Trump EPA Declares No Harm from Climate Change in Controversial Move

Feb 27, 2026, 2:29 AM
Image for article Trump EPA Declares No Harm from Climate Change in Controversial Move

Hover over text to view sources

In a significant policy shift, the Trump administration's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed to repeal the Endangerment Finding, a key 2009 determination that concluded greenhouse gases pose a danger to public health and welfare. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin stated that the agency believes it lacks the legal authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, framing the repeal as necessary to reduce regulatory burdens and stimulate the economy.
The Endangerment Finding has served as the legal foundation for many federal actions aimed at curbing climate pollution, including regulations on vehicle emissions and power plant standards. Critics of the repeal argue that it represents a dangerous departure from established science and environmental protections that have been upheld in court.
"This decision is a betrayal of the American people and compromises public health," said California Governor Gavin Newsom, who has vowed to challenge the repeal in court. He emphasized that the decision aligns the Republican Party with polluters while ignoring overwhelming scientific evidence about climate change's impacts.
The Trump administration's rationale for repealing the Endangerment Finding is based on claims that previous regulations imposed excessive costs on American families and businesses. Zeldin described the repeal as a move to "drive down the cost of living" and to "unleash American energy," arguing that the existing regulations have stifled economic growth.
However, environmental advocates are concerned that removing the Endangerment Finding will lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions, exacerbating health problems such as asthma and other respiratory issues. According to a report from the Environmental Defense Fund, the repeal could result in millions of additional asthma attacks and thousands of premature deaths by 2055.
The proposal to eliminate the Endangerment Finding comes amid a broader deregulatory agenda by the Trump administration that aims to roll back many environmental protections put in place during the Obama administration. On what Zeldin called the "greatest day of deregulation in US history," the EPA announced 31 actions intended to dismantle prior climate regulations.
This proposal has already drawn legal challenges. Environmental groups and state officials have expressed their determination to fight the repeal, highlighting the potential health risks associated with increased air pollution and climate change. Past court rulings, including the landmark Massachusetts v. EPA case, established that the EPA has a duty to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, a principle that critics argue the Trump administration is currently attempting to ignore.
The implications of this repeal are far-reaching, potentially affecting various sectors dependent on regulatory frameworks to limit pollution. The transportation sector, which is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the US, would be particularly impacted by the elimination of vehicle emissions standards tied to the Endangerment Finding.
As the public comment period for this proposal continues, environmental advocates are mobilizing to voice their opposition, emphasizing the need for robust climate action in the face of ongoing environmental challenges. The outcome of this proposal could set critical precedents for future climate policy and public health protections.
In summary, the Trump administration's proposal to repeal the Endangerment Finding has sparked significant backlash from health and environmental advocates who warn of the potential consequences for public health and climate stability. As the debate unfolds, the future of US climate policy hangs in the balance.

Related articles

Local Climate Initiatives Highlight Need for Federal Action

While local governments, like the Board of Island County Commissioners, are implementing comprehensive climate strategies, experts emphasize that substantial climate change solutions require federal involvement. The disconnect between local initiatives and national policies raises concerns about the effectiveness of local efforts in the face of broader federal challenges.

Supreme Court to Hear Oil and Gas Companies' Appeal on Climate Lawsuits

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case from oil and gas companies seeking to block climate change lawsuits that hold them accountable for environmental damages. This case from Boulder, Colorado, could set significant precedents for similar legal actions nationwide.

Supreme Court to Review Boulder Climate Change Lawsuit Against Big Oil

The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear a pivotal climate lawsuit initiated by Boulder, Colorado, against ExxonMobil and Suncor. The case could set a significant precedent regarding whether local governments can hold fossil fuel companies accountable for climate-related damages.

Political Polarization Contributes to Rising CO2 Emissions

Recent research indicates that political polarization in democracies is linked to increased CO2 emissions from power plants. As partisan hostility rises, the effectiveness of climate policies diminishes, complicating efforts to combat climate change.

Trump Administration's Deregulation: A Major Blow to Climate Action

The Trump administration has revoked a critical scientific finding that supported federal regulations on greenhouse gas emissions, significantly undermining the government's ability to combat climate change. This action is expected to increase pollution levels and endanger public health, sparking legal challenges from environmental leaders.