(NEW YORK) — Controversial radio and TV personality Alex Jones was found liable Monday for damages in a lawsuit brought by the parents of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims.
Judge Barbara Bellis found Jones liable for damages by default because Jones and his companies, like Infowars, showed “callous disregard” for the rules of discovery. She previously faulted the Infowars host for failing to comply with requests for documents and other procedures.
The ruling sends the case to a jury to award the families damages without a civil trial. It is legal a victory for eight parents of Newtown victims who sued Jones for defamation after he called the elementary school shooting massacre a hoax.
The plaintiffs earlier alleged a “yearslong campaign of abusive and outrageous false statements in which Jones and the other defendants have developed, amplified and perpetuated claims that the Sandy Hook massacre was staged and that the 26 families who lost loved ones that day are paid actors who faked their relative’s deaths.”
The judge agreed with the families that Jones, Infowars and his other companies failed to turn over documents to the families that they would need to prove their case, as required by law.
“The defendants were ordered to produce the documents,” Bellis said during Monday’s hearing, which was conducted remotely. “Discovery is not supposed to be a guessing game. What the Jones defendants have produced by way of analytics is not even remotely full and fair compliance.”
Jones was similarly defaulted in Texas for failing to turn over documents.
The U.S. Supreme Court had declined to take up a petition from Jones earlier in April, who had challenged legal sanctions imposed on him by a court in Connecticut.
“This callous disregard of their obligations to fully and fairly comply with discovery and court orders on its own merits a default against the Jones defendants,” Bellis said.
“While the families are grateful for the Court’s ruling, they remain focused on uncovering the truth. As the Court noted, Alex Jones and his companies have deliberately concealed evidence of the relationship between what they publish and how they make money,” Chris Mattei of Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, which represents the eight families suing Jones, said.
“Mr. Jones was given every opportunity to comply but, when he chose instead to withhold evidence for more than two years, the Court was left with no choice but to rule as it did today. While today’s ruling is a legal victory, the battle to shed light on how deeply Mr. Jones has harmed these families continues,” Mattei said.
The judge in Connecticut will hold a hearing in August to determine how much Jones will have to pay in damages.
Twenty children and six staff members died in the Dec. 14, 2012, shooting at the Newtown, Connecticut, school at the hands of gunman Adam Lanza.
(NEW YORK) — A Wisconsin jury could begin deliberating the fate of Kyle Rittenhouse on Monday after hearing what is expected to be starkly different theories of the same evidence in the homicide case with prosecutors set to portray the teen as a trouble-seeking active shooter to counter defense claims he shot three men, two fatally, in self-defense.
The closing arguments are currently unfolding in Kenosha County Circuit Court.
Rittenhouse was 17 and armed with a semiautomatic rifle at the time he shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, and severely wounded Gaige Grosskreutz, 27, during an Aug. 25, 2020, protest in Kenosha.
During the trial, which began on Nov. 2, Rittenhouse testified that he shot all three men in self-defense as they and others allegedly attacked him during the demonstration over the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a 29-year-old Black man who was left paralyzed.
The court hearing began Monday with a presentation from Judge Bruce Schroeder of instructions to the jury that included allowing the panel to consider lesser charges against the 18-year-old.
Schroeder also spent time instructing the jury on the legal elements of self-defense.
“The law of self-defense allows the defendant to threaten or intentionally use force against another only if he believed that there was an actual or imminent unlawful interference with his own person, and he believed that the amount of force which he used or threatened to use was necessary to prevent or terminate the interference and his beliefs were reasonable,” the judge said.
On Friday, Schroeder told Rittenhouse he runs the risk of being convicted on the lesser charges if the jury finds him not guilty of the original counts of first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree intentional homicide, attempted first-degree intentional homicide and two counts of first-degree recklessly endangering safety.
The judge also granted a defense motion Monday to dismiss a charge of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 after the prosecution agreed that the rifle Rittenhouse used in the shooting did not meet the required standard of a short-barreled rifle under the law.
Immediately following the jury instructions, prosecutor Thomas Binger began giving his summation by telling the jury, “This is a case in which a 17-year-old teenager killed two unarmed men and severely wounded a third person with an AR-15 that did not belong to him.”
