Following Trump's lead, some GOP states seek to limit environmental regulations

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Some Republican legislators are looking to restrict their states' ability to set environmental regulations, a move that comes as President Donald Trump 's administration pushes to roll back environmental rules on power plants, water and greenhouse gases.

The Alabama Legislature on Tuesday approved legislation backed by business groups that would prevent state agencies from setting restrictions on pollutants and hazardous substances exceeding those set by the federal government. In areas where no federal standard exists, the state could adopt new rules only if there is a ''direct causal link'' between exposure to harmful emissions and ''manifest bodily harm'' to humans.

Supporters said the Alabama measure would ground standards in ''sound science'' and prevent regulatory overreach. Environmental groups said it would cripple the state's ability to respond to environmental or health risks, including a group of chemicals known as PFAS, or forever chemicals, that has contaminated swaths of the South.

Sarah Stokes, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, said the bill sets an "impossible hurdle" for state regulations since the bill specifies that an ''increased risk of disease'' is not enough to demonstrate harm to humans.

''It's a blank check to businesses. We're basically sacrificing human health for businesses," Stokes said. ''That doesn't seem like the best calculation for our citizens.''

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and business groups supported the legislation, and the bill's sponsor, Republican Sen. Donnie Chesteen, told a legislative committee this month that his bill is a ''pro-business'' piece of legislation.

''If we're going to be able to compete with states in the Southeast to attract and bring some of these businesses in, then we need to have these standards adopted so that it's clearly defined what our companies are working with,'' Chesteen said. Supporters also argued the bill follows Trump's deregulatory agenda.

Stubbs disputed that it would weaken existing rules, saying current state regulations would stay in place. However, the environmental lawyer Stokes said she is concerned that businesses could use it as a basis to challenge existing rules.

The measure is the latest effort to restrict state-level environmental regulations. Indiana Gov. Mike Braun signed an executive order last year saying Indiana can't have new environmental rules stricter than federal ones unless deemed necessary by state law or the governor. Tennessee lawmakers last year passed legislation requiring any regulations that are more stringent than federal regulations to be based on links to ''manifest bodily harm in humans.''

Stokes said the Alabama proposal goes further than the Tennessee law. A similar bill has been introduced in Utah.

Stokes said the Alabama legislation was introduced after advocacy groups persuaded the Alabama Environmental Management Commission to consider updating state standards for arsenic and cyanide and 11 other toxic pollutants.

Cara Horowitz, an environmental law professor and executive director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law, said the legislation would prevent state agencies from making ''independent decisions about how much to protect public health from things like water pollution, air pollution, and toxics.''

The bill also bars agencies from using the EPA's Integrated Risk Information System, which characterizes the health hazards of chemicals found in the environment, as the default basis for water quality standards. A lobbying group for the chemical industry has criticized the system as overly burdensome and scientifically flawed.

Democrats in the Alabama Legislature spoke against the bill for two hours until GOP lawmakers voted to end debate and force a vote.

Democratic Rep. Chris England said the bill turns Alabama residents into test subjects. ''We are a petri dish for businesses to do as they will until they kill people,'' England said.

Rep. Neil Rafferty, also a Democrat, said the bill is ''defining sound science just to gut our ability to use it to drive science-based and data-driven policy.''