The Supreme Court ruled Monday against a key Obama policy aimed at limiting mercury and other toxic emissions from power plants. The decision is a blow for environmentalists and a dent in President Obama’s legacy on the environment.
In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency’s failure to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the rule violated a provision of the Clean Air Act that requires regulations to be “appropriate and necessary.”
Trade groups representing the energy industry argued that a cost-benefit analysis was needed to determine whether the regulation was necessary. In their estimation, Obama’s rule cost nearly $10 billion annually for a mere $6 million in benefits. The EPA contested those numbers, but also emphasized the health benefits of the regulation. The rule could have halted up to 11,000 premature deaths each year, according to the EPA.
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion, joined by the Court’s four other conservative justices, and Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent.
“One would not say that it is even rational, never mind ‘appropriate,’ to impose billions of dollars in economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits,” said Scalia from the bench on Monday. “No regulation is ‘appropriate’ if it does significantly more harm than good.”
Coal power plants emit about half of all the mercury that enters the environment in the U.S. each year. The toxin can cause a variety of ailments, and even death, when it contaminates the food supply.