McCuskey leads multistate lawsuit against New York's Climate Superfund Act
Feb. 7—charleston — West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey said Thursday he is leading a coalition of 22 attorneys general in a lawsuit challenging New York State's Climate Superfund Act, a recently signed state law that McCuskey said attack's America's energy suppliers.
The New York Act could impose $75 billion of liability on major fossil fuel companies by requiring them to pay into a state "climate Superfund" based on their past greenhouse gas emissions.
McCuskey said the Climate Superfund Act incorrectly punishes a group of energy producers for global greenhouse gases emitted from all sources into the atmosphere from 2000 to 2018. McCuskey said New York relied on coal, oil and natural gas during that time, keeping the lights on for New York City's iconic skyscrapers and beyond.
"The iconic New York City skyline was built with the blood, sweat and labor of the men and women of our coalfields — from the steel in their skyscrapers, down to the electricity they use every day," McCuskey said. "The level of ungratefulness from the elites in New York for the sacrifices that continue to be made to give them the lavish lifestyle they enjoy is beyond the pale. This lawsuit is to ensure that these misguided policies, being forced from one state onto the entire nation, will not lead America into the doldrums of an energy crisis, allowing China, India and Russia to overtake our energy independence."
The lawsuit points out the law will be devastating to traditional energy producers, including coal producers in West Virginia, leaving them with no other option than to cease operations, resulting in massive job losses.
"This law is unconstitutional, and I am proud to lead this coalition of attorneys general and brave private energy companies and industry groups in our fight to protect against this overreach," McCluskey added. "If we allow New York to get away with this, it will only be a matter of time before other states follow suit — wrecking our nation's power grid."Proceeds from New York's Superfund are earmarked for "climate change projects" like storm water systems, road and transit projects and wetland restoration.
The civil lawsuit, filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York Albany Division, lists New York Attorney General Letitia James, Interim Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Sean Mahar and Acting Tax Commissioner (New York State Department of Taxation and Finance) Amanda Hiller as defendants. The coalition is asking the court to, among other things, issue an injunction and declare the Act preempted by federal statutes.
Joining McCuskey in the lawsuit are attorneys general from Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc., the West Virginia Coal Association, the Gas and Oil Association of West Virginia and America's Coal Associations are also joining in the fight.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Social media giants ask judge to block Georgia age verification law
Social media companies have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Georgia law that would create new online age restrictions for minors. A June 3 hearing was held in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Georgia in downtown Atlanta. Jill Nolin/Georgia Recorder A federal judge heard arguments this week on a Georgia law aimed at restricting social media use for minors and requiring Georgians to confirm their age before viewing adult websites. Judge Amy Totenberg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia announced at the Tuesday hearing that she will determine soon whether to hear more evidence regarding a lawsuit by a group called NetChoice to stop the law. NetChoice represents various internet-based services, including powerful businesses like Google and Meta, as well as smaller companies like online journal site Dreamwidth Studios. On the same day, a Florida judge blocked sections of a similar Florida law. Children under the age of 16 would need parental consent to open social media accounts under the new Georgia law, which is set to go into effect July 1. NetChoice filed a lawsuit in May seeking to prevent that from happening. The companies claim the rules violate young people's First Amendment rights, as well as place unnecessary burdens on social media companies. Attorneys also argued the revised rules strip away some of the flexibility of parents monitoring what online sites their children are accessing. Jeremy Maltz, an attorney representing NetChoice in the lawsuit, argued at Tuesday's court hearing that many people using online websites affected by the Georgia law would consider it an invasion of privacy if they had to use sensitive information to create an account. The plaintiffs argue that adults could face a burden if companies require them to potentially give companies driver licenses, banking or credit card information or use facial recognition software in order to access user-generated online sites. Data breaches and other cyber security threats could be increased by the new age guidelines, Maltz said. 'We know people are going to have to provide some sort of information to access protected speech,' he said. And despite the law exempting educational, public safety, and professional networking platforms, Martz said it would also create new verification hurdles even for innocuous sites such as college football and recipe message boards. 'This bill targets minors at the places where minors go to engage in free speech,' Maltz said. Republican state lawmakers push for Georgia law to require proof of adulthood to view adult websites Georgia lawmakers passed SB 351 in 2024 with bipartisan support. Logan Winkles, a state deputy attorney general, said that social media is designed to drive engagement and promote addiction, and the intent of legislators in passing the law was to protect children from adult bad actors online. 