Category: Homepage

By Sharon Franklin.

As climate change drastically increases the frequency and severity of wildfires, utility companies say they’re facing growing risk for payouts that could bankrupt them or require massive rate hikes on customers.  Across the West, electrical utilities are pushing state lawmakers to grant them legal immunity or limit damage payouts if their equipment sparks a blaze.  State legislators in at least eight states over the past few years have passed legislation or have proposed legislation, that would require the utility companies to follow plans to limit their risks of causing a fire.  In exchange, lawmakers would give utilities protection from lawsuits that could expose them to billions of dollars in damage claims   

What Are Wildfire Victims Saying?  Wildfire victims say these bills don’t do enough to protect residents from dangerous electrical infrastructure issues.

What Are Energy Consumer Advocates Saying?  Michele Beck, Utah Office of Consumer Services, who advocates for Utah energy customers, says it’s difficult to protect electrical customers and wildfire victims at the same time. “The costs for ratepayers are substantial, and it’s reasonable to try and find a balance between these extremely high jury awards  “I admit, it’s a devastating loss for people who are impacted [by wildfires], but somebody is also paying on the other side.” 

In Oregon, consumer advocates are similarly torn.  Bob Jenks, Oregon Citizens’ Utility Board, stated “It is a difficult place to be, having utilities close to bankruptcy and unable to make investments that are necessary to provide service,” “At the same time, the principle that customers shouldn’t be bailing out utilities for bad practices is a critical standard.”

How Are Utility Companies Responding: Shawn Taylor, Wyoming Rural Electric Association, said “We’re only one wildfire away from bankruptcy,” “Even if we avoid bankruptcy, we’d have huge rate increases to cover the cost of a lawsuit.  He and other industry leaders argue that power companies should be granted relief if they take actions to limit their risk, becauseutilities are also facing soaring insurance premiums due to the increasing magnitude of claims they would face if they caused a fire.He cites examples to support their claim, stating that Pacific Gas and Electric Company declared bankruptcy in 2019 because of the $30 billion liability from a series of wildfires caused by its equipment, and Oregon, PacifiCorp is facing billions of dollars in damage claims due to its role in the state’s 2020 Labor Day fires. As reported by the Oregon Capitol Chronicle, PacifiCorp has been a key player backing immunity liability bills in five states.  

How Are Insurance Companies Responding:   Insurers are saying their own customers could pay the price if lawmakers protect utilities.  Greg Van Horssen, State Farm Insurance, testified before the Montana House Judiciary Committee in February, 2025, stating “If we have a problem with recovering costs for burnt-down houses in Montana, from an insurance company’s perspective, we only have one option, and that’s to raise the rate of homeowners’ insurance.” “When you push in one side of the balloon, it comes out somewhere else,”

Brandon Vick, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, a trade group noted that more and more residents in fire-prone areas are going without insurance coverage, leaving them with no recourse if they can’t seek damages from a utility. “Utilities are rightfully concerned that they’re gonna do something that causes a catastrophic wildfire.”  He went on to say “The question we’ve been posing is, who should be responsible when that ultimately happens? [These bills] are really pushing that liability onto the people who can least afford it.”

Resources for this Blog

https://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/dr20250423-as-wildfires-intensify-utilities-want-liability-protections-but-then-who-pays

https://stateline.org/2025/04/22/as-wildfires-intensify-utilities-want-liability-protections-but-then-who-pays/wildfires intensify, utilities want liability protections. But then who pays? • Stateline

https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/power-grid/outage-management/as-wildfires-intensify-utilities-want-liability-protections-but-then-who-pays/

https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/03/31/pacificorp-involved-in-bills-in-oregon-western-states-limiting-utility-wildfire-liability-damages/

https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/04/16/proposal-to-impose-penalties-on-private-utilities-delaying-wildfire-lawsuits-quietly-moves-forward/

Every day, people facing threats to their health and environment call CHEJ for help. They are looking for proof that all landfills leak, health studies linking incinerators to cancer, or the environmental record of a company that wants to build a plant in their community. CHEJ tries to provide those facts. But we also help people through the terrible realization that simply speaking the truth about landfills, incinerators, or previous violations won’t stop the poisoning.

The truth is only a start. In order for things to change, the truth has to be understood by a large group of people who then use this knowledge to fuel their efforts to win justice. The truth won’t stop the poisoning, but organizing will.

According to Webster’s dictionary, organizing is “uniting in a body or becoming systematically arranged.” Organizing to protect our communities from environmental harm means pulling together a large enough, diverse enough, active enough group of people to convince corporations and the government that they have to stop making people sick.

Organizing is how we restore the balance between the rights of the people to safe food and healthy communities, and the rights of corporations to profit and pollute. We will never have as much money as the corporate polluters. We will never be able to afford their Madison Avenue media campaigns or their 24-hour access to elected officials. But we can build our own power to overcome their influence. We can do this by organizing to demonstrate the strength of our numbers and the righteousness of our demands.

Successful organizing happens when a group of people finds visible ways to use the truth to wake up the conscience of a larger group. In an era when politics is defined by sound-bites, organizing can remind the American people that political life is supposed to be about self-government, justice and the common good.

After years of doing it, we’ve come to the conclusion that organizing is more of an art than a science. It’s more important to be in touch with what is happening in your community and to respect and include your friends and neighbors than to follow a set of rules.

At the same time, there are some basic rules for organizing that usually hold true. These rules aren’t always applicable, but they are right often enough that you should consider them as you start to get organized around an environmental issue in your community.  Some of those rules are:

Power determines the outcome. If two or more groups care about an issue, and one of them has a lot more power, that group will get what it wants, no matter what the facts are or who will be hurt.

• Our power comes from people, while corporations and government’s power comes from money. Communities need to use strategies that depend on people’s creativity, courage and caring. The corporations and government will use strategies that depend on things which can be paid for, like experts and lawyers.

• Polluters and government agencies write the rules so they can win using experts and lawyers which is their strength. You can assume going in that if you play exactly according to the rules of their game, you will lose most of the time, whether you are at the slot machines in Atlantic City or the hearing process of your state environmental agency. Create your own rules instead.

• To win, communities have to work harder than polluters and government agencies do. Polluters and agencies are doing what they do because they are paid to. They’ve done it before, and they know most of the facts before the fight even starts. You are opposing them because you believe your health and your community are at risk. This gives you an unmatched motivation for working harder than they do.

These rules may seem harsh and they are. Sometimes things turn out to be easier than these rules would lead you to expect. But when your community is at stake, it’s important to start out vigilant, alert and ready to face the challenges that lie ahead.  

Experience has taught us that organizing isn’t easy. Recognizing this should help you be forgiving of others and ourselves. Together we are trying to build a democratic society without adequate blueprints and models, so it’s important to leave room for experimentation and mistakes. And recognizing how necessary organizing is should help us to be inclusive and persistent. There are no magic facts. There are no perfect heroes to give perfect speeches that will convince the polluters to stop polluting. There is only the dogged determination of people working together to protect their own health, their families’ health and the health of their communities. This is why we organize. 

Originally published in Organizing Toolbox in CHEJ’s Everyone’s Backyard.

By Leila Waid.

A recently published systematic review article analyzed effective methods for increasing heat literacy. A systematic review summarizes the current scientific literature by synthesizing multiple studies and providing the lessons learned. In this case, the authors focused on analyzing community-based health adaptation programs – defined as “interventions focus[ed] on local engagement, offering culturally tailored resources and information designed to enhance individual knowledge and adaptive behaviors related to heat-related illness prevention.” Instead of utilizing a top-down approach to address climate change, these programs focus on empowering communities by affecting local change via education initiatives and behavior change theories.

One study found that educational outreach efforts for older adults were an effective method when utilizing community spaces they are already familiar with and go to regularly. The participants were also taught how to measure Wet Bulb Globe Temperature. Another study, also focusing on delivering an education curriculum, found that Community Health Worker-led curriculums were associated with a 38% reduction in hospital visits. Also, a successful education program needs to increase not only the participants’ knowledge but also their attitude and practice (KAP) to induce desired behavior change.

Addressing heat risk among the elderly population is especially important due to their increased vulnerability. One study in the review focused on the importance of working with elderly individuals to draft a list of emergency contacts to call during heat waves. Another study evaluated the importance of addressing social isolation among older adults by strengthening their social networks and increasing their ties to the local community. The study found that elderly individuals participating in the program had lower mortality rates than non-participants.

