In an , President Trump took direct aim at one of Vermont鈥檚 prominent recent climate policies, saying the law 鈥渆xtorts鈥� energy producers.
The order calls out , alleging it is unconstitutional.
The document broadly seeks to restrict states鈥� abilities to set local energy policy, particularly policies that support climate action or renewables like solar and wind, or that impede the development of new domestic energy sources.
The order reiterates the administration鈥檚 support for domestic oil and gas production and coal, as well as nuclear, geothermal, hydropower, 鈥渃ritical minerals鈥� and biofuels.
It also takes direct aim at state laws that support environmental justice, greenhouse gas emissions or that disincentivize carbon pollution.
But Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark says the executive order on its own has no legal teeth. She says it will have absolutely no bearing on Vermont鈥檚 enforcement of its own laws.
鈥淭he president has a lot of power; he does not have the extent of the power he wishes he had, which is why we see all these executive orders that say a lot of words but don't actually do anything,鈥� she said. 鈥淎nd this is another one of those examples.鈥�
Globally, the scientific community agrees that humans burning fossil fuels is the driving force behind climate change, which is .
Scientists similarly agree that many of these impacts 鈥� 鈥� , a fact Trump鈥檚 executive order does not acknowledge.
Modeled after the federal superfund program, which makes companies pay for the pollution they caused while doing business, Vermont鈥檚 Climate Superfund Act directs Vermont鈥檚 attorney general to bill major fossil fuel producers to help pay for what climate change is costing the state, based on how much their products have contributed to the problem globally.
The move by the Trump administration comes as many lawmakers are joining Vermont Gov. Phil Scott in calls to soften Vermont鈥檚 own landmark climate law 鈥� the Global Warming Solutions Act.
That policy sets firm deadlines by which Vermont must reduce climate warming greenhouse gas emissions, and allows citizens to sue the state if it misses those deadlines.
Vermont has enacted a host of climate policies in recent years, including the Climate Superfund Act, which allows Vermont to seek payments from the largest fossil fuel companies in the world for their products鈥� contributions to climate damages in the state. The law is by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and fossil fuel lobby.
, as well as a and sourced from more new local renewables like solar by 2030. And Trump鈥檚 executive order compels the U.S. attorney general to 鈥渆xpeditiously take all appropriate action to stop the enforcement of state laws and continuation of civil actions 鈥� that the Attorney General determines to be illegal.鈥�
It raises concerns about states seeking to regulate energy trade outside their borders and accuses states of attempting to set national climate policy 鈥� and particularly targets solutions that try to shift energy markets towards lower carbon fuels, similar to the way Vermont鈥檚 stalled Clean Heat Standard would have worked.
Vermont Attorney General Clark was again quick to dismiss the content of the order as grandstanding.
鈥淎s we all learned in elementary school, it is the courts who interpret the laws. Congress passes the laws. The executive branch, the president, carries out the instructions of Congress, and it's the courts who get to interpret the laws,鈥� she said.
Brad Campbell leads the New England-based environmental advocacy group Conservation Law Foundation, which lobbied for Vermont鈥檚 Climate Superfund Act.
He says the U.S. Constitution protects states鈥� right to defend their citizens against injury, including from environmental harms like climate change.
鈥淚 think ultimately this will prove to be political theater and further undermine the justice department's credibility, rather than something of consequential legal impact,鈥� he said.
Under the executive order, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi will have 60 days to compile a report of her efforts and recommend any additional action needed to prevent states from undertaking climate policy she deems illegal.
