Consumers and businesses won big on Monday, when the Supreme Court struck down an Environmental Protection Agency regulation on coal plant emissions because the EPA failed to consider whether the
I'm missing something here (Supreme court blocks Obama's limits on power plants): The Supreme Court on Monday blocked one of the Obama administration’s most ambitious environmental initiatives, an Environmental Protection Agency regulation meant to limit emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants from coal-fired power plants. Industry groups and some...
The White House OMB released a Statement of Policy this week detailing the many reasons why the President would veto H.R. 2822, a 2016 appropriations bill for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior put together by the Appropriations Committee in the House of Representatives. read more
On Monday night, the networks showed scant interest in covering the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling against the Obama administration and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the regulation of power plant emissions as NBC ignored the story completely with ABC and CBS combining to spend only 29 seconds on the decision. Show More Summary
(Reuters) - Sixteen states on Monday filed lawsuits against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, contesting a rule that expands the definition of bodies of water subject to federal pollution controls.
In the last announced decision of its term, the U.S. Supreme Court today, by a 5-4 vote and an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia, struck down the Environmental Protection Agency's carefully-crafted rules to limit the emission of mercury...Show More Summary
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled 5-4 that when the Environmental Protection Agency made its first-ever rule limiting toxic air pollution like mercury from power plants, it failed to adequately take into account the costs of reducing...Show More Summary
In a five-to-four decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency “unreasonably” interpreted the Clean Air Act...
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia compared the Environmental Protection Agency's rulemaking to buying a Ferrari without looking at the price tag, and even claimed that a regulation that restricts mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants could hurt human health and the environment
Siding with industry against the Environmental Protection Agency, Supreme Court holds that EPA can only regulate air pollution when it’s cost-effective to do so.
The U.S. Supreme Court plunked a setback into the lap of the Environmental Protection Agency Monday by trashing the agency's regulation of emissions of mercury and other air toxins from electricity-generating plants. The court overturned a lower-court decision in the case of Michigan v. Show More Summary
The utility industry wins a critical -- but possibly short-lived -- victory as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Environmental Protection Agency must consider costs in certain regulations.
In a 2014 ruling, an appeals court decided that the Environmental Protection Agency "properly [put] the horse before the cart" in coming up with mandates to limit power-plant emissions of mercury and other pollutants. The Supreme Court today overturned that ruling, blocking a key White House environmental initiative because it...
In a 5-4 ruling, the court says the Environmental Protection Agency should have taken into account the costs of complying with regulation.
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court threw out an Environmental Protection Agency regulation limiting mercury and other toxic emissions from power plants on Monday, undermining the Obama administration's drive to cut pollution from electricity...Show More Summary
The Supreme Court on Monday blocked the Obama administration’s plan for controlling emissions of mercury and other toxins from power-company smokestacks, saying the Environmental Protection Agency should have considered the cost of the rules first.Read full article >>
From the Hill, a summary of the ruling: The Supreme Court overturned the Obama administration’s landmark air quality rule on Monday, ruling the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not properly consider the costs of the regulation. In...Show More Summary
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must consider costs before deciding whether regulation is appropriate and necessary. In the 5-4 decision, the majority of justices reversed the D.C. Show More Summary
Backstop plans for states that don’t draft their own plans for compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed Clean Power Plan can utilize renewable energy and energy efficiency to keep costs associated with reducing carbon emissions down, based on a new report from Advanced Energy Economy (AEE). Show More Summary