U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against EPA On Emissions Limits

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standard is meant to regulate the pollution from power plants that could make people sick. The law phased in earlier this year, and utilities like Georgia Power have already complied with it.

The rule is supposed to cut down on asthma, heart attacks and bronchitis, explained Ashten Bailey, an attorney at GreenLaw in Atlanta.

“That’s really what the EPA was trying to address by putting the Mercury and Air Toxics standard in place, was helping people remain healthy rather than getting sick from breathing in the pollution from coal-fired power plants,” she said.

In the last two years, Georgia Power has closed units in six of its coal- and oil-fired power plants. Jacob Hawkins, a spokesman for Georgia Power, said that reasons for the closures included the costs associated with the EPA’s rule. He also cited other environmental regulations, economic conditions and lower natural gas prices.

In the case, Michigan v. EPA, the state of Michigan said the agency didn’t properly consider costs to power companies before they issued the standards. The Supreme Court agreed with Michigan.

Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson welcomed the decision.

“I am pleased the Supreme Court ruled today in Michigan v. EPA that the EPA should have first considered the costs before issuing its burdensome air quality regulations,” Isakson wrote in a statement. “I remain committed to fighting this administration’s power grabs that hurt Georgians on every front.”

Southern Company said in a statement that it would prefer for Congress to make energy policy, rather than the EPA.

While the Supreme Court’s ruling doesn’t specifically kill the EPA rule, it will force the agency to rewrite and review the restrictions looking at costs as well.