Update:\r\n\r\nThe U.S. Supreme Court\u0026#039;s right-wing majority handed down a decision Thursday that will severely limit the Environmental Protection Agency\u0026#039;s authority to regulate planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, undermining the federal government\u0026#039;s ability to combat the climate emergency.\r\n\r\nIn its 6-3 ruling in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, the court\u0026#039;s conservative justices—led by Chief Justice John Roberts—sided with the coal industry and Republican attorneys general who sought to curb the EPA\u0026#039;s rulemaking powers under the Clean Air Act.\r\n\r\nAmy Coney Barrett, one of the right-wing justices who voted to limit the EPA\u0026#039;s authority, has family ties to the fossil fuel industry.\r\n\r\nLiberal Justice Elena Kagan warned in her dissent that \u0022today, the court strips the Environmental Protection Agency of the power Congress gave it to respond to \u0026#039;the most pressing environmental challenge of our time.\u0026#039;\u0022\r\n\r\nEnvironmentalists echoed that assessment in response to the majority\u0026#039;s decision, the latest in a series of hugely consequential rulings over the past week. According to EPA data, the power sector represents the United States\u0026#039; second-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.\r\n\r\n\u0022A Supreme Court that sides with the fossil fuel industry over the health and safety of its people is anti-life and beyond broken,\u0022 said John Paul Mejia, national spokesperson for the youth-led Sunrise Movement. \u0022We cannot and will not let our Democratic leaders standby while an illegitimate court and the GOP goes on the offense.\u0022\r\n\r\nWenonah Hauter, executive director of Food \u0026amp; Water Watch, said in a statement that the court\u0026#039;s ruling is \u0022part of a broad-based assault on the ability of regulators to protect our air, water, and climate.\u0022\r\n\r\n\u0022Long-sought by corporate polluters, industry-backed think tanks, and politicians who serve monied fossil fuel interests, this decision strikes at the heart of federal experts\u0026#039; ability to do their jobs,\u0022 added Hauter, who stressed that \u0022while this ruling intends to hamstring the federal government\u0026#039;s ability to regulate dangerous emissions, it does not signal the end of climate action.\u0022\r\n\r\n\u0022The climate movement must and will continue to pressure agencies and elected officials at the local, state, and federal levels to enact policies that ensure a swift reduction in climate pollution and an end to the fossil fuel era,\u0022 Hauter said. \u0022The Supreme Court will not stand in the way of the fight for a livable planet.\u0022\r\n\r\nThe court\u0026#039;s ruling spells serious issues for President Joe Biden\u0026#039;s vow to put the U.S. on a path to 100% clean electricity by 2035. Meanwhile, the administration is moving ahead with oil and gas leasing on public lands, drawing backlash and legal action from climate groups.\r\n\r\nThe People vs. Fossil Fuels coalition, made up of more than 1,000 U.S.-based environmental groups, called on Biden to use his still-existing authority to \u0022declare a climate emergency and stop new fossil fuel leases, exports, pipelines, and other infrastructure today.\u0022\r\n\r\n\u0022Using authorities under the National Emergencies Act and the Defense Production Act,\u0022 the coalition noted, \u0022the president could also halt crude oil exports, stop offshore oil and gas drilling, restrict international fossil fuel investment, and rapidly manufacture and distribute clean and renewable energy systems.\u0022\r\n\r\nEarlier:\r\n\r\nClimate advocates are\u0026nbsp;apprehensively watching the U.S. Supreme Court Thursday morning as it\u0026#039;s expected to deliver a ruling that could imperil the federal government\u0026#039;s regulatory authority to rein in carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, striking a potentially fatal blow to global efforts to fight the climate crisis.\r\n\r\nThe closely watched case, formally known as West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, is the culmination of a yearslong legal campaign by Republican attorneys general and right-wing activists financed by the oil and gas industry, which is hoping the high court\u0026#039;s right-wing supermajority will hand down a decision that guts the EPA\u0026#039;s rulemaking authority.\r\n\r\n\u0022The Supreme Court must not give corporations license to recklessly destroy our planet.\u0022\r\n\r\nIf the court does just that, it would spell doom for President Joe Biden\u0026#039;s stated goal of transitioning the U.S. to a 100% clean electricity sector by 2035. As the Washington Post notes, West Virginia v. EPA \u0022comes before a Supreme Court that\u0026#039;s even more conservative than the one that stopped the Obama administration\u0026#039;s plan to drastically reduce power plants\u0026#039; carbon output in 2016.\u0022\r\n\r\n\u0022This will undoubtedly be the most important environmental law case on the court’s docket this term, and could well become one of the most significant environmental law cases of all time,\u0022 said Jonathan Adler, an environmental law expert at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.\r\n\r\nGiven the United States\u0026#039; status as the world\u0026#039;s largest historical emitter and second-largest current emitter of planet-warming carbon dioxide, the Supreme Court\u0026#039;s decision will have serious ramifications for global efforts to avert climate catastrophe.\r\n\r\n\u0022The Supreme Court could hand down an extreme decision in the case of West Virginia v. EPA, which would devastate the federal government\u0026#039;s ability to curb climate chaos,\u0022 Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) tweeted late Wednesday. \u0022The Supreme Court must not give corporations license to recklessly destroy our planet.\u0022\r\n\r\nSen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) similarly warned earlier this week that the Supreme Court\u0026#039;s ruling \u0022could unleash a new era of reckless deregulation that will gut protections for all Americans and the environment.\u0022\r\n\r\nDuring oral arguments over the case earlier this year, the Supreme Court\u0026#039;s conservative justices appeared inclined to restrict the EPA\u0026#039;s regulatory authority to slash carbon emissions—authority that the court affirmed a decade and a half ago in Massachusetts v. EPA.\r\n\r\nClimate experts and advocates fear the worst from the industry-friendly Supreme Court majority.\r\n\r\n\u0022Each morning at 10 am, my anxiety spikes,\u0022 Sara Colangelo, director of the Environmental Law and Justice Clinic at Georgetown University Law Center, told the Post Thursday morning, referring to the time the court\u0026#039;s ruling is expected to drop.