As it has said for months it would do, the Environmental Protection Agency Tuesday began the process of overturning its key tool for fighting climate change.

Known by its shorthand — the endangerment finding — it refers to a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling under which the EPA began regulating greenhouse gas emissions in addition to the standard pollutants it had been regulating under the Clean Air Act since 1970. The finding said that the EPA had to regulate any air pollutant found to endanger “public health or welfare.”

The announcement, made by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin at an event in Indiana, disputes how the EPA administered some of the original court decision.

Repealing the endangerment finding “will be the largest deregulatory action in the history of America,” Zeldin said on the Ruthless podcast ahead of the official announcement.

“There are people who, in the name of climate change, are willing to bankrupt the country,” Zeldin said. “They created this endangerment finding and then they are able to put all these regulations on vehicles, on airplanes, on stationary sources, to basically regulate out of existence, in many cases, a lot of segments of our economy. And it cost Americans a lot of money.”

The EPA proposal must go though a lengthy review process, including public comment, before it is finalized, likely next year. Environmental groups are likely to challenge the rule change in court.

Zeldin called for a rewrite of the endangerment finding in March as part of a series of environmental rollbacks announced at the same time in what he said was “the greatest day of deregulation in American history.” A total of 31 key environmental rules on topics from clean air to clean water and climate change would be rolled back or repealed under Zeldin’s plan.

He singled out the endangerment finding as “the Holy Grail of the climate change religion” and said he was thrilled to end it “as the EPA does its part to usher in the Golden Age of American success.”

While the EPA’s decision does not alter Connecticut’s own efforts to slash greenhouse gas emissions, it is likely to make it harder for the state to meet its goals.

Exhaust from cars and trucks makes up by far the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Connecticut, according to the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, followed by emissions from residential and commercial buildings.

“Rolling back these protections puts our communities — especially our children, seniors, and vulnerable populations — at greater risk from the harmful effects of greenhouse gas pollution,” said Gov. Ned Lamont. “Connecticut has a proud, bipartisan history of standing up for environmental safeguards, and we won’t sit by while decades of progress are dismantled.”

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, who has filed for Connecticut to join a number of lawsuits against other Trump measures and cutbacks, similarly argued state officials would not let “Trump and Zeldin do this without a fight.”

Tailpipe emission limits also targeted

The EPA also rescinds limits on tailpipe emissions that were designed to encourage automakers to build and sell more electric vehicles. The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.

Environmental groups said Zeldin’s action denies reality as weather disasters exacerbated by climate change continue in the U.S. and around the world.

“As Americans reel from deadly floods and heat waves, the Trump administration is trying to argue that the emissions turbocharging these disasters are not a threat,” said Christy Goldfuss, executive director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. “It boggles the mind and endangers the nation’s safety and welfare.”

Under Zeldin and Trump, “the EPA wants to shirk its responsibility to protect us from climate pollution, but science and the law say otherwise,” she added. “If EPA finalizes this illegal and cynical approach, we will see them in court.”

Gina McCarthy, who led Connecticut’s environment department and then served as the air bureau chief and EPA administrator for President Barack Obama as well as a national climate advisor to President Joe Biden, said in a statement: “Trump’s EPA is trying every trick in the book to deny and avoid their mission to protect people and the environment from the ravages of unchecked climate pollution. Instead of doing their job, this EPA is putting the safety of our loved ones at risk while ratcheting up grid instability, energy bills, and disaster costs.”

McCarthy is now managing co-chair of the climate activist group America Is All In.

The New England based Conservation Law Foundation, which specializes in legal action on behalf of environmental issues, also issued a statement.

“President Trump is once again siding with Big Oil and Gas over our health,” said Kate Sinding Daly, the group’s senior vice president for law and policy. “It’s a scientific fact: fossil fuel pollution is deadly. But President Trump is trying to erase that truth. His administration is attacking the EPA’s legal backbone that that gives the agency power to regulate climate-warming emissions and the danger they pose. Gutting it would strip away vital protections, lead to dirtier air, and cost lives.”

