On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to set standards regarding the emission of greenhouse gases from existing power plants.
In its 6-3 decision, the court ruled that only Congress, not the EPA, has the power to create a comprehensive system of trade regulations and reduce emissions from existing coal-fired power plants to move from coal to renewable energy. Energy sources.
The decision is a significant obstacle to Biden’s management plan for climate change, significantly eliminating carbon emissions from 2035 and reducing land emissions by 2100.
The case stems from the EPA’s 2015 directive for coal-fired power plants to reduce production or support other forms of energy. That order did not work because he was immediately challenged in court.
According to the EPA, fossil-fired power plants are the second-largest source of pollution in the U.S. after transport. The US is also the second-largest producer of greenhouse gases behind China, making it a key player in global efforts to combat climate change.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion of the majority in the case, known as West Virginia v. the Environmental Protection Agency. Five other court members joined his idea, following the rules.
This decision is for the first time that public opinion has identified the so-called “doctrine of big questions” to justify the decision. That controversial doctrine states that in matters of national importance, the governing body must have explicit legal approval from the ANC to perform specific actions and not rely on its agency authority.
Roberts wrote, “There is little reason to think that Congress made such decisions” regarding the policies discussed in the EPA, despite the organization’s belief that “Congress sets out the task, and it’s alone and balances many of the critical national policy issues involved in determining how Americans will achieve their power. “
“Reducing carbon dioxide emissions at a rate that will force a national shift away from the use of coal to generate electricity could be a ‘logical solution to the daily problem.'” Writes Roberts. “But it does not make sense that Congress gave the EPA the power to create that control system itself.”
“The decision of such magnitude and effect rests with the Congress itself, or the agency acting in accordance with a clear delegation from that representative body,” Roberts added.
Judge Elena Kagan filed a motion, joined by two other court justices. “Today, the Court deprives the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power conferred on it by Congress in response to ‘the most difficult environmental challenge of our time,'” wrote Tagan in his protest.
“The Court appoints itself – instead of Congress or an expert agency – that makes decisions on climate policy. I can’t think of many scary things,” Kagan wrote. of big questions’ before.'”
A White House spokesman on Thursday said the EPA ruling was “another painful decision from the Court aimed at reversing our country.”
“President Biden will not stop using the powers that be under the law to protect public health and to address the problem of climate change,” a spokesman said. “Our attorneys will carefully review this decision and we will find ways to move forward under organizational law.”
In a statement, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the decision “added to the many violent decisions that have undermined public confidence in the Court.”