The administration of President Donald Trump on Thursday (February 12, 2026) announced the repeal ‌of a scientific finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health, removing the legal basis ​for federal climate regulations.

It also ended subsequent federal greenhouse gas emission standards for all ⁠vehicles and engines of model years 2012 to 2027.

Opinion | On U.S. President Donald Trump’s rant against climate change science

The move represents the most sweeping climate change policy rollback by the administration to date, after a string of regulatory cuts and other moves intended to unfetter fossil fuel development and ‌stymie the rollout of clean energy.

“Under the process just completed by the EPA, we are officially terminating the so-called endangerment finding, a disastrous Obama-era policy that severely damaged ‌the American auto industry and drove up prices for American consumers,” Mr. Trump said, announcing the repeal ‌beside ⁠EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and White House Budget director Russ Vought, who has long ⁠sought to revoke the finding.

Mr. Trump has said he believes climate change is a “hoax” and has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Agreement, leaving the world’s largest historic contributor to global warming out of international efforts to combat it, in ​addition to killing Biden-era tax credits aimed at ‌accelerating deployment of electric cars and renewable energy.

The so-called endangerment finding was first adopted by the United States in 2009, and led the EPA to take action under the Clean Air Act of 1963 to curb emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and four other heat-trapping air pollutants from vehicles, ‌power plants and other industries.

Its repeal would remove the regulatory requirements to measure, report, ​certify, and comply with federal greenhouse gas emission standards for cars but may not initially apply to stationary sources such as power plants.

The transportation and power sectors ⁠are each responsible for around a quarter of U.S. greenhouse gas output, according to EPA figures.

The EPA said the repeal will save U.S. taxpayers 1.3 trillion, eliminating both the endangerment finding and all federal GHG emission ‌standards for vehicles.

While many industry groups back the repeal of stringent vehicle emission standards, they have been reluctant to show public support for rescinding the endangerment finding because of the legal and regulatory uncertainty it could unleash. Legal experts said the policy reversal could, for example, lead to a surge in lawsuits known as “public nuisance” actions, a pathway that had been blocked following a 2011 Supreme Court ruling that GHG regulation should be left in the hands of the Environmental Protection Agency instead of the ‌courts.

“This may be another classic case where overreach by the Trump administration comes back to bite it,” said Robert Percival, ​a University of Maryland environmental law professor.

Environmental groups have slammed the proposed repeal as a danger to the climate. Future U.S. administrations seeking to regulate greenhouse gas emissions ⁠likely would need to reinstate the endangerment finding, a task that could be politically and legally complex.

The Environmental ⁠Defence Fund said that the repeal will end up costing Americans more, despite the EPA’s statement that climate regulations have driven up costs for consumers.

“Administrator Lee Zeldin has directed EPA ‌to stop protecting the American people from the pollution that’s causing worse storms, floods, and skyrocketing insurance costs,” said EDF President Fred Krupp. “This action will only lead to more of this pollution, and ​that will lead to higher costs and real harms for American families.”

U.S. President Donald Trump is set this week to scrap a landmark scientific finding that greenhouse gases jeopardise public health by driving climate change — the bedrock of U.S. regulations to curb planet-warming pollution.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) last summer proposed reversing the so-called “endangerment finding” of 2009, in the administration’s latest boost to the fossil fuel industry.

Opinion | On U.S. President Donald Trump’s rant against climate change science

“On Thursday, President Trump will be joined by (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin to formalise the rescission of the 2009 Obama-era endangerment finding,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told a news briefing Tuesday (February 10, 2026).

“This will be the largest deregulatory action in American history, and it will save the American people $1.3 trillion in crushing regulation.”

The finding under then-president Barack Obama concluded that six greenhouse gases — including carbon dioxide and methane — endanger public health and welfare by driving climate change.

That determination flowed from a 2007 Supreme Court decision, Massachusetts v. EPA, which ruled that greenhouse gases qualify as pollutants under the Clean Air Act and directed the EPA to determine whether they pose a danger to public health and welfare.

While it initially applied only to a section of the Clean Air Act governing vehicle emissions, it was later incorporated into other regulations.

As a result, repealing the determination would immediately be accompanied by revoking the requirement for federal greenhouse gas emissions standards for automobiles.

The revocation is also set to place a broader suite of climate regulations at legal risk, including limits on carbon dioxide from power plants and methane from oil and gas operations.

“This action is unlawful, ignores basic science, and denies reality,” said Democratic Governors Gavin Newsom of California, a likely presidential candidate, and Tony Evers of Wisconsin in a joint statement.

“We know greenhouse gases cause climate change and endanger our communities and our health — and we will not stop fighting to protect the American people from pollution.”

Study authored by climate sceptics

The administration’s draft proposal, which elicited more than half a million public comments, asserts that greenhouse gases should not be treated as pollutants in the traditional sense because their effects on human health are indirect and global rather than local.

Regulating them within U.S. borders, it contends, cannot meaningfully resolve a worldwide problem.

The proposal also sought to downplay the scale and impacts of human-caused climate change, citing a study commissioned by an Energy Department working group filled with sceptics of human-caused climate change to produce a report challenging the scientific consensus.

That report was widely criticised for misattribution and misstating the conclusions of the studies it cited.

Environmental groups sued the Energy Department, alleging the panel was convened behind closed doors in violation of federal rules.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright later disbanded the group.

Legal challenges, disputed math

The Trump administration has claimed that repealing the endangerment finding would lead to reduced new car costs, which have spiralled since the pandemic, but its calculations do not account for savings from reduced fuel use.

Dan Becker of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Safe Climate Transport Campaign said the administration was “stoking oil demand at home by pushing for more gas guzzlers” while presenting a gift to China’s electric vehicle makers, who would no longer face meaningful U.S. competition.

While the administration says the rules imposed more than $1 trillion in cumulative regulatory costs that were passed on as “hidden taxes”, critics say it does not weigh those costs against the monetised benefits from climate protection, public health and fuel savings.

“The EPA’s slapdash legal arguments should be laughed out of court,” said Meredith Hankins, federal climate legal director at the Natural Resources Defence Council, vowing a swift court challenge.