Supreme Court Just Crushed Biden’s Agenda With a Massive Ruling

OPINION:  This article contains commentary which may reflect the author’s opinion

Trump’s Supreme Court is almost better than having him as president. Not quite the same, but they are throwing some wrecking balls around on the libs.

In the wake of Roe vs. Wade being overturned by the Supreme Court, liberals became apoplectic, raging across the country. Violence erupted in some places, where, ironically, abortion is still legal. Saving babies to the left is abhorrent. They want no responsibility for individual actions.

In overturning Roe, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested in a concurring opinion that the Supreme Court should revisit certain rulings that have political implications.

He suggested reexamining contraception and gay marriage decisions by the Supreme Court.

Imagine if those decisions were changed. Liberal heads would supernova.

Today, SCOTUS delivered a victory for freedom while at the same time crushing angry Biden’s socialist agenda.

The Daily Mail reported:

The Supreme Court ruled in a 6 to 3 decision to restrain the federal government’s ability to regulate emissions at power plants.

The case declares it unlawful for federal agencies to make ‘major’ decisions without clear authorization from Congress. It appears to allow for regulations focused narrowly on capping pollution from smokestacks, but blocks wider rules that set state-by-state targets for emissions reduction or a cap-and-trade system that would trigger a faster shift to clean energy.

‘Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible ‘solution to the crisis of the day,’ Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his opinion for the court.

But he added that the Clean Air Act does not give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to do so.

‘A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body,’ he wrote.

The court’s liberals, Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented.

‘Today, the court strips the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power Congress Instead of deciding on an existing rule, the Supreme Court set a precedent for Biden’s future rule, which was expected to fall in line with his goal for the entire U.S. power grid to run on clean energy by 2035.

‘It’s a bad decision and an unnecessary one, but the EPA can still limit greenhouse gases at the source under Section 111 and more broadly through other Clean Air Act provisions. In the wake of this ruling, EPA must use its remaining authority to the fullest,’ said Jason Rylander, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, in a statement.

The question of how much power the EPA has was based on Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, which allows the agency power to set ‘standards of performance’ for air pollutants. gave it to respond to the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,’ the liberal Kagan wrote.

As a result of the ruling, the Biden administration will not be able to adopt the kind of sweeping emissions rules the Obama administration attempted to implement. Obama’s Clean Power Plan never went into effect after the Supreme Court put it on hold in 2016.

In West Virginia v. EPA, the court sided with coal power plants and Republican-led states following an appeals court decision to scrap the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule, a Trump-era regulation that virtually killed the Clean Power Plan.

However, the Clean Power Plan never went into effect, but the utility sector met its goals – a reduction of 32 percent in carbon emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. A new regulation was planned by the Biden administration and the Court was asked not to intervene.

The Mail continued:

Instead of deciding on an existing rule, the Supreme Court set a precedent for Biden’s future rule, which was expected to fall in line with his goal for the entire U.S. power grid to run on clean energy by 2035.

‘It’s a bad decision and an unnecessary one, but the EPA can still limit greenhouse gases at the source under Section 111 and more broadly through other Clean Air Act provisions. In the wake of this ruling, EPA must use its remaining authority to the fullest,’ said Jason Rylander, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, in a statement.

The question of how much power the EPA has was based on Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, which allows the agency power to set ‘standards of performance’ for air pollutants.

As a result of its decision Thursday, the court handed down the most significant climate case since 2007. At that time the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gases were air pollutants subject to Clean Air Act regulation. When Congress was deadlocked, then-president Obama attempted to combat climate change by regulating the power plants, which emitted more greenhouse gases than the transportation sector.

The justices had to decide whether Congress should ‘speak with particular clarity when it authorizes executive agencies to address major political and economic questions.’ They referred to this concept as ‘major questions doctrine.’

COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

 

 

 

 

 

Send this to a friend