2 ms·

> That wasn’t on the list of measures available under the Clean Air Act. There's a whole bunch of wrong rolled up here. The regulations were about how to stop

> That wasn’t on the list of measures available under the Clean Air Act. There's a whole bunch of wrong rolled up here. The regulations were about how to stop CO2 from polluting the atmosphere. From there, you try to play Senator CS to shift this into some sort of weird "delegating an industry" language. But in the end it was all about regulating CO2. If the EPA had acted outside its authority, in what you term "delegating an industry," lower courts would have said that. Instead, in order to stop the EPA's actions, the Supreme Court had to change the scope of the law that was passed.

laverya 4y ago
> There's a whole bunch of wrong rolled up here. The regulations were about how to stop CO2 from polluting the atmosphere. From there, you try to play Senator CS to shift this into some sort of weird "delegating an industry" language. > But in the end it was all about regulating CO2. The regulations were about how to stop things OTHER than CO2 from polluting the atmosphere without destroying the US economy. Things like Sulfur Dioxide and fly ash. CO2 may fall under the language as written, and it may be appropriate for the EPA to regulate it, but that was not the central example of an airborne pollutant back in the 70s when this was written (Or 90s, when it was amended).