logo
EPA drafts rule to strike down landmark climate finding

EPA drafts rule to strike down landmark climate finding

Washington Post18 hours ago
The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to rescind a landmark 2009 legal opinion that greenhouse gas emissions put human health at risk, which underpins many of the government's actions to combat climate change, according to two people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the decision was not yet public.
The 'endangerment finding,' which determined that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and welfare, provides the legal justification for regulating them under the Clean Air Act.
In March, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the agency would reconsider the finding, among dozens of potential environmental rollbacks announced on what he called 'the most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin has previously said he aims to strike a balance between economic concerns and protecting the environment.
'After 16 years, EPA will formally reconsider the Endangerment Finding,' Zeldin said in a statement at the time. 'The Trump Administration will not sacrifice national prosperity, energy security, and the freedom of our people for an agenda that throttles our industries, our mobility, and our consumer choice while benefiting adversaries overseas.'
A decision to completely rescind the endangerment finding is still a draft proposal and could be subject to change, according to the two individuals. The draft would also eliminate all resulting limits on motor vehicle greenhouse gas emissions, according to one of them, with the second person describing this outcome as likely.
A government website lists the title of a document under review with the Office of Management and Budget called 'Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and Motor Vehicle Reconsideration Rule,' but it gives no details on the proposal, which still must be released for public comment before it is finalized.
David Doniger, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an advocacy group, said the proposed repeal of the endangerment finding is not justified under the law.
'They're trying to completely defang the Clean Air Act by saying, 'Well, this stuff's just not dangerous,'' Doniger said. 'That claim is just mind-bogglingly contrary to the evidence.'
Thomas Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research, a conservative think tank, said he fully supports the administration's efforts to review the endangerment finding, saying that Congress never mandated the EPA to take action on the issue and that the agency instead relied on a single ambiguous Supreme Court case.
'It's long since past the time for an administration to review this,' Pyle said. 'Ultimately Congress should have a say when it's all said and done.'
The draft rule largely avoids making scientific arguments about climate change and instead focuses on making legal arguments saying that the agency does not have the basis to act on climate change under a certain section of the Clean Air Act, the two people familiar with the matter said.
Zeldin's EPA has said that the Biden administration did not properly consider all the policy implications. The finding has allowed for seven regulations on vehicle emissions with a cost of more than $1 trillion, according to the EPA.
Richard Revesz, a law professor at New York University and former Biden administration official, said that repealing the endangerment finding is unlikely to hold up in court but that the move will still affect U.S. climate policy until a final judicial decision is made.
'If the endangerment finding fell, it would call into question essentially all or almost all of EPA's regulation of greenhouse gases,' Revesz said.
The endangerment finding was written in response to a 2007 Supreme Court decision saying that greenhouse gases are an air pollutant, essentially requiring the EPA to regulate them, according to legal experts.
The endangerment finding had been updated and expanded since 2009, effectively serving as the government's understanding of the latest climate science, said Joseph Goffman, who headed the EPA's air office under President Joe Biden.
'Withdrawing the endangerment finding is in effect a repudiation of scientific reality,' Goffman said.
Doniger and other people familiar with the matter said that the Trump administration official Jeffrey Clark, acting administrator in the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, is the primary architect of the proposed repeal of the endangerment finding.
'Since 2009, I've consistently argued that the endangerment finding required a consideration of downstream costs imposed on both mobile sources like cars and stationary sources like factories,' Clark said in the March statement released by the EPA. 'Under the enlightened leadership of President Trump and Administrator Zeldin, the time for fresh thought has finally arrived.'
As a career attorney in the Justice Department during the George W. Bush administration, Clark worked on the case that eventually resulted in the 2007 Supreme Court decision that prompted the EPA to write the endangerment finding.
'He's trying to get revenge,' Doniger said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

White House Gives 'The View' Chilling Warning After Joy Behar Claims Trump is 'Jealous' Of Obama
White House Gives 'The View' Chilling Warning After Joy Behar Claims Trump is 'Jealous' Of Obama

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

White House Gives 'The View' Chilling Warning After Joy Behar Claims Trump is 'Jealous' Of Obama

