Trump Administration Dismantles Federal Climate Regulations

On February 12, 2026, the Trump administration officially repealed the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2009 Endangerment Finding, which had determined that greenhouse gases are a threat to public health and welfare. The cost to future generations is incalculable, as a variety of rules that prevent global warming are now at risk.

President Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the decision at the White House, calling it “the single largest deregulatory action in American history.” This repeal removes the main legal basis the federal government has used for 16 years to regulate carbon dioxide, methane, and four other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. Separate endangerment findings related to power plants and aircraft will be addressed in distinct rulemakings.

The Endangerment Finding came from the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which held that greenhouse gases are air pollutants under the Clean Air Act and directed the EPA to determine whether they harm public health. In 2009, the EPA, under President Obama, found that six greenhouse gases pose a threat. This led to regulations on vehicle emissions, power plant carbon standards, methane controls for oil and gas, and required emissions reporting from about 8,000 industrial sites.

The Trump Administration’s Justification

The EPA’s final rule is based on two main points.

First, the agency argues that Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act does not give the EPA the authority to set motor vehicle emission standards to address global climate change. They believe only Congress can make such a big policy decision.

Second, the EPA under Trump and contradicting previous findings, says its own models show that even if all U.S. vehicle greenhouse gas emissions were eliminated, it would have “no material impact on global climate indicators through 2100,” so further regulation is not needed. Administrator Zeldin called the Finding “the Holy Grail of federal regulatory overreach” that “led to trillions of dollars in regulations that strangled entire sectors of the United States economy.”

The White House claims the repeal will save Americans $1.3 trillion, mostly by lowering vehicle costs by about $2,400 per car, SUV, or light truck. However, many critics point out that the Administration is ignoring proven benefits, from cleaner air that leads to fewer deaths from pollution to lower maintenance costs for EVs that more than offset the promised savings.

Widespread Criticism Meets The Ruling

The scientific community and environmental law organizations have responded with uniform condemnation and immediate litigation plans. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine stated in a September 2025 report that “the evidence for current and future harm to human health and welfare created by human-caused greenhouse gases is beyond scientific dispute.” The American Geophysical Union called the repeal “a rejection of established science, a denial of the struggles we are facing today, and a direct threat to our collective future.”

Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy called the action “reckless,” noting that EPA would “rather spend its time in court working for the fossil fuel industry than protecting us from pollution.” David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defense Council characterized the repeal as a “kill shot” designed to invalidate virtually all federal climate regulations and prevent future administrations from reinstating them. Earthjustice president Abigail Dillen promised an immediate legal challenge, saying “there is no way to reconcile EPA’s decision with the law, the science, and the reality of disasters that are hitting us harder every year.”

Even the fossil fuel industry disagrees with the repeal. Mike Sommers, CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, said that the organization supports keeping the Endangerment Finding for stationary sources and wants to continue federal methane regulation. This shows the repeal goes further than what some industry allies wanted. Michael Gerrard, who leads the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia, said the immediate impact may be limited because the Trump administration has already removed most greenhouse gas regulations. Still, he said the repeal “attempts to be the nail in the coffin” of federal climate authority.

Legal experts widely expect the repeal to face years of litigation and potentially return to the Supreme Court, where the five justices who formed the 2007 majority have all since died or retired. Meanwhile, state-level climate programs in California, Washington, Oregon, and participating states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative remain intact, as they derive their authority from state law rather than the federal Endangerment Finding.

Federal Programs and Regulations Now At Risk

A wide swath of environmental protection regulation is based on the Endangerment Finding. The following programs and regulations were authorized, either directly or indirectly, by the 2009 Endangerment Finding. Now that the finding has been revoked, each could be eliminated or lose its legal basis. Below is a sampling of the rules, regulations, and programs that can now be revoked by the Trump Administration.

Programs marked [indirect] have their own legal authority but depend on the Endangerment Finding’s science, data, or regulatory structure.

Note: Projected emissions reductions listed above overlap in both timeline and sector coverage and cannot be simply summed. Actual emissions impacts depend on market conditions, technology adoption, litigation outcomes, and state-level policies that continue independent of the federal Endangerment Finding. Several of these programs, including the power plant carbon standards and the Phase 3 heavy-duty vehicle standards, were stayed or never fully implemented due to litigation before the repeal.