Environmental Groups Oppose this Deal, Given Failure to Meet Basic Criteria

A statement by environmental organizations opposing the negotiated NAFTA 2.0 deal, arguing that it fails to meet baseline environmental criteria and instead protects corporate polluters while undermining climate and pollution protections.

• The NAFTA 2.0 deal is criticized for failing to prevent the offshoring of pollution and jobs. The authors argue the environment chapter uses "weak, non-binding language" that does not compel Mexico to raise its standards and omits lead standards, which may encourage corporations to "dump their lead waste in Mexico." Furthermore, the deal does not mention climate change, which the authors claim allows corporations to avoid US state clean energy policies by moving to Mexico.
• The deal is described as a regression in multilateral environmental protections. It fails to reinforce a standard set of seven Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), providing standard enforcement language for only one and omitting four. Additionally, it removes a provision from the original NAFTA that required countries to follow environmental commitments even if they conflicted with NAFTA rules, suggesting that countries should now "disobey their environmental commitments if they conflict with NAFTA’s rules."
• The authors contend the deal reinforces fossil fuel dependency. It retains a rule that prevents the US government from determining if gas exports to Mexico or Canada are in the public interest, which may "lock in US gas exports to Mexico for decades to come." While the "proportionality" rule regarding Canadian tar sands oil was removed, the deal introduces new terms that make it "cheaper for oil corporations to export more Canadian tar sands oil through US oil pipelines."
• While the deal reduces some broad corporate rights under the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, it grants full substantive corporate rights to oil and gas corporations. This allows companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron to challenge environmental protections in Mexico. Additionally, the deal introduces "regulatory cooperation" rules that allow corporations to challenge proposed environmental regulations before they are finalized or request that existing regulations be "repealed."
• The enforcement mechanism for environmental standards in NAFTA 2.0 is viewed as ineffective. The authors state it replicates a failed system that the US has never used to bring a case against a trade partner for environmental abuses. The new deal further weakens this by allowing a government committing environmental abuses to "block a case from advancing."

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2018). Environmental Groups Oppose this Deal, Given Failure to Meet Basic Criteria. https://www.ciel.org/news/new-nafta-threatens-air-water-climate/

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. Environmental Groups Oppose this Deal, Given Failure to Meet Basic Criteria. 2018. https://www.ciel.org/news/new-nafta-threatens-air-water-climate/.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=Environmental Groups Oppose this Deal, Given Failure to Meet Basic Criteria |date=26 November 2018 |url=https://www.ciel.org/news/new-nafta-threatens-air-water-climate/ |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2018environmental, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{Environmental Groups Oppose this Deal, Given Failure to Meet Basic Criteria}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2018}, month = nov, url = {https://www.ciel.org/news/new-nafta-threatens-air-water-climate/}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }