Federal

In the first few months of the second Trump presidency, the Administration has taken steps to roll back environmental justice (EJ) considerations in federal decision making. This included a flurry of executive orders (EOs) issued in his first hours and days in office, which effectively rescinded all federal EJ initiatives. A more in-depth review of these EOs can be found here. The Trump Administration followed these EOs by moving to terminate the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights (OEJECR) after placing 160 employees on paid administrative leave at the beginning of February. 

On 5 February, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a memo implementing EO: Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity. Specifically, Pam Bondi, the new US Attorney General, stated that by 15 March, each DOJ Department needed to submit a report including the following:

• Confirming the termination, to the maximum extent allowed by law, of all DEI, DEIA, and “environmental justice” programs, offices, and positions;
• Identifying agency or department DEI, DEIA, or “environmental justice” positions, committees, programs, services, activities, budgets, and expenditures in existence on 4 November 2024, and providing an assessment of whether these positions, committees, programs, services, activities, budgets, and expenditures have been misleadingly relabeled in an attempt to preserve their pre-November 4, 2024, function;
• Identifying federal grantees who received federal funding to provide or advance DEI, DEIA, or “environmental justice” programs, services, or activities since 20 January 2021; and
• Assessing the operational impact (e.g., the new of new DEI hires) and the cost of the prior administration’s DEI, DEIA, and “environmental justice” programs and policies.

In response, Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Representative Nanette Diaz Barragan (D-CA) introduced the Empowering and Enforcing Environmental Justice Act, which would “permanently codify the Office of Environment Justice within [DOJ’s] Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD).” Meanwhile, the EPA (and the Department of Government Efficiency) announced the cancellation of nine contracts “related to DEI, environmental justice, and more” and the cancellation of an additional 20 grants as “the EPA puts a stop to wasteful DEI and environmental justice programs being funded by taxpayers.” 

On 12 March 2025, EPA issued an internal memorandum announcing that it would shut down all EJ offices and officially end other EJ-related initiatives. Leading up to this announcement, the agency had taken down EJ-related tools such as EJScreen, an “open-source mapping and screening tool” that allowed the public to map “EJ Indexes” by combining metrics for environmental burdens with demographic indexes derived from US Census data on poverty and racial demographics. 

States

Despite federal efforts to roll back Biden-era EJ initiatives, many states continue to focus on EJ. Importantly, states’ EJ laws will not be immediately impacted by the actions of the Trump administration; instead, it is expected the rollback of EJ at the federal level will likely encourage many states, particularly Democratically controlled states, to more aggressively enact and enforce EJ standards and policies. Below is a highlight of EJ updates on the state level.

Colorado

On 14 January 2025, Colorado announced the launch of its updated screening tool, “Colorado EnviroScreen 2.0.” The new EnviroScreen provides updated quantifiable measurements of combined environmental stressors, taking into account environmental exposures, environmental effects, climate vulnerability, sensitive populations, and demographics. Colorado’s EnviroScreen tool is used in a variety of contexts within the state’s regulatory programs, such as in oil and gas permitting actions. The launch of the updated tool is in tandem with the rollout of Colorado’s new tool known as the Disproportionately Impacted Communities Map, which highlights areas that meet criteria for disproportionately impacted communities, as defined by Colorado law. Permittees must include plans with their application materials that indicate whether the proposed operations are within disproportionately impacted communities, conduct outreach activities to disproportionately impacted communities, and identify potential impacts in the operators’ prepared cumulative impact evaluations for the oil and gas operators’ comprehensive area plans. 

On 26 February 2025, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment held its final public meeting regarding the proposed Landfill Methane Rule and on 17 April 2025, the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission set a rulemaking hearing for August on the proposed rule.¹ The proposed rule encompasses several modifications to landfill gas emissions requirements, to include earlier installation of gas collection and control systems than what federal requirements currently mandate, the inclusion of aerial monitoring and biofilters, and phasing out open flares. These modifications, in particular the phase out of open flares, are expected to have positive implications for protecting “fenceline” or EJ communities, that may otherwise be disproportionately impacted. However, even if the rule is adopted, its successful implementation remains tenuous, as Colorado was previously selected to receive from the EPA US$23 million in funding for the Air Pollution Control Division’s methane monitoring efforts, a grant that is now uncertain due to the Administration’s recent funding actions.

