- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States of America
- /
- Colorado
- /
- Environmental Defense Fund v. National Science Foundation
Environmental Defense Fund v. National Science Foundation
Geography
Year
2026
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2026
Status
Complaint filed.
Geography
Docket number
1:26-cv-03824
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → United States District Court for the District of Colorado (D. Colo.)
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Other Statutes and Regulations (US)
Principal law
United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
At issue
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
08/20/2026
Complaint filed.
In a lawsuit filed in the federal district court for the District of Colorado, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) sought to enjoin the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), OMB Director Russell Vought, and the official performing the duties of the NSF Director from terminating the climate research functions of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). EDF asserted that the elimination of NCAR’s climate functions was arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Calling the Trump administration’s decision “the antithesis of the reasoned decision-making” that the APA requires, EDF alleged that the defendants failed to articulate a scientific, technical, budgetary, or other rationale for the decision; failed to consider the NSF’s statutory mission; and failed to consider scientific and public welfare consequences and the waste of significant federal investments in NCAR’s climate research labs, functions, and models. The complaint alleged that “political retaliation” against Colorado was “a driving force” for the decision. In addition, EDF alleged that the defendants’ actions were arbitrary and capricious because they failed to consider “the serious reliance interests of climate scientists and researchers” who depend on climate models and other resources from NCAR; failed to consider alternatives to termination of the climate research functions; and failed to follow their procedures for considering public feedback. Alternatively, EDF contended that the defendants’ actions were arbitrary and capricious because they were “substantively unreasonable.” EDF also asserted that the closure of the NCAR Mesa Lab in Colorado without compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) was unlawful and sought an injunction barring the closure, transfer of ownership, or other major undertaking related to Mesa Lab until the defendants fully comply with the NHPA.
Complaint
Summary
Action to prevent the federal government from terminating the climate research functions of the National Center for Atmospheric Research.