On Friday, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit denied a stay request from 25 states aiming to block the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) newly established carbon emission rules for fossil fuel power plants. This decision allows the EPA to proceed with its regulations, while the larger lawsuit progresses on an accelerated schedule.
EPA’s Carbon Regulation History and Legal Challenges
The EPA’s regulatory efforts on carbon emissions trace back to the second Bush administration, where states successfully sued the agency to enforce greenhouse gas regulations. Under Obama’s administration, a formal endangerment finding was established, remaining unchallenged even during Trump’s term.
Obama’s Clean Power Plan faced legal hurdles and was not fully implemented by the end of his term. Trump’s administration introduced a less stringent replacement amidst the shift from coal to natural gas and renewables, which outpaced the Clean Power Plan’s goals.
On the last day of Trump’s administration, courts nullified his plan, enabling Biden’s EPA to start fresh. Biden’s initial strategy to regulate emissions on a state-wide basis was overturned by the Supreme Court, leading to plant-specific regulations per the West Virginia v. EPA decision.
Current EPA Plan and States’ Opposition
The EPA’s current regulations, issued last year, allow fossil-fuel plants scheduled for early 2030s shutdowns to operate without restrictions, while others must install carbon capture technology or switch to green hydrogen.
In response, 25 states sued to block these rules, requesting a stay to prevent implementation during the legal process. They argued carbon capture technology is underdeveloped for regulatory use and claimed the rules would effectively eliminate coal usage, beyond the EPA’s authority.
The DC Court of Appeals rejected these arguments, stating, “Petitioners have not shown they are likely to succeed on those claims given the record in this case.” The court noted states aren’t required to submit plans for two years, and the regulations won’t take effect until 2030, undermining claims of irreparable harm.
States cited the Supreme Court’s West Virginia v. EPA decision, arguing the new rules represent a “major question” needing Congressional input. The court disagreed, asserting the EPA’s authority to set emissions limits falls within its jurisdiction.
The court will review concerns about potential irreparable harm during the 2024 term, with parties given two weeks to propose briefing schedules.
4o