The administration rescinded the "harm rule" under the Endangered Species Act, sparking a lawsuit from nine environmental groups.
The administration announced the formal rescinding of the "harm rule" under the Endangered Species Act, a move that removes the requirement to protect wildlife from habitat degradation. By removing this definition, the administration determined that losing millions of acres of habitat does not necessarily constitute an illegal "take" of a species. The Interior Department defended the move as a correction of "regulatory overreach," arguing that agencies should follow the plain text of the law rather than interpretations favored by advocacy groups. However, nine environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, filed a lawsuit in Seattle federal court to overturn the decision. The plaintiffs argue that the change defies reason and ignores decades of legal precedent, specifically the 1995 Supreme Court ruling that upheld habitat modification as a form of harm. While the administration relies on a dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia to justify the change, critics argue that protecting where animals live, eat, and sleep is a fundamental pillar of conservation. The litigation will determine if the new rule remains in place or if the previous standard will be reinstated.