The Supreme Court heard a case this week in which, by following the Constitution, it can help states save money, electricity generation, and lives while lower courts consider a legal challenge to strict new regulations that President Joe Biden is trying to impose.
According to a brief by three states that the Supreme Court considered this week, the EPA also "Used nonstatutory factors to deny those plans, relied on data unavailable to the states at the time of their submissions, and contradicted its own earlier guidance."
A large group of plaintiffs, including three states - Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia - filed a separate suit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit because the EPA rules were still operative in those states even while suspended in others.
When the District of Columbia Circuit punted, this plaintiff group appealed to the Supreme Court.
They ask the court to put a hold on the rules while complicated underlying legal issues are litigated in lower courts.
Seven straight appeals courts have ruled that it is likely that the EPA power grab will eventually be not just delayed but struck down.
Until or unless the EPA wins a final victory in court, which is unlikely, the Supreme Court should suspend the new rule so states avoid its deleterious effects.
No comments:
Post a Comment