Supreme Court Delivers Massive Blow To Biden’s Climate Agenda
The Supreme Court delivered a massive blow to the Biden administration’s ‘climate change’ plan on Thursday, severely limiting the power of federal agencies.
The Court, in a 6-3 decision on West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), limited the agency’s authority to regulate ‘greenhouse gases’ from power plants, significantly curtailing the power of the federal agency.
The decision restricts the agency to regulating individual power plants and not the entire power sector.
“Congress did not grant EPA in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan,” Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion.
West Virginia v. EPA concerns emissions caps first proposed in the Clean Power Plan, a 2015 rule intended to curb carbon emissions from power plants. The plan was blocked by the Supreme Court in 2016 and was eventually repealed by the Trump administration, and replaced with the Affordable Clean Energy Rule.
“Unlike the Clean Power Plan, ACE adheres to the Clean Air Act and gives states the regulatory certainty they need to continue to reduce emissions and provide a dependable, diverse supply of electricity that all Americans can afford,” former EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a statement at the time.
Hillsdale College Associate Professor of Politics Joseph Postell said the case has to do with the EPA’s authority to regulate major sources of air pollution that are stationary, like smokestacks.
“Does the statute allow the Obama administration to force the state of West Virginia to put more clean power into its energy grid as a means of reducing carbon emissions or does the Clean Air Act force the states to implement technology controls at the actual existing plants?” Postell said.
Postell said the new Trump rules regulated only the existing sources of air pollution rather than requiring new energy generation from sources like wind and solar.
“The Trump administration basically advanced a version of what is now known as the major questions doctrine,” Postell said. “When there is a question of major importance or a major question. It has to be resolved by Congress and cannot be kicked over to the agency.”
In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated everything the day before Biden’s inauguration, according to SCOTUSblog. While the Biden Administration could reinstate the Clean Power Plan, it has instead chosen to draft alternate power plant emissions rules.
The Biden administration was awaiting the Supreme Court’s ruling before releasing its plan, The Washington Post reported.
Following the repeal, West Virginia led a coalition of 20 other Republican states and coal companies to file an appeal asking the Supreme Court to challenge the appeals court decision.
The plaintiffs argued that the appeals court wrongly grants “an agency unbridled power—functionally ‘no limits’—to decide whether and how to decarbonize almost any sector of the economy.” They asked the Supreme Court to preemptively intervene before the EPA issues additional emissions reduction plans or rules using this authority.
See more here: dailycaller.com
Bold emphasis added
Header image: Andrew Kelly
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Kevin Doyle
| #
Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant. It is the basis for all life on Earth, both in the oceans and on land.
A child with Downs Syndrome can understand this concept, yet for some bizarre reason (pronounced falsehood) we are all told/instructed/brainwashed CO2 is bad.
If CO2 is so bad, why has this not been demonstrated in a laboratory?
Courts do not admit ‘hear-say’ evidence. The legitimate Courts only allow Empirical, Verifiable Evidence.
This is complete non-sense, because CO2 is not a pollutant, rather the best thing on Earth for growing food, animals, trees, and humans.
Is that the fundamental problem?
Reply
MattH
| #
Curious how people talk of carbon emissions. I have not seen diamonds or graphite spilling out of smokestacks.
The difference between carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide is significant. Carbon monoxide binds with hemoglobin more easily than oxygen which leads to hypoxia and death.
Dr. Tim Ball suggests carbon dioxide is referred to as carbon because soot is carbon so therefore carbon dioxide can be falsely portrayed as a dirty pollutant.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Matt,
You read a LOT and I have been not remarking about the significance of what you bring to our (PSI Readers) attentions. I has been pondering the fact that incomplete combustion produces carbon monoxide instead of carbon dioxide relative to wild fires. But that will possibly to a topic of another comment.
For now I was looking for your comment about the yearly influence of the earth’s elliptical orbit on its variable rate of revolution about the sun. I cannot remember the scientific terms you used but I know they were correct and real. I will continue to look for your comment but in case I don’t find it this will have to do. Of course, if you read this you can maybe direct me to when you wrote this.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers,
While I haven’t found Matt’s comments, his words were aphelion and perihelion which are related to the 26,000+ year solar precession cycle. Which I question: Could there be some relationship between this long solar cycle and the northern hemisphere’s glaciations which I have been observed to occur with a similarly long period? We should not ignore what we have observed as we try to understand (explain) weather and climate.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Alcheminister
| #
They have tried artificial scarcity tactics for monopolization, reliance, control, subjugation purposes.
And btw, phosphorus and nitrogen are rather underrated in terms of supporting life.
There are very good reasons why carbon, phosphorus and nitrogen are near the surface or in the atmosphere (to support life).
But hey, other than that, “science” and math is entirely flawed. They have diverted from Socratic and Pythagorean principles, tend to reductionism, quantization, homogenization (coz they’re retarded).
Reply
Alcheminister
| #
Tables are turned.
Reply
Alcheminister
| #
We live on an Earth of abundance, but people do not seem to know plants, my heart is failing, if my heart fails, you are dead.
Reply
Tom Anderson
| #
Half a dozen studies confirm CO2 concentrations follow temperature change on all time scales. Causes must precede effects. It is an effect not cause of temperature change.
A NASA-sponsored study in 1971 concluded that the more familiar product of fossil-fuel burning, smoke and soot (aerosols), offset any possible warming by CO2 by screening out and reflecting solar energy back to space. The study determined they were coolants and unsuitable for warming the planet.
CO2 is radiatively interactive by its quantum number, predominantly at 15 microns wavelength, at -80C
It is among the gases that radiate away incoming solar energy and help radiate outgoing terrestrial energy.
Promoting plant growth, the evapotranspiration it adds increases atmospheric water vapor and, hence, cloud cover
Reply
Lucas Dean
| #
When they start saying again, “Ladies and Gentlemen” at online workworks, then I will return, but not until then! Florida is a common sense conservative state where most people have brains! https://www.Worksclick.com
Reply
Kevin Doyle
| #
Pontius Pilate, “What is truth?”
Reply
Tom O
| #
SCOTUS merely threw a bone to the hopefuls. Read it again. It says the EPA wasn’t granted that power by congress, thus it was overturned. Short answer? Congress now passes a law giving it that authority and its back to square one. SCOTUS gave the farm away when it allowed EPA to call CO2 a pollutant. Until that is reversed, this was just one of those “watch my right hand, don’t notice what the left hand does.”
Since the Dems have found a different way to steal the election by loading the Republican primaries with “new, disenchanted, former democrat voters,” who just happen to vote for the liberal Republican primary candidate, insuring that their philosophy is elected, regardless of party, the green weenie will be back in our ears in no time flat, and we still won’t have government of the people, by the people, and FOR the people. We still will get government of the agenda, by the agenda, and for the agenda.
Conservatives just don’t think of just how crooked things are, and how easy it is to manipulate a population that has been educated to the level of a 3rd grader from the 1800s, and that’s only if they got at least some post high school education.
Reply
Russ D
| #
Hey Climate Whack job IDIOTS………….
Define the “correct” temperature range for the planet.
Define the “correct” humidity range for the planet.
Define the “correct” mean sea level for the planet.
Define the “correct” amount of precipitation for the planet.
Define the “correct” makeup of the atmosphere.
Define the “correct” amount of sea ice at the N/S poles.
Define/explain past glaciation and subsequent warming without any input from humans.
Reply
schutzhund
| #
What do all human beings exhale when breathing?
Reply
Geraint Hughes
| #
RGHE is 100% demonstratably a lie.
Reply