MIL USHOR-2b Engine

Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Salud Carbajal (CA-24)

Today, U.S. Representative Salud Carbajal (D-CA-24), U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA), and members of the California congressional delegation are launching an inquiry into Sable Offshore’s efforts to restart oil drilling off the California coast and are demanding answers on the company’s collaboration with the Trump administration to invoke the Defense Production Act (DPA) in relation to this project. 

In a letter to Sable Offshore Corp.’s CEO and Chairman Jim C. Flores, the lawmakers raise concerns about the timeline of Sable’s accrued lawsuits, cease and desist orders, fines, etc. dating back from April 2025 to March 2026. They demand Sable preserve all of their internal communication records between the company and administration officials related to the restart.

“The administration’s reliance on the Defense Production Act (DPA)—no doubt in consultation and coordination with lawyers representing Sable—is a serious misuse of a federal law meant to be involved for national security reasons, not to enrich an industry already making record profits. To help Congress better understand this effort to circumvent California law and coastal protections, we seek detailed information on the company’s role in this decision, and your communications with the Trump administration in relation to Sable Offshore’s SYU project,” the lawmakers wrote.

The lawmakers also point to concerning financial ties between Sable and President Trump, including executives at Sable directly contributing to the president’s campaigns. They emphasize that Sable has closely worked with the Trump administration to restart the oil pipelines that have been dormant for over a decade all in an effort to “benefit industry partners and preferred energy sources” rather than protect our coastlines.

“Californians do not want oil production restarting along their coasts and have voted repeatedly for California laws that block coastal oil production. The environmental impacts, along with the economic fallout from those impacts, are simply too great, especially when there is little to no benefit for California consumers. We urge you to pause and consider the long-term legal and financial ramifications of collaborating with the Trump administration to circumvent California law,” the lawmakers concluded.

In addition to Carbajal and Schiff, the letter was signed by U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) and U.S. Representatives John Garamendi (D-CA-08), Dave Min (D-CA-47), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA-19), Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-11), and Mike Thompson (D-CA-04).

Carbajal has long opposed the expansion of offshore oil drilling along California’s coastline. 

In April 2025, Carbajal announced the reintroduction of the California Clean Coast Act. The California Clean Coast Act was the first bill Congressman Carbajal introduced as a Member of Congress, demonstrating his longstanding commitment to protecting California’s coast from offshore drilling and the devastating impact of oil spills.

Most recently, Carbajal and Schiff joined local Central Coast environmental leaders to rally against the Trump administration’s attempt to restart offshore oil platforms owned by Sable.

Additionally, Carbajal and Schiff wrote to Governor Gavin Newsom raising concerns about the potential restart of offshore oil drilling operations along California’s Gaviota Coast by Sable Offshore Corp, and demanded answers from the Trump administration on its involvement in Sable Offshore Corporation’s attempts to restart offshore oil drilling using the same pipelines that caused the Refugio State Beach oil spill of 2015. 

The full text of the letter can be found here and below. 

Dear Mr. Jim Flores: 

We write to express our grave concern over the restart of Sable Offshore Corporation’s (Sable) Santa Ynez Unit (SYU) offshore oil activities near the coast of Santa Barbara, California, and your company’s disregard for California law and the well-being of our constituents. The administration’s reliance on the Defense Production Act (DPA)—no doubt in consultation and coordination with lawyers representing Sable—is a serious misuse of a federal law meant to be invoked for national security reasons, not to enrich an industry already making record profits. To help Congress better understand this effort to circumvent California law and coastal protections, we seek detailed information on the company’s role in this decision, and your communications with the Trump administration in relation to Sable Offshore’s SYU project. We also demand that all relevant documents and records pertaining to the SYU project as described in detail below be preserved. 

In February 2024, your family-owned special purpose acquisition company, Flame Acquisition Corp., struck a deal with ExxonMobil to acquire SYU for roughly $700 million, creating the Sable merger. Given the liabilities attached to SYU operations, including ten years of platform and equipment inactivity, challenges with complying with State regulations, and twenty-seven other risk factors identified in Sable’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) 10-K Form, this was a risky purchase. 

Since April 2025, Sable has accrued multiple lawsuits, shareholder complaints, notices of violation, cease and desist orders, and fines from California state agencies and nonprofit organizations. Sable has responded by disobeying directives and filing counterclaims for monetary damages. A timeline of state agency and court penalizations are outlined below:  

April 2025: The California Coastal Commission (CCC) issued an $18 million fine and cease and desist order against Sable for unpermitted work that harmed habitats and waters on California’s coastline in violation of California’s Coastal Act. At the hearing, CCC staff presented evidence of Sable ignoring state orders; Sable had previously received two cease and desist orders from CCC for violating the Coastal Act and Sable responded by suing the CCC and vowing to continue work in defiance of the order. In October 2025, Sable filed a complaint seeking over $347 million in damages from the CCC, claiming “unlawful delay” of the pipeline restart.3 The CCC won a preliminary injunction against Sable in May 2025. 

July 2025: Multiple class action lawsuits were filed by Rosen Law Firm and Schall Law Firm on behalf of purchasers of Sable securities, alleging the company made misleading statements by claiming they had restarted oil production when they had not. Sable is also currently under investigation by the SEC for allegations of advance information being shared selectively among company insiders in October 2025, right before Sable raised $250 million by selling shares of its common stocks to private investors to help keep the company afloat. This same month, a Santa Barbara court placed a separate injunction against Sable preventing the restart of operations unless and until Sable obtains all necessary state approvals.  

September 2025: The Santa Barbara County District Attorney John Savrnoch filed 21 criminal charges, including five felony counts, against Sable for unlawful discharge of pollutants into waterways and improper excavation during pipeline repair. The District Attorney alleged that these actions are in violation of the California Fish and Game Code and the Water Code. Sable responded by calling theses criminal charges “inflammatory and extremely misleading” and a “politically motivated attack”.  