'Everyone agrees that social media poses some risk to children,' Winkles said. NetChoice successfully overturned similar laws in Arkansas and Ohio after arguing they unfairly censored free speech on online platforms. The bill requires social media companies to make commercially reasonable efforts to verify the age of their users, which can be done through methods including banking and credit card accounts, facial and fingerprint recognition software scanning. The Age Verification Providers Association, which supports third-party age verification businesses, reports that about a dozen states have passed laws restricting or requiring parents to consent to minors accessing social media. In several states, including Arkansas, California and Ohio, court orders have been issued to block the provisions of the law. As of May, the age verification group listed Georgia among the 24 states that have passed laws requiring age verification to access online pornography. Opponents say such laws could create privacy concerns and prevent people from accessing constitutionally protected speech. Winkles said at Tuesday's hearing that legislators and Gov. Brian Kemp backed the law to protect more kids and teens from social media sites that lead to higher rates of bullying and mental health problems such as depression and that technology can estimate a person's age without revealing their identity. 'What we know is there are many other ways to verify ID other than showing government ID,' Winkles said. But Totenberg questioned the verification processes. 'It doesn't seem very precise,' Totenberg said. 'It's a highly subjective standard and I'm not sure what it ultimately means.' The law allows parents and guardians to file complaints with the attorney general office if they believe a company isn't complying with age verification. Violations of the law may result in a fine of up to $2,500 per violation. On Tuesday, federal Judge Mark Walker of the northern district of Florida blocked sections of Florida's law banning children under 14 from having social media accounts and requiring parents' approval for teens as old as 16 while expressing concerns about social media's adverse effects on children. Georgia attorneys contend that the state's new social media rules stand up to legal scrutiny and differ from states like Florida, which limited companies' ability to control user-posted content. Right wing officials from several states have expressed concerns about social media companies blocking conservative viewpoints. John Acevedo, an Emory University constitutional law professor, pointed out that when it's pornography, there has been a legal history showing a legitimate interest in protecting children. 'Really, it's not controversial to put an age requirement in, but the controversy is the manner in which the age requirement is implemented,' he said Wednesday. 'Conversely, in social media there's a controversy over whether we should even limit social media at all to any age group.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
White House backs major legislation to speed up deportations
EXCLUSIVE: The White House is backing legislation to expedite the timeline for executing removal orders for illegal immigrants. The Rapid Expulsion of Migrant Offenders who Violate and Evade (REMOVE) Act, led by senators Marsha Blackburn, Ted Budd and Ted Cruz would give the Department of Justice a quick 15-day timeframe to finish "removal proceedings" after the process has "commenced." "Under Joe Biden's failed leadership, we saw the largest wave of illegal immigration in our nation's history, forcing communities across Tennessee and America to bear the consequences," Blackburn said in a statement Thursday, when the bill was introduced. "With a record number of illegal aliens now living in the United States, President Trump must have every tool necessary to remove them quickly from our country. Our REMOVE Act would require these illegal aliens to begin removal proceedings within 15 days of a Notice to Appear being served," she added. Ice Touts Record-breaking Immigration Enforcement During Trump's First 100 Days Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy, said the bill will help with the administration's deportation goals, adding the administration is aiming for 3,000 arrests daily. Immigration and Customs Enforcement broke single-day arrest records Tuesday and Wednesday with well over 2,000 arrests. Read On The Fox News App "Under the Biden Administration, the American people witnessed a full-scale invasion of our country that directly threatened our national security and sovereignty. With untold millions of illegal aliens in the U.S. due to Democrats' open-border policies, we must take strong, decisive measures to remove those who have been ordered to be removed from the United States," Miller, who's also a Homeland Security advisor for the White House, said in a statement. Vice President Vance Vows Trump Admin Will 'Use Everything' It Can To Increase Number Of Criminal Deportations "The REMOVE Act is critical legislation that will help us fulfill our mass deportation operation and get gang members, cartels, and violent criminals off the streets. Passing this legislation, in conjunction with the largest mass deportation investment in American history provided by our One Big Beautiful Bill, will ensure we permanently secure the border. Thank you to Senator Blackburn for her leadership." Millions of people were estimated to have entered the country illegally during the Biden administration, including through the southern border. 