-
Injured Australian swim star O'Callaghan pulls out of PanPacs
-
Veteran Wallabies playmaker Quade Cooper eyes World Cup comeback
-
California lifeguards wiped out from extreme weather
-
FIFA scraps private investment plan after backlash
-
FIFA scraps private investment plan after backlash: Infantino
-
US plans steep water cuts for southwest amid Colorado River crisis
-
South Africa's WAFCON hopes hang in the balance after dramatic draw
-
Nakashima ousts top seed de Minaur, Osaka advances at Washington
-
Hunter Bell cruises to Commonwealth gold, Pathirage stuns javelin stars
-
Nakashima ousts top seed de Minaur and Osaka advances at Washington
-
Amazon surges as US stocks shrug off bond yield worries
-
Nakashima ousts defending champion de Minaur to reach Washington semis
-
Google rolls back new satellite image AI tool after backlash
-
Magaia salvages last-gasp WAFCON draw for South Africa
-
Ryu leads in bid for third straight major at women's British Open
-
Forever chemicals and pesticides under Trump: what to know
-
Fire-hit France region 'coming up for air' as main blaze calms
-
US announces steep water cuts for three states amid Colorado River crisis
-
Wembanyama to get signature shoe in Nike contract extension: reports
-
EU grapples with migrant crisis in Spain's N. Africa enclave
-
Oil giants report blowout profits on war, warn high gas prices could persist
-
Hungary to shut nuclear plant as heatwave hits central Europe
-
Google launches new satellite image AI tool, alarming researchers
-
Strengthening El Nino 'adding fuel to a planet already on fire': UN chief
-
Eddie Howe resigns as Newcastle boss to 'recharge'
-
Tech-fuelled rally fizzles as oil prices rise
-
High winds hamper firefighting efforts in western Turkey
-
Chelsea's Mudryk cleared to play after doping ban appeal
-
Howe resigns as Newcastle boss
-
A side of oysters for France's flat-out firefighters
-
Full-scale tour will benefit All Blacks, says coach Rennie
-
England cricket chief Key refuses to rule out Stokes return
-
US Fed dissenters call for rate hikes over sustained inflation
-
New blazes in Greece as strong winds hamper firefighting
-
Trump and far-right seize on Spanish migration crisis
-
Springboks star Feinberg-Mngomezulu back for Argentina Test
-
Hamas agrees to disarm under Trump plan
-
Shops closed, businesses quiet as Spain's Ceuta faces migrant surge
-
French, Italian winegrowers face earliest ever harvest
-
Chelsea fined £10mn, handed suspended transfer ban for breaching agent rules
-
Alarm over climate-linked low level of German waterways
-
Residents defend Spain’s ancient 'El Abuelo' tree from flames
-
UK court rejects challenge against new Chinese embassy in London
-
Forever chemicals and pesticides: what to know
-
New York sues online prediction markets giant Kalshi
-
Spaniard Santi Denia takes over as Czech Republic coach
-
Commerzbank agrees to talks with UniCredit after two-year standoff
-
EU races to contain new migrant crisis as thousands cross into Spain's N. Africa enclave
-
A rumour, a rush: chaos at Morocco border with Spain's Ceuta
-
Profits surge at US oil giant amid Iran war supply shock
US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning
A divided US Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in an environmental regulation case with potentially far-reaching implications for the Biden administration's fight against climate change.
The case concerns the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants, which produce nearly 20 percent of the electricity in the United States.
As the Supreme Court was hearing arguments, the United Nations issued a landmark report containing dire warnings over climate change.
While the three liberal justices on the nine-member Supreme Court appeared largely to support arguments that the EPA was operating within its brief, several of the conservative justices appeared skeptical.
"This agency is doing greenhouse gas regulation," said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the liberal members of the court. "This is in, you know, exactly in its wheelhouse."
Jacob Roth, arguing for The North America Coal Corp., said the EPA is going beyond its remit.
"The agency is asking questions like: Should we phase out the coal industry? Should we build more solar farms in this country? Should we restrict how consumers use electricity in order to bring down emissions?
"Those are not the types of questions we expect the agency to be answering," Roth said.
In 2007, the Supreme Court, by a narrow majority, ruled that the EPA has the power to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act of 1970.
In 2015, Democratic president Barack Obama unveiled his Clean Power Plan, which was intended to combat global warming by reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal- and gas-burning plants and shifting energy production to clean sources such as solar and wind power.
The Clean Power Plan was blocked in the Supreme Court in 2016 and repealed by former Republican president Donald Trump, who replaced it with his own industry-friendly Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule.
Trump, a climate change skeptic hostile to government regulation of industry, also nominated three justices to the Supreme Court, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority.
- 'Constrain EPA authority' -
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out Trump's ACE rule on the last day of his presidency, setting the stage for the case currently before the Supreme Court: West Virginia vs EPA.
West Virginia and several other coal-producing states asked the Supreme Court to intervene and define the powers of the EPA. The case has also been embraced by opponents of strong government regulatory authority.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, arguing before the court for the Biden administration, said the justices should just wait until the EPA publishes its new rules.
"The DC Circuit's judgment leaves no EPA rule in effect," Prelogar said. "No federal regulation will occur until EPA completes its upcoming rulemaking.
"Petitioners aren't harmed by the status quo," she said. "Instead, what they seek from this court is a decision to constrain EPA authority in the upcoming rulemaking."
In its brief to the court, West Virginia accused the EPA of acting like "the country's central energy planning authority."
Justice Samuel Alito, one of the more conservative members of the court, questioned how far the EPA could go in regulating emissions.
"Is there any reason EPA couldn't force the adoption of a system for single family homes that is similar to what it has done, what it is claiming it can do, with respect to existing power plants?" Alito asked.
Prelogar, the solicitor general, replied that the EPA "has never listed homes as a source category and couldn't do so because they are far too diverse and differentiated."
UN experts, in the report issued Monday on the global impacts of climate change, said humanity is perilously close to missing its chance to secure a "liveable" future.
"The cumulative scientific evidence is unequivocal: Climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and planetary health," the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said.
Any further delay in global action to cut carbon pollution and prepare for impacts already in the pipeline "will miss a brief and rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all," the 195-nation IPCC warned.
The Supreme Court is expected to issue its decision in West Virginia vs EPA before June.
K.Brown--BTB