Trump wants the EPA to stop regulating
climate pollution. Blue states have launched
a high-stakes legal case against him
CNN,
by
Ella Nilsen
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
3/20/2026 3:00:46 AM
A coalition of 40 Democratic states, cities and counties sued the Trump administration on Thursday, challenging the recent termination of a longstanding policy allowing the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate climate pollution.
The lawsuit, and others like it, will kick off a years-long court saga that could wind up at the Supreme Court and determine the fate of Trump’s plan to undo decades of climate policy.
First issued in 2009 during the Obama administration, the endangerment finding is considered the federal government’s most powerful tool to tackle climate pollution. The finding determined that six greenhouse gases could be categorized as dangerous to human health
Post Reply
Reminder: “WE ARE A SALON AND NOT A SALOON”
Your thoughts, comments, and ideas are always welcome here. But we ask you to please be mindful and respectful. Threatening or crude language doesn't persuade anybody and makes the conversation less enjoyable for fellow L.Dotters.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
JimBob 3/20/2026 4:19:00 AM (No. 2082526)
The whole Global Cooling (oops!) / Global Warming (oops! / Climate Change (oops!) / ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE DISRUPTION (There, That's It- at least for now!)..... narrative is the Biggest SCAM in Human History!
This SCAM was given a HUGE BOOST with Zero's EPA 'Finding'..... the thing that President Trump is working to REMOVE.
America and Europe are destroying their manufacturing and industrial base chasing 'Net Zero Carbon Emissions', while Communist China is putting TWO LARGE COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS INTO SERVICE- EVERY WEEK! China now burn more Coal than the rest of the world- COMBINED!
But CHINA calls itself a 'Developing Nation' and Exempts itself from All the UN 'Climate' treaties and agreements.
But the Carbon Dioxide created in China is carried Around the Globe. There is NO net reduction.
Recent Ice Core studies show that temperature change like we are seeing these last few years have happened many times in the past..... before humans were organized and burning wood or coal
This is nothing more than a GIANT WEALTH TRANSFER OPERATION from America and Europe to Communist China.
22 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 3/20/2026 6:25:37 AM (No. 2082541)
Gotta keep the scam rolling along.
15 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Strike3 3/20/2026 7:22:39 AM (No. 2082556)
All I see here is pollution in the human gene pool by Letitia James.
13 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
danoso 3/20/2026 7:45:32 AM (No. 2082575)
CNN really is a hopeless case. Climate pollution? They want to leave the impression that Trump is fine with belching smokestacks or something. Obviously this is all about the dubious ruling from Obama to classify CO2 as a pollutant, a nonsensical position. CNN delenda est.
12 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
RuckusTom 3/20/2026 7:46:05 AM (No. 2082577)
"First issued in 2009 during the Obama administration, the endangerment finding is considered the federal government’s most powerful tool to tackle climate pollution."
Figures.
9 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
skacmar 3/20/2026 7:55:27 AM (No. 2082585)
If the EPA has the power to regulate or set policy on greenhouse gasses, they have the power to change and update their policies. Trump is simply updating or removing outdated policies. If the states don't like it, the are free to issue their own reasonable policies. Unfortunately, the Democrat State AGs want unreasonable policies for everyone.
6 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
franq 3/20/2026 8:34:55 AM (No. 2082606)
Nothing but chaos, lies, and tomfoolery.
5 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 3/20/2026 8:54:47 AM (No. 2082619)
The key issue about this has nothing to do with climate. It is the question whether the Federal government can take major actions, seek legal challenges, and spend massive amounts of money based on the decisions of Executive agencies vs. Legislation based on Congressional and Presidential approval. AND whether agencies, even with legislation authorizing it, can bind and limit the power of the Chief Executive who is their boss, which is Constitutionally not permissible.
The government has drifted in this direction for several decades of mostly dem control because the dems could not get sufficient majorities and presidential approval enough to pass their agendas. So they shopped it out to government agencies and declared that was good enough. Liberal courts gave the process a wink and a nod and let it proceed.
Then it all started to fall apart. Agencies were NEVER meant to have such power. More Conservative courts started to rule against such arbitrary and UNCONSTITUTIONAL power. Trump started challenging and winning decisions that had left power in the hands of agencies. Agencies that asserted their power OVER the duly elected President were declared to be acting unconstitutionally. The SCOTUS has clearly stated that agencies that have acted this way are acting illegally. The SCOTUS has also said that legislation that limits the President's CONSTITUTIONALLY defined powers is illegal.
So, the dems can posture and pose but most of the legal groundwork that removes the power from the agencies to make impactful decisions without CONSTITUTIONAL or LEGISLATIVE supporting steps has already been done. It just needs to be applied to this specific issue.
And per the doctrine of "fruit from a poisonous tree", agency findings by themselves have no legal weight, so actions based on those findings are also without legal weight. The whole structure of climate Imperial Rule falls apart. If the Climate Alarmists want to control things, they are going to have to pass Constitutionally viable LAWS, approved by Congress and the President, slowly and painfully, in an atmosphere that is doubtful and suspicious of the Alarmists motives and information.
It's just not going to happen.
8 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
kono 3/20/2026 9:10:58 AM (No. 2082627)
#1 is on to the main feature, the Left's typical language pivot when they've lost the advantage. But the new term seems to be "climate pollution". That's sufficiently murky in its meaning to be used for whatever they want it to mean.
6 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
snowoutlaw 3/20/2026 9:41:27 AM (No. 2082651)
The SC already ruled on this a few years ago. The first real court will just follow that SC ruling.
2 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Kate318 3/20/2026 9:50:44 AM (No. 2082653)
I’m so sick and tired of blue states. Can we please, please have a serious discussion about a national divorce, now? As long as there are democrats, the union is beyond reconciliation.
3 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
padiva 3/20/2026 10:19:30 AM (No. 2082666)
It's all about controlling people.
4 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
mc squared 3/20/2026 10:28:54 AM (No. 2082672)
Just like the underworld when prohibition was ended and liquor was legal again. The Golden Goose was cooked.
3 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
DVC 3/20/2026 3:39:55 PM (No. 2082838)
The concept of "climate pollution" is a myth. Totally fictional.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)