Zeldin tells climate skeptics to "celebrate" endangerment finding repeal

Zeldin urges “vindication” after EPA repeals 2009 endangerment finding

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin used a conservative conference setting to defend the Environmental Protection Agency’s repeal of a key legal finding that has been used to set federal rules aimed at slowing climate change. Speaking Wednesday at a conference hosted by the Heartland Institute, Zeldin framed the change as a reversal of what he characterized as years of deference to “liberal politicians and environmental groups.”

In his keynote address, Zeldin told attendees the day was one to mark what he described as vindication of the position that climate policy should not rely on the 2009 “endangerment finding.” He said, “Today is a moment to celebrate. It is a day to celebrate vindication,” according to the account of his remarks. Zeldin, a former Republican congressman from New York, made the appearance days after Pam Bondi’s forced departure, a detail the report said left him widely believed to be in contention for a possible promotion to attorney general.

The EPA earlier this year revoked the endangerment finding, a scientific conclusion that had provided the central basis for regulating planet-warming emissions for more than a decade and a half. The finding determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare, underpinning climate regulations under the Clean Air Act for motor vehicles, power plants and other pollution sources.

Trump administration officials have argued that the endangerment finding hurts industry and the economy and that prior administrations “twisted science” to conclude that greenhouse gases are a public health risk. Zeldin echoed that theme at Heartland, telling the conference it reflected the “front lines” against having an endangerment finding in 2009 and arguing that earlier adherence to the finding had been unthinking.

Backlash from environmental groups and EPA response

Environmental advocates criticized Zeldin’s decision to open the Heartland conference. Joe Bonfiglio, U.S. director of the Environmental Defense Fund, denounced the appearance as an effort that promotes disinformation and accused the administration of doing Heartland’s bidding, according to the report. Bonfiglio said the Heartland Institute is “not a serious scientific organization” and called it “a disinformation factory,” adding that having the EPA administrator as the group’s opening act was “embarrassing.”

The report also said Bonfiglio described the speech as “surreal” and said the remarks were tone-deaf and insulting given rising gasoline costs and more frequent extreme weather events, including the report’s reference to a major heat event in the Southwest last month and March heat records in 14 states. Heartland’s framing, Bonfiglio said, discourages people from “look[ing] out the window” to defend positions that climate change is not a threat.

An EPA spokeswoman dismissed the criticism. She said, “the era of EPA as a vehicle for radical ideology is over,” and told the report that Zeldin aimed to return the agency to statutory obligations to protect human health and the environment, “backed by gold standard science, not doomsday models designed to scare the public into compliance.”

What the repeal changes and what comes next

The Heartland Institute, based in Illinois, describes itself as a “free-market think tank” and says it aims to challenge the narrative that the world faces a climate crisis driven by burning fossil fuels. The organization does not disclose its funder list, and the report said it has received financial support from oil and gas interests.

Zeldin’s speech highlighted what critics say is the regulatory impact of the legal change. The report said the 2009 endangerment finding functioned as the legal underpinning for nearly all climate regulations under the Clean Air Act. The repeal, experts said, eliminates greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and trucks and could unleash a broader rollback of climate regulations for stationary sources such as power plants and oil and gas facilities.

Legal challenges have been filed by nearly two dozen states, along with cities and public health and environmental groups, the report said. MSI previously reported that states and cities sued EPA over the repeal as courts evaluate the agency’s authority following the change.