Connect with us

News

Newsom Suspends State Environmental Rules for Rebuilding After Fires

Published

on

Newsom Suspends State Environmental Rules for Rebuilding After Fires

Governor Gavin Newsom has signed a broad executive order that aims to make it easier to rebuild after the fires by suspending California’s costly and time-consuming environmental review process for homeowners and businesses whose property was damaged or destroyed.

The order is likely to be the first of several permit streamlining measures issued by state, county and city agencies in the wake of the devastating fires across greater Los Angeles.

Mr. Newsom’s three-page order, signed Sunday, covers all of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties and directs state agencies to coordinate with local governments to remove or expedite permitting and approval processes during rebuilding. The most significant piece is a waiver on permitting requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act — a landmark environmental law known colloquially as C.E.Q.A. or “See Qua.”

The governor also announced that he had suspended all permitting requirements under the California State Coastal Act for properties rebuilding after the fires.

California is one of America’s most difficult and costly places to build — a driving factor behind the state’s longstanding affordable housing shortage. Between state agencies and local land use commissions, the process of developing buildings, from office complexes to subsidized rental complexes, is longer and more expensive than in almost every other state.

Advertisement

Of all the hurdles a project can be subjected to, few are more difficult and time-consuming than C.E.Q.A. The law often requires developers to fund in-depth environmental studies on a project’s potential impact on everything from local wildlife to noise, views and traffic. Groups who oppose a particular development often use C.E.Q.A. lawsuits to try to stop them. This can add years even to small projects.

While the state’s powerful environmental groups are fiercely protective of any attempts to amend C.E.Q.A. or the Coastal Act, the laws are routinely suspended in emergencies and for large projects such as sports stadiums.

Still, Mr. Newsom’s order was unusually extensive. For instance, after other disasters C.E.Q.A. suspensions have typically required rebuilding property owners to show they tried to comply with the law, even if they weren’t subjected to it. The order announced Sunday is a full waiver: For anyone rebuilding after the fires, C.E.Q.A. is effectively gone.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Ukraine accuses Russia of drone attack on Chernobyl nuclear plant

Published

on

Ukraine accuses Russia of drone attack on Chernobyl nuclear plant

Stay informed with free updates

A Russian attack drone carrying what Ukraine described as “a high-explosive warhead” has struck the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, piercing the protective structure over Reactor 4 — the site of the 1986 disaster.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Friday the damage to the shelter was “significant”, according to initial assessments, but a fire caused by the attack had been extinguished. He added that radiation levels remained stable and were being “constantly monitored”.

The International Atomic Energy Agency said its team at the Chernobyl site “heard an explosion” at about 1.50am local time coming from the safe confinement protecting the remains of Reactor 4. “At this moment, there is no indication of a breach in the inner containment [unit],” the IAEA said.

Advertisement

Completed in 2016, the containment unit is meant to safeguard the damaged nuclear reactor and keep radiation from leaking into the atmosphere.

This photo provided by Ukraine shows a damaged part of the sarcophagus covering Reactor 4 © State Emergency Service of Ukraine
Damage at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant
Damage inside the nuclear power plant © State Emergency Service of Ukraine

The latest Russian bombardment comes two days after US President Donald Trump phoned his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin to “start negotiations immediately” to end the war.

Following Friday morning’s attack, Zelenskyy dismissed Putin’s claims that Moscow was seeking peace, arguing instead that Moscow was preparing to “continue deceiving the world”.

Zelenskyy, who is set to meet US vice-president JD Vance in Munich later on Friday, called for unified international “pressure on the aggressor”, adding: “Russia must be held accountable for its actions.”

IAEA director-general Rafael Grossi said Friday’s incident and the recent increase in military activity around Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which is occupied by Russian forces, underlined persistent nuclear safety risks. “There is no room for complacency, and the IAEA remains on high alert,” he said.

Zelenskyy condemned the attack, saying Russia had been carrying out such strikes on Ukraine’s infrastructure and cities “every night”.

Advertisement

In footage captured by a security camera and shared on social media by the president, an explosion can be seen on the roof of the containment unit. A video filmed by a surveillance drone later on showed a fire caused by the attack and a large hole visible.

