Supreme Court is Unsatisfied With the Bush Administration’s Inaction on Climate Change
The ruling came down 5-4 in Massachusetts vs. EPA the other day, on the side of the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency had denied responsibility for regulating greenhouse gas emissions, claiming they lacked the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate a “non-pollutant” and letting the Bush administration off the hook for idly standing by and watching our planet burn. Luckily, other environmental groups, with the help of many states and large cities, were able to convince the powers that be that carbon dioxide is indeed a pollutant, is a threat to public health, and the EPA does in fact have the authority and responsibility to regulate it.
While it’s very unlikely that the EPA will now actually regulate greenhouse gas emissions, the ruling will make it much easier for the next president to do so if he or she is so inclined. It also means that it will be much easier for individual states to pass their own initiatives to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions. So, not enough, but an important step in the right direction. One that’s worth being excited about.
See Grist for another summary.
Filed under: Emily Oppenheimer, Environment, Secondary Featured Stories
[...] a major lawsuit is in order here…after the recent victory of the EPA vs. Massachusetts case which ruled that the EPA was not doing its duty by refusing to regulate carbon dioxide as a [...]
[...] a major lawsuit is in order here…after the recent victory of the EPA vs. Massachusetts case which ruled that the EPA was not doing its duty by refusing to regulate carbon dioxide as a [...]