Blog Archives

Justices Hear Arguments On EPA’s “Tailoring Rule”

Even before the Justices took the bench for what might have, mistakenly, seemed like a blockbuster argument on global warming – there was even a demonstrator in polar bear costume on the plaza – the spotlight shifted to the Court’s decision not to hear two NRA challenges to gun regulation laws.

Today’s case, actually six different lawsuits rolled into one, was not about the Environmental Protection Agency‘s power to regulate greenhouse gases. That was settled seven years ago in Massachusetts v. EPA. The arguments heard by the Justices today focused on the EPA’s “tailoring rule” under which the agency adjusts, or tailors, the threshold at which certain pollutants must be regulated.

Under the Clean Air Act limits were established for stationary sources of pollution such as factories and refineries, but the limits for those traditional pollutants like sulfur and nitrous oxides, 100-250 tons per year, are much too low for greenhouse gases which are emitted in much higher volumes.

It is interesting that the usually pro-regulation side supporting the EPA was today arguing for less regulation, saying that applying the limits, without tailoring, would mean regulating every mom & pop factory and overburden an already overburdened bureaucracy. The EPA’s opponents, on the other hand, hope that overturning the rule and expanding regulation to include small sources will cause a backlash against the agency.

Lyle Denniston’s recap of the arguments in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA is here.

Posted in Arguments, Supreme Court Tagged with: , , ,

Class Action and Global Warming

As the Supreme Court comes into the final stretch of the term opinions on some of the eagerly awaited bigger cases are coming down.  SC110620_Scalia

Today Justice Scalia delivered the opinion in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the largest ever class-action suit.  Brought by female employees of the retail giant it accused Wal-Mart of sex discrimination in pay and promotion.  Not surprisingly Wal-Mart won.

SC110620_Ginsburg

The other opinion on my watch list to come down today, American Electric Power Co. v. Conn., did not get as much attention.  In an opinion written by Justice Ginsburg the Court said that the regulation of greenhouse gases is the job of the EPA, and that States cannot make an end run around the Clean Air Act by filling a “public nuisance” claim in federal court.

ScotusBlog’s Lyle Denniston on the global warming case can be found here.

NYT article on Wal-Mart is here.

 

Posted in Opinions, Supreme Court Tagged with: , , , , , ,
2013_Blawg100Honoree_300x300
TWITTER @courtartist

Blog Updates

Enter your name and email below to receive blog updates via email.