Politics
California will fare better than other states as Trump guts climate reporting rules
For nearly 20 years, thousands of industrial plants across the U.S. and California have been required to track and report the greenhouse gas pollution they spew into the atmosphere.
This month, the Trump administration moved to permanently end that program, which has long held bipartisan support, originating during the administration of George W. Bush. President Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Lee Zeldin, said that greenhouse gas reporting was expensive and burdensome, and that cutting the program would save American businesses up to $2.4 billion in regulatory costs.
But ending the requirement will make it harder for some state regulators to track climate progress, and for residents to know if their neighboring power plant or factory is reducing or increasing emissions.
“Measuring and reporting climate pollution is a critical step in reducing the deadly impacts of climate-driven extremes that cause more pollution, catastrophic weather events, health emergencies and deaths,” said Will Barrett, assistant vice president for nationwide clean air policy at the American Lung Assn. “Ignoring this reality is a deadly choice, and not one that EPA should be making for American families.”
The EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requires about 8,000 power plants, oil refineries and other industrial facilities to report their output each year, representing about 90% of the country’s emissions. Greenhouse gases are by far the largest driver of climate change.
If finalized, the proposal to end the program would remove reporting obligations for most large facilities and all fuel and industrial gas suppliers, the EPA said. The move comes after various business groups have lobbied the administration for reduced regulatory requirements across numerous federal agencies.
Environmental groups said the announcement marks yet another blow from an administration that has already taken aim at many of the nation’s bedrock climate programs. The EPA this year has also proposed rolling back more than 30 rules and regulations that govern air and water quality while simultaneously promoting oil and gas production. Among the proposed repeals is the so-called endangerment finding, which establishes that fossil fuel emissions pose a threat to human health and the environment.
California, however, may be better prepared to weather the storm than other states.
The California Air Resources Board — a major state agency under the umbrella of the California EPA — administers its own state-level greenhouse gas reporting program that in some ways exceeds that of the federal one that is now on the chopping block.
CARB requires large stationary polluters that emit over 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent to report their emissions each year, compared with the minimum 25,000 metric tons at the EPA. The state’s program also includes additional reporting categories such as fuel suppliers and electricity importers that the EPA does not require.
“We’ve been taking climate change seriously for many years,” said John Balmes, a professor emeritus at UC Berkeley who also serves as CARB’s physician board member. “Knowing what greenhouse gas emissions there are in California is important to our planning mitigation strategy, so we have pretty strict reporting.”
Unlike the federal program, California’s system also goes beyond data collection and is directly tied to compliance obligations. That’s because CARB’s reporting is integrated with cap-and-trade, California’s signature climate program that sets limits on greenhouse gas emissions and allows large polluters to buy and sell unused emission allowances at quarterly auctions.
CARB uses the data reported by the state’s emitters to determine their allowance allocations. Each year, fewer allowances are created, lowering the total annual climate pollution in the state. The program is seen as critical to California meeting its ambitious climate goals — including 100% carbon neutrality by 2045 — and state lawmakers on Saturday agreed to extend cap-and-trade for an additional 15 years through that same year.
“It’s a global issue, but jurisdictions have to lead where they can, and California has long been a sub-national leader in climate change mitigation policy,” Balmes said.
For his part, Zeldin said the cut is justified by lack of regulations tied to the EPA’s reporting program. The federal program’s facility-level data is used to monitor national emission estimates and trends over time, identify opportunities for reductions, inform state and local policies, and aid communities in identifying nearby sources of pollution.
“The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program is nothing more than bureaucratic red tape that does nothing to improve air quality,” Zeldin said in a news release. “Instead, it costs American businesses and manufacturing billions of dollars, driving up the cost of living, jeopardizing our nation’s prosperity and hurting American communities.”
California’s reporting program applies to more than 550 facilities, the largest of which include Pacific Gas & Electric, the Southern California Gas Co. and fossil fuel companies such as Chevron, Marathon and Phillips 66, according to state data from 2023, the most recent year available. Marathon’s Los Angeles Refinery — the largest refinery on the West Coast — was also high on the list.
Total emissions reported to the state that year were about 370 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, compared with 2.58 billion metric tons reported to the federal program that same year.
Under the EPA’s proposal, none of these entities would be required to report their emissions to the federal government. Though they would still be subject to state reporting, officials noted that pollution doesn’t stop at state lines.
