By MICHAEL PHILLIS, ALEXA ST. JOHN and MATTHEW DALY

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency illegally canceled grants worth more than $1.5 billion focused on improving the environment in minority communities hit hard by pollution, Senate Democrats say.

Related Articles

Newly unsealed memo sheds light on Justice Department’s rush to drop NYC mayor’s corruption case

Trump signs order seeking to overhaul US elections, including requiring proof of citizenship

President Trump pardons former Hunter Biden business partner Devon Archer

US Vice President JD Vance to join his wife in Greenland on Friday

The US Postal Service has been struggling for years. Now Trump’s talking about privatizing it

Hundreds of grants were awarded by former President Joe Biden’s administration under a 2022 law that directed the EPA to spend $3 billion on grants to help low-income and minority communities improve their air, water and protect against climate change. Those environmental justice efforts were a major priority under Biden.

President Donald Trump’s administration, however, has cut funding, grants and people focused on environmental justice. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced March 10 that that he was canceling more than 400 “DEI and Environmental Justice grants” totaling $1.7 billion. In a post on X, Zeldin said the cuts were the fourth — and biggest — round of EPA/Department of Government Efficiency cuts.

All nine Democrats on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works signed the letter to Zeldin dated Monday. It demands information from the EPA about the terminated grants and eliminated environmental justice employees, and asks the agency to explain its plans to “combat pollution specifically in marginalized communities.”

“The vast majority of the targeted grant awards were made using funds appropriated by Congress with a statutory mandate that they be distributed to disadvantaged communities,” according to the senators’ letter.

The senators also accused the EPA of violating court orders and rules for terminating grants.

An EPA statement said the terminations will not stop.

“We have received the letter and will respond through appropriate channels. As the Trump administration reins in wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars, EPA will continue terminating assistance agreements in line with terms and conditions,” the statement said.

An internal EPA list of the roughly 400 grantees that was shared with The Associated Press detailed the cuts.

They included a wide swath of recipients for clean air and water initiatives. The Childhood Lead Action Project was granted $500,000 for a lead poisoning prevention program. Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice was granted $474,000 for a community air quality system, while the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection was granted $1 million for a pilot project in communities affected by PFAS contamination in drinking water, as examples.

To carry out the spending in the Inflation Reduction Act, the agency funded several environmental justice grant programs during the Biden administration. Community Change Grants, for example, focused on community-driven projects for places “facing legacy pollution, climate change, and persistent disinvestment,” per the EPA.

“Unsurprisingly, the illegal termination of these grants puts communities at risk and does nothing to lower costs for families,” said Delaware Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester, a Democrat.

Trump signed an executive order overturning decades worth of environmental justice policies and purging DEI efforts from the government. Zeldin has in turn dismantled the Biden administration’s climate program and environmental justice work.

“EPA continues to work diligently to implement President Trump’s executive orders,” Zeldin has said.

For example, the agency directed a bank to freeze $14 billion in funding spent during the Biden administration on a green bank to finance climate-friendly projects — a program authorized by Congress. Zeldin accused the nonprofits administering the program of mismanagement and self-dealing and terminated the grants. That move was paused by a federal judge who said the government’s accusations of fraud were “vague and unsubstantiated.”

Senate Democrats are pushing back against the Trump administration’s effort to withhold congressionally authorized spending, called impoundment. They argue Zeldin is violating a promise he made during his Senate confirmation hearing to follow the law.

“The illegal termination of these EPA grants not only violates congressional appropriations law, contractual agreements, and multiple court orders, but it also undermines essential programs aimed at eliminating childhood lead poisoning, reducing toxic air pollution, and mitigating health risks from heat and wildfires,” said Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, the top Democrat on the committee.

The Washington Post was first to report on the letter.

Last year, the EPA changed the terms and conditions for its grants, eliminating its ability to do policy-based cancellations. An internal EPA Office of General Counsel email obtained by Senate Democrats and provided to The AP says that even though EPA officials knew some grants had this updated language, they were terminated anyway.

Phillis reported from St. Louis and St. John reported from Detroit.

The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment

Gov. Tim Walz Tuesday announced that he will require state workers to be in the office at least 50 percent of their work days beginning around June 1.

The governor noted that the policy change supports the economic vitality of office districts like downtown St. Paul, which depend on foot traffic back to businesses and public spaces that public employees provide.

