Twenty states and D.C. file suit against Trump administration's narrowed ESA harm definition
Twenty U.S. states and Washington, D.C. have sued the Trump administration over a rule that excludes habitat destruction from the definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act.
In July, the Trump administration issued a regulation that narrows the Endangered Species Act’s definition of “harm” by excluding habitat destruction, prompting a lawsuit by twenty states and Washington, D.C. The challengers contend the rule overturns the Act’s original intent to prevent habitat loss, a leading cause of species decline, and cite the 1995 Supreme Court ruling that upheld habitat protection. The Department of the Interior argues the change corrects an overreach, reduces costly permits, and aligns with a 2024 court decision emphasizing agency authority limits.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum criticized previous ESA enforcement as burdensome to property owners and businesses. Environmental advocates, including Noah Greenwald of the Center for Biological Diversity, warn the rule could cripple future conservation efforts, while Utah’s public lands office, favoring quicker delisting of recovered species, remains silent on the litigation.
Why it matters
The case could reshape federal wildlife protections and affect land use, development, and conservation across the United States.
In this story