October 2025: The California Office of the State Fire Marshal determined that Sable had failed to comply with safety standards on its pipeline corrosion repair work and therefore its restart could not proceed. That same month, on behalf of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Attorney General, Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit against Sable asserting three causes of action: 1) Sable repeatedly discharged or threatened to discharge waste to waters of the state without authorization, despite being notified by the Central Coast Water Board that permits were required for the activities; 2) Sable activities resulted in the discharge of sediment and vegetative debris to various bodies of water inland and near the Gaviota Coast, harming water quality and aquatic habitat; and 3) Sable failed to submit information to the board that was required by law. Sable responded by working with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to update its federal Development and Production Plan to allow the company to bypass its onshore pipeline and use a floating barge operating in federal waters (an Offshore Storage and Treating Vessel). 

March 2026: Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Chris Wright issued an order claiming that SYU oil production was a national security concern invoking the Defense Production Act (DPA), which unlawfully superseded state laws and restarted SYU oil production. On behalf of the State of California, Attorney General Bonta responded by filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration to halt the use of the DPA Order as a basis for executive overreach. The lawsuit alleges that the DPA Order, which DOE issued at Sable’s request, violates the Administrative Procedure Act and infringes on California’s sovereign power under the Tenth Amendment. The Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel opinion supporting DOE’s move to invoke the DPA explicitly references a letter from Sable through Holland and Knight to the DOE General Counsel requesting the invocation of the DPA.  

The Trump administration has clearly been working hand in glove with Sable to try to force the restart of SYU. For example, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) made misleading statements about SYU oil production in July 2025 that paralleled statements made by Sable, the same statements that resulted in securities class action lawsuits by your shareholders. California Congressional Members also requested further information about these statements in a letter to DOI Secretary Doug Burgum and BSEE Deputy Director Kenneth Stevens. To date, we have not received any response. While this fight between California and the Trump administration continues, these actions suggest that the Trump administration is willing to circumvent state laws to benefit industry partners and preferred energy sources, and you appear to be a willing partner in its efforts. 

Furthermore, we have concerns regarding financial ties between Sable and President Trump. Executives at Sable have directly contributed to President Trump’s campaigns. You have contributed over $300,000 to Super PACs like Right to Rise USA and Senate Leadership Fund, which made contributions to President Trump’s 2016 and 2024 campaigns. Additionally, Gregory Patrinely, Executive Vice President and CFO of Sable, contributed thousands of dollars to Trump-aligned committees in 2020 and 2024. During his campaign, President Trump promised to reverse environmental rules for your industry in exchange for $1 billion in donations. It is difficult to avoid the inference that actions like the use of DPA to overcome state laws on behalf of an oil producer represents a fulfillment of that “pay to play” promise. 

In addition to the information requests below, please preserve all records and communications related to your efforts to work with the Trump administration or campaign to restart the SYU from January 1, 2024, to March 13, 2026, and on an ongoing basis moving forward. This preservation hold applies to your personal records, corporate records, and all communications with President Trump, the White House, the Department of Energy, the Trump presidential campaign and outside entities, and any person representing or purporting to be acting on behalf of President Trump, as well as communications with any intermediary that communicated with these entities on your behalf. This includes but is not limited to: records and communications via email, whether official or personal; mobile devices; encrypted or disappearing messaging applications; social media; calendar entries; meeting notes; and voicemail and text messages. To the extent that you or Sable use any auto-delete functions, you should immediately suspend autodelete functions and notify persons with control over potentially relevant records of their preservation obligations. You should also preserve all records of your or Sable’s communications with the White House or White House personnel, Department of Energy political appointees and staff, others appointed by the President or his advisors, or any member of the Trump presidential campaign. 

We request responses to the following: 

1. When did your relationship with President Donald Trump begin? Please outline those communications, including any meetings with Trump, his family, or his representatives, to date.  
2. When did your relationship with Secretary Chris Wright begin? Please outline those communications to date.  
3. Did Sable, its executives, attorneys, or other representatives at any point discuss with President Trump or any member of his administration or campaign the SYU project and did you link it in any way with any campaign or political donations made by you or executives of your company?  
4. Did you, your attorneys, your representatives, or any executive of Sable ever make contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations or any other entity for which public disclosure would not be required, and were these contributions ever discussed with President Trump, any member of his family, any member of his campaign, or any political appointee of the current administration in relation to the SYU project? 
5. Did you, your attorneys, your representatives, or any executive of Sable ever discuss campaign or political donations at all—before or after it was given—with President Trump, any member of his family, any member of his campaign, or any political appointee of the current administration? What was communicated and when did these communications begin?  
6. Has Sable, its executives, attorneys, or other representatives ever communicated with anyone in the DOE General Counsel’s office or the White House Counsel’s office? Please detail those communications.  
7. Has Sable, its executives, attorneys, or other representatives communicated with anyone in the Executive Office of the President, the President, the President’s campaign, or any Cabinet members since the start of President Trump’s second term? Or direct others to do so on your behalf? If so, please outline those communications to date.  
8. Please provide any and all communications to the Department of Energy (DOE) from Sable (including through Holland and Knight), asking DOE to invoke the Defense Production Act, including the December 12, 2025, letter Re: Sable Offshore Corp.— Request for Action Under the Defense Production Act.  
9. Who initiated the request to DOE to ask for an opinion on the Defense Production Act? Did Sable’s attorneys, DOE, or a member of the President’s administration advise you to do so?  
10. Did you communicate nonpublic information to a select group of investors concerning your strategy to convince Secretary Wright, Secretary Lutnick, or President Trump to assist in your preemption of California law, and did this strategy involve offering a round of golf with Phil Mickelson to Secretary Lutnick or having an intermediary promise President Trump to affix gold leaf to your offshore oil platform in exchange for helping to override California law? 

Californians do not want oil production restarting along their coasts and have voted repeatedly for California laws that block coastal oil production. The environmental impacts, along with the economic fallout from those impacts, are simply too great, especially when there is little to no benefit for California consumers. 

We urge you to pause and consider the long-term legal and financial ramifications of collaborating with the Trump administration to circumvent California law. We also advise you that we will continue our oversight and investigative efforts in the next Congress. We look forward to your response and acknowledgement of compliance with this preservation request by June 10, 2026.  

 

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Ken Calvert (CA-42)

Congressman Ken Calvert has secured $69,750,000 for Riverside County infrastructure projects in the Fiscal Year 2027 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill. The bill was introduced last week and is set to be marked up by the House Appropriations Committee next week. Rep. Calvert is a senior member of the Appropriations Committee. The total amount for Community Project Funding in House appropriations bills is capped at less than one half of one percent of discretionary spending.

“The infrastructure funding included in this bill will make a significant impact in the Riverside County communities I am honored to represent,” said Rep. Calvert. “By improving our roads, expanding water projects, and enhancing our airports, we are investing in the infrastructure Riverside County families rely on today and in the future. As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, I will keep fighting to return the tax dollars my constituents send to Washington and put them to work in our region.”

At Rep. Calvert’s request, the following Community Project Funding Requests were included in the bill:

• $10,000,000 – Quail Valley Subarea 4 Septic Conversion Project (Eastern Municipal Water District) – The requested funding would be used to support the construction of critical sewer infrastructure in Subarea 4, where 540 homes are located.
• $4,000,000 – Calimesa Blvd. Revitalization Project (City of Calimesa) – The requested funding would be used to revitalize one mile of Calimesa Boulevard, the City’s historic main street and primary commercial corridor.
• $5,000,000 – CV Sync – Rancho Mirage Interconnect Improvements Phase II Project (City of Rancho Mirage) – The requested funding would be used to implement an Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) across transportation corridors within the City of Rancho Mirage.
• $5,000,000 – La Quinta Critical Infrastructure Improvements Project (City of La Quinta) – The requested funding would be used for channel lining and roadway construction to increase flood control and roadway connectivity.
• $5,750,000 – Wildomar Roadway Improvement Project (City of Wildomar) – The requested funding would be used to repave and improve various roadways throughout the city for increased safety and access.
• $5,000,000 – Palm Springs Airport Auxiliary Gate Expansion Project (City of Palm Springs) – The requested funding would be used to complete the design and construction of a 24,000 sq ft two-gate auxiliary facility, which includes Federal Inspection Station capabilities.
• $10,000,000 – Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Drinking Water Sustainability Project (Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District) – The requested funding would be used to rehabilitate the 40-year-old Corydon Well in the City of Wildomar to benefit 164,000 people.
• $5,000,000 – French Valley Airport Contract Air Traffic Control Tower Construction Phase II Project (County of Riverside) – The requested funding would be used for the construction of a tower that will allow aircraft movements to be actively managed, improving safety by reducing the risk of runway incursions, ground conflicts, and midair collisions.
• $4,500,000 – Portola Interchange Project (City of Palm Desert) – The requested funding would be used to add an Interchange to the I-10 at Portola Avenue.
• $3,500,000 – Lake Elsinore Nichols Road Bridge Project (City of Lake Elsinore) – The requested funding would be used to construct a durable and modern bridge along Nichols Road.
• $2,500,000 – McCall Boulevard/I-215 Interchange Project (City of Menifee) – The requested funding would be used to add two tolled express lanes in both directions in the existing median along I-15.
• $2,500,000 – Highway 74 Improvements Project (City of Palm Desert) – The requested funding would be used to repair, resurface, and improve Highway 74.
• $3,000,000 – Highway 111 Safety Improvement Project (City of Indian Wells) – The requested funding would be used for roadway improvements along Highway 111, mostly pedestrian crosswalks, speed signs, and merge lanes.
• $1,250,000 – Coachella Valley Regional Sterile Mosquito Insectary and Public Health Campus Expansion Project (Coachella Valley Mosquito and Vector Control District) – The requested funding would be used to establish a regional Sterile Mosquito Insectary and strengthen community education and workforce training capacity across the Coachella Valley.
• $1,000,000 – North Lake Elsinore Fire Station Project (City of Lake Elsinore) – The requested funding would be used to build a new fire station, which will improve emergency response times, strengthen wildfire preparedness, and reduce operational burden.
• $1,000,000 – Corona Parks Improvement Project (City of Corona) – The requested funding would be used for safety, accessibility, and recreational upgrades to Brentwood Park.
• $750,000 – SilverLakes Causeway Trail Connectivity & ADA Improvement Project (City of Norco) – The requested funding would be used for ADA-compliant improvements beginning at Eastvale Community Park, traveling beneath the Hamner Avenue Bridge, and extending into SilverLakes Sports Park and the Santa Ana River corridor.

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Brett Guthrie (2nd District Kentucky)

Brownsville, KY – Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02) and Senator Mitch McConnell (KY) were joined by local and state leaders in Brownsville, KY, to celebrate the recently secured nearly $30 million in federal and state funding to support much-needed upgrades for the Edmonson County Water District. The two leaders were joined by State Senator David Givens (SD-09), State Representative Michael Meredith (HD-19), Edmonson County Judge/Executive Scott Lindsey, and former Edmonson County Water District General Manager Kevin Shaw. 

“It was an honor to play a part in securing $14 million in funding that will provide for modernization upgrades within the Edmonson County Water District, ensuring residents have access to safe and reliable water,” said Congressman Guthrie. “This project would not have been possible without the collaboration between federal, state, and local partners. It has been a years-long process to secure this state and federal funding, and I look forward to seeing it directly improve the lives of Kentuckians for years into the future.”

