The Supreme Court evaluates the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's initiative to decrease emissions affecting neighboring states, aiming to mitigate smog-related health issues.
Anna Phillips and Ann E. Marimow report for The Washington Post.
In short:
- The EPA's "good neighbor" rule, aimed at reducing cross-state air pollution, faces challenges from three states and various industry groups.
- This rule extends Obama-era regulations to include additional industrial pollutants, targeting a significant reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions by 2026.
- Legal and political battles highlight the ongoing debate over federal versus state authority and the economic impact of environmental regulations.
Key quote:
The case "represents an even further invasion from the Supreme Court into what have traditionally been considered legislative and executive branch policy judgments."
— Sam Sankar, senior vice president for programs at Earthjustice
Why this matters:
This case may represent a pivotal moment for environmental policy, with implications for how the U.S. manages cross-state pollution and enforces clean air standards nationwide, reflecting a broader struggle over the balance of power between federal agencies and the courts. Does the Supreme Court's conservative majority, in the words of Justice Elena Kagan, have it's "thumb on the scale" of justice?
