President Donald Trump has taken a bold stand against global overreach with a fresh executive order that yanks the United States out of a United Nations climate change panel long criticized for its overblown predictions.
This panel, known as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), was the backbone of the Paris Climate Accords, which Trump already distanced the U.S. from in January 2025, as reported by the Daily Caller. The IPCC's track record includes wild claims, like predicting Himalayan glaciers would vanish by 2035, only to backtrack when the science didn’t hold up.
Trump’s move signals a rejection of international bodies that push policies with little accountability. It’s a clear message that American energy and industry won’t be shackled by unproven forecasts or arbitrary targets.
The IPCC has been a driving force behind agreements like the Paris Accord, which aimed to cap global warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius through sweeping shifts to green energy. Yet, despite all the grand promises, global emissions barely budged in the decade following the accord’s adoption.
Europe, in particular, bought into the green energy push, only to find itself reliant on Russian gas and lagging behind China in energy production. This outcome exposes the flaws in policies driven by IPCC rhetoric rather than practical reality.
State Department Spokesperson Tommy Pigott didn’t mince words on this, saying, “Unaccountable international institutions like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have leveraged alarmist rhetoric in their attempt to sway public policy in the United States and across the world.” His point cuts to the heart of why so many Americans are fed up with global mandates that seem to punish our economy while letting industrial giants like China and India skate by.
Pigott also highlighted how the IPCC’s so-called expertise often props up radical agendas like the Green New Deal, which threaten to choke entire industries under heavy regulation. He called it out directly, stating, “Often, the so-called ‘expert’ opinion of this sham organization is used to justify the Green New Scam and efforts to regulate various industries into oblivion in the name of climate insanity.”
That kind of sharp critique resonates with folks who see their livelihoods at stake when untested theories turn into binding rules. It’s not about denying science but questioning why American workers should bear the brunt of policies that don’t even deliver results.
Beyond economics, the IPCC has veered into ideological territory, dabbling in diversity, equity, and inclusion projects and even setting up a “gender action team” in 2020 to focus on gender balance within the organization. One has to wonder how gender initiatives solve rising temperatures or fix energy grids.
This withdrawal is a reclaiming of sovereignty over policies that affect everyday Americans, from factory workers to farmers. It challenges the notion that distant bureaucrats should dictate how we power our homes or run our businesses.
The IPCC’s history of retracted predictions and questionable priorities shows a disconnect from the real-world impact of their recommendations. Trump’s order serves as a reminder that sound policy must be grounded in evidence, not ideology or globalist wish lists.
For too long, panels like the IPCC have operated without scrutiny, setting targets that bind nations like ours while ignoring the bigger polluters. Pulling out sends a signal that the U.S. will chart its own path, balancing environmental concerns with the need to keep our economy strong.
Americans deserve policies that respect both the environment and the paycheck that puts food on the table. Trump’s decision to exit the IPCC reflects a push for that balance, free from the alarmism that clouds rational debate.
The Paris Accord and its supporting bodies have failed to slow emissions while burdening nations that play by the rules. It’s time to focus on innovation and domestic solutions rather than bowing to international frameworks that don’t deliver.
This executive order isn’t a dismissal of climate challenges but a rejection of flawed mechanisms that prioritize narrative over results. Let’s hope it sparks a broader conversation about how to tackle real issues without sacrificing American independence or prosperity.
