Friendly Fire? Who Shot the Secret Service Officer During the WHCA Dinner?
Wait, There Was a Shooting Near the White House Two Weeks Ago...and the...
How You Know the Politico Story About Kash Patel's Impending Termination Is Fishy
CNN's Ben Ferguson Couldn't Believe Libs Had This Take About Jimmy Kimmel's Melania...
The Latest Update on the Third Trump Assassination Attempt Was Rather Disconcerting
At Long Last, Thom Tillis Will Vote to Confirm Trump's Fed Chair Pick
Democrats Always Act Surprised When One of Their Own Tries to Murder Trump
Scott Jennings Proves America Has a Left-Wing Violence Problem
Former Border Patrol Chief Greg Bovino Talks Deportations
Here's Why Hundreds of Border Patrol Agents Have Been Reassigned to Laredo, Texas
The Ninth Circuit Just Handed ICE a Major Win in Portland
Here's How Many Jobs the California Billionaire Tax Will Cost
James Talarico's Spiritual Mentor Makes Vile Joke About the Latest Assassination Attempt A...
They Could Do It, but You Wouldn't Like It
Dead Men Don’t Vote: Federal Oversight Is the Only Way to Clean Up...
OPINION

The EPA’s Endangerment Finding Belongs on the Ash Heap of History

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
The EPA’s Endangerment Finding Belongs on the Ash Heap of History
AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

On January 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “Unleashing American Energy,” which requires EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin to “submit recommendations…on the legality and continuing applicability” of the Endangerment Finding within 30 days.

Advertisement

Most Americans have probably never heard of the Endangerment Finding, however, this obscure rule has effectively allowed the federal government to label carbon dioxide a harmful “pollutant” that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

This is a prime example of government gone wild. The Clean Air Act was never intended to allow the EPA to declare carbon dioxide to be a dangerous pollutant. Rather, it was designed to “address the public health and welfare risks posed by certain widespread air pollutants.”

It is important to note that in 1963, when the Clear Air Act was initially passed, carbon dioxide was not listed as an “air pollutant.”

Fast-forward to 1999. As the EPA notes, “On October 20, 1999, the International Center for Technology Assessment and 18 other environmental and renewable energy industry organizations filed a petition seeking the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from on-road vehicles under the Clean Air Act.”

As happens all too often in our over litigious modern society, this “petition” eventually became a lawsuit. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that “greenhouse gases are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act and that EPA must determine whether or not emissions of greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”

Advertisement

Although this is the standard interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling, it is not necessarily the correct interpretation. According to the majority opinion, authored by former Justice John Paul Stevens, “We need not and do not reach the question whether on remand EPA must make an endangerment finding, or whether policy concerns can inform EPA’s actions in the event that it makes such a finding. We hold only that EPA must ground its reasons for action or inaction in the statute.”

In other words, the Supreme Court decision did not determine that carbon dioxide is a harmful air pollutant. Instead, it simply stated that the EPA has the authority to decide whether carbon dioxide is a harmful greenhouse gas if and only if that is supported by unequivocal data.

A more recent Supreme Court decision in 2022, West Virginia v. EPA, provides even more grounds for the Endangerment Finding to be rescinded. In this landmark ruling, the Supreme Court decided that the Obama-era Clean Power Plan was unconstitutional because it violated the letter of the law under the aforementioned Clear Air Act. Specifically, the Court cited the “Major Questions Doctrine,” which clearly states “that if an agency seeks to decide an issue of major national significance, its action must be supported by clear congressional authorization.”

Advertisement

Incredibly, this is the first time the Supreme Court had cited the Major Questions Doctrine in a ruling.

The fact that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of West Virginia, and essentially reprimanded the EPA to stay strictly within its constitutional guardrails, bodes well for those who believe the Endangerment Finding is unconstitutional and should be eliminated.

But if that is not convincing enough, consider that the Endangerment Finding is predicated on flawed science to begin with. Despite the insistence by the EPA that carbon dioxide is a harmful pollutant that is driving an existential climate crisis, the facts and data say otherwise.

Over the past few decades, climate alarmists and environmental zealots have been somewhat successful in fooling too many Americans into believing that carbon dioxide emissions must be eliminated no matter the cost.

However, the cost of demonizing carbon dioxide as a harmful pollutant is immense. By vilifying CO2 and attempting to regulate it to death, the EPA has absolutely harmed tens of millions of Americans with higher energy bills. Moreover, the EPA’s absurd notion that carbon dioxide is a harmful air pollutant has put the entire U.S. energy grid at risk.

Advertisement

As we enter the AI age, there will be an enormous demand for dependable and affordable energy. The only energy sources that can deliver reliable and cost-effective energy (aside from nuclear) for the United States to remain the global leader in the AI arms race necessarily produce carbon dioxide emissions. Put simply, if we do not eliminate the Endangerment Finding and free ourselves from its shackles, the United States will not be able to keep pace with the Communist Chinese Party in the worldwide battle for AI supremacy.

Chris Talgo (ctalgo@heartland.org) is editorial director at The Heartland Institute.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement