• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
  FEATURED
‘Huge Loss’ for Local Green Economy as Vancouver Shutters Its Economic Commission September 28, 2023
Leading Climate Models Underestimate Clean Energy Progress, Overstate Cost, Study Finds September 28, 2023
Green Space Groups Gear for Bigger Fights After Ontario Reverses Greenbelt Land Grab September 28, 2023
Put Lower-Income Households First in Line for Low-Carbon Technologies: Samson September 28, 2023
Fossil Fuels Fall 25% by 2030, Renewables ‘Keep the Path Open’ in IEA Net-Zero Update September 26, 2023
Next
Prev

DC Court Gives Trump a ‘Tactical Advance’ on Clean Power Plan Rollback

April 30, 2017
Reading time: 3 minutes

Michael Weinberg/Flickr

Michael Weinberg/Flickr

 

The Trump Administration won a conditional victory last week in its plan to roll back President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan, after the DC Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to postpone its decision on a pending lawsuit against the plan.

The decision “sends the rule back to Trump’s EPA to review and most likely quash the regulation,” Politico reports. “The court’s pause in the case means EPA will not have to contend with a potentially awkward opinion that could have upheld the regulation as Trump’s EPA worked to dismantle it. Many legal observers believed after last year’s arguments that the rule would have survived most, if not all, of the legal challenges.”

  • Concise headlines. Original content. Timely news and views from a select group of opinion leaders. Special extras.
  • Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
  • The Weekender: The climate news you need.
Subscribe

But InsideClimate News reports that the “significant tactical advance” doesn’t give the administration the clearcut victory it wanted.

Pruitt “had sought an indefinite hiatus—or ‘abeyance,’ in legal jargon—for as long as it took for him to decide what to do about controlling carbon dioxide emissions, which the Supreme Court has repeatedly found to be EPA’s mandate under the Clean Air Act,” writes ICN’s John H. Cushman Jr.

“Instead, the appeals court granted an abeyance for just 60 days. It asked the adversaries who have been fighting in court ever since the rules were proposed to submit briefs in just over two weeks on whether the painstakingly-devised regulations should be ‘remanded’—basically sent back to EPA’s drawing board.”

If that’s the way the eventual decision goes, emissions from U.S. power plants will be “largely unfettered by federal constraints”, ICN notes, “mitigated only by market forces, state and local laws, and rules governing other pollutions.” But Natural Resources Defense Council attorney David Doniger called the ruling disappointing but not devastating. If the court remands the rule, the existing Clean Power Plan will remain in force until it’s replaced. If not, both sides will face years of uncertainty (while clean energy markets continue to surge forward—Ed.).

New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman noted that the “temporary pause in the litigation does not relieve EPA of its legal obligation to limit carbon pollution from its largest source: fossil-fueled power plants,” adding that “I will continue to fight in court to ensure EPA fulfills its legal responsibility.”

Playing out one possible outcome of last week’s ruling, Politico reports that “Pruitt’s EPA now has the time it needs to review the rule and most likely propose repealing it.” But the actual repeal “could take a year or more, since the agency must go through the same sort of public notice-and-comment rulemaking it followed in creating the rule that was issued under former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy in 2015. And EPA’s final decision could be challenged in court, as well, meaning the agency would have to defend its legal rationale” for repealing a rule it previously championed.

Some observers believe that will be a tough argument for the EPA to make, since the climate science behind the Clean Power Plan becomes more robust, not less so, with each passing day.

“Some experts say it is possible that if EPA’s expected repeal is rejected by the courts in the future, the issue could simply push the court to rule on the legal merit of the challenges to the Clean Power Plan,” writes Politico’s Alex Guillén. “Repealing the Clean Power Plan and litigating that action could last through much of Trump’s term, keeping the issue in the political spotlight during the 2018 and 2020 elections.”



in Carbon Levels & Measurement, COP Conferences, Heat & Power, Legal & Regulatory, United States

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

Solarimo/pixabay
Ending Emissions

Leading Climate Models Underestimate Clean Energy Progress, Overstate Cost, Study Finds

September 28, 2023
176
shopblocks/flickr
Cities & Communities

E-Bikes, Scooters Overwhelm Toronto Bike Lanes

September 28, 2023
95
kelly8843496 / Pixabay
Environmental Justice

Put Lower-Income Households First in Line for Low-Carbon Technologies: Samson

September 28, 2023
43

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

Iota 9/Wikimedia Commons

‘Huge Loss’ for Local Green Economy as Vancouver Shutters Its Economic Commission

September 28, 2023
251
Rewat Wannasuk/Pexels

Virtual Power Plants Could Cut Peak Demand 20%, Save U.S. Grid $10B Per Year

September 20, 2023
201
Solarimo/pixabay

Leading Climate Models Underestimate Clean Energy Progress, Overstate Cost, Study Finds

September 28, 2023
176
McDonald's/flickr

McDonald’s Failing to Follow Through on Climate Promises, Critics Say

December 17, 2021
2.6k
Jason Blackeye/Unsplash

Fossil Fuels Fall 25% by 2030, Renewables ‘Keep the Path Open’ in IEA Net-Zero Update

September 28, 2023
472
Kristoferb/Wikimedia Commons

Oxford Expert Tackles 20 Myths About Heat Pumps

May 1, 2023
3.8k

Recent Posts

Duffins Agriculture Preserve/North Country House Media via Greenbelt Foundation

Green Space Groups Gear for Bigger Fights After Ontario Reverses Greenbelt Land Grab

September 28, 2023
207
DiscoverEganville/wikimedia commons

EV Rentals to Improve Transportation Access for Ontario Townships

September 28, 2023
72
shopblocks/flickr

E-Bikes, Scooters Overwhelm Toronto Bike Lanes

September 28, 2023
95
kelly8843496 / Pixabay

Put Lower-Income Households First in Line for Low-Carbon Technologies: Samson

September 28, 2023
43
Power lines, Mississauga, Canada

Two First Nations Groups Vie to Build Northern Ontario Power Line

September 28, 2023
146
Friends of the Urban Forest/flickr

U.S. Pours Record $1B into Urban Forest Grants

September 28, 2023
46
Next Post
jdoughertydc/Flickr

200,000 in DC, Hundreds of Rallies World-Wide, as People’s Climate March Protests Trump Rollbacks

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
The Energy Mix - Energy Central
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}