General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSupreme Court Rules that EPA can't regulate emissions.
Supreme Court curbs EPA's ability to fight climate change
Source: CNN
The Supreme Court curbed the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to broadly regulate carbon emissions from existing power plants, a major defeat for the Biden administration's attempts to slash emissions at a moment when scientists are sounding alarms about the accelerating pace of global warming.
In addition, the court cut back agency authority in general invoking the so-called "major questions" doctrine -- a ruling that will impact the federal government's authority to regulate in other areas of climate policy, as well as regulation of the internet and worker safety.
The ruling was 6-3. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the conservative majority, with the three liberal justices dissenting.
This story is breaking and will be updated.
Read more: https://www.cnn.com
OrlandoDem2
(2,065 posts)dchill
(38,464 posts)Conservative=insane.
RKP5637
(67,102 posts)Diamond_Dog
(31,956 posts)ProudMNDemocrat
(16,783 posts)If it cannot regulate the amount of pollutants that go into the atmosphere? Or in the water we drink?
Expand the Court!
Igel
(35,293 posts)Just not carbon dioxide from pre-existing sources, using the text of the particular law that they claimed gave them authority.
Ocelot II
(115,659 posts)or even eliminate the delegation doctrine completely - how broad is the ability of federal agencies to enact rules.
sop
(10,145 posts)"The Delegation doctrine is a principle limiting Congress's ability to transfer its legislative power to another governmental branch, especially the executive branch. This is based on the separation-of-powers concept. It says that the power to declare whether or not there shall be a law, to determine the general policy to be achieved by the law, and to fix the limits within the limits within which the law shall operate is vested by the constitution in the legislature and it shall not be delegated. Therefore any statute conferring excessive legislative power is invalid because it is unconstitutional to delegate powers. Delegation is permitted only if Congress prescribes clear and adequate standards to guide an executive agency in making the policy."
Ocelot II
(115,659 posts)The Magistrate
(95,244 posts)emulatorloo
(44,106 posts)Kid Berwyn
(14,859 posts)While responsible for making the planet inhospitable to life, now immune.
dchill
(38,464 posts)...a thing. Only the States, in their ultimate wisdom, can make any law or regulation. And of course regulation is bad because it might be applied to a militia - or other religion-related activity.
The Supreme Court has today proved that they are bad for civilization. Congratulations.
c-rational
(2,590 posts)d_b
(7,463 posts)The Republicans who made shit up to get them there. Denying precedent, lying under oath, and turning the court into a right-wing cookie jar.
And now pollution has more rights than women.
Its an illegitimate court pack the motherfucker. Fight back, or hand the party over to those with the stomach for it.
Enough is enough.
intheflow
(28,460 posts)Bayard
(22,038 posts)As the, "liberal," judges. I have to worry about their blood pressure levels, with trying to maintain their sanity at this point.
Deminpenn
(15,273 posts)Too much is environmental policy is already baked in. Only the dying WVa coal industry continues to want to pollute.
US industry discovered awhile ago that polluting the enviroment is bad for business. Capitalism at work as it were.
Novara
(5,838 posts).... about pollutants and what they do to people and the environment.
As an environmental scientist this infuriates me.
Of course, everything the court does infuriates me.
Igel
(35,293 posts)That statute and Constitution were fairly clear, as written, giving the President that authority.
RANDYWILDMAN
(2,667 posts)great job supreme court very consistent