“I’m proud to have worked alongside Congressman Guthrie and local leaders to help secure more than $9 million in federal funding to modernize this critical water treatment facility in Edmonson County. Investments like this are essential to supporting growing communities and ensuring Kentuckians have access to reliable, modern infrastructure,” said Senator McConnell. “Throughout my time in the Senate, I’ve worked to make sure Kentucky punches above its weight when it comes to federal resources so that community projects like this one can help strengthen local economies and improve quality of life for families across the Commonwealth.”

“This coordinated effort by local, state and federal leaders to address the drinking water challenges faced by Edmonson County met with great success today as we celebrated the vital funding to address intake and infrastructure needs. The future just got much brighter for Edmonson County,” said Senator Givens.

“It was a pleasure to welcome Congressman Guthrie and Senator McConnell to Brownsville.  The $23 million they secured in Washington is a transformational investment in our community.  It will ensure that the people of our community have clean drinking water and will prepare us for future growth. I am grateful to both Senator McConnell and Congressman Guthrie for their support of Edmonson County and our water district,” said Representative Meredith.

“We are humbled and honored to welcome Senator Mitch McConnell and Congressman Brett Guthrie to our community. Both they and their staff have been instrumental in helping make this outcome possible,” said Judge/Executive Lindsey. “All of their dedication and hard work to secure the funding needed will have a generational impact on our community, and for that, we are sincerely grateful. This is proof positive of what can happen for communities when a critical need arises, and everyone at every level of government works together to create solutions to the needs at hand. I could not ask for better advocates for Edmonson County and our people than the Senator, Congressman, and the teams that they have assembled to assist the local governments.”

“It was just a great example of what everyone can accomplish working collaboratively towards a common goal. While the water level changing on Green River was of no fault of the Water District, the consequences were,” said former Edmonson County Water District Commissioner Kevin Shaw. “Now a change due to progress has been righted and we will all move forward and make the necessary adjustments and improvements to the Water Treatment Plant, and the community will be all the better for it.”

Pictures from this week’s event can be found HERE.

Additional information about the federal and state funding can be found HERE.

Source: United States House of Representatives – Julia Brownley (D-CA)

Washington, DC – Today, Congresswoman Julia Brownley (D-Calif.-26), Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Congressman Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.-24), and members of the California congressional delegation are launching an inquiry into Sable Offshore’s efforts to restart oil drilling off the California coast and are demanding answers on the company’s collaboration with the Trump administration to invoke the Defense Production Act (DPA) in relation to this project. 

In a letter to Sable Offshore Corp.’s CEO and Chairman Jim C. Flores, the lawmakers raise concerns about the timeline of Sable’s accrued lawsuits, cease and desist orders, fines, etc. dating back from April 2025 to March 2026. They demand Sable preserve all of their internal communication records between the company and administration officials related to the restart. 

“The administration’s reliance on the Defense Production Act (DPA)—no doubt in consultation and coordination with lawyers representing Sable—is a serious misuse of a federal law meant to be involved for national security reasons, not to enrich an industry already making record profits. To help Congress better understand this effort to circumvent California law and coastal protections, we seek detailed information on the company’s role in this decision, and your communications with the Trump administration in relation to Sable Offshore’s SYU project,” the lawmakers wrote.  

The lawmakers also point to concerning financial ties between Sable and President Trump, including executives at Sable directly contributing to the president’s campaigns. They emphasize that Sable has closely worked with the Trump administration to restart the oil pipelines that have been dormant for over a decade all in an effort to “benefit industry partners and preferred energy sources” rather than protect our coastlines. 

“Californians do not want oil production restarting along their coasts and have voted repeatedly for California laws that block coastal oil production. The environmental impacts, along with the economic fallout from those impacts, are simply too great, especially when there is little to no benefit for California consumers. We urge you to pause and consider the long-term legal and financial ramifications of collaborating with the Trump administration to circumvent California law,” the lawmakers concluded. 

In addition to Brownley, Schiff, and Carbajal, the letter was signed by U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and U.S. Representatives John Garamendi (D-Calif.-08), Jared Huffman (D-Calif.-02), Mike Levin (D-Calif.-49), Dave Min (D-Calif.-47), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.-19), Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.-11), and Mike Thompson (D-Calif.-04). 

The full text of the letter can be found here, and below: 

---

Dear Mr. Jim Flores: 

We write to express our grave concern over the restart of Sable Offshore Corporation’s (Sable) Santa Ynez Unit (SYU) offshore oil activities near the coast of Santa Barbara, California, and your company’s disregard for California law and the well-being of our constituents. The administration’s reliance on the Defense Production Act (DPA)—no doubt in consultation and coordination with lawyers representing Sable—is a serious misuse of a federal law meant to be invoked for national security reasons, not to enrich an industry already making record profits. To help Congress better understand this effort to circumvent California law and coastal protections, we seek detailed information on the company’s role in this decision, and your communications with the Trump administration in relation to Sable Offshore’s SYU project. We also demand that all relevant documents and records pertaining to the SYU project as described in detail below be preserved. 

In February 2024, your family-owned special purpose acquisition company, Flame Acquisition Corp., struck a deal with ExxonMobil to acquire SYU for roughly $700 million, creating the Sable merger. Given the liabilities attached to SYU operations, including ten years of platform and equipment inactivity, challenges with complying with State regulations, and twenty-seven other risk factors identified in Sable’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) 10-K Form, this was a risky purchase. 

Since April 2025, Sable has accrued multiple lawsuits, shareholder complaints, notices of violation, cease and desist orders, and fines from California state agencies and nonprofit organizations. Sable has responded by disobeying directives and filing counterclaims for monetary damages. A timeline of state agency and court penalizations are outlined below:  

April 2025: The California Coastal Commission (CCC) issued an $18 million fine and cease and desist order against Sable for unpermitted work that harmed habitats and waters on California’s coastline in violation of California’s Coastal Act. At the hearing, CCC staff presented evidence of Sable ignoring state orders; Sable had previously received two cease and desist orders from CCC for violating the Coastal Act and Sable responded by suing the CCC and vowing to continue work in defiance of the order. In October 2025, Sable filed a complaint seeking over $347 million in damages from the CCC, claiming “unlawful delay” of the pipeline restart.3 The CCC won a preliminary injunction against Sable in May 2025. 

