Supreme Court limits EPA's ability to fight climate change, a major environmental ruling that could affect Biden's goals

• The Supreme Court limited the EPA's ability to fight air pollution.
• The challenge against the EPA was brought by West Virginia and other GOP-led states.

The Supreme Court on Thursday dealt a blow to the federal government's ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants — a major environmental ruling that hinders the Biden administration's climate change goals.

The 6-3 decision, for the case West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, weakens the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to set environmental regulations that aim to slow the advancement of climate change.

Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the majority opinion. The court's three liberals dissented.

The challenge was brought by West Virginia and a slew of Republican-led states, many of which are fossil fuel producers, that took issue with the EPA's authority to impose regulations on the energy sector. They asked the court to review whether the EPA was allowed to issue such rules under the Clean Air Act, and the court ruled that EPA does not have the power to do so.

"A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body," Roberts wrote in the opinion.

The complex dispute stems from the 2015 Clean Power Plan, which then-President Barack Obama announced to try to set guidelines on how states can limit carbon dioxide pollution coming from power plants. The following year, the Supreme Court blocked the plan.

In 2019, under the Trump administration, the EPA replaced the plan with the more-relaxed Affordable Clean Energy Rule. But a federal appeals court struck down that rule too.

President Joe Biden's EPA has not yet created its own rules, but the GOP-led states brought their challenge to the Supreme Court ahead of time in a bid to prevent potential sweeping regulations created by the agency.

In a Thursday statement, Biden called the ruling "another devastating decision that aims to take our country backwards."

"I have directed my legal team to work with the Department of Justice and affected agencies to review this decision carefully and find ways that we can, under federal law, continue protecting Americans from harmful pollution, including pollution that causes climate change," Biden said.

He continued: "My Administration will continue using lawful executive authority, including the EPA's legally-upheld authorities, to keep our air clean, protect public health, and tackle the climate crisis. We will work with states and cities to pass and uphold laws that protect their citizens."

The court heard arguments for the case in February. The ruling also presents legal questions about other federal agencies' ability to make decisions.

Justice Elena Kagan criticized the court's ruling in a strongly worded dissenting opinion.

"The Court will not allow the Clean Air Act to work as Congress instructed. The Court, rather than Congress, will decide how much regulation is too much," Kagan wrote.

"Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change. And let's say the obvious: The stakes here are high," she continued. "Yet the Court today prevents congressionally authorized agency action to curb power plants' carbon dioxide emissions. The Court appoints itself—instead of Congress or the expert agency—the decisionmaker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening."

Emissions have caused global temperatures to rise, which could significantly impact food and water supply, people's health, and where people can live, according to a United Nations report. The UN warned that governments are not doing enough to combat climate change and are unprepared for its impact.

Thursday's ruling sparked reactions among Democrats concerned about the climate change crisis.

"Catastrophic. A filibuster carveout is not enough. We need to reform or do away with the whole thing, for the sake of the planet," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, a progressive Democrat, tweeted in response to the decision.