On Tuesday, Lee Zeldin, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), revealed that the Trump administration intends to revoke a pivotal scientific determination that forms the basis for the government's legal authority to combat climate change. In a discussion on the conservative podcast “Ruthless,” Zeldin disclosed plans to rescind the 2009 declaration, often referred to as the “endangerment finding.” This landmark determination concluded that greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming pose significant risks to public health.
The Obama and Biden administrations utilized the endangerment finding to impose stringent limits on greenhouse gas emissions from various sources, including cars, power plants, and other industrial polluters. Zeldin stated, “Repealing it will be the largest deregulatory action in the history of America,” adding that the regulations stemming from this finding have “cost Americans a lot of money.” A formal announcement of this significant policy shift is scheduled for Tuesday at a truck dealership in Indianapolis, with Indiana Governor Mike Braun expected to participate.
Without the endangerment finding, the EPA would lack the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate the emissions of greenhouse gases that result from fossil fuel combustion. This could lead to dire consequences, including rising sea levels, intensified storms, and an increase in deadly heatwaves, as well as other extreme weather events. The proposal represents President Trump’s most substantial attempt to undermine federal climate initiatives, marking a drastic shift from an administration that previously downplayed the threat of climate change to one that largely denies the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding its existence.
In recent weeks, the Trump administration has taken further actions to dismantle existing environmental regulations. This includes scrapping restrictions on pollution from power plants, halting critical measurements of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and delaying the approval of wind and solar energy projects on federal lands. Additionally, the EPA is expected to argue that emissions from cars on American roads do not significantly contribute to climate change, citing their relatively minor share of global emissions. This argument suggests that eliminating these emissions would have no meaningful impact on public health and welfare.
Many environmental advocates and legal experts have criticized the administration's stance. They highlight that transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. According to the EPA’s data, if the U.S. motor vehicle sector were classified as a country, it would rank as the fourth-largest emitter of greenhouse gases worldwide. Dena Adler, a senior attorney at the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law, remarked, “If vehicle emissions don’t pass muster as a contribution to climate change, it’s hard to imagine what would.”
Dan Becker, who leads transportation policy for the Center for Biological Diversity, described the EPA's proposal as a “cynical one-two punch.” He argued that it would lead to an increase in gasoline-burning vehicles on the road and fewer options to mitigate tailpipe pollution. Becker emphasized that the auto emissions regulations being rescinded were projected to prevent approximately 7 billion metric tons of emissions from entering the atmosphere, while also saving the average American driver around $6,000 in fuel and maintenance costs over the lifespan of vehicles built under those standards. “The EPA is revoking the biggest single step any nation has taken to save oil, save consumers money at the pump, and combat global warming,” Becker stated.
Despite widespread criticism, the administration's plan does have its supporters. Daren Bakst, director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, argued that it is unreasonable to assert that pollutants contribute to endangerment if emissions are minimal. Representatives from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a lobbying group representing most major car manufacturers, did not respond to requests for comments. However, John Bozzella, the group’s chief executive, previously stated that the Biden administration’s auto emissions rules would be “extremely challenging to achieve,” citing insufficient consumer adoption of electric vehicles.
While the Chamber of Commerce and fossil fuel groups initially opposed the endangerment finding, there has been a noticeable shift in recent years. Marty Durbin, who leads the Chamber’s energy institute, referred to the finding as “settled law” and indicated that his group is not actively seeking its repeal. As the debate continues, the implications of revoking the endangerment finding will likely shape the future of environmental policy in the United States.
