Trump Rescinds EPA Endangerment Finding, Prioritizes Cheap Cars
In what the White House has described as the "largest deregulatory action in American history," President Donald Trump has undone a key scientific finding that has been the cornerstone of United States efforts to fight climate change for more than 16 years. Speaking at the White House on Thursday, the president officially rescinded a 2009 Obama-era government declaration known as the endangerment finding.
The White House has announced what it calls the "largest deregulatory action in American history": President Donald Trump has revoked the 2009 EPA "endangerment finding," the scientific and legal determination that allowed the Environmental Protection Agency to treat greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane as threats to public health and welfare. That 2009 finding rested on the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which authorized the agency to regulate heat-trapping emissions.
Speaking at the White House, Mr. Trump called the finding a "giant scam" with "no basis in fact" or law and said its repeal will benefit the auto industry by lowering vehicle prices and delivering "a better car... for a lot less money." The administration says removing the finding will expand access to affordable, reliable energy and will save the nation more than $1.3 trillion by eliminating regulatory requirements tied to vehicle emissions standards and related programs.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin criticized prior administrations, saying the Obama and Biden teams "twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science" to justify greenhouse gas rules that he contends harmed businesses and consumers. The White House framed the action as part of a broader shift toward increased fossil fuel production and relaxed environmental oversight.
Scientists, environmental groups and many policy experts strongly reject that rationale. Organizations such as the American Geophysical Union say the endangerment finding is "grounded in decades of rigorous, peer-reviewed climate science." Critics warn that rescinding it strips the EPA of a key legal basis under the 1963 Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases, potentially hampering the agency's ability to limit emissions from cars, trucks, power plants and the oil and gas sector.
Analysts also note the administration's projected \$1.3 trillion in savings does not account for the mounting economic and public health costs of climate change, including damage from more frequent and severe heatwaves, floods and storms, threats to biodiversity, and increases in climate-driven health problems. Researchers warn that rolling back U.S. climate policy could intensify global warming and increase the likelihood of destabilizing feedback loops with long-term consequences.
One immediate effect of eliminating the endangerment finding would be to slow or block stricter vehicle emissions standards and to weaken federal support for electric vehicles. The Biden administration had set a nonbinding goal for EVs to make up at least 50 percent of new-car sales by 2030; without the endangerment finding, federal leverage to pursue such targets is reduced. Transportation is the largest source of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, so auto and truck standards are central to national emissions-reduction strategies.
Environmental and public policy experts described the decision as a retreat from renewable energy and efficiency in favor of expanded coal, oil and natural gas use. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists called the move "unlawful" and "destructive," accusing the administration of acting at the behest of industry interests. University of Michigan professor Barry Rabe said it represented "a complete U.S. step away from renewable energy and energy efficiency."
The rollback is the latest in a series of actions by the Trump administration since the president began his second term in January 2025, including withdrawal from international climate commitments such as the Paris Agreement, cuts to environmental protections, suppression of climate research, and other measures favorable to the fossil fuel industry. In a separate directive this week, the president told U.S. military bases and facilities to buy electricity from what he called "beautiful clean coal," criticizing the reliability of renewable energy.
Environmental legal advocates say they will challenge the repeal in court. Groups including the Environmental Defense Fund and Earthjustice have indicated they will seek judicial review, potentially taking cases as high as the Supreme Court. Legal proceedings could take years; until they are resolved, the endangerment finding and the regulatory authority it supported will no longer be in effect. Manish Bapna of the Natural Resources Defense Council warned that people nationwide will "pay the price" for what he described as an illegal move that grants a "free pass to oil billionaires."
Some power companies worry the rollback could expose them to a wave of "public nuisance" lawsuits alleging actions that harm community health and safety. Legal scholars say the administration's approach may invite litigation that could complicate or even undermine its stated regulatory objectives.
Scientists continue to highlight the links between rising global temperatures and worsening extreme weather, public health impacts, and biodiversity loss. Oregon State University ecologist William Ripple warned that stepping away from policies aimed at stabilizing the climate raises the risk of pushing the Earth toward a "hothouse" trajectory.
This article was edited by Tamsin Walker and updated with reactions to the EPA decision on February 12, 2026.