The Brief

The Trump administration formally rescinded the legal foundation of federal climate policy Thursday — setting up a new front in California’s long-running battle with Washington over emissions rules.

“Today, the Trump EPA has finalized the single largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States of America,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said at a White House press conference. “Referred to by some as the holy grail of federal regulatory overreach, the 2009 Obama EPA endangerment finding is now eliminated.”

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the federal government may regulate greenhouse gases if they were found to endanger public health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a scientific determination that greenhouse gases indeed were a threat. By withdrawing its own so-called “endangerment finding,” the EPA is abandoning its justification for federal tailpipe standards, power plant rules and fuel economy regulations.

California opposed the withdrawal of the endangerment finding when it was proposed last year, and is expected to sue over the decision.

California Air Resources Board executive director Steven Cliff testified at the time that the move ignored settled science.

“Thousands of scientists from around the world are not wrong,” Cliff said in his testimony. “In this proposal, EPA is denying reality and telling every victim of climate-driven fires and floods not to believe what’s right before their eyes.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement Thursday that California would take the Trump administration to court over the decision.

“Donald Trump may put corporate greed ahead of communities and families, but California will not stand by,” Newsom said. “We will continue to lead because the lives and livelihoods of our people depend on it.”

Other states and environmental groups have also indicated they could sue. They include Massachusetts, which was part of the coalition of states that sued to force the federal government to curb greenhouse gases nearly two decades ago.

Eliminating the federal basis for regulating planet-warming gases will not halt California’s climate policies, most of which – from California’s market-based approach to cutting carbon pollution to clean energy mandates for utilities — rest on state law.

In fact, the decision may open the door for California to set its own greenhouse gas standards for vehicles, a possibility that lawmakers and regulators are actively weighing.

The reversal in federal policy could also undercut arguments that federal law blocks state lawsuits against oil companies and boosts interest in expanding California’s authority over planet-warming pollution within its borders.

California prepares for a fight 

Ann Carlson, a UCLA law professor and former federal transportation official, has argued that aggressive federal action against climate policy “could, ironically, provide states with authority they’ve never had before.”

Writing in the law journal Environmental Forum, Carlson theorized that California could attempt to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks directly under state law.

Campbell Power Plant in Sacramento on Aug. 31, 2022.

(

Rahul Lal

/

CalMatters

)

Federal law has preempted most states from setting local vehicle emission standards; California has, through a series of waivers granted under federal clean air law, obtained permission to set stricter standards than the federal government does.

This could help California’s efforts “in the long run,” Carlson wrote in an email Wednesday, “but of course withdrawing the United States from all efforts to tackle climate change is a terrible move. We should be leading the global effort, not retreating.”

In California, where cars and trucks account for more than a third of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions, California regulators at the air board and lawmakers are weighing in. When asked last year by CalMatters whether the air board would consider writing its own rules, Chair Lauren Sanchez said, “All options are currently on the table.”

“This is definitely a conversation,” Assemblymember Cottie Petrie-Norris, a Democrat from Irvine, said during a Wednesday press conference held by the California Environmental Voters. “So stay tuned.”

Ripple effects in court and Sacramento

If Washington formally exits the field of carbon regulation, states may argue they have broader room to pursue liability claims tied to wildfire costs and other climate impacts, experts said.

California has sued major oil companies as recently as 2023, in an attempt to hold them responsible for climate impacts. Oil companies have frequently cited federal oversight as a reason to dismiss climate-damage lawsuits against them.

“California is struggling with wildfire costs, for example, which are linked strongly to a warming climate,” said Ethan Elkind, a climate law expert at UC Berkeley. “I think that opens up a lot of legal avenues for states like California.”

The federal pullback has prompted lawmakers to consider expanding the Air Resources Board’s powers.

Assemblymember Robert Garcia, a Democrat from Rancho Cucamonga, this week introduced a bill aimed at affirming the state’s power to curb pollution from large facilities that generate heavy truck traffic, such as warehouses and ports, which concentrate diesel exhaust in nearby communities.

“It's no secret that the federal government and California are not seeing eye to eye — we're not on the same page,” Garcia said at Wednesday’s news conference. “This is an opportunity for our state, for California to step in.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

This story first appeared in the Boyle Heights Beat.

Air regulators on Thursday ordered Lineage Logistics to strengthen odor-control measures, expand air monitoring and improve communication with residents as cleanup of the burned warehouse continues.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District hearing board unanimously approved an abatement order on the second day of a public hearing into a series of air quality violations tied to the June fire in Boyle Heights.

The board did not require Lineage to pay any financial penalties, which several elected officials, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, had requested in light of the numerous air quality violations it had been issued.

Lineage is required, among other things, to:

• Each day remove 10%, or about 8.8 million pounds, of the food waste stored in the facility at the time of the fire; 
• Conduct more monitoring for airborne pollutants further from the warehouse; 
• Increase communication with the community, including providing updates on the cleanup in Spanish.

