Water contamination crisis escalates as U.S. regulatory oversight falters

The incoming Trump administration has expressed a clear intent to reduce the EPA’s role in environmental regulation while an estimated 200 million Americans—over 60% of the U.S. population—may be drinking water contaminated with toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals.”

These synthetic compounds are widely used for their nonstick, water-resistant, and heat-resistant properties. While useful in industries ranging from cookware to firefighting foams, PFAS chemicals have earned their nickname because of their extraordinary persistence in the environment and human bodies.

They do not easily degrade and have been linked to serious health risks, including cancer, thyroid disease, and developmental issues.

The crisis has spotlighted regulatory agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

However, recent legal developments have hindered their ability to act decisively, including Supreme Court rulings that limit federal regulatory power, most notably the weakening of the Chevron doctrine.

Established in 1984, this landmark principle granted federal agencies broad latitude to interpret ambiguous statutes. With its erosion, the EPA faces additional challenges in crafting and enforcing policies to combat PFAS contamination and other environmental hazards.

As the country braces for potential policy shifts under an incoming Republican administration led by Donald Trump, there is growing concern about the future of environmental protections.

Campaign rhetoric and policy proposals from Trump-aligned lawmakers suggest significant rollbacks to EPA authority and expanded opportunities for fossil fuel industries, raising alarms among environmental advocates about the implications for water quality and the broader climate crisis.

PFAS chemicals have been manufactured and used in the United States since the 1940s. They are present in everyday items such as nonstick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, and food packaging. Despite their utility, these chemicals pose severe risks to both human health and ecosystems. Scientific studies have linked PFAS exposure to:

• Increased risk of kidney and testicular cancer.
• Immune system suppression.
• Hormonal disruptions.
• Complications during pregnancy, including low birth weight.
• Elevated cholesterol levels.

One of the most concerning aspects of PFAS is their bioaccumulation in living organisms. Once these chemicals enter the body—through drinking water, food, or air—they remain for years, accumulating over time. This persistence magnifies their potential impact on public health, particularly for communities with sustained exposure.

According to data released by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), PFAS contamination has been detected in the water supplies of thousands of communities across the United States.

The issue is especially acute near military bases, airports, and industrial sites where PFAS-containing firefighting foams have been extensively used.

Key findings include:

• PFAS contamination in public water systems serving approximately 200 million Americans.
• Groundwater contamination levels far exceeding the EPA’s health advisory limits.
• High levels of PFAS in fish and wildlife, indicating widespread environmental contamination.

States like Michigan, North Carolina, and New York have emerged as hotspots for PFAS contamination, leading to significant litigation and public outcry.

The EPA has taken some steps to address the PFAS crisis, including establishing health advisories and proposing regulations to limit PFAS discharges. However, its efforts have been hampered by legal, political, and financial constraints.

Recent Supreme Court decisions have significantly narrowed the scope of regulatory authority. The weakening of the Chevron doctrine means that federal agencies like the EPA now face higher legal hurdles when interpreting statutes that govern their actions. This shift complicates the agency’s ability to enforce existing environmental laws and develop new regulations to address emerging threats like PFAS.

The first Trump administration replaced the Clean Power Plan, redefined critical terms under the Endangered Species Act, lifted oil and natural gas extraction bans, weakened the Coal Ash Rule, which regulates the disposal of toxic coal waste, and revised Mercury and Air Toxic Standards–just to name a few

When he returns to the White House, Trump again intends to reduce the EPA’s role in environmental regulation. Key proposals include:

• Slashing the EPA’s budget.
• Revising or repealing regulations governing PFAS, clean water, and greenhouse gas emissions.
• Promoting fossil fuel development by rolling back restrictions on oil and gas companies.

Such moves could further undermine the agency’s capacity to address PFAS contamination and other environmental crises.

The EPA’s ability to tackle PFAS effectively has been constrained by limited funding and staffing. Comprehensive testing for PFAS in water systems, soil, and air requires significant financial and technological resources. Many local and state governments lack the capacity to address these challenges independently, leaving vulnerable communities at risk.

The Role of the Courts

In addition to the weakening of the Chevron doctrine, other Supreme Court decisions have narrowed the scope of the Clean Water Act, limiting federal jurisdiction over certain wetlands and waterways.

These rulings make it more difficult for the EPA to regulate pollutants, including PFAS, that travel through interconnected water systems.

Environmental law experts warn that these legal precedents could embolden industries to challenge future EPA regulations, further delaying critical actions to protect public health and the environment.

The PFAS crisis is unfolding against the backdrop of a broader climate emergency.

Many environmental advocates argue that expanding fossil fuel development under the Trump administration would exacerbate both crises.

Fossil fuel extraction and processing are significant sources of water pollution, and a lack of regulatory oversight could lead to increased PFAS contamination in addition to greenhouse gas emissions.

Moreover, climate change itself could amplify the risks associated with PFAS. Rising temperatures and extreme weather events can accelerate the spread of PFAS in water systems and disrupt cleanup efforts. Coastal and low-lying areas are particularly vulnerable, as sea-level rise could lead to the intrusion of PFAS-contaminated water into aquifers.

Public Health and Economic Costs

The financial burden of addressing PFAS contamination is substantial. Cleanup efforts, medical expenses, and economic losses from environmental damage are estimated to run into the billions of dollars annually. Key costs include:

• Upgrading water treatment facilities to remove PFAS.
• Conducting health studies and providing medical care for affected communities.
• Restoring ecosystems damaged by PFAS pollution.

Industries responsible for PFAS contamination have faced significant legal liabilities. Companies like DuPont and 3M have been the subject of lawsuits seeking compensation for cleanup and health costs. However, critics argue that the legal system alone cannot address the scale of the crisis and that stronger regulatory measures are essential.

While federal action has been limited, several states have taken the lead in addressing PFAS contamination. Efforts include:

• Setting stricter PFAS limits than those proposed by the EPA.
• Conducting statewide testing programs to identify contaminated water systems.
• Providing funding for water treatment and remediation projects.

Community advocacy has also played a critical role. Grassroots organizations have raised awareness about PFAS risks, pushed for legislative action, and supported legal challenges against polluters.

Addressing the PFAS crisis will require coordinated action at all levels of government. Policy experts and environmental advocates have proposed several recommendations:

1. Strengthening Regulatory Authority

Congress could pass legislation clarifying the EPA’s authority to regulate PFAS under the Clean Water Act and other environmental statutes. Such measures could counteract the impact of recent Supreme Court rulings.

2. Increasing Funding

Significant investments are needed to support PFAS testing, cleanup, and research. Federal funding could help states and municipalities upgrade water treatment facilities and provide resources for affected communities.

3. Promoting Industry Accountability

Policymakers could implement “polluter pays” principles to ensure that industries responsible for PFAS contamination bear the costs of remediation. Such measures could include fines, taxes, and mandatory cleanup requirements.

4. Enhancing Public Awareness

Education campaigns can help inform the public about PFAS risks and empower communities to advocate for stronger protections. Transparency in reporting PFAS levels in water systems is also critical.

The PFAS contamination crisis poses a significant threat to public health and the environment. As legal and political challenges constrain regulatory agencies, the path forward requires bold and coordinated action.

Without comprehensive federal leadership, the burden will fall disproportionately on states, local governments, and affected communities. The stakes are high, and the time for decisive action is now.