President Donald Trump has issued a new executive order declaring a national energy emergency. The move signals a sharp escalation in his administration’s approach to state-led climate initiatives, directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to challenge state laws that he believes interfere with national energy production.
The order is part of Trump’s broader effort to ramp up fossil fuel output and counter what he calls regulatory “overreach” by liberal states. It arrives at a time when electricity demand in the U.S. is surging, driven by the expansion of artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and federal manufacturing investments.
Targeting Climate Laws in Democratic States
Trump’s order specifically tasks the DOJ with focusing on state climate laws that attempt to regulate emissions or impose costs on energy companies. These include new “climate superfund” laws passed in states like New York and Vermont, which require fossil fuel companies to pay into funds to cover the costs of climate-related damages.
“These state laws threaten American energy dominance,” Trump said, describing them as efforts to “extort” the energy sector. He argued that they infringe on federal authority and endanger economic and national security.
What Are Climate Superfund Laws?
Climate superfund laws mirror the federal Superfund law of 1980, which held polluting industries financially responsible for environmental cleanup. The new state-level versions aim to make major fossil fuel producers pay for their historic greenhouse gas emissions.
Currently Enacted or Proposed in:
- New York
- Vermont
- California (under consideration)
- Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Oregon (in legislative review)
These laws have triggered backlash from the fossil fuel industry, conservative lawmakers, and now the Trump administration.
Legal Challenges Already Underway
The American Petroleum Institute and U.S. Chamber of Commerce have already filed lawsuits against Vermont’s law. In New York, a legal challenge is backed by West Virginia and 21 other Republican-led states, including Texas and Georgia.
Climate activists argue that these lawsuits—and now Trump’s executive order—are attempts to shield polluters from accountability. The group Make Polluters Pay condemned the order as an example of “corporate capture of government.”
Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, called the order “extraordinarily bold.” He noted that while rare, the DOJ could try to insert itself into existing lawsuits as a supporter of fossil fuel companies.
State Leaders Push Back
Governors and mayors across the U.S. quickly condemned the move. California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Trump was “turning back the clock” on environmental policy and vowed that California would continue its pollution-cutting efforts.
Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego, chair of the Climate Mayors group, accused the federal government of ignoring the social and environmental consequences of climate change.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, co-leaders of the U.S. Climate Alliance, pledged to continue “advancing solutions to the climate crisis.”
Widening the Legal Battlefield
Trump’s order could extend beyond climate laws. Environmental experts worry it may pave the way for broader attacks on state-level pollution regulations.
In Pennsylvania, Gov. Josh Shapiro is fighting a legal challenge to a new rule that would make the state the first major fossil fuel producer to charge power plants for carbon emissions.
John Quigley, a former Pennsylvania environmental official, warned that Trump’s order could open the door to federal lawsuits against any state air or water regulation. “This kind of order knows no bounds,” Quigley said.
Supreme Court Stays Quiet—for Now
Despite the growing number of lawsuits, the U.S. Supreme Court has recently declined to intervene in key climate-related cases. These include efforts by oil companies to block lawsuits from Honolulu and other cities seeking damages for wildfires, rising seas, and extreme storms.
Alabama and 18 other Republican-led states had also asked the court to stop climate lawsuits from moving forward—but their request was denied.
What Happens Next?
Trump’s new energy order sets the stage for a tense and potentially lengthy legal battle between federal and state governments. Democratic states are expected to resist any federal attempts to weaken their climate policies. Meanwhile, fossil fuel interests have gained a powerful new ally in the DOJ.
As court cases continue to unfold, the future of state-led climate action—and its conflict with federal energy policy—will likely remain a hot-button issue across the United States.
