Washington, D.C. (February 28, 2022)After oral argument before the Supreme Court West Virginia v. Environmental Protection AgencyThe following statements were made in response by the environmental respondents to the casetoday:
Today, coal companies and their allies requested the Supreme Court to stop the EPA’s efforts to limit the climate pollution emitted from power plants. This would be extremely dangerous. We have very limited time to address the climate crisis, which poses a grave and growing threat to Americans’ health and safety. This is the worst time to tie EPA’s arms behind its back. Fred Krupp is president of Environmental Defense Fund. The EPA must continue to enforce our proven, time-tested clean Air laws and protect people from climate pollution. The Court should allow the EPA to do its job.
Today, the Supreme Court looked at a case that could have significant consequences for our ability face rising costs and the growing dangers of climate changes. Manish Bapna is President and CEO of NRDC. Just as the nation is ready to take the climate action it so urgently needs, the coal industry wants a Court to limit the federal government’s authority to limit carbon pollution coming from the largest industrial source in the country: power plants that use fossil fuels. The coal argument should not be accepted. If an industry causes growing damage to the economy and risks the health of its citizens, it is the business model that must be changed, not our laws. The Court has already ruled in the positive when it comes time to set commonsense limits on carbon pollution from power plants. It should do it again.
This is the largest climate action case before the Supreme Court in many years. Coal executives and fringe politicians want to repeal the Clean Air Act as well as the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority and responsibility to address the climate crisis. But they are not stopping there. They also want to use this case as a platform to establish a right-wing power grab that could weaken the ability of federal agencies to protect the public against corporate overreach, corruption, and pollution. Ramon Cruz is President of the Sierra Club. This case should not have been brought to the Court at all, as it concerns policies which were never implemented and that do not apply to any existing EPA rules. A few extremists have attempted to use this opportunity to reverse decades of progress in the fight against climate change. Today, a wide coalition of public health experts and scientists, as well as businesses and scientists, are in support of the EPAs authority. They know that the Supreme Court has to reject this fringe attempt at reducing climate action when it is most needed. Anything less is a threat to our communities, democracy, and the future of a livable world.
Their BriefSierra Club, EDF and NRDC, along with allied environmental, public and clean energy sector groups, asked the Supreme Court to affirm the Clean Air Act’s authority, and duty, to the EPA to reduce dangerous carbon pollution from the nation’s dirtiest power plants. The respondents claim that petitioners are not entitled to any standing. West Virginia v. EPAThe case should be dismissed as there is no EPA carbon emissions rule currently in effect. A video recording of the case featuring environmental experts can be viewed. Here.
Background
The coal companies and allies behind this case want the EPA to limit carbon pollution and to thwart the fight to combat climate change. The petitioners’ actions would bring the United States back in the pre-1970s, when very few pollution controls existed before Clean Air Act was enacted.
There is strong legal support for EPAs authority by the power sector to regulate polluting to protect clean air, public health, and the environment. The Court heard today from power companies that would be subjected to regulation. It agreed that the EPAs authority is consistent in accordance with the Constitution, Clean Air Act, and Supreme Courts decisions. Massachusetts v. EPAAnd American Electric Power vs. Connecticut.
The Department of Justice and EPA were also involved in the filing. They are a joint effort of two dozen cities and state leaders, as well as a group of power companies that provide millions of customers across the nation. Briefs The Supreme Court has endorsed the EPA’s authority to regulate carbon emissions from power plants. The complete list of amici fileds can be found here Here.
Contact Media
Contact us for more information and media inquiries [email protected]
