Author: Jimmy Vasquez
-
Why No Kings Matters: With Indivisible’s Ezra Levin | PoliticsGirl
As Ezra Levin reminds us, No Kings is not just something we HAVE to do but something we GET to do. That we get to be a part of history by sending a very public message to our country, and the world, that we are mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore. But this time, it’s not enough to just go, we need to be bringing people with us. This administration is an existential threat to America and the world. No Kings is a day of community, that doesn’t just protest our bad president but brings together good people. Authoritarians want us to feel hopeless, like they are inevitable, but days like No Kings and the actions we take with our people afterward, is the antidote. We come in peace. But we come in numbers.
Watch the full 30 min video here: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1196219832399024
-
California sues the Trump admin over an order to restart a long-shuttered offshore oil operation.
by Alejandro Lazo (CalMatters)
March 24, 2026Original article: https://calmatters.org/environment/2026/03/bonta-sable-defense-production-oil/
IN SUMMARY
- California is suing the Trump administration over an order to restart a long-shuttered offshore oil operation.
- The order could bypass a prior consent decree requiring state approval before the pipeline can restart.
Welcome to CalMatters, the only nonprofit newsroom devoted solely to covering issues that affect all Californians. Sign up for WhatMatters to receive the latest news and commentary on the most important issues in the Golden State.
California sued the Trump administration Monday to block what it says is an unprecedented power grab: using emergency authority to force the restart of an offshore oil operation shut down more than a decade ago.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in San Francisco, argues a March 13 order by U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright oversteps his authority under the Defense Production Act, a Cold War-era law.
“No matter how much President Trump may claim there’s a so-called national energy emergency — it’s just not true,” Attorney General Rob Bonta told reporters. “The U.S. already produces significantly more oil and gas than we use — it’s a completely fabricated claim intended to curry favor with the oil industry.”
The legal fight pits the Trump administration and Sable Offshore Corp. against California officials and environmental groups – and comes as fuel prices jump in the wake of the Iran conflict. Sable, which bought the system from ExxonMobil in 2024, has told investors that production could increase from about 30,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day to more than 50,000 if it restarts, sending oil to refineries in Los Angeles, Bakersfield and the Bay Area.
California argues the emergency powers law is meant to prioritize contracts during emergencies — not to override state law or force a pipeline restart. The state says the administration failed to meet the law’s basic requirements, including showing an actual energy shortage.
Wright’s order marked the most aggressive federal intervention yet in a yearslong dispute. A March 3 legal opinion from the U.S. Justice Department had laid the groundwork, concluding that the emergency order could preempt state law — and even override a 2020 federal consent decree requiring approval from the California State Fire Marshal before the pipeline can restart.
Environmental groups and experts have argued that forcing the pipeline back into production would not lower gasoline prices but would put coastal wildlife at risk and set a troubling precedent for federal power over state law. The Trump administration has long sought to expand offshore oil leasing along the West Coast, which has drawn fierce opposition in California.
Sable is facing mounting legal pressure on multiple fronts. In December, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration ruled that the infrastructure qualifies as an interstate pipeline and issued an emergency permit approving a restart plan — a move environmental groups and the state of California challenged. That case is pending before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
In February, a Santa Barbara County Superior Court judge ordered the pipeline to remain shut down, ruling that earlier federal intervention was not enough to override an injunction requiring Sable to obtain state approvals before restarting.
Representatives for Sable, the Energy Department and the U.S. Department of Justice did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.
-
It’s Not Too Late for States and Congress to Stop Trump from Subverting the Midterms
By Marc Elias
February 9, 2026
I’ve wanted Marc Elias to be wrong for seven years, or six years, for as long as he’s been coming on my show. I have wanted his warnings to be wrong, but every single one of them has been either affirmed or prescient.
That is how Nicolle Wallace recently began a segment concerning Donald Trump’s latest attacks on free and fair elections. She asked me how I felt now that even moderate Democrats have begun to echo my warnings about the midterm elections.
The truth is that I take no joy in having correctly predicted that Trump would attack our democracy in 2020. I gain no satisfaction from being right about Republican attacks on election certification. I wish I had been wrong about Donald Trump weaponizing the Department of Justice to go after his political opponents.
But here we are.
Now, with only nine months before the midterm elections, Trump is plotting to prevent Democrats from taking control of Congress. He started by trying to rig congressional maps through midcycle partisan gerrymandering. When that failed, his Department of Justice sought access to state voter files and seized ballots in Fulton County, Georgia. Now he is advocating for a Republican-led federal takeover of elections in blue states.
Most importantly, no Republican has stepped up to stand in his way. His White House is stocked with sycophants and enablers. His Cabinet executes his every wish. Vladimir Putin wishes the Russian Duma were as deferential to him as Republicans in Congress are to Trump.
As Nicolle Wallace pointed out, all Democrats are increasingly being forced to confront this stark reality. The sober-minded traditionalists who typically seek bipartisan agreement have reluctantly come to accept that Trump is torching our democracy — and that there can be no middle ground between a firefighter and an arsonist.
Contrary to many doomsayers, it is not too late to protect the midterm elections. There are steps Democrats can take now — at both the state and federal levels — to safeguard our elections.
Shortly after the 2025 elections, I published a list of seven voting laws every blue state should enact. While I stand by all seven, I want to highlight three:
1. Ban third-party voter challenges and other forms of vigilantism.
States must prohibit anyone — including the federal government — from challenging a person’s voter registration or right to vote. For years, Republicans have compiled private voter databases to challenge voters they want removed from the rolls. Now, the federal government is attempting to do the same. This practice of allowing voter challenges should be banned outright by every blue state.
2. Provide criminal and civil remedies for voter intimidation.
States must enact new laws that provide stronger protections against voter harassment and intimidation. These laws must allow for both civil and criminal remedies and cover a broad range of threats. Federal laws are not broad enough to address current threats. Existing state laws often fail to account for newer intimidation tactics. States need to adopt the broadest measures possible.
3. Revise and strengthen election-certification laws.
We must recognize that the weakest point in our election process is often the post-election counting and certification phase. Blue-state certification laws must be updated with modern language that unambiguously defines certification as a ministerial duty. These laws should allow private parties and state officials to sue to compel certification and impose criminal penalties on election deniers. State courts should also be empowered to certify elections when election officials fail to meet their obligations.
With Congress now negotiating funding priorities for the coming year, I offer the following four suggestions for new federal laws:
1. Prohibit federal law enforcement or the Department of Justice from operating within 500 feet of any polling place, counting location or election office.
Federal law enforcement must be barred from engaging in any legal or law enforcement activity near anyone casting a ballot, administering an election, or counting or certifying votes.
2. Prohibit federal officials from taking investigative steps involving elections from 30 days before Election Day until one week after the last member of the new Congress is seated.
For years, the DOJ has maintained a policy against making public criminal investigations involving candidates or voting in the run-up to Election Day. That policy is insufficient. Congress should codify a ban on any investigative steps — public or private — during this period.
3. Require that any criminal grand jury subpoena, arrest or search warrant involving elections be sought by the Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney for the district where the activity occurs.
Donald Trump has attempted to circumvent U.S. attorney offices to pursue political investigations and prosecutions. For example, the search warrant in Fulton County was sought by the U.S. attorney in Missouri, not by federal prosecutors in Georgia. Congress should prohibit this. Only the Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney for the relevant district should be authorized to seek such actions. If no U.S. attorney has been confirmed, approval should be required from the longest-serving federal prosecutor in that office.
4. Remove immunity from federal, state and local election officials for any action that interferes with or denies a qualified voter the right to vote or have their ballot counted.
Officials who disenfranchise voters should not be able to hide behind official immunity. Allowing lawsuits against election deniers for voter suppression or vote denial would create a powerful deterrent against such conduct.
None of these steps alone will guarantee a free and fair election in 2026. Taken together, however, they weaken the hand of those seeking to undermine the will of the voters while empowering those committed to protecting democracy.
