Facts of the Case

Provided by Oyez

The Trump administration repealed the 2015 Clean Power Plan, which established guidelines for states to limit carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, and issued in its place the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule, which eliminated or deferred the guidelines. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated the ACE Rule as arbitrary and capricious. One of the challengers, North American Coal Corporation, challenged the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to so broadly regulate greenhouse gas emissions.


Questions

  1. Does the Environmental Protection Agency have the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in virtually any industry, so long as it considers cost, non-air impacts, and energy requirements?

Conclusions

  1. Congress did not grant the Environmental Protection Agency in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan.

    Under the “major questions doctrine,” there are “extraordinary cases” in which the “history and the breadth of the authority that [the agency] has asserted,” and the “economic and political significance” of that assertion, provide a “reason to hesitate before concluding that Congress” meant to confer such authority. This is one such case, so the EPA must point to “clear congressional authorization” for the authority it claims. It cannot do so.

    The EPA has admitted that issues of electricity transmission, distribution, and storage are not within its traditional expertise, yet it claims that Congress implicitly tasked it with the regulation of how Americans get their energy. Without “clear congressional authorization” for the EPA to regulate in such a manner, the agency lacks authority to implement the Clean Power Plan under the Clean Air Act.

    Justice Neil Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Samuel Alito joined.

    Justice Elena Kagan filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined.

Pushing Pause on Liquified Natural Gas Exports: Can the Department of Energy Halt LNG Exports to Save the Planet?

Pushing Pause on Liquified Natural Gas Exports: Can the Department of Energy Halt LNG Exports to Save the Planet?

Federalist Society Review, Volume 25

The Biden-Harris Administration recently interrupted the normal, export-friendly operation of the Natural Gas Act, triggering...

Click to play: Major Questions Doctrine and the Tech and Telecom Sectors After West Virginia v. EPA

Major Questions Doctrine and the Tech and Telecom Sectors After West Virginia v. EPA

Last year, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in West Virginia v. EPA, in...

Deep Dive Episode 248 - Creatures of Statute III: Congress’ Responsibility to Answer the Major Questions

Deep Dive Episode 248 - Creatures of Statute III: Congress’ Responsibility to Answer the Major Questions

Regulatory Transparency Project's Fourth Branch Podcast

The Federalist Society’s Regulatory Transparency Project and Capitol Hill Chapter hosted the third in a...

Necessary & Proper Episode 81: Creatures of Statute III: Congress’ Responsibility to Answer the Major Questions

Necessary & Proper Episode 81: Creatures of Statute III: Congress’ Responsibility to Answer the Major Questions

On October 17, 2022, the Federalist Society’s Regulatory Transparency Project and Capitol Hill Chapter hosted...

Click to play: Environmental Law After West Virginia v. EPA: Can the Biden Administration’s “Whole of Government” Approaches Survive Judicial Review?

Environmental Law After West Virginia v. EPA: Can the Biden Administration’s “Whole of Government” Approaches Survive Judicial Review?

2022 National Lawyers Convention

The Biden Administration began with executive orders on an environmental policy agenda, directing a “whole...

Click to play: A Seat at the Sitting - February 2022

A Seat at the Sitting - February 2022

The February-March Docket in 90 Minutes or Less

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting by...

A Seat at the Sitting - February 2022

A Seat at the Sitting - February 2022

The February-March Docket in 90 Minutes or Less

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting by...