Posted on 03/03/2016 8:05:41 AM PST by xzins
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rejected a plea Thursday to block a contentious air pollution rule for power plants, in a big victory for the Obama administration.
Roberts’s order came despite his court’s 5-4 decision last year ruling that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulation, known as mercury and air toxics standards, is illegal.
Michigan led a group of 20 states last month, empowered by the Supreme Court’s recent unprecedented decision to halt the EPA’s climate change rule for power plants, in asking the court to live up to its ruling last year and block the regulation’s enforcement. “Unless this court stays or enjoins further operation of the Mercury and Air Toxics rule, this court’s recent decision in Michigan v. EPA will be thwarted,” the states wrote in a Feb. 23 filing with the court.
“A stay or injunction is appropriate because this court has already held that the finding on which the rule rests in unlawful and beyond EPA’s statutory authority.”
The EPA responded that no judicial stay is necessary, since it’s working to fix the problem the court identified by next month, and the states would not suffer irreparable harm in that time.
“The requested stay would harm the public interest by undermining reliance interests and the public health and environmental benefits associated with the rule,” the government said. “The application lacks merit and should be denied.”
Roberts acted swiftly, waiting less than a day after the EPA’s response brief to side with the Obama administration. He acted unilaterally, electing to reject the request himself rather than take it to the full court, which may have led to a 4-4 split following Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.
The court ruled last June that the EPA should have conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the regulation before it even decided to start writing it. The agency did so as part of the regulatory process, but the justices said that was not sufficient.
But the Supreme Court did not overturn the rule at the time, and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in December that the EPA could keep enforcing it.
Environmental groups were very pleased with Roberts’s decision.
The whole basis of the rule is flawed
https://www.cfact.org/pdf/Scientific_Critique_of_EPA_MercuryRule062011.pdf
The one person we know we cannot trust is the race-baiting Cruz, who additionally lies about everything and blemishes the Church.
“Let’s not forget who pushed for and endorsed Roberts’ nomination.”
That would be pretty much every conservative on this forum. We all wanted a Constitutionalist. We all thought he was one. We were betrayed by Roberts for whatever reason, just like Rubio did to conservatives who supported him running for the senate.
But you might not remember that far back since you have only been participating on this forum since after Trump announced his candidacy.
I retract my comment about you joining after Trump became a candidate. I see you have been on the forum since 2012, like the year in your screen name. Time to take out my contacts and put on my glasses.
Well stated.
If we can get Trump or Cruz in the white hut and maintain both houses, I want Roberts impeached and replaced. Thomas will do just fine for CJ and that will leave two openings for good originalists to counter the two activists Soetoro put up.
No offense,but when Roberts was nominated by "W" no one over here at FR questioned whether it was a good pick. We all got fooled.
Trump or Cruz wins. No more EPA.
We don’t need epa.
We need a rivers and lakes pollution division within department of interior.
Dotcha. Just love the court’s?
If I am the coal, producing States. I pass legislation, Nullifying the Court’s ruling. And force, Obama and EPA to enforce their tyranny.
Yep. It’s way past time to restore checks and balances to this government, in all its legitimate forms.
Like I said in my original post, EVERYBODY here had no bad opinion of Roberts when W nominated him. So you are calling every Freeper a fool who was here in 2005?
Makes since, since you didn't join until 2015.
Not everyone
Curious. Where did you stand on the Roberts nomination? Or did you just learn who he was in the past year or so?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.