“This approach balances the flexibility of telework with the workplace advantages of being in office,” Walz said in a statement. “Having more state employees in the office means that collaboration can happen more quickly and state agencies can build strong organizational cultures more easily.”

Approximately 60% of state employees currently work in-person and did so through the pandemic.

There is an exemption for workers living more than 75 miles away from where their main work site.

The governor’s announcement noted that the move will support downtown districts, such as St. Paul, that rely on foot-traffic form employees.

Related Articles

The Jonas Brothers to play career-spanning concert at Xcel Energy Center

Minnesota Wild, St. Paul Saints make pitches for state bonding projects

Young, Fisher: One way to think about reinvention in downtown St. Paul

Dining Diary: Potato pancakes and spätzle at Waldmann, dumplings at Ruam Mit and Sunday specials at Brunson’s

St. Paul looks to state for half of $769 million renovation of the Xcel Center

By JAMIE STENGLE

The gunman who killed 23 people in a racist attack targeting Hispanic shoppers at a Walmart near the U.S.-Mexico border in 2019 would avoid the death penalty under a plea offer announced Tuesday, abruptly ending years of efforts by prosecutors to see that he face execution by lethal injection.

El Paso County District Attorney James Montoya said his decision in the prosecution of Patrick Crusius for one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history was driven by victims’ families who wanted the case behind them.

“I could see a worst-case scenario where this would not go to trial until 2028 if we continued to seek the death penalty,” he said.

But Montoya also acknowledged that not all families agreed with the reversal by his office, which under previous leadership had committed to taking the case to trial and seeking the death penalty.

Under the plea offer, Montoya said, Crusius would receive life in prison with no possibility of parole. Crusius, 26, was already sentenced to 90 consecutive life sentences at the federal level after pleading guilty in 2023 to hate crime charges.

FILE – In the is Oct. 10, 2019 file photo, El Paso Walmart shooting suspect Patrick Crusius pleads not guilty during his arraignment in El Paso, Texas. (Briana Sanchez/El Paso Times via AP, Pool, File)

Mark Stevens, an attorney for Crusius, did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.

Under the Biden administration, federal prosecutors also took the death penalty off the table but did not explain why. In addition to the federal case, Crusius was also charged in state court with capital murder.

Montoya said he supports the death penalty and believes Crusius deserves it. But he said he met with the families of the victims and there was an overriding desire to conclude the process, though some relatives were willing to wait as long as it took for a death sentence.

“I’m just glad it’s over,” said Elise Hoffmann-Taus, whose father, Alexander Hoffmann was among those killed. “This is the outcome I wanted.”

Republican Gov. Greg Abbott also said Crusius deserved to die.

“I’ve heard about it. I think the guy does deserve the death penalty, to be honest,” Abbott said Tuesday about the announcement. “Any shooting like that is what capital punishment is for.”

Montoya, a Democrat, took office in January after defeating a Republican incumbent who was appointed by Abbott.

Crusius, who is white, was 21 years old and had dropped out of community college when police say he drove more than 700 miles from his home near Dallas to El Paso.

Moments after posting a racist screed online that warned of a Hispanic “invasion” of the state, he opened fire with an AK-style rifle inside and outside the store.

Before the shooting, Crusius appears to have been consumed by the immigration debate, posting online in support of building the border wall and other messages praising the hardline border policies of President Donald Trump, who was in his first term at the time. He went further in the rant he posted before the attack, saying Hispanics were going to take over the government and economy.

In the years since the shooting, Republicans have called migrants crossing the southern border an “invasion” and dismissed criticism that such rhetoric fuels anti-immigrant views and violence.

FILE – In this Aug. 6, 2019, file photo, police officers walk behind a Walmart at the scene of a mass shooting at a shopping complex in El Paso, Texas. (AP Photo/John Locher, File)

In the U.S. government’s case, Crusius received a life sentence for each of the 90 charges against him, half of which were classified as hate crimes. Then-Attorney General Merrick Garland said after the sentencing that “no one in this country should have to live in fear of hate-fueled violence.”

One of his attorneys told the judge before the sentencing that his client had a “broken brain” and his thinking was “at odds with reality.”

Federal prosecutors did not formally explain their decision not to seek the death penalty, but they did acknowledge that Crusius suffered from schizoaffective disorder, which can be marked by hallucinations, delusions and mood swings.

The people who were killed ranged in age from a 15-year-old high school athlete to several grandparents. They included immigrants, a retired city bus driver, teachers, tradesmen including a former iron worker, and several Mexican nationals who had crossed the U.S. border on routine shopping trips.

