A Class-Action Lawsuit Aims to Restore Climate and Environmental Grants

The Environmental Protection Agency and its administrator, Lee Zeldin, face a class-action lawsuit after canceling $3 billion in grant funding for climate and environmental programs in disadvantaged communities.

The lawsuit, filed June 25 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, argues the EPA violated Congress’ spending power and legislative authority by eliminating the Environmental and Climate Justice Program, authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act and the Clean Air Act.

“The EPA’s termination of the program is unlawful,” the complaint says. “It violates the bedrock separation-of-powers principles by effectively repealing a congressional enactment and impounding funds based on nothing more than the President’s disagreement with policies Congress duly enacted.”

The litigation was filed on behalf of a coalition of more than 20 nonprofits, Tribes and municipalities from across the country that had secured funding for community-based programs aimed at disaster preparedness, workforce development, air quality, flood control and high energy costs. The programs involved things like installing pollution notification systems and replacing lead pipes and were designed to strengthen communities against more damaging weather events while including community members in decision-making that affected their environment and health.

The Southern Environmental Law Center, Earthjustice, Public Rights Project and Lawyers for Good Government filed the lawsuit, which calls on the court to compel the EPA to reinstate the grants on behalf of 350 recipients and also provide resources to help the funded programs succeed. The complaint names as defendants the EPA and Zeldin. Representatives for the EPA declined to comment on pending litigation.

The litigation recognizes that “this administration’s wholesale decisions are having significant impacts on communities across the country that are working together to solve environmental problems in their communities,” said Ben Grillot, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “The administration’s decision to do this was unlawful and is not based on the merits of the projects but on a disagreement with Congress, which is a clear violation of the separation of powers.”

The litigation centers on two executive orders President Donald Trump issued in January. The first, entitled “Unleashing American Energy,” directed federal agencies to stop disbursing funds allocated under the Inflation Reduction Act, a monumental measure enacted during the Biden administration that included clean energy initiatives. The other, called “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing,” mandated that all equity-related grants or contracts be terminated within 60 days. 

Some of the plaintiffs in the litigation say they were forced to reduce staff and adjust programming after their funding abruptly ended. Appalachian Voices, an environmental nonprofit, had planned to put its grant toward projects in five communities in rural Virginia, where declining coal resources have challenged the region’s economy.

“The coal industry in the area was not killed by regulation. It was not killed by tree huggers. It declined largely because all of the coal that it was financially feasible and safe to get was gone. It was mined,” said Emma Kelly, new economy program manager at Appalachian Voices. “It has not been clear what will replace that, and people have been struggling with that loss of identity.”

One project in flood-prone Pound, Virginia, involved the construction of a riverwalk designed to prevent floodwaters from disturbing dilapidated buildings and dispersing harmful substances associated with mold and asbestos. The town cannot fund the project on its own, and without the grant the work has not proceeded. Kelly said the loss has been heartbreaking in the region.

“People were disillusioned before we got these grants. This area has a very long history of being extracted from, being overlooked, being looked down upon, and our organization—especially my team—has spent several years working with these counties to build up trust,” Kelly said.

“If you cannot count on an awarded grant from the federal government, who can you count on?” she said. “That is supposed to be the most reliable source that you can get. So people, I think, felt foolish and as if their time had been wasted and like, if this wasn’t going to happen there’s not going to be anything else coming down the pipeline.”