Who knew the attempted dismantling of the First Amendment would be kind of dumb? The White House emailed an intimidating statement to Entertainment Weekly on Wednesday after the outlet reached out for comment about remarks Joy Behar made on 'The View' about President Donald Trump. During Wednesday's episode, the women of 'The View' discussed Trump's accusation that former President Barack Obama participated in a 'coup' against him in 2016 — an allegation Obama later called 'outrageous.' In response to Trump's claims, Behar immediately brought up Jan. 6, 2021, in which a horde of Trump supporters participated in an insurrection on the Capitol to overthrow the results of the 2020 presidential election. 'The thing about [Trump] is he's so jealous of Obama,' Behar said. 'Because Obama is everything that he is not — trim, smart, handsome, happily married, and can sing Al Green's song 'Let's Stay Together' better than Al Green. And Trump cannot stand it. It's driving him crazy.' In response to EW's request for a comment on Behar's remarks, the White House called the daytime talk show host 'an irrelevant loser suffering from a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.' It also alleged that the show has 'hit the lowest ratings' in recent years. The statement went on to say Behar 'should self-reflect on her own jealousy of President Trump's historic popularity before her show is the next to be pulled off air.' The Trump administration's ominous warning against 'The View' follows CBS's announcement last week that the 'Late Show with Stephen Colbert' would be ending in May 2026. The network said it would not be finding a new host for the three-decade-long franchise, which was initially helmed by David Letterman. CBS claimed the decision was 'purely a financial' one, pointing to the general decline of late-night audiences. The news that the 'Late Show' was being canceled altogether occurred shortly after Colbert criticized CBS's parent company, Paramount, for agreeing to pay $16 million to settle a ridiculous lawsuit with Trump over a pretty standard edit made by '60 Minutes.' That settlement came amid a pending multibillion-dollar merger between Paramount and Skydance Media, one that requires approval from the Federal Communications Commission. Brendan Carr, the chairman of the FCC, was a Trump selection. On Tuesday, Carr complained on X about the 'left's ritualist wailing and gnashing of teeth' over Colbert's cancellation. 'They're acting like they're losing a loyal DNC spokesperson that was entitled to an exemption from the laws of economics,' Carr wrote.

White House Slams Joy Behar's Recent Trump Comments And Warns Of ABC's ‘The View' 'Being The Next To Be Pulled Off The Air'
White House Slams Joy Behar's Recent Trump Comments And Warns Of ABC's ‘The View' 'Being The Next To Be Pulled Off The Air'

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

White House Slams Joy Behar's Recent Trump Comments And Warns Of ABC's ‘The View' 'Being The Next To Be Pulled Off The Air'

The White House lashed out at Joy Behar after she said on ABC's The View that Donald Trump's attacks on his predecessor, Barack Obama, were motivated by jealousy, while noting the current president's role in the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. On Wednesday, Behar and the other View co-hosts talked about Obama's response to Trump's claim that his predecessor was guilty of treason. The Trump administration claims that Obama and his team conspired to alter intelligence assessments to boost the notion Russia was attempting to help Trump get elected in 2016. More from Deadline Candace Owens Accuses Brigitte Macron Of Bullying Her With Defamation Suit Over Claims French First Lady Was Born A Man: "Candace Owens Is Not Shutting Up" - Update Skydance Commits To CBS News Ombudsman, Pledges No DEI Policies As Company Seeks FCC Greenlight Of Paramount Merger Patrick Soon-Shiong Says He Plans To Take Los Angeles Times Public; Shares Will Be Offered Through Regulation A Financing - Update Obama's spokesperson called the allegations 'bizarre' and a 'weak attempt at distraction.' On The View, Behar said, 'First of all, who tried to overthrow the government on January 6th? Who was that again?' Behar added, 'The thing about him is is so jealous of Obama, because Obama is everything that he is not. Trim. Smart. Handsome. Happily married. And can sing Al Green's song Let's Stay Together better than Al Green.' White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said, 'Joy Behar is an irrelevant loser suffering from a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. It's no surprise that The View's ratings hit an all-time low last year. She should self-reflect on her own jealousy of President Trump's historic popularity before her show is the next to be pulled off air.' EW first reported on the White House response. Trump has celebrated the decision by CBS to cancel The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, hosted by another of his critics. On Tuesday, he predicted that ABC's Jimmy Kimmel 'is NEXT to go in the untalented Late Night Sweepstakes and, shortly thereafter, Fallon will be gone. These are people with absolutely NO TALENT, who were paid Millions of Dollars for, in all cases, destroying what used to be GREAT Television. It's really good to see them go, and I hope I played a major part in it!' At the same time, the White House highlighted Trump's claims about 2016. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who has claimed that Obama's team was engaged in 'a years-long coup intended to subvert President Trump's entire presidency,' appeared at the White House press briefing to talk about the release of new documents. That was a 2017 GOP House Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference, casting doubt on the intelligence that Russian President Vladimir Putin favored Trump to win the election. But a 2020 bipartisan report from the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that Russia did interfere in the election, while detailing contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russian influence actors. Obama's spokesperson said that 'nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.' On The View, other hosts said that Trump's focus on Obama, and the referral to the Justice Department to investigate, was an attempt to distract from the Jeffrey Epstein story. Alyssa Farah Griffin, who was Trump's director of strategic communications in his first term, said, 'I saw the intelligence that we had. I actually was with Mike Pence when he confronted Vladimir Putin in Signapore and said, 'We know what you tried to do in our elections, Do not do it again.' It was the consensus of the people in the first term, including the director of national intelligence that Russia did try to meddle in our elections.' Best of Deadline Everything We Know About Season 3 Of 'Euphoria' So Far 'Wednesday' Season 2: Everything We Know About The Cast, Premiere Date & More Everything We Know About 'Only Murders In The Building' Season 5 So Far

