Day of Solidarity with eco-prisoner Jeffrey Free Luers June 9, 2007

Day of Solidarity with Jeffrey Free Luers
June 9, 2007


Finland eventPrevious solidarity event in Finland

June 9, 2007 Day of Solidarity with Jeffrey “Free” Luers

June marks the seventh year that our friend and comrade, Jeffrey “Free” Luers has been imprisoned and held captive by the state. Sentenced to an outrageous 22 years and 8 months for burning three Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) at Romania Chevrolet in Eugene, Jeff has continued to be active in prison and fight back with his words and inspiration. Although Jeff recently won his appeal and is expecting a reduced sentence, this case is not over:

“I have spoken with my attorney and there are still many battles ahead. Hard choices will have to be made. I am by no means close to walking out of prison, just one step closer. This is a victory, and while my own personal struggle is making headway others are just beginning.”

We encourage people to organize events for Jeff and other political prisoners, uniting struggles for human, earth, and animal liberation. In Jeff’s own words:

“This June, show your solidarity with me, and all those who have struggled, past and present, to make this world a better place. Struggle with us. Hold demonstrations or gatherings at federal buildings or US embassies and demand change. It doesn’t matter what cause or issue you fight for – we are all connected. What does matter is that we stand united and make our voices heard.”

For more information on how to get involved, contact Jeff’s support network at PO Box 3, Eugene, Oregon 97440 USA. Email freefreenow@mutualaid.org and visit www.freefreenow.org Donations for Jeff’s re-sentencing attorney are urgently needed, please help via www.freefreenow.org/donate.html

Contact Friends of Jeff Luers, PO Box 3, Eugene, OR 97440 USA or email freefreenow@mutualaid.org with details of your event.

General contact:
Friends of Jeff ‘Free’ Luers-freefreenow@mutualaid.org

West Coast contacts:
Oregon – Free’s Defense Network -PO Box 3, Eugene, OR 97440, breakthechains02@yahoo.com
San Francisco – Jeffrey Luers Support Network- freejeffreyluers@resist.ca

Climate Justice League Strikes Merrill Lynch in Asheville, NC

Originally found posted at www.infoshop.org:

Climate Justice League Strikes Merrill Lynch
April 13th Asheville, NC

In a daring daylight raid, members of the Climate Justice League struck a blow against Merrill Lynch, a major financier of global climate change. At approximately 11am two masked avengers entered the Merrill Lynch building in downtown Asheville, NC dumping a bag of coal in the lobby, throwing fliers into the air which read “Merrill Lynch, stop funding climate change!”, and locking the main entrance shut with a bike lock.

Merrill Lynch was targeted as part of a national day of action against the financial backers of the fossil fuel industry. Merrill Lynch is currently helping to seal the deal on 3 new coal plants in Texas being built by TXU. In the face of devastating global climate change we cannot allow companies such as Merrill Lynch to continue funding massive fossil fuel infrastructure. Merrill Lynch has previously been involved in funding coal companies such as Massey Energy, which is one of the largest companies involved in mountaintop removal coal mining. As long as Merrill Lynch and their ilk continue to invest in and support the fossil fuels industry, the Climate Justice League and others around the country will continue to target them.

For a fossil fuel free future, CJL

Supreme Court rules in favor of greenhouse gas regulations

High Court Rebukes EPA on Emissions, Environment

Listen to this story... by

California Attorney General Jerry Brown welcomed the Supreme Court's decision .

Eric Risberg

California Attorney General Jerry Brown welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from cars. AP Photo

All Things Considered, April 2, 2007 · The Supreme Court stood up for the environment in two major court rulings Monday. One gives the Environmental Protection Agency the go-ahead to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The second ruling sends a rebuke to the owners of dirty coal-fired power plants.

It was kind of like when Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz learned she always had the power to go home. The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Environmental Protection Agency does, in fact, have the authority to regulate the greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.

Bush administration officials had argued that the agency didn’t have that power – and so the EPA couldn’t require cars to reduce emissions. Several states and environmental groups sued the EPA, arguing that the agency did have that power and should use it.

Law professor Lisa Heinzerling from Georgetown University represented the states. She says the ruling has implications not just for car emissions but for power plants, factories and other sources of greenhouse gases.

“It’s a huge deal, it’s hard to overstate the importance of this,” Heinzerling said.

The ruling does not require the EPA to regulate. But Heinzerling says for the EPA to avoid regulating, it would have to show that these emissions don’t endanger public health or welfare.

“I think it will be extremely difficult, and I would venture to say impossible for them to conclude based on the scientific evidence we have that you cannot anticipate that greenhouse gases will endanger public health or welfare,” Heinzerling said.

EPA officials declined an interview with NPR. An EPA press release says the agency is reviewing the court ruling. The ruling could put the EPA in a difficult position because so far, President Bush has rejected mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

In the meantime, environmentalists and state officials say the ruling opens the door for states to move ahead with regulating greenhouse gas emissions from cars. A dozen states, led by California, have adopted or are in the process of adopting such rules. They need the EPA’s OK to go ahead. And Heinzerling says the Supreme Court ruling will make it hard for EPA officials to say no.

“I can’t imagine that they wouldn’t,” she said. “I don’t see any legal basis for refusing to allow California and other states to enact standards after this ruling.”

The main auto industry trade group wouldn’t comment on the ruling. But Dan Riedinger from Edison Electric Institute says his industry doesn’t want the EPA to set standards.

“If greenhouse gases are going to be regulated, and obviously a lot of people think that’s inevitable, we would far rather that come from the U.S. Congress,” Riedinger said.

The other big Supreme Court decision could also have a big impact on power plants and their pollution. Attorney Blan Holman from the Southern Environmental Law Center worked on the case for environmental groups.

“The case is all about old coal-fired power plants and what happens when you rebuild them,” Holman said. “Do you have to put air pollution controls on them or do you not?”

Holman’s talking about the equipment that filters out fine particles and smog from smoke stacks. They cause thousands of early deaths and many emergency room visits every year.

The EPA, environmental groups and states are suing several power companies for failing to install pollution controls. In this case, the Supreme Court decided against Duke Energy.

“It’s a major set back to the case and it’s something that is regrettable to us, but it is not shutting down the case by any means,” said Tom Williams, who represents Duke.

The Supreme Court was deciding whether annual emissions or hourly emissions are the deciding factor when measuring if emissions have increased and thus pollution controls should be installed. The Supreme Court says annual emissions are what matters. But the power companies have other ways to defend their actions.

“It’s our contention in this case that we did nothing wrong in the first place, and that is why we’re going to continue to press this in the lower courts,” Williams said.

But environmentalists say the ruling will provide a strong incentive to clean up many of the dirtiest coal-fired power plants in the country. And they say that both rulings together suggest that the Supreme Court is far greener than anyone realized.