Creation Covenant Alliance

Analyzing the Supreme Court’s Recent Environmental Decisions

Even though the conservative justices have curtailed the power of Congress and the presidency, federal climate action is still possible.
The Supreme Court

At the close of its recent term, the Supreme Court issued several decisions limiting government agencies’ ability to implement laws, while expanding its own powers to review actions from Congress and the executive branch. These decisions threaten to destabilize effective modern government, including its ability to protect the environment and public health.

In Jarkesy v. SEC, the court eliminated the SEC’s ability to impose administrative penalties on fraudsters. In Corner Post v. Board of Governors, it opened the door for industries to challenge a range of federal agency decisions. In Ohio v. EPA, the court halted the EPA’s “Good Neighbor Plan” meant to reduce interstate air pollution. The most significant move came in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, where the court discarded judicial deference to agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutes, granting courts unprecedented power over public-health and environmental laws.

Each decision is problematic individually, but collectively they undermine Congress and the president. To understand the full impact, one must consider how the federal government has historically functioned. Laws like the Clean Air Act give agencies goals and rules to achieve those goals, expecting steady pursuit of these goals within statutory limits.

This model has worked well, as seen in the Clean Air Act, which prevented 370,000 premature deaths in 2020 and provided $30 in benefits for every dollar spent by polluting industries. Agencies need discretion to decide how best to pursue congressional goals, and courts used to defer to agencies’ reasonable decisions. This allowed agencies, under presidential direction, to handle policy and technical questions while courts corrected oversteps.

In Loper Bright, the Supreme Court claimed final authority over law interpretation, dismissing the need for technical expertise. Justice Kagan, in dissent, noted the court’s trend of overruling federal agencies on critical issues like workplace health, climate change, and student loans, centralizing power in the judiciary.

This shift of power to the judiciary will not benefit the public. Federal agencies are accountable to the president and the electorate, while courts lack democratic features and scientific expertise. The majority in Loper Bright overestimated its ability to master technical details, evident from confusion in Ohio v. EPA.

Despite these decisions, climate action remains possible due to economic forces favoring zero-emission technologies, public investments in renewable energy, and advocacy against fossil fuel interests. The regulatory work of agencies like the EPA provides stability to the clean energy transition, but the main drivers are beyond judicial interference.

The Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan aimed for a cost-effective shift from coal and gas power plants. The Supreme Court blocked it, yet emissions declined faster than required, driven by economic and public support for cleaner energy. However, this transition was less efficient without the plan. Effective government ensures a predictable and fair climate transition, but recent court decisions make the path more costly and chaotic.

Laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act require strong steps to ensure health and environmental protection. Agencies, supported by environmental advocates, will continue to act within the court’s new rules. The public’s commitment to environmental sustainability remains crucial for progress toward a stable climate.

Original Story at www.sierraclub.org

Trending News

Mississippi River Faces Persistent Saltwater Intrusion, Region Seeks Long-Term Solutions



For the third consecutive year, the Mississippi River is experiencing significant saltwater intrusion, prompting local communities and environmental experts to search for sustainable solutions. This recurring issue arises as the river’s flow decreases, allowing saltwater to move upstream and threaten drinking water supplies. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is actively involved in addressing this problem, employing temporary measures like saltwater barriers to mitigate the impact on affected areas.



Saltwater infiltration poses serious risks to public health and agriculture, as freshwater sources become compromised. The situation is exacerbated by prolonged periods of drought, which have reduced freshwater flow in the Mississippi River. According to the National Weather Service, drought conditions have worsened due to climate change, increasing the frequency and severity of saltwater intrusion events.



Local authorities are collaborating with federal agencies to explore permanent solutions. Among the proposed strategies are enhanced levee systems and improved water management techniques. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is evaluating the feasibility of long-term infrastructure projects to prevent further saltwater encroachment. Additionally, community leaders are advocating for increased funding to support these initiatives and safeguard the region’s water resources.



The impact of saltwater intrusion extends beyond drinking water concerns, affecting local ecosystems and agricultural productivity. Farmers in the region have reported crop damage due to elevated salinity levels in irrigation water. The Natural Resources Conservation Service is working with farmers to implement adaptive practices, such as planting salt-tolerant crops and improving soil management techniques.



As the Mississippi River continues to face challenges from saltwater intrusion, stakeholders emphasize the importance of collaborative efforts and innovative solutions. The ongoing threat underscores the need for comprehensive planning and investment to protect one of America’s most vital waterways from the impacts of climate change and environmental stressors.

November 19, 2024



Environmental activists have raised concerns over the fossil fuel sector’s significant impact on COP29, the latest United Nations Climate Change Conference. Activists argue that the industry’s presence diverts focus from critical climate actions.



The conference, designed to promote global climate agreements, faces criticism for allowing fossil fuel companies to participate extensively. Environmental groups claim these companies undermine efforts to reduce carbon emissions and transition to renewable energy sources.



According to Climate Action Network, fossil fuel representatives have increased their lobbying activities, aiming to weaken climate policies. These industries allegedly influence negotiations, leading to watered-down commitments that fail to address the urgency of climate change effectively.



Experts suggest that the influence of these companies stems from financial contributions and longstanding relationships with decision-makers. Critics argue that this affects the conference’s ability to enforce meaningful climate change regulations.



During the event, several protests highlighted the need for transparency and a stronger focus on sustainable energy solutions. Activists are calling for increased participation of renewable energy stakeholders in future conferences.



The controversy surrounding fossil fuel involvement at COP29 underscores the ongoing challenge of balancing industrial interests with the global imperative to combat climate change.



November 19, 2024