内容摘要：and a cooling chutney with cilantro and mint cut through all the meat. For dessert were bowls of chopped fruit and

and a cooling chutney with cilantro and mint cut through all the meat. For dessert were bowls of chopped fruit and

Trump has previously called the tax-exempt status a “privilege” that has been “abused,” and he’s already threatened tofor those that don’t abide by his directives or agree with his views. Most recently that’s included Harvard University, which defied the administration’s demands to limit on-campus activism. Trump froze more than $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts to the school, moved to

Michelle Roos, executive director of the Environmental Protection Network, which represents hundreds of former scientists and regulators, said last month “we all pay the price” when charitable organizations are silenced based on politics.For example, the move to revoke tax-exempt status could choke off funding for groups that urge greater action to promote clean air, water and land, work to help communities most affected by industrial pollution and advocate for projects and policies to combat climate change — among other issues.“It threatens the rights, health, and future of every community,” Roos said in a statement.

Last month, Trump said he couldand the ethics watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Though past presidents have tried to influence and direct the IRS, presidents

to conduct tax investigations under a law passed by Congress in 1998. The IRS can examine an organization’s tax-exempt status and can rescind it if it’s not operating for charitable purposes as required. Still, the IRS’ independence under Trump is in question.President Donald Trump’s administration has already said it’s speeding up that process after the president in January declared a “national energy emergency” and vowed to boost U.S. oil and gas production.

referred to the decision as a “course correction” in an opinion fully joined by four conservative colleagues.“Congress did not design NEPA for judges to hamstring new infrastructure and construction projects,” he wrote. The three liberal justices agreed the Utah project should get its approval, but they would have taken a narrower path.

The justices reversed athat required a more thorough environmental assessment and restored an important approval from federal regulators on the Surface Transportation Board.