Supreme Court Delays Implementation Of Clean Power Plan

If a writ of certiorari is sought and the court denies the petition, this order shall terminate automatically.

“The supreme court has never issued a stay on a rule that hasn’t been ruled on by a lower court”.

The Supreme Court ruling came as somewhat of a surprise and suggests the final decision about the legality of the plan will not come until after Obama leaves office.

Numerous states opposing the initiative rely heavily on fossil fuels for the economic wellbeing.

The Republican attorneys general leading the charge against President Obama’s power plant rules said Wednesday they are encouraged by the Supreme Court’s decision to temporarily halt the rule. West Virginia is one of the states that has sued to overturn the EPA regulations.

“Make no mistake: This is a great victory for West Virginia”, said Patrick Morrisey, West Virginia’s attorney general. An EPA spokesman said “We’re disappointed the rule has been stayed”.

States will no longer have to meet the original deadline of September to implement the plan.

The ruling comes as Obama continues to push action on global warming as a key part of his legacy, and effort that reached its peak with the deal at the U.N.-led talks on climate change in Paris in December.

Even though Oklahoma is involved in the case against the EPA, the Clean Power Plan would likely have little impact on the state, as StateImpact has reported.

The far-reaching regulations issued a year ago by the Environmental Protection Agency are central to Obama’s drive to reduce overall U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

Environmentalists lamented the decision. “It is a grave disappointment that the same Supreme Court that made clear that carbon dioxide must be regulated as a pollutant, has now chose to stay enforcement of the Clean Power Plan pending a far fetched legal challenge”.

They also filed an emergency appeal with Chief Justice John G. Roberts at the end of the January asking for the high court to put the EPA plan on hold while their lawsuit proceeds. A group of 27 states, many of which are reliant on coal for their energy, as well as utility companies and coal miners, attempted to block the proposals in a Washington appeals court in January until legal challenges were heard.