Trump Order Challenges State Climate Regulations

In a dramatic action that promises to remake America's environmental policy landscape, U.S. President Donald Trump on April 8 signed a contentious executive order called "Protecting American Energy from State Overreach." The order instructs the federal administration to shut out state-level climate legislation that limits the use of fossil fuels, encourages environmental regulation, or includes ESG (environmental, social, governance) principles — contending such measures are unconstitutional, onerous, and detrimental to national interests.

Positing state climate legislation as an economic threat as well as a national security risk, Trump's executive order authorizes the U.S. Attorney General to find all such applicable laws and lawsuits — most notably those penalizing fossil fuel corporations, implementing carbon caps or taxes, holding up energy permitting, or citing climate justice policy. The Department of Justice is directed to seek legal action to challenge them and make findings in 60 days, which could be a harbinger of a legal and political confrontation between federal and state authorities.

The executive order is a big extension of federal power and part of Trump's larger pro-fossil fuel agenda. His administration sees many climate efforts initiated by states as ideological excesses that hurt consumers and undermine American energy superiority. "Americans need to be allowed to heat their houses, power their vehicles, and enjoy peace of mind — without policies that drive up the cost of energy and inevitably compromise quality of life," the order reads.

Targeted among the targeted laws are New York's so-called "climate change extortion law," which assesses retroactive fines on fossil fuel firms for past emissions, and Vermont's analogous legislation seeking to hold corporations financially liable for global emissions outputs. California's cap-and-trade system also gets in its share of criticism, with the Trump administration complaining it forces companies to purchase carbon credits under so-called "impossible caps." The order also seeks to put an end to a tidal wave of state-level climate liability lawsuits, which it argues would leave energy producers facing "crippling damages" tied to global emissions.

The executive order has already been met with intense criticism from Democratic governors and climate activists. New York Governor Kathy Hochul and New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, co-chairs of the U.S. Climate Alliance, issued a joint statement denouncing the action. "We will continue to move forward with solutions to the climate crisis that build the clean energy economy and ensure our future is healthier and safer," they said, upholding their support for state-led environmental leadership.

On the contrary, the fossil fuel sector embraced the order. The American Petroleum Institute credited it with shielding energy producers against "unconstitutional efforts" from states like California and New York, which have increasingly shifted toward holding the sector responsible for contributing to the climate crisis.

The executive order was issued at a time of increased tension between the federal and state governments regarding action on climate change. Since the Clean Power Plan under Obama, under which states were incentivized to lower carbon emissions from power plants, several states have assumed leadership on climate change — particularly as federal leadership faltered under Trump's first term. Between 2018 and 2023, California, Massachusetts, and New York, among other states, filed lawsuits against large oil companies seeking damages for climate effects of decades of fossil fuel emissions.

Trump's latest action not only aims to roll back these legal steps but also heralds a wider attack on what his administration describes as "ideologically driven" climate regulations. Lawyers predict the order will trigger a tide of constitutional challenges, especially based on federalism and states' rights grounds. The Tenth Amendment grants states considerable regulatory authority, particularly in fields such as environmental protection — leaving open questions about whether the federal government can preempt such authority.

Over the next two months, the Department of Justice is to present a report defining whose state laws and suits are likely to be federally challenged, with additional executive or legislative measures to follow. Concurrently, states can mount legal defenses or enact new bills to exercise their regulatory powers.

Environmental groups caution that if the order is implemented in full, it would suppress state-level innovation in climate policy, sap the momentum behind clean energy growth, and erode legal accountability for fossil fuel corporations. Opponents also say it sends a chilling signal to investors, insurers, and local governments who have adopted ESG frameworks as tools for managing climate risk and creating sustainable economies.

As the country continues to move toward an election year, Trump's executive order can already be anticipated as a battleground issue in the already contentious debate regarding the direction of U.S. climate policy. The verdict on the upcoming court battles might remake the distribution of power between Washington and the states — and shape the rhythm and direction of America's response to climate for many years.