The decision is a loss for the Biden administration on the question of the clean air act and the ability to combat global warming. The Environmental Protection Agency does not have broad jurisdiction to try to create a national energy policy by pressuring industries to move to healthier forms of electricity supply, such as wind and solar, according to a 6-3 decision by the Supreme Court.
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling undermines EPA’s authority to protect people from climate pollution at a time when all evidence shows we must take action with great urgency,” said Vickie Patton, general counsel for Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).
The supreme court says that Congress did not give the EPA that broad authority. that the EPA’s authority is limited more to trying to restrict emissions from specific coal-burning power plants.
now, this goes back to a tussle between the Obama and Trump Administrations. the Obama administration had proposed a much broader clean air program for the EPA that would encourage industries to switch to clean energy.
The Trump administration trimmed that back. The question is how broad is the EPA’s authority?
the answer from the supreme court today is not broad at all. the court has gone on to say that this is what is called a major question. this has been a darling of conservatives. the idea that federal agencies when they rule on — when they set regulations that would change policy in a broad way, that that that’s a major question and that they can’t do that unless they have authority from Congress to act. so, this decision is not only something that will restrict the EPA’s authority going forward but also may have implications for other federal agencies who want to have regulatory changes
