After three successive years with the hottest temperatures on record, the planet is already starting to see the damaging results of global warming. Unfortunately, president elect Donald Trump seems to believe that global warming is just a hoax intended to limit big companies. As the Senate starts confirmation hearings for Trump cabinet nominees, they are revealing some information about how these nominees view climate change.

Trump’s Nominees Reveal Disregard for Climate Change at Senate Hearings

Now that Trump has nominated his picks for the cabinet positions, it is time for the Senate to conduct hearings. Confirming a nomination only requires 51 votes, so it is likely that most of Trump’s nominees will become cabinet members. The confirmation process will provide some interesting information about the nominees positions on important issues.

Department of Defense nominee, James Mattis, noted that the ice shelves in the Arctic were retreating. He mentioned that the United States would need to assert its sovereignty in this area if we want to claim the new shipping lanes instead of Russia. He did not make note of any problems with the environment other than the changes in geography that could lead to territorial conflicts.

When questioned about climate change, the nominee for the head of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, chose not to address it directly. Instead, he just said:

Frankly, as the director of CIA, I would prefer today not to get into the details of climate debate.

This goes against the previous CIA director’s position, because he felt that climate change was contributing to instability in foreign countries.

Environmentalists are particularly worried about Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of Exxon Mobil, being nominated as secretary of state, and he seemed to confirm those worries in his hearing. Tillerson mentioned that he did not think it was a threat to national security because Tillerson claims that scientific research on climate change and global warming is inconclusive.

However, Tillerson did state that the nation ought to “continue in international leadership on climate change” because it was important for the United States to be involved in international agreements like the Paris Agreement.

A lot of issues with Tillerson’s nomination seem to rely on his connections to oil groups because Tillerson does not plan to avoid interacting with Exxon for more than the one year period required by law. In the hearings, Tillerson refused to answer any questions about how his company affected the public view on climate change.

Instead of worrying about the effect on the environment, Tillerson expressed concerns that international climate change agreements could put American business at a disadvantage.

Senator Jeff Sessions was also examined by the Senate for his nomination as Attorney General because the Senate was curious about how he would rule in cases that considered climate change. Sessions did acknowledge that climate change was a real occurrence, but he sidestepped the question of whether he would rule against the official Republican party position that climate change is not an issue.

Skeptics also found it worrisome that he did not address questions about how he would enforce laws related to carbon emission controls.

Future Looks Grim for the Environment and Global Warming

Most of the cabinet nominees who will have positions of power in the new government seem to feel that climate change is not a big deal. Though many admit that it happens on a small scale, quite a few do not think it is the government’s job to preserve the planet. Hopefully, the few who do believe climate change is a huge danger will help to steer the new government in the right direction.

 

Image source: pexels.com/photo/power-plants-during-day-time-173423/

As he transitions into the nation’s president, Donald Trump has began nominating many people to fill important roles in the government. Many of his choices have resulted in controversy due to their past business and political ties, and some citizens also expressed discomfort that most Trump nominees have been male. More scandal was generated when it was revealed that one of the few women nominated to a position by Trump had plagiarized her book.

Monica Crowley Resigns Amid Plagiarism Scandal

Crowley first became involved in the world of politics when she became a research assistant for former United States President Richard Nixon. She went on to write regular political columns for many prestigious newspapers, and eventually Crowley got her own political radio show. Other notable events in Crowley’s career include working as a political analyst for Fox News Channel and publishing multiple books on Nixon.

When Monica Crowley published a book titled What the (Bleep) Just Happened? it quickly became a New York Times bestseller. The book was roundly criticized for views that some saw as xenophobic, and reviewers called it “300 pages of cynical quips, Nixonian realism, and declarations that the romanticism of the left is over”. There were some rumors of plagiarism when it was published in 2012, but no one bothered to examine it extensively.

However, this all changed when Crowley was thrust into the spotlight as a member of Trump’s new team. She was named the senior director of strategic communications at the National Security Council, and more people started to take a look at her book. On January 7, 2017, CNN published allegations that many sections of this book were plagiarized.

At first, Trump’s team stood by Crowley, and they released a statement saying:

HarperCollins—one of the largest and most respected publishers in the world—published her book which has become a national best-seller. Any attempt to discredit Monica is nothing more than a politically motivated attack that seeks to distract from the real issues facing this country.

