[ad_1]
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Friday joined President Trump and Congressional Republicans in overseeing the oil and gas industry to challenge California’s electric vehicles.
In a 7-2 decision, Justice revived industry lawsuits and determined that fuel manufacturers were trying to sue California’s strict emissions standards.
The lawsuit alleges that under President Biden, California and the Environmental Protection Agency are relying on 1970s ERA rules to combat smog as a way to combat 21st century climate change, abusing their powers.
California’s new emission standards “didn’t target the issue of air quality in our local California, as they say, required by the Clean Air Act, but instead were designed to address global climate change,” wrote Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, who used italics to explain the industry’s position.
The court did not control the case itself, but he said the fuel manufacturer was trying to sue him because it was injured by state rules.
“Fuel producers make money by selling fuel, so the decline in gasoline and other liquid fuel purchases caused by California regulations will undermine revenue,” Kavanaugh said.
Only judges Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson opposed.
Jackson questioned why the court “revives (and has already largely denied) the fuel industry lawsuit that all consents will be disputed soon.
But the outcome was hidden by recent actions by Trump and Congressional Republicans.
With Trump’s support, the House and Senate adopted the disapproval regulations adopted by the Biden administration, which would allow California to implement wide range of new regulations to require “zero-emissions” vehicles and trucks.
Trump said the new rules adopted in Congress are designed to replace California as the nation’s leader in the fight against air pollution and greenhouse gases.
At the White House bill signing ceremony, he said the disapproval measures “stricken California’s attempts to regulate national fuel economy by imposing national mandates of electric vehicles and regulating carbon emissions.”
“Our constitution does not allow a special status in one state to limit consumer choices and create standards that impose electric vehicle mandate across the country,” he said.
California Atty in response to Friday’s decision. General Rob Bonta said, “The fight for the battle for clean air is not over. We are disappointed with the Supreme Court’s decision to allow this case to advance in lower courts, but we will continue to vehemently defend California’s authority under the Clean Air Act.”
Some environmentalists said the decision would greenlight future lawsuits from industries and polluters.
“This is a dangerous precedent from hellish courts to protect the interests of businesses,” said David Pettit, an attorney at the Center for Climate Law Research in Biodiversity. “The decision opens the door to more oil industry litigation and attacks the state’s ability to protect residents and wildlife from climate change.”
Tony Brisco, a Times staff writer in Los Angeles, contributed to this report.
[ad_2]Source link
