By I. Hansana, Jadetimes News
On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court halted an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation designed to mitigate ozone emissions that contribute to air pollution in neighboring states. This decision marks a victory for three Republican led states and various industrial entities that contested the rule.
In a 5:4 decision, the Court granted requests from Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia, along with U.S. Steel Corp, pipeline operator Kinder Morgan, and industry groups, to suspend enforcement of the EPA's "Good Neighbor" plan. This plan aimed to limit ozone pollution from upwind states while its legality is reviewed by a lower court.
The EPA introduced the rule in March 2023, targeting gases that form ozone, a critical component of smog, emitted by power plants and other industrial sources in 23 upwind states. These state's individual plans failed to meet the "Good Neighbor" provision of the Clean Air Act, which mandates measures to reduce cross state pollution. According to the EPA, the rule would have improved air quality for millions, potentially saving thousands of lives.
This legal challenge follows a significant 2022 Supreme Court ruling that restricted the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon emissions from coal and gas fired power plants, impeding President Joe Biden's climate agenda. Last year, the Court also limited the EPA's power to protect wetlands and combat water pollution.
Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia, along with pipeline operators, U.S. Steel, regional electricity generators, and energy trade associations, initiated the challenge to the "Good Neighbor" rule. They argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the EPA violated federal law by not ensuring its actions were reasonable. After the D.C. Circuit declined to block the rule during its review, the challengers sought intervention from the Supreme Court, which has a 6:3 conservative majority. Opponents of the rule claim it would impose excessive costs and disrupt power grids. The Justice Department, defending the EPA, emphasized the significant public health harms that could result from blocking the regulation.
The rule was part of a federal program affecting 23 states, though separate lower court challenges have already paused enforcement in 12 of these states, including West Virginia. During arguments on February 21, some conservative justices questioned the EPA's rationale for the plan's efficacy when it now applies to only 11 states instead of the intended 23. Conversely, liberal justices questioned whether the case warranted emergency intervention by the Supreme Court at this juncture.
Some industry specific requests were presented to the Supreme Court. Kinder Morgan sought to block the regulation as it pertains to natural gas pipeline engines, while U.S. Steel aimed to prevent its enforcement on iron and steel mill reheating furnaces and boilers. On January 16, the EPA issued a proposed rule to implement the "Good Neighbor" plan in five additional states, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, New Mexico, and Tennessee.
The Supreme Court is currently addressing several cases concerning the authority of various federal agencies. On May 16, the justices upheld the funding mechanism of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in a case brought by the payday loan industry. The Court is expected to soon rule on cases involving the Securities and Exchange Commission and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
