Republicans have long critized the costs of regulations as a hidden tax on business owners, employees, investors, and consumers.
Advertisement
The Supreme Court is strongly suggesting that conversation take place. “It delays the implementation of these controls”.
“EPA can act quickly, but how quickly is to be determined”.
Power plants were not subject to the same MACT process imposed on other sectors. The National Federation of Independent Business said the regulations, known as Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), are among the costliest ever issued. Congress treated these programs as equivalent to the MACT process for other industries. “It is a win for rational decision-making, I hope signaling that the Court will carefully scrutinize EPA’s upcoming Clean Power Plan Rules”. The Environmental Protection Agency is likely to release rules limiting carbon pollution from power plants-the nation’s leading sources of heat-trapping carbon dioxide-within the next eight to 12 weeks, leading to speculation that Monday’s ruling could hamper those regulations as well.
In the case of mercury, the costs of installing and operating equipment to remove the pollutants before they are dispersed into the air are hefty – $9.6 billion a year, the EPA found.
Christmann called the potential impact of those rules, which seek to limit carbon emissions from power plants, “devastating”. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion.
At the heart of the court’s decision was a dispute about the benefits of cracking down on mercury pollution from coal burning.
The case will return to lower courts to determine how the EPA will account for costs.
“Now what EPA will have to do is complete a [new] cost analysis and do a new rulemaking”, Billings said.
EPA administrator Gina McCarthy says the changes would lead to government regulation of just 3-percent more land.
“The government needs to prioritize rather than penalize this state’s incredible advantage of reliable and affordable energy”, says Jay Timmons, NAM’s president and CEO in the video above. As NPR’s Christopher Joyce reports, the decision comes too late for most power companies, but it could affect future regulations. The Supreme Court said otherwise. The similarities go beyond the obvious impact of Justice Scalia having penned both opinions.
The ruling will not have a short-term effect on the air we breathe. Those pundits were proven correct today.
Read the Supreme Court’s ruling in Michigan vs. EPA here. In other words, EPA has hit significant roadblocks with its “the end justifies the means” justification for sweeping rulemakings. But the justices did say regulatory decisions have to be appropriate. That the 111(d) rules will be litigated seems beyond question. “And now after that work is done and the money spent, the Supreme Court points out that they should have been taking cost into consideration so they overturn it”. The Supreme Court took the side of the opponents and ruled that the rules didn’t fit that mandate.
Advertisement
Another factor: Since the mercury rules had already gone into effect before the Supreme Court ruled against them on Monday, industry groups said the damage had already been done.
