Judges have curtailed the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority over emissions from coal-fired power plants in a 19-state Republican-backed fossil fuel-led state led by West Virginia. The decision closes a nearly decade-long legal battle that began under the Obama administration and could bring President Biden’s ambitious plans to halve domestic emissions by 2030. “The Supreme Court ruling in West Virginia against the EPA is another catastrophic decision that aims to push our country backwards,” President Biden said in a statement. “While this decision risks jeopardizing our nation’s ability to keep our air clean and fight climate change, I will not back down from using my legitimate principles to protect public health and tackle the climate crisis.” The court’s conservative judges ruled that Congress had not given the EPA broad powers to regulate the energy sector under the landmark 1970 Clean Air Act. The case stemmed from President Obama’s Clean Energy Plan (CPP) in 2014, which sought to use a small portion of the Clean Air Act – 111 (d) – to bring about “generational change” in the energy industry. and move from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. “Reducing carbon dioxide emissions to a level that will force a national transition from using coal to electricity generation can be a logical ‘solution to the crisis of the day,’” wrote Justice Chief Justice Robert Roberts. . “But it is not reasonable that Congress gave the EPA the power to adopt such a regulatory system on its own in Section 111 (d). A decision of this magnitude and consistency belongs to Congress itself or to a service acting in accordance with a clear delegation from that representative body. “ The dissenting opinion came from the court’s three liberal judges, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Steven Breyer. The ruling “deprives the EPA of the power required – and the power provided – to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” Judge Kagan wrote. The dissenting opinion concluded: “Whatever this Court may know, it has no idea how to deal with climate change. “And let ‘s say the obvious: The stakes here are high. However, the Court is now preventing the action of the authorized service of the Congress to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions of the power plants. The Court appoints itself – instead of Congress or the Office of Experts – as the climate policy-maker. “I can not think of many things more frightening.” The EPA still has general authority to regulate greenhouse gases as sources of pollution, as decided in a previous case, Massachusetts v EPA, 2007. The decision will not lead to immediate changes in federal policy, but it could affect the way the Biden government sets its own rules for power station emissions. “We are considering the decision of the Supreme Court,” an EPA spokesman told The Independent. “The EPA is committed to using the full range of its existing principles to protect public health and significantly reduce environmental pollution, which is in line with the growing clean energy economy.” Robert Rhode, a physicist at the non-profit Berkeley Earth, wrote on Twitter that the court “did not ban the EPA from other types of greenhouse gas regulations, nor did it violate the Clean Air Act, the EPA or the regulatory process in general.” . “This narrow result avoids most of what people feared,” he added. Jodi Freeman, a Harvard law professor and Obama White House climate official, also wrote that the “silver investment” in the decision leaves intact the EPA’s ability to identify the best emission reduction system. However, he added that the decision of Chief Justice Roberts still retains the ability to go “beyond the fence”, referring to regulations that affect an entire industry, as opposed to an individual power plant. Environmental groups have criticized the court ruling. “Following the seizure of fundamental freedoms, the court of right-wing activists has just curtailed vital climate action,” Jason Rylander of the Center for Biological Diversity said in a press release. “In the aftermath of this decision, the EPA must make full use of its remaining power,” he added. Justice Breyer retired on Thursday afternoon and was replaced by Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who made history as the first black justice woman. The Conservative Supreme Court’s conservative majority, which includes three former President Donald Trump appointees, has already turned to the right on issues, favoring less government oversight. Last week, the Conservative majority overturned the Roe v Wade landmark case, overturning 50 years of constitutional protection against abortion. The Conservative majority 6-3 has also recently weakened restrictions on gun ownership. On Monday, a majority of the court ruled that a high school football coach who prayed on the pitch after matches was protected by the Constitution, which opponents claimed could lead to “much more compulsive prayer” in public schools. This article has been updated
