WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Monday on a case concerning the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to use the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Specifically, arguments will center on the permitting process by focusing on Massachusetts v. EPA—a 2007 ruling that supported the EPA’s authority, under the Clean Air Act, to limit emissions of greenhouse gases from vehicles.

Since then, the EPA has used that ruling to develop emissions standards for other sources, including power plants, chemical facilities, refineries and other facilities. The EPA has defended its regulatory expansion by claiming greenhouse gases are a danger to public health and welfare.

The question before the U.S. Supreme Court is whether the EPA’s emissions standards for vehicles under the Clean Air Act trigger similar requirements, during permitting, for those larger sources. Some states and industry groups are challenging that.

The case is not about the EPA’s overall authority to regulate greenhouse gases and, whatever the ruling, it is not expected to change the emissions limits the EPA is in the process of developing or implementing for new and existing power plants.

For Monday, the usual 60 minutes allotted for arguments in front of the U.S. Supreme Court has been expanded to 90 minutes.

Gov.Earl Ray Tomblin spent the weekend in Washington, D.C., for the National Governor’s Association’s Winter Meeting. He said he planned to meet with EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy during to the trip to “discuss reasonable standards to balance the environment and economic opportunity.”

bubble graphic


bubble graphic


  • Fentanyl Bomb

    At least we will get a sniff of which way the winds are blowing.

    This may be a landmark ruling that will validate some and more fully convince others that they are being oppressed.

    Either way, I do not expect any of the parties involved to just go away.

  • Rodney Hytonen

    "Economic opportunity" is nothing but a euphemism for fascism and corruption.

    Government has no place helping business or even communicating with it except to regulate it, and protect the people from its abuses.

  • Wirerowe

    In recent years the Supreme Court has made three horrible decisions. In first place for the most horrible decision was the citizens case that gave corporation free speech rights spelled out for individuals. Tied for second place are the decision that the mandate under the affordable care act is not a mandate and the decision that EPA has the authority under the original clean air act to regulate greenhouse gases for mobile sources. The Clean Air Act was passed in 1970 and amended in 1990. There is no way that the act could have envisioned the need to regulate greenhouse gases. Hopefully the Supreme Court will recognize this and give congress who has the sole authority to pass and amen legislation the authority to update the clean air act to regulate green house gases if they so choose. If 100% of "scientists" believe in it then it should be a snap to follow the constitution and control greenhouse gases.

  • WVU 74

    "The case is not about the EPA’s overall authority to regulate greenhouse gases and, whatever the ruling, it is not expected to change the emissions limits the EPA is in the process of developing or implementing for new and existing power plants."

    It will not affect other countries. There is an exception. In the Third World, there is a current need to import coal to produce electricity for their ever expanding populations. The need is nearly as great as their need for food.

    Depending on other countries to take responsibility for polluting the planet is nonsense. They have a higher priority and they call it -- survival.

  • Don Vinqujst


    • RHytonen

      What proof do you have of that claim?

      The government is the ONLY defense we have against the who are so profit-crazed they have destroyed West Virginia.

      THe EPA's only problem is it's so underfunded and small already that, like the DEP and DNS, Big Energy has completely Bought it.

      Why else would there be ANY exemptions to the clean air or clean water act?And why could frackers be exposing us all to cancer within ten years with those huge "evaporation impoundments?" Go try to breathe near one.
      The announced plan is for every home in WV and PA to have at least one within a mile.

      Dont even start about the 5 million gallons of permanently poisoned water they leave under the ground (at 10-20 THOUSAND psi)for EACH WELL - not each pad which usually have twelve wells on them. That has been communicating with the over 100,000 abandoned wells IN OUR COUNTY ALONE
      at an almst 100% frequency. In our town, it IS 100% so far. And some have frac fluid bubbling up in their yards without a well...that they know of. And deer kills are polluted and many are being found dead, along with livestock, in the heavily fracked areas. IT was not happening before. They drink the spilled brine as well as the cancer ponds..

  • jay

    The EPA is over reaching in it's attempt to enforce policy, corporate america and companies are and have been making head way and being responsible for pollutants the companies may be producing, some companies may to be fined but most are trying to be responsible care takers of our planet, we are not the only country that need to be responsible, are companies are leading in this area compared to others countries, the EPA needs to back off and give them time to adjust to ever changing policies and enormous fines, Now there is other matters to consider such as,an article in The Old Farmers Almanac pg.82 A strange ringing sensation, tells the how and why of climate conditions, also the website naturesverdict.net every member of congress should discover and read along with EPA administrators, this ininformation I feel is very important in order to make an informed decision on many aspects of our global world!

    • RHytonen

      Evidentlyyje "fines" you mention are negligible to the frackers.

      Looks like it's up to an enraged populace to stop it.