Hawaii Announced a Climate Lawsuit. So the Government Sued Hawaii First.
'I guess this might be breaking news,' he said during an interview on local television. 'We will be filing suit.'
On Wednesday, the Trump administration sued Hawaii first, seeking to block the lawsuit before it could even be filed.
The Justice Department also filed a nearly identical suit against Michigan, where Attorney General Dana Nessel has retained three private law firms to pursue climate change litigation but has not yet sued. The main thrust of the administration's argument is that the federal government should determine national energy policy, not individual states.
Legal experts said it was highly unusual to sue to block other lawsuits that have yet to be filed.
Nine Democratic-led states have already sued fossil fuel companies over climate change, along with dozens of municipalities around the country. The oil industry and its allies have tried to get those cases thrown out by making similar arguments to the ones put forth in the Justice Department filings this week.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Its two lawsuits cite President Trump's April 8 executive order, 'Protecting American Energy From State Overreach,' which argued that state policies inhibiting the energy industry weaken national security and drive up costs for Americans. It also said that the other lawsuits already filed by states over climate change could result in 'crippling' damages to oil companies being sued.
Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, said it was 'at least highly unusual' to try and preemptively block lawsuits. 'The usual procedure would be to move to intervene in existing lawsuits,' he said. 'I've never heard of a situation where a lawsuit is filed to seek an injunction against somebody else filing a lawsuit.'
He predicted that such a legal strategy would not fare well. 'Procedurally, it's wacky,' he said.
Both suits, filed in federal courts in Hawaii and Michigan, named the state, its governor and attorney general. The offices of Mr. Green and the Hawaii attorney general, Anne Lopez, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Ms. Nessel called the lawsuit 'at best frivolous and arguably sanctionable.' She said Mr. Trump had 'made clear he will answer any and every beck and call from his Big Oil campaign donors' and called the lawsuits 'perhaps the most surprising debasement of both the White House and D.O.J. yet.'
The states that have already sued are California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What a weaker dollar means for inflation
The US dollar ( has fallen this year, and that can have big implications for inflation. RSM chief economist Joe Brusuelas talks about that connection and when the impact of tariffs may start to show in the US economy. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime. turning out to the dollar index, it's seen many swings we know amid economic uncertainty. Joe, you highlight what the moves in the currency mean for inflation? Walk us through that. All right. When you get a sustained 10% decline in the value of the dollar, typically, you should expect to see a 1/2 of 1% increase in inflation over the next 6 to 12 months. We clearly are at that point, even though we had a nice rebound. I think it was 3.3% for the month of July, strongest month for the greenback this year, but nevertheless, the policy mix out of the administration, all points towards a weaker dollar, and I think that's what we're going to get. Moreover, when you take a look at import prices, especially import prices ex petroleum, it tells the tale. We're going to see more inflation and a weaker dollar going forward. Does Trump want a strong dollar? I would think he does, and I think, well, I think like all politicians, he wants to have his cake and eat it, too. He doesn't want de-dollarization, clearly, but he wants a weaker dollar because A, it really tends to juice the tech sector, and B, it will provide relief to the beleaguered manufacturing sector that's been in an effective recession for the past couple of years. Is it too soon to say the kind of impact the softer dollars had during this earnings season, particularly what it's meant for the multinationals? It's way too early to jump on that bandwagon. I think we're really going to be talking in the fourth quarter earnings, and then next year. Moreover, a lot of those firms that he wants to help are actually having real problems with the tariff issue because, you know, 45% of everything we import goes into domestic manufacturing. So policies at a cross purposes, a good portion of the time this year, which is why that economy slowed to 1.2% growth in the first half of the year, and we think it's not going to do much better. Our forecast for this year is 1.1%. Can I ask you when we talk about these tariff policies? We've been talking about them all show. There's the near to intermediate impact, but how long do we have to wait to see what the long-term impact is? Meaning, do I have to wait till does it have to be August 2026, and Joe and Josh are back on set for me to really know, okay, it's really boosted manufacturing job. It's really opened up all these new markets for American business. It's really raised this much revenue. It's a little worse, actually. So as of midnight last night, on once we get to October 5th, we're going to have an effective 18.3% tariff. The real problem is we won't really understand what any of this means, not till October 5th, 2026, but more like October 5th, 2027. Why? Why do you say that, Joe? Because it takes so long to pass through the tariff costs. You know, there are four points along the chain. You've got your retail, you've got your consumers, you've got your importers, and you've got your exporters. At each point of the supply chain, you're going to see a bit of it absorbed, a bit of it eaten. When we went through this in 2018, for example, we didn't see the full price of the increase in the price of washing machines, dryers, and dishwashers caused by tariffs show up on consumers' balance sheets until about two years later. Turned out 90% of that cost was eaten entirely by consumers. So when we talk about whether where the cost falls falls on the value chain, and there was this big debate, maybe it's really the key debate inside the Fed. Tell me if I'm wrong, but this debate about whether the the the tariff induced inflation is one time or transitory persistent. Even if it's one time, it could go on for some time. Is that part of the point? Well, that's right, and that's why they've been counseling patients because you just don't know. Right now, for all of the noise, right? The tariff rate that's showing up, which is causing revenues to rise, right? And from the Trump administration's point of view, that's an absolutely good thing. It's about 8.85%. It's not 30, it's not 50, it's not 15. But as we get into mid-October, it'll be closer to 20 is my sense because we're still not done with Mexico, and we're still not done with China, and then USMCA has to be renegotiated next year. So this is going to be a variable target. It's going to be a moving target, but nevertheless, if you cause the average price of goods imported in the United States to rise by 18.3%, that's going to be eaten. And here's why we say that. There's a lot of talk that, well, foreign exporters are just eating the price. You know, they're going to engage in invoice pricing. If that was the case, import prices would be falling significantly. They're not. They're actually rising. So that's just not happening. So that means it's not the exporter, it's going to be the importer, the retail, or the consumer. Those points on the chain where those are going to be eaten. Joe, I can honestly say that given the news flow today, you were the perfect guy to be sitting in that chair. That's very kind of you to say. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you so much, Joe.
New York Post
23 minutes ago
- New York Post
Dems' grim outlook for '26, ‘Palestine' is a made-up cause and other commentary
From the right: Dems' Grim Outlook for '26 'November 2026 may not go the way conventional wisdom suggests,' and Dems may lose, warns the Washington Examiner's Michael Barone. During midterm elections, 'the president's party almost always loses the House and, slightly less often, Senate seats.' But this time around, 'it looks like the Democrats' baggage, especially from the Biden years, is heavier than the loads Trump Republicans must juggle.' Black marks like 'the Russia collusion hoax, COVID-19 school closings, 'transitory' inflation, the Hunter Biden laptop, and open borders immigration' have too deeply damaged' Dems' credibility. Trump and Republicans are also becoming widely popular, with 'Republican gains' being 'widespread while Democratic gains are scarcely visible.' 'Nothing's inevitable in politics, but so far, the Democrats have not gotten up off the floor.' Mideast beat: 'Palestine' Is a Made-Up Cause Advertisement Westerners should 'understand that the George Soros-funded agents of Jew Hate and chaos' in the streets 'have zero to do with the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world,' argues Christopher Messina at Messy Times. As Dalia Ziada, an Egyptian political analyst notes, protesters claim ' 'Palestine' is the cause of all Muslims,' but there's 'no trace of anything called 'Palestine' or anything similar to it in the Quran or the Prophetic Hadiths!' Indeed, the 'Palestinian Cause' was 'invented by the Pan-Arabist communists,' who 'attached it to Islam' to 'fool ordinary Muslims' and gain 'legitimacy' to commit crimes against nations 'in the East and the West.' 