Attorneys general sue over changes to Endangered Species Act

The attorneys general said the changes weaken protections for endangered and threatened species, as well as violate the law.OAKLAND, Calif. (CN) — Several state attorneys general on Wednesday sued the Trump Administration over what they call unlawful and immoral changes to the Endangered Species Act.In two lawsuits, the states, including California and Washington, challenge new rules finalized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The attorneys general target three changes to the Endangered Species Act that would affect the definition of “harm,” critical habitats, and species that are threatened though not necessarily endangered.“They are wrong on the merits, the morals and the law,” Washington state Attorney General Nick Brown said in a press conference.The attorneys general ask a federal judge in the Northern District of California to vacate the final rules, as they violate the Endangered Species Act, Administrative Procedure Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.The Endangered Species Act is a landmark environmental law over 50 years old that the attorneys general said protects thousands of species like the bald eagle, grizzly bear and humpback whale. The Trump administration’s changes threaten those protections in three different ways, according to the states.The first change affects the “harm” rule, changing the definition of what it means to harm a species and weakening the act’s protections for breeding and feeding grounds, pollution or the degradation of habitats.“This is illegal, unscientific and contrary to common sense,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said.The second change the plaintiffs challenge is to the habitat exclusion rule. The attorneys general said the change permits, and sometimes requires, Fish and Wildlife to exclude some spots from receiving a critical habitat designation based on third-party costs and other regulatory burdens.That will affect Fish and Wildlife’s ability to protect and assist endangered species, as it will reduce the amount of habitat that’s shielded, they added.Bonta said the Trump administration had no scientific backing for that change.The last change is to what’s called the 4(d) rule. The Trump administration repealed protections for newly listed threatened species — a different classification from endangered. Instead of that protection, Fish and Wildlife will adopt species-specific protections, though it has no requirement or deadline to pass them.Also, Fish and Wildlife must examine economic impacts before implementing any species-specific rules, the attorneys general said.Bonta said the Trump administration provided no reason for this change.“’We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals,’” Bonta said, quoting German philosopher Immanuel Kant.In California, one of almost two dozen states bringing the suits, there are over 300 species protected by the Endangered Species Act, Bonta said. Those species include the Western bumblebee and blue whale.California has its own version of the Endangered Species Act, but the state needs federal law to work in tandem with it. Federal law has protections for species that cross state lines, Bonta said.“None of these species live in a vacuum,” Bonta added. “It’s a delicate game of Jenga.”Holding the press conference with Bonta, Brown called the Endangered Species Act a bipartisan achievement and a monument to the wisdom of the American people.Brown said that before the act’s passage, ubiquitous species had been driven close to extinction.“And that includes the bald eagle,” he added.Now, he said, the Trump administration is degrading critical habitats and changing the meaning of “harm.”“This doesn’t make any sense,” Brown said.The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service could not immediately be reached for comment.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads