{"id":375218,"date":"2025-04-16T08:33:35","date_gmt":"2025-04-16T06:33:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=375218"},"modified":"2025-04-16T08:33:37","modified_gmt":"2025-04-16T06:33:37","slug":"archive-emails-privilege-logs-suggest-epas-endangerment-finding-was-unlawfully-predetermined-review-needed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=375218","title":{"rendered":"Archive: Emails, Privilege Logs Suggest EPA\u2019s Endangerment Finding Was Unlawfully Predetermined, Review Needed"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Government Accountability & Oversight<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Webadmin<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amid reports that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is reconsidering the December 2009 \u201cEndangerment Finding\u201d regarding greenhouse gases,[1]<\/a> a recanvassing of emails obtained in the infamous \u201cRichard Windsor\u201d Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit brought over a dozen years ago by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) against the Agency[2]<\/a> leads to a troubling conclusion: the Obama EPA\u2019s regulatory \u201cfinding\u201d that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare was the product of an illusory notice-and-comment process, and the agency predetermined its outcome because the relevant decisionmakers had unalterably closed minds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Endangerment Finding is the basis for the entire \u201cclimate\u201d regulatory edifice that has followed, not to mention the electricity reliability crisis we are now being warned about by reliability organizations such as the North American Electric Reliability Corp.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Putting aside the obvious imperative for revisiting the EF given the evolution of scientific understanding and increasing disparity between the claims serving as the basis for the EF and subsequent scientific observations casting doubt on its evidentiary foundations, none of the proposed reforms to that climate regulatory state are likely to be durable if the Endangerment Finding remains in place. All of the regulatory reforms will be short-term and, ultimately, for naught. Electricity reliability crises will indeed be the new normal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reviewing the Agency\u2019s internal record for procedural improprieties is a responsible step in reconsidering any<\/em> prior or pending action. This is particularly important given what we have learned<\/a> about the Obama and Biden EPA and other agencies deployed in the facially unconstitutional \u201cwhole of government\u201d approach to imposing this climate agenda, despite the whole of government not being authorized to implement such policy and, per West Virginia v. EPA<\/em>, even the EPA not having been authorized to do most of what it is trying to do post-EF.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And these emails, and privilege logs<\/a> of randomly selected (by EPA) withheld-in-full records from CEI\u2019s FOIA litigation suggest that there is a sound basis for believing the Obama team proceeded with a predetermined outcome in mind, and that the Endangerment Finding was the product of  unalterably closed minds such that there was no realistic chance the process would achieve any other result. That violates our due process requirements as affirmed in the Administrative Procedure Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even given just that information, to protect the integrity of the rulemaking process and hopefully guard against further adventurism in the future, it is clear that any reconsideration should also consider what the internal discussions reveal about the original propriety of this action in this respect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Endangerment Finding Timeline<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

10.20.99          International Center for Technology Assessment submits petition to EPA seeking regulation of GHGs under \u00a7 202(a) of the CAA. This was denied in Sept. 2003, then winded its way through DC Cir. litigation, where that court upheld the denial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4.02.07            SCOTUS holds 5-4 in Massachusetts v. EPA<\/em> that the CAA definition of \u201cair pollutant\u201d contemplates GHGs, and that the Administrator must determine whether emissions of greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution, which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make that decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It did not order EPA to regulate GHGs, but to set forth a reasoned basis for doing so or not doing so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

12.18.08          EPA Administrator Johnson finds no endangerment, focusing specifically on stationary source permitting requirements, as set forth in the 19-page \u201cJohnson memo\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1.21.09            Obama administration takes office at noon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1.29.09            Principal advisor to the Administrator on legislative climate issues and former green-group (NRDC) lawyer, David McIntosh, reports to the Administrator Lisa Jackson (under her false-identity email account in the name of \u201cRichard Windsor\u201d) and Lisa Heinzerling[3]<\/a> about the second of two scheduled meetings with [          REDACTED        ]            climate modelers. [     REDACTED    ].\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1.30.09            Scheduled \u201cBriefing on the response to the Endangerment issue from Mass. v EPA<\/em>\u201c<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.08.09            Lisa Heinzerling sends \u201cRichard Windsor\u201d a \u201cpower plants memo\u201d, withheld in full (WIF)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.09.09            Jackson, McIntosh call with White House climate advisor \u201cCarol Browner to discuss Coal Plants\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.16.09            Emails, heavily redacted, discuss how much and what to say to NYT\u2019s Broder in interview the next day. Redactions include discussion of endangerment. State, re that interview: \u201cSUBJECT: Handshake meeting; Opportunity to outline agenda; endangerment<\/strong>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.16.09            Jackson writes to Heinzerling, Subject: Good news re: Johnson memo, \u201cThe Sierra Club and other petitioners who have challenged the Johnson memo on PSD will NOT be asking the court to stay the memo tomorrow. [            REDACTED     (two lines )                    ]. Have a good night.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Heinzerling responds, \u201cWow. How did you pull THAT off?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

