By Andrew Chung
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court blocked an Environmental Protection Agency regulation aimed at curbing ozone emissions that could worsen air pollution in neighboring states, handing a victory on Thursday to three Republican-led states and the steel and fossil fuel industries that challenged the rule.
The 5-4 decision honored requests from Ohio, Indiana and West Virginia, as well as US Steel Corp., pipeline operator Kinder Morgan and industry groups, to enforce the EPA’s Good Neighbor plan, which prevents ozone pollution from states limited in the wind direction. They are challenging the legality of the rule in a lower court.
It was the last ruling by the court with a conservative majority limiting the EPA’s powers.
The EPA issued the rule in question in March 2023 with the intention of targeting gases that form ozone, a key component of smog, from power plants and other industrial sources in 23 Windward states whose own plans did not meet the Good Neighbor -provision of the Clean Air Act anti-pollution legislation, which requires steps to reduce pollution drifting downwind into states.
The agency said the rule would result in cleaner air for millions of people, saving thousands of lives.
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who wrote the ruling, said the court granted the challengers’ request because they are likely to ultimately prevail in the lawsuit, and said the EPA failed to reasonably explain its actions.
Conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett, along with the court’s three liberal justices, was not convinced.
“The court today orders enforcement of a major Environmental Protection Agency rule based on an underdeveloped theory that is unlikely to succeed on the merits,” Barrett wrote.
The EPA said it was disappointed with the ruling but looked forward to defending the plan as the case continues to be litigated. Thursday’s court action “will delay the benefits the Good Neighbor Plan is already delivering in many states and communities,” an EPA spokesperson said.
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey said the decision “is correct, but the EPA will continue to try to legislate and circumvent Congress’s authority – and it has been settled by the Supreme Court: the EPA must regulate within the express limits of the statute that Congress has passed. “
The challenge followed a landmark 2022 ruling by the court that limited the EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act to reduce carbon emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants, undermining President Joe Biden’s plans to tackle climate change. Last year, the court also stymied the EPA’s power to protect wetlands and combat water pollution.
The challenge to the “good neighbor” rule was led by Ohio, Indiana and West Virginia – all targeted by the rule – as well as pipeline operators, US Steel, regional electricity producers and energy trade associations. In their lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, they argued that the EPA violated a federal law aimed at ensuring that agency actions are reasonable.
The D.C. Circuit declined to block the rule pending its review, prompting challengers to ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
Opponents have said the rule would impose unreasonable costs and destabilize power grids. The Justice Department, defending the EPA, urged the Supreme Court to consider the serious harm to public health that would result from blocking it.
‘OPEN SEASON’
Environmental groups have denounced the ruling. Sam Sankar, senior vice president of programs at environmental law group Earthjustice, called the ruling part of a growing pattern of anti-environmental decisions by the Supreme Court.
“The court’s order puts thousands of lives at risk, forces states in the Leeward Region to more strictly regulate their industries and tells major polluters that it is time for our environmental laws to change,” Sankar said.
The rule implemented a federal program that applied to 23 states, but separate lower court lawsuits have already halted enforcement in 12 of them, including West Virginia.
During arguments in the case on Feb. 21, some conservative justices focused on the EPA’s lack of explanation about how the plan could work when it now regulates only 11 states instead of 23 as intended. Liberal justices expressed concern about whether the case warranted emergency Supreme Court intervention at this time.
Some of the Supreme Court’s industry requests were specific. Kinder Morgan asked the judges to block the regulation as it applies to natural gas pipeline engines. US Steel sought to prevent enforcement against heating iron and steel mill furnaces and boilers.
On January 16, the EPA published a proposed rulemaking to enforce the “Good Neighbor” plan in five additional states: Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, New Mexico and Tennessee.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)