Public health communication campaigns—such as handing out informational flyers and newspaper ads, installing an automated phone warning system, and conducting media outreach via radio, television, and newspaper ads—were also found to be effective. Another mass communication technique that was found to be effective included handing out water bottles with PSAs about heat safety to senior citizens at their place of residence.

These studies showcase that climate change adaptation techniques do not always need to utilize top-down approaches, focus on policy changes, or require a lot of resources. In many cases, outreach to communities and individuals to increase their knowledge levels via educational campaigns can be effective tools in the fight against climate change.

By Juliet Porter.

At the start of April, devastating storms swept across parts of the Midwest and Southeastern United States, bringing tornadoes, violent winds, and catastrophic flooding. Millions of Americans were affected as rivers overflowed, homes were damaged or destroyed, and lives were lost. The National Weather Service warned early on that this would be a “multi-day catastrophic and potentially historic” event, with a “barrage of life-threatening” conditions, including powerful tornadoes and widespread flash flooding.

The Kentucky, Ohio, and Mississippi Rivers rose to historic levels, inundating communities and dismantling local economies. In Frankfort, Kentucky, the Buffalo Trace Distillery, America’s oldest operating distillery, was forced to shut down as the Kentucky River crested at nearly 48.5 feet. Floodwaters swallowed traffic signs, submerged cars, and damaged buildings, pausing operations at a cornerstone of the region’s economy. The long-term clean-up ahead reflects the broader challenges that communities across the region are now facing.

This incident is not isolated, nor is it simply the result of bad luck. It’s a powerful example of how climate change-fueled weather events collide with existing social inequalities, often with devastating consequences. The communities hit hardest by storms like these are frequently those with the fewest resources to recover.

Looking ahead, experts are warning of an especially intense Atlantic hurricane season. A recent report from Colorado State University estimates there could be 17 named storms and 9 hurricanes, roughly 125% higher than the average season from 1991 to 2020.

This pattern of increasingly frequent and extreme weather is a direct result of global warming. But while the threat is real, so are the solutions. Action can and must be taken now to protect vulnerable communities and build long-term climate resilience.

First, infrastructure investment is essential. Maintaining and upgrading levees and flood control systems can prevent or reduce the worst impacts of future flooding.

Second, community engagement must be prioritized. At the heart of environmental justice is the principle that those most affected must have a say in the decisions that impact their lives. Involving residents in planning, preparedness, and recovery efforts ensures that policies are shaped by those who know their communities best.

Finally, policy reform is needed at every level of government to address the systemic inequalities that make marginalized communities more susceptible to climate disasters.

As we approach Earth Day on April 22, this moment serves as a sobering reminder of the work ahead. But it also underscores why organizations like the Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ) exist. For over four decades, CHEJ has supported grassroots efforts to build healthier, more resilient communities in the face of environmental threats. Through advocacy, organizing, and education, CHEJ continues to empower those on the frontlines of the environmental justice movement, especially when the waters rise.

Sources: 

NPR- https://www.npr.org/2025/04/02/nx-s1-5349304/storms-tornadoes-flooding-midwest-south 

Associated Press- https://apnews.com/article/kentucky-whiskey-bourbon-buffalo-trace-2a386bc74dfbcde223cfa157d8d6da1b 

CBS- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2025-atlantic-hurricane-season-forecast/ 

Urban Lab Systems- https://urbansystemslab.com/urbanfloodrisk#:~:text=climate%2Ddriven%20events.-,The%20Environmental%20Justice%20of%20Urban%20Flood%20Risk%20and%20Green%20Infrastructure,communities%20across%204%20U.S.%20cities. 

By Ken Grossinger.

Strongmen all want the same thing. They want us to feel powerless. When we feel we don’t make a difference, that’s when they win.

But long before Trump, Musk, and their sycophants began to demean and attack environmental justice activists in order to chill our protest, and long before they acted to shred anything that runs counter to their toxic environmental policies, the EJ community – along with many others – was re-evaluating its strategies and tactics for building power. Our often hide-bound approach to social change needed new shots of creative thinking because it remained insufficient to challenge corporate and government policy and practices that harmed our communities.

