So, the Supreme Court of the United States of America attempted to backhand the Environmental Protection Agency.
But did it actually do anything?
In an another example of the Supreme Court redefining & restricting regulatory rights of an agency we see that these Justices, for some time now, have been potentially pondering some sort of idea that the federal government has done enough or what it can. Odd to say, considering this is an extremely active time for the Court as they’ve made a total of 7 decisions since June 23rd of this year; some would say that’s more than enough & some of what’s been done is more than unnecessary.
Solely focusing on the EPA matter though, considering what this decision may mean for our collective future, I wonder if we may witness the beginning of a reinvigorated battle between state economies & the likelihood of various sustainability development goals set by the UN being met by the United States of America by 2030.
Although this recent Court decision emphasizes the States’ right to discern appropriate levels of emission reduction over periods of time, external forces besides the federal government are pushing to incentivize States to move away from coal as much as possible, as soon as possible.
Summarily, the Supreme Court denied the EPA, emboldened by the Clean Power Plan introduced by the Obama Administration in August of 2015, the regulatory power to implement a cap-and-trade economy centered around carbon credits & compliance costs through the form of increased energy prices that would begin this year. The goal of the Clean Power Plan was to reduce carbon emissions by 32% by 2030, a legislative example of a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDCs) spoken of in the Paris Agreement that was adopted in December of 2015.
Every five years, nations that are party to this agreement submit NDCs that detail how their governments will steer their respective nations towards achieving various sustainability development goals set by the UN & its various subgroups like the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) & IMO (International Maritime Organization).
Provided here are the two NDCs the USA has submitted since the inception of the Paris Climate Agreement:
In a portion of the dissenting opinion provided by Justice Kagan, supported by Justices Breyer & Sotomayor, it is said “the effect of the Court’s order, followed by the Trump administration’s repeal of the rule, was that the Clean Power Plan never went into effect. The ensuing years, though, proved the Plan’s moderation. Market forces alone caused the power industry to meet the Plan’s nationwide emissions target-through exactly the kinds of generation shifting the Plan contemplated.”
The “market forces” vaguely presented as proof of some inevitable generation shift are more aptly described in full as the corporate compliance with a global cap-and-trade carbon credit system established by non-government organizations & various conglomerates in the banking & energy industries.
Earlier this year, UN Secretary-General António Guterres spoke at a Powering Past Coal Summit, urging members to reduce coal use in electricity generation “by 80% below 2010 levels by 2030” by “cancel[ling] all global coal projects in the pipeline and end[ing] the deadly addiction to coal, end[ing] the international financing of coal plants and shift investment to renewable energy projects & jump-start[ing] a global effort to finally organize a just transition, going coal plant by coal plant if necessary.”
While the United States federal government itself is not a member of the Powering Past Coal Alliance (a coalition of governments, businesses and organizations) representatives of California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania & Washington state all attend the Summits & act as intermediaries, to a degree, that facilitate the economic & legislative maneuvers these international agreements seek to enact.
Cognizant of these extrajudicial environments that enumerate new requirements implemented through “market forces” just about every year, five years at the minimum accounting for NDCs, I have to wonder, what exactly did the Supreme Court do?
What do you think?
Thanks for reading.
Links to ponder in this frame of light:
For decades, these UN sub-groups have been affecting governments on the micro & macro level; here’s a San Carlos, CA city council meeting from 2009 that showcases the process by which they circumnavigate democracy through “rapport building”:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Su7i4cH7eYo
© 2022 Zakariyas James. First shared here at theruminationcompilation.wordpress.com.
The Rumination Compilation 
One thought on “Environments & Requirements”