This article was added by the user . TheWorldNews is not responsible for the content of the platform.

The Supreme Court ruling limits the power of the EPA and returns it to the parliament to which it belongs.

NEWYou can now listen to FoxNews articles.

For some time, the Environmental Protection Agency has wanted to destroy the American coal industry and has issued regulations with that in mind. Today, the Supreme Court has stated that it cannot be done without the explicit authority of the parliament. This ruling should not only stop the EPA's environmental enthusiasts, but also prevent bureaucrats from other institutions from seizing key powers. This is a groundbreaking decision against an institution that has become like the fourth branch of the government. 

 In the West Virginia v EPA ruling on June 30, the court was interested in an Obama-era regulation called the Clean Power Plan. The EPA felt obliged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and created rules to force the state to do so. In the process, the agency decided that "the best system for emission reductions" would not survive the coal industry. Regulators relied on the less-used Clean Air Act provisions, which have been used only for cleaner operation, rather than eliminating emission reduction systems. The court said this was not possible. 

My colleague Sam Kazman, who has been fighting these bureaucrats for nearly 40 years, said: "The EPA tried to change the legislation in the same way it tried to change the power industry. The majority pointed out that Congress repeatedly rejected similar legislation in the past, and in both respects it. Blamed. " 

The best coat deals with the serious blow of BIDEN CLIMATE AGENDA with the EPA's decision

This The decision has a broader impact than sending an EPA, but back to the drawing. As the court said, "This is the case for the main question." In other words,the main issue of public policycannot be decided by bureaucrats alone. Its power is for Congress and Congress only. 

Supporters of "Just Stop Oil" glue themselves to the frame of a Vincent van Gogh painting. 

"Just Stop Oil" adhesive Self in the frame of the picture of supporter Vincent van Goch.  (Just Stop Oil)

This should shake the spine of all Washington D.C. officials. Interpretation of old legislation to justify regulatory power. Following this ruling, some major initiatives already look volatile. 

For example, the Securities and Exchange Commission suddenly states that it has the power to force companies to put together disclosures about the direct and indirect environmental impacts of their activities . increase. This is a fundamental reinterpretation of the Commission's role, which has always been to protect investors from fraud. 

The Federal Communications Commission wants to re-impose "net-neutral" rules on Internet service providers and require them to treat all Internet traffic equally. No matter what you think about the benefits of that policy, it's not clear that the FCC has that authority, and Judge Kavanaugh (in 2017) suggests that it's no longer the case. 

Many regulators want to jump into the crypto industry. Given that all the laws they depend on were created before the code appeared on the parliamentary radar screen, the authority to do so must be questionable. The same is true for all kinds of new technologies like drones. 

These are all important issues, and one might say that we need to have the rules of the way for them. In principle, the court does not object. It simply says that theparliament must determine these questions andexplicitly approve the types of actions and principles that the agency can take or follow. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer yelled at the decision and called it regressive and radical, a sign of recent parliamentary dysfunction. 

Click here to sign up for the Opinion Newsletter

The State clarifies thedecision from Congresson these questions. As Judge Gorsuch implied in his consent, no one will help the world in which successive administrations interpret and reinterpret old laws. But that means that in a rapidly split parliament, our representatives get together, discuss thoroughly, and compromise to give clear instructions on the laws that executives must enforce. It means that you need to. 

The biggest losers today are the power-consuming bureaucrats. No matter how professional they are on their subject (and it is an unresolved question how professional environmental lawyers are expert on the subject of power generation), they are on our constitutional basis. Under the government system, they cannot make their judgment in lieu of the decision of the representatives of the people of Congress. The government's ambitious "government-wide" agenda, which seeks to insert climate considerations into unrelated areas such as securities law, has been blunted by a court ruling. 

Click here to get the Fox News app

Returned to place, in parliament. See if Congress can carry out its mission.