- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Massachusetts
- /
- Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Wright
Litigation
Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Wright
About this case
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
09/17/2025
Decision
Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction denied and plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment granted.
The federal district court for the District of Massachusetts ruled that the Climate Working Group assembled by Secretary of Energy Chris Wright did not fall within an exception to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) for groups “assembled to exchange facts or information with a Federal official.” The court found that a “single act of incorporating feedback on a draft of an otherwise independent report” was “not analogous to the prolonged exchanges between indeterminate groups” that courts had found to fall within the FACA exception. The court further found that no reasonable jury could find that the report authored by the Climate Working Group did not constitute “advice or recommendations for a renewed approach to climate policy” and not a “mere ‘review’ of the literature.” The court denied the environmental group plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction requiring the defendants to provide them with the Climate Working Group records; the court found the plaintiffs’ inability to draw on the records in comments on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed rescission of the 2009 Clean Air Act endangerment finding regarding greenhouse gas emissions did not constitute an irreparable informational injury.
09/15/2025
Response
Response filed by defendants to plaintiffs' notice of outcome of further discussions among the parties.
–
09/04/2025
Motion To Dismiss
Memorandum filed by EPA defendants in support of their partial motion to dismiss.
–
09/04/2025
Opposition
Memorandum filed by defendants in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction of, in the alternative, for summary judgment or consolidation under Rule 65(a)(2).
–
08/12/2025
Complaint
Complaint filed.
After EPA proposed to rescind its 2009 endangerment finding for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, Environmental Defense Fund and Union of Concerned Scientists filed a lawsuit against Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, EPA, and the Climate Working Group asserting that the establishment and utilization of the Climate Working Group to “produce a report for DOE and EPA that would provide justification for their predetermined goal of rescinding the Endangerment Finding” was unlawful. The complaint, filed in the federal district court for the District of Massachusetts, alleged that Secretary Wright “quietly arranged for five hand-picked skeptics of the effects of climate change” to form the Climate Working Group and tasked them to “provide ‘balance’ against the consensus views of climate scientists and ‘cut against the prevailing narrative that climate change is an existential threat.’” The plaintiffs asserted that the Climate Working Group was an advisory committee within the meaning of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and that because it had not been established in accordance with the requirements of FACA, its implementing regulations, and the DOE Manual, actions utilizing the Climate Working Group were unlawful and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. In addition, the complaint asserted a failure to comply with advisory committee meeting and records requirements. The plaintiffs also asserted that the members of the Climate Working Group were not “fairly balanced” as required by FACA. Alternatively, the court asserted a nonstatutory review and ultra vires actions count. The plaintiffs requested declaratory relief, as well as postponement of the effective dates and vacatur of actions taken by the Climate Working Group or utilizing the Climate Working Group. In addition, the plaintiffs requested injunctive relief, including an injunction requiring disclosure of committee records and minutes and requiring that the public comment period on the proposed rescissions of the Endangerment Finding and related rescission of vehicle emissions standards be kept open for at least 45 days from the date records and minutes are released.
Summary
Lawsuit asserting that establishment and utilization of the Climate Working Group to produce a report to provide justification for rescinding the Clean Air Act endangerment finding for greenhouse gases for was unlawful.