That seems a very good question.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.18.09            NYT\u2019s Broder publishes story \u201cEPA to regulate Greenhouse gases\u201d. Story quotes Jackson saying mind not made up but Mass. v EPA<\/em> anniversary was coming up, which she calls \u201cmomentous,\u201d saying \u201cWe have to lay out a road map.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EPA redacted several emails, shielding discussion of same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>2.22.09            Vaughn index shows several email discussions of Endangerment, between Administrator and Heinzerling, WIF, as was email with same and public affairs chief discussing when and how to tell public about EF<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.23.09            Email from Bob Sussman to Windsor, Heinzerling, McIntosh, Subject: \u201cOMB\/Endangerment Finding\u201d, refers to recommendation for \u201cone important item\u201d from Michael Fitzpatrick of OIRA (OMB) for proceeding with the Endangerment Finding<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Heinzerling responds, \u201cWe\u2019re planning on doing this<\/em>.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

See 2.26.09 email to White House re same. This shows EF was well in the works one month into office.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.26.09            Email from Heinzerling to \u201cWindsor\u201d, McIntosh, states that EF will be made<\/strong>, even though it was at the time purportedly just something under consideration, and<\/em> that Agency can proceed w tailpipe regs (subject of Mass. V. EPA<\/em>) while EF is underway<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.26.09            EPA tells Heather Zichal, deputy WH coordinator for climate and energy policy, that the EF will be made, they will get OMB to expedite its review and gives the timeline for going final<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.05.09            Vaughn index shows email discussions of Endangerment, between Administrator and Heinzerling, WIF<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.10.09            Vaughn index shows email discussions of Endangerment, between Administrator and Heinzerling, WIF<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.12.09            Al McGartland, director of EPA\u2019s National Center for Environmental Economics, emails (soon-to-be) whistleblower Alan Carlin, \u201cIn light of the tight schedule<\/strong> and the turn of events, please do not have any direct communication with anyone outside of NCEE on endangerment.<\/strong>\u201c<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.13.09            Vaughn index shows string of emails about drafting memo to POTUS re EF, Heinserling and Windsor, Attachment: \u201cPresidential Decision Memo endangerment LH 3-15 \u2013 redline.doc\u201d. Other entries show this thread continues on 3.16.09 and 3.22.09, including David McIntosh<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.16.09            Subject: Comments on the Endangerment TSD, copying more Agency officials, Carlin presses for inclusion of what are later described as \u201cnot helpful\u201d comments contradicting what the administration has decided to do<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.17.09            More WIF email between Windsor and Heinzerling, \u201cEndangerment\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.17.09    <\/strong>        McGartland emails Carlin, Subject: endangerment comments???  stating he did not forward Carlin\u2019s input and stated, inter alia<\/em>, \u201cThe administrator and the administration has decided to move forward on endangerment, and your comments do not help the legal of policy case for this decision.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.20.09            More WIF email between Windsor and Heinzerling, \u201cEndangerment\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.22.09            WIF emails between Windsor, Heinzerling, PR chief, \u201cEndangerment\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3.202-23.09     WIF email between Windsor, Heinzerling, PR chief, on the matter of public hearings on \u201cthe endangerment finding\u201d, which the records states had not yet been made<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4.07.09            Lisa Jackson (\u201cRichard Windsor\u201d) trying to get time w David Axelrod to message EF<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4.24.09            EPA proposes EF<\/p>\n\n\n\n

6.09                 Alan Carlin whistleblowing. 6.24.09 email re same, and having not been presented with the questions about Carlin allegations \u201cwe had been worried about.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

12.03.09          Vaughn index shows East Anglia (i.e., ClimateGate) Talking Points<\/p>\n\n\n\n

12.05.09          Memo, redacted (first in full, then merely heavily), Tough Qs and As, \u201cIssues raised regarding the Climate Research Unit (CRU) University of East Anglia<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fully redacts \u201cRelevance to EPA and the Endangerment Finding<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

