A controversial law that was intended to lower the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions was struck down by a U.S. District Court on Wednesday, putting a major setback on the Biden administration’s climate change agenda.
The rule, introduced by the Department of Transportation ( DOT )’s Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA ) in December 2023, sought to compel states to actively measure, report, and establish declining targets for carbon dioxide emissions generated by vehicles on U. S. highways.
The state of Texas argued that the new law, in addition to the federal mandate, had overstepped its bounds. U. S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, appointed by former President Trump, concurred with Texas, stating firmly that” the law was illicit”.
” A provincial administrative bureau cannot work without legislative authorization”, Hendrix wrote. The disputed concept required states to monitor and report greenhouse gas emissions as well as establish and work toward gradually lowering emissions goals. The Biden administration defended the law as a significant step toward promoting green transport system and reducing climate shift.
WATCH:
Texas, however, successfully challenged the FHWA’s claim that the latest legislative framework lacked the legal authority to carry out such environmental mandates. Judge Hendrix’s research aligned with this view, saying that the DOT’s broad view of its regulatory capabilities was unsupported by the statute’s words.
” The related definitions and related efficiency actions make clear that’ performance of the Interstate/National Highway Systems ‘ focuses on the infrastructure’s effectiveness in facilitating travel, commerce, and regional defense—not economic outcomes of cars using the methods”, Hendrix elaborated.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg stated in December that the “new achievement measure will give states the freedom to set their own climate targets and a clear and consistent platform to monitor carbon waste.”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton passionately opposed the effort, declaring the country’s intention to block “unlawful weather mandates”. Moreover, in December, a coalition of 21 says filed a complaint in Kentucky to challenge the rules, a situation that remains unresolved.
Texas argued that, in accordance with CW39, the new Department of Transportation ( DOT ) regulation goes beyond the authority granted by Congress to the administration. However, the state contended that reaching net zero emissions by 2050 is an “ultimately impossible to achieve” purpose. Also, Texas maintained that the different state Lines lack any knowledge in environmental regulation.
The lawsuit claimed that Texas’s achievement of declining target year over year may require significant changes to how the people of Texas use the Interstate and National Highway System and would have a significant impact on the economy because the state has significant national and international docks and distribution centers.
” Also, the DOT’s broad understanding is undermined by the fact that adopting it would create other statutory rules superfluous”, added Judge Hendrix, more critiquing the DOT’s justification for the law.
The Biden government’s wider climate policy goals are being significantly affected by the decision, which shows that judges are opposed to broad interpretations of regulatory authority without explicit congressional support. The decision halts the greenhouse gas reporting requirement and raises questions about the authority of governmental agencies to enact climate-related rules.
