by Kevin Killough
Just The News
The Trump administration will likely repeal the so-called “endangerment finding,” which has been the basis for a host of climate policies coming out of the EPA. Climate groups will surely attack the final rule in court. Legal experts say the administration needs to strategize if it’s going to withstand the litigation.
st July, the Environmental Protection Agency began a formal rulemaking process to reconsider the Obama-era “endangerment finding,” which is the basis for regulations on emissions from motor vehicles, among other things.
The Trump administration is reportedly poised to announce the final rule this week, according to The Wall Street Journal, and while critics of the rule say it should go, legal experts say the rule will need to withstand litigation challenges, as well as future administrations.
Steve Milloy, senior legal fellow with the Energy and Environmental Legal Institute and publisher of “JunkScience.com,” told Just the News that a repeal is a great first step toward undoing the regulatory regime behind what he calls the “climate hoax.” However, if the final rule is to last, the Supreme Court will need to overturn Massachusetts v. EPA, a 2007 decision that opened the door for the process by which the Obama administration finalized the original rule.
“It’s not enough for the Trump administration to rescind the endangerment finding,” Milloy said…
These rulings, legal experts say, have created an opportunity to overturn Massachusetts v. EPA. Milloy explained that if the final rule rescinding the endangerment finding is going to stick through legal challenges, this has to happen.
“If Massachusetts versus EPA is not reversed — and this is the time to do it — then this whole exercise is going to be an exercise for naught. Next time there’s a Democratic president, the Democrats will have the legal authority, so to speak, to reimpose the endangerment finding,” he explained.
Milloy said he has “genuine concerns” that whoever is writing the final rule won’t understand the importance of overturning that decision. “When this thing goes to court, it’s going to require competent lawyering, which the Trump administration doesn’t always have,” Milloy said.
