US top court examines rules on cross-border air pollution

December 11, 2013
The US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, November 6, 2013

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments on environmental rules aiming to reduce smog that drifts from one state to another.

An appeals court in Washington has blocked the Environmental Protection Agency's "good neighbor" regulations, saying the agency exceeded its authority, after 14 states and several industry groups appealed.

But nine states and six cities have asked the top court to reverse the decision and put the regulations into force.

At issue are control measures on emissions of sulfur dioxide and other greenhouse gases which sometimes waft across state boundaries, leaving upwind states in violation of clean air standards.

The government claims this pollution is behind one out of every 20 deaths in the United States and thousands of cases of asthma.

The EPA under the program would make a determination as to whether a given state had "contributed significantly" to the of a neighboring state.

If so, the federal agency required that the offending state state implement corrective measures, including possibly closing old factories or making sizeable investments in emission-reducing technology.

US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer answers a question during an interview at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on May 17, 2012

Air pollution "depends on where the wind blows, and that changes all the time," emphasized liberal Justice Stephen Breyer, apparently leaning towards approving the EPA regulations.

But Texas Lawyer Jonathan Mitchell, who also represents 13 other states and Peter Keisler, lawyer for several industry and mining groups, questioned whether the EPA had the authority to impose these costly regulations, and conservative Justice Antonin Scalia seemed to agree.

Justice Samuel Alito recused himself, leaving eight justices to issue a decision, likely in the spring.

The four progressive justices seemed swayed by the government arguments, while the four conservatives seemed more divided in their opinions.

Explore further: US court upholds agency's global warming rules

Related Stories

US court upholds agency's global warming rules

June 26, 2012

(AP) — A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld the first-ever U.S. regulations aimed at reducing the gases blamed for global warming, handing down perhaps the most significant decision on the issue since a 2007 Supreme ...

Court strikes down EPA pollution rule

August 22, 2012

A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down a key Obama administration air pollution rule meant to protect residents of some states from polluters in neighboring states, saying that the Environmental Protection Agency must ...

What moves the Supreme Court's 'swing' justices?

November 1, 2013

Whenever the U.S. Supreme Court hands down a 5-4 decision, the pivotal "swing" vote must be cast by the "median" justice (midway, ideologically, between four more liberal justices and four more conservative), right?

Recommended for you

Asteroid impact, volcanism were one-two punch for dinosaurs

October 1, 2015

Berkeley geologists have uncovered compelling evidence that an asteroid impact on Earth 66 million years ago accelerated the eruptions of volcanoes in India for hundreds of thousands of years, and that together these planet-wide ...

History shows more big wildfires likely as climate warms

October 5, 2015

The history of wildfires over the past 2,000 years in a northern Colorado mountain range indicates that large fires will continue to increase as a result of a warming climate, according to new study led by a University of ...


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.