Big Ten commish makes it clear: When it comes to College Football Playoff expansion, his No. 1 priority is inventory
Big Ten commish makes it clear: When it comes to College Football Playoff expansion, his No. 1 priority is inventory

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Big Ten commish makes it clear: When it comes to College Football Playoff expansion, his No. 1 priority is inventory

Remember all the thrilling games of the 2024-25 College Football Playoff? Texas' two-overtime victory against Arizona State in the Peach Bowl! Notre Dame's walkoff field goal to defeat Penn State in the Orange Bowl! And … and … hey, how about that Peach Bowl? The sad truth about the debut of the expanded College Football Playoff was that from a competitive standpoint, it was pretty much a wet firework. Only two of the 11 games — those two above — finished with a one-possession margin of victory. Five of the games were decided by a margin of two touchdowns or more, and three were 20-plus-point blowouts. (Thanks for stopping by, SMU, Tennessee and Oregon.) More, in other words, didn't come anywhere near better. Yes, these were college football playoff games … but more importantly, they were inventory created to meet demand. And if people are going to buy as much of the product as you put on the shelves, what's the incentive to limit that product? Why worry about quality when quantity is your overall goal? College power conference leaders know this, which is why they're angling so hard for representation in the CFP's bracket — now at 12, almost certain to expand to 16. If — no, let's be honest, when — that expansion comes, most conferences favor a 5+11 bracket. That would comprise five conference champions, 11 at-large teams, and would seem to be as meritocratic as possible: Play well and you're in. (Win those winnable games, Alabama.) But meritocracy isn't the endgame here, aristocracy is. And so now you have Tony Petitti, Big Ten commissioner, backing a '4-4-2-2-1-3' idea, which would give the Big Ten and the SEC four automatic bids apiece, the Big 12 and the ACC two apiece, and the remaining conferences a single bid, with three more at-larges. (It's like one of those ridiculous old word problems — 'If the Big Ten gets four automatic berths in the playoffs, and the SEC gets four automatic berths … how can they screw the ACC and the Big 12 out of three more?') 'At the end of the day, I think there's been a lot of concern about how [the playoff selections] are made. I focus on that piece,' Petitti explained. 'How are we differentiating from teams that don't have head-to-head play, teams that don't play common schedules across leagues that do different things? I think that's a really hard, tall order.' It's quite the rhetorical trick Pettiti is playing there, saying that because his conference is so big, you can't adequately determine strength by head-to-head matchups alone. And whose fault is that? It wasn't the selection committee that expanded the Big 'Ten' to 18 teams. Petitti isn't interested in creating a more equitable playoff, or in creating the conditions for better competition. He wants to pack the bracket with his schools, damn the optics or the on-field results. (Worth noting: the talent dropped off fast in the Big Ten after the top four last year. Would Iowa or Illinois, with their 6-3 conference records, be more deserving of an at-large spot than a whole range of other options? No.) Petitti understands that there are spots that need to be filled — both now and in the 16-team playoff to come — and he wants those guaranteed for his conference, not subject to the whims of a playoff selection committee. But guaranteed bids are the very antithesis of 'settle it on the field,' and run counter to literally every 'you gotta earn it!' mantra preached by every coach from the beginning of time. It's no surprise why the ACC and Big 12 hate the idea, and it's also no surprise what's driving the Big Ten's push to claim as much inventory as possible. We're not exactly breaking news here to note that money trumps tradition at every single level of college sports now. Tradition only has value for universities, and especially for broadcast partners, to the extent it can be monetized. Yes, it's wonderful that you can hum along to your alma mater's fight song … but maybe you can kick in a few bucks to the ol' athletic capital campaign while you're at it? That rivalry you enjoyed your entire life … well, your rival just didn't have deep enough pockets to join a new conference. Shame to lose that, really, but how about a replacement conference game against a school from halfway across the country? That's almost as good, right? Tradition has no place in the College Football Playoff. This is about inventory, plain and simple, and every business wants to create enough inventory to meet demand. Except here, instead of cereal boxes on a grocery shelf or burgers on a restaurant warming tray, the inventory in question is college football playoff games. Broadcasters want more inventory because each playoff game is a highly monetizable asset. Universities want more inventory because each nationally televised game means more exposure, more alumni goodwill, more broadcast dollars. Fans might want more inventory because … well, more football is good football, right? Yeah, not so much. Sure, there's always the chance that a Cinderella will knock out a Goliath, to mix literary metaphors, but given the wide variance between college football haves and have-lesses, the more likely outcome is what we saw last year: the big dogs carving right through the happy-to-be-here teams. You know the best way to ensure competitive playoff games? Narrow the field down to the best four and let them have at it. Wild idea, right? We're never going back there, meaning college football fans are now living a truth that plagues everything from pizza to music to Marvel movies: As quantity goes up, quality goes down.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store