Can states and cities lead in a Trump-led climate? »Yale Climate Connection

In its first few months of office, the Trump administration has taken more than 100 actions aimed at stopping the federal climate initiative. New examples are announced almost every day, and many seeking climate policy victory turn their attention to states and cities.

Although the volatility of the political environment makes it impossible to predict how state and local climate efforts will work in the coming years, their potential is enormous.

“I think states are where most actions are going to be taken,” said Joshua Basseches, professor of public policy and environmental studies at Tulane University. “For those interested in continuing progress on climate and renewable energy, I would say trying to be more organized and active at the state level is a good thing.”

State and local governments have a great influence on the largest source of planetary warm gases in the country. States control many aspects of transportation and electricity, and cities often have power over issues related to buildings, transportation, land use, energy and waste. (However, local power varies from state to state.

State and local efforts as climate game changer

In fact, subnational players such as state and local governments, such as state and local governments, can significantly reduce emissions, so that even if federal actions stop effectively in the coming years, the state can still achieve critical climate goals.

This is the conclusion of the February 2025 policy brief at the University of Maryland Center for Global Sustainability, written as part of its partnership with the United States is a group of state and local governments, businesses, and large institutions engaged in climate change.

After Donald Trump won the 2024 election, the league wanted to understand what its members could achieve collectively during administration. Answer: Many. The Global Center for Sustainability found that by 2035, even without federal leadership, ambitious ambitions will likely drop between 54% and 62% in 2005, compared with 2005. The high end of this range will meet the goals established by the Biden administration in its nationally determined contribution to the Paris Agreement in 2024.

According to Alicia Zhao, the lead author of this article, while all sectors of society need to work together to achieve this, state and local governments are particularly important because they can create a supportive policy environment only without federal leadership.

“For example, if only the business community decides to take action, then a successful ecosystem is an intertwined ecosystem,” she said. “You have to join these states and local governments.”

But, under the leadership of pioneers of pioneers like California, meeting the goal of the competitive era will require cities and states to greatly improve their climate efforts, which requires that by 2035, 100% of new cars sold in the state are electric, while Austin, Texas, is 70% of the strategy in the company, which is achieved in the 2030 range, and the company's scope is 70% policy. Assuming federal rollbacks continue, the state will still significantly lower its Paris Agreement targets.

Zhao said: “Depending on whether the actors in the secondary state step up, the emissions effect varies greatly.”

“Put the dagger directly into the heart of climate change religion”

Ironically, the silver lining of the current situation is that states and cities are being used to lead as the federal government lags behind past climate change in the past, Barcas said.

“Many climate activists want the federal government to take action back to the 90s until the inflation reduction bill, which the federal government has not taken action at all,” he said.

However, the main difference today is the positive hostility to climate action. (“We are bringing the dagger straight into the heart of climate change religion,” EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said in a press release from an agency.)

“These are really unprecedented times thanks to the new federal government,” Basseches said.

Many national and local initiatives that have been explicitly targeted by climate efforts. On April 8, the White House issued an executive order ordering the attorney general to classify all state and local climate policies and stop those deemed illegal.

On May 1, the Justice Department mentioned the order when it announced a lawsuit against climate initiatives in New York, Vermont, Hawaii and Michigan.

“The Department of Justice is working to produce the barriers to the affordable, reliable energy that Americans deserve by blocking these illegal obstacles,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a press release.

Amy Turner, director of the Urban Climate Law Initiative at Columbia University’s Sabin Climate Change Law Center, said the executive order is not clear yet how it will pass over time.

“The order is expected to further attack state and local climate laws, but these attacks may be conducted in a variety of ways,” she said. “Under most of the considerations of the order, depending on how it is enforced, it is unlikely to be held in court. But it is a formal threat to state and local governments and a federal government seizing real power from the states.”

The day President Donald Trump took office for the second time signed another executive order that had far-reaching impacts on state and local climate action. It called on the administration to stop allocating funds to the climate initiative under the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act.

Read: Clean energy can generate significant economic benefits, especially in red states

According to Politico, the freezes of these funds have been challenged in many court cases. On April 15, a federal judge ordered the EPA and other relevant agencies to resume payments.

But the Trump administration’s willingness to violate court orders makes it difficult to know what will happen next.

“It's an interesting moment to be a lawyer because you can explain how something should work according to the law, but that's not necessarily how it works, just considering that the government is willing to try something that is obviously illegal,” Turner said.

Uncertainty and delay

Many state and local governments feel the impact of these and other actions.

Through the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, many of the cities are a network of U.S. mayors involved in climate efforts, paying plans for projects to add public EV charging and generate renewable energy, and after obtaining federal climate funding and bipartisan infrastructure laws. But the freeze of federal funds has left many cities uncertain about how to manage their relationships with contractors and nonprofit partners that have been brought into the project, according to Kate Wright, the group’s executive director. Some of the work expected to be created is also doubtful.

Joe Flarida, executive director of Power A Clean Future Ohio, has worked with 50 local governments in the state and has watched similar scenes throughout Buckeyes. Many of the towns he worked with were adversely affected by the federal grant freeze.

“Pure uncertainty creates many problems for local governments and how they plan, invest and have direct employees,” he said. As a result, some climate initiatives have been suspended. “Any momentum these cities have when planning their work is completely taken away.”

He said some Ohio towns also tried to regulate their language in grant documents and scrub the likes of “environmental justice” and “diversity, equity and inclusion” that the government criticized.

Reasons for continuing to drive climate

Despite this, many states and cities have committed to continuing to make progress in the climate despite federal headwinds.

“Our mayor is unwavering in its commitment and we are all on the same page as to continue ambitious climate action,” Wright said. “We work closely with groups like the American Climate Alliance, which supports the governor and leads at the state level. All work will continue under this administration and any administration.”

Dawone Robinson, who leads national and regional climate and energy advocacy for the Environmental Nonprofit Natural Resources National Defense Council (NRDC), said the officials he worked with were also ahead of schedule.

Read: Four Ways Your Community Can Save Life in the Heat Waves This Summer

“States will continue to do their best and what they should do, and that is to advance strong climate policies, which are entirely within their rights as the state pursued,” he said.

The belief behind this commitment is that climate action and clean energy are in their best interests, providing benefits such as economic growth and cheap energy.

“Georgia is now experiencing a boom in solar power, and they have also opened this huge modern factory that is creating thousands of jobs due to the growth of electric vehicles nationwide,” Robinson said. “Texas, for example, has long been a leader in U.S. wind power, and that won’t change.”

Wright said the city saw similar benefits. For example, San Antonio, Texas is working with developer Big Sun Solar to cover 42 city-owned facilities and facilities with photovoltaics, and in a project that is expected to save up to 25 years of energy costs over 25 years.

Flarida said local governments’ own climate risks are also largely factored in many decisions. Many of the financial costs of climate impacts end up falling on local governments. As the effects of these events worsen over time, municipalities are increasingly aware that ignoring climate change is not an option.

“I've talked to Republican elected officials and they've seen the impact,” Flarida said.