Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Dunleavy administration asks US Supreme Court to decide the future of subsistence fishing in Alaska

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

The Kuskokwim River is seen in this image captured by scientists working on NASA’s Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment, or ABoVE, which measured the elevation of rivers and lakes in Alaska and Canada to study how thawing permafrost affects hydrology. (Photo by Peter Griffith/NASA)

The state of Alaska is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether rural Alaskans should continue to get preferential fishing rights on most rivers and lakes within federal parks, preserves and reserves.

On Monday, the Alaska Department of Law asked the Supreme Court to reconsider a ruling from a three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the state’s existing two-tiered subsistence fishing system last month. 

State attorneys have argued unsuccessfully since 2021 that federal law, as interpreted by recent rulings from the Supreme Court, means the state, not the federal government, has the power to regulate fishing in navigable waters on federal land.

A federal law, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, requires that rural Alaskans be given preferential treatment when hunting and fishing are regulated in Alaska. Simultaneously, the Alaska Constitution forbids that kind of preference.

For decades, the result has been a two-tiered system under which the federal government regulates hunting and fishing on federal land and water, and the state regulates it everywhere else.

Under the state framework, someone from Anchorage would have the same fishing rights on the Kuskokwim River as someone who lives a mile away. Under the current system, the local resident gets priority in parts of the river within federal land.

In 2021, a regulatory dispute on the Kuskokwim River during a salmon shortage resulted in the federal government filing a lawsuit against the state. The Alaska Federation of Natives, Association of Village Council Presidents and other Native groups from across the state joined the lawsuit on the side of the federal government. 

In 2024, a U.S. District Court judge in Alaska ruled in favor of the federal government, but the state appealed that decision. Last month, three judges from the 9th Circuit again ruled in favor of the federal government. Rather than appeal the issue to the full 9th Circuit, the state is going directly to the Supreme Court.

The state’s filing on Monday was formally known as a “cert petition,” which asks the court to take up the case.

The court takes only about 1% of the cases it receives, though the acceptance rate is higher (about 5%) if the large number of cases involving prisoners representing themselves in court are excluded.

In a written statement announcing the filing, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy and Attorney General designee Stephen Cox said the state believes that federal law gives Alaska control of its navigable waters when it comes to fishing.

“Alaska is asking the Supreme Court to hold fast to the text, because fidelity to the law as written is the foundation of the rule of law,” Cox said in his statement.

Doug Vincent-Lang, commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, said he believes the 9th Circuit decision “deepens a fractured system that undermines conservation, creates confusion, and threatens equitable access for all Alaskans. Salmon don’t recognize federal and state boundaries — our management shouldn’t either. We remain committed to sustainable management and will continue fighting for a system that works for every Alaskan. The Court should decide this case and reverse the Ninth Circuit.”

Attorneys representing Alaska Native groups said on Monday that they expected an appeal to the Supreme Court, even if they didn’t know the exact timing.

Nathaniel Amdur-Clark, who has represented the Kuskokwim River Intertribal Fish Commission in the lawsuit to date, said by text message on Monday that his clients “are disappointed, but not surprised, to see the state’s cert petition. It is just a continuation of the state’s push to undermine subsistence protections for Alaska Natives and rural Alaskans.”

The Supreme Court does not have a set timeline for considering the state’s petition, which will be taken up in a closed-door judicial conference after both sides of the argument file written briefs on the issue.

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Alaska lawmakers prepare to file suit against Gov. Dunleavy over executive order

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

The Alaska State Capitol in downtown Juneau. (Photo by Greg Knight/News of the North)
The Alaska State Capitol in downtown Juneau. (Photo by Greg Knight/News of the North)

A panel of state lawmakers voted 9-2 on Wednesday to approve spending up to $100,000 on a lawsuit against Gov. Mike Dunleavy.

The lawsuit, if filed, would challenge the governor’s decision to press ahead with plans to create a cabinet-level Alaska Department of Agriculture via executive order.

The governor issued an executive order in January, but lawmakers rejected it in a 32-28 vote in March, saying they preferred to create it through legislation instead. Creating the department through legislation, legislative leaders said, would allow lawmakers to debate and structure the department how they wish, instead of relying on the governor’s plans alone.

Dunleavy disagrees with that approach and in August filed a new executive order during a 30-day special session.

The leaders of the House and Senate refused to accept the filing, saying that it was not within the governor’s power to issue an executive order during a special session, or to reintroduce an already-rejected order.

