Amidst the flurry of directives emerging from the Trump administration, there have been several sweeping steps to dismantle efforts at environmental justice. Last month, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lee Zeldin, announced “31 historic actions in the greatest and most consequential day of deregulation in U.S. history,” including “terminating Biden’s Environmental Justice and DEI arms of the agency.”
Practically speaking, this move targets ten regional offices and the central environmental justice division of the EPA. The decision is in line with President Trump’s Executive Order 14151, titled “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing,” which was issued on his first day in office. Couched within the text is a call for the termination of all “environmental justice offices and positions” as well as an examination of whether these environmental justice roles “have been misleadingly relabeled in an attempt to preserve their pre-November 4, 2024 function.”
That the Trump administration would seek to erode much of President Biden’s legacy on environmental justice is unsurprising. During the 2024 presidential campaign, President Trump repeatedly flouted concerns around climate change, terming the issue “one of the greatest scams of all time.” In line with this ethos, his return to office has catalyzed the U.S.’s rapid retreat from multiple key climate efforts, including the Paris Agreement and a meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
However, the Trump administration’s decision to undo domestic environmental justice initiatives may prove damaging to an extent that could take time to fully appreciate. The American Public Health Association characterizes environmental justice as “the idea that all people and communities have the right to live and thrive in safe, healthy environments with equal environmental protections and meaningful involvement in these actions.” Central to understanding this idea is acknowledging that communities across the country have historically not enjoyed equal environmental protections.
Take, for instance, Cancer Alley. Tracing the Mississippi River, this 85-mile region is home to numerous petrochemical plants, which have sullied the air. This resulting pollution has had deleterious effects on the area’s residents, with some pockets of the region being estimated to confer a 700-times greater cancer risk relative to the national average. Residents of the region have long sought resolutions and recourse to this toxic calamity, especially after the EPA’s risk assessment tools underscored the links between nearby chemical exposure and poor health outcomes. One EPA report, titled “Waiting to Die,” borrows its name from the haunting words of a resident who succumbed to cancer, underscoring the profound environmental injustices that locals have endured.
These lasting effects require a strong, coordinated public health response, rooted in recognition that communities have faced these environmental harms unevenly. Meaningfully righting these wrongs starts with a thorough investigation of their roots, a strategic deployment of resources, and robust community partnerships to gather feedback and prevent recurrence. This series of essential, corrective measures are essentially precluded by a political climate that buries the topic of environmental injustice in the first place.
To take another example of how recognizing environmental injustices is critical for improving public health, consider the emerging research on urban heat islands. According to the EPA, heat islands can arise “when areas experience hotter temperatures within a city.” In cities that have an uneven distribution of foliage, neighborhoods featuring more greenery can offer a relative cooling effect, enabling residents to better withstand dangerously hot summers. This natural effect is especially important when considering that not all residents may have access to air conditioning or cooling centers. Even when that access exists, periods of extreme heat can often contribute to power outages, amplifying the danger to public health.
All things considered, it’s thus vital to continue to work towards environmental justice solutions, even as the discipline faces mounting pressure in the new political era. The future of healthy communities depends on it.
