By Tom Molloy
A recent decision makes it easier for courts to block regulations to address air pollution, climate change and endangered species
Just when you thought the corruption of the Supreme Court could not get worse, the Trump-packed court on Friday curtailed the power of federal agencies to, among other things, regulate the environment and public health. The ruling makes it easier for courts to block regulations to address air pollution, climate change and endangered species. Here are the main points.
The pair of cases—Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce—challenged a federal rule that requires the herring industry to cover the costs of observers on fishing boats.
The Supreme Court struck down the rule, issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service, which lower courts had previously upheld, effectively overturns a long-standing precedent known as the Chevron doctrine. The doctrine says that courts should defer to an agency’s interpretation of a law, as long as that interpretation is reasonable. It was established by the Supreme Court’s landmark 1984 ruling in Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
Many conservative advocacy groups urged the court to overturn the Chevron doctrine, but petrochemical billionaire Charles Koch has played a particularly influential role through the “Koch network” to help fund the efforts. National Resources Defense Council, the Environment Defense Fund, and Earth Justice filed briefs. Other support from Democratic senators, the American Cancer Society and others fell on deaf ears.
David Doniger of the National Resources Defense Council says that “The real goal of the interest groups on the right that are backing this litigation is to enfeeble the federal government’s ability to deal with the problems that the modern world throws at us. We could end up with a weaker federal government, and that would mean that interest groups would be freer to pollute without restraint.”
In litigation over protections for vulnerable plants and animals, courts have often deferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s interpretation of the Endangered Species Act. That could change in response to Friday’s ruling. said Damien Schiff, a senior attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative public interest law firm that supported overturning Chevron. “Chevron has been invoked to justify a very broad level of discretion for how endangered species are protected,” Schiff said.
We can now expect a spike in lawsuits over actions by federal agencies—not only environmental agencies such as the EPA, but also the Departments of Education, Labor and Health and Human Services among others.
Staff for the House Republican Study Committee wrote days before the ruling, “If Chevron is rolled back or overturned, this will be a landmark decision which could open the door to Congress … rolling back Biden’s woke and weaponized administrative agenda.” Biden’s signature climate change and other legislation to support a more livable planet is now at risk.
In a lengthy dissent read from the bench, Justice Kagan said the court discarded precedent, unwisely setting up the Supreme Court and courts in general as the final arbiter on regulatory matters in which they are not experts. Kagan said that power rightly belongs with federal agencies. “In every sphere of current or future federal regulation, expect courts from now on to play a commanding role,” Kagan wrote in her opinion. “It is not a role Congress has given them. … It is a role this court has now claimed for itself, as well as other judges.” Kagan said Friday’s ruling would cause “breathtaking change” and shift power to the courts.
The long-standing precedent, she wrote, “falls victim to a bald assertion of judicial authority. The majority disdains restraint, and grasps for power.” How do we respond? Get out the vote! Legislation can take precedence over some Supreme Court decisions. As Nora Ephron said – which I repeat here to motivate independents and those who choose to be uninformed – “ The President has got to be a Democrat, that goes without saying because, after all, there’s the Supreme Court.“ And that we live with for a lifetime. Whether the environment can survive the lifetime appointments of this corrupt Supreme Court remains to be seen. Get out the vote!
