La ola de calor y la falta de lluvias colocan a varios países de Europa en una situación crítica respecto al acceso al agua. El informe de la organización Europe in Motion ‘Overheated and Underprepared’, y citado por la agencia Euronews, señala que uno de cada diez ciudadanos de la Unión Europea afronta escasez de agua. El consumo promedio del 5,8% de los recursos hídricos europeos no refleja las profundas diferencias existentes entre los Estados miembros.

Chipre representa el caso más grave, con un uso de hasta el 92% de sus recursos de agua dulce en verano, muy por encima del umbral de alerta del 20%. Según el informe, las autoridades chipriotas solicitan a la población una reducción del consumo del 10%, equivalente a dos minutos menos de uso diario por persona. El Gobierno promueve la instalación de plantas desalinizadoras para asegurar el suministro de agua potable, sobre todo en la temporada turística.

Después de Chipre, otros países mediterráneos enfrentan presiones intensas sobre sus recursos hídricos. Malta registra un consumo anual del 33%, que escala al 67% en verano. De acuerdo con datos de la oficina estadística Eurostat y la Agencia Europea de Medio Ambiente (AEMA), la explotación hídrica alcanza niveles de alerta en Grecia (37%), Rumanía (34%), Portugal (31%), Italia (27%) y España (26,5%) durante los meses más cálidos.

El informe subraya que estos valores sitúan a estos países en zonas de alto riesgo, donde la combinación de altas temperaturas y aumento poblacional incrementa la presión sobre los sistemas de abastecimiento. La AEMA advierte que el impacto de la sequía y el cambio climático incrementará la frecuencia y la intensidad de estas crisis al menos hasta 2030.

La escasez de agua no solo depende de la cantidad disponible. También de la capacidad de los sistemas de distribución. La AEMA indica que aproximadamente el 10% de los europeos tiene dificultades para acceder a agua limpia y segura. El problema es especialmente grave en Chipre (36,5%) y Grecia (31,5%), donde la proporción de población afectada supera ampliamente la media de la Unión Europea.

Llama la atención que países como Bulgaria, Hungría, Croacia e Irlanda, aunque no presentan tasas elevadas de explotación de recursos, enfrentan dificultades para garantizar el acceso debido a infraestructuras envejecidas y sistemas de suministro deficientes. De acuerdo con Euronews, esta situación sugiere que la escasez tiene menos relación con la cantidad de agua y más con la gestión y el mantenimiento de las redes hidráulicas.

Por otro lado, países como Francia, Portugal y España, a pesar de los desafíos en la explotación de agua dulce, lograron mantener bajo el porcentaje de población afectada por la falta de acceso a agua potable y segura. Sus sistemas de distribución muestran una capacidad de respuesta más eficiente, con cifras por debajo de la media europea del 9%.

El informe de Europe in Motion resalta que la gestión del agua se convirtió en un asunto prioritario para la Unión Europea, especialmente ante la perspectiva de veranos cada vez más calurosos y secos. La creciente demanda, el turismo estacional y el cambio climático complican la capacidad de los gobiernos para garantizar el suministro a toda la población.

La agencia de noticias internacional, recoge que la urgencia de actuar se refleja en las medidas adoptadas en Chipre y en las advertencias de la AEMA sobre la necesidad de modernizar infraestructuras y aumentar la resiliencia de los sistemas de distribución. La experiencia de los países mediterráneos podría anticipar retos similares en otras regiones si no se aplican soluciones sostenibles.

La disparidad entre los Estados miembros evidencia la necesidad de estrategias diferenciadas y coordinadas, en las que el acceso equitativo y la inversión en tecnología sean ejes centrales para evitar una crisis hídrica generalizada en el continente.

The Supreme Court may have done more Monday than give President Donald Trump new firing power — it may have opened the door to a far broader challenge to the modern administrative state, the sprawling network of federal agencies that many conservatives have long dubbed the «deep state.»

In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled Trump could lawfully remove Federal Trade Commission Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, overturning much of the nearly 90-year-old Humphrey’s Executor precedent that had protected independent agency officials from at-will dismissal.

While Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion held that the FTC’s leaders must remain accountable to the president because the agency exercises executive power, Gorsuch argued the ruling raises a broader constitutional question over whether Congress can continue allowing executive agencies to exercise sweeping legislative and judicial powers.

«The fourth branch’s powers still exist; they have just been reassigned to the President,» Gorsuch wrote in a concurring opinion.

SCOTUS TAKES UP TRUMP’S BID TO FIRE FTC COMMISSIONER AT WILL — A SHOWDOWN THAT COULD TOPPLE 90-YEAR PRECEDENT

That observation could become the next major front in the Supreme Court’s ongoing effort to reshape the modern administrative state.

For decades, independent agencies such as the FTC, Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Communications Commission and National Labor Relations Board have combined multiple governmental functions under one roof. They investigate alleged violations, write regulations carrying the force of law and adjudicate enforcement actions through administrative proceedings.

With Humphrey’s Executor now overruled, those agencies remain intact, but their leadership is subject to presidential control if they exercise executive power. Gorsuch questioned whether Congress can continue delegating broad legislative and judicial authority to agencies that are now unmistakably under presidential supervision.

«The power to write new regulatory crimes still exists,» Gorsuch wrote. «The ability to judge disputes in-house remains, but now the house is white.»

Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, said Gorsuch’s concurrence points toward the next phase of litigation.

CONGRESS EXPANDED THE EXECUTIVE—ONLY FOR TRUMP TO QUASH MUCH OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE

President Donald Trump speaks during a Rose Garden Club dinner at the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 25, 2026. He hosted U.S. farmers from Iowa in the newly renovated Rose Garden. (Tierney L. Cross/Getty Images)

«I think the next step in this type of litigation won’t be looking at firings per se, but really trying to make sure all of these administrative agencies actually fall into one of our constitutional buckets,» Severino said. «Are they executive agencies or are they legislative or are they judicial? You can’t straddle all of this.»

She said that while Monday’s ruling restored presidential control over executive agencies, it did not resolve whether those same agencies can continue exercising quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers that Congress has delegated over decades.

«There still remains to be more work going back and taking out of these agencies that now are properly under executive control the activities that really aren’t fundamentally executive in nature,» Severino said.

Haley Proctor, a constitutional law professor at Notre Dame Law School, similarly described Gorsuch’s opinion as a roadmap for future legal challenges.

LEGAL CHALLENGES ON ADMINISTRATIVE REACH EXPECTED IN TRUMP’S DEREGULATORY SCHEME, EXPERTS SAY

«I do think what Justice Gorsuch is pointing out is that this is the first step toward rethinking the way in which the administrative state is empowered and structured,» Proctor said.

Rather than simply expanding presidential authority, Proctor said the concurrence raises the possibility that Congress may ultimately have to reclaim powers it has delegated to agencies or assign certain responsibilities back to Article III courts.

«If we’re concerned about the amount of power that the Federal Trade Commission has, then the next step would be to reconsider giving that power to the Federal Trade Commission because some of the decisions that it’s making could be made by Congress instead and some of the decisions that it’s making could be made by the courts,» she said.

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch speaks at the Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, Calif. (Paul Bersebach/MediaNews Group/Orange County Register)

The majority opinion did not resolve those questions. Instead, Roberts limited the Court’s holding to presidential removal authority, concluding that the FTC «unquestionably exercises executive power» and therefore its commissioners must remain accountable to the president.

The Court stopped short of deciding how much power Congress can give executive agencies to make rules or resolve disputes, saying questions involving agencies such as the Federal Reserve will have to wait.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But Gorsuch suggested future cases could go much further, arguing the Constitution provides the tools to dismantle much of the modern administrative state. He pointed to several constitutional doctrines that could be used to sharply limit the power of independent federal agencies and return lawmaking authority to Congress and judicial power to the courts.

«From here, the only sure path is to finish the journey we start today and restore legislative and judicial powers to where they belong: in Congress and the courts,» Gorsuch wrote.

Luz verde para despedir funcionarios públicos

Límites para la Reserva Federal

Voto por correo

El caso Carroll