Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency
In brief
EPA cannot enforce the Good Neighbor Plan against these applicants while their challenge moves through the courts.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 5-4 · June 27, 2024 · Opinion by Justice Gorsuch
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court temporarily blocked the Environmental Protection Agency's "Good Neighbor Plan," which aimed to reduce ozone pollution crossing state lines, finding that the agency likely failed to adequately explain why the plan's emissions controls remained reasonable after several states were removed from coverage.
- Who it affects
- The pause stops the plan's emissions controls from being enforced against the applicants while the case continues.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court ruled that the challengers were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the EPA's action was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The case concerns EPA's role under the Clean Air Act in addressing air pollution that travels from one state into another.
Question presented
Should the Court stay the EPA’s federal emissions reduction rule, the Good Neighbor Plan, and are the emissions controls imposed by the rule reasonable regardless of the number of states subject to the rule?
What the Court decided
Holding
The applications for a stay are granted; enforcement of EPA’s rule against the applicants shall be stayed pending the disposition of the applicants’ petition for review in the D. C. Circuit and any petition for writ of certiorari, timely sought.
The vote
From the opinions
“The applications for a stay are granted; enforcement of EPA’s rule against the applicants shall be stayed pending the disposition of the applicants’ petition for review in the D. C. Circuit and any petition for writ of certiorari, timely sought.”
“The Court today enjoins the enforcement of a major Environmental Protection Agency rule based on an underdeveloped theory that is unlikely to succeed on the merits.”
What's next
The D.C. Circuit will continue considering the applicants' challenge to the rule. The stay remains in place through that review and any timely petition for certiorari (a request for Supreme Court review).
Why it matters
Power plants and states covered by the applications are directly affected, while the plan sought to reduce ozone pollution that crosses state lines.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 6 moreShow fewer
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Opinion added: Opinion
Opinion added: opinion
Brief added: Reply
Court Order added: Lower Court Orders/Opinions
More questions
- What did the Supreme Court rule in Ohio v. EPA?
- The Court paused enforcement of EPA's Good Neighbor Plan against the applicants while their legal challenge proceeds.
- Who won Ohio v. EPA?
- The applicant states and other challengers won temporary relief. The Court granted their request to stop enforcement against them during further review.
- What does Ohio v. EPA mean for power plants?
- Power plants covered through the applicants cannot be subjected to this rule's emissions controls while the stay remains in effect.
- Is the Good Neighbor Plan still the law after Ohio v. EPA?
- The Court stayed enforcement against the applicants, rather than issuing a final decision on the rule's legality. The D.C. Circuit will continue reviewing the challenge.
- What happens next in Ohio v. EPA?
- The D.C. Circuit will decide the applicants' petition for review. A timely request for Supreme Court review could follow.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.