“Requiring polluters to report their emissions is a critical way local governments can keep track of how industries in their cities are impacting people’s health,” read a statement from Kate Wright, executive director of Climate Mayors, a bipartisan group of nearly 350 mayors in the U.S. that includes L.A. Mayor Karen Bass.
“Air pollution kills about 135,000 Americans each year — and cities are working hard every day to lower that number,” Wright said. “They need access to that data to help them make the best decisions for their communities and ensure people across the country can breathe clean air free of toxic, cancer-causing chemicals. Without that accountability in place, emissions will go unchecked, and thousands of Americans will pay the price.”
While California is home to many nation-leading climate policies, the state has also long suffered from some of the worst air quality in the country — driven largely because of its vast numbers of cars, trucks, trains and cargo vessels and by topography that traps pollution in the state’s interior. Los Angeles has been ranked the nation’s smoggiest city 25 out of the last 26 years.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration took aim at some of the state’s regulatory muscle by moving to revoke its authority to set strict tailpipe emission standards under the EPA — an action that prompted California to respond with a lawsuit.
Trump has also moved to roll back Biden-era regulations designed to address mercury air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, and has offered large polluters two-year exemptions from key regulations governed by the Clean Air Act, which they can request by sending an email.
The Environmental Protection Network, a D.C.-based group composed of more than 650 former EPA employees, estimated that the repeal of these and other safeguards would lead to nearly 200,000 premature deaths through 2050 and cause more than 10,000 asthma attacks each day for U.S. children, among other outcomes.
The latest proposal to end the greenhouse gas reporting program is a “broadside against climate science and policies to protect human health,” said Barrett, of the American Lung Assn.
Such federal efforts, he added, “shine a spotlight on the importance of California’s ongoing climate and clean air leadership.”
EPA will initiate a public comment period to solicit input on its proposal to eliminate the greenhouse gas reporting program in the weeks ahead.
Politics
Supreme Court blocks lower court order forcing Trump administration to fully fund SNAP program
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a temporary block on Friday on a lower court’s order requiring the Trump administration to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program amid the government shutdown.
The decision came shortly after a federal appeals court on Friday denied a Trump administration request to temporarily block the lower court ruling.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Jack McConnell rejected the administration’s effort to only partially fund the benefits program for some 42 million low-income Americans for November as the shutdown drags on, giving the government 24 hours to comply.
“People have gone without for too long,” McConnell said in court.
DOJ ACCUSES FEDERAL JUDGE OF ‘MAKING MOCKERY OF THE SEPARATION OF POWERS’ IN SNAP APPEAL
Volunteer Bruce Toben packs groceries during an emergency food distribution at The Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia’s Mitzvah Food Program in Philadelphia, Friday. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)
After the appeals court ruling, the Trump administration filed the emergency appeal to SCOTUS late Friday.
“Given the imminent, irreparable harms posed by these orders, which require the government to transfer an estimated $4 billion by tonight, the Solicitor General respectfully requests an immediate administrative stay of the orders pending the resolution of this application by no later than 9:30pm this evening,” an administration spokesperson told Fox News.
New York Attorney General Letitia James responded to the Supreme Court decision Friday, calling it a “tragedy.”
“This decision is a tragedy for the millions of Americans who rely on SNAP to feed their families. It is disgraceful that the Trump administration chose to fight this in court instead of fulfilling its responsibility to the American people,” she said in a statement.
The Supreme Court ruling came after the U.S. Department of Agriculture on Friday said it is working to comply with a judge’s order to fully fund the program for November.
In a letter sent to all regional directors of the SNAP program on Friday, Patrick Penn, deputy undersecretary for USDA’s Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, said, “FNS is working towards implementing November 2025 full benefit issuances in compliance with the November 6, 2025, order from the District Court of Rhode Island.”
He added, “Later today, FNS will complete the processes necessary to make funds available to support your subsequent transmittal of full issuance files to your EBT processor.”
TRUMP SAYS SNAP BENEFITS WILL ONLY RESUME WHEN ‘RADICAL LEFT DEMOCRATS’ OPEN GOVERNMENT
An EBT sign is displayed on the window of a grocery store in New York City. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
Penn said the department would keep regional directors “as up to date as possible on any future developments and appreciate your continued partnership to serve program beneficiaries across the country. State agencies with questions should contact their FNS Regional Office representative.”