Many of the order’s requirements had already been implemented at the site, Lineage representatives said, while the community communication plan and increased air quality monitoring is expected to happen within five days.

Representatives for AQMD said the order was designed to strike a balance between swift food waste removal and work to control the odors plaguing the community. AQMD focuses specifically on air pollution regulation.

Dominic DiCarlo, Lineage’s vice president of global safety and compliance, said that he believes all of the rotting bulk food items will be removed by next week, without citing a specific date. He added that it would take another week to remove the rest of the material and fully disinfect the facility.

Bass ordered that all biohazard food waste be removed from the facility by Aug. 14. It’s unclear if Lineage will meet the mayor’s deadline.

DiCarlo said the company expects to spend between $80 million and $100 million on the cleanup and remediation of the burn site. He claims that about 80% of the approximately 88 million pounds of food stored at the facility has been removed to about 10 landfills and recycling facilities in Southern California and Arizona.

“This order will ensure that there are enforceable conditions on [Lineage] as it completes this cleanup project, which will minimize odor impacts on the community and expedite removal of food waste which is the source of these odors,” said Josephine Lee, senior deputy counsel for AQMD.

A new guide from a group of local scientists helps Angelenos affected by the 2025 L.A. fires navigate questions about soil testing and clean up.

The guidelines are based on soil tests conducted by USC CLEAN and Community Action Project Los Angeles on more than 6,000 lots in and around burn zones in the Pacific Palisades and Altadena.

Sujeet Rao, the health and well-being practice director at Public Exchange at USC, who contributed to the guide, said it's a response to questions that he and other contributors knew residents had.

“We all came together … to help fire affected families understand and navigate questions they may have about environmental contamination related to the fires,” Rao said.

The guide includes information about soil contamination, testing, cleanup methods and ways to reduce your exposure risk.

The dangers of soil contamination

When the Eaton and Palisades fires burned down houses and garages, items including paint, kitchen appliances and car batteries released dangerous substances into the environment.

Exposure to these substances can increase the risk of respiratory, neurological and reproductive problems, as well as certain cancers.

Lead was the most common concern, according to the scientists’ testing.

Rao said that’s worrying because lead is a neurotoxin.

“What that means is that [for] especially young children whose brains are still developing or women who are pregnant, lead can affect the development of the brain,” Rao said.

Should you test your soil? 

Rao said it’s hard to say whether any specific property needs soil testing or cleanup, but gave some general guidelines.

If your house burned, definitely.

If you saw ash in the air, on the ground or otherwise near your house during the fires, get your soil tested.

If not, testing is likely unnecessary.

Other things to consider are the age of the houses that burned and their proximity to your property.

“We do know that if you’re in a neighborhood that has a lot of old housing, it is more likely that there is lead that could have been mobilized,” Rao said. “The inverse of that is, in the Palisades, we generally see much lower levels of lead contamination because the housing there tends to be so much newer.”

What to know about soil testing

The guide suggests two main options for going about testing.

One option is to hire specialists to come to your house to collect and test samples.

The other option is collect samples yourself and submit them to a testing program, such as USC CLEAN.

In the testing results, look for contaminant levels that exceed the residential limits set by the Environmental Protection Agency or the California Department of Toxic Substances Control.

Both account for how the area is used, including whether children are playing outside or people are gardening.

Cleanup methods

If your soil test results are above the EPA or DTSC limits, the guide offers four main methods to clean it up.

1. Excavation: Removing the soil, throwing it out at a disposal facility and replacing it with clean soil.
2. Capping: Putting clean soil, gravel or another physical barrier between the contaminated soil and the people and animals who may come into contact with it.
3. Immobilization: Adding compost, phosphorus or other materials to stop the spread of contaminants.
4. Bioremediation: Putting plants, bacteria or fungi into the affected soil to break down biodegradable contaminants.

Some soil remediation can be paid for through insurance. Costs will depend on the size of your yard and which contaminants are present. The guide estimates that the least costly options are capping and immobilization, which can run around $10,000.

The full soil remediation guide is on the Consortium website.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said Thursday that he is once more trying to limit the number of people who are born in the country who can become American citizens, in a sign that even after his first attempt at limiting birthright citizenship was rejected by the Supreme Court, he’s ready to try again.

The president said he was signing two executive actions on immigration, including one limiting the number of people eligible for U.S. citizenship after being born in the United States.

The written executive order released later Thursday was narrower in scope than the previous one shot down by the Supreme Court and appeared to focus on restricting automatic citizenship to specific categories of people, including children born to adults with connections to foreign embassies or organizations, as well as anyone considered an “alien enemy” of the United States.

It also aimed to restrict birthright citizenship to anyone whose parents “engaged in fraudulent activity to obtain citizenship.”

A second order seeks to curb what Trump called “birth tourism” by increasing restrictions on visitors to the U.S. who want to obtain visas to give birth while in the country.

