After the Trump administration announced last week intentions to strip some habitat protections in favor of energy extraction, a legion of conservation groups have come together to sue the Trump administration over its decision.

Saying the decision contradicts all scientific and legal understanding of the importance of habitat to America’s most vulnerable plants and animals, organizations including the Center for Biological Diversity, Columbia Riverkeeper, Conservation Law Foundation, Conservation Northwest, Friends of the Wild Swan, Oregon Wild, Sierra Club, Swan View Coalition and WildEarth Guardians filed the lawsuit in federal district court in Seattle, Washington.

“Preventing harm to wildlife by protecting where they live, eat and sleep is a basic foundation of the Endangered Species Act,” said Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles in a July 14 press release. “The Trump administration repeal violates the core language of the statute and decades of legal precedent, including from the U.S. Supreme Court. Now more than ever, imperiled fish, birds and wildlife need protection to survive and recover.”The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service repealed their regulatory definitions of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act, paving the way for the modification or degradation of habitat by extractive industries, even if doing so kills or injures imperiled wildlife.

The final rulemaking comes amid a series of moves by the administration on the Endangered Species Act and wildlife. In 2025 the Trump administration proposed additional rules that have been criticized for weakening the law in favor of energy extraction. At the time, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum announced four proposed rules to restore Endangered Species Act regulations to the 2019 and 2020 framework enacted in the first Trump administration. Burgum said the actions were important to advance Trump’s directives to "strengthen American energy independence, improve regulatory predictability and ensure federal actions align with the best reading of the law." 

The Trump administration, through the unofficial Department of Government Efficiency, reduced the federal workforce responsible for protecting endangered species and managing ecosystems across the country in the first year of Trump's second term.

According to the lawsuit, the latest move is illegal, in part because harming species through habitat destruction is prohibited by the law’s statutory language. The definition repealed by the administration had been on the books for 50 years. The Trump administration’s rulemaking could immediately harm wildlife, they contend.

The group also links the new rules to the administrations desire to sell off public lands, something that a number of politicians have dndorsed to a degree, but somewhat of a third rail situation with the majority of western state residents.

“Rolling back habitat protections under the Endangered Species Act is tantamount to the Trump administration’s push to sell off public lands, trading our natural heritage for short-term gain,” said Joanna Zhang, endangered species advocate at WildEarth Guardians.

“The danger of weakening the harm rule is about survival, plain and simple. If we fail to protect habitat, we fail to protect wildlife.”

Habitat loss is the leading driver of extinction and by weakening the harm rule, the Trump administration is literally attacking vulnerable wildlife where they live, said John Persell, staff attorney at Oregon Wild.

“This gutting of the Endangered Species Act is part of a broader assault on our bedrock environmental values, he said.” From public lands to wildlife to clean air and drinking water, the Trump administration is determined to waste, loot and pollute America’s natural heritage.”