Donald Trump overturns law preventing companies dumping coal mining debris in streams and rivers
President dismisses regulation as 'a job-killing rule' by signing Resolution 38, nullifying stream protection legislation
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.President Donald Trump has put the brakes on a regulation blocking coal mining debris from being dumped into nearby streams.
Trump called the stream protection regulation a “job-killing rule” before he signed a measure to overturn it.
Lawmakers from coal-mining states stood close by, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican-Kentucky), Senator Rand Paul (Republican-Kentucky), Senator Joe Manchin (Democrat-West Virginia) and Senator Shelley Moore Capito (Republican West Virginia).
Several coal miners and energy company executives also attended the White House signing ceremony.
Republicans and some Democrats argued that the rule could eliminate thousands of coal-related jobs. They said the rule also ignored dozens of existing federal, state and local regulations.
The Interior Department said in December when it announced the rule that 6,000 miles of streams and 52,000 acres of forests would be protected.
AP
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments