Supreme Court seems divided in climate case

Associated PressFebruary 25, 2014 

Supreme Court Greenhouse Gases

FILE - This Feb. 4, 2014 file photo shows Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Ky. during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington. The Supreme Court appeared divided on Monday over the sole Obama administration program already in place to limit power plant and factory emissions of gases blamed for global warming. The presence of McConnell in the courtroom underscored the political stakes in President Barack Obamaís high-profile effort to deal with global warming _ a policy Obama is pursuing after failing to persuade Congress to enact climate change legislation. McConnell is facing a tough re-election fight in which he refers often to the administrationís assault on the coal industry in Kentucky and elsewhere. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

J. SCOTT APPLEWHITE — AP

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court appeared divided on Monday over the sole Obama administration program already in place to limit power plant and factory emissions of gases blamed for global warming.

The justices took on a small, complicated piece of the politically charged issue of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in an extended argument that included references to Dunkin' Donuts stores, football games and light bulbs. The examples were meant to illustrate the vast potential reach of the program, in its critics' view, or its limited nature, as the administration argued.

The presence of Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky in the courtroom underscored the political stakes in President Barack Obama's high-profile effort to deal with global warming -- a policy Obama is pursuing after failing to persuade Congress to enact climate change legislation. McConnell is facing

a tough re-election fight in which he refers often to the administration's assault on the coal industry in Kentucky and elsewhere.

The court's liberal justices seemed comfortable with the scope of an Environmental Protection Agency permitting program that applies to companies that want to expand facilities or build new ones that would increase overall pollution. Under the program, the companies must evaluate ways to reduce the carbon they release. Carbon dioxide is the chief greenhouse gas.

However, conservative members of the bench indicated they're skeptical of the EPA's authority, with Justice Anthony Kennedy as the probable decisive vote. Kennedy seemed most interested in making clear that EPA would retain the ability to combat climate change under earlier high court rulings, regardless of the outcome of this case.

Both sides acknowledged on Monday that the result would not impede EPA's proposal of first-time national standards for new power plants or its regulations for existing plants expected to be proposed this summer. It will then move on to other large stationary sources such as factories.

The permitting program, though, is the first piece of EPA's attempt to reduce carbon output from large sources. Justice Samuel Alito suggested that EPA simply rewrote a provision of the Clean Air Act to justify its permitting program and avoid sweeping in tens of thousands of businesses.

Bradenton Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service