The Obama administration’s ambitious effort to reduce power plant pollution underwent tough scrutiny Wednesday as the U.S. Supreme Court debated whether the Environment Protection Agency should have given more consideration to the costs involved in writing its regulations.
The 90-minute argument in three cases consolidated under the title Michigan v. EPA toggled between the technicalities of the Clean Air Act and a broader discussion of a regulatory scheme that the energy industry asserts will cost $9 billion a year, while creating benefits to society valued only at $6 million. The EPA and environmental groups dispute those figures.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
