12/27/2023 0 Comments Scorched 3d controlsAnd like all of Earthjustice’s over 200 attorneys, I pay special attention to the Court’s decisions on environmental and administrative law so that we can shape our case selection and legal strategies accordingly. I have watched the Supreme Court carefully from the days when I clerked for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. Sackett reversed prior decisions by holding that the language of the Clean Water Act does not extend to protect wetlands unless they are “as a practical matter indistinguishable” from surface waters. EPA, decided just a few weeks ago, the Court held that the EPA could not require an Idaho couple to obtain a permit before filling in wetlands on their property. The Court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) couldn’t do this because the Clean Air Act only allows the EPA to mandate pollution controls that plants can implement “inside the fenceline” of the facility. The CPP had aimed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by requiring them to shift towards renewable sources. EPA, decided in June 2022, the Court struck down the Obama-era “Clean Power Plan” (CPP). Two recent decisions showcase the current Court’s attitude to environmental protections. Among its distressing actions, the six-justice supermajority is aggressively pursuing an anti-environment agenda driven by, among others, the nation’s biggest polluters. Thanks to unlucky timing and scorched-earth politics, Americans are now governed by the most conservative Supreme Court of the United States in modern history.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |