In a move that sends shivers down the spine of environmental advocates and public health experts alike, the Trump administration has initiated steps to repeal a foundational scientific finding by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – the “endangerment finding.” This critical declaration, established in 2009, unequivocally states that greenhouse gases pose a grave threat to human health and welfare. Its potential repeal is not merely a bureaucratic adjustment; it represents a direct assault on the legal bedrock of climate action in the United States and is poised to ignite fierce legal challenges.

The “Endangerment Finding”: A Pillar of Climate Regulation

To understand the profound implications of this proposed repeal, it’s essential to grasp the significance of the endangerment finding. Born from a landmark 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, which affirmed the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act, the finding served as the scientific and legal justification for a wide array of climate regulations.

Specifically, the 2009 finding concluded that six key well-mixed greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide (CO2​), methane (CH4​), nitrous oxide (N2​O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6​) – in the atmosphere endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations. This scientific determination provided the necessary legal authority for the EPA to implement standards for emissions from motor vehicles, power plants, and the oil and gas industry. These regulations have been instrumental in driving down pollution, fostering innovation in cleaner technologies, and, crucially, safeguarding public health from the escalating impacts of a warming planet.

For years, this finding has been considered the “holy grail” of climate regulation, the indispensable legal tool that empowers the federal government to address the climate crisis. Its existence has underpinned efforts to reduce smog, improve air quality, and mitigate the health risks associated with climate change, from respiratory illnesses exacerbated by pollution to heat-related fatalities and the spread of vector-borne diseases.

The Administration’s Rationale and the Reality of Climate Impacts

The Trump administration, through EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, argues that the 2009 finding was established in a “flawed and unorthodox way” and that the EPA overstepped its legal authority. They contend that these regulations have imposed “trillions of dollars of costs on Americans” and stifle economic growth. The administration aims to “unleash American energy” and reduce what it perceives as burdensome regulations.

However, this narrative starkly contrasts with the overwhelming scientific consensus and the lived experiences of millions. Since the 2009 finding, the impacts of climate change have become increasingly evident and severe. The United States has witnessed a dramatic increase in extreme weather events, including more frequent and intense heatwaves, devastating wildfires, prolonged droughts, and catastrophic floods. These events not only cause billions of dollars in damages but also take a profound toll on human lives, infrastructure, and public health systems.

Experts from various fields, including former EPA leaders, have vehemently criticized the proposed repeal, asserting that it ignores irrefutable scientific evidence and abandons the agency’s core mission to protect human health and the environment. They warn that dismantling these protections would expose communities to greater risks, particularly those already disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and climate vulnerabilities.

Fierce Legal Challenges on the Horizon

The path to repealing the endangerment finding is fraught with significant legal hurdles and is expected to face fierce opposition in the courts. Environmental groups, legal experts, and state attorneys general are preparing for a protracted legal battle. Here’s why the administration faces an uphill climb:

1. Supreme Court Precedent: The 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA decision explicitly affirmed the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases. Any attempt to revoke the endangerment finding would directly challenge this precedent. The Supreme Court has also declined to hear challenges to the endangerment finding as recently as December 2023, further solidifying its legal standing.
2. Administrative Procedure Act (APA): Agencies seeking to repeal a rule must follow strict procedural requirements under the APA. This includes demonstrating a reasoned basis for the change, which typically involves showing that the underlying facts have changed or providing a compelling justification for why the prior reasoning was flawed. Given the escalating evidence of climate change impacts, demonstrating a change in facts that would justify repealing the finding will be incredibly difficult.
3. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA): The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act included language that labels greenhouse gases as pollutants under the Clean Air Act, further complicating any attempt to abandon the finding. This legislative action reinforces the legal basis for regulating these emissions.
4. Reliance Interests: The endangerment finding has been in place for over 15 years, during which time industries, states, and businesses have made significant investments and strategic decisions based on its existence. Utilities have retooled power plants, and auto manufacturers have invested in electric and hybrid vehicles. Courts often consider these “reliance interests” when evaluating rule changes, and the administration would need to demonstrate that the benefits of repeal outweigh the disruption to these established interests.
5. Potential for State-Level Action: If the federal government steps back from regulating greenhouse gases, it could create a patchwork of state-level regulations. While some states might be empowered to enact more stringent rules, this fragmentation could also lead to regulatory uncertainty and inconsistencies for businesses operating across state lines.

The Broader Implications for Public Health and Welfare

The repeal of the endangerment finding would have far-reaching consequences for public health and welfare. Without this crucial legal underpinning, the EPA’s ability to limit emissions from major sources of climate pollution would be severely curtailed. This could lead to:

• Worsening Air Quality: Increased emissions of greenhouse gases often correlate with other harmful air pollutants, exacerbating respiratory illnesses, heart disease, and other health conditions.
• Increased Extreme Weather Impacts: A weakened regulatory framework would likely accelerate climate change, leading to more frequent and intense heatwaves, floods, droughts, and wildfires, all of which pose direct threats to human life and well-being.
• Economic Instability: Beyond the direct costs of climate disasters, regulatory instability can deter investment in clean energy and create uncertainty for businesses, potentially leading to higher insurance rates and disruptions to supply chains.
• Erosion of Scientific Integrity: The attempt to dismiss established scientific consensus for political or economic reasons undermines the role of science in public policy and could set a dangerous precedent for future environmental protections.

Sustainable Action Now: Our Call to Action

At Sustainable Action Now, we believe that protecting our planet and the health of its inhabitants is not a political issue, but a fundamental responsibility. The proposed repeal of the endangerment finding is a stark reminder of the ongoing battle for climate action. We must stand united against efforts to dismantle critical environmental safeguards.

It is imperative that we raise our voices during the public comment period for this proposed rule. We must communicate the undeniable scientific evidence and the real-world impacts of climate change on our communities, our health, and our future. Furthermore, we must support organizations and legal efforts that are committed to defending this vital finding in court.

For more information on the critical issues surrounding climate policy and how you can get involved, please visit our climate section: https://sustainableactionnow.org/category/climate/. The fight for a sustainable future is ongoing, and every action, every voice, makes a difference. Let us ensure that the “endangerment finding” remains a cornerstone of our nation’s commitment to a healthier, safer planet for all.