Heavy traffic fills multiple lanes of a freeway in Los Angeles, California, in February. Photograph: Apu Gomes/Getty ImagesView image in fullscreenHeavy traffic fills multiple lanes of a freeway in Los Angeles, California, in February. Photograph: Apu Gomes/Getty ImagesYoung Americans demand court halt Trump’s biggest rollbacks of pollution protectionsSuit says administration is impinging on rights to life and liberty by worsening planet-warming and toxic pollution
Eighteen American youth are demanding that a court immediately halt the Trump administration’s repeal of the scientific finding underpinning virtually all US climate regulations.
The plaintiffs sued the Trump administration in February days after officials revoked the 2009 endangerment finding, which found that greenhouse gas pollution threatens public health and welfare. Filed in the Washington DC circuit court of appeals Venner v EPA alleges that the move infringes upon rights guaranteed by the US constitution, including to religious freedom, life and liberty.
“My faith has taught me to protect and nurture all children, all life, all creation,” said Elena Venner, the 21-year-old named plaintiff in the case. “With these repeals, the conditions for life are not being protected.”
The rule must be halted urgently, says a motion for a stay filed on Wednesday, and shared with the Guardian, because it is already causing damage: car companies are already changing their business plans to lock in more gas-powered vehicles, it says.
The filing also asks the court to immediately halt the repeal of annual motor vehicle greenhouse gas standards, which the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized the day it rolled back the endangerment finding. In the time it could take for their lawsuit to wind through the courts, the filing says, the rescissions may result in an additional gigaton of additional planet-warming C02 pollution – more than Japan’s total emissions in one year. That figure is based on EPA’s 2024 calculations of pollution cuts attributable to the regulations each year.
“The increased exposure to all of the pollutants that will result from this rule can’t be undone,” said Julia Olson, the founder and chief legal counsel for Our Children’s Trust, the non-profit law firm behind the lawsuit. “The harm to the petitioners is irreversible.”
More than a dozen environmental groups and public health advocacy organizations also sued EPA over the February repeals, but the Venner v EPA plaintiffs are the first to call for a stay. They are also the only ones calling for the repeal to be struck down on constitutional grounds.
By worsening planet-warming and toxic pollution, the challengers say, the administration is impinging upon their rights to life and liberty. It is also threatening states’ ability to protect the rights they provide to their citizens, something protected under the fifth amendment.
In June 2024, for instance, Hawaii committed to decarbonizing its transportation system by 2045 in the settlement for another Our Children’s Trust case, Navahine v Hawaii Department of Transportation. The case was brought under the state’s constitution, which states: “All public natural resources are held in trust by the State for the benefit of the people.”
“Hawaii’s ability to decarbonize transportation and move towards EVs, to comply with the settlement agreement [and to] uphold its own constitution are all being harmed by what EPA has just done,” Olson said.
The repeal is also impeding plaintiffs’ ability to engage in religious customs, in violation of the rights to religious freedom guaranteed by the first amendment and 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the challengers say. One Muslim challenger in California, for instance, says her ability to fast for Ramadan is being threatened by increased risk of dehydration amid extreme heat.
Venner, meanwhile, said that by degrading the natural world, the repeal is inhibiting her ability to practice Catholicism, which holds that the environment must be protected. In Laudato Si: On Care for Our Common Home, a 2015 encyclical, Venner noted, “Pope Francis said the climate is a common good, and it belongs to everyone, and it’s meant for everyone because it’s a foundational system that helps support all human life.”
“When I look at what’s being rolled back right now, it’s making that foundation less stable,” she said.
Elijah Schaffzin, a 17-year-old Memphis native and a challenger in the case, said the repeal will impact his ability to practice Judaism. He suffers from has asthma and severe pollen allergies, which force him to take a “cocktail of medications” and avoid going outside at all in springtime. Increased heat and pollution will make his ailments worse, which in turn will make it harder for him to observe his faith, he said, for instance by impeding his ability to go to synagogue on Saturdays. When observing the Sabbath, Jewish law forbids the operation of motor vehicles.
“If I want to go to services on Saturdays, I have to walk, and my walk is about 0.7 miles, or 20 to 25 minutes each way [along] a six-lane road that is extremely busy and polluted,” he said. “That means for stretches that are unshaded on days where the heat index is too high, or when there’s an air quality alert issued, or if the pollen is too intense, I’m unable to go.”
“They’re prioritizing the financial interests of certain industries over the health and safety of children,” she said.
