Under Trump, EPA’s enforcement of environmental laws collapses, report finds

Source: Ars Technica

Overview

A new report from the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) shows a dramatic reduction in civil lawsuits filed by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in cases referred by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

• 16 lawsuits were filed in the 12 months after Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, 2025.
• This is 76 % fewer than the first year of the Biden administration.
• By comparison, Trump’s first administration filed 86 cases in its first year, down from the Obama administration’s 127 cases four years earlier.

“Our nation’s landmark environmental laws are meaningless when EPA does not enforce the rules.” – Jen Duggan, Executive Director, Environmental Integrity Project

Supporting Analyses

The findings echo two recent reports from other watchdog groups:

1. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) – Enforcement Report – Narrative
2. Earthjustice – The Laws Still Exist, the Consequences Don’t

Both documents document a steady erosion of environmental enforcement under Trump.

Deregulatory Agenda

From day one of his second term, the administration pursued an aggressive deregulatory agenda:

• Energy “emergency” declaration – announced immediately after inauguration.
  Source: Inside Climate News – Energy Emergency

• EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s March rollout of what the administration called the “biggest deregulatory action in U.S. history.”

  • 31 separate initiatives to roll back air‑ and water‑pollution restrictions.
  • Transfer of more authority to states with historically lax enforcement.
  • Relinquishment of EPA’s mandate to regulate climate change under the Clean Air Act.
    Source: Inside Climate News – Deregulation Launch

These actions have been especially favorable to fossil‑fuel interests.

Agency Response

• EPA and the White House did not respond to requests for comment on the report’s findings.

Takeaway

The new EIP report, together with analyses from PEER and Earthjustice, paints a clear picture: environmental enforcement has sharply declined under Trump’s second term, coinciding with a sweeping deregulatory push that weakens protections for air, water, and climate.

For the full report, see the embargoed PDF:
EPA Enforcement Report – 2.5.26 (PDF)

A “Compliance First” Approach

Part of the decline in lawsuits against polluters could be due to the lack of staff to carry them out, experts say. According to an analysis from E&E News, at least a third of lawyers in the Justice Department’s environment division have left in the past year. Meanwhile, the EPA laid off hundreds of employees in 2025 who monitored pollution that could hurt human health — see the report from Inside Climate News.

Top agency officials are also directing staff to issue fewer violation notices and reduce other enforcement actions. In December, the EPA formalized a new “compliance first” enforcement policy that stresses working with suspected violators to correct problems before launching any formal action that could lead to fines or mandatory correction measures.

“Formal enforcement … is appropriate only when compliance assurance or informal enforcement is inapplicable or insufficient to achieve rapid compliance,” wrote Craig Pritzlaff, principal deputy assistant EPA administrator, in a Dec. 5 memo to all enforcement officials and regional offices.

“Only in rare cases involving an immediate hazard should enforcers use traditional case tools. Immediate formal enforcement may be required in certain circumstances, such as when there is an emergency that presents significant harm to human health and the environment.”

Federal agencies like the EPA, whose staffs are far outmatched in size compared to the vast sectors of the economy they oversee, have traditionally used enforcement actions not only to deal with violators but also to deter other companies from breaking the law. Environmental advocates worry that without visible “environmental cops” on the beat, compliance will erode.

Background on Craig Pritzlaff

• Joined the EPA last fall after five years heading enforcement for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).
• Public Citizen described him as a “reluctant regulator.”
• Under his leadership, TCEQ was criticized for reticence in taking decisive action against repeat violators.

Case Study: INEOS Chemical Plant

• Over a decade, the plant accumulated close to 100 violations.
• A 2023 explosion sent a worker to the hospital, temporarily shut down the Houston Ship Channel, and sparked a fire that burned for an hour.
• Public Citizen reported that TCEQ officials allowed violations to pile up, arguing it would be more efficient to handle multiple issues in a single enforcement action.

“But that proved to be untrue, instead creating a complex backlog of cases that the agency is still struggling to resolve,” Public Citizen wrote after Pritzlaff joined the EPA. “That’s not efficiency, it’s failure.”

• Early last year, TCEQ fined INEOS $2.3 million for an extensive list of violations that occurred between 2016 and 2021.

Sources:

• E&E News analysis (Feb 2026)
• Inside Climate News (Oct 2025)
• Public Citizen statement (Fall 2025)

“A slap on the wrist”

The EPA doesn’t always take entities to court when they violate environmental laws. At times, the agency can resolve these issues through less‑formal administrative cases, which actually increased during the first eight months of Trump’s second term when compared to the same period in the Biden administration, according to the new report.

Most of these administrative actions involved violations of requirements for risk‑management plans under the Clean Air Act or municipalities’ violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act. The Trump administration did not increase administrative cases that involve pollution from industrial operations, Environmental Integrity Project spokesperson Tom Pelton said over email.

Declining Enforcement

• Through September of last year, the EPA issued $41 million in penalties—$8 million less than the same period in the first year of the Biden administration (adjusted for inflation).
• The report reads: “the Trump Administration may be letting more polluters get by with a slap on the wrist when the Administration does take enforcement action.”

Combined, the lack of lawsuits, penalties, and other enforcement actions for environmental violations could impact communities across the country, said Erika Kranz, a senior staff attorney in the Environmental and Energy Law Program at Harvard Law School (not involved in the report).

“We’ve been seeing the administration deregulate by repealing rules and extending compliance deadlines, and this decline in enforcement action seems like yet another mechanism that the administration is using to de‑emphasize environmental and public‑health protections,” Kranz said.
“It all appears to be connected, and if you’re a person in the US who is worried about your health and the health of your neighbors generally, this certainly could have effects.”

The report notes that many court cases last longer than a year, so it will take time to get a clearer sense of how environmental enforcement is changing under the Trump administration. However, early data compiled by the Environmental Integrity Project and other nonprofits shows a clear and steep shift away from legal actions against polluters.

Historically, administrations have a “lot of leeway on making enforcement decisions,” Kranz said. “But this stark drop could prompt lawsuits against the Trump administration.”
“Given these big changes and trends, you might see groups arguing that this is more than just an exercise of discretion or choosing priorities — it is an abdication of an agency’s core mission and its statutory duties,” she added. “It will be interesting to see if groups make those arguments and how courts respond.”

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non‑partisan news organization that covers climate, energy, and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here.