July 2025: Multiple class action lawsuits were filed by Rosen Law Firm and Schall Law Firm on behalf of purchasers of Sable securities, alleging the company made misleading statements by claiming they had restarted oil production when they had not. Sable is also currently under investigation by the SEC for allegations of advance information being shared selectively among company insiders in October 2025, right before Sable raised $250 million by selling shares of its common stocks to private investors to help keep the company afloat. This same month, a Santa Barbara court placed a separate injunction against Sable preventing the restart of operations unless and until Sable obtains all necessary state approvals.  

September 2025: The Santa Barbara County District Attorney John Savrnoch filed 21 criminal charges, including five felony counts, against Sable for unlawful discharge of pollutants into waterways and improper excavation during pipeline repair. The District Attorney alleged that these actions are in violation of the California Fish and Game Code and the Water Code. Sable responded by calling theses criminal charges “inflammatory and extremely misleading” and a “politically motivated attack”.  

October 2025: The California Office of the State Fire Marshal determined that Sable had failed to comply with safety standards on its pipeline corrosion repair work and therefore its restart could not proceed. That same month, on behalf of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Attorney General, Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit against Sable asserting three causes of action: 1) Sable repeatedly discharged or threatened to discharge waste to waters of the state without authorization, despite being notified by the Central Coast Water Board that permits were required for the activities; 2) Sable activities resulted in the discharge of sediment and vegetative debris to various bodies of water inland and near the Gaviota Coast, harming water quality and aquatic habitat; and 3) Sable failed to submit information to the board that was required by law. Sable responded by working with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to update its federal Development and Production Plan to allow the company to bypass its onshore pipeline and use a floating barge operating in federal waters (an Offshore Storage and Treating Vessel). 

March 2026: Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Chris Wright issued an order claiming that SYU oil production was a national security concern invoking the Defense Production Act (DPA), which unlawfully superseded state laws and restarted SYU oil production. On behalf of the State of California, Attorney General Bonta responded by filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration to halt the use of the DPA Order as a basis for executive overreach. The lawsuit alleges that the DPA Order, which DOE issued at Sable’s request, violates the Administrative Procedure Act and infringes on California’s sovereign power under the Tenth Amendment. The Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel opinion supporting DOE’s move to invoke the DPA explicitly references a letter from Sable through Holland and Knight to the DOE General Counsel requesting the invocation of the DPA.  

The Trump administration has clearly been working hand in glove with Sable to try to force the restart of SYU. For example, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) made misleading statements about SYU oil production in July 2025 that paralleled statements made by Sable, the same statements that resulted in securities class action lawsuits by your shareholders. California Congressional Members also requested further information about these statements in a letter to DOI Secretary Doug Burgum and BSEE Deputy Director Kenneth Stevens. To date, we have not received any response. While this fight between California and the Trump administration continues, these actions suggest that the Trump administration is willing to circumvent state laws to benefit industry partners and preferred energy sources, and you appear to be a willing partner in its efforts. 

Furthermore, we have concerns regarding financial ties between Sable and President Trump. Executives at Sable have directly contributed to President Trump’s campaigns. You have contributed over $300,000 to Super PACs like Right to Rise USA and Senate Leadership Fund, which made contributions to President Trump’s 2016 and 2024 campaigns. Additionally, Gregory Patrinely, Executive Vice President and CFO of Sable, contributed thousands of dollars to Trump-aligned committees in 2020 and 2024. During his campaign, President Trump promised to reverse environmental rules for your industry in exchange for $1 billion in donations. It is difficult to avoid the inference that actions like the use of DPA to overcome state laws on behalf of an oil producer represents a fulfillment of that “pay to play” promise. 

In addition to the information requests below, please preserve all records and communications related to your efforts to work with the Trump administration or campaign to restart the SYU from January 1, 2024, to March 13, 2026, and on an ongoing basis moving forward. This preservation hold applies to your personal records, corporate records, and all communications with President Trump, the White House, the Department of Energy, the Trump presidential campaign and outside entities, and any person representing or purporting to be acting on behalf of President Trump, as well as communications with any intermediary that communicated with these entities on your behalf. This includes but is not limited to: records and communications via email, whether official or personal; mobile devices; encrypted or disappearing messaging applications; social media; calendar entries; meeting notes; and voicemail and text messages. To the extent that you or Sable use any auto-delete functions, you should immediately suspend autodelete functions and notify persons with control over potentially relevant records of their preservation obligations. You should also preserve all records of your or Sable’s communications with the White House or White House personnel, Department of Energy political appointees and staff, others appointed by the President or his advisors, or any member of the Trump presidential campaign. 