'I am a Muslim,' but Palestine 'will never be my cause,' because it hinders 'peace' — 'a divine obligation of all Muslims.' Former U.S. President Joe Biden speaks at the National Bar Association's 100th Annual Awards Gala in Chicago on July 31, 2025. REUTERS Capitol watch: Rep's War on DC Dementia Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) wants a 'way for Congress to evaluate whether some politicians are no longer fit to serve,' reports The Free Press' Gabe Kaminsky. Most Dems 'would rather talk about anything other than the Biden cover-up — and the wider problem of the gerontocracy that runs the party and Washington.' But, Gluesenkamp Perez is pushing'an amendment that would direct the Office of Congressional Conduct to develop a standard to determine House members' 'ability to perform the duties of office unimpeded by significant irreversible cognitive impairment.' ' Some Democratic colleagues took her move 'personally,' and it 'failed in her first attempt to tuck it into a federal spending bill, with Democrats and Republicans all voting against its inclusion.' But her office is 'still exploring avenues to build a coalition.' Advertisement Liberal: Democrats' Best Way Back 'The Democratic Party faces a conundrum,' observes the Liberal Patriot's John Halpin. Despite President Trump's struggles with voters on 'his overall job approval rating' and among specific issues, 'Democrats are doing even worse with Americans.' They've tumbled 'from roughly a 3-point net unfavorable rating just before [Joe] Biden was elected in 2020 to a 30-point net unfavorable rating today.' With polls showing more than half of voters believe 'Congress isn't doing enough to keep Trump in line,' a 2026 message 'arguing for divided government to stop Republican overreach' may help 'Democrats to retake the House.' Ahead of 2028, Democrats should offer 'new voices without cultural baggage' and a message of 'economic uplift for America's working- and middle-class families.' Advertisement Foreign desk: Chinese Dam's Regional Threat China has 'officially acknowledged' that it's building 'the biggest dam ever conceived,' gasps Brahma Chellaney at The Hill. The structure will 'generate nearly three times as much hydropower' as the massive Three Gorges Dam but 'portends a looming geopolitical and environmental crisis.' The new dam 'is on a geologic fault line — a recipe for catastrophe.' Moreover, 'capturing silt-laden waters before they reach India and Bangladesh, the dam will starve' farmers of crucial riparian nutrients. While China's dam-building 'has long alarmed downstream nations, from Vietnam and Thailand to Nepal,' this project 'raises profound questions about regional stability.' By seizing control over regional water, 'China is methodically locking in future geopolitical leverage.' — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board
USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
What does TACO mean? What to know when Trump issues new tariffs after 2 delays
President Donald Trump signed an executive order to issue a new slate of tariffs on July 31, the latest in a long saga of policy changes for imports from countries around the world. Reciprocal tariff rates for 70 countries will range from 15% to 41%, set to go into effect seven days from the order. Trump also separately raised the tariff rate on imports from Canada from 25% to 35%, which is set to go into effect Aug. 1. Tariffs are a tax on goods from other countries that importers pay, and economists generally agree it leads to higher prices for consumers. Trump began imposing tariffs on imports from the U.S.'s top trade partners in February, only to change their effective date, scope or rate over the following months. The on-again-off-again tariffs have been a theme of Trump's second term, leading to the creation of the term TACO. Here is what to know: Live updates: Trump fires head of labor statistics bureau after weak jobs report What does TACO mean? Financial Times columnist Robert Armstrong coined "TACO trade" in May, describing how some investors anticipate market rebounds amid Trump's on-again, off-again tariff policies. The acronym stands for "Trump always chickens out." Armstrong describes TACO trade as many investors' strategy to buy into the market that dips when Trump announces steep tariffs on the assumption that he will back off his tariff order, and the market will rebound. Trump hit back at a reporter who asked about the term on May 28, saying, "you ask a nasty question like that. It's called negotiation." Trump's tariffs have been on-again-off-again Back in February, Trump announced a 25% tariff on goods from top trade partners Mexico and Canada and 10% on goods from China. Such was the start of a series of delays and negotiations that left Canada and Mexico relatively untouched when Trump expanded steeper tariff orders to the rest of the world in April. China and the U.S. were caught up in an intense trade war where the economic powerhouses retaliated until both sides issued tariffs in the triple digits. They reached a truce in May and have discussed extending the 90-day pause while they work out a deal. Trump on April 2 announced widespread tariffs in what he called "Liberation Day." Shortly after, he paused the climbing rates for 90 days. That pause was set to expire on July 9, but instead of the tariffs going into effect, Trump extended the deadline. That deadline was Aug. 1, and Trump had said the deadline would not change, but the recent order gives it another week. Mexico remains at 25% while it continues to work on a trade deal for the next 90 days, Trump said. Contributing: Joey Garrison, USA TODAY Kinsey Crowley is the Trump Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at kcrowley@ Follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley or Bluesky at @
