Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumLeaked SCOTUS Memos From 2016 Show Alito & Roberts Never Once Considered Costs Of NOT Regulating GHGs, Toxins
When the Supreme Court blocked President Barack Obamas signature climate regulation a decade ago, conservative justices were worried about the cost to industry, according to private memos reported by The New York Times. Chief Justice John Roberts called it the most expensive regulation ever imposed, repeating a refrain common among critics of Obamas Clean Power Plan. And although liberal justices argued the rule didnt require action for several more years, Republican-controlled states and energy industries faced immediate and significant harm from having to make plans, Justice Samuel Alito wrote. And this harm, once incurred, is by nature irreparable.
Ed. - Ah yes, "irreparable harm" - see also "Planet Earth", Sam.
Not mentioned in 16 pages of chamber memos from 2016 reported by the Times documents that were not expected to see the light of day for several more decades are the costs of not regulating greenhouse gases as they drive global temperatures to rise. The Clean Power Plan, proposed in 2015, aimed to reduce power plant climate pollution 32 percent by 2030. They should have been asking, What are the public benefits from the rule, the costs of blocking the rule? said David Doniger, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council. And they didnt even ask.A spokesperson for the Supreme Court did not respond to requests for comment.
The February 2016 stay of the Clean Power Plan, which came after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit declined to block it, sent shock waves across Washington. It was the first time the high court had stepped in to block a rule before a lower court had been able to rule on whether it was legal. But some of the courts conservative justices made the case that this was an unprecedented regulation.The case would inevitably end up before the Supreme Court eventually, and there is a fair prospect for reversal, Roberts wrote in his initial memo. In addition to casting a skeptical eye on EPAs authority, Roberts also highlighted the irreparable harm the rules opponents would face if it wasnt stayed immediately. Irreparable harm is one of the criteria to staying a regulation under Supreme Court precedent.
Roberts pointed to EPAs modeling, which indicated the rule would cause a 2 percent decrease in coal production for the power sector in 2016 and 2017 and a 4.3 percent decrease in 2018.That harm, once incurred, is irreversible, Roberts wrote. Given the long lead times and high capital expenditures required for the construction of new plants, once a utility takes steps to comply with the rule its actions are not likely to be undone. (In reality, coal production dropped 43 percent between 2015 and 2024 in the absence of any regulation, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration data.)
EDIT
https://www.eenews.net/articles/leaked-memos-show-supreme-court-ignored-climate-dangers-in-obama-regs-fight/
Blues Heron
(8,904 posts)FBaggins
(28,707 posts)It isn't their job to determine which policies will be most effective.
In this case, the question was whether or not the executive branch had the power to do something without congressional authorization (or, better put, whether the existing congressional authorization covered what they wanted to regulate). For SCOTUS is was (while that determination was working it's way through the lower courts) whether one side or the other was likely to win in the end and whether (while waiting) the side asking for the injunction would be irreparably harmed while waiting for the decision.
It was thus relevant whether some power company would spend large sums of money (that could not be undone) complying with the regulation, only to later find that it was not within the regulators' power in the first place.
eppur_se_muova
(42,144 posts)... particularly if it's going to diminish profit margins in even the slightest degree, despite truly overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They're little more than cavemen who learned to read and write.