In a 2-to-1 decision posted Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that the EPA’s new Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, targeting the 28 states that generate the majority of the electricity in the United States, exceeded the agency’s legal authority. The EPA had previously estimated that the regulations would inflict $2.7 billion in economic costs on the private sector.The court said:
EPA seems reluctant to acknowledge any textual limits on its authority under the good neighbor provision. At oral argument, EPA suggested that “reasonableness” is the only limit on its authority to use cost-effectiveness to force down States’ emissions. EPA would not rule out the possibility that under the good neighbor provision, it could require a State to reduce more than the State’s total emissions that go out of State. But such a claim of authority does not square with the statutory text – “amounts” of pollution obviously cannot “contribute” to a downwind State’s pollution problem if they don’t even reach the downwind State.That's gonna leave a mark...
Previous articles on the fight over the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule:
Court Puts Cross State Air Pollution Rule on Hold
Is EPA Selling Environmental Indulgences for Votes?
Texas Pushes Back on EPA Threat to Turn Out the Lights
500 Lost Jobs in Texas