US EPA Proposal Paves Way for Rollback of 'Good Neighbor' Rule on Transboundary Air Pollution
The Trump administration has taken a step towards dismantling a long-standing environmental regulation aimed at curbing air pollution that affects neighboring states. The proposed rule would allow eight US states to disregard the "good neighbor" standard, which requires industrial sites to limit emissions that cross state lines.
The Supreme Court's 2024 ruling cleared the way for this move by stating that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot enforce the rule. Under President Joe Biden, the EPA had rejected or disapproved the air quality plans submitted by these states, citing inadequate measures to control ozone-forming emissions.
However, under President Donald Trump, the EPA is pushing forward with "cooperative federalism," a policy that gives states more control over environmental regulations. Administrator Lee Zeldin defended this approach, calling it "unfair" and stating that it would allow states to move forward with their own air quality goals without excessive federal oversight.
The affected states – Alabama, Arizona, Kentucky, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, and Tennessee – would no longer be subject to the EPA's approval process for their ozone plans. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, have expressed strong opposition to this move, warning that it would put neighboring states at risk of continued air pollution harm.
Critics argue that the Trump administration is prioritizing polluters' interests over public health and environmental protection. The Sierra Club's Zachary Fabish stated that letting states "off the hook" while their pollution continues to affect others would be "dangerous" and would lead to more illnesses and higher energy costs for Americans.
The EPA has announced a 30-day public comment period, which may help mitigate concerns about this move. However, environmental advocates urge caution, as the impact of this policy on air quality across the country remains uncertain.
The Trump administration has taken a step towards dismantling a long-standing environmental regulation aimed at curbing air pollution that affects neighboring states. The proposed rule would allow eight US states to disregard the "good neighbor" standard, which requires industrial sites to limit emissions that cross state lines.
The Supreme Court's 2024 ruling cleared the way for this move by stating that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot enforce the rule. Under President Joe Biden, the EPA had rejected or disapproved the air quality plans submitted by these states, citing inadequate measures to control ozone-forming emissions.
However, under President Donald Trump, the EPA is pushing forward with "cooperative federalism," a policy that gives states more control over environmental regulations. Administrator Lee Zeldin defended this approach, calling it "unfair" and stating that it would allow states to move forward with their own air quality goals without excessive federal oversight.
The affected states – Alabama, Arizona, Kentucky, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, and Tennessee – would no longer be subject to the EPA's approval process for their ozone plans. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, have expressed strong opposition to this move, warning that it would put neighboring states at risk of continued air pollution harm.
Critics argue that the Trump administration is prioritizing polluters' interests over public health and environmental protection. The Sierra Club's Zachary Fabish stated that letting states "off the hook" while their pollution continues to affect others would be "dangerous" and would lead to more illnesses and higher energy costs for Americans.
The EPA has announced a 30-day public comment period, which may help mitigate concerns about this move. However, environmental advocates urge caution, as the impact of this policy on air quality across the country remains uncertain.
. The Trump administration's plan to roll back the "good neighbor" rule is a no-brainer considering their track record on the environment 
. They're just going to let these states do whatever they want and see who gets hurt first? It's like playing a game of whack-a-mole, except instead of mallets, it's people's lives at stake 
.
The EPA is basically saying "good luck" to neighboring states as they continue to breathe in toxic air. And what's with this "cooperative federalism" nonsense? Sounds like just a fancy way of saying "we're not going to do anything about it" 
.
. Environmental groups are right to sound the alarm and warn people about the potential consequences. It's not just about saving the planet, it's about basic human decency and ensuring that everyone has access to clean air and water 
.
like seriously what's next? the US just gonna let its neighboring states burn their own people alive and we're supposed to be a global leader in clean energy 
?! i mean, didn't we learn from our environmental disasters back in the 70s and 80s? it's not like the 'good neighbor' rule was a huge burden on these states or anything... just peachy 
.
so the Trump admin is basically saying that states can just make their own rules when it comes to emissions and it's gonna be a disaster for our air quality 
like what if one state lets some industrial site spew all sorts of pollution but another state is like "oh no, my air is getting bad" and then they have to go through this whole mess with the EPA and it'll just get delayed and more people will suffer from asthma and other respiratory issues 
meanwhile polluters are gonna be raking in the cash without anyone checking their emissions and it's just not right 
... like how can they just make their own rules and not think about others breathing their toxic air? 
isn't that kinda counterproductive to, like, taking care of the planet or something? 
I don't get why President Trump would wanna do this if it's gonna hurt people's health... isn't public health more important than just letting states be free to pollute? 
. Like, isn't that just common courtesy? Next thing you know, they'll be letting corporations decide what's best for our air quality without consulting anyone 
. Alabama and co. are gonna love having more freedom to pollute their way into neighboring states' lungs. Meanwhile, I'm over here wondering when we'll see a " pollution tax" to make up for it 
. The EPA's 30-day comment period is basically just a PR stunt – they know what they're doing and don't care 
The US is taking a huge risk with this new proposal... it's like they're playing catch-up and expecting everyone to fall into line 
. It's crazy that we're still debating this stuff – shouldn't we be focusing on fixing the problem instead of giving polluters a free pass? 
. It's like the gov't is basically saying 'oh, you're all just gonna take care of that pollution thingy by yourselves'. Like, what about those people who can't afford a fancy mask or a sweet air-purifying system in their house? 
. The EPA needs to stand firm on this one - all for the people, not just the corporations 
!
This is gonna be bad for everyone's health
. I mean, the 'good neighbor' rule has been in place for ages to protect neighboring states from industrial pollution, and now it seems like they're just gonna let some states get away with it 
cant let polluters get away w/ this one... trust me, its gonna cost us big time in terms of our health and environment 
my mind is blown tho why would they do this? didn't trump's admin promise to protect environment more? idk maybe i'm just naive but dont think its right to prioritize polluters' interests over people's lives 
Don't we need some kind of standard to protect our environment and public health?
.