Supreme Court case: The states' angle

When the Supreme Court hears oral arguments tomorrow in the landmark global warming case, Massachusetts v. EPA, the case will decide more than just whether the Clean Air Act authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the pollution that causes global warming.

It will also have a direct bearing on the eleven states that have adopted global warming tailpipe emissions standards for cars and trucks.

Under the Clean Air Act, states may decide to adopt the California tailpipe emissions standards in lieu of the federal standards. California has adopted regulations that would reduce fleet-wide global warming emissions from new vehicles by 25 percent in model year 2009, rising to a 30 percent reduction in model year 2016.

The 11 states that followed California's lead are: Oregon, Washington, Connecticut, Illinois, New Mexico, Maine, Vermont, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

The Bush administration is arguing that EPA does not have authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate global warming pollution, even though the act says that effects on "weather...and climate" are two of the criteria used to define a pollutant's negative impact on the public welfare. Among those backing the EPA's position are the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the National Automobile Dealer’s Association and a coalition of electric utilities.

Stay tuned. --Craig Pittman

Comments

[Melissa Meehan]

This will be a fascinating case, and one I will closely follow. I hear speculation that the court may agree the EPA has authority to regulate CO2, but fall short of mandating it to do so.
I am hoping there will be no setbacks for progress in individual states... some energy firms are saying they would rather have one national program rather than 25 different rules from individual state RGGIs.