We request responses to the following: 

1. When did your relationship with President Donald Trump begin? Please outline those communications, including any meetings with Trump, his family, or his representatives, to date.  
2. When did your relationship with Secretary Chris Wright begin? Please outline those communications to date.  
3. Did Sable, its executives, attorneys, or other representatives at any point discuss with President Trump or any member of his administration or campaign the SYU project and did you link it in any way with any campaign or political donations made by you or executives of your company?  
4. Did you, your attorneys, your representatives, or any executive of Sable ever make contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations or any other entity for which public disclosure would not be required, and were these contributions ever discussed with President Trump, any member of his family, any member of his campaign, or any political appointee of the current administration in relation to the SYU project? 
5. Did you, your attorneys, your representatives, or any executive of Sable ever discuss campaign or political donations at all—before or after it was given—with President Trump, any member of his family, any member of his campaign, or any political appointee of the current administration? What was communicated and when did these communications begin?  
6. Has Sable, its executives, attorneys, or other representatives ever communicated with anyone in the DOE General Counsel’s office or the White House Counsel’s office? Please detail those communications.  
7. Has Sable, its executives, attorneys, or other representatives communicated with anyone in the Executive Office of the President, the President, the President’s campaign, or any Cabinet members since the start of President Trump’s second term? Or direct others to do so on your behalf? If so, please outline those communications to date.  
8. Please provide any and all communications to the Department of Energy (DOE) from Sable (including through Holland and Knight), asking DOE to invoke the Defense Production Act, including the December 12, 2025, letter Re: Sable Offshore Corp.— Request for Action Under the Defense Production Act.  
9. Who initiated the request to DOE to ask for an opinion on the Defense Production Act? Did Sable’s attorneys, DOE, or a member of the President’s administration advise you to do so?  
10. Did you communicate nonpublic information to a select group of investors concerning your strategy to convince Secretary Wright, Secretary Lutnick, or President Trump to assist in your preemption of California law, and did this strategy involve offering a round of golf with Phil Mickelson to Secretary Lutnick or having an intermediary promise President Trump to affix gold leaf to your offshore oil platform in exchange for helping to override California law? 

Californians do not want oil production restarting along their coasts and have voted repeatedly for California laws that block coastal oil production. The environmental impacts, along with the economic fallout from those impacts, are simply too great, especially when there is little to no benefit for California consumers. 

We urge you to pause and consider the long-term legal and financial ramifications of collaborating with the Trump administration to circumvent California law. We also advise you that we will continue our oversight and investigative efforts in the next Congress. We look forward to your response and acknowledgement of compliance with this preservation request by June 10, 2026.  

###

Issues: 119th Congress, Climate Crisis, Local Issues, Natural Resources

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA)

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded St. Charles Health Council Inc., based in Jonesville, Virginia, a grant of $1,122,356. The funding supports Stone Mountain Health Services and its black lung clinic program. In response to this grant notice, U.S. Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) issued the following statement:

“As the only federally funded Black Lung Clinic in the Commonwealth of Virginia, Stone Mountain Health Services is a critical health care provider in our region.

“This HHS grant for more than $1.1 million helps this community health care center deliver black lung treatment opportunities for the region.”

BACKGROUND

Congressman Griffith recently announced a separate grant of more than $5 million to St. Charles Health Council Inc. to support its health care center operations.

In a previous Health Subcommittee hearing with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Congressman Griffith expressed his support for working with the Trump Administration to help fight black lung disease. 

The HHS National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recently provided free, confidential black lung screenings to coal miners in the region.

The awarding office of this grant is the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).

As a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Congressman Griffith serves as the Chairman of the Health Subcommittee. 

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA)

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded Virginia Tech, based in Blacksburg, Virginia, a $883,097 grant. The funding supports research into drug use and addiction risk. U.S. Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) issued the following statement:

“I support the delivery of knowledge, tools and resources to better inform local communities of the risks of substance use disorder and addiction.  

“This HHS grant for more than $880,000 helps Virginia Tech study risk factors that affect adolescents and provide relevant information for scientists and communities to consider.”

BACKGROUND

Congressman Griffith is chief House sponsor of the HALT Fentanyl Act, which President Trump signed into law in July 2025. This legislation permanently designates lethal fentanyl-related substances as Schedule I drugs.

Congressman Griffith also helped contribute to the SUPPORT Act, which President Trump signed into law in December 2025. Griffith is responsible for crafting Section 103 of the bill to reauthorize the prescription drug monitoring program.

The awarding office of this grant is the HHS National Institute on Drug Abuse.

As a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Congressman Griffith serves as the Chairman of the Health Subcommittee. 

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Rick Larsen (2nd Congressional District Washington)

Yesterday, Representative Rick Larsen (WA-02) sent a letter to Sound Transit’s Board of Directors in support of completing the light rail regional spine from Everett to Tacoma:

“Completing the spine is critical to creating jobs, providing more affordable transportation options, expanding equitable access to transit and promoting regional connectivity,” said Rep. Larsen. “Doing so will help Sound Transit capitalize on the significant federal transit investments already made in our region.”

Rep. Larsen is the top Democrat on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. He helped pass the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law of 2021 (BIL), which invested $341.1 million into Sound Transit’s Lynnwood Link Extension, in addition to other historic investments in local infrastructure across the country. In total, the Lynnwood Link Extension project received $1.3 billion in federal funding, which Rep. Larsen helped secure.

“In the Pacific Northwest, transportation means jobs: workers need reliable ways to get to employment centers, students need access to education and training, families need affordable transportation options, and businesses need confidence that people and goods can move efficiently,” Rep. Larsen continued. “The Everett Link Extension will improve access to one of the region’s most important employment centers and industries.”

Last week, Rep. Larsen’s BUILD America 250 Act passed out of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The bipartisan, five-year surface transportation reauthorization bill continues the historic investments started by the BIL, including $87.5 billion over five years to expand and improve transit networks across America.

Rep. Larsen’s full letter to the Sound Transit Board of Directors is available here and below.

May 27, 2026

Board of Directors
Sound Transit
401 S. Jackson Street
Seattle, WA, 98104

Dear Board of Directors:

I write in support of completing the light rail regional spine from Everett to Tacoma. Completing the spine is critical to creating jobs, providing more affordable transportation options, expanding equitable access to transit and promoting regional connectivity. Doing so will help Sound Transit capitalize on the significant federal transit investments already made in our region.

