WASHINGTON − On Wednesday, the Supreme Court decided not to suspend the Biden administration’s initiative aimed at cutting emissions from coal-powered plants, even though the Court had previously put a stop to a similar initiative from the Obama administration.

The Court dismissed an urgent appeal from Republican-led states and energy sector groups requesting that the strict emission reduction mandates be frozen while the matter is in legal proceedings.

Justice Clarence Thomas expressed that he would have approved the request.

Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch commented that the states and industry representatives may ultimately prevail in their arguments. However, they emphasized that there is no need for the Supreme Court to intervene prior to the appeals court’s ruling, given that compliance will not be required until next year.

Kavanaugh stated, “Thus, this Court justifiably denies the stay applications for the time being. With the D.C. Circuit moving swiftly, it is expected to conclude the case within the current term.”

Justice Samuel Alito did not participate in the decision, but did not provide a reason for his recusal.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unveiled the new regulations in April to address climate-related pollution.

The administration’s legal representatives informed the Supreme Court that, “Climate change poses the most significant environmental challenge we face today.”

Environmental and public health advocates warned in a legal filing that postponing the compliance deadline would result in millions of additional tons of carbon dioxide emissions being released into the atmosphere.

‘Déjà vu all over again’

The challengers argue that the required technology for maintaining the operation of coal-fired plants is impractical and that the EPA has overstepped its jurisdiction, mirroring allegations made during the Obama era concerning carbon emission reductions.

In 2022, the Supreme Court, split along ideological lines, ruled that the EPA could not undertake such significant measures without clearer authorization from Congress.

Referring to this latest case, Republican attorneys general from 25 states remarked it feels like “déjà vu all over again.”

The states, along with trade associations for power producers and the coal industry, had requested the Supreme Court’s intervention after the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to suspend the regulations in July.

The appeals court reasoned that a suspension was unnecessary because compliance wouldn’t be required until some time after the legal challenge is resolved.

The court also asserted that the current rules “are well within the EPA’s authority,” unlike the earlier version that the Supreme Court had invalidated.

After the Supreme Court blocked the Obama administration’s regulations in 2016, the Trump administration rescinded them the following year. However, Democratic-led states contested the repeal, resulting in the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that the EPA had indeed overextended its powers.

Coal-fired power plants are responsible for nearly 25% of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Reduce or Capture 90%

Under the new regulations, existing coal plants and new natural gas plants are required to reduce or capture 90% of their greenhouse gas emissions by 2032.

The EPA believes it is possible to achieve the targeted reduction through carbon capture and underground storage techniques, and does not expect the Supreme Court to challenge its scientific and technical assessment. However, critics assert that the technology is still in development and has not proven it can be implemented as rapidly or broadly as the administration claims.

Furthermore, the EPA has projected that most coal power plants may shut down by 2045.

Out of the approximately 220 coal plants still operating today, many have announced plans to retire within the next ten years.

While some energy companies have challenged the EPA, including the Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned utilities, other major utilities, like Pacific Gas and Electric and Con Edison, have backed the agency and urged the Supreme Court to uphold these rules.