Motor vehicle pollution is known to worsen asthma and many other health, lung and heart problems. It tends to disproportionately impact at-risk communities already suffering from higher pollution and the effects of the more intense storms caused by climate change.

“Let’s be clear: this isn’t just wrong — it’s an attack on public health, basic science, and families who just want clean air and a livable future. And all to let polluters keep profiting while the rest of us choke on the consequences,” Sinding Daly said.

Three former EPA leaders have also criticized Zeldin, saying his March announcement targeting the endangerment finding and other rules imperiled the lives of millions of Americans and abandoned the agency’s dual mission to protect the environment and human health.

“If there’s an endangerment finding to be found anywhere, it should be found on this administration because what they’re doing is so contrary to what the Environmental Protection Agency is about,” Christine Todd Whitman, who led EPA under Republican President George W. Bush, said after Zeldin’s plan was made public.

The EPA proposal follows an executive order from Trump that directed the agency to submit a report “on the legality and continuing applicability” of the endangerment finding, which came directly from Project 2025, released during the 2024 presidential campaign.

Conservatives and some congressional Republicans hailed the initial plan, calling it a way to undo economically damaging rules to regulate greenhouse gases.

But environmental groups, legal experts and Democrats said any attempt to repeal or roll back the endangerment finding would be an uphill task with slim chance of success. The finding came two years after a 2007 Supreme Court ruling holding that the EPA has authority to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

Dan Esty, who is the Hillhouse professor at Yale serving in both Yale Law School and the School of the Environment, said through the regulation provided by the endangerment finding, the U.S was moving towards a clean energy future and greenhouse gas emissions were going down.

“This disrupts that process, and it puts the United States at odds with virtually every other country in the world,” said Esty, who was Connecticut’s first commissioner of the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, serving from 2011 to 2014.

He also noted that the EPA action is in sharp contrast to the International Court of Justice opinion last week, which declared that any number of elements of this regulatory package could be seen as in violation of international law and subject the United States and potentially entities operating within it to legal consequences around the world.

Esty’s legal assessment is that the administration will face significant difficulty proving that the evidence does not suggest that there’s a problem that needs to be addressed on the Clean Air Act. He said the tactic seems to be to shift from focusing on the science to focusing on the cost. But he called the trillion dollar price tag floated by Zeldin “a fictional number picked out of the air and has no bearing to the reality on the ground.”

“They face substantial challenges in meeting the basic test under the Administrative Procedure Act, which is where the litigation will go. And that is, are they acting in a manner that is arbitrary and capricious?” he said. “They have to demonstrate with substantial evidence that the direction they want to go is justified. And I do not think they will be able to meet that legal test.”

Charles Rothenberger is an attorney and director of Connecticut government relations at Save the Sound. He said the endangerment finding is a scientific finding, not a policy determination. “You can’t just willy nilly reverse yourself as an agency and say, ‘well, what we believed yesterday, we don’t believe today.’ There has to be substantial evidence to support that, and a clear and compelling reason to do that. So what the administration is bringing to the table, really is a policy preference,” he said.

Passing court muster could be an issue

David Doniger, a climate expert at the NRDC, accused Trump’s Republican administration of using potential repeal of the endangerment finding as a “kill shot” that would allow him to make all climate regulations invalid. If finalized, repeal of the endangerment finding would erase current limits on greenhouse gas pollution from cars, factories, power plants and other sources and could prevent future administrations from proposing rules to tackle climate change.

“The Endangerment Finding is the legal foundation that underpins vital protections for millions of people from the severe threats of climate change, and the Clean Car and Truck Standards are among the most important and effective protections to address the largest U.S. source of climate-causing pollution,” said Peter Zalzal, associate vice president of the Environmental Defense Fund.

“Attacking these safeguards is manifestly inconsistent with EPA’s responsibility to protect Americans’ health and well-being,” he said. “It is callous, dangerous and a breach of our government’s responsibility to protect the American people from this devastating pollution.”

Conrad Schneider, a senior director at the Clean Air Task Force, said the Trump administration “is using pollution regulations as a scapegoat in its flawed approach to energy affordability” and reliability.

