Court says it will consider a request by several states and trade groups to halt implementation of EPA emission reduction requirements for upwind states.
At the start of its 2023-2024 session on Oct. 2, the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet set a date to hear arguments in a major case that could reevaluate the authority federal agencies have to interpret ambiguous language in U.S. law in rulemaking.
Republican lawmakers on the House Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee criticized the Biden administration's recent rule covering U.S. waters protected by the Clean Water Act, calling it "bureaucratic overreach."
Oral arguments in Sackett v. EPA had justices squaring off on methods and tests used under the Clean Water Act to determine if building sites are federally protected—with other novel industry linked issues in additional cases this term
The U.S. Supreme Court has limited the ability of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate power plant greenhouse gas emissions, and though the court’s opinion referred to a fairly narrow provision within the Clean Air Act, the ruling potentially places broad restrictions on the ability of federal agencies to enact regulations to address the climate crisis, according to several sources.
In a 6-3 decision, justices said the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency overstepped its authority to set a broad greenhouse gas emissions reduction mandate.
US Supreme Court justices rule that 2018 Washington state law allowing more federal and federal contractor employees to claim benefits related to cleanup work at US Energy Dept nuclear site violates the US Constitution.
Arguments before U.S. Supreme Court pit power companies, EPA and environmental advocates against coal industry interests and several Republican-led states.