Appeals court rejects Trump EPA bid to abandon soot pollution rule
10 reported
A federal appeals court on Friday rejected the Environmental Protection Agency’s attempt to abandon a Biden-era rule that sets tough standards for deadly soot pollution. The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the US court of appeals for the District of Columbia circuit leaves intact, for now, a tighter standard set in 2024 on pollution from coal-fired power plants, factories and other industrial sources. The EPA under Donald Trump asked the appeals court last year to invalidate the Biden-era rule, arguing that the agency under previous leaders had exceeded its statutory authority and acted unreasonably by failing to consider costs to businesses. The court denied the request, saying in a decision written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg that the agency’s arguments “lack merit”. The ruling keeps in place an annual limit of 9 micrograms of fine particle pollution per cubic meter of air, down from 12 micrograms established more than a decade ago. The EPA’s bid came in response to a lawsuit by 25 Republican-led states and business groups that attempted to block the 2024 rule. An EPA spokesperson said on Friday the agency was reviewing the court decision.
What’s reported
A federal appeals court rejected the EPA’s attempt to abandon a Biden-era rule on soot pollution.
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the DC circuit court leaves the 2024 standard intact.
The EPA under Trump asked the appeals court last year to invalidate the rule, arguing the agency exceeded statutory authority and acted unreasonably by not considering business costs.
The court denied the request, with Judge Douglas Ginsburg writing that the agency’s arguments “lack merit”.
The ruling keeps an annual limit of 9 micrograms of fine particle pollution per cubic meter of air, down from 12 micrograms.
The EPA’s bid came in response to a lawsuit by 25 Republican-led states and business groups.
The EPA under Biden said the tighter limits would prevent more than 800,000 asthma symptom cases, 2,000 hospital visits, and 4,500 premature deaths.
An EPA spokesperson said in November the 2024 rule would cost “hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars to American citizens” and was not based on a full review of available science.
The EPA said on Friday it was reviewing the court decision.
Environmental groups hailed the ruling as a victory for public health.
Key figures
Judge Douglas Ginsburg (wrote the court decision)
Patrice Simms (vice-president of healthy communities at Earthjustice)
Vijay Limaye (climate and health scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council)
Lee Zeldin (EPA administrator)
Sources: The Guardian