The governor’s office has said that lawmakers’ failure to vote down the new order means that it will take effect and allow the executive branch to create the cabinet-level department at the start of 2026.

Why does the Legislature’s failure to vote on the executive order matter?

Article III, section 23 of the Alaska Constitution says that executive orders automatically take effect “unless disapproved by resolution concurred in by a majority of the members in joint session.”

The question that could be decided in court is whether lawmakers need to take that vote if an order is issued during a special session. Is issuing an order in a special session even legal? And does it matter if the order is identical to one that’s already been issued and voted upon?

Under Article III, section 23 of the Alaska Constitution, the “legislature shall have sixty days of a regular session, or a full session if of shorter duration, to disapprove” executive orders that would make a change to the functions of the executive branch.

For almost two hours on Wednesday, members of the joint House-Senate Legislative Council — a committee that makes decisions for the Legislature when it is out of session — heard about the dispute behind closed doors, then debated it briefly in open session before voting.

“It’s a disagreement between the Legislature and the governor about whether or not the governor has the authority under the Alaska Constitution to introduce an executive order during a special session,” said Emily Nauman, director of Legislative Legal Services, the legal department for Alaska’s legislative branch.

Because the House and Senate’s presiding officers returned the order to the governor without taking action, “the governor is asserting that he will give effect to the executive order because it was not specifically rejected or disapproved by the legislature, thus causing a conflict in the interpretation of the Constitution between the Legislature and executive branch.”

Rep. Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak, voted in favor of authorizing the Legislature to prepare and, if necessary, file a pre-emptive lawsuit to keep the governor from enacting the executive order.

“It’s just a question, to me, of, we said, ‘No. Don’t you understand what no means?’”

Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, also voted in favor of moving forward with a lawsuit. He said that while there is still time for the governor to back away from his position, “I really see it as our prerogative to protect ourselves procedurally, and for us to do that, I believe we need to file litigation.”

The two votes against Wednesday’s proposal came from Reps. Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage, and Mike Prax, R-North Pole.

Prax said he feels as if it could set a precedent that could allow lawmakers to disapprove of a future governor’s actions in a “more urgent” situation by simply not taking action.

“We would establish a precedent that the Legislature can do something by doing nothing, and that just does not seem like a very good practice to have established for any organization,” Prax said.

Sen. Jesse Kiehl, D-Juneau, said he doesn’t think that’s a correct interpretation of the lawsuit.

“With great respect to Representative Prax, no one is asserting here that the Legislature may act by inaction. What is before us is the question of whether the second shot at an executive order came in a way that the Constitution allows. I am convinced it did not.”

Kopp said he believes the governor may be prepared to change course on his executive action, and he’s reluctant to approve a lawsuit unless the governor attempts to take action and actually create the department.

“I would like to see us not initiate this until there’s some overt action by the administration that clearly indicates their intent to move unilaterally on this issue outside of the legislative process,” he said.

As of Friday, there was no estimate as to when a lawsuit might be filed.

Under the Alaska Constitution, the executive branch may not sue the legislative branch. Lawsuits by the Legislature against the governor are rare; this would be the fourth against Dunleavy during his two terms in office beginning in 2018. 

In 2019, lawmakers sued the governor over a school funding issue. The governor won that case in the Alaska Supreme Court. The following year, legislators sued Dunleavy over their failure to consider some of his appointees during the COVID-19 pandemic emergency. The Alaska Supreme Court again ruled in Dunleavy’s favor.

In 2022, lawmakers filed a ‘friendly’ lawsuit against the governor in a dispute over the proper handling of oil and gas tax settlements. That dispute, which dates to the administration of Gov. Bill Walker, has yet to be decided by the Alaska Supreme Court.

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Murkowski, Sullivan vote with Republicans against measure seeking release of Epstein files

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

The U.S. Capitol on July 2, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

Alaska Republican U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan joined fellow Senate Republicans Wednesday night in voting to set aside a budget amendment that would have compelled the U.S. Department of Justice to release files related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The vote to table the amendment, stopping the Senate from considering it, was 51-49. 

All of the Senate’s Democrats voted in favor of the amendment, as did Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

The failure of either of Alaska’s Republican senators to vote for the amendment drew criticism from the Alaska Democratic Party.

