If you are among the game addicts who bet on every conceivable future scenario for this country, and you have put it on a maximum Climate disaster comes. Then you have a friend in the Trump government.
States as hope in climate protection
As President Donald Trump At the beginning of the year, climate protection officers were confident that the Trump federal government would certainly no longer deal with the topic of climate change, but the states would contribute to thisto close some of the gaps. That gave rise to hope. At least part of this important work would continue. This view was recently questioned, since the Trump government is now trying to prevent the states from doing anything to limit the effects of climate change.
Complaints against New York and Vermont
The Ministry of Justice laminated currently the states new York and Vermont. In order to prevent them from enforcing laws adopted last year, which would make fossil fuel companies liable for some of the costs of combating climate change. Besides that laminated it Hawaii And Michigan about her climate -drawn complaints against fossil fuel companies. Finally works The Trump government on the strict exhaust gas standards for motor vehicles in California and his program to end for emission certificates. ((The Republicans Recently in the Senate Take stepsto lift the California exhaust gas standards for motor vehicles.)
Attack on California’s climate policy
The first row of complaints concerns the “superfund” laws on climate protection. These are laws on one in the 1980s adopted Legislation are based, the chemical and oil companies are obliged to pay the costs for the elimination of dangerous waste. This scenario is about signing companies in the fossil fuel industry to pay the costs for the harmful effects of climate change. New York and Vermont passed climate protection laws last year. Numerous states – from Maine to Tennessee – have expressed interest in the adoption of similar laws in recent years.
“You will try to impose certain liability – certain fees – to force you to internalize the costs of your previous activities,” explains Rachel Rothschild, assistant professor of law at the University of Michigan and Expert for Superfunds Rolling Stone. “The companies that would be considered responsible parties according to the bills are those who have produced, promoted or sold fossil fuels above a certain threshold during the period for whom the draft laws provide for this retrospective liability.”
Origin in laws of the 1980s
Rothschild says that it is “rather unprecedented” that the federal government submits complaints to block this type of environmental law. And that the states historically had the authority to tackle environmental problems that affect public health. These laws are just being implemented. Therefore, it is still very early to submit complaints against them.
“This seems to be part of a larger strategy. Not only does not do anything against climate change. But actively dismantling climate science and climate responsibility, which are built up in response to the costs of climate change, which manifest themselves in everyday life from all people,” says Justin Mankin, climate scientist at Dartmouth College. “These costs of climate change. We are only at the beginning to deal with it. And they are terrifying.”
The complaints against Hawaii and Michigan are also quite unusual. The Ministry of Justice decided to sue the two states before their respective lawsuits had been submitted against fossil fuel companies. Both states want to hold fossil fuel companies responsible for the negative effects of climate change on their environment by causing them to pay for climate -related damage.
“It is almost unprecedented that the federal government interferes here,” says Anthony Moffa, legal professor at the University of Maine.
Threat to state independence
Moffa says the Trump government seems to “put itself on the side of the private sector”. And he believes that these measures may have been taken to prevent other states from taking similar legal steps.
The measures of the Trump government against the environmental regulations of California could have far-reaching effects in view of the size and influence of the state. Trump issued one in April Ordinancethe Attorney General Pam Bondi provides laws such as the California that deal with climate change.
California as the goal of strategic weakening
California has had some of the strictest exhaust gas standards for vehicles in the USA for decades. The state sells many cars, so that the automotive industry is essentially managed by these standards. Many states have also decided to take over the standards defined by California.
“California is leading nationwide both in the case of strict regulations for greenhouse gas emissions of vehicles as well as in the regulation of conventional air pollution,” says Ann Carlson, professor of environmental law at the University of California in Los Angeles. “This is the step that worries me the most.”
The Trump government’s employees learned a lot from Trump’s first term. According to Moffa, a realization seems to be that the states are fighting the fight against climate change when the federal government gives it up.
Findings about federal climate strategies
“You realized that this is the strategy. And the states have become even more ambitious,” says Moffa. “This is your attempt to prevent that.”
The states try to hold fossil fuel companies responsible for their contribution to climate change. And the Trump government makes it clear that she doesn’t want to know anything about it. The government’s lawsuits and strategies may not be successful. But they clearly create another hurdle for measures against climate change. You could also lead to the states becoming more reluctant to become the adoption of new climate laws.
“Trump demanded Of the oil industry, high contributions in consideration for lax regulation, ”says Carlson.“ The Trump government is determined to undermine everything that has to do with climate change. But also, in a broader sense, any kind of environmental regulations that protect public health. ”