ACTION

United States Senator and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

McConnel's referenced amicus brief was filed to support Kentucky’s coal miners, their families, small businesses and all those negatively affected by the Obama "Administration’s War on Coal," according to a statement released by the Senator:

"...The amicus brief was filed in a sequel case (Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency) to the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency that the EPA may regulate greenhouse gases as hazardous pollutants under the Clean Air Act – which resulted in the EPA’s 2010 first-ever permitting requirements for motor vehicles, known as the 'Tailpipe Rule.' The EPA has since used the Tailpipe Rule to trigger regulations on coal-fired power plants and other stationary sources..."

*The EPA issued its "Tailpipe Rule" to set emission standards for cars and light trucks, after a June 26, 2012 ruling by a District of Columbia U.S. Court of Appeals panel found that "...rules and findings by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that regulate greenhouse gas emissions from cars, light trucks and large, stationary emission producers are neither "arbitrary nor capricious" and are "unambiguously correct"; it also found that various state and industry appellants lack standing to sue the agency. (According to the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc.,et al. No 09-1322, D.C. Cir. [via Tom Moylan, LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom ] )

Moylan reported that the EPA had determined that the Clean Air Act:

"...required major stationary sources of greenhouse gases to obtain construction and operating permits.  To avoid overwhelming burdens on greenhouse gas producers who needed permits, the agency issued Timing and Tailoring Rules that required only the largest stationary sources of greenhouse gases to get permits..."

According to Moyland, 26 appeals to these rulings were consolidated by the District of Columbia U.S. Court of Appeals, including "...Various state governments and industry groups ... [which] ... challenged the rules and findings, arguing that they were based on improper constructions of the CAA and were arbitrary and capricious..."

Joining the Amicus Brief with McConnel are also Senator Rand Paul, and Congressmen Hal Rogers, Ed Whitfield, Brett Guthrie, Thomas Massie, Andy Barr, and Lamar Smith.

“This case is an egregious example of the EPA’s violation of the law in pursuit of its overzealous, anti-coal agenda. The ability to create laws is the purview of Congress and the EPA has clearly overstepped its authority. In doing so, accountability has been thrown out the window and Kentucky families are left with nothing but frustration and the likelihood of even higher energy costs and more job losses,” stated Congressman Paul.

Congressman Rogers said, "The EPA's power-grabbing schemes are unbelievable, and unconstitutional. This federal agency wants to bend the rules to suit its own agenda by undermining the authority of Congress. Time and again, the courts have struck down the overreaching arm of the EPA, and I hope that our highest court will see through the agency's efforts to impose one-size-fits-all regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. No region has realized the cost of the EPA's job-killing regulations more than the Central Appalachian coalfields, where power plants and mines are shutting down, and thousands of coal miners are losing their jobs every year."

Congressman Barr added that, "This case is an important opportunity for the Supreme Court to make clear that the EPA’s legislation by regulation aimed at killing the coal industry and stifling our economic recovery is unconstitutional. For the EPA to amend or misinterpret unambiguous provisions of the Clean Air Act to advance its War on Coal is not acceptable and it intrudes on Congress’s lawmaking authority as reserved by the Constitution. Just because the votes for the President’s environmental agenda don’t exist in either the House nor the Senate, doesn’t change the fact that the EPA’s overreach is unlawful.”