Drilling in Alaska: The Legal Battles and Blowback
By: Sarah Wejman
Edited by: Brooke Ebner and Peyton Austin
In its second term, the Trump administration has ushered in several measures that have removed existing climate regulations or withdrawn the U.S. from international climate pacts. In January, the U.S. officially exited the Paris Climate Accords, an agreement which 195 member nations are part of; the U.S. joins Yemen, Iran, and Libya as the few exceptions. [1] Not only have climate safeguards been removed, but the Trump administration is also taking proactive steps to broaden the U.S.’s oil and natural gas industries, with the promoted goal of being energy independent. Notably, in June of last year, the Department of the Interior (DOI) announced that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) would be open for drilling after years of protection. As the legal history of these valued lands has developed, it has drawn sustained pushback from conservation groups and wildlife activists, manifesting in outspoken critiques and court challenges.
The legal battle of the ANWR originated in the early 1900s, when a series of executive orders set aside the land for naval use, only to be used in emergencies or in times of short supply of oil. [2] This remained untouched until decades later, when a global push for energy independence led to reconsiderations for use of the billions of barrels of unharnessed oil in Alaska and the Western U.S. The Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act (NPRPA) of 1976 set out to reduce oil imports by opening up the Naval Petroleum Reserves, located in California and Wyoming, for commercial sale. [3] It also redesignated Alaskan oil fields as the “National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska” and would be subject to the discretion of the Department of the Interior in accordance with the rest of the statute’s guidelines. [4]
In 2017, during President Trump’s first term in office, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act opened up 1.5 million acres of land within the ANWR for oil and gas drilling. This Act received mass criticism from Democrats, environmental groups, and scientists alike. Consequently, during President Biden’s term, the Bureau of Land Management created a rule, “Management and Protection of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska,” which blocked off 13 million acres from drilling. [5] In June 2025, the U.S Department of the Interior announced it was going to take steps to remove the Biden era restriction, claiming it did not follow the 1976 NPRPA. [6] The Trump administration argued Biden’s policy went against the intentions of the NPRPA by imposing “unnecessary barriers to responsible energy development” and conflicts with the purpose of the Act. [7] Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski supported Trump’s position, saying that, “[t]his is a victory not only for those who support responsible development, but also those who believe in the rule of law.” [8]
Unsurprisingly, Trump’s second endeavor with Alaskan drilling was flooded with scrutiny. Namely, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and partners renewed a 2020 lawsuit that was under moratorium due to Biden policy changes. Now amended to cover the 2025 ANWR policies, the complaint alleges there are violations of several environmental protection statutes, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act. [9] The case specifically cites concerns over the role that ANWR has in preserving the nursery of the Porcupine caribou, the denning habitat of the threatened Southern Beaufort Sea polar bears, and the Gwich’in, an Alaskan Indigenous peoples. [10] Kristen Moreland, executive director of the Gwich’in Steering Committee, explained that, “[t]he Gwich’in have been fighting - and succeeding - for decades in protecting the calving grounds of the Porcupine Caribou herd.” [11] Thus, merely relocating Native American peoples, which has historically been a common strategy in U.S. policy, would likely also have adverse effects on animal species whose populations are already dwindling due to climate change.
Ultimately, the Trump administration’s steps to drill in Alaska will cause a wide array of environmental challenges whose damage might be irreversible. From a broader lens, this policy sets back the U.S. as a global leader of the climate movement. Because developed countries like the U.S. and China have the technology and resources to shift their energy supply to renewable sources, they should do so with the goal of eventually guiding developing countries that are still heavily reliant on fossil fuels. Too often are climate agreements framed as being fair or unfair to certain countries; it is true that some countries have to “go green” at different paces based on their technological capacity to widely adopt clean energy. Viewing the climate crisis as a tit-for-tat conflict is damaging and counterproductive; if meaningful change is not made, none of these conflicts will matter when widespread permanent damage ensues to the Earth’s ecosystems.
Notes:
Dharna Noor, “‘Abdication’: Trump Takes US out of Paris Climate Agreement for a Second Time,” The Guardian, January 27, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/27/trump-withdraws-paris-climate-agreement.
“Naval Petroleum Reserves,” U.S. Department of Energy, 2025, https://www.energy.gov/hgeo/opr/naval-petroleum-reserves.
Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976
Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976
“Alaska Delegation Welcomes Interior Process to Rescind Unlawful NPR-A Rule,” Dan Sullivan: United States Senator for Alaska, June 2, 2025, https://www.sullivan.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/alaska-delegation-welcomes-interior-process-to-rescind-unlawful-npr-a-rule?utm_source=copilot.com.
U.S. Department of the Interior, “Interior Moves to Rescind 2024 Rule on Alaska’s Petroleum Reserve,” June 2, 2025, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-moves-rescind-2024-rule-alaskas-petroleum-reserve.
U.S. Department of the Interior, “Interior Moves to Rescind.”
“Alaska Delegation Welcomes,” Dan Sullivan.
Center for Biological Diversity, “Legal Action Challenges Arctic Refuge Drilling Plan,” January 15, 2026, https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/legal-action-challenges-arctic-refuge-drilling-plan-2026-01-15/.
Center for Biological Diversity, “Legal Action Challenges.”
Center for Biological Diversity, “Legal Action Challenges.”
Bibliography:
Center for Biological Diversity. “Legal Action Challenges Arctic Refuge Drilling Plan,” January 15, 2026. https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/legal-action-challenges-arctic-refuge-drilling-plan-2026-01-15/.
Frazin, Rachel, and Zack Budryk. “Biden Administration Bars Drilling on Millions of Acres in Alaska.” The Hill, April 19, 2024. https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/4604023-biden-administration-bars-drilling-on-millions-of-acres-in-alaska/.
Noor, Dharna. “‘Abdication’: Trump Takes US out of Paris Climate Agreement for a Second Time.” The Guardian, January 27, 2026. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/27/trump-withdraws-paris-climate-agreement.
Sullivan, Dan: United States Senator for Alaska. “Alaska Delegation Welcomes Interior Process to Rescind Unlawful NPR-A Rule,” June 2, 2025. https://www.sullivan.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/alaska-delegation-welcomes-interior-process-to-rescind-unlawful-npr-a-rule?utm_source=copilot.com.
U.S. Department of Energy. “Naval Petroleum Reserves,” 2025. https://www.energy.gov/hgeo/opr/naval-petroleum-reserves.
U.S. Department of the Interior. “Interior Moves to Rescind 2024 Rule on Alaska’s Petroleum Reserve,” June 2, 2025. https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-moves-rescind-2024-rule-alaskas-petroleum-reserve.