Reliable public transit is essential to a strong regional economy. In the Pacific Northwest, transportation means jobs: workers need reliable ways to get to employment centers, students need access to education and training, families need affordable transportation options, and businesses need confidence that people and goods can move efficiently. The Everett Link Extension will improve access to one of the region’s most important employment centers and industries. The SW Industrial Station will connect light rail to Paine Field for the first time, providing better transit access for workers in the aerospace industry. The Boeing Everett Factory alone employs more than 30,000 people, and more than 1,300 other aerospace-related businesses are located in Snohomish County. Light rail is a long-term investment in economic growth and the quality of life for communities across the Puget Sound region.

Completing the spine will help relieve congestion, support transit-oriented housing and job growth, reduce transportation costs for working families and build a cleaner, greener and more accessible transportation network. As the region continues to grow, light rail provides a reliable alternative to increasingly congested transportation corridors and helps connect communities that are underserved by high-capacity transit. Everett has the largest population of any city north of Seattle and is expected to grow significantly in the coming decades. The Puget Sound Regional Council designated Everett as one of five Metropolitan Cities, which together are expected to comprise 36% of the region’s population growth and 44% of its employment growth by 2050.

Bringing light rail to Everett Station will expand transit access for many communities throughout Snohomish County. Everett Station is a major transportation hub, serving more than 20 bus routes as well as regional transportation services. The 2024 opening of Lynnwood Link demonstrated the strong demand for light rail in Snohomish County. The Everett Link extension will build on that success and serve multiple Opportunity Zones along SR 526 and Broadway in Everett, where communities will benefit significantly from expanded light rail service.

Connecting Everett and Tacoma to the light rail network though completion of the spine is critical to the economic success of the region, equitable transit access and the future of a truly connected regional transportation system.

Sincerely,

Rick Larsen
U.S. Representative
Washington State, Second District

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Dwight Evans (2nd District of Pennsylvania)

PHILADELPHIA (May 28, 2026) – U.S. Reps. Dwight Evans (D-PA-3) and Madeleine Dean (D-PA-4) are pressing federal electricity regulators for answers and transparency about data centers.

Today, Evans and Dean sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission seeking information on how the agency is overseeing the increased power demand from data centers, especially with respect to reliability of the electrical grid and costs that may be passed on to home consumers. They also requested information on how the Trump-Vance administration’s decision to cancel 223 clean-energy projects could impact transmission planning and delivering electricity to consumers due to changes in energy supply.

“We encourage FERC to continue providing transparency in its decisions on transmission and infrastructure policies as the demand to connect to the grid grows,” the lawmakers said. “As members who are increasingly concerned with affordability and grid reliability, we look forward to receiving your prompt responses.”

Evans and Dean requested responses by June 30.

The full text of the letter follows:

Dear Chairman Swett and Commissioners Rosner, LaCerte, See, and Chang: 

We write this letter expressing interest in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) plans to address domestic grid reliability, affordability, and future planning opportunities. This comes during a time when lawmakers are being asked to address real constraints in American energy markets and grid reliability. We encourage FERC to continue providing transparency in its decisions on transmission and infrastructure policies as the demand to connect to the grid grows.   

There is an increasing presence of data centers, and questions of how, when, and where they will connect to the grid. Our concerns about the future of data centers and their energy demand impacting interstate transmission capacity not only include realistic assessments of load interconnection projects that will be added to the grid but also fluctuating load cycles destabilizing the grid. This is in addition to concerns about the environmental impact, including air quality and water consumption, community input, long-term planning, and the inclusion of distributed energy resources (DERs) in any future buildout.

The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) published [1] a Level 3 Essential Action Alert highlighting reliability concerns arising from new computational loads – such as data centers, artificial intelligence compute clusters, and cryptocurrency facilities – interacting with the bulk power system (BPS). The alert highlights 7 advisory actions that transmission planners, owners, coordinators, and operators should consider, and encourages their adoption to support reliability standards and address emerging challenges.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s lawmakers and policy leaders have also acted in recent weeks. Governor Josh Shapiro sent a letter [2] to utility companies describing the criteria his administration will consider justifiable in future rate-making cases. This was in addition to the governor stating that utilities should seek the most cost-effective forms of capital, provide plain and clear language in investment proposals with cost/benefit analyses and transparent data, and offer clear, justifiable equity returns. Separately, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives unanimously passed H.B. 2223 [3], which would require a utility to evaluate and consider integrating advanced transmission technologies (ATTs) before building costly new infrastructure.

Considering these actions, we have included questions that we would like a response to no later than June 30, 2026:

1. Given that transmission costs can be passed through to customers, are there oversight or implementation issues that FERC has encountered with orders that encourage prior consideration and integration of ATTs and grid-enhancing technologies (GETs) to maximize cost-savings opportunities? Are there any existing FERC regulations that are biased against ATTs or GETs? Has FERC considered how developments in generation technologies, such as DERs and virtual power plants, could improve transmission utilization on the consumer side through improved real-time data sharing or reduce transmission congestion?
2. Has FERC assessed the implications of NERC’s alert and the need to establish reliability standards to protect from new, large load connections on the BPS? To what extent is FERC considering using its authority to establish processes that would encourage transmission owners and operators to conduct reliability studies and gap assessments, enhance communication coordination to improve operational awareness, integrate technology to model BPS system failure impact depending on the stage/cycle of the computational load, and produce risk mitigation assessments with real-time response monitoring?
3. The Department of Energy terminated 321 financial awards for 223 energy projects [4]. If transmission planning accounts for new supply plans over a 20-year cycle, and there are uncertainties and risks on the supply side with power plant development, has FERC considered the extent to which transmission planning directives from Order No. 1920 and 1920-A may be challenging? Additionally, there has been a change in commissioners since Order No. 1920 and 1920-A were approved. Given this change in leadership, how do you anticipate that these orders will address affordability concerns?

Thank you for your attention to this matter. As members who are increasingly concerned with affordability and grid reliability, we look forward to receiving your prompt responses.

