The US Supreme Court limited Environmental Protection Agency's (EPC) power to issue regulations and to set standards related to carbon emission. In the 6-3 ruling, six conservatives were the majority, with three liberals dissenting. The Supreme Court said that EPA has no authority to create cap-and-trade regulations to limit emissions. Instead, the court noted that Congress has the authority to conduct such activities.
Biden expressed his disappointment stating that the ruling could only make the country backward.
"While this decision risks damaging our nation's ability to keep our air clean and combat climate change, I will not relent in using my lawful authorities to protect public health and tackle the climate crisis," Biden said.
US Supreme Court Ruling on EPA Climate Standards
The US Supreme Court justified the ruling using the major questions doctrine as its basis. The doctrine stated that issues with major national significance must not rely on its general agency authority. Instead, the doctrine imposed that Congress should authorize the agency before taking certain actions.
Chief Justice John Roberts recognizes that the capping of carbon dioxide emissions could be a sensible solution to the crisis of the day. However, he said that it was not plausible that Congress authorized EPA to adopt its own such a regulatory scheme.
"A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting according to a clear delegation from that representative body," Roberts added.
The Supreme Court's decision would constrain the issuance of regulations on power plants from EPA. It gave an implication that the administration became less powerful in battling greenhouse-related cases.
Liberal Justice Elena Kagan dissented from the ruling. She said the court chose to restrain the Biden's agenda before the administration issued its rule.
Kagan said that the court has no clue how to address climate change. She added that the court prevented the agency from curbing the carbon dioxide emissions of power plants.
ALSO READ : Scientists Found Nearly 42,000 Toxic 'Forever' Chemicals That Could Contaminate Drinking Water
US President's Attempts on Lowering Carbon Emission
The EPA has been facing restrictions since the Obama administration. The Supreme Court temporarily blocked the former president's Clean Power Plan in 2016 even though the plan aimed to lower the US power plants' carbon emissions to 32 percent by 2030.
In 2019, the Trump administration repealed the plan proposing the Affordable Clean Energy Rule. However, environmental groups and the states challenged the policy. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit strike down the more lenient standard in regulating carbon emissions.
The Biden administration also aimed to lower the carbon emission in the country. However, there would be no attempt to repeal the Clean Power Plan. Instead, it would create its own rules in the power plant emission regulation.
The court did not restrict the agency in the energy regulation. It can still regulate the energy section. It can still use emission control measures at individual power plants. However, the court did not allow the agency to conduct a cap-and-trade system and other ambitious approaches.
The court's decision was criticized by EPA's supporters. On the other side, conservative states and the coal industry praised the ruling.
RELATED ARTICLE : Long-Term Air Pollution Exposure Effects on Physical Health Identified, Is It Really Risky?
Check out more news and information on Environment in Science Times.
