Trump's stand against states' climate overreach is long overdue
President Trump just drew a hard line against blue state climate activism — and not a moment too soon.
His April 8 executive order, Protecting American Energy From State Overreach, takes direct aim at states like California, New York and Hawaii that are trying to sue American energy companies into submission. These lawsuits, funded by taxpayers, don't just threaten jobs and gas prices — they're a direct attack on the U.S. energy sector and the families who depend on it.
The order rightly calls out these rogue lawsuits as a national security risk. It directs the Department of Justice to review and challenge state and local laws, policies and legal actions that interfere with domestic energy development, especially those dressed up in the language of 'climate change,' 'ESG' or 'environmental justice.' In plain English, it tells activist state attorneys general to stop using the courts to make energy policy the voters never approved.
As someone who served on the Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee in Congress, I've seen firsthand how these lawsuits work. State officials file sweeping legal claims blaming energy companies for climate change, while trial lawyers circle like vultures. Meanwhile, working families face higher energy prices and fewer jobs, all because a handful of states want to virtue signal in court.
Here's the bigger problem: Many of these same states are still taking billions in federal grants for infrastructure, transportation and grid upgrades — projects that depend on the very energy companies they're trying to bankrupt.
Why should taxpayer money be spent in states that are suing the industries we all rely on to build our roads, power our homes and keep our economy moving?
If states want to pursue these lawsuits, they shouldn't expect to keep cashing federal checks while they do it. Trump should take the next logical step: direct agencies to cut off infrastructure and energy funding to states actively pursuing climate lawsuits against U.S. energy companies.
That's not political retribution — it's common sense. No business would invest in a state actively trying to sue it out of existence. The federal government shouldn't, either.
Just look at California. Attorney General Rob Bonta and Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) are suing oil and gas companies for supposedly misleading the public about climate change, while still demanding federal support for electric vehicle infrastructure and clean energy development. Michigan is suing fossil fuel companies for 'consumer fraud.' Hawaii is suing them for sea-level rise. Who is paying the legal bills? Their taxpayers — and in many cases, you.
These lawsuits are political theater. They're not about justice but about forcing a radical left-wing environmental agenda on the rest of the country through the courts, bypassing the checks and balances that make our constitutional system work.
Thankfully, courts are starting to see through it. New Jersey's massive climate lawsuit was recently dismissed with prejudice. Similar cases in Maryland and Delaware have also been thrown out. Even the Supreme Court has refused to take up cases brought by climate activists hoping to create new legal doctrines from the bench.
Trump's executive order is a major course correction, but it can't be the last step. There must be no more taxpayer-funded climate lawsuits, no more federal dollars to states attacking American energy. and no more letting a few deep-blue states dictate national energy policy.
If states want to lead a green crusade, let them — just not on the backs of working families in every other state. It's time to end the hypocrisy, defend American energy, and put taxpayers first.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Upturn
20 minutes ago
- Business Upturn
I regret some of my posts about President Trump: Elon Musk expresses regret
By Aditya Bhagchandani Published on June 11, 2025, 12:44 IST In what appears to be a shift in tone, Elon Musk on Tuesday posted that he regrets some of his recent remarks about President Donald Trump, saying, 'They went too far.' I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025 This comes just days after Trump addressed their ongoing feud, stating he wished Musk 'very well' and suggesting the tech mogul might be seeking a conversation. In a gesture that caught attention, Musk had responded with a heart emoji on X (formerly Twitter), sparking speculation about a possible reconciliation. Tensions between the two escalated last week after Musk called Trump's proposed 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' a 'pork-filled abomination' and accused the President of suppressing Jeffrey Epstein-related files. The latter post, which Musk later deleted, reportedly infuriated Trump, who retaliated with harsh criticism and even threatened to sever government contracts with Musk-led firms. The feud intensified when Musk countered by threatening to halt NASA-linked SpaceX missions and claimed Trump would have lost the 2024 election without his support. He also floated the possibility of impeachment. However, Musk's latest message—posted at 12:34 PM on June 11—marks a notable departure from his confrontational stance, possibly signaling the beginning of a de-escalation. While no official conversation has been confirmed, both camps appear to be softening their positions, leaving the door open for future dialogue. Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.
