EPA faces lawsuit over scrapping the ‘endangerment finding,’ a pillar of climate regulation
Medical and environmental groups are challenging the EPA’s decision to break with the long-standing scientific evidence that climate change endangers human health
The Environmental Protection Agency’s headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg/Getty Images
On Wednesday prominent medical and environmental groups challenged the Trump administration’s decision to scrap a 2009 finding that climate change threatens human health.
The suit was filed on February 18 by the American Public Health Association (APHA), the American Lung Association, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and several other medical and environmental advocacy groups.
The Environmental Protection Agency “has a duty to consider the well-being and safety of all, and the science is clear; climate change and air pollution threaten everyone’s health,” said Georges Benjamin, chief executive officer of the APHA, in a statement.
On supporting science journalism
If you’re enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
The challenge comes days after EPA administrator Lee Zeldin announced that the agency would scrap the 2009 “endangerment finding,” breaking with the long-standing scientific consensus that global warming poses a risk to human health. The finding played a critical role in regulating greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles such as cars and trucks, which accounted for 28 percent of all U.S. emissions in 2022.
The new lawsuit could once more elevate the fight over whether climate change harms health to the Supreme Court. In 2007 the Court decided in the case Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, qualified as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. This formed the basis of the endangerment finding, which held that six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide from combustion engines, did “threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.”
Rescinding the endangerment finding removes mileage requirements from automakers and could undermine future regulation of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
When contacted by Scientific American on Wednesday, the EPA declined to comment on the lawsuit, citing a long-standing practice of not commenting on current or pending litigation.
Editor’s Note (2/18/26): This is a developing story and may be updated.
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can’t-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world’s best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.