Upload
michigan-news
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/12/2019 U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against EPA Overreach, Burdensome Greenhouse Gas Regulations
1/2
STATE OF MICHIGAN
BILL SCHUETTE
ATTORNEY GENERAL
FORIMMEDIATERELEASE MEDIA CONTACT: Joy Yearout
JUNE 23,2013 517-373-8060
www.michigan.gov/AGPress
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against EPA Overreach,
Burdensome Greenhouse Gas RegulationsA.G. Schuette: We Are a Nation of Laws
LANSING - Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette today praised a 5-4 decision by the U.S.
Supreme Court striking down burdensome Environment Protection Agency (EPA) regulations that would
have imposed new permitting requirements on large manufacturing facilities and power plants. The
regulation would have ultimately required a multitude of smaller facilities, including hospitals, churches,
schools, apartment buildings and retailers, to comply with complicated greenhouse gas emission
permitting requirements. The 5-4 ruling authored by Justice Antonin Scalia declared that the regulation
exceeded the authority granted to the EPA by Congress and violated the federal Clean Air Act.
To achieve real economic recovery, we must cut burdensome regulations, not pile them on
without regard to consequence, said Schuette. Todays ruling is a victory for the rule of law and the
Constitution. We are a nation of laws, and unelected bureaucrats cannot simply run roughshod over those
laws. We will continue to hold the President and his administration accountable and rein in overreaching
policies that harm citizens, states and our economy.
The following excerpts from the ruling address the lack of Congressional authorization for the
sweeping regulations:
Since, as we hold above, the statute does not compel EPAs interpretation, it wouldpatently unreasonable not to say outrageous for EPA to insist on seizing expansive
power that it admits the statute is not designed to grant. (p. 20)
In the Tailoring Rule, EPA asserts newfound authority to regulate millions of smallsourcesincluding retail stores, offices, apartment buildings, shopping centers, schools,and churchesand to decide, on an ongoing basis and without regard for the thresholds
prescribed by Congress, how many of those sources to regulate. We are not willing to standon the dock and wave goodbye as EPA embarks on this multiyear voyage of discovery. We
reaffirm the core administrative-law principle that an agency may not rewrite clearstatutory terms to suit its own sense of how the statute should operate. (p. 23)
-MORE-
http://www.michigan.gov/AGPresshttp://www.michigan.gov/AGPresshttp://www.michigan.gov/AGPress8/12/2019 U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against EPA Overreach, Burdensome Greenhouse Gas Regulations
2/2
U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against EPA Overreach, Burdensome Greenhouse Gas Regulations
June 23, 2014
Page 2
Were we to recognize the authority claimed by EPA in the Tailoring Rule, we would deal asevere blow to the Constitutions separation of powers. Under our system of government,Congress makes laws and the President, acting at times through agencies like EPA, faithfullyexecute[s] them. The power of executing the laws necessarily includes both authority andresponsibility to resolve some questions left open by Congress that arise during the laws
administration. But it does not include a power to revise clear statutory terms that turn out not towork in practice. (p. 23)
Case Background
In May 2010, Michigan joined Texas challenge to the regulations in the case Coalition for
Responsible Regulation v U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Michigan, Texas and 14 other states
challenged EPAs original endangerment finding under the Clean Air Act that greenhouse gases from
new cars endanger public health and welfare because they contribute to climate change. The finding
triggered the additional greenhouse gas regulations on stationary sources that the Supreme Court struck
down today as not authorized by the Clean Air Act..
Schuette noted that although the first round of regulations applied only to larger facilities like
power plants and oil refineries, a more significant problem was the potential impact on thousands of
smaller facilities, including smaller manufacturing facilities, retail stores, hospitals, churches, schools, and
residential facilities if the EPA lowered the regulation thresholds.
Read the Supreme Courts ruling at this link:bit.ly/scotusepa.
- 30 -
http://bit.ly/scotusepahttp://bit.ly/scotusepahttp://bit.ly/scotusepahttp://bit.ly/scotusepahttp://bit.ly/scotusepahttp://bit.ly/scotusepa