Harvard Law Schools Animal Law & Policy Clinic (Clinic) submitted a petition on June 9 to the USDAs Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), urging it to adopt a labeling approach for the emerging category of cell-based meat and poultry that does not overly restrict speech and that respects the First Amendment.[1] In its response of July 23, FSIS indicates that it considers the document a request for future rulemaking.[2]

The petition indicates that the Clinic focuses on high-impact opportunities to improve the treatment of animals through litigation, policy analysis and applied academic research. From this perspective, the Clinic views development of these technologies as just such an opportunity, and it advocates adoption of labeling policies that would appear to facilitate widespread public acceptance of these products.[3] More specifically, the Clinic maintains that there is no need for the development of new regulatory standards of identity in this area, that such products should be allowed to be labeled with traditional nomenclature such as hamburger, and that additional labeling disclosure should not be required absent compositional differences in the finished product or additional food safety risk.[4]

Although the first two elements of the request are not surprising, the third is more aggressive. Without directly saying so, the petition strongly suggests that the government would not have a legal basis for requiring that a given pound of hamburger be labeled as cell-based unless it failed to meet such a standard. In doing so, it does a fair amount of constitutional saber rattling in support of a broad reading of the concept of commercial free speech.[5] How this line of argument can best be reconciled with the occasional vagaries of FSISs prior label approval processor with the concept of the Consumers Right to Know that has so animated other labeling issues of recent interest, such as mandatory disclosure of bioengineered ingredientsremains to be seen as the rulemaking process in this area unfolds.

Substance aside, the existence and submission or the petition itself is noteworthy, since one does not often see the words Harvard Law School and FSIS included in the same sentence. This suggests that the particular issue has resonated within a larger community than the one normally engaged in debates over meat and poultry regulation, a reality that is certain to persist.

[3] Petition to FSIS, at 12, 19-20.

[View source.]

Read more here:

Were Not in Kansas Anymore Harvard Law School Petitions FSIS on Cell-Based Meat and Poultry Labeling - JD Supra

People gather in protest in front of the Mark O. Hatfield federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon, on Tuesday.Spencer Platt/Getty Images

The First Amendment prevents the government from doing a whole lot of things. We tend to focus on the freedom of speech, but the First Amendment also protects other, equally important freedoms, among them, the right of the people peaceably to assemble. The right to assemble, protest, and gather is the neglected younger sister to the free speech clause. As the Supreme Court lavishes attention on commercial speech and money as speech and religious signage and union dues and cake baking as speech, the freedom to gather and protest is often forgotten.

But this spring and summer, as protests broke out across the country initially in response to the police killing of George Floyd, a Black man, and increasingly in response to government crackdowns on protest itself, we are left with the grim prospect of protesters without much legal protection, despite the First Amendment. This much was plain to see in two congressional hearings on Tuesday, in which thousands of peaceful demonstrators were dismissed as anarchists and mobs, both by Republicans in Congress and by Attorney General William Barr.

The first hearing, before the House Committee on Natural Resources, was about what transpired on June 1, when government officials assaulted protesters in Washingtons Lafayette Square. Adam DeMarco, a major in the D.C.National Guard, testified that he saw what he deemed excessive force used to clear peaceableprotestersoutside the White House immediately before President Donald Trumps photo opportunity atSt. Johns Church. DeMarco testified that inaudible warnings to clear the park were issued at 6:20 p.m. and that even though a curfew was set for 7 p.m., at 6:30 he witnessed a clearing operation that included explosions and smoke he was told was stage smoke, which he recognized from his own military experience as tear gas. He said he later found spent tear gas cannisters on the street nearby. DeMarco described the people targeted as demonstratorsour fellow American citizensengaged in the peaceful expression of their First Amendment rights.

Testifying immediately before DeMarco, though, acting U.S. Park Police Chief Gregory Monahan insisted thatwhat he had seen in the same park was some of the mostviolent protests that Ive been a part of my 23 years of the United States Park Police, and that the police were responding to severe violence from a large group of bad actors including arson, vandalism, and injuries sustained by more than 50 officers.He insisted that the surge of official violence to clear the park that happened at 6:30 p.m. needed to occur in a crowded park with almost no warning because protective fencing had to be installed around the perimeter and that the presidents walk to the church at that hour was pure coincidence. In response to multiple videos of police in riot gear assaulting unarmed protesters with bats and shields, and footage of an Australian TV crew punched and assaulted, Monahan insisted that the footage represented merely a moment in time, and that violent protesters had bats, boards, water bottles, and bricks that they were using against law enforcement. Monahan concluded that the Park Police had exercised tremendous restraint in clearing the protesters, although he conceded there were no incidents involving attacks on officers that day, save a single assault after the violent clearing began.

Neither Barr nor Monahan could explain when and how one protester hellbent on violence turns an entire peaceful protest into an angry mob, or why a thrown water bottle should be met with pepperspray.

