WV v. EPA and the Major Questions Doctrine
An interview with Prof. Lisa Heinzerling
On June 30th, 2022, the Supreme Court decided West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), limiting the EPAs ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Beyond its direct impact on climate policy, the case significantly impacts administrative power by supercharging a new legal regime - the “major questions doctrine.” Environmental law and administrative law expert, Professor Lisa Heinzerling (Georgetown Law Center) unpacks the Court’s decision in WV v. EPA and explains the broad powers of the judicial doctrine.
Prof. Heinzerling goes on to explain how major questions may prove to be the death knell for a prior test known as “Chevron deference.” Where Chevron assured judicial restraint toward federal policy, major questions now threatens to stymie agency action on some of the most critical and contentious issues of the moment, from climate change policy and far beyond.
Additional Resources
WEST VIRGINIA v. EPA
CASES DISCUSSED
- Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (1984): In a case involving the definition of a “stationary source” and its regulation, the Supreme Court sided with the EPA, deferring to the agency’s reading and in the process created the Chevron doctrine.
- FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation (2000): The Supreme Court ruled that the FDA did not have the power to regulate tobacco under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act as Congress had not given the FDA explicit authority to do so.
- King v. Burwell (2015): The Supreme Court ruled that the Internal Revenue Service did not overstep when it created a regulation extending tax credits authorized by the Affordable Care Act to federal exchanges. The majority determined that Congress intended for the tax credits to be available for both the state and federal exchanges.
- National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB) v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (2022): The Supreme Court ruled that OSHA overstepped its authority by creating a rule that required vaccination or testing/mask-wearing for businesses with over 100 employees.
- Alabama Association of Realtors v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2021): The Supreme Court overturned the CDCs extension of an eviction moratorium to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, finding that the agency did not have the authority to enact such a moratorium.
- Sackett v. EPA: The Supreme Court will hear this case in Fall 2022. The case concerns the EPAs authority to regulate wetlands under the Clean Water Act.
LAWS DISCUSSED
Listen on Podcast
About Prof. Lisa Heinzerling
Lisa Heinzerling is a leading envirnmental law scholar and a professor at Georgetown University Law Center. Her primary specialties are environmental and administrative law. She has published several books, including a leading casebook on environmental law. Peer environmental law professors have four times voted her work among the top ten articles of the year.
