Supreme Court Deals Blow to EPA's Clean Power Plan, Obama Vows to Fight
Dealing a major blow to President Obama's climate change agenda, the Supreme Court on Tuesday placed a temporary hold on the Clean Power Plan Tuesday until all legal proceedings surrounding it have concluded.
This decision is not the final word from the justices. The case is likely to return to the Supreme Court after an appeals court hears a challenge made by a group of more than two dozen states led by West Virginia and Texas.
The temporary hold has proponents of the plan worried though, because it's "an early hint that the program could face a skeptical reception from the justices," The New York Times reported.
The White House said in a statement that it disagreed with the court’s decision and remained confident that it would ultimately prevail: “The administration will continue to take aggressive steps to make forward progress to reduce carbon emissions."
Environmental organizations were quick to share their disappointment with the Supreme Courts decision.
"The Clean Power Plan is a flexible, economical response to the Clean Air Act's mandate to regulate carbon emissions," Ken Berlin, president and CEO of Climate Reality Project, said. "It is a grave disappointment that the same Supreme Court that made clear that carbon dioxide must be regulated as a pollutant, has now decided to stay enforcement of the Clean Power Plan pending a far fetched legal challenge.
"This disturbing development makes clear that people must demand that their leaders at all levels act on climate. One hundred ninety five nations spoke in one voice in Paris to say climate change is real, caused by humans and must be addressed urgently. There is no doubt that the Clean Power Plan is the United States' path forward to turning the agreements made in Paris into a reality."
The 5 to 4 vote, with the four liberal justices dissenting, was an unprecedented ruling, according to The New York Times, as "the Supreme Court had never before granted a request to halt a regulation before review by a federal appeals court."
“If there was ever a Supreme Court decision that looked backwards instead of towards the future, this was it,” Jamie Henn, communications director at 350.org, said. “If left to conservatives on the court, we’ll be stuck addressing climate change with ‘all deliberate speed.’
"Make no mistake, this case was brought forward on behalf of the fossil fuel industry and companies like ExxonMobil who will hold back change by any means necessary, but their days are numbered. The American people overwhelmingly support efforts to fight climate change and momentum is on our side.”
The regulations, issued last summer by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), require states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from electric power plants, the nation's largest source of such pollution. The plan would cut emissions from existing power plants by a third by 2030, from a 2005 baseline, by shutting down hundreds of coal-fired plants and increasing production of renewables, particularly wind and solar.
As Earthjustice puts it, the Clean Power Plan is a centerpiece of the nation's climate action strategy that draws on the strength and ingenuity of American innovation to slash dangerous carbon pollution being dumped into our air, while fostering investment in energy efficiency and clean energy.
Last October, two dozen states and Murray Energy filed lawsuits, accusing the U.S. EPA of “going far beyond the authority Congress granted to it.” West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who is leading the charge, called it “the single most onerous and illegal regulations that we’ve seen coming out of DC in a long time.”
In response to the Supreme Court decision, Morrisey told Bloomberg he was “thrilled that the Supreme Court realized the rule’s immediate impact and froze its implementation, protecting workers and saving countless dollars as our fight against its legality continues.”
Joanne Spalding, the Sierra Club’s chief climate counsel noted, however, that “the Supreme Court has already upheld the EPA’s authority to limit carbon pollution from power plants under the Clean Air Act. We believe that the Clean Power Plan is a valid exercise of that authority. We fully expect the Clean Power Plan to ultimately prevail in the courts.”
Earthjustice remains optimistic as well. "The battle to defend the Clean Power Plan is far from over. Today's Supreme Court ruling did not rule on the validity of the plan, but instead left that for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to decide," Howard Fox of Earthjustice said. "We are confident that the DC Circuit will uphold the plan, which rests on a solid legal and factual foundation.
"Recognizing the need to move decisively away from carbon pollution and towards clean energy, an unprecedented coalition has intervened in court to defend the Clean Power Plan. Among those joining the Environmental Protection Agency in opposing the court challenges are state, county and municipal governments; power companies; renewable energy producers; companies that specialize in helping businesses and consumers save energy; businesses that use energy; and public health and environmental groups.
"In contrast, the parties working to overturn this crucial forward-looking plan remain mired in yesterday's thinking. We will continue to strongly oppose that counterproductive effort."
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
By Gary Paul Nabhan
President Trump has declared a national emergency to fund a wall along our nation's southern border. The border wall issue has bitterly divided people across the U.S., becoming a vivid symbol of political deadlock.
By Daniel Ross
Hurricane Florence, which battered the U.S. East Coast last September, left a trail of ruin and destruction estimated to cost between $17 billion and $22 billion. Some of the damage was all too visible—smashed homes and livelihoods. But other damage was less so, like the long-term environmental impacts in North Carolina from hog waste that spilled out over large open-air lagoons saturated in the rains.
Hog waste can contain potentially dangerous pathogens, pharmaceuticals and chemicals. According to the state's Department of Environmental Quality, as of early October nearly 100 such lagoons were damaged, breached or were very close to being so, the effluent from which can seep into waterways and drinking water supplies.
China has closed its Everest base camp to tourists because of a buildup of trash on the world's tallest mountain.
By Madison Dapcevich
Plastics have been recorded in every corner of the world, from the remote icy waters of Antarctica to the bellies of deep-sea fishes. Now, preliminary findings presented at this year's American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting in Washington, DC suggest that bird eggs from the high Arctic—one of the most remote wildernesses on the planet—show evidence of contamination from chemicals used in plastics.