Alaska Republican U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan (Alaska Beacon file photos)
Alaska Republican U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan (Alaska Beacon file photos)

Murkowski, talking by phone on Thursday, said the amendment, proposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, came as a surprise, and she voted against it for procedural reasons, not because she opposes the idea of a release.

“What Schumer did was nothing more than a political stunt,” Murkowski said.

In July, Murkowski and other members of a Senate budget subcommittee voted unanimously to amend a proposed appropriations bill to mandate that the U.S. Department of Justice compile a report on the activities of Epstein, a sex trafficker with extensive ties to rich and powerful people worldwide. Epstein died in jail while awaiting trial in 2019. 

The final text of the bill requires a report, but not the release of original documents in the possession of the federal government.

President Donald Trump campaigned on releasing the documents during last year’s presidential election, but this summer has since broken that campaign pledge, downplaying the case 

In February, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said she had Epstein’s client list “sitting on my desk right now.” But in July the FBI announced in a memo that there was no “client list” and no more public information would be released. The announcement caused a public outcry, and the federal government still has not released the documents.

Trump’s social relationship with Epstein was well-documented, and this week, the Wall Street Journal published a copy of a birthday greeting Trump sent to Epstein in 2003. Trump has claimed the letter doesn’t exist, but it bears his signature.

The letter was released to the public after being obtained by U.S. House members investigating the Epstein case.

“I have been — I don’t know if it’s fair to say one of the rare Republicans — certainly a very early Republican on the Senate side who said, ‘Look, just, just release these Epstein files. Just get this stuff out there,” Murkowski said.

The appropriations bill with Murkowski’s preferred Epstein language would fund the U.S. Department of Justice and other commerce and science-related parts of the federal government. For that reason, it’s been nicknamed the “CJS bill.”

It has not yet come to a floor vote, and with senators hurrying to pass budget bills before the end of the federal fiscal year on Sept. 30, it isn’t clear when it will come up.

“Will we see the CJS as part of a floor package that could move through the Senate? It’s not impossible, but we are kind of running out of daylight,” Murkowski said.

Part of that uncertainty is due to Senate Democrats’ opposition to the overall contents of the bill. That opposition has slowed the bill’s progress.

Schumer’s amendment would have forced the Senate to debate the Epstein issue immediately, as part of the annual defense authorization bill now under debate.

In response to a request for comment, Sullivan’s office issued a written statement that also criticized Schumer’s amendment and defended his vote.

It said in part, “Senator Sullivan has repeatedly said that he believes the DOJ should release as much information as possible on Epstein’s horrific crimes, while protecting survivors. Chuck Schumer tried slipping the Epstein provision into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), knowing full well it would be stripped out as the bill went through the process, leaving no doubt he’s using Epstein’s atrocious crimes as a political pawn instead of focusing on building up our military in the NDAA, which Schumer has never shown any interest in doing.”

Murkowski said the amendment disrupted normal work on the defense bill and “threw a real wrench into the whole negotiated process that had really been moving along in a positive way.”

She said she believes Schumer brought up the Epstein issue because Senate Republicans are preparing to change the rules for the confirmation of Trump’s executive-branch nominations.

Ordinarily, the Senate approves uncontroversial nominees without a roll-call vote to make the process more efficient. Since the beginning of Trump’s second term, none of his nominees have been approved without a roll-call vote, an unprecedented change in the Senate, and one that has slowed both the Senate and the Trump administration’s confirmations.

In response, Senate Republicans are planning to change the Senate’s rules to allow the approval of multiple nominees with a single vote.

“I think he was trying to kind of change the narrative,” Murkowski said of Schumer’s proposed amendment. “I don’t think he was making much headway on his pushback on some of the nominations. And he made a decision that, I think, is going to be short-lived in its political fire. He really kind of poisoned the waters around here in terms of good-faith negotiations.”

The day after the vote, Alaska Democratic Party Chair Eric Croft released a statement, saying by email: “Just two months ago, Dan Sullivan called on the Department of Justice to release the documents to shine a light on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s horrific crimes. But last night, Dan Sullivan was a deciding vote to continue the cover-up and block an effort to force the DOJ to release the Epstein files. Instead of listening to Alaskans and the victims of Jeffrey Epstein, Sullivan acted in his usual fashion – like a spineless politician who’s only loyal to his billionaire buddies. Alaskans and survivors deserve better.”

Sullivan faces re-election in 2026 and is running for another term in Congress.

