"It strains credulity to believe" Congress meant to give the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "the sweeping authority" it used to impose the moratorium, a majority of the court ruled in August. In the eviction case, the Trump and Biden administrations relied on a 1944 public health law that lets officials "make and enforce such regulations" as they deem "necessary to prevent the…spread of communicable diseases." But the law, the court said, doesn’t say anything specifically about halting evictions during a pandemic. Recent Supreme Court decisions striking down a nationwide eviction moratorium – a policy crafted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic – and blocking a mandate that employers create vaccine-or-testing programs raised the same issues. The debate over how much leeway federal agencies have to regulate isn’t limited to the environment. Nineteen states, led by West Virginia, challenged climate regulations approved by the Obama administration and later abandoned by President Donald Trump.Īs the Supreme Court prepares to decide a major climate case in the coming days and resolve a controversy over water pollution this fall, the mood among environmental groups is more gloomy. In one of the most significant climate cases to reach the high court in years, the justices will soon decide whether the EPA may regulate carbon emissions from power plants. "It seems likely that they're going to be making major cutbacks in the EPA's authority." Power plant emissions "Environmentalists are holding their breath to see just how bad it will be," said Robert Percival, director of the environmental law program at the University of Maryland. Presidents of both parties often turn to agency regulations when they’re unable to move their agenda through Congress – even though those policies frequently run into trouble in court. The answer to that question will have sweeping implications for President Joe Biden's administration beyond the Environmental Protection Agency if Republicans capture control of Congress this year. Greenhouse gases: Supreme Court wrestles with EPA authority to regulate carbon Roberts: Chief justice faces leadership test amid tense time at Supreme Courtĭocket: Supreme Court is juggling major controversies besides abortion
That's not only because the Supreme Court is more conservative than it has been in decades – and perhaps more willing to reconsider precedent – but also because environmental rules are caught up in a broader fight over whether federal agencies may regulate businesses without explicit approval from Congress. WASHINGTON – Fifteen years ago, a divided Supreme Court ruled the federal government had the power to regulate carbon dioxide from car emissions – a decision hailed by environmentalists as a landmark win in the effort to curb climate change.īut as the high court prepares to decide another major climate case in the coming days and resolve a controversy over water pollution this fall, the mood among environmental groups is more gloomy – and the sense of foreboding, experts say, is likely justified.
0 kommentar(er)
