On June 18, a coalition of 12 state attorneys general released guidance examining the legal landscape for environmental justice policies. The Multi-State Guidance Affirming the Importance and Legality of Environmental Justice Initiatives (Guidance) clarifies for states and communities what strategies remain legally available to ensure communities have equal protection from environmental hazards.[1] The state attorneys general issued the Guidance following President Trump’s recent executive orders labeling environmental justice as “illegal discrimination” (for example, see Trump’s January 21 executive order). However, there are many policies consistent with applicable laws designed to protect the rights of all communities to a safe environment and promote equity. The Guidance includes specific examples of strategies and beneficial policies to protect the health of communities, summarized in in multiple languages in the PDFs below.
Summary of the Guidance
In the Guidance, the attorneys general affirm that states and local governments can continue to implement a variety of strategies and policies to advance environmental justice and protect the health, safety, and welfare of all residents. The Guidance defines environmental justice as practices that “seek to overcome environmental and public health disparities, as well as improve local conditions, including: public engagement; grassroots organizing; technical assistance; water, soil, and air quality monitoring; legal and legislative advocacy; remediation efforts; and the enforcement of applicable laws.”
The Guidance notes that existing state environmental justice requirements are valid under states’ reserved powers provided by the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution.[2] Federal statutes and civil rights laws also allow, and may even require, public entities to ensure evenhanded environmental enforcement, such as by accounting for disparities and aiming to protect communities bearing the highest health and safety risks. The guidance also notes that advancing environmental justice may further compliance with federal and state civil rights protections, including preventing and remedying the impacts of unlawful discrimination.[3]
The Guidance also explains that the First Amendment protects private environmental justice efforts from punitive consequences, such as suppressing protected speech through funding conditions. Regarding nonprofit organizations, the First Amendment and Internal Revenue Code protect the tax-exempt status of a charitable organization from being targeted on the sole basis of otherwise lawful efforts to advance environmental justice.[4]
Additionally, the Guidance discusses the federal government’s “direct obligations” to Tribal Nations and Indigenous peoples, who often suffer severe and disproportionate environmental and health harms.[5] The Guidance affirms that Tribal Nations are sovereigns that possess the power to govern themselves and their lands and hold a unique political and legal relationship with the United States.
More broadly, the Guidance provides an overview of the legal underpinning for environmental justice actions. The Guidance explains that public and private action may lawfully address concentrated and chronic pollution, exposure to environmental harms, disparate impacts, cumulative impacts, and impacts on vulnerable populations through:
- Educating and providing technical assistance regarding environmental justice efforts.
- Conducting public engagement, promote public participation, do outreach, ensure language accessibility, and improving accessibility for people with disabilities and people vulnerable to immigration enforcement.
- Identifying and analyzing environmental and other burdens through data collection (including community-based data collection initiatives) and mapping.[6]
The Guidance affirms that state policies may lawfully aim to achieve equity and equal rights to a healthy environment provided they are consistent with existing laws and jurisprudence. However, the Guidance does not serve as legal advice, and groups engaging in these types of projects should consider individualized, tailored legal advice before moving forward.
Through the Guidance, the participating state attorneys general offices commit to “pursuing environmental justice and enforcing related laws in [their] jurisdictions” in collaboration with communities.[7]
Federal Repeal of Environmental Justice Initiatives
The Guidance responds to a series of recent federal actions rescinding federal environmental justice policies and programs, including:
- Executive Order 14148, issued on January 20, rescinded a suite of executive orders that directed federal agencies to prioritize environmental justice in their programming and policies, including requirements to safeguard the environmental health of all communities, prioritize meaningful public engagement in federal rulemaking, and ensure equal access to federal energy and environmental investments.
- Executive Order 14173, issued on January 21, rescinded the longstanding 1994 Executive Order 12898, which established the requirement that federal agencies identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on “minority populations and low-income populations.” EPA subsequently terminated its Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights (see EPA’s March 12 press release), and environmental justice and equity-related positions, funding, and programs were eliminated.
- On February 5, the Department of Justice rescinded a memo requiring federal efforts to prioritize environmental enforcement in communities most burdened by pollution hazards.
For more recent federal actions related to environmental justice, see EELP’s Federal EJ Tracker.
Empirical Research Supports Addressing Environmental Injustices
The Guidance discusses and cites to a growing body of empirical research documenting the urgent need to address severe environmental health impacts and disparities. For example, recent scholarship published in the Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, shows that traditional environmental laws often fail to protect communities equally, and instead can lead to concentrated community harms. Additional studies show the correlation between human proximity to polluting operations and cancer risks. And new research in the Journal of Environmental Health Perspectives on cumulative exposures methodology reveals even higher health risks from exposures to multiple pollutants than standard assessments have identified. Citing these and other studies, the Guidance states that environmental justice work remains necessary and urgent to address these ongoing harms and protect communities facing disproportionate threats to their health, safety, and well-being.
Takeaways from Multi-State Attorneys General Guidance Affirming the Legality of Environmental Justice Initiatives
Arabic (PDF)
Cape Verdean Creole (PDF)
Chinese – Simplified (PDF)
English (PDF)
Haitian Creole (PDF)
Hmong (PDF)
Korean (PDF)
Portuguese – Brazilian (PDF)
Russian (PDF)
Somali (PDF)
Spanish Latin (PDF)
Tagalog – Filipino (PDF)
Vietnamese (PDF)
Yiddish (PDF)
[1] Multi-State Guidance Affirming the Importance and Legality of Environmental Justice Initiatives, Att’ys Gen. of Cal., N.Y., & Mass. (June 17, 2025), https://www.mass.gov/doc/multi-state-guidance-affirming-the-importance-and-legality-of-environmental-justice-initiatives/download.
[2] Id. at 3. The guidance also notes several states also have their own constitutional provisions guaranteeing the right to a “clean and healthy environment.”
[3] Id.
[4] Id. at 4.
[5] Id.
[6] Id. at 5–6.
[7] Id. at 1, 7.