The Environmental Justice Case, Maynas Carijana Vs. Occidental Petroleum

Environmental ethics has widely circled around human interactions with biotic ecosystems. Little voice has been given to city residents who are overexposed to environmental hazards. It is a subject rarely touched upon by mainstream environmentalist. Though conservation efforts receive much media attention and advocacy, environmental pollution in urban areas inhabited by minorities and the impoverished receive less attention despite it clearly being a grave injustice. It fact, it can be argued that minority and impoverished neighborhoods are deliberately targeted by corporations and governmental agencies because of the inherit vulnerability of the inhabitants. It is no secret that the impoverished in this country frequently live in areas characterized

The Law firm won the case in the end with the verdict that Pacific Gas & Energy had to compensate the plaintiffs in the amount of $333 million for damages (cornell.edu web site).

In April 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded, polluting the Gulf of Mexico with 4.9 million barrels of oil (EPA, 2015). This disaster is known as the BP oil spill, and is regarded as one of the worst environmental catastrophes in American history. Although it is widely recognized for its impact on ocean ecosystems, marine animals, and public health, it is also a human rights issue. The extensive impacts of the spill include the violations of the human rights to a healthy environment, livelihood, and housing. Further, the oil spill disproportionately affected low-income communities of color that are systematically excluded from protection against environmental harm. This adds to its relevance to human rights because all rights are intended to be enjoyed equally regardless of race, color, income, or other status. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill demonstrates how the legal system often fails to defend vulnerable people and the inequalities associated with the damage and compensation of the disaster.

Today we’re faced with multiple forms of inequalities and injustices. None of them are in no way, shape or form are okay or justifiable. While we as a people are striving to deal with the obvious forms of injustices, there is another form that is a real quiet one, but it can be heard throughout the world that we are living in and is a severe problem that needs to be addressed. The type of injustice that I’m speaking on is called: Environmental Racism. This has been a definite issue that not only affects the environment, but it also has effects on communities, individuals and it effects the economic system in the long run as well. Environmental Racism needs to be brought up in conversations within our communities as well as our local governments, so they will not forget their remains a problem.

In “Disproportionate Siting” author Dorcetta Taylor discusses the common claims of unequal exposure to environmental hazards being due to racial and class discrimination (33). Taylor states, “Proponents of this thesis argue that hazardous facilities are disproportionally located in minority and low-income areas and that these patterns are the result of discrimination” (33). In regards to racial and social class discrimination, she argues that the claim of racism is the more controversial of the two with many scholars arguing on both sides (Taylor, 34). She then delves into different studies that argued that race was a factor in explaining location of and exposure to environmental hazards (Taylor, 35). Taylor then discusses the studies that

By this time I had obtained courage to speak out against topics of that were controversial or even at the least uncomfortable for me. The class was structured around climate change and sustainable energy. There was harmonious agreement that water bottles were inefficient and not needed at the university. The opinion further spread to doing away with all water bottles because they were contributing to the decline of the environment. While I agreed water bottles were bad for the planet, I thought about times they were useful in third world countries,not only in third world countries but even in the United States. I was slightly upset because this was after the water crisis in Flint, Michigan had occurred. There was no mention of the importance of water bottles for those in crisis. I was also sensitive because I could recall a time where segregation forced people to drink from two separate fountains. Packages of water bottles were donated were being sent to families affected, I watched this story on the news. I watched this story because Flint, Michigan had a very high population of african-americans affected by this water contamination. Race in my mind, plays a valuable factor when it comes to climate change. The environmental justice movement had gone hand in hand with the civil rights movement. The environmental justice movement sought to stop the minority from paying the consequence of poor

In the book, Sacrifice Zones, Steve Lerner takes readers through twelve separate stories of communities in the United States that have been unwillingly exposed to high levels of environmental toxicity. In each of these cases, citizens of those communities reacted to and pushed back against being exposed to toxic chemicals, sometimes successfully and sometimes less so. In every case, the people most heavily exposed to these health hazards were minorities and low-income citizens, which, Lerner argues, is why government officials and corporate decision-makers chose knowingly to risk exposing them. This paper will outline Lerner’s book and argue that despite a long history of protests, lawsuits, media attention and nationwide outrage, willing exposure of low-income and minority Americans to toxic chemicals in the pursuit of government and corporate interests is still a major problem today.