Even today, while the nation’s courts offer legal advocates a vehicle to fight back, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the courts may not restore or advance the policies we’ve long fought for. To the contrary, the latest legal assault on Greenpeace by corporate giant Energy Transfer makes it abundantly clear how the court may be weaponized to destroy our organizations and silence our voice.

Community organizing and public protest remain essential to win. And elevating art to amplify and deepen our campaigns for environmental justice is crucial to shifting false narratives and to enriching our fight. That might sound thin in the context of the onslaught against our work, but an upsurge of new alliances – fusing politics and culture – is altering how we think about and approach our campaigns.

When people are not emotionally primed to accept new ideas, they often don’t. Think about the graphs, charts, and data that environmental organizations have used over the decades to make our policy cases. While necessary, quantitative data is rarely sufficient to move people into the streets or even in the halls of Congress. For that, passions need to be ignited, and our emotions and sensibilities brought into play. 

Art has a unique capacity to penetrate popular culture in ways organizing never will. It’s why movement leaders over the years led with so many forms of art that give rise to and support organizing. Just look at a few historical and contemporary examples.

Think about music, an ever-present force in organizing during the civil rights movement. Activists sang to strengthen their resolve and overcome their fears.  Author Bruce Hartford said “the songs spread our message, bonded us together, elevated our courage, shielded us from hate, forged our discipline, protected us from danger, and it was the songs that kept us sane.” 

During the same period theater galvanized farmworkers. The United Farmworkers (UFW) created El Teatro Campesino, a theater company driven by their members to take on agribusiness. UFW co-founder Delores Huerta said El Teatro was a powerful organizing tool, as important as the picket line in building solidarity among farmworkers to deal with strike-breaking scabs.

The power of film in political mobilization was evident in Jeff Orlowski’s cinematically beautiful Chasing Ice (2014), a film which brings the devastating impact of climate change into sharp relief. In a Ohio Congressional district represented by a climate change denier, Orlowski used polling to demonstrate how film shapes public opinion. The polling, which preceded and followed ninety screenings of the film, along with talk backs in theaters and the community, indicates that the film lifted by 15-25% (depending on the question) the number of people who thought that climate change was real, caused by human activity, and an extremely important cause for concern.     

More recently, following the police killings of so many young Black men and women, the Black Lives Matter movement spurred and embraced street art, amplified by social media, that spoke to our communities. Across the nation and internationally artists painted hundreds of George Floyd murals. The Floyd mural became an iconic image of the 21^st century. A symbol of protest. A tribute. A way to heal.

Artwork in the form of music, film, theater, painting, storytelling and more have always helped shape narratives about social justice.

We won’t win if we don’t organize, but organizing alone is unlikely to produce long-term change if we’re unable to touch the heart and reach the soul of our communities and shift the narratives that maintain the status quo. Cultural strategies do that.

Ken Grossinger is a longtime movement strategist and author most recently of Art Works: How Organizers and Artists are Creating a Better World Together (New Press, 2023) For more information about Art Works or to schedule a book talk, see www.artworksbook.com

By Ben Chisam.

On January 16, 2025, a fire broke out in Moss Landing, California at the world’s largest lithium-ion battery storage facility. The fire burned for several days, and 1,200 residents were temporarily evacuated. While this was the fourth fire at the facility since 2019, this event was “much more significant” according to professor Dustin Mulvaney at San José State University. The photos are just devastating.

Shortly after the fire, community members began to complain of symptoms like headaches, nosebleeds, and a metallic taste in the mouth. Many have been concerned that the fire released toxic chemicals into the environment which may cause negative health impacts. Additionally, the region is known for growing fruits and vegetables, and some question whether this produce will be safe to consume in the future. To make matters worse, the facility reignited on February 18 and burned for 2 days.

Within a few days after January 16, the group Never Again Moss Landing (NAML) was formed by community members to share information about each other’s symptoms. Within a week, volunteers collected over 100 dust samples to test for heavy metals deposited by the fire. In recent weeks, NAML has taken direct action to demand that government officials provide resources to victims and pass legislation to prevent future accidents. They have created a website (neveragainmosslanding.org) where you can learn more about the information they’ve collected and upcoming events.

