Supreme Court backs EPA over state govts on climate change

United States Supreme Court building in Washington D.C.

/ Getty Images

In one of two significant rulings favoring business, the Supreme Court is barring states from using public nuisance laws to try to force major utilities to cut greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.

In a unanimous decision, the court said climate change regulation is the business of the federal government. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg writes that under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency has the duty to regulate carbon-dioxide released into the atmosphere. Nowhere in the law, she says, is there a basis for "control of greenhouse gas emissions by federal judges."

Eight states initiated this novel approach. They argued that under traditional common law, power plants were creating a public nuisance, and that state governments had the power to intervene. Eight states were originally involved: California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Wisconsin. When Republican governors took over in New Jersey and Wisconsin, those states withdrew from the case.

The targets were five of the biggest greenhouse gas emitters in America. Four of them are part of the Edison Electric Institute, a major industry group. Institute lawyer Bill Fang praises the ruling, saying "you can't have plaintiffs running into federal court and suing not just utility defendants but any number of industrial and business defendants on nuisance grounds. It's back door way to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. " Companies, he says, can't operate if they have to face different climate change regulations in each state. "They need certainty and a set of federal standards is obviously better than having 50 states try to regulate."

The EPA plans to issue sweeping regulations to reduce power plant emissions by next year. It's decision is expected to be challenged. Republicans in Congress, for instance, argue that tough standards will be too costly for companies trying to recover from the recession. The Obama administration favors stronger measures to limit global warming. Even so, it sided with the power companies in this case, to protect federal authority.

Environmentalists are disappointed. David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defense Council says, "Now the EPA must act without delay." He complains that power plant "pollution is driving dangerous heat waves and smog, stronger storms, floods and droughts." Justice Ginsburg says that while states can't go to court right now to force emissions cutbacks, they can sue after the EPA issues its regulations if they disagree with them.

In another pro-business decision, the Supreme Court is making it harder for employees to band together to file class actions to fight workplace discrimination. That ruling stops what would have been the largest such lawsuit in history, potentially involving more than a million-and-a-half workers at Wal-Mart.

[Benna-benna]

I think the headline for this story is misleading. Additionally, I think once the EPA regs were in place then the challenge could have come in each state that had nuisance laws trying to clean up the environment and atmosphere by the big boys. In the meantime nothing is in place and the big, polluting interests are undermining our health and that especially of children who are more defenseless and EPA is slowed down time and time again.
I lost respect for the supreme court years ago when the justices decided to become kingmakers. Nothing has changed my mind. This decision is just another typical demonstration of poor short sighted thinking.

[hhandyman]

Chicken little or is it the fly and the grashopper try both Prepair as if it was and live with caution but witout fear of loss asthe ant or be like nothins happning do nothing and be the non prepaired grashopper

[hhandyman]

Gee it seems Robards might loose his Im a Republican Card One of the few times hes not bounced hard for the values of the National Chamber of commerce MORE than the values of the general population.. Just like his deal with handing the Vote Advertisement with no price limit to the corperate heads with no ID required to show who backed what political view or if it was accuate... That is one thing that should be taxed to cover the debts it helps make, Political controbutions in excess of 50 dollars should be taxed at 50 percent and divided among the three most important debts First the Social Security trustfund to pay off any bonds it holds and return the funds to solventsy second third appily to meidicare account for excessive charges and final third direct to pay against the national debt.. this will get the ones in office or running for it to cover what they have cost while in office or caused to happen as a result of them trying to get elected

[justme2012]

Going to be riots in the streets when people can't afford to heat and cool their houses and the rolling blackouts start!

Wait until Americans are told they have to live like the Chinese that Obama keeps wanting us to be more like.

[retm-w]

Sorry the republicans are the ones that want us to live like the chinese. Take away workers rights, lower wages to compete with chinese, let the seniors die since they are no longer productive.

[justme2012]

No, I'm pretty sure it's Obama who is pushing for the global economy. He's giving taxpayer money to lots of other countries to boost their economies and his top advisor for jobs in the country is the CEO of GE who has shipped over 20% of their workforce overseas in the past few years. And it's Obama that wants energy prices to skyrocket along with his Government Motors CEO who wants to add a $1.00 a gallon tax to gas. And I'm pretty sure that it was Obama's Sec. of the Treas that said in a few weeks if we don't borrow money from China he will not be able to send out checks to seniors.

Yes, checked my facts and that it's all true.

