20 States Sue EPA for Delayed Phaseout of ‘Super Pollutants’

By the Editorial Team · Friday, July 24, 2026

Twenty states have sued the EPA to challenge its delaying the planned phaseout of hydrofluorocarbons, potent greenhouse gases used in refrigeration and air conditioning. The lawsuit argues that the postponement undermines legal requirements to reduce HFC emissions and could hinder progress on climate change mitigation efforts.

Twenty states have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) challenging the agency’s recent decision to delay the phaseout of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a group of potent greenhouse gases commonly used in refrigeration and air conditioning systems. The legal action was announced Tuesday and submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which oversees many regulatory disputes.

The lawsuit is led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, along with counterparts from Massachusetts, Washington, and other states. It argues that the EPA’s revision of the phaseout schedule is “arbitrary and capricious” and violates the mandates of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020, which originally set a timeline to reduce the use of HFCs by 85 percent by 2036. The act was signed into law during the first term of President Donald Trump.

In May, the Trump administration announced a postponement of the deadline, granting grocery stores, air conditioning manufacturers, and related industries several additional years to comply with the phaseout. The rule adjustment was set to take effect on July 27. The EPA’s decision reversed earlier regulations aimed at encouraging manufacturers to transition to alternative refrigerants with significantly lower climate impacts, which many companies had already begun adopting.

HFCs are often referred to as “super pollutants” because their global warming potential can be hundreds to thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide during their relatively short atmospheric lifespans. Environmental and public health advocates have pushed for their reduction as part of broader efforts to mitigate climate change.

At a news conference, Attorney General Bonta criticized the EPA’s move, saying the agency was “opening the spigot” to release more of these high-impact greenhouse gases into the atmosphere despite the readiness of manufacturers to switch to cleaner technologies.

The EPA declined to comment on the ongoing litigation. The case will likely add to the growing debate over federal climate regulations and the administration’s role in enforcing environmental standards amid competing economic and political considerations.

This article was reported by synthesizing coverage from multiple independent news outlets to present a balanced, unbiased account. Read about our editorial standards. Spotted an error? Let us know.