Trump cites a Supreme Court dissent that lost 6–3 to gut endangered-species protections
Effective September 14, a new rule removes habitat destruction from the 50-year-old definition of harm, easing drilling, logging, and mining.
The Orange Menace claims his administration restored the Endangered Species Act to the meaning Antonin Scalia "explained." Scalia explained it in a dissent. The Supreme Court's 6–3 majority upheld the definition Trump's administration just erased.
For 50 years, the definition of "harm" included any significant habitat modification that killed or injured wildlife by disrupting their breeding, feeding, or sheltering grounds. Trump's new rule negates that definition effective September 14, in favor of a losing dissent, making it easier to drill, log, mine, and build where endangered animals live.
The Supreme Court called habitat destruction harm. Grandpa Pudding Brains calls the habitat open for mining.
I'd argue that couldn't possibly be legal, but then again, everything this dimwit does flies in the face of established law and is never held to account, so who knows. Maybe the administration will get sued. Likely it won't matter.
Just as the results of decades of the Clean Air act was used as justification for gutting those regulations, this makes no sense. Of course, it might make the twatwaffle’s buddies some cash.