21 States Sue EPA Over Power Plant Emissions Repeal: What's at Stake
Twenty-one states led by New York sued the Trump administration on Oct. 1, 2026, over the repeal of rules limiting greenhouse gas emissions from coal- and gas-fueled power plants. The Guardian The coalition petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review the Environmental Protection Agency's decision and strike down the repeal.
Who is challenging the repeal
The 21 states are New York, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. The coalition also includes Pennsylvania's governor, the District of Columbia, New York City, Chicago, and the city and county of Denver. That group includes four cities in addition to the 21 states. The New York Times New York Attorney General Letitia James led the filing, announced in a press release titled "Attorney General James Challenges EPA Rollback of Power Plant Pollution Limits," while New Jersey Attorney General Davenport separately announced a challenge to the rollback on Oct. 1, 2026.
What the EPA did
The repeal action finalized the repeal of the 2024 power plant regulations. EPA On Sept. 14, 2026, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin signed the final partial repeal of the Carbon Pollution Standards for fossil fuel-fired electric generating sources. The agency revoked the Biden-era power plant greenhouse gas rule and proposed a separate rule to prevent future administrations from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. The venue is the D.C. Circuit.
The underlying EPA proposal would repeal all greenhouse gas emissions standards for the power sector under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act. Think of Section 111 as the switch that tells EPA when it must set pollution standards for an industry category like power plants. In that proposal, EPA advanced the position that greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution. EPA said repealing the power plant emissions rule would save industry more than $300 billion in costs.
Why the states object
The coalition's petition centers on administrative procedure and cost accounting. It alleges the repeal was arbitrary and capricious \u2014 a legal term for government action taken without adequate reasoning \u2014 because EPA did not sufficiently calculate the full cost of repealing the rule. New York Attorney General's Office It further alleges EPA abandoned the pollution limits without properly considering reasonable alternatives or the health and climate costs of increased pollution. The repealed 2024 Carbon Pollution Standards required many of the country's largest power plants to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Power plants produce roughly one-quarter of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions. The coalition argues the repeal clears the way for millions of additional tons of greenhouse gas emissions.
Alongside the petition for review, the coalition told EPA it intends to sue over the agency's failure to regulate pollution from many gas-fired power plants. That notice preserves a second track focused on unregulated gas-fired sources, distinct from the request that the court vacate the repeal itself.
What to watch next
The broader context here is that the litigation will turn on one legal finding. If EPA can sustain a determination that power-sector greenhouse gases do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution under Section 111, it narrows the agency's obligation to set standards at all. If it cannot, both the repeal and the effort to foreclose future regulation become vulnerable on judicial review. The states are attacking on the ground most available to them, inadequate consideration of alternatives and uncounted health and climate costs. That finding is the test. The parallel notice on gas-fired plants widens the field, giving the coalition a claim for omission as well as a claim for unlawful commission.