Thus far, CHEJ has supported Never Again Moss Landing’s fight in a couple ways. We began by independently analyzing and summarizing soil data collected by Dr. Ivan Aiello at San José State University shortly after the fire. We came to similar conclusions as many others studying Moss Landing. There were significant increases in cobalt, manganese, and nickel in the soil after the fire, with average concentrations above EPA Regional Screening Levels. These results signify a threat to human health, as cobalt and nickel are carcinogenic while cobalt and manganese are neurotoxic. This may just be the tip of the iceberg, as it’s likely that many other substances besides the metals Dr. Aiello studied were present in the smoke generated by the fire. Therefore, more extensive testing of air, soil, and water is needed to account for these chemical possibilities and the threat to human health they represent.

More recently, CHEJ developed a community survey to gather information about how residents have been affected by the fire and what demands they have for the government and Vistra. The results of this survey should help shape the future of NAML’s organizing strategy. Beyond this, CHEJ’s Science Director Stephen Lester has provided general science and organizing support to NAML’s leadership.

The facility at Moss Landing is what’s known as a battery energy storage system (BESS). These systems are able to store electricity generated by renewable energy sources like solar panels and wind turbines. Because of this, places like California are adopting BESS as a strategy to mitigate climate change. However, the fires at Moss Landing put into question the safety of these facilities. Monterey County Supervisor Glenn Church has compared the event to the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, which led to stricter safety protocols in nuclear power plants: ““If renewable energy is going to be the future, it really needs to be safe energy. There’s got to be lessons learned from this. There really needs to be a full independent investigation of what’s happened here.”

While battery energy storage systems like the facility at Moss Landing are meant to address climate change, they are clearly still capable of harming human and environmental health. If these systems are to become widespread, it’s essential that action be taken to protect communities from toxic contamination in the future. California state assembly member Dawn Addis has introduced a bill to require new regulations for energy storage facilities and the utilities commission has proposed new safety protocols. Climate change is an urgent problem, but we need to ensure that “clean” energy is clean for all.

By Leila Waid.

On January 20, 2025, the Trump administration ordered the termination of work-from-home arrangements for federal workers. This decision destroyed employee morale, led to mass layoffs of remote workers, and created logistical issues for federal agencies. The return-to-office mandate also has wider implications for environmental health.

One of the main benefits of working from home is reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Climate change is one of the biggest threats facing environmental and public health in the 21st century, and reducing our carbon footprint is imperative to mitigating this risk. One study found that WFH reduces work-related carbon footprint by 58 percent, an example of a climate change mitigation approach.

Addressing climate change issues occurs from two intertwined perspectives—adaptation and mitigation. Reducing GHGs is a mitigation approach because it focuses on lessening the severity of climate change by slowing down warming. Meanwhile, adaptation focuses on alleviating the ecological and health burden associated with a changing climate. One way that working from home has adaptation benefits is that it can help reduce heat stress. A study conducted in Germany found that WFH employees had much lower perceived heat stress, which also contributed to increased productivity.

Another benefit of working from home and, thus, reducing long commute times is the reduction in air pollution. Non-electric vehicles produce hazardous pollutants such as PM2.5 (tiny particles that can get deep into the lungs), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). All of these different pollutants can impact your health and cause diseases such as lung cancer. A study measuring the relationship between traffic, NOx emissions, and lung cancer found that a 10-μg/m^3 (10 micrograms per cubic meter) increase in NO2 was associated with a 4 percent increase in lung cancer. Reduction in commuting traffic also means that residents living near business hubs in urban areas can enjoy cleaner air and less traffic during typical rush hour time frames.

By Sharon Franklin.

The March 4, 2025 U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decision has dealt a blow to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  The 5-4 decision effects the landmark Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972, which is the principal law governing pollution control and water quality of our nation’s waterways.  This case drew the attention of powerful business groups (National Mining Association and the US Chamber of Commerce), and was the first case concerning the CWA regulations since the June 2024 Chevron case.  This ruling effectively restricts the EPA from holding polluters accountable when water quality falls below federal standards, even if specific permit rules are followed.  It also weakens EPA’s ability to regulate water pollution, marking a significant setback for environmental protections under the CWA. This ruling also blocks the EPA from enforcing broad water quality limits through “end result” permits, which require cities and businesses to ensure discharged water meets pollution standards.

