US government reverses longstanding endangered species regulation, opens habitats to development

Lead

The Trump administration has finalized a rule change that removes habitat protections for imperiled wildlife under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), a move that environmentalists say could push vulnerable species closer to extinction and that administration officials describe as a return to the law's original intent.

The change, approved by the US Interior and Commerce Departments on July 10, revises the definition of “harm” under the 1973 ESA. For the past 50 years, the term included “habitat modification or degradation,” a broad interpretation upheld by the US Supreme Court in 1995 in a ruling that protected old-growth forests relied on by endangered spotted owls.

The new rule opens habitats of imperiled wildlife to development, logging, mining, and other uses, according to reporting by The Guardian and the Jerusalem Post.

Coverage comparison

The Guardian reported the move as a repeal of “a crucial part” of the Endangered Species Act, emphasizing that habitat destruction is the strongest driver of species loss and that the law has helped safeguard more than 1,700 species and their habitats. The Guardian also noted that 80% of registered voters favor full funding of the ESA, citing broad public support for species protections.

The Jerusalem Post, citing CNN, framed the change as a return to the law’s “actual text and original intent,” and quoted Interior Secretary Doug Burgum describing the former definition as a “regulatory trap” that “drove up costs that impacted people’s lives, and expanded federal authority beyond what Congress intended.”

Both outlets reported that Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles criticized the rule change, saying: “There is no support for the Trump Administration’s rule, no scientific support, no legal support, no public support.”

Key claims

• The Trump administration removed habitat modification from the definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act, as reported by both The Guardian and the Jerusalem Post.
• The previous definition, which prohibited “habitat modification or degradation,” was upheld by the US Supreme Court in 1995, as reported by both outlets.
• Habitat destruction is the strongest driver of species loss, according to The Guardian.
• The Endangered Species Act has helped safeguard more than 1,700 species and their habitats, according to The Guardian.
• Experts fear the move could cause catastrophic damage to species already close to the brink, The Guardian reported.
• The US public broadly supports species protections, with 80% of registered voters favoring full funding of the ESA, according to The Guardian.
• Interior Secretary Doug Burgum described the former law as a “regulatory trap” and said the changes would end “years of federal overreach,” as reported by the Jerusalem Post.
• Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles said there is “no support” for the rule change, as reported by both outlets.

Perspectives

Environmental groups — Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles said the rule has no scientific, legal, or public support. Stephanie Kurose of the Center for Biological Diversity previously called a similar proposal “a death sentence for wolverines, monarch butterflies, Florida manatees and so many other animals and plants that desperately need our help,” as reported by The Guardian.

Trump administration — Interior Secretary Doug Burgum described the former definition as a “regulatory trap” that drove up costs and expanded federal authority beyond what Congress intended. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the changes remove “overly broad and burdensome regulations,” as reported by the Jerusalem Post.