for migrants seeking the right to remain in the United States, have become sites of massive arrests and deportation orders under a Trump administration policy that was challenged in a nationwide lawsuit Wednesday. The policy discards decades of practices under presidents of both parties and unconstitutionally 'deprives noncitizens of a meaningful opportunity to be heard' in court, lawyers for immigrants and advocacy organizations said in a suit filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. The immigrants 'have been abruptly ripped from their families, lives, homes and jobs for appearing in immigration court,' the lawyers said. One of the attorneys in the case, Jordan Wells of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, said the administration's drastic changes 'forsake any notion of immigration courts as a neutral forum, weaponizing them into a trap for immigrants who show up in reliance on the American promise of a fair process before a judge, only to be met instead with handcuffs and shunted into a fast-track deportation process.' California does not allow federal immigration agents at state courts, a policy that does not affect U.S. immigration courts. Immigration courts, whose judges are appointed by the Justice Department, hear cases of undocumented immigrants seeking asylum and others applying for legal status. Under previous administrations, the lawsuit said, immigrants appearing at the courts were protected from arrest unless their presence posed a threat to public safety or national security, rules intended to encourage migrants to attend their hearings. But those restrictions were repealed in the first few days of Donald Trump's administration. Then in May, the suit said, Trump's Department of Homeland Security adopted an 'unprecedented policy' of directing its attorneys to seek immediate dismissal of immigrants' cases, allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to seize immigrants at the courthouses and hold them in custody. They were then placed in 'expedited removal' proceedings before a judge, with little or no access to a lawyer. Those proceedings, which can result in swift deportation, were formerly limited to migrants who had been in the U.S. for no more than two weeks and were found within 100 miles of the border. But the Trump administration now applies expedited removal to immigrants who have been in the U.S. for up to two years, or sometimes longer, the suit said. The lawyers said one plaintiff had been shot and imprisoned in Cuba before fleeing, and has a daughter and partner who are legal U.S. residents. He entered the U.S. in 2022 and was attending immigration proceedings this May when his case was suddenly dismissed and he was arrested and eventually moved to a detention facility in Tacoma, thousands of miles from his family. Another plaintiff fled Liberia after suffering female genital mutilation and was hospitalized after her arrest in immigration court, the lawyers said. The plaintiffs also include a gay man who fled Ecuador, was deported in less than 30 days under the new policy, and now is in hiding in Ecuador, the suit said.
Politico
17 minutes ago
- Politico
Kilmar Abrego Garcia's fate in limbo as judge weighs whether to release him from criminal custody
In recent weeks, Justice Department attorneys repeatedly said they'll seek to expel Abrego from the U.S. — likely to a country other than El Salvador — if he is granted release by the court overseeing his criminal case. However, spokespeople for the White House and DOJ insisted they're committed to the criminal case rather than deportation. Defense attorney Sean Hecker raised that uncertainty at the conclusion of the bail hearing Wednesday, asking if U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire could clarify Immigration and Customs Enforcement's plans for Abrego if he's released while trial preparations proceed. However, McGuire did not respond before Crenshaw ended the Wednesday hearing by saying he doesn't expect to rule on the bail issue until next week. A federal magistrate judge already ordered Abrego released in the criminal case last month, but the administration appealed the decision — and Abrego took the unusual step of asking to remain incarcerated for now to ensure he's not subject to snap deportation proceedings upon his release. The Trump administration deported Abrego without warning to El Salvador in March, labeling him a member of the violent MS-13 gang. But Abrego, who denies any gang connections, had been protected from deportation to his home country by a 2019 immigration court order finding he would likely be subject to violence at the hands of Barrio 18, another local gang. Despite lower courts and the Supreme Court finding the deportation illegal, the Trump administration resisted court orders to secure Abrego's return. Then, in June, the administration abruptly returned Abrego to the United States, announcing at a nationally televised press conference that prosecutors had secretly secured a grand jury indictment, charging Abrego with immigrant smuggling. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges. The hearing Wednesday produced some new evidence against Abrego, including call logs that prosecutors say show him calling the man who allegedly ran the smuggling operation, Jose Hernandez-Reyes, on the night in November 2022 when Tennessee state troopers stopped Abrego as he drove an SUV with nine Hispanic men on Interstate 40 near Cookeville, Tennessee. Prosecutors also said Abrego called from a phone number that was registered to Abrego's wife and saved in the contacts of Hernandez-Reyes' phone under 'Kitmar Chofer.' Chofer means driver in Spanish. Data discussed at the hearing also shows the phone moved through Texas, Arkansas and Missouri in the lead-up to the traffic stop, which did not immediately result in charges or even a ticket. Abrego can be seen in a bodycam video telling a trooper that the men were working in construction in St. Louis.
