Trump Administration Destroys Clean Water Act; Blatant Polluter Giveaway
Last week, the Trump Administration issued its proposed Polluted Water Rule – formally known as a new definition of “Waters of the United States.” The rule takes a hatchet to what remains of the Clean Water Act, giving a green light for polluters to dump in and destroy more waters all across the country than has been allowed since that Act first passed over 50 years ago.
“The Trump administration’s Polluted Water Rule is another blatant giveaway to big corporate polluters that will jeopardize the waters that our families and communities rely on for drinking, recreation, and fueling our local economies. In 2023, the Supreme Court’s devastating Sackett decision stripped federal protections from millions of miles of streams and tens of millions of acres of wetlands, and now corporate polluters are pushing their friends in the administration to go even further in decimating our clean water safeguards. They won’t be happy until the Clean Water Act is nothing more than words on a page and they can pollute our waters with abandon,” said the League of Conservation Voters’ (LCV) Healthy Communities Program Director Madeleine Foote. “The public overwhelmingly supports stronger protections for our waters, and contrary to this administration’s preference, do not think polluting industries should be left to police themselves. The Trump administration should abandon this attempt to ignore science and the law, and work to ensure everyone, no matter who they are or where they live, has access to the clean water they deserve.”
Clean Drinking Water and Millions of Acres of Wetlands At Risk
According to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the proposed rule would dramatically narrow which waters are covered by federal safeguards, leaving many wetlands and headwaters vulnerable to pollution and destruction. This includes filtering drinking water, reducing flood and drought risks, and sustaining wildlife. According to NRDC’s 2025 GIS analysis, between 38 million and 70 million acres of wetlands are at risk of pollution or destruction under scenarios modeled similar to the proposed new rule.
“This is a reckless giveaway to polluters,” said NRDC senior vice president Andrew Wetzler. “By gutting protections for wetlands and streams, the EPA is trying to disown its legal obligation to protect our drinking water and our communities. For the millions of Americans who swim or fish in our nation’s rivers and lakes, this is a bracing slap in the face. Wetlands are nature’s safeguard against flooding, and stripping away protections for them puts millions of people in harm’s way. At a time when climate change is fueling stronger storms and worsening floods, taking away these protections is not just shortsighted – it’s dangerous.”
NC’s Drinking Water
Since the similarly short-sighted and dangerous decision by the pro-polluter-led NC General Assembly to limit the state’s definition of wetlands to the minimum required by federal law – regardless of scientific information or the public’s need for protection of clean water resources – this federal change would gut clean water protections in North Carolina as well.
In its 2023 decision in Sackett v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the scope of the Clean Water Act, holding that wetlands were only protected by the federal law if they had a “continuous surface connection” to otherwise covered “navigable” waters. This shredded decades of well-established legal interpretation of the Clean Water Act, without supporting scientific evidence or any real rationale other than a changed membership of the U.S. Supreme Court.
“This proposed rule, if adopted, could have catastrophic ramifications for communities already plagued by flooding, water quality concerns, and drinking water shortages,” said Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) senior attorney Mark Sabath. “After critical, longstanding protections for clean water and wetlands were drastically narrowed by the Sackett decision, we need stronger protections, not weaker, to safeguard our communities and environment.”
The public now has less than 45 days to submit comments. Much of that time will be consumed by the winter holiday period, shortening the public comment opportunity even further as a practical matter.