“This isn’t a situation where he was protecting his home or his family,” Binger said. “He killed people after traveling here from Antioch, Illinois, and staying out after a citywide curfew.”
Binger launched into detail about the first killing on the night of Aug. 25, 2020, in Kenosha, showing the jury video the prosecutor claims shows that Rittenhouse provoked the deadly encounter with Rosenbaum.
Binger said Rittenhouse sat down a fire extinguisher he had in his left hand and pointed his gun at Rosenbaum and others. In a dramatic reenactment, Binger sat down a water bottle as if it were the fire extinguisher with his left hand and raised the semiautomatic rifle used in the shootings at the courtroom gallery.
“That is what provokes this entire incident. And one of the things to keep in mind is that when the defendant provokes the incident, he loses the right to self-defense,” Binger said. “You cannot claim self-defense against a danger you create. That’s critical right here. If you’re the one who is threatening others, you lose the right to claim self-defense.”
The prosecutor asked the jury to watch the video of the Rosenbaum shooting closely, pointing out that Rosenbaum held up his hands as he ran after Rittenhouse and cited the teenager’s testimony during the trial that he knew the man was unarmed.
“Mr. Rosenbaum is not even within arm’s reach when the first shot occurs,” Binger said, playing the video of the shooting several times.
Binger described the confrontation between Rosenbaum and Rittenhouse as being akin to a “bar fight,” even showing the jurors an image of Patrick Swayze in the movie “Roadhouse,” in which the actor played a bar bouncer who protects a small town from a corrupt businessman.
“This is a fight that maybe many of you have been involved in,” Binger said, referring to the confrontation between Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum. “Two people, hand to hand. We’re throwing punches, we’re pushing, we’re shoving, we’re whatever. But what you don’t do is you don’t bring a gun to a fistfight.”
Binger said that after shooting Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse ran away without attempting to provide first aid. The prosecutor said others in the crowd had every reason to chase after Rittenhouse to stop him.
“At that point, the crowd is dealing with what they perceive to be an active shooter, someone who has just shot someone who is still in possession of the gun, who is fleeing the scene, and how are we supposed to know where he’s going next?” Binger said.
He said those chasing Rittenhouse took the “least intrusive means possible” to stop the gunman.
Binger showed video of Rittenhouse running down a street and Huber hitting him twice with a skateboard, the second time after which, Rittenhouse lost his balance on his own and fell to the ground.
The prosecutor said Rittenhouse fired twice at an unarmed unidentified man who reportedly kicked him in the face, without regard for others standing nearby, before he shot Huber point-blank in the chest, killing him.
Binger said Grosskreutz, who was armed with a pistol, was shot in the right bicep when he tried to disarm Rittenhouse. “Gaige Grosskreutz had his own gun in his own hand. He could have aimed and fired at the defendant, but he did not,” Binger said.
He said that despite lying to people throughout the night that he was a trained EMT, Rittenhouse never attempted to help the people he shot.
“This is someone who has no remorse, no regard for life, only cares about himself,” the prosecutor said of Rittenhouse.
Binger wrapped up his argument by telling the jury to put themselves in Rittenhouse’s shoes and asking if a “reasonable person” would react in the same way.
“I submit to you that no reasonable person would have done what the defendant did. And that makes your decision easy,” Binger said. “He’s guilty of all counts.”
What happens next
Following the closing arguments, court officials will draw names to determine which of the 18 jurors who heard the evidence will be among the 12 that will deliberate on a verdict.
During the trial, Rittenhouse testified in his own defense, telling the jury, “I didn’t intend to kill them. I intended to stop the people who were attacking me.” During his stint on the witness stand, Rittenhouse erupted in sobs as he explained why he shot Rosenbaum.
Rittenhouse, who said he was a former lifeguard and firefighter EMT cadet, said he went to Kenosha that night to provide first aid to people in need and help protect businesses after looting and vandalism broke out in the city, saying he brought his medical supplies along with his AR-15-style rifle and 30-round ammunition clip.