To date, no Democrat has filed with the Alaska Division of Elections to challenge Sullivan. Filings with the Federal Elections Commission show Republican Christopher Miklos of Homer and Democrat Ann Diener of Fairbanks have filed forms necessary to begin fundraising.

The U.S. House, meanwhile, is close to having enough support to force a vote on the Epstein issue. While Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, opposes bringing up the topic, a bipartisan petition could override the Speaker if it has 218 signatures. As of Wednesday night, it had 217. Alaska’s lone member of the House of Representatives, Rep. Nick Begich, has not signed the discharge petition. His office did not respond to questions about his position on the Epstein issue and whether he will sign the petition.

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Republican Bernadette Wilson announces Sen. Mike Shower as lieutenant governor running mate

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

Sen. Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, speaks Friday, April 12, 2024, on Senate Bill 187, the capital budget. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

Wasilla Republican Sen. Mike Shower will run for lieutenant governor alongside Republican gubernatorial candidate Bernadette Wilson, the two announced Tuesday night in Big Lake.

Wilson is the first of Alaska’s 10 governor candidates to announce her running mate.

The other nine candidates include former Democratic Sen. Tom Begich of Anchorage and eight Republicans: former state Sen. Click Bishop of Fairbanks; former Alaska Revenue Commissioner Adam Crum; current state Sen. Shelley Hughes of Palmer, Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom of Eagle River; Matanuska-Susitna Borough Mayor Edna DeVries; podiatrist Matt Heilala of Anchorage; former teacher James William Parkin IV of Angoon; and Bruce Walden of Palmer. Former Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor is also expected to file for the office.

Current Rep. George Rauscher, R-Sutton, said he will run for Shower’s seat in the state Senate. Rauscher previously ran for Senate in 2018 and said he put his name in “one minute after Bernadette stated it was Shower.”

By phone, Wilson said the lieutenant governor has two jobs: taking care of the state seal, and taking care of elections. 

“The Division of Elections is incredibly important and too important to get passed off to who is the politically expedient candidate,” she said.

Bernadette Wilson and Mike Shower pose for a photo on Tuesday, Sept. 9, 2025, in Big Lake, Alaska. (Bernadette Wilson photo)
Bernadette Wilson and Mike Shower pose for a photo on Tuesday, Sept. 9, 2025, in Big Lake, Alaska. (Bernadette Wilson photo)

Wilson said she believes “election integrity and the ability to vote at the ballot box is the very foundation of the Republic” and said that Shower is the right person to fix problems with voting in rural Alaska, an unusually large voter roll, and slow-to-arrive results.

“I felt very confident that Sen. Mike Shower has the knowledge in that area. It is an area that he is passionate about, which is the first step in solving any problem, and he’s worked on that extensively. So I felt that that was incredibly important and made him the best choice for Alaska’s next lieutenant governor,” she said.

Shower served over 20 years as a pilot in the U.S. Air Force and currently works as a commercial cargo pilot. 

Shower was originally appointed to the Senate in February 2018 to replace Mike Dunleavy, who held the seat until resigning to run for governor. Elected on his own merits later that year and re-elected in 2022, he has repeatedly introduced proposals to make changes to the state’s elections system.

His first proposal was introduced in 2019 related to election security protocols, before President Donald Trump began lying about fraud in the 2020 election. 

Currently the Senate’s minority leader, he has regularly re-introduced legislation related to the state’s elections system and has frequently been a key figure in end-of-session negotiations on the topic. Thus far, the Legislature has been unable to pass significant changes.

As a member of the Senate, Shower has consistently endorsed the idea of a large Permanent Fund dividend, going so far as to propose a statewide tax in order to pay for it. 

Wilson said that she and Shower are confident in their ability to win the governor’s race, but if they finish behind another Republican in the August primary, they will withdraw and throw their support behind the leading Republican.

Under Alaska’s current voting system, all candidates for the same office run in the same race, regardless of political party. The top four-vote getters advance to the general election, where Alaskans use ranked choice voting to pick the ultimate winner.

Wilson, one of the leaders of a campaign to repeal that system, said she believes “that when you’ve got multiple people on the ballot of any party, it leads to so much confusion, it leads to voters only ranking one at the end of the day. … I think it’s very arrogant to say, Well, I’m not the top vote getter, but I’m going to stay in anyways. I just don’t think that that’s appropriate.”

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local Music News Feeds Sitka Local

Alaska judge rules in state’s favor on repeal of a rule intended to limit health care costs

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

Wooden gavel with books in background.

