Opinion: The Supreme Court Has Now Limited the Environmental Protection Agency's Capacity to Curb Power Plant Emissions

Daniella Cressman

The Supreme Court has made a decision that could be even more disastrous for climate during a time when we are already in dire straits.


"In a blow to the fight against climate change, the Supreme Court on Thursday limited how the nation's main anti-air pollution law can be used to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants." —Mark Sherman

Quite a few conservatives do not believe in climate change. In my personal opinion, it is more convenient for a lot of individuals to disregard what is arguably the most urgent issue of our time because they profit from ignoring the severity of the problem.

Similarly, for many who are affiliated with oil companies in some way, they rely on their earnings from this industry to feed their families. While a lot of Democrats have explained—in detail—how many new jobs could result from a shift to clean energy, there is still a great deal of friction on this issue.

While I have long believed that shifting to clean energy more gradually would likely be better for the economy, our current circumstances are already forcing many Americans to reevaluate the necessity of gasoline-fueled vehicles, whether they like it or not.

The court's ruling is, unfortunately, yet another step backward for America in my view.

"The court's ruling could complicate the administration's plans to combat climate change. Its detailed proposal to regulate power plant emissions is expected by the end of the year. Though the decision was specific to the EPA, it was in line with the conservative majority's skepticism of the power of regulatory agencies and it sent a message on possible future effects beyond climate change and air pollution." —Mark Sherman

United States spokesperson Stephane Dujarric also sees the Supreme Court's ruling as a major setback in our fight against climate change.

In his words, this decision is "a setback in our fight against climate change, when we are already far off-track in meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement."

In a word, the Supreme Court's ruling is disappointing, though I would venture to say that is the understatement of the century.

Comments / 3

Published by

Canadian-American author writing about local politics, personal finance, & dining in Albuquerque.

Albuquerque, NM

More from Daniella Cressman

Comments / 0