Zürcher Nachrichten - US Supreme Court to hear high-stakes environmental case

EUR -
AED 4.293926
AFN 80.664061
ALL 97.673606
AMD 448.805894
ANG 2.092137
AOA 1072.008381
ARS 1473.86814
AUD 1.777194
AWG 2.107191
AZN 1.992006
BAM 1.954969
BBD 2.359897
BDT 142.119594
BGN 1.956648
BHD 0.440707
BIF 3438.141097
BMD 1.169038
BND 1.495564
BOB 8.093595
BRL 6.502078
BSD 1.168803
BTN 100.195413
BWP 15.604368
BYN 3.824874
BYR 22913.14706
BZD 2.347702
CAD 1.601524
CDF 3373.844424
CHF 0.930865
CLF 0.029161
CLP 1119.038818
CNY 8.380309
CNH 8.386416
COP 4674.983423
CRC 589.449462
CUC 1.169038
CUP 30.97951
CVE 110.795635
CZK 24.665189
DJF 207.761914
DKK 7.461795
DOP 70.497539
DZD 151.705573
EGP 57.855667
ERN 17.535572
ETB 160.045846
FJD 2.621276
FKP 0.861628
GBP 0.866082
GEL 3.16855
GGP 0.861628
GHS 12.162504
GIP 0.861628
GMD 83.590727
GNF 10119.194341
GTQ 8.978184
GYD 244.526067
HKD 9.176307
HNL 30.804608
HRK 7.533988
HTG 153.404797
HUF 399.5543
IDR 18972.787189
ILS 3.894218
IMP 0.861628
INR 100.328609
IQD 1531.439931
IRR 49231.122092
ISK 142.400984
JEP 0.861628
JMD 186.90056
JOD 0.828894
JPY 172.334969
KES 151.39488
KGS 102.232832
KHR 4700.702671
KMF 492.340851
KPW 1052.173978
KRW 1612.291055
KWD 0.357481
KYD 0.973978
KZT 610.670442
LAK 25169.39103
LBP 104721.265739
LKR 351.480608
LRD 234.977068
LSL 20.949609
LTL 3.451866
LVL 0.70714
LYD 6.307006
MAD 10.52427
MDL 19.78759
MGA 5178.839256
MKD 61.56729
MMK 2453.70284
MNT 4194.046924
MOP 9.450302
MRU 46.415189
MUR 53.168296
MVR 18.007558
MWK 2030.039055
MXN 21.79146
MYR 4.971339
MZN 74.772119
NAD 20.949604
NGN 1786.89858
NIO 42.962591
NOK 11.839321
NPR 160.312861
NZD 1.945479
OMR 0.449493
PAB 1.168808
PEN 4.145998
PGK 4.822327
PHP 66.037214
PKR 332.445259
PLN 4.266015
PYG 9058.149949
QAR 4.256005
RON 5.081579
RSD 117.102724
RUB 91.189371
RWF 1676.400657
SAR 4.384424
SBD 9.733981
SCR 16.480784
SDG 702.011685
SEK 11.176827
SGD 1.496958
SHP 0.91868
SLE 26.307644
SLL 24514.149043
SOS 668.109564
SRD 43.49699
STD 24196.728708
SVC 10.226653
SYP 15199.779355
SZL 20.949595
THB 37.935718
TJS 11.296147
TMT 4.103324
TND 3.393762
TOP 2.738009
TRY 46.955356
TTD 7.940625
TWD 34.1849
TZS 3039.499492
UAH 48.831645
UGX 4189.219426
USD 1.169038
UYU 47.259913
UZS 14794.17774
VES 133.584256
VND 30528.845862
VUV 140.012408
WST 3.21431
XAF 655.672706
XAG 0.030416
XAU 0.000348
XCD 3.159384
XDR 0.812965
XOF 655.250067
XPF 119.331742
YER 282.732293
ZAR 20.963079
ZMK 10522.750076
ZMW 27.056616
ZWL 376.429796
  • CMSC

