For decades, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, the federal government has recognized that safeguarding all communities requires a deliberate effort to enforce environmental regulations, monitor pollution, and implement programs aimed at those most affected by environmental harm. Despite decades of progress in environmental protections, the Trump administration aims to systematically roll back these safeguards. Upon taking office, President Trump immediately rescinded a suite of Executive Orders that directed federal agencies to prioritize environmental justice— including one that had been in effect for more than thirty years. 

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has doubled down on this effort by announcing plans to cut 65% of the agency’s budget. He further detailed his plan by announcing a suite of more than 30 actions aimed to weaken or eliminate longstanding protections for air quality, water quality, chemical safety, greenhouse gas regulation and much more. This plan undermines the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to fulfill its mission, to “protect human health and the environment.”  

As a former Environmental Health fellow at the EPA during the first Trump administration, I witnessed the importance of environmental justice programs in action. Environmental justice, as defined by the EPA, is “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, culture, national origin, income, or educational levels, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of protective environmental laws, regulations, and policies.”  

The EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and Civil Rights (Office of EJ) advocates for community-led solutions to environmental issues, coordinating these efforts across the agency and enforcing civil rights protections. This office has played a crucial role in addressing environmental injustices in over-polluted communities, such as Cancer Alley in Louisiana, where high cancer rates are linked to the region’s petrochemical industry, and Flint, Michigan, which suffered from the infamous lead-contained water crisis.   

During my fellowship, I worked in the Office of Air and Radiation in the Indoor Environments Division. Our office integrated environmental justice and equity into programs that reduce asthma triggers indoors, reduce exposure to harmful gases such as radon, and improve air quality in schools.  On average, Americans spend 90 percent of their time indoors where concentrations of some pollutants can be as much as five times higher than outdoors. Older adults, children and people with cardiovascular and respiratory disease face a greater health risk from exposure to pollutants indoors. Black individuals in the US are 1.5 more likely to diagnosed with asthma. The EPA works to ensure that all communities have access to a healthy environment by reducing environmental risks and improving public health in overburdened areas.  

EPA’s Office of EJ develops policies and provides guidance to help federal, state, and local agencies incorporate environmental justice principles into their programs. The office also addresses environmental disparities by identifying and rectifying areas with higher pollution levels or limited access to green spaces. One place where EPA’s intervention has helped to address community pollution is North Birmingham, Alabama. North Birmingham, Alabama has faced decades of residential contamination due to its close proximity to heavy industry. The area includes asphalt plants, cement facilities, coke production, and lumber manufacturing, many of which are located near homes and schools. The neighborhood’s population is predominantly Black, a direct result of racial redlining, a discriminatory practice that historically confined Black residents to certain areas.  

The contamination from these plants includes chemicals in soil such as Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP), lead and arsenic which are known carcinogens. In 2011, EPA decided that immediate action was needed to address the contamination and underwent an effort to sample the soil in residential properties and at schools. Based on the results, the EPA Superfund program removed about 90,000 tons of contaminated soil and replaced it with clean soil to reduce residents’ exposure to harmful toxins.  

North Birmingham is just one example where the EPA has focused on improving public health by identifying and addressing areas with elevated pollution levels. By slashing environmental justice, the administration is cutting programs designed to ensure equal protection for clean air, water, and land, endangering vital research into environmental health risks. Furthermore, cuts to funding, resources, and community engagement jeopardize strategic efforts to address public health issues and promote local economic growth. 

In addition to my role as Senior Campaign Manager at the Union of Concerned Scientists, I also serve as a County Commissioner in Macon County, Alabama. In this position, I am deeply committed to ensuring that our community, along with others across the country, receives the support needed to keep our governments functioning and our residents safe. This can be especially challenging for small, rural counties with limited budgets. The EPA’s justice programs and resources have been vital for counties like mine, providing grants, technical assistance, and enforcement support.  

Communities nationwide, including those in my home state of Alabama, have long struggled to access the funding and support needed for life-saving infrastructure upgrades. Alabama is home to several of the nation’s worst environmental disaster sites, along with numerous Superfund sites. As a result, federal resources have been crucial in helping us make the necessary improvements to our infrastructure.  

My hometown of Tuskegee, AL has experienced years of underinvestment and economic stagnation. We have benefitted from the EPA’s Brownfields Program, a program designed to assist communities, states and tribes in assessing, safely cleaning up and reusing contaminated properties. Known for its power to clean up and revitalize communities, the EPA Brownfields programs has received bipartisan support. As a part of a larger effort to “improve the environmental, public health, economic and social impacts associated with contaminated and abandoned sites,” Tuskegee applied for and received a $300,000 grant from the EPA Brownfield’s program. 

This award is intended to develop seven cleanup plans and conduct community engagement activities in the City of Tuskegee. Notably, the grant provides funding to assess the level of contamination in soil and groundwater for sites, including a former oil distribution center, former hotel, and former gas station. The funding will also support examining contamination on properties with dilapidated buildings. Rehabilitating properties like this is tough for local leaders like me because no one otherwise would want to take on the liability risks to redevelop them. This program, and programs like this, support communities in remediating and reusing sites with legacy pollution which can be vital for economic development and community improvement.

The Brownfields program is just one of the EPA’s countless programs revitalizing small communities while making people healthier across the country. While Brownfields has historically enjoyed bipartisan support, reports of the administration’s desire to slash the EPA’s funding by 65% amidst broader attacks on environmental justice leaves me deeply concerned for the future of vital programs like this.  

Counties across the country rely on many EPA funding programs to provide basic services and protect public health. To provide safe drinking water, we rely on the support of programs like the Clean Water State Revolving Funds program which is administered by the EPA to finance projects to upgrade wastewater treatment plants and/or repair old pipelines. A drastic reduction in funding could lead to delays in maintaining and upgrading these facilities, resulting in lower water quality or the unreliability or failure of critical infrastructure.  

It is clear that the Office of Environmental Justice and Civil Rights helps EPA connect people and communities to government resources needed to solve problems and protect health and the environment. Moreover, that EPA at large has an important mandate, to protect all people. Whether it is in my community or any other part of the country, EPA’s programs help communities and local officials by providing the technical support and funding needed to address long standing environmental pollution challenges.

There is broad cross-cutting support for the EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and Civil Rights. Recently, 170 organizations signed-on to a joint letter to urge Congress and the EPA officials to reverse steps to dismantle the Office of Environmental Justice and Civil Rights. In a parallel show of support, more than 500 individuals from across the United States signed on to a similar letter urging the EPA to keep the Office of Environmental Justice.  

The environmental justice movement emerged as a response to years of evidence showing that low-income and communities of color were disproportionately affected by environmental and health harms. Industries that others were unwilling to have near their homes, such as toxic landfills, polluting fossil fuel plants, and hazardous chemical manufacturing companies, were often placed in marginalized communities of color lacking the political power or capital to block such decisions.  

The recognition of EJ in the federal government fulfilled a distinct need, backed by science. Without the safeguards, our nation is on track to exacerbate environmental issues that disproportionally impact low-income communities and communities of color and local officials around the country will have to figure out how to navigate the challenges without the support of the agency charged to lead the way.