Photographs published by Ukraine’s state emergency service purport to show debris from a “Shahed” suicide drone that Iran has provided to Russia’s military and helped Moscow reproduce during the war.

The attack appeared to be part of a broader assault on Ukraine’s critical infrastructure, which has been targeted over the past winter months by Russia’s missiles and drones.

Odesa governor Oleh Kiper said a drone strike had also damaged port facilities in the Black Sea coastal region early on Friday. The air force said Russia had launched 133 drones at targets across Ukraine overnight.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Immigration poll shows growing support for restrictions, but deep divisions remain

Published

on

Immigration poll shows growing support for restrictions, but deep divisions remain

Members of the U.S. Marine Corps patrol the U.S.-Mexico border area as seen from San Diego on Feb. 7.

Carlos Moreno/NurPhoto via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Carlos Moreno/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Americans are deeply divided when it comes to the details of President Trump’s sweeping crackdown on immigration, according to a new NPR/Ipsos poll.

The poll shows growing approval for restrictions on immigration, like expanding the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. And a plurality of respondents say they support Trump’s call for mass deportation of all immigrants living in the U.S. without legal status.

But at the same time, the White House’s most dramatic moves — detaining migrants at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, pushing to end birthright citizenship for all children born in the U.S. and allowing immigration authorities to make arrests in schools and churches — are broadly unpopular with Democrats and independents, even as they’ve been welcomed by most Republicans.

Advertisement

“Americans on the whole may be more supportive of immigration restrictions in theory,” said Mallory Newall, a vice president at Ipsos, which conducted the poll for NPR. But in practice, she says, “there’s still not a lot of agreement about what that looks like.”

Immigration often ranks as a bigger concern for Republican voters than for others, and this poll is no exception: 47% of Republicans describe immigration as a top issue, compared with 19% of independents and only 9% of Democrats.

Overall, 23% of poll respondents ranked immigration as a top-tier issue — a larger share than in previous polls but still lagging far behind the top concern, “inflation and increasing costs,” at 47%.

The president’s supporters have largely welcomed his first steps to restrict illegal and legal immigration. In the Trump administration’s first weeks, it has ramped up arrests of immigrants without legal status, suspended admissions of refugees and asylum-seekers at the southern border and rolled back legal protections for more than a million recent migrants from South and Central America.

Advertisement

Nearly 1 in 3 poll respondents said that recent restrictions on immigration “go too far,” while a similar proportion (29%) said the restrictions “do not go far enough.”

For the most part, Republicans stand united behind the White House’s immigration agenda. Three out of 4 support denying federal funds to sanctuary cities that limit their cooperation with immigration authorities; nearly as many back using the U.S. military to arrest and detain immigrants without legal status.

Four out of 5 Republicans support deporting all immigrants without legal status and characterize the record numbers of recent migrant encounters at the southern border as an invasion.

“So as far as I’m concerned, that was an invasion. It was not an armed invasion, certainly, but it was an invasion,” said poll respondent Thomas Dunkelberger, a longtime Republican voter from western Michigan, in a follow-up interview. “And that’s got to stop. We can’t afford it as a people.”

But the poll shows that some Trump voters have doubts about his immigration policies.

Advertisement

“I think he’s done a good job because we definitely do need to close the borders,” said poll respondent Maria Rose Pawlyk in a follow-up interview.

Still, Pawlyk worries that the White House is cutting off legal pathways for refugees and other immigrants who deserve humanitarian protections. And she does not support deporting all of the estimated 12 million immigrants living in the U.S. without legal status.

“There’s no easy answer to it,” said Pawlyk, who considers herself a political independent and says she voted for Trump. “You can’t just give a blanket statement of saying deport everyone, ’cause you can’t.”

Perhaps none of Trump’s executive actions has met with more opposition than his push to end birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants who don’t have permanent legal status in the United States.

According to this poll, less than a third of Americans support that proposal, which has been blocked for the moment by several federal judges.

Advertisement

“It just seems like a fundamental right,” said poll respondent Morgan McGee, a Democratic voter from southwest Louisiana. “If you are born here, regardless of where you came from, you should be a U.S. citizen. Like, that is just the end of it, you know?”

