The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has officially annulled its greenhouse gas ‘endangerment finding’, a crucial legal decision that provided the agency with the power to regulate gases related to climate change under the Clean Air Act. Announced on February 12th, this choice could lead to far-reaching effects on various pollution control approaches but is likely to encounter legal challenges.
The 2009 endangerment finding had previously acknowledged the risk that rising greenhouse gas levels pose to public health, establishing the basis for emission restrictions on vehicles and power plants nationwide. The EPA’s recent action is touted by the agency as ‘the single largest deregulatory action in US history’, intended to eradicate regulatory expenses allegedly totaling trillions of dollars. By abolishing the requirement to measure, report, and adhere to federal greenhouse-gas emission standards, the EPA asserts that taxpayers will save over $1.3 trillion.
The agency’s current head, Lee Zeldin, appointed by the Trump administration, has led this and several other deregulatory efforts. However, the abolition of the endangerment finding has prompted immediate backlash from environmental advocates, political opponents, and former EPA officials.
Paul Anastas, a past EPA science adviser and expert in sustainable chemistry, condemned the decision, highlighting the strong scientific foundation of the endangerment finding. “The endangerment finding is one of the most rigorously pursued scientific analyses on climate change and its impacts on humans ever created,” Anastas remarked, underlining its scientific validity and potential robustness against upcoming legal challenges.
Christine Todd Whitman, who directed the EPA under President George W. Bush, shared these views, labeling the withdrawal as “irresponsible” and favoring corporate profit over public health. She expressed regret over the elimination of regulations credited with protecting American health over the years.
The revocation occurs despite a recent report from the US National Academies in September 2025, which affirmed the precision and continual significance of the endangerment finding. This report reinforced the presence of negative health effects arising from greenhouse gases, declaring the evidence “beyond scientific dispute.”
Thus, while the EPA’s action aligns with its more extensive deregulatory objectives, it faces considerable dissent and legal examination, with many predicting prolonged judicial battles to challenge the validity of the decision and its possible consequences for public health.