Alabama among 28 states calling on US Supreme Court to stay EPA’s clean power plan

8

Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange said Tuesday that the state has joined 27 other states to demand the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the Environmental Protection Agency‘s (EPA) Clean Power Plan, according to a news release.

The states involved in the petition are a bipartisan conglomerate asking for a halt to the “unlawful and job-killing” plan, which sets a national limit on carbon pollution created by power plants.

“Once again, President Obama has attempted to radically expand the power of the federal government by adopting policies through executive action that Congress has refused to enact,” Strange said. “But the scope of President Obama’s job-killing Clean Power Plan is unprecedented. If this new EPA rule is allowed to go into effect, it will shutter coal-fired power plants around the country, resulting in higher electricity costs and fewer jobs. The United States Supreme Court should act to immediately stay this rule until the lower courts can address the serious concerns the states have raised about its legality.”

The states involved in the coalition, which challenged the new EPA rule on the day it was published last year, include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming, along with the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Mississippi Public Service Commission, North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality.

The petition, addressed to SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts, claims that “the power plan’s central premise that states may be required to meet emission reductions based on the shifting of electricity generation away from coal-fired and fossil fuel-fired plants is unprecedented and unlawful.”

The petition further states that the “EPA’s invasion of the states’ historic powers is unsupported by the required clear statement of congressional intent” and “the power plan unconstitutionally commandeers and coerces states and their officials into carrying out federal energy policy,” among other assertions.

Share.

8 Comments

  1. Another waste of our state money, tilting at the anti-Federal windmill.
    I think SCOTUS has already made itself clear when it REJECTED – just last week- a request by this SAME GROUP of litigants – to block implementation of regulations on emissions from coal-fired power plants while a lawsuit moves through the courts.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/22/us/politics/court-rejects-bid-to-delay-obama-rule-on-climate-change.html?_r=0

    I DO NOT understand why our State Attorney General is spending so much funds from his budget (during our fiscal crisis) pursuing a fights against Federal laws, as well as having to defend in court so many unconstitutional laws passed by our legislature.

    • AND it is further evidence that our state will be one of the LAST ones to implement ANY renewable energy plan that will bring thousands of new jobs to our state, to replace the ones that are lost. The Attorney General, the PSC and lots of politicians are in the pockets of Drummond and the other coal gods, doing their bidding for a dirty, declining fuel source. They will skip town and leave a mess the minute they can’t gouge us for maximum profit.

Show Buttons
Hide Buttons
%d bloggers like this: