Recently, several websites that track pollution and climate impacts in low-income communities were taken down by the Trump administration. This removal stripped away vital resources for understanding environmental risks that affect many Americans.
In response, environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and Public Citizen, have filed a lawsuit seeking to reinstate these critical websites. Zach Shelley, a lawyer with Public Citizen Litigation Group, emphasized that such tools provide essential facts that help both policymakers and communities understand the environmental challenges they face. He noted, “Without this information, it’s harder for people to engage with their government.”
The lawsuit specifically addresses two key resources: the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) and EJScreen, an interactive mapping tool. Both were designed to help users track climate-related risks and pollution data. CEJST aims to direct federal investments toward underserved communities, part of a broader initiative called Justice40. EJScreen, launched in 2015, allows users to access and compare data on local pollution and demographics.
Kameron Kerger, who helped develop the CEJST tool, shared that these resources were invaluable for various stakeholders, from researchers to community activists. They enabled individuals to back their claims with official data, thereby strengthening community advocacy efforts. “Community members were using these tools to advocate for themselves. The data validated their lived experiences,” Kerger explained.
The lawsuit also highlights tools from other agencies, such as the Department of Energy’s Low-Income Energy Affordability Data (LEAD) Tool and the FEMA Future Risk Index. These tools play a significant role in assessing environmental burdens, particularly on low-income and marginalized populations. Darya Minovi from the Union of Concerned Scientists remarked, “Removing these tools is devastating. The public has a right to this information.”
After the websites were taken down in early 2023, some groups attempted to restore the data on new platforms. However, Minovi pointed out that these independent efforts lack regular updates, making them less reliable than the original government-maintained resources. “It shouldn’t fall on nonprofits to do the government’s job,” she added.
The effects of these removals could be long-lasting. Kerger warns that vital data will stop before crucial changes to climate policy can be assessed. “We need ongoing data to understand the impact of initiatives like Justice40,” he stated.
As the lawsuit unfolds, it raises questions about access to information that impacts vulnerable communities. The administrations cannot ignore the necessity for transparency in environmental data. A spokesperson for the EPA stated that they do not comment on ongoing litigation. Other agencies involved have not responded to inquiries.
The outcome of this case could influence how environmental data is shared and utilized moving forward, particularly for those advocacy groups fighting for their communities. As the conversation around climate justice continues, the reinstatement of these tools could empower communities to become more engaged in the decision-making processes that affect their health and environment.
For those interested in more on this topic, the EPA’s EJScreen provides a blended approach to understanding environmental justice issues across the country.
Check out this related article: Join the Conversation: NPDC Invites Your Feedback on Climate Change Impact Management Plans
Source link