This news story originally provided by The Progress Report

November 27, 2006

BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES UNDER FIRE IN COURT
The Supreme Court has decided to hear two cases "that could determine whether the Bush administration must change course in how it deals with the threat of global warming." The first, Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp., "could determine the fate of an Environmental Protection Agency initiative targeting some of the biggest utilities in the nation." Duke Energy Corp. is resisting government enforcement action "requiring aging coal-fired plants to install state-of-the-art pollution-control equipment." Attorneys of the electric power industry claim that the government "changed course in regulating emissions from coal-fired power plants" and the industry "didn't know until 1999." Industry documents released Nov. 2 by the Natural Resources Defense Council revealed that "since the early 1980s, industry officials have been fully aware of the EPA requirements." The court's decision is due next summer along with a decision for the case Massachusetts v. the Environmental Protection Agency, in which opening arguments will begin Wednesday. Twelve states, led by California, and the District of Columbia are calling for the "Supreme Court to order the federal government to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobile tailpipes." The Bush administration is standing by its policy of relying on industry to reduce emissions voluntarily and arguing that "it has no power over an entire category of potential pollutants -- or that if it had the power, it wouldn't use it." Despite the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community, the EPA maintains that "greenhouse gases are not air pollutants, and therefore are not subject to government regulation." The agency argues that, if they were pollutants, "nationwide regulation would be premature at best and might cause more harm than good."