The Supreme Court could stall action on climate change yet again as it weighs whether to pause new pollution regulations for coal-fired power plants. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized rules this year<\/a> aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions from coal plants. But red states and industry groups are challenging the EPA in court<\/a> and have asked SCOTUS to step in<\/a> and stop the rules from being implemented while they duke it out. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n The request is now in the Supreme Court\u2019s so-called \u201cshadow docket<\/a>\u201d \u2014 meaning SCOTUS can essentially issue a stay on the rules at its whim. The court has already made it way tougher for federal agencies to regulate industry since Donald Trump packed it with conservative-leaning justices. This is another opportunity to gut the EPA\u2019s efforts to limit the pollution causing climate change.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cI would have considered this kind of request laughable just a few years ago.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n \u201cI would have considered this kind of request laughable just a few years ago, but given the way this court is operating \u2014 I don\u2019t laugh at anything anymore,\u201d says Sambhav Sankar, senior vice president for programs at the nonprofit environmental law organization Earthjustice.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n The rules are a cornerstone of the Biden administration\u2019s efforts to meet climate goals<\/a> set under the Paris agreement. They require coal plants<\/a> expected to continue operating for at least 15 years to reduce their climate pollution by 90 percent. Coal happens to be the dirtiest fossil fuel, creating more planet-heating carbon dioxide when burned than oil or gas. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n When the EPA finalized the plan in April, it was arguably only a partial victory for environmental and health advocates. The rules had to comply with the Supreme Court\u2019s 2022 decision on West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency<\/em><\/a>. <\/em>It was a monumental opinion that strengthened the \u201cmajor questions<\/a>\u201d doctrine, the idea that federal agencies shouldn\u2019t have the authority to call the shots on issues of major national significance without Congress passing legislation explicitly allowing the agency to do so. The decision meant that the EPA wouldn\u2019t be allowed to determine whether the US gets its electricity from fossil fuels or cleaner sources of energy like wind and solar. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n As a result, the EPA\u2019s plans to rein in the greenhouse gas emissions allow fossil fuel power plants to keep running as long as they install technologies that capture carbon dioxide emissions. Fossil fuel companies have championed carbon capture and storage as a way to fight climate change without having to give up coal, oil, or gas. But relying on carbon capture lets down health and environmental advocates who had hoped that a transition to renewable energy would fight climate change and<\/em> push utilities to phase out fossil fuel plants that spew soot and other kinds of pollutants into nearby neighborhoods. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n