He and other advocates “are dismayed that an administration that claims it cares about cleaner, healthier and safer air is seeking to dismantle the very protections that are required for those conditions,” Schneider said.

“This decision is both legally indefensible and morally bankrupt,” said Joseph Goffman, former assistant administrator of EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation. “The Supreme Court made clear that EPA cannot ignore science or evade its responsibilities under the Clean Air Act. By walking away from the endangerment finding, EPA has not only broken with precedent; it has broken with reality.”

CT Mirror reporter John Moritz contributed to this story.

EPA Releases Proposal to Rescind Obama-Era Endangerment Finding, Regulations that Paved the Way for Electric Vehicle Mandates

If finalized, this proposal would undo the underpinning of $1 trillion in costly regulations, save more than $54 billion annually

July 29, 2025

Contact Information EPA Press Office ( press@epa.gov

INDIANAPOLIS – At an auto dealership in Indiana, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin released the agency’s proposal to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding, which has been used to justify over $1 trillion in regulations, including the Biden-Harris Administration’s electric vehicle (EV) mandate. If finalized, the proposal would repeal all resulting greenhouse gas emissions regulations for motor vehicles and engines, thereby reinstating consumer choice and giving Americans the ability to purchase a safe and affordable car for their family while decreasing the cost of living on all products that trucks deliver. Administrator Zeldin was joined by U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, Indiana Governor Mike Braun, Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, U.S. Representative Jim Baird (R-IN-04), Indiana Secretary of Energy and Natural Resources Suzanne Jaworowski, and the Indiana Motor Truck Association.

Since the 2009 Endangerment Finding was issued, many have stated that the American people and auto manufacturing have suffered from significant uncertainties and massive costs related to general regulations of greenhouse gases from vehicles and trucks. Finally, EPA is proposing to provide much needed certainty and regulatory relief, so companies can plan appropriately, and the American people can have affordable choices when deciding to buy a car.

“With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end sixteen years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,” said EPA Administrator Zeldin. “In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year. We heard loud and clear the concern that EPA’s GHG emissions standards themselves, not carbon dioxide which the Finding never assessed independently, was the real threat to Americans’ livelihoods. If finalized, rescinding the Endangerment Finding and resulting regulations would end $1 trillion or more in hidden taxes on American businesses and families.”

“Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, America is returning to free and open dialogue around climate and energy policy – driving the focus back to following the data,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. “Today’s announcement is a monumental step toward returning to commonsense policies that expand access to affordable, reliable, secure energy and improve quality of life for all Americans.”

“The Obama-Biden EPA used regulations as a political tool and hurt American competitiveness without results to show for it. Today’s announcement is a win for consumer choice, common sense, and American energy independence. President Trump, Secretary Wright, and Administrator Zeldin are returning the EPA to its proper role, and I’m proud they chose Indiana as the place to make this announcement because our state is proof we can protect our environment and support American jobs,” said Governor Mike Braun.

“Thanks to the outstanding work of President Trump, Administrator Zeldin, and Secretary Wright, the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy are ending costly, sweeping vehicle emissions standards and ending the authoritarian EV mandates. Once again, this administration is standing up for common sense and our great American automakers and consumers. I thank Administrator Zeldin and Secretary Wright for their historic action to unleash American innovation, implement sound energy policies, and lower costs for American families,” said Congressman Jim Baird (IN-04).

“The Endangerment Finding has long been a Democrat tool to issue burdensome regulations that ignore commonsense science in pursuit of radical Green New Deal aligned agendas. I applaud Secretary Wright, Director Zeldin and the entire Trump Administration for making sure we cut the red tape that is unnecessarily impeding American business, while also preserving our nation’s precious natural resources,” said Congressman Mark Messmer (IN-08).

“Over the last four years, conservative state attorneys general were the last line of defense in fighting back against the Biden administration’s federal overreach and green new scam agenda,” said Attorney General Todd Rokita. “However, thanks to President Trump and patriots like Administrator Zeldin and Secretary Wright, we are now on the front lines helping to unleash American energy.”