He scolded the Trump administration for failing to comply with the order he issued last week, which required the U.S. Department of Agriculture to fund the SNAP benefits programs before its funds were slated to lapse on Nov. 1, marking the first time in the program’s 60-year history that its payments were halted.
The judge also said Trump officials failed to address a known funding distribution problem that could cause SNAP payments to be delayed for weeks or months in some states. He ordered the USDA to tap other contingency funds as needed.
DOJ ACCUSES FEDERAL JUDGE OF MAKING ‘MOCKERY OF THE SEPARATION OF POWERS’ IN SNAP APPEAL
The USDA on Friday said it is working to comply with a judge’s order to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program amid the government shutdown. (Daniel Acker/Bloomberg/Getty Images)
“It’s likely that SNAP recipients are hungry as we sit here,” McConnell said Thursday.
Trump administration officials said in a court filing earlier this week that they would pay just 65% of the roughly $9 billion owed to fund the SNAP program for November, prompting the judge to update his order and give the administration just 24 hours to comply.
“The evidence shows that people will go hungry, food pantries will be overburdened, and needless suffering will occur,” McConnell said. “That’s what irreparable harm here means.”
Fox News’ Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report.
The Supreme Court temporarily blocked an order late Friday night that would have forced the government to backfill the country’s largest anti-hunger program — a move the administration claimed would require it to “raid school-lunch money” to keep families fed.
The decision, issued on behalf of the court by Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, put a brief hold on the district court order that would have forced the Trump administration to pay out $4 billion for food stamps — formally called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP — to keep it afloat through November amid the ongoing government shutdown.
That hold is set to expire 48 hours after the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules on whether to compel the payment or allow food assistance to lapse for millions of Americans who rely on it.
The courtroom drama began late on Thursday, when a U.S. district judge ordered the federal government to pay the $4 billion by 5 p.m. Friday.
The administration responded with a breakneck appeal, filing around breakfast time Friday in the 1st Circuit and again at the Supreme Court in the middle of dinner.
“There is no lawful basis for an order that directs USDA to somehow find $4 billion in the metaphorical couch cushions,” Assistant Atty. Gen. Brett A. Shumate wrote in the 1st Circuit appeal.
The administration’s only option would be to “to starve Peter to feed Paul” by cutting school lunch programs, Shumate wrote.
On Friday afternoon, the appellate court declined to immediately block the lower court’s order, and said it would quickly rule on the merits of the funding decree.
The administration immediately appealed to the Supreme Court, demanding the justices block the move by 9:30 p.m. Eastern.
“The district court’s ruling is untenable at every turn,” Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer wrote in his petition, saying it would “metastasize” into “further shutdown chaos.”
SNAP benefits are a key fight in the ongoing government shutdown. California is one of several states suing the administration to restore the safety net program while negotiations continue to end the stalemate.
Millions of Americans have struggled to afford groceries since benefits lapsed Nov. 1, inspiring many Republican lawmakers to join Democrats in demanding an emergency stopgap.
The Trump administration was previously ordered to release contingency funding for the program that it said would cover benefits for about half of November.
But the process has been “confusing and chaotic” and “rife with errors,” according to a brief filed by 25 states and the District of Columbia.
Some states, including California, have started disbursing SNAP benefits for the month. Others say the partial funding is a functional lockout.
“Many states’ existing systems require complete reprogramming to accomplish this task, and given the sudden — and suddenly changing — nature of USDA’s guidance, that task is impossible to complete quickly,” the brief said.
“Recalculations required by [the government’s] plan will delay November benefits for [state] residents for weeks or months.”
In response, U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. of Rhode Island ordered the full food stamp payout by the end of the week. He accused the administration of withholding the benefit for political gain.
“Faced with a choice between advancing relief and entrenching delay, [the administration] chose the latter — an outcome that predictably magnifies harm and undermines the very purpose of the program it administers,” he wrote.
“This Court is not naïve to the administration’s true motivations,” McConnell wrote. “Far from being concerned with Child Nutrition funding, these statements make clear that the administration is withholding full SNAP benefits for political purposes.”