An Anchorage Superior Court judge’s ruling has cleared the way for the state of Alaska to repeal its “80th Percentile Rule,” enacted by the state in 2004 as part of an attempt to reduce health care costs in the state.

The Dunleavy administration repealed the rule in 2024, saying it was counterproductive and argued it contributed to higher health care costs. Medical providers say that isn’t true and that repealing the rule will cause some clinicians to close down. 

In 2023, a group of medical providers sued the state, alleging problems with the process used to repeal the rule. On Aug. 27, following a four-day bench trial in February, Judge Yvonne Lamoureaux ruled in favor of the state. 

In her findings of fact and conclusions of law, Lamoureaux concluded that the repeal was not “unreasonable or arbitrary,” and the state did not conduct an improper procedure.

An appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court is possible.

When in place, the rule required that insurance companies reimburse out-of-network medical providers at a rate equal to the 80th percentile of charges for the given service.

If five clinics provide a given procedure, the required payment would be what the second-most-expensive clinic charges.

The rule was intended to prevent Alaskans from being left with large medical bills after visiting out-of-network clinics. The state and Alaska’s largest health insurance company, Premera Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alaska, contend that it required insurance companies to pay more for services than was warranted, contributing to higher insurance costs.

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Trump administration wants to cancel Biden-era rule that made conservation a ‘use’ of public land

FILE – Interior Secretary Doug Burgum listens as President Donald Trump speaks with reporters in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Monday, Aug. 11, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File)

AP-Interior Secretary Doug Burgum on Wednesday proposed canceling a public land management rule that put conservation on equal footing with development, as President Donald Trump’s administration seeks to open more taxpayer-owned tracts to drilling, logging, mining and grazing.

The rule was a key part of efforts under former President Joe Biden to refocus the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management, which oversees about 10% of land in the U.S. Adopted last year, it allowed public property to be leased for restoration in the same way that oil companies lease land for drilling.

Industry and agriculture groups were bitterly opposed to the Biden rule and lobbied Republicans to reverse it. States including North Dakota, where Burgum served as governor before joining Trump’s Cabinet, pursued a lawsuit hoping to block the rule.

Wednesday’s announcement comes amid a flurry of actions since Trump took office aimed at boosting energy production from the federal government’s vast land holdings, which are concentrated in Western states including Alaska, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.

Interior officials said the Biden rule had sidelined people who depend on public lands for their livelihoods and imposed unneeded restrictions.

Burgum said in a statement that it would have prevented thousands of acres from being used for energy and mineral productions, grazing and recreation. Overturning it “protects our American way of life and gives our communities a voice in the land that they depend on,” Burgum said.

“The previous administration’s Public Lands Rule had the potential to block access to hundreds of thousands of acres of multiple-use land – preventing energy and mineral production, timber management, grazing and recreation across the West,” Burgum said.

Environmentalists had largely embraced the rule that was finalized in April 2024. Supporters argued that conservation was a long-neglected facet of the land bureau’s mission under the 1976 Federal Lands Policy Management Act.

“The administration cannot simply overthrow that statutory authority because they would prefer to let drilling and mining companies call the shots,” said Alison Flint, senior legal director at The Wilderness Society.

While the bureau previously issued leases for conservation purposes in limited cases, it never had a dedicated program for it.

Critics said the change under Biden violated the “multiple use” mandate for Interior Department lands, by catapulting the “non-use” of federal lands — meaning restoration leases — to a position of prominence.

National Mining Association CEO Rich Nolan said Burgum’s proposal would ensure the nation’s natural resources are available to address rising energy demands and supply important minerals.

“This is a welcome change from the prior clear disregard for the legal obligation to balance multiple uses on federal lands,” Nolan said.

The rule also promoted the designation of more “areas of critical environmental concern” — a special status that can restrict development. It’s given to land with historic or cultural significance or that’s important for wildlife conservation.

In addition to its surface land holdings, the land bureau regulates publicly-owned underground mineral reserves — such as coal for power plants and lithium for renewable energy — across more than 1 million square miles (2.5 million square kilometers). The bureau has a history of industry-friendly policies and for more than a century has sold grazing permits and oil and gas leases.

The pending publication of Burgum’s proposal will kick off a 60-day public comment period.

House Republicans last week repealed land management plans adopted in the closing days of former President Joe Biden’s administration that restricted development in large areas of Alaska, Montana and North Dakota. Interior officials also announced a proposal aimed at increasing mining and drilling in Western states with populations of greater sage grouse. Biden administration officials proposed limits on development and prohibitions against mining to help protect the grouse.

