Make America Green Again: Understanding Trumpism as it Relates to Environmental Injustice Legislation

Abstract: The United States is witnessing the emergence of what has popularly been coined Trumpism – a new conservatism inspired by the administration of Donald J. Trump, however, extending beyond to other far-right politicians. This research aims to better understand Trumpism as it relates to environmental (in)justice via a legislative case study analysis including the US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) exemption of Tongass National Forest, Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ruling not to regulate Hazardous Air Pollutants emissions from coal- and oil-fired power plants under the Clean Air Act, and the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Temporary Rule removing various limitations on H-2A visas. The results were extracted through an agenda-setting and framing analysis of the case studies and Trump’s 2020 State of the Union Address. The main results pertain to themes of importance identified within the documents. The results on Trumpism identified the following themes: identity, corporate influence, nativism and stigma, the American Dream, the American Frontier, great economic success, American security against an “other”, and America first and American leadership. For the USDA’s policy, the themes identified were deregulation, rural prosperity and economic development, and management for diverse interests. EPA’s policy demonstrated the themes of assigning value, role and obligation, wait-and-see approach, and human health and pollution. Lastly, for DHS’ policy the themes of American security, immigration and nonimmigrant status, and temporary workers as mission critical, were identified. These results were analyzed through an environmental justice framework comprising colonialism, specifically settler colonialism, socio-spatial stigmatization, and exploitation. The findings indicate Trumpism to be heavily revolved around economic success as it relates to environmental (in)justice, however, certain groups are omitted from this success. For the policies, a line of consideration was found to be drawn. This line causes an increase in some groups’ capacity for social reproduction, or rather the ability to access the conditions for a culturally, socially, and physically fulfilling daily life while decreasing the capacity for others. Based on these conclusions, recommendations for further research and policymakers are drawn.