During the trial, prosecutors leaned heavily on video, showing multiple angles to all three shootings, including Huber hitting Rittenhouse twice with a skateboard, Rosenbaum threatening to kill Rittenhouse and chasing him before he was shot dead, and Grosskreutz being shot as he approached the teenage armed with a loaded handgun.
In advance of the verdict, Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers has authorized about 500 National Guard troops to be on standby to support public safety efforts if needed in Kenosha.
(NEW YORK) — The United Autoworkers Union announced it has reached a third tentative agreement that now heads to local unions for a ratification vote that could end the ongoing strike of thousands of John Deere workers.
Results of the latest vote are expected to come in on Wednesday, a union rep told ABC News, after the tentative deal was reached late last Friday. The strike will continue through the ratification vote.
The work stoppage includes employees at the agricultural machinery giant across 12 facilities in three states and just crossed the one-month mark after commencing on Oct. 14, when workers overwhelmingly rejected a contract offer from the company that would have given immediate 5% or 6% wage raises, among other things.
By a much closer margin — 55% against and 45% in favor — UAW workers rejected a second tentative agreement earlier this month that would have guaranteed an immediate 10% wage increase as well as improved retirement benefits to new employees and more.
Many have pointed to the ongoing strike and negotiations as a signpost of the new, post-pandemic labor movement that gives workers an apparent upper hand as major companies have reported struggles to find staff and record-high numbers of workers are quitting their jobs.
The Labor Department said just last week that a new record-high number of employees — representing some 3% of the total workforce — quit their jobs in September, while job opening figures also hover near record highs. Meanwhile, new unionization efforts are emerging at major companies including Amazon and Starbucks.
Details on the latest contract agreement were not immediately released by the union or John Deere, but the UAW said it includes “modest modifications.”
“John Deere and Company has made a last, best and final offer to the UAW negotiating team that includes modest modifications to the last tentative agreement presented for ratification on Nov. 2,” the UAW said in a statement.
“As a result, the UAW will present the Company’s offer for ratification and, as has been the case throughout the bargaining process, will support the outcome as determined by our members,” the statement added, saying the strike continues and voting information will be provided by local unions to members.
In a statement earlier this month after the union rejected the second tentative agreement, Marc A. Howze, the chief administrative officer for John Deere, said, “Through the agreements reached with the UAW, John Deere would have invested an additional $3.5 billion in our employees, and by extension, our communities, to significantly enhance wages and benefits that were already the best and most comprehensive in our industries.”
“This investment was the right one for Deere, our employees and everyone we serve together,” Howze added. “Even though it would have created greater competitive challenges within our industries, we had faith in our employees’ ability to sharpen our competitive edge.”
John Deere has also called the second, rejected agreement “groundbreaking” on its website, saying it would allow the workers to “share in our current and future success through wages and benefits that are not only the best in our industry — they are groundbreaking.”
The company did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment on the latest negotiations Monday.
The first strike in more than three decades at John Deere comes after the company reported earning a record-high $4.68 billion during the first nine months of the 2021 fiscal year, more than double the $1.99 billion reported during the same time last year.
John Deere’s chairman and CEO John May, meanwhile, earned compensation of some $15.58 million in fiscal year 2020, according to a company SEC filing. This would make the ratio of the CEO’s total compensation to a median employee’s total compensation in 2020 approximately 220 to 1, the SEC filing states.
A GoFundMe page started to support the workers while they are on strike has garnered some $158,591 in a little over three weeks, from more than 3,500 donors.
(NEW YORK) — As the COVID-19 pandemic has swept the globe, more than 5 million people have died from the disease worldwide, including over 763,000 Americans, according to real-time data compiled by Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Systems Science and Engineering.
Just 68.8% of Americans ages 12 and up are fully vaccinated against COVID-19, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Latest headlines:
-Fauci says fully vaccinated families should ‘feel good’ about gathering for holidays
-US daily case average jumps 23%
-NYC residents over 18 can get boosters, health commissioner says
Here’s how the news is developing. All times Eastern.
