The Trump administration has indicated it will strip California of its authority to protect its coastline unless state regulators agree to more than a dozen specific corrective actions. These findings, detailed in a draft federal review, cite "a pattern of jurisdictional and regulatory overreach" by California coastal authorities.
The 92-page review, obtained through a public records request, asserts that state coastal authorities have demonstrated "unjustified hostility and political bias against offshore drilling opportunities, oil and gas projects broadly, and SpaceX’s launch activities." It states that future federal funding for California’s coastal management program has been suspended "unless and until the identified deficiencies are satisfactorily addressed."
Among the top corrective actions demanded, the California Coastal Commission is directed to meet with SpaceX to discuss "outstanding concerns about political bias and ... productive next steps moving forward." Coastal authorities are also required to discuss "outstanding concerns about regulatory burden and overreach" with Sable Offshore Corp., a Texas-based oil company seeking to restart an offshore operation off the Santa Barbara coast.
Additionally, the state’s leading coastal agency must issue an official statement by January pledging that California "will not categorically oppose initiatives led by certain entities, or relating to certain industries, such as oil and gas, or involving certain activities, such as offshore drilling." Trump officials have stated their aim, citing "environmental extremism," is to end California’s ability to challenge offshore oil, floating nuclear reactors, and rocket launches.
Legal experts who reviewed the draft document expressed concern over what they described as the Trump administration’s politicized use of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), a longstanding federal law. They noted the federal government has never before attempted to strip a coastal state of its rights in this manner, and the potential consequences could be far-reaching if these preliminary findings become final.
This action coincides with the president’s efforts to dismantle various environmental regulations. The plan, if implemented, would mark the first new oil and gas leases in federal waters of the Pacific Ocean in over four decades.
Three California agencies—the Coastal Commission, the California State Coastal Conservancy, and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission—have until November 16 to respond to the preliminary findings and corrective actions. The Coastal Commission, currently reviewing the draft, has requested a 15-day extension to respond comprehensively.
Joshua Smith, a spokesperson for the Coastal Commission, expressed disappointment with the draft evaluation, highlighting the commission’s "long history of stellar reviews from the federal government and a 50-year track record of a successful federal partnership, where 96% of the time the commission either approves projects as submitted or negotiates improvements so they can move forward." Smith declined to comment on whether the commission would accept the corrective actions.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick ordered a fresh evaluation of California’s CZMA compliance earlier this year, citing "national priorities and economic interests" and incorporating considerations for offshore oil production, pipeline maintenance, spaceport infrastructure, desalination projects, and undersea cables.
The public response to the review has been substantial, with more than 23,000 written comments submitted during a 45-day period this summer. Hundreds of Californians, including surfers, fishers, business owners, real estate brokers, and residents, rallied in Santa Monica in August to express support for the state's coastal protection efforts. Approximately 95% of these comments supported California’s existing coastal protection framework. Federal officials, however, noted that of 23,071 written comments, only 22 were considered "complex," with about 12 of those expressing concern or disapproval of California’s coastal management approach to certain industries.
