The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday to temporarily block President Barack Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan.
The Clean Power Plan would establish federal limits on carbon emissions across the country, Brett Healy, John K. MacIver Institute for Public Policy president, said. Each state would have the flexibility to adapt this plan according to its needs.
Wisconsin officials voice disapproval over federal Clean Power Plan
Healy said the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision was rooted in its concern of the plan’s future impact.
“Supreme Court recognizes significant damage the plan will have on economy and way of life,” Healy said.
According to a statement from Attorney General Brad Schimel, 24 states, including Wisconsin, filed a lawsuit against the plan in the D.C. Court of Appeals to remove the plan altogether. While this lawsuit was unsuccessful, the states filed another lawsuit, this time in the U.S. Supreme Court. Based on the second lawsuit, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay on the plan’s implementation until further debate.
Schimel said in another statement the plan was unconstitutional, and he commends the Supreme Court’s recent decision.
“It is an extraordinary action for the Supreme Court of the United States to grant a stay and is telling of the obvious illegality of the rule,” Schimel said. “It’s imperative that we fight back against the federal government’s intrusion into the affairs of the State of Wisconsin.”
Gov. Scott Walker also expressed his support for the decision in a statement and said it was a “win for Wisconsin.” He said the plan surpassed the president’s authority and would cost Wisconsin ratepayers and businesses approximately $13 billion.
Lucas Vebber, director of environmental and energy policy at Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, said WMC is very happy with the plan’s stay because the plan would have cost jobs and increased electricity prices in the state.
“This will be good for Wisconsin’s families and employers, especially manufacturers,” Vebber said.
Vickie Patton, general counsel for Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement the Supreme Court’s decision does not reflect a decision on the plan’s merits. When implemented, the plan would have several environmental and health benefits including reducing carbon emissions and 90,000 childhood asthma attacks annually. It would also save $85 on annual energy bills, Patton said.
Patton said the Supreme Court made the decision to stay the plan by a 5-4 vote. Attorney generals of 18 states, 10 power companies, clean energy organizations and public health and environmental organizations have formed a coalition that will defend the plan.
“The Clean Power Plan has a firm anchor in our nation’s clean air laws and a strong scientific record, and we look forward to presenting our case on the merits in the courts,” Patton said.
Healy said the plan’s fate would not be finalized until summer 2017. It will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court once the lawsuit against it has been completed.
