According to a recent New York Times article, the Supreme Court has rejected (refused to entertain) a lawsuit filed by several states, New York City, and others against several major utility companies. The lawsuit sought to force these utility companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. However, the Supreme Court has (citing a 2007 ruling) declared the Environmental Protection Agency is the sole part of the government with the expertise (and authority under the Clean Air Act) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
I encourage you to read the full NYT article for all the details; however, one particular quote intrigues me:
“The expert agency is surely better equipped to do the job [regulating greenhouse gas emissions] than individual district judges issuing ad hoc, case-by-case injunctions,” Justice Ginsburg wrote. “Federal judges lack the scientific, economic and technological resources an agency can utilize in coping with issues of this order.”While I agree with Justice Ginsburg, I am worried that if there is a congressional repeal of the EPA's regulatory authority, this quote/mentality may be used to deter judges from later making a necessary ruling.
On the other hand, this quote/mentality may be a good argument against a congressional repeal. In fact, it may suggest if the EPA's current ability to regulate greenhouse gas related grievances is insufficient, a congressional improvement rather than repeal may be needed.
I will be sure to post on this topic again as it appears in the news.
Sean Diamond
No comments:
Post a Comment