States Sue EPA Over Repeal of Greenhouse Gas ‘Endangerment’ Finding

WASHINGTON (AP) — A coalition of 24 states, along with numerous cities and counties, has filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) challenging the agency’s recent repeal of the 2009 “endangerment finding.” This finding, established during the Obama administration, determined that greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to public health and welfare, and it served as the foundation for U.S. Climate regulations.

What is the ‘Endangerment Finding’?

The 2009 endangerment finding was a crucial determination by the EPA that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases contribute to air pollution that endangers public health and welfare. It was the legal basis for regulations on motor vehicles, power plants, and other sources of pollution under the Clean Air Act.

Why is the Repeal Being Challenged?

The lawsuit argues that the EPA’s decision to revoke the endangerment finding is unlawful and abandons the federal government’s responsibility to address climate change. Plaintiffs contend the repeal eliminates greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and trucks and could lead to the dismantling of broader climate regulations affecting power plants and other facilities.

Who is Involved in the Lawsuit?

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, is led by the attorneys general of New York, Massachusetts, California, and Connecticut. Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford also joined the legal challenge. In total, 24 states, 10 cities, and five counties are participating in the suit. Cities involved include Albuquerque, Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

Legal Background

The EPA’s original endangerment finding followed a 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, which affirmed the agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Courts have consistently upheld the endangerment finding in subsequent legal challenges.

EPA’s Response

EPA spokesperson Brigit Hirsch stated that the lawsuit is “not about the law or the merits of any argument” and that the plaintiffs are “clearly motivated by politics.” The EPA maintains it “carefully considered and reevaluated the legal foundation” of the 2009 finding.

What’s Next?

The case is likely to be appealed and could ultimately return to the Supreme Court.