10 months later, and the Supremes have made their decision:

In a defeat for the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that a U.S. government agency has the power under the clean air law to regulate greenhouse gas emissions that spur global warming.

The nation’s highest court by a 5-4 vote said the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency “has offered no reasoned explanation” for its refusal to regulate carbon dioxide and other emissions from new cars and trucks that contribute to climate change.

Waitaminute, something’s not right about that…

The court had three questions before it.

  • Do states have the right to sue the EPA to challenge its decision?
  • Does the Clean Air Act give EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases?
  • Does EPA have the discretion not to regulate those emissions?

Heh…the opening part is inaccurate.  It wasn’t about whether they have the authority to do it, it was about whether they can be FORCED to.  How odd…

My previous view of the central question still stands: pollution is an issue of market externalities, not whether a line drawn is being crossed, apply the costs of pollution to the polluters and the problem solves itself.  However, I suspect the implication from how this ruling was reached will lead to future “make them DO SOMETHING!!!” lawsuits on almost any issue now — don’t think the State is involved enough in something?  Just sue ‘em into action!