Cities and states sue EPA over power plant emissions rollback
Chicago, Denver and New York City join multistate lawsuits challenging the agency’s move to end greenhouse gas emissions standards and failure to enforce requirements on existing gas-fired plants.
Source: ESG Dive · October 5, 2026 at 9:32 PM · AI-assisted report
Single-source
WASHINGTON, 6 OCTOBER 2026 —
Chicago, Denver, and New York City have joined a broad coalition of state and local governments in filing lawsuits against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to challenge the federal agency’s recent moves to dismantle greenhouse gas emissions standards for the power sector. The legal action, filed in the U.S.
Market Impact
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, targets both the repeal of existing regulations and the EPA’s failure to enforce mandatory requirements on existing gas-fired plants. This coordinated legal offensive marks a significant escalation in the conflict between subnational governments and the federal administration over climate policy and environmental regulation.
The litigation follows a series of regulatory reversals announced by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin in September. Zeldin declared that the agency had finalized the repeal of most provisions of the 2024 Carbon Pollution Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units. Furthermore, he announced a proposal to rescind every remaining greenhouse gas emissions standard for the power sector.
Zeldin asserted that the EPA lacks the legal authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate power plant greenhouse gases specifically for the purpose of addressing climate change. The administration’s legal strategy relies on the Trump administration’s repeal of the 2009 endangerment finding and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, which altered the framework for judicial review of agency interpretations.
In its announcement of the repeal, the EPA cited scientific models to justify its position, stating that “models continue to show that GHG emissions from power plants have no material impact on global climate change.” This statement contrasts sharply with the positions held by the plaintiff coalition, which argues that the agency’s inaction violates statutory duties that have been in effect for over two decades.
The coalition contends that the EPA’s failure to promulgate emission guidelines for existing stationary combustion turbines has caused direct harm to states and local governments that have long demanded the agency fulfill its legal obligations.
The lawsuit and accompanying intent-to-sue notice were filed by a diverse group of plaintiffs, including the City and County of Denver, the Pennsylvania governor, and the mayors of Chicago and New York City. They are joined by attorneys general from twenty states and the District of Columbia: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.
The intent-to-sue notice is a procedural requirement that must be issued before a party can sue a federal agency for failing to perform a mandatory duty.
Denver Mayor Mike Johnston emphasized the economic and health implications of the regulatory rollback in a public statement. “The president’s actions won’t unleash American energy, but they will lead to record profits for polluters — all while our air gets dirtier and our bills stay just as high,” Johnston said.
He added, “The cost of these rollbacks is our health, and we look forward to fighting this in court and seeing these commonsense regulations restored.” The coalition’s legal filings highlight the disproportionate impact of these changes on specific populations, noting that the EPA’s failure to act directly harms overburdened frontline and fenceline communities.
These communities, according to the coalition, often bear the brunt of co-pollutant harms from existing gas plants that are disproportionately sited in their neighborhoods and are distinctly vulnerable to the threats posed by climate change.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson also issued a statement supporting the legal challenge, declaring that the city is “proudly standing shoulder-to-shoulder with our partners across the country to use the legal system to tell the Trump administration that its rollbacks are unacceptable.” Johnson stated that the administration’s actions “recklessly and callously bring harm to the most vulnerable among us, and that Chicago won’t back down.” The coalition’s filings argue that the states and local governments have experienced, and will continue to experience, catastrophic climate-related harms as a direct result of the EPA’s inaction.
The EPA did not respond to a request for comment from ESG Dive’s sister publication, Smart Cities Dive, regarding the lawsuit or the regulatory changes. The legal battle unfolds against a backdrop of shifting corporate and financial sector strategies. Agendas for 2025 industry events indicate an increased focus on compliance and how to meet climate goals as companies navigate the current U.S. political environment.
While financial institutions have increasingly departed from groups such as the Net-Zero Banking Alliance and Climate Action 100+, experts note that banks remain committed to sustainability. The outcome of this litigation could have significant implications for the regulatory landscape governing the power sector and the broader climate policy framework in the United States.