In a separate hearing held the same day, Attorney General William Barr was testifying before the House Judiciary Committee for the first time in more than a year. He had said he was the one who gave the order to clear the park in June, and during the hearing, he characterized the scene at Lafayette Square as unprecedented rioting around the White House. He also urged that the timing connected to Trumps photo shoot was a coincidence. Barr described what is widely acknowledged as weeks of peaceful racial justice protests in Portland, Oregon, as a moblike siege by violent rioters and anarchists against a courthouse, which includes the use of lasers, pellet guns, and slingshots against federal officers. (The New York Times could not confirm the use of those weapons.) Barr declared that what unfolds nightly around the [Portland] courthouse cannot reasonably be called a protest; it is, by any objective measure, an assault on the government of the United States, although he could not explain why protests in Michigan by armed white men that included overt threats of lynching the governor were not a mob. (Barr claimed he did not even know of the Michigan protests.) Chillingly, he insisted that while tear gas and violence were not appropriate responses to peaceful protesters, the problem when these things sometimes occur is, its hard to separate people. Barr claimed that unmarked vans were used on protesters so that they could pick them up where there was less of a risk to this mob response. He further claimed there could be probable cause for law enforcement officers to arrest and detain innocent protesters simply because they had been standing next to someone else suspected of using a laser against law enforcement, or because it could mean the person ditched the laser. A peaceful protest thus reverts to a violent mob if one person throws a water bottle or if unarmed protesters fail to clear the perimeter when told to disperse. It is appropriate to use tear gas when its indicatedto disperse an unlawful assembly, the attorney general of the United States said.

In other words, in Barrs hands, the freedom of assembly is transformed to mass guilt by association. Neither he nor Monahan could explain when and how one protester hellbent on violence turns an entire peaceful protest into an angry mob, or why a thrown water bottle should be met with pepper spray. And never you mind that Barr is virtually alone in his view of what happened at Lafayette Square. Trumps own former Defense Secretary James Mattishas blastedthe administration for its treatment of the D.C. protesters, calling the June 1 eventa bizarre photo op. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley later saidit wasa mistake for him to participate in the walk to the church. Former DHS Secretary Tom Ridge has decried the use of federal law enforcement authorities in Portland as pouring gasoline on a fire and emphasized that preserving the right to dissent is something very important, and that you cant justify the violence that has accompanied those protests. Michael Chertoff, who served as secretary of homeland security under President George W. Bush, has written that what DHS is doing in Portland is wildly inappropriate:

Videos reveal agents operating in camouflage uniforms with no clear identifying insignia. That may be appropriate combating transnational drug gangs in a border environment, but not in American cities. Other videos and reports make clear that even peaceful demonstratorssuch as individuals identifying asmilitary veteranswere struck with nonlethal projectiles and strong tear gas. And there was no respect for, or coordination with, the wishes of local authorities.

Perhaps in response to the widespread horror from virtually everyone who is not currently serving in the Trump administration, Oregon Gov. Kate Brown announced Wednesday that federal forces would be withdrawn from the city of Portland.

But even if Barr stands alone, with only the president and DHS officials sharing his views of what the right to protest actually means, the retreat from Portland isnt without consequences. In perhaps the most alarming development on Tuesday, Dara Lind at ProPublica reported that federal authorities in Portland have been arresting protesters for offenses as minor as failing to obey an order to get off a sidewalk on federal property then advising them that they are specifically barred from attending protests or demonstrations as they await trials on federal misdemeanor charges. While one of Linds experts describes these orders as sort of hilariously unconstitutional, its manifestly clear that Barrs claim that the mere act of standing next to someone holding a weapon, or failing to obey an order to disperse, means you are part of an unlawful assembly has now been used by federal prosecutors to prosecute participants and also to explicitly chill any future protest. That renders the peaceable assembly clause of the First Amendment a shell of a freedom, an alarming new phase in its overlooked status.

It hasnt always been this way. As Drexel University professor Tabatha Abu El-Haj explained in her 2009 article The Neglected Right of Assembly, the existence of a right of peaceable assembly was not controversial at the founding because it was a traditional right of English freemen. Despite crowded cities and worked-up mobs, until the late 19th century, it was widely understood that street politics demanded the right to protest, gather, assemble, and shout on busy streets and parks. As Abu El-Haj explains it, that included bonfires and toasting and rowdiness and feasting, and all of that street gathering was deemed a central, and essential, feature of civic political life. And as she notes, so widely accepted was the fundamental right to gather and protest that it was included virtually without comment in the First Amendment. Moreover, in the first United States Congress a discussion of the proposed Bill of Rights amendment [regarding assembly] was declared beneath the dignity of the members.

There was very little case law, or even academic writing, about the right to assemble, and it was also widely understood that while the state could prosecute those who behaved criminally at public rallies, rallies themselves were integral to democratic freedom and the free exchange of ideas. This all changed, Abu El-Haj explains, only in the late 19th century, when courts began to permit all sorts of licensing requirements on public assemblies. Today, its simply understood and accepted that demonstrations require paperwork and permits and state discretion as to time, place, and manner constraints, and as she notes, in this century, maintaining order, preventing traffic jams, and ensuring security are all considered significant governmental interests. We have, in short, acceded to a regulatory regime that forces protesters to both seek government permission to assemble, and then to be at the mercy of state claims about potential lawlessness, rioting, inconvenience, or traffic, when the government seeks to quell protest. As Abu El-Haj points out, we have replaced the notion that the state can only interfere with gatherings when they disturb the peace, with a legal regime in which the state is permitted to regulate in advance (by confining to certain spaces or times) assemblages that are both peaceful and not inconvenient. Garrett Epps explains here that red states have been expansively regulating protest and protesters for years now, culminating, as he writes, inagrotesque opinionout of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year, approving the principle that anyone who organizes a protest can be suedand thus possibly bankruptedif someone else present commits an illegal act. That is why this summer we have seen enforcement officers justifying the use of tear gas on peaceful protesters on the grounds that they dont want to wait around to see if violence will ensure. That is essentially Barrs claim as well. And the larger the protest, the greater the chance for individual bad actors to act out, the less likely warnings to disperse will be heard, and the more likely arrests, and federal bans on future protest, will occur. In other words, as protests grow and spread, regardless of conduct, the more certain Barrs vision of all protests as inherently dangerous mobs of anarchists will become.