The White House’s push to detain immigrants without legal status at the U.S. naval station in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, is also unpopular. Only 36% of poll respondents approved, although the idea is much more popular with Republicans.

The poll also reveals some broader shifts in public opinion about immigration over time.

When NPR and Ipsos began asking about building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border in 2018, only 38% of Americans supported the idea. That figure has gradually grown over time, to nearly half in our latest poll.

Advertisement

At the same time, support for DREAMers — immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children — has steadily declined. Seven years ago, nearly two-thirds of Americans favored giving them legal status. Now, that figure has declined to less than half for the first time.

“That, to me, is telling of the overall mood that the country is in right now,” said Newall, of Ipsos.

“But many of these newer proposals being pushed by the administration are a bridge too far. Yes, they are supported by the Republican base. But they are not supported by the American public,” she said.

The NPR/Ipsos poll was conducted from Feb. 7 to 10, 2025, with a sample of 1,013 adults online. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.8 percentage points for all respondents.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Donald Trump Jr invests in ‘steroid Olympics’

Published

on

Donald Trump Jr invests in ‘steroid Olympics’

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Donald Trump’s son has backed a proposed sports event for athletes using performance enhancing drugs as the US president shakes up health policy and sports governance.

The Enhanced Games, dubbed by critics as the “steroid Olympics”, announced on Thursday that Donald Trump Jr’s venture fund 1789 Capital would co-lead an investment round for the sports group.

The vision for the games is to allow athletes in the competition to use almost any legally available performance enhancing drugs in an effort to break world records. One person close to the deal said the fundraising round would raise double digit millions of dollars for the project.

Advertisement

“For over 100 years, elites in charge of global sports have stifled innovation, crushed individual greatness, and refused to let athletes push the limits of what’s possible. That ends now,” said Trump Jr.

“The Enhanced Games represent the future — real competition, real freedom, and real records being smashed.”

​The Trump administration​ has championed an unorthodox agenda on drugs and health policy, driven by health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr. Trump Jr is seen as a close adviser to his father but does not hold a formal position in the administration.

The games have already received financial support from tech investor Peter Thiel, another figure with close ties to the White House, crypto investor Balaji Srinivasan and Christian Angermayer, a German financier who is a leading investor in commercial psychedelics.

Aron D’Souza, president of the Enhanced Games, said: “We’re building something revolutionary — sports without hypocrisy, where the best can actually be the best.”

Advertisement

The Enhanced Games have yet to announce a host city or date for the competition. The games would include athletics, swimming, and “strength” events, although only one athlete, retired Australian Olympic team member James Magnussen, has enlisted in the games.

The Enhanced Games have emphasised the scientific grounding and pioneering nature of the contest. It has promised athletes they will receive comprehensive medical testing and supervision. 

D’Souza told the FT that the games would be partly funded by advertising by pharmaceutical and biotech firms.

Former president Joe Biden’s White House issued a statement condemning the Enhanced Games last year. Both the World Anti-Doping Association and the International Olympic Committee have also expressed concerns about the games. 

“D’Souza believes that data collected from chemically boosted Enhanced Games athletes might help his billionaire investors live longer and richer lives,” said John Hoberman, a professor at the University of Austin who has authored several books on the use of performance enhancing drugs.

Advertisement

The Trump Jr endorsement of the Enhanced Games comes at a time when the US is at loggerheads with the World Anti-Doping Agency.

The US last year accused Wada of failing to conduct a proper investigation into allegations of doping rule breaches by 23 Chinese swimmers in the run up to the Tokyo Olympics.

China’s own doping watchdog said the swimmers were accidentally exposed to a banned heart drug by a chef working in a hotel kitchen. The athletes were allowed to compete in the Olympics, with some going on to win medals.

An independent prosecutor appointed by Wada found no evidence of wrongdoing in the body’s handling of the case. The incident came to light last year following investigations by the New York Times and German TV channel ARD.

The US, the biggest government contributor to Wada funding, withheld a $3.6mn payment due late last year.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending