The Supreme Court heard oral argument in West Virginia v. EPA on Monday, a case that could result in the narrowing of the agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
Listen here and subscribe to Parts Per Billion on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Megaphone, or Audible.
But, to some surprise, a few of the court’s conservative justices posed tough questions to the attorney arguing against the EPA, which may indicate they’re open to siding with the agency in this case.
On today’s episode of Parts Per Billion, our weekly environmental podcast, we’re joined by Bloomberg Law’s Jennifer Hijazi to break down what happened at the high court on Monday. Jennifer explains why, even if the court doesn’t end up siding with the EPA, the agency has likely avoided the potential worst-case scenario some had feared going into the argument.
Do you have feedback on this episode of Parts Per Billion? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.