Sen. Bernie Sanders announced a plan Monday to forgive the country's $1.6 trillion outstanding student loan tab, intensifying the higher education policy debate in the 2020...Personal Financeread more
"We do not seek conflict with Iran or any other country," Trump tells reporters in the Oval Office.Politicsread more
While earnings usually come in substantially ahead of expectations — as much as 4 or 5 percentage points is not unusual — the downward direction in the outlook doesn't speak...Earningsread more
Tech's hottest IPOs of the year, including Beyond Meat and Zoom, dropped on Monday, falling more than the broader market.Technologyread more
"We missed being the dominant mobile operating system by a very tiny amount. We were distracted during our antitrust trial. We didn't assign the best people to do the work,"...Technologyread more
PatientsLikeMe was bought by UnitedHealth following a review by Trump's Treasury Department, which scrutinized the start-up because it's backed by Chinese cash.Technologyread more
Some traders think the energy rally is about to wane, despite the sector being one of June's big winners.ETF Edgeread more
Stocks with this one feature are poised to crush the market after a rate cut, according to Goldman Sachs.Marketsread more
An Air Canada passenger traveling to Toronto from a weekend in Quebec City found herself stranded alone on the tarmac and in the dark, in what she described as a "nightmare."Airlinesread more
When Victoria's Secret exited the swimsuit business in 2016, it opened the floodgates for start-ups to conquer that market.Retailread more
Shopify debuts a new network to help it compete with Amazon.Marketsread more
(Adds EPA comment)
Feb 7 (Reuters) - The Trump administration has persuaded a U.S. appeals court to reconsider its recent decision ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to ban the widely-used pesticide chlorpyrifos, which critics say can harm children and farmers.
In an order on Wednesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it will again review former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt's March 2017 refusal to ban chlorpyrifos for use on food crops such as fruits, vegetables and nuts.
Pruitt's ruling reversed a 2015 Obama administration plan to extend a 2000 ban on the pesticide that had covered most household settings.
The appeals court had, in a 2-1 decision last Aug. 9, directed the EPA to ban chlorpyrifos within 60 days.
It cited the agency's failure to consider, or debunk, "scientific evidence" associating the pesticide with low birth rates, impaired mental development, attention and behavior problems, and other damage to children.
Wednesday's order means an 11-judge appeals court panel will reconsider the case.
Chlorpyrifos, developed as a nerve gas in World War Two, has been used commercially in the United States since 1965.
Groups that challenged Pruitt's ruling included the Natural Resources Defense Council and the United Farm Workers.
"EPA's own scientists have said for more than two years that chlorpyrifos is harmful, particularly to children," said Patti Goldman, a lawyer for Earthjustice representing the groups, in a statement. "Any delay to ban this toxic chemical is a tragedy."
If the 9th Circuit upholds Pruitt's original ruling, it will be a win for President Donald Trump, who along with other Republicans has long criticized what is widely viewed as one of the more liberal federal appeals courts.
In seeking a rehearing, the EPA said the appeals court lacked jurisdiction to review Pruitt's ruling, and otherwise should have simply directed him to reconsider the evidence rather than order a ban.
The EPA is now overseen by acting administrator Andrew Wheeler.
A spokeswoman said the agency is pleased the case will be reheard, and that federal rules allowing the pesticide's use "can continue, as permitted by state law," during the appeals process.
Judge Jed Rakoff, who normally sits on the federal district court in Manhattan, wrote the Aug. 9 decision.
Circuit Judge Ferdinand Fernandez dissented, saying the court lacked jurisdiction.
The case is League of United Latin American Citizens et al v New York et al, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 17-71636. (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York Editing by Sonya Hepinstall and Susan Thomas)