In addition, the court reduced the agency’s authority in general by invoking the doctrine of so-called “main questions,” a ruling that will affect the federal government’s authority to regulate in other areas of climate policy, as well as the Internet and worker regulation. security.
The sentence was 6-3. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the Conservative majority, with the three Liberal judges disagreeing. Roberts said “our precedent advises skepticism toward the EPA’s assertion” that the law “authorizes it to design carbon emission limits based on a generational change approach.”
“According to our precedents, this is a case of important questions,” Roberts wrote, adding that “there is little reason to think that Congress assigned these decisions to the Agency.”
Roberts wrote that limiting carbon dioxide emissions to a level that will force a national transition from coal use may be a “sensible” solution.
“But it is not plausible that Congress has given the EPA the authority to adopt this regulatory scheme on its own” under the law in question.
“A decision of this magnitude and consequences rests with Congress itself, or with an agency acting in accordance with a clear delegation from that representative body,” he wrote.
This story is being broken and will be updated.