Illinois 

On 24 March 2025, EPA’s OEJECR determined that the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency met its obligations under an Informal Resolution Agreement, dated 14 February 2024, which was issued to resolve allegations that Illinois EPA engaged in racial and national origin discrimination in its permitting process. This dispute arose following Illinois EPA’s approval of a construction permit that would have moved a scrap metal recycling facility from the Lincoln Park neighborhood of Chicago, a primarily white and wealthy area, to a low-income primarily minority community in southeast Chicago. The settlement required Illinois EPA to expand access to public participation across the full permitting lifecycle and affirmatively consider a permit applicant’s history of violations under the Illinois Environmental Protection Act and potentially implement permit restrictions based on same. On 13 January 2025, Illinois EPA notified OECRC that it had fulfilled its final obligations upon publishing a finalized Enhanced Public Participation Plan on its website.

In addition, following a yearslong battle with Illinois environmental public interest groups, the US Army Corps of Engineers recently announced it was rescinding a planned expansion of a toxic waste disposal site on the Southeast Side of Chicago, an overburdened EJ community. The proposed expansion along the Lake Michigan shoreline would have taken in an additional one million cubic yards of contaminated sediment dredged from the Calumet River. Opponents of the expansion said the area is already overburdened with toxic pollution, and they also cited the long-held promise of a lakefront park once the site was decommissioned. Leading up to withdrawing its plans, Illinois EPA sent a letter to the Corps in January stating that the expansion would violate state law, which prohibits construction or expansion of landfills in Cook County. 

Maryland 

On 7 February 2025, House Delegate Jazz Lewis introduced the CHERISH (Cumulative Harms to Environmental Restoration for Improving our Shared Health) Our Communities Act. The Act creates new permit application requirements for a broad spectrum of permits for “covered projects” issued by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). Among other things, the bill requires a permit applicant for a covered project to submit an environmental impact analysis, and, under specified circumstances, an existing burden report with their permit application. The Act gives MDE authority to reject a permit application if it determines that the proposed project would cause or contribute to an increased potential for adverse environmental and public health impacts within a specified surrounding area. MDE may also grant conditions to a permit to reduce pollution impacts. The bill also expands the applicability of existing public participation requirements to projects identified as having an increased potential for adverse community environmental and public health impacts. Census tracts covered under the CHERISH Act are identified based on the Maryland EJ Screening tool. 

New Jersey

Two appeals are pending before the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, challenging many aspects of New Jersey’s first of its kind environmental justice rules (EJ Rules) published by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) on 17 April 2023. These EJ Rules seek to implement Governor Murphy’s landmark environmental justice legislation, which was aimed at reducing pollution in historically overburdened communities that the Murphy administration says have been disproportionately impacted by environmental and public health stressors. The appeals challenge the EJ Rules as going beyond the scope of NJDEP’s statutory authority or as otherwise being arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. The appeals also challenge the EJ Rules and the Environmental Justice Mapping, Assessment and Protection Tool (EJMAP) on the grounds that they were promulgated in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The appeals are currently awaiting the scheduling of oral argument.

On 30 January 2025, the Department updated EJMAP, New Jersey’s tool that maps overburdened communities as defined by the EJ law and environmental and public health stressors impacting those communities. The updates incorporate new overburdened community determinations based on the 2023 American Community Survey and new stressor data made publicly available since the map’s previous release last year. Any permit application submitted on or after 31 January 2025 must use the new Overburdened Community/Adjacent Burden Group (OBC/ABG) and stressor data layers for analysis. 

New Mexico 

On 17 January 2025, the EPA OEJECR announced an investigation into civil rights violations by the City of Albuquerque, New Mexico in preventing the adoption of a pollutant-reducing rule. As one of the final actions of the Biden Administration, EPA took up a complaint alleging that the city council and county air quality control boards violated procedural state requirements in blocking a rule that would benefit an identified environmental justice community. Though the matter remains pending, it is unclear whether OEJECR will continue to investigate cases opened under the Biden administration or whether the substantial shift in EJ initiatives will impact EPA’s ability to investigate allegations of discrimination. 

New York

On 29 January 2025, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) announced the release of proposed amendments to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) regulations, to integrate EJ considerations into environmental reviews. These amendments, mandated by ECL Article 8, build upon what has become known as the Environmental Justice Siting Law (EJSL), signed by Governor Kathy Hochul on 31 December 2022. 

EJSL mandates that EJ concerns be considered in environmental permitting decisions and the SEQRA review process. Specifically with respect to SEQRA, the EJSL requires the SEQR process to consider the “effects of any proposed action [subject to a determination of significance] on disadvantaged communities, including whether the action may cause or increase a disproportionate pollution burden on disadvantaged community” when making the determination of significance under SEQR (that is, the SEQR lead agency decision of whether to prepare or cause to be prepared an environmental impact statement). NYSDEC’s proposed regulations implement this requirement. The public comment period on the proposed amendments began on 29 January 2025, and NYSDEC will accept comments until 7 May 2025. 

Pennsylvania

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) is working on a comment-response document for comments received on an Interim Final EJ Policy issued on 16 September 2023. The Interim Final EJ Policy is a significant modification and expansion of the Department’s prior EJ policy published in 2004. The policy impacts how and when major environmental permits are issued in Pennsylvania and also impacts enforcement of environmental laws in EJ areas. Unlike prior iterations of the policy, PADEP will determine whether an area constitutes an EJ area based on a weighted index of both environmental indicators and population characteristics. Permits covered by the policy will be analyzed for impacts to EJ areas and will be required to engage in additional outreach to local communities. Perhaps most interestingly, the Interim Final EJ Policy allows for enhanced civil penalties for violations that occur in EJ areas covered by the policy. PADEP will be using a mapping and screening tool known as “PennEnviroScreen” that identifies EJ communities using 32 environmental, health, and socioeconomic indicators. A more detailed update on the Interim Policy can be found here. 

In addition, on 14 January 2025, State Rep. Greg Vitali (D-Delaware) introduced an EJ bill, H.B.109, which would require additional processes for permit applications in EJ areas—including the submittal of a cumulative environmental impact report and a more robust public hearing process—and would empower PADEP to “require additional conditions or mitigation measures” or “deny a permit application in an environmental justice area based on the cumulative environmental impacts.” The bill was most recently referred to the House Committee on Environmental and Natural Resource Protection.

Virginia 

On 8 January 2025, Senator Lamont Bagby (D-14) introduced legislation, SB-1254, that would require municipalities with a population above 20,000 and counties above 100,000 to consider incorporating an EJ strategy into their comprehensive plans each time they are under review. EJ became codified in Virginia law in 2020 through the Virginia Environmental Justice Act, which makes it state policy to ensure that environmental justice is “carried out throughout the Commonwealth,” with a focus on low-income communities, communities of color, and especially those near major sources of pollution. A comprehensive plan is a policy document intended to set forth how a locality plans to grow and steer future development. Virginia law has required since 1980 that all local governments develop and adopt a comprehensive plan, and it also stipulates that the plans must be reviewed at least once every five years. 

The bill provides that the locality's strategy shall be to identify EJ and fenceline communities within the jurisdiction of the local planning commission and identify objectives and policies to reduce health risks, to promote civic engagement, and to prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of environmental justice and fenceline communities, as those terms are defined by the bill. The bill passed both the House and Senate but was vetoed on 24 March 2025, the very last day for the Governor to act on legislation from the 2025 General Assembly session.

Conclusion

In light of these recent developments, the Trump Administration’s approach to EJ marks a significant shift from prior federal policies. Businesses, particularly those operating in overburdened communities, should closely monitor policy shifts and enforcement trends at both the federal and state levels. The firm has assembled a task force that is closely watching these developments and is ready to work with clients to understand how these and other changes may impact their businesses. 

Footnotes