United States: The Trump administration has already cut funding for climate research, removed past climate reports from government websites, and dismissed federal scientists who worked on the National Climate Assessment. Now, according to a new lawsuit from environmental groups, it has taken the next step — reshaping the science itself.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is moving to cancel the Endangerment Finding — the 2009 decision that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases harm public health and can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. At the same time, the Department of Energy (DOE) released a new review on the impacts of greenhouse gases. This report is being seen by critics as an attempt to back the EPA’s plan to weaken climate protections.
A Report with Controversial Origins
The DOE’s document, titled “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate”, was put together earlier this year by the 2025 Climate Working Group — a panel of five scientists chosen directly by Energy Secretary Chris Wright.
These five scientists, however, are widely known in the climate community for skeptical or contrarian views on global warming. Critics point out that they were selected without any public announcement, and the report was written in a matter of weeks behind closed doors.
In the preface, the authors admit that the short deadline meant they “could not comprehensively review all topics.” Yet, they still delivered their final draft by May 28, which quickly became a tool for the EPA.
What the Report Claims
The DOE report suggests:
- The warming effect of carbon emissions may not be as harmful as widely believed.
- Aggressive US climate policies would have a minimal impact on the global climate.
- Some warming could be attributed to natural cycles or changes in the sun, rather than just fossil fuel burning.
- Sea level rise is not accelerating — a claim that goes against well-established data.
- Higher carbon dioxide levels may even help plant growth.
This stands in sharp contrast to the scientific consensus that human activity is the main driver of dangerous climate change and that the risks are already severe.
Scientists Push Back
Experts have called the DOE’s review misleading and incomplete.
Phil Duffy, a climate scientist who worked under both the Obama and Biden administrations, says the document “presents an incomplete and misleading picture of how climate change is affecting the United States.”
Other scientists have published fact-checks listing over 100 false or distorted claims in the DOE report. Many accuse the authors of cherry-picking evidence and misrepresenting peer-reviewed studies — including the work of Ben Santer, a respected climate researcher.
“This DOE report is in service of a political goal,” Santer said. “It’s not credible science.”
Political and Industry Ties
Energy Secretary Chris Wright is a former oil and gas executive who has been open about his belief that climate change is a “by-product of progress.” In earlier writings, he argued that while climate change is real, it is not the greatest threat, and expanding energy access should come first.
Wright has also hinted at plans to review past National Climate Assessments — massive reports written over the years by hundreds of scientists. This has raised fears that the administration could edit or censor key findings.
The Legal Battle
The Environmental Defense Fund and the Union of Concerned Scientists have now filed a federal lawsuit against both the EPA and DOE. They claim the Climate Working Group was created in secret, in violation of transparency laws, and that its biased report is being used to justify major policy rollbacks.
The lawsuit asks the court to block the government from using the DOE report to repeal the Endangerment Finding until the process follows legal rules for openness and balanced expert input.
Both the EPA and DOE have refused to comment on the lawsuit.
Why It Matters
The Endangerment Finding is a cornerstone of US climate policy. If it is overturned using this controversial report, it could weaken or eliminate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, power plants, and industries.
Scientists warn that such a move could set back climate action for years, even as extreme heat, flooding, and storms — made worse by global warming — continue to cause damage across the country.
