Washington, D.C
The Supreme Court this week struck down a key component of the Bush administration’s laissez-faire approach to global warming, ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate automobile emissions or provide legal and scientific justifications for not doing so. In a 5–4 decision, the court ruled that the EPA had the authority to regulate the emissions, contrary to the EPA’s claims. The suit, brought by Massachusetts and other states, argued that citizens were being irreparably harmed by the EPA’s refusal to regulate automotive gases that trap the sun’s heat and contribute to global warming. Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said the EPA’s “laundry list” of reasons for not enforcing clean-air regulations was not sufficient. Justice Antonin Scalia, dissenting, said the court was improperly interfering in a dispute between the White House and Congress.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
-
5 health-conscious cartoons about anti-vaccine rhetoricCartoons Artists take on RFK Jr's militant methods, the viral lottery, and more
-
September 13 editorial cartoonsCartoons Saturday's political cartoons include court-approved racial profiling and America's moral compass
-
Giorgio Armani obituary: designer revolutionised the business of fashionIn the Spotlight ‘King Giorgio’ came from humble beginnings to become a titan of the fashion industry and redefine 20th century clothing
