Supreme Court Deals Major Blow to EPA's Regulatory Power

Late last month, the Supreme Court ruled on a 6-3 basis to constrain the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to regulate emissions from the power sector. Many climate advocates consider the decision to be a blow to the administration’s efforts to address the growing climate crisis.

The Environmental Protection Agency interpreted a statute of the Clean Air Act as giving the agency power to restrict emissions on a sector-wide basis. To achieve this, the EPA pushed the power sector to use more renewable energy rather than simply reducing emissions from fossil fuels. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court ruled that this was an overreach of the EPA’s authority.

The decision referenced the “major questions doctrine” as informing the Court’s opinion. The doctrine details that if a federal agency’s actions will have widespread “economic and political significance,” the agency needs to be unambiguously empowered by Congress to take those actions.

Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that this doctrine “ensures that the national government’s power to make the laws that govern us remains where Article I of the Constitution says it belongs—with the people’s elected representatives.” It remains to be seen how this decision will impact future rulings on the ability of federal agencies to address climate change.

The Supreme Court decision is a clear reminder that Congress must pass legislation that will move the United States toward a clean energy economy and help us reach our emissions-reduction goals.