This website requires certain cookies to work and uses other cookies to help you have the best experience. By visiting this website, certain cookies have already been set, which you may delete and block. By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to the use of cookies. Visit our updated privacy and cookie policy to learn more.
This Website Uses Cookies By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to our cookie policy. Learn MoreThis website requires certain cookies to work and uses other cookies to help you have the best experience. By visiting this website, certain cookies have already been set, which you may delete and block. By closing this message or continuing to use our site, you agree to the use of cookies. Visit our updated privacy and cookie policy to learn more.
As construction industry groups await a Supreme Court ruling in a narrowly focused Clean Water Act case, they also are seeking clues as to how the justices may view a much more important matter that has not yet come before them—an expected frontal challenge to a wide-ranging U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Army Corps of Engineers regulation governing federal jurisdiction over the “waters of the United States.”
Merrick B. Garland, President’s Obama’s nominee to fill the U.S. Supreme Court seat left open by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in February, has a history of giving deference to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in clean air and other environmental cases and has sided more often with EPA than industry, according to SCOTUSblog, which analyzes high court cases.
With Republicans vowing to block any Supreme Court nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died unexpectedly on Feb. 13, the fate of cases pending before the court, or that could end up on its future docket, has been clouded with uncertainty.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will abide by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to place a hold on implementing a rule to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions from power plants, the agency’s administrator says.
In a move that appears to have surprised power-market observers, the U.S. Supreme Court last month agreed to decide whether a state can offer subsidies for powerplant construction to provide needed capacity—without infringing on the authority of federal regulators and distorting the wholesale price of electricity.
