February 18, 2026
Trump has done more than harm the government’s ability to fight global heating | Jamil Smith
In his recent address, President Trump undermined the federal government's ability to combat climate change by announcing the repeal of the EPA's "endangerment finding," which recognizes greenhouse gases as a threat to public health. This decision disregards extensive scientific evidence linking climate change to severe health risks and environmental disasters, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. The implications are significant, as it dismantles legal protections that enable the government to regulate emissions, leaving vulnerable populations exposed to worsening climate impacts. Ultimately, this move reflects a broader pattern of denying responsibility for measurable harm, jeopardizing both public health and environmental justice.

Stoic Response
Address to My Students in the Stoa
Greetings, seekers of wisdom. Today, we gather to reflect upon a pressing matter that weighs heavily upon our collective conscience: the climate crisis and the recent actions taken by those in power. As we delve into this issue, let us challenge our judgments and anchor our thoughts in the Stoic disciplines of desire, impulse, and assent.
Recognize the Nature of Reality
- Acknowledge the Truth: The climate crisis is not a mere abstract concept; it is a tangible threat to our health and well-being.
- Discern the Evidence: Understand that extensive scientific findings illuminate the dangers posed by greenhouse gases. Disregarding these truths is to invite folly.
Challenge Unhealthy Judgments
- Resist Denial: When we hear claims that the climate crisis is a "scam," we must question the motives behind such statements.
- Examine Impulses: Are we swayed by rhetoric that serves the interests of the few rather than the many? Reflect on the implications for marginalized communities who bear the brunt of environmental neglect.
Cultivate Discipline in Desire, Impulse, and Assent
-
Desire:
- Seek Justice: Let your desire align with the well-being of all, especially those most affected by climate change.
- Long for Truth: Yearn for knowledge that empowers you to act in accordance with reality.
-
Impulse:
- Pause Before Reacting: When faced with misinformation, take a moment to reflect rather than respond impulsively.
- Act with Purpose: Let your actions be guided by reason, not by fear or anger.
-
Assent:
- Choose Wisely: Do not assent to harmful judgments that undermine the health of our planet and its people.
- Affirm Responsibility: Recognize your role in advocating for change and holding leaders accountable.
Embrace Your Role
- Be an Advocate: Speak out for those whose voices are silenced by power and privilege.
- Foster Community: Engage with others who share your commitment to environmental justice.
- Act Locally: Begin with small, impactful actions in your own community to combat climate injustices.
In conclusion, let us not be passive observers of this unfolding crisis. Instead, let us embody the Stoic virtues of wisdom, courage, and justice. Stand firm in the knowledge that your actions—however small—can contribute to a greater good.
Remember: The fires still burn, the floods still come, but together, we can strive for a world where all are protected from harm.
Article Rewritten Through Stoic Lens
Journal Entry: Contemplations on Duty and Nature
Observations on Governance
In the recent address by the leader of my nation, I am reminded of the weight of responsibility that accompanies power. It appears that he has chosen to disregard the fundamental truths of our existence—the truths that bind us to the natural order. The repeal of the Environmental Protection Agency’s “endangerment finding” is not merely a political maneuver; it is a profound abdication of duty towards our fellow citizens and the world we inhabit.
Acceptance of Nature’s Order
The climate crisis is not a distant threat but a present reality, one that manifests in the suffering of many. It is a reminder that we are part of a greater whole, interconnected with the earth and each other. The denial of this reality is akin to turning one’s back on the very fabric of existence. Nature does not bend to our whims, and to ignore its laws is to invite chaos.
The Call to Virtue
In moments such as these, I see an opportunity for virtue. It is not enough to lament the actions of those in power; we must embody the principles we hold dear. We can choose to act with integrity, advocating for those who suffer the consequences of negligence. The marginalized communities, often the first to bear the brunt of environmental degradation, call for our support. We must rise to the occasion, embodying justice and compassion.
The Nature of Responsibility
The president’s words reflect a troubling trend—one of redefining truths to suit personal narratives. Yet, we must remember that true leadership is grounded in accountability. To govern is to serve, and in serving, one must acknowledge the realities faced by the people. The “endangerment finding” was not merely a bureaucratic detail; it was a recognition of the dangers that threaten our health and welfare. Without such acknowledgment, we strip ourselves of the moral and legal foundation necessary to protect the vulnerable.
The Interconnectedness of Challenges
As I reflect on the broader implications of this decision, I see a web of interconnected challenges. The climate crisis knows no borders; it transcends the artificial divisions we create. The consequences of inaction will ripple across nations, displacing populations and straining resources. In our refusal to confront this crisis, we risk exacerbating the very issues we seek to mitigate.
The Path Forward
In the face of such adversity, let us not succumb to despair. Instead, let us cultivate resilience and fortitude. We must advocate for a recognition of the dangers posed by climate change, not just for ourselves, but for all of humanity. The fires, floods, and rising tides are not mere statistics; they are calls to action.