Nov 15, 2:39 pm
Consider rapid testing before Thanksgiving, experts say
Former Baltimore health commissioner Dr. Leana Wen said in an interview Monday hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center that her family is rapid-testing on Thanksgiving because they’re gathering indoors with multiple families and have young, unvaccinated children.
She said it was reasonable for families with immunocompromised members to continue to take precautions, like rapid test and gather outdoors.
“A family in which everybody is generally healthy and fully vaccinated might take very different types of risks than a family with unvaccinated young kids or elderly, immunocompromised family members,” she said.
Dr. Jerome Adams, former Surgeon General under President Donald Trump, said to make sure all relatives are vaccinated and that no one has cold symptoms.
“Even if you’re vaccinated, if you’re coughing, if you’re sneezing, if you’ve got symptoms, you still could be spreading the virus,” he said.
Looking to the future, Dr. Anthony Fauci said, “If we can get most of the people who are eligible to be boosted, boostered, we can go a long way to make in 2022 much more of a normal year than what we’ve seen in 2021.”
ABC News’ Cheyenne Haslett
Nov 15, 1:45 pm
Long-term study of kids with COVID begins
The National Institutes of Health is starting a study to track the impact of COVID-19 infections in children, enrolling its first participant at the NIH’s Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland.
The idea of “long COVID,” or long-term health impacts, is of concern in children, and is one of the reasons doctors strongly encourage pediatric vaccination. Six million children in the U.S. have had COVID-19, and many “experienced significant acute and long-term effects,” the NIH said.
The study will track up to 1,000 children and young adults between 3 and 21 years old who previously tested positive for COVID-19 and evaluate the impact on their physical and mental health over three years.
The study will also try to determine risk factors for complications. It will evaluate the long-term immune responses to the disease, screen for genetic factors that may affect how children respond to COVID-19 infection and determine whether immunological factors influence long-term outcomes.
ABC News’ Eric M. Strauss
Nov 15, 12:00 pm
Fauci says fully vaccinated families should ‘feel good’ about gathering for holidays
Dr. Anthony Fauci said vaccinated family members “can feel good about enjoying a typical Thanksgiving, Christmas,” in an interview Monday hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center.
But Fauci warned that cases are still high, so people should wear masks when they’re in groups of people in indoor settings.
“We are not going to be going through this indefinitely,” Fauci said. “How quickly we get to the end depends on us: how well we vaccinate, how well we get boosted and how well we do the kinds of things to protect ourselves.”
ABC News’ Cheyenne Haslett
Nov 15, 11:19 am
US daily case average jumps 23%
The daily case average in the U.S. now stands at 78,500 – a 23% jump over the last 2.5 weeks, according to federal data
Twenty-one states have seen an uptick in daily cases of 10% or more over the last two weeks: Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.
Last week marked the first national increase in hospitalizations in nearly 10 weeks. There are now more than 47,000 patients with COVID-19 in hospitals — up by about 2,000 patients since last Monday, according to federal data.
(WASHINGTON) — White House National Economic Council Director Brian Deese acknowledged that “inflation is high and it’s affecting Americans in their pocketbook and their outlook,” but promised the administration is working to address the rise in costs in both the short and long term.
“That concern actually underscores why it’s so important to move forward on the Build Back Better bill that Congress is considering,” Deese said in an interview Sunday with George Stephanopoulos on This Week, making the case for President Joe Biden’s nearly $2 trillion social spending bill still being debated in Congress.
“This bill is actually going to address the core costs that American families are facing in child care, in housing, in health care,” he added.
Pressed by @GStephanopoulos what Biden admin can do in the short term to address inflation, National Economic Council director Brian Deese says “we have to finish job on COVID.”
As inflation continues to plague the U.S., a new ABC News-Washington Post poll paints a problematic picture for the president on the economy as a whole: 70% of Americans say it is in bad shape, and more than half — 55% — disapprove of Biden’s handling of the economy.
“Inflation is high and it’s affecting Americans in their pocketbook and their outlook,” White House National Economic Council director Brian Deese tells @GStephanopoulos, says Build Back Better bill would address “core costs” American families are facing. https://t.co/MPVhQ6Wmjrpic.twitter.com/Tq4hSGKxi7
With the holidays rapidly approaching and prices climbing by more than 6% in the last 12 months, Stephanopoulos pressed Deese on what the administration can do now to offer relief to families.