One of the first influences on the deliberation on Environmental Justice was The Civil Rights Movement in the United States of America. Leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr. fought hard to ensure that social transformation and power be established for African Americans, especially those in the southern states as well as those in the northern inner-city parts. Activists like King altered the philosophy on Environmental Justice arguing that there was a lopsided effect that proved that environmental hazards were not accidental. What environmentalists advocated instead was that environmental dangers resulted from racial segregation that placed power plants, nuclear plants, and other potential ecological hazards in areas with a high concentration of minority and low income groups. Several activists defined this as “environmental racism.”

When one discusses acts of racism, slander or the stereotyping of a group of people may come to mind. However, the concept of environmental racism is rarely considered. This form of racism positions dominant environmental framing as racially driven, in which people of color (i.e. minorities) are affected disproportionately by poor environmental practices. Communities of color throughout the United States have become the dumping grounds for our nation’s waste disposal, as well as home to agricultural and/or manufacturing industries that pollute the land. Government regulations and cultural practices have all contributed to environmental racism. The government’s policies have also negatively impacted low income groups as well as people of

Environmental justice “is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (www.epa.gov.). The case of Navajo-Hopi Struggle to Protect the Big Mountain Reservation provides evidence of an environmental justice framework.

According to the Oxford dictionary, deference is defined as the act of being submissive, polite and showing respect. In law, deference refers to the process whereby the court gives its ruling based on a justified party for example, referring to executive in national defense cases. In the judiciary, the deference is a common method that is used to make rulings. On the other hand, agency discretion refers to formatively practice of judgment and making of decisions permitted to public administrators. As such, agency discretion and the concept of deference is a decision making process which mainly employs legal procedures in their ruling.

The book Toxic Communities examines several theories that are used to explain why hazardous substances and facilities are prevalent in minority communities. A pungent argument in the book is why people in minority communities choose not to move away from places hosting hazardous facilities. In other words, the book identifies reasons why people choose to remain in communities where dangerous facilities are sited. Grounded in practical examples and cases, the book is divided into ten chapters and concluding remarks. The first chapter explores the rise of environmental justice activism as a response to notable cases of toxic exposure in some parts of the United States.

Hazards and pollutants are apparent in a variety of outcomes. Possible outcomes include asthma, cancer and chemical poisoning (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Furthermore, “Although debated, the main hypothesis explaining these disparities is that disadvantaged communities encounter greater exposure to environmental toxins such as air pollution, pesticides, and lead” (Gee and Payne-Sturges 2004: 1647). Therefore, disadvantaged groups, such as people of color and the poor, experience greater environmental risks. Additionally, “Blacks in particular are exposed to a disproportionate amount of pollution and suffer the highest levels of lead and pesticide poisoning and other associated health problems” (Jones and Rainey 2006: 474). People of color, essentially, compete to live healthily. For example, African-Americans and Africans alike, struggle with the negative affects of oil refineries and unresponsive governments. The same can be said for Hispanics in California and the natives of Ecuador, who are forced to cope with the pollution of the Texaco oil refineries (Bullard 2001: 4). Environmental racism not only exploits natural resources, it abuses and profits from the communities involved. Governments and polluting facilities will continue to capitalize on the economic susceptibilities of poor communities, states, nations and regions for their “unsound” and hazardous operations (Bullard 2001: 23).

As stated in the thesis, environmental injustice mostly affects minority communities. In a map presented by the Los Angeles Times, in Southeast LA there are 26 communities- which 83.9% of the inhabitants are of minority groups (Southeast, n.d.). Similarly, another map released by EPA from the 1990 U.S. Census illustrates that in places where there is 80 to 100% of people of color there is at least 2

140 -- Nondiscrimination, Executive Order on Environmental Justice, DOT Order on Environmental Justice, FHWA Order on Environmental Justice, 23 CFR 200.5 -- Title VI Definitions, 23 CFR 200.7 et.al. -- Title VI Policy and State Responsibilities, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Impacts of the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 on FHWA Programs, and the Title VI Legal Manual, US. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division.” (FHWA 2014) As we can see there is no shortage of laws and regulations pertaining to Environmental Justice. For example, an objective, the main one as I see it from the former President Bill Clinton, Presidential Executive Order 12898, “provide guidance to Federal agencies on criteria for identifying disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations and low-income populations” (Clinton 1994) With this in mind the focus on the need to diversify the negative significance and impacts to the environment is key to a healthy and sustainable living environment for ALL to