What the centurieslong failure to protect a robust right to assemble and demonstrate means is that we now gather to protest at the sufferance of local authorities. And the testimony of the attorney general on Wednesday signals that federal authorities will not wait to be invited to crack down on protest either. Arrests of protesters on pretext that lead to agreements not to protest in the future are perhaps the best signal that the First Amendment right to assemble is not nearly as robust as we might have believed.

Readers like you make our work possible. Help us continue to provide the reporting, commentary, and criticism you wont find anywhere else.

Continue reading here:

Weve Neglected the Freedom of Assembly for Years Before Portland - Slate

July 24, 2020

Friends,

This week the House passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Included in this years NDAA is a section Iauthored as well as two amendments that Ico-sponsored. The National Defense AuthorizationAct fulfills one of Congress mostessential duties: funding our military. This years NDAA puts our troops and Americas security first by laying the foundations for an Indo-Pacific Command Deterrence Initiative, continuing to reform the Pentagons business practices, and improving provisions to support our military families.

Passing the National Defense Authorization Act is one of Congress most important constitutional duties. It is imperative that Congress passes a bill to support the brave men and women of our Armed Forces and provide them with the resources they need. I am especially pleased that three sections I co-authored were included in the final version of the bill. Those sections will equip our Armed Forces with the skills they need, deter our enemies threats, andkeep Americans safe.

Thelegislation I authored was the Banking Transparency for Sanctioned Persons Amendment whichrequires the Treasury Secretary to submit a semi-annual report regarding financial services for state sponsors of terrorism and puts foreign banks on alert that Congress will be watching their dealings with human rights abusers and corrupt officials.

The first amendment I co-sponsoredisentitled"Limitation on Eligibility of For-Profit Institutions To Participate In Educational Assistance Programs of the Department of Defense. This amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act will close the 90/10 loophole and help send more veterans to college by stopping for-profit institutions from exploiting Department of Defense funding.

The second amendment that I co-sponsoredis the"Homeland and Cyber Threat Act, which creates a cyber attack exception under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) to protect U.S. nationals against foreign state sponsored cyber attacks.

The application process for student nominations to the U.S. Service Academies is now open. As a Member of Congress, I have the distinct honor of nominating candidates to four of the five U.S. Service Academies. Members of Congress can nominate candidates to the U.S. Military Academy (West Point), U.S. Naval Academy, U.S. Air Force Academy, and U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. The fifth Service Academy, U.S. Coast Guard Academy, does not require a Congressional Nomination for an appointment. The honor of attending a U.S. Service Academy comes with the obligation and commitment to serve in the military for a minimum of five years upon graduation. For more information and how to apply visit my website. I am deeply proud of my own time serving as an Air Force Officer and am grateful for all our students who are willing to serve.

The National Zoo is reopening today in Washington. The zoo will be open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily.

Earlier this week, I was saddened to learn of the passing of Congressman John Lewis of Georgia. Congressman Lewis was a giant who fought for civil liberties and spoke out against injustice. It was an honor to serve with him in Congress.On Monday, the late Congressman will lie in state in the Capitol Rotunda.

If you need help with a federal agency, please contact my Charlottesville Office at (434) 973-9631. At this time all indoorSmithsonian museums in Washington, D.C. are temporarily closed to the public. Additionally, tours of the White House, US Capitol, FBI, and Library of Congress have been suspended to help contain the outbreak and prevent community spread.

See the original post:

On the Hill with Denver Riggleman - Brunswicktimes Gazette

On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the National Federal Register. With its latest foray into rulemaking, the Board is looking to make two amendments to the current rules governing representation elections held under the National Labor Relations Act. Both these amendments are subject to public comment for sixty days following the published notice.

This is the third set of amendments the NLRB has made to the election rules in the past twelve months. In December 2019, the Board issued a proposed rule that would make sweeping changes to election rules and processes by eliminating many of the quickie election rules issued in 2015. As you may have seen, a federal judge blocked implementation of some of those rules, holding they failed to comply with the APA by circumventing the notice-and-comment procedure. The Board has since appealed that order, and implemented the rules that were unaffected by the order. The Board also announced changes to the Boards blocking charge policy, timing and notice requirements attendant to voluntary recognition, and 9(a) recognition in the construction industry in April. Implementation of those rules was delayed until July 31 due to COVID-19.

The first amendment announced on July 28 seeks to eliminate the Boards requirement that employers provide available personal email addresses and home and cell phone numbers of all eligible voters to the Regional Director. The Board believes that the current requirement does not protect employees privacy interests, and eliminating this rule would better advance these important privacy interests.

The second amendment seeks to provide absentee ballots to employees currently on military leave. In light of congressional policies that protect service members employment rights and provide them with the opportunity to vote in federal elections, the Board believes it should seek to accommodate service members during representation elections. Additionally, the Board believes it can do so without impeding the resolution of these elections.

These two most recent proposed changes to NLRB representation election rules will not only protect employee privacy, but will also bolster enfranchisement for workers who are out of the workplace on military leave when an election occurs. We will certainly track the progress of this most recent round of proposed rules and will keep you posted of any significant updates.

See the rest here:

National Labor Relations Board Announces Another Proposed Rule Regarding Representation Elections - Labor Relations Update

TribLIVE's Daily and Weekly email newsletters deliver the news you want and information you need, right to your inbox.

About an hour ago

A federal grand jury indicted eight people in connection with alleged damage and vandalism during protests May 30 in Downtown Pittsburgh.

Most of those indicted were in some way connected to the destruction of a two Pittsburgh Bureau of Police cruisers that were set ablaze during protests sparked by the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody days prior.

The indictment was returned July 22 and unsealed Wednesday.

Those indicted are:

George Allen, 31; Nicholas Lucia, 25; Raekown Blankenship, 24; Devin Montgomery, 24; Brandon Benson, 29; and Christopher West, 35, all of whom live in Pittsburgh. DaJon Lengyel, 22, of McKees Rocks, and Andrew Augustyniak-Duncan, 25, of Carnegie, also were indicated.

The protests through Downtown carried on peacefully for much of the afternoon but turned violent after several people began damaging a marked police SUV. The marked SUV and an unmarked commanders SUV were eventually set on fire.

Throwing IEDs and bricks at police officers, throwing projectiles at and striking police horses, and setting police cruisers on fire are not the protected First Amendment activities of a peaceful protest; they are criminal acts that violate federal law, U.S. Attorney Scott Brady said in a statement.

He called those accused of sparking the violence agitators who hijacked a lawful protest and undermined a message of equality with one of destruction.

Michael Christman, Special Agent in Charge of the FBIs Pittsburgh office, vowed to continue making arrests when demonstrators spark violence. We are not done. We continue to use all of our investigative resources to find each person who chose to start a violent confrontation, he said.

Forty-six people were arrested May 30 in connection with the protest. District Attorney Stephen A. Zappalas office dropped charges against 39 of them.

Two days later, dozens were arrested during a protest in Pittsburghs East Liberty neighborhood, which had carried on peacefully for hours before the events turned violent. Zappala went on to drop charges against 22 who were arrested in that melee.

The lawlessness we saw on May 30 cannot be tolerated, said Public Safety Director Wendell Hissrich.

All of those named in the indictment also face state charges.

Allen is alleged to have thrown something through the window of a police cruiser, leading to charges of interfering with law enforcement. Blankenship, Lengyel, Montgomery and West face a similar charge for their alleged roles in kicking, punching and setting fire to the cruiser.

Augustyniak-Duncan is charged with interfering with law enforcement for allegedly throwing things at officers, and Lucia is accused of throwing a homemade explosive device at an officer that bounced off his vest and exploded on the ground. Benson and Montgomery are alleged to have tried to break into the Dollar Bank on Smithfield Street.

Megan Guza is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Megan at 412-380-8519, mguza@triblive.com or via Twitter .

Categories:Downtown Pittsburgh | Local | Allegheny | Top Stories

TribLIVE's Daily and Weekly email newsletters deliver the news you want and information you need, right to your inbox.

Read this article:

Feds charge 8 in Pittsburgh protests that turned violent - TribLIVE

The Church at Planned Parenthood (TCAPP) in Spokane, Wash.,is being sued for making too much noise and allegedly harming patients, but theanti-abortionpastor says, "it'sfalse accusations across the board."

TCAPP's First Amendment rightsare at odds with the health care of the patients at Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho (PPGWNI), according to thesuit filed in Juneby Legal Voice against five area pastors and Covenant Church, which started the ministry.

BABY LIVES MATTER MURAL PAINTED IN FRONT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD CLINIC

"You have a billion-dollar industry suing local church pastors that aren't wealthy at all, for singing and peaceably assembly," TCAPP Pastor Ken Peters told Fox News.

"We've been running for two years. We've never been cited. Wedon't cause destruction. We don't loot. We don't riot. We literally go to Planned Parenthood and we hold church once a month," Peters explained. "We do this after hours.We are not causing any harm."

Pastor Ken Peters, who started The Church at Planned Parenthood (TCAPP), speaks Tuesday, July 28, 2020 in front of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Spokane, Wash. (Christine Stickelmeyer/TCAPP)

Hundreds gathered Tuesday night singing worship songs and Ryan Bomberger, a pro-life advocate who was conceived in rape andfounded the Radiance Foundation, was the speaker. The event began at 6 p.m. as the Planned Parenthoodclosed.

The abortion facility, which has been measuring noise levels, allegesthe group's worship and speakers reached disruptive and intimidating levels, violating an ordinancepassed by the Spokane City Council in March, after TCAPP started conducting the services. The lawsuit claims police are not enforcing the law because they "are on the side of the church."