In the decision, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the EPA exceeded its powers, “This case involves provisions that do not spell out what a permittee must do or refrain from doing; rather, they make a permittee responsible for the quality of the water in the body of water into which the permittee discharges pollutants,” “When a permit contains such requirements, a permittee that punctiliously follows every specific requirement in its permit may nevertheless face crushing penalties if the quality of the water in its receiving waters falls below the applicable standards”.

Environmental groups warn that the decision jeopardizes water quality nationwide, making it easier for polluters to discharge waste into rivers, lakes, and coastal waters while placing more strain on underfunded regulatory agencies.

What Are The Current Results Of The SCOTUS March 4, 2025 Decision, So Far?

In Frankfort, Kentucky on March 12, 2025, a bill was passed that would limit state regulation of water pollution.  Kentucky’s Energy and Environment Cabinet Secretary, Rebecca Goodman noted “The bill threatens the water quality of many Kentucky rivers, streams, and tributaries and, as a result, would significantly compromise Kentucky’s groundwater, impacting the water quality of more than 31,000 private use wells and at least 156 public water systems”.

Audrey Ernstberger, Kentucky Resources Council sums up the impact of this Kentucky bill and stated “this bill is dangerous and a deliberate choice to cater to a few at the expense of many and “exposes rural communities to pollution risks that could devastate local economies and health.”

Resources for Blog

https://kentuckylantern.com/2025/03/12/public-water-supplies-gain-protection-but-opponents-say-bill-still-puts-wells-groundwater-at-risk/

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-753_f2bh.pdf

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-reins-epa-power-police-water-pollution-discharge-2025-03-04/

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/04/us/politics/supreme-court-epa-water.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/04/epa-ruling-sewage-water

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-chevron-curtailing-power-of-federal-agencies/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65717057

https://www.nationofchange.org/2025/03/05/supreme-court-weakens-clean-water-protections-allowing-more-raw-sewage-discharge-into-us-waterways/

https://www.ehn.org/us-supreme-court-ruling-weakens-epas-power-over-water-pollution-rules-2671271736.html

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2025-03-04/us-supreme-court-reins-in-epa-power-to-police-water-pollution-discharge

By Gregory Kolen II.

In communities across the country, women have long been the driving force of the environmental justice movement. From protesting toxic dumps to defending clean water, it’s often women – mothers, grandmothers, and daughters – who first speak out when their families’ health is at risk. This Women’s History Month, we honor the trailblazing women who turned personal concern into public action, launching campaigns to clean up neighborhoods and fight for a healthier, more equitable world. Their victories are both a celebration and a call to action, reminding us that the fight for environmental justice is far from over.

One of these pioneers is Lois Gibbs, who in 1978 was a young mother in Love Canal, New York, when she discovered her neighborhood sat atop 21,000 tons of toxic chemical waste (Lois Gibbs – Goldman Environmental Prize). With no prior experience, she organized her neighbors to demand relocation and cleanup. Gibbs’s relentless advocacy led to the evacuation of over 800 families and the creation of the federal Superfund program to clean up hazardous waste sites (Lois Gibbs – Goldman Environmental Prize). She went on to found the Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ), proving how one determined woman can spark a nationwide movement for change.

Another early hero is Hazel M. Johnson, often hailed as the “mother of environmental justice” (Hazel Johnson Launched an Environmental Movement in Chicago That Trump Is Trying to End – Inside Climate News), who fought environmental racism in Chicago. Living in a public housing complex surrounded by landfills and factories, Johnson exposed the pollution poisoning her neighbors. In 1979 she founded People for Community Recovery and spent decades advocating for clean air and water, a crusade that helped push President Bill Clinton to sign the first federal Executive Order on environmental justice in 1994. In New York City, Peggy Shepard co-founded WE ACT for Environmental Justice after witnessing Harlem plagued by disproportionate pollution. She was even arrested for blocking traffic to protest a sewage plant’s foul impacts, and has since devoted her life to preventing low-income communities from being treated as “sacrifice zones” (The godmother of the environmental justice movement speaks out | EDF).

