Search

Search

Legal Experts: Trump Could Exit Paris Agreement, But Leaving UNFCCC Would Be Much Harder

As Americans head to the polls, the close race between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump could have major implications for global climate efforts. While climate change has not dominated the campaign, the election outcome could influence the U.S.’s role in fighting global warming, particularly as recent hurricanes hit the southeastern U.S. hard.

Trump has pledged to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement, as he did briefly during his first term, and there's speculation he may even consider pulling the U.S. from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the founding treaty of the UN climate talks. However, legal experts are divided on whether he could do this without Senate approval and what it would mean for future U.S. re-entry.

Exiting the Paris Agreement

Trump has promised to leave the Paris Agreement if elected, which would make the U.S. one of only four countries not part of the accord. When Trump withdrew from the agreement in 2019, the U.S. officially left for a brief period until Biden rejoined it in early 2021. Under Trump, the U.S. could again exit the agreement a year after filing, leaving the world's second-largest emitter without an obligation to submit a national climate plan every five years.

Experts believe that a Trump administration's climate action plan would likely be far weaker than a Democrat-led one, which could also ease the pressure on other major emitters like China to adopt ambitious plans.

Possible Exit from the UNFCCC

Reports indicate that Trump could be under pressure to take a more drastic step: exiting the UNFCCC entirely. Unlike the Paris Agreement, which Obama entered without Senate ratification, the UNFCCC was approved almost unanimously by the Senate in 1992, raising legal questions about whether the president can withdraw from a treaty without Senate consent.

Former Obama climate adviser Nathaniel Keohane noted that leaving the UNFCCC would have more profound consequences for U.S. interests than exiting the Paris Agreement. David Waskow of the World Resources Institute argued that, even if the U.S. left, it could still engage with climate efforts indirectly, similar to its participation in the UN Biodiversity Convention, which it never ratified.

Todd Stern, former U.S. climate envoy, doubted Trump would pursue an exit from the UNFCCC, questioning if it would even be legal under U.S. law. The Senate's backing in 1992 might mean a future president wouldn't need further approval to rejoin, but this is uncertain.

Impact on the UNFCCC Budget and U.S. Influence

Leaving the UNFCCC could weaken the organization financially, as the U.S. contributes about 20% of its budget. Without U.S. funding, China would become the largest funder, reshaping the dynamic of international climate discussions. If the U.S. were to leave the UNFCCC, it would attend COP summits as an observer, not as a party to the convention, limiting its influence in negotiations and diminishing its role in global climate discussions.

Keohane warned that a U.S. exit would severely restrict its ability to shape UNFCCC and COP discussions on climate action, fundamentally reducing its role in international climate policy.