BLACK PRO-LIFE LEADERS PAN PLANNED PARENTHOOD'S SANGER DISAVOWAL: 'LIKE CHANGING THE NAME OF AUSCHWITZ'

It's really, really frustrating and should not be allowed to happen, when the laws are very clear in Washington state and the city of Spokaneabout interference with health care facilities, Paul Dillon, vice president of public affairs for PPGWNI, told Crosscut. Its extremely unnerving for the patients at Planned Parenthood.

However, the pastor said their once-a-month services begin when the abortion facility closes down, and he's said they will start the service later if that is the problem.

The Church at Planned Parenthood (TCAPP), gathers Tuesday, July 28, 2020 in front of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Spokane, Wash. (Christine Stickelmeyer/TCAPP)

"We arebringing attention to the fact that they are killing life for money," Peters said."That's what they don't like. That's what they're suing us for. We are shining a light for the Lord and on their sin and that's what they hate us."

PLANNED PARENTHOOD'S NEW YORK CHAPTER DISAVOWS FOUNDER MARGARET SANGER OVER RACIST EUGENICS

"At first they tried to drown us out with their own sound and their own protesters, but we kept singing, praying and praising God under our First Amendment rights of assembly and freedom of religion," Peters said.

The pastor says Planned Parenthood filled the city council with pro-abortion members and passed the city ordinance, but his gathering has even lowered their decibels.

The Planned Parenthood spokesman added that the hundreds who gather "can call themselves whatever they want, [but] in no way, shape or form is this a church.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"The Church at Planned Parenthood is NOT a protest," TCAPP writes on its website, describingitself as a"gathering of Christians for the worship of God and corporate prayer for repentance for this nation, repentance for the apathetic church, and repentance for our blood-guiltiness in this abortion holocaust."

"We don't do anything but pray, preach, and give," Peters said.

TCAPP's next service is set to be held on August 18 with speaker Greg Locke, a Tennessee pastor.

Planned Parenthood claims the service isnt protected under the First Amendment because of care provided by the facility.

Patients who rely on Planned Parenthood for vital medical care have the same right as all Washingtonians to access health care without unreasonable disruption or interference, Kim Clark, Senior Staff Attorney for Legal Voice, told KREM. This is more vital than ever in a global health pandemic that is disproportionately harming people of color people who already face substantial obstacles to accessing healthcare. TCAPP and its loud mob of angry protesters, many of whom carry guns, have terrorized patients and staff at Planned Parenthood long enough.

Read this article:

Planned Parenthood sues pop-up church over noise, but pastor says there's more to the story - Fox News

Editors Note: Morning Energy is a free version of POLITICO Pro Energy's morning newsletter, which is delivered to our subscribers each morning at 6 a.m. The POLITICO Pro platform combines the news you need with tools you can use to take action on the days biggest stories. Act on the news with POLITICO Pro.

With help from Ben Lefebvre, Annie Snider and Alex Guillen

President Donald Trump heads to the Texas oil patch to tout his regulatory rollbacks as the industrys ails deepen during the pandemic.

House lawmakers will battle over amendments to a spending bill funding the Energy Department, Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation.

Proposed revisions to the Democratic National Committees draft platform will put climate change in the convention spotlight.

A message from Chevron:

To reduce emissions from their operations, Chevron has spent over $1 billion building one of the worlds largest integrated carbon capture and storage facilities, capable of capturing up to 4 million tons a year. Learn more.

WELCOME TO WEDNESDAY! I'm your host, Zack Colman. Natural Resources Defense Councils Cullen Howe correctly identified Bert Campaneris as the first Major League Baseball player to play all nine positions in one game (he did it for the Oakland As in 1965). For today: Who is the individual with the most Academy Award nominations without ever winning? Send your tips, energy gossip and comments to [emailprotected].

Check out the POLITICO Energy podcast all the energy and environmental politics and policy news you need to start your day, in just five minutes. Listen and subscribe for free at politico.com/energy-podcast.

RALLY AT THE RIG: President Trump will be appearing Wednesday at a rig site in Texas owned by a campaign donor to boast about his administration's record on energy production. There, in the heart of the west Texas oil country, Trump is expected to discuss how reducing regulation, streamlining the permitting of projects and incentivizing private investment in energy infrastructure have helped make the United States a dominant energy power, White House spokesman Judd Deere said.

Yet that talk might ring hollow to an industry thats seen the coronavirus pandemic in this country continue to rage and suppress fuel sales while countries overseas have been better able to suppress it. Oil companies here have been slashing their workforce by double-digit percentages or been forced to receive grants from the government to survive. Double Eagle, which is hosting his remarks, received up to $1 million in grants from the Paycheck Protection Program.

Choppy weather ahead? U.S. producers have been able to make up some ground as states tried reopening their economies and oil prices climbed back to around $40 a barrel. But even as Trump takes the stage today, domestic Covid-19 cases are spiking again and OPEC is signaling that it may turn the oil taps back on after having cut production earlier this year. That combination could bring another flood of fossil fuels to the market just as the U.S. industry started to find its feet again. OPECs experiment to increase production from August could backfire as we are still nowhere near out of the woods yet in terms of oil demand, Bjornar Tonhaugen, Rystad Energys head of oil market research, said in a client note Tuesday. The overall liquids market will flip back into a mini-supply glut and a swing into deficit will not happen again until December 2020.

Trumps visit also comes as polls show Texas is within relative reach for Joe Biden, his presumptive White House opponent. A Quinnipiac poll released last week showed Biden with a 1 percentage point lead over Trump. Still, the Lone Star State hasnt voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1976, and the solidly red oil industry hasnt shown signs of abandoning Trump. Deere said a combined $91,400 of donations from Double Eagle owners Cody Campbell and John Sellers since 2016 to Trumps campaign and Trump Victory, the joint Trump and Republican National Committee operation, did not influence the site visit or aid Double Eagle in securing PPP loans.

READY TO ROLL (AGAIN): The House Rules Committee adopted a rule setting up debate on a sprawling government funding package that includes 42 amendments to the Energy and Water title. Here are some of the measures that caught MEs eye:

Grant applications: Lawmakers will consider measures barring the rejection of grant applications for using the terms climate change or global warming, and sea level rise; Pebble mine: An amendment from Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) would bar the federal government from moving forward with permitting the proposed Pebble Mine project in Alaska; Big funding boosts: The chamber will consider whether to boost weatherization and energy efficiency grant funding by $250 million each in light of the economic strain wrought by the coronavirus pandemic; Transfers with offsets: Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) has a host of amendments boosting funds for DOEs critical minerals and energy efficiency offices to be in line with Trumps request and adding $5 million each for cybersecurity and quantum computing efforts. A bipartisan amendment would transfer $5 million to DOEs fossil energy office. Grab bag: Amendments to clarify that DOEs Section 1703 loan guarantee program must go only to projects that avoid, reduce, or sequester greenhouse gas emissions; that bar governmental contacts with Trump-owned businesses and that stress safety requirements from FERC in dam approvals will also get votes.

No dice: A lightning-rod amendment from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) that would have blocked the Army Corps of Engineers from issuing a key water permit for any oil and gas pipeline will not get a vote. The amendment had rattled the oil and gas industry after a series of high-profile court losses relating to Corps water permits.

DNC COMMITTEE SENDS ALONG CLIMATE ADDITIONS: The Democratic National Committees platform committee approved several amendments that would beef up the partys stance on climate change. The DNC will now weigh whether to include statements that would, among other things: commit the U.S. to emissions targets keeping global temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius beyond preindustrial levels, rather than 2 degrees C; require companies to publicly disclose climate risks both physical and financial and greenhouse gas emissions in their operations and supply chains; ban new oil and gas permits on federal land and water; raise royalty rates for existing federal fossil fuel leases to account for climate change; and eliminate fossil fuel tax breaks and subsidies.

The DNC will vote on the new measures at its August convention, capping months of both public and private jockeying. The progressive-friendly DNC Council on the Environment and Climate Crisis, a DNC advisory body, has urged the party to go bolder on climate. Meanwhile, a unity task force composed of Biden confidants and allies of Sen.Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) crafted a compromise climate platform. Biden followed up with a refreshed climate vision earlier this month, while the DNC last week laid out its own draft plan.

DO YOU KNOW THAT YOURE TOXIC? Coastal flooding fueled by sea-level rise and worsening storms linked to climate change increasingly threatens spreading toxics from Superfund sites throughout the U.S., according to a Union of Concerned Scientists report. More than 800 Superfund sites face flooding risks with low sea-level rise over the next 20 years, leaving public health implications for millions of people living nearby. Those closest to Superfund sites are also disproportionately people of color and low-income residents, creating equity concerns. The report argued executive or legislative action is necessary to improve Superfund sites abilities to withstand flooding, noting it is unlikely responsible parties will improve their sites resilience.

REPORT: DECARBONIZING CREATES JOBS: A rapid and total decarbonization of the U.S. economy by 2035 would create bout 25 million new jobs at the peak of the transition and 5 million sustained new jobs, according to a report by Rewiring America, a new nonprofit organization advocating a dramatic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The report said the effort would require a $3 trillion federal investment over a decade and save the average household up to $2,000 annually on energy costs.

ERNST VS. WHEELER, REDUX: Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) clashed again with EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler over ethanol, Pro's Anthony Adragna reports. In a letter dated Tuesday, Ernst requested the EPA initiate a rulemaking certifying that existing infrastructure can handle 15 percent ethanol gasoline (E15) and remove an orange and black unnecessary warning label concerning E15 use. Iowa Republican and Twitter celebrity Sen. Chuck Grassley chimed in with a supportive tweet: "I agree w Sen Ernst EPA needs to hurry up w E-15 labels to show its a safe and clean fuel for cars & trucks Thx to Joni for her leadership on biofuels."

PARK POLICE CHIEF DEFENDS LAFAYETTE SQUARE APPROACH: U.S. Park Police Acting Chief Gregory Monahan defended the way his officers cleared Black Lives Matter demonstrators from near the White House last month, shortly before President Donald Trump's walk to a historic church, Anthony reports. Testifying at a House Natural Resources Committee and becoming the first Trump official to speak about the episode under oath Monahan also said the White House did not give the order to clear the protesters. His testimony maintaining that officers followed all rules in a volatile situation paints a far different image than the prepared testimony from a major in the D.C. National Guard who later told the panel the protesters' removal was deeply disturbing and appeared to be an infringement of their First Amendment rights.