In 2023, Crusius agreed to pay more than $5 million to his victims. Court records showed that his attorneys and the Justice Department reached an agreement over the restitution amount, which was then approved by a U.S. district judge. There was no indication that he had significant assets.

Associated Press writer Nadia Lathan contributed from Austin, Texas.

A federal judge in Texas has set a June trial date for the U.S. government’s years-old conspiracy case against Boeing for misleading regulators about the 737 Max jetliner before two of the planes crashed, killing 346 people.

Related Articles

Wall Street drifts and Trump Media jumps despite souring moods for US consumers

Napster sold to tech commerce company for $207 million

Social Security under Trump: 5 warning signs to watch

Chinese electric vehicle maker BYD reports 2024 revenue over $100B, topping Tesla’s sales

Tesla sales fall by 49% in Europe even as the electric vehicle market grows

U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor did not explain in the scheduling order he issued on Tuesday why he decided to set the case for trial. Lawyers for the aerospace company and the Justice Department have spent months trying to renegotiate a July 2024 plea agreement that called for Boeing to plead guilty to a single felony charge.

The judge rejected that deal in December, saying that diversity, inclusion and equity policies the Justice Department had in place at the time might influence the selection of a monitor to oversee the company’s compliance with the terms of its proposed sentence.

Since then, O’Connor had three times extended the deadline for the two sides to report how they planned to proceed. His most recent extension, granted earlier this month, gave them until April 11 to “confer on a potential resolution of this case short of trial.”

The judge revoked the remaining time with his Tuesday order, which laid out a timeline for proceedings leading up to a June 23 trial in Fort Worth.

The Department of Justice declined to comment on the judge’s action. A Boeing statement shed no light on the status of the negotiations.

“As stated in the parties’ recent filings, Boeing and the Department of Justice continue to be engaged in good faith discussions regarding an appropriate resolution of this matter,” the company said.

The deal the judge refused to approve would have averted a criminal trial by allowing Boeing to plead guilty to conspiring to defraud Federal Aviation Administration regulators who approved minimal pilot-training requirements for the 737 Max nearly a decade ago. More intensive training in flight simulators would have increased the cost for airlines to operate the then-new plane model.

The development and certification of what has become Boeing’s bestselling airliner became an intense focus of safety investigators after two of Max planes crashed less than five months apart in 2018 and 2019. Many relatives of passengers who died off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia have pushed for the prosecution of former Boeing officials, a public criminal trial and more severe financial punishment for the company.

In response to criticism of last year’s plea deal from victims’ families, prosecutors said they did not have evidence to argue that Boeing’s deception played a role in the crashes. Prosecutors told O’Connor the conspiracy to commit fraud charge was the toughest they could prove against Boeing.

O’Connor did not object in his December ruling against the plea agreement to the sentence Boeing would have faced: a fine of up to $487.2 million with credit given for $243.6 million in previously paid penalties; a requirement to invest $455 million in compliance and safety programs; and outside oversight during three years of probation.

Instead, the judge focused his negative assessment on the process for selecting an outsider to keep an eye on Boeing’s actions to prevent fraud. He expressed particular concern that the agreement “requires the parties to consider race when hiring the independent monitor … ‘in keeping with the (Justice) Department’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.’”

“In a case of this magnitude, it is in the utmost interest of justice that the public is confident this monitor selection is done based solely on competency. The parties’ DEI efforts only serve to undermine this confidence in the government and Boeing’s ethics and anti-fraud efforts,” O’Connor wrote.

An executive order President Donald Trump signed during the first week of his second term ended diversity, equity and inclusion programs across the federal government, likely rendering the judge’s concerns moot.

Trump’s return to office also means the Justice Department’s leadership has changed since federal prosecutors decided last year to pursue the case against Boeing.

Boeing agreed to the plea deal only after the Justice Department determined last year that the company violated a 2021 agreement that had protected it against criminal prosecution on the same fraud-conspiracy charge.

Government officials started reexamining the case after a door plug panel blew off an Alaska Airlines 737 Max during flight in January 2024. That incident renewed concerns about manufacturing quality and safety at Boeing, and put the company under intense scrutiny by regulators and lawmakers.

Boeing lawyers said last year that if the plea deal were rejected, the company would challenge the Justice Department’s finding that it breached the deferred-prosecution agreement. O’Connor helped Boeing’s position by writing in his December decision that it was not clear what the company did to violate the 2021 deal.