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Republican attorneys general say they see a threat from Democratic states’ climate laws and lawsuits

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

Attorneys general (from left to right) Treg Taylor of Alaska, Marty Jackley of South Dakota, Kris Kobach of Kansas, J.B. McCuskey of West Virginia, and Liz Murrill of Louisiana participate in a panel discussion on Thursday, Aug. 28, 2025, at the Alaska Oil and Gas Association conference in Anchorage. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

During a pair of public panel discussions during the last week of August, attorneys general from five conservative Republican states said they see climate ‘superfund laws’ passed by Democratic states as major threats to the fossil fuel industries of their state.

“I think that the group of people that are on this panel are all united in making sure that all of the expertise in all of our offices are being utilized to make sure that this doesn’t keep going, because it’s very, very dangerous,” said J.B. McCuskey, attorney general of West Virginia, at the annual meeting of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association.

Alongside him were attorneys general Kris Kobach of Kansas, Liz Murrill of Louisiana, Marty Jackley of South Dakota, and then-attorney general of Alaska, Treg Taylor.

The attorneys general said they are also concerned by lawsuits from states and local governments that could result in financial penalties against fossil fuel companies for disasters attributed to climate change.

Vermont made history in 2024 when it enacted a law that allows the state to hold fossil fuel companies financially liable for the negative impacts of climate change on that state. New York followed suit with a similar law later in the year. 

Under both laws, fines levied by the states and paid by fossil fuel companies would go into a large fund that would be spent on projects that could mitigate natural disasters or subsidize clean energy projects.

Other Democratic-led states, including Massachusetts, New Jersey and California, are considering similar laws.

“Now that we have a friendly EPA and a friendly administration, the blue states are deciding that they’re now going to be the EPA,” McCuskey said, speaking at a different panel hosted by the Republican Women of Anchorage. 

The attorneys general, plus Ken Paxton of Texas, who was not present at the industry panel, nodded along as McCuskey spoke.

“Their argument is that every single permitted operation that happened in Alaska caused $75 billion worth of damage to the people of New York. It’s completely outrageous. And the problem isn’t just that it’s New York, it’s that Illinois has one. California is going to have one. Vermont’s going to have one. Massachusetts is going to have one. You name a place that has radical environmentalists running their government, and then it becomes an amount of money that’s not withstandable,” McCuskey said.

Taylor, who has since resigned as Alaska’s attorney general and is expected to run for governor, said he believes that in states with budget holes, “it’s pretty convenient just to raise taxes on oil and gas, right? And those states that don’t have oil and gas, that’s their way of dealing with their budget shortfalls, is to take it out of oil and gas through these types of acts.”

Republican attorneys general from five states speak at an event hosted by the Anchorage Republican Women on Thursday, Aug. 28, 2025, in Anchorage. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
Republican attorneys general from five states speak at an event hosted by the Anchorage Republican Women on Thursday, Aug. 28, 2025, in Anchorage. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

Fossil fuel businesses and trade groups, including the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, filed suit last year against the Vermont law. 

A group of Republican attorneys general, led by McCuskey, sued New York in February. Another McCuskey-led suit, filed in May, targets Vermont. 

The Trump administration has also gotten involved by filing lawsuits against both states and against states like Hawaii that have filed lawsuits against fossil fuel companies.

Those suits say companies should be financially liable for harm caused by climate change.

Speaking at the Alaska oil panel, Kobach said he’s concerned about climate lawsuits filed by cities and counties and believes they’re being encouraged by national environmental law firms and groups.

“The reason I’m so energized about fighting back against that is Ford County, Kansas, which you probably never heard of, where Dodge City is — little tiny county, rural county, very low population — somehow, they were convinced by some very well-heeled attorneys in California to be a plaintiff in one of these lawsuits. And so we’re chasing them around. My office is chasing them around, trying to get them kicked out of court because they don’t speak for the people of Kansas,” he said.

Taylor said he sees the same issue.

“We’re seeing those opportunistic plaintiffs’ attorneys convince municipalities and boroughs and cities to take on litigation that’s really not in their best interest and really puts money into their own pockets,” he said during the panel discussion.

McCuskey, of West Virginia, said his state is considering a law that would restrict the ability of local governments to sue.