However, proof of the plagiarism in the book quickly started to pile up. Entire sections are lifted directly from popular economics website Investopedia, a 2004 article published by the Mises Institute, Fox News articles, columns by Andrew McCarthey, and several other columnists. Articles from the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, the BBC, and even Yahoo News were all copied directly into her book without any citations, quotations, or attributions.

Crowley’s publishers immediately responded by saying they would not sell more copies of the book unless Crowley revises her book and properly sources all of her material. Unfortunately, the total slip count for the book included over 50 proven examples of blatant plagiarism from multiple sources.

Due to the scandal, Monica Crowley decided to step down from her position with the National Security Council. She released a statement saying that she “will not be taking a position in the incoming administration” without any mention of the plagiarism charges. The statement concluded with Crowley saying:

I greatly appreciate being asked to be part of President-elect Trump’s team and I will continue to enthusiastically support him and his agenda for American renewal.

What’s Next for Crowley?

The growing plagiarism charges have greatly damaged Crowley’s career, so she may have difficulty getting more work as a political commentator and columnist. Any future books that she writes will most likely be under a great deal of scrutiny after such allegations. For now, Monica Crowley plans to stay in New York and avoid participating in politics in Washington D.C. The Trump administration has not released any news on who will be taking over her former position.

 

Image source: https://twitter.com/MonicaCrowley/

In 2015, the nation was shocked by the Charleston church shooting at an African Methodist Episcopal Church. A white supremacist murdered nine people during their prayer meeting before being apprehended by law officials. The shooter in the mass killing, Dylan Roof, was just sentenced to death on January 10th. Though many instances of the death penalty result in controversy, there has been a great deal of support for executing the Charleston shooter.

Man Convicted of Mass Shooting Is Sentenced to Death

The Charleston Shooting occurred when Roof entered the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, attended a Bible study with the victims, and then shot several members of the Bible study group at close range. The victims of the Charleston shooting were Cynthia Hurd, Susie Jackson, Ethel Lance, Pastor Depayne Middleton-Doctor, Senator Clementa Pinckney, Tywanza Sanders, Pastor Daniel Simmons, Pastor Sharonda Coleman-Singleton, and Myra Thompson.

Throughout the shooting, the killer shouted racial epithets, and told victims, “I have to do it. You rape our women and you’re taking over our country. And you have to go.” He spared one woman, telling her that she needed to survive so that she could tell others about the incident. Before the shooting, Roof had published a white supremacist manifesto online, and he later wrote another while in prison after the shooting.

Roof was first charged with nine counts of murder and one count of possessing a firearm, and then he was later charged with three attempted murder charges, 12 federal hate crime charges, 12 federal counts of violating a person’s freedom, and 12 civil rights violations. Altogether, 18 of the charges that Roof faced have a potential death penalty sentence. He was ultimately found guilty and sentenced to death in early January.

Throughout the entire legal process, there has been little question of whether or not the shooter was guilty. Most of the controversy was in finding an appropriate punishment for him. There was some uncertainty that the Charleston shooter was mentally competent, so no one knew if he would actually be sentenced to death.

Some speculated that Roof would be declared insane due to his erratic behavior such as firing his defense team. However, multiple competency evaluations found that Roof was mentally competent to stand trial for his crimes. These findings were supported by the shooter, who released statements claiming that “there’s nothing wrong with me psychologically.”

The sentence of the death penalty is somewhat surprising because execution is becoming rare even in very heinous crimes. However, Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina called for prosecutors to seek the death penalty due to the killer’s premeditated plan of a mass shooting. His lack of remorse and desire to start a race war further influenced the decision to sentence him to death.

This new trend towards increasing death penalties may be related to the increase in mass shootings over the past decade. Strict consequences may be viewed as a deterrent for people who wish to make a political statement with a shooting, and there is little public sympathy for killers in these cases. Mass shootings also tend to have clearly defined shooters, so there is less of a concern about wrongly convicted innocents being executed.

The Road to Execution Will Be Lengthy

Despite his clear expressions of guilt, the Charleston shooter has plans to appeal his sentence. Some theorize that he is either mentally disabled or just wants to draw more public attention to his case. If the killer continues to appeal his case, years could be spent in bureaucracy and more trials. Even though he has been sentenced to death, it will be quite some time before the shooter is actually executed.

Image source: Charleston County Sheriff’s Office

In what will likely be one of the most consequential decisions of his presidency, President Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch, a judge on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, on Tuesday to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

The announcement – made at a lavish White House ceremony – fulfills Trump’s campaign promise to quickly nominate a strong conservative to fill a seat left vacant for nearly a year after the death of justice Antonin Scalia.

