OPINION:
Many Americans believe the nation won a great victory over the regulatory “deep state” with the Supreme Court’s ruling in West Virginia v. EPA.
The ruling specifically restricts the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. It also says federal agencies cannot interpret laws broadly to significantly expand their authority unless Congress has given them explicit authority in such matters.
The Court’s West Virginia v. EPA decision did not apply only to EPA or only to greenhouse gases, but to all major actions by all agencies.
However, the decision won’t mean much if the Biden administration refuses to acknowledge the ruling and continues to do as it pleases. That appears to be what’s happening when it comes to pipeline policy.
Richard Glick, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s radically progressive chairman, claims the ruling doesn’t apply to him. He says federal district courts previously held that the EPA could regulate carbon, and claims the energy-killing regulations he wants to impose on pipelines can remain in place or even be strengthened unless the Supreme Court specifically overrules him.
Under this view, federal agencies can ignore or defy the Supreme Court on any regulations they want to implement, even regulations with major national implications, unless and until the Court renders a decision specifically against those rules. Or perhaps even until it sends an FBI or IRS SWAT team to kick in agency doors and enforce Court decisions.
Chairman Glick wants FERC to revive its proposed rule requiring pipeline companies to account for all greenhouse gas emissions from the construction or operation of their pipelines – even if it means many states and cities could find themselves without natural gas to electrify, heat and air condition homes.
Major regions of America – especially New England – depend on pipelines and gas for homes, schools, hospitals and businesses. They already face threats of gas shortages and electricity blackouts this winter.
Pipeline companies say they would have to abandon many markets if the FERC rule is imposed because it is hugely expensive, impossible to follow and likely to bankrupt them.
When Democratic and Republican members of Congress learned about the proposed rule, they urged FERC to rescind it. The commission ultimately did suspend further consideration of the measure, but Mr. Glick’s recent remarks suggest he may unilaterally lift the suspension.
Perhaps his position is so at odds with the Supreme Court ruling because the White House told him to disregard it. President Joe Biden repeatedly said on the campaign trail and since his inauguration that he is not concerned about high energy prices. He promised to end fossil fuel use in this country, and he intends to do so regardless of any impacts it might have on families, jobs and our geopolitical standing in the world.
Mr. Biden promptly canceled the Keystone Pipeline, increased regulations, suspended federal permitting, designated large areas as “national monuments” to restrict exploration and production, and directed all federal agencies to base all decisions on theoretical effects on Earth’s climate.
Those actions clearly signaled that he was willing to sacrifice our nation’s hard-won energy independence on the altar of extreme green ideologies.
When gasoline prices more than doubled and shot inflation to 40-year highs, his approval ratings sank to lows never endured by any American president, Mr. Biden was reduced to begging Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and even Iran to produce more oil.
Now, thanks to a deciding vote by Vice President Kamala Harris, Congress passed the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, which will slap $370 billion in taxes on middle-class families to pay for electric vehicles, solar panels and wind turbine tax credits.
The wealthy will buy expensive electric cars that will be charged with expensive, intermittent, weather-dependent wind and solar power. The middle classes see their jobs and living standards plummet further.
Meanwhile, China, India, a hundred other developing countries and a newly refocused Europe are all burning more fossil fuels, to improve and safeguard people’s living standards and lives.
The United States could totally eliminate coal, oil and natural gas – and it wouldn’t improve Earth’s climate or weather one iota, even if greenhouse gas emissions actually drive climate change.
The fact that Mr. Glick’s boss has an anti-fossil-fuel agenda does not mean FERC’s chairman can ignore and defy America’s highest court. He swore to respect our Constitution and the separation of powers enshrined in it. He has no right to advance the ideological whims of a political officeholder, even a president.
Chairman Glick’s past comments show he already understands this. If he reverses course now for political convenience, it will spell trouble – for American families, and for our Constitution, judicial system, the regulatory state, respect for the rule of law, and survival as a united nation.
We can only hope he ultimately musters the courage, common sense and recognition of his oath of office to do what is right, as opposed to what’s momentarily convenient.
• Paul Driessen is a lawyer, senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org), and author of books and articles on energy, environmental, legal and human rights issues.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.