By
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday left in place Biden administration regulations aimed at curbing oil and gas facility emissions of methane, a major contributor to climate change.
In a separate action, the court also rejected a bid to block a regulation aimed at curbing emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants from coal-fired power plants.
In both cases, the court rejected emergency applications without comment, with no noted dissents. Litigation against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will continue in lower courts.
A separate emergency application seeking to block Biden regulations concerning carbon emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants remains pending.
“The Supreme Court has sensibly rejected two efforts by industry to halt critical safeguards,” said David Doniger, a lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group. “The court should do the same with the effort to block EPA’s power plant carbon pollution standards.”
A spokesman for Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who led the challenge to the methane regulation, expressed disappointment in the decision. “But we respect the court’s decision,” he added.
The court’s decision in the methane case means that an EPA regulation that was finalized in March and is intended to cut methane emissions by up to 80 percent over the next 14 years will remain in effect.
Methane is a greenhouse gas that is 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide at trapping heat once emitted into the atmosphere, hence contributing to global warming.
The regulation has been challenged by Republican states led by Oklahoma and various oil and gas industry groups.
#
BREAKING: #SCOTUS allows EPA power-plants rule to take effect. Denies stays requested by utilities. No dissent noted https://t.co/PFitMDfDAb
— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) October 4, 2024
Our (still) leftist-dominated federal court system does not allow federal courts to review federal regulatory agency science:
1. The fundamental regulatory flaw of many EPA rules (i.e, junk science) can't be and so doesn't get litigated. https://t.co/OZDv9y0eFC
2.. Despite… pic.twitter.com/97k4X61jmh
— Steve Milloy (@JunkScience) October 4, 2024
