Okay, here's the gist: Not good, but also not as bad as it could have been. It's pretty narrow & focused on Section 111d of the Clean Air Act. Does not say EPA can't regulate CO2. Still leaves Section 115, particulate matter regulations, TSCA and more: drilledpodcast.com/what-paths-wou
Conversation
Replying to
Here's a link to the ruling: supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf. I'll have more detailed analysis later. Take the day to grieve if you need to, then please get pissed and fight.
7
35
288
This was just too weird a case for them to go full ham but if the perfect case is not already on its way to SCOTUS it will be soon.
1
25
174
ALSO just want to point out that the head of the EPA under Trump, who injected the major questions doctrine here when repealing the Clean Power Plan, was also the guy who spearheaded this case as the head of RAGA 🤯 Scott Pruitt, always working for coal.
6
48
201
But the RAGA (Republican Attorneys General Association) machine has only gotten more powerful and emboldened since Pruitt ran it. Their fingerprints are all over the court’s docket these days, and the goal is to get back to a pre New Deal era (follow !)
4
33
166
Replying to
That’s exactly what I was thinking reading it, esp the bit where Roberts is like DHS doesn’t weigh in on foreign policy, OSHA can’t regulate emissions yada yada
1
18
Show replies