
Trump administration pushes to reverse scientific ruling behind climate regulations
Speaking at an auto dealership in Indianapolis, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin argued that the 2009 Endangerment Finding was based on flawed reasoning and had inflicted serious economic harm.
"If finalized, today's announcement would amount to the largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States," said the former Republican congressman.
He was joined by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, a former fracking company CEO, whose department published a climate science study cited in the EPA action.
The proposed reversal -- first announced in March -- will be subject to a 45-day public comment period and is certain to face legal challenges.
While Zeldin cast the move as a way to undo what he called the " Biden - Harris administration's electric vehicle (EV) mandate," revoking the Endangerment Finding could also unravel the legal basis for a wide array of climate regulations, including those on power plants and oil and gas operations.
In his remarks, Zeldin accused the EPA under former president Barack Obama, a Democrat, of making "mental leaps" in determining that heat-trapping gases posed a threat to public health and welfare.
The EPA said in a press release that the finding had "been used to justify over $1 trillion in regulations" and undoing it would save $54 billion annually.
A 302-page document outlining the rationale for the revocation makes a number of bold claims around climate science, including the assertion that "extreme weather events have not demonstrably increased relative to historical highs," citing the Energy Department report.
It also speaks about the "beneficial impacts" of carbon emissions on plant growth and agricultural productivity.
The Endangerment Finding was grounded in overwhelming scientific consensus and peer-reviewed research. It followed a landmark 2007 Supreme Court ruling that found greenhouse gases qualify as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act and directed the EPA to revisit its position.
Transportation accounts for 28 percent of US greenhouse gas emissions -- more than any other sector.
If it were a country, the US transportation sector would rank as the fourth largest emitter of greenhouse gases globally, while the power sector would be fifth.
Legal battle looms
Environmental groups and states are expected to swiftly sue. The case could ultimately reach the Supreme Court, which may need to overturn its own 2007 precedent to side with the current Republican administration.
Dan Becker of the Center for Biological Diversity told AFP the Endangerment Finding has survived multiple legal challenges by industry over the years, "but this time, it's the government itself mounting the attack."
"Hopefully they will recognize that this is science and not politics -- that there was a good reason for that precedent and no good reason to revoke it," said Becker. "But this is a very political court."
He added that the administration's cost-saving arguments were misleading, pointing to official data showing that rules now targeted for repeal saved the average American driver $6,000 in fuel and maintenance over the lifetime of vehicles built under the standards.
Camille Pannu, an environmental law specialist at Columbia University, told AFP the Trump administration had failed to present robust legal arguments grounded in scientific evidence in its proposal.
"I think they're hoping they can just refuse to regulate for four years and do crazy things during that time while it's all tied up in court," she said.
Since returning to office, Trump has withdrawn the US from the Paris Agreement and launched a sweeping campaign to expand fossil fuel development.
The announcement comes as tens of millions of Americans are baking under a brutal heat dome in the Southeast, while climate-fueled flooding earlier this month killed more than 100 people in Texas.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


France 24
8 hours ago
- France 24
'Trump is tightening his grip on American economic policy and institutions'
01:28 01/08/2025 Trump Tariffs : US President Donald Trump grants Mexico 90-day reprieve Americas 01/08/2025 US President Donald Trump imposes sweeping trade tariffs to many countries Americas 01/08/2025 US tariffs on India: A changing tide in their partnership? Americas 01/08/2025 El Salvador's parliament approves reform to allow Bukele to run indefinitely Americas 01/08/2025 D-Day for Trump's tariffs: 'A complete rewiring of the global trade system' Americas 01/08/2025 US President Donald Trump hits dozens of countries with steep duties Americas 01/08/2025 MAGA global shakedown: Facing tariffs, sanctions, Lula now stands 'good chance of getting reelected' Americas 31/07/2025 Trump slaps 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports over Bolsonaro trial Americas 31/07/2025 Trump's abrupt reversal on climate policy a 'dreadful blow' to the battle against global warming Americas
LeMonde
13 hours ago
- LeMonde
California and other liberal states sue Trump over transgender care ban
A coalition of liberal US states on Friday, August 1, said it was suing Donald Trump's administration over an order to prevent clinics providing gender-affirming care to children. The lawsuit, brought by officials from California and 15 other states, as well as the District of Columbia, challenges an executive order that denounces the treatment as "chemical and surgical mutilation." The order, which Trump signed in January, calls on the Department of Justice to investigate providers who offer such treatment, even in states where it is legal. "The President and his Administration's relentless attacks on gender-affirming care endanger already vulnerable adolescents whose health and well-being are at risk," California's Attorney General Rob Bonta said. "Their demands that our healthcare providers discriminate against transgender individuals and deny them access to medically-necessary healthcare is cruel and irresponsible." The DoJ said last month it had issued more than 20 subpoenas to doctors and clinics providing treatment to adolescents. US Attorney General Pam Bondi said at the time that "medical professionals and organizations that mutilated children in the service of a warped ideology will be held accountable." 'A chilling effect' The lawsuit, filed in a US District Court in Massachusetts, argues that the administration's actions have no legal basis and should be declared unlawful. "These actions have created a chilling effect in which providers are pressured to scale back on their care for fear of prosecution, leaving countless individuals without the critical care they need and are entitled to under law," said Bonta. LGBTQ+ rights have become a divisive subject in the United States, where Trump rode a wave of public support for his crusade against so-called "woke ideology." In his first days in office, Trump declared the federal government would recognize only two genders – men and women – and has targeted transgender people in a slew of other orders. In February, he issued an executive order aimed at banning transgender athletes, allowing federal agencies to halt funding to any institution that does not consider birth-assigned genders in determining sex. The lawsuit groups California with New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia. It is the latest legal effort from a coalition of Democratic-run states aimed at pushing back at what liberals see as overreach by the Trump presidency.

LeMonde
15 hours ago
- LeMonde
In Brazil, Lula resists pressure from the Trump administration
Donald Trump appears willing to go to any length to defend his ally Jair Bolsonaro. On Wednesday, July 30, the US Department of the Treasury announced new sanctions against Judge Alexandre de Moraes, who is overseeing the trial for the attempted coup by the far-right president who served from 2019 to 2022. Accused by Washington of leading a "witch hunt," the judge –who was already banned from entering the United States starting on July 18 – has now had his assets frozen on US territory and is barred from conducting financial transactions with American citizens and businesses. A few hours later, Trump also signed an emergency executive order to impose 50% tariffs on goods imported from Brazil, as he had announced on July 9. Describing Brazil as posing "an unusual and extraordinary threat (...) to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States," Trump ultimately excluded 694 products from the measure, which is now set to take effect on August 6, five days later than originally planned. These new retaliatory measures, however, have not swayed the Brazilian government. On X, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva quickly defended Brazil's sovereignty and expressed his support for Judge de Moraes. "Brazil is a sovereign and democratic country that respects human rights and the independence of powers; it is unacceptable for the American government to interfere in the Brazilian judiciary," he declared on Wednesday. Earlier in the day, before the executive order was announced, the Brazilian president also urged his US counterpart, during an interview with the New York Times, not to "mix everything together": "If he wants to have a political fight, then let's treat it as a political fight. If he wants to talk trade, let's sit down and discuss trade." "These sanctions are absolutely unprecedented," said Marco Antonio Carvalho Teixeira, a political scientist at the Getulio Vargas Foundation. "There is no historical precedent for such foreign interference in Brazil, aimed at favoring a political group close to the [US] president," the researcher explained.