Trump administration rescinds ESA definition of "harm", prompting lawsuits from environmental groups

The U.S. Departments of the Interior and Commerce said on Friday that the definition of "harm" in the 1973 Endangered Species Act would be rescinded. The original definition, added in 1975 and revised in 1981, covered actions that kill or injure wildlife, including significant habitat modification that impairs essential behaviors such as breeding, feeding or sheltering. A 1995 Supreme Court ruling had affirmed that the definition barred habitat degradation that threatened endangered species.

Environmental groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club, Conservation Law Foundation and Defenders of Wildlife, have filed lawsuits challenging the change. > "The Trump Administration repeal violates the core purpose of the statute and decades of legal precedent, including from the U.S. Supreme Court. Now more than ever, imperiled species ... need habitat protection to survive and recover," said Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles.

The Interior Department said the final rule will reduce permitting requirements, lower compliance costs and eliminate confusion, arguing that it restores the ESA to its original text and intent. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said the prior approach "turned routine activity into a regulatory trap" and that the revision provides certainty for landowners. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick added that the change removes overly broad regulations that have constrained fishermen and aims to balance conservation with economic growth.

Critics contend the rule ignores scientific evidence and could make it easier to damage protected habitats. > "Removing habitat destruction from the definition of 'harm' disregards decades of scientific evidence and puts species ... at risk," said Jennifer Jones, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. The rule was published in the Federal Register and is set to take effect on Sept. 14.