Conclusion: A Reflection on Duty
Ultimately, the refusal to recognize a documented danger is not merely a policy change; it is a failure of duty. We must hold ourselves accountable, striving to ensure that our leaders do the same. In this, we find our purpose—not in the fleeting whims of power, but in the enduring pursuit of justice and the well-being of all.
Let us accept the nature of our circumstances and respond with virtue, for in doing so, we honor the interconnectedness of our existence and the responsibilities that come with it.
Source Body Text
The climate crisis is killing people. These deaths are measurable, documented and ongoing. Concluding otherwise is just playing pretend. Studies explain the mechanics, but lived experience supplies the truth. The people who suffer the consequences see the fire rising and water closing in. They need their government’s help. Despite that, the president of the United States stood at a microphone last Thursday and abdicated his duty to them. “It has nothing to do with public health,” he claimed about the climate crisis while announcing that the federal government would repeal the Environmental Protection Agency’s “endangerment finding”, a determination that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare. “This is all a scam, a giant scam.” What he was lying about is a truth the federal government – even under his first administration – has embraced for nearly two decades. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the “endangerment finding” in 2009. Drawing upon extensive scientific evidence, the EPA concluded that emissions driving the climate crisis contribute to extreme heat, intensified storms, rising sea levels, wildfires and degraded air quality, all of which carry direct consequences for human life and safety. The endangerment finding was not rhetorical flourish. It was the legal keystone of modern US climate regulation, the scientific and administrative determination that enabled the federal government to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. It formed the basis for emissions standards governing vehicles, power plants and industry. Erase that finding, and you do more than undermine the Clean Air Act and the regulatory framework it supports. The move dismantles the authority that made those protections possible in the first place. In the process, the president is withdrawing official recognition of a danger millions of Americans are already living through. This is on brand. Trump is wont to redefine documented facts, definitions and knowledge until it bears no resemblance to reality. When confronted with his own electoral defeat, he reframes it as fraud and uses government power to buttress that con. When addressing racism, he and his acolytes falsely and exclusively reframe it as discrimination against white Americans. The Trump White House doesn’t so much contest facts as it attempts to erase them. Now, confronted with a warming planet, the Trump administration is risking something even more consequential: redefining and exacerbating an existing danger to his constituents. Across the country, people are confronting the climate crisis not as a projection but as past and present conditions – living on top of toxic fracking sites, smoke-choked skies and strained power grids. The climate crisis is not a forecast. It is an incident report. It long ago moved beyond the theoretical, and its harms do not fall evenly. Black Americans, for example, are more likely to live near polluting infrastructure and suffer disproportionate exposure to toxic air. They experience higher rates of premature death tied to pollution-related illness. Environmental justice advocates warn that dismantling the endangerment finding removes one of the federal government’s last legal shields against these harms – leaving frontline communities more exposed as climate risks intensify. That vulnerability extends beyond chronic pollution exposure to acute disaster impact. The Eaton fire in California – which destroyed more than 16,000 structures – underscores how climate-intensified catastrophes often fall hardest on communities with the least infrastructure, insurance coverage and political leverage to recover. There is also a strategic irony embedded in Trump’s latest retreat. In refusing to fight the climate crisis, the administration risks undermining the nationalist politics it claims to champion. The climate crisis does not stop at national borders. Drought, crop failure and rising seas are already displacing populations abroad, fueling migration flows wealthier nations struggle to absorb. Weakening climate mitigation while simultaneously hardening borders ignores the causal chain connecting the two – a posture that risks intensifying the very displacement pressures it claims to resist. Racism may color Trump’s politics, but it is probably not the sole driver here. The economic incentives are clear: erasing the finding would benefit polluters and the oligarchs behind them. The administration’s retreat from climate responsibility is hardly passive. As it works to erase the scientific finding that allows the federal government to regulate greenhouse gases, it is simultaneously directing the Pentagon to purchase coal-fired power – using federal muscle to sustain the very industry fueling planetary warming. It is one thing to deny a crisis. It is another to help finance it. What Trump’s decision most clearly reflects, however, is a governing pattern the president has exhibited for years: distancing himself from responsibility for the harm he commits, even when the consequences are measurable and grave. Recognition of danger undergirds our laws, enabling enforcement and creating the possibility of accountability. In the absence of findings like the EPA’s 2009 report, the government’s response to climate harm would rest largely on moral duty rather than enforceable obligation – a posture far more vulnerable to political discretion. Without formal recognition of danger, citizens and states lose one of their strongest legal footholds for compelling federal action when disaster strikes. Should this erasure stand up after the inevitable court challenges, the government’s declared obligation to confront those realities with the full weight of its authority would disappear. The harm would not disappear, however. The only thing that changes is the terrain on which citizens can demand protection. The fires still burn. The heat still kills. The floods still come. When someone like Trump rescinds the recognition of a documented danger already harming the people he’s charged with serving, it is not a mere change of policy. The president is refusing to do his job. Jamil Smith is a Guardian US columnist