**
In a move that initially seemed to favour the fossil fuel industry, the Trump administration’s recent revocation of the “endangerment finding” could paradoxically expose major oil companies to an array of legal challenges. This controversial decision, finalised earlier this month by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), dismisses a critical 2009 assessment that linked greenhouse gas emissions to threats against public health and welfare. As states and local governments ramp up their climate litigation efforts, experts suggest that the rollback may inadvertently dismantle the legal protections that have shielded the oil sector from accountability.
The Endangerment Finding and Its Implications
The endangerment finding, established under the Obama administration, was a significant regulatory framework aimed at curtailing emissions from various sources, including motor vehicles. By revoking this finding, the Trump administration has not only lifted federal restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions but has also created uncertainty regarding the regulatory landscape for fossil fuels. Critics argue that the move was designed to benefit oil companies, many of which invested heavily in Trump’s political campaign. However, this apparent boon could backfire, as it opens the door for local authorities to pursue litigation against these corporations for climate-related damages.
Legal experts believe that the absence of federal regulations may weaken the fossil fuel industry’s defence against state-level lawsuits. Pat Parenteau, an environmental law professor at Vermont Law School, asserts that with the federal government stepping back from regulating greenhouse gases, the argument that state lawsuits are pre-empted by the Clean Air Act becomes more tenuous. “I don’t see how oil companies can, with a straight face, any longer make that argument,” he stated, highlighting the shifting legal landscape.
Rising Tide of Climate Litigation
In recent years, an increasing number of states and municipalities have taken action against big oil, filing lawsuits aimed at holding these companies accountable for their contributions to climate change. Notably, New York and Vermont have instituted “climate superfund” laws, mandating that oil corporations help finance the recovery from climate disasters. The repeal of the endangerment finding could significantly bolster these local initiatives, as it undermines the fossil fuel industry’s previous claims of federal pre-emption.
Michael Gerrard, founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, noted that public nuisance claims, which assert that companies have harmed community health and safety, are likely to gain traction in the wake of this rollback. The Supreme Court’s consideration of a petition from two oil companies seeking to dismiss a climate lawsuit filed by Boulder, Colorado, may also set a critical precedent. If the court decides in favour of the oil companies, it could invalidate not only the Boulder case but also other climate accountability lawsuits and superfund laws.
Industry’s Concerns and Future Legislative Moves
The potential ramifications of the endangerment finding’s repeal have raised alarm among corporate interests. Andres Restrepo, a senior attorney at the Sierra Club, indicated that many companies are apprehensive about the implications of this decision. The Edison Electric Institute and the American Petroleum Institute have both expressed concerns about increased litigation stemming from the rollback, indicating a shift in the industry’s stance on federal regulation.
Amidst this uncertainty, some states are actively working to shield fossil fuel companies from climate litigation. Recent proposals from Republican lawmakers in Wyoming and other states aim to construct legislation that would protect these corporations from legal accountability. Such moves may be a response to the growing anxiety within the industry regarding potential liabilities.
The Future of Climate Regulation
While the EPA maintains that the Clean Air Act continues to pre-empt state greenhouse gas regulations, the lack of federal oversight presents a unique opportunity for local governments to take action. Delta Merner, a lead scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, argues that the ambiguity surrounding regulations is intentional, allowing the fossil fuel industry time to prepare legal arguments. Ultimately, the courts will be tasked with determining whether the Clean Air Act still applies to state-level climate initiatives.
As the legal landscape evolves, there is significant potential for new strategies aimed at holding fossil fuel companies accountable for their contributions to climate change. With the Trump administration’s rollback of critical regulations, communities across the United States are not expected to relent in their pursuit of climate justice.
Why it Matters
The repeal of the endangerment finding represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing battle against climate change, with significant implications for both the fossil fuel industry and local communities. While it may appear to provide immediate relief to oil companies, the ensuing legal vulnerabilities could lead to a surge in accountability efforts. As local governments and advocacy groups push back against corporate interests, the landscape of climate litigation is poised to shift dramatically, underscoring the importance of continued vigilance and action in the fight for environmental justice.