12.15.09          EPA publishes \u201cEndangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

9.26.11            OIG report requested by Ranking EPW Member Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), \u201cProcedural Review of EPA \u2018s Greenhouse Gases Endangerment Finding Data Quality Processes\u201d\u2014which found, among other procedural deficiencies, that the EF \u201cshould have been peer reviewed as\u201d required by implementing guidance for the Information Quality Act but was not\u2014states, inter alia<\/em>, in its discussion \u201cOAR Did Not Follow Some Steps in the Action Development Process\u201d:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cEPA initiated a formal action development process for the stand-alone greenhouse gases endangerment finding in early March 2009,\u201d and \u201cOAR [Office of Air and Radiation] began the action development process for the stand-alone endangerment finding in March 2009\u2026\u201d, citing no other point of note in the history of considering an EF between March 2009 and July 2008;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 and<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cin the endangerment finding EPA described the April 2009 TSD as the \u201cunderlying scientific and technical basis\u201d for the Administrator\u2019s proposed findings.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/a> Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, December 7, 2009, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171, https:\/\/www.epa.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/2021-05\/documents\/federal_register-epa-hq-oar-2009-0171-dec.15-09.pdf<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2]<\/a> Competitive Enterprise Institute v. EPA<\/em> (DDC), Case No. 1:12-cv-01617 (JEB).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[3]<\/a> Ms. Heinzerling, who authored Massachusetts et al.\u2019s brief in the Massachusetts v. EPA<\/em> case, was brought in to the administration immediately and set to work on this matter for the first approximately seven months as \u201cAdministrator Jackson\u2019s chief advisor<\/a> on climate matters\u201d (apparently until \u201creinforcements have arrived\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Amid\u00a0reports that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is reconsidering the December 2009 \u201cEndangerment Finding\u201d regarding greenhouse gases,[1]\u00a0a\u00a0recanvassing of emails obtained in the infamous \u201cRichard Windsor\u201d Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit brought over a dozen years ago by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) against the Agency[2]\u00a0leads to a troubling conclusion: the Obama EPA\u2019s regulatory \u201cfinding\u201d that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare was the product of an illusory notice-and-comment process, and the agency predetermined its outcome because the relevant decisionmakers had unalterably closed minds.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":375221,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691833924,691833542,691833292,691820933,691834407],"class_list":{"0":"post-375218","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-competitive-enterprise-institute-cei","9":"tag-endangerment-finding","10":"tag-epa-environmental-protection-agency","11":"tag-freedom-of-information-act-foia","12":"tag-ghgs","14":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0Epa-Symbol.png?fit=3840%2C2160&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1zBU","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":426214,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426214","url_meta":{"origin":375218,"position":0},"title":"Trump Administration Ends Obama-Era Climate Finding, Repeals Vehicle GHG Standards","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"14\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"On February 12, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under Administrator Lee Zeldin and alongside President Trump, finalized a major rule that revokes the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding, a landmark Obama-era determination that greenhouse gases (GHGs) like carbon dioxide endanger public health and welfare. This finding had served\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Biden and Obama administrations\"","block_context":{"text":"Biden and Obama administrations","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=biden-and-obama-administrations"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":426833,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426833","url_meta":{"origin":375218,"position":1},"title":"Endangerment Finding Rescission Victory for Science and Law","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"18\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"On February 12, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under Administrator Lee Zeldin in the Trump administration, finalized a rule rescinding the 2009 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding.","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-12-184328-1.png?fit=1033%2C937&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":425719,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=425719","url_meta":{"origin":375218,"position":2},"title":"Pre-Cooked and Politically Timed: How Obama\u00b4s EPA Faked the Endangerment Finding to Meet Copenhagen Deadlines","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"11\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"In December 2009, under the Obama administration, the EPA issued the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Clean Air Act Section 202(a). This concluded that six greenhouse gases (CO\u2082, methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs, PFCs, and SF\u2086) qualify as air pollutants that endanger public health and welfare,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-183050.png?fit=1127%2C941&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-183050.png?fit=1127%2C941&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-183050.png?fit=1127%2C941&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-183050.png?fit=1127%2C941&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-183050.png?fit=1127%2C941&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":425649,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=425649","url_meta":{"origin":375218,"position":3},"title":"EPA Endangerment Finding Was\u00a0Pre-Cooked","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"11\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 2009 Endangerment Finding which determined that greenhouse gases (GHGs) like CO\u2082 endanger public health and welfare was predetermined politically rather than based on open scientific deliberation.","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-100410.png?fit=1092%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-100410.png?fit=1092%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-100410.png?fit=1092%2C937&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-100410.png?fit=1092%2C937&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Screenshot-2026-02-11-100410.png?fit=1092%2C937&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":405947,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=405947","url_meta":{"origin":375218,"position":4},"title":"Funding for green groups soared after 2009 endangerment finding, nonprofit finds","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"30\/09\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Fed grants to organizations increased from $350 million in 2009 to nearly $1.4 billion in 2023, analysis finds.","rel":"","context":"In \"Biden Administration\"","block_context":{"text":"Biden Administration","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=biden-administration"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN6D-9fMJBJdhAXTKCJGLqNAEfmfXCtWGnpFRwLn9Q1_OcDGgZpdeFUbva_plDAqWOnj1L8G7omlz5Y4Ss8-zyhkdu7YHhvO7UdXm5tEskk5zeBzGsU8Bi9HcM33AAlQt69z0p8RhllRitu-pa5HBbcL0P2ig.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN6D-9fMJBJdhAXTKCJGLqNAEfmfXCtWGnpFRwLn9Q1_OcDGgZpdeFUbva_plDAqWOnj1L8G7omlz5Y4Ss8-zyhkdu7YHhvO7UdXm5tEskk5zeBzGsU8Bi9HcM33AAlQt69z0p8RhllRitu-pa5HBbcL0P2ig.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN6D-9fMJBJdhAXTKCJGLqNAEfmfXCtWGnpFRwLn9Q1_OcDGgZpdeFUbva_plDAqWOnj1L8G7omlz5Y4Ss8-zyhkdu7YHhvO7UdXm5tEskk5zeBzGsU8Bi9HcM33AAlQt69z0p8RhllRitu-pa5HBbcL0P2ig.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN6D-9fMJBJdhAXTKCJGLqNAEfmfXCtWGnpFRwLn9Q1_OcDGgZpdeFUbva_plDAqWOnj1L8G7omlz5Y4Ss8-zyhkdu7YHhvO7UdXm5tEskk5zeBzGsU8Bi9HcM33AAlQt69z0p8RhllRitu-pa5HBbcL0P2ig.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQN6D-9fMJBJdhAXTKCJGLqNAEfmfXCtWGnpFRwLn9Q1_OcDGgZpdeFUbva_plDAqWOnj1L8G7omlz5Y4Ss8-zyhkdu7YHhvO7UdXm5tEskk5zeBzGsU8Bi9HcM33AAlQt69z0p8RhllRitu-pa5HBbcL0P2ig.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":425995,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=425995","url_meta":{"origin":375218,"position":5},"title":"Trump and Zeldin Deliver Single Largest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"13\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"On February 12, 2026, President Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced what they described as the single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history. This occurred during an event in the White House Roosevelt Room. The core of the action is the EPA's final rule repealing the 2009 Greenhouse\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"American dream\"","block_context":{"text":"American dream","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=american-dream"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQN0KhAmYkjSkAWpPLnH2R5K_gRWQqHTkycKyB7IWN58whr3XAQiPIsaYYmy-wd0-RKF3dLXpuzrDFKe5EgG8Fyoa5fyVLiEZ5zM6CotN7PsOLjZ3xujIDJ7zRDkhCXQ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C723&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQN0KhAmYkjSkAWpPLnH2R5K_gRWQqHTkycKyB7IWN58whr3XAQiPIsaYYmy-wd0-RKF3dLXpuzrDFKe5EgG8Fyoa5fyVLiEZ5zM6CotN7PsOLjZ3xujIDJ7zRDkhCXQ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C723&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQN0KhAmYkjSkAWpPLnH2R5K_gRWQqHTkycKyB7IWN58whr3XAQiPIsaYYmy-wd0-RKF3dLXpuzrDFKe5EgG8Fyoa5fyVLiEZ5zM6CotN7PsOLjZ3xujIDJ7zRDkhCXQ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C723&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQN0KhAmYkjSkAWpPLnH2R5K_gRWQqHTkycKyB7IWN58whr3XAQiPIsaYYmy-wd0-RKF3dLXpuzrDFKe5EgG8Fyoa5fyVLiEZ5zM6CotN7PsOLjZ3xujIDJ7zRDkhCXQ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C723&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQN0KhAmYkjSkAWpPLnH2R5K_gRWQqHTkycKyB7IWN58whr3XAQiPIsaYYmy-wd0-RKF3dLXpuzrDFKe5EgG8Fyoa5fyVLiEZ5zM6CotN7PsOLjZ3xujIDJ7zRDkhCXQ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C723&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/375218","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=375218"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/375218\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":375223,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/375218\/revisions\/375223"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/375221"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=375218"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=375218"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=375218"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}