Supreme Court rules Clean Air Act gives EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases

facebooktwittergoogle_plus

Associated Press: In a 5-4 decision, the court said the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from cars.


Associated Press
April 2, 2007

Court Rebukes Administration in Global Warming Case

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP)—The Supreme Court ordered the federal government on Monday to take a fresh look at regulating carbon dioxide emissions from cars, a rebuke to Bush administration policy on global warming.

In a 5-4 decision, the court said the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from cars.

Greenhouse gases are air pollutants under the landmark environmental law, Justice John Paul Stevens said in his majority opinion….

“EPA has offered no reasoned explanation for its refusal to decide whether greenhouse gases cause or contribute to climate change,” Stevens said….

The lawsuit was filed by 12 states and 13 environmental groups that had grown frustrated by the Bush administration’s inaction on global warming….

copyright 2007 The Associated Press

See our November 30, 2006, post of links to documents on this case:

Documents in Supreme Court case on greenhouse emissions regulation

Posted on Thursday, November 30, 2006

On November 29 the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in the case of Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency, on the issue of EPA’s refusal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new vehicles.  The case presented the questions of (1) whether EPA has authority to regulate air pollutants associated with climate change under the Clean Air Act, and (2) whether EPA may decline to issue emission standards for motor vehicles based on policy considerations. Much of the case revolves around “standing” and other legal issues, but as documents in the case, the hearing transcript, and media coverage make clear, the case raises questions about how to translate climate science into decisionmaking. 

This entry was posted in Science-Policy Interaction. Bookmark the permalink.