OAKLAND, Calif.—As intense heatwaves become more common and climate scientists issue more alarming warnings, many states and environmentalists are pushing back on what they see as the Trump administration’s climate change denialism. California Attorney General Rob Bonta this week co-led a coalition of 19 attorneys general and one city in filing a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), challenging its rule that would weaken regulations designed to phase out the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) in commercial equipment.
HFCs are chemicals used for refrigeration and cooling that are reportedly up to 10,000 times more potent than the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide; they are considered among the fastest-growing sources of greenhouse gas emissions both in the United States and around the world. According to scientists, greenhouse gas emissions trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere, acting like a blanket that raises global temperatures and drives climate change.
“Across the country, communities are enduring record-breaking temperatures, devastating floods, and raging wildfires. They are clear warnings that our planet is approaching a dangerous climate tipping point. Yet, the Trump administration is weakening critical environmental safeguards that combat the climate crisis, including restrictions on the super pollutant hydrofluorocarbons—one of the most powerful categories of greenhouse gases driving this crisis,” said Bonta.
On May 26, 2026, the EPA finalized a rule that took effect on July 27, 2026, that revises the 2023 Technology Transitions Rule under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act. The 2020 AIM Act directed the EPA to reduce the production and use of HFCs in an effort to reduce greenhouse gases by 85% by the year 2036. Under Trump’s EPA, these regulations and deadlines have been relaxed, raising global warming thresholds for cold storage and removing specific residential installation limits. This new rule affects supermarkets, cold storage warehouses, and other industries.
Calling the reversal “a win for American families and lowering the cost of living,” the Trump White House called the Biden-era 2020 rule “ridiculous” and “burdensome,” and said that these regulations drove up prices on food and other items Americans buy. Under the guise of affordability—an issue that hangs over the administration like a dark cloud as the crisis of record-breaking rising costs takes a toll on the wallets of many Americans—the administration claims that by saving the industry and businesses money, it will pass these savings on to consumers. In a White House fact sheet titled “President Donald J. Trump Reverses Biden-Era Refrigerant Rules,” the administration called the move a restoration of “economic freedom for families and businesses.”
But many push back against the president’s claims on both economic and environmental grounds.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which is also taking the Trump administration to court, called the president’s math “cockeyed” and said that the alleged savings would only account for $.03 a month on the grocery bill for a family of four. They asserted that in the “Trump administration, however, the EPA routinely exaggerates the costs and ignores the benefits.”
“Food prices will go up, not down. That’s because existing supermarkets will have to pay more to maintain their current equipment, which leaks as much as 20 percent of its HFCs each year. This will cost supermarkets billions of dollars more, driving food price increases that will swamp the savings that the White House trumpeted,” the group asserts.
In a statement to the press, Bonta’s office explained that if Trump’s deregulation was allowed to move forward, HFC emissions would increase, “accelerating the damage already threatening our planet from climate change.” The statement noted that in California, nine of the ten warmest years on record have occurred since 2014 and that as temperature continues to rise, “so do the consequences: more heat-related illnesses, intensifying drought conditions, and increasingly catastrophic wildfires.”
The Trump administration is no stranger to deregulation and rollbacks when it comes to environmental issues. In January of this year, it was revealed that Trump’s Department of Energy (DOE) quietly overhauled a set of safety directives related to nuclear power plants. And in February, the president announced the official termination of the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2009 landmark determination that greenhouse gases warm the planet and threaten the health and welfare of those who inhabit it. Many advocates at the time called it a “dark day for science.”
The California co-led lawsuit includes Massachusetts, Washington, Colorado, Delaware, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, and the City of New York.
The coalition alleges that the EPA’s new rule is contrary to law and that the EPA fails to justify its change in position. As Bonta put it, “We’re taking the Trump Administration to court, yet again, for its effort to skirt the law with this final rule. As the Trump Administration continues to bury its head in the sand at the expense of our environment, California will continue to confront the climate crisis head-on and hold the Administration accountable for breaking the law.”
We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!
CONTRIBUTOR
