This analysis and news roundup comes from the Canary Media Weekly newsletter. Sign up to get it every Friday.
This week, Trump signed several more executive orders meant to advance his pro–fossil fuel, “energy dominance” agenda. Among them was a directive to Attorney General Pam Bondi to “identify and take action against state laws and policies that burden the use of domestic energy resources.”
That could be a big problem for climate progress in the U.S., because under Trump, states and cities have become the country’s most promising venues for clean energy action.
Trump named some of those state policies as prime targets in the executive order. That includes New York and Vermont’s climate “Superfund” laws, which require oil and gas companies to pay for damages caused by fossil fuel burning. New York taxpayers paid about $2.2 billion for climate-related repairs and projects in 2023, an analysis by the New York Public Interest Research Group found — costs the state’s Superfund could help cover. Trump referred to these policies as “extortion laws.”
California’s expansive cap-and-trade program was also called out in Trump’s order. Under the policy, entities like power plants and large manufacturers that are responsible for most of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions have to either reduce their climate impacts or pay for emissions “allowances.” Available allowances drop every year — and so have the state’s emissions. Other states and multistate coalitions have adopted or are considering similar cap-and-invest programs.
Trump’s order goes on to demand action against policies that mention “climate change,” “environmental justice,” and “greenhouse gas” emissions, effectively putting hundreds of state climate laws and clean-electricity targets in the Justice Department’s crosshairs.
Legal experts are skeptical that Trump can cast such a wide net. Michael Gerrard, faculty director of Columbia University’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, told E&E News that the order is “toothless” and that state judges likely wouldn’t support its implementation. TD Cowen Washington Research Group meanwhile said it sees “no real constitutional or preemption risk” to state clean-electricity standards, carbon trading programs, or low-carbon fuel standards.
But climate-minded state leaders and environmental advocates are still taking the threat seriously. A bipartisan coalition of 24 governors pledged in a statement to defend their state policies against federal overreach. And as Evergreen Action advocate Justin Balik told E&E News, it’s hard not to be worried when the country’s best hope at climate action is at stake.
More big energy stories
Trump’s coal order has a dangerous side effect
President Trump’s other executive orders were aimed at reinvigorating the coal industry and include measures to keep retiring coal plants open and expand mining on federal lands. The orders come just after the administration moved to lay off federal occupational health workers and close mine safety offices in Appalachian coal country.
Energy executives and environmentalists alike say it’s highly unlikely Trump’s actions will rescue the industry, given that both fossil gas and renewables have emerged as cheaper power sources. But the orders still set up a dangerous precedent, Canary Media’s Jeff St. John reports. One of the directives instructs Energy Secretary Chris Wright to give his department sole control over grid-reliability decisions, which will allow it to unilaterally decide to keep uneconomical fossil-fuel plants open.
Clean power had a big March — and year
