In this task, you are given an article. Your task is to summarize the article in a sentence.

California and New York issued a joint statement saying they would continue the fight against climate change.
Environmental groups have hired a host of lawyers to challenge Mr Trump's move that boosts fossil fuel production.
Mr Trump said he wanted to end "job-killing regulations".
His supporters believe that ending the climate change rules brought in by Barack Obama will create thousands of jobs in the gas, coal and oil industries.
The governors of New York and California summed up opponents' views by saying Mr Trump's stance was "profoundly misguided and shockingly ignores basic science".
In a joint statement, Governors Jerry Brown of California and Andrew Cuomo of New York, both Democrats, said: "With or without Washington, we will work with our partners throughout the world to aggressively fight climate change and protect our future."
The two states have set even stricter targets on reducing greenhouse gas emissions than required by Mr Obama's rules and have far-reaching plans for converting to renewable energy sources for producing electricity.
Governor Brown said: "Erasing climate change may take place in Donald Trump's mind, but nowhere else."
A host of legal issues could be in the pipeline.
California has a special waiver allowing it to enforce tougher measures on vehicle emissions. Mr Trump could rescind that - but this would lead to a fierce challenge.
He could also ask Congress to revoke the Clean Air Act.
Back in 2007, the US Supreme Court ruled that carbon dioxide gas was a pollutant under the Act.
Some experts believe that the ultimate goal of Mr Trump's executive order is to overturn that ruling.
Already tied up in the courts is Mr Obama's Clean Power Plan (CPP), which seeks to cut fossil fuels from electricity production.
The BBC's environment correspondent, Matt McGrath, says Mr Trump will let the CPP fester there while coming up with a much weaker replacement.
David Goldston, of the Natural Resources Defence Council, said activists were gearing up for legal challenges.
He said: "The president doesn't get to simply rewrite safeguards; they have to... prove the changes are in line with the law and science. I think that's going to be a high hurdle for them."
Any legal challenges would dovetail with action to win over public opinion.
Jeremy Symons, of the Environmental Defence Fund, told Associated Press: "In terms of the big picture, our strategy is simple: shine a spotlight on what is going on and mobilise the public against these rollbacks."
But Mr Trump's move does have supporters.
US Chamber of Commerce president Thomas Donohue said: "These executive actions are a welcome departure from the previous administration's strategy of making energy more expensive through costly, job-killing regulations that choked our economy."
Mr Trump's Energy Independence Executive Order suspends more than half a dozen measures enacted by his predecessor.
Although during his election campaign he also vowed to pull the US out of the Paris climate deal agreed in December 2015, he has not spelled out the US intentions.
Whatever the US chooses, the EU, India and China say they will stick to their pledges made in Paris.
On Wednesday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said: "No matter how other countries' policies change, as a responsible large developing country, China's resolve, aims and policy moves in dealing with climate change will not."
Opponents of President Donald Trump's decision to scrap his predecessor's climate change policies say they will organise a public campaign and pursue legal avenues to challenge it.

That meant 2.5% of the employed UK workforce was on such a contract.
The 801,000 figure is the highest since the ONS began monitoring the number of zero-hours contracts.
ONS statistician Nick Palmer said some of the rise could reflect greater recognition of "zero-hours" contracts.
However, he added: "There's also nothing to suggest this form of employment is in decline."
In its report, the ONS said there were about 1.7 million contracts that did not guarantee a minimum number of hours in November, meaning that many workers had more than one zero-hours contract.
The previous estimate, for May 2015, was 2.1 million, but the ONS said that the estimates could be affected by seasonal factors and should not be directly compared.
The ONS data on zero-hours contracts is not as clear as it could be. As the ONS points out, "at least some of this increase may be due to greater public recognition of the term 'zero-hours contract'". That means that many people do not know that they are on a zero-hours contract, or what the term means.
Therefore much of this increase may be down to media coverage - or even the fact that the statisticians are explaining the term to people when they gather the data. The ONS itself does not know how much of this increase is down to an increasing use of these contracts and how much is down to such factors.
What we do know is that the proportion of businesses using such contracts varies considerably. In the hotel and catering industries more than a quarter of employers use them, but in the construction sector only one in 20 companies do so. These figures may also be affected by seasonal factors, given that many industries employ more people in the summer.
However, the ONS says that "there's also nothing to suggest this form of employment is in decline". That means the controversy is unlikely to decline either.
Those on zero-hours contracts were more likely to be young people, part-time workers, women, or those in full-time education when compared with other people in employment.
Someone on a zero-hours contract worked an average of 26 hours a week. About a third of those on a zero-hours contract wanted to work longer, with most wanting more hours in their current job, as opposed to a different job that offered more hours.
In comparison, only 10% of other people in other types of employment wanted more hours, the ONS said.
TUC general secretary Frances O'Grady said zero-hours contracts could be "a nightmare for workers".
"The so-called flexibility these contracts offer is far too one-sided," she said. "Staff without guaranteed pay have much less power to stand up for their rights and often feel afraid to turn down shifts in case they fall out of favour with their boss."
TUC research found that average weekly earnings for zero-hours workers were Â£188, compared with Â£479 for permanent employees.
Laura Gardiner, of the Resolution Foundation, said some workers on zero-hours contracts struggled to cope with fluctuating pay levels, which made it hard to budget.
"While zero-hours contracts still make up a comparatively small, albeit growing, part of the labour market, it is still crucial that policy makers consider the effect of unstable employment on both workers and the economy," she said.
Owen Smith, shadow work and pensions secretary, said the Conservatives had failed to take action on zero-hours contracts as promised before the last general election.
A Department for Business spokesperson said zero-hours contracts "had a part to play in a modern, flexible labour market", adding: "We have acted to ban the use of exclusivity clauses in these contracts which prevent people from boosting their income when they have no guarantee of work."
The number of workers on a zero-hours contract for their main job stood at 801,000 in late 2015, up by 104,000 from a year earlier, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has said.

East Antrim MP Sammy Wilson claimed it would amount to exhibitionism if women members of Parliament were allowed to breastfeed in the House of Commons.
His party said the comments represented a personal view.
It said it was "vital we continue to promote breastfeeding and ensure adequate public awareness of its benefits".
"The party has not had an opportunity to read or consider the report which relates to the House of Commons," a DUP spokesman said.
"Comments made this morning represented a personal view.
"We recognise that the benefits of breastfeeding are well established, with a positive impact on both babies and mothers.
"It is vital we continue to promote breastfeeding and ensure adequate public awareness of its benefits."
Initially Mr Wilson had said there was an element of voyeurism in women wanting to breastfeed in the chamber.
When challenged by broadcaster Stephen Nolan on BBC Radio Ulster's The Nolan Show, Mr Wilson amended his comment to "exhibitionism".
DUP MLA Pam Cameron made it clear she did not agree with Mr Wilson's comments through a tweet, which ended "I'll sort him out".
A pregnant Alliance councillor Sian O'Neill said she was disgusted at the MP's remarks.
"They represent an antiquated and out-of-date view both in terms of breastfeeding in public but also in terms of women's value and role in public and civic life," she added.
Ulster Unionist MLA Jo-Anne Dobson said she was "astonished".
"I found myself shouting at the radio, this is a senior politician, he needs to grow up," she said.
"It is acting like a schoolboy giggling at the back of the biology class."

The DUP has distanced itself from remarks over breastfeeding made by one of its most senior MPs.

