“That finding reflects EPA’s determination that consideration of cost does not justify any adjustment of its prior conclusion that regulation of hazardous emissions from power plants is ‘appropriate and necessary, ‘” the Obama administration said in court papers. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled past year that birthright citizenship does not automatically apply to the nation’s unincorporated political territories. The EPA finalized its updated cost analysis in April. But last December, a three-judge panel of the appellate court ruled that MATS could remain in place as the EPA worked to bring the rule in compliance with the high court’s directive (see Daily GPI, Dec. 15, 2015). “The polluters’ case could have threatened not only MATS, but also the ability of [the appellate court] to recognize the serious practical impacts – including the impacts on human health – of their decisions and to craft their relief accordingly”. The rules affect mainly coal-fired power plants.
Advertisement
The Supreme Court’s Monday decision is a major victory for the Obama administration and environmentalists.
The Justice Department said USA territories are not “in the United States” within the meaning of the Constitution, so only Congress can confer citizenship, as it has for all territories except American Samoa.
“Today, millions of American families and children can breathe easier knowing that these life-saving limits on toxic pollution are intact”, Vicki Patton, general counsel at the Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement.
The EPA estimates that MATS will prevent up to 11,000 premature deaths and more than 100,000 asthma and heart attacks each year.
Coal-burning power plants are the nation’s largest single source of man-made mercury. According to the EPA, the public health benefits from MATS would total $90 billion annually, outpacing the cost of compliance.
“The United States Supreme Court correctly awarded MI a victory a year ago in this case of unconstitutional federal overreach”, Schuette’s spokeswoman Andrea Bitely said in a statement. The court held that the EPA was required to take costs into consideration when deciding whether regulating power plants was “appropriate and necessary” under the Clean Air Act.
Advertisement
The litigations who previously challenged the regulation in court are also challenging the April supplement.
