The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has vacated a preliminary injunction that blocked Executive Order 13990, which re-established an interagency working group to calculate the “social costs of greenhouse gases” for consideration by federal agencies during policymaking. The order was challenged by a group of Republican-led states, including Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming. However, the court concluded that the states did not have standing to challenge the order because their injuries flow from “potential future regulations.”
In the opinion of Judge Jacques Wiener Jr., the court noted that the order does not require any federal action, and the alleged harms from the order “rely on a highly attenuated chain of possibilities.” As per legal requirements, a plaintiff must demonstrate that they suffered an injury fairly traceable to the defendant’s conduct and likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision. However, in this case, the court ruled that the plaintiffs did not meet this burden because the injury must be “actual or imminent.”
The states sued the US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, asserting that the order was procedurally invalid, arbitrary, and inconsistent. The court agreed with the states and issued a preliminary injunction blocking agencies from relying on any work product from the working group.
The Biden administration has been facing criticism from environmental activists over the approval of the Willow Project. The $8 billion oil development project proposed by ConocoPhillips in the Alaskan Arctic was approved in March, and several challenges and lawsuits have been filed against the decision.
The decision by the appeals court is seen as a significant victory for the Biden administration’s climate change policies. The administration has been actively working towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate change. The order in question was a crucial component of this strategy and aimed to ensure that the federal government considers the social costs of greenhouse gases while making policy decisions.
However, the court’s decision will likely face criticism from the plaintiffs and opponents of the Biden administration’s climate change policies. The ruling could also impact future legal challenges against the administration’s environmental policies, as the court has set a high bar for demonstrating standing in such cases.
Overall, the decision highlights the legal complexities of the government’s efforts to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Biden administration will likely continue to face legal challenges and opposition from various quarters as it seeks to implement its climate change policies.