On October 4, 2024, without opinion and no recorded dissents, the United States Supreme Court handed the Biden Administration two wins on notable climate change regulations, denying emergency stay applications against Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations.
First, in Oklahoma, et al. v. EPA, et al., the Court turned down a request by Oklahoma and industry groups to stay the implementation of EPA's regulations aimed at curbing oil and gas facility emissions of methane. This decision means that EPA regulations finalized earlier this year and intended to cut methane emissions by up to 80 percent over the next 14 years will remain in effect pending resolution of litigation challenging those regulations.
In the second order, the Court rejected seven combined cases[1] amounting to a bid by 23 Republican-led-states, utility companies, mining companies and industry groups to stay application of EPA's "Mercury Rule," which took effect in July and requires coal-fired plants to reduce the emissions of certain "hazardous air pollutants," including mercury, arsenic, chromium, and nickel. Both the states and industry groups have argued that the mercury rule will force power plants to shut down or install unjustified equipment that provide only inconsequential environmental benefits.
The original actions in both cases will now proceed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The Court did not rule on a third pending stay request of an EPA rule aimed at decreasing carbon dioxide emissions by power plants.
While the litigation continues, the denials by the Supreme Court are a break with their recent slate of rulings against agency action by the EPA, and broader federal agency executive power that was curtailed in Loper Bright. Environmental regulations have always operated in a somewhat ambiguous area where agencies have interpreted statutes, and the impact of Loper Bright was forecasted to curb agencies abilities to create stronger rules regarding emissions, protect endangered species, and protect our waterways. However, these rulings by the Supreme Court have clipped that doomsday scenario somewhat. For now, the EPA will continue to regulate emissions of arsenic, lead, and mercury from coal-powered facilities, as well as methane emissions from oil and gas-powered facilities.
Footnote
1 The combined cases are: NACCO Natural Resources Corp. v. EPA, et al.; Westmoreland Mining Holdings, LLC, et al. v. EPA, et al.; North Dakota, et al. v. EPA, et al.; Midwest Ozone Group v. EPA, et al.; Talen Montana, LLC, et al. v. EPA, et al.; America's Power, et al. v. EPA, et al.; Natural Rural Electric Cooperative Association, et al. v. EPA, et al.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