“We commend President Trump and EPA Administrator Zeldin for taking decisive action to rescind the disastrous GHG Phase 3 rule. This electric-truck mandate put the trucking industry on a path to economic ruin and would have crippled our supply chain, disrupted deliveries, and raised prices for American families and businesses. Moreover, it kicked innovation to the curb by discarding available technologies that can further drive down emissions at a fraction of the cost. For four decades, our industry has proven that we are committed to reducing emissions. The trucking industry supports cleaner, more efficient technologies, but we need policies rooted in real-world conditions. We thank the Trump Administration for returning us to a path of common sense, so that we can keep delivering for the American people as we continue to reduce our environmental impact,” said American Trucking Association President and CEO Chris Spear.

The Endangerment Finding is the legal prerequisite used by the Obama and Biden Administrations to regulate emissions from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines. Absent this finding, EPA would lack statutory authority under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to prescribe standards for greenhouse gas emissions. This proposal, if finalized, is expected to save Americans $54 billion in costs annually through the repeal of all greenhouse gas standards, including the Biden EPA’s electric vehicle mandate, under conservative economic forecasts.

If finalized, this proposal would remove all greenhouse gas standards for light-, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engines, starting with EPA’s first greenhouse gas set in 2010 for light-duty vehicles and those set in 2011 for medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty vehicles and engines—which includes off-cycle credits like the much hated start-stop feature on most new cars.

EPA’s proposal also cites updated scientific data that challenge the assumptions behind the 2009 Endangerment Finding. Cited data includes the updated studies and information in the Department of Energy’s 2025 Climate Work Group study that is concurrently being released for public comment.

EPA will initiate a public comment period to solicit input. Further information on the public comment process and instructions for participation will be published in the Federal Register and on the EPA website.

How We Got Here

Congress tasked EPA under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act with prescribing emission standards for new motor vehicles and engines when the Administrator determines that emissions of an air pollutant from any class of vehicles causes or contributes to air pollution that endangers public health or welfare. But the Obama Administration ignored Congress’ clear intent, slicing and dicing the language of the statute to make an “endangerment finding” totally separate from any actual rule setting standards for emissions from cars.

In an unprecedented move, the Obama EPA found that carbon dioxide emissions emitted from automobiles – in combination with five other gases, some of which vehicles don’t even emit – contributes some unspecified amount to climate change, which in turn creates some unspecified amount of endangerment to human health and welfare. These mental leaps were admittedly novel, but they were the only way the Obama-Biden Administration could access EPA’s authority to regulate under Section 202(a).

Likewise, the Obama EPA did not consider any aspect of the regulations that would flow from the Endangerment Finding. EPA subsequently relied on the Endangerment Finding to underpin seven vehicle regulations with an aggregate cost of more than $1 trillion. The Endangerment Finding has also played a significant role in EPA’s justification of regulations of other sources beyond cars and trucks, resulting in additional costly burdens on American families and businesses.

Much has changed since the 2009 Endangerment Finding was issued, including new scientific and technological developments that warrant review. Additionally, major Supreme Court decisions in the intervening years, including Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, West Virginia v. EPA, Michigan v. EPA, and Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, have significantly clarified the scope of EPA’s authority under the CAA. The decisions emphasized that major policy determinations must be made by Congress, not by administrative agencies.

Background

On the greatest and most consequential day of deregulation in the history of the United States in March 2025, Administrator Zeldin announced that the agency was kicking off a formal reconsideration of the 2009 Endangerment Finding in collaboration with the Office of Management and Budget and other relevant agencies in addition to reconsidering all of its prior regulations and actions that rely on the Endangerment Finding. Please visit the Endangerment Finding Reconsideration website to learn more.

Administrator Zeldin also announced the agency would reconsider the Model Year 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles regulation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles. Please visit the Termination of the EV Mandate website to learn more.

These were announced in conjunction with a number of historic actions to advance President Trump’s Day One executive orders and Power the Great American Comeback. While accomplishing EPA’s core mission of protecting the environment, the agency is committed to fulfilling President Trump’s promise to unleash American energy, lower costs for Americans, revitalize the American auto industry, restore the rule of law, and give power back to states to make their own decisions.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under President Donald Trump’s administration has proposed revoking a critical scientific finding that serves as the foundation for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Announced on Tuesday (July 29), the proposed rule aims to rescind the 2009 “endangerment finding,” which declared that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health and welfare.

This finding has been the legal basis for various climate regulations under the Clean Air Act, targeting emissions from motor vehicles, power plants, and other pollution sources. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, who initiated the proposal in March, described the move as part of a broader effort to roll back 31 key environmental rules, calling it “the greatest day of deregulation in American history.”

“A lot of people are out there listening, they might not know what the endangerment finding is. If you ask congressional Democrats to describe what it is, the left would say that it means that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, carbon dioxide is an endangerment to human health. They might say methane is a pollutant, methane is an endangerment to human health,” Zeldin said during an appearance on the Ruthless podcast.

The proposal has sparked criticism from former EPA leaders and environmental groups. Christine Todd Whitman, who led the EPA under President George W. Bush, argued that the repeal would endanger millions of Americans and contradict the agency’s mission to protect the environment and human health. Environmental groups, such as the Natural Resources Defense Council, have expressed doubt that the EPA could develop a new finding that would hold up in court, given the 2007 Supreme Court ruling affirming the agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

If finalized, the repeal could invalidate current limits on greenhouse gas pollution and hinder future administrations from implementing climate change regulations.

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency proposed eliminating a rule that guides much of the country’s ability to fight climate change during a visit June 29 to an Indianapolis auto dealership.

Rescinding the pivotal 2009 air pollution guidance would eliminate greenhouse gas standards and regulations, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said at a press conference attended by Gov. Mike Braun and other state and federal officials.

“If finalized, today’s announcement would amount to the largest regulatory action in the history of the United States,” Zeldin said.

Environmental advocates responded, saying the devastating move is a direct assault on clean air protections, and will exacerbate climate change, endanger public health and even slow the economy.

Braun, who formerly operated an automotive parts company now embroiled in a Clean Air Act legal battle, said he was “tickled pink” the EPA chose to partner with Indiana — a state whose auto manufacturing industry could benefit from emission deregulation — in announcing the proposal.

Zeldin claimed the original finding that allowed the EPA to regulate greenhouse gasses relied “on assumptions that ended up not being true. They ended up making predictions about the science that many respects were not just pessimistic, they turned out not to be true.”

Environmental and public health advocates don’t agree. In a statement, the Sierra Club said the effort to repeal was the “most direct assault thus far on the movement to mitigate the climate crisis.”

“The vast majority of scientists will disagree with him,” said Meredith Hankins, an attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “Science has gotten stronger at demonstrating the harmful effects from greenhouse gases.”

Suzanne Jawaroski, the Indiana Secretary of Energy & Natural Resources, said Indiana’s model of balancing economy and emissions could now scale nationally. She didn’t mention Indiana ranks below all other states for its natural environment, according to a US News report.

What is the endangerment finding?

Greenhouse gases weren’t always classified as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

Concerns about motor vehicles emissions rising throughout the early 2000s led to a petition where 19 organizations called upon the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA rejected the petition, arguing the gases weren’t considered air pollutants subject to the Clean Air Act.

Litigation ensued. And in 2007, the Supreme Court categorized greenhouse gases as “without a doubt” air pollutants in a ruling leading to the endangerment finding.

In 2009, the finding gave the EPA authority to regulate six greenhouse gases — including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide — as threats to human health. That move contributed to regulations on emissions from cars, trucks, power plants and the oil and gas industry.

The agency considered “the full weight of scientific evidence” when finalizing the finding under the Clean Air Act, and at the time, the EPA found the greenhouse gasses were dangerous to both public health and welfare for current and future generations.

Then-EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson cited assessments from the U.S. Global Climate Research Program, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the National Research Council as supporting evidence of the endangerment finding.

“This long-overdue finding cements 2009’s place in history as the year when the United States Government began seriously addressing the challenge of greenhouse gas pollution and seizing the opportunity of clean-energy reform,” Jackson said in a 2009 statement. “In less than 11 months, we have done more to promote clean energy and prevent climate change than happened in the last eight years.”

Indiana’s push to stop the endangerment finding

The state of Indiana has long opposed the endangerment finding. Before it was finalized in 2009, the state submitted comments to the EPA expressing a disagreement over the quality of the science cited by the agency.

The endangerment finding proposal “is not supported by sound science,” wrote Thomas Easterly, then-head of IDEM. The state expressed disbelief that human-caused greenhouse gas emissions have any direct impact on public health or welfare.

After pointing to studies outlining the Earth’s history of temperature fluctuation, the report argued that a clear link between climate change and greenhouse gas emissions hadn’t yet been established. The state requested the EPA conduct more research before making a finding that could result in “cumbersome and costly regulatory actions” — but ultimately, the endangerment finding was finalized later that year.

Since 2009, climate change research has proliferated. NASA has determined that despite the Earth’s history of climatic changes, the current rate of warming is unprecedented when compared to 10,000 years of the planet’s history.

But Indiana hasn’t stopped pushing for the deregulation of greenhouse gas emissions.

IDEM commissioner Clint Woods assisted in the completion of a chapter of The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 — a conservative vision for President Trump’s second term. The chapter, which focused on the EPA, recommended an “update the 2009 endangerment finding.”

In March, the Trump administration initiated a formal reconsideration of the endangerment finding, and this month, IDEM participated in a meeting with the federal Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs to discuss Indiana’s perspective.

“IDEM did not have access to the underlying proposal but shared previous State of Indiana comments on related issues, including on the ‘2009 Endangerment Finding,'” wrote Allen Carter, a spokesperson for IDEM.

On July 25, State Rep. Beau Baird, R-Greencastle, invited Zeldin to visit Indiana to tour conservation sites and discuss environmental issues. Just four days later, Zeldin was in Indianapolis to announce a proposal to repeal the finding.

Repeal provides economic benefits, some say

Zeldin’s tenure as EPA’s administrator has been marked by deregulation in the name of economic progress. Braun and Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita both commended the administrator’s efforts to align the agency with President Trump’s efforts in the White House.

The Indiana Manufacturers Association also made a statement saying this will remove burdens that hindered economic growth. Ashton Eller, vice president of governmental affairs at IMA, wrote that burdensome regulatory actions cost jobs, drive up energy prices and are counterproductive.

“This is a significant victory for manufacturers and other large stationary sources that face burdensome regulations and increased costs under the previous framework,” Eller added.

Environmental advocates say it is a step backward

Several environmental organizations and Democrat lawmakers have expressed frustration with the EPA’s proposal to rescind the endangerment finding.

Rep. Carey Hamilton, D-Indianapolis, said repealing the rule is short-sighted from not only a human health perspective, but an economic one, too.

“China is eating our lunch when it comes to clean energy manufacturing,” Hamilton told IndyStar. “Indiana — thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act — has significant investments going into EV battery and solar panel manufacturing.”

She is concerned the proposal to rollback the endangerment finding threatens these investments and weakens Indiana’s foothold in renewables as the rest of the global economy is moving away from fossil fuels.

Rep. Sue Errington, D-Muncie, the ranking minority member of the House Environmental Affair Committee, said summers in Indiana are already “hotter, longer and more dangerous than they were a decade ago.” Eliminating greenhouse gas standards, she said, will accelerate climate change and harm public health.

“Environmental protections, long supported on a bipartisan basis, are now being used as a political tool,” Errington said. “Hoosiers deserve better than short-term political gain at the expense of our land, water and health.”

IndyStar’s environmental reporting project is made possible through the generous support of the nonprofit Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust.

Karl Schneider is an IndyStar environment reporter. You can reach him at karl.schneider@indystar.com. Follow him on BlueSky @karlstartswithk.bsky.social or X @karlstartswithk.

Sophie Hartley is an IndyStar environment reporter. You can reach her at sophie.hartley@indystar.com or on X at @sophienhartley.

Wisconsin’s governor, environmental advocates and climate researchers say the Environmental Protection Agency is abandoning science in its proposal to gut regulation of climate pollution.