Trump Taps Gorsuch to Fill Scalia Vacancy

Justice Scalia’s death last February sparked the first Supreme Court vacancy since Elena Kagan filled John Paul Stevens’ seat in 2010. Immediately after Scalia’s death, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced that the seat would remain vacant until the newly-elected President was inaugurated. This way, McConnell denied President Barack Obama the opportunity to fill the seat with a more liberal nominee.

Obama picked District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals judge Merrick Garland for the job, but Senate Republicans sided with McConnell on the issue and refused vote on the Garland nomination. With Garland stuck in the Senate, then-presidential candidate Trump announced a list of conservative justices that he would consider for the vacancy, if elected.

The Supreme Court vacancy proved to be a galvanizing point for conservatives and Republicans. Many evangelical Christians, who were otherwise disturbed by Trump’s behavior, decided to support him over his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton due to the prospect that he would appoint a staunch conservative to the highest court in the land.

An additional conservative vote besides those of staunch right-leaning justices Samuel Alito, John Roberts, and Clarence Thomas and that of right-tilting justice Anthony Kennedy would help shift the Supreme Court’s balance on key issues like abortion and gay rights, potentially leading to the reversal of Roe v. Wade.

It seems that Trump has found just that conservative voice and vote he wants in Judge Gorsuch. The new SCOTUS nominee boasts an elite pedigree, having obtained an undergraduate degree from Columbia before picking up a Harvard law degree. After graduation, Gorsuch served as a Supreme Court law clerk – a highly prestigious position – for Justice Kennedy and the late Justice Byron White.

After practicing as civil lawyer in Washington and then serving a brief stint in the Justice Department under President George W. Bush, he was nominated for the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2006. The Denver-based federal court is just on level of the judiciary below the Supreme Court.

On the 10th Circuit, Judge Gorsuch received considerable praise for his strong legal mind and a collegial attitude. Fellow judges and attorneys who practiced alongside him, have lauded his intellect and his well-written opinions, many of which are written in a language plain enough to be accessible to the general public.

However, many liberals have expressed serious concerns about Judge Gorsuch’s political views. In his book “The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,” Judge Gorsuch made comments that appeared to indicate support for overturning Roe v. Wade. He is also the author of a Hobby Lobby decision that hammered a federal requirement from employers to provide female employees with access to contraception regardless of their religious views on birth control.

Senate Confirmation Battle Looms

While barely any Democrat has challenged Judge Gorsuch’s basic qualifications to serve on the Supreme Court, many have raised serious concerns about the possibility that he will steer the court rightward.

Under the rules stemming from the time Democrats controlled the U.S. Senate, 60 votes are required to confirm a Supreme Court nominee. With only 52 Republicans in the Senate, eight Democrats will have to be persuaded to vote for Gorsuch or McConnell. If they reach a deadlock, Republicans might consider invoking the “nuclear option” and change Senate rules.
Image Source: Flickr

The Central Intelligence Agency, or CIA, is tasked with protecting America against both foreign and domestic threats. One of the most productive means available to CIA agents is collecting information on everyday Americans as well as on American businesses and organizations. In the last days of his presidency, Obama set limits on the practice and restrictions on the data collection manner and the period of time records can be maintained. The new President Donald Trump, however, will likely reverse these CIA limitations and thus pave the way for the CIA to ramp up its collection of citizen data in the U.S.

President Obama’s Limitations on CIA’s Data Collection Program

President Obama’s executive actions came on the heels of intense public outrage at the discovery of the CIA’s habit of tapping into people’s private emails and phone conversations. Carriers like Verizon and AT&T willingly handed over this information to the CIA without notifying the public first. After it was revealed that major carriers were allowing unlimited access to people’s phone conversations, emails, texts, and other records, the American public reacted swiftly to denounce these companies. Many people canceled their accounts and demanded justice for what they viewed as a violation of their privacy.

To quell the outrage and also put limits on the CIA, Obama outlined changes to the organization’s data collection procedures. Under these changes, the CIA must now limit the way it obtains information. The agency must also store the records it obtains for shorter periods of time. What’s more, CIA operatives cannot target organizations like mosques and anti-American groups without due cause.

However, because these changes occurred during the last days of Obama’s presidency, many political insiders do not expect them to remain in effect for long. Trump unveiled that he favors broader CIA surveillance. The new commander-in-chief also likes to keep a close watch on mosques and anti-American groups that publicize their domestic terrorist threats through social networking and other means.

