Various industries are urging the Supreme Court to restrict federal agencies' power to enforce regulations, potentially reshaping legal defenses for government rules.
Pamela King reports for E&E News.
In short:
- The Supreme Court seems open to arguments against the Chevron doctrine, which allows agencies like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to interpret ambiguous laws.
- Industries, including fossil fuels and vaping, support this change, seeing it as a way to reduce regulatory burdens.
- The shift could mark a continuation of the Supreme Court's trend towards favoring business interests over federal regulatory powers.
Key quote:
"Businesses cannot plan and invest for the future when agencies are free to unilaterally change the basic rules that govern them at any time."
— Andrew Varcoe, deputy chief counsel of the Chamber’s Litigation Center.
Why this matters:
This potential legal shift is significant for environmental and public health policy. Limiting agency powers could hinder the government's ability to effectively regulate industries, impacting everything from air quality to consumer safety.
The Supreme Court has taken a brazen anti-regulatory turn. It’s our planet and health that will suffer.
