Why rejecting the endangerment finding also rejects climate science

Scientists and policy experts say that by revoking the endangerment finding, the scientific justification for regulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act, the Donald J. Trump administration has reached a dangerous milestone in dismissing, ignoring, or directly contradicting scientific information in its policy decisions. But while scientists are dismayed by the action, some see a renewed role for their discipline in influencing climate policy in the US. The second Trump administration has smacked science with blow after blow—canceling grants, killing funding, slashing budgets, and dismantling federal scientific offices. But rescinding the endangerment finding is probably the most egregious example so far of ignoring science, says Hannah Safford, associate director of climate and environment at the Federation of American Scientists. “We've amassed a great deal of science to demonstrate the impact that climate change is having, and the rollback of endangerment kind of says, ‘Well, we're just going to put all that science to the side,’” she says. Julie McNamara, associate policy director in climate and energy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says that while revoking the endangerment finding is in step with the path this administration has been on, it’s still a watershed moment. “It is one of those milestones where you say, ‘I can't believe we're here.’”In the July proposal to rescind the endangerment finding, US Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lee Zeldin claimed that the science on climate change was undecided. As evidence, he cited a report written by the Climate Working Group (CWG), five researchers