24 minutes ago
Trump's actions in Los Angeles spur debate over deportation funds in his 'big, beautiful' bill
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' in Congress includes more than tax breaks and spending cuts — it also seeks to pour billions of dollars into the administration's mass deportation agenda. Republican leaders capitalized Tuesday on the demonstrations in Los Angeles, where people are protesting Trump's immigration raids at Home Depot and other places, to make the case for swift passage of their sprawling 1,000-plus-page bill over staunch Democratic opposition. House Speaker Mike Johnson said the One Big Beautiful Bill Act delivers 'much-needed reinforcements,' including 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, $45 billion to expand migrant detention facilities and billions more to carry out at least 1 million deportations a year. 'All you have to do is look at what's happening in Los Angeles to realize that our law enforcement needs all the support that we can possibly give them,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. The focus on some $350 billion in national security funding comes as action on the massive package is lumbering along in Congress at a critical moment. Trump wants the bill on his desk by the Fourth of July. But Senate Republicans trying to heave it to passage without Democrats are also running up against objections from within their GOP ranks over the details. At the same time, Democrats are warning that Trump's executive reach into California — sending in the National Guard over the governor's objections and calling up the Marines — is inflaming tensions in what had been isolated protests in pockets of LA. They warned the president's heavy-handed approach has the potential to spread, if unchecked, to other communities nationwide. 'We are at a dangerous inflection point in our country,' said Rep. Jimmy Gomez, who represents the Los Angeles area. 'Trump created this political distraction to divide us and keep our focus away from his policies that are wreaking havoc on our economy and hurting working families," he said. "It's a deliberate attempt by Trump to incite unrest, test the limits of executive power and distract from the lawlessness of his administration.' At its core, the bill extends some $4.5 trillion in existing tax breaks that would otherwise expire at the end of the year without action in Congress, cutting some $1.4 trillion in spending over the decade to help offset costs. The Congressional Budget Office found the bill's changes to Medicaid and other programs would leave an estimated 10.9 million more people without health insurance and at least 3 million each month without food stamps from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. At the same time, CBO said the package will add some $2.4 trillion to deficits over the decade. One emerging area of concern for Republican leaders has been the bill's status before the Senate parliamentarian's office, which assesses whether the package complies with the strict rules used for legislation under the so-called budget reconciliation process. Late Monday, Republicans acknowledged potential 'red flags' coming from the parliamentarian's office that will require changes in the House bill before it can be sent to the Senate. Leaders are using the reconciliation process because it allows for simple majority passage in both chambers, were GOP majorities are razor-thin. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said Republicans are preparing to address the concerns with a vote in the House, possibly as soon as this week, to change the package. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer seized on the House's upcoming do-over vote as a chance for Republicans who are dissatisfied with the package to reassert their leverage and 'force the bill back to the drawing board.' 'They say they don't like parts of the bill — now is their opportunity to change it,' Schumer said. On Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance was dispatched to speak with one GOP holdout, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has pushed for deeper spending reductions in the bill to prevent skyrocketing deficits from adding to the nation's $36 trillion debt load. Other Republican senators have raised concerns about the health care cuts. But Republicans are in agreement on border security, deportation and military funding, over the objections of Democrats who fought vigorously during the committee process to strip those provisions from the bill. The package includes about $150 billion for border security and deportation operations, including funding for hiring 10,000 new ICE officers — with what Johnson said are $10,000 hiring bonuses — as well as 3,000 new Border Patrol agents and other field operations and support staff. There's also funding for a daily detention capacity for 100,000 migrants and for flights for 1 million deportations annually. The package includes $46 billion for construction of Trump's long promised wall between the U.S.-Mexico border. Additionally, the bill includes $150 billion for the Pentagon, with $5 billion for the military deployment in support of border security, along with nearly $25 billion for Trump's 'Golden Dome' defense system over the U.S. Separately, the bill adds another $21 billion for the Coast Guard. Democrats have argued against the deportations, and warned that Trump appears to be stirring up protests so he can clamp down on migrant communities. Rep. Nanette Barragan — whose district represents the suburban city of Paramount, where the weekend Home Depot raid touched off protests — implored Americans: 'Listen to the words of this administration: They're using words like insurrection. They're using words like invasion.' She warned the administration is laying the groundwork for even steeper actions. 'That's a concern,' she said. 'That is dangerous. It's wrong.'
Newsweek
28 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Gavin Newsom Compares Donald Trump to Emperor Palpatine
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. California Gov. Gavin Newsom's office shared a meme portraying President Donald Trump as Star Wars villain Emperor Palpatine. In the video, Palpatine's voice reads out a Truth Social post by Trump talking about the riots in Los Angeles. The Democratic governor and Republican president have clashed over the latter's decision to send in National Guard troops and Marines to quell the disorder that erupted from protests against federal immigration raids in Los Angeles. A ONCE GREAT AMERICAN CITY HAS BEEN OCCUPIED! — Governor Newsom Press Office (@GovPressOffice) June 10, 2025 This is a developing article. Updates to follow.
