Michigan-led coalition wins SCOTUS challenge to emission standards By SHOHAM GEVA Daily News Editor WASHINGTON, D.C.— Last week’s ruling to legalize same- sex marriage wasn’t the only Supreme Court decision in recent days directly tied to Michigan. The Court struck down the Environmental Protection Agency’s Mercury and Air Toxic Standards Monday in a victory for a coalition of twenty three states and interest groups, led by Michigan, who initially chal- lenged the regulations in the D.C. Circuit Court last year. The 5-4 decision marks the end of a twenty-five year push to create the first U.S regulations governing levels of mercury, arsenic, metals and several other airborne emissions for most power plants, first authorized in 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act. 21 power plants in Michigan would have been subject to the standards if enacted, though the overall impact may have been limited due to existing state reg- ulation on mercury and other airborne emissions that closely parallels the standards laid out in MATS. In a statement Monday morn- ing, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette called the ruling a victory for both family budgets and job creation in the state. “The court agreed that we can and must find a constructive balance in protecting the envi- ronment and continuing Michi- gan’s economic comeback,” he said. The judicial challenge hinged primarily on language in the amendments that instructed the EPA to implement the regula- tions only if they were deemed “appropriate and necessary”, examining what costs had to be included in that determination. The government argued that under that mandate the EPA was only required to consider the public health costs of the emissions, not the financial costs to power plants, in the ini- tial decision to regulate. How- ever, Michigan Solicitor General Aaron Lindstrom, represent- ing the states, argued that the financial costs were also perti- nent. Justice Antonin Scalia, in delivering the opinion of the Court, acknowledged that there are situations where “appropri- ate and necessary” wouldn’t indicate the need to consider cost, but said MATS wasn’t one of them. “Agencies have long treated cost as a centrally relevant fac- tor when deciding whether to regulate,” the opinion read. “Consideration of cost reflects the understanding that rea- sonable regulation ordinarily requires paying attention to the advantages and disadvantages of agency decisions.” Scalia also emphasized that though the agency considered costs later on in the process of drafting MATS, that consider- ation wasn’t enough. “By EPA’s logic, someone could decide whether it is “appropriate” to buy a Ferrari without thinking about cost, because he plans to think about cost later when deciding whether to upgrade the sound system,” he wrote. That point was a key disagree- ment between the majority opin- ion and the four justices who dissented. In a dissent joined by the other three dissenting justices, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that in look- ing at the EPA’s process of draft- ing the regulations as a whole, it was clear that financial costs had been considered, fulfilling the mandate of appropriate and nec- essary. “When making its initial “appro- priate but necessary” finding, EPA knew it would do exactly that — knew it would thoroughly consider the cost-effectiveness of emissions standards later on,” Kagan wrote. “That context matters.” Finalized in 2011 and set to come into effect this year, MATS would have required most coal and oil- powered power plants to reduce emissions by ninety percent for some substances, such as mercury, and close to ninety percent for sub- stances like acid gas. 9 Thursday, July 2, 2015 The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com NEWS Supreme Court to review affirmative action 2013 case on race- based admission policy to resurface By EMMA KINERY Daily Staff Reporter After a historic week for the Supreme Court, during which justices legalizedsame-sex mar- riage and overturned EPA regu- lations, the Court announced Monday it would review a 2013 case concerning affirmative action at the University of Texas at Austin. The Supreme Court will rule on the case in the upcoming fall session in early October. In 2008, Abigail Fisher, a white student, was denied undergraduate admission to the University of Texas at Austin for reasons she claimed were racially biased. During litiga- tion for the case, named Fisher v. University of Texas, Fisher alleged that the school’s admis- sions policy was in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The University of Texas admits students under the Texas Ten-Percent Plan, a sys- tem that guarantees admission to in-state students who gradu- ate within the top ten percent of their high school class. Because of the plan, eighty-one percent of incoming freshman at the University of Texas were auto- matically offered admission in 2008. While race is not considered in admissions for students cov- ered by the Ten-Percent Plan, race remains a factor in the admissions process for appli- cants of the University of Texas who do not graduate within the top ten percent of their high school class. Fisher graduated in the top 12 percent of her class; however, because of her grades and extracurricular activi- ties, she believed she deserved admission. The case brought to light complications concerning the Texas Ten Percent Plan, which subsequently prevented the University admissions office from adopting a similar policy. However, some campus groups, like the Coalition for Defending Affirmative Action, advocate for it. If the Universi- ty were to adopt a similar plan, the top students in every high school in Michigan would auto- matically be offered admission, which some believe would natu- rally create an incoming class of students from diverse back- grounds. The Supreme Court consid- ered the case for eight months before reaching a 7-1 decision in 2013 that Fisher’s case would be retired to a lower court. The ruling was based on Grutter v. Bollinger, a 2003 case in which Barbara Gutter, a white stu- dent, was denied admission to the University of Michigan Law School in 1997. ZACH MOORE/Daily Marge Iveide and Ann Sorrell receive the first same-sex marriage license in Washtenaw County, after forty-three years together. AT LONG L A ST Decision prevents EPA regulations Read more at MichiganDaily.com Read more at MichiganDaily.com