He Helped Write the Clean Air Act. He Fears for Its Future.

Published on April 5, 2026

Thomas Jorling, a key figure in the drafting of the Clean Air Act of 1970, is expressing deep concerns about the current administration’s stance on environmental regulations, particularly regarding greenhouse gases and climate change. As an adviser to Republican legislators who supported the groundbreaking legislation, Jorling has witnessed the evolution and challenges of air quality regulations over the decades.

Recently, the Trump administration has claimed that the Clean Air Act does not apply to emissions of greenhouse gases, a position Jorling strongly disputes. He argues that the law was designed to protect air quality and public health from a variety of pollutants, including those that contribute to climate change. “The Clean Air Act has always been about ensuring clean air for all Americans,” Jorling stated. “To suggest that it shouldn’t apply to greenhouse gases is a fundamental misinterpretation of its purpose.”

Since its enactment, the Clean Air Act has played a crucial role in reducing air pollutants and has led to significant improvements in public health. However, Jorling fears that reversing protections related to greenhouse gas emissions could undermine decades of progress and exacerbate climate-related issues. He highlights the scientific consensus on climate change and the urgency of addressing its effects through comprehensive policy measures.

“I never anticipated that the very framework designed to protect our air would be challenged in this way,” Jorling lamented. He called for a renewed commitment to the original vision of the Clean Air Act, urging both policymakers and the public to recognize the importance of robust environmental protections in the face of climate change.

As discussions surrounding environmental regulations continue to intensify, Jorling’s insights serve as a reminder of the pivotal role the Clean Air Act has played in safeguarding air quality. If the current trajectory persists, he warns that the consequences could be dire, compromising the health of future generations and the overall integrity of environmental legislation.

Related News