# Environmental justice *Concept: a social movement concerning the distribution of environmental burdens and benefits, and community participation in environmental decisions.* Environmental justice is a social movement that began in the United States in the 1980s. It centres on claims that poor or marginalized communities absorb the harms of hazardous waste, resource extraction and other land uses whose benefits go elsewhere.[^1] The [[United States Environmental Protection Agency]] defines the term as "the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income" in making, carrying out and enforcing environmental laws, regulations and policies.[^1] In [[Minnesota]], the term appears in the titles of public documents. These include the Met Council's *[[Imagine 2050]]* Environmental Justice Framework[^2] and a page from the MPCA titled *Environmental justice legislation*.[^3] The record here carries the titles of these documents, not their texts. It does not establish what either framework or the legislation provides.[^2][^3] The record does document the federal agency's grant actions under the same heading. The EPA announced $50 million for the [[Minneapolis Foundation]] as an Environmental Justice grantmaker for Region 5 on December 20, 2023. It terminated the funds in February 2025.[^4] The Foundation and two co-grantmakers sued in April 2025. On June 17, 2025, Judge [[Adam B. Abelson]] of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland found the termination arbitrary and capricious. The court restored $180 million across the three grantmakers.[^4] ## Definitions The EPA definition adds a test for fair treatment. No group of people, "including racial, ethnic, or socio-economic groups", should carry a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences of industrial, municipal and commercial operations. The same applies to the execution of federal, state, local and tribal programs and policies.[^1] Proponents usually treat the concept as a matter of distributive justice: how environmental risks and benefits are shared. Other accounts add procedural justice, meaning fair participation in decisions, and recognition justice, meaning acknowledgment of oppression and difference in affected communities. Some scholars have proposed further dimensions, including self-governing authority, relational ontologies and epistemic justice.[^1] The term is also discussed under the names environmental racism and environmental inequality.[^1] ## History Accounts of the movement trace part of its origin to the Indigenous environmental movement. That movement's resistance to displacement and assimilation, and its claims to sovereignty and land, run back several centuries.[^1] The terms "environmental justice" and "environmental racism" entered common use after the first court cases. The first was filed in Texas in 1979 and the second in North Carolina in 1982.[^1] The 1979 case, *Bean v. Southwestern Waste Management Corporation*, challenged the siting of a garbage dump in Northwood Manor in East Houston. The plaintiffs lost. According to the Wikipedia account, a 1983 federal report later confirmed the landfill data compiled for the case.[^1] From its American beginnings, the movement drew on the civil rights movement and concentrated on environmental racism in wealthy countries. It later widened to cover gender, LGBTQ people, international environmental injustice, and inequalities inside marginalized groups.[^1] ## Environmental discrimination and conflict The movement's targets include hazardous waste disposal, resource extraction and land appropriation, and the environmental discrimination associated with them.[^1] The Wikipedia account states that race is the leading determinant of environmental injustice in the United States. It names poverty, caste and tribal affiliation as major indicators elsewhere.[^1] The Environmental Justice Atlas counted 3,100 environmental conflicts worldwide as of April 2020. It noted that many more remained undocumented.[^1] ## Relationships to other movements and philosophies The movement intersects with climate justice, ocean justice, Indigenous land-rights movements, and the claimed human right to a healthy environment.[^1] In Minnesota, MCEA published a piece titled *Environmental justice requires justice for George Floyd*.[^6] ## In the Minnesota record ### Who - The [[Minneapolis Foundation]] was the EPA's Environmental Justice grantmaker for Region 5. It sued the EPA alongside the [[Green & Healthy Homes Initiative]] and [[Philanthropy Northwest]].[^4] - The project's master record describes the Foundation as a node through which public money routes, and as a plaintiff against the United States.[^5] - Judge [[Adam B. Abelson]] of the District of Maryland issued the June 17, 2025 ruling.[^4] - The Met Council[^2] and the MPCA[^3] issued the Minnesota documents that carry the term in their titles. ### What - The case is *[[Minneapolis Foundation et al. v. EPA (Environmental Justice grantmaker terminations)]]*. It is a federal civil action over the termination of the EPA Region 5 Environmental Justice grantmaker award.[^4] - The record gives three figures for each grantmaker's award: $50 million announced in December 2023, $52 million on the Foundation's own program page, and $60 million at litigation.[^4] - The figure in the court matter is $60 million per grantmaker, or $180 million across three. The master record reconciles it with the $50 million announcement and the $52 million program-page figure.[^4] ### When - **December 20, 2023:** the EPA announced the Region 5 award of $50 million.[^4] - **February 2025:** the EPA terminated the funds.[^4] - **April 2025:** suit was filed.[^4] - **June 17, 2025:** the court found the termination arbitrary and capricious and restored $180 million across three grantmakers.[^4] ### Where - The suit was brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The award concerned EPA Region 5.[^4] ### Why - The record establishes the sequence of award, termination and litigation. It does not establish the EPA's stated reasons for the termination.[^4] ### How - The court found the termination arbitrary and capricious and restored the funds. The pack records the status as of June 17, 2025, and does not record any later appeal or disposition.[^4] ## Notes [^1]: Wikipedia contributors, *Environmental justice* (revision 1379075040, retrieved 2026-10-26) — the movement's definition, the EPA definition as quoted there, dimensions, history, early cases and scope. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_justice [^2]: Metropolitan Council (Met Council), *Imagine 2050 — Environmental Justice Framework* (undated in the record) — Met Council's regional plan carries an Environmental Justice Framework. https://imagine2050.metrocouncil.org/ [^3]: MPCA, *Environmental justice legislation* (undated in the record) — the state agency's page on environmental justice legislation. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/news-and-stories/environmental-justice-legislation [^4]: *How Minnesota Got Here* (merged master, footnoted), entry [35] [primary-confirmed] — $50M EPA Region 5 announcement (Dec. 20, 2023); termination (Feb. 2025); suit with Green & Healthy Homes Initiative and Philanthropy Northwest (Apr. 2025); June 17, 2025 ruling by Judge Adam B. Abelson (D. Md.) finding termination arbitrary and capricious and restoring $180M ($60M each); reconciliation of the $50M/$52M/$60M figures. No URL in the record. [^5]: *How Minnesota Got Here* (merged master, footnoted), "Power" section — the Minneapolis Foundation as a node public money routes through and as plaintiff against the United States in the EPA grantmaker matter. No URL in the record. [^6]: MCEA, *Environmental justice requires justice for George Floyd* (undated in the record) — publication title. https://www.mncenter.org/environmental-justice-requires-justice-george-floyd