

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
In what is being hailed as a major victory for public health, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday affirmed the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate cross-state air emissions from polluting factories and power plants.
In a 6-2 decision, the Court upheld the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, commonly known as the Transport Rule, which required 28 eastern states to reduce power-plant emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), which often form smog and worsens air quality across state lines.
"Air pollution is transient, heedless of state boundaries," wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who delivered the opinion for the Court. "Left unregulated, the emitting or upwind State reaps the benefits of the economic activity causing the pollution without bearing all the costs."
After being adopted by the EPA in 2011, power companies and several states sued to block the rule from taking effect and in 2012 a federal court ruled to invalidate the rule.
"The EPA safeguards follow the simple principle that giant utility companies shouldn't be allowed to dump their dirty emissions onto residents of downwind states," said John Walke, director of the Clean Air Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, in a statement following the ruling. "The Supreme Court wisely upheld this common-sense approach."
Walke added that these "long-overdue protections" will save "tens of billions of dollars a year in health costs" and defend the health and safety of millions who live downwind from polluting power plants.
"For too long, these communities have shouldered an unfair burden on their health and well-being without the ability to protect themselves and their families from dangerous pollution," added Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club.
_____________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
In what is being hailed as a major victory for public health, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday affirmed the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate cross-state air emissions from polluting factories and power plants.
In a 6-2 decision, the Court upheld the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, commonly known as the Transport Rule, which required 28 eastern states to reduce power-plant emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), which often form smog and worsens air quality across state lines.
"Air pollution is transient, heedless of state boundaries," wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who delivered the opinion for the Court. "Left unregulated, the emitting or upwind State reaps the benefits of the economic activity causing the pollution without bearing all the costs."
After being adopted by the EPA in 2011, power companies and several states sued to block the rule from taking effect and in 2012 a federal court ruled to invalidate the rule.
"The EPA safeguards follow the simple principle that giant utility companies shouldn't be allowed to dump their dirty emissions onto residents of downwind states," said John Walke, director of the Clean Air Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, in a statement following the ruling. "The Supreme Court wisely upheld this common-sense approach."
Walke added that these "long-overdue protections" will save "tens of billions of dollars a year in health costs" and defend the health and safety of millions who live downwind from polluting power plants.
"For too long, these communities have shouldered an unfair burden on their health and well-being without the ability to protect themselves and their families from dangerous pollution," added Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club.
_____________________
In what is being hailed as a major victory for public health, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday affirmed the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate cross-state air emissions from polluting factories and power plants.
In a 6-2 decision, the Court upheld the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, commonly known as the Transport Rule, which required 28 eastern states to reduce power-plant emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), which often form smog and worsens air quality across state lines.
"Air pollution is transient, heedless of state boundaries," wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who delivered the opinion for the Court. "Left unregulated, the emitting or upwind State reaps the benefits of the economic activity causing the pollution without bearing all the costs."
After being adopted by the EPA in 2011, power companies and several states sued to block the rule from taking effect and in 2012 a federal court ruled to invalidate the rule.
"The EPA safeguards follow the simple principle that giant utility companies shouldn't be allowed to dump their dirty emissions onto residents of downwind states," said John Walke, director of the Clean Air Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, in a statement following the ruling. "The Supreme Court wisely upheld this common-sense approach."
Walke added that these "long-overdue protections" will save "tens of billions of dollars a year in health costs" and defend the health and safety of millions who live downwind from polluting power plants.
"For too long, these communities have shouldered an unfair burden on their health and well-being without the ability to protect themselves and their families from dangerous pollution," added Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club.
_____________________