WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear appeals from Republican-led states and coal companies seeking to limit its authority to regulate carbon emissions under clean air law.
Richard J., a Harvard law professor. “This is similar to earthquakes around the country for people who are deeply concerned about climate change,” Lazarus said.
The court ruled that President Biden’s participation in the International Climate Summit in Scotland was to reassure other countries that the United States would continue to pursue harsh policies to combat global warming.
In January, by Donald J. On Trump’s last day in office, a federal appeals court in Washington rejected his administration’s plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The move paved the way for Biden’s administration to impose stricter restrictions.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. District of Columbia District Court of Appeals ruled that the Trump administration’s plan was based on a “fundamental misuse of the so-called fair energy regulation.” “In a series of misreading.
The panel He did not restore the Obama-era clean energy plan in 2015, forcing resources to move away from coal to renewable energy to reduce emissions. But the Trump administration has rejected attempts to repeal the law and replace it with a toothless one.
The Obama administration plans to reduce emissions by 32 percent by 2030 compared to 2005. To that end, he instructed each country to develop a plan to eliminate carbon emissions by generating coal and renewable energy.
The measure was never implemented. A.D. It was suspended by the Supreme Court in 2016, which ruled that states should not comply with the dispute until the dispute between the conservative states and the coal industry was resolved. That decision, to the right of the Supreme Court following a change in membership, has prompted environmental groups to be wary of what the court could do on climate change.
Shortly after Mr. Trump’s election, his EPA revoked his clean energy plan.
The decision of the Supreme Court to hear the case, Professor Elazar, states:
Pro-industry groups have welcomed the decision.
“The Supreme Court will reconsider EPA’s huge claims to power to restructure entire industries instead of requiring improved technology,” said Davin Watkins, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free market think tank that opposes most environmental regulations. “This is very good news because the agency does not have such great authority under the law.”
What you need to know about Supreme Court time
Blockbuster words begin. The Supreme Court, now dominated by six Republican nominees, returned to the bench on October 4 to begin a crucial campaign to abolish the constitutional right to abortion and to expand gun rights.
Biden’s administration has warned judges not to hear the case. ”
The states and companies, on the other hand, said in a statement: “Request this court to review it now to help it make its next regulation.
A brief statement from West Virginia and more than a dozen other states urged judges to take action now.
“While our response to climate change is a matter of concern for our country, some of the future routes will be costly for the regions and countless other affected people,” he said. “Continuous uncertainty over the EPA’s mandate will incur costs that we cannot recoup because the EPA, the government and other additional years and resources will be forced to enter the enterprise – at most – in a state of uncertainty. The court must now intervene,” he said.