The Predictions for Trump’s CIA Surveillance Plans

Although President Trump is still in the earliest days of his presidency, he is largely expected to dispel these practices in favor of procedural changes that broaden the reach of the CIA in collecting data and information on the public and private American sectors. Trump made it clear during his campaign that he is very much in favor of being able to obtain records from global businesses like Apple and Amazon as well as private or religious groups like mosques and churches.

He famously went head-to-head with Apple even before he was sworn in by demanding from the tech giant to return manufacturing to the American soil. He also insisted on compelling Apple to release records of the San Bernadino terrorists, specifically their phone records, text messages, and emails. Trump has also suggested that he would take anti-trust measures against the retail giant Amazon. His demeanor toward these major companies suggests that he wants to bring them in line with American domestic policies that demand businesses cooperate with law enforcement and intelligence agencies quickly and without complaints.

However, Trump has yet to enact any policy changes at the CIA or elsewhere within the intelligence community. As of now, the CIA must obey the Obama policies that were put into place in early January 2017.

The CIA has a contentious relationship with President Trump, one that is expected to improve as Kansas congressman Mike Pompeo gets settled into his new directorship role. Until then, CIA agents are bound to honor the procedures set in place by former President Obama. So, they must limit the manner in which they collect and store data. They also must approach private entities like mosques and churches with caution when searching for incriminatory details or records. And they must do it at least until they are ordered otherwise.
Image Source: Flickr

The Boy Scouts of America is an organization that has goals to teach boys about outdoor activities, community involvement, useful life skills, and ethics. Though this might seem like a relatively well-liked organization, the strict membership policies of the Boy Scouts has resulted in some controversy. After just starting to allow gay Scout leaders, The Boy Scout organization is facing more criticism after a transgender boy was removed from his Cub Scout program.

New Jersey Cub Scouts Kick 8 Year Old Out of Their Pack

8-year-old Joe Maldonado has been identifying as a boy for over a year. His transition was mostly drama-free, and his parents and classmates quickly accepted him as a transgender boy. Sadly, some of the other parents in Joe’s community have not been as welcoming or understanding.

Joe made the decision to join Cub Scouts, which is the Boy Scouts organization for younger boys because he wanted to socialize with other kids. At first, there were no issues with Joe joining Pack 87 in Secaucus, New Jersey, and Joe’s mother states that she knows of a few other Packs in the country that do have transgender members. The Cub Scouts Pack was well aware of Joe’s transgender status, but he was allowed to join.

None of the kids or the scout troop leader protested Joe’s acceptance. According to Joe’s mother, Kristie Maldonado, complaints from parents ultimately created issues. Though Joe’s peers accepted him, some less welcoming parents protested the addition of a transgender member and took their complaints to the council.

A month after Joe joined the pack, he was told that he could no longer participate in a phone call from the Northern New Jersey Council of Boy Scouts. Though the Cub Scouts met at a local church, the church’s spokesperson says that they had nothing to do with the Boy Scouts actions. When asked about the event, the executive who called Maldonado said that Joe simply did not meet their membership standards.

Spokesperson Effie Delimarkos said:

“No youth may be removed from any of our programs on the basis of his or her sexual orientation, [but] gender identity isn’t related to sexual orientation.”

It is true that gender identity and sexuality are not always related, but many still find the Boy Scouts’ decision to be problematic. Though it is not discrimination due to race, religion, or sexuality, the Boy Scouts’ actions are still discriminatory.

Currently, the Boy Scouts of America stands by their decision to only allow transgender boys to participate in coeducational community outreach programs. Actual pack membership is reserved only for those who were born male. So far, no comment has been made on whether or not the organization will allow transgender girls who were born male to join.

Joe is somewhat frustrated by the Boy Scouts decision, but he hopes that they may change their minds. When asked how he felt about being kicked out, Joe said:

“I’m way more angry than sad. My identity is a boy. If I was them, I would let every person in the world go in. It’s right to do.”

The Future of the Boy Scouts

The Boy Scouts of America is generally known for being less accepting than the national Girl Scouts troops that have allowed transgender members to join for years. In other matters of diversity, the Boy Scouts generally only accepted diverse members once there was a lot of public pressure to do so. They may not allow transgender members currently, but they will probably begin accepting them in a few years as transgender rights movements gain momentum.

