SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
earthjustice
In 'Death Knell for America's Wildlife,' Trump Admin Guts Habitat Protections for Endangered Species
"If animals don’t have a place to live, they can’t live," said one critic.
Jul 10, 2026
President Donald Trump's administration on Friday paved the way for letting US corporations destroy the habitats of endangered species by rescinding a longtime interpretation of the Endangered Species Act.
As reported by The New York Times, the Interior Department and the Commerce Department announced that they were narrowing the law's definition of what constitutes harming endangered species.
Whereas the law has for decades been interpreted as protecting endangered animals' habitats from significant "modification or degradation," the administration said that offenders would have to directly injure or kill an endangered animal to be considered in violation of the law.
"The change could open the door for fossil fuel companies, agricultural interests, land developers, and others," wrote the Times, "to disturb or even destroy the habitats of vulnerable species."
The Endangered Species Act has been interpreted as protecting animals' habitats for decades, and that interpretation upheld by the US Supreme Court in 1995.
Environmental advocates expressed horror in response to the rule change, which they said would put endangered species at unprecedented risk.
Kristen Boyles, attorney for Earthjustice, vowed that the administration would face legal challenges for its rule change, which she said would jeopardize endangered animals' ability to "raise their young, or search for food."
"Let’s be clear: There is no support for the Trump Administration’s rule—no scientific support, no legal support, no public support," Boyles said. "We will see the Trump Administration in court."
Ben Greuel, wildlife campaign manager at the Sierra Club, called the rule changed "a direct attack on the foundation of the Endangered Species Act" that, if kept in place, would put species "on a path to extinction."
"This rule ignores that reality in an unlawful attempt to open the door for corporate polluters to degrade vitally important habitats, wildlife be damned," Greuel emphasized. "The Endangered Species Act is a bedrock law that must be followed."
Tara Zuardo, a senior campaigner at the Center for Biological Diversity, pointed out that "habitat destruction is the number one threat to endangered species," while calling the Trump administration's new policy "a death knell for America’s wildlife."
"If animals don’t have a place to live, they can’t live," Zuardo said. "Spotted owls, Atlantic salmon, Florida panthers, and thousands of other species need protections for the wild places where they make their homes."
Andrew Bowman, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, accused the Trump administration of embracing an "erroneous and nonsensical interpretation" of the Endangered Species Act that he vowed to challenge in court.
"We intend to fight back with the full force of the law," said Bowman, "to defeat this attack and innumerable others by the administration on the statutes and regulations that protect America’s cherished wildlife."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Good News for Clean Air' as Court Rejects Trump EPA Bid to Ditch Coal Plant Soot Rule
"The court’s rejection of the Trump administration’s attempt to eliminate our national health standards for soot will mean healthier, longer lives for people across the country," said one advocate.
Jun 26, 2026
A federal appeals court on Friday rejected the US Environmental Protection Agency's attempt to scrap a Biden-era rule tightening limits on harmful soot pollution spewed from coal-fired power plants and other sources.
In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dealt a blow to President Donald Trump's deregulatory agenda by leaving intact a national soot standard enacted in 2024 that lowers the amount of fine particulate matter from power plants, factories, and vehicles from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter.
"Soot, made up of tiny toxic particles that lodge deep in the lungs, results in severe health harms, including premature death, and comes from sources like vehicle exhaust pipes, power plants, and factories," the legal advocacy group Earthjustice explained.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Administrator Lee Zeldin last year asked the appellate court to invalidate the soot rule, claiming that the Biden administration exceeded its authority and failed to take into account the economic cost of implementing the policy.
“Clean air is not a luxury. We are thrilled these vital air quality standards have been upheld by a federal court,” said Patrice Simms, vice president of Healthy Communities at Earthjustice. “The 2024 soot standard is a critical advancement for public health, projected to save thousands of lives every year. Lee Zeldin’s EPA must stop catering to polluters and must instead fulfill its mission to protect public health. The time for implementing the 2024 soot standard is now.”
Clean Air Task Force senior director of legal advocacy Shaun Goho also welcomed the ruling, saying: "Fine particulate matter standards provide critical public health protections. The court correctly rejected EPA’s about-face on the need for a stronger standard."
Katie Huffing, executive director of the Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, called Friday's decision "a win for public health."
“Every day in practice, nurses witness and treat conditions made worse by soot pollution," she said. "From asthma exacerbations and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to heart disease and preterm birth, nurses see the real-world health implications of toxic air pollution."
"The science shows stronger limits to reduce dangerous soot pollution provide significant health benefits for Americans, especially for those most vulnerable and those exposed to higher levels of particulate matter pollution," Huffing added. "We now urge EPA to fully implement the strengthened standard to ensure those health benefits are realized.”
Noha Haggag, senior attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund, said that “today’s federal court decision is good news for clean air in America and for the millions of people harmed by deadly soot."
“Soot can cause asthma attacks, lung cancer, and premature deaths," Haggag added. "The court’s rejection of the Trump administration’s attempt to eliminate our national health standards for soot will mean healthier, longer lives for people across the country.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's ANWR Oil and Gas Auction Was a Bust—But Alaskan Arctic Still Faces Fossil Fuel Threat
"Even though the interest in today’s sale was tepid, the new leasing still poses significant threats to habitat, iconic wildlife, and Indigenous ways of life," said Earthjustice.
Jun 05, 2026
In an embarrassment for President Donald Trump and his "drill, baby, drill" energy policy, Friday's third oil and gas lease sale in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge once again drew no bids from Big Oil—but conservationists stressed that fossil fuel expansion still poses a serious threat to the pristine wilderness and its human and animal inhabitants.
The US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) offered 60 tracts on 689,000 acres in the ANWR in northeastern Alaska's Coastal Plain for lease sales. Just two companies—the government-owned Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority and Hex LLC, an Alaska firm—bought five leases that generated a paltry $3.7 million in total receipts.
“Yet again, no major oil and gas companies showed up to bid, because they know that drilling in the Arctic Refuge is a losing proposition,” said Kristen Moreland, executive director of the Gwich'in Steering Committee, which represents the Gwich'in Indigenous people and opposes drilling.
“We will continue to fight the Trump administration’s leasing program, and work with our friends and allies to protect this sacred and irreplaceable landscape from development of any kind," Moreland added.
The Trump administration had touted fossil fuel lease sales as a way to help pay for tax cuts in the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act that mostly benefited corporations and wealthy individuals. The law, which was signed last July by Trump and extends tax cuts the president enacted in 2017, is expected to result in over $5 trillion in lost revenue through 2034, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation, the world's leading independent tax policy nonprofit.
Despite the underwhelming result, the BLM described Friday's ANWR lease sale as "successful," with agency Director Steve Pearce calling it "another important step toward restoring American Energy Dominance and responsibly developing the vast resources Congress directed us to make available in the Coastal Plain."
Friday's lease sale was the third such auction, the first of which was held in 2021 during Trump's first term and generated just 1% of the administration's projected revenue. The Biden administration—which canceled the leases issued in the 2021 sale—held another lease auction last year because Trump's 2017 tax cut law required two ANWR lease sales within seven years. The 2025 auction drew no bidders.
Green groups and other drilling opponents warned that Friday's flop does not diminish the threat posed by fossil fuel development in ANWR, which is home to the North Slope Iñupiat and the Gwich’in peoples and 270 animal species, including all of the world’s remaining South Beaufort Sea polar bears and the 200,000 porcupine caribou upon which the Gwich'in—who call the area the "sacred place where life begins—rely upon for their survival. The North Slope Iñupiat broadly support drilling and called Friday's lease sale "an important milestone."
"Even though the interest in today’s sale was tepid, the new leasing still poses significant threats to habitat, iconic wildlife, and Indigenous ways of life in one of the nation’s most wild and beautiful landscapes," Earthjustice—one of the groups leading a lawsuit challenging the lease sales—said in a statement. "All of today’s leases are in important polar bear habitat, for example."
Athan Manuel, the Sierra Club's director of lands protection, said that "today's lease sale was another embarrassment and broken promise. The Trump administration has pushed leasing out the Arctic Refuge as the way to finance huge tax cuts, yet today generated $3.7 million for the federal government."
“Let's call that what it is, another scam to trick Americans into giving away our precious natural world," Manuel continued. "It does nothing to change the reality that drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge remains a risky, controversial, and fundamentally flawed proposition."
"For years, the public was promised that sacrificing the refuge would generate significant economic benefits," Manuel added. "Instead, this leasing program has been plagued by uncertainty while putting one of America's most important public lands at risk."
Autumn Hanna, vice president of the advocacy group Taxpayers for Common Sense, said, "From two previous failed lease sales that delivered less than 1% of promised revenue, taxpayers already know that drilling in the Arctic Refuge is a bad deal."
"Today’s lease sale is yet another reminder that oil and gas development in the refuge is high-risk, low-reward, with zero interest from real industry players," Hanna added. "Americans will not see relief at the pump and, instead, face greater risks from the drilling in a sensitive region.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular