Great Lakes Wire

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has joined a coalition of states in submitting a formal comment to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), opposing the agency’s proposed rescission of its 2009 Endangerment Finding. The original finding determined that greenhouse gas emissions, including those from motor vehicles, contribute to climate change and pose risks to public health and welfare.

The EPA’s proposal follows an announcement by the Trump Administration to eliminate the 2009 Endangerment Finding, asserting that the agency does not have authority to regulate air pollution related to climate change. This move would also remove all existing EPA vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards.

The 2009 Endangerment Finding was based on the Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which confirmed that the Clean Air Act allows the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases if they are found harmful to public health or welfare. Following more than two years of scientific study, the EPA concluded in 2009 that these emissions are indeed harmful.

“Decades of scientific research have shown the devastating consequences greenhouse gas emissions have on our health, our environment, and our economy,” said Nessel. “Dismantling the very finding that requires the EPA to regulate these harmful pollutants is dangerous and irresponsible. I will continue to speak out against such reckless rollbacks to protect our communities from the growing threats of climate change.”

In a 225-page letter submitted to the EPA, Nessel and other attorneys general argue that rescinding the Endangerment Finding would violate established law, Supreme Court precedent, and scientific consensus. They claim this action would endanger millions of Americans, especially those in communities already impacted by environmental harm. The coalition urged the EPA not to proceed with its plan.

Nessel and her colleagues also filed another letter warning that repealing all federal greenhouse gas emission standards for motor vehicles would disrupt regulatory policies maintained over the past 15 years. They stated this could have significant negative effects on state residents, industries, natural resources, and public investments.

Additionally, Nessel joined in filing a comment letter challenging a report by the Climate Working Group—used by the EPA as justification for rescinding its finding—citing legal flaws and urging withdrawal of what they called an unlawful report.

She also participated in litigation by filing an amicus brief in Environmental Defense Fund v. Wright before a U.S. District Court in Massachusetts. The brief argued that establishing and using the Climate Working Group violated federal law because it did not follow required advisory committee procedures; according to court findings, this group is not exempt from such regulations.

On August 19, Attorney General Nessel testified before the EPA in opposition to both rescinding its 2009 Endangerment Finding and removing vehicle emission standards.