President Donald Trump’s administration ignited fresh outrage Friday by proposing another sweeping rollback of Clean Water Act protections for streams and wetlands. Environmental advocates warn the move could expose drinking water, wildlife habitats, and communities vulnerable to flooding to even greater harm.

The supplemental proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of the Army would redefine which waters qualify for federal safeguards. It builds upon a widely condemned November proposal and pushes beyond the limits imposed by the Supreme Court in its 2023 Sackett v. EPA decision.

That ruling already stripped protections from vast areas of wetlands by narrowing the federal government’s authority. Rather than repairing the damage, the Trump administration appears determined to hand polluting industries an even larger gift, with ordinary families left to absorb the consequences.

Oil industry lobbyists and congressional Republicans predictably welcomed the proposal alongside EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Adam Telle. Environmental and public health groups responded with alarm over the threat to water supplies and flood protections.

“What the Supreme Court did in its Sackett decision was an inexcusable assault on clean water,” said Jon Devine, director of freshwater ecosystems at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “Communities and wildlife will pay the price until Congress fixes it. The Trump administration’s answer has been to make a bad situation worse.”

Devine said the proposal could erase federal protection for nearly all wetlands and most streams across the country, with western states facing especially severe losses. “This proposal declares open season on the nation’s waterways,” he warned.

The administration’s own analysis reportedly acknowledges that most streams could lose federal safeguards. Those waters do not exist in isolation, no matter how eagerly industry lobbyists pretend otherwise, since they feed rivers, replenish water supplies, support wildlife, and influence flooding downstream.

Food and Water Watch legal director Tarah Heinzen delivered an equally blunt assessment. “Trump is taking yet another sledgehammer to our bedrock Clean Water Act, shamelessly doubling down on his initial terrible proposal to strip protections from countless streams and wetlands.”

Heinzen said the proposal would allow polluters and developers to fill, drain, or contaminate sensitive waterways with reduced federal oversight. “Make no mistake: This unlawful proposal gives bad actors the green light to fill, drain, and poison sensitive waterways from coast to coast,” she said.

Gary Belan, senior director of American Rivers’ Clean Water Program, argued that weakening protections is especially reckless as climate change places growing pressure on water supplies. He said “our nation’s water resources are precious and increasingly at risk.”

The initial proposal’s public comment period has ended, but publication of the supplemental rule in the Federal Register will begin another thirty day window. Belan welcomed additional public input while cautioning that the proposed changes could have serious consequences for communities nationwide.

“The proposed definitions do not reflect the established science on how rivers function and would significantly reduce the scope of the Clean Water Act,” Belan said. Losing protections for headwater streams, intermittent streams, and wetlands can worsen flooding while increasing drinking water treatment costs.

Wetlands naturally absorb excess water, reduce flood damage, filter pollutants, and provide habitat for countless species. Removing federal safeguards does not eliminate those functions, but it does make it easier for corporate interests to destroy them while shifting the financial burden onto the public.

Jim Murphy, associate vice president for legal advocacy at the National Wildlife Federation, noted that this is the fifth major attempt to define Clean Water Act jurisdiction within a decade. “We need Congress’ help,” he said, calling for a durable standard that protects water, wildlife, and communities.

Murphy also accused the administration of struggling to produce a rule that survives court challenges while satisfying donors who want environmental protections gutted. Families could then face dirtier drinking water, higher treatment bills, less reliable supplies, and increased flooding while polluters celebrate another regulatory giveaway.

Congress now faces growing pressure to restore protections weakened by the Supreme Court and targeted by Trump’s agencies. Until lawmakers act, the administration’s assault on clean water will continue flowing downstream, along with the pollution, costs, and public anger it is creating.