EPA Rescinds Greenhouse Gas Emissions Endangerment Finding

Experts warn the move could have major health implications for Americans

Published on Feb. 15, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has rescinded the 2009 endangerment finding, which determined that six key greenhouse gases threaten human health and welfare. This decision, made by the Trump administration, has been called "the single largest deregulatory action in American history" and could have significant short- and long-term impacts on public health.

Why it matters

The endangerment finding has been the legal basis for establishing federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, covering everything from vehicle tailpipe emissions to power plant releases. Experts warn that rolling back this finding could lead to higher pollution levels, increasing the risk of chronic diseases, heart attacks, and other health issues linked to climate change.

The details

The endangerment finding stemmed from the 2007 Supreme Court decision Massachusetts v. EPA, which held that the EPA could regulate greenhouse gases from motor vehicles under the 1970 Clean Air Act. Researchers have shown that greenhouse gases drive climate change, which can harm human health by exposing people to events like wildfires, extreme heat, flooding, and waterborne diseases. For example, rising temperatures can increase the risk of dehydration, heart attacks, and mental health issues.

  • The EPA announced the rescission of the endangerment finding on February 13, 2026.
  • The 2009 endangerment finding was established during the Obama administration.

The players

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

The federal agency responsible for protecting human health and the environment, including regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

Donald Trump

The former President of the United States who called the EPA's move "the single largest deregulatory action in American history".

Dr. Ana Navas-Acien

Chair of the department of environmental health sciences at Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University, who believes the rescission is concerning and could have major health implications.

Kai Chen

Associate professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and faculty director of the Yale Center on Climate Change and Health, who says the scientific evidence on the health harms of climate change is clear.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The scientific evidence showing the connection between greenhouse emissions, climate change and then the related health effects — it's massive, it's substantial, it has been reviewed by independent organizations. So, the fact that this body of evidence has become so well established, it just speaks to the level of rigorous science that has been done.”

— Dr. Ana Navas-Acien, Chair of the department of environmental health sciences at Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University (ABC News)

“Climate change is impacting our health right now. It's not a political debate. It is science and the science is clear. We need to take action.”

— Kai Chen, Associate professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and faculty director of the Yale Center on Climate Change and Health (ABC News)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Walker Reed Quinn out on bail.

The takeaway

This case highlights growing concerns in the community about repeat offenders released on bail, raising questions about bail reform, public safety on SF streets, and if any special laws to govern autonomous vehicles in residential and commercial areas.