Clearing the air
THE STAKES WERE much higher -- about as high as the Earth’s atmosphere -- but California won a gratifying victory Monday in the Supreme Court. In a case that could easily have been called Science vs. Bush, the court ruled 5 to 4 that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming -- and that states can go to court to demand that the EPA do its duty.
The decision puts pressure on the EPA to revisit the question of regulating greenhouse gases, and it adds momentum to an effort in Congress to legislate tighter controls. It also should make it easier for California to enforce its own strict controls on greenhouse gases. Last year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed California’s landmark global warming law, which seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by 2020.
Justice John Paul Stevens’ majority opinion begins with a science lesson. “A well-documented rise in global temperatures has coincided with a significant increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” it reads. “Respected scientists believe the two trends are related. For when carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere, it acts like the ceiling of a greenhouse, trapping solar energy and retarding the escape of reflected heat.”
After establishing the scientific framework, the opinion disposes of two arguments for dismissing the lawsuit brought by Massachusetts, California and 10 other states: that the Clean Air Act does not cover greenhouse-gas emissions and that, even if it does, state governments lack the legal standing to sue the EPA in federal court.
On the first point, the decision relies on the plain language of the Clean Air Act, which refers broadly to “air pollutants.” As for the states’ standing to sue, it cites past decisions holding that states are not “normal litigants.” As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in a 1907 case: “[T]he State has an interest independent of and behind the titles of its citizens, in all the earth and air within its domain. It has the last word as to whether its mountains shall be stripped of their forests and its inhabitants shall breathe pure air.”
For Californians, the decision is especially satisfying. By recognizing that greenhouse gases are covered by the Clean Air Act, the court has made it possible for California to seek a waiver from the EPA for controls stricter than those that the federal government imposes. California’s EPA, which predates the federal agency, is entitled under federal law to set higher standards for tailpipe emissions. Other states can then follow California’s standards or the federal government’s.
Even more gratifying is the effect this decision could have on the environment. If the EPA declines to follow the lead of California -- and 11 other states -- on global warming, Congress should step in with new legislation.
