Trump revokes the legal basis for US climate policy
President Donald Trump announces the elimination of policies based on research that identified greenhouse gases as harmful to public health due to their contribution to climate change.
President Donald Trump has announced a major shift in the United States' climate policy by formally revoking the legal framework that underpinned regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This framework, which was established in 2009 during Barack Obama's administration, recognized six specific greenhouse gases as being detrimental to public health and welfare due to their role in accelerating climate change. The announcement was made during a press briefing at the White House and signifies a significant rollback of environmental protections that were put in place based on scientific research.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under Trump's direction, emphasized that this change represents the largest deregulatory action in American history, as stated by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. This move not only dismisses the scientific consensus that greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health, but it also sets a controversial precedent for how environmental and health policies may be shaped in the future. Critics of the decision argue that it undermines the rigorous scientific research that has informed federal policy, potentially endangering the efforts to combat climate change and its associated health risks.
This revocation reflects a broader trend within Trump's administration to prioritize economic considerations over environmental regulations, a stance that has drawn both support and condemnation from various sectors. Supporters argue that reducing regulatory burdens can boost economic growth, while opponents are concerned this could lead to dire consequences for public health and the environment. As debates continue over climate change and its impacts, the implications of this policy change will likely be contested in both legal and public arenas as advocates push back against what they perceive as an alarming shift in government priorities.