Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin faced intense scrutiny during a CNN interview on Sunday, August 3, after being confronted with his previous statements supporting climate action, contrasting sharply with his agency’s recent reversal of Obama-era environmental policies. The former New York congressman appeared visibly uncomfortable when host Katie Hunt played a 2016 clip of his own words advocating for reduced fossil fuel reliance.

The confrontation occurred during CNN’s “State of the Union” program, where Hunt questioned Zeldin about the EPA’s Tuesday, July 29, announcement reversing its 2009 determination that greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to human health. The agency’s decision effectively dismantled a key scientific finding that had underpinned federal climate regulations for over a decade.

Hunt pressed Zeldin on his apparent skepticism of the scientific consensus regarding human-caused climate change. When the EPA chief suggested Hunt was attempting to twist his words, she noted that he sounded considerably different from his congressional days. The host then presented video evidence of Zeldin’s 2016 remarks, where he acknowledged climate change and advocated for environmental stewardship.

In the 2016 footage, Zeldin clearly stated his position on environmental issues. Zeldin declared, “Our climate is changing. We need to do more to be better stewards.” He went on to emphasize the importance of reducing fossil fuel dependence and pursuing alternative energy sources, including clean and green energy initiatives.

When Hunt asked what had changed in his perspective, Zeldin paused for four seconds before responding. He claimed that nothing had changed, stating that the climate has always been changing throughout history. The EPA administrator then shifted focus to energy independence, arguing that America should reduce reliance on foreign energy sources and pursue domestic energy dominance instead of addressing climate concerns.

Zeldin defended the EPA’s policy reversal by arguing that the agency had overstepped its legal authority. He maintained that such determinations should be made by Congress rather than federal agencies, suggesting the EPA derives its power strictly from legislative mandates. This reasoning formed the basis for rescinding the 2009 endangerment finding that classified greenhouse gases as pollutants harmful to public health and welfare.

The timing of this controversy coincides with broader Trump administration efforts to withdraw from international climate commitments. On Inauguration Day, President Trump instructed the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations to submit a formal withdrawal notice from the Paris Climate Agreement, marking the second time the United States has exited the international accord under Trump’s leadership.

The Paris Climate Agreement represents a global commitment by 194 sovereign nations to limit temperature increases and mitigate climate change impacts. Trump previously withdrew from the agreement in 2017, characterizing it as unfair to American interests, before the Biden administration rejoined in 2021. The current withdrawal follows an executive order titled “Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements.”

Zeldin’s congressional background includes representing New York’s First District, where he previously acknowledged the reality of climate change and supported environmental protection measures. His 2016 statements reflected positions typical of moderate Republicans who accepted climate science while advocating for American energy independence through cleaner alternatives to fossil fuels.

The EPA’s reversal of the endangerment finding represents a significant shift in federal environmental policy. The 2009 determination served as the scientific foundation for numerous climate regulations, including vehicle emission standards and power plant pollution limits. By rescinding this finding, the Trump administration has effectively removed the regulatory framework that justified federal action on greenhouse gas emissions.

Environmental advocates and scientists have criticized the EPA’s decision, arguing that it contradicts overwhelming scientific evidence regarding human-caused climate change. The agency’s action comes despite decades of research demonstrating the link between greenhouse gas emissions and global temperature increases, along with associated environmental and public health impacts.