Image source: Wikipedia

Since it was first made illegal in 1937, critics of marijuana have warned that it may make users suffer from poor judgment. One of the biggest concerns that are brought up in modern times is driving under the influence of cannabis. Many worried that legalizing marijuana would result in far more traffic deaths, but it turns out that marijuana users tend to be much more responsible in states with legalized marijuana.

Traffic Accidents Reduced After Marijuana Is Legalized

In the past few decades, 28 states have made it legal to use marijuana for medical purposes. The drug greatly reduces pain and anxiety, so it has a variety of medical uses for those with depression, cancer, arthritis, anxiety disorders, or anorexia. Since marijuana causes slower reflexes, many were concerned that legal medical marijuana could cause an increase in traffic accidents.

The American Journal of Public Health recently published a study lead by Julian Santaella-Tenorio to determine how traffic data is affected by newly legalized medical marijuana. Traffic fatalities from 1985 to 2014 were examined in association with marijuana legalization laws in various areas. Santaella-Tenorio reports that he was somewhat surprised to see the results.

Instead of having an increase in traffic fatalities, the study concluded that there was an average of 11 percent fewer fatalities in states after medical marijuana was legalized. The number of traffic fatalities was particularly high among the 25 to 44 year old demographic that makes the majority of registered medical marijuana users. The drop in traffic fatalities was an immediate reduction that occurred as soon as medical marijuana was legalized.

Santaella-Tenorio’s findings have been confirmed in other previous studies. A 2013 review from the Journal of Law and Economics examined multiple studies and found an overall drop in traffic fatalities of 8 to 11 percent in the year after a state started allowing medical marijuana use. This review also mentioned that alcohol purchases declined once medical marijuana was allowed.

Researchers are still not certain of the precise cause for the association between lowered traffic fatalities and marijuana legalization. Some theorize that access to marijuana prevents patients from dulling their pain with alcohol, and people may be less likely to drive drunk when they are peacefully enjoying marijuana at home. It is also possible that people can self-assess impairment after using marijuana instead of alcohol, so there are fewer people accidentally driving while impaired.

Another potential cause for the drop in fatalities is an increased police presence. Drivers are more likely to be cautious when police are driving nearby, and police tend to patrol more right after a state decriminalizes marijuana. The decrease in fatalities may therefore just be due to dangerous drivers being removed from the road before they can hurt anyone.

Though all of this research is reassuring, there are still some issues with drivers possibly using marijuana. A test for marijuana only reveals whether or not a person has used it in the past few months, so police have difficulty determining whether or not a driver has recently consumed marijuana. This makes it difficult to remove any dangerous drivers from the road.

The Future of Legal Marijuana

There is a growing trend towards decriminalization of marijuana. Many states allow users to consume marijuana for medical purposes, and some allow it for recreational purposes. The increasing legalization of this drug allows more studies to examine the drug’s effects, and the increase in studies further promotes legalization. As research shows that marijuana legalization does not result in health issues, mental problems, or societal turmoil, it will most likely become legal in more areas.

Image Source: Pixabay

The nation was shocked in 2012 by the explosion that killed two at the Richmond Hill subdivision in Indiana. Indianapolis fire and police departments instantly began investigating, but it took them three years to find and charge all of the suspects. The very last suspect in the case, Glenn Hults, was finally sentenced on Wednesday. After agreeing to a plea deal, Hults will receive the lightest sentence out of all five co-conspirators.

Final Person Responsible for Richmond Hill Tragedy Sentenced

The Richmond Hill explosion was an insurance scam that went terribly wrong. A Richmond Hills homeowner, Monserrate Shirley, planned to blow up her home for insurance money with the help of brothers Mark Leonard and Bob Leonard. The arson resulted in an explosion that killed neighbors Dion and Jennifer Longworth and caused 4 million dollars in property damage.

Though the men responsible for setting the fire were arrested very quickly, Hults’ involvement was not confirmed until 2015. The trial for Hults revealed that he babysat the family’s daughter on the night of the arson. He knew about the plot, helped the other members to plan the arson, and stored their valuables in his home the night of the incident.

After lengthy negotiations, Hults agreed to plead guilty to one class D felony for assisting a criminal. Hults received the maximum sentence of three years in prison for this charge.

All five of the people involved in the plan were closely related to each other. Shirley was dating Mark Leonard, who hatched the plan to blow up the house with his brother Bob. Hults was a close family friend who quickly became a part of their plot. In fact, they may have gotten the idea to burn down the house due to Hults receiving insurance money for a house fire in the past.

Gary Thompson, the fourth co-conspirator, was pulled into the plot because he was a friend of Hults’. After doing electrical work with Hults in the past, Hults suggested that he be the one to rig the microwave to start a fire.

The amount of devastation caused by the explosion has haunted most Richmond Hills residents. The family of the Longworths will never recover from the sorrow and fear they faced after learning about their loved one’s deaths.

In addition to the two deaths, seven people were seriously injured, and several homes were destroyed. One young boy still grieves for his dog who died in the blast, while others are struggling with PTSD. Therefore, few are pleased with the fact that Hults managed to get such a light sentence.

This is especially surprising when evidence at the trial revealed that Shirley claims Hults was the first one to suggest a house fire for insurance money. Even if Hults was not the mastermind, he was aware of the plans, yet did nothing to stop them. Some feel that three years is not enough for a person who was directly involved in the tragedy.

Richmond Hills Still Recovering After Explosion

Though Richmond Hills residents are starting to rebuild after the massive explosion, the closely knit subdivision still struggles to move on.

For many, the sentencing of the final co-conspirator is a relief. Though Hults may be leaving prison soon, most of the others will still be behind bars for decades. Richmond Hills residents can stop reliving the tense moments at trial and focus on getting their lives back to normal.

However, normality cannot be achieved so easily as the entire neighborhood stood witness to a terrible crime, one in which the culprits seem to be the only ones that got away easy. The majority of people still think that the Richmond Hills arsonist should have payed a steeeper price.

Image source: Wikipedia

President Obama may only have a few weeks left in office, but he is determined to make them count. On December 28, Obama declared stretches of land in Utah and Nevada to be national monuments. This makes the highly contested areas into federally protected land that cannot be developed, bought, or sold by private companies. Both of the monuments are intended to protect sites of archaeological and cultural significance to Native Americans. The appointment of the new national monuments is one of the last things Obama did as President of the Unites States.

Obama’s New National Monuments Will Protect Acres of Land

Obama released an executive order on Wednesday that is a move to preserve yet more undeveloped land. The president used an Antiquities Act created by President Theodore Roosevelt to create Bears Ears National Monument and Gold Butte National Monument. Altogether, an astounding 1.65 million acres of land became national monuments. These two spacious monuments are just the latest addition to the many other areas of land that Obama has declared monuments.

In the eight years of his presidency, Obama has used the Antiquities Act to preserve over 554,590,000 acres of land. According to the Antiquities Act, the President or Congress of the United States can

“set aside historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest.”

These designated areas become federal property, so they cannot be developed by corporations that may destroy them. Obama has used this act to protect a far larger area of land than any previous president.

Obama released a statement explaining that the designations will

“protect some of our country’s most important cultural treasures…and will ensure that future generations are able to enjoy and appreciate these scenic and historic landscapes.”

Bears Ears contains many important archaeological sites from early Spanish settlers, cattle ranchers, and Native American Tribes. The Gold Butte National Monument also contains some archaeological treasures, but its primary value is the many endangered desert animals and plants that live there.

The Bears Ears Monument is particularly notable because it contains several areas that have a religious significance to Native American tribes. For the first time in national history, the tribes will be able to manage the land and provide input into how their historical sites are treated by the government. The Hopi, Navajo, Ouray Ute, Pueblo of Zuni, and Uintah Ute tribes will work together to protect and preserve the area. Though the five tribes do not always get along, they are pleased with this decision. The president of the Navajo Nation, Russell Begaye, said:

“these places, the rocks, the wind, the land, they are living, breathing things that deserve timely and lasting protection.”

Conservationists applaud these appointments, but not everyone is happy. Utah politicians opposed the protection of Bears Ears because they wanted to pass a bill that would allow some development in the area. Likewise, the city of Las Vegas wished to expand into the area that will now become Gold Butte. The federal government taking this state-owned land under federal jurisdiction is seen as somewhat inconvenient. It will prevent development and expansion in these areas, so Utah and Nevada will have to find less historically significant areas to build new businesses or homes.

President Obama’s Environmental Legacy

With this move, Obama protects land from development and provides more rights to marginalized Native American tribes. Many have praised these actions as a move to protect untouched land from the greedy developers. This popular decision may not be entirely foolproof, though. The Antiquities Act may potentially allow future presidents to modify a previously declared monument. Political experts are currently divided on whether or not the Trump administration is able to undo the designations.

Image source: Flickr