The U.S. EPA’s revised definition of “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act would reduce permitting needs for waste facilities, but raises new questions, experts say.

The SELC started the official rematch by filing a federal lawsuit in October, joined by Lawyers for Good Government, the Conservation Law Foundation, and the Lawyers Committee for Rhode Island, to reverse what they call the administration’s “illegal termination” of the program. The government has 60 days to respond to the filing (Dec. 5 at the latest).

Khadijah Silver, the supervising attorney for civil rights at Lawyers for Good Government, told HuffPost the dissent unfolding right now at the lower courts is a “real act of civil service.”

“They aren’t just saying what’s happening now is wrong. They are spelling out for the sake of the public and posterity what the law is in a way that is so crystally clear and lovingly crafted. And really, it’s written not just for the opposition, not just for people who brought the case, but for the country,” Silver said.

Lawmakers join growing backlash as legal challenges mount to restore the $7 billion program designed to deliver solar access and bill relief for low-income households.

At least one of the cases will likely land in a federal court as a battle of interstate laws, according to Alyssa Morrison, Senior Staff Attorney for Reproductive Justice at Lawyers for Good Government, a nonprofit that mobilizes lawyers to uphold civil and human rights. The result, she thinks, will largely depend on which federal courts the cases end up in. Ultimately, the cases will likely end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Massachusetts was going to receive $156 million to help install solar with low-income households through the Solar for All project before the Environmental Protection Agency canceled the program in August.

The funds would have brought solar to an estimated 29,000 households in the Bay State and created 3,000 jobs.

The plaintiffs are represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center, the Rhode Island Center for Justice and Lawyers for Good Government.

The Solar for All program was projected by the Biden administration to help 900,000 households get access to solar power. It would save Americans, the Biden administration said, $350 million a year in energy costs.

The termination of the $7 billion Solar for All program — once hailed as a cornerstone for expanding solar access to low-income households — is officially being challenged in court.

The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), along with Lawyers for Good Government, the Conservation Law Foundation, and the Lawyers Committee for Rhode Island, filed a federal lawsuit today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island to reverse what they call the Trump administration’s “illegal termination” of the program

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island, challenges the EPA’s decision to terminate all funding for the Solar for All program. Local attorneys representing the Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island, Southern Environmental Law Center, Lawyers for Good Government, and the Conservation Law Foundation filed the suit.

Conservation groups say the Environmental Protection Agency is harming nearly 1 million households that were promised cheaper energy.

In a 47-page complaint, filed in federal court in Rhode Island, the groups accuse the Environmental Protection Agency and its head Lee Zeldin of “hastily and unlawfully” eliminating the Solar for All program this summer — a move they say only Congress, not the executive, has the right to make.

The lawsuit filed Monday in federal court in Rhode Island challenges the Trump administration’s decision to end the solar energy initiative, which received congressionally mandated funding under the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act.

The lawsuit targets EPA’s cancellation of funds intended to bring clean energy to low-income communities.

CLF, alongside the Southern Environmental Law Center, Lawyers for Good Government and the Lawyers' Committee for Rhode Island, filed the complaint on behalf of the plaintiffs.

Since the start of the year, environmental law groups—including Lawyers for Good Government, the Environmental Defense Fund, Earthjustice, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and others—have worked overtime to counter Trump’s rollbacks. These groups, largely philanthropically funded and traditionally focused on separate regions or issues, are now more coordinated than ever, says Kym Meyer, litigation director of the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Several signers have sought support from attorneys with the Government Accountability Project and Lawyers for Good Government, two whistleblower protection organizations.

“This is intimidation and patently violates the whistleblower laws,” Government Accountability Project Senior Counsel David Seide said of the investigation. “(These workers) filed a petition and were put on administrative leave immediately. That’s retaliation. Now they’re being investigated, and that’s retaliation too.”

Trans rights advocate Allison Chapman, a civil rights and health equity fellow at Lawyers for Good Government, criticized the FTC’s approach to the comment period.

“The FTC is clearly on a fishing expedition, looking for responses that will justify its predetermined position,” Chapman told Truthout. “The questions posed are written in a way that leads commenters toward the answers the FTC wants to receive.”

La abogada de derechos civiles Khadijah Silver del grupo Lawyers for Good Government (L4GG) aportó datos contextuales.

“Las personas transgénero constituyen el 1% de la población total en Estados Unidos, pero solo representan el 0,11% de los tiradores masivos”, según datos del Archivo de Violencia Armada.

Silver añadió que estadísticamente, los individuos transgénero son “significativamente menos propensos que la población general a cometer estos crímenes” y en cambio, tienen cuatro veces más probabilidades de ser víctimas de delitos.

On Tuesday, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling that had found Houston County, Georgia’s health insurance policy— which denied coverage for gender-affirming surgeries—constituted sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

“This decision to withhold that care is steeped in animus and distorts the holding in Skrmetti to fit and further a discriminatory agenda, unlawfully expanding Skrmetti to apply to care for adults,” Khadijah Silver, Supervising Attorney of Civil Rights at Lawyers For Good Government, told LGBTQ Nation.

Stroud's complaint comes after the Government Accountability Project on Tuesday said it had, in partnership with the nonprofits Lawyers for Good Government and Stand Up for Science, filed complaints on behalf of FEMA employees who wish to remain anonymous.

In a letter to the OSC, DHS's Office of Inspector General and members of the House and Senate subcommittees on Homeland Security, attorneys for the groups argued the administration's actions "blatantly violate the federal laws protecting whistleblowers."

The Trump administration put many FEMA employees on leave, about 36 hours after they signed an open letter of dissent about agency leadership.

Lawyers for Good Government launched a new resource hub on Tuesday tracking changes in state policies around access to gender-affirming care and constitutional protections in all 50 states and six territories.

Jill Wine-Banks interviews Traci Feit Love, founder and executive director of Lawyers for Good Government (L4GG). They discuss L4GG’s mission to mobilize lawyers for pro bono work, especially in response to threats to democracy and civil rights.

Large firms now are taking longer to decide if they will take a pro bono case and avoid publicity for their efforts, she said. With major firms pulling back, clients seeking pro bono representation face a shrinking pool of lawyers, Feit Love said, and "even the impact litigation organizations are now beyond capacity."

So this summer, Lawyers for Good Government, also known as L4GG, launched an initiative to deploy what Feit Love called an "untapped resource" in high-impact constitutional litigation: small firms, solo practitioners and retirees.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin argued that July’s passage of President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act means the agency lacks both the authority and the money “to keep this boondoggle alive.”

EPA is “basically trying to make it sound like you’ll never get your funding unless you agree to their terms, and that’s just not correct,” Jillian Blanchard, vice president of climate and environmental justice at Lawyers for Good Government, told Jean about EPA’s termination notices. “People are owed what they’re owed.”

Jillian Blanchard, an attorney with the advocacy group Lawyers for Good Government, said language in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is very clear — it does not touch obligated funds. The Trump administration knows it would probably lose in court, so they make these shocking announcements just to try to scare the grant recipients into folding, she said. 

“This is legally completely unfounded what they’re doing,” Blanchard said. “It’s really, really important for states, no matter their political leanings, to protect the rule of law …This should not be a political analysis by the state. This should be pure economics.”

In July, Lawyers for Good Government, a legal nonprofit, rolled out the Pro Bono Litigation Corps to give retired, solo, and unaffiliated attorneys the support and infrastructure needed to take on the constitutional litigation that larger firms now avoid.

The corps received seed funding from attorney Jay Sadd, former president of the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association, and is fundraising the rest of its program costs.