Care to dispute any of it?

[tellingthestory]

The Supreme court once again they are the only sane body in Washington. The EPA RIGHT OR WORNG whether you believe their motives or not and whoever is the President at the time is the only agency that can regulate. Now I believe good people of good faith can disagree on the fringes of the science but the basic concept that MANKIND has an effect on our climate is just too simple and clear and self evident to even argue about. So everyone should do all we can to leave a better planet for our children. The Liberals and their fake science and falsifying science have done a grave disservice to the cause but the Idea of Global warming is real and it will affect all of us. It is kind of like it does not matter if you believe in GOD or not you will die and then someone will be right or someone will be wrong meantime it is better to be good and treat all with Humanity and respect.

[stn_sage]

It's suggested in the article that companies can't function if there are 50 different laws (environmental), in fifty different states........
But, aren't there fifty different environments due to fifty different topographies?!
And, shouldn't EACH state rule over it's own unique topography?
That seems like a reasonable thing to me!
I think this is just ANOTHER massive goof up by the SC!
WHICH, is appears to be in some sort of contest with Congress and the Executive Branch, to be the worst achiever in government!

[justme2012]

And yet it was the feds that just decided to fly in radioactive waste from Germany into Tennesse.

[fiberglass3]

"Republicans in Congress, for instance, argue that tough standards will be too costly for companies trying to recover from the recession"

They didn't mind see us struggle with gasoline at $ 4.00 / gallon as we were all trying to recover from the recession.

[WillMunny1]

It didn't seem to bother Obama that much either. He said he was going to put together a "Gas" Task Force that never materialized.
The Dems held a pretentious hearing on the matter but as usual nothing really came of it. They were just grandstanding for political brownie points.
So what was your point again?

[tellingthestory]

I am not a republican but I do not understand you point. It is the DEMOS that have caused and continue to cause the $4 a gallon gas. Second who said that was a bad thing? Remember we need to change energy consumption habits. The USA has 3 % of the world's population yet consumes 25 % of its resources. Maybe three cars in every family or living in sprawling suburbs is not the best Idea.
Second: Yes it will cost more to business that is a fact and that cost will be paid by you the consumer. People that live in HOT climates may well kiss air conditioning good bye because electricity is already high bit will triple with some of the new proposed standards. Time for a wind mill or solar panels in your home. Fine but what about those that have no home? All of this is very complicated and all of us are going to have to decide what we want easy living or a good planet for our children. To make it worse even if we do everything right CHINA ,Brazil, India and others are doing what they want to do. Remember the 3 % part we will not make much of a difference.

[WillMunny1]

Not fraudulent junk science and hoaxes when you've seen them before.
And you don't see it as us against them.
Something has affected the left wing socialists and I don't think it's been "Climate Change".

What a stupid question and not worthy of an answer.

[obboy2037]

I'm a moderate Republican, conservative on important issues but not an extreme religious, authoritarian like you. I guess even moderates and centrists are "left wing socialists" to someone as rabidly right as you are. You can not see the log in your own eye and that is tragic.

But, hey you sure can sling the mud. That isn't something to be proud of, no not at all.

[WillMunny1]

I don't know how "Religious" you think I really am. I do the best I can and know right from wrong. I've seen it all from the the left and from some of pseudo conservative GOP who are no better than the left.

Being a centrilist or moderate is nothing to brag about or to be proud of.
How would you like your loved ones and friends to be luke warm to you or could take you or leave you? Don't you spit out luke warm liquids? It's either has to be hot or cold.
The middle of the road is where horses road apples are found.

[WillMunny1]

One more time, there is no "Climate Change just as there was no ice age coming in the 1970's or gas shortages or mass starvations because of over population and other things of doom and gloom that the whack jobs said would happen by the 1990's that are trying to control our lives and resources.
Now regulating less pollution if okay but there is no global warming AKA now "Climate Change"
It's a socialist hoax like all of the previous ones were.

[obboy2037]

You clearly do not understand the science.

But a person like you that sees everything in the world in an "us against them" political issue wouldn't understand something that affects every living thing EQUALLY.

Question: Do you think God is a religious conservative?

[hhandyman]

Poor misguided fella guess hes into lepracons unicorns and easter bunny..has no idea that things like Fracking pollute ground water with chemical id doubt hed like to have in his drinking fountain.. then again if he belched hed be able to play flame thrower with a mouth full of the same "Lubricants and water" that is shot into the ground to fracture the gas levels