EPA Places 139 Employees on Leave Over Letter Criticizing Trump’s Environmental Policies

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has placed 139 employees on administrative leave after they signed a public letter sharply criticizing President Donald Trump’s environmental policies.

The letter, titled “Declaration of Dissent”, accused the administration of harmful deregulation, disregarding scientific consensus in favor of polluting industries, and fostering a culture of fear within the agency. It was initially sent internally to EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin before being released publicly.

A public version of the letter, which had previously included the names of the signatories, had removed them by late Thursday.

The EPA stated that it has a “zero-tolerance” policy toward employees it claims are unlawfully undermining or sabotaging the government’s agenda.

In its official response, the agency said the employees are under investigation for using their official titles and EPA affiliations when signing the letter, which it claims misleads the public about the agency’s work.

This disciplinary action coincides with a broader reorganization of the EPA, which includes the dissolution of the agency’s Office of Research and the cancellation of billions of dollars in environmental grants.

The restructuring aligns with the Trump administration’s push to reduce regulatory burdens and promote fossil fuel development, consistent with the president’s recent executive orders.

The controversy follows a broader pattern of dissent within federal agencies over perceived political interference in science and environmental regulation.

In June, a similar protest was staged by employees of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), who raised concerns about the politicization of research and the obstruction of scientific integrity.

The EPA’s actions signal a tough stance against internal opposition, even as public and institutional scrutiny grows over the administration’s environmental agenda and its impact on federal scientific institutions.

When federal environmental staff get sidelined for internal dissent, the second-order effect is compliance uncertainty for anyone whose permits, monitoring or enforcement pathways run through those same offices. Building compliance workflows that hold up across administrative turbulence is where our sustainability-due-diligence team ends up spending a lot of hours right now.