Supreme Court Decision Signals Need for Strong Implementation and Adequate Funding for New York’s Landmark Climate Law
***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***: June 30, 2022
Contact: Lala Peñaranda | lala@nyrenews.org | (301) 526-1312
Web: @NYRenews | www.nyrenews.org
Supreme Court Decision Signals Need for Strong Implementation and
Adequate Funding for New York’s Landmark Climate Law
In response to the release of the abhorrent Supreme Court of the United States Decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency today, NY Renews issued the following statement:
Coming on the heels of a string of other politically motivated and harmful decisions by the Court, today’s decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency moves us in the wrong direction. Today, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled to limit the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to broadly regulate power plant emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act. The 6-3 decision in West Virginia v. EPA prevents the agency from implementing sweeping changes for the entire energy sector and limits it to emissions control at individual power plants unless given explicit authority by Congress. This decision threatens to not only exacerbate the climate crisis, but also continue the legacy of harm and perpetuate historic health disparities for black, brown, and low-income communities across the country, where these fossil fuel burning power plants are concentrated. While we await the implication this ruling has for other federal agencies, one thing is clear – we cannot wait for the federal government to act on climate, and State-level action is more critical than ever.
Governor Hochul can and must act in this moment to use every administrative and legislative power of the State of New York to reduce emissions and transition off fossil fuels. New York and other States can and must move forward and lead aggressively on climate change This moment is the time for New York to act. Fully implementing the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), funding new and existing programs to transition off fossil fuels, and signing or passing additional legislation must happen now!
Moreover, while the SCOTUS decision does allow for emission controls at individual power plants, this must not be seen as an invitation to proliferate false solutions like carbon capture and sequestration, or other geoengineering schemes that cannot be granted operating permits pursuant to the CLCPA.
President Biden still has the existing legal authority to act and follow through on his promise to ban new federal fossil fuel leasing, halt permit approvals for new pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure, hit the brakes on new gas exports, halt crude oil exports, stop offshore oil and gas drilling, restrict international fossil fuel investment, and expand support to rapidly manufacture and distribute clean and renewable energy systems.
###
BACKGROUND:
Petitioners in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (red states, energy companies, and owners of coal mines) have challenged whether the EPA can use any means to regulate planet- warming pollution from power plants, without express authorization from Congress. The case arose from a challenge to the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP). Although that plan never took effect, and was repealed by the Trump administration, petitioners asked the Court to rule on whether the EPA has authority to issue the kind of rules the CPP would have imposed, requiring power plants to decarbonize by shifting toward cleaner energy sources. It challenged the EPA’s authority to require power plants to decarbonize, and the Court could set limits on what power the EPA has to require emissions reduction measures, and to regulate in a range of other areas. NYLPI Primer on SCOTUS WV v EPA decision impacts on EJ
The Key finding was “Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible “solution to the crisis of the day.” New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, 187 (1992). But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme in Section 111(d). A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is reversed, and the cases are remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.“ 20-1530 West Virginia v. EPA (06/30/2022)
###
NY Renews is a coalition of over 320 environmental, justice, faith, labor, and community groups, and the force behind the CLCPA, the nation’s most progressive climate law.