Nationally, the fossil fuel industry is lobbying Congress to pass a liability shield law akin to the one passed in 2005 to protect the gun industry against lawsuits attempting to hold gun manufacturers responsible for gun crimes. 

In June, McCuskey and other attorneys general wrote a letter to the U.S. Attorney General to offer support for a national liability shield to protect fossil fuel companies. 

The National Association of Counties and the National League of Cities have each adopted resolutions opposing such a liability shield. Both organizations say that local governments should retain the power to file lawsuits.

McCuskey, speaking at the oil panel, got a laugh from the audience when he asked attendees what they thought West Virginians would say if New York tried to collect a fine from the state of West Virginia.

“Our big joke is that the people in New York are literally looking down on us from the skyscrapers that were built with coal from West Virginia,” McCuskey said at the oil and gas association panel. “So they’re not just looking down on us figuratively, but both literally and figuratively, and they just have no contemplation of why their economies were built by the people who do the work that’s happening here.”

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Former Alaska House Speaker reflects on legislative process, State and Federal issues in memoir

Jim Duncan portrait

NOTN- Jim Duncan, a former Alaska House Speaker and longtime labor leader, is looking back on more than four decades in public life in a new memoir he says shows how politics is a lot like making sausage.

Duncan, who served in the Legislature from the 1970s through the 1980s eventually becoming Speaker of the House. Over that time, he sponsored dozens of bills and says he learned that compromise was the only way to get things done.

Duncan also lead Alaska’s largest public employee union and said his book Making Sausage aims to put Alaska’s political issues into perspective, he says much of what was covered in the 70s and 80s is still applicable today.

“It was a long process, but it was worthwhile in my mind, because it really brought me back to how important the issues are that we were addressing and how those issues are still alive today.” Said Duncan, “The one thing I mentioned in the book is that it’s, about history, but it’s not ancient history, because what we did when I was serving in the legislature and after, are still alive today, those issues still need to be addressed. And I hope that there will be some encouragement given to some folks too, if they read this and say, Okay, let’s get busy and try to resolve these issues. They need to be done.”

Duncan recalled sifting through nearly 20 boxes of legislative files to piece together the book, which details his work on oil taxes, education, and labor negotiations.

He said one of his proudest achievements was securing finality in collective bargaining for school employees, a fight that spanned 15 years.

“Education funding has been at the top of the list for past legislators and legislators for a number of years.” Duncan said, “You know, we didn’t adequately address it when I was in the legislature. We tried to, and we put together a foundation, a formula program, but unfortunately, that hasn’t been kept up to date, and there hasn’t been adequate funding. And we complain about our schools and the fact that we don’t think that they’re providing a good education, but we’re asking our teachers to do more with less. There’s less teachers. The classroom sizes have increased. They’ve got to bring in their own supplies, so it’s very difficult.”

Locally, he pointed to helping secure funding for the University of Alaska Southeast library, which he argued cemented the campus’ future in Juneau.

Much of Duncan’s book also revisits Alaska’s battles over oil taxes, a debate he said shaped his career and even led to his removal as House Speaker.

“You know, the fact that the state doesn’t have a long-term fiscal plan, so we can really clearly set our goals and attain those, it’s got to be resolved.” Said Duncan, “And the one reason that hasn’t happened is because, so far, when they talk about creating fiscal plan, what they look at is decreasing spending and increasing the permanent fund dividend, but they forget about the fact they need more revenues, and unfortunately, revenues, the ones that we can get would come from oil companies.”

Duncan said that Alaska’s state issues like education and state funding are also federal issues.

“Education is being attacked with the current administration, the Department of Education is being decimated, and they’re reworking the way that the federal government helps provide education, health care is under attack, as we know, there’s talks about trying to repeal parts of Obamacare, doing away with Medicaid funding and or reducing it and Medicare, and that’s going to have a tremendous impact.” Duncan said “So the important thing I think here, is that the issues that we were addressing, trying to address years ago, are still alive today and need to be addressed. And I hope that this might spur some if folks read this.”

Duncan spoke on today’s political landscape and expressed concerns on partisanship, “I think Alaska, we do better working on a bipartisan nature than some other states do, and what they do on the federal level.” he said, “I think there’s good ideas on both sides, whether you’re Republican or Democrat. The goal you is to try to bring folks together, and you gotta be willing to accept their thoughts and views. Also, I think unfortunately, on the federal level, that’s not happening. It’s become very strident.”

