The Supreme Court ruled against Obama's energy plan, and it's a huge deal.

Last night's New Hampshire primaries went pretty smoothly, all things considered.

Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump both took home sweeping victories for their respective parties. And in their victory speeches, both Trump and Sanders noted that despite the positive steps forward, they still have long fights ahead of them. "They are throwing everything at me except the kitchen sink, and I have the feeling that the kitchen sink is coming pretty soon as well," noted Sanders.


Photo by Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images.

Another victory went to voter turnout, which has been pretty astounding so far in New Hampshire and Iowa.

But behind all the victorious fanfare was a subtle yet important defeat — one that could have implications long after 2016.

Late Tuesday night, the Supreme Court announced that it would block President Obama's efforts to curb global warming by reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants.

The Clean Power Plan, which was announced in August, aimed to set new national standards for reducing carbon emissions from coal plants, which, according to the EPA, account for 77% of carbon dioxide emissions produced in the electricity sector.

A coal plant in Pennsylvania. Photo by Jeff Swensen/Getty Images.

Last night's 5-4 ruling on the plan was a stay request, which essentially means the EPA will not be allowed to enforce the plan for now. Although it's not the final word on things (an appeal to uphold the CPP will be heard in June), it's a surprising blow to the president's efforts to combat climate change.

Among the primary opponents of the Clean Power Plan are coal states such as Wyoming, whose legislators and citizens alike argue that they would lose thousands of jobs if the measure is passed.

Unfortunately, this vote is much more important symbolically than you may realize.

Why? While the Supreme Court's four liberal members opposed the stay request, it simply wasn't enough. That's alarming when you consider that:

1. Supreme Court justices are periodically appointed by presidents.

2. Presidents generally appoint justices with whom they share ideological views.

Since four justices are in their 70s or 80s, the next president will probably make at least one appointment. The implications for climate change could be huge.

Photo by Steve Petteway/Wikimedia Commons.

Right now, the Supreme Court is made up mostly of conservative justices, with Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg occupying the court's only strong liberal positions.

And since conservative justices are more likely to vote against climate measures — or deny climate change altogether — a conservative president appointing another conservative justice could be bad news for future emission reduction plans or other climate-change-curbing regulations.


Climate change is one of the most immediate and present threats to the livelihood of all people.

And a great way to fight it is with sweeping, immediate legislation. If the Supreme Court is still able to surprise us like they did last night — and block a tip-of-the-iceberg measure to address such a huge problem — I smell trouble. And carbon.

True

In 1945, the world had just endured the bloodiest war in history. World leaders were determined to not repeat the mistakes of the past. They wanted to build a better future, one free from the "scourge of war" so they signed the UN Charter — creating a global organization of nations that could deter and repel aggressors, mediate conflicts and broker armistices, and ensure collective progress.

Over the following 75 years, the UN played an essential role in preventing, mitigating or resolving conflicts all over the world. It faced new challenges and new threats — including the spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, a Cold War and brutal civil wars, transnational terrorism and genocides. Today, the UN faces new tensions: shifting and more hostile geopolitics, digital weaponization, a global pandemic, and more.

This slideshow shows how the UN has worked to build peace and security around the world:

1 / 12

Malians wait in line at a free clinic run by the UN Multidimensional Integrated Mission in Mali in 2014. Over their 75 year history, UN peacekeepers have deployed around the world in military and nonmilitary roles as they work towards human security and peace. Here's a look back at their history.

Photo credit: UN Photo/Marco Dormino

ZACHOR Foundation

"What's 'the Holocaust'?" my 11-year-old son asks me. I take a deep breath as I gauge how much to tell him. He's old enough to understand that prejudice can lead to hatred, but I can't help but feel he's too young to hear about the full spectrum of human horror that hatred can lead to.

I wrestle with that thought, considering the conversation I recently had with Ben Lesser, a 91-year-old Holocaust survivor who was just a little younger than my son when he witnessed his first Nazi atrocity.

It was September of 1939 and the Blitzkrieg occupation of Poland had just begun. Ben, his parents, and his siblings were awakened in their Krakow apartment by Nazi soldiers who pistol-whipped them out of bed and ransacked their home. As the men with the shiny black boots filled burlap sacks with the Jewish family's valuables, a scream came from the apartment across the hall. Ben and his sister ran toward the cry.

They found a Nazi swinging their neighbors' baby upside down by its legs, demanding that the baby's mother make it stop crying. As the parents screamed, "My baby! My baby!" the Nazi smirked—then swung the baby's head full force into the door frame, killing it instantly.

This story and others like it feel too terrible to tell my young son, too out of context from his life of relative safety and security. And yet Ben Lesser lived it at my son's age. And it was too terrible—for anyone, much less a 10-year-old. And it was also completely out of context from the life of relative safety and security Ben and his family had known before the Nazi tanks rolled in.

Keep Reading Show less
True

In 1945, the world had just endured the bloodiest war in history. World leaders were determined to not repeat the mistakes of the past. They wanted to build a better future, one free from the "scourge of war" so they signed the UN Charter — creating a global organization of nations that could deter and repel aggressors, mediate conflicts and broker armistices, and ensure collective progress.

Over the following 75 years, the UN played an essential role in preventing, mitigating or resolving conflicts all over the world. It faced new challenges and new threats — including the spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, a Cold War and brutal civil wars, transnational terrorism and genocides. Today, the UN faces new tensions: shifting and more hostile geopolitics, digital weaponization, a global pandemic, and more.

This slideshow shows how the UN has worked to build peace and security around the world:

1 / 12

Malians wait in line at a free clinic run by the UN Multidimensional Integrated Mission in Mali in 2014. Over their 75 year history, UN peacekeepers have deployed around the world in military and nonmilitary roles as they work towards human security and peace. Here's a look back at their history.

Photo credit: UN Photo/Marco Dormino

With many schools going virtual, many daycare facilities being closed or limited, and millions of parents working from home during the pandemic, the balance working moms have always struggled to achieve has become even more challenging in 2020. Though there are more women in the workforce than ever, women still take on the lion's share of household and childcare duties. Moms also tend to bear the mental load of keeping track of all the little details that keep family life running smoothly, from noticing when kids are outgrowing their clothing to keeping track of doctor and dentist appointments to organizing kids' extracurricular activities.

It's a lot. And it's a lot more now that we're also dealing with the daily existential dread of a global pandemic, social unrest, political upheaval, and increasingly intense natural disasters.

That's why scientist Gretchen Goldman's refreshingly honest photo showing where and how she conducted a CNN interview is resonating with so many.

Keep Reading Show less
via State of Deleware

Same-sex marriage is legal in America and these days 63% of all Americans support the idea. Ten years ago, it was still a controversial issue among Democrats, but in 2019, 79% say they support same-sex marriage.

The issue played a big role in the Democratic primary for the Delaware's House of Representatives 27th district race. On September 15, Eric Morrison defeated incumbent Earl Jacques in a landslide and gay rights was a central issue.

In 2013, Jaques voted against same-sex marriage and refused to vote yes or no on banning gay conversion therapy in the state. On the other hand, Morrison is a gay drag queen who performs under the name Anita Mann and is very progressive on LGBTQ issues.

Keep Reading Show less