    0.0900

    22.314

    +0.4%

  • CMSD

    0.0250

    22.285

    +0.11%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    69.04

    0%

  • SCS

    0.0400

    10.74

    +0.37%

  • RELX

    0.0300

    53

    +0.06%

  • RIO

    -0.1400

    59.33

    -0.24%

  • GSK

    0.1300

    41.45

    +0.31%

  • NGG

    0.2700

    71.48

    +0.38%

  • BP

    0.1750

    30.4

    +0.58%

  • BTI

    0.7150

    48.215

    +1.48%

  • BCC

    0.7900

    91.02

    +0.87%

  • JRI

    0.0200

    13.13

    +0.15%

  • VOD

    0.0100

    9.85

    +0.1%

  • BCE

    -0.0600

    22.445

    -0.27%

  • RYCEF

    0.1000

    12

    +0.83%

  • AZN

    -0.1200

    73.71

    -0.16%

US Supreme Court to hear high-stakes environmental case
US Supreme Court to hear high-stakes environmental case

US Supreme Court to hear high-stakes environmental case

The conservative-dominated US Supreme Court is to hear an environmental regulation case on Monday with potentially far-reaching implications for the Biden administration's fight against climate change.

Text size:

The high-stakes case concerns the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants, which produce nearly 20 percent of the electricity in the United States.

"This is the first major climate change case to be before the justices in 15 years and the court's membership has dramatically changed since then," said Richard Lazarus, a professor of environmental law at Harvard University.

In 2007, the Supreme Court, by a narrow majority, ruled that the EPA has the power to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act of 1970.

The nation's highest court has been radically transformed in recent years, however.

Former Republican president Donald Trump, a climate change skeptic hostile to government regulation of industry, nominated three justices to the nine-member court, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority.

"Because we have the most conservative Supreme Court that we've had in decades many of the people from the fossil fuel industry are asking the court to do all kinds of outrageous things to limit EPA authority," said Robert Percival, director of the Environmental Law Program at the University of Maryland.

In 2015, Democratic president Barack Obama unveiled his Clean Power Plan, which was intended to combat global warming by reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal- and gas-burning plants and shifting energy production to clean sources such as solar and wind power.

The Clean Power Plan was blocked in the Supreme Court in 2016 and repealed by Trump, who replaced it with his own industry-friendly Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule.

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out Trump's ACE rule on the last day of his presidency, however, setting the stage for the case currently before the Supreme Court: West Virginia vs EPA.

- 'Christmas gift' -

West Virginia and several other coal-producing states asked the Supreme Court to intervene and define the powers of the EPA. By accepting the case, the court sent a signal to detractors of the agency and, more broadly, opponents of strong government regulatory authority.

"This was like a Christmas gift to regulated industries," Percival told AFP.

In its brief to the court, West Virginia accused the EPA of acting like "the country's central energy planning authority."

The EPA is "reshaping the power grids and seizing control over electricity production nationwide" without the express authorization of Congress, the state said.

No matter "how serious the problem," West Virginia said, a federal agency "may not exercise its authority in a manner that is inconsistent with the administrative structure that Congress enacted into law."

Harvard's Lazarus said there is "good reason for concern" that the court will rule against the EPA.

The court could find that Congress is "powerless to delegate an administrative agency the authority to issue regulations that address major public health and welfare issues such as climate change," he said.

"Or, that it can do so only with very precise statutory language enacted by Congress.

"In either event, given how partisan gridlock (is in Congress) such a ruling would seriously threaten the national government's ability to address some of the nation's most pressing problems including, but not limited to climate change."

- 'Free from oversight' -

Several environmental protection groups have submitted their own briefs to the court in support of the EPA.

"In the absence of sustained efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," a group of climate scientists said, "the total increase in temperature could surpass 10 degrees (Fahrenheit) -- leading to physical and ecological impacts that would be irreversible for thousands of years, if ever."

"It is still possible to mitigate the human and economic costs of climate change," they said, "if greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants and other sources can be reduced.

"But such mitigation will require significant coordination at the federal level."

A group of Democratic lawmakers, including Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, submitted a brief urging the court to reject a case they said was being brought by those in favor of "an era free from oversight by the government."

"Metrics that boomed in the 20th century, from average lifespan to economic productivity, were made possible by a slew of new regulations aimed at protecting the public welfare," they said.

"As the excesses of powerful industries were reined in, however, these same regulations fostered resentment among those seeking to operate without such restraint.

"These cases are the direct product of that resentment."

H.Roth--NZN