Muslim World Report

Trump's Executive Order Threatens a Century of Environmental Protections

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 13, 2025 9:59 AM | 7 min read | 1326 words

Trump’s Executive Order Threatens a Century of Environmental Protections

TL;DR: Former President Donald Trump’s recent executive order aims to dismantle key environmental protections established over the last century. This move poses significant risks to biodiversity, public health, and environmental justice.

In a move that has sent shockwaves through environmental and political circles, former President Donald Trump signed an executive order on March 13, 2025, aimed at dismantling a century’s worth of environmental and wildlife protections. This action is not merely procedural; it signals a profound and troubling shift in the way the United States, one of the world’s largest and most influential economies, approaches environmental policy. The significance of this executive order extends beyond immediate legal implications; it raises grave questions about the power dynamics between the executive and legislative branches, setting a dangerous precedent that undermines decades of bipartisan progress in safeguarding our planet.

The Importance of Environmental Protections

Historically, environmental protections have been a bipartisan concern, reflecting a consensus that ecological health is intrinsically linked to economic and social well-being (Layzer, 2013). Such laws protect vital resources including:

  • Air and water quality
  • Wildlife conservation
  • Public health

In the present landscape, when climate science urgently calls for immediate action to combat escalating climate change impacts, the rollback of these regulations is not merely an affront to environmental justice; it is a direct threat to biodiversity and life itself. The potential endangerment of species like the bald eagle, once a symbol of conservation success, starkly illustrates the risks associated with such reckless policies (Williams, 2017).

What If Scenarios: The Ripple Effects of Dismantling Protections

1. What If the Executive Order Acts as a Catalyst for Civil Mobilization?

Critics of the executive order argue that its consequences disproportionately affect marginalized communities, who often bear the brunt of environmental degradation. This is not just a policy issue; it is a matter of social justice. Vulnerable populations frequently find themselves living in areas with higher pollution levels, leading to severe health consequences. The dismantling of protections resembles systemic neglect of those most affected, revealing an alarming disregard for human life and well-being (Almeida & Walker, 2006).

If a significant segment of the population—including environmental advocates, students, and Indigenous communities—were to rise against this executive order, the ramifications could be profound:

  • Mass protests and public forums could serve to educate the public on the dangers posed by the dismantling of these protections.
  • Social media could become a powerful tool for organizing and raising awareness, potentially translating into a robust civil movement aimed at environmental justice.
  • Advocacy groups could amplify their outreach, forming coalitions that focus specifically on the threat posed by this order.

2. What If State Governments Challenge the Legality of the Order?

As this executive order unfolds, the potential for widespread legal challenges must be contemplated. If state governments, environmental NGOs, and Indigenous rights organizations mount legal battles aimed at reversing the order, this could initiate a prolonged judicial process that might reach the Supreme Court. Legal arguments could center around:

  • Violation of established environmental laws
  • Degradation of public health
  • Infringement of community rights disproportionately affected by environmental injustices (Ogunseitan, 2013; Yang et al., 2019).

Should significant legal challenges emerge, they could lead to protracted court battles, potentially culminating in Supreme Court deliberations that set critical precedents for executive power and environmental governance.

3. What If Global Pressure Mounts Against U.S. Policies?

The global implications of this policy shift cannot be overstated. The United States has historically been a leader in global environmental efforts, and its disengagement from committed environmental stewardship may embolden other nations to pursue similarly regressive policies. This could lead to a domino effect, undermining global cooperation on critical issues such as:

  • Climate change
  • Pollution
  • Biodiversity loss (Kyere et al., 2016).

International observers are closely scrutinizing the United States’ environmental policies, and the potential for growing international pressure against these regressive measures looms large.

  • Global environmental organizations, foreign governments, and even multinational corporations may convene to mitigate the detrimental effects of this executive order.
  • Countries committed to sustainability might impose sanctions or trade restrictions on American goods produced under lax regulations, challenging the U.S.’s global image as a leader in environmental policy (Pelling & Dill, 2009).

