EPA Has Authority to Regulate Greenhouse Gasses

In a 5-4 split decision, the Supreme Court found that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority to regulate greenhouse gasses that may contribute to global warming.  The Supreme Court further tasked the EPA with examining scientific evidence linking greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles with climate change.
 

In the future, this decision will impact lawsuits that involve the term “air pollutant.” The Court’s expansive holding that the definition of “air pollutant” includes greenhouse gasses will make it increasingly difficult for industries to argue for a narrower reading of the term.

Background on the Decision

The lawsuit Massachusetts v. EPA began when a group of private organizations petitioned the EPA to regulate the emissions of four greenhouse gasses, including carbon dioxide.  The petition was based on scientific evidence that a rise in global temperatures and environmental climate changes have resulted from a significant increase in greenhouse gasses, and that the Clean Air Act gave EPA the authority to regulate such emissions.
 

The EPA denied to regulate the greenhouse gasses complained of in the petition, stating that first, the Clean Air Act did not give EPA the power to issue mandatory regulations to address global climate change, and second, even if EPA had the authority to regulate greenhouse gas standards, it would have been unwise to do so because the science was relatively new.  The EPA also stated that any regulation of motor-vehicle emissions would simply be a piecemeal approach to climate change that would conflict with the Presidential approach. 

The Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court ruled that the EPA does have the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles if it finds that such emissions will contribute to climate change.  Ultimately, the Court remanded the case back to the EPA, with specific instruction that it may no longer rely on policy judgments to avoid regulating auto exhaust fumes. 

Although the Court stated that the EPA as a federal agency still retains discretion over its resources and enforcement priorities, the majority opinion suggests that the Court would be skeptical if EPA found that greenhouse gas emissions do not endanger the public health or welfare, or that the EPA should decline to regulate. 

Effects of the Decision

The decision will have several effects:

1. First, because the ruling defines greenhouse gasses as “air pollutants,” this or any future administration may regulate emissions from motor vehicles without additional congressional action under section 202 of the Clean Air Act.
2. Second, as mentioned above, the ruling may affect pending cases.  Industry defendants relying on arguments that the term “air pollutant” should be read narrowly will have a more difficult road ahead of them.  Also, because the Court concluded that the EPA’s duties under the Clean Air Act are “wholly independent” and separate from the Department of Transportation’s responsibility to regulate fuel efficiency, and that both agencies will be able to regulate side-by-side, industry defendants who argue that the federal fuel efficiency program should preempt state programs may not be successful.
3. Last, the ruling may encourage the United States Congress to act more quickly and aggressively on global warming legislation. 

This legal update is for informational purposes only as a service to clients and other friends, is not a complete summary of the rules relating to the subject matter discussed above, and is neither to be construed as legal advice nor intended as basis for decisions in specific situations. For more information about this subject matter or other recent developments, please contact the attorneys in our Environmental, Energy and Resources practice group or any other attorney in our firm with whom you normally consult by calling (303) 825-4200.