Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.

188 L.Ed.2d. 775, 572 U.S. 489, 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 26,900+ case briefs...

EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.

United States Supreme Court

188 L.Ed.2d. 775, 572 U.S. 489, 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014)

Facts

The Clean Air Act delegated authority to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (defendant) to promulgate regulations setting national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The act directed states to propose State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to comply with the NAAQS. Any time the EPA revised the NAAQS, states had three years to file new SIPs. If the EPA determined that a state failed to do so, the act required the EPA to create a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the state within two years. The act required each SIP to include a Good Neighbor Provision for intergovernmental cooperation with respect to interstate air pollution. In 1990, Congress amended the provision to require a SIP to prohibit emissions that would contribute significantly to another state’s NAAQS noncompliance. As part of its implementation of the amended provision, in 2011, the EPA promulgated a regulation (called the Transport Rule) under which a state violated the Good Neighbor Provision if (1) the state produced at least 1 percent of the NAAQS in another state and (2) the pollution could be eliminated cost-effectively. At the same time, the EPA found that states that had violated the Transport Rule had also failed to submit an adequate SIP. Accordingly, the EPA crafted a FIP for each such state. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. (plaintiff), challenged the regulations. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit invalidated the regulations because they effectively required states to implement a comprehensive solution to interstate air pollution without first receiving any EPA guidance. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Ginsburg, J.)

Dissent (Scalia, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 541,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 541,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 26,900 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 541,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 26,900 briefs - keyed to 983 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership