US Supreme Court limits federal power to cut C02 emissions

The US Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the federal government did not have broad authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.

The decision was a blow to the administration of President Joe Biden, whose Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sought to tackle climate change.

Biden had promised to halve US greenhouse gas emissions by the end of the decade while calling for an emissions-free power sector by 2035

The ruling was decided by a 6-3 vote, with conservatives in the majority. It comes after the conservative majority also overturned abortion rights nationwide.

Thursday's decision will constrain the EPA's ability to issue any regulations on power plants, which currently account for roughly 30% of carbon-dioxide output in the United States.

Although the EPA was founded by Republican former President Richard Nixon in 1970, the Democratic party has recently supported environmental policies and clashed with corporations over pollution and climate change. Present-day Republicans have largely sought to weaken the regulatory power of the EPA and oppose climate-change-related policies, such as the phasing out of coal.

Currently, there are no regulations in force to reduce carbon emissions from power plants. The latest attempt, the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, was also blocked by the Supreme Court in 2016.

Justice Roberts: Climate rules up to Congress

Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his opinion for the court that while "capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible solution to the crisis of the day," the federal government did not have the authority to do this under the existing Clean Air Act.

"A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body,'' Roberts wrote.

Dissenting Justice Elena Kagan pushed back, writing that the decision strips the EPA of the power Congress gave it to respond to "the most pressing environmental challenge of our time.''

"The Court appoints itself instead of Congress or the expert agency the decisionmaker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening,'' she added.

White House decries 'another devastating' Supreme Court ruling

The EPA also responded to the ruling saying it was "committed to using the full scope of its existing authorities to protect public health and significantly reduce environmental pollution, which is in alignment with the growing clean energy economy."

"This is another devastating decision from the Court that aims to take our country backwards," White House spokesperson Abdullah Hasan said in a statement.

Lawyers for the White House said they will study the Supreme Court's ruling so that the Biden administration can find ways to move forward under existing federal law.

"President Biden will not relent in using the authorities that he has under law to protect public health and tackle the climate change crisis," Hasan added.

Republicans praise court's decision

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who represents Kentucky, a state with a large coal mining industry, praised the court for undoing "illegal regulations issued by the EPA without any clear congressional authorization." 

Republican House member Yvette Herrell called it a "huge win" for the American people. "The insane mission creep of regulating normal atmospheric gasses threatened the livelihood and prosperity of countless Americans," she added in a tweet.

But Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer shot back, saying the decision "will cause more needless deaths" from pollution and "exacerbate the climate crisis."

Schumer's deputy in Senate leadership, Dick Durbin, said the ruling was "a dangerous step backwards."

This ruling sets a troubling precedent both for what it means to protect public health and the authority regulatory agencies have to protect public health," Durbin added.

The United Nations also expressed its disappointment with the court's decision.

"This is a setback in our fight against climate change, when we are already far off-track in meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement," UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said. "An emergency as global in nature as climate change requires a global response, and the actions of a single nation should not and cannot make or break whether we reach our climate objectives."

jcg/sms (AP, Reuters)