EPA’s Deregulatory Efforts Supported by Case Law, Official Says

The Environmental Protection Agency is “aiming higher” in its deregulatory campaign following several US Supreme Court decisions that reined in the agency’s discretion, the EPA’s deputy administrator said Thursday.

David Fotouhi said the justices have empowered the agency to cut “costly and unnecessary regulations” from the Biden and Obama administrations. The previous regulations stretched rulemaking authority under laws like the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, he said.

Fotouhi spoke during the Federalist Society’s Executive Branch Summit in Washington, and his comments came the same day President Donald Trump announced the EPA is relaxing requirements on planet-warming refrigerants, claiming the move will save consumers money by reducing costs for grocery operations.

Recent high court decisions like Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which scrapped agency authority to interpret ambiguous laws, and Sackett v. EPA, which limited the definition of “federal waters” subject to CWA protections, are part of “more receptive case law that encourages the agency to look at the best reading of a statute and to think twice before enacting regulatory authority that’s never been used before,” Fotouhi said.

Under Trump’s second term, EPA officials have pushed speed and efficiency in rulemaking across state air plan submissions, pesticide and chemical reviews, small refinery exemptions, and water quality standards. Fotouhi said the agency has been able to reduce the backlog of these permitting schemes, and it has “nearly eliminated” small refinery exemption petitions under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program.

The agency’s deregulatory moves are happening under a significantly reduced headcount, with Fotouhi confirming the agency has shrunk from 18,000 to approximately 12,500 employees, with the “vast majority” leaving through early retirement or deferred resignations.

Critics of the Trump EPA argue the agency’s rapid unwinding of regulations, which includes the withdrawal of the greenhouse gas endangerment finding, is testing the legal boundaries of administrative and environmental law.