Duncan also weighed in on the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend, which he helped establish during his time in office. While he said he supports a larger dividend to benefit rural and low-income residents, he argued it must be paired with new revenue sources, including changes to oil production taxes.

“The challenge is, how do you maintain the dividend, provide government services and see the dividend grow? You know, the dividend has been going down in recent years. It’s going to be the lowest this year than it has been for some time. And in fact, it’s probably the lowest it’s ever been.” Duncan said “The reason is because so much of those earnings needs to be used to help support government services, I support that we should have a larger dividend, because it does a lot of good for people who really need it in rural Alaska and elsewhere, in order to do that, you need to find revenues outside of the permanent fund earnings and outside of the general fund money that’s just generated from other sources.”

Making Sausage is available online through Amazon and Google Books, with audio and additional formats expected soon.

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

City and Borough of Juneau Releases Body-Worn Camera Footage from July 30 Arrest Incident; Probationary Officer Resigned

This is a copy of an information release by the City and Borough of Juneau

Today, the City and Borough of Juneau released body-worn camera footage and related materials from the July 30, 2025 incident in which a Juneau Police Department (JPD) officer used force during an arrest that resulted in a serious head injury to the arrested individual.  The officer, who was in his probationary period, resigned on August 28, 2025.

This release is part of the City’s ongoing commitment to transparency and accountability and in accordance with CBJ Code (Ordinance 2025-05(c)(am)). In addition to the body-worn video, the City has published dashboard camera footage and applicable JPD policies. All materials are available online at bit.ly/jpd-incident-july30.
City Manager Katie Koester stated, “This has been a painful event for our community. The officer’s resignation reflects the seriousness of what occurred, and our obligation to uphold the standards of conduct our community expects. Accountability means not only reviewing the facts but acting on them. I want to be clear: the Juneau Police Department is full of good and hardworking people who serve with professionalism, empathy and integrity. One incident does not define the department. We’re committed to using this moment to strengthen relationships and to listen and learn from all impacted voices.”

She added, “Chief Bos has been in contact with the family of the individual who was injured, and we are keeping them in our thoughts. Out of respect for their privacy, we will defer any questions regarding his condition or legal matters to the family.”

The officer was placed on administrative leave following the incident. JPD immediately requested an investigation of the incident by an independent third party. That investigation is ongoing.

JPD Chief of Police Derek Bos stated, “What happened on July 30 was not consistent with department policy, values or the conduct we expect from our officers. As Chief, I take responsibility for ensuring our department earns and maintains the public’s trust. We have already begun reviewing JPD directives, implementing policy clarifications as well as additional training focused on de-escalation, proportionality in use-of-force, and medical response protocols.”

As part of the City’s commitment to long-term healing and improved relationships, the Juneau Police Department will also participate in cultural sensitivity training. This training is designed to deepen officers’ understanding of Indigenous history, values, and lived experiences in Juneau, and to reinforce the department’s role as a respectful and responsive community partner.

“This training is not a checkbox. It’s a step toward meaningful connection,” said City Manager Katie Koester.
In addition, Tlingit & Haida has offered to co-host a community dialogue with the City to create space for open and respectful conversations about the community’s relationship with law enforcement. The event will be designed to elevate voices, share perspectives, and chart a path forward rooted in trust, accountability, and shared values.

“We need to approach the dialogue in a thoughtful manner and recognize that it will be difficult for many in our community who have experienced trauma. We’re grateful to Tlingit & Haida for their leadership and willingness to engage with us on this important work,” said Manager Koester. Details about the training and dialogue event will be shared in the coming weeks.

All referenced videos and materials are accessible at: bit.ly/jpd-incident-july30.

Categories
Featured Juneau News Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Politics Sitka Local

Gov. Dunleavy says no additional special session this year, but promises more if no action taken on his education policy requests

Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy talks to reporters during a news conference on Monday, May 19, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

NOTN – Governor Mike Dunleavy is criticizing the Alaska Legislature for failing to take action on education reform, pointing out that the state remains last in the nation for student outcomes. 

In a letter to legislators Friday, he emphasized that increasing funding won’t improve results without meaningful policy changes, and called on lawmakers to act immediately.

According to lawmakers who spoke with News of the North, Dunleavy has declined to call a second special session this year.

Dunleavy warned that if the legislature does not pass education reforms during the next regular session, he is prepared to call additional special sessions in 2026 until changes are made, stressing that each year of inaction affects an entire cohort of students.