Connect with us

News

Federal Court Rules: Youth’s Climate Change Suit May Proceed

Published

on

climate change plaintiffs

What does a federal climate change law suit brought by young people against the United States government have to do with Elon Musk and Tesla Motors? On the surface, the answer is nothing. But dig a little deeper and you will see these kids are promoting the same philosophy that drives Tesla — a desire to rid the world of the scourge of fossil fuels.

climate change plaintiffs

21 young people between the ages of 8 and 19 have sued the federal government for failing to protect them from the dangers of climate change. Photo credit: The Guardian

The plaintiffs in the suit are 21 young people ranging in age from 8 to 19. They are joined by climate activist Dr. James Hansen. The suit claims the federal government is violating their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution to life, liberty, and property. It says the government is permitting, encouraging, and otherwise enabling continued exploitation, production, and combustion of fossil fuels.

Lawyers for various fossil fuel interests filed motions to dismiss the suit on several technical grounds. They claim the plaintiffs have not suffered any harm personally. They also claim the suit raises political questions that are not the proper province of the courts.

On April 8, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Coffin of the federal District Court in Eugene, Oregon denied the defense motions and ruled that the suit, Juliana vs. United States, may proceed. He characterized the case as an “unprecedented lawsuit” addressing “government action and inaction” resulting “in carbon pollution of the atmosphere, climate destabilization, and ocean acidification.”

In his decision, Judge Coffin wrote: “The debate about climate change and its impact has been before various political bodies for some time now. Plaintiffs give this debate justiciability by asserting harms that befall or will befall them personally and to a greater extent than older segments of society.”

Advertisement

The judge continued, “It may be that eventually the alleged harms, assuming the correctness of plaintiffs’ analysis of the impacts of global climate change, will befall all of us. But the intractability of the debates before Congress and state legislatures and the alleged valuing of short term economic interest despite the cost to human life, necessitates a need for the courts to evaluate the constitutional parameters of the action or inaction taken by the government. This is especially true when such harms have an alleged disparate impact on a discrete class of society.”

Plaintiffs’ attorney Philip Gregory tells the press, “This decision is one of the most significant in our nation’s history. The Court upheld our claims that the federal government intensified the danger to our plaintiffs’ lives, liberty and property. Judge Coffin decided our complaint will move forward and put climate science squarely in front of the federal courts. The next step is for the Court to order our government to cease jeopardizing the climate system for present and future generations. The Court gave America’s youth a fair opportunity to be heard.”

This is only a preliminary step in what could be a long and torturous legal process that eventually could wind up before the US Supreme Court. Rest assured that the fossil fuel industry and the conservative groups they underwrite will marshal their enormous resources to fight the case every step of the way.

The suit is not without precedent, however.  A legal action in the Netherlands last year got the court to order the government to cut emissions more quickly. A lawsuit against the state of Washington in 2011 resulted in the state government being ordered to re-examine its plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Eventually Governor Jay Inslee directed regulators to cap emissions and curb them by 50 per cent by 2050.

Advertisement

When we compare the remarks Elon Musk made at the COP21 conference in Paris last December with the claims made by these young plaintiffs, it is clear they are closely aligned. Perhaps America needs to pay more attention to its children and less time listening to the climate deniers in Congress who are willing to sell out their constituents for 30 pieces of silver.

Source: Our Children’s Trust

 

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Earnings: financial expectations and what we should to hear about

In terms of discussions, Tesla earnings calls are usually a great time to get some clarification on the company’s outlook for its current and future projects.

Published

on

Credit: MarcoRP | X

Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) will report its earnings for the first quarter of 2026 this evening after the market closes, and analysts have already put out their expectations from a financial standpoint for the company’s first three months of the year.

Additionally, there will be plenty of things that will be discussed, including the recent expansion of the Robotaxi program, the Roadster unveiling, and Full Self-Driving (Supervised) approvals across the globe.

Financial Expectations

Wall Street consensus expectations put Tesla’s Earnings Per Share (EPS) at $0.36, while revenues are expected to come in around $22.35 billion.

