A coalition of health and environmental groups has taken a stand against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They filed a lawsuit challenging the EPA’s recent move to revoke the 2009 “endangerment finding,” a key aspect of regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
Katie Nekola, the general counsel for Clean Wisconsin and one of the plaintiffs, criticized this decision as harmful. She stated, “The EPA is neglecting its responsibility to protect our health from greenhouse gas emissions while catering to big oil, gas, and coal interests.”
Support for this lawsuit extends beyond these groups. Governors and attorneys general from Democratic-led states are also preparing to take legal action. At the same time, mayors across the country are urging the EPA to reconsider, emphasizing the urgent need for strong climate policies.
The debate over the endangerment finding has ignited significant public interest. Last summer, local leaders across the political spectrum weighed in, leading to over 300,000 comments from stakeholders. While a group of Republican-led attorneys general argued that the finding was weak scientifically, others warned that its repeal would worsen environmental and health issues many states face.
Notably, over 50 U.S. cities voiced concerns, asserting that removing these science-based standards would jeopardize public health. Climate Mayors Executive Director Kate Wright noted the clear message from cities: rescinding these standards puts communities at risk.
The EPA’s recent announcement to rescind the finding is set to go into effect by April 20. The coalition of environmental organizations, which includes the American Public Health Association and the Environmental Defense Fund, is urging the D.C. Circuit to review this decision. According to the EDF, the EPA is legally obliged to regulate pollutants that threaten public health based on a 2007 Supreme Court ruling. This ruling established that the agency must evaluate scientific evidence to determine if greenhouse gas emissions endanger human welfare, a decision it previously made in favor of regulation in 2009.
Environmental advocacy groups argue that the EPA is rehashing legal arguments that were already dismissed by the Supreme Court. The U.S. Climate Alliance, a coalition of governors committed to climate action, described the rescission as unlawful, vowing to protect citizens from pollution. California Attorney General Rob Bonta has announced plans to challenge the EPA in court, asserting that this move violates established law.
In all, this lawsuit reveals a deep divide in U.S. climate policy and highlights rising tensions between federal regulations and local governance in the fight against climate change. Public sentiment is increasingly emphasizing the need for strong action on climate issues, reflecting a broader social media trend where users express concern over environmental risks and demand accountability from their leaders. For more in-depth context and analysis, you can refer to the Environmental Defense Fund.
