Oyez, oyez, oyez! It sounds like the U.S. Supreme Court justices doled out the questioning fairly and forcefully to both sides in today’s oral arguments to decide whether the EPA can and should regulate vehicle emissions under the Clean Air Act.
The NAM has issued a news release on the case, with our Vice President of Litigation Quentin Riegel observing, “Congress has enacted several laws to begin to address the global warming debate, but the Clean Air Act is not one of them.”
Sam Kazman, general counsel of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, witnessed the arguments and opines in the CEI’s Open Market blog:
I would predict that the EPA will win on the basis of Massachusetts not having standing. Moreover, even if EPA were to act on regulating CO2, the result would only be a minor reduction in emissions over the coming years. After all, it would take years to manufacture and sell new cars that have reduced CO2 emissions.
Case Western law professor Jonathan Adler, posting at the Volokh Conspiracy, covers the issue of standing, as well, sensibly enough to our non-legalized reading:
[The] overall structure of the Clean Air Act is a poor fit with greenhouse gas regulation. By this, I do not mean simply that it would be “inefficient,” but that it would not work. Certain provisions that could be triggered by a finding that greenhouse gases are pollutants under the Act make no sense if applied to globally dispersed pollutants with global effects. In sum, if the FDA did not have the authority to regulate tobacco, as the Court found in Brown & Williamson, I think there is a strong argument that the EPA lacks the authority.
And Iain Murray of The National Review punches a hole in an argument full of, well, hot air:
From the Mass v EPA oral arguments today, I give you James R. Milkey of the State of Massachusetts:
Your Honor, once these [greenhouse gases] are emitted the laws of physics take over, so our harm is imminent in the sense that lighting a fuse on a bomb is imminent harm.
Now that’s climate science!
Latest posts by NAM (see all)
- Manufacturers Win Several Website Design Awards - June 15, 2011
- China Makes Commitments on Trade, Intellectual Property - December 16, 2010
- ITC Details Widespread Theft of Intellectual Property in China - December 14, 2010