Trump pulls U.S. from 66 global organizations, including key UN climate agencies

President Trump on Wednesday announced plans to withdraw the U.S. from dozens of global organizations, including the United Nations climate change agencies.Why it matters: It's among the biggest and most extreme steps this administration has taken to retreat from the global stage and pull back foreign spending.Legal experts immediately questioned whether Trump's move is legal, though the existence of laws haven't stopped other moves of his.Between the lines: At the highest level, these moves might feel shocking, but they shouldn't be surprising. It can take a while — in this case, almost a year — to turn completely around a government bureaucracy as big as the United States'.Driving the news: Trump's memoranda to executive departments and agencies said that after consulting with his Cabinet, he "determined that it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support to" the organizations.Among the nearly 70 groups included were the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the foundation of most other global climate work, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which regularly assesses climate science.The Trump administration was essentially absent from the United Nations climate talks in Brazil last November, so the writing was on the wall.Reality check: The UNFCCC is a Senate-ratified treaty — which occurred in 1992 and signed by Republican President George H. W. Bush. What they're saying: "Whether a president can unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from a Senate-ratified treaty is an open legal question," Columbia University law professor Michael Gerrard wrote on LinkedIn.The U.S. would become the only one of the 193 member states of the UN not to be in the UNFCCC. Thus the U.S. would have no vote in further decisions, though future presidents could send observers," Gerrard wrote.Zoom out: To rejoin the treaty, the U.S. Senate would need to ratify the treaty, a Herculean effort requiring two-thirds of the upper body unlikely to occur in today's polarized Congress.Follow the money: The biggest, tangible impact for many of these groups is likely to be funding, since the U.S. has historically often been the biggest in intergovernmental groups like this.Flashback: Rumors constantly swirled about whether Trump would do this in his first administration. But that never happened, much to the relief of groups and others working on climate change.Considering Trump's position roundly dismissing and sometimes mocking climate change, the lack of such removal in his first term was likely more of a sign of lack of organization or time — or both, instead of intentional preservation.Friction point: Environmental groups painted Trump as giving up on clean energy leadership and investments.Walking away doesn't just put America on the sidelines — it takes the U.S. out of the arena entirely," said David Widawsky, director of the World Resources Institute's U.S. program."American communities and businesses will lose economic ground as other countries capture the jobs, wealth, and trade created by the booming clean-energy economy."Gina McCarthy, who served as EPA administrator and White House climate adviser, said in a statement that Trump "is throwing away decades of U.S. climate change leadership and global collaboration."The intrigue: One group absent from the list is the International Energy Agency, which has tangled with the administration before but more recently moved in its direction.Other groups included on the list include the International Renewable Energy Agency and the International Energy Forum.What we're watching: To what degree and how this is challenged — and the tangible impacts on the ground. What's next: This likely will be a top topic later this month at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, often considered the ultimate global gathering.