The EPA released a draft rule Tuesday in Indiana that aims to reverse the scientific basis that supports regulation of climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions. The rule repeals a 2009 finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare, triggering regulation under the Clean Air Act.

After taking office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that called for reviewing the legal basis for that finding. On Tuesday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin made good on a promise to rescind it after announcing plans in March to do away with the finding and 30 other environmental regulations.

Stay connected to Wisconsin news — your way Get trustworthy reporting and unique local stories from WPR delivered directly to your inbox. Email Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Gov. Tony Evers and California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued a statement as co-chairs of the U.S. Climate Alliance, saying the agency’s actions don’t change the facts.

“From devastating floods to extreme heat to catastrophic wildfire, Americans are seeing the deadly impacts of climate change with their own eyes, and we won’t be deceived by the Trump administration’s reckless abandonment of science and the law,” the two wrote.

In a statement, Zeldin argued that the EPA “twisted the law” and “warped science” under the administrations of Democratic former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, and said rescinding the finding and the environmental regulations that result from it “would end $1 trillion or more in hidden taxes on American businesses and families.”

Former Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to head the Environmental Protection Agency, appears before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Capitol Hill, Thursday, Jan. 16, 2025, in Washington. Mark Schiefelbein/AP Photo

The EPA said the proposal would repeal all regulations on tailpipe emissions for cars and trucks, giving consumers more choice. The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions nationwide. Biden-era regulations aimed to ensure at least half of all new car and pickup truck sales would be electric by 2032, prompting opponents to call it an electric vehicle mandate.

American Trucking Association President and CEO Chris Spear said such regulations “would have crippled our supply chain, disrupted deliveries, and raised prices for American families and businesses.”

Greg Nemet, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, served as a lead author on a United Nations panel report on climate change. He called the move a political change that’s meant to prop up fossil fuels.

“The change seems to be to get rid of that ruling that greenhouse gases are a danger to humans, and there’s certainly no scientific basis for that,” Nemet said. “Over time, there’s just been more and more evidence about how damaging it will be to have a hotter climate.”

Jim Boulter, public health and environmental studies professor at UW-Eau Claire, said any reversal could have a dramatic effect on the basis for many environmental regulations. He said that includes rolling back limits on pollution from power plants and tighter standards for mercury emissions.

“As Wisconsinites who love to fish, love to be outdoors, love to be on the water, that’s a real concern,” Boulter said.

Any rule to overturn the finding is likely to face legal challenges. If it makes it to the U.S. Supreme Court, Boulter said there’s a concern the court may overturn its 2007 ruling that found the EPA has authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

The announcement comes as more than 140 million Americans are under extreme heat advisories, watches or warnings. Ciaran Gallagher, energy and air manager at Clean Wisconsin, noted many Wisconsinites have seen more extreme heat and hotter overnight temperatures that make it difficult to recover from daytime heat.

“Right now, Wisconsinites are sweltering. Extreme heat can seem innocuous, but is one of the most deadly weather-related hazards,” Gallagher said.

Gallagher added Texas witnessed catastrophic flooding that has claimed around 140 lives, making it the 10th deadliest flash flood on record. Earlier this year in California, wildfires caused an estimated $250 billion in damage and economic losses. Researchers say they were fueled by hot, dry and windy conditions made worse by climate change.

Wisconsin is under an air quality advisory through Thursday due to smoke from Canadian wildfires. Research shows climate change is making wildfires more common worldwide.

Climate change is also contributing to warmer winters in Wisconsin that could upend winter tourism and sports, affecting the regional economy. As temperatures grow wetter and warmer, farmers are also threatened with reduced crop yields and lower milk production. The state is also seeing more frequent, intense storms that have caused major floods in northern and southern Wisconsin.

Since 1980, Wisconsin has been affected by 63 weather/climate disasters that resulted in more than $1 billion in losses. The annual average has increased from roughly 1 event each year to 5 events annually since 2020.

“This is not a climate that we grew up in,” Boulter said. “It’s dangerous.”