This is a YUUUUGE win!
The court’s decision in the West Virginia v. EPA case decided that the EPA doesn’t have the power to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
The vote was 6 to 3, with the court’s three liberal members dissenting.
Chief Justice John Roberts, said that Congress had not explicitly given the EPA the authority to regulate emissions.
Excerpt from Justice Roberts:
But the only interpretive question before us, and the only one we answer, is more narrow: whether the “best system of emission reduction” identified by EPA in the Clean Power Plan was within the authority granted to the Agency in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. For the reasons given, the answer is no.
Here’s the final paragraph of the Opinion of the Court:
Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible “solution to the crisis of the day.” New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, 187 (1992). But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme in Section 111(d). A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is reversed, and the cases are remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
I guess the next GOP Supreme Court nominee will have to be Jesus, but he will get Borked anyway.
Omg, Jesus?
How could someone with such outdated bigoted opinions get a majority in the Senate?
Sen Pocahontas (S -MA):
Mr Jesus, can you assure this committee that you will uphold gay marriage and LGBQIT+ rights?
JC: Senator, I hate the sin but love the sinner.
(Pop pop pop pop pop!! Demonrat Senator heads explode)
After all the fuss they made over Kavenaugh’s drinking of beer, imagine the hullaballo over turning water into wine!!!!
This article is incorrect. The Court struck down Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan on the grounds that the EPA cannot expansively extend its authority to prescribe a “system” of emissions reductions for sources of emissions to the entire grid. The Court previously held that the EPA can regulate CO2; that ruling is unchanged.
Is there a case pending on UN and world court overreach?
There should be a class action lawsuit filed against the U.S. Government and all federal agencies and officers seeking trillions of dollars in loses resulting from the illegal actions taken against their companies, officers and employees as well as against the states, counties and cities that occurred as a consequence of the U. S. Government and its agencies illegal actions based upon EPA CO2 driven unconstitutional authority.
Folks need to read the decision. The SCOTUS ruled on extent of emissions control, not on co2 as a pollutant.
Read first, then post
Just in: Biden just cancelled leases in Utah, It’s running paywalled in the Salt Lake City trib.
Here is some background from May 2022
https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2022/05/15/apc-utah-among-states-asking-fed-appeals-court-did-biden-legally-suspended-oil-and-gas-lease-sales/#.Yr35Ay9E2fA
civilization survives!
I wish the ruling was broader in scope. The regulatory state is out of control.
Let’s be honest, the problems the EPA was created to solve have been largely solved, if not entirely solved. This is true of many regulatory entities. Rather than fading away, the regulatory state just expands its mission and creates reasons for its continuing existence.
IMO, every agency, bureau, commission, etc., should have to justify its continued existence on a regularly scheduled basis. Each of these entities has one or more bills that define its charter. Every budget request should include how the items fill the mission, that is, each item must have a law behind it.
People keep saying the court is majority conservative. But, if they realy were conservative and originalists (i.e. the Constitution should be interprested to mean what it meant when it was ratified), there wouldn’t even BE an EPA agency. Sadly, both Dems and Reps, want the power to change the Constitution without bothering with an amendment.
The signers all thought the words in the Constitution limited it to the enumerated powers. (i.e. the powers that are listed for it). And an EPA is not one of those things. So the powers the EPA claim, are reserved for the states to exercise if they want to use it.
Is an originalist allowed to use computer?
Sometimes a brief criticism is hard to figure out. But, if you are concerned about updating interpretations as things change, that is not a problem for an originalist.
And even things like creating an Air Force, or Space Force are not really a problem. Though, they are cannot legally be created at the same level of authority as the Army, Navy and Marines that the Constitution specifies to exist. But, the Air Force and military space program were both created under the Army. It should simply be the Army Space Force, etc.
The right to bear arms is another good example. Machine guns were invented long before the Constitution was ratified. They weren’t yet practical, but most of the signers would certainly have known about them, and expected weapons to continue to develop. Arms are arms, regardless of its capability. So, any talk of an assault weapons ban, is quite unconstitutional. If they want that, the Constitution has to be amended.
There is a reason there was a process to amend the Constitution. Sometimes things need to be changed. Changing the meaning of the “General Welfare” clause is how they are doing it. But, changing it by redefining what the words said at the time, is not permitted.
Now the progs are countering with a coup at the USSC…
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/06/30/markey-bowman-join-climate-coalition-urging-scotus-expansion
and yet this will have no effect on closure rate of US coal plant or get any new coal plant built.
So Much For Coal’s Rebound – Plant Closures Come Roaring Back. It’s Time To Unlock A Just Transition. (forbes.com)
Lots of coal restarting in germany
Just haven’t gotten to the level of destruction here, with luck we arrested it in time
I wonder how many nanoseconds before the automotive industry hops on this one. Generator-motor pairing replacing a mechanical linkage turns the engine into a power plant. XD
The SCOTUS ruling made it clear as could be to the EPA. Strictly stay in your lane as defined by your charter.
But the EPA obviously isn’t listening based on this response:
It is not in the EPAs Charter to be concerned with “reducing pollution that is driving climate change”, “support the industries ongoing efforts to grow our clean energy economy”, “create jobs”, “gobal competitiveness”, or even “lowering costs.”
Not really. This looks merely like EPA being slapped for failure to remember the chains of command, both formal and informal.
There’s nothing that stops the Green Morgenthau Plan from sneaking through another door.
Jeez, I’ve been out of the loop for a few days and incredible things have happened.