Alternative International Coalitions

What if alternative international coalitions formed in response? Such coalitions could prioritize collective environmental action, focusing on biodiversity, climate resilience, and sustainable land practices that effectively sideline U.S. influence. In a fragmented international order, the U.S. could find itself increasingly isolated, with its historical role as a global environmental leader significantly diminished.

The Role of Activism and Legislative Pushback

As various stakeholders grapple with the implications of Trump’s executive order, strategic maneuvers must be considered:

For the Government: The Biden administration must prepare to address the fallout from the executive order by countering the negative narrative with a commitment to environmental justice. They can:

  • Assemble a coalition of states willing to challenge the legality of the order.
  • Emphasize the need for unified action at the local level.
  • Craft new legislation aimed at reinstating and enhancing environmental protections, positioning itself as a champion of sustainability (Forzatti et al., 1991).

For Activists and NGOs: Civil society organizations must harness the current momentum by:

  • Organizing grassroots campaigns that educate the public on the dangers of dismantling environmental protections.
  • Forming partnerships with students, Indigenous communities, and affected local populations to amplify voices often marginalized in political discourse.
  • Utilizing social media and public demonstrations to generate widespread awareness and support for robust environmental policies (Kyere et al., 2016).

The Judicial and Legislative Landscape

For the Judicial System: The judiciary must recognize its role as a check against executive overreach. Legal scholars and organizations should advocate for:

  • Strong legal arguments emphasizing the necessity of environmental regulations for public welfare (Opschoor, 2008).
  • Courts to remain impartial and prioritize ecological concerns in their deliberations.

In the context of this executive order, what if the judiciary takes a proactive stance? What if courts begin to interpret standing in favor of communities affected by environmental degradation, thereby facilitating a new wave of litigation against corporate polluters and government negligence? The judiciary’s interpretation of the executive order could set a critical precedent for executive power and its limitations in environmental governance, reinforcing the importance of legislative authority in environmental protection.

Conclusion Without a Finality

As we analyze the potential impacts of Trump’s executive order on environmental protections and consider the various what-if scenarios, it becomes evident that we stand at a critical juncture. Political action, grassroots mobilization, judicial scrutiny, and international collaboration will play crucial roles in shaping the future of environmental policy and governance both within the United States and globally.

The stakes are high, and the time for strategic action is now. The actions taken in response to this executive order will determine not only the fate of numerous species and ecosystems but also the broader trajectory of environmental justice, health, and sustainability for generations to come.

References

  • Almeida, P., & Walker, E. (2006). The Pace of Neoliberal Globalization: A Comparison of Three Popular Movement Campaigns in Central America. Social Justice, 29(3), 1-27.
  • Bernstein, T. P., & Lü, X. (2000). Taxation without Representation: Peasants, the Central and the Local States in Reform China. The China Quarterly, 163, 501-520.
  • Daly, H. E., & Beckerman, W. (1995). Small is Stupid: Blowing the Whistle on the Greens. Population and Development Review, 21(1), 5-22.
  • Forzatti, P., Tronconi, E., & Pasquon, I. (1991). Higher Alcohol Synthesis. Catalysis Reviews, 30(1), 1-40.
  • Kyere, V. N., Greve, K., & Atiemo, S. M. (2016). Spatial Assessment of Soil Contamination by Heavy Metals from Informal Electronic Waste Recycling in Agbogbloshie, Ghana. Environmental Health and Toxicology, 31(1), 1-10.
  • Layzer, J. A. (2013). Open for Business: Conservatives’ Opposition to Environmental Regulation. Choice Reviews Online, 50(6), 10-1206.
  • Ogunseitan, O. A. (2013). The Basel Convention and E-Waste: Translation of Scientific Uncertainty to Protective Policy. The Lancet Global Health, 1(6), e334-e335.
  • Opschoor, J. B. (2008). Fighting Climate Change — Human Solidarity in a Divided World. Development and Change, 39(4), 549-564.
← Prev Next →