This would compare to an EPS of $0.27 and $19.34 billion compared to Tesla’s Q1 2025. Last quarter, EPS came in at $0.50 on $29.4 billion of revenue.

Advertisement

Tesla beat analyst expectations last quarter, but the next trading day, the stock fell nearly 3.5 percent. We never quite can gauge how the market will respond to Tesla’s earnings; we’ve seen shares rise on a miss and fall on a beat.

It really goes on the news, and investor consensus, it seems.

What to Expect

In terms of discussions, Tesla earnings calls are usually a great time to get some clarification on the company’s outlook for its current and future projects. Right now, the big focus of investors is the Robotaxi program, the Roadster unveiling, and what the outlook for Full Self-Driving’s expansion throughout Europe and the rest of the world looks like.

Robotaxi

Tesla just recently expanded its unsupervised Robotaxi program to Dallas and Houston, joining Austin as the first cities in the U.S. to have access to the company’s ride-hailing suite.

Advertisement

Tesla expands Unsupervised Robotaxi service to two new cities

Some saw this move as a quick effort to turn attention away from a delivery miss and an anticipated miss on earnings. However, we’ve seen Tesla be more than deliberate with its expansion of the Robotaxi suite, so it’s hard to believe the company would make this move if it were not truly ready to do so.

The company is also working to expand its U.S. ride-hailing service outside of Texas and California, and recently filed paperwork to build a Robotaxi-exclusive Supercharger stall.

Expansion is planned for Florida, Nevada, and Arizona at some point this year, with more states to follow.

Advertisement

Roadster Unveiling

The Roadster unveiling was slated for April 1, and then pushed back (once again) to “probably late April,” according to Elon Musk.

It does not appear that the Roadster unveiling will happen within that time frame, at least not to our knowledge. Nobody has received media or press invites for a Roadster unveiling, and given the lofty expectations set for the vehicle by Musk and Co., it seems like something they’d want to show off to the public.

Tesla Roadster unveiling set for this month: what to expect

The Roadster has become a truly frustrating project for Tesla and its fans; evidently, there is something that is not up to the expectations Musk and others have. Meanwhile, fans are essentially waiting for something that is six years late.

Advertisement

At this point, also given the company’s focus on autonomy, it almost seems more worth it to just cancel it, remove any and all timelines and expectations, and surprise people with something crazy down the line, maybe in two or three years. There should be no talk of it.

Full Self-Driving Global Expansion

We expect Musk and Co. to shed some details on where it stands with other European government bodies, as it recently was able to roll out FSD (Supervised) to customers in the Netherlands.

Tesla Full Self-Driving gets first-ever European approval

Spain is also working with Tesla to assess FSD’s viability as a publicly available option for owners.

Advertisement

With that being said, there should be some additional information for investors as they listen to the call; no talk of it would be a pretty big letdown.

Optimus

There will likely be a date set for the Gen 3 Optimus unveiling, and we’re hopeful Tesla can keep that date set in stone and meet it. Not reaching timelines is a relatively minor issue, but a company can only do this for so long before its fans and investors start to lose trust and disregard any talk about dates.

It seems this is happening already.

Optimus has been pegged as Tesla’s big money maker for the future. The goals and expectations are high, but it is a privilege to have that sort of pressure when investors know the company’s capability.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla just unlocked sales to 50,000+ government agencies

It marks a significant step in expanding Tesla’s presence in the public sector, where procurement processes have traditionally slowed electric vehicle adoption.

Published

on

Credit: Patrick Bean | X

Tesla just unlocked sales to over 50,000 government agencies by entering a new agreement with Sourcewell, a purchasing cooperative.

Tesla entered a new master purchasing agreement with Sourcewell, the largest government purchasing cooperative in the U.S. This will enable streamlined sales of its EVs to more than 50,000 U.S. public entities. Tesla entered Designated Contract 0813525-TES, and the agreement covers Model 3, Model Y, and Cybertruck, and potentially other vehicles the company could release.

It marks a significant step in expanding Tesla’s presence in the public sector, where procurement processes have traditionally slowed electric vehicle adoption.

