Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency Oral Argument
2015-03-31T16:39:09-04:00https://ximage.c-spanvideo.org/eyJidWNrZXQiOiJwaWN0dXJlcy5jLXNwYW52aWRlby5vcmciLCJrZXkiOiJGaWxlc1wvMjhjXC8yMDE1MDMzMTE3MDYwMTAwMV9oZC5qcGciLCJlZGl0cyI6eyJyZXNpemUiOnsiZml0IjoiY292ZXIiLCJoZWlnaHQiOjUwNn19fQ==The Supreme Court heard oral argument in the consolidated cases of Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, and National Mining Association. v. EPA. The cases concern the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2010 rule regulating mercury emissions at power plants and whether the EPA should have taken costs into account when it first decided to regulate emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants from power plants, or if public health risks were the only consideration under the Clean Air Act. The legal question focuses on the interpretation of the law which states that the regulations are to be “appropriate and necessary.”
The EPA’s rules were scheduled to take effect in April 2015 and be fully in place by 2016. Three separate cases involving 21 states and industry groups were consolidated into this single 90-minute argument.
This program contains the audio recording released by the court. Still images of participants
The EPA’s rules were scheduled to take effect in April 2015 and be fully in place by 2016. Three separate cases involving 21 states and industry groups were consolidated into this single 90-minute argument.
This program contains the audio recording released by the court. Still images of participants
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in the consolidated cases of Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, and National… read more
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in the consolidated cases of Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, and National Mining Association. v. EPA. The cases concern the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2010 rule regulating mercury emissions at power plants and whether the EPA should have taken costs into account when it first decided to regulate emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants from power plants, or if public health risks were the only consideration under the Clean Air Act. The legal question focuses on the interpretation of the law which states that the regulations are to be “appropriate and necessary.”
The EPA’s rules were scheduled to take effect in April 2015 and be fully in place by 2016. Three separate cases involving 21 states and industry groups were consolidated into this single 90-minute argument.
This program contains the audio recording released by the court. Still images of participants close
People in this video
-
F. William Brownell Attorney -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Paul M. Smith Attorney
-
-
-
Hosting Organization
Purchase a Download
Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency Oral Argument
-
MP4 video - Standard
- Price:
- $6.99
-
MP3 audio - Standard
- Price:
- $0.99
Related Video
-
Supreme Court Cases on EPA Emissions Regulations
Jeremy Jacobs talked about three consolidated cases heard before the Supreme Court to decide whether the Environmental…
-
EPA Clean Power Plan Compliance
Senior energy, environmental, and utility officials talked about states' compliance options for the Environmental Protection…
-
Environmental Protection Agency Clean Power Rule
Gene Karpinski talked about the release of a final Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) clean power rule, as well as the impact of…
-
Clean Power Plan
David Doniger talked about the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' consideration of the constitutionality of the Environmental…
User Created Clips from This Video
-
- 1 minute
- 7 views