Legal uncertainty and chaos in industry: Trump wants to repeal a key climate regulation

Donald Trump’s administration has announced plans to repeal a key legal document that states greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health. The government says the move will reduce costs for industry. Legal experts and industry representatives, however, warn that repealing the so-called “Endangerment Finding” will bring chaos, uncertainty and new legal disputes, Reuters reports.

Since returning to the presidency in January this year, Donald Trump has changed course on climate policy, withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement once again and cancelled all related financial commitments. Other steps taken by his administration include suspending programs to monitor methane leaks and ending government support for electric vehicles.

The president is now also planning to repeal the so-called “Endangerment Finding” — a legal determination issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in December 2009 which, based on scientific evidence, concludes that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and welfare. The document has so far served as the cornerstone of federal emissions regulation in the US.

Repealing it would have far-reaching consequences, removing a key legal framework that enables the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, which the scientific community considers the main cause of climate change and related health problems such as respiratory illnesses.

Greenhouse gases as pollutants

The current legal basis for regulation stems from a 2007 US Supreme Court ruling that classified greenhouse gases as “pollutants” and gave the EPA authority to regulate them under the Clean Air Act. Critics argue, however, that the law was originally intended to address local air pollution, not global emissions with climate impacts.

If the Trump administration’s proposal goes through, it would automatically weaken emissions standards for passenger cars and trucks.

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lee Zeldin, says the proposal will simplify rules for automakers, power plants and other businesses struggling with stringent emissions limits, and reduce their costs by an estimated up to 52 billion dollars. Experts and industry representatives, however, warn that the situation is not so simple. Many companies have already invested heavily in reducing emissions, both in response to legislation and due to pressure from investors. A sudden easing of regulations therefore threatens the stability of the legal framework and disrupts companies’ long-term planning.

Industry response is cautious

Meghan Greenfield, a lawyer who represents clients in the automotive sector, warns that a stable regulatory environment is crucial for industry. If the federal framework is repealed, individual states could introduce their own, inconsistent rules. Lawyer Zach Pilchen agrees, saying businesses would face a fragmented regulatory landscape.

The announced changes also affect specific technical requirements. According to sources in the automotive industry, the EPA plans to repeal not only exhaust emissions limits but also air-conditioning efficiency testing and battery lifespan monitoring. This comes at a time when electric vehicle sales are growing and manufacturers are investing in battery production and clean technologies. According to the Environmental Defense Fund, since 2015 companies have announced nearly 200 billion dollars in investments in US electric vehicle and battery manufacturing.

Albert Gore, a representative of the Zero Emission Transportation Association, warns that regulatory instability could put markets, consumers and manufacturers’ business decisions at risk.

Industry responses have so far been cautious. Organizations such as the Edison Electric Institute and the US Chamber of Commerce said they would study the proposal first. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised that repealing the EPA’s federal authority to regulate emissions could, they say, fundamentally undermine legal predictability and a unified approach.

While some groups, including representatives of the oil and transport sectors, welcome the proposal, much of industry fears that this step backwards will bring not relief but new complications.

Energy experts warn that the EPA proposal could slow the development of clean energy sources, including nuclear power, whose support is based on its producing no carbon emissions. If carbon is no longer seen as a threat, this could weaken the political motivation to invest in nuclear power.

The proposal is now awaiting public comment and interagency review, with legal challenges from environmental groups expected.