Today, women continue to lead the charge for environmental justice with the same courage and resolve. Linda Garcia, for example, rallied her community in Vancouver, Washington for years to stop a giant oil terminal that would have endangered her city. Facing intimidation and even death threats, she persevered – and ultimately the proposed terminal, which would have been the largest in North America (Fighters for Environmental Justice: Lois Gibbs and Linda Garcia), was cancelled. Around the world, women are also front and center in this fight. In Kenya, Wangari Maathai mobilized rural women to plant over 30 million trees, linking environmental restoration with women’s empowerment (Inspiration for Women’s History Month: Wangari Maathai – Carolina Women’s Center).

As we celebrate these extraordinary activists, we are reminded that our work is not done. Every community deserves clean air, safe water, and a healthy future – and women are continuing to rise up to make it happen. This Women’s History Month, let’s honor their legacy not just with words, but with action:

• Support organizations and campaigns that fight for environmental justice in affected communities.
• Amplify the voices of women leaders and community members calling for change.
• Demand policies that put public health and equity first, so no group is left to bear the brunt of pollution.

The stories of Lois Gibbs, Hazel Johnson, Peggy Shepard, Linda Garcia and so many others inspire us to stand together in the ongoing fight for a healthier, more equitable world.

By Juliet Porter.

On February 24th, the trial against Greenpeace, filed by fossil fuel giant Energy Transfer, began in North Dakota. The company is pursuing a $300 million SLAPP suit—short for “strategic lawsuit against public participation”—a legal tactic designed to intimidate and silence activists. This lawsuit specifically targets Greenpeace, one of the most prominent environmental nonprofit organizations in the world, for its role in supporting protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). Though the pipeline was completed in 2017, Energy Transfer has strategically revived this legal battle years later, signaling a broader effort to punish environmental activism and deter future opposition. As reported by (Environmental Health News, 2024).  

The allegations being pressed by Energy Transfer surround claims that Greenpeace spread information, and even incited illegal activity, during the indigenous-lead protests at the time of the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (MSN, 2025). The DAPL represents a pivotal moment for the environmental justice movement and its advocates in the US. The DAPL protests were led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, who opposed the pipeline due to threats to water and sacred lands as reported by (Environmental Health News, 2024).   

SLAPP suits like this attempt to silence Indigenous voices and grassroots activism. If Greenpeace loses, it could set a precedent where corporations sue activists into silence, making it harder for communities to fight pollution, climate change, and corporate harm. SLAPP suits weaponize the legal system against those working for climate justice. They represent both a threat to free speech and the right to protest as reported by (Environmental Health News, 2024),  

So why now, you might ask? Why would the company wait eight years after the protests and construction occurred to pursue this legal challenge? This is a signal of long-term retaliation against environmental activism. Unfortunately, this incident doesn’t represent an isolated case. Similar lawsuits against climate activists and journalists have been successful in silencing the cries of protest.  If Greenpeace loses, it would be a major setback for environmental advocacy. it could set a precedent where corporations sue activists into silence, making it harder for communities to fight pollution, climate change, and corporate harm.

Why Is this Important?  This lawsuit is not just about Greenpeace—it’s about the future of environmental activism and the right to protest corporate harm. If Energy Transfer succeeds, it could create a chilling effect, discouraging advocacy groups and frontline communities from speaking out against environmental injustice.

However, the fight for climate justice does not end here. Organizations like The Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ) will continue to support activists fighting for environmental justice, ensuring that those on the frontlines of environmental defense are not silenced by corporate intimidation. The right to protest is fundamental to environmental justice, and it is through collective action that we can push back against corporate suppression.

Now is the time to stand in solidarity with Greenpeace and sign its open letter to demand the protection of free speech and climate activism .

Background Information:

 https://www.ehn.org/fossil-fuel-companys-lawsuit-against-greenpeace-heads-to-trial-in-north-dakota 2671203092.html?vgo_ee=hjtl0nkE5iu873lvRJ1Pxn1kp5hmwuDDWM23LCAhLN%2FA5g%3D%3D%3A9qrAobJxq2RmX%2BzHMPpm%2F5UHdbWp%2F09J