Trump Administration Sues California Cities Over Natural Gas Bans

Introduction to the Lawsuit

The Trump administration is suing two California cities over ordinances that ban the use of natural gas piping and appliances in new buildings, despite the fact that both cities said they have not enforced those bans in several years. In a lawsuit filed Jan. 5 in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the Department of Justice said natural gas bans in the Bay Area cities of Petaluma and Morgan Hill are “radical measures” that drive up costs for consumers and conflict with federal energy policy.

Background on Natural Gas and Climate Change

Natural gas, or methane, is a major cause of climate change when it leaks out without being burned. When it is burned in stoves, the emissions are a leading source of smog and indoor air pollution and have been linked to health issues such as respiratory infections and increased childhood asthma. Morgan Hill, in Santa Clara County, banned natural gas for new buildings in 2019. Petaluma, in Sonoma County, followed with a similar ordinance in 2021.

Statement from the Attorney General

“These natural gas bans hurt American families and are outright illegal,” Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said in a statement. “Alongside the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice is working around the clock to end radical environmentalist policies, restore common sense, and unleash American energy.” The lawsuit stems from a 2025 executive order issued on President Trump’s first day in office titled “Unleashing American Energy,” which seeks to remove “burdensome and ideologically motivated” Biden-era energy regulations and maximize the development of domestic resources — particularly fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal.

Details of the Lawsuit

The complaint asks the court to rule that federal law overrides the cities’ natural gas bans, and to permanently block their enforcement. But officials in both cities said they have not enforced their ordinances since the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Berkeley’s first-in-the-nation ban in 2023, though neither has been formally repealed. “Based on our initial review, this lawsuit appears to be an unnecessary effort to seek to compel the city to comply with federal law with which it already complies,” said Eric Danly, Petaluma’s city attorney, in an email.

Response from City Officials

“In fact, the city has not denied any project or permit applications based on its electrification regulations, and has approved and is processing development projects that include gas infrastructure,” Danly said. “In any event, the city has observed that developers have generally opted voluntarily to install electric utilities.” Officials in Morgan Hill similarly said that the city “follows federal law, and will continue to do so.” “The city has not denied any permits for gas infrastructure based on the 2019 ordinance since the courts struck down Berkeley’s similar ordinance,” said City Atty. Donald Larkin.

White House Perspective

Meanwhile, White House officials said such bans “deny consumers reliable, resilient and affordable energy.” “When states and cities pick winners and losers, consumers pay the price,” read a statement from Adam Gustafson, principal deputy assistant attorney general with the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “Our complaint seeks to restore consumer choice so that people and businesses can build in a way that fits their needs best.”

History of Conflict

It’s not the first time the Trump administration has taken aim at California’s progressive policies in favor of the oil and gas industry. The president last year moved to kill California’s auto emission standards and goal of phasing out gas-powered cars; canceled funding for wind, solar and hydrogen projects; and opened up the Pacific coastline for offshore drilling, among many other efforts. But natural gas regulations have also proved controversial in the state.

Conclusion

The lawsuit against Petaluma and Morgan Hill marks another chapter in the ongoing conflict between the Trump administration and California over environmental and energy policies. As the case moves forward, it will be watched closely by cities and states across the country that are considering similar bans on natural gas. The outcome could have significant implications for the future of energy policy and the role of local governments in addressing climate change.

FAQs

• Q: What is the basis of the lawsuit against Petaluma and Morgan Hill?
  A: The lawsuit claims that the cities’ natural gas bans are “radical measures” that conflict with federal energy policy and drive up costs for consumers.
• Q: Have the cities enforced their natural gas bans?
  A: According to city officials, the bans have not been enforced since the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a similar ban in Berkeley in 2023.
• Q: What is the Trump administration’s position on natural gas bans?
  A: The administration believes that such bans “deny consumers reliable, resilient and affordable energy” and is seeking to restore consumer choice.
• Q: What are the potential implications of the lawsuit?
  A: The outcome could have significant implications for the future of energy policy and the role of local governments in addressing climate change.