Boozman Statement on Supreme Court’s Stay of EPA’s Carbon Mandates

Unfortunately, the court can’t overrule climate change, and its misguided decision won’t protect our kids from this widening scourge; it will only slow the certainty and predictability we need to help clean up our dirty power plants.

State Attorney General Patrick Morrisey called the high court’s ruling a huge victory for West Virginia, as the Clean Power Plan would strictly regulate emissions from coal-fired power plants in an attempt to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by one-third by 2030.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court granted a stay for the federal Clean Power Plan while its merits are debated in court.

“We want to be clear … that the court’s decision does not overturn the policy or decide its legal merits”, Coequyt said.

McCarthy said the agency will use continue to use the “authorities we have”, and predicted the administration’s air and water regulations would eventually “be seen as an appropriate and proper and necessary application of the law”.

The Environmental Protection Agency gave USA states individual greenhouse gas emission targets, but they have until 2022 to comply, which Kimmell noted was a “very long” timeline.

Through prior EPA regulations, “Georgia utilities have already reduced our carbon footprint by 30 percent”, he added.

I urge our elected officials to continue to promote a strong state Clean Power Plan that also includes our own targeted approach to stimulate green renovations in our schools for the well-being of the student population of urban Pennsylvanians. The 5-4 ruling, which saw Justice Anthony Kennedy side with the conservatives, seemed to come as a shock to leftists and ecofascists.

The order from the justices was brief, with no explanation provided. Currently, 27 states have sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the CPP, arguing that it is an overreach by the federal regulatory agency (see Daily GPI, Jan. 22).

Complicating the matter is the timing.

A hearing is set for June in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The good news is that the Clean Power Plan has prompted hundreds of public meetings, forums and discussions around the country on how to harness the benefits of an already emerging modern energy economy.

Environmentalists were generally tight-lipped about what a Plan B might look like, instead repeating their confidence that the rule will stand. Any delay in the Clean Power Plan complicates that prospect.

“The Clean Power Plan was always more of a long-term signal to the industry”, Ms. Wilson said. “We will pay attention to what the GAO said”.

Navroz K. Dubash, a senior fellow at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, told the New York Times: “If the US Supreme Court actually declares the coal power plant rules stillborn, the chances of nurturing trust between countries would all but vanish”.

“In the last couple of days I’ve heard people say, ‘The Supreme Court struck down the clean power plant rule, ‘” the president said in a White House pool report via TIME. The editorial urged Congress to “wake up” and act, but Congress acted by resolving to block implementation of this rule, only to be denied by the president.

He said the administration’s proposal was not really an energy plan, but a taxation plan. So it’s no wonder the Supreme Court’s ruling was hailed by politicians as a “real ray of hope”. As states continue their everyday work to ensure reliable, clean and safe energy for Americans, their planning can continue in the direction of compliance, as the electricity power sector continues to evolve.

“It is our estimation that the inclusion of those tax credits is going to have more impact over the short term than the Clean Power Plan”, Schultz said aboard Air Force One on Wednesday as the president was flying to Springfield, Illinois.