US Supreme Court limits government action against climate change

In a ruling written by Chief Justice John Roberts and supported by five other conservative judges, the highest court in the country found that the Clean Air Act did not give the EPA broad authority to regulate emissions from already constructed facilities.

The resolution does not criticize carbon dioxide emission limits, which it sees as “a sensible solution to the crisis of our time” – referring to the previous sentence – but denies that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate these limits. the Clean Air Act, written decades ago.

The leader of the Democrats in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, criticized the Supreme Court’s decision, likening it to the sentence that abolished the legal protection of abortion, saying “It would lead to more unnecessary deaths—in this case, an increase in Pollution”, in a statement released minutes after learning of the decision.

Republican leader in the Upper House, Mitch McConnell, for his part, celebrated that the sentence “restores power to the people”; this is an argument similar to the one used to praise the penalty for abortion, which does not prohibit the medical interruption of pregnancy, but it gives states the power to regulate it.

Referring to the previous sentence, the three progressive judges of the Supreme Court issued a dissenting opinion, criticizing the court that “Congress has taken from the EPA the authority to respond to the ‘biggest environmental challenge of our time'”. .

“The Court delegates the power to decide environmental policy to itself, rather than Congress or the specialized agency. I can’t think of much more frightening,” Judge Elena Kagan wrote.

For some US media, the decision is an example of the conservative majority of this court’s tendency to limit the power of federal agencies in favor of broader legislative action.

Petition for new laws to limit pollution

The Sierra Club, one of the oldest environmental organizations in the US, criticized the Court’s decision, while urging US President Joe Biden to introduce new laws to limit pollution.

“Our future depends on it,” said Andres Restrepo, attorney for the organization’s environmental law program.

Biden’s ambitious climate policy came into question six months ago, when a stalemate in the Senate, which is 50-50 percent split between Democrats and Republicans, blocked passage of his “Rebuild Better” plan, which aims to allocate billions of dollars to war. against climate change.

A spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General described this Thursday as a “setback” in the fight against climate change, the US Supreme Court’s decision to limit the government’s Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA, English) power to regulate the environment. emissions of polluting gases emitted by power plants.

Reactions in Spain

Spanish environmental organizations have expressed disappointment with the decision. Since Greenpeace, José Luis Garcia It denounced the decision of “radical members” of the Supreme Court to block the fight against climate change and considered it severely restricting the federal government’s ability to protect people and life-supporting ecosystems.

José Luis García, “It is clear from his last sentences that this court owes itself to the corporate lords,” said José Luis García, who is no doubt that the American judges intend to overthrow the rules and institutions of democracy. the health and safety of families, communities and future generations.

“This decision represents a major setback for the climate fight, not just in the United States but worldwide,” he told EFE. Irene RubieraA member of the legal team at Ecologista en Acción reminded that behind this decision were “great friends of the fossil industry” who support the Republican majority in the US Congress.

Rubiera said President Joe Biden “will tie his hands to run an ambitious climate policy.” Efforts must be made against climate change at all levels, from states to governments”.

…..

Environment department contact address:[email protected]