“Drill, Baby, Drill”: Recent Executive Orders and Potential Implications for Environmental Law

Analysis of President Trump's Executive Order

---

Written on Feburary 23rd, 2025

Analysis by Erin Kemper

In the flurry of executive orders issued during the first weeks of President Donald Trump’s return to office, some have captured more national attention than others. While debates rage over immigration policies and tax cuts, a series of energy and environmental directives have gone largely unnoticed by the general public. Yet these orders — calling for the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, the declaration of a national energy emergency and an aggressive push for domestic oil drilling — could leave a lasting mark on environmental law. Their legal and regulatory implications may reshape how the federal government approaches climate commitments, environmental protections and the balance between economic growth and ecological preservation.

Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement

On January 20, 2025, Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements,” directing the immediate withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement, as published by the White House. This marks the second time the U.S. has exited the global accord — the first occurred during Trump's initial term in office, according to Columbia Law School.

The Paris Agreement, established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, aims to limit global temperature rise to below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, as outlined by the United Nations Climate Change. The U.S. previously committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025. The legal ramifications of this withdrawal are significant. While the executive branch has the authority to withdraw from international agreements, these actions often face domestic and international legal challenges. Domestically, more than 120 House Democrats introduced a resolution condemning the withdrawal, signaling potential legislative pushback. Internationally, the move may undermine global climate initiatives and could lead to disputes regarding U.S. obligations under environmental treaties.

Declaration of a National Energy Emergency

On the same day, Trump declared a national energy emergency aimed at accelerating fossil fuel production. This declaration empowers federal agencies to expedite permits for oil and gas projects, bypassing standard environmental reviews. The administration argues this move is necessary to ensure energy affordability and security. Legal experts suggest that while the National Emergencies Act grants the president broad powers, the use of such powers to circumvent established environmental laws will likely face judicial scrutiny, according to the N.Y.U. Journal of Legislation and Public Policy. A New York Times article reports that environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice and the Sierra Club are expected to challenge the emergency declaration, arguing it unlawfully prioritizes fossil fuel interests over environmental protection and public health.

Pledge to Increase Domestic Oil Drilling

In line with the energy emergency declaration, President Trump has pledged to “unleash” domestic oil and gas drilling, PBS reports. This includes rolling back regulations and accelerating the approval process for drilling projects. The administration argues that increasing domestic production will lead to energy independence and economic growth.

From an environmental law standpoint, this initiative raises concerns about compliance with statutes such as the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. Fast-tracking projects without thorough environmental assessments may lead to legal challenges asserting the administration is neglecting its duty to protect natural resources and endangered species.

Environmental and Legal Implications

The cumulative effect of these executive actions signifies a substantial shift in U.S. environmental policy, prioritizing energy development over environmental protection. This shift could influence environmental law in several ways:

First, regulatory rollbacks are likely, as federal agencies may be directed to rescind or weaken regulations limiting fossil fuel production. This could lead to increased pollution and environmental harm, as existing safeguards are diminished. According to JD Supra, such regulatory changes are subject to legal scrutiny and may be contested in courts for failing to adhere to statutory mandates.

Second, these executive actions are expected to prompt a series of legal challenges. Environmental organizations and state governments could file lawsuits alleging the administration's directives violate federal laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act. The outcomes of these legal battles will shape the future enforcement and interpretation of environmental statutes.

Third, in response to federal policy shifts, state governments may enact their own environmental regulations, leading to a more fragmented regulatory landscape. States with strong environmental commitments could implement stricter standards, while others may align with the federal government's deregulatory approach. This divergence may result in legal disputes over states’ rights and federal preemption.

Lastly, the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement may have international legal implications. This action could strain diplomatic relations and hinder global climate cooperation, as other nations may question the reliability of U.S. commitments. Additionally, it may affect international trade and investment, particularly in sectors related to clean energy and environmental technologies.

As illustrated, Trump’s recent executive actions represent a decisive pivot in U.S. environmental policy, emphasizing energy independence and economic growth over environmental conservation. These developments are likely to prompt extensive legal debates and challenges, influencing the trajectory of environmental law and policy both domestically and internationally. The interplay between executive directives, statutory mandates and judicial review will be critical in determining the balance between energy development and environmental protection in the coming years.

---