Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Court Hears Emergency Bid From States to Stay EPA's "Good Neighbor" Rule
Summary
The Supreme Court heard arguments in Ohio v. EPA over an emergency request to stay the EPA's multi-state "good neighbor" federal plan. State applicants say the agency's single cost-threshold method becomes arbitrary if many states drop out; EPA and the Solicitor General said a stay would harm downwind states and industry.
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 23-349, on an emergency application by a coalition of states seeking a stay of the EPA's "good neighbor" federal plan for interstate ozone pollution.
Applicant counsel told the Court the EPA adopted a single cost-threshold method across 23 states and then failed to account for the possibility that many states would be removed from the plan. "The plan now regulates under half of the states and a quarter of the emissions that the EPA originally set out to regulate," counsel said, arguing that EPA's methodology becomes arbitrary and imposes unfair costs and reliability risks on the states and industries left in the plan.
The applicants asked the Court for emergency relief, saying compliance spending is already under way and that some industry declarations warn of imminent reliability and energy…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat