4 ms·

But Congress hasn't disappeared now either and can easily s/may/must/. What's the problem?

• matthewdgreen 4y ago
  Because the Court has taken an issue that Congress did not [yet] show any urgent inclination to act on, i.e., alleged overreach by the EPA over many Congressional sessions with many different partisan compositions. And they have taken away Congress's discretion to decide its own agenda and priorities by turning this into an emergency that has to be dealt with right now by this Congress. There is real harm to this: it halts an existing regulatory process, and it may take years for Congress to repair the damage.
  • cryptonector 4y ago
    Since the EPA had tried to moot the case by holding back, there must be no emergency.
    • matthewdgreen 4y ago
      The fact that nobody was harmed by this regulation -- and there was no urgency -- and yet the Court still took the case is indeed a huge problem that underlines my concerns with this case. Why did the Court step into this case and override both Congress and the executive branch when the regulation itself wasn't harming the plaintiffs? The emergency here is that the EPA now has no idea what its authority will be on any regulatory actions regarding CO2. (And when Congress finally legislates, it won't know what its authority is either.)
      • cryptonector 4y ago
        The court decided there was a harm. Seems reasonable to me. > The emergency here is that the EPA now has no idea what its authority will be on any regulatory actions regarding CO2. That's hyperbole.