The Supreme Court has now extended that deadline through at least the weekend. A fuller decision from the 1st Circuit or the Supreme Court could nullify it entirely.
The 1st Circuit is currently the country’s most liberal, with five active judges, all of whom were named to the bench by Democratic presidents. But the Supreme Court has a conservative supermajority, and has regularly sided with the administration in decisions on the emergency docket.
While the 1st Circuit deliberates, both sides are left sparring over how many children will go hungry if the other prevails.
More than 16 million children rely on SNAP benefits. Close to 30 million are fed through the National School Lunch Program, which the government now says it must gut to meet the court’s order.
But the same pool of cash has already been tapped to extend Women, Infants and Children, which is a federal program that pays for baby formula and other basics for some poor families.
“This clearly undermines the Defendants’ point, as WIC is an entirely separate program from the Child Nutrition Programs,” McConnell wrote.
In its Friday order, the 1st Circuit panel said it would issue a full ruling “as quickly as possible.”
In her order, Justice Jackson said it is expected “with dispatch.”
The government shutdown, now the longest on record, is growing increasingly painful as more Americans start to feel its effects.
First, more than 600,000 federal workers were furloughed, and an even larger number were forced to work without pay. Then, funding lapses began to endanger critical antipoverty programs that tens of millions of Americans rely on, like food stamps and nutritional programs for women and children.
And on Wednesday, when the government shutdown became the longest in American history, Trump officials said they would slash air traffic at 40 major airports.
Here is a list of some of the shutdown’s most significant impacts.
- Trump suggests furloughed employees may not receive back pay once the government reopens.
- The Trump administration notifies thousands of federal workers that they will be laid off later this year. (A federal judge temporarily blocked the layoffs).
- Most federal workers receive only a partial paycheck this week.
- All unpaid federal workers miss their first full paycheck this week.
- Thousands of furloughed health workers are called back into work to handle open enrollment for both Medicare and health plans available under the Affordable Care Act.
- Active-duty service members are paid through another reallocation of funding.
- A federal judge orders the Agriculture Department to quickly partially or fully fund SNAP.
- A voucher program providing benefits for 6.7 million women and young children received last-minute additional funding for the month of November.
- An additional 134 Head Start programs, which serve more than 65,000 children and families, run out of federal funding.
- Low-income families begin to miss SNAP deposits.
- A federal judge orders the Trump administration to fully fund food stamps, after admonishing the government for ignoring his original order.
- Reductions of 10 percent of air traffic at dozens of the nation’s busiest airports are set to begin.
If the shutdown continues …
Alvaro Folgueiras, Tate Sage and takeaways from Iowa basketball’s win vs Western Illinois
Indiana vs. Penn State prediction: Odds, picks, best bet for Saturday’s Big Ten matchup
How to watch Iowa State vs TCU today, time, TV channel for Week 11 college football game
Final Availability Report Ahead of Arizona, Kansas Game
How to Watch Florida Gators vs. Kentucky, TV, Betting Lines and More
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Video: ‘It Didn’t Have to Happen This Way:’ U.Va. Faculty Call for Review of Police Response to Protests
Supreme Court blocks lower court order forcing Trump administration to fully fund SNAP program
Full SNAP benefits start to go out even as the Trump administration appeals
Video: The Decline of America’s Largest Environmental Organization
Hegseth warns traffickers after deadly drug boat strike: ‘We will kill you’
ICC confirms war crimes charges against Uganda’s rebel leader Joseph Kony
-
Austin, TX2 days agoHalf-naked woman was allegedly tortured and chained in Texas backyard for months by five ‘friends’ who didn’t ‘like her anymore’
-
Culture1 week agoVideo: Dissecting Three Stephen King Adaptations
-
Education1 week agoOpinion | New York City Mayoral Candidates: Who Would Be Best?
-
Seattle, WA6 days agoESPN scoop adds another intriguing name to Seahawks chatter before NFL trade deadline
-
San Diego, CA1 week agoAdd Nick Hundley, Ruben Niebla to list of Padres’ managerial finalists
-
Business1 week agoCommentary: Meme stocks are still with us, offering new temptations for novice and unwary investors
-
Business1 week ago
Disneyland Resort lays off 100 people in Anaheim
-
Politics1 week agoVirginia school district slapped with complaint alleging new claims in viral trans locker room fight
