-
Britney Spears admits to reckless driving in plea deal
-
Two dead as car ploughs into crowd in Germany's Leipzig
-
Ujiri hired as president of NBA's Mavericks
-
McFarlane backs Chelsea flops after woeful Forest defeat
-
Demi Moore joins Cannes Festival jury
-
Two dead after car ploughs into people in Germany's Leipzig: mayor
-
China's Wu holds slender lead in World Snooker Championship final
-
Mosley fired as coach after Magic's first-round NBA playoff exit
-
Stars set for Met Gala, fashion's biggest night
-
Forest sink woeful Chelsea to boost survival bid
-
Oil prices jump as Iran attacks UAE, US warships enter Hormuz
-
France launches one-euro university meals for all students
-
French TV defend Champions Cup video referee after Van Graan criticism
-
Former France, England duo called up by Fiji for Nations Championship
-
US Supreme Court temporarily restores mail access to abortion pill
-
3 dead in Colombia monster truck show crash
-
Mysterious world beyond Pluto may have an atmosphere: astronomers
-
UniCredit raises capital ahead of Commerzbank takeover bid
-
A year into Merz government, German far right stronger than ever
-
French scholars seek to resurrect Moliere with AI play
-
Allies jolted on defence as Trump pulls troops from Germany
-
Passengers isolating on cruise after Cape Verde ban over suspected virus deaths
-
Famed cartoonist Chappatte calls medium a 'barometer' of freedom
-
Three things we learned from the Miami Grand Prix
-
Energy crisis fuels calls to cut methane emissions
-
Europe, Canada pull together in Yerevan in Trump's shadow
-
India's Modi eyes important win in opposition-held West Bengal
-
Hantavirus: spread by rodents, potentially fatal, with no specific cure
-
French starlet Seixas to ride Tour de France in July
-
Cruise ship operator says Dutch to repatriate two ill passengers
-
India's Modi eyes win in opposition-held West Bengal
-
In Wales, UK Labour Party loses grip on storied heartland
-
Musk vs OpenAI trial enters second week
-
India's Modi faces key test as vote count underway
-
Japan PM says oil crisis has 'enormous impact' in Asia-Pacific
-
Badminton no.1 An brings 'fire' as South Korea win Uber Cup
-
Saka sparks Arsenal attack into life ahead of Atletico showdown
-
Atletico aim to show Alvarez their ambition in Arsenal semi
-
Seoul, Taipei hit records as Asian stocks track Wall St tech rally
-
Boeing faces civil trial over 737 MAX crash
-
Australian inquiry opens public hearings into Bondi Beach shooting
-
Iran warns of ceasefire violation as US plans to escort Hormuz ships
-
North Korean club to play rare football match in South
-
Pistons rout Magic to cap comeback, book NBA playoff clash with Cavaliers
-
Japan, Australia discuss energy, critical minerals
-
Village braces for closure of Spain's largest nuclear plant
-
GameStop makes $56 billion takeover bid for eBay
-
Ex-NY mayor Giuliani hospitalized in 'critical' condition: spokesman
-
Europe, Canada leaders hold Yerevan talks in Trump's shadow
-
'No pilgrims': regional war hushes Iraq's holy cities
US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning
A divided US Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in an environmental regulation case with potentially far-reaching implications for the Biden administration's fight against climate change.
The case concerns the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants, which produce nearly 20 percent of the electricity in the United States.
As the Supreme Court was hearing arguments, the United Nations issued a landmark report containing dire warnings over climate change.
While the three liberal justices on the nine-member Supreme Court appeared largely to support arguments that the EPA was operating within its brief, several of the conservative justices appeared skeptical.
"This agency is doing greenhouse gas regulation," said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the liberal members of the court. "This is in, you know, exactly in its wheelhouse."
Jacob Roth, arguing for The North America Coal Corp., said the EPA is going beyond its remit.
"The agency is asking questions like: Should we phase out the coal industry? Should we build more solar farms in this country? Should we restrict how consumers use electricity in order to bring down emissions?
"Those are not the types of questions we expect the agency to be answering," Roth said.
In 2007, the Supreme Court, by a narrow majority, ruled that the EPA has the power to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act of 1970.
In 2015, Democratic president Barack Obama unveiled his Clean Power Plan, which was intended to combat global warming by reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal- and gas-burning plants and shifting energy production to clean sources such as solar and wind power.
The Clean Power Plan was blocked in the Supreme Court in 2016 and repealed by former Republican president Donald Trump, who replaced it with his own industry-friendly Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule.
Trump, a climate change skeptic hostile to government regulation of industry, also nominated three justices to the Supreme Court, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority.
- 'Constrain EPA authority' -
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out Trump's ACE rule on the last day of his presidency, setting the stage for the case currently before the Supreme Court: West Virginia vs EPA.
West Virginia and several other coal-producing states asked the Supreme Court to intervene and define the powers of the EPA. The case has also been embraced by opponents of strong government regulatory authority.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, arguing before the court for the Biden administration, said the justices should just wait until the EPA publishes its new rules.
"The DC Circuit's judgment leaves no EPA rule in effect," Prelogar said. "No federal regulation will occur until EPA completes its upcoming rulemaking.
"Petitioners aren't harmed by the status quo," she said. "Instead, what they seek from this court is a decision to constrain EPA authority in the upcoming rulemaking."
In its brief to the court, West Virginia accused the EPA of acting like "the country's central energy planning authority."
Justice Samuel Alito, one of the more conservative members of the court, questioned how far the EPA could go in regulating emissions.
"Is there any reason EPA couldn't force the adoption of a system for single family homes that is similar to what it has done, what it is claiming it can do, with respect to existing power plants?" Alito asked.
Prelogar, the solicitor general, replied that the EPA "has never listed homes as a source category and couldn't do so because they are far too diverse and differentiated."
UN experts, in the report issued Monday on the global impacts of climate change, said humanity is perilously close to missing its chance to secure a "liveable" future.
"The cumulative scientific evidence is unequivocal: Climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and planetary health," the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said.
Any further delay in global action to cut carbon pollution and prepare for impacts already in the pipeline "will miss a brief and rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all," the 195-nation IPCC warned.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue its decision in West Virginia vs EPA before June.
F.Santana--PC