CONSERVATIVES PUSH GOP ON CLIMATE BILL: A collection of climate-friendly conservative organizations urged Republican lawmakers to back the Growing Climate Solutions Act (S. 3894 (116)), which would create an Agriculture Department certification program enabling farmers, ranchers and forest managers to participate in carbon credit markets. As conservatives, we see this legislation as an opportunity to offer effective, meaningful, and fiscally responsible policies that can be enacted right now to mitigate the effects of climate change, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, American Conservation Coalition, ConservAmerica, National Taxpayers Union and R Street Institute wrote in a letter.

TRASH TALK: The House Foreign Affairs Committee will mark up a series of bills that include legislation designed to foster international cooperation on removing plastics from the ocean (H.R. 4636 (116). A bill from Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) would authorize the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to work on improving waste management systems.

CARPER ASKS FOR BECK INQUIRY: Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ranking member Tom Carper (D-Del.) asked the EPA's inspector general to open a probe into Trump's nominee to head the Consumer Product Safety Commission for her role in changes that potentially weaken a final rule governing the import of toxic "forever chemicals, Pros Annie Snider reports.

Carper said his office learned that CPSC nominee Nancy Beck, who is now at the White House Council on Economic Advisers and previously worked at EPA, ordered that language be deleted stating that any portion of a product coated with PFAS was subject to the rule. Instead, he said, she directed a statement to be added indicating that EPA would later issue guidance about which coatings would be governed by the rule, "raising questions about whether that guidance would ultimately make fewer products coated with PFAS subject to the rule," according to Carper. He also alleged Beck nixed language in the signed version of the rule about Congress' intent relating to a step in the regulatory process for toxic chemicals.

EPA ADVANCES PFAS REGS: EPA on Tuesday sent a pair of proposals relating to PFAS to the White House for review. One is guidance (Reg. 2050-ZA18 ) that was mandated by Congress in last years defense bill on how to dispose of waste containing the chemicals that are nearly impossible to break down. The other is a rule mandating a new round of drinking water testing (Reg. 2040-AF89 ) that the Trump administration has said will include new monitoring requirements for PFAS. An earlier round of drinking water monitoring for PFAS was limited to a handful of chemicals and did not require utilities to test down to the very low concentrations that scientists now say can pose health dangers.

Speaking of EPA and regulations: Wheeler will join the Heritage Foundation for a 10 a.m. webinar. Heritage said the event will get to the truth about the agency's 2020 regulatory actions and what they mean to Americans.

COURT UPHOLDS FIRST VAPOR INTRUSION SUPERFUND LISTING: A federal court on Tuesday upheld EPA's first-ever addition to the Superfund National Priorities List based solely on "vapor intrusion," a process by which noxious vapors emanate from soil into buildings. EPA in 2018 listed a former wheel-covering manufacturing and chrome-plating site in northern Mississippi; Meritor, the company now responsible for the site, said EPA failed to consider steps it had already taken to lessen the intrusion. But a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Meritor's arguments, calling EPA's listing "reasonable and consistent with the governing regulatory provisions."

WATCHDOG FAULTS MSHA CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE: The Mine Safety and Health Administration must do more to protect miners from the coronavirus pandemic, the Labor Department's inspector general said in a new report. The agency's Covid-19 guidance remains unenforceable absent a temporary emergency rule, which MSHA has declined to issue. The Labor IG also flagged reduced enforcement, delayed inspections, PPE shortages and postponed mine rescue trainings as challenges to carrying out MSHA's mission. The agency agreed with the recommendations to monitor and manage the enforcement backlog and track Covid-19 outbreaks at mines and use that to potentially reevaluate the decision not to issue an emergency standard.

Oil and gas groups see some common ground in Biden energy plan, via The New York Times

The curse of both-sidesism: How climate denial skewed media coverage for 30 years, via Grist

EPA Biomass Carbon Rule Delayed Over Potential Ties To RFS, ACE, via Inside EPA

Murray Energy finds bankruptcy exit path, discloses $15.7M founder settlement, via S&P Global

Believe It Or Not, Forests Migrate But Not Fast Enough For Climate Change, via NPR

A message from Chevron:

Its only human to protect the world we all live in. Through our $100 million Future Energy Fund, were investing in startup companies working to capture carbon. Learn more.

THAT'S ALL FOR ME!

Read the original:

Trump talks oil in Texas as pandemic, recession rage - Politico

Getty Images

When the regular season begins (and hopefully it will), the head coach of The Washington Football Team will be standing for The National Anthem. But Ron Rivera will not question the decision of players to use the anthem as a platform for protest.

Well, the truth of the matter is again, lets go back to our Constitution, to our Bill of Rights, the amendment, Rivera recently told TheAthletic.com. Lets go back to the oath of office to serve and protect. Part of the Constitution is the First Amendment. Theres a lot of people out there that support the Second Amendment vehemently. Well, if you support the Second Amendment vehemently, why wouldnt you support the first one, which is freedom of expression, freedom of speech? And thats all that is. Thats an extension of one of our unalienable rights, one of our God-given rights, one of the things written into the Constitution. So, again, lets at least applaud that. Lets celebrate that as well.

