Supreme Court Limits EPA In Curbing Power Plant Emissions
The court's ruling could complicate the Biden administration's plans to combat climate change.
In a blow to the fight against climate change, the Supreme Court on Thursday limited how the nation's main anti-air pollution law can be used to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
By a 6-3 vote, with conservatives in the majority, the court said that the Clean Air Act does not give the Environmental Protection Agency broad authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants that contribute to global warming.
The court's ruling could complicate the administration's plans to combat climate change. Its proposal to regulate power plant emissions is expected by the end of the year.
President Joe Biden aims to cut the nation's greenhouse gas emissions in half by the end of the decade and to have an emissions-free power sector by 2035. Power plants account for roughly 30% of carbon dioxide output.
The justices heard arguments in the case on the same day that a United Nations panel's report warned that the effects of climate change are about to get much worse, likely making the world sicker, hungrier, poorer and more dangerous in the coming years.
The power plant case has a long and complicated history that begins with the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan. That plan would have required states to reduce emissions from the generation of electricity, mainly by shifting away from coal-fired plants.
But that plan never took effect. Acting in a lawsuit filed by West Virginia and others, the Supreme Court blocked it in 2016 by a 5-4 vote, with conservatives in the majority.
With the plan on hold, the legal fight over it continued. But after President Donald Trump took office, the EPA repealed the Obama-era plan. The agency argued that its authority to reduce carbon emissions was limited and it devised a new plan that sharply reduced the federal government's role in the issue.
New York, 21 other mainly Democratic states, the District of Columbia and some of the nation's largest cities sued over the Trump plan. The federal appeals court in Washington ruled against both the repeal and the new plan, and its decision left nothing in effect while the new administration drafted a new policy.
Adding to the unusual nature of the high court's involvement, the reductions sought in the Obama plan by 2030 already have been achieved through the market-driven closure of hundreds of coal plants.
Power plant operators serving 40 million people called on the court to preserve the companies' flexibility to reduce emissions while maintaining reliable service. Prominent businesses that include Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Tesla also backed the administration.
Nineteen mostly Republican-led states and coal companies led the fight at the Supreme Court against broad EPA authority to regulate carbon output.
Additional reporting by The Associated Press.
Navajo Nation fights for water access in front of Supreme Court
Navajo Nation was left out of Colorado River allocations as western states fight over its resources. Now they're fighting for reassignments.
Supreme Court questions Biden's ability to forgive student loans
Proponents of student loan forgiveness point out the rising cost of education in recent decades, while opponents say the plan is too costly.
Supreme Court weighs Google's liability in ISIS terror case
Justices will look at Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects tech firms from being sued over content recommended to users.
The unlikely duo: Dog and goat besties are up for adoption as a pair
While Felix and Cinnamon are not up for public adoption at this time, the shelter wants to find a rescue partner who can help take care of them.
Airlines cut service to small airports; Congress looks for solution
If you don't live in a major city, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find flights to smaller airports.
Damar Hamlin heads to Capitol Hill for AED bill shaped by Scripps News
U.S. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Florida) will introduce the Access to AEDs Act, which she said was shaped by a Scripps News investigation.