The Supreme Court has agreed to hear three cases from industry groups regarding federal environmental regulations, sparking a debate over the selection of courts perceived to be more favorable to their causes. The decisions made by the conservative-leaning Supreme Court next year could significantly impact the ability of states and others to challenge Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules.
Forum shopping, a practice where plaintiffs choose courts they believe will rule in their favor, has become prevalent in recent years, particularly in Texas. The Supreme Court's conservative majority has previously ruled against the EPA, including blocking a major effort to reduce smog and air pollution earlier this year.
While federal law dictates where challenges can be filed under the Clean Air Act, the cases granted by the Supreme Court may raise questions about the political balance of the nation's appeals courts. The Clean Air Act requires challenges of nationally applicable EPA decisions to be filed in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, known for upholding environmental regulations.
Environmental groups have expressed concerns that decisions favoring industry groups could weaken the agency's regulations, potentially impacting clean air and public health. The EPA's denial of waivers to small oil refineries seeking exemptions from blending ethanol with gasoline in 2022 led to legal challenges in different courts across the country.
Two additional cases the Supreme Court agreed to hear involve Biden administration ozone regulations aimed at curbing pollution from crossing state lines. The EPA argued that these regulations are nationally applicable and should be handled by the federal appeals court in Washington, emphasizing the need for consistency in enforcing environmental regulations.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments on these cases early next year, with potential implications for the future of environmental protection policies and legal challenges in the United States.
