Advertisement

April 20, 2014

Supreme Court Accepts Appeal Challenging EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Rules

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the United States granted‎ six separate petitions for ‎certiorari from a decision of the Federal Circuit Court for the District of Columbia upholding ‎EPA’s efforts to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The ‎petitions will be consolidated and the Court’s review will be limited to a single question: "Whether EPA permissibly determined that its ‎regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles triggered permitting ‎requirements under the Clean Air Act for stationary sources that emit greenhouse gases." The ‎petitioners include the State of Texas, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and industry associations ‎of energy producers and users.‎

The Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that EPA has the authority to regulate GHG emissions ‎‎(Massachusetts v. EPA) and cited EPA's developing regulatory framework in its ‎‎2011 decision to dismiss claims related to damages caused by climate change (AEP v. Connecticut).‎  Still, its decision to review the D.C. Circuit Court's opinion in this case is a win for opponents of GHG regulation since it signals the Court's interest in potentially scaling back EPA's efforts.

The decision being appealed resulted from the litigation titled Coalition for Responsible ‎Regulation, Inc. et al., v. Environmental Protection Agency (D.C. Cir. Index No. 09-1322). This ‎case is a consolidation of dozens of separate lawsuits challenging EPA’s 2009 endangerment ‎finding and the resulting rules that propose GHG emission limits for light-duty vehicles (tailpipe ‎rule) and large, stationary sources (timing and tailoring rules). You can read more about the ‎circuit court’s opinion here.‎ The Supreme Court also denied three petitions arising out of this ‎case and declined to consider some of the largest issues, including the validity of EPA’s ‎endangerment finding and EPA’s adaptation of the CAA’s permitting provisions to GHG ‎emissions through the tailoring rule.‎

©2014 All Rights Reserved. Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP

About the Author

Associate

As a regulatory lawyer, Matt helps public and private companies successfully interface with ‎government agencies. He mostly focuses on permitting, siting, compliance, and enforcement matters, ‎especially those impacting the mining, energy, construction, and utility industries.‎ 

Leveraging his background in engineering, Matt approaches every project as if he’s solving a puzzle. He ‎thrives on identifying and analyzing all of the pieces and then systematically putting each piece in its ‎proper place to create the best possible result for his client....

602-262-5320

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.