Environmental Law Advisor

Shortly after taking office, President Trump froze funding already allocated to various parties, citing the Administration’s disapproval of issues including climate change and social equity. Additionally, executive agencies removed content discussing climate change from websites.

For decades, businesses have focused on “doing more with less,” maximizing efficiency by optimizing resources and streamlining processes to achieve greater output with fewer inputs. This effort often involves leveraging technology, improving productivity, and reducing waste to maintain or enhance performance.

For decades, regulators have tried to quantify harm related to emissions, including the “social cost of carbon” (SCC), but that approach has now changed. The Trump Administration recently released a memorandum seeking to discontinue regulatory use of SCC except as required by law.

The Illinois Commerce Commission staff (ICC Staff) announced recommendations laying the groundwater for Illinois’ first procurement of energy storage resources expected to occur this summer.

In recent years, environmental nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and local governments have increasingly sued gas, oil, and energy companies, challenging their historic messaging on climate change, plastic recycling, and fossil fuels effects.

On April 22, the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order (EO) directing the US Department of Justice (DOJ) to begin to unwind “disparate impact” regulations that were established under federal civil rights laws. In the environmental context, the EO likely represents the functional end of some Biden Administration environmental justice (EJ) efforts.

President Trump’s energy-focused ambitions will generate work for regulators at all levels of the government.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is planning a major reorganization of the Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) that includes consolidating several sections within the division into other DOJ divisions, as well as eliminating field offices.

Earlier this month, California Governor Gavin Newsom directed the state’s recycling agency, CalRecycle, to restart the process of issuing regulations for California’s landmark plastic and packaging extended producer responsibility (EPR) law.

The full scope of the Trump Administration’s deregulatory efforts in the environmental space was recently made clear with a series of announcements from US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin.

The first weeks of the Trump Administration have been defined by executive orders and new policies that were immediately challenged on constitutional or statutory grounds.

In the US Supreme Court’s first post-Chevron decision involving the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the Supreme Court found against EPA, invalidating ‘end result’ NPDES permit requirements.

A Biden-era US Department of Labor (DOL) Rule permitting consideration of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors when choosing investments as a “tiebreaker” was recently upheld by Texas federal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk. This decision applied the US Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, revisiting three topics lost in 2025’s Department of Government Efficiency-era drama.

The Trump Administration is beginning to roll out its policy plans to “dominate” the global energy space. These plans tackle energy transition issues in a dramatically different manner than did the Biden Administration, particularly by leaning into fostering the development of resources, including fossil fuels, nuclear, and hydroelectric power that provide reliable “baseload” supply. This comes as no surprise given President Trump’s promise to “drill, baby, drill” at the inauguration.

The initial weeks of the second Trump Administration has seen fast and furious changes to US government policies touching nearly every aspect of policy.

The Trump Administration has issued a memo directing a temporary freeze on all environmental litigation to allow for review and potential reconsideration by the new Administration of its position in these matters.

Many parties are rightly concerned about the impact of yesterday’s announcement that nearly all federal funds will be frozen for an indeterminate period. Minutes before it was intended to go into effect today, a federal judge in Washington, DC, temporarily ordered the freeze to be lifted until at least Monday February 3, when a full hearing will occur as to whether the freeze is permissible under federal administrative procedure laws and the First Amendment.

The first day of any presidential administration is filled with both ceremony and bureaucracy. The first day of the second Trump Administration was no different.

Working toward a more circular economy will continue to be at the forefront in 2025. More and more, states are requiring producers to manage the end-of-life of an increasing number of consumer items, from packaging materials, paper products, and food service ware, to mattresses, carpets, and more. California is now the first state in the nation to establish an extended producer responsibility program expressly for textiles.

State governments increasingly engage on climate issues. In search of a new source of funding for hundreds of billions of dollars in anticipated climate adaptation costs, a recent New York state law could impose $75 billion of liability on major fossil fuel companies.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced this month that it will use enforcement discretion for the first greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reports due in 2026 to allow regulated businesses (doing business in California with annual revenue of over $1 billion) to report on GHG metrics using older data. CARB is also seeking public comment (due February 14, 2025) on the implementation of the GHG reporting requirements and those related to the disclosure of climate-related financial risks.

In the environmental space, 2024 has been a memorable year with regulatory efforts and court decisions touching on every aspect of environmental and energy regulation, capped out by a closely divided election.

Proponents of more comprehensive climate regulations who are frustrated by the federal government have increasingly turned their attention to state litigation.

There is significant potential that the Congressional Review Act (CRA) will play a prominent role in the early weeks of the Trump Administration. Below, we will break down what the CRA is, when it applies, and how it may be deployed by the incoming US Congress to further Trump Administration regulatory priorities.

As the Biden Administration comes to a close, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has banned two commonly used chemicals under the 2016 Lautenberg Amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).