In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has overturned a 40-year-old precedent, significantly limiting the federal government's ability to regulate various activities under the Clean Air Act.
The Supreme Court has delivered a major blow to federal regulators, overturning a four-decade-old decision that made it easier for the federal government to regulate the environment, public health, and workplace safety.
In a 6-3 ruling, the conservative-majority court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overstepped its authority when it issued regulations limiting emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act.
Supreme Court Upholds States' Rights, Weakens Federal Regulators
The decision, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, said that the EPA could not regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants because the Clean Air Act did not explicitly authorize the agency to do so.
The ruling is a significant victory for states' rights advocates and industry groups that have long argued that the federal government has overreached its regulatory authority. But it is also a major setback for environmentalists, public health advocates, and labor unions that have relied on the EPA to protect the environment, public health, and workers' safety.
The decision is likely to have far-reaching implications for the federal government's ability to regulate a wide range of activities under the Clean Air Act, including emissions from cars, trucks, and other sources.
It could also make it more difficult for the Biden administration to implement its ambitious climate change agenda, which relies on the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
The ruling is also a victory for the Trump administration, which has been working to roll back environmental regulations. The Trump administration had urged the Supreme Court to overturn the 40-year-old precedent that made it easier for the EPA to regulate under the Clean Air Act.
Environmental groups were quick to condemn the ruling, saying that it will make it more difficult to protect the environment and public health.
"This is a devastating decision for the environment and public health," said David Doniger, senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "It will make it much harder to regulate harmful air pollution, including the carbon pollution that is driving climate change."
The decision is also likely to embolden states to challenge other federal regulations. In recent years, states have increasingly challenged federal regulations on a variety of issues, including environmental protection, immigration, and education.
The Supreme Court's decision is likely to make it easier for states to win these challenges.
The decision is a major blow to the federal government's regulatory authority and is likely to have far-reaching implications for the ability of the federal government to protect the environment, public health, and workers' safety.
