From the Wall Street Journal, February 9:
Move would reverse legal determination that greenhouse gases threaten public health
The Trump administration is planning this week to repeal the Obama-era scientific finding that serves as the legal basis for federal greenhouse-gas regulation, according to U.S. officials, in the most far-reaching rollback of U.S. climate policy to date.
The reversal targets the 2009 “endangerment finding,” which concluded that six greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health and welfare. The finding provided the legal underpinning for the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate rules, which limited emissions from power plants and tightened fuel-economy standards for vehicles under the Clean Air Act.
“This amounts to the largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in an interview.
The final rule, set to be made public later this week, removes the regulatory requirements to measure, report, certify and comply with federal greenhouse-gas emission standards for motor vehicles, and repeals associated compliance programs, credit provisions and reporting obligations for industries, according to administration officials.
It wouldn’t apply to rules governing emissions from power plants and other stationary sources such as oil-and-gas facilities, the officials said. But repealing the finding could open up the door to rolling back regulations that affect those facilities.
The move is likely to be seen as a victory for the fossil-fuel industry, which for years has pushed back against federal climate regulations. Since taking office, President Trump has sought to repeal rules that his allies in the oil-and-gas industry have cited as overly burdensome. Trump has framed fossil fuels as vital to economic and national security, and he has argued that expanded reliance on them will help lower energy prices.
The decision to repeal the endangerment finding might also create fresh uncertainty for companies with global operations, which could find themselves caught between lower environmental standards at home and a higher baseline for emissions rules abroad. A void at the federal level might prompt states to implement their own regulations, and create new legal exposure for companies.
Environmental groups have said they would challenge a rollback in the courts, and it could be years before litigation is resolved. The administration could decline to enforce rules and fines while a legal process unfolds. Several unsuccessful attempts to revise or repeal the “endangerment finding” have been made in recent years—including in the courts.
The Environmental Defense Fund, a nonprofit advocacy group, has said that rolling back the endangerment finding would “eliminate some of our most vital tools to protect people from the pollution that causes climate change.” The group said the administration was trying to steer Americans toward dirtier, more dangerous and more destructive air.
On Inauguration Day last year, Trump signed an executive order directing the EPA to submit an assessment on whether the endangerment finding—which the Obama and Biden administrations used to set greenhouse gas emission limits on vehicles, power plants and large industrial facilities—should be kept in place. The EPA announced a proposal to rescind the finding last July.
Officials said the rollback would equate to more than $1 trillion in regulation cuts, though they didn’t provide details on how they came up with the number. They said that rescinding the finding would result in an average per-vehicle cost savings of more than $2,400. Public health and environmental groups have said federal climate regulations help prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths each year....
....MUCH MORE
If interested see also:
May 2009 - UPDATE: OMB on the Cost of EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gasses
May 2009 - White House: CO2 rules to seriously impact economy
December 2009 - From the Endangerment Finding to the Tailoring rule.
Monday, December 7, 2009
01:15 P.M. EST "U.S. EPA to make 'significant climate announcement'"
From Reuters:The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Monday it would make a "significant climate announcement" at 1:15 p.m. EST (1815 GMT).
The EPA has been expected to issue a final ruling that greenhouse gases endanger human health. That finding would allow the agency to issue rules to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, even if Congress fails to pass legislation to cut U.S. emissions of the heat-trapping gases that scientists say cause global warming.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told Reuters last month the endangerment finding was being considered by the Office of Management and Budget and that the agency was hoping for an expedited review....
The EPA's Tailoring Rule which is downstream from the Endangerment Finding affects, one way or another, around 20% of GDP.
February 2012 - EPA Chief Jackson Signs Tailoring Rule, Probably Illegal. Coincidentally D.C. Court of Appeals Hears Arguments Tomorrow
This is a pretty big deal affecting approximately 20% of GDP.
The question is whether the EPA or any Executive branch agency has the power to ignore the actual wording of the Clean Air Act to "tailor" the rules. Tomorrow and Wednesday a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear two full days of oral arguments on this and three other issues.
But, the Appeals Court didn't listen to moi:
U.S. Court of Appeals Upholds EPA's Tailoring RuleThe court sees no problem granting power to the bureaucrats that was never intended and wasn't in the law.
I can see part of the argument for the auto emissions and the Mass v EPA re-hash but the Tailoring rule is just makin' stuff up.
This is going to the Supremes but for now You just keep me hangin' on.
July 3, 2022 - Background On The Supreme Court's EPA/CO2 Ruling: The Administrative State
March 2025 - Carbon Dioxide Regulation: "EPA to Reconsider Legal Basis of US Climate Change Rules"
July 24, 2025 - "EPA drafts rule to strike down landmark climate finding"
July 29, 2025 - "EPA proposing to repeal climate ‘endangerment finding’ Tuesday"If this action survives court challenges it is a very big deal.
And many more, it's a pretty big deal.