Trump said he thought his latest actions would be constitutional.

“I thought we were going to win it at the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, we had a bad decision, very unfair decision. Our country suffers because of it and we’re ending it a different way,” Trump said.

In June, the Supreme Court rejected Trump’s previous efforts to declare that children born to people in the U.S. illegally or temporarily aren’t American citizens, and upheld a broad conception of birthright citizenship.

On Trump’s first day in office of his second term, he signed an executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship, which allows anyone born in the United States to automatically become an American citizen.

Trump’s administration was immediately sued by opponents who said the executive order went against the 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, which makes anyone born in the country a citizen, with very limited exceptions.

The executive order was blocked by several lower courts and never took effect.

In June, the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s order by a 6-3 vote. But the vote was too close for many immigration advocates and legal observers who felt the legal question of birthright citizenship was a long-settled issue.

Just past the doorway at ALTO, off busy Ventura Boulevard in Studio City, the bar opens up under exposed post-and-beam ceilings, tanned cowhides hanging along the walls like abstract art.

Grab a seat at one of the small tables and settle in for the open-fire South American restaurant's new, more casual bar concept, where street food takes center stage from executive Chef Esteban Klenzi and co-founder Juana Castellanos.

In its first year, ALTO has already landed a spot in the Michelin Guide California.

One culture, two chefs

Both chefs came up through fine dining — including time in Spain's Basque Country — and watched their peers wear rigid, high-pressure kitchen culture as a badge of honor.

But Castellanos and Klenzi wanted something different.

For Klenzi, cooking is as much about feeling as it is about food — an idea his new bar menu extends directly.

"It's like cooking at home for my friends or my family," he said.

ALTO Co-Founder Chef Juana Castellanos and Executive Chef Esteban Klenzi.

(

Courtesy ALTO

)

Their connection runs deeper than the kitchen, though. Both chefs grew up around the Río de la Plata, the shared basin uniting Argentina and Uruguay into a single Rioplatense identity — once part of the same Spanish colonial territory before an 1828 treaty, brokered under British pressure, split them apart. Not unlike the Basque Country straddling Spain and France: one culture, divided by a border neither side chose.

What to order

The bar leans into what Klenzi calls the rotisserías tradition — the everyday, prepared-food spots common across Argentina. That shows up in the Tongue & Trout Roe Toast ($17): sous-vide beef tongue over brioche, finished with a celery-carrot vinaigrette and a crown of trout roe. It's a savory, briny bite, perfect for sharing to start the meal.

Close-up of two pieces of toast on a dark plate, each topped with ruffled, thin-sliced beef tongue tinted pale pink, scattered with chopped herbs and diced vegetables, and crowned with a generous mound of glistening orange roe.

(

Soledad Recatume

/

Courtesy ALTO

)

The Real Deal ($18) — ALTO's take on the classic choripán sandwich — pulls from the dinner menu, too: short rib and smoked pork, the same cuts used in the Asado Banderita and Pork Txuleta.

When the pair first sat down to design the menu, Klenzi found himself facing a deceptively simple question: "Should we make a burger? Or shall we make a choripán?"

They chose the choripán, prizing the way beef and pork together deliver, in his words, "the best flavor you can get from both of them." Lard from the pork chop trim adds richness; the short rib's fat keeps the sausage moist, with smokiness carried over from that same applewood-smoked chop.

For something heartier, there's the Banderita & Frites ($39): a thinner cut of short rib than its dinner-menu counterpart, seared on both sides.

Alongside it, try the smashed potatoes from Weiser Family Farms, cooked in the charcoal oven with beef tallow. Klenzi refuses to serve french fries — this is his answer instead, crisp outside, rich with tallow underneath.

What to drink

A pour from ALTO's Vermucito Experience, served over ice with soda water.

(

Soledad Recatume

/

Courtesy ALTO

)

Ever since I wrote about Spanish vermouth last month, I've been a magnet for the stuff — not complaining, especially during these warmer months. ALTO had me covered, though the serving style looked nothing like what I'm used to.

Unlike the Spanish and Italian style of an orange slice and olive, Argentine vermouth is served over ice with soda water — lighter, easier to drink.

A cozy corner of ALTO's dining room, where velvet chairs surround a wood-burning fireplace.

(

Courtesy ALTO

)

On the table: a trio from the Vermucito Experience — Las Flores blanco from Uruguay, and La Fuerza's rojo and sideral from Argentina, Malbec-based pours ranging from $12 to $22.

"When you pour it in the glass, it's almost red. It looks almost like a wine," Klenzi said of La Fuerza's rojo, made with Malbec. "You can really feel the pure essence of the Malbec wine."

The regular dinner menu is a great choice for a special night out. But the bar is for every other night — the "almost every day" Klenzi imagined when he decided a choripán, not a burger, was the answer.

"If we see your face every day, we're gonna take care of you every day," Klenzi said.