'Prompt Removal': Trump Dhs Expands Expedited Deportation Powers As Operations Ramp Up Federal authorities have stressed removing those with criminal convictions and ties to gangs like MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, which the administration designated as foreign terrorist organizations. Others have been encouraged to self-deport before facing a potential arrest, and the federal government will pay for their exit flight and provide $1,000 after their exit from the United States is confirmed. Click Here For More Immigration Coverage During Trump's first 100 days in office, over 65,000 illegal immigrants were removed from the country, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "Now, President Trump is stepping in to restore order. I'm proud to stand with Senator Blackburn and my colleagues to fast-track the removal of those who have been ordered to be removed. It's time we uphold the integrity of our immigration system to protect our nation," Budd stated. A Pew Research Center poll from March indicated the majority of American adults back deportations of illegal immigrants to at least some extent, including 32% who back the removals of all of them, regardless of whether another crime was article source: White House backs major legislation to speed up deportations
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Democrats can barely contain their glee over Trump and Musk's ‘big beautiful breakup'
Just in time for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's visit to Washington, Democrats enjoyed a healthy helping of schadenfreude as President Donald Trump and Elon Musk's feud went nuclear in real time. 'The big beautiful breakup?' Rep. Sarah McBride asked in response to a question from The Independent Thursday about Trump and Musk's spat, a reference to the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill,' Trump's centerpiece legislation that seeks to extend the 2017 tax cuts, slash social spending and ramp up immigration spending. The first inklings of a crack in the partnership that started when the Tesla CEO bankrolled Trump's return to the White House and blossomed as he took on the DOGE role of slashing government spending, came on Tuesday, when Musk called Trump's bill an 'outrageous, pork-filled, disgusting abomination.' 'You ever see that meme of the guy's face, like, when the person, the worst person in the world, you actually agreed with?' Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona said to The Independent, in reference to a popular Clickhole article headlined 'Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point.' 'That's kind of what I feel right now,' Gallego said. Sen Raphael Warnock of Georgia could not help but laugh. 'It is proof positive that even a broken clock is right twice a day,' Warnock said. Musk's words plunged Senate Republicans into chaos as they seek to pass the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' Act after the House passed their version last month. But on Thursday, Musk went scorched earth, tweeting that Trump 'is in the Epstein files,' and saying that is why they had not been released. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' the Tesla billionaire tweeted. 'Have a nice day, DJT!' Musk turned up the heat even higher when he endorsed Trump's impeachment. Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, who led the second Trump impeachment, said he had missed Musk's tweet calling for Trump to be impeached. 'Well, he must know a lot more information,' about Trump's ties to Epstein, Raskin told The Independent. Democrats have spent the early months of the Trump administration depicting Musk as a shadow president who spent $290 million to elect Trump and whose Department of Government Efficiency slashed vital services. For a while, it seemed like Trump and Musk would be a perfect match, with Musk dubbing himself 'First Buddy,' wearing his 'Dark Ultra MAGA' hat and carting his son X around the Oval Office. But some Democrats said that the fallout was inevitable. 'It was always going to happen,' Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida told The Independent. 'I didn't expect it to happen at the same time like it is now.' Musk became a villain in Democratic attacks in the Supreme Court race in Wisconsin, given that Musk's political action committees poured in millions. Shortly thereafter, Musk said he would refrain from giving money. But Musk did little to dispel the idea that he played a role in winning Trump the presidency on X. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,' Musk said. 'Such ingratitude.' Rep. Eric Swalwell of California, an outspoken critic of Trump, agreed with Musk. 'If Elon didn't help Donald Trump, he wouldn't be he wouldn't be president, he'd be in prison,' Swalwell, told The Independent. Progressives said that the fight between a president who largely ran on the premise that he was an incredibly wealthy businessman versus the world's richest man showed the dangers of wealth concentration. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the democratic socialist from New York, said that the fight validated the message she and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont had spread across the country in their 'Fighting Oligarchy' tour. 'I don't think that the whole state of the country should be with two should be concentrated in two guys with massive egos that are fighting with each other,' the progressive firebrand Ocasio-Cortez told The Independent. When asked if she enjoyed the feud, AOC said, 'I mean, it was a long time coming.' Trump has sniped back in kind, saying, 'Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave,' further saying: 'I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' For other Democrats, the fallout shows that Musk and Trump deserve each other. 'They both got what they paid for,' Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the DOGE subcommittee to House Oversight, told The Independent. But Musk's impact on the Trump administration will last longer than the feud. As Stansbury descended the steps, she clutched a folder with the DOGE logo.
