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 Notably, the dispute was about a regulation — the Clean Power Plan (CPP) — that was no longer in effect.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

several rows of solar panels on a roof

Climate activist Bill McKibben to Houston: It’s solar’s time to shine

Speaking in the heart of the oil industry, climate activist Bill McKibben said solar power has become the cheapest and fastest-growing energy source, offering Texas a path to lead the clean energy transition.

landscape photography of trees and mountains with melting snow in the foreground

New Hampshire snowpack decline reveals hidden impacts on forests and water

New England residents know that snow is disappearing from our landscape, and scientists have proven that climate change is to blame. But the effects of snowpack decline go far beyond what’s visible.
a couple of people walking across a dry field

Syria's worst drought in decades pushes millions to the brink

A devastating drought has slashed Syria’s wheat harvests by 40%, pushing millions closer to food insecurity as bread prices soar and farmers abandon their land.

A man sitting at a desk with a laptop and computer printouts

Trump's call to end quarterly reports gets unlikely support from climate-conscious investors

A call by Donald Trump to ditch quarterly corporate reporting has received cautious support from an unlikely source: international investors pushing business to do more on longer-term sustainability issues, many lambasted by the U.S. president.
An aerial view of a rail yard with tracks and trains

Effort to curb Southern California rail yard pollution stalls under Trump

A landmark rule to cut toxic emissions from Southern California’s rail yards has been blocked under the Trump administration, leaving communities in the Inland Empire pushing state officials to take action.

Marching for climate with sign:  "There Is No Planet B"
Photo by Li-An Lim on Unsplash

It isn’t just the U.S. The whole world has soured on climate politics.

How do we think about the climate future, now that the era marked by the Paris Agreement has so utterly disappeared?
An old oil pump jack in a dry field

New Mexico’s billion-dollar oilfield orphans

A recent report warns that bankrupt oil companies could leave New Mexico with up to $1.6 billion in cleanup costs, as orphaned wells and leaking tank batteries pile up.

From our Newsroom
Multiple Houston-area oil and gas facilities that have violated pollution laws are seeking permit renewals

Multiple Houston-area oil and gas facilities that have violated pollution laws are seeking permit renewals

One facility has emitted cancer-causing chemicals into waterways at levels up to 520% higher than legal limits.

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

"The reality is, we are not exposed to one chemical at a time.”

Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro speaks with the state flag and American flag behind him.

Two years into his term, has Gov. Shapiro kept his promises to regulate Pennsylvania’s fracking industry?

A new report assesses the administration’s progress and makes new recommendations

silhouette of people holding hands by a lake at sunset

An open letter from EPA staff to the American public

“We cannot stand by and allow this to happen. We need to hold this administration accountable.”

wildfire retardants being sprayed by plane

New evidence links heavy metal pollution with wildfire retardants

“The chemical black box” that blankets wildfire-impacted areas is increasingly under scrutiny.

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