SCOTUS restricts EPA’s ability to regulate green house gases.
West Virginia and 18 other Republican-led states and coal companies appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court, arguing that the lower court had given the EPA too much authority to regulate emissions, even going above what Congress intended.
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts agreed with the states that “it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme.”
“A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body,” he added.
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court decided that the EPA cannot have unlimited authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions at power plants.
Roberts also noted that the EPA claimed to have the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions only after Congress declined to expand that authority through legislation.
“At bottom, the Clean Power Plan essentially adopted a cap-and-trade scheme, or set of state cap-and-trade schemes, for carbon,” the chief justice wrote. ” … Congress, however, has consistently rejected proposals to amend the Clean Air Act to create such a program. It has also declined to enact similar measures, such as a carbon tax … Given these circumstances, our precedent counsels skepticism toward EPA’s claim …”
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts agreed with the states that “it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme.”
“A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body,” he added.
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court decided that the EPA cannot have unlimited authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions at power plants.
Roberts also noted that the EPA claimed to have the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions only after Congress declined to expand that authority through legislation.
“At bottom, the Clean Power Plan essentially adopted a cap-and-trade scheme, or set of state cap-and-trade schemes, for carbon,” the chief justice wrote. ” … Congress, however, has consistently rejected proposals to amend the Clean Air Act to create such a program. It has also declined to enact similar measures, such as a carbon tax … Given these circumstances, our precedent counsels skepticism toward EPA’s claim …”
Do I like liberal tears? You BET! Preferably with Gin.
“Smell that? Do you SMELL that? That smell. That 6-3 smell. Nothing else in the world smells like that. It smells like.........democracy.”
It's been a good week.
Just another dagger in the LSGPD’s heart.
Nothing can stop what is coming.
Panic in DC!
One of the biggest problems we face is that Congress has decided to stick their noses into EVERYTHING instead of focusing on the few things they should be concerned with. And then to further deflect from taking personal responsibility, they delegate their authority to all these acronym machines.
What we really needed was a Supreme Court who said "Is this a power specifically delegated to the Federal Government? No? DENIED!"
I was hoping that the Court would swing a much larger wrecking ball today, and perhaps even abolish entirely the Code of Federal Regulations, so that Congress itself would have to write all the laws from now on. But it's a start.
The most telling bit of the decision was Kagan's dissent, in which she scolds her colleagues for not deferring to EPA's "experts" as she felt it was already obvious that Congress intended to do. But at least most of us understand the lesson of the past three years of Cov-idiocy, that "experts" are never to be trusted. Especially in an "emergency" if the "experts" are the ones who get to proclaim the emergency.
It's going to take a successful armed insurrection, imo.
A coincidental great start: https://www.theepochtimes.com/house-l...
are confident that the brainwashed sheep will keep returning them to office.
NIFOITOWTBS