On February 12, 2026, the Trump administration repealed the Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 Endangerment Finding, which had established greenhouse gases as threats to public health and welfare. President Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the move at the White House, describing it as the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history. The repeal undermines the legal foundation for numerous federal climate regulations.
The repeal targets the 2009 finding, stemming from the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which classified greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. Under President Obama, the EPA determined that six such gases—carbon dioxide, methane, and four others—pose risks, leading to rules on vehicle emissions, power plant standards, methane controls in oil and gas operations, and emissions reporting from approximately 8,000 industrial sites.
The administration justifies the action by arguing that Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act does not authorize the EPA to regulate vehicle emissions for global climate change, a decision reserved for Congress. EPA models, according to the agency, indicate that eliminating all U.S. vehicle greenhouse gas emissions would have no significant effect on global climate through 2100. Administrator Zeldin labeled the finding "the Holy Grail of federal regulatory overreach," claiming it imposed trillions in economic burdens. The White House estimates savings of $1.3 trillion, including $2,400 per vehicle in reduced costs.
Critics from the scientific and environmental sectors have decried the move. A September 2025 National Academies report asserts that evidence of harm from human-caused greenhouse gases is "beyond scientific dispute." The American Geophysical Union described it as "a rejection of established science" and a "direct threat to our collective future." Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy called it "reckless," prioritizing fossil fuel interests over pollution protection. David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defense Council termed it a "kill shot" against federal climate rules, while Earthjustice's Abigail Dillen vowed immediate litigation, stating it cannot align with law, science, or intensifying disasters.
Notably, Mike Sommers, CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, supported retaining the finding for stationary sources and federal methane regulation. Legal scholar Michael Gerrard noted limited immediate effects, as many regulations were already dismantled, but viewed it as an attempt to end federal climate authority. Litigation is anticipated, potentially reaching the Supreme Court, where the 2007 majority has changed. State initiatives in California, Washington, Oregon, and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative persist under state laws.
