The Trump administration is taking its fight with the Environmental Protection Agency so far to the courts.
The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on Tuesday in a lawsuit brought by a coalition of environmental groups challenging the EPA’s proposed rule on air pollution, which is aimed at curbing emissions from coal-fired power plants.
The suit seeks to stop the EPA from taking such action, arguing that it violates the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and is likely unconstitutional.
The administration has filed a legal brief that argues that the Clean Power Plan, as it is currently written, violates the Tenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, which says a federal agency cannot regulate commerce with the consent of Congress.
The White House has argued that the courts have rejected the Trump Administration’s arguments.
But the Supreme Court will have to weigh in on whether the EPA is constitutionally required to take such a step.
The case has sparked controversy because of the fact that the Environmental Defense Fund, a non-profit environmental group, is one of several groups that have sued the EPA to stop its plan to implement the Clean Energy Standard, which would ban carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 2030.
The Clean Energy Rule, as proposed by the Trump EPA, would require coal-burning power plants to reduce their emissions by 40 percent from 2010 levels by 2030 and 20 percent by 2050.
The Obama Administration, which took office in January, also tried to implement that rule in 2015, but that rule did not go into effect until 2022.
The Trump Administration argues that both of these regulations are necessary to combat climate change, and that a Clean Energy Plan is not necessary.
The EPA argues that they are necessary because of rising pollution levels from coal plants, and because the Clean Electricity Plan, which it has been pushing since 2011, would have required the EPA, under the Clean Coal Rule, to reduce emissions by 50 percent by 2030, and 80 percent by 2040.
However, the Trump Administrations legal brief also argues that these regulations, while they may be necessary, are not sufficient.
The Department of Energy, which oversees the EPA in Washington, D.C., has said that the Trump Plan is necessary for two reasons.
First, the EPA has repeatedly demonstrated its ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, and Second, it has demonstrated the ability to effectively communicate that it intends to take action.
According to the EPA documents, the administration’s efforts to develop the plan, including drafting it, preparing it, and working with the coal industry on its public relations campaign, “were not effective.”
The documents also state that the plan was “not a scientific study, and was based on incomplete information and incomplete information analysis,” and that the EPA “does not have a scientifically validated and robust plan to achieve emission reduction targets” under the EPA plan.
But some of the groups that are suing the EPA say that they have received no information on the Clean and Green Plan, and they are not aware that the government has even attempted to produce one.
The groups also contend that the administration has failed to make public the plans proposed by its various agencies for implementation, or on the impact of the regulations that are on the books, and has failed “to fully engage with and consult with them, including with Congress.”
They also contend the plan has been rushed through without sufficient time to properly consider the impact it will have on the coal sector and on communities of color, particularly communities of Asian descent, who are disproportionately affected by the industry.
The coal industry argues that its case is one that is different from that of other industries.
The argument is that the industry is already dealing with the costs of the proposed regulations, and this is an attempt to further impose additional costs on them by implementing the rules.
“We’re already facing a significant increase in costs,” said Scott Nichols, executive director of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, in a press release.
“That’s why we’re asking for a delay in implementation of these rules.”
Nichols added that the coal companies have received “overwhelming support from the coal community” in their campaign to protect the coal economy, and the coal industries own polluting coal plants.
“The Trump administration has ignored the voices of the coal miners, the coal families, the steelworkers, and thousands of coal workers,” Nichols said.
The environmental groups that filed the lawsuit also contend, in their filing, that the agency’s proposal is “unconscionable,” and the EPA and its supporters have been “unfair and irresponsible.”
The EPA’s arguments have also been used by a number of other coal companies, including Chesapeake Energy, Alpha Natural Resources, and Duke Energy, to argue that the regulations are needed because of climate change.
But these arguments have been undercut by the fact the Trump administrations efforts to address climate change have been met with overwhelming support from coal companies and from the Trump supporters.
The legal fight over the Clean Clean Power plan is set for Tuesday.
The Environmental Defense Foundation, a nonprofit environmental law group, filed its suit against the EPA last November