Rivera said hell stand because his father served in the military, his brother was a first responder, and his wifes family has a history of military service.

My dad had brothers that served in World War II, Rivera added. So to me, standing at attention is what Im going to do. Thats how Im going to honor them. I might kneel during the coin toss because I do support Black Lives Matter. I do support the movement to help correct the policing. But at the same time, I think everybody has to celebrate what the Constitution of the United States entitles us to do as Americans. Thats the thing that everybodys got to understand. We got to get past all this other stuff and quit making this a political fight. Theres nothing political about the Constitution. Its clear cut the Supreme Court rules on it, follow it, and then were supposed to defend it.

As the pandemic continues to consume so much of footballs focus, issues regarding the anthem will become front and center if/when games are played. Given the uncertainty created by COVID-19, criticism and controversy over players not standing for the anthem should be regarded as the proverbial good problem to have, because it will mean that games are being played.

More:

Ron Rivera will stand for anthem, but fully supports First Amendment rights - NBCSports.com

The First Amendment met the Second Amendment in June when a Missouri couple were confronted with protestors over police brutality in the wake of the George Floyd murder on May 25 in Minneapolis.

The couple, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, drew firearms on the crowd to defend their home, they said. This happened after the large group of protestors marched past their front gates, proceeded to their mansion, and made threats, according to the McCloskeys in a Fox News interview.

Patricia McCloskey stated that member(s) from the protest group said they were going to kill them, live in their house after they were dead (while pointing to different rooms they would live in), burn down their home, and that threats were made against their dog which was outside the home.

No shootings from the rifle or the handgun that the couple was wielding occurred.

But what did occur were felony charges made by the St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner against the McCloskeys, citing unlawful use of a weapon.

The couples attorney, Joel J. Schwartz, was quoted in a July 20 Washington Post article saying the charges were disheartening, and he believes, unequivocally, that no crime was committed. He went on to say that he supports the First Amendment right of every citizen to have their voice but that the First Amendment must be balanced with the Second Amendment and Missouri law which entitles people to protect their home and family from potential threat under the Castle Doctrine Law.

The prosecutor went one step further beyond the charges; the McCloskeys had their firearms seized. A search warrant was obtained and the guns were seized by law enforcement.

Situations like the one the McCloskeys found themselves in are perhaps why a large group of Second Amendment supporters attended the Mille Lacs County Second Amendment Sanctuary Resolution public hearing at the Historic Courthouse last Tuesday, July 21. Their voices were heard as they exercised their First Amendment rights in defense, or in one case, against, the proposed resolution.

Both Amendments, First and Second, have come under attack as of late. Some reason that hate speech incites violence and believe the First Amendment must be revisited. And were now in a cancel culture where if a group of individuals deems certain words as hateful, their livelihoods are canceled.

Of course we know terroristic threats must never be tolerated, but as Americans, we must reject this new form of attack on personal liberties. Whether its sending someone to jail over lawfully exercising their Second Amendment rights or canceling someone for disagreement over the choice of their words, we must reject this and stand for liberties.

The group Human Rights Watch, in their fight against all forms of repression of speech in the media and around the globe, states: How any society tolerates those with minority, disfavored, or even obnoxious views will often speak to its performance on human rights more generally.

The press must remain free to exercise independence, uncontrolled by a government, a political force or social system. This needs to happen in order to maintain transparency for those very entities which the people should dictate, not the powers given within those institutions. In the same manner, individuals must remain free in speech as liberation depends on such. And when our Second Amendment doesnt exist, weve lost our ability to protect ourselves against the most lethal of threats.

I was pleased to see the First Amendment exercised last Tuesday at the Courthouse in a respectful, non-violent way. We dont know that the outcome would have been the same for the McCloskeys had they not been able to exercise their Second Amendment right.

Traci LeBrun is the editor of the Messenger.

Read more:

When the First Amendment meets the Second Amendment | Our Columnists - Aitkin Independent Age

Wester Wuori's "Perspective" (July 24, 2020).

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That is the First Amendment to the US Constitution, ratified on December 15, 1791. I part company with many of my fellow liberals when it comes to freedom of speech. In the past 20 years, in my view, its been the far left that has slowly chipped away at First Amendment rights and a free exchange of ideas, especially those with whom we may not agree.

College and university speech police routinely bow to student pressure to bar speakers from campus because of their views or past writings. Campuses have created safe spaces where opinions and words are banned so as not to damage young minds. Sadly, now some in higher education are considering speech policies that could expel students for voicing a racist opinion.

The First Amendment is not absoluteno one should yell fire in a crowded theater, of course. However, this most important of our Bill of Rights does allow me to learn from and challenge others on their opinions and beliefs, no matter how vile or loathsome society may find their comments or writings or speeches.

How do we combat hateful or incendiary speech? With more speech. With better speech. With more effective arguments that make their case not because of the volume at which they are delivered but by the power of their meaning.

When it comes to racism, I would argue that silencing peoples views only drives them underground. And, its there, out of sight, where those beliefs and practices can and will do the most damage.

Im Wester Wuori and thats my Perspective.

View post:

Perspective: The Power Of The First Amendment | WNIJ and WNIU - WNIJ and WNIU