Jonathan Martel Discusses Repeal of GHG Endangerment Finding in Inside EPA
Jonathan Martel, co-chair of Arnold & Porter’s Environmental practice group and a former attorney at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of General Counsel, was quoted in the Inside EPA article, “Critics Blast EPA’s Legal Rationale For GHG Endangerment Finding Repeal,” which explores the agency’s recent final rule repealing the 2009 greenhouse gas (GHG) endangerment finding and the legal arguments surrounding the agency’s authority under the Clean Air Act.
Jonathan noted that, in Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court was not “addressing the meaning of air pollutant in a vacuum,” emphasizing that the Court was considering EPA’s authority to determine whether pollutants require an endangerment finding under Clean Air Act section 202. He explained that this creates “tension” with the agency’s current characterization of Massachusetts.
He also highlighted that while the Supreme Court could overturn its own precedent in Massachusetts, doing so is more difficult in cases involving statutory, rather than constitutional, interpretation.
“The idea that the Supreme Court would overrule directly Massachusetts v. EPA is I think subject to a higher hurdle,” Jonathan said.
