Sotomayor’s History Favors Environmental Statutes

June 2, 2009

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court, in 2007 ruled that power plants should use the best available technology upgrades to protect the environment, regardless of the cost involved.

At the time, environmental groups sued the Bush-era Environmental Protection Agency to protect fish in waterways impacted by the plants. The EPA had permitted power plants to use cost-benefit analyses when upgrading technology aimed at protecting the environment.

But Sotomayor, in her post at the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled that according to the statute, the EPA was required to consider the best available technology, and that power plants could not argue for lesser technology based on the billions it would cost to comply.

“The statutory language requires that the … selection … be driven by technology, not cost,” read Sotomayor’s opinion.

Just weeks ago, the Supreme Court reversed her ruling.

But Sotomayor’s introduction to the Supreme Court could sway future decisions in favor of the environment, analysts say.

Reece Rushing, with the Center for American Progress, said environmentalists are “very positive” about Sotomayor, based on her opinion in the 2007 case. “I think there’s evidence that she’ll continue that on the Supreme Court,” said Rushing, reports FoxNews.

A pending case at the Supreme Court involving global warming would give a clear indication of her impact on the nation’s legal framework, analysts say.

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

Advertisers

Make sustainability part of your strategy.

Get equipped at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>

Unclear about the EPA's new GHG Rule?

Learn how it could affect your business. >>

EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st

CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>

Survey Results: Product Environmental Compliance Best Practices

How to achieve compliance at a significantly lower cost. Download the full report. >>

Join the Discussion

Reader Comments

Of course, let’s not be concerned with cost. Let’s give the environmentalists what they want without any concern for the companies ability to stay in business or to protect consumers from increasing costs resulting from catering to the environmental lobby. Sotomayor may be a smart cookie, but she is not Supreme Court judicial quality. She appears to be biased and agenda driven. No thank you.

Glennis | June 2nd, 2009

Recent Daily News [ see all ]

11/20/2009
11/19/2009
11/18/2009

Charts [ see all ]

European Paper Industry Cuts CO2 Emissions by 42% since 1990

S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks

Nike Tops Annual Climate Action Scores

Oceans May Trap more Carbon than Forests

Jobs

View All Jobs >> Post a Job >>

Comments and Discussions

Trade Association on Trade Group on EPA Chemical Regs: ‘If Everything is a Priority, Then Nothing is a Priority’
"Seriously… that..."

Gary Markowitz on Supermarkets Tackle Emissions Reductions, Fuel Efficiency
"Supermarkets waste over 10 percent of their energy through improper..."

peter in ireland on Ontario May Follow California’s Lead on TV Energy Efficiency
"Governor Schwarzenegger is shooting himself in the foot! 1...."

Environmental Leader on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"The survey respondents (the PDF report mentions 4,000 respondents in 38..."

Jake on UPS Trying New Hydraulic Hybrid Trucks
"A point of clarification: the Reuters press release referenced herein reports that 20 UPS will purchase..."

Custom Organic Shirts on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"90% of North Americans believe it is urgent to get a global climate..."

peter dublin on California City’s Green Building Ordinance Applies to Commercial Buildings
"Why energy efficiebnt regulation on buildings –..."

Environmental Leader