Environmental Protection
Q&A: Supreme Court weighs meaning of ‘appropriate’ in EPA mercury case
By Ayesha Rascoe
(Reuters) – A U.S. Supreme Court case examining whether the Obama administration should have considered costs before issuing mercury pollution rules for power plants may come down to the meaning of the word “appropriate,” said Tom Donnelly, counsel for the Constitutional Accountability Center.
The Clean Air Act allows the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate power plants for mercury and other toxic pollutants only if it finds it is “appropriate and necessary.”
More from Environmental Protection
May 25, 2023
RELEASE: Court Rewrites Clean Water Act to Protect Private Land Development at the Expense of…Clean Water
WASHINGTON, DC – Following the Supreme Court’s announcement of its decision in Sackett v. EPA,...
January 19, 2023
BLOG: Defending the Environment with Constitutional and Statutory Text and History
This Term, the Supreme Court is considering Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, an important environmental...
June 30, 2022
U.S. Supreme Court just gave federal agencies a big reason to worry
(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas...
June 30, 2022
RELEASE: Supreme Court’s Conservatives Deal Crushing Blow to Ability of Government to Protect the Environment
“Because of this flawed, ideologically tainted ruling, the power of the national government to solve...
U.S. Supreme Court
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
In Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court determined the proper test for ascertaining whether wetlands are “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act.
U.S. Supreme Court
West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency
In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court considered whether a regulation issued by the EPA to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants was authorized by the Clean Air Act.