---

[1] North American Electric Reliability Corporation. (2026, May 4). NERC issues level 3 alert, reliability guideline focused on large load challenges. https://www.nerc.com/newsroom/nerc-issues-level-3-alert-reliability-guideline-focused-on-large-load-challenges.

[2] Shapiro, J. (2026, April 29). Letter to utility leaders. Latitude Media. https://www.latitudemedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026.4.29-JDS-Utility-CEOs-letter-v2.pdf.

[3] House Bill 2223, 2025-2026 Session (2026). https://www.palegis.us/legislation/bills/text/PDF/2025/0/HB2223/PN3321.

[4] Department of Energy. (2025, October 1). Energy Department announces termination of 223 projects, saving over $7.5 billion.https://www.energy.gov/articles/energy-department-announces-termination-223-projects-saving-over-75-billion

 

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Linda Sanchez (38th District of CA)

WASHINGTON – Congresswoman Linda T. Sánchez (D-Calif.) today called on acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to explain if victims of the Trump administration’s cruel and inhumane immigration enforcement tactics would be eligible to receive damages from the $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” established by the Department of Justice.

“This slush fund is a plainly illegal diversion of taxpayer funds,” Congresswoman Sánchez wrote. “However, you have stated that the fund exists to compensate ‘victims of lawfare and weaponization.’ The terms ‘lawfare’ and ‘weaponization’ are not defined in any state or federal statute. Instead, they are seemingly defined in the Settlement Agreement as the ‘sustained use of the levers of government power by Democrat elected officials, political and career federal employees, contractors, and agents in order to target individuals, groups, and entities for improper and unlawful political, personal, and/ or ideological reasons.’ That is a sweeping, politically-charged statement. I therefore ask whether the individuals in the following categories — whose grievances are documented, whose harms are real, and who in many cases have already prevailed in federal court — would be eligible to file claims for damages.”

The full text of the letter is available HERE and follows:

May 28, 2026

The Honorable Todd Blanche
Acting Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Mr. Blanche:

I write regarding the so-called “Anti-Weaponization Fund” newly established by the Department of Justice — the $1.776 billion fund created when President Trump dropped his lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. 

This slush fund is a plainly illegal diversion of taxpayer funds. However, you have stated that the fund exists to compensate “victims of lawfare and weaponization.” The terms “lawfare” and “weaponization” are not defined in any state or federal statute. Instead, they are seemingly defined in the Settlement Agreement as the “sustained use of the levers of government power by Democrat elected officials, political and career federal employees, contractors, and agents in order to target individuals, groups, and entities for improper and unlawful political, personal, and/ or ideological reasons.” That is a sweeping, politically-charged statement. I therefore ask whether the individuals in the following categories — whose grievances are documented, whose harms are real, and who in many cases have already prevailed in federal court — would be eligible to file claims for damages:

Victims of unlawful ICE detention across the country. Federal judges have ruled against ICE detention practices in more than 10,000 cases — roughly 90 percent of all cases filed since the agency mandated universal detention. These are not allegations; they are judicial findings. Are these detainees eligible for damages?

The six people who died in California ICE detention centers. According to a 175-page report released by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, six people died in California immigration detention facilities over the past year, four at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center in San Bernardino County, where families allege the facility failed to provide adequate medical care. May these families apply for damages?

Detainees subjected to chemical agents at Adelanto. The same state report documents an incident in which guards deployed pepper spray in a confined room holding approximately 50 people. Are those 50 people eligible to file claims under the terms of the fund?

Women strip-searched in front of male officers at Otay Mesa, San Diego. State investigators found that the Otay Mesa Detention Center is the only California facility with a policy of strip-searching detainees after every non-lawyer visit. Women described the searches as “humiliating” and “denigrating,” including being searched in front of male officers while menstruating. Some detainees stopped receiving family visits entirely to avoid the practice. May these women file claims?

Detainees denied adequate medical care at California City. At the California City detention center — a former state prison converted to ICE detention center by the Trump administration — state investigators described “crisis-level” medical staffing, with only one physician available for nearly 1,000 detainees. May detainees submit their medical records showing the results of being denied proper medical care as evidence of their entitlement to compensation?

Cary López Alvarado, a nine-months-pregnant U.S. citizen from Hawthorne, California. She was illegally arrested by immigration agents during a raid, detained, and subsequently went into premature labor and was hospitalized. Is she entitled to a claim?

Residents and families of the El Rancho Unified School District, Pico Rivera, California — my own constituents. Last July, surveillance cameras captured ICE and Customs and Border Protection agents trespassing on a school campus in my district, urinating in a parking lot adjacent to a preschool playground, in broad daylight. May these children and their parents file individual claims, or may the school district? 

The administration’s own stated rationale would seem to encompass every one of them. And if the threshold for compensation is “victimhood at the hands of a federal agency,” these individuals — many of them U.S. citizens, many of them Californians, all of them subjected to documented and in some cases lethal, government misconduct — would seem to clear it far more easily than individuals convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers on January 6th.

I respectfully request a written response detailing the eligibility criteria for the Anti-Weaponization Fund, the process by which claims will be evaluated, and whether the categories of harm described above fall within scope.

Sincerely,

Linda T. Sánchez
Member of Congress

###

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Andy Harris (MD-01)

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Congressman Andy Harris, M.D. (MD-01), announced that West Cecil Health Center in Conowingo, Maryland, received $852,366 through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Health Center Program to support patient care for rural communities across Cecil County and neighboring areas.

Statement from Congressman Harris:

“West Cecil Health Center is a critical healthcare provider for rural residents across northeastern Maryland, offering primary care, dental services, optometry, pharmacy services, and laboratory testing close to home. I applaud the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for this funding, which will help West Cecil Health Center keep up with growing demand for appointments and medical services throughout the region.”

For media inquiries, please contact Michella Carter at “>Michella.Carter@mail.house.gov