Supreme Court to hear important case on global warming in Massachusetts v. EPA

This morning Grist Magazine has a thorough review of an upcoming case that the Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments for next week - Massachusetts v. EPA. Here's a backgrounder from Gristmill:

The case involves a suit by Massachusetts and its allies (a coalition of other states and nonprofit groups) -- I'll refer to them as the petitioners -- against the EPA for refusing to use the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide emitted from motor vehicles. The petitioners lost in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but convinced the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

When the Supreme Court decides to hear a case, it grants certiorari on specific questions. In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Court agreed to consider two:

• "Whether the EPA Administrator has authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other air pollutants associated with climate change under [the Clean Air Act]" (I'll call this the authority issue), and
• "Whether the EPA Administrator may decline to issue emission standards for motor vehicles based on policy considerations not enumerated in [the Clean Air Act]" (I'll call this the discretion issue).
  

There's also the potential for a sleeper issue: Constitutional standing. Over the years, the Supreme Court has crafted an elaborate body of law that governs whether a suit involves, in the words of Article III of the Constitution, a "case or controversy."

The first question is whether the language of the Clean Air Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. The EPA argues it does not have this authority (of course, it's run by a Bush administration stooge) and petitioners say the law does.

There are other issues in the case, too, but we see the first question as being the most interesting. Whether the Supreme Court decides in our favor or not, though, action is desperately needed to make progress in tackling global warming.