-1600x900.webp)
Click here to subscribe to our Patreon, where you'll get free merch and receive exclusive access to The Pebble, which features Ethan's full monthly column and snippets of The Sweaty Penguin's latest climate solutions stories.
Among the many actions taken by the Trump administration in the last 14 months in opposition to environmental advocates, none sounded alarm bells quite like last month’s repeal of the Endangerment Finding. In the courtroom, this action is as juicy as it gets. But from a “climate math” perspective, it’s really not that big a deal.
The Endangerment Finding is a 2009 determination from the Environmental Protection Agency, which serves as the basis for the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, most notably from motor vehicles and large stationary sources such as fossil fuel power plants. On February 12, 2026, the EPA finalized the rescission of the Endangerment Finding, and with that, repealed federal GHG emission standards for motor vehicles and engines. Three legal challenges have already emerged in the month since.
Seemingly, everyone thinks this new Rescission Rule is a massive deal. Mainstream media headlines called it Trump’s “biggest climate rollback” and said the president “erased the government’s power to fight climate change.” Environmental groups called it a “cold-hearted plan to let climate pollution run wild” and said it “sets our country down a dangerous path.” Meanwhile, the president himself deemed the new rule “about as big as it gets,” while EPA administrator Lee Zeldin declared it “the single largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States.”
On the Rescission Rule’s merits, the environmental groups are correct. Repealing the Endangerment Finding is scientifically wrong and legally untenable, so much so that even a conservative Supreme Court may not allow it. That said, it is not nearly as big a blow for American climate emissions as stakeholders on both sides seem to suggest. The Rescission Rule will likely face years of litigation, after which time a future administration may reinstate the Endangerment Finding or individual states may impose their own stricter standards. Amid all that uncertainty, manufacturers are unlikely to scrap years of investment and start making dramatically less efficient vehicles overnight. And with electric vehicles getting less expensive and more popular each year, they may be outcompeting gas-powered vehicles by the time the dust settles. While this repeal is unlawful, unscientific, and should be reversed — it will not impede America’s climate progress if it stands.