The Environmental Protection Agency is basically letting polluters off the hook, and the numbers don’t lie. A new report from the Environmental Integrity Project shows that civil lawsuits against companies violating environmental laws have plummeted by 76% compared to Biden’s first year in office. We’re talking about just 16 cases filed in the first 12 months of Trump’s second term.
To put this in perspective, Trump’s own first administration filed 86 cases during the same period. Obama’s EPA? 127 cases. The trajectory here isn’t just declining, it’s nosediving.
“Our nation’s landmark environmental laws are meaningless when EPA does not enforce the rules,” said Jen Duggan from the Environmental Integrity Project. She’s not wrong. What’s the point of having regulations if nobody’s enforcing them?
The Deregulation Playbook
From day one, the Trump administration kicked off what they proudly called the “biggest deregulatory action in U.S. history.” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin launched 31 separate efforts to roll back restrictions on air and water pollution. They’re handing more authority to states, many of which have historically been, let’s say, less than enthusiastic about enforcing environmental rules.
The push has been particularly sweet for fossil fuel companies. Trump declared an “energy emergency” immediately after taking office, which basically gave business interests a green light to prioritize profits over environmental protection.
But here’s where it gets interesting. This isn’t just about changing regulations. The EPA is actively pulling back on enforcing existing laws. They’re not even responding to requests for comment about it anymore.
Staffing Collapse and Policy Shifts
Part of the problem is that there’s literally nobody left to do the work. At least a third of lawyers in the Justice Department’s environment division have left in the past year. The EPA itself laid off hundreds of employees who were supposed to monitor pollution that could hurt human health.
You can’t enforce laws without enforcers. It’s pretty simple math.
Then there’s the new “compliance first” policy that the EPA formalized last December. Sounds nice on paper, right? Work with companies to fix problems instead of hitting them with lawsuits and fines. But in practice, it means polluters get a gentle nudge instead of real consequences.
Craig Pritzlaff, now a principal deputy assistant EPA administrator, wrote in a memo that formal enforcement should only happen when “compliance assurance or informal enforcement is inapplicable or insufficient.” Translation: we’ll try asking nicely first, and maybe second, and probably third.
A Familiar Face With a Troubling Record
Speaking of Pritzlaff, his background is telling. He spent five years heading enforcement for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, where he earned a reputation as a “reluctant regulator.” Public Citizen called out his track record there, pointing to cases like the INEOS chemical plant that racked up nearly 100 violations over a decade before a 2023 explosion sent a worker to the hospital and sparked a fire.
TCEQ’s approach under Pritzlaff was to let violations pile up, arguing it was more efficient to handle everything in one big enforcement action. Except that created a backlog they’re still trying to sort out. INEOS eventually got fined $2.3 million for violations between 2016 and 2021, but that’s closing the barn door after the horses have already escaped, caught fire, and polluted the local water supply.
The Numbers Tell a Grim Story
Administrative cases did increase slightly during Trump’s second term compared to Biden’s, but here’s the catch. Most of those cases involved paperwork violations around risk management plans or municipal drinking water issues. Cases involving actual industrial pollution? Those didn’t increase at all, according to the Environmental Integrity Project.
The EPA issued just $41 million in penalties through September, which is $8 million less than the same period under Biden when you adjust for inflation. So even when they do take action, the financial consequences are lighter. It’s like getting a parking ticket when you’ve been street racing.
What This Means for Real People
Federal agencies like the EPA have always been outnumbered by the industries they regulate. They’ve historically relied on high-profile enforcement actions to send a message: break the law, face consequences. That deterrent effect keeps other companies in line.
But what happens when there’s no cop on the beat? Companies start testing boundaries. Violations that might have been caught and punished become business as usual.
Erika Kranz from Harvard Law School points out that this enforcement collapse is part of a broader pattern. “We’ve been seeing the administration deregulate by repealing rules and extending compliance deadlines, and this decline in enforcement action seems like yet another mechanism that the administration is using to de-emphasize environmental and public health protections.”
If you’re worried about the air you breathe or the water your kids drink, this should concern you. These aren’t abstract policy debates. They have real impacts on real communities.
Could This Trigger Legal Challenges?
The drop in enforcement is so dramatic that it might actually be legally vulnerable. Administrations typically have wide latitude in making enforcement decisions, but there’s a difference between setting priorities and abandoning your core mission entirely.
Kranz suggests we might see advocacy groups argue that this isn’t just discretion, it’s an abdication of the EPA’s statutory duties. Courts would then have to decide whether an agency can simply choose not to enforce the laws Congress passed. That’s going to be an interesting legal fight if it happens.
The report acknowledges that many court cases take longer than a year to resolve, so we’re still in the early stages of understanding the full impact. But the trend is clear and steep. When the agency responsible for protecting our environment decides enforcement isn’t a priority, we’re all left breathing the consequences.
