Month: March 2026

Environmental Gaslighting

Under Trump 2.0, the Environmental Protection Agency has gone after the nation’s pollution rules the way a hyena devours a gazelle. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin proudly depicted the abandonment of the finding that climate change endangers human health as “the single largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States.”

The agency has also moved to weaken limits on mercury releases from coal-burning power plants, rolled back vehicle emission standards, and eased restrictions on ethylene oxide, a cancer-causing gas used to sterilize medical devices. And much more.

Amid this environmental demolition derby, it was a shock to see a recent press release from the EPA touting that in fiscal year 2025 the agency produced its “strongest enforcement and compliance results in years.” Among what it presents as “highlights from President Trump’s first year back in office” is the claim that the EPA concluded over 2,300 civil enforcement cases, which is said to be “over 400 more than the final year of the Biden Administration and more than the last nine fiscal years.”

The first thing to point out is that nearly one-third of fiscal year 2025, which began in October 2024, occurred while Biden was still in office. Second, it is unclear whether the reference to concluded cases included those in which no penalties were imposed.

According to data collected for Violation Tracker, the EPA announced 727 civil penalty cases during FY 2025, which is far less than the 2,300 figure, and more than one-quarter of those occurred while Biden was still in office. The penalty total for the fiscal year was about $1.1 billion, a fraction of the $6 billion the EPA claims it collected in “commitments to return facilities to compliance.”

During the first 12 months of Trump 2.0, the EPA announced 586 civil penalty cases, well below the total of 889 cases during the final 12 months of Biden. The Trump cases entailed $722 million in penalties, which is vastly below the $3.2 billion total for the Biden cases during that period.

It is no surprise that an agency overseen by Donald Trump would grossly exaggerate its accomplishments. The question is why it is choosing to inflate those accomplishments that run contrary to its larger mission of weakening the country’s environmental safety net while promoting fossil fuels and sabotaging wind and solar energy.

In issuing that press release, the EPA may in effect be acknowledging that there is still a large portion of the public that cares about clean air and water and wants to control toxic substances. The agency seems to be betting that it can persuade those people it is still doing its traditional job even as it hacks away at the underpinnings of that mission.

For the time being, environmental enforcement is not defunct. But neither is it thriving in the way the EPA wants us to believe. As more and more regulations are weakened or eliminated, the amount of enforcement will continue to decline, as will the health of the country.

Coddling Rogue Corporations

When it comes to alleged terrorists, drug cartels, so-called illegal aliens, and purported fraudulent voters, Trump’s Justice Department is quick to adopt an aggressive prosecutorial posture. The DOJ is eager to throw the book at defendants.

Yet when it comes to cases involving corporate misconduct, DOJ changes from a lion to a lamb. The focus shifts to leniency and the desire to avoid putting an undue burden on companies. Restraint seems to be the primary objective.

The latest expression of the latter approach can be seen in the DOJ’s announcement of the first Department-wide policy on how corporations should be criminally prosecuted. Actually, it is a policy on how they shouldn’t be prosecuted, since the emphasis is on rewarding companies that cooperate with investigations by declining to bring charges against them.

Declinations are not a new policy. They are part of a long-term trend toward decriminalizing corporate misbehavior by using devices such as deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements.

Proponents of these policies argue that the emphasis should be on prosecuting individuals within corporations rather than the companies themselves. The Trump DOJ embraces this approach, putting its focus on getting corporations to self-report.

As Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche put it: “This policy draws on decades of experience across the Department and creates incentives for companies to come forward and do the right thing when misconduct occurs so that we may hold accountable the individual wrongdoers. Well-intentioned businesses know that, across the Department, they will be rewarded when they self-disclose wrongdoing, cooperate with our investigations, and remediate the misconduct.”

The new policy formalizes the incentives, laying them out in a detailed flow chart that creates a degree of clarity sorely missing from the way in which immigration cases, for example, are being handled.

Putting more emphasis on prosecuting individuals is not a bad thing, assuming they are high up on the corporate ladder, but the DOJ policy seems to be based on the assumption that misconduct is mainly initiated by lower-level employees acting on their own accord and for their own benefit. In reality, most corporate criminality is initiated to serve the needs of the company and is often encouraged, at least implicitly, by policies emanating from the c-suite. A prime example occurred at Wells Fargo, where lower-level employees facing unrealistic demands from top management to increase revenue created large numbers of bogus fee-generating add-on accounts without the knowledge of the bank’s customers.   

The only positive things to say about DOJ’s policy is that it still requires companies benefiting from a declination to pay a penalty, usually the amount of profit it received from the illicit activity, and that the declination is supposed to be made public.

There is also a provision that declinations are not to be offered in cases of corporate recidivism, “specifically, a criminal adjudication or resolution either within the last five years or otherwise based on similar misconduct by the entity engaged in the current misconduct.” This should not be taken too seriously. The history of non-prosecution and deferred prosecution agreements is filled with instances of companies getting a leniency agreement, committing more offenses, and then, instead of being prosecuted, getting another leniency agreement. It is likely the Trump DOJ’s policy will produce similar results.

Requiring companies to make penalty payments, which are usually not terribly onerous, does not begin to outweigh the benefits of completely avoiding a prosecution that could result in consequences such as being debarred from receiving federal contracts.

The DOJ’s new policy is nothing more than a continuation of the Trump Administration’s inclination to coddle rogue corporations.

A Neutered Financial Watchdog

Since its creation nearly a century ago, the Securities and Exchange Commission has been one of the country’s premier regulatory agencies, protecting investors from misconduct by large corporations and other players in financial markets.

In the early 2000s the SEC investigated accounting fraud by the likes of Enron and Worldcom. In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, it brought major enforcement actions against Wall Street banks for packaging and selling toxic securities. It has brought thousands of other cases against perpetrators of market manipulation, insider trading, and foreign bribery.

You wouldn’t know this by looking at the recent track record of the agency. Under Trump 2.0 this once fierce regulator is a shadow of its former self. The watchdog has lost its bite.

The enfeeblement of the SEC is highlighted in a new report from Cornerstone Research focusing on the agency’s accounting and auditing enforcement actions. It finds that the number of such cases initiated by the SEC in 2025 dropped 68 percent from the year before and reached the lowest number since 2017.

At the same time, the total monetary settlements collected by the agency in accounting and auditing cases dropped to just $31 million, a plunge from the $907 million figure in 2024. Some 98 percent of the 2025 amount was collected during the final few weeks of the Biden Administration, meaning that under Trump 2.0 the penalties have been next to nothing.

The picture is slightly less dismal in the data collected for Violation Tracker covering SEC cases of all kinds against companies. It shows that total penalties during the first 12 months of Trump 2.0 were $298 million, down from $1.6 billion during Biden’s final year. The average penalty sank from $25 million to $5 million.

One reason for the drop is a shift in the typical defendant. Biden’s SEC brought more cases against big investment banks and other larger corporations, while under Trump the resolved matters are more likely to involve small-time players.

Even more worrying is the SEC decision to largely abandon enforcement actions against certain categories of companies, especially those involved in cryptocurrency. After Trump did an about-face on crypto, the SEC withdrew dozens of lawsuits involving that sector. That included major investigations of companies such as Coinbase and Binance. All this, of course, occurred as the Trump family itself invested heavily in crypto and got a boost from the founder of Binance.

The SEC also seems to be abandoning its role with regard to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Under Trump 2.0 the agency has not resolved a single foreign bribery case. During Biden’s final year, five such cases were completed, including one in which the weapons producer RTX Corporation (formerly known as Raytheon Technologies) paid $124 million to settle a civil case involving improper payments made to assist in obtaining contracts with the Qatari military.

Both at home and abroad, corruption is being given a freer rein by the SEC and the rest of the Trump Administration.