supreme court climate change

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

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 Notably, the dispute was about a regulation — the Clean Power Plan (CPP) — that was no longer in effect.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

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

puffin tern recovery climate change
Credit: Derrick Z. Jackson

Good news: A good year for puffins and terns, despite climate change

A visit to a remote Maine island finds puffins and terns rebounding despite climate change

The title of supervisory wildlife biologist for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service does little justice to Linda Welch (pictured above). In practice, she is the housing and unusual development secretary for seabirds on Maine’s Petit Manan Island.

Keep reading...Show less
Sunrise in the woods

Get our Good News newsletter

Get the best positive, solutions-oriented stories we've seen on the intersection of our health and environment, FREE every Tuesday in your inbox. Subscribe here today. Keep the change tomorrow.

John Podesta to oversee $370B in U.S. Climate Spending
www.nytimes.com

John Podesta to oversee $370B in U.S. Climate Spending

Mr. Podesta, a Democratic stalwart, will oversee $370 billion in clean energy investments. Gina McCarthy, the president’s domestic climate adviser, is stepping down.
electric cars and mining of rare minerals
Pixabay

Peter Dykstra: Forty years of “just around the corner”

We’re seeing some big signs that electric vehicles (EV) may be ending their decades-long tease.

Keep reading...Show less
The reason behind the slow hurricane season and what’s next
www.wfla.com

The reason behind the slow hurricane season and what’s next

fter a 60 day gap between Danielle and the last named storm, Colin, the 2022 hurricane season seems to be finally coming alive. This is likely only the beginning as a more favorable pattern for tro…
California takes steps to battle climate change
calmatters.org

California takes steps to battle climate change

Five of the six bills that the governor pushed at the last minute were approved by the Legislature. But one ambitious one fails.
The beauty industry is a climate disaster
heated.world

The beauty industry is a climate disaster

The beauty and oil industries are inextricably linked, argues beauty reporter and critic Jessica DeFino.
Underwater Seismic Testing Off South Africa
Matt Hrkac/Flickr

A court blocks oil exploration and underwater seismic testing off South Africa’s ‘wild coast’

A judge found that Shell and Impact Africa had failed to engage in a “genuine, bona fide substantive two-way process” with Indigenous tribes “aimed at achieving, as far as possible, consensus.”

From our Newsroom
Ruth Greenspan Bell: Wealth and the climate dilemma

Ruth Greenspan Bell: Wealth and the climate dilemma

Developing countries that increase their fossil fuel production are at a crossroads: securing their own long-term well-being or earning revenue to finance programs to support immediate economic growth.

Optimism in the climate change fight

Optimism in the climate change fight

So much is happening so quickly. With the climate bill now law, here's what you need to know.

Colorado fracking

How Colorado is preventing PFAS contamination from the oil and gas industry

And how other states, including Pennsylvania, could do the same.

fracking kids health

PFAS: The latest toxic concern for those near fracking

The “forever chemicals” are used by the oil and gas industry, but a lack of transparency and accountability makes it impossible to know how widespread contamination could be.

children health

Derrick Z. Jackson: Children will suffer the consequences of recent Supreme Court rulings

A rash of recent decisions by the high court will irreparably impact our children's health.

summer reading list

Our annual summer reading list, 2022 edition

Happy 4th of July! Here's some summer reading picks from our staff.

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