supreme court climate change

Op-ed: Reflections on the Supreme Court’s Decision in West Virginia v. EPA

Danger resides in the majority’s having invoked a sweeping “Major Questions Doctrine” to justify its decision in this relatively narrow case.

The recent 6-3 U.S. Supreme Court decision in West Virginia v. EPA was an exercise of raw political power.

The anti-regulation, conservative majority did it with a highly contrived, legally threadbare argument simply because they could. Notably, the dispute was about a regulation — the Clean Power Plan (CPP) — that was no longer in effect.

It’s also worth noting that market forces had already done more to drive a transition away from coal in U.S. electricity generation than the CPP had been predicted to do, had it stayed in force.

The only apparent reasons for the Supreme Court to take the case were (1) to allow the Court’s most radical majority in modern times to reduce the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to address climate change, and (2) to do so in a way that would open the door to future decisions reining in the power of the so-called “administrative state” to regulate industry under broad guidelines granted by the Congress.

Depriving the agency of an important option 

What the decision explicitly forbids EPA to do is to use “generation-shifting mechanisms”— that is, forcing electricity generators to shift to cleaner options -- to reduce the reliance of U.S. electricity generation on coal-fired power plants.

The ruling does not deprive EPA of the right to regulate coal-fired power plant emissions in other ways, such as with emission standards or technology requirements applied to specified types of plants. (One could assume the Court only left those options open to EPA because it was only the generation shifting options that had been challenged in the case the Court was reviewing.)

The Court’s majority claims it is simply returning to Congress the opportunity to indicate whether or not it intended to delegate to EPA authority to do the specific thing that the disputed regulation did; but the majority is well aware there’s no chance the current Congress would come down in favor.

While the ruling does, then, deprive EPA of one important option for regulating greenhouse-gas emission, the far larger danger resides in the majority’s having invoked a sweeping “Major Questions Doctrine” to justify its decision in this relatively narrow case.

Dangerous doctrine 

That majority declared that this newly labeled doctrine — whose antecedents in previous Court decisions do not fit the current case (see Justice Kagan’s dissent)― holds that rules imposed by EPA or other Executive Branch agencies are subject to judicial review if the rules have major economic or other societal impacts and were not authorized, explicitly and in detail, in the language of Congress’s delegation of authority to the agency in question.

Inasmuch as Congressional delegations of regulatory authority to Executive Branch agencies often do not specify the specific regulatory tools the agencies may use (for the good reason that Congress lacks the relevant expertise and doesn’t wish to constrain those better equipped), the majority’s newly elevated doctrine puts a vast array of environmental and business regulations at risk when this Court finds opportunities to review them.

John Holdren is a research professor in Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and Co-Director of the Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program in the School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

From January 2009 to January 2017, Holdren was President Obama’s Science Advisor and Senate-confirmed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy

Biden, Trudeau announce progress on Canadian coal mine pollution agreement

President Joe Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have announced a forthcoming deal to “reduce and mitigate” the impact of pollution flowing into Montana and Idaho from Canadian coal mines.
Senator Whitehouse & climate change

Senator Whitehouse puts climate change on budget committee’s agenda

For more than a decade, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse gave daily warnings about the mounting threat of climate change. Now he has a powerful new perch.
International Courts to rule on climate obligations
photo: Vince Reinhart/Flickr/Commercial use & mods allowed/Artwork by Nissa Tzun/

Three international courts could soon rule on the obligations of nations in responding to climate change

The rulings, while legally non-binding, could still carry significant moral and legal weight. A group of 18 climate-vulnerable nations are seeking an opinion from the “World Court,” with support from 117 other countries.

hauling water children
Photo by Gyan Shahane on Unsplash

U.N. warns of water wars as 2 billion people lack clean water

A new report by the United Nations warns that a quarter of humanity lacks access to safe drinking water, and nearly half of the global population has no access to basic sanitation. Unless action is taken, 60% of the world’s population could face water supply issues by 2050.

tornado warning systems deficiencies
NOAA Photo Library/Flickr/Commercial use & mods allowed

Rolling Fork residents say they didn't hear any tornado warning sirens

Many Rolling Fork residents say they didn't hear sirens before the Mississippi tornado. Questions now remain about warning systems in poor, rural communities.
sea creatures are washing up dead
Michael Coghlan/Flickr/Commercial use & mods allowed

Why sea creatures are washing up dead around the world

From Florida to New Zealand, algal blooms, warming seas and human activities are threatening aquatic species.
EU chiefs use private jets
Photo by Chris Leipelt on Unsplash

EU chiefs flew to UN climate talks in private jet

European Council President Charles Michel hopped on a private jet for 72 of 112 official trips.
Puerto Ricans bracing for blackouts
Photo by Karl Callwood on Unsplash

Why Puerto Ricans are bracing for more blackouts

President Joe Biden tapped Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm last year to lead the federal government’s efforts to modernize the grid.
From our Newsroom
Partha Dasgupta economics of nature

An economist's 'answer to everything.' Hint: It takes nature

Economist Partha Dasgupta takes issue with our failure to account for the cost of Earth's destruction

oil and gas wells pollution

What happens if the largest owner of oil and gas wells in the US goes bankrupt?

Diversified Energy’s liabilities exceed its assets, according to a new report, sparking concerns about whether taxpayers will wind up paying to plug its 70,000 wells.

Paul Ehrlich

Paul Ehrlich: A journey through science and politics

In his new book, the famous scientist reflects on an unparalleled career on our fascinating, ever-changing planet.

oil and gas california environmental justice

Will California’s new oil and gas laws protect people from toxic pollution?

California will soon have the largest oil drilling setbacks in the U.S. Experts say other states can learn from this move.

Stay informed: sign up for The Daily Climate newsletter
Top news on climate impacts, solutions, politics, drivers. Delivered to your inbox week days.