California v. Burgum

AG coalition sues to block a rule declaring that harming a protected area is only illegal if it is a direct, intentional act against an individual animal, leaving habitat destruction completely unregulated even when it kills or injures a species.

On September 9, 2026, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown co-led a coalition of 21 attorneys general in challenging a new rule that guts essential Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for the survival of endangered and threatened species.  

The new rule eliminates habitat modification from the definition of “harm,” limiting the prohibition primarily to actions taken directly against individual animals. Previously, the rule defined harm to include “significant habitat modification or degradation” that could kill or injure wildlife by damaging species’ natural habitats and behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering. Rescinding this definition reduces protections for habitats and makes it easier for them to be damaged or destroyed, even when that destruction ultimately threatens the survival of protected species.  

The coalition argues that habitat destruction is one of the leading causes of species decline and that eliminating these protections could undermine decades of conservation efforts. Because wildlife and ecosystems cross state boundaries, the AG coalition argues that individual state protections cannot substitute for federal safeguards. The ESA has helped prevent the extinction of approximately 99 percent of species protected under the law, and its weakening could significantly imperil these species.
 
The state coalition asks the court to vacate the rule and restore the longstanding federal protections against habitat destruction. 

Caring for our wildlife and our environment is part of caring for our future, yet President Trump seems to care only for himself and his industry friends. The Trump Administration has continuously sought to put our ecosystems in danger, which is why we continue to take them to court. For over half a century, the ESA has stood as a bipartisan example of what it means to protect an irreplaceable part of our planet, but these new rules attempt to destroy longstanding and integral regulatory protections and open the door to further species decline and possible extinctions.Attorney General Rob Bonta

Case Details

AG Posture

Plaintiff

Plaintiffs

Defendants