Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 FEBRUARY 2016

Implications Of The Clean Power Plan Stay

Late in the day on Tuesday, February 9, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed, for at least a year and possibly longer, the implementation of the Clean Power Plan, the EPA's widely-publicized regulations governing greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal-, oil- and gas-fired power plants.

United StatesEnergy and Natural Resources

Late in the day on Tuesday, February 9, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed, for at least a year and possibly longer, the implementation of the Clean Power Plan (CPP), the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) widely-publicized regulations governing greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal-, oil- and gas-fired power plants.  The stay means that the CPP's requirements and deadlines are on hold, at least until resolution of the pending legal challenges to the CPP.  But what are the broader implications of the Court's decision?

First, the stay decision bodes poorly for the ultimate fate of the CPP, even though the Supreme Court did not opine as to the CPP's legality.  The stay decision signals, at a minimum, that a majority of the Supreme Court is sympathetic to the challengers' claims that the CPP is unlawful.  Indeed, it signals more than that—a distrust of EPA's assertions about the minimal burdens imposed by the CPP.  That said, the CPP may yet survive judicial

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from