07/08/2025 / By Belle Carter
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has placed 144 officials on administrative leave after they signed a public letter criticizing the agency’s direction under Administrator Lee Zeldin.
The letter, sent last week, accused the EPA of sidelining environmental protections, ignoring scientific evidence and fostering a culture of fear within the agency.
The letter, signed by more than 400 current and former government employees, highlighted five major concerns: the EPA’s alleged disregard for science, the dismantling of environmental justice initiatives, the dismantling of the Office of Research and Development and the creation of a “culture of fear” among staff. However, only 144 of the signatories were identified as active EPA employees. The remaining signatories included former government appointees, retirees and individuals from other agencies who chose to remain anonymous or use pseudonyms.
Zeldin, who has been a vocal critic of the previous administration’s environmental policies, responded swiftly.
“We have a ZERO tolerance policy for agency bureaucrats unlawfully undermining, sabotaging and undercutting the agenda of this administration as voted for by the great people of this country last November,” Zeldin stated emphatically. “The will of the American public will not be ignored at our agency.”
Zeldin further criticized the letter, calling it “riddled with misinformation regarding agency business.” He emphasized that the majority of EPA employees remain committed to implementing the administration’s agenda, describing the letter as the work of a small, disgruntled minority.
This is not the first time the EPA has faced internal criticism. During previous administrations, the agency has been a hotbed of political tension, with employees often clashing with political appointees over policy direction. The Obama administration, for instance, faced similar challenges when it sought to implement stricter environmental regulations, encountering resistance from career officials and industry groups.
However, the Trump administration’s approach to dissent appears to be more aggressive. By placing the 144 officials on leave, Zeldin is sending a clear message that public criticism from within the agency will not be tolerated.
The EPA’s actions have significant implications for the future of environmental policy in the United States. By removing officials who advocate for stricter regulations and environmental justice, the administration is signaling a shift toward a more industry-friendly approach. This is consistent with Zeldin’s previous efforts to roll back regulations he deems overburdensome and harmful to economic growth.
Critics argue that this approach could have dire consequences for the environment and public health.
“The EPA is supposed to protect our air and water, not cater to the interests of big polluters,” said John Smith, a prominent environmental activist. “This move is a direct attack on the agency’s mission and the people who dedicate their lives to protecting our planet.”
Supporters of the administration’s policies, however, argue that the EPA’s actions are necessary to streamline the agency and eliminate wasteful spending.
“The previous administration poured billions into ineffective programs that did little to improve the environment,” said a spokesperson for a pro-business advocacy group. “It’s time to focus on practical solutions that benefit both the economy and the environment.” (Related: U.S. EPA signals return to fossil fuel dominance with power plant emission rollbacks.)
The EPA’s decision to place 144 officials on leave is a stark reminder of the precarious balance between political ideology and scientific integrity within the agency. As the Trump administration continues to push its agenda, the tension between career officials and political appointees is likely to intensify.
The move also raises important questions about the role of civil servants in a democratic society. Should they be expected to implement policies they fundamentally disagree with, or should they be allowed to voice their concerns publicly? The answers to these questions will shape the future of EPA and, by extension, the future of environmental policy in the United States.
In the end, the EPA’s actions serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of politicizing scientific institutions. As the world grapples with pressing environmental challenges, the need for a robust, independent EPA has never been more urgent. Whether the agency can rise to the occasion remains to be seen.
Watch the video below that talks about EPA axing billions in contracts and federal grants.
This video is from the NewsClips channel on Brighteon.com.
EPA faces scientific backlash: Climate skeptics challenge 40-year consensus.
EPA proposes repeal of climate regulations on power plants: A new era for energy policy.
Groundbreaking study exposes EPA’s failure to protect babies from NITRATE contamination.
Tagged Under:
big government, Donald Trump, ecology, environ, EPA, independent EPA, internal criticism, Lee Zeldin, politics, progress, Resist, speech police
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
COPYRIGHT © 2017 RESIST NEWS