What agency, in February 2026, rescinded the legal basis for regulating greenhouse gases?

In February 2026, the agency that rescinded the legal basis for regulating greenhouse gases was the Environmental Protection Agency, commonly known as the EPA. On February 12, 2026, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin signed a final rule that officially rescinded the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and simultaneously repealed all motor vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards under the Clean Air Act. This action marked a significant shift in federal climate policy.

The 2009 Endangerment Finding had served as the crucial legal prerequisite, establishing that greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare. This finding was the foundation (Review) for virtually all federal greenhouse gas regulations that followed, impacting not just vehicles but also other major emitting sectors. The Supreme Court's 2007 decision in *Massachusetts v. EPA* had previously affirmed that greenhouse gases qualified as "air pollutants" under the Clean Air Act, directing the EPA to make a judgment on their endangerment.

The EPA's 2026 decision was primarily based on a reinterpretation of its statutory authority under Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act. The agency concluded that this section does not authorize the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions for global climate change concerns, asserting that "air pollution" should be interpreted as local or regional exposure. This move, which Administrator Zeldin characterized as the "single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history," is projected to save over $1.3 trillion. While immediately impacting vehicle emissions, the legal reasoning employed by the EPA has broader implications for the regulation of greenhouse gases across other industries, such as power generation and oil and gas.

The rescission has not been without controversy, with environmental and public health groups already filing lawsuits to challenge the rule. This ongoing legal battle highlights the deep divisions over the federal government's role in addressing climate change and sets the stage for potential future Supreme Court review, underscoring the dynamic nature of environmental policy and its interpretation.