The Trump administration’s latest climate policy changes threaten funding, disrupt global cooperation, and challenge state-level clean energy initiatives, experts warn.
At a Glance
- The Trump administration has cut $4 million from Princeton’s climate research funding.
- U.S. scientists will not participate in the next international climate assessment.
- A new Executive Order challenges state clean energy laws.
- Experts warn this undermines national and global climate efforts.
Federal Climate Strategy Faces Disruption
The Trump administration’s sudden decision to cut funding for the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) is raising alarm among scientists and environmental policy experts. The move includes eliminating $4 million earmarked for Princeton University, which supports the Cooperative Institute for Modeling the Earth System (CIMES), a major center for atmospheric and Earth system science.
According to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, the decision stems from “a detailed, careful, and thorough review” of how NOAA-aligned research fits into the administration’s streamlined vision of government. But critics say the action is ideologically driven and intended to suppress findings that reinforce the urgency of climate change.
CIMES, which plays a central role in building climate models used in policy planning, has been accused by some administration officials of promoting “exaggerated” threats. The decision reflects a broader attempt to reshape—or diminish—the government’s role in climate research and policy.
Global Collaboration Breaks Down
In a more dramatic step, the administration has halted U.S. participation in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s upcoming plenary session in China. American scientists will not contribute to the body’s next global climate assessment, which many see as the most influential science-based guide for national and international policy.
Delta Merner of the Union of Concerned Scientists told Environmental Health News, “The power of the IPCC is that governments, businesses, and global institutions can operate with shared conclusions. The U.S. being completely removed from that process is concerning.”
The U.S. had previously relied on the consultancy ICF to manage coordination across agencies for the USGCRP. That contract has now been terminated, with administration officials alleging the firm encouraged “worst-case scenarios” in its work on the National Climate Assessment. According to Politico reporting cited by the Daily Wire, this decision has “forever severed” multi-agency climate collaboration at the federal level.
State Policies Under Fire
Further intensifying the administration’s offensive, President Trump has signed an Executive Order instructing the Department of Justice to oppose state and local climate laws that impose regulations deemed harmful to economic interests. This directly challenges states like California and Michigan that have implemented mandates for carbon-free electricity and emissions pricing.
“These state laws and policies are fundamentally irreconcilable with my Administration’s objective to unleash American energy,” Trump said, according to the New York Times.
In response, Colorado Attorney General Philip J. Weiser argued, “We don’t want Washington, D.C., telling us we can’t govern the way we see fit.” A coalition of state Attorneys General has vowed to fight the order in court.
National Climate Role Diminished
These actions represent a sweeping shift in America’s approach to climate governance—away from collaboration and regulation, toward deregulation and strategic withdrawal. The U.S., once a central force in international climate science and diplomacy, now risks becoming isolated and ill-prepared for the environmental and economic shocks ahead.
