U.S. rescinds habitat-harm definition from Endangered Species Act; environmental groups sue

The U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Commerce announced on July 10 the rescission of the definition of "harm" from the Endangered Species Act. The 1975 definition, revised in 1981, had included significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures wildlife by impairing essential behaviors such as breeding, feeding or sheltering.

A 1995 Supreme Court ruling had upheld the broader interpretation. The final rule was uploaded to the Federal Register on July 14 and will take effect on September 14. The Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club and Conservation Law Foundation filed suit against the Trump administration over the change.

The Defenders of Wildlife sent notice signaling its intent to sue. The Interior Department said the rule will reduce unnecessary permitting, cut compliance costs and eliminate confusion. The Trump administration stated that the rescission returns the ESA to its actual text and original intent and ends years of federal overreach.

Core protections remain firmly in place, the department added. The administration cited a recent Supreme Court decision ending Chevron deference, finding the prior regulations did not match the single best meaning of the statute. "For years, federal agencies abused the ESA to obstruct lawful land use and burden American families and businesses," Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said.

Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick said the move rescinds overly broad regulations that had restrained fishermen and returns the ESA to its foundational purpose without sacrificing economic growth. Environmental groups countered that the change violates the statute's core purpose and decades of precedent.