“The President has said over and over again that where Congress does not act, he will act unilaterally. The EPA’s greenhouse gas permitting scheme is a perfect example of that dangerous philosophy in action. Today the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a stern rebuke to the President. The Court’s ruling affirms that we are a nation of laws, and the President and his executive agencies must follow the law just like anybody else. When they do not, the courts will hold them accountable. This is a great victory for the rule of law and for the Constitution. It is a resounding defeat for those, like the President, who would use unelected bureaucracies to override the will of the people.”
That’s the statement Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott issued after the June 23 Supreme Court decision that the EPA’s greenhouse gas permitting plan ignores federal law, exceeds the agency’s authority, and violates the Clean Air Act.
We couldn’t have said it better.
Nor can we add anything to the High Court’s compelling explanation for its decision.
“It is plain as day that the [Clean Air] Act does not envision an elaborate, burdensome permitting process for major emitters of steam, oxygen, or other harmless airborne substances,” the Court concluded.
Among other problems, the EPA’s presumptuous permitting process “would place plainly excessive demands on limited governmental resources [and] would bring about an enormous and transformative expansion in EPA’s regulatory authority without clear congressional authorization.”
The Court affirmed that in our republic “Congress makes laws and the President, acting at times through agencies like EPA, ‘faithfully execute[s]’ them. The power of executing the laws necessarily includes both authority and responsibility to resolve some questions left open by Congress that arise during the law’s administration,” it conceded. “But it does not include a power to revise clear statutory terms that turn out not to work in practice.”
Though segments of the mainstream media are trying to spin the Court’s decision as a victory for the EPA, it remains, as Abbott said, “a resounding defeat.”
Want to get notified whenever we write about
U.S. Supreme Court
Next time we write about
U.S. Supreme Court,
we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.
Sign-up for Alerts
Organizations in this Story
U.S. Supreme Court