On Monday, June 23, the Supreme Court ruled against the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) expansion of authority for the first time in years.
The case was Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. A major part of the case was the EPA’s attempt to bypass Congressional support for any regulations it might want to pass. Justice Scalia wrote, “Were we to recognize the authority claimed by EPA in the Tailoring Rule (whereby it expanded its regulatory power), we would deal a severe blow to the Constitution’s separation of powers.”
However, while the Supreme Court’s decision emphasizes the lasting power of Constitutional checks and balances on the branches of government, the outlook is not so cheerful for coal-fired electricity generation plants or large factories.
The American Petroleum Institute called the ruling a “stark reminder that the EPA’s power is not unlimited.” However, as Justice Anton Scalia wrote in his majority opinion, “It bears mention that EPA is getting almost everything it wanted in this case.” As Reuters pointed out, “… as a result of the ruling, roughly 83 percent of greenhouse gas emissions that could potentially be regulated under the EPA’s interpretation of the law would still be covered, compared with the 86 percent of emissions that the EPA had hoped to regulate.”
Thus, while some smaller sources of greenhouse gas emissions will not be affected by this case (churches and shopping centers, for example), the EPA has not lost any power it needs to enforce its rulebook on the American industry. The Washington Post reported that the ruling “does not in any way curtail the EPA’s underlying authority to treat GHGs as pollutants subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act.”
Also, the Court decided that “The petitions for a writ of certiorari should be denied.” This means that a court of lower standing will not be able to do research for, or preview cases related to, the Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. case. The Supreme Court will handle all such matters personally, which could be taken as a sign of integrity or of finality.
[sam_ad id=”32″ codes=”true”]
Important disclosures: The information provided herein is believed to be reliable; however, EnerCom, Inc. makes no representation or warranty as to its completeness or accuracy. EnerCom’s conclusions are based upon information gathered from sources deemed to be reliable. This note is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security or financial instrument of any company mentioned in this note. This note was prepared for general circulation and does not provide investment recommendations specific to individual investors. All readers of the note must make their own investment decisions based upon their specific investment objectives and financial situation utilizing their own financial advisors as they deem necessary. Investors should consider a company’s entire financial and operational structure in making any investment decisions. Past performance of any company discussed in this note should not be taken as an indication or guarantee of future results. EnerCom is a multi-disciplined management consulting services firm that regularly intends to seek business, or currently may be undertaking business, with companies covered on Oil & Gas 360®, and thereby seeks to receive compensation from these companies for its services. In addition, EnerCom, or its principals or employees, may have an economic interest in any of these companies. As a result, readers of EnerCom’s Oil & Gas 360® should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this note. The company or companies covered in this note did not review the note prior to publication. EnerCom, or its principals or employees, may have an economic interest in any of the companies covered in this report or on Oil & Gas 360®. As a result, readers of EnerCom’s reports or Oil & Gas 360® should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report.
