The Trump administration moved to undo the legal basis for U.S. climate rules, citing disputed science that researchers say misrepresents decades of evidence linking greenhouse gases to rising global temperatures.
In short:
- The proposal targets the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 endangerment finding, which underpins federal limits on greenhouse gas emissions.
- Critics say the administration’s justification relies on fringe studies, cherry-picks data, and downplays well-documented links between fossil fuels and warming.
- Scientists note that climate models and observational data consistently show human-caused warming and increasing risks from extreme heat, floods, and other disasters.
Key quote:
“This is a general theme in the report; they cherrypick data points that suit their narrative and exclude the vast majority of the scientific literature that does not.”
— Zeke Hausfather, climate scientist at Berkeley Earth
Why this matters:
The endangerment finding is the foundation for most U.S. climate policy, including limits on carbon emissions from vehicles and power plants. Overturning it would remove the government’s legal obligation to regulate greenhouse gases, reshaping climate efforts domestically and abroad. The debate also highlights how political pressure can distort established science. Evidence from decades of research shows human activity is warming the planet, driving sea level rise and extreme weather that already harms communities and economies. Weakening federal recognition of these risks could stall adaptation and increase costs of future disasters, leaving vulnerable populations — particularly the elderly, children, and low-income households — exposed to greater health and safety threats.
Learn more: Architect of EPA's 'endangerment finding' warns about consequences of Trump administration's repeal