“I know you’re hoping to pass it, but even if it does pass, it’s going to take a while for the benefits to kick in. So what can Americans expect in the short term? Is inflation going to get worse before it gets better?” Stephanopoulos asked.
“We have to finish the job on COVID. We know that the more that people feel comfortable getting out into the economy, going to movies rather than buying television at home, working in the workplace, the more we can return a sense of normalcy to our economy,” Deese said, adding that the administration will also tackle the supply chain crunch felt across the globe with the bipartisan infrastructure bill Biden will sign into law Monday.
“It’s the first time that a president is actually delivering on a bipartisan infrastructure bill, and while a number of those pieces will be longer term, there are things that will go into effect right away to try to get money out to help. For example, upgrade our ports, upgrade our airports, upgrade our roads,” Deese said.
“We’re going to work without delay to get that money working for the American people,” he added.
The new ABC News-Washington Post poll does also have some good news for the president on his agenda, as 63% support for the $1 trillion infrastructure bill passed by Congress that Biden will sign into law Monday, and 58% support the social spending bill.
Despite the strong public support for the social policy initiative, the White House is still facing pushback from Republicans and some Democrats, who worry pumping more money into the economy could worsen the inflationary woes currently facing the country.
Deese pushed back, pointing to economic analyses that show the measures will decrease inflation, not add to it, and arguing the bill is fully paid for.
“Frankly, it’s been sometime in Washington since we’ve done something that’s fiscally responsible.”
“You say it’s fully paid for, but the Congressional Budget Office still hasn’t weighed in and certified that it actually is fully paid for,” Stephanopoulos pressed.
“We’re confident this bill, as it moves through the process, is going to be fully paid for, and not only that, it’s actually going to reduce deficits over the long term,” Deese replied.
“We’ve already seen the independent Joint Committee on Taxation, as well as the Treasury Department, look at the tax components of this bill and say, not only are they enough to offset the investments in this package, but actually over the long term, they will reduce the deficit by trillions of dollars because we’re making permanent changes to the tax code,” he said.
Asked about West Virginia Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin’s suggestion that the bill should be delayed due to inflation concerns, Deese remained optimistic that there would be progress this week and said Manchin’s worries actually make the case for taking action now.
“We’re confident that this bill is going to come up in the House this week, that it will get a vote it will pass, and it will move on to the Senate,” he said. “And those concerns, which we understand and we share, those concerns actually underscore why we need to move out on this bill.”
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump’s political ally Steve Bannon on Monday surrendered to the FBI on charges of criminal contempt of Congress stemming from his refusal to cooperate with the House select committee on the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
Bannon on Friday was charged with two counts of contempt for failure to comply with a committee subpoena to produce any records and testify about what he knew about the assault.
He was expected to be arraigned on the charges later Monday.
His attorney has claimed in repeated letters to the committee that Bannon’s communications with Trump were privileged.
The indictment sets off what will likely be a contentious legal battle with significant ramifications for the Jan. 6 committee as it seeks to compel other witnesses to testify about the events leading up to the attempted insurrection, including any communications they may have had with Trump.
“Since my first day in office, I have promised Justice Department employees that together we would show the American people by word and deed that the department adheres to the rule of law, follows the facts and the law and pursues equal justice under the law,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland after the department charged Bannon on Friday.
He added the “charges reflect the department’s steadfast commitment to these principles.”
Executive privilege, according to the Cornell Legal Institute, “is the power of the President and other officials in the executive branch to withhold certain forms of confidential communication from the courts and the legislative branch. When executive privilege is invoked in litigation, the court should weigh its applicability by balancing competing interests.”
Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows has also been in the committee’s crosshairs after he defied the committee’s subpoena last week to testify about what his version of events were on Jan. 6 — citing similar executive privilege claims.
“Mr. Meadows, Mr. Bannon, and others who go down this path won’t prevail in stopping the Select Committee’s effort getting answers for the American people about January 6th, making legislative recommendations to help protect our democracy, and helping ensure nothing like that day ever happens again,” Reps. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said in a statement.