The deal allows eligible agencies, including cities, school districts, state governments, and higher-education institutions, to purchase Tesla vehicles directly through Sourcewell without conducting their own lengthy competitive bidding or request-for-proposal (RFP) processes.

Advertisement

Pricing is pre-negotiated and capped, providing transparency and predictability. Agencies simply register for a Sourcewell account online or by phone and place orders under the existing contract. This cooperative model aggregates demand across thousands of members, reducing administrative costs and time while ensuring compliance with public procurement rules.

For Tesla, the agreement removes major barriers to government fleet sales. Public-sector procurement cycles often stretch 12 to 18 months due to bidding requirements and committee reviews.

Tesla buyers in the U.S. military can get $1,000 off Cybertruck purchases

By securing the master contract, Tesla gains immediate, simplified access to a massive customer base that previously faced friction in adopting EVs. The company highlighted in its announcement that the partnership will help these 50,000-plus agencies “save thousands of $$$ in operating costs for their vehicle fleet over time” through lower maintenance, energy efficiency, and the elimination of tailpipe emissions.

Advertisement

The initial four-year term runs through November 13, 2029, with options for up to three one-year extensions, offering long-term stability for both parties.

Sourcewell’s role is central to execution. As a cooperative purchasing organization, it negotiates and manages vendor contracts on behalf of its members, then makes them available nationwide. Participating entities contact Tesla’s dedicated fleet team or Sourcewell representatives to complete purchases, bypassing redundant paperwork.

This structure accelerates fleet electrification while maintaining fiscal accountability—agencies receive pre-vetted pricing and terms without reinventing the wheel for each vehicle order.

The partnership positions Tesla to capture a larger share of the public fleet market, where total cost of ownership often favors electric vehicles once procurement hurdles are removed.

Advertisement

For government buyers, it translates to faster deployment of sustainable fleets, reduced long-term expenses, and alignment with environmental mandates. As more agencies transition, the contract could contribute to broader EV infrastructure growth and taxpayer savings across the country.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

How much of SpaceX will Elon Musk own after IPO will surprise you

SpaceX’s IPO filing confirms Musk will maintain his voting power to make key decisions for the company.

Published

on

By

Rendering of Elon Musk overlooking a Starship fleet (Credit: Grok)

Elon Musk will retain dominant voting control of SpaceX after it goes public, according to the company’s IPO prospectus that was filed with the SEC. The filing reveals a dual-class equity structure giving Class B shareholders 10 votes each, concentrating power with Musk and a handful of other insiders, while Class A shares sold to public investors carry one vote.

Musk holds approximately 42% of SpaceX’s equity and controls roughly 79% of its votes through super-voting shares. He will simultaneously serve as CEO, CTO, and chairman of the nine-member board after the listing. Beyond that, the filing includes provisions that may limit shareholders’ influence over board elections and legal actions, forcing disputes into arbitration and restricting where they can be brought.

The case for Musk holding this level of control is grounded in SpaceX’s actual history. The company’s most important bets, from reusable rockets to a global satellite internet constellation, were decisions that ran against conventional aerospace thinking and would likely have faced resistance from a board accountable to investor gains. Fully reusable rockets were considered economically irrational by established industry players for years. Starlink, which now generates over $4 billion in annual operating profit, was widely dismissed as financially unviable when it was proposed. The argument for concentrated founder control seems straightforward, and the decisions that built SpaceX into what it is today required someone willing to ignore consensus and absorb years of losses.

SpaceX files confidentially for IPO that will rewrite the record books

Advertisement

For context, Musk’s position is significantly more dominant than Zuckerberg’s at Meta. The comparison with Tesla is also worth noting. When Tesla did its IPO in 2010, it did not issue dual-class shares. Musk has only recently pushed for enhanced voting protection, proposing at least 25% control at Tesla in 2024 after selling shares to fund his Twitter acquisition left him with around 13%.

SpaceX has clearly learned from that experience and structured the IPO differently by planning to allocate up to 30% of shares to retail investors, roughly three times the typical norm for a large offering. The roadshow is expected to begin the week of June 8, with a Nasdaq listing rumored to be a $1.75 trillion valuation and a $75 billion raise.

Continue Reading