Largest Deregulation EVER? Trump Targets EPA

Person in suit pointing on stage with audience watching

After years of Obama-era climate rules being used as a backdoor to control America’s power grid, the Clean Power Plan became the prime example of how far unelected regulators were willing to stretch federal authority.

Quick Take

President Trump directed the EPA in 2017 to withdraw and rewrite the Clean Power Plan (CPP), a sweeping Obama-era carbon rule for existing power plants.
The CPP never took effect because the U.S. Supreme Court stayed it in 2016 while litigation moved forward.
EPA proposed rescinding the CPP in 2017, then finalized repeal in 2019 and replaced it with the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule.
Courts vacated the ACE rule in January 2021, sending the issue back to EPA and leaving major uncertainty about federal power-plant climate policy.

How the Clean Power Plan Became a Flashpoint for Federal Overreach

President Barack Obama’s EPA built the Clean Power Plan around Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, aiming to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants for the first time at the federal level. The rule set a target described as a 32% reduction in electricity-sector emissions by 2030 compared with 2005. The structure required states to draft compliance plans on a multi-year timeline, pushing decisions that traditionally belong to states and utilities into Washington’s orbit.

Industry groups and coal-producing states challenged the CPP almost immediately, arguing it exceeded EPA’s legal authority and effectively forced a redesign of state power portfolios. That fight reached the Supreme Court early: in February 2016, the Court issued a stay that halted implementation while the litigation proceeded. Because the CPP was paused before it could begin, the rule became a symbol of regulatory ambition colliding with constitutional limits and the courts’ role in checking executive-branch agencies.

Trump’s 2017 Executive Order and the EPA’s Rescission Process

On March 28, 2017, President Donald Trump signed an executive order on “Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth,” directing the EPA to review the CPP and move toward withdrawing and rewriting it. The step matched Trump’s campaign pledge and fit a broader deregulatory agenda targeting rules that were created through executive action rather than clear legislation. The practical effect was to start a formal rulemaking process that typically takes years, requiring proposals, hearings, and public comment.

EPA followed with a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in October 2017 to rescind the CPP. The agency then held multiple public hearings between late 2017 and early 2018 in places including West Virginia, San Francisco, Gillette, and Kansas City, with reports of more than 1,600 scheduled speakers. That volume illustrates how the CPP debate was never a narrow technical dispute—it was a national argument over energy costs, local jobs, and whether regulators should be able to reshape the power sector without Congress.

The 2019 Repeal and the Affordable Clean Energy Rule Replacement

On June 19, 2019, the EPA finalized the repeal of the Clean Power Plan and released the Affordable Clean Energy rule as a replacement. The research describes ACE as less stringent than the CPP, focusing on efficiency improvements at existing plants rather than broader system-wide emissions reductions. Supporters viewed that approach as a more restrained reading of EPA’s authority; critics argued it weakened a major federal emissions-reduction tool and would do less to change long-term climate outcomes.

From a conservative, limited-government lens, the central issue is not whether emissions matter, but who gets to make binding energy policy for the entire country. The CPP’s design pulled states into federally directed planning and set deadlines that would have forced major compliance decisions years in advance. By contrast, a narrower rule focused on plant-level efficiency changes reflects a more confined regulatory role. Still, both approaches remained vulnerable to court review because the underlying authority was heavily contested.

Courts Vacated ACE in 2021—And the Legal Uncertainty Didn’t Disappear

Legal challenges did not end with the CPP’s repeal. The ACE rule faced immediate litigation, and on January 19, 2021, courts vacated the Trump administration’s replacement rule and sent it back to EPA. That decision underscored how unstable power-plant climate policy becomes when it relies on shifting administrative interpretations instead of durable legislation. The research provided does not include detailed updates after early 2021, so the current litigation posture and subsequent regulatory steps are not fully documented here.

Sanity restored

Trump Admin to Repeal Obama-Era Climate Rule in 'Largest Act of Deregulation in the History of the US' https://t.co/SKGshX2pAw #gatewaypundit via @gatewaypundit

— Cherie Kennedy (@c_cdke) February 10, 2026

Even with limited post-2021 detail in the research, the broader takeaway is clear: when massive rules are built through agency interpretation, they can be reversed by the next administration or struck down by judges, whipsawing states, utilities, and consumers. For households already sensitive to energy prices and inflation, that kind of regulatory turbulence can translate into uncertainty and cost. If Washington wants lasting policy, Congress—not bureaucrats—has to do the hard work in the open.