• The Trump administration has revoked the 2009 endangerment finding that deemed greenhouse gases a threat to public health.
• The repeal is seen as the most significant rollback of climate regulations in U.S. history and could jeopardize numerous existing emissions standards.
• Environmental and health experts warn this move could lead to increased pollution and health problems in the U.S.
• Legal challenges are expected rapidly as various groups aim to contest this decision in court.
• Critics argue the administration's reasoning is scientifically unfounded and ideologically motivated.

The Trump administration has officially revoked the 2009 "endangerment finding," a crucial ruling that identified greenhouse gases as a significant threat to public health. This decision is described as the most significant rollback of climate regulations in U.S. history, which could lead to the dismantling of key emissions standards impacting various sectors, particularly transportation and energy, according to Reuters, Vox, Los Angeles Times, BBC, Le Monde, and Channel News Asia.

During the announcement, President Trump claimed, "This determination had no basis in fact...this was all a scam," reiterating his skepticism about human-caused climate change. Moreover, he has positioned the repeal of the endangerment finding as essential for reducing regulatory burdens and costs for automakers, potentially lowering vehicle prices Vox, BBC, Le Monde.

The endangerment finding had previously facilitated federal actions against six greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, but its removal has raised alarms among environmentalists and public health experts. They suggest that the repeal could increase pollution levels, leading to millions more asthma attacks and tens of thousands of premature deaths, with a severe impact on vulnerable populations, according to Los Angeles Times, BBC, and Channel News Asia.

Industry groups have shown mixed reactions to the repeal, with some supporting the move for less regulation, while others express concern over possible international competitiveness, especially in relation to emissions standards that other countries may enforce. This uncertainty might hinder the automotive sector's transition toward electric vehicles, as noted by climate law experts, according to Vox and Reuters.

The decision has sparked an expected wave of legal challenges from environmental organizations and various state entities aiming to contest the abrupt termination of this regulatory framework. Legal experts have predicted that the fight may escalate to the Supreme Court given the precedent established by the Massachusetts v. EPA ruling, which has reaffirmed the authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases multiple times since 2007, according to Los Angeles Times, BBC, and Channel News Asia.