Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown has spearheaded opposition against proposed changes to federal laws that protect endangered species. On Monday, Brown, along with attorneys general from 18 states, sent a comprehensive letter to U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, urging them to abandon four initiatives initially enacted during the Trump administration in 2019. These measures were reversed last year but are now being reconsidered.
The letter argues that reinstating these proposals would undermine the essential protections established by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, which has played a critical role in preventing the extinction of various species, including the bald eagle and grizzly bear. “These changes would put endangered wildlife and critical habitats at greater risk,” Brown stated on social media, emphasizing the need for science-based protections that will benefit future generations.
Concerns Over Proposed Regulatory Changes
The proposed revisions include significant alterations to interagency cooperation and allow for economic considerations when designating critical habitats. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has indicated that these changes are designed to enhance American energy independence and align government actions with the law. FWS Director Brian Nesvik expressed the belief that the changes would lead to clearer regulations, providing confidence to those in the regulated community while maintaining a focus on recovery outcomes rather than excessive paperwork.
Conversely, the attorneys general argue that these proposals would “undermine key regulations” and do not reflect “reasoned decision-making.” They contend that the case-by-case assessment of species protections fails to adequately consider the broader impacts on conservation efforts.
The letter cites concerns that the fourth proposal would eliminate a “blanket rule” which currently extends the same protections to threatened species as those granted to endangered species. Instead, the FWS would be required to evaluate each species individually, a process the attorneys general believe could lead to inadequate protections for many vulnerable species.
Legal and Environmental Implications
The FWS has not yet released an updated list of threatened and endangered species, but a previous list from November 8 included more than 300 species, highlighting the diversity at risk. This list encompassed mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and insects, including notable species such as lions, humpback whales, and polar bears.
In a press release, Brown warned that if these changes are adopted, the Trump administration’s rules would significantly weaken federal protections under the Endangered Species Act, putting imperiled species and their habitats in even greater jeopardy.
The coalition of attorneys general opposing the changes includes representatives from states such as Arizona, California, Colorado, and New York. The collective effort underscores a significant legal and political challenge to the proposed regulatory changes that could shape the future of wildlife conservation in the United States.
As this situation develops, responses from the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Commerce remain awaited. The dialogue around these proposed changes reflects broader tensions between environmental conservation efforts and economic interests, a theme that continues to resonate in U.S. policy discussions.