Meadow’s lawyer, George J. Terwilliger III said he was “surprised and disappointed” that the Biden Justice Department rejected the former chief of staff’s claims of executive privilege, in a Washington Post op-ed over the weekend.
“Under Supreme Court precedent, President Donald Trump also has a voice to be heard on claims of executive privilege arising from his tenure, and he has instructed Meadows to maintain the privilege. My client thus finds himself caught between two rocks (Congress and the Biden administration) and a hard place (instructions from the president he served.),” Terwilliger wrote.
“Moreover, [Meadows] knows from experience how critical it is for senior aides to be able to communicate freely with the president — and how dangerous a precedent he would set for presidents of both parties were he to appear and answer questions without limitation,” he wrote.
Terwilliger also called negotiations with the committee “fruitless” and suggested the parties “take a deep breath and reconsider ending the tradition of accommodation between the executive and Congress.”
He suggested Meadows deliver written answers to questions.
(WASHINGTON) — Half of parents in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll are skeptical about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines for children, potentially a key barrier as the government seeks to boost uptake.
Numerous recent surveys have found substantial numbers of parents hesitant to have their child vaccinated against the coronavirus. This poll explores these compunctions by assessing parents’ views of whether the vaccines are safe and effective, both well-established motivators of uptake.
The results: Just 46% of adults with a child younger than 18 at home are confident that the vaccines are safe for children age 5 to 17. It’s about the same, 47%, for confidence that the vaccines are effective at preventing serious illness and death in this age group. Fifty-two percent are not so or not at all confident in their safety or effectiveness.
These are far from ABC/Post results in September asking about the vaccines generally, not specifically for children. Among all adults, 71% called the vaccines safe and 72% saw them as effective. Results on safety were similar last April for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, less so for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, measured during a pause in its use.
This poll, produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates, finds that strength of sentiment is a further challenge: Twice as many parents are not at all confident that the vaccines are safe for children age 5 to 17 than are very confident of this, 41% versus 21%. The gap is smaller on effectiveness, but still 12 percentage points, 38% versus 26%.
Groups
As with many pandemic attitudes, partisan and ideological preferences inform views on vaccines for children. While sample sizes for parent subgroups are small, skepticism about the vaccines’ safety and effectiveness in 5- to 17-year-olds peaks among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, as well as among conservatives.
In other gaps, mothers are more apt than fathers to be confident in the vaccines’ effectiveness, 55% versus 38%. (The difference between the sexes in views of safety is smaller, and not statistically significant.) Confidence in safety, for its part, is much higher among parents who are members of racial or ethnic minority groups, compared with white parents. (On effectiveness, the racial/ethnic gap shrinks, and is not significant.)
A connection with attitudes on school policies is apparent as well. Parents who support their local school district’s pandemic policies are more apt than those who see these policies as too strict to express confidence in the vaccines. That again connects with politics: Seeing school policies as too strict rises sharply among leaned Republicans and conservative parents.
Methodology
This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Nov. 7-10, 2021, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 1,001 adults, including 240 adults with children living at home. Results among adults with children at home have a margin of sampling error of 7.5 percentage points, including the design effect.
The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates of New York City with sampling and data collection by Abt Associates of Rockville, Maryland. See details on the survey’s methodology here.
(HAWKINSVILLE, Ga.) — The search is on for three “violent” inmates who remain at large days after escaping from a Georgia jail, authorities said.
Tyree Williams Jr., 33; Brandon Pooler, 24; Dennis Penix Jr., 28; and two other inmates fled the Pulaski County Jail, about 130 miles south of Atlanta, on the night of Nov. 12, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said.
They had two Tasers and were last in a stolen white 2015 Kia Sedona van with Georgia license plate CMP8628, the GBI said.
One of the five escapees, Tyree Jackson, was taken into custody Sunday, the GBI said.
A second inmate, Lewis Wendell Evans III, was taken into custody late Sunday night in Warner Robins, about 100 miles south of Atlanta, the GBI said.
As the search continues for the remaining three escapees, the U.S. Marshals Service is offering a reward of up to $5,000 for information leading to any arrests, the GBI said.
Proposed drilling in the Gulf of Mexico – ABC News Photo Illustration, U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
(WASHINGTON) — On the heels of his stirring plea at the just-completed Glasgow Climate Conference for “every nation to do its part” to solve the climate crisis, President Joe Biden’s administration is preparing this week to hold an auction for drilling rights in the Gulf of Mexico over impassioned objections from environmental organizations.
“It’s hard to imagine a more dangerous, hypocritical action in the aftermath of the climate summit,” said Kristen Monsell, a lawyer for the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity. “Holding this lease sale will only lead to more harmful oil spills, more toxic climate pollution, and more suffering for communities and wildlife along the Gulf Coast.”
The auction, set for Wednesday, will grant oil companies the opportunity to bid on nearly 80 million acres of lucrative federal waters, which would produce an estimated 1.12 billion barrels of oil and 4.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas over the next 50 years.
The winning bidder will have the right to build platform rigs up to 231 miles from shore and drill for oil at underwater depths of up to 11,000 feet. Environmental groups say the distance from shore and depth of drilling increases the likelihood of a repeat of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which caused 4 million barrels of oil to leak into the Gulf.
Brettny Hardy, an attorney with the environmental nonprofit group Earthjustice, said the development of those waters would amount to a “huge climate bomb” that would “compromise our future and move our climate action in the exact wrong direction.”
Biden promised to end new drilling on federal lands during his presidential campaign, and issued an executive order pausing the lease sales during his first week in office, pending a review of their environmental impact.
In June, however, a federal judge ordered the resumption of those lease sales, siding with 13 states that sued the administration for overstepping its authority.
The administration has appealed the judge’s ruling, but agreed to go forward with the leases while the matter works its way through the courts.
A spokesperson for the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which is tasked with coordinating the auction, said the administration is just adhering to the court’s orders.
“[The administration] is complying with a U.S. District Court’s injunction regarding [the auction] while the government appeals the decision,” said spokesperson John Filostrat. “The Biden Harris Administration is continuing its comprehensive review of the deficiencies associated with its offshore and onshore oil and gas leasing programs.”
The Interior Department said in August that, while it would adhere to the court’s ruling, it will also “continue to exercise the authority and discretion provided under the law to conduct leasing in a manner that takes into account the program’s many deficiencies.”
But environmental advocates argue that the Biden administration has not exhausted its legal “authority and discretion” — and in fact has several options at its disposal to delay or cancel the bidding.
“The administration has more than sufficient authority to choose not to hold the lease sale and to cancel it,” Monsell said.
The Justice Department could file an emergency injunction to pause the lease pending its appeal, according to Hardy, or make the case in court that the environmental effects of the sale could conflict with other federal laws, like the National Environmental Policy Act.
Monsell and Hardy are leading a coalition of environmental groups in suing the administration to prevent the auction from moving forward, with the goal of winning an injunction before the leases come into effect, which the government said would be on Jan. 1.
In a press release announcing their lawsuit, the environmental groups accused the Biden administration of “folding to the oil industry,” which has promoted the auction as “welcome news for the American worker and our national security.”
“As global energy prices rise, continued Gulf of Mexico leasing can help avert inflationary risks and proactively ensure affordable energy for all walks of life, especially low-income communities,” said Erik Milito, the president of the National Ocean Industries Association, an offshore energy trade group.
Neither the Interior Department nor the White House has responded to allegations that the administration is buckling to pressure from the oil industry.
In Glasgow, Biden promised a return of American leadership on climate change issues, pledging to halve greenhouse emissions by 2050.
“We’ll demonstrate to the world the United States is not only back at the table, but hopefully leading by the power of our example,” he said.
Environmental groups said Biden’s words ring hollow as long as these oil leases move forward.
“This isn’t just hypocritical, it’s outright deceitful,” said Jeremy Nichols of WildEarth Guardians, a nonprofit environmental group. “It truly calls into question whether the Biden administration’s climate agenda is nothing but broken promises.”
