American Lung Association v. EME Homer City Generation
Consolidated with:
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12-1183 | D.C. Cir. | Dec 10, 2013 | Apr 29, 2014 | 6-2 | Ginsburg | OT 2013 |
Holding: The Clean Air Act directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for pollutants at levels that will protect public health. Once EPA settles on a NAAQS, the Agency must designate "nonattainment" areas, i.e., locations where the concentration of a regulated pollutant exceeds the NAAQS, and each state must submit a State Implementation Plan, or SIP, to EPA within three years of any new or revised NAAQS. From the date EPA determines that a State SIP is inadequate, EPA has two years to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan, or FIP. Among other things, the CAA mandates SIP compliance with the Good Neighbor Provision, which requires SIPs to "contain adequate provisions . . . prohibiting . . . any source or other type of emissions activity within the State from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will . . . contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other State with respect to any" NAAQS. The CAA does not require that states be given a second opportunity to file a SIP after EPA has quantified the state's interstate pollution obligations. Nor does the Good Neighbor Provision require EPA to disregard costs and consider exclusively each upwind state's physically proportionate responsibility for each downwind air quality problem. EPA's cost-effective allocation of emission reductions among upwind states is a permissible, workable, and equitable interpretation of the Good Neighbor Provision.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 6-2, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on April 29, 2014. Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined. (Alito, J., recused)
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Argument recap: A good day for the EPA? (Lyle Denniston, December 10, 2013)
- Argument preview: Ill winds and good neighbors (Lyle Denniston, December 7, 2013)
- More on todays orders: Good news for the EPA (Tejinder Singh, June 24, 2013)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| 03/29/2013 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 29, 2013) |
| 04/10/2013 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 29, 2013, for all respondents. |
| 04/18/2013 | Brief of Respondent States and Cities in support filed. VIDED. |
| 04/18/2013 | Brief of respondents Calpine Corporation,and Exelon Corporation in support filed. VIDED. |
| 05/29/2013 | Brief of respondents Luminant Generation Company LLC, et al. in opposition filed. VIDED. |
| 05/29/2013 | Brief of State and Local respondents in opposition filed. VIDED. |
| 06/04/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 20, 2013. |
| 06/06/2013 | Reply of petitioner American Lung Association, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| 06/24/2013 | Petition GRANTED limited to the questions presented by the petition in No. 12-1182. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 12-1182 is granted. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. |
| 07/16/2013 | Order extending time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits to and including September 4, 2013. |
| 07/16/2013 | Order extending time to file respondent's brief on the merits to and including October 31, 2013. |
| 08/21/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioners American Lung Association, et al. VIDED. |
| 08/30/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the Industry and Labor Respondents . VIDED |
| 08/30/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the State and Local Respondents (Texas, et al.) . VIDED |
| 08/30/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondents Calpine Corporation and Exelon Corporation. VIDED |
| 09/04/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the Federal Petitioners. VIDED |
| 09/04/2013 | Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.) VIDED. |
| 09/04/2013 | Brief of petitioner in No. 12-1182, Environmental Protection Agency, et al., filed. VIDED. |
| 09/04/2013 | Motion of the federal parties to deem the Court of Appeals Joint Appendix to be Volumes 2 thru 8 of the Supreme Court Joint Appendix filed by respondent Environmental Protection Agency, et al. VIDED. |
| 09/04/2013 | Brief of Respondent States and Cities in support of petitioners filed. VIDED. |
| 09/04/2013 | Brief of respondents Calpine Corporation and Exelon Corporation filed. VIDED. |
| 09/04/2013 | Brief of petitioners American Lung Association, et al. filed. |
| 09/10/2013 | Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the State and City Respondents (New York, et al.). VIDED |
| 09/10/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Law Professors on Issue Exhaustion filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 09/10/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of American Thoracic Society filed. VIDED. |
| 09/11/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Atmospheric Scientists and Air Quality Modeling Experts filed. VIDED. |
| 09/11/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of APA Watch in support of neither party filed. VIDED. |
| 09/11/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law filed. VIDED. |
| 09/11/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed. VIDED. |
| 09/11/2013 | Brief amici curiae of Benjamin F. Hobbs, et al. filed. VIDED. |
| 09/17/2013 | SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday December 10, 2013. |
| 09/17/2013 | CIRCULATED |
| 09/30/2013 | Records received from USCA for the DC Circuit electronically filed. |
| 10/07/2013 | Motion to deem the Court of Appeals Joint Appendix to be Volumes 2 thru 8 of the Supreme court Joint Appendix GRANTED. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion. |
| 10/31/2013 | Brief of respondents Utility Air Regulatory Group, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 10/31/2013 | Brief of respondents State and Local respondents filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 10/31/2013 | Brief of respondents Luminant Generation Company LLC, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 11/04/2013 | Motion for divided argument filed by respondents. VIDED. |
| 11/07/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 11/07/2013 | Brief amici curiae of West Virginia and 8 Other States filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 11/26/2013 | Motion for divided argument filed by respondents GRANTED. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion. |
| 12/02/2013 | Reply of respondents Environmental Protection Agency, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 12/03/2013 | Reply of petitioners American Lung Association, et al. filed. (Distributed) |
| 12/03/2013 | Reply of respondents Calpine Corporation and Exelon Corporation in support of petitioners filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 12/03/2013 | Reply of Respondent States and Cities in support of petitioners filed. VIDED. (Distributed) |
| 12/10/2013 | Argued. For petitioners: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For State and Local respondents: Jonathan F. Mitchell, Solicitor General, Austin, Tex. For Industry and Labor respondents: Peter Keisler, Washington, D. C. |
| 04/29/2014 | Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined. Alito, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the cases. VIDED |
| 06/02/2014 | JUDGMENT ISSUED. |
| 06/03/2014 | Record returned for U.S.C.A. District of Columbia Circuit. |
Issue: (1) Whether the statutory challenges to EPA”s methodology for defining upwind states” “significant contributions” were properly before the court, given the failure of anyone to raise these objections at all, let alone with the requisite “reasonable specificity,” “during the period for public comment,” 42 U.S.C. § 7607(d)(7)(B); (2) whether the court”s imposition of its own detailed methodology for implementing the Good Neighbor provision violated foundational principles governing judicial review of administrative decision-making; and (3) whether an upwind state that is polluting a downwind state is free of any obligations under the Good Neighbor provision unless and until EPA has quantified the upwind state”s contribution to downwind states” air pollution problems.