Since his inauguration, President Donald Trump has signed countless executive orders rolling back climate legislation, causing concern and confusion for some. 

Since Jan. 20, 2025, Trump has, among many other things, signed an executive order titled “Unleashing American Energy,” declared a national energy emergency, revoked executive orders addressing environmental justice for low-income populations and once again pulled the U.S. out of the Paris Climate Agreement. 

With lawsuits being filed and courts already striking down some of Trump’s executive orders, some Americans are confused about the feasibility and legality of this new climate legislation. Environmental professors at Pitt explain the history of climate change and environmental law, the reality of the executive orders and what actions the American public can take regarding the issue.

Mark Abbott, a professor in the geology and environmental science department, said the burning of fossil fuels is necessary for energy purposes. Yet in regards to Trump’s view of energy production as a national emergency, Abbott said energy is already being produced at a rapid rate.

“Energy’s a big deal. We all use computers and phones and cars,” Abbott said. “The problem with fossil fuels is you’re taking all of that out of the ground and burning it all at once, in a geologic second.”

To Patrick Shirey, assistant professor of environmental science at Pitt and certified ecologist, Trump’s declaration of a national energy emergency is to allow for more leniency in drilling projects, despite energy levels being at “max level.”

“The goal of [the executive order] is to bypass the consultation process and the permitting process for proposed projects that receive federal funding and go through review,” Shirey said.

Ward Allebach, adjunct professor of environmental studies at Pitt, called the national energy emergency executive order “absurd.”

“What he wants to do is divert attention away from oil extraction and environmental problems that are a result of oil extraction industries which are horribly harmful, mostly to underprivileged communities,” Allebach said.

Both Shirey and Abbott considered the 1987 Montreal Protocol to be an important precedent of effective climate legislation. The protocol was an international agreement aiming to limit the chemicals that were causing the breakdown of ozone in the upper atmosphere. 

A more recent piece of legislation was the 2015 Paris Agreement, which set its goal as keeping the global average increase in temperature below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. However, Abbott said that currently, environmental legislation, including the Paris Agreement, is difficult to settle on and hard to implement.

“The Paris Agreement doesn’t have enforcement teeth,” Abbott said. “One of the issues is obviously we keep going back and forth between presidents with different ideas on how to do it.”

Shirey also said the Montreal Protocol succeeded because of direct political pressure from the public, which he views as a strategic tactic in making change.

“Politicians were scared because skin cancer doesn’t discriminate when there’s a hole in the ozone layer. Everybody’s affected, rich or poor,” Shirey said. “If you put it in writing and ask your congressmen to respond, they have to respond and take a stance on that issue. If someone cares about agriculture and its impact on the environment, write your congressperson about it. If someone cares about the Paris Climate Accords, write your congressperson about it. They are our employees.”

However, many environmental legislation decisions are left up to judicial courts. According to Shirey, who holds a law degree, the governmental system of checks and balances is meant to ensure that the judicial branch holds the executive branch accountable for its actions. However, this system is now being “tested.”

“There’s a concern that those checks either aren’t gonna be implemented quick enough or maybe at all if the Supreme Court gives broad deference to the executive branch, and so it’s not just environmental laws that I’d be concerned about,” Shirey said. “The challenge with the judicial branch is you can do a lot of damage in a short period of time.”

From his own experience in growing up in the Pittsburgh area, Shirey said he believes western Pennsylvania’s biggest climate concerns are extreme precipitation events and extreme storms which occur in low-lying areas — typically low-income communities.

“The streams near me where I grew up peak a lot more frequently than they used to … I think it was last spring, we had, like, 48 hours of rain straight, and it led to flooding and damages and the damage is often in low-lying communities,” Shirey said. “You can think of Millvale, Etna, Sharpsburg, often places that experience some level of flooding any time there’s extreme precipitation.”

In teaching environmental advocacy, Allebach, who has been leading a sustainability class for 18 years that fathered Thriftsburgh and Forbes Street Market, said environmental issues tend to be “emotional.” Combined with the “misinformation” and “outright lies” that he believes comes with this administration’s mindset, Allebach said he understands the level of exhaustion from advocacy efforts.

“These ideas of justice and racism and discrimination and inequality and diversity are being demonized,” Allebach said. “It’s really hard for a lot of people, who already fought these battles, to think that we’ve gotta do this again now — and not only do we need to do it again, he’s more organized and more experienced now, and that makes the battles much harder.”

Allebach said that different lifestyle choices and changes may contribute to the fight against climate change, but placed a special emphasis on advocacy, seeing the main problem in the broader system. 

“We’re bombarded with choices from the time we get up in the morning to the time we go to sleep. We have choice fatigue coming out of our ears,” Allebach said. “I think some of that is by design so that your attention is diverted from where the real problems lie, and the real problems lie with wealthy, powerful corporations, individuals and leaders who want you to think it’s your fault, and that they don’t bear the responsibility to fix things.”