Friday, March 17, 2006

Judges rule against the EPA

In its attempts to emasculate the Clean Air Act, the EPA had been trying to allow major polluters avoid required and necessary upgrades in pollution control equipment. The ruling to day was infavor of the plaintiffs, including more than a dozen states and environmental groups.
Ruling in favor of a coalition of states and environmental advocacy groups, the court declared that the plain language of the act required a much stricter approach, as the Clinton administration had devised, and that only "a Humpty Dumpty" interpretation, as the court called the E.P.A.'s position, could construe the law otherwise.

"We decline such a world view," said the unanimous decision of a three-judge panel that included Judge Janice Rogers Brown, a conservative appointed last summer by President Bush.
Has anyone counted the dollars spent by the utilities and other polluters fighting this law? I wonder how that